One of the things I can’t stand hearing during this primary process is a Democrat (it doesn’t matter who) says (or reveals) who Obama doesn’t want to run against, or who does. The latest example would be Nancy Pelosi, who says Romney can’t win.
Polls have shown everyone from Generic Republican to Mitt Romney can win. Some candidates may have a harder time than others, but Barack Obama’s poor record in office will be the same regardless of who he ends up running against. I think Newt Gingrich give us the best shot of booting Obama out of office, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think Mitt Romney or Rick Perry can’t beat Obama.
The only person Obama wants to run against is himself. He can’t win running on his record, and this election will force him to defend his failures. Make no mistake about it. Obama’s biggest obstacle to winning reelection is himself.
So, ignore the suggestions by anyone with a (D) after their name on who can or can’t beat Obama. For that matter, ignore anyone with an (R) after their name with the same suggestions.
Blogs For Victory 
“I think Newt Gingrich give us the best shot of booting Obama out of office, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think Mitt Romney or Rick Perry can’t beat Obama.”
There are only 2 candidates on the GOP ballot in Virginia, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. That means there are only 2 decent campaigners in the contest. That Matt skipped over Ron Paul in favor of Rick Perry is just par for the course. Polls show Paul and Romney both tied with Obama.
I think Obama will win, but there is a reasonable chance Mitt could beat Obama. Given the GOP campaign against Paul I think he would have a hard time undoing the racist epithet. There is no way Gingrich overcomes his serial hypocrisy and divorces. Rick Santorum scares too many moderates. Rick Perry might be able to win, but he hasn’t shown himself to be a great campaigner and will drop out after S.C.
I think Ron Paul’s “grab your ankles” foreign policy is enough to disqualify him, and maybe you could expound on your serial hypocrisy charge leveled against Newt for me, if you’re up to it that is.
And maybe you could also tell us in more detail why moderates would be scared of Santorum. Is it that he sat in the pews for 20 years listening to the rantings of a Black Liberation Theologist, and calling that pastor his mentor, right before he threw him under the bus? Oh wait, that was somebody else.
If you say Ron Paul has a “grab your ankles” foreign policy I say Newt and Santorum have a “Kill them all, let God sort them out” policy, with of course thousands of Americans dying as well. Newt avoided the draft and is willing to send Americans to die for nation building or in the service of corporations.
Newt took 1.6 million from Freddie while pretending to be a fiscal conservative. Newt is for Newt. Any number of conservative websites including Malkin or Coulter could give you a laundry list of Newt’s hypocrisy.
Santorum’s stance on contraception alone scares off the American public.
Sounds like dolf is out howling at the moon again, picking up a word here and a phrase there and then extrapolating these fragments into imagined facts.
Rick Santorum’s view on contraception is his own religiously based PERSONAL view, which he has never tried to foist upon anyone else.
Rick Santorum’s view on states’ rights was in a response to a leading question cleverly phrased to mingle it with the contraception issue, thereby giving intellectual lightweights and political hacks a feeble weapon, the lie that believing in the right of a state to legislate on the issue of contraception is the same thing as promoting the legislation of contraception.
The uber-gullible could be, and evidently were, distracted by the use of the subject of contraception in the question about whether or not a state has the right to make its own laws. dolf sure bit on it.
But the question could have used any example at all. The question really was not about contraception, or Santorum’s belief regarding contraception. It was about the right of a state to legislate its own laws. The choice of contraception as the focus of the question was a political ploy, and the dolfs of the nation prove it to be effective, at least in that subset of Americans who were distracted by it and missed the real point of the exchange.
(Of course this does not address the determination to ignore the repeated explanations of the exchange—but then, why let the truth get in the way of a petty attack on false grounds? That would undermine dolf’s whole schtick.)
Sure, the smear machine will be able to “scare” a few who are either stupid enough to miss the point about states’ rights or gullible enough to buy into the Left’s lies about the issue, but this “American public” that dolf seems to think will be so easily swayed by Leftist propaganda also happens to be overwhelmingly in favor of states’ rights and is not nearly as stupid or easily swayed as he seems to think it is.
Newt took 1.6 million from Freddie while pretending to be a fiscal conservative.
Boy, talk about a non sequitur!
Why not just say “Newt took a consulting fee from Freddie while pretending he knew how to ride a bicycle”?
Newt Gingrich had a consulting firm. He was hired by Freddie Mac. He did his work, he was paid for it. Period. This has nothing at all to do with his political philosophy, other than to illustrate a belief in the free market.
It does just so happen that the opinion his company gave to Freddie Mac was to change the way they did business, but that is beside the point. He could have been hired to consult on the interior design of the boardroom, or the best way to build a cupola on the roof. It doesn’t matter.
Freddie Mac was a legal entity, with the legal right and authority to hire a consultant. Newt Gingrich’s company had a legal right to sell its services. Neither of these facts had the slightest thing to do with political theory or belief.
What the comment DOES illustrate is dolf’s penchant for trying to graft his strange and bizarre fantasies onto narratives which do not support them, and his inability to sort out fact from those fantasies.
Amy
Your reading comprehension is slipping. Clueless was interested in the serial hypocrisy charge leveled at Newt by his GOP adversaries. I just quoted GOP material.
Rick Santorum’s views inform his policy and the US electorate is none to keen on the outcome.
Spin it as you like. Newt took 1.6 million from a company that helped cripple the economy and which left the taxpayer holding the ball.
I don’t see how someone with these numbers wins — period.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postabcpoll_011512.html?wpisrc=nl_politics
Maybe you should go back and review the numbers at the end of President Reagan’s first term.
Maybe you should look at the economic trajectories of each President at this stage of their administrations.
If Obama wins will you still have your vision problems?
Obama gets to run against somebody, not himself.
On an earlier thread Cluster was talking about how liberals remind him of adolescents who want more and more handouts. Of course different people use various mental constructs to categorize others; in this case Matt reminds me of the child with his fingers in his ears, not just refusing to hear what anyone says who disagrees with him – but telling the rest of us who to ignore, on the basis of his own likes or dislikes. That’s not even high school behavior – more like middle school.
But how about the rhetoric of Republicans from Rubio to Boehner and now Romney, accusing Obama and other Democrats of “class warfare” for daring to suggest the growing income divide in America might be something to be legitimately concerned about? Seriously, do the top 1 percent work hard enough to legitimately claim a quarter of the income earned by all Americans? And is it really “class warfare” to suggest there might be ways through public policy to help hard-working people from the bottom 99 percent to achieve some kind of economic security for their efforts, rather than a diminishing slice of the pie that often includes neither health or catastrophic insurance coverage? I’m talking about people who work hard here – not slackers or welfare recipients.
No, Romney and GOP leaders say that’s class warfare. Interesting that conservative commentator David Brooks even said Romney was out of touch on the matter, but I’m guessing most here will call it that too.
“rather than a diminishing slice of the pie that often includes neither health or catastrophic insurance coverage?”
Maybe just maybe here, the bottom 99% percent should start thinking about baking some pies and getting the government out the kitchen. That would be too easy. Yes it would be easier if the 99% just took a slice of pie they had nothing to do with in the baking.
Lot less work that way, right?
On an earlier thread Cluster was talking about how liberals remind him of adolescents who want more and more handouts.
Well, yes, of course, Dennis. That’s what welfare, or nanny state does … it allows people to opt out of work, and depend on the government to supply their day to day needs, instead of working for them, and becoming citizens who are beneficial to society. Our country needs more workers, and more jobs to hire those workers, but with Democrats (socialist/communists) in charge of things, there is not much opportunity for that because they don’t want people to be in control of their lives. No, they want to control them. All the while, the people thinking that they are in no danger of losing anything with “Big Brother” in control, they don’t see the end result much bloodshed and chaos, because there is no one there to supply the monetary funds needed to give them there day to day needs, therefore the government has no other choice but to ration out goods, and bring back slavery in order to produce the goods. In most of those cases the people starve for lack of basic food and clean water. Most dictator operated nations are like that, just ask people who survived Nazi Germany or the Soviet empire back in Stalin’s day. There were even extreme cases where people ate their own children because of the insanity that their dictator operated country drove them to.
Now your excuse is that we “need” to help the “poor” … well, my answer to that, is….the poor need help, but the government doesn’t need to be in the business of helping the poor, because it’s not their business to be helping the poor in the first place. That is the responsibility of the Church or God’s people … not the government’s. When the government got in the business of helping the poor, they took the church’s responsibility away, which led to some bad after-effects, namely, awarding bad behavior. You see, when the government took over taking care of the poor, people quit reading their Bible’s as often, and they paid less attention to raising a quality household (their children), because what responsibility do people have when the government is taking care of them? People spend more time staying drunk, than what their children are doing on a video game filling their young minds with garbage.
So, yeah, it’s not such a good idea to have the government paying the bills, because someone has children of their own who are being responsible for their children, and they want a future for their children, and it’s very hard to do that when the government is taking their hard earned money to pay for other peoples bad habits, and are taking advantage of the system. A young man in the Republican presidential debate the other night asked a very good question regarding this very thing, and people bettered be paying attention, because if we don’t someone in Washington who can turn this welfare state up on its head, we are in serious trouble in this country. I just hope and pray that people will make up their minds, and vote wisely come November, and vote that sucker in the White House out of office.
“You see, when the government took over taking care of the poor, people quit reading their Bible’s as often, and they paid less attention to raising a quality household (their children), because what responsibility do people have when the government is taking care of them? People spend more time staying drunk, than what their children are doing on a video game filling their young minds with garbage.”
Jeremiah, where is your proof of this statement? This is such a Christian thing to say. Do you work in your community with the poor, so you might have first hand knowledge of the drunk poor people who quit reading their Bibles? Maybe your church ministers to the poor so you have some first hand knowledge about these drunk poor people the government is taking care of?
scummy
Do you work in your community with the poor, so you
went to a party this last week, met a tall black man 50yo and his 35 yo girlfriend.
he has four kids, she has six kids, both on welfare, unemployment, food stamps etc etc yet both dressed to the nines and in a nice car.
one doesnt have to travel wide or far to find this it is all over the place.
OPM and looters and takers aint it grand?
velma: “where is your proof of this statement?”
The “war on pverty” has failed. the “Great Society” has failed. The trillions spent to “raise” the poor (or reduce the economic divide) has not done its job. The “poor” stay poor of their own choice. You can look around and see GENERATIONS of individuals on welfare and food stamps. There is no incentive to better oneself if the government takes care of their every need. Poverty, illegitimacy, single mothers, neglected children, etc. etc. have all increased since the Democrats came along and said “we will take care of you” or (another mindless talking point) provide you with “dignity”. When welfare first came out, it was an insult to be on it. Therefore the Democrats changed the language to make it “dignified”.
Your choosing to look the other way (yes choosing, one can see it if one WANTS to) or voluntary ignorance rears its ugly head once again. Your claims “that you have never seen this” are getting old and stale like the Democrats tired old rhetoric and “solutions” of more of the same for the problems they themselves have created.
The Democrats have increased the size of the DEPENDENT CLASS since the inception of the “Great Society” that is a fact you cannot deny (but in your case, you will do so, because you don’t like the truth).
Once again I have reduced Wally to an f-bomb dropping moron when he can’t have his way against the facts I have presented.
And then he whines about his post being deleted by the blog for his childish response.
How will his dainty ego survive such an onslaught?
wally/bodie/jeffie/monty/(or whatever you had to call yourself so you can post):”You’ve lost every time you’ve tried to go against me.”
Only in your land of make believe. I and many other here on this blog have beaten you so badly that you have to resort to childish f-bomb posts, insults, name calling and other vulgar posts that results in yourself getting banned time and again, since you can’t present a factual and coherent argument.
You can’t win at debate (what minuscule bit you do) so you essentially throw tantrums and insults hoping to intimidate your opposition into backing off. Nope never happened, so you resort to your usual posts that get you banned.
Whining about it won’t get you very far here. I can’t ban anyone here. That is another one of your lies to repair your damaged and dainty ego.
Sniff, sniff, I think your fries are burning, time to get back to work.
Denny, I know you try, but listen to yourself. The bottom 99%? Are you such a drone to regurgitate such nonsense? The bottom 99%…. You, without realizing it, are participating in the class warfare that the obAMATEUR and the Democrats are waging.
Their solutions? Are more of the same….. Instead of encouraging the “bottom 99%” to become producers (those who are moochers) and producers to become more efficient ones and increase their potential, they are presenting ways to drag down the 1% and keep the 99% where they are. More income redistribution, attacking the 1% for getting where they are, not from hard work, but alluding to some nefarious and dishonest activity and for not “paying their fair share”. Democrats continue to present solutions that maintains the status quo and regurgitate the rhetoric of class warfare and try to convince the moochers and looters that they are the only solution. Their divisive rhetoric continues.
Well, when you have been a student of these Marxist professors and mentors that is all you know.
That is class warfare denny no matter how you try to spin it…. and you are unwittingly participating in it.
dennistooge
but I’m guessing most here will call it that too.
as USUAL not a clue.
PS
47% of that 99% pay NO federal income tax, the 1% pays 44% of ALL taxes.
once again ignorance and stupidity reign in your brain.
And is it really “class warfare” to suggest there might be ways through public policy to help hard-working people from the bottom 99 percent to achieve some kind of economic security for their efforts, rather than a diminishing slice of the pie that often includes neither health or catastrophic insurance coverage?
Dennis, the top 1% already pay as much in taxes as the bottom 95%. I’m assuming you will only be happy if they pay as much as the bottom 99%. Is that the kind of “public policy” you’re referring to? This envy of people who have been successful, and the desire for the government to punish them is, IMO, one of the most mentally unhealthy aspects of our current society.
As a percentage of income, does the top pay more than the average US citizen who pays taxes? I am not including those who are retired and living on fixed incomes who probably pay little or no taxes or those such as Mitt Romney who receives most of his income from investments and is allowed a lower tax rates. I understand that the top 1% pays the majority of taxes due to the fact they make the majority of income, however, it is unfair if they pay the majority of taxes collected considering their incomes and also the tax breaks many of them received under the tax codes?
“Allowed” a lower tax rate? Who allows that Sunny? And what do you mean by this?:
I understand that the top 1% pays the majority of taxes due to the fact they make the majority of income, however, it is unfair if they pay the majority of taxes collected considering their incomes and also the tax breaks many of them received under the tax codes?
This sentence doesn’t make much sense.
Sunny is just mad because some people make more money than others. I bet she makes more money than her company’s janitor—–should the company take her sallary and his, add them and divide by 2, and give him more and her less? Why not? He is just as entltled to her salary as she is. Does she drive a nicer car than the supermarket clerk? Why is that fair?
We should all turn in our cars and then all be issued the.same cars so no one feels bad about someone else having a nicer car.
Ditto for houses. And average out all the salaries and wages of the country, take an average and give everyone the same. After all it is not fair to pay to someone with a better education or more skill or experience—–that is discrimination.
velma’s questions and lack of knowledge are the best reasons we need to get rid of income, corporate and capital gains taxes and change our system to a consumption tax (with allowances for everyone based on family size for the necessities of life). That way the more the person consumes or spends on luxuries, electronics, hobbies, etc. etc. will go to supporting our government. The poor are not taxed (unless they indulge in non-necessary spending) so that argument is out the window).
This way EVERYONE pays and the government has incentive to keep the economy going at a healthy rate (truly “more skin in the game”).
Talk about a lack of reading comprehension – tired – you might consider a class at the local junior college if you are having such a hard time understanding what I wrote. Let me put it to you another way: If a person making a million $ a year pays a 15% rate on his taxes and a person making $60,000.00 a year pays 25% – is that fair? Granted, the million dollar man will pay more in taxes than the $60 thousand tax payer, but is it fair for the man who makes a lesser amount to have to pay a greater percentage of his earnings? Or does fairness even enter into the discussion?
touchtone, I am not upset with some who make more money than others – that is a pretty ignorant thing to say. I was merely asking the question of fairness of the percentage of taxes to be paid from earnings. Many in the high income brackets have tax breaks those in the lower tax brackets do not have. If you think that is fair, just say so instead of going into some silly argument about the janitor or the check out person at the local grocery store. I do believe in free enterprise – my only question was about the equity in our tax laws. As to the “allowed” – Romney is “allowed” a lower tax rate on his investment income via the US Government tax laws.
No Velma once again your lack of understanding gets the better of you. You are comparing apples to oranges. In your scenario like most what ifs forwarded by the Democrats (and Warren Buffet) the are comparing two different taxes. Plus your numbers are completely unrealistic.
So you need to get a basic understanding of what you are trying to comment on. Until then, you will continue to make a fool of yourself and regurgitate dumbed down talking points.
Is it fair that what is considered “fair” is arbitrarily determined by left-wing politicians know-towing to the weath envy special interests? Like yourself?
Go educate yourself before commenting on something that is obviously way way way over your head.
Velma, why don’t you give us examples of these tax breaks that you are so jealous of?
Be sure to give the specifics of what they have to do in order to get the tax break.
From you posts I see you are green with envy of the wealthy hence your hostility to all who make more than you do.
Velma, maybe you should take some more classes at Bertha’s School of Hair Design and Law, to help you understand the difference between “making” money as salary, wages or profits on a business venture and “making” money as a return on an investment.
Clearly this is way over your head right now.
Either that or you do understand it and prefer to just lie.
Our tax code taxes return on investment, whether on dividends or capital gains, at 15%. This is for two reasons. The purely economic reason is to encourage investment. The “fairness” reason—and you Libs are all about FAIRNESS, right?—is that the money invested has already been taxed once, probably at the top tax rate. As it is, the 15% tax on revenue from investment is a double tax.
Only the very very stupid or the devoutly dishonest can claim that there is no difference between tax on earned income, vs the tax on return on investment of already-taxed earned income.
Again, you prove that the two are not mutually exclusive.
how about the rhetoric of Republicans from Rubio to Boehner and now Romney, accusing Obama and other Democrats of “class warfare” for daring to suggest the growing income divide in America might be something to be legitimately concerned about?
Well, what exactly IS the concern about this new talking point of “income disparity”?
I suggest that it is a bogus concern, a distraction invented by the Left in a frantic effort to disguise the fact that their own policies destroy opportunity. They keep people mired in poverty so they will be dependent on the government, or cripple job creation because of antipathy toward capitalism and thereby make upward economic progress problematic if not impossible.
You suggest that “..there might be ways through public policy to help hard-working people from the bottom 99 percent to achieve some kind of economic security for their efforts..”
But the real question is, why should economic progress depend on “public policy”? You are talking about a basic philosophical difference—-one side believes that the engine of economic progress and prosperity is the private sector, and the other that the government should intervene to manipulate economic issues.
The most vigorous economic growth in this nation took place in a period in which the federal government paid attention to the restrictions on its scope and power laid out in its Constitution, and allowed people the freedom to pursue their ambitions.
The worst and most damaging economic downturn (prior to the past few years) was due to government intervention in a normal cyclical economic downturn, which resulted in making it worse and dragging it out for nearly ten years.
The economic misery we are experiencing today is due to the intervention of the federal government in the private sector, legislating dangerous and foolish and unbusinesslike demands on private lending, creating a wholly false market in lending, housing, and securities, and a bubble guaranteed to burst.
I suggest that you and people like you stop allowing yourselves to be directed toward fretting about what other people have, and if they “deserve” it, and how to get your hands on some of it, and instead focus on recreating an economic model based on free enterprise and on allowing people to keep more of what they earn.
Returning to a business-friendly and Constitutional form of government will free up billions, possibly trillions, of dollars now idle because of the uncertainty of the current business environment. Where can that money be invested? Name a business in this country where large investments can be made which is not already targeted by this administration’s policies, or in line to be if it makes enough money.
There is a lot of money to be made in petroleum-related industries, but the petro industries are targeted by Obama and his pet agency, now given complete power and authority, the EPA. Don’t believe it? Well, Barry shut down drilling in the Gulf in what has come to be known as the Permatorium, the EPA has pushed to ban hydraulic fracturing (successfully in New Jersey) oil and gas permits are restricted, the new pipeline is battling for its life, drilling is banned along almost all of the Eastern Seaboard, drilling is banned in ANWR—the industry is under attack.
Finance? Ha! Take a look at the constantly shifting regulations, most of which hamper the development of new businesses. Credit is the lifeblood of small business: Obama is the tourniquet.
Manufacturing? Where? What?
And why risk capital if you are told that you will not be able to realize much of a profit if your risk pays off? When you are informed, as we were by Joe Biden, that we WILL be taxed more, there is little incentive to risk capital for diminishing returns,even if the business environment was friendly to new endeavors.
I suggest that we need less “public policy” unless it is a policy to get out of the way and let the engines of enterprise spool up and run the way they are supposed to run. When this happens, the ambitions and enterprising will have the opportunity to run with their ideas and dreams, to succeed or fail, and those who are not ambitious will have jobs working for those who do.
Leave the obsessing about that phantom ONE PER CENT to the class warfare strategists, who love to divide so they can conquer.
You want a “public policy” to get more opportunity for the struggling masses?
How about a three year moratorium on capital gains taxes, taxes on dividends, and corporate taxes, coupled with a permanent tax rate cut keeping the tax rate no higher than the Bush rates.
That would free up billions if not trillions of cash to invest in existing or new businesses, in equipment and land and buildings. That means jobs, and opportunities. Get rid of some of those band-aid “regulations” that made banks refuse to lend money to anyone who couldn’t prove he didn’t need it, to free up reasonable business credit, and small business will boom.
I have asked many realtors how the foreclosure problem would have developed if Congress had simply passed a law, back in 2008, saying that there would never be a capital gains tax or other tax on any profits made from buying buildings either in foreclosure or facing foreclosure. The response has always been that the market would have been flooded with private investors taking advantage of the opportunity to make money, offsetting the risk to capital.
And why not? You have a family that could make a $1200 payment on their loan but can’t make a higher payment when the introductory interest rate went up, so the house is going into foreclosure. A private investor could buy the house from the bank, allow the family to stay in the house at the old rate of $1200 a month, and ride out the downturn, knowing that he will have a chance to make tax-free money on the house when the market recovers. In the meantime, he’s building equity, the family doesn’t have to move, the banks are out from under the bad loan, the feds don’t have to use OPM to try to “fix” the problem they created, bad loans are not being marketed as investments, and a steep roller coaster of financial disasters is smoothed out to some rolling bumps.
I have a feeling that when YOU talk about “public policy” you are talking about redistribution of other peoples’ wealth.
Remember what happened to Bachman when Perry got into the race? Remember what happened to Perry after his “brain freeze”? What happened to Cain after all the allegations came out and his long pause in answering a foreign policy question? And lastly, what happened to Gingrich after the negative ads in Iowa?
Polls are only the measure of a particular moment of time in the minds of the voters, it is a long way before November. Conventional wisdom would say, considering what history says when the economy is this bad, that Obama will lose.
Yes, Obama’s record is horrible but with the war chest they have, you think their going to realistically defend it? You will be surprised how they will turn statistics on their head. How greedy and racist Republicans are, how extreme conservatives and the tea party are. Considering nearly half of Americans don’t pay income taxes and many of those are dependent on government one way or another, their propaganda isn’t going to fall on deaf ears entirely.
All what has happened in these debates has been important, the candidates have been tested. After the South Carolina debate, we found that Romney, after running for eight years for this, wasn’t prepared with a convincing answer for his tax returns or Bain Capital. There have been how many debates? Against Obama, their will probably be just three debates. One moment can make or brake a voters confidence and that works both ways. Considering what Republican polls show now, you have to ask yourself, is the man, who lost to the man, who lost to Obama, ready to enter that arena? There may be a need for more vetting in these primaries.
Newt gave it to Juan Williams good in the debate the other night.
It was awfully brazen, hateful, and bigoted of Juan to ask such a question, knowing that Newt would NEVER discriminate against blacks like that. Haha! Good for Newt, you’re doing a fine job of exposing the Left-wing for what they are!
Newt’s dog whistle about food stamps backfired in Iowa but will be forgotten when he drops out of the race after South Carolina. Here’s a newsflash for all of those that are and should be afraid of Barack Obama as President but not facing a reelection campaign with a midterm election in 2014, “America is not prepared to elect a Mormon hedge fund manager.”
greenteeth
Newt’s dog whistle about food stamps backfired
they have dog whistles and food stamps in hell??
the back fire noise came from your boss….open the window
What was brazen, bigoted and hateful about the question Juan asked of Newt? He just repeated what Newt had said and asked him if he understood the impact of those statements on the black community. That is hateful, bigoted and brazen? I would hardly call Juan Williams a Left-wing commentator.
Newt never singled out children of any race when he talked about teaching children a work ethic. Williams projected a claim that this was directed to black children and that was a lie. Williams is the one who leaped to the conclusion which he then attributed to Newt that blacks are only suited to be janitors as well as that this is a shameful job. Newt mentiomed.several things kids could do…..Williams twisted it to claim it was not only just about being a janitor it.was just about blacks.
Williams did not repeat what Newt said. He lied about what Newt said and dragged race into it. I lost all respect for Williams when I saw him stoop so low. He let his victimhood parananoia and inherent racism override his intellect and it diminished him
touchy – you might see Juan Williams in the way you describe, but there will be millions of Americans who know full well Newt was speaking of black children working as janitors. You need to get a better understanding of the underlying meaning of “political speak” if you really believe Newt was not referring to black children, that blacks are lazy and they only get cash through illegal acts. Exactly who do you think Newt was speaking of in the following statement? Convince me it is not the black community.
“Really poor children, in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works, so they have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day, they have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash,’ unless it is illegal.”
Also, why do conservatives cheer when candidates speak of letting an uninsured 30 year old man die if he failed to get health insurance; if a candidate states he has overseen more electrocutions than any other governor; and booing a soldier serving in a foreign who said he was gay? These mostly white crowds should be an embarrassment to the GOP for their display of indifference and total lack of empathy for anyone different from them.
scummy
and asked him if he understood the impact of those statements on the black community.
Why? are MOST of them on welfare??
OUCH maybe it SHOULD hurt.
BAM………
scummy
Convince me it is not the black community.
WHY?
go to the DOJ website and do crimes by demographics….then get back… K?
What was brazen, bigoted and hateful about the question Juan asked of Newt?
Because it was untrue, and Juan knew it.
Velma, nothing can convince you of anything that flies in the face of your sour, hateful, anti-conservative bigotry.
What amazes me is the total lack of awareness of your kind—the raging racism inherent in automatically snapping to a conclusion that anyone describes as poor or on food stamps or not working MUST be black.
OK, be a racist pig, never consider that anyone BUT black people can be poor, or lazy. But please stop projecting that vicious bigotry on others.
While there actually MAY be “millions” as blind, racist and hateful as you, there are many more who realize that skin color and character are very separate, that people from any racial or ethic background can be poor or lazy, and that poverty is an equal opportunity condition.
How DARE you assert that any comment made about parents who do not work, families on welfare, etc. simply has to be about black people? I find this outrageous and deeply offensive.
But then I find YOU outrageous and deeply offensive.
The simple fact is, children learn from observation. When children do not observe their parents or other caregivers going to work, being responsible, bringing home paychecks, then what is wrong with creating a circumstance where they can learn it on their own? How else to break the pattern of multi-generational unemployment?
Velma, you are simply the most blatant liar I have ever seen. For example,no one booed a soldier “because he was gay”. Not only was this not the reason anyone booed (and it was only one or two people) the truth was repeatedly pointed out to you.
But you gravitate toward the ugly and the false, because this is what you seek and what you crave, so you simply ignore the often-repeated truth in favor of spewing more of your vile hate-based lies.
Good thread so far with some well thought out posts from everyone, with the exception of Robin, but hey it’s hard for liberals to stay focused. The first misnomer however is the 99%, which is a complete falsehood. The vast majority of the 99% do just fine in a robust economy (hint: not the Obama economy), and actually those that serve in public unions are doing extremely well even in today’s economy thanks to tax payer money (think: 2009 stimulus). The segment of society that liberals continue to fret over and attempt to make a bigger issue than it really is comprises approximately 10%. Those are the people that do need help and some assistance, and if we were all more reality based (there’s that word again that incensed barstool), we would concentrate our efforts at the STATE LEVEL, and design programs that can be effectively administered to give these people a HAND UP, not a hand out.
Going back to the previous thread, I can’t ignore this:
If you are a Bible believing person which issue is more important?…….Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser’s or Thou shalt do no murder? – GMB
I don’t think I have ever had to struggle with this question, but I will keep an open mind. I then went on to read this:
Maybe you will think again before you bring me into a personal attack on another poster. – GMB
No question. With a stinging retort like that, who in their right mind would venture into that arena again?
tired
Democrats continue to present solutions that maintains the status quo and regurgitate the rhetoric of class warfare and try to convince the moochers and looters that they are the only solution. Their divisive rhetoric continues.
Well, when you have been a student of these Marxist professors and mentors that is all you know.
it is worse than that, O is the Manchurian candidate with NO back ground, NO experience, trained from the cradle in marxism, a doper, community agitator, alleged homosexual……….you get what you pay for.
OPM can buy a lot of votes from the plantation drones.
Rut Ro
The apparent stonewalling at the White House over vast areas of Barack Obama’s background continues.
In response to a question today at the daily news briefing that concerned Obama’s college records and transcripts, press spokesman Jay Carney said it was a good idea to have presidential candidates release their tax records.
Tax records?
Yes.
The question came from Ed Henry of Fox News.
“Now, I don’t know how many years – maybe you do – George Romney released of his college transcripts, but Republicans like to complain the president has not released his college transcripts. What is the stated reason for that?” he asked.
“I’d refer you to the campaign. I mean, I think,” Carney started
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/carney-dodges-obamas-college-transcripts/
neostupid,
get over your paranoia idiot. the man is a citizen, harvard graduate, and a constitutional law professor.
next!
jamestooge
neo,
get over your paranoia idiot. the man is a citizen, harvard graduate, and a constitutional law professor.
I post a website for you to look at and Im paranoid?
LOL
the “man” is also a drug head, racist, bisexual. according to HIS own book (by ayers) and larry sinclairs sworn testimony and book….
Next, dummy?
Get over WHAT, “James”?
Get over the fact that records of this “citizen and Harvard graduate” have been carefully kept hidden from the public? (BTW, he was never a “constitutional law professor”. He taught some classes, briefly.
If you argue that yes, he has released his college transcripts, his thesis, the scholarly writings that justified his position as the head of the law review, etc. then please please do. Quote them or give us links, because no one has been able to find any of them.
Maybe you can tell us how a self-admitted stoner, who wrote that his mother was always on his back for getting bad grades, somehow managed to get into not one, not two, but three prestigious temples of higher education.
Or how he paid for them. (And no, a whining comment from Michelle about how they had to work so hard to pay off “student loans” is not enough.)
How about this, when you disagree with what someone has posted maybe you should check your snark at the door?
Not expecting anything to change. You will venture into that area again. You cant help yourself. Disagree with Cluster and it is open season.
Question….
do any of the GOP candidates fall into this category?
The book, released Monday, compares the Utopian and unworkable schemes laid out by political philosophers from Plato to Thomas Hobbes with the vision of natural law, God-given rights, and individual liberty that inspired the Founding Fathers when they wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
“Utopianism is not new,” Levin writes in “Ameritopia.” “It has been repackaged countless times—since Plato and before. It is as old as tyranny itself. In democracies, its practitioners legislate without end. In America, law is piled upon law in contravention and contradiction of the governing law—the Constitution.”
Levin’s verdict: Barack Obama and modern American liberals are firmly in the Utopian camp—pursuing a vision fundamentally at odds with limited government and human freedom.
“I believe to a great extent we now live in a post-constitutional country, where much of the Constitution is ignored or evaded,” Levin told CNSNews.com.
“What I want the readers to understand, what I want the public to understand is, this is not new and it’s going to destroy us,” said Levin. “It’s going to destroy us because it is an attack on the individual. It is an attack on the nature of human beings.”
Who that posts here has had their freedom limited since Obama took office ? Anyone? If so, what freedom have you lost?
scummy
Ochimpys FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND $$$$$$$$$$ book advance on a UN WRITTEN BOOK the DAY BEFORE his INAUGURATION………CHA CHING…..
OPM, looters takers and grifters
scummy
a cave in Tora Bora???
We are losing our freedoms as we speak. Freedom of speech is in jeopardy with the acts currently going into effect – SOPA and PIPA – it would censor the web, and put harmful regulations on business. And you can’t see it, but there are other freedoms that have been lost, or that you will deny, the freedom to speak in a public square against homosexuality in a non-threatening, beneficial way in order to help people have second thoughts about this dangerous lifestyle … hundreds of Christians have been discriminated against because they would not marry people of the same gender. Hundreds of pastors have been discriminated against because they spoke out against the immoral lifestyle of homosexuality. And I’m sure that if Obama had his way, that anyone disagreeing with the lifestyle would be jailed. Doctors are in jeopardy of fines and imprisonment if they do not comply with “provisions” that are contained in the Obama healthcare bill, which states that you must provide abortions to women who come to you asking for them. We have lost the freedoms to share the Bible with children in the classroom.There’s hundreds and thousands of cases to show that Democrats are in favor of taking away freedoms. While we’ve lost many freedoms over the years, the only thing that has allowed us to keep what little freedoms we have is the freedom we have to own and bear arms, America’s guns. And that’s the only thing that has saved them, and Democrats want to take away that freedom, as well. And if they take our guns away, we will have truly lost our freedom period, and the socialists in Washington will have their wish of total control.
I called my GOP rep about SOPA, did you?
Nope, I called the DNC Chair.
If you’re going to talk someone out of it it’s always better to call someone that supports it than someone that doesn’t.
You know who is pushing the bill right?
Lets see here, the person whyo introduced the SOPA bill happened to be Lamar Smith (R) Texas Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Who was appointed by John Boehner (R) Ohio Speaker of the House.
You want somebody to complain to, how about one of those fine folks.
They are just compromising folks. Can’t blame them for doing that can you you?
Isn’t it refreshing to hear from a thoughtful, articulate person on the subject who sees the need for such protections, but who is also very aware of the unintended consequences of such a move. Rather than from two people who either use the bill as a political weapon (barstool), or from someone who thinks that opposition, or support, of this bill should have been determined at birth and that any thoughtful analysis shows weakness. (GMB)
“In recent weeks, we’ve heard from many Floridians about the anti-Internet piracy bills making their way through Congress,” said Rubio. “On the Senate side, I have been a co-sponsor of the PROTECT IP Act because I believe it’s important to protect American ingenuity, ideas and jobs from being stolen through Internet piracy, much of it occurring overseas through rogue websites in China.”…………“As a senator from Florida, a state with a large presence of artists, creators and businesses connected to the creation of intellectual property, I have a strong interest in stopping online piracy that costs Florida jobs,” added Rubio. “However, we must do this while simultaneously promoting an open, dynamic Internet environment that is ripe for innovation and promotes new technologies,”
http://www.sunshineslate.com/2012/01/18/marco-rubio-drops-support-sopa/
Obama panders to extreme base again and loses sight of his “laser focus” on jobs by killing the pipeline.
http://nationaljournal.com/congress/obama-rejecting-pipeline-pokes-back-at-gop-20120118?mrefid=subhplead_1
Yah, but he’s reset that “laser focus” on the irrational rabidly radical Left, hoping they will gin up enough votes to make up for the losses in the middle. He’ll play them, just like he did with his promises about Gitmo, etc., and then he’ll back off and do what he needs to do to court the middle, again.
He’s given the eco-Nazis the whole EPA, and just has to remind them of that and dangle the hopes of killing another petro project to keep them happy. Christie has played into this game, banning hydraulic fracturing in New Jersey without any more reason that some shrill hysteria from this pseudo-environmental base. They’ve got enough from Barry in three years to keep them happy while he plays political games with the pipeline.
“or from someone who thinks that opposition, or support, of this bill should have been determined at birth and that any thoughtful analysis shows weakness. (GMB)
Project much Cluster?
Bottom line. Will SOPA/PIPA result in the loss of more of our freedoms? More than likely. But since Smith and Rubio thinks it is a good idea we will just let it pass without a thought.
Thank you for the response from someone who lacks the gray matter to discern the complexities of the bills need vs the potential ramifications. No need to think things through right GMB?
Too easy velma.
obAMATEUR’s DOJ demands for emails from yahoo without warrant.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/04/15/
Search “freedoms lost under Obama”. Of course you will be scared of the results.
The freedom to pay cash for medical procedures must buy insurance. The freedom to buy raw milk by my own choice.
More Velma, I have lost the freedom not to be assassinated by my own country.
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/07/assassinations/index.html
Your stupid question has been asked and answered many times before. A lawyer is supposed to know the answer to a question before it is asked. I guessed you missed that day of instruction at bob’s school of law and tire repair.
What a delightful group of bloggers – all of the Christian posters on this blog that cannot resist calling those who might disagree or have a different view, rather ugly names. Then there is the Amazona, who just cannot resist the catty remarks. You sound so darn unhappy and miserable every time you post one would almost feel sorry for you but for the fact you really are not a nice person.
I am unaware of telling lies as Amazona stated – I mostly asked questions. Oh and tired – a lawyer has to ask questions before the trial – called depositions. That is so you know the answer to the questions you are going to ask before a judge and jury. I am just trying to figure out what your answer before the trial starts. You might find the questions stupid, but that coming from you doesn’t really mean much to me. You are a political hack and are not interested in honestly answering a question (and not hard ones at that), but would much rather insult and call people names. I have come to learn that is the conservative way. No real discussions, just “boy are you stupid” and other such intelligent responses.
I find it interesting that you never felt your freedom threatened while Bush was president and all electronic communications surveillance occurring by the government. Now you are so worried that Obama is taking your freedoms by demanding emails without a subpoena? Have your emails been demanded by the Justice Department? I asked what freedoms have YOU lost. If you truly want unpasteurized milk, you can do so – either find a dairy farmer who will sell you whole, unpasteurized milk or go buy a milk cow. I’m sorry, but this is one of the lamest things I have ever heard. There is no law preventing you from buying raw milk – it is just that the local market is not going to sell it to you. That is their right as a business.
And as to Jeremiah’s complaint that we can no longer read the Bible to children in schools – this did not happen during the Obama administration. This has been the law for many years. And tell me, which Bible should be read to the children? Can we read from the Jewish Holy Book, the Mormon Bible, the Muslim Holy Book, or any other religious affiliation that might want their Holy Book to be read to children in classrooms. How do we decide? Would it be OK with you if a different Holy book was read each day just to be fair to all religions?
Jeremiah, please provide the provision in the new health care bill that forces doctors to perform abortions. I want the actual language. Also, could you provide proof that hundreds of Christians have been discriminated against because they would not endorse the homosexual life style and would not marry another person of their gender???? Really? This really is a hidden news story – I cannot find any thing on this story. You didn’t just make this up, did you? How have minister been discriminated against because they have spoken out against homosexuality? Were their churches closed down? I think you are way too obsessed with the sexuality of others, and you have an especially disturbing obsession about homosexuality. That does make me wonder . . . why?
Most of the bloggers here are filled with anger and hate. This blog is like a pile-up on the freeway with fatalities – you don’t want to look, but for some reason, you just cannot help yourself. Most of you are really sad human beings in that your greatest satisfaction in life seems to be contrived from putting down those who see life differently than you by name calling and immature responses. One of the few really decent bloggers is Spook – even though we seldom agree on issues. He seldom calls anyone names and makes an honest attempt to respond to a post.
Most of you are really sad human beings in that your greatest satisfaction in life seems to be contrived from putting down those who see life differently than you by name calling and immature responses.
And you haven’t seen this tactic employed by liberals? Or do you just want to ignore that?
By the way, I didn’t get a chance to respond your questions from yesterday, one of which related to the cap gains rate, of which Amazona answered very well. Which is that investment money has already been subject to income taxation, hence the lower rate – do you understand that?
Secondly, Obama did not close Gitmo probably as a result of learning more information after becoming POTUS, information of which he did not know when he politically attacked Bush over the issue. Obama also said during the campaign that he understood very well what condition the economy was in, and what was needed to fix it – it becomes rather convenient after the fact, to say that the economy was worse than he anticipated. When you make declarative statements Sunny, they can come back to haunt you, that’s part of living in the adult world.
Finally, I will ONCE AGAIN remind you that Obama had two years of a democratically controlled Congress, and passed everything he wanted. he has even admitted that, so please stop with the excuses.
you have heard of the filibuster, right Cluster? It has been slightly over used by the Republican Senate for the past few years. No excuses, just facts. And I really have no interest in what Amazona says, she is very nasty and catty to everyone who posts here. She is not worth wasting my time to read her snarky remarks and she is wasting her time if she thinks I will waste mine on her posts.
scummy
It has been slightly over used by the Republican Senate for the past few years.
PROOF of this??
I say BS!!
scummy
she is wasting her time if she thinks I will waste mine on her posts.
Uhhhhhhhh you just did….WTF????
Velma, again Republicans don’t have sufficient numbers for a filibuster. If they did, then healthcare would not have made it through. In the last three years the Democratshave let only ONE budget to the floor for debate. But do keep up that dumbed down talking point. It proves you to be a mindless hack.
In other words, Velma, when confronted with your lies and distortions and spite and malice, you can’t rebut the confrontations so just have to call some names and waddle off, trying to project your ungainly retreat as moral and intellectual uprightness.
And I am NOT “nasty and catty to everyone who posts here”. I believe I have referred to one poster as Clustericious, have supported and defended ideas and facts when I have found them, have had a great relationship with neo and Jeremiah and Spook and the wonderful California sock puppet brigade, and so on. Even when I spar with GMB, I would have his six in any encounter, and I’ve defended tired’s posts and threads from the get-go.
No, it’s just you RRL dupes and drones who get called on your shallowness, deceptiveness, and downright nastiness. Awwwwwww
What the Left simply cannot stand is having your lies held up to the light of day, and when it happens the default reaction is to attack the messenger.
I repeat: Awwwww
BTW, note that Velma couldn’t deny her vicious racism, as it oozes out of her posts, no matter how much she tries to project it onto conservatives.
No, she just takes her broom and goes home.
“Republican Senate”, “Republican Senate”, “Republican Senate” …now, just how long has it been since we’ve had a “Republican Senate” ?
And just what IS a “Republican Senate” anyway? Is it 51 Republicans or 60?
Cluster, allow me to remind you that George W. Bush invited all of the likely Dem candidates to the White House, before the convention, and shared with them the information upon which he had based his decisions.
Of the Seven Dwarfs (or maybe it was down to five or six at the time) only one, Hillary Clinton, had the integrity to change her position on several issues relating to terrorism, Iraq and so on. She turned on a dime and started to sound very much like Bush in those areas.
OK, it might not have been integrity. It might have been the political calculation that if she happened to get the nomination, and win the election, she would have to eat any words about getting out of Iraq early, closing Gitmo, military tribunals, etc.
But she did change her rhetoric once she had the information, while Obama just kept on tossing raw meat to his rabid base, knowing that none of them would ever hold his words up to him and challenge him on saying one thing and doing another.
I think he underestimated the fervor of the anti-American, anti-military, base though, and he has had to do some very complicated tap-dancing to try to keep them in the fold. It’s really been fascinating to watch—both the to-and-fro-ing of his constantly shifting claims and actions, and the complicity of the media in never calling him on any of it.
I think the refusal to allow the Keystone pipeline is one of the crumbs he is tossing them, shifting the focus from military matters (like assassinating Americans overseas, bombing with drones, etc.) to economic matters where the Left is profoundly stupid and even more easily manipulated. I suggest that the whole Occupy thing was ginned up and supported by Lefty leaders to give this rabidly radical base a reason to, if not support Obama, at least get all wound up about enemies of the Left like capitalism.
(Don’t forget the racist code implicit in the term “tap dancing”)
So now Velma is claiming she doesn’t lie when she phrases her untruths as questions. Nice try, Velma.
The litany of lies you spew every time you post would take way too long to list. But here is a cluster of them from just one paragraph from just one post, on this one thread,
If Republicans were not so exclusive in the requirements to be a member of its party, you might garner more votes from minorities.
Really? Republicans have exclusive requirements to be a member of the party? Gee, who knew? When I finally caught on to the lies and manipulations of the Left, I just checked “Republican” when I registered. No test, no qualifications, none of the nonsense Velma claims.
Though she does, inadvertently, admit to her ignorance about what it means to be a conservative and a Republican.
But lets face it, you just plain do not like minorities.
Another lie.
I don’t believe it is statement (sic) like Obama made that divides the states, but it is more due to the GOP philosophy of minorities
Number 3, already, though technically this would be 3 and 4 as it says that Obama’s statements are not divisive and that the GOP has a “philosophy of minorities”, whatever that is supposed to mean.
… and the GOP governors and state senators/representatives in Red states that are causing the divide
Five lies in just a couple of sentences…
.. like AZ, GA, FLA and other states that are inflicting legislation against minorities…
Up to six lies, and so quickly, too……
…and voting rights.
There you go. Seven major lies in one paragraph. Not a lick of truth in any of it. And none of it phrased as questions, just bald statements of untruth.
And then the submission, which is more craziness than just a lie:
I submit that has much more to create divide than anything Obama has said.
How typical of Velma to just ignore the facts presented and claim I am just “unhappy” blah blah blah. Well, Vel, I am not the one who has to seek out and slurp down vile vicious lies to be satisfied. I am not the one so sour and surly that if I can’t find something ugly about a candidate I just make it up. I am not the one who feeds on petty gossip and hateful stories about other people. I am not such an inbred racist that every time I hear words like “poor” or “welfare” or “food stamps” or “lazy” I automatically think of black people, and I am not so inherently dishonest that I then project my hateful bigotry on others who do not associate negatives with skin color.
Nah, I’m a pretty cheerful person, and quite happy in my life—happier when I reflect on how different I am from you.
And I can spell, too.
You should look at the hundreds of congregations who left the ELCA in the last 2 years after the ELCA allowed gays in relationships to preach from the ELCA pulpits. Obviously the faith based churches are losing many of their congregants to bible based churches or starting new affiliations in accordance with GOD’s law..not man’s.
scummy
and you have an especially disturbing obsession about homosexuality. That does make me wonder . . . why?
IF you have to ask…..you wouldnt understand.
YOU, on the other hand, have this fixation FOR homosexuality, that does make me wonder………..WHY?
Again Velma in you excessive whine you speak of something in which you know nothing about.
http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/obama-administration-says-“no-raw-milk-for-you-”/
And it is not that you simply disagree with us. It is the fact that no matter how many times you are proven wrong, you keep regurgitating the same incorrect nonsense over and over. Each time we prove you wrong you disappear from the thread and reappear in another spewing the same cr@p…and you wonder why we have little confidence in you mental ability. You are the one that’s a hack. You are an oh so loyal Democrat drone. No matter what facts are against you, you will stick to the party line, regardless.
Again, if you don’t like it here go to one of your echo chambers like the dailykos or the pitchfork.
Whaaaaatttttt??
New Obama OMB director a Bain alum
rotfl
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201201180008
Bmitch
BFD
NEXT?
Verrrrrrrrry Interestiiiiiiiing !!!
Presidential Accomplishments
The Conservative Treehouse ^ | 01/11/12 | Menagerie
“I get tired of all the mail stating the President hasn’t accomplished anything.
An impressive list of accomplishments!
· First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.
· First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.
· First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States
· First President to violate the War Powers Act. .
· First President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico .
· First President to defy a Federal Judge’s court order to cease implementing the Health Care Reform Law.
· First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.
· First President to spend a trillion dollars on ‘shovel-ready’ jobs when there was no such thing as ‘shovel-ready’ jobs.
· First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.
· First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat. .
· First President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S. , including those with criminal convictions.
· First President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.
· First President to terminate America ’s ability to put a man in space.
· First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.
· First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.
· First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.
· First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.
· First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).
· First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.
· First President to fire an inspector general of Ameri-corps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.
· First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office. .
· First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 90 to date.
· First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.
· First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.
· First President to go on multiple global ‘apology tours’.
· First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends; paid for by the taxpayer.
· First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.
· First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.
· First President to repeat the Holy Qur’an tells us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.
· First President to take a 17 day vacation.
So how is this hope and change working out for you?”
Half of U.S. Households Received Government Benefits in 2010
The Atlantic ^ | January 18, 2012 | By contributors@theatlantic.com (Derek Thompson) |
A record-high 49% of the population lived in a household receiving some type of government benefit in the second quarter of 2010, according to Census data reported by the Wall Street Journal. Most of this group received so-called “means tested” benefits like food stamps, subsidized housing or Medicaid. Many are also benefiting from unemployment insurance spending, which has quadrupled since the downturn.
This is the sort of figure I call a Rorschach Statistic, because (a) it’s guaranteed to provoke a passionate reaction and (b) that reaction will say a lot about your politics. Liberals are more likely to see this as a symptom of a very sick labor force begging for help. Conservatives are more likely to see it as a symptom of a very sick government that is drowning in bloat and addicted to redistribution.
And Velma and Juan will see it as an attack on black people, because they simply cannot hear words like “poor”, “food stamps”, “welfare”, and “unemployed” without assuming the words describe black people.
And they call US “racist”.
You like quotes from the conservative treehouse, how about this one?
“McCain’s Opposition Research File on Mitt Romney is proving itself to be not only informative but quite insightful as to the character of Gov. Romney. The last six pages of the file are titled “Boston Video Archive” and they’re particularly interesting. The 97 tapes therein contain Gov. Romney’s personal opinions on everything from taxes, fees, social issues, and immigration, ending with a section titled “Family/Personal”.
Check out that final page 200…and the last line:
Romney: “I thought becoming rich and famous would make me happy. Boy was I right.” (Tape 78) Just how is that going to play in Peoria? ”
Next?
Kind of like Obama’s musings in his book – “white mans greed runs a world in need”. Or when Obama said – “when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everyone”
Those two lines still don’t play well in Peoria.
Next.
but they love em in detroit, DC, los angeles, NYC and every other plantation innercity.
Gee, Robin, maybe those folks in Peoria will decide that the free market will be a good idea for them, too, as the collectivist Utopian model only makes a small handful of ruling elites wealthy, and that at the whim of the State.
Being told that something will make people happy is going to make them decide not to do it?
You also miss the real point—he did not say BEING rich and famous made him happy, but BECOMING rich and famous did. This is what mooches and parasites don’t understand—the thrill of accomplishment, accompanied by the rewards.
People who thrive on competition and accomplishment tend to accomplish more, and get great satisfaction from their successes, while people who don’t have that drive and ambition just sit around whining and mitching about those who do, utterly clueless about the pleasure of the journey as well as the rewards.
You seem to have a lot of contempt for the people of Peoria—maybe they are just bitter clingers—-but what you PL dupes don’t get is that Middle America DOES understand the satisfaction of a job well done, as well as the inherent fairness of being able to enjoy the compensation for it.
RNgreenteeth
O and the Mooch “I thought becoming rich and famous would make me happy. Boy was I right.”
AND
OPM mmmmm mmmmm mmmmmm
thanks sukas
And here’s the problem. Wingers don’t check facts if the appearance makes their point!
“Robin”, thank you for pointing out that Velma’s posts are a mishmash of lies and falsehoods. Boy, talk about a “winger”—she’s as far out on that left wing as you can get, at least emotionally, though she’s still clueless about the ideology.
But what the hell—intellectual cannon fodder is the lifeblood of the Left.
What do you believe will be the impact of Mitt Romney’s comment yesterday that he didn’t make that much for speaking fees, which is about $370,000.00, when so many in this country are struggling to make ends meet? Who here doesn’t believe that making $370,000.00 a year would be a nice living for most of us? Do you think Mitt is truly out of touch with most Americans?
A second question: What is your opinion of Newt suggesting that Rick Perry and Rick Santorum both drop out of the race so he, Newt, has a chance to beat Mitt as the GOP presidential candidate? I know Newt is very impressed with his debating skills, but is that enough for most conservative voters to support him? Most women I know have said there is no way they could ever vote for him and the thought of Callestia as first lady is repulsive to them. I know men look at infidelity than women, but there are a lot of women voters out there. There are legitimate questions that need to be asked and seriously addressed by conservatives.
scummy
I would rather ask the first grifters about the HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of OPM spent on their semi weekly lavish vacations.
scummy
There are legitimate questions that need to be asked and seriously addressed
Pot meet Kettle….what a riot!!!
Sunny, I think, when Mitt said he didn’t make much from speaking fees, he was comparing himself to Bill Clinton
You’ll have to admit that $370,000 a year is chump change compared to $10.7 million.
Spook, I didn’t realize Bill Clinton was running for president again. I certainly would vote for him a third time if the opportunity presented itself. There is a big difference between a former president making big bucks for speaking events and a man running for president saying that he didn’t earn that much from speaking engagements and that about was over $370,000.00. For most Americans that is a lot of money. I think you completed missed the point of my question.
Clinton isn’t running for President. Thanks for trying the moral equivalence game, try harder next time and just answer the question.
On another note. what was the stock market when Obama took office? and what is it now? I’d like you to tell us how much the market has gone up since this “socialist” took office.
There go the drones again when given the facts of their own party they chant “but but but but but ” and give their guy a pass. They still believe that their part is the party who cares… It does not matter if their guy is no longer president he still should be the “caring” individual that he is spun into being. But why quibble about details and facts when they can make issue of anything against the opposition no matter what their party does?
Typical of the mindless drones and just as pathetic as before.
Let’s see….Velma compares what Romney earned to, well, someone who makes less. That comparison is OK. But to compare him to someone who makes vastly MORE, doing the same thing? No sirree, we don’t compare anyone to Saint Bill.
Which reminds me—-Velma has bleated endlessly about Newt being a “serial adulterer” and claims this should disqualify him for the presidency, and just now brags that she would vote, yet again, for a man who defines the term.
A man who’d hump a woodpile on the chance there might be a snake in it.
Who didn’t fall in love while married to another woman, and then marry the woman with whom he committed adultery, but a man who assured the nation (with a tear in his eye) that “I did not have sex with that woman” when he’d been repeatedly serviced by her in the Oval Office.
And she was nearly his daughter’s age, he led her on, and she was just one of so many no one can even hazard a guess as to the total.
Yeah, guys, you keep trying to make infinitely flexible rules about what can and can’t be compared, and we’ll just keep identifying you as hypocritical hate-driven kneepadders.
This is interesting although I’m sure most of you will slam it. Which only proves the author’s point.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/andrew-sullivan-how-obama-s-long-game-will-outsmart-his-critics.print.html
a good post from another site.
“It’s this simple folks;
In the last 60 years, the Republicans have fumbled the baton every time they’ve been given it, except once.
People got comfortable that time and took their eyes off the baton.
The socialists got power again and passed socialist laws, then lost power, and the Republicans took the baton again, and dropped it.
This baton passing has been going on for decades and we move closer to a socialist nation each time.
Follow the money
Mr. John F Kennedy Jr. once told me, “We have no choice … follow the money.”
We have a Senate that needs to be flushed down the toilet, along with an administration that needs to be incarcerated.
Don’t lose sight of conservative goals this time, or we lose our nation.
The socialists are almost there and they are drooling on themselves in anticipation of their final rule.
Even if Barry Soetoro loses the presidency, if we don’t have a strong conservative House and Senate forcing a RINO president into their corner, nothing will change.
Read history, it tells us a sorry story people …“
Bmitch
We’ve already elected the nation’s first black president and replaced a tongue-tied dauphin with a man of peerless eloquence.
what a CROCK of BS.
a marxist Muslim usurper, who has to have a teleprompter to talk to sixth grade students.
a never was empty suit community agitator not fit to shine the shoes of his predecessor, (but could with training).
NEXT?
bmitch
you want interesting?
Obama Presidential Eligibility – An Introductory Primer
Copyright (©) 2009-2011 Stephen Tonchen
Revision date: December 31, 2011
http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm
Mitch,
Thank you for the post from that “conservative” Andrew Sullivan. Here’s my favorite line:
A caveat: I write this as an unabashed supporter of Obama from early 2007 on. I did so not as a liberal, but as a conservative-minded independent
I wonder what it was that led Andrew to support Obama in 2008? Was it Obama’s extensive resume of private sector, or even public sector experience? Was it Obama’s stellar record of taking sides on tough issues and not voting “present” – oh wait. Or maybe it was Obama’s tough stance on raising the debt ceiling, only to violate his own position time and time again after winning the election. Or maybe it was Obama’s billion dollar hand outs to public unions. Or maybe it was Obama’s time spent with Bill Ayers, Rezko, and Rev Wright’s influence, those bulwarks of our society. Either way, I am glad that Andrew feels comfortable supporting this empty suit, and Mitch, thanks so much for sharing.
What do you believe will be the impact of Mitt Romney’s comment yesterday that he didn’t make that much for speaking fees, which is about $370,000.00, when so many in this country are struggling to make ends meet? – Sunny
Good call on that Sunny, you really nailed it. All of those people that freely paid to hear Romney speak should have been offered a handout instead right? I mean it’s not as if Romney wasted $500 billion of tax payer money to prop up a failing solar energy company, because of his desire to push a green agenda, and then brush it off as nothing. That would really suck
You’re not a conservative, you are an extremist. Give up the Rev Wright and Bill Ayers crap already. Unless of course, you are a birther as well. Unfortunately for you, Obama is far more conservative than you have any capacity to understand. There is nothing in Sullivan’s article that you can refute because it is based on facts and that is why it has enraged folks like you so much. He hit a nerve.
In part he chose to support Obama because the alternative was suicide. McCain and what’s her name?? The fraud from Alaska.
Wow Mitch,
Angry much? I don’t have the capacity to understand how conservative Obama is??? That’s absolutely hilarious – really, kudos for that line. Much of what Andrew posted was opinion, but let’s just address a few of his “facts”. From the article:
The job collapse bottomed out at the beginning of 2010, as the stimulus took effect. Since then, the U.S. has added 2.4 million jobs. That’s not enough, but it’s far better than what Romney would have you believe, and more than the net jobs created under the entire Bush administration
While admittedly anemic, there 3.5 million private and public sector net jobs created between 2001-2009. And this is a net after 9/11 and Katrina – two fairly substantial tragedies
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/06/a_lost_decade_f.html
How about this nugget:
But given the enormity of what he inherited, and given what he explicitly promised, it remains simply a fact that Obama has delivered in a way that the unhinged right and purist left have yet to understand or absorb.
Obama promised unemployment under 8% – that’s a fact, and of which he failed to deliver on. Obama promised full public scrutiny of all legislation – that’s a fact, and of which he failed to deliver on. Obama promised that the auto bail out would be paid back and not expose tax payers to a loss – that’s a fact, and of which he failed to deliver on. Obama promised to close Gitmo – that’s a fact and of which he failed to deliver on. Do you want me to go on?
Let’s address another fact that Andrew omitted and that’s health care. Obama promised that premiums and other related health care costs would come down with the implementation of Obamacare. Today, insurance premiums are at all time highs, doctors are leaving the industry, and Medicare patients are finding services harder to obtain. In fact, Obama was the first president to ever cut medicare to the tune of $500 billion.
Obama also promised that we were not a nation of blue or red states, rather we were the United States, and then he goes out and says this:
“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”
cluster, could you please explain why Obama failed closing Gitmo? Or provide proof that Obama said the auto bail out would not cost taxpayers. (Would it have been better to have all of those thousands of auto wookers on welfare, food stamps, unemployment etc?? – to say nothing of the supply chain involved in this industry). Do you understand that the depth of the economy was even worse that originally though – and that mess was left by the president preceding Obama (can’t remember his name, can you?) and that may have had something to do with the 8% unemployment number being off??? One last question – Are all presidents able to keep all their promises? If so, please provide a couple of names.
Cluster – just checking, but do you think Obama should just be crowned the King of the United States so he could fulfill all of what he hoped to accomplish during his presidency? You seem to think that because he is the president he can do everything he hoped to accomplish – but the last time I checked there was this group called the “Congress” – and they are not very cooperative most of the time. Especially those who have the “R” after their name. They do all kinds of things to get in the way of the president, like filibusterer, stall, just say no etc. So, if you think it might be more beneficial to just crown Obama and let him do whatever the heck he deems appropriate for this country, I would bet he would AND could fulfill all of your dreams of the promises made.
And, just one more little thing, since you brought up the issue of the Latinos and Blue and Red states. If Republicans were not so exclusive in the requirements to be a member of its party, you might garner more votes from minorities. But lets face it, you just plain do not like minorities. I don’t believe it is statement like Obama made that divides the states, but it is more due to the GOP philosophy of minorities and the GOP governors and state senators/representatives in Red states that are causing the divide, like AZ, GA, FLA and other states that are inflicting legislation against minorities and voting rights. I submit that has much more to create divide than anything Obama has said.
scummy
mews flash Moron
Hispanics mostly HATE blacks…….
ohh, mitch’s panties are really in a twist, aren’t they?
I have to wonder how mitch defines “conservative”—either as a noun or a verb. We’ll never know, since he will never tell us—his kind doesn’t do definitions, at least not of political philosophy—but he will give us hints, as they always do.
Funny, isn’t it, that noticing Barry’s fondness for associating with vicious racists and domestic terrorists is supposed to be dismissed as “crap” but it’s OK to call an accomplished businesswoman and governor a “fraud”.
Just curious–how many times does a Lefty have to double down on a double standard before it stops being a “double” standard?
mitchie-the-kid: “You’re not a conservative, you are an extremist.”
What a dutiful little mindless drone! I see you have begun to regurgitate the latest carefully select and marketable buzz word that has been found popular with the ignorant masses – extreme, extremist.
Democrats have researched that word and it other forms to be the most acceptable in different focus groups. When they use that word or any of its forms the ignorant masses perk their ears and pay more attention.
What else do they have to run on? Four more years? Nope, they found that people are not confident of this President nor his party to solve the economic problems. But that gets countered and makes the ignorant masses afraid if they believe that the opposition is “extreme”.
What a good little drone you are!!! Keep up the good work, mindlessly regurgitating talking points carefully crafted for the ignorant!!!
Even more vicious lies from, who else?, vicious liar Velma. She snivels about:
.. states that are inflicting legislation against minorities and voting rights…
???????????
OK, it happens to be true that illegal aliens are a minority in this country—that is, they constitute less than half of the people here. So I guess she is whining about “inflicting legislation” regarding the crimes they are committing. Ooooh.
Of course, you can extrapolate that to any legislation about any crime——laws against murder are, I guess, “inflicting legislation against” the statistical minority of people in this country who kill other people.
So Velma is, technically, finally right in a roundabout way, if she is complaining that some states target a certain demographic minority—those who enter and/or remain in the country illegally. She just overlooks the point that every law against every crime targets some minority or another, and this will remain true until a majority of people start to commit a certain crime.
The shrill “inflicting legislation against” is just more Velma drama queen hysterics, muddled up with her abject ignorance of the legislative process.
But then she goes completely off the rails by adding on “voting rights”. “Inflicting legislation against voting rights”?
Really?
What “legislation” is supposedly being “inflicted”, and against what “voting rights”?
Demanding that only legally authorized voters vote? Is this the dreaded “infliction of legislation” that has her stomping her little hooves in outrage?
She sure is casual about protecting the sanctity of the vote, isn’t she? Or is she? It’s always so hard to sort through the lies and hysteria that make up a Velma spewing.
BTW, just what IS “…the GOP philosophy of minorities..” ?
Cluster, I call your solar energy argument and raise you two unpaid for wars by George W. Bush. (I will save the unpaid for prescription plan and unfunded NCLB by Bush for the next round).
scummy
and I’ll raise you 0chimpy’s THREE un funded wars and 3 TRILLION in his debt.
and $100,000,000.00 in OPM vacations
Still sticking with that debunked useful idiot talking points there Velma?
Of course you are, you have nothing else.
BTW, obAMATEUR has already outspent Bush’s two wars in less than half the time…..plus started a third!
NCLB was funded. The Democrats wanted more spending for it and it was unnecessary but it made for good dumbed down talking points for the ignorant masses.
All the spending criticisms we heard during Bush by Democrats are non-existent today, but those who criticized Bush’s spending here are again criticizing obAMATEUR’s spending, but you consider that unfair.
Figures….. Coming from a mindless drone.
Neoconehead and other birthers:
From a tactical point of view, why should Obama or Romney or anyone else release personal information? If Obama got straight A’s it wouldn’t help, if he got straight C’s it would hurt. If Romney gave a lot to charity on his W-2’s it wouldn’t help him, if he gave little it would hurt him.
The American electorate is like the viewers of Wheel of Fortune. They like Vanna because she is mostly a blank slate they can project themselves onto. Bush Jr. knew that, Obama understood and now Romney is coming around to this way of thinking.
Look at the Supreme Court nomination process. Bork had lots of solid opinions which were used against him. Kagan has almost nothing and she is on board. Only in exceptionally clean cases do we get a John Roberts nominee.
Of course Obama released his certificate to shut up the Donald and blunt some bad press at the time. I wonder if Obama has decent enough grades if he will release them during a trying time to get some free good press.
baldork
Of course Obama released his certificate to shut up the Donald and blunt some bad press at the time
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g30VCl_cgk
LOL
If you believe Alex on this you should support his 911 conspiracy stuff too. The guy is so crazy he is a Ron Paul supporter.
Does Palin’s mild support help or hurt Newt? Also, when is Mitt going to release his returns? Fatso in NJ says he should do it immediately.
Oh, goody, yet another example of bigotry. You forgot to say Christie is old, white, Christian and fat. Why stop with just one piercing example of political commentary when you can hit a Lefty home run?
Almiranta if you stop calling people names I will, okay?
???????????????????
Or are you saying that intolerance of intolerance is a form of bigotry?
I don’t care if you call Christie fat. He’s fat. I just think it odd to have to try to identify him as such when the real point is not how he looks but what he said.
I am just saying I will stop calling people names if you do. k
But nobody cares what you call people, or what you say at all.
I merely pointed out yet another example of bigotry, as well as a typical example of what seems to pass for political commentary on the Left.
I wasn’t complaining, just noticing.
K?
Why is Newt’s ex-wife talking now when he is catching up to Mitt a little bit? She must be with Cluster and thinks Mitt is the man to beat Barky. Or she just hates Newt because he is a turd?
Hell hath no fury………
agreed
Isn’t it refreshing to hear from a thoughtful, articulate person on the subject who sees the need for such protections, but who is also very aware of the unintended consequences of such a move. Rather than from two people who either use the bill as a political weapon (barstool), or from someone who thinks that opposition, or support, of this bill should have been determined at birth and that any thoughtful analysis shows weakness. (GMB)
“In recent weeks, we’ve heard from many Floridians about the anti-Internet piracy bills making their way through Congress,” said Rubio. “On the Senate side, I have been a co-sponsor of the PROTECT IP Act because I believe it’s important to protect American ingenuity, ideas and jobs from being stolen through Internet piracy, much of it occurring overseas through rogue websites in China.”…………“As a senator from Florida, a state with a large presence of artists, creators and businesses connected to the creation of intellectual property, I have a strong interest in stopping online piracy that costs Florida jobs,” added Rubio. “However, we must do this while simultaneously promoting an open, dynamic Internet environment that is ripe for innovation and promotes new technologies,”
http://www.sunshineslate.com/2012/01/18/marco-rubio-drops-support-sopa/
It is good to see that the GOP is behind SOPA. It might be better if the senator in charge wasn’t open to the charge of protecting wealthy contributors at the expense of others. Of course copyright law should be made to optimize innovation, long enough to make IP worthwhile without becoming a barrier to innovation. Clueless likes the BIG GOVERNMENT when it supports Disney.
Clueless seems to favor a MInority Report view policy making which is hardly conservative. You don’t invade countries that MIGHT be trouble in then future and you don’t pass laws to control a problem which MIGHT not exist.
Amazona – get a grip on reality.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/22/republican-debate-dadt-repeal-rick-santorum_n_977105.html