Monday, March 12, 2012

Dog Days for the Mittster

These should be Mitt Romney's glory days. What with his round-up of all those juicy delegates in the primaries recently, everything should be coming up roses for our hero. And yet things just haven't been going his way. A photo caption in this week's Time Magazine reads, "Why is this man smiling?" Why indeed. It must be a terribly frustrating thing to be Mitt Romney these days. Were he to be elected president (and that's never gonna happen, I promise you) he would be an unerringly reliable water boy for the plutocracy. In spite of this fact, establishment Republicans continue to remain wary of him.

He has been stumbling across the country saying all of the idiotic things a candidate needs to say in order to fire-up "the base". But still, the nincompoops who tend to vote in Republican primaries - particularly down in Dixieland - refuse to see this "
sternly conservative" guy as an honest-to-goodness right winger. They steadfastly refuse to embrace this damned Yankee who was once the governor of "Taxachusetts" - a hostile foreign nation in the eyes of these chuckle-heads. And then there are the religious bigots and fools who tend to populate that region of the country. They just can't bring themselves to vote for a Mormon. As if things could not possibly get any worse for the guy, there is the Ghost of Seamus the Irish Setter to contend with. He has risen from the dead and he is chasing the Mittster across the American night. He is hounding his former master. Dogging him. Puns intended.

Seamus' Revenge

I never thought anyone would replace Molly Ivins when she died five years ago - and nobody has. But Gail Collins of the New York Times comes just a tad too close for comfort. She has been having more fun with this story than the law should allow. A column hasn't gone by since this primary season began where she hasn't managed to insert it somewhere into the piece regardless of its relevance to the topic in question . It really has been scads of fun to watch! Just in case this story has somehow managed to elude your attention, here are the Cliff Notes:

In the Sprin
g of 1992, Picture-perfect Mitt packed his picture-perfect Mrs. and their picture-perfect kids into the family station wagon and took off for a twelve hour drive from Boston to Toronto. Good ol' Mitt! He just couldn't bear to leave his dog Seamus behind languishing in a kennel. Isn't that sweet? Well, not exactly. He stuffed the poor creature into a dog carrier and strapped the crate onto the roof of the vehicle. En route, Seamus protested this harsh treatment by making a bit of a mess - which apparently started to leak down onto the windows of the car. This is the most apropos example of the "trickle down" theory I've ever heard of. Halfway toward their destination, Mitt pulled into a rest stop and calmly hosed-down the station wagon, Seamus and the crate. They then went on their merry way, Seamus and crate refastened to the roof. Once they arrived at their destination, Seamus ran away and became a temporary refugee of sorts . Legend has it that he sought asylum from the Canadians.

In 2007, one of Romney's sons cheerfully related this jaw-dropping story to the Boston Globe in an attempt to illustrate what a cool, take-charge kinda guy dear old dad is. Apparently sociopaths loom large in that family.

Mitt should be cut at least a little bit of slack here. We should not read too much into the fact that the dog ran away upon arriving in Toronto. Some Irish Setters are prone to that sort of behavior, but they always return home. Well almost always....

When I was a little
kid we had a Setter named Rex. He was an excitable pooch who (for his own well being) needed to be kept chained up when he was outside due to the unfortunate fact that whenever he got loose, he would run-a-terror all over the damned town. My cousin Mike Cullen (photo left) remembers that "REX IS LOOOOOOSE!!!" was the regularly scheduled shriek that could be heard emanating from our neighborhood on any given mid-nineteen-sixties afternoon. It was always next-to-impossible to catch the little bugger and bring him home. What usually happened was that, come dinner time, old Rex would be reminded of the hands that fed him and he would happily prance back to the door of our house, where a tasty plate of Purina Dog Chow was waiting for and thankfully received by him.

Then one fateful day in the autumn of 1966 - right around the time I entered the third grade if memory serves - Rex got loose again. Like a rabid bat on an LSD binge, he tore off for the abandoned harness racing track that once stood behind our home. We never saw or heard from him again - not even a postcard.
To this day, his fate remains a mystery. His disappearance soon gained him a sort of legendary stature; the Ambrose Bierce of hound dogs. As was the habit of so many restless souls in that bygone era, he quite possibly made his way to Haight Ashbury and got strung out on the hard stuff. We'll never know know.

In the long scheme of things, how a
man treats a dog is not necessarily a reliable gauge as to what kind of chief-executive he will turn out to be. Teddy Roosevelt once shot and killed a neighbor's dog merely for barking at him. He had recently lost his new bride Alice - and his mother - on the same day and was not in a particularly playful mood - as the poor canine found out much to its eternal chagrin I'm sure. Still, Roosevelt turned out to be a pretty good president. One of the best in fact! It must also be remembered that at the moment Teddy committed this inexcusable act of Fidocide, he was in a horrible mental state. At least it was not his own dog that he offed. I'm not trying to be an apologist for TR here, but he had many dogs throughout his life and by all accounts was very fond of - and kind to - each and every one of them. To the best of my knowledge, no historical record survives of him ever strapping any of the little darlin's to the roof of Sagamore Hill.
Maybe we should take Mitt Romney's word for it when he tries to make us believe that he was ignorant about the laws against using a live Irish Setter as a roof ornament. Maybe he is telling us the truth when he says that on that trip to Toronto thirty years ago, as the winds were blowing into his little face with all of the force of a major hurricane, Seamus was just having the time of his life. Sadly, he is no longer around to confirm or deny Mitt's claim. He shuffled off to doggie Heaven a long time ago, living out his declining days with Mitt's sister and her family on a farm in California. Again, pun definitely intended: Maybe this story is all bark and no bite (Clever, huh?) Maybe this is one of those non-issues that is intended to distract us from the real story which is, of course, the economic plunder of the American economy that's been going on for over thirty years now. Nonetheless, it does make you wonder about him just a bit, doesn't it? Every dog has his day, ay Mitt?

Not long after Rex took off to find the great American dream, he was replaced by a big black poodle named Bijou. Bijou's demeanor was more low key than the psychotic but perfectly lovable Rex. Whether Long Beach Island, New Jersey or Stowe, Vermont - he alwa
ys joined the family when we went on vacation.


And he always rode inside of the car. I'm just sayin'.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
Know Your Irish Setter:
A Comprehensive Owner's Manual

Just a thought.

For more recent postings on this electronic sewer of left wing propaganda. please go to the link below:

"The Rant" by Tom Degan


A toast to my late uncle Joseph A. Gargiulo (March 12, 1912-October 6, 1990) on the centennial of his birth. Joe was performing on Broadway with George M. Cohan in "I'd Rather Be Right" when he met my father's sister Audrey Degan. They married in 1942 and he left the Great White Way to settled down with her in Goshen, NY where for forty years he owned and operated the local hardware store. Tonight we'll raise a glass to you, Uncle Joe!


At 11:16 AM, Blogger Nancy, Near Philadelphia said...

Oh, dear. I just might have to share this.

My word verification is eredue uppled. I kind of like it.

At 12:08 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

At 12:12 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

I was going to say:

Oh, come on! What dog, or person for that matter, wouldn't love to be hosed down while sick, then confined and jostled around in a crate with hurricane force winds howling all around?

Uptight bleeding heart liberals just don't appreciate big fun, that's all.

But now I feel bad using sarcasm over the suffering of an innocent dog caused by a cold-blooded human.

Never mind.

At 3:28 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

I get the feeling the Seamus predicament may be a metaphor for the real hosing the American people can expect if, and when, Romney becomes number forty-five.

Canada may very well be our only escape.

At 3:53 PM, Blogger Ellis D., Esq. said...

See what happens when one has mitt for brains ??

At 4:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder if the way the Mittster treated his dog is, as unthinkable as it would be for a REAL patriot and would be leader of our country, just the way he would treat the aged--like me--and the middle class--like me, the disabled--like me, those with a set income--like me, and the impoverished.

At 5:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ask voters which presidential contender’s views are more like their own, and just 37% say President Obama. Most (53%) say they think more like one of the four Republican presidential hopefuls. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 16% of Likely U.S. Voters say when it comes to the important issues facing the nation, their views are more like former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s. An identical number (16%) say they think more like Rick Santorum.

The number of voters who consider President Obama more liberal than they are has risen this month to its highest level since last October.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters now think, in political terms, that the president is more liberal than they are. That’s up from 52% last month.

Eleven percent (11%) feel the president is more conservative than they are, and 25% say his views are about the same as their own.

At 5:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

(WaPo) — Disapproval of President Obama’s handling of the economy is heading higher — alongside gasoline prices — as a record number of Americans now give the president “strongly” negative reviews on the 2012 presidential campaign’s most important issue, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Increasingly pessimistic views of Obama’s performance on the economy — and on the federal budget deficit — come despite a steadily brightening employment picture and other signs of economic improvement, and they highlight the political sensitivity of rising gas prices.

The potential political con sequences are clear, with the rising public disapproval reversing some of the gains the president had made in hypothetical general-election matchups against possible Republican rivals for the White House. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former senator Rick Santorum (Pa.) now both run about evenly with Obama. The findings come just five weeks after Obama appeared to be getting a boost from the improving economy.

Gas prices are a main culprit: Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they disapprove of the way the president is handling the situation at the pump, where rising prices have already hit hard. Just 26 percent approve of his work on the issue, his lowest rating in the poll. Most Americans say higher prices are already taking a toll on family finances, and nearly half say they think that prices will continue to rise, and stay high.

Friday’s employment report showed a gain of 227,000 jobs in the past month, continuing an upward trend and offering the White House something positive to point to. Still, the survey — conducted Wednesday through Saturday — finds 59 percent of Americans giving Obama negative ratings on the economy, up from early last month. Now, 50 percent give him intensely low marks, the most yet in a Post-ABC News poll, and a jump of nine percentage points.

The negative movement has also stalled what had been a gradual increase since the fall in the president’s overall approval rating. In the new poll, 46 percent approve of the way Obama is handling his job; 50 percent disapprove. That’s a mirror image of his 50 to 46 positive split in early February. The downshift is particularly notable among independents — 57 percent of whom now disapprove — and among white people without college degrees, with disapproval among this group now topping approval by a ratio of more than 2 to 1, at 66 versus 28 percent.

At 6:13 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

"religious bigots and fools who tend to populate that region of the country."

That's quite a bold statement. How exactly did you come to that conclusion?

At 7:51 PM, Anonymous James said...

When Mitt was governor of Mass he helped push through universal health coverage but in the fine print of the coverage there is a huge problem. If your income is low enough to qualify for Mass Health, a free health care policy, there is a price to pay down the road.

If you accept even one year of coverage, the state will take your house when you die.

Some people are house rich and cash poor and will lose a 300,000 house for very little in return.

If Mitt would bring this up maybe Conservatives would say he is not that Liberal after all!

At 8:45 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Anonymous (aka, "Mitt" for Brains) said...

"The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters now think, in political terms, that the president is more liberal than they are. That’s up from 52% last month."

That's good thing! (Rasmussen Reports didn't call me. If they did, that percentage would be lower.)

At 8:07 AM, Anonymous boltok said...

Same boltok.

I read crap less so I have more time to type properly when I respond to it.

Still waiting for someone to pay me for my missives.

Let me help you understand the primary.
1. Romney will will in the not too distant future.
2. Ron Paul has negotiated a nice spot for Rand and will send his troops toward Romney.
3. Newt will be out soon. Too bad. I love his sarcasm.
4. Santorum will stay in till near the end. One, it increases his stock price for the future. Two, Democrats can't real start their media machine until their is one candidate, so the Republicans will own the story line and avoid attacks while the race goes on.

End result:
House held
Senate 60 R Seats =/- 2
Romney next president

Enjoy your final months of unbridled socialist imperialism.

Anywho, TD, this is the state of your state from one of your favorite sources. Watered down of course. Go government.

At 8:08 AM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

"At a time of rising gas prices, heightened talk of war with Iran and setbacks in Afghanistan, Mr. Obama’s approval rating dropped substantially in recent weeks, the poll found, with 41 percent of respondents expressing approval of the job he is doing and 47 percent saying they disapprove — a dangerous position for any incumbent seeking re-election. " NYT/CBS Poll

Go Obama, go, get more liberal, watch your approval numbers drop. Hurry up Nov!

At 12:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tom Deegan

The following may cheer up Mitt:

March 12, 2012
Poll: Obama's approval rating sinks to new low

(CBS News) President Obama's approval rating has hit the lowest level ever in CBS News polling, according to the latest CBS News/New York Times survey. The drop may be partially attributable to rising gas prices.

Just 41 percent of Americans approve of the job Mr. Obama is doing as president, according to the poll, conducted from March 7 to 11. Another 47 percent disapprove of his performance, up from 41 percent last month.

Mr. Obama's approval rating was 50 percent last month.

Jefferson's Guardian, is the news source valid? If you can't trust the Communist Broadcast Service, who can you trust?

At 4:07 PM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

In today’s CBS News poll:

Compared to four years ago, is your family’s financial situation better today, worse today, or about the same?

The survey finds 20 percent say better today, 37 percent say worse today, and 43 percent say “about the same.”

I guess Jefferson didnt get called on this poll either.

At 7:05 PM, Anonymous Edith Bunker said...

I voted for President Obama to see some "Hope and Change" but what I want to know is "Where is the beef?"

Does anybody here on "The Rant" know if President Obama wants higher or lower gas prices?

President Obama sure knows how to talk from both sides of his mouth.

At 3:44 AM, Anonymous Ron Baldwin said...

This is a true story. A friend had an Irish Setter who would run away anytime it could, despite a six foot fence in the back yard. They tied the dog on a long rope so he had the run of the yard. One day the dog figured how to get over the fence. Trouble was that the rope had only a three foot slack on the other side of the six foot fence. Ooops.

At 8:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tax the rich, tax the rich, tax the rich, we need more money!!

President Obama's national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO's standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama's pledge that the legislation would cost "around $900 billion over 10 years." When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.

Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law's core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion. That's because we now have estimates for Obamacare's first nine years of full implementation, rather than the mere six when it was signed into law. Only next year will we get a true ten-year cost estimate, if the law isn't overturned by the Supreme Court or repealed by then. Given that in 2022, the last year available, the gross cost of the coverage expansions are $265 billion, we're likely looking at about $2 trillion over the first decade, or more than double what Obama advertised.

At 3:12 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you quoted a partial sentence from Tom's post and commented...

"That's quite a bold statement. How exactly did you come to that conclusion?"

Obviously, you've never lived in the south.

Plus, yesterday's primary results in Alabama and Mississippi should have been some kind of a clue...

At 4:37 PM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

Jeff's Jockstrap,
Are you saying that anyone who doesn't vote liberal is stupid?

Support that position with sources showing where liberalism has improved lives over conservative postions.

At 5:02 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

JG -

The MS results were relatively evenly distributed. Is there some other distribution that would have indicated to you a higher average IQ amongst the GOP primary voters?

Since you've obviously lived in the south, tell me what it's like.

At 7:28 PM, Anonymous Nancy Peloosi said...

To The Rant,

I just want all my liberal friends here to know that the CBO has finally read what is in the ObamaCare bill and its gross costs will double to $1.76 Trillion.

At 7:38 PM, Anonymous James said...

Well here it comes, HR 347 the trespass bill. It will soon be a felony to protest so instead of a lousy night in jail for supporting the OW movement it could be years in jail. The for profit prison industry must be coming in their pants.

I believe Obama is eager to sign it when it hits his desk and of course it has full support amongst Republicans.

I was looking forward to seeing the OW movement go big this summer but I guess the whole thing will fizzle out with this development.

At 9:47 AM, Blogger Ellis D., Esq. said...

Once upon a time a bill such as HR 347 would have been ruled know when Mother Goose sat on the U.S. Supreme Court and all the fables were given the presumption of innocence !! How far we have fallen into the abyss....

At 11:03 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Below is HR 347. It is nothing new and is basic common sense – at least for those of us who enjoy living in a civil society with the rule of Law – however imperfect it may be.

‘‘(a) Whoever—
‘‘(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building
or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
‘‘(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the
orderly conduct of Government business or official functions,
engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such
proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so
that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions;
‘‘(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt
the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions,
obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted
building or grounds; or
‘‘(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence
against any person or property in any restricted building or
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided
in subsection (b).
‘‘(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is—
‘‘(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more
than 10 years, or both, if—
‘‘(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense,
uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm;
‘‘(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as
defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
‘‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more
than one year, or both, in any other case.
‘‘(c) In this section—
H. R. 347—2
‘‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any
posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
‘‘(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice
President’s official residence or its grounds;
‘‘(B) of a building or grounds where the President or
other person protected by the Secret Service is or will
be temporarily visiting; or
‘‘(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction
with an event designated as a special event of national
significance; and
‘‘(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’
means any person whom the United States Secret Service is
authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by
Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined
such protection.’’.

At 11:05 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Ellis, pray tell. Which part would have EVER been deemed unconstitutional?

At 11:16 AM, Blogger Ellis D., Esq. said...

Harley, for one thing that statute contains extremely vague and over-broad language that can easily be misapplied. All protests could be deemed disorderly and obstructive conduct. THAT is whole point behind demonstrations, to get attention and disrupt the establishment as much as possible. Anything less is chickenshit and useless. Amerikans take way too much bullshit from the establishment and fighting back is not only warranted, at this point it is ethically justified.

At 12:07 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

Ellis -

The concept of "disorderly conduct" is very well established in American law - you should know that. It is widely used in municipal and state ordinances. Nothing new at all.

At 12:22 PM, Blogger Ellis D., Esq. said...

Of course I know that Harley....disorderly conduct is used as grounds for just about every bullshit arrest of otherwise law abiding citizens that is made. That is why so many such charges end up dropped after review by prosecutors. It is used as a deterrent to suppress lawful citizen dissent.

At 12:40 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you countered with...

"Is there some other distribution that would have indicated to you a higher average IQ amongst the GOP primary voters?"

I don't recall equating "religious bigots and fools" with intelligence (or lack thereof), but I'd tend to believe there's a pretty strong correlation. Although, low intelligence certainly doesn't corner the market on bigotry or a lack of good sense and sound judgement.

"Since you've obviously lived in the south, tell me what it's like."

Aside from hot and horribly humid, I generally find the people, while outwardly friendly, to be excessively bigoted and prejudiced, close-minded, and suspicious toward those not exactly like themselves. Most, it seems, are ruled by fundamental Christian zealotry, and are not accepting of those who don't subscribe to their particular brand of religiosity. This attitude permeates their state and local governments, and carries over into a very restricted cultural atmosphere. That's why I'm not surprised that Rick Santorum took Alabama and Mississippi (and Tennessee and Oklahoma). They finally got over Catholicism, although it took fifty years, so the message of theological rule, overriding privacy, rang true with them -- whether Catholic or not Catholic.

At 12:58 PM, Blogger Ellis D., Esq. said...

JG all you need to do is have folks watch the movie Easy Rider. That shows the South at its best !!

At 2:25 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

"I generally find the people, while outwardly friendly, to be excessively bigoted and prejudiced, close-minded, and suspicious toward those not exactly like themselves..."

OK, and how does your approach towards them differ from your above characterization?

For the record, Tom called them "nincompoops" and "fools". I'm guessing nincompoops and fools tend to have lower IQs than the rest of us.

Also, the distribution of votes couldn't have been more equal amongst the three front-runners in MS. So, in my mind, the opportunity to simply spew hateful language by you and by Tom was gratuitous and baseless. You simply enjoy it, I think. Makes no difference to me, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

At 4:16 PM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

Easy Rider. The Movie, yup, Hollywood's all about getting it correct, never about reallty.

That's why you can no longer find the movie "Cruising".

At 4:29 PM, Blogger Ellis D., Esq. said...

JTF.....yeah there were never any rednecks in the South. Pure Hollywood fantasy !! Like that movie Game Change !!

At 4:38 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you replied with...

"So, in my mind, the opportunity to simply spew hateful language by you and by Tom was gratuitous and baseless." your mind...please indicate which words, that I used, you consider "hateful language".

At 9:41 PM, Anonymous J said...

Harley, I think you are ignoring the fact that they are not passing these new bills to rehash what is already law. These new laws will make protesting much more dangerous and risky to the patriotic people who get off their ass and try to change America for the better.

If you could have told me all about the Fascist laws passed and the crazy shit going on today, back in 1997 I would have told you it could never happen here. And I would have thought you a nut job.

But here we are 87 steps down the road to a Fascist United States and most people do not even give a shit about it!

At 10:52 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

JG -
I considered Tom's comments unfounded and hateful and you were quick to defend his conclusions regarding the "nincompoops" and "fools" in the South. I was surprised you did.

At 4:00 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you guys are champions at rephrasing and changing the whole discourse, aren't you?

Let me help refresh your memory of what transpired. Look back at your quoted phrase (time stamp 6:13 PM), where you inquired:

"That's quite a bold statement. How exactly did you come to that conclusion?"

I replied to this, which wasn't about "nincompoops" and "fools" as you alleged it was. I mentioned neither term, and neither did you (until after the fact).

But, I stand behind my observations cited at 3:12 PM and 12:40 PM.

Harley, apparently just like your friend and comrade-in-arms, Just the Falsehoods!, you can't argue in good faith. I'm disappointed in you. I thought you were better than that.

At 7:02 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Besides, Harley, I hardly think "nincompoops" and "fools" qualify as "hateful language".

Gimme a break...

At 9:49 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

JG -

I stand behind my assertion that you have treated the people you claim are "outwardly friendly, to be excessively bigoted and prejudiced, close-minded, and suspicious toward those not exactly like themselves" in the same way you describe them. You are prejudiced, close-minded and suspicious towards those not like yourself.

Obviously, anyone would understand I was referring originally to the totality of Tom's "rant" against the good people of MS, AL (and you added TN and OK). If you have nothing better to do than to nitpick, go right ahead.

To claim I'm "rephrasing" the whole discussion is laughable. But, right on cue, you quickly retreat to this kind of diversionary tactic in debating.

Okay, I'll take back "hateful". How about unfounded, mean-spirited and arrogant? Thanks for the correction.

At 11:30 AM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Nincompoops, bigots and fools are everywhere, and are not just Republicans...however:

Public Policy Polling surveyed 656 likely Republican voters in Mississippi and 600 likely Republican primary voters in Alabama on March 10th and 11th

PPP shows only 67% think that interracial marriage should be legal.

A very large percentage of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans believe President Obama to be Muslim.

In Alabama, 45% said “Muslim”, 41% said “unsure.” Only 14% said that the President is Christian.

Mississippi Republicans were even more distrusting of President Obama’s faith, with 52% saying he was Muslim, 36% unsure and only 12% saying Christian.

It’s no shock to see 60% do not believe in evolution.

This is the mentality that poisons our democracy. And we wonder why we’re headed off a cliff.

At 11:46 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you claim...

"Obviously, anyone would understand I was referring originally to the totality of Tom's "rant"..."

No, actually it wasn't obvious. Otherwise, you wouldn't have provided the quoted segment that you did, and instead would have claimed offense at the totality of the post (which you didn't). I'm sorry, but I'm not a mind reader.

"You are prejudiced, close-minded and suspicious towards those not like yourself."

No, there's a difference. I'm not the one who chooses to hate people based upon the color of their skin, or their gender, or their sexual preferences -- attributes that people have no control over; or one who chooses to limit a person's freedom of privacy because I don't agree with their religious (or non-religious, atheistic, or agnostic) beliefs. I don't attempt to impose my religious (or non-religious) beliefs upon others, and I especially don't believe anybody should be forced to compromise their freedom of choice when it doesn't infringe upon the freedoms or rights of others. I'm more open-minded than any conservative, whether it's concerning social issues or economic issues, and I don't advocate or choose to limit others' democratic freedoms and natural rights just because I personally don't subscribe to their beliefs. I believe in social, legal, and economic justice for all -- not just a small and select elite. If I'm suspicious of others, it's of those who claim to be doing "the work of god", or for the good of the country, while in reality they're doing the bidding for those with the deepest pockets and most deceitful agendas.

"Okay, I'll take back 'hateful'. How about unfounded, mean-spirited and arrogant?"

Nope, I'll stand by what I experienced personally while living in one of the reddest of red states. I prefer to call it empirical evidence, based upon a lot of observations in twenty years. It would only be mean-spirited if it wasn't true.

At 12:26 PM, Anonymous Harry From Mississippi said...

"A very large percentage of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans believe President Obama to be Muslim."

Why on earth would a person change his name to a muslim one then?

What percentage of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans believe the phoney reports that man is the major reason the climate is changing?

What percentage of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans believe the 911 was an inside job?

At 3:02 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Thanks for the link, Dave. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out how many couldn't answer Question #12 correctly? (Or would it?)

The "Other notes from Alabama and Mississippi" from PPP was just as interesting, and the comments were a riot!

At 5:04 PM, Blogger Harley A. said...

JG said -

"and I especially don't believe anybody should be forced to compromise their freedom of choice when it doesn't infringe upon the freedoms or rights of others"

The veiled reference to abortion kills the "others". That's what makes your statement so ridiculous and the pro "choice" reasoning so vacuous.

Also, for the record, I was born and raised in MS, university in TX, and have lived in TX, OK, and KS the bulk of my adult life. So, turns out, your very first assumption was wrong as well as the bulk of your arguments.

You feel you are unbiased and that southerners are overly biased, bigoted, foolish, etc. Ok. I've travelled and worked all over the country and I've found that people are people all over - and come in all stripes.

And, again, to re-iterate. The voters in MS evenly split amongst the 3 front-runners, which would indicate they were perhaps the most open-minded and least biased of any state regarding the Rep primary. Tom's insults were gratuitous and baseless.

I'm bored with this one now. I'm going to enjoy the incredible weather.

At 8:30 AM, Blogger Fabianna said...

Wasn´t the "Teddy Bear" named after Teddy Roosevelt for his kindness to a bear once? Yes those Irish Setters can be pretty high strung, we had one too. So sorry we never found out what happened to Rex maybe someone at the track adopted him.~)

At 10:56 AM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) counted a whopping 641 programs in place at 130 federal agencies in 2010 to prop up windmill technology and underwrite solar panel manufacturers. The report released Tuesday didn’t include a reliable estimate of the total cost to taxpayers. The auditors found the array of loans, tax credits, agency purchases of purportedly green vehicles and the cost of regulations would take a great deal of effort to tally.

For instance, the Commerce Department has a Joint Wind Energy Program, Clean Energy Trade Missions, a Global Climate Change Mitigation Incentive Fund, an Environmentally Sustainable Development Investment Priority and a Green Technology Pilot Program – to name just a few. These programs frequently overlap, as the Commerce Department also runs a Green Ship Initiative. The secretary of defense has his own Renewable At-Sea Power Program. The Navy has an Energy Program for Security and Independence, an Alternative Fuels Program, a Third Party-Financed Medium Scale Renewable Power Generation program, and more. Of course, the U.S. Navy was founded on renewable energy. It was wind power that propelled Capt. John Paul Jones and the USS Ranger to victory in battle with the HMS Drake in 1778.

At 3:16 PM, Anonymous Crazy Hungarian said...

Lets hope the Mittster wins in 2012!

Rather than “seeking to avert planetary destruction,” progressives are causing it. Their irrational crusade against C02 has disrupted the operations of almost every institution and market, and the interactions of humans within them.

They have poisoned the minds of impressionable students, teaching them that capitalism is evil and that its effects are destroying the planet. These students are robbed of the capabilities and confidence required to successfully engage their futures.

Subsidies for ethanol and green energy have distorted global markets causing dramatic increases in grain prices. The ensuing supply shocks led to the food riots in Tunisia and Egypt, serving as the spark igniting the "Arab Spring.” Radical Islamists now control the oil producing regions of the Middle East.

Discretionary incomes of middle class families and small businesses have been decimated by the need to reallocate these funds from quality investments, to meeting basic expenses for much higher energy and food costs. The extreme run-up in gasoline prices in 2007 pushed many marginal income homeowners over the edge, precipitating the avalanche of foreclosures and bursting the housing bubble.

Progressives purposefully engineer systematic economic chaos leading to destruction of businesses and chronic unemployment. They seek to destroy and thwart capitalism at every turn while blaming it for the failings that they, themselves, have brought into being. They never pause to reflect on the damage being caused, but relentlessly push forward to generate even more.

Until we turn away from the false prophet of progressivism and its global warming religious narrative, we will continue to witness the disintegration of civilization. The 2012 elections are perhaps our last chance to do so. Unfortunately, too many people have been dumbed-down by progressivism and into allowing themselves to be made its “useful idiots.”

At 3:43 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Crazy is as crazy says.

This is what happens when you mix the cult koolade of the radical Right with insane paranoia and demonization of science and education.

Yessir, them librools have been in charge of everything on Wall Stree and in DC. They ruined it all, for the past three decades, not counting two terms of Reagan, and three terms of Bushes, and NAFTA friendly corporatists like Clinton and Obama. But it's still all the librools fault.

Yessir. Glug, glug, glug goes the koolade.

The fascists would be blaming Jews instead of liberals, but that line didn't work out so well last century. Liberals are the Jews of the Fourth Reich.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."

At 5:00 PM, Anonymous Harry from Mass said...

Dave Dubya,

The greatest trick the marxists ever pulled was pretending their kind does not exist!

Yet they live here on "The Rant", "No Corporate Rule" and "Dave (I'm just an old-fashioned American citizen who believes in our traditional values of freedom, truth, and justice) Dubya's Freedom Rants"

With high gas prices, high unemployment, and the exploding costs of ObamaCare, "The Messiah" is going to get flattened by a big steamroller!

At 6:22 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

It appears some extremists would rather hijack a thread with their Obama Derangement Syndrome than comment on the topic.

They do provide us with a perfect example of how we can identify a cult indoctrinated fascist:

When Just the Harry FOX(R) from MS (and MA) says you're a commie, he just might be a fascist.

There's a lot of hate behind that ignorance. They need an outlet for their hatred. It's the only real reason they lurk and troll at progressive blogs. They certainly don't come to read what we write or discuss the subject.

Notice how not ONE of the Right Wingers commented on Romney's cruelty to the dog.

Not one. And I see only one mention of Romney.

Why is that? Because their agenda is to vent their hate, troll, disrupt and distract.

There is no reasoning with the cultists of the radical Right. Like fascists, they refuse to even listen to others, let alone compromise.

This is what chatacterizes them authoritarian extremists.

At 7:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dave Dubya,

stop being a crybaby.

this blog allows free speech unlike your blog.

i'm just waiting for your significant other, JG, to comment.

At 8:54 PM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

JG's Blog no longer allows free speech. He, like Dave, is afraid to allow conservative positions or questions on their blog. Afraid that by doing so, their EXTREME LIBERAL beliefs will be found wanting in the free market place of ideas.

At 8:56 PM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

As a conservative, here is my comment on Romney's cruelty to the dog.
It was a bad thing to do.
There, you feel better now?

At 1:33 AM, Anonymous Ron Baldwin said...

Look at every rant by Tom. Eventually the long posts and pontifications become so tedious they turn readers off.

Perhaps Tom may have to put a limit on the size of the comments, say 1,000 characters. That would allow plenty of space to tell Tom, JG, JTF, Dave, and me among others, just what buffoons you believe we are without presenting a doctoral dissertation on the subject.

At 12:26 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Just the Falsehoods! claimed...

"JG's Blog no longer allows free speech."

Not true...although I have restricted your off-topic and irrelevant remarks, your article dumps, and your insulting behavior.

As I mentioned more than once, I'm not restricting free speech. Blogger is available to anyone to develop and write their own blog. I'm not stopping you from this; neither is anyone who frequents this blog, and neither is Google.

By the way, everyone else is free to comment on my blog -- just not you. You're no longer welcome.

At 6:44 PM, Anonymous Liberals Are Sexy said...

Tom, Thank you for another good write. Keep up the good work. Your writing surely agitates the trolls.

With the Obama hatred on the right, it would have been a great time for them to produce a good candidate to run against him. (if one even exists.)There isn't one out there running, that's for sure. There's just no love for Romney after all the time he's been running and all the money spent on him. He's made every other candidate seem appealing for a time. Gingrich is just a riot when he opens his mouth. Santorum even comes out with some funnier ideas. It's no wonder the trolls are upset.

At 8:06 PM, Blogger Just the Facts! said...

Dear Jeff jockstrap

The best part of this is your claim of my insulting behavior.
Now there's the lid calling the kettle black. Btw, will you display insulting behaviour towards me on other sites like you have in the past?
Thought I forgot about that little fault of yours?

At 9:50 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Just the Falsehoods!, are you drinking again? You know you make even less sense when you do that at night.

By the way, the idiom you attempted to make is the "pot" calling the kettle black -- not the lid.

You can't even get that right...

At 2:47 AM, Blogger Catharine said...

It might be a non-issue, if Romney didn't prove to be the kind of guy who would do something like that every time he opens his mouth.

At 10:04 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

"Notice how not ONE of the Right Wingers commented on Romney's cruelty to the dog."

Sorry, here you go...

Romney did a dumb thing back then when he strapped a dog to the top of the car. Boy, that was really dumb. Really, really dumb. I bet the dog had a tough time - too bad for the dog. I wish he hadn't done that. What was he thinking! Glad I've never made a dumb mistake.

At 11:14 AM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you said, without real conviction or sincerity...

"I bet the dog had a tough time - too bad for the dog. I wish he hadn't done that. What was he thinking! Glad I've never made a dumb mistake."

Don't ya' think, Harley, it's more than just a mistake; that possibly it's due to a total lack of compassion, understanding, and empathy? We're not talking about a turning-down-the-wrong-road kind of mistake, or forgetting-to-set-the alarm-clock kind of mistake. This wasn't a mistake! It was a calculated and purposeful action, the ramifications and consequences that any rational human-being would fully understand. It was a significant reflection of a lack of sound character.

A mistake?!?

Gimme a break...

At 11:43 AM, Blogger Harley A. said...

When I become a card-carrying member of the thought police, perhaps I'll be better equipped to help you guys out with an analysis of what Romney was thinking.

The lack of conviction or sincerity was due to the presence of a huge amount of sarcasm. The point being - of course no one is commenting on such an inane topic. No serious person would. Nor would I want to comment on keeping an animal "chained up" outside either.

Furthermore, the point of the post was to harshly criticize Romney. At the same time, the point was to criticize those who would vote for Santorum over Romney. Confusing and pointless I'd say, in the final analysis. The main point being, as I've beat to death by now, an opportunity to insult the south.

At 4:06 PM, Blogger Jefferson's Guardian said...

Harley A., you summed up with...

"The main point being, as I've beat to death by now, an opportunity to insult the south."

No, I believe the main point was how foolish and out-of-touch Romney and the rest of his knee-jerk cohorts have been. If, for some particular reason, "the south" was insulted during the melee, it's only because it became too closely associated with the madness.

At 7:26 PM, Blogger PMMF Custodian said...

Hey, Tom, it's your new friend Chris Payne down here in Longview, Texas, where Faux News stays on 24/7 in every doctor, dentist and hospital waiting room from the Louisiana border to outskirts of Dallas/Fort Worth.

Lovely post. I might add, also, that have you noticed that the conservatives occasionally toss out that the Obama White House is "corrupt?"

Ain't that a gas? I gotta tell you: In all my years of being an American, I've never seen a president so absolutely untarnished by even the faintest hint of scandal.

This guy runs a good tight, pragmatic, stay-focused ship.

I really appreciate that.

So anytime some republicant know-nothing, other-hater says something to the effect that Obumma is a corrupt socialist criminal, none of us should have any hesitation in squaring off and staring them right in the eyes and telling them they are full of poop.

Awesome blog, man. :-)


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home