Poll: People View Government Very Negatively

Gallup finds us just disgusted with the whole thing:

  • 82% of Americans disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job.
  • 69% say they have little or no confidence in the legislative branch of government, an all-time high and up from 63% in 2010.
  • 57% have little or no confidence in the federal government to solve domestic problems, exceeding the previous high of 53% recorded in 2010 and well exceeding the 43% who have little or no confidence in the government to solve international problems.
  • 53% have little or no confidence in the men and women who seek or hold elected office.
  • Americans believe, on average, that the federal government wastes 51 cents of every tax dollar,  similar to a year ago, but up significantly from 46 cents a decade ago and from an average 43 cents three decades ago.
  • 49% of Americans believe the federal government has become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens. In 2003, less than a third (30%) believed this.

But what about Obama?  How’s he doing?  Gallup has him at 41% overall for the past month.  Not exactly what you would expect for The One who was going to make the oceans recede…wonder if anyone still thinks he’s what we were all waiting for?  I mean, other than himself?

Going to be a long, hard year for the Ruling Class in 2012…


68 thoughts on “Poll: People View Government Very Negatively

  1. neocon1 September 27, 2011 / 8:47 am


    Communist Party USA Reveals: We’re Using the Democrat Party

    Not too awful long ago I wrote about the Communist Party USA and their support for many of the identical principles endorsed by the Democrat Party here in the US. I listed the various similarities but now I have some even more honest words from the Communists themselves. Joe Sims, co-editor of the Communist Party USA online magazine Peoples World states among other things “the possibility that the communists may be able to “capture’ the Democratic Party entirely.” Read that slowly and carefully…”the possibility that the communists may be able to “capture’ the Democratic Party entirely.”

    June 14, 2008
    “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

    Obama’s ineligibility: Congress is both guilty and gutless

    imageTo the US Congress – Is there not even one among you, who will stand by your oath of office and state unequivocally that Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born citizen and is, therefore, ineligible for the office of President of the United States?

    It serves no purpose here for me to present arguments supporting a case against Obama’s eligibility or recite the background and intent of the natural born clause of the Constitution. That information is already available, for example, in the brilliant and exhaustive documentation provided by Stephen Tonchen from whom I liberally pilfer.

    Why does Congress feign ignorance, continue a conspiracy of silence and display blatant cowardice in regard to this issue? Is it that members of Congress are too politically correct, too complicit in a cover-up and are just stalling in the desperate hope that Obama is not re-elected?

    What happens then, if through some tragic mistake of history, Obama is re-elected? Congress could find themselves, not only in dereliction of their duty, but potentially contributing to the destruction of our republic.


    The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a conservative advocacy group that favors tighter immigration laws, argues that the answer is clear: illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers more than $100 billion each year.


    The chart above is from the Joint Economic Committe (based on 2006 IRS data), showing the percentages of federal personal income tax paid by different groups of taxpayers:

    The top 1% of taxpayers pay about 40% of all income taxes,

    the top 10% pay 71%,

    and the top 50% pay 97% of all taxes.

    The bottom 50% pays less than 3% of all income taxes paid.

  2. RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 9:49 am

    Not exactly what you would expect for The One who was going to make the oceans recede…

    Actually, that’s one of the few areas where it appears that he’s succeeded.

  3. js September 27, 2011 / 10:49 am

    “69% say they have little or no confidence in the legislative branch of government, an all-time high and up from 63% in 2010. ”

    aint that a fact…just look at how abortion was legalized…and the roots of our counstitution are founded in the principal…that life itself is an unalienable right…

    the courts have lost contact with the soul and spirit of america….how can anyone have confidence is them when they dont protect us, but instead…serve the government as its master

  4. Cluster September 27, 2011 / 10:55 am

    The Harry Reid led Senate has accomplished NOTHING. Has not produced a budget going on three years now, and every piece of legislation sent to it by the House has not even been brought onto the floor for debate. Harry Reid is the worst Majority Leader in the history of our great nation.

  5. MSMII September 27, 2011 / 11:09 am

    But, why should we view it negatively? There are a large number of governmental agencies which are run by presidential appointees. These appointees must be approved of by congress. What happens when the Congress and the President are all on the same party line is that the vast bureaucratic ship of state turns towards a direction that looks a lot like a centralization of power and a primary dominion. These are things which the founders of America sought to avoid.

    • neocon1 September 27, 2011 / 11:20 am

      communism was not a problem in the founding fathers days.

      • neocon1 September 27, 2011 / 11:23 am

        our *leader* ???

        WTF X10,000

  6. J. R. Babcock September 27, 2011 / 12:58 pm

    I’ve seen what I consider to be main stream conservatives on this blog ridiculed as being far right-wing kooks by the lefty trolls who come here to disrupt. You ain’t seen far right wing and negativity toward the government until you’re lived in rural Idaho. When I moved to a suburb of Boise recently, I thought I’d left the kook fringe behind. Man was I surprised.

    • Amazona September 27, 2011 / 1:53 pm

      The problem with the Pseudo-Left contingent which sometimes like to infest this blog is that they toss around terms like “far right” with absolutely no idea of what the Right IS, much less the “far right”.

      Which is no surprise, as they are even more ignorant of what the Left really is, and know nothing (and care less) about the reality of the system they support, even ignorantly, by attacking its opposition.

      They are fueled by blind hatred, sour emotion sought out and nurtured by a callous system quite willing to use them as dupes and stooges, as intellectual cannon fodder taking up time and space in the political battle being fought.

    • Amazona September 27, 2011 / 1:57 pm

      J.R.—your post reminded me of the time I was transporting my late husband’s gun collection to my new place in Wyoming. I was driving the whitest vehicle on the road, a white Excursion, and I am the whitest woman on the road, being 3/4 Eastern European and 1/4 Irish, and when I put the back seats down and loaded the guns the pile of long guns alone rose higher than the headrests.

      I threw some blankets over them and headed out, praying I would not be stopped, and decided that if I was, I would just explain that I only had one more stop to make, to buy some freeze-dried food, on my way to Idaho.

      Boise is not exactly a metropolis and probably offers more in the way of employment and opportunity, so I guess it is no surprise that some of the fringe element find it attractive. It’s still pretty close to the bunkers…

      • J. R. Babcock September 27, 2011 / 2:53 pm

        It’s still pretty close to the bunkers…

        You know about the bunkers? Damn!

  7. Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 2:04 pm

    I would still like a definate definition of the “fringe”. Is fringe a personal opinion or is it an agreed upon definition by those who consider themselves “main stream” republicans or conservatives?

    Anyone care to define it? What do you have to belive or practice to be considered fringe?

    • RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 2:26 pm


      I’ve always considered “fringe” to be those on the Right that view government as the ultimate evil and those on the Left that view capitalism as the ultimate evil — probably less than 5% at each extreme. That said, what I used to think was the Left-wing fringe has, in the last few years, become much more mainstream in the Democrat Party, as is evidenced by Neo’s first post in this thread. I guess one could say that the Democrat Party has become a “fringe” party, heh.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 3:32 pm

        I don’t know what to think about that answer 🙂 Government can not be the ultimate evil. Government is composed of people. If the government is the ultimate evil, then people have to be also.

        Is this the only definition of fringe that anyone cares to offer?

      • Leonard L'Farte September 27, 2011 / 3:49 pm

        Green, I think Spook’s definition is pretty close to how I view fringe. My dictionary defines fringe as “that part considered to be marginal or extreme”. In political terms, I would define it as an extreme, inflexible adherence to a particular ideology. How would you define it, and, more importantly, why are you asking the question?

      • dbschmidt September 27, 2011 / 3:50 pm

        I would have to add that when the “Representatives of the People” which we elect become only interested in how they can further enrich themselves. On the salary they receive–there is an large membership in the millionaires and billionaires clubs that wasn’t there before. Basically, when they stop doing their Constitutional duty and form the circle-jerk elites club which believes it knows better than the people who elected them while stuffing our money in their bank accounts.

        Government (Constitutional) is not evil nor are the elected leaders until they get corrupted. Fringe on the right would be the anarchists who believe in no government. On the left it would be the Communist / Marxist that believe in total government but you can add those that think Socialism is utopia because, whether they realize it or not, Socialism is not an end-point but just a stepping stone towards the ultimate end of Communism / Marxism.

        Now, I believe that both of these fringes extend a little farther than those extremes into those that believe in or use these folks to advance their agenda as well, but at least as far as the “fringe” right goes–it would be, IMHO, anyone that goes to the right of the Constitution towards anarchy. I cannot clearly define the left because they don’t know what they believe in anyway except it requires a lot of Other Peoples Money, ranges from cradle to grave, and people are too stupid to do anything on their own.

      • Amazona September 27, 2011 / 5:24 pm

        db, what a great answer! You covered all the main bases.

        One point in particular needs to be emphasized. I know that you have touched on this before but it is very important. That is, that so many who are emotionally attracted to the Left do not see the level of their attraction as being related to Marxism.

        We see it all the time—the sneering dismissal of those of us who understand that there is a continuum of Leftism and that Americans have been desensitized enough to be comfortable with ever-Leftward movement along that continuum.

        About 50 years ago, calling someone a “socialist” was a major insult. Now the response is pretty much “So….?” Or a denial that the redistribution of OPM in question is socialism at all. But there is no real sense of insult or indignation at the use of the word. I think this is because the Left has done such a brilliant job of making socialism a non-threatening word that describes nothing more than a warm fuzzy group hug kind of let’s make all the problems go away and be FAIR.

        It is a slippery slope of ever-increasing acceptance of what was, not so long ago, clearly understood to be unconstitutional controls by government.

        The water has been heated up slowly enough that the frogs don’t realize how hot it is getting, or how close they are to getting cooked.

        And the Left’s primary defense against awareness of this is its recruitment of the sour-natured who love to hate, and its identification of Constitutionalists as enemies and attacks on them as virtuous and noble political discourse.

    • bardolf September 27, 2011 / 5:10 pm


      I would define the left ‘fringe’ as people who believe centralized decision makers are capable of solving most problems. I would define the right ‘fringe’ as those who believe ” the invisible hand of the market” will lead everyone to a utopia.

      One can not have a dialog with the fringes. It’s obvious that one can’t have a discussion with believers in government as savior. OTOH, when most of the ‘successes’ of business are shown to be dependent directly on government money the ‘fringe’ right denies the facts and calls itself open minded. Take, Las Vegas casinos owners for example. They rely on government regulation to keep out competitors. They have been the beneficiary of public works projects like the Hoover Dam, federal interstate system, federal support of airports, … yet somehow the moguls who own the casinos can lecture the government on spending. Boeing would be out of business without government subsidies. Disney relied on the DOD projects to get them through tough times. Of course the entire electronics industry, internet, etc. were all government financed. Even at the local level ranchers rely on government land to graze, farmers rely on agriculture subsidies and social programs like school lunches to keep demand high and on and on and on.

      • Amazona September 27, 2011 / 5:36 pm

        Well, dolf, as usual you have to completely invent a definition to try to make your comments coherent.

        I do not know of a single human being who believes that ” the invisible hand of the market” will lead everyone to a utopia.

        I do, however, recognize a tired old debate tactic still quite popular with the Left, which is that of restating something in such exaggerated and ridiculous terms that it is then easy to sneer at it and dismiss it.

        A typical example is that of anti-religionists sneering that people of faith “worship an old man with a beard who lives in the clouds and grants wishes”.

        I also recognize the truth lurking behind your reductio ab absurdum smirk, which is your profound ignorance of the free market system. This ignorance, coupled with your disdain for people who do not believe government is the answer, marks you as an intellectually dishonest and limited fool.

        Those who understand the free market system know it not only has nothing at all to do with any form or level of “utopia”, it guarantees absolutely nothing. On the contrary, it is based on the realization that in such a system, some will succeed and some will fail—about as far as one can get from your absurd claim that anyone believes
        it “…will lead everyone to a utopia..”

        I know you have above-average intelligence in your area of mathematics. I just don’t understand why you assume your superiority in this one area means you are even remotely intelligent in others, but it appears you are convinced that if you are a numbers smarty you don’t need to bother to actually LEARN anything about anything else, your math smarts will just carry over.


      • RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 5:45 pm


        One of your more thoughtful posts. I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I’d love to see our entire society rolled back to a time when industry and agriculture were not intertwined with government. Government has it’s place, but that place has been so far exceeded during the last century that this country bears almost no resemblance to what the Founders envisioned, something for which we have the Progressive movement to thank. And the only difference between Democrat Progressives and Republican Progressives is Republican Progressives move leftward at a more leisurely pace.

        OTOH, I don’t know anyone who wants to go back to the days of the robber barons and child labor, but I do think that the free market would work pretty well with a minimum of rules and strict enforcement of said rules. The present dynamic of crony capitalism isn’t an improvement over robber barons, IMHO.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 5:51 pm

        Bardolf, I am getting no money at all from the government. My poor little one hundred acres of earth depend only on my ability to grow what people are willing to pay for.

        Seed companies. I am sure you have seen the adds on the net for non terminator garded seeds. The best cash crop you can plant in these times.I would recommend having some around in case time get tough.

        Think happy thoughts. 🙂

      • Count d'Haricots September 27, 2011 / 6:05 pm

        The accoutrements of a society always having been intended to advance commerce and development of the publicare the reason we have a government.

        For ‘dolf to proffer that these things are an anathema to capitalists is absurd.

        Roads, canals, communication systems, ports, airports, infrastructure to facilitate commerce is the function of government. Laws written to protect commerce and consumers; anti-trust, copyright, torts and regulations are the function of government.

        The structure and maintenance of this system is the purpose of government and supported by the capitalists.

        I won’t even comment on the gross misuse of the “invisible hand.”

      • bardolf September 27, 2011 / 8:26 pm

        @Amy and @Count

        You would be included in my definition of “fringe” of course. GMB asked for a definition.

        The idea that the PURPOSE of SOCIETY is to ADVANCE COMMERCE is FRINGE.

        Count and his wife would be unemployed in a real free market. University work, accountant for collecting government taxes and a lawyer to deal with the government. They live in a part of the country which is dependent on federal money from military spending and from previous water projects. Only in the “fringe” right wing mind is it the ‘natural purpose’ of a government to bring water to deserts.

        Amy depends obviously on the government for health care, subsidies of all sorts and price supports and even a government land giveaways in the past know as homesteading. You believe in a myth. “Those who understand the free market system.” is akin to “Those who understand astrology.” only problem is you don’t know that.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 8:40 pm

        “Government has it’s place, but that place has been so far exceeded during the last century that this country bears almost no resemblance to what the Founders envisioned, something for which we have the Progressive movement to thank.”

        Spook, in reply to this quote, I have to disagree some. Where was the opposition to this while it was happening? The people of this country allowed the progressives to accomplish it.

      • bardolf September 27, 2011 / 9:58 pm

        Cantaloupe Listeria Outbreak Is The Deadliest In A Decade; 16 Dead So Far

        A person from the “fringe” would say we need less regulation.

        If the government’s job is to “help commerce” I don’t see how we can complain if solar energies are shoveled boat loads of money in the hopes of a discovery that would lower the energy costs for business everywhere.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 10:03 pm

        Thanks Bardolf. 🙂 I am working on keeping myself on the fringe.

        I believe we need less forced regulation. Telling someone they can not buy unpasturized milk rather than warning of the dangers of unpasturized is pure balonium.

        Not very Libertarian attitude there now was it?

      • Mark Edward Noonan September 27, 2011 / 10:57 pm


        Indeed – given a choice between J. P. Morgan and little Timmy Geithner, I’ll take Morgan…at least his schemes worked and some actual wealth was created.

        It may be better, though, if we head towards a Distributist future…taking our cue from Chesterton (“the problem with capitalism isn’t too many capitalists, but too few”), we need to ensure that more means of wealth creation are in the hands of individuals and local entities than there are today…and this, of course, means the government has to get out of the business of trying to pick winners in the economy…a future America where there is neither a Department of Commerce nor a General Electric is the goal we should shoot for.

      • RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 11:43 pm

        Spook, in reply to this quote, I have to disagree some. Where was the opposition to this while it was happening? The people of this country allowed the progressives to accomplish it.

        Most people think the Progressive era began with Wilson, but Teddy Roosevelt was really the first Progressive President, and the two parties have been trading places ever since, with the GOP appearing to give voters a choice by not moving left as fast as the Democrats. It’s the progressive wing of the GOP that the Tea Party movement is taking on.

      • Amazona September 28, 2011 / 11:44 am

        dolf, I understand how lost you would be if you had to depend on real facts instead of just inventing your own, but you need to know you are not convincing anyone.

        I get not one penny of any government subsidy. Not one.

        No government pays for one cent of my health care.

        “Price supports”? “Government giveaways”? “Homesteading”?

        Yet you claim that I OBVIOUSLY DEPEND on all of these. What a fool you are. Not one of these claims is any way related to anything I do. Not one. You know, at some point stating your own fantasies becomes out-and-out lying.


        I know your nose is out of joint over what you constantly bleat about as “agricultural subsidies” but get over it. This is your obsession, and no more related to reality than your demented fantasy about me getting kicked out of 8th grade by fed-up nuns.

        Stick to your numbers and quit pretending that you are capable of, or even interested in, independent thought. One would think that someone with your raw intellect, having made it into middle age, would be less infantile and less dependent on projection of internal fantasy.

        BTW, interesting to see your paranoid spin on gambling regulation. To you, it is just to “keep out competitors” of Las Vegas casino owners.

        Time to change the tinfoil hat, dolf—it’s clearly wayyyyyy too tight.

      • County Haircuts September 28, 2011 / 2:14 pm

        Count and his wife would be unemployed in a real free market. University work, accountant for collecting government taxes and a lawyer to deal with the government. They live in a part of the country which is dependent on federal money from military spending and from previous water projects. Only in the “fringe” right wing mind is it the ‘natural purpose’ of a government to bring water to deserts.

        One wonders how to respond to such vacuousness. I wonder how it is possible for dolf to respond to information and expressed opinion without actually reading same. After clearly stating that capitalism, trade and commerce depend upon a governmental structure dolf constructs a strawman, personal in nature to alter the position I have taken to imply that I, personally am hypocritical in my position.

        Doubling down on his ignorance dolf demonstrates his inability to rationally discuss by making a bizarre claim that legal and financial professionals are not part of a free market.

        In a flaming coup de grâce of insanity, he actually ridicules government’s responsibility in irrigation. Only a fringe right wing mind would envision creating a public works to facilitate reclaiming a desert for agrarian use; are you listening Israel? Can you hear him Utah? Is anyone in Arizona or California taking notes?

        I think the most disturbing thing about dolf is his constant personalization to advance a contrarian point of view. Since he has no knowledge of history; politics, religion, warfare, commerce or economics he is reduced to frothing personal attacks without prior knowledge of what he seeks to discredit.

        But, isn’t that always the case? Those that lack the entrepreneurial spirit resent those that have demonstrated it. Sad little failure.
        Btw, has Ruby arrived? I’m looking forward to photos.

  8. Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 3:56 pm

    Ok, isn’t extreme just like beauty, in the eye of the beholder?

    Why am I asking the question? I think that mistrust of the government is largerly view as as extreme, both by donkies and by establishment minded republicans.

    I don’t define extreme believe it or not. What may be extreme or fringe to me is not the same to you. If you are going to label someone, which a few of the people around here are want to do, you might as well tell them what makes them extreme or on the fringe. Instead of using some vague definition that only the accusers know.

    • RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 4:09 pm


      That’s exactly why I generally refrain from putting labels on people. Just because I disagree with someone doesn’t make them extreme. A few of us who have been here for a long time have attempted, repeatedly, to make the case for the limited central government envisioned by most of the Founders. We have been the brunt of lots of ridicule and criticism, but, to the best of my knowledge, no one has ever come here and made a substantive argument for a Federal Government with unlimited power.

      • Bodie September 29, 2011 / 2:22 pm

        “no one has ever come here and made a substantive argument for a Federal Government with unlimited power.”

        Perhaps because nobody except for the strawmen that populate your mind actually wants that?


  9. Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 4:26 pm

    When have I ever made an argument for unlimited government power? I am not trying to now. How did you get that that impression?

    What I am looking for is any belief or practice that may be held as extreme. What belief could be held that government is the ultimate evil?

    • RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 4:32 pm

      Sorry, you misunderstood. I was not referring to you. I was referring to our Lefties who have come here and ridiculed conservatism but have offered no defense of that which is not conservatism. Amazona articulates it far better than I.

      And, for the record, I don’t disagree with you most of the time.

    • J. R. Babcock September 27, 2011 / 4:37 pm

      What belief could be held that government is the ultimate evil?

      You’re kidding, right? Not sayin’ I agree, but there are lots of Americans who would be just fine if the federal government ceased to exist.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 4:53 pm

        Beg pardon Spook. No offense intended.

        J.R. I would be ok with all federal government that is not mandated by our constitution disappearing today, tommorrow at the latest.
        That would be about 95% of the federal government.

        And no I was not kidding. Do you have an example?

      • J. R. Babcock September 27, 2011 / 5:02 pm

        Do you have an example?

        Well, I’m not gonna name names if that’s what you mean. And I certainly don’t consider someone extreme just because they’d like that part of the government that exceeds its constitutional authority to disappear. That’s not extreme, that’s just common sense.

      • RetiredSpook September 27, 2011 / 5:04 pm

        Beg pardon Spook. No offense intended.

        No offense taken. Like I said, I didn’t word it very well.

  10. Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 5:14 pm

    J.R. Not names. An example of a belief or practice that would put someone on the fringe.
    The label of birther has been applied to those who do not believe bho is legally able to be potus. Would this put them on the fringe?

    • J. R. Babcock September 27, 2011 / 5:24 pm

      OK, that’s not hard. Just my opinion, though, nothin’ more.

      I’d consider someone is fringe who believes every word in the bible is the literal word of God – who believes the earth is only 6,000 years old. Not sayin’ they don’t have the right to believe that, just that those beliefs put them out there on the fringe. Those kinds of people aren’t a danger to anyone, IMO — they just want, for the most part, to be left alone.

      I’d also consider someone fringe who believes that the government has no legal right to enforce laws or collect taxes. I know a few of this type, and they’re generally not too rational, and not someone who can be reasoned with.

      Does that help?

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 5:46 pm

        Very much so. Those of us on the fringe need to know what and how you are defining us. 🙂

        Six thousand years old? That is debatable. I am waiting for more evidence. 😛

    • J. R. Babcock September 27, 2011 / 5:26 pm

      Sorry, forgot your birther question. I’m not sure yet that Obama is legally able to be president, and I’m not on the fringe, so, I guess the answer is no.

      • Amazona September 27, 2011 / 5:41 pm

        What I find interesting is the effort to first make the word “birther” a pejorative and then to apply it, as an intended insult, to everyone who has any question at all regarding any aspect of any area of citizenship, a question which may not relate specifically to Obama but which has arisen during the course of various discussions.

        Even those of us who say “Hey, the guy is already in office, you can’t unring the bell, trying to unmake his presidency would be a massively chaotic undertaking with more negatives than positives, let’s just list the questions that have come up during this debate and resolve them so we don’t have to deal with them again with somebody else” are dismissed as fringe kook “birthers”.

  11. Amazona September 27, 2011 / 5:47 pm

    I find it odd that people who are the least radical of all, those who do not promote some new kind of government or extension of our own form but who simply want the nation run according to its own rule of law, are defined by the Left as “kook fringe”.

    I don’t argue against government-funded health care. That’s a huge and complex topic and I am simply not qualified to offer detailed and informed opinions on the topic as a whole. What I AM against is FEDERALLY funded health care, for the simple and obvious reason that it is not an enumerated duty of the federal government, and is therefore the obligation of the state, should the state vote to provide it.

    It’s not complicated, it’s not radical, it’s not weird. As Cluster quoted the other day, the only issue is not whether we NEED a law, but is that law constitutional.

    (BTW, Lefty dolf ignored the quote, refused to argue the merits of the statement, but played the Identity Politics card and just sneered at Barry Goldwater. Typical.)

    • Count d'Haricots September 27, 2011 / 6:06 pm

      For the record, wasn’t it I that quoted Goldwater?

      At least that’s the way I remember it.

      • Count d'Haricots September 27, 2011 / 6:08 pm

        “I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible.”

        Yep, it was me.

      • Amazona September 28, 2011 / 11:45 am

        Sorry. Smart guy/Smart guy—–an honest mistake

    • bardolf September 27, 2011 / 10:11 pm


      Why would anyone respond to a quote which bears no relevance to how someone conducts their actual political life. That’s nonsense.

      Goldwater was just an anti-union frat boy living off his dad’s money. He was borderline insane in foreign policy and made the decision to oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in domestic policy.

      He won electoral votes in the South by appealing to the racist Democrats that Neo constantly reminds people about on B4V.

      While I do agree with Goldwater on many states rights issues, the idea that he was SANER than Dr. Ron Paul M.D. boggles the brains of those who live outside the “fringe”.

      • County Haircuts September 28, 2011 / 5:20 pm

        One would never write the prefix “Dr.” and the suffix “M.D.” for the same name, pick one.

        What kind of a college do you work for anyway?

        Timmy J. Rooter’s School of Harness Repair and Pole Dancing

  12. Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 6:21 pm

    Bardolf is a lefty? Does not seem that way to me. A consistant libertarian yes. A lefty no. I think that the problem some of you have with Bardolf is that he critsises repulicans too much. Calls into questions that you would rather not deal with.

    I have yet to see a lefty support Ron Paul for POTUS. I suppose there might be such a person but I have not found one.

    • bardolf September 27, 2011 / 10:22 pm



      I think the main problem “fringe people” have is that I oppose NAFTA and the sending of US jobs overseas as well as the importation of cheap labor to undercut our lower classes.

      I’m pro-life which is not a lefty position. I’ve called repeatedly for the abolition of BATF, DOE, NCLB,… those are hardly lefty positions. I think the role of the military is to defend US lives which is not the same as building nations, designing weapons systems or making sure individuals (corporations) abroad have a taxpayer police force … a libertarian position. I am for ending the war on drugs even though I’ve never used them.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 10:43 pm

        Be careful there Bardolf, :P, soon you will join us completely on the dark side of the fringe. Embace it. Revel in in it. Enjoy it. 🙂

      • bardolf September 27, 2011 / 11:08 pm


        You can’t be too fringe if you live in Illinois. You’ll need to move to Boise Idaho or Lincoln Montana to be closer to the dark side of the fringe.

      • Green Mountain Boy September 27, 2011 / 11:15 pm

        yes I am in Illinois but my nearest neighbor that is not family is about two miles away. We have not seen a county sherriff out here in years so I think we could call it Idaho in Illinois. 😛

      • bardolf September 28, 2011 / 12:00 am


        Haven’t seen a sheriff in years just means Janet Reno is planning something devious. Fortunately Obama and Eric Holder couldn’t locate rural Illinois with Google maps so you are safe for now.

      • neocon1 September 28, 2011 / 9:56 am

        by the lefts standard JFK and Bobby would be “right wing wackos”

        you want left wing wackos? look at the democrat congressional role.

      • Amazona September 28, 2011 / 11:55 am

        Yet, dolf, you insist on assigning sinister motives for things you don’t happen to like, and inventing biographies for people you want to deride. My family only moved because the nuns couldn’t stand me, Goldwater was “…JUST an anti-union frat boy living off his dad’s money…” so you don’t have to address the content of a quote from one of his speeches, etc. He just invents things to support his hyper-emotional statements and feelings. We call that lying, around here. And no, it is NOT “Libertarian”. He sees our overseas presence as “…making sure individuals (corporations) abroad have a taxpayer police force ” and doesn’t think our military ought to be “designing weapons systems”.

        And so on.

        No, GMB, I don’t dislike dolf because he criticizes Republicans. I dislike him because he is so goofy and irrational and downright dishonest.

        As for him being a Lefty, you are right. He is not. He is also not a conservative nor a Libertarian. He is all over the map, quite evidently driven by emotion rather than rational thought, and cannot or will not explain which political system he thinks should be running the country, preferring his free-form silliness to be unconstrained.

      • neocon1 September 28, 2011 / 1:19 pm


        doesn’t dolf “teach” at a community college or something?
        no wonder we are turning out the leftist lemmings we are.

        Those who CAN…DO
        Those who cant …Teach.

      • County Haircuts September 28, 2011 / 2:32 pm


        The ever ignorant dolf demonstrates yet again he isn’t fit to discuss any subject beyond his little numbers class.

        Then Senator Goldwater voted against the 1964 Act, he strongly supported both the 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts.

        He came to regret his 1964 vote but his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was based strictly on political ideological grounds.

        He believed that two of its sections, Title II and Title VII, unlawfully overextended the role of the federal government.

        Goldwater appealing to racists is hysterical!

        The truth is that Barry Goldwater had a long history of championing civil rights, including he was successful in desegregating the Arizona National Guard long before Truman had desegregated the U.S. military

        Barry Goldwater integrated GOLDWATERS the family business.

        As a city councilman in Phoenix, he became a founding member of the Arizona NAACP, and he remained a proud member until his death.

        Dolf is just a dolt.

  13. Cluster September 27, 2011 / 7:15 pm

    So, tell me again which body of Congress is incompetent and do-nothing?

    President Obama still is pressing Congress to pass his jobs stimulus bill immediately, but his own party leaders in the Senate, where Democrats have a majority, have pushed that vote off yet again.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said Monday night that when the Senate returns from a weeklong vacation, the chamber will work instead on a bill that would push to label China a currency manipulator, which would make retaliatory steps in order.


  14. grumfeld September 28, 2011 / 12:49 pm

    I am finding the 2012 election cycle very fascinating. What we are seeing today is nothing new. In the election of 1896 the public was more disgusted in the government than we are today. That election cycle ushered the close of the industrial era and the age of the robber barons. It ushered in the age of progressivism. And now a little more than 100 years later the progressive movement has become the robber barons of their time and we will now see a new rise of a political movement. I hope its the tea party myself. So I am positive on the future, and love watching the destruction of progressivism or liberalism as it is known today. We live in unique times indeed.

    • neocon1 September 28, 2011 / 1:22 pm


      how old are you?
      Just asking,
      I like your enthusiasm,and am hoping you are young…we need more intelligent obtomistic yet focused youth in our party.

      • neocon1 September 28, 2011 / 1:40 pm

        obtomistic = optimistic, DOH!

  15. Green Mountain Boy September 28, 2011 / 1:58 pm

    Neo, I am sure everyone except the one who shall not be named understood what you meant. 🙂 Rghit?

  16. Green Mountain Boy September 28, 2011 / 2:32 pm

    Was Bardolfs description of Barry Goldwater accurate? Debateable to some. He was in a fraternity in college and has been rumored to a violent drunk by some. These descritions are available to anyone not to lazy to use a search engine.

    After all that I have read, I would say the answer is yes. After reading a lot more than I ever had wanted on Mr. Goldwater I am confindent that he is one person who public and private lives did not match.

    Read into this what you will. Think happy thoughts. 🙂

    • neocon1 September 29, 2011 / 8:22 am


      the voters saw this and rejected him on the national scene (goldwater)
      to bad they didnt for kennedydrunk,johnson, jimmah, the rapist, perjoror, and marxist muslim usurper.

Comments are closed.