Rolling Out the "I" Word
 |
| Degan back in the Days of Dubya ` |
One of the main reasons I have never regretted leaving the Democrats over sixteen years ago was because of their spineless, cowardly behavior during the sick and twisted reign of George W. Bush. Think about it: He was the most corrupt, mind-jarringly incompetent chief-executive in the history of human folly; a man who led his clueless countrymen and women into a war that never should have been fought, for reasons that were based on lies, the result of which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings - and not one of those worthless Democrats had the political courage to call the little bastard on the carpet by initiating impeachment proceedings against him.
Don't hold your breath waiting for the goddamned Obama justice department to do the right thing by prosecuting both Bush and Cheney (not to mention Donny Rumsfeld and Condi Rice) for the atrocities committed against the human race on the killing field of Iraq. The precedent has been forever set in granite: Any United States president will, henceforth, be able to get away with murder - that would include mass murder on an unimaginable scale.
Now then, doesn't that make you feel all warm and squishy inside? I just knew it would.
Say what you want to about the right wing in this doomed land. What they lack in brains they more-than-make-up for in chutzpa. They're now seriously talking about impeaching the sitting president for the failure of his immigration policies. Sarah Palin has condemned the prez for what she calls "years of abuse" (she wasn't specific on that point) and then went on to proclaim that Obama's failures at the border were "the last straw". It's my opinion that a former governor who walked away from her job for no other reason than to make a shitload of money in the private sector is the last person on the planet who should be proposing that anyone be forcibly be removed from office. The fact that this blabbering nincompoop was once selected for the second spot on a national ticket defies any sense of rationality. Gee, we do live in wonderful times, don't we?
Will they really go through with something as outrageous as that? If they regain the senate and retain control of the house in the fall they will - count on it. Will the American electorate make it happen? There's the cockeyed optimist inside of me that thinks that by that time they will have had-it-up-to-here with the GOP's obstruction and indifference to the national well being. Then there's the gambler inside of me that remembers the old adage that "no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". We shall see.
That they're even having this discussion at all is further proof (as if more was really necessary) that the Republican party has lost its mind. This is black comedy at its finest. Move over Dr. Strangelove! Just when you come to believe that the freak show couldn't possibly get any freakier they lower the bar even further. That a failed policy (which has been failing for decades by the way) can be defined as "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a rib-tickler in itself. Someone should make this into a movie. And what actor alive possesses the comedic genius to take on the role of Ted Cruz? Where have you gone, Peter Sellers?
Maybe this is all a ruse; a distraction to take the people's minds off of the train-wreck that the GOP has become in recent years. That's always a distinct possibility. Whatever their motivation it's a knee-slapping joy to behold. The sad thing about this whole, demented affair is the fact that it'll be generations before the American people dare to nominate an African American for the office of president. So insane has been the reaction of the racists out there to the boringly moderate Barack Obama, I just can't see it happening again in my lifetime. I'm just happy to have lived to see it happen at all.
As disappointing as Obama has been in a lot of respects, I don't regret casting my ballot for him. Think of the alternatives.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
SUGGESTED READING:
John F. Kennedy 1917-1963 - An Unfinished Life
by Robert Dallek
Of all of the books I've read on the subject of the life of John Kennedy (and I've read damned-near all of 'em, folks!) this is arguably the best. Mr. Dallek presents us with neither hatchet job nor lullaby, but an insightful, well-researched inquiry into the life and times of a good and great man who was greatly flawed. Still, we're all better off today because, a half century ago, Jack Kennedy sought the presidency.
Don't let it be forgot that once there was a spot....
I'm sorry, I'll stop.
SUGGESTED LISTENING:
Bo Diddley
by Bo Diddley:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jrIK7YB0tE&list=RD3jrIK7YB0tE
Please, if this isn't the greatest rock 'n' roll record ever recorded, I don't know what the heck is. From 1958, the year I was born.
Say what you want to about the right wing in this doomed land. What they lack in brains they more-than-make-up for in chutzpa. They're now seriously talking about impeaching the sitting president for the failure of his immigration policies. Sarah Palin has condemned the prez for what she calls "years of abuse" (she wasn't specific on that point) and then went on to proclaim that Obama's failures at the border were "the last straw". It's my opinion that a former governor who walked away from her job for no other reason than to make a shitload of money in the private sector is the last person on the planet who should be proposing that anyone be forcibly be removed from office. The fact that this blabbering nincompoop was once selected for the second spot on a national ticket defies any sense of rationality. Gee, we do live in wonderful times, don't we?Will they really go through with something as outrageous as that? If they regain the senate and retain control of the house in the fall they will - count on it. Will the American electorate make it happen? There's the cockeyed optimist inside of me that thinks that by that time they will have had-it-up-to-here with the GOP's obstruction and indifference to the national well being. Then there's the gambler inside of me that remembers the old adage that "no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". We shall see.
 |
| Sellers as Dr. Strangelove ` |
Maybe this is all a ruse; a distraction to take the people's minds off of the train-wreck that the GOP has become in recent years. That's always a distinct possibility. Whatever their motivation it's a knee-slapping joy to behold. The sad thing about this whole, demented affair is the fact that it'll be generations before the American people dare to nominate an African American for the office of president. So insane has been the reaction of the racists out there to the boringly moderate Barack Obama, I just can't see it happening again in my lifetime. I'm just happy to have lived to see it happen at all.
As disappointing as Obama has been in a lot of respects, I don't regret casting my ballot for him. Think of the alternatives.
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
John F. Kennedy 1917-1963 - An Unfinished Life
by Robert Dallek
Of all of the books I've read on the subject of the life of John Kennedy (and I've read damned-near all of 'em, folks!) this is arguably the best. Mr. Dallek presents us with neither hatchet job nor lullaby, but an insightful, well-researched inquiry into the life and times of a good and great man who was greatly flawed. Still, we're all better off today because, a half century ago, Jack Kennedy sought the presidency.
Don't let it be forgot that once there was a spot....
I'm sorry, I'll stop.
SUGGESTED LISTENING:
Bo Diddley
by Bo Diddley:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jrIK7YB0tE&list=RD3jrIK7YB0tE
Please, if this isn't the greatest rock 'n' roll record ever recorded, I don't know what the heck is. From 1958, the year I was born.
posted by Tom Degan @ 12:55 PM
87 comments
87 Comments:
"Here was the most corrupt, mind-jarringly incompetent chief-executive in the history of human folly, a man who led his clueless countrymen and women into a war that never should have been fought for reasons that were based on lies, the result of which led two the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings"
"What difference at this point does it make?"
Hillery Clinton
What difference indeed: unpaid for...and unnecessary wars, a tanked economy.........but TAX CUTS, Unpaid for Medicare Part D, DICK CHENEY, the Religious Right, Blackwater, the now-siege of immigrants from Central AmericA, guns for everybody, the worst SCOTUS known to man, And spotlight on TEXAS.
As disappointing as Obama has been in a lot of respects, I don't regret casting my ballot for him. Think of the alternatives.
"Bomb bomb Iran" and "You betcha!" and "Corporations are people".
VP of the Border Patrol Union, Chris Cabrea said "a lot of our guys" are coming down with diseases.
"Coming off the long journey they have been subjected to and then diseases some agents are contracting. We had one get bacterial pneumonia a couple days ago," Cabrea said. "A lot of our guys are coming down with scabies or lice."
Cabrea added: "The border patrol is trying to play catch up and we're having a lot of diseases coming in and some we haven't seen in decades and we are worried they'll spread throughout the United States especially if they are being released and have the disease."
"Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who has tortured and killed his own people, even his own family members, to maintain his iron grip on power. He used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds and on Iranians, killing over 20 thousand people. Unfortunately, during the 1980's, while he engaged in such horrific activity, he enjoyed the support of the American government, because he had oil and was seen as a counterweight to the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." H Clinton.
More of "look how bad GWB was" while not holding accountable the Obama Administration by the O-Baggers.
"What difference at this point does it make?"
I love it when the RRBC cult quotes Hillary, proving how right wing she really is.
I can help.
“For goodness’ sake, you can’t be a lawyer if you don’t represent banks.”
What kind of kook thinks this is liberal?
The same kooks who think Obama is a commie.
These radicals are beyond the influence of fact and reason. It's all about their beliefs, that just happen to align with corporate PR and GOP propaganda.
One lesson of history ignored by authoritarian leaders, if they impeach Obama. It will guarantee Hillary the White House.
Tom,
You mentioned you have read almost all the books on Kennedy.
What did you think of "Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot" by Bill O'Reilly that is going to become a movie and whose show is the most watched in the country?
Sarah Palin wants to impeach the President. The sitting representatives of the GOP & Tea Party haven't been told their opinion yet. In every news story I read about Washington, Obama, waffles...whatever...there's always some lunatic conservative constituent making the case for impeachment.
You won't hear this coming from sitting GOPers. They just don't have the balls for it and the reason is, they know they are full of shit. Impeachment isn't a new call by the Right. It's been shuffling over on the sidelines since Day One.
Name an issue in Washington and all the GOP has offered is to have someone resign. They have no plan and they offer solutions or alternative. Worse, their idiot electorate are perfectly fine with this. These whiners don't want solutions. They want retribution. They want blood! Literally.
I don't know what they conservative electorate is seeing, but I'm watching a very cowardly, miserly, petty GOP that has no leadership beyond its punditry. I doubt Palin, Hannity, or Limbaugh will be on the ticket for 2016, but it really doesn't matter, because that's who is driving the GOP these days.
I think it is marvelous the way Obama caused this sudden influx of illegal aliens flooding into our country carrying drugs and contagious diseases.
Just like Obama and all the Democrats say, this will be really good for our economy!
I also think it is fantastic that Obama released 5 terrorists from Gitmo and then released 12 more terrorists being held in Afghanistan a week later.
This, combined with the fact he is allowing terrorists to take over Iraq, will be really good for American security and Middle East peace!
Its as if all the American soldiers who lost life and limb in Iraq did so for absolutely nothing, now that Obama has undone everything Bush did there.
The world is finally a good place thanks to Obama cleaning up after Bush!
In an extraordinary moment of sobriety, comedian Bill Maher confessed that his liberal co-religionists are sometimes “useless Obama hacks without a shred of intellectual honesty.”
On his Friday show, “Real Time with Bill Maher,” the man who personally donated $1 million to Obama’s reelection campaign referred to a report recently concluded on National Security Agency eavesdropping.
“Many files, it says, described as useless by the analysts had a strangely intimate even voyeuristic quality,” Maher said. “Stories of love and heartbreak, illicit sexual liaisons, mental health crises and disappointed hopes.”
Laughing, he quipped that “this is exactly what they said they weren’t going to do. Just be nosey and look into the lives of private people for their own chits and giggles.”
And here Maher’s conscience got the better of him.
“If this was happening under Bush, liberals would be apoplectic. I’m sorry, but liberals are just sometimes useless Obama hacks without a shred of intellectual honesty.”
Guest U.S. Rep. Donna Edwards, D-Md., immediately interjected that she was apoplectic over the surveillance, and that a liberal advocate was needed on the court that oversees NSA surveillance.
But fellow liberal author and journalist Ron Suskind pointed out the spectacular growth in government snooping had occurred since 2009 – under Obama’s watch — and that mega-leaker Edward Snowden “had provided the goods” to prove it. He said, “The question now is what are we going to do about it?”
I see the batshit right wing deflectors have chimed in. Anonymous actualy found a way to look even more ridiculous with his first post. Just when you'd think he'd reached his limit.
Seriously, I hop the GOPDOES impeach Obama.When they did it to Clinton it revealed their petty, vindictive hypocricy, and Clintons approval rating soared as a result.
To quote Anonymous' messiah..."bring em on!"
Maher's show is a good example of non-Obama hack liberals speaking the truth.
We note this is never the case on the Right. They STILL cannot criticize or blame Bush/Cheney for anything. This indicates the authoritarian nature of the radical far Right. But they have someone to blame, don't they?
Thanks to “Nucky Chuckie” for being true to his Radical Right Bubble Cult.
Not one of them can admit the situations in Iraq are consequences of the military aggression of their heroic "Decider" and his sociopath co-president.
Nothing is Bush/Cheney's fault. They MUST blame the black guy. Period. Not that they are racists. No, never. Just ask them.
They hate Obama for the mess Bush made in Iraq. They hate him for anything and everything, real or imagined. Just as they hate anyone who disagrees with their world view of corporate PR and Party propaganda. Fascism requires scapegoats. Jews were the scapegoats for the Third Reich. Liberals, or even moderates and corporatists whom they decree as liberals, are the scapegoats for the American Fourth Reich.
Theirs is the kind of radical hate that fuels fascism. This is the face of fascism in America.
You notice how Anonymous focused on 3 minutes of Bill Maher, but didn't talk about all the stuff he saud about Cheney/Bush etc?
He didn't mention the entire "Flip a district" campaign where he is trying to get rid of the very people Anonymous worships?
Anonymous, that one sentence does not mean Maher is ending his support of Obama. It means that unlike your GOP heroes he IS "fair and balanced".He's dissapointed that liberals are not doing ENOUGH,Dumbass, not that that what they are doing is wrong. Maybe now you could talk about how he used the rest of the show to ROAST the GOP, all the while using FACTS and actual intelligent debate to do so.
here's betting you wont, but way to resort to the old conservative tactic of cherry picking an out of context statement and twisting it to fit your agenda.
Mozart1220 said...
Anonymous, it would benefit conservatives (at least those running the show) in TWO ways. FIrst, it wouldcreats a state where there are TWO classes, a RULING class,and a SERVICE class, and second, they would feel so GOOOOOOD about being the RULING class.You can see that happening already with the income disparity and their refusal to pay a living wage. It's no fun to be rich if you can't lord it over others to make yourself feel superior, right?
3:37 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Wow Mozart, think for a minute about what you just said.
Income disparity has grow at the highest rate under Obama than under any President in our history.
You are saying without the "state" there would be just two classes, the "RULING class,and a SERVICE class".
Do you mean as an example like Cuba? Or our IRS, or VA?
According to what you said, the other benefit conservatives would get would be
to "feel superior, right"? The role of govt programs is to control how a group of people feel? Does this mean you feel better about yourself when others have to pay more in taxes than you do? How does your feeling better improve your life style?
If as you said it would "benefit conservatives (at least those running the show)" then why would the conservatives not running the show stay conservative? Or you could look at it this way, if being conservative put you into the RULING class, why wouldn't everybody be conservative?
What I'm amazed by is your belief that government programs are designed in part to punish some to the benefit of others. Wouldn't it make more sense if government programs were designed to punish no one, to benefit all, and to allow all the move upward in economic class as their skill and efforts would take them?
I don't believe that those unable to reach their best because of physical or mental handicaps should not be taken care of 100% by the rest of us. What % of us would fit into that class, 4%, 6%? Nor am I saying to do away with SS and Medicare. Instead I want both programs to apply for those whom it was originally designed.
Some time take a look at the Iowa state budget. Look how the money is being spent. I would not be surprised if you were to find the largest % of the budget was on social service programs,(not education, not roads, not law enforcement) maybe up to 45% of the total. Do you think that 45% of Iowans are helpless with out government?
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds widespread public disapproval of the way President Obama and Republicans in Congress are handling the influx of unaccompanied foreign children at the southern border as the two sides engage in a fierce debate over how to stem the crisis.
Nearly 6 out of 10 Americans are not happy with Obama’s performance in dealing with the tens of thousands of minors who have arrived from Central America in recent months, overwhelming Border Patrol stations. All told, 58 percent disapprove of his management on the issue, including 54 percent of Latinos.
The findings represent a political blow for a president who called immigration reform a top second-term priority when he was reelected two years ago with 71 percent support from Latino voters.
"A nation that cannot control its borders isn’t really a nation anymore."
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/212098-obama-the-pariah
OBAMA THE PARIAH
Democrats in tough reelection races have a blunt message for President Obama: Keep away.
Obama’s approval ratings are in the basement and show no signs of improving, so Democrats are keeping their distance. On the stump, in campaign ads and at fundraisers, Obama’s absence is increasingly conspicuous.
Democrats are voicing their displeasure with his policies and campaign advisers are telling candidates to avoid being photographed with him, so as to deny Republicans effective visuals for campaign ads.
“It’s a no-brainer,” said one operative who works for a senator up for reelection in 2014. “The second term has been a bit of a disaster, his approval ratings are the lowest of his presidency and Washington is in disarray.”
Many of the Democratic senators elected in 2008 rode to office on Obama’s coattails. Six years later, they’re asking, “Barack who?”
Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) last week ,avoided being at his own fundraiser while Obama was there, excusing himself on the grounds that he had to attend votes at the Capitol.
Yes Anonymous, it has, BECAUSE THE GOP WILL NOT ALLOW ANY BILLS TO COME TO A VOTE THAT WOULD CURTAIL IT! You can't BLAME OBama for things when the House won't allow him to act. Jeez, you are a fucking moron aren't you?
Its so painful to read that "Obama The Pariah" article.
Clearly the chickens are finally coming home to roost for Obama. Even the lap dog media is looking very stupid if they keep trying to cover up for this failed, incompetent president.
But what really flares up my hemorrhoids are the white Senators who rode Obama's coattails to victory and now won't be seen with him. Just look at Sen. Mark Udall who cancelled appearing at his own fund raiser because Obama was going to show up! I can only conclude to the best of my knowledge that these people are RACISTS!!!
Obama's disapproval rating is so high that Debbie Wasserman Schultz just cancelled him to get her hair re-frizzed and Nancy Pelosi told him she is cancelling lunch next week because she would rather have a colonoscopy.
BECAUSE THE GOP WILL NOT ALLOW ANY BILLS TO COME TO A VOTE THAT WOULD CURTAIL IT
Not the truth, House passes bills that Harry Reid refuses to allow the Senate to even vote on. The House is the source of ALL spending bills. The Senate is blocking legislation, even though the O-Baggers hold the majority.
Anonymous, Reid is not going to vote on a bill to defund or repeal Obamacare, and even if it passed the Senate which it never would, Obama would VETO. He is also not going to vote on bills that have the XL pipeline attached which NO ONE with a brain wants. Other than that the GOP House has not sent much his way, so stop making that tired old excuse. Obama ahs called for immigration reform (Demanded by the GOP) and the house does nothing. Obama has sent THREE different jobs bills including a highway bill that has passed renewal several times before he got elected. NOTHING. SO the GOP which has stated publicly more than once that they refuse to work with OBama under any circiumstances, is now threatening to "sue" the President for using the EO like every President before him, even though they should know that one cannot sue a sitting president for official acts. MORONS.
Mozart,
If you don't agree with Obama, you are a MORON. Or are you a racist?
EO's that the Supreme Court ruled were not Constitutional.
Typical O-bagger.
"THE GOP WILL NOT ALLOW ANY BILLS TO COME TO A VOTE"
"Reid is not going to vote on a bill"
"Obama would VETO"
"the GOP House has not sent MUCH his way"
Which "tired excuse" is it Mozart?
You are the one making excuses for being a troll. You tell me. I stand by my statements, and you know they are true.
THis congress is the worst in history, and why is that?
"Our FIRST PRIORITY is to make Obama a one term President" Mitch McConnell
I also noticed you edited what I said to fit your agenda. Fox news much?
Oh and was that the same supreme court that said corporatins are people and that a buisiness can decide what healthcare they allow women to get?
yeah, that's credible.
"THis congress is the worst in history, and why is that?
"Our FIRST PRIORITY is to make Obama a one term President" Mitch McConnell"
Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, not the Congress.
If poll ratings are so important to you, how do you deal with the poll's that show Obama has a high disapproval rating and the numbers for his policies are even worse?
"I stand by my statements, and you know they are true." Spoken like a true O-Bagger
Tom,
I particularly liked "JFK and the Unspeakable" by James W. Douglass. I'm a fan of his.
Have you had a chance to read it?
Um...Anonymous, "Congress" includes the SENATE and the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress
LOL. I love it when you step in your own shit.
Oh, and anonymous, if you look at the polls, most of the people who "dissaprove" want MORE of Obama's policies and are dissapointted that he's not MORE AGRESSIVE against the right.
But you never did let the facts color your thinking did you?
"Oh and was that the same supreme court that said corporatins are people and that a buisiness can decide what healthcare they allow women to get?"
More rhetorical twisting to color an argument - when if fact you have no argument...
To be clear, they were fighting a bad law in the ACA that overstepped their religious freedom. They were protesting the fact that they would be required to provide (at no cost to the insured) forms of abortafacients - not merely "birth control". And, certainly not "health care". It liberal humanistic policy carry-over from the sexual revolution that has destroyed our moral and social fabric - at best. Eugenic carry-over at worst. And, it is the continuing humanistic attempt to force any religious expression to be solely an individual (and keep-it-to-yourself) realm. I applaud Hobby Lobby for standing up to the totalitarian nature of the bad policy. And, I stand with them.
ACA is unconstitutional on many levels, and one of the worst policies to come out of Washington in a long time.
Those who want more of Obama want less of what made America a once-great nation. Many past presidents have been less-than-satisfying - his presidency is a disaster.
Tom, the argumentation out here is becoming more and more ridiculous everyday. I fear greatly for a country if its citizens truly think this way. And, based on what I hear, I'm afraid they do.
The crazies are not kidding and if you think that you forgot about Clinton being impeached.
They have done nothing. They have nothing else.
I'm surprised Mr. Issa isn't taking the lead on impeaching Obama.
"But you never did let the facts color your thinking did you?"
Unlike you Mozart who believe, like a good O-bagger, that Obama has been a success?
These mystical polls you keep referring to, where can one find them, to see if " most of the people who "dissaprove" want MORE of Obama's policies and are dissapointted that he's not MORE AGRESSIVE against the right"? You realize that "the right" is made up of America's just like you? Obama's aggression is therefore against Americans who do not agree with him.
"THis congress is the worst in history" which means the Senate too? The Harry ("our borders are secure") Reid led and controlled Senate? Say it's not so!
Harley,
Never forget the goal of Obama and his followers has been and ever more will be to "fundamentally change America". What we see now on our southern border is an example of that change that is being allowed and promoted to detriment of all American CITIZENS.
If Obama had done nothing more that this, it will be enough to "fundamentally change America". If in 50 years his history is written in English he will go down as a traitor to his of Oath of Office, if the history is in Spanish, he will be a hero.
Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley warned a panel of lawmakers that they “must act” in support of a lawsuit against President Barack Obama for executive overreach or face “self-destruction” as a deliberative body.
Turley appeared as a witness for the House Rules Committee on Wednesday as that panel considered advancing a proposed lawsuit that would check the White House’s recent moves to cut out Congress on issues like health-care reform, immigration and drug policy.
The George Washington University law professor — who supports many of President Obama’s policies but opposes their unilateral implementation — expressed his support for the lawsuit and his belief that Congress, as a coequal branch of government, has the standing to sue to presidency.
“Our system is changing,” he warned, “and this body is the one branch that must act if we are to reverse those changes. We are seeing the emergence of a different model of government, a model long-ago rejected by the framers.”
Turley excoriated lawmakers who he believes won’t stand up for their own rights under the Constitution.
not a problem if you believe that Hope and Change means to "fundamentally change America".
ANonymous, you have nothing to say about failing 5th grade social studies? The Senate is doing fine, though I am dissapointed about INE thng they did. They checkened out on gun control. Other than that they are doing thaie best against GOP obstuctionism.
But no apology about BOTH THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE BEING PART OF CONGRESS?
ANd Yes Clinton got impeached. And when it happened his popularity went up 20%. I Can't WAIT for the GOP to do it to Obama. It will be the final nail it the coffin of the "Grumpy ole party". Why do you think they haven;t done it yet? THEY KNOW.
It's also funny that they WHINED AND CRIED about certain parts of the ACA being enacted, so Obama threw them a bone and postponed parts of it, and NOW they want to SUE him for that (One cannot sue a sitting president for official acts, so it's an idle threat)
And there was no "rhetorical twisting" about the SCOTUS, just legitimate questions about their objectivity. 5 more conservatives obstucting justice instead of doing the jobs they were charged with.
Do we have to teach you government 101 again Anonymous?
LOL. Come back again so we can "school" you. It's so much fun.
Thanks to Anonymous Chuckie for his glowing tribute to Turley:
I happen to agree with him. Let’s see more from Turley:
”We have had the radical expansion of presidential powers under both President Bush and President Obama.
With President Obama they have a president who went to the CIA soon after he was elected and promised CIA employees that they would not be investigated or prosecuted for torture, even though he admitted that waterboarding was torture.
President Obama has not only maintained the position of George W. Bush in the area of national securities and in civil liberties, he's actually expanded on those positions. He is actually worse than George Bush in some areas…a good example of it is that President Bush ordered the killing of an American citizen when he approved a drone strike on a car in Yemen that he knew contained an American citizen as a passenger… Well, President Obama outdid President Bush. He ordered the killing of two US citizens as the primary targets and has then gone forward and put out a policy that allows him to kill any American citizen when he unilaterally determines them to be a terrorist threat.
Bush and Obama both selected Attorney Generals who would do what they wanted them to do, who would enable them by saying that no principles stood in the way of what they wanted to do. More importantly, that there were no principles requiring them to do something they didn't want to do, like investigate torture.
On corporate media:
The civil liberties perspective is rarely given more than a passing reference while national security concerns are explored in depth. Fox is viewed as protective of Bush while MSNBC is viewed as protective of Obama. But both presidents are guilty of the same violations.
I have a great proposal for a compromise that should please all civil libertarians. Instead of the theatrics of a lawsuit over Obama delaying what the GOP wants to abolish entirely, let’s arrest Obama and Bush/Cheney for violating the constitution by committing war crimes.
Oh, that’s right. Bush and Cheney are blameless and everything is the black guy’s fault to the extreme Right.
There really is no compromise with fascists and extremist ideologues. They will cheer the next Republican president for doing the same things Obama is doing, just as unenlightened liberals support Obama for committing and allowing the same crimes as Bush committed.
Oh, well, at least I tried to reason and compromise. I can’t help it if reason and compromise are shunned by the radical Right.
Their “values” have no room for such civilized measures.
Well, I for one didn't cheer on much of what Bush did...
Anonymous is strangly quiet these days...wonder why...;)
Harley,
Did you hear today about Israel launching a ground attack on Gaza Strip.
The downing of a passenger aircraft over the Ukraine killing almost 300?
That the lack of sun spots indicate the start of a cooling climate change?
That the illegal immigrants invading across our southern borders are bringing disease into our country?
Did you hear of ANOTHER IRS computer crashing and burning?
Or that the bad polls for Obama are because of the GOP not doing what he commands?
That President Obama is blameless unless conservatives criticize GWB?
To clear the air for once and for all so that we CAN talk about the BLACK GUY and can be critical of the BLACK GUY and we can BLAME the BLACK GUY, the policy's of GWB did not always get the hopped for results, and he made mistakes.
There, I blamed Bush. End of story.
Now let's do some current events.
Now let's talk about why this President is tearing apart our country with his policy of
fundamental change of America. Let's talk about what Prof Turley said yesterday about Obama instead of what he said who knows how long ago about GWB, you know FORMER President Bush. Who I have criticized.
Can the O-Baggers afford to do so? I doubt it. If their past criticism of Obama is any indicator, they will criticize him for not being liberal enough, too much like Bush, failing because of someone else actions.
Talk about impeachment only in the light of GWB, ignore the fact that the world is burning down around them, while they dream of a more liberal world where guns can be made into ELECTRIC CARS
Mozart,
It amazes me how you can say Congress is the reason for Obama's failure, then define Congress as the senate and the House and then defend the Senate under Harry Reid, claiming they are not the problem. That want Obama to attack with his policy's your fellow Americans who disagree with his policy's because it prevents those people from becoming the ruling class and haughty, provides the depth of you misunderstanding of what Conservatives stand for.
the policy's of GWB did not always get the hopped for results, and he made mistakes.
Ooh, harsh and in-depth analysis.
LOL!!!
I guess the same can be said for Obama, except he's black of course. That makes it much worse.
Obama lied, nobody died. Bush lied, hundreds of thousands died and are still being killed.
Anonymous, I don't define congress as the Senate and the house IT IS THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE, and I DO blame the GOP controlled house becuse they ARE the problem! THEY said they would refuse to work with Obama, THEY shut down the government over a hissy fir THEY are wsting time voting to repeal OBamacare 50 TIMES, and suing Obama for doing what they asked him to do even though YOU CANNOT SUE A SITTING PRESIDENT OVER OFFICIAL ACTS.
Besides, do you REALLY think you have any credibility afyer you proved you lack a 5th graders knowledge of our government?
(Not that you had any credibility to begin with LOL)
Sigh,
As I expected O-Baggers, Dubya and Mozart, don't want to discuss current events.
Taking a page out of the Hero of Socialist Workers play book
When asked by CNSNews.com on Wednesday whether legalizing illegal aliens would help the unemployed in the United States, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D.-Conn.) countered that that was a “a gotcha question” and declined to answer it.
DeLauro was speaking outside the U.S. Capitol at a rally for the unemployed.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/20/exclusive-hillary-clinton-took-me-through-hell-rape-victim-says.html
"The woman at the center of the scandal over Hillary Clinton’s defense of an alleged child rapist speaks out in depth for the first time.
Hillary Clinton is known as a champion of women and girls, but one woman who says she was raped as a 12-year-old in Arkansas doesn’t think Hillary deserves that honor. This woman says Hillary smeared her and used dishonest tactics to successfully get her attacker off with a light sentence—even though, she claims, Clinton knew he was guilty.
In a long, emotional interview with The Daily Beast, she accused Clinton of intentionally lying about her in court documents, going to extraordinary lengths to discredit evidence of the rape, and later callously acknowledging and laughing about her attackers’ guilt on the recordings."
I just want to say that I was going to vote for Hillary in 2016. All I can say now is who would vote for such a nasty fucking cunt who laughed when she got a man off for raping a 12 year old girl?
Anonymous, we want to discuss the subjectt of the blog, not your constant WHINING about things completely unrelated.
Still haven't heard you admit you were wrong about the Senate being part of congress. Go figure. But I'm going to keep throwing that at you because it not only shows you have no understanding of how the government works, but it's just plan FUNNY.
No matter what you say, I am PROUD of what Obama is doing and PROUD to have voted for him. Is he perfect? Of course not, but he's certainly better than what we'd have with Uncle Pervy and Klondike Barbie in charge of things. He's doing his best considering the country he inherited from the CLOWN that came before and in spite of unprecidented (and quite fronkly CHILDISH) obstructionism from your heroes on the right.
Keep deflecting and making excuses though, it's clearly all you have.
Oh, and as for Hillary "defending a rapist" THAT WAS HER JOB! Everyone deserves a defense, even the guilty. We forget that John Adams defended the british soldiers in the Boston massacre. It's what we do. Innocent befre proven guilty, remember? Also, what was that 40 years ago? Why bring it up NOW? Oh yeah, politics.
Still haven't heard you admit you were wrong about the Senate being part of congress.
Nothing to apologize for. Just a realization that I cant fix stupid. Further you haven't answer my questions, no surprise there.
I did talk about impeachment, but I wasn't strong enough per your buddy Dubya, no surprise there. Although it would be pretty hard to impeach a former President, maybe we could start by impeaching Carter.
So have your little hate fest towards GWB if it makes you feel better and keeps you from having to blame the black guy.
In the words of H. Clinton
"What difference at this point does it make?”
How are your Spanish lessons coming along? Has your employer posted any job openings in Spanish yet? “Do you think allowing illegal aliens to stay in the U.S. and putting them on a path to citizenship will help unemployed Americans?”
No, you can't fix stupid. But at least you admit you have a problem and that's a start. As for the rest of your rant, it's just more of the same thing from all conservatives. Give Bush/Cheney a pass, blame the Black guy.
And liberals blame Bush/Cheney and give Obama a pass. Both sides are asymmetrically indignant towards the "other side" and grant an occasional critique towards their man.
The constant rehashing of it is old already. Is it possible to write a reply without referencing Bush or Obama?
I hate to tell you, but Obama and Bush have had lots of help screwing up this country. Hundreds if not thousands of leaders in Washington for decades have been working hard to put us in the hole we're in - quit giving all the credit to Obama and Bush. Neither of them created the fundamentals of the issues we are dealing with. Certainly neither had the ability/desire/political capital (whatever) to make any positive changes. And, both made / are making bad policy decisions. And both are beholden to forces more powerful than themselves.
Until we quit allowing money to talk and put these men in office (i.e. vote for a Libertarian or other 3rd party) we will get more of the same old shell game. Republicans think the pea is under the right shell - Democrats think it's under the left shell. But, there's no pea... someone else stole it a long time ago...
I mean, seriously, do you ever just get tired of being angry about this stuff? Do you ever step back and look at the utter futility of American politics? Do you ever doubt the certainty of your trust in ANY of these power-hungry folks?
Recommended reading - Psalms 2.
Until we quit allowing money to talk and put these men in office
Amen to that, Harley.
Point A: Corporate "persons" and corporatist pseudo-libertarians like the Kochs will never relinquish their "money is free speech" and a "corporation is a person" lock on electioneering and political power.
Point B: Our only hope is a constitutional amendment with clear definitions of persons and individual rights.
Point C: This will never happen. See point A.
Harley A.
Problem is Liberals are opposed to Libertarianism because it stands for less big government and stronger States rights.
As a Conservative and only speaking for my self, the only issue I have with Libertarians is their foreign policy towards Israel. For two reasons.
Biblical
"I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse"
GENESIS 12:3
Strategical
Israel is our ally in a part of the World were we have no others.
Israel does not demands we convert to Judaism or die.
Israel is not run by a dictator or king likes it's neighbors.
Israel has freedom of religion.
When Libertarianism resolves that issue they would get my vote and my support. But here's is the problem as I see it. Libertarianism does not take votes from the democrat party's base, but it does take votes from the GOP base. It should be no surprise that liberals, who favor the democrat party would encourage conservative voters to vote libertarian.. Same thing that happened with Ross Perot. He took more conservative votes from the GOP than he did the DNC with the result being Clinton elected for two terms but never with majority.
I view 3rd party's with caution.
I view 3rd party's with caution.
As do all devoted partisans.
Some of us view the entrenched, and sold out, 2 parties with caution. Neither represents the public over special moneyed interests.
Obama has never acted on his progressive rhetoric. Like his fellow democratic-republicans he answers to established economic and militarist interests.
Once in office, Obama chose:
• three successive White House chiefs of staff who’d made fortunes in the financial industry: Rahm Emanuel (amassed $16 million within a couple years of exiting the Clinton White House), William Daley (JPMorgan Chase) and Jacob Lew (Citigroup/now U.S. Treasury Secretary).
• Wall Streeters to dominate his economic team, including Clintonites like Larry Summers as chief economic advisor and Peter Orszag as budget director.
• Monsanto executives and lobbyists for influential food and agriculture posts.
• a corporate healthcare executive to preside over healthcare “reform,” while allowingpharmaceutical lobbyists
to obstruct cost controls.
• an industry-connected nuclear power and fracking enthusiast as Secretary of Energy.
• two successive chairs of the Federal Communications Commission who’ve largely served corporate interests, including former lobbyist Tom Wheeler now undermining Net Neutrality.
For the most part, the Rebublicrat Party simply has two faces.
"While today's political climate is tense, agreement on some essential economic truths could help lawmakers get things done in Washington, says Jeffrey Dorfman, University of Georgia economics professor.
Dorfman identifies 10 important economic facts that he says policymakers(NOTE TO ALL, THE PROF SAID TO POLICYMAKERS, NOT TO A CERTAIN PARTY) need to recognize:
Government only reshuffles wealth, jobs and income; it cannot create anything on its own, as it has to take money from some in order to spend it on others. Any money collected or jobs "created" by government merely replace the private sector investment and job creation that would have occurred had people been allowed to spend their own funds.
Income inequality does not harm the economy. While the poor spend nearly all of their money, higher-income earners save some of their income, which is just as good for the economy as spending, if not better. Saving leads to more investment and greater national income in the long run.
Paying low wages is not corporate exploitation. Just as businesses have to set prices according to consumer demands, they establish wages based on the supply and demand for labor.
Environmental over-regulation drives up prices. Because the poor spend a greater percentage of their income, especially on energy, such over-regulation acts as a regressive tax.
Education is not a public good. While we publically fund K-12 education, it produces human capital that is privately owned by each person. While many defend public education because it is a "public good," it is important to realize that the ensuing benefits of education are not given away for free.
CEO pay may be high, but so is the pay to athletes and movie stars. Such pay may reduce a company's profits, but it does not reduce the pay of other employees, as their pay is determined the marketplace.
Consumer spending does not drive the economy. Saving more and spending less of our income will lead to greater wealth in the long run.
"Free" things provided by the government are typically low-quality and unnecessarily expensive.
Injustices happen. The government cannot correct every injustice, and every time the government steps in to "fix" something, it puts costs on someone else. Affirmative action policies, for example, grant college admissions only by denying admissions to other applicants.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. "Free" government services cost money. Similarly, raising the minimum wage gives money to employees only by taking away jobs and raising prices for consumers.
While liberals often focus their policy arguments on compassion, compassion cannot trump basic economic truths, writes Dorfman. All too often, government policies have unintended -- and harmful -- consequences."
Is this libertarianism Harley?
WE don't give Obama a pass, but he didn't start two wars based on a lie, crash the economy and steal BILIONS from the American people. He didn't allow the biggest attack on American soil since the Civil War,(and sit doing nothing for 7 minutes while it was happening) ignore millions of hungry homeless people after a hurricane, put hundreds of thousands out of their homes....jeez, I could go on all day.
OBama's crime? Being Black in a White mans world.
And Anonymous, yes COLLECTING AND SPENDING MONEY IS PART OF THE GOVERNMENTS JOB You are benefitting from that right now as you foam at the mouth using the internet. Do you really think Republicans don't do that? They "reshuffle money" from the hands of the poor and middle class to the hands of the rich.
And Harley, the Bible is a book of MYTH. If you want to go there try the stuff about JESUS. I'm an Ateist but whoever wrote the stuff attributed to Jesus had the right idea.
And spending money to help poor people is ALWAYS better than handing it to those already rich. I notice Anonymous NEVER mentions corporate welfare. Just the talking points Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck tell him to regurgitate.
HEY ANAONYMOUS, DO YOU STILL THINK THE SENATE IS NOT PART OF CONGRESS?
jeez...
Dorfman's Right wing dogma, courtesy of the National Center for Policy Analysis, is presented as “facts”. LOL!
Of course!
This is corporatist propaganda in its essence. Can we imagine the Kochs, Exxon-Mobile and other wealthy power elites funding the National Center for Policy Analysis?
Let’s follow the money , shall we?
Harry Bradley was one of the original charter members of the far right-wing John Birch Society, along with another Birch Society board member, Fred Koch, the father of Koch Industries' billionaire brothers and owners, Charles and David Koch.
So yes, these so-called “facts” are merely corporate PR, of the far Right.
“Income inequality does not harm the economy.”
The IMF doesn’t see that “fact” either. Only the arrogance of the far right does this. MOST people, as well as scientists, are ignored by corporate PR.
Income Inequality Leads to Slower Economic Growth -IMF Economists
“Education is not a public good.” Amazing. It is a private good, and a public good.
“Paying low wages is not corporate exploitation.” Right, and neither was slavery.
“Consumer spending does not drive the economy.” Preposterous and contrary to realty. What kind of economy is NOT driven by consumer spending?
Above all, Screw the public:
Majority of Americans want minimum wage to be, poll finds increased
I could go on, but there’s no point in contradicting far Right beliefs with facts.
They can’t handle the truth. They trust only corporate PR and party propaganda, and they prove me correct all the time.
Thanks.
Right on Dave Dubya!
Its the Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers, Koch Brothers!
Fellow marxist brother Dave, have you noticed Obama seems to be speaking more with his negro dialect lately in his speeches?
"Harry Reid" is clearly working for the Koch bros, and is a racist besides. Go figure.
Wow Mozart, think for a minute about what you just said.
Income disparity has grow at the highest rate under Obama than under any President in our history.
You are saying without the "state" there would be just two classes, the "RULING class,and a SERVICE class".
Do you mean as an example like Cuba? Or our IRS, or VA?
According to what you said, the other benefit conservatives would get would be
to "feel superior, right"? The role of govt programs is to control how a group of people feel? Does this mean you feel better about yourself when others have to pay more in taxes than you do? How does your feeling better improve your life style?
If as you said it would "benefit conservatives (at least those running the show)" then why would the conservatives not running the show stay conservative? Or you could look at it this way, if being conservative put you into the RULING class, why wouldn't everybody be conservative?
What I'm amazed by is your belief that government programs are designed in part to punish some to the benefit of others. Wouldn't it make more sense if government programs were designed to punish no one, to benefit all, and to allow all the move upward in economic class as their skill and efforts would take them?
I don't believe that those unable to reach their best because of physical or mental handicaps should not be taken care of 100% by the rest of us. What % of us would fit into that class, 4%, 6%? Nor am I saying to do away with SS and Medicare. Instead I want both programs to apply for those whom it was originally designed.
Some time take a look at the Iowa state budget. Look how the money is being spent. I would not be surprised if you were to find the largest % of the budget was on social service programs,(not education, not roads, not law enforcement) maybe up to 45% of the total. Do you think that 45% of Iowans are helpless with out government?
Wow Anonymous, think about what YOU said:
"Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, not the Congress."
I think I'll disregard any of your inane rants for lack of basic intelligence.
Mozart,
Are the Democratic Senators running for reelection this year who refuse to appear in any photo ops with Obama racists?
I agree with Dave Alinsky Dubya that they are racists.
No Dave, since Obama is telling them they should do so. It's not the "scandal" you think it is.
Why was George W. Bush not invited to the 2008 GOP convention?
Why was George W. Bush not invited to the 2008 GOP convention?
Same reason Democratic Senators running for reelection this year refuse to appear in any photo ops with Obama. But, and I realize this may come as a complete shock to you, Bush is NOT the current President!
Or maybe it's the low poll numbers Obama has? Still waiting for proof that the cause of these poll numbers are due to THE ONE not going far enough.
I have news for you Anonymous, the damage his administratin did will be with us for generations, and most of it you and your ilk BLAME on Obama. Let's see if you give Obama a pass in a couple years when Hillary is running the country. Remember, the feces throwers on AM radio and Fox news BLAMED 9-11(and many other Bush screw ups) on Clinton.
You might as well give up, whatever shred of credibility you might have had died when you claimed the Senate was not part of congress. Your real name is not "Sarah" is it?
Honestly Mozart I would again explain to you that you quoted a Senator while you were blaming Congress, and when I said that the blame must therefore apply to the Senate as well as the House since Congress is made up of both, you said the Senate was doing fine. However the quote you provided was from a Senator. How therefore would a quote from a Senator apply to the House? Now if a member of the House was quoted it would then follow that the House was prevented Obama from reaching his full affirmative action self. That is not what happened. But I doubt you would get it even if I explained to you 100 more times, so why bother.
You can't fix the stupidity of an O-Bagger.
I have to agree with anonymous on this one.
Mozart really is a dumb fukker!
Not knowing the congress is made up of both the House and Senate is really sad.
LIFs (low information voters) like this make you wonder if you should have to pass a test to vote, just like you should have to pass a test to drive. just sayin.
The Senate IS doing fine, IN SPITE of a bonehead like Mitch McConnell. He wasn't speaking for the Senate, he was speaking for the Republican party. YOU said
"Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, NOT THE CONGRESS."
Those were your EXACT WORDS.
AS usual you rewrite history like a good conservative as if everyone didn't see what you said.
And James Hansen, call me what you want, but I know the Senate was part of congress, Anonymous didn't.
THe Senate didn't shut down the government. The Senate has not voted to reapeal the ACA FIFTY TIMES even knowing that it would never pass. The Senate is not wasting MORE time and money "sueing" The President.
Please. Just stop, the hole you are digging is nearly to China already.
I apologize Mozart. I see now that anonymous is probably working for the Koch Brothers and is trying to twist the facts like that socratic waffler Dave Dubya.
Anon -
The thrust of my argument was not to promote Libertarians necessarily. Rather, to say the two parties do not stand for what they say they do. There is a common factor (complex in scope) that drives both at this point - and it has little or nothing to do with the "will of the people". There is no other explanation for the dissonance and confusion we see.
Rather than seek to address such a complex force that arguably is outside our ability to defeat, it is far easier to pick a "side" and claim that our problems are all due to the "other side". It is oversimplification and it is a tool used by our leadership to keep us ignorant and distracted.
Don't you find the notion that these two entities (REP/DEM parties) somehow encapsulate the essential beliefs of most of our population and that we are truly essentially pitted against one another in our life goals at a 50/50 ratio. It is a ridiculous notion when you think about it - but that is what they want us to believe - it is that lie that keeps them in control.
Hmmphmmphmmpm.. Sorry, hard to talk with Bush and Cheney's weens in my mouth at the same time.
A YouGov/Huffington Post poll found that 49% of Americans, 89% of Republicans, and a majority of independents (52%) "think that President Obama has exceeded the constitutional limits of Presidential authority." But 35% of Americans "say impeaching Obama would be justified," including 8% of Democrats, 37% of independents, and 68% of Republicans.
Time Magazine has issued a kick to Obama’s groin with a piece called The Border And Obama. In it, author Joe Klein calls Obama a coward and begs him to do something, anything, presidential. And those are some of the nicer things he says about our Procrastinator-In-Chief.
Besides being wrong about everything, the biggest slam on Obama is he essentially does nothing. He’ll make a few speeches blaming Republicans for his failings, then whisk off for golf, vacations, and fundraising. Conservatives have noticed this behavior since the beginning of his first term, but now with his inaction on the border crisis, the liberals are waking up to it, and they’re just as pissed off as the rest of us.
Waking up to except the O-Baggers like Mozart
So if Obama is "doing nothing" how is it that he's a "Dictator" who's "Destroying America"?
And I don't call getting millions of people acces to affordable healthcare "Nothing". I also don't call eliminating TWO enemies of our nation"nothing". But if you think he's so inneffective, why don't you tell your heroes in the HOuse of Reps to get off their asses and DO SOMETHING TO HELP HIM AND STOP OBSTRUCTING EVERYTHING?
Jeez, your hypocricy is only exceeded by your stupidity.
"Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, NOT THE CONGRESS." --- Anonymous
James Hansen, Apology accepted.
Mozart, some one is using my name, as you can see they spelled it wrong both times and I never attack people with the word "fukker"
I only post when I have something intelligent to say so they cannot copy that.
'DO SOMETHING TO HELP HIM AND STOP OBSTRUCTING EVERYTHING"
I have a phone and I have a pen, and you think he needs help in advancing his dangerous radical far left socialist agenda?
Thank God Congress is trying to stop him.
Now you are giving Obama credit for eliminating two of our enemies? How can that be Mozart, I thought our two enemies were based on a lie from Bush? How can Obama take credit for eliminating enemies who according to liberals Bush created?
"millions of people "acces" to affordable healthcare" Including the wave of new Democrat voters illegally crossing our southern border. (I hope the majority of them end up living in eastern Iowa, next to you then we will see if Mozart an put his money where his mouth is) Access and being signed up are two different things. Just like you have access to the library, doesn't mean you have a library card.
I never said Gadaffi and bin Laden were lies from Bush. I said WMD'S IN IRAQ were lies from Bush. Once again you prove your stupidity. And if the House of Reps (Reprobates?) wants to oppose Obama that's fine, BUT COME UP WITH A SOLUTION OF THEIR OWN!!! Their plan is to do NOTHING! "Oh, we are the party of fiscal responsibility! Let's waste time and money voting on soemthing 50 TIMES that we KNOW has no chance of passing! Boehner called it a "symbolic victory". Yeah, how much did your 50 "symbolic victories" cost the American taxpayers? Then your heroes want a pipeline from CANADA so they can sell oil to CHINA an somehow that gets America off of "foreign oil". What?
Then we have EIGHT hearings on Benghazi, during which NO EVIDENCE OF WRONGDOING OR NEGLIGENCE IS EVER FOUND! How did that save money or help the country? You keep repeating the "What possible difference could it make" line like it's relevent, but you left out the FACT that HIllary was trying to find ways to see that IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN! The GOP neglected to add to the hearings that it was THEM that refused to authorize funding for additional security! NOw they want to "sue" the President even though that is against the law. They don't care because they know their followers (like you) don't know that you cannot sue a sitting president for official acts. It does give the feces throwers on AM radio and Fox news something to crow about, even though it's NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Kind of like Obama's impeachment. They know if they actually try, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WOULD BE OVER.
"Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, not the Congress."
ROTFLMFAO!!! That is the gift that keeps on giving.
Oh, and my wife and I have offered to take at least one of these frightened REFUGEES into our home (You know a "Christian" act) but we have been informed that Govornot Two Salaries will have anyone who tries charges with "Harboring a fugitive". BTW, NONE of these CHILDREN would be eligable to vote in ANY election,(another scare tactice from the right, like saying they carry ebola) but if they DID become citizens and gain that right, who do you THINK they would vore for? The people that treated them like human beings, or those that treated them like vermin? Jeez...you are SUCH a dittoheaded moron.
James,
Welcome to the club!
Chuckie is so alone in his fearful little world, he needs to make up imaginary friends.
So far in this thread, he is at least, Anonymous, Chuckie, Dave Alinsky Dubya, James Hanson, and Stephanie. His ridiculously obvious MO is quite plain to see. Ignorance and hate permeate all his words.
It's about "values" and "character", right?
Harley,
My reply was an attempt to show that the Democrat/ liberals while they say amen to your position that both parties being bad only do so as it weakens by dividing the party(s) who oppose them. Dubya proved that with his response to the post I sent to you. Republicans do not react to Libertarians as Democrats do. Why, because at its root Libertarianism threatens the liberal notion that the answer to any problem is more govt regulations and spending. Without problems, there would be no need for liberalism to fix with spending, rules and regulations. That is the source of their power, we (gov) can fix what ails you.
As I said in my post if it were not for their position on Israel, I could vote Libertarian.
Political Parties exist for one reason and that is to win elections. To do so a Party has to attract with it's platform the majority of votes. Hence the GOP's leadership reaction to the Tea Party movement, IE it threatens their power and their winning of elections. I imagine the Green Party has the same effect on Democrat party.
If as you state, the Parties have split us 50/50, then it would seem reasonable to examine their positions/ platforms.
One party is pro life, the other is not
On party believes that govt is the answer, the other not so much.
One party believes the job of govt is to punish some and reward others, the other party believes govt is best when it gets out of the way.
One party while claiming the other is authoritarian, supports more government rules and regulations on it's citizens for the greater good(?). The other party not so much.
Does the GOP have issues that I wish they would address internally by listening and acting on the voices of their base, the Constitutional and Social Conservative? Yes, I do. I am willing to weaken their goal of winning elections and by doing so allowing abortion rights to expand? No I am not. It is not unlike the liberal who claims their disappointment with Obama is that he hasn't gone far enough, but would not vote for a candidate who was less liberal. Out of necessity, it works for the GOP as well.
While I agree that it is impossible to believe that just two parties
encapsulate the essential beliefs of most of our population, it is also impossible to envision a coalition government at the federal level performing it's duties as set forth by the Constitution. Since the Constitution does not limit the number of party's that can offer candidates, (we could turn into a one party system) I believe the current two party system is one that has evolved because it has worked. If it starts to fail, then I believe it will be replaced with something else by the voters.
Is it perfect, not by a long shot, should it be fixed, absolutely, is it the best we have right now, yes.
Better hope this article doesn't get out.
americanthinker.com/2014/07/ten_reasons_i_am_no_longer_a_leftist.html
One party is pro life, the other is not
(Yeah, "Pro life" if you are rich and WHITE" see Central American Refugees, and any poor kid 10 secods after birth)
On party believes that govt is the answer, the other not so much.
(Yeah, the answer to keeping women in their place, people from marrying whom they choose, and opposing parties from Voting)
One party believes the job of govt is to punish some and reward others, the other party believes govt is best when it gets out of the way.
(Yeah punsihing the poor and rewarding the rich, punishing minorities and rewarding WHites, punishing women and reward ing men)
One party while claiming the other is authoritarian, supports more government rules and regulations on it's citizens for the greater good(?). The other party not so much.
(Complete and Utter BULLSHIT.)
Does the GOP have issues that I wish they would address internally by listening and acting on the voices of their base, the Constitutional and Social Conservative? Yes, I do. I am willing to weaken their goal of winning elections and by doing so allowing abortion rights to expand? No I am not. It is not unlike the liberal who claims their disappointment with Obama is that he hasn't gone far enough, but would not vote for a candidate who was less liberal.
(Obama is not a "Liberal" he's a moderate. He's closer to Regan than any candidate the GOP has put forward in a Generation.)
Out of necessity, it works for the GOP as well.
While I agree that it is impossible to believe that just two parties
encapsulate the essential beliefs of most of our population, it is also impossible to envision a coalition government at the federal level performing it's duties as set forth by the Constitution. Since the Constitution does not limit the number of party's that can offer candidates, (we could turn into a one party system) I believe the current two party system is one that has evolved because it has worked. If it starts to fail, then I believe it will be replaced with something else by the voters.
Is it perfect, not by a long shot, should it be fixed, absolutely, is it the best we have right now, yes.
Jeez Anonymous, you really are in "The Bubble" aren't you?
"Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, not the Congress." --- Anonymous
Obama's fascist corporatist disguised as a centrist.
Hey Anon, your post is right on the money, what is your opinion of Bush/Cheney?
"Ahh Mozart, Mitch McConnell is in the Senate, not the Congress." -- Anonymous
Yeah, we should take YOU seriously.
James,
This is what we got from Chuckie for Bush/Cheney:
the policy's of GWB did not always get the hopped for results, and he made mistakes.
War in Iraq for crony profit and political capital? Mission Accomplished.
Everyone else loses.
Oops, false reasons for the war. So what? What difference does it make now, right?
And the Great Bush Financial Collapse and Recession? Oops, deregulating Wall Street and "trickle down" benefits from tax cuts for the rich didn't turn out to be such a triumph for American capitalism after all. Few elite winners, mostly losers. What difference does it make now, right?
See? Bush did nothing as terrible as lead us from the brink of depression, and expand healthcare insurance. Now THAT's Communism. Unforgivable treachery, I tells ya. And Everything in Iraq is Obama's fault now too. Bush just didn't get the same the "hopped for results" is all. Then Obama ruined everything.
That should cover more than Chuckie would dare say about Bush/Cheney.
So impeach GWB.
If not, where can we send you cheese to go with your constant winning about Bush/Cheney?
Tom,I have been a fan of yours since I saw your posts on Alternet.I always enjoy your funny,yet very spot on comments on this refreshing blog.I was born in 1953,and today I have much more respect for my parents generation than for my own.It seems to me that Boomers dropped the ball bigtime first around 1968,and then again around 1980.What are your thoughts about what I am feeling about the "Peace and Love" generation,in 2014,now being a big fatassed blob that is quite a large sector of the gun industry,and that always entertaining clown car,the Baggers?? Thanks...
Tom,I have been a fan of yours since I saw your posts on Alternet.I always enjoy your funny,yet very spot on comments on this refreshing blog.I was born in 1953,and today I have much more respect for my parents generation than for my own.It seems to me that Boomers dropped the ball bigtime first around 1968,and then again around 1980.What are your thoughts about what I am feeling about the "Peace and Love" generation,in 2014,now being a big fatassed blob that is quite a large sector of the gun industry,and that always entertaining clown car,the Baggers?? Thanks...
Post a Comment
<< Home