A Real Leader Gives Credit and Takes Responsibility While obAMATEUR Takes Credit and Shirks Responsibility.

What makes a leader?

Does this pResident have the abilities to be a leader?

This was the President that had “to descend his throne to become President” was going to “heal the planet”, “stop the rising oceans”, “improve relations with other nations”, “fix the economy”, “pay down the debt”, “balance the budget” etc. etc.  His failures just keep piling up.  But to listen to him, it is someone or something else’s fault – the tsunami, the Arab Spring, flooding, the evil Republicans, Big Oil, the Chinese and on and on and on…..

While, of course, our resident leftist, mindless drones would say “YES! HE IS A LEADER”.  His actions and record say otherwise.

Have at it! (It seems our resident leftist drones cannot comment on the more cerebral topics.  That is a little harsh…They cannot defend the indefensible.  Here is somewhat of an open topic for them to repeat their talking points.)


75 thoughts on “A Real Leader Gives Credit and Takes Responsibility While obAMATEUR Takes Credit and Shirks Responsibility.

  1. neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 7:44 am

    a REAL POTUS is an American,
    NOT a marxist, NOT a racist, NOT some inexperienced community agitator, NOT a kenyan, NOT on vacation on OPM, NOT a race hustler.

    barry soetoro Uboma hates the US, and LEADS us in nothing but division, hate, and coming strife by his goons and thugs.

  2. Cluster April 4, 2012 / 8:50 am

    Obama is disgraceful. I can never recall a POTUS singling out a member of Congress and personally challenging his morals in front of a sycophantic crowd over the submission of a common sense, responsible budget, when Obama’s own recent budget was voted down 414-0 in the House, and 97-0 in the Senate. In addition to that, Obama’s own party leader in the Senate, Harry Reid has not offered a budget in over three years. The attacks on Ryan were shameful, disgraceful and childish.

    Also yesterday, Obama not only took another un-presidential shot at the SC, but he again started blaming the Bush tax RATE cuts for the financial crisis he still can’t seem to find an answer to. It needs to be mentioned AGAIN, that in December 2010, the democrats controlled all three branches of government, and decided to EXTEND those tax rates. So those are no longer Bush tax rates, those are now Obama tax rates, but he wont even take responsibility for that.

    GTFO 2012!

  3. Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 9:17 am

    My wife and I were just talking about ol’ Mr. Hope’nChange this morning over breakfast. I would have to think that the people who were attracted by the “hope” part in 2008 have got to be the most disappointed of all. Clearly, a lot of people who voted for him were just hoping for something for nothing, but there must have also been a pretty large number who were simply struggling and hoped for expanded opportunity. Instead they’ve gotten 38 straight months of 8%+ unemployment, a dynamic not seen in this country in over 70 years — and that’s with blatant manipulation of the statistics to eliminate millions of long-term unemployed individuals from the statistics.

    I can only speak from anecdotal examples, as I’m sure just about everyone else here can do, but I don’t know ANYONE who bought into the “change” part who is pleased with the kind of change they got with this race hustling interloper and his team of radicals. And then we’ve got the people who were horrified by Bush’s last budget deficit which, including TARP, went over $1 trillion, who voted for the guy who promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term but has yet to have a single budget deficit UNDER $1 trillion. How many of them are saying, “yeah, man, I want 4 more years of this.”

    November can’t get here soon enough!

    • mitch April 4, 2012 / 9:59 am

      And if he wins a second term then what? For all of your posturing and feigned outrage and indignation do you honestly believe that Romney is the answer to defuse your contempt?
      The fact is that the Republican party has moved so far to the right as to be unrecognizable. They have lost the middle, where most people reside and they have done a great job at alienating women and Hispanics. There is no reasonableness left. There is no recognition of the common good and cooperating for the benefit of the country. Instead the Republicans have morphed into active partisan zealots who would rather destroy themselves and become irrelevant than to give one iota of cooperation to get things done. This insanity has gone so far as to refuting their own ideas when they are proposed by the President.
      Several months ago; in his inimitable smug and righteous indignation, Newt Gingrich declared that he was the presumptive nominee. How’d that turn out? Mitch McConnell stated that his number 1 priority was to thwart the President at every opportunity.
      I think that McConnell will be as humiliated as Newt.

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 10:07 am


        Your comments would be better suited for a pro-Gingrich or McConnell website. They’re pretty much falling on deaf ears here.

      • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 10:21 am

        There is no recognition of the common good and cooperating for the benefit of the country – mitch

        Really Mitch? The democrats passed a purely partisan, questionably constitutional, massive entitlement that will add trillions of debt, on top of the trillions in debt they have already added, and have not passed a budget in over three years. And you think this is “reaching out” and doing what’s best for the country??

        You are delusional.

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 10:32 am

        mitch, please define “far right”.

        You say …The fact is that the Republican party has moved so far to the right as to be unrecognizable. .. but this territory of “so far to the right” is never defined. What are the boundaries of right, far right, and for that matter, “middle”?

        Also, the GOP has done nothing at all to alienate anyone except those who are either dedicated to an ideology based on large and controlling central government or those who support this political model without bothering to understand it.

        However, the Left has done what the Left does, and created a series of invented situations designed to turn different demographics against the Republican Party. To some extent, this has been successful, but for the most part all these efforts have done is solidify the hatred people like you already have for what you seem to think is “the Right”.

      • bozo April 4, 2012 / 1:28 pm

        Hey, that’s refreshingly honest, RS. There are some big, proud “deaf ears” here.

        Romney’s strong points generally don’t include giving credit or taking responsibility, especially for that wonderfully socialist enigma known as RomneyCare, or that fantastic rise in sales of Etch-A-Sketches.

        But we are on common ground when calling for a real leader. Wouldn’t it be great if we could actually vote for one this fall?

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 2:56 pm

        Wouldn’t it be great if we could actually vote for one this fall?

        Bozo, I think Romney, if he were to win, will surprise everyone WRT his leadership skills. It’s “refreshingly honest” of you to acknowledge that Obama is lacking in those skills.

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 7:29 pm


        have we moved as FAR right as JFK was?
        NOT JFnK

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 7:58 pm

        freakzo, do you know the difference between a state and the federal government?

        Do you know what the 10th Amendment says?

        Do you understand that if a state wants to pass legislation involving something like socialized medicine, it legally and Constitutionally CAN?

        But thanks for admitting that Obamacare is socialist. Admitting that and that Obama is not a choice for someone looking for a real leader show a gradual, if resentful, acceptance of reality. Good for you. A few more steps in this direction and you might even be able to identify yourself as something other than a clown or an ugly freak.

        I’m rooting for you……

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 8:02 pm

        There will be no definition of “far right” or even “right” or even “middle”—-the trolls just like to throw out terms they themselves can’t even define or explain, much like their political philosophy, which also remains stranded in some limbo of meaningless random wordplay.

      • Majordomo Pain April 5, 2012 / 9:35 am


        There does need to be a clear definition of “right” and “far right” made here, however, We do not feel this is an easy process, or that what We have observed would be accepted as a plausible answer. Liberals/Progressives see those who are pushing for “personhood” legislation in states as “far right” because those on the “right” of center do not see this as a forefront issue for America.

        There has been much discussion here about debt and deficits. These are issues that are of value to both the right and the far right in times when they do not control the White House but gain less traction when a member of the GOP sits in the Oval Office. It would be very facile of Us to say that the right wants every American working, paying low taxes, and having the right to own a gun to protect themselves. To extend that to the far right would be to bring in issues of race and religion that are generally met with disdain in this space.

      • J. R. Babcock April 5, 2012 / 9:53 am

        Liberals/Progressives see those who are pushing for “personhood” legislation in states as “far right” because those on the “right” of center do not see this as a forefront issue for America.

        Major, would it have been more acceptable for the Court to rescind the “personhood” status of unions, making it illegal for either corporations OR unions to contribute to political campaigns? You have, on the business side, management, owners, and stock and bond holders, and on the labor side, employees and, in many cases unions. Should one side have the ability to fund candidates who reflect their views but not the other; should both, or should neither?

      • Amazona April 5, 2012 / 5:14 pm

        Major pain, you have pretended to define “right” but really just gave a couple of examples of your personal opinion of what a person on the “right” might think.

        OK. Y won’t or can’t define “left” or “right” or your political philosophy——how about defining “WE”?

        The voices in your head?

      • Cliff May 8, 2012 / 5:51 pm

        About 43% of Americans say they are conservative Mitch.About 21% say liberal,and the rest are either indepent or they aren’t paying attention.I’d also like to hear your definition of far right.I can give you a clear example of the far left.People like Maxine Waters,Bernie Sanders,and yes…Barack Hussein Obama,hmm,hmm,hmm!!!At least Maxine and Bernie had the guts to admit they’re socialists.Again on the issue of gay marriage he votes present(evolving my ass) .Just like 95% of his votes as a senator.He doesn’t have the balls to be accountable for anything unless it’s something positive.What a coward this president is!!!

  4. Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 9:19 am

    LOVE the aircraft carrier, BTW.

  5. J. R. Babcock April 4, 2012 / 10:03 am

    Clearly, a lot of people who voted for him were just hoping for something for nothing

    There are still quite a few who haven’t given up hope for free guv’mint cheese.

    Stephanie Brown, Obama’s national director for the African-American vote, made that pitch, saying the president has “shown our communities … he can deliver the change that he talked about in 2008, so we need to continue to have his back.”

    The second comment from the DC article says it all:

    In short, “In a second term we can redistribute wealth without having to lie about doing it.”

    • Majordomo Pain April 5, 2012 / 8:36 am


      With nearly fifty million American recieving SNAP, formerly known as the food stamp program, We find it difficult to understand your rationale here. Sixteen million non Hispanic White Americans are getting the benefit of the safety net of SNAP, however there are quite possibly an additional 5 million who could use this economic support. Of those sixteen million nearly half are children.

      The truth of the matter is clear America needs a redistribution of wealth back to those who do work. This can be accomplished via grants for education and a system of health care assurance backed by the United States government. These are the steps that need to be taken to move America forward. Both of those goals could have been met if the US had focused only on defeating the Taleban in Afghanistan and left the nation of Iraq alone.

      • J. R. Babcock April 5, 2012 / 9:06 am

        With all due respect, Major, you’re full of crap. Making more people dependent on the government doesn’t “move America forward”. We’ve redistributed neary $5 trillion since Obama took office. Poverty is at a 40 year high, and the number of food stamp recipients is at an all-time high. Sorry, hope and change just ain’t working.

      • Majordomo Pain April 5, 2012 / 9:21 am


        This is not about government dependency. This is a fundamental moral issue that the government owes the working class, the poor and the elderly a safety net when they find their means to provide the basic necessities has suffered. This transcends politics, race, religion and ideology. The mandate for such a net is a basic Human right.

      • J. R. Babcock April 5, 2012 / 9:57 am

        The mandate for such a net is a basic Human right.

        Major, you don’t live in this country — correct? You need to study up on OUR Constitution.

      • Majordomo Pain April 5, 2012 / 10:05 am


        There are choices to be made here that are clearly defined.

        When people grow old is Society to cast them aside to die in the streets? Equally, is it fair as Humans live longer in a nation of wealth like America that the young have to continue to pay the the elderly merely for living longer?

        Is it reasonable for a group of people to go so far as killing to support the rights of the unborn and then turn their backs on those that are living and need help to buy food, clothes and have shelter? These are not simplistic political questions but those brought about by the very essence of the Human Condition as We see it. Is it worse to give from the government trough to those in need or to simply let them fail in a grotesque parody of “survival of the fittest”?

      • Amazona April 5, 2012 / 5:37 pm

        It is fine to have fantasies of the perfect nation with the perfect government in a perfect world. As a a matter of fact, the United States of America was developed, and its rule of law written, by people who had a vision of correcting what they saw as flaws in existing forms of government.

        Fortunately, they were also intelligent and pragmatic, and able to sort out wishful thinking from reality.

        What they came up with was a form of government in which the central, or federal, government was severely restricted as to scope and power, and which allowed great leeway for state and local governments as well as individuals to act as needed to address various problems and situations that might arise.

        They were absolutely adamant that the central government be rigidly restricted, and wrote into the Constitution 18 specific enumerated duties of the central government. They then wrote an amendment to clarify this restriction, saying that if something is not assigned to the federal government it is forbidden to it.

        There are people who want the federal government to go beyond its enumerated duties, and they tend to make ponderous pronouncements about what the government SHOULD do, but sadly for them their choices are limited.

        1. They can move to a country that is closer to their ideal

        2. They can start their own country and do it right, according to their vision

        3. They can ignore or defy the law that already exists in this country

        4. They can go through the process of amendment to change the law of the land to more closely comply with their dream nation

        5. They can just whine and complain and opine and insult and lecture

  6. Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 10:15 am

    This really belongs several threads back, but then no one would see it.

    U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack told The Daily Caller on Tuesday that he wasn’t sure when the cost of algae biofuel would be able to rival the price tag on a gallon of gas. Instead of answering when algae-based energy will be ready for public use without subsidies, Vilsack accused TheDC of coming at him with a “hypothetical” that was impossible to answer.

    President Barack Obama has touted algae in recent speeches as a partial solution to America’s energy crunch. The idea was first floated by President Jimmy Carter. (RELATED: Obama’s campaign push for biofuels evokes Carter’s 1980 State of the Union address)

    Obama pushed the algae biofuel technology in a February speech, saying, “You’ve got a bunch of algae out here, right? If we can figure out how to make energy out of that, we’ll be doing all right.”

    On Tuesday Vilsack praised Sapphire, an Iowa company that has received more than $100 million in taxpayer cash — including $54.5 million from Vilsack’s Department of Agriculture. Even so, Sapphire is currently behind schedule and has generated only about 36 jobs.

    Vilsack did acknowledge the steep climb ahead for algae-energy advocates, saying, “There are 30,000 different types of algae, so there’s a lot of work that has to be done to figure out the most efficient uses.”

    And although Obama has enthusiastically said the unorthodox energy source shows promise, Vilsack cited several other “hypotheticals” about algae’s future as a fuel source.

    “Tell me what kind of Congresses we’re going to have in the future,” Vilsack said. “That’s anybody’s guess. There’s a lot of hypotheticals here.”

    Now in deference to Amazona, who is excited about the future of algae-based biofuels, I’ll concede that someday we may be driving algae-fueled cars, and that would be fine with me, but I trust Mitt Romney to make that happen a lot sooner than Barry.

    • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 10:54 am

      Spook, your excellent post supports my own comments about the need for steady research and development which should come from the private sector. I wish I could remember the name of the big oil company that had a series of TV ads in which the rep talked about their research into algae as a source of oil for fuel.

      If we are going to pursue alternative energy sources, I feel that this is one of the most promising. It does not compete with food crops, it has a relatively small footprint, it feeds on a gas the enviros think is killing the planet so it provides a solution to that “problem” and the byproducts are valuable. It is grown in enclosed tubes so is not very vulnerable to changes in weather, it grows quickly, and it has no toxic byproducts calling for special disposal.

      If a goal of alternative energy is a smaller impact on the environment, algae is far superior to crops which have to be planted in tilled fields, fertilized, and harvested, all of which make large demands on water and fuel to run tractors and other ag equipment. We are already seeing problems with fertilizer seeping into aquifers, and expending tons of fuel to produce tons of fuel doesn’t seem very productive. For now, solar energy seems to be focused on large and, let’s face it ugly, collectors, and then the electricity has to be moved from the generation site to the user, calling for expanded infrastructure. As you have noted, wind turbines seem to be killing birds and bats, and they are large and expensive.

      (To me, a big advantage to biodiesel, whether from canola or algae or hemp or whatever, is the existing infrastructure for transport. Biodiesel is, at least for now, usually mixed with petrodiesel, so locating biodiesel production adjacent to exiting petro refineries means that only inert vegetable oil is shipped to the refineries, and from there the finished product is transported via existing systems. Even B100, or pure biodiesel, can be transported in existing pipelines and by truck and train.)

      But, and it always comes back to the dreaded BUT, at this point in time the technology is too undeveloped to be able to provide material in a volume and at a cost which make it feasible. I like the idea of a less polluting, easily renewable, fuel source which puts less strain on the environment and, as someone who has paid a lot of attention to the feeding practices of most of our beef cattle, I seriously want a better and more healthful source of feed for what we end up eating. (Don’t look into feedlot practices unless you have a strong stomach.) When I can look at a single source for both, I find it more attractive than the alternatives.

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 11:01 am

        I just went to the Sapphire link and found much of what I said on their website. I promise, I did not see it beforehand, but just stated what I have learned from my own research over the past couple of years, spurred by a brother’s interest in developing a biodiesel plant in Colorado or Wyoming.

        Let’s just say, if I had to invest in an alternative energy technology, I would put my money on algae.

        And, no, Spook, you don’t want to run a car on algae. I just found out that when an employee pumped stream water into my 1000-gallon water tank he did not sanitize it afterward (which would not have occurred to me, either) and this spring it is full of big rafts of algae which have to somehow be broken up and removed through the small port on the top before I can use it. Anyone know where I can find a tank monkey?

      • dbschmidt April 4, 2012 / 11:36 am

        I realize this one is way off topic but in a chance to help Ama–maybe the folks at Suburban Auto Group can help you find a “tank monkey” — their “trunk monkeys” seem to be popular.

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 12:13 pm

        And, no, Spook, you don’t want to run a car on algae.

        Sorry, bad joke, along the same lines as the Chevy Volt being the first coal-powered car.

        I’m actually with you on biodiesel, and algae-based biodiesel makes by far the most sense for the reasons you spelled out. I still go back to Romney being the most likely candidate to actually get something like that done instead of just talking about it.

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 12:42 pm

        I agree that Romney will be a better manager of alternative technology development than Obama, whose approach seems to be just to throw OPM—a lot of it—–at companies run by cronies and contributors.

        He’s never had to stick to a budget, he’s never had to be accountable for the productivity of any decision he has made, he has never been responsible for success or failure. He’s evidently never been graded on his success or failure, given his surliness when we do it now.

        I think we are supposed to view him through the same rose-colored (red?) glasses the Nobel committee evidently used when they gave him what used to be a prestigious prize and a lot of money for what they thought he might do, someday.

        db, I had forgotten about the “trunk monkey” but was thinking of a request from a kid who used to work for me, feeding horses in several pastures twice a day, who asked for a “gate monkey” to help him out.

        I need an agile little guy who will fit through a 10″ diameter opening to hand out clumps of algae and even scrub out the interior of the tank.

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 12:52 pm

        He’s never had to stick to a budget,

        First of all he’d have to be able to submit a budget that someone, including members of his own party, would vote for, and he’d have to belong to a party that was serious about submitting a budget.

      • dbschmidt April 4, 2012 / 2:57 pm

        I need to find some time to do my own research on this but what ever happened to sugar cane as part of a alternative fuel? I know they grow tons of it in Florida but I also thought a S.American country had converted a great deal of it’s fuel over on an e85 style basis. It seemed to have just dropped off the radar.

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 12:54 pm


        The people who abuse the public trust and misuse the taxpayers’ money like that should be in jail, good intentions notwithstanding.

  7. GMB April 4, 2012 / 10:19 am

    “His failures just keep piling up.” Who believed him in the first place? Did you?

    He has ben a spectacular success from the prog point of view. He does what he pleases with barely a peep out of the opposition.

    Trillion dollar deficits. Who cares?
    Unconstitutional war in Lybia. Who cares.
    Fast and Furious. Who cares?
    NDAA. Who cares?

    If we did anything about these the msm might say bad stuff about us. Not the time,fight,hill, yada yada.

    • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 10:37 am

      I know you may disagree, but Romney’s speech last night was pretty damn good. As a former CEO, he understands debt, and the importance of a balanced budget. He understands the cost of a bloated, ineffective bureaucracy, and he understands that private sector expansion and innovation is the only way to reduce unemployment and poverty and to restore what America was.

      • GMB April 4, 2012 / 10:52 am

        If only you could believe what he says. Would you like a few examples of him saying opposites on the same subject? His record is one of governing from the center to the left. Who do think is going to have more influence on how he governs. Reid or McConnell?

        From his history I would have say to Reid.

      • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 11:49 am


        Romney’s only experience in politics is governing the heavily democratic, and liberal state of Mass. He worked with the very liberal legislature as best he could, but he was not king of Mass. and as a leader, did need to respect the wishes of his constituency.

        At least be honest.

      • GMB April 4, 2012 / 12:01 pm

        Who do you think will have more influence on him. Reid or McConnell?

        I am going with Reid. Nothing in his history shows that he has the ability to go against the progs. The first time the donks say “boo” he will cave in.

        Socialism is socialism. That is honesty.

      • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 12:16 pm

        Quite honestly I think both Reid and McConnell are career politicians and I wouldn’t listen to either of them, and I hope Romney doesn’t either. I want Romney to choose either Ryan or Rubio as VP and move forward with their agenda of repealing Obamacare and unleashing the private sector without listening to anyone. It’s time to lead

      • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 12:18 pm


        Re: socialism. Would you completely repeal SS, Medicare, and welfare in all it’s forms; food stamps, unemployment, etc.?

      • dbschmidt April 4, 2012 / 3:04 pm

        Actually, there would need to be a State level replacement for each available but I would. If you review how each of these got “passed” like threatening to expand the SCOTUS until enough “like minded” justices could be appointed to uphold the “constitutionality” of the law–many are just parallel examples of ObamaCare midnight passage.

        At this point in time (I am 51) — just give me back everything the government has taken from me by force (SS & MediCare) and what I will make in the future–I will invest it myself and ask nothing of them again.

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 7:54 pm

        The whole tax scheme is upside down. The feds should be taxing at about 8-10% to cover the expenses of their few enumerated duties, and the state taxes should be higher than they are to cover what programs the states want to implement

      • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 10:28 pm

        Amazona is exactly right. The states should be receiving the bulk of our individual income taxes.

  8. Count d'Haricots April 4, 2012 / 2:19 pm

    “Doesn’t he have an aide who can tell him that the symbol of America is not the bald ego?”


    • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 3:23 pm

      Liar Liar pants on fire…….

      April 4, 2012
      Obama’s Endless Energy
      By William L. Gensert

      Anyone who still believes a word out of Barack Obama’s mouth has to be a complete idiot. The man is a lie-machine. Every speech, every utterance and aside, is designed to mislead — whether by misstatement, omission, or outright licentious license.

      ObamaCare? He really does care, even if it costs much more, to do much less, than he said it would, and even if you do not get to keep your health plan, despite how much you like it. And the mandate is not a tax — remember that. Oh…and it’s not unconstitutional overreach.

      Solyndra? It was not his program…”per se,” even if the principal investor with no principles was a bundler for Barack and the eternal campaign. What is a half a billion dollars between friends? Besides, the subject is raised only by obstructionists and people trying to prevent Obama from realizing his greatness.

      Fast and Furious? He never heard of it, and either did any of his people, and mentioning the 300 dead Mexicans is a racist assault on Barack, simply because he once wore a hoodie. If Eric Holder had a son, he would look like Barack Obama — remember that, too.

      A leader takes responsibility and gives credit. Barack Obama takes credit and shirks responsibility. He has to lie. How else could he claim to be the father of all success, while maintaining his failures have many daddies — George Bush, the tsunami, those bastards the Canadians who want to send us “sharia-free” oil — in other words, anyone but Barack?

      He is now the “Energy President,” taking credit for the portion of the Keystone XL pipeline still being built — after he rejected the entire pipeline twice — and the increase in domestic oil production.

      The particular leg of the pipeline that is going forward didn’t need his approval, and the increase in production is happening on private land — something Barack couldn’t prevent.

      Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/obamas_endless_energy.html#ixzz1r6Kx1oxw

      dont hold back…LOL tell it like it is.

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 3:34 pm

        PALIN: Pick Allen West…

        and put Alan in a Hoodie and introduce him as a COULD be Uboma’s son, only an American version……LOL

    • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 3:39 pm


      The Gay Caballero

      (Plot Summary for
      The Gay Caballero (1940) More at IMDbPro »
      The Cisco Kid and his buddy Gordito arrive in town and learn that Cisco is supposedly dead. Not only that: Before his death, he is believed to have attempted to steal Susan Wetherby’s land.)

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 3:47 pm

        It has begun……..

        SANTA MONICA, Calif. (AP) – Campus police pepper-sprayed as many as 30 demonstrators after Santa Monica College students angry over a plan to offer high-priced courses tried to push their way into a trustees meeting, authorities said.

        Raw video posted on the Internet Tuesday evening showed students chanting

        “Let us in, let us in” and “No cuts, no fees, education should be free.

        FREE???? WTF?
        duhhhhhh ObomaBots…..SOMEONE HAS to PAY………

        another Uboma son…….and OPM

      • Count d'Haricots April 4, 2012 / 4:58 pm

        Familiar faces; we had the same demonstration just below my office window a month ago. Same rent-a-mob showed up chanting the same slogans.

        When you confront them and ask them who will actually pay for the “free” education, they’ll tell you Kindergarten through High School is free, what’s 4 additional years?

        But, they do have a point, the cost of education has skyrocketed in the past few years, government is paying less per student and students are paying more. Fees, tuition, supplies, rooms, food have all gone up while financial aid has gone down. The next round of budget cuts to post-secondary education will likely be paid entirely from tuition/fee increases.

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 4:58 pm

        Good GRIEF…………are these people suicidal or what?

        Study Finds Vast Majority of American Jews Still Plan to Vote for Obama In November

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 5:03 pm


        “these people” not meaning American Jews as a group,
        meaning the individuals who are not the usual dumbed down drones, but smart educated people with ties to Israel.

        Im puzzled…………WHY? would they as a group support this cretin?

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 5:14 pm

        Im puzzled…………WHY? would they as a group support this cretin?

        Simple answer, Neo; they’re Liberals first and Jews a distant second.

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 5:14 pm

        count I paid for mine out of my own pocket going nights and working all day for years……..TOUGH SHIITE for them….

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 5:15 pm


        I cant compute that, this guy will lead to the ovens of them again but this time by the muslims

      • Retired Spook April 4, 2012 / 5:42 pm

        I cant compute that, this guy will lead to the ovens of them again but this time by the muslims

        Neo, must all be part of God’s plan for his chosen people — eh?

      • Count d'Haricots April 4, 2012 / 6:22 pm

        Let me help you out here neo.

        Jews as a group believe in social justice administered by a benevolent government. They believe in increasing government spending and expanding benefits to the poor and raising up the lower classes to a society of equals; financially as well as conditionally. They believe in the power of the collective to achieve outcomes, either through government or unions or both at the expense of business including their own for the greater good. They believe that the community is an extension of the Jewish values and heritage and they believe democrats and liberals are more interested in perpetuating these collective values.

        Jews collectively understand the persecution of the group better than most, and are wary of anyone outside of the collective threatening to allow the collective to fail; rise or fall on its own. The see tolerance as their responsibility and therefore those that fail or fail to assist the collective are not viewed as a burden, they are viewed as exceptions that require more assistance. This is most common in the reformed Jew or in the secular Jew, and rarely the interpretation of Jewish values among the orthodox Jews who see the Conservative model as more in line with Jewish values.


      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 6:39 pm


        outstanding explanation,
        I have several close friends who are conservative Jews so the question or discussion has never come up, they all hate Uboma and are huge supporters of Israel who they think is being sold down the river by this muslim bowing regime.

        still after the Holocaust, communism and the iron curtain, and now the march of islam the light bulb would go off for many of these hard working wonderful people….

      • Count d'Haricots April 4, 2012 / 6:53 pm

        Couldn’t agree more; I often feel like banging my head against a wall when trying to reason with some of my friends who are otherwise brilliant people.

        The subject came up recently at a friend’s house, our Jewess hostess offered that with the city strapped for cash they should suspend street sweeping and let people clean their own gutters. What about the guy who works for the city driving the street sweeper? Are we just supposed to let him go hungry? Doesn’t the city have a responsibility to his family?

        I thought her head was going to explode.

    • dbschmidt April 5, 2012 / 1:06 am

      Question is — does that count when I grow mt hair out for “Locks of Love”? I mean. it may be wrong on my part, but I have a goal of having a bunch of grey haired little ones running around because of me. I know, or I have heard, they actually die my donated locks but there is always room for hope…not so much change.

    • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 6:40 pm

      a suggestion conservatives call silly.

      more like Fn STUPID!!!

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 6:49 pm

        ‘Kill That White Man!’: 78-Year Old Man Beaten By 6 black Youths in Racially-Motivated Attack

      • Amazona April 4, 2012 / 7:50 pm

        Do you think Sarah Palin will rush out to buy a butt-ugly pink rhinestone-trimmed “cowboy” hat and bellow that the old guy was “hunted down lahk a DAWG!!!!”

        Anyone want to run book on how many white mobs will howl for the immediate arrest of the assailants?

        How high do you think the bounty will be for them, dead or alive?

      • Majordomo Pain April 5, 2012 / 9:48 am

        ‘Kill That White Man!’: 78-Year Old Man Beaten By 6 black Youths in Racially-Motivated Attack


        Unlike the murder of Trayvon Martin, this man, Dallas Watts, is still very much alive and three of the six who assaulted him have been arrested and charged with aggravated assault as they should be. This is clearly a hate crime and must be prosecuted as such.

      • Amazona April 5, 2012 / 9:59 am

        Major Pain, do try to keep your language precise. The word “murder” has a precise meaning, and it is in no way related to what happened to Trayvon Martin. This is the lowest form of demagoguery, and is quite shameful.

        As is your editorializing that the beaten 78-year-old man is “very much alive”. What does that mean? Water-skiing, or on life support?

        There are times when your propagandic posts are rather sly, but here you are barging in swinging a lie and an unfounded claim (“VERY MUCH alive”) and you show your true lack of respect for truth and fact, in favor of being able to parrot vicious lies.

        And for what? What is your involvement in this case? What is it about it that has you so frantic to lay blame for a heinous crime on someone without any evidence to back it up?

        There can be only one reason, and that is race. It could be that you are black and simply hate whites, or it could be that you are a political tool who understands that if you can create enough divisiveness and distrust among different demographics there is a political advantage for your chosen political model.

        Why don’t you fill us in on your motives for hurling such a vile and unfounded accusation, and for trying so hard to minimize a black-on-white attack by blithely stating that the victim is “VERY MUCH” alive?

    • Count d'Haricots April 4, 2012 / 6:58 pm

      Why are liberals the only ones that use secondary boycotts?

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 7:11 pm

        they are the only ones stupid enough to believe they work?

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 7:15 pm

        in the OMG category
        the you have to be Fn kidding me.

        Fox News Hires Jesse Jackson’s Daughter Santita Jackson As Newest Contributor

      • neocon1 April 4, 2012 / 7:21 pm

        the highlight being a call to boycott Coke, Walmart and others that back a leading organization pushing for

        shoplifting drops to a record low third week in a row.

  9. GMB April 4, 2012 / 8:58 pm


    “Re: socialism. Would you completely repeal SS, Medicare, and welfare in all it’s forms; food stamps, unemployment, etc.”

    One word answer.


    There is no constitutional basis for any of those programs you have listed. Each of those programs only makes people dependent on the government for thier dailey needs. Private charities would do the job better.

    • Cluster April 4, 2012 / 10:30 pm

      Good to know.

    • Amazona April 5, 2012 / 9:49 am

      And I would leave programs like these up the states as well as to private charity. They are Constitutionally allowed to implement programs like these if they want to.

      Not only are programs like these in direct contradiction to the Constitution, they are very prone to abuse and corruption. When there is that much money at stake, it is hard to keep track of it all, and when there are that many people wanting that much money it is hard to vet them properly

      Having your welfare payment records come back to your neighbors with information that the money was spent at a casino or on a cruise ship and you will have a much harder time justifying staying in the program, but at the federal level no one knows you and no one cares

    • bozo April 7, 2012 / 4:49 pm

      Unemployment insurance is insurance, not welfare. You have to pay in to get anything out. It’s even taxed as income.

      Stop bashing the recently employed. It makes you look crazy.

      • Amazona April 8, 2012 / 9:57 am

        Stop bashing the recently employed.

        ???????? Looks like the voices are back

        It makes you look crazy.

        At least you’ve got a mirror.

Comments are closed.