For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Thou shalt be saved, just not as many of you nor as quickly as I promised.
[President Obama] repeated his mantra that the country's economic picture would likely get worse before it got better and seemed to hedge a bit on how many jobs his proposals would create and by when.
In Saturday's address he said his stimulus package would save or create at least 3 million jobs "over the next few years." During his address on January 10, before he had taken over the presidency from Republican George W. Bush, Obama said an analysis by his advisers showed up to 4 million jobs could be saved or created by 2010 through the package.
Isn't this called a bait and switch?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I tcould take years!!!!!
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:19 ET by pbthinkerHey, you all voted for change so change it is. We know we could do tax-cuts and stop the bleeding; but hey, we're Democrats we don't do tax cuts. SO here's our plan, get in all those programs the nasty Republicans wouldn't let us get in for years, watch the economy go down the tubes, and blame it on Republicans that didn't vote with us on the spending.
I think it will work, especially with the syncophant media we have in the USA.
Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.
The more I look at this
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:26 ET by R D HelmThe more I look at this "plan" and the more I hear from the government and the media in its shameless, near hysterical promotion of same, it is looking to me as if there is not a small amount of deception at work.
They are trying to rush this thing through before anyone bothers to actually read the thing. If people do begin reading it, they will realize, as I have, that this is nothing but a colossal government power grab.
There is nothing in that bill that will do anything to stimulate our economy. The only entity that can do that will be the private sector, when and if the government gets out of the way.
I hope now that the hangover has had nearly two weeks to play itself out, maybe people will start paying a little closer attention to what our government is currently up to.
It is time for people to stop celebrating and start asking tough questions.
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Dave,Neil Cavuto
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:35 ET by Chris NormanDave,
Neil Cavuto reported this morning that Congress has voted it's members an additional $93,000 a year for "helping constituents" and "expenses". I guess they're doing their part to single-handedly stimulate the economy - noble public serpents - er -servants - they are...
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris,
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:02 ET by R D HelmThat is probably more money than 95% of the population earns in a year.
The congress critters are becoming rather brazen these days.
And why not? The American sheeple have shown no inclination whatsoever to throw these bums out of office. Instead, they vote to send these clueless idiots back to Washington every chance they get.
Now the crooks are about to plunder the treasury to the tune of $825 billion (+ or - a few billion) and that on top of the raid of a few months ago, which was over $700 billion.
Somebody once said, I forget who just now, that in a democracy, the people get the kind of government they deserve.
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Oh, their congressman is
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:30 ET by Chris NormanOh, their congressman is good - it's the rest who are bad...
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Dr. Suess RD
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 10:52 ET by jistincaseI think it was Dr. Suess who said, people don't always get the government they deserve but always deserve the government they get.
On the Saturday morning
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:29 ET by Chris NormanOn the Saturday morning business bloc on Fox News, even the usually liberal pundits admitted that there wasn't much "stimulus" and "job creation" in the pork and liberal supporter payoff bill. One liberal guest couldn't come up with a single example where "stimulus" spending had ever worked - and after hemming and hawing admitted it.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
The WSJ this morning noted
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 18:39 ET by celatorThe WSJ this morning noted that about 12 percent of the Oink-Oink bill could even remotely be considered an economic "stimulus". The rest.....well, we know.
This is the biggest theft of the peoples' treasure in the history of the world. And the democrats are as proud of themselves as can be for pulling it off.
For liberal Democrats and the Old Media, everything is crisis, chaos, calamity and catastrophe. That justifies stealing your property and liberties.
The Intelligent Thinkers Movement has over 20,000 members...
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:29 ET by R D Helm...as of yesterday, and is really beginning to catch on. :-)
Congratulations Herman Cain!
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Some fun for a change
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:30 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsSome fun from a Mensa contest, people were asked to change/add a letter to words and come up with a new word. My favorites are 3 and 14.
1. Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to begin with.
2. Reintarnation: Coming back to life as a hillbilly.
3. Bozone
(n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas
from penetrating. The Bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of
breaking down in the near future.
4. Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period of time.
5. Giraffiti: Vandalism spray-painted very, very high.
6. Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get
it.
7. Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
8. Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
9. Osteopornosis: A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.)
10. Karmageddon:
It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes,
right? And then like, the Earth explodes and it's like, a serious
bummer.
11. Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you.
12. Glibido: All talk and no action
13. Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you
rapidly.
14. Arachnoleptic Fit (n.): The frantic dance performed just after you've accidentally walked through a spider web.
15. Beelzebug (n.): Satan in the form of a mosquito, that gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot be cast out.
16. Caterpallor (n.): The color you turn after finding half a worm in the fruit you're eating.
And, the pick of the lot...
17. Ignoranus: A person who's both stupid and an asshole
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
LOL EXCELLENT !!!
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:50 ET by Miss CheviousI hereby formally petition for the exclusive rights to use #17 as a perfect description for a certain un-named anti-Palin / anti-Steele poster here !!
There was a show on in the
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:02 ET by motherbeltThere was a show on in the 70's or 80's that had a feature like that every week; they had a funny name for the combo words too.
Things like "Checkuary: the first few weeks of a new year when you keep writing the old year on your checks.... "
Anyone else remember this, and what they were called?
Update: I just found it...they were called Sniglets (words that aren't in the dictionary but should be)...
The name there, Rich Hall, triggered my memorey, and if I'm not mistaken ( it's not at the linked page) the show was "Not Necessarily the News."
Excellent!! These should be
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:33 ET by celatorExcellent!! These should be incorporated in the next revision of Webster's.
For liberal Democrats and the Old Media, everything is crisis, chaos, calamity and catastrophe. That justifies stealing your property and liberties.
DFTT
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 03:49 ET by thebutlerdiditExcellent! I have got to save those. I suggest we all incorporate a few of those into our vocabulary, just for fun. I really did LOL!
Bringing the government in to run Wall Street is like saying, "Dad burned the dinner, let's get the dog to cook." PJ O'Rourke
We need to go on the platinum standard.
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:49 ET by mizflame98Going back on the gold standard isn't going to save us from what the Democrats are doing to our currency.
"Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." - Francois Guisot
Check this one out
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:50 ET by StarAZhttp://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/01/31/meet-google-obamas-new-ministry-of-truth/
Anyone know anything about this?
.....but is it true?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:50 ET by pbthinkerHey, you're the President and your party sends out a stimulus bill, like the one in the Senate now, what would you say? Hey, I'd be telling people it might not be done in their lifetime because there's nothing in that bill that will change a thing.
This may be the only time Obama's being honest with the whole country.
Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.
Springstien caught with his pants down
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:52 ET by ricklailSeems that Brucie boy is full of regret that Wal Mart is marketing his new album exculsively. I bet there was nothing wrong until some of his leftiest buddies complained. You know how WM treat workers and all. Hey Brucie, at least the folks at WM have a job. Most of your union buddies are out of work.
Ricky Joe the Plumber
bait n switch ?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:54 ET by Miss Cheviousor just more "CHANGE" we can believe in
How long should he be given?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 11:56 ET by exLibRemember in 2002 when Bush said the War on Terror would last years and years and that it wasn't a quick thing?
The media and everyone else, quickly forgot that and started wondering in 2003 why we were still worried about terrorism.
After Bush won in 04, Al Gore came on the scene to distract us from Terrorism and Obama/Clinton came on the scene to further distract us.
So, if the media is doing their job, Obama has about 1 years to clean up the mess and get unemployment down to under 4%, keep inflation away, get housing pricing back up, get people to buy, buy, buy and completely rescue the economy.
Obama is backing down from
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:02 ET by TN MomObama is backing down from his earlier statements. He is just an experienced lier! Every single time he opens he opens his mouth, he back-peddels.
Billy Carter? Roger Clinton?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:03 ET by Caringwhiteguyhttp://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/01/31/george.obama.arrest/index.htm...
Hopenchange becomes
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:03 ET by wiwfHopenchange becomes waitferchange!
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
Wa-wa-wha'd I say------
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:13 ET by Roscoe MendagoBarack Obama doesn't know what he's doing, could it be any more clear. What's he gonna say next week, "I'm going to create 10 million new jobs", he's pulling those numbers out his a$$. Obama simply is warning people it may take 2 terms to fix this grave problem, remember the glass is always half full, according to Democrats and there's no reason to believe there's a bright future, but Barack is here to save America.
I didn't vote for the poser!!!!
As much as I'm against
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:29 ET by BKeyserAs much as I'm against this, and any "bailout plan" (past or present) I'm almost hoping this goes through- though without one single Republican vote from either house.
If it passes, and Obama signs it, he'll first have to extole/justify the emergency nature and "swiftness" of it's passage- as he's been telling us for several weeks now. The only way to do this will be to suggest it's importance in rescuing the economy. No one, not even the liberal media could justify an extended recovery process in light of the bailout and the President's claim of necessity. They will hail it as a saving grace in spite of Republican opposition, and try to ram that angle down the throats of the public.
That being said, we all know that this plan, and likely any bailout plan, won't actually save the economy. Oh, the free-market system will re-emerge; we do have general elections every four years- and in 2012 when the economy has shown little, if any, improvement as a result of the government power grab and wasteful excesses, Obama and all the Democrats will be clamoring for excuses.
I predict that if this plan is passed, and without Republican support, the GOP will gain 30 seats in the House in 2010. From there, the next Newt Gingrich will emerge (maybe Eric Cantor?) and the next "Contract with America" will open the door for a GOP sweep in 2012. This thing is doomed to fail- Obama knows it- and that's why he wants Republican names on the bill.
So why then would he want it to pass, you ask? Simply because his ideology is solidly left-wing. Government-run commerce is all he knows and believes in. He just wants cover because while he has strongly held beliefs, unlike recent suggestions, he doesn't really have the gonads to stand alone on those beliefs.
The logical argument, however; given that he keeps backtracking and downplaying expectations, is to say, "Why spend this money at all? You're telling me it's not going to actually fix anything, yet we're borrowing Yen to do it and strapping the future with a deficit that will likely reduce our global economic viability for decades! Help me understand the need for this ridiculous monstrosity." But, alas, he cannot...
The "swiftness" of its passage
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 13:05 ET by BlondeSpot-on.
With the new economic numbers out, and the GDP numbers being less awful than expected, the "not a second to spare" thing that BHO has been using like a bat to beat fear into the hearts of the nanny-staters has evaporated.
When the Congresscritters are talking about a trillion dollars.....that's alot of money, and all Americans are concerned about exactly WHAT this money is being spent on. So the fact that there's a fool's rush going on by the dems, while the republicans are shouting "wait just a minute" at the top of their lungs, will go a long way to give us a leg to stand on in 2010.
J, its even worse than that.
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 19:36 ET by R D HelmThose few public works projects present in that bill, which are about the only things in that hideous document that might actually result in (temporary) job creation, are major construction projects, such a bridges and other ,ajor structures.
Those kind of projects don't get cranked up over night.
There are all kinds of environmental impact studies that will have to be carried out, plus soils analysis and geotechnical drilling in order to determine the how much weight can actually be supported, and that before the actual design process even begins.
Then there is the plan approval process, which can take months, if not years, to navigate through, and a whole bunch of other BS, such as permitting, that you wouldn't believe even if I told you about it.
We the people are being fed a load of manure by the government and the media.
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Stimulus
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:33 ET by JDWstimulus package would save or create at least 3 million jobs
Last week 100,000 jobs were cut.
Why are bailouts being awarded to companies who are laying off?
JDW
DAILY WAVE
Whatever else you think, your mother and my mother are both mothers
The President just threw a
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 13:04 ET by motherbeltThe President just threw a hissy about Wall Street companies getting bailouts, and handing out billions in bonuses.
Does it ever occur to politicians to look into this stuff BEFORE they give them money???
Does the word "enabler" mean anything to them????
Economy
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 13:22 ET by JDWAgain, last week 100,000 employees were canned. In economic terms, how many of those families will be purchasing a new car, paying their mortgage, buying anything other than essentials...? What about about health care or college?
Why doesn't the TARP plan include a provision showing the ability to hire more employees?
JDW
DAILY WAVE
Whatever else you think, your mother and my mother are both mothers
Of course the economic
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:48 ET by celatorOf course the economic situation will get worse. That's the plan. Economic chaos is the goal, so Obama and his goosesteppers can continue to move us from a free economy to a command economy.
Secular fundamentalists like Obama worship at the altar of omnipotent central government. A command economy is at the heart of their political theology.
We have no idea where the first half of TARP went. Not a clue. They won't tell us. (Note to IRS: check offshore accounts of each and every member of Congress and members of the Old Media for recent transactions.)
The Obama team has no inclination whatsoever to fix this soon. Tax cuts, which would literally pour money into the economy, is like drinking poison to democrats. Lowering our highest in the world corporate taxes is another tool which would help enormously. "Na' gonna do it," as Bush 1 might say.
Recession, inflation, prosperity come and go in our free capitalism system. It's a dynamic SYSTEM which is always correcting itself with its own systemic rules (like the weather). Government tampering with the natural laws of our economic system is meant to prolong the crisis situation. Check the "Great Depression".
And the Old Media are the enablers of the whole process.
For liberal Democrats and the Old Media, everything is crisis, chaos, calamity and catastrophe. That justifies stealing your property and liberties.
delete
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:07 ET by Radiomandelete
deleted
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:03 ET by Radiomandeleted
delete
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:04 ET by Radiomandelete
delete
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:06 ET by Radiomandelete
Oooooh!
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 10:06 ET by RukusYou got the SSS flu! LOL!
Gary
Sorry Al, I've used up my allotment of "give a crap!"
Obama Jokes
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 12:50 ET by Radioman*Michelle Obama just confirmed the rumor that Barack took the wedding vow not twice but THREE times. On the first occasion he had his hand on the Bible, the second it was the Koran and the third time he repeated the vows, his left hand was firmly placed on Alinsky's Rules For Radicals!
* Some White House staffers are concerned about our new president's weird behavior. He's been seen poking in corridors and asking about the secret passages JFK used for his trysts. Fearing another Clinton scandal they informed Michelle about his behavior. She shook her head and laughed it off saying, " Oh, Barack's just looking for a safe place to sneak a smoke!"
* Obama and Michelle are excited about the White House kitchen staff and all the exotic foods they want to sample. However, once a month, for the girls, they plan on ordering a dozen Happy Meals from McDonalds . They are shooting for the last Tuesday in the month which, incidentally, is the night Joe Biden and wife are invited over.
www.chalktalk
→ Obama Jokes
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 13:07 ET by Cool ArrowGot any Obama Jokes you'd like to repeat?
Bwahahaha
Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country - Khalil Gibran
Radioman
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 13:20 ET by RadiomanSorry about that! I clicked ttoooooooooo many times and don't know how to delete. Besides, the jokes weren't all that good but nobody wants to write Obama stuff and somebody's got to. Just how does one delete an entire post?
Just click on "edit" at the
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 14:55 ET by motherbeltJust click on "edit" at the bottom, and highlight and delete all the print. Then just write "deleted" because you have to have something in the body of the post.
Edit
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:15 ET by RadiomanThanks! I appreciate the tip!! It won't happen again, again, again, aga....!
Ted
It's called a Jimmy Carter.
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 14:34 ET by WesenIt's called a Jimmy Carter. I remember when the Captain of Planet Peanut told us hard times would last into the future. That was malaise and I don't want to revisit the past... it's like moving back in with an Ex.
Jokes?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 14:39 ET by StarAZKinda funny--we thought Michelle was mixing up the Lobster Helper on her own, but they had a cook, Sam Kass.
Isn't that a hoot? Can
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:32 ET by motherbeltIsn't that a hoot? Can you imagine if Cindy McCain had gotten caught like that?
Jeez, with Cindy, they even included the price of her diamond earrings (which she could have had for years) in the "cost" of her outfit for the Republican convention!
And notice there's no talk about how Mrs. O has "graduated from Target and WhiteHouse/Black Market to major designers!
And not much either, about the fact that there is some angst out there that she isn't patronizing black designers!
I guess like Oprah, she wants to exclaim "All these white folks....workin' for ME!!"
Isn't Military Spending 'Shovel-Ready'?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 14:42 ET by slickwillie2001Re economic stimulus; why cut back on military spending and then have to turn over rocks to find ways to blow money out the door on 'shovel-ready projects' etc?
Military spending items are already thoroughly vetted for American-only content, well understood by Congress, and for the most part involve US manufacturing, Instead of cutting F-22 production, why not double it? Isn't that more productive than spending the money on yet another Robert Byrd Civic Center, or a bike trail in Schenectady? Why not finally fix our Air Force tanker problem? How about the military heavy-lift program? Replacing hummers with IED-resistand vehicles? Completing the M-16 replacement program? Buying more submarines? More of those littoral ships? Every single one of these programs involve US jobs and the manufacturers are ready to go.
Why does every talking head economist agree we need to spend some money, but the military seems off-limits?
NO ONE IS BEING "SAVED"
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 14:44 ET by DelsaSOBama and his socialist policies are not meant to "save" anyone. They are meant to enslave.
Even if the lending rate were zero, banks will NOT loan unless the the borrower has GREAT credit.
What about the guy who is NOT behind on his mortgage, has equity on his home, but has seen his business fall way down or has just lost his job? Who will force the banks to help restructure his mortgage?
If banks cannot make money, they will not lend.
SOBama is saying this is no quick fix because he needs cover when it doesn't work and it will help him be re-elected because without him as president there will never be a fix.
The idiots who voted will believe this is Bushes problem, inherited by SOBama, therefore it is not his fault.
The dip sh*ts will believe him.
This man is dangerous. He is doing what he has been told to do by???
If Judd Greg takes his job offer, his plan will be complete.
He will contro both houses of congress and we will be truly totally screwed.
Delsa, I'm no financial
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:12 ET by motherbeltDelsa, I'm no financial genius, but even I can read and find out that "stimulus" packages, especially those full of pork, are not going to get that guy his job back, or pay his mortgage, or anything else.
Colber King has a doozy of an op-ed in the Washington Post today.
He starts out with "Republicans voted in lock-step" (insert goose-stepping image here) to oppose the bailout plan.
He then goes on to explain why they will remain the minority party.
They just don't want to help those poor guys who can't pay their mortgages etc. They don't care about "the children."
Nowhere in his piece does he explain how anything in this bailout plan will help that guy, or retirees who are seeing their investments shrink, or how all this pork will create (or save) a single job.
But his money quote comes near the end, and is indeed the money quote for the entire Democrat Party and all their liberal friends: the gold standard by which all actions are graded, no matter how stupid or ineffectual:
there's a good chance that today's children and grandchildren will
look back from adulthood and see an era in which a Democratic president
and Congress tried, at least, to help their families and communities. (emphasis added)
At least they tried. That's what counts.
Hopefully, the final
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 16:31 ET by JerHopefully, the final version of the stimulus bill--and whether your label or Colbert's, it's not a "bailout plan"--will reflect the co-operative efforts of Democrats and Republicans. But, since any legislation will be signed by Obama, it will, in conjunction with other measures, be considered part of this administration's overall economic policy. Whatever success there may be will no doubt inure to the benefit of Obama and, more important, to the American public as well. Conversely, failure will be pinned, perhaps disproportionately, on the administration and the Democratic Congress.
So what do you propose should be the appropriate role of the Republican members of Congress? It would appear at this point they are following the orders of their House leaders and their ideological 'top cop', Commissioner Limbaugh, and acting as obstructionists--despite the conciliatory efforts of the President. You seem fond of money quotes. Here's one from the linked article:
"None of the Republicans spoke up in disagreement when urged to oppose the legislation by their leaders...[who] said they wanted '100 percent' opposition to the measure...." [emphasis mine]
Well, they wanted it and they got it. And I would submit "lockstep" is a pefectly acceptable description of the GOP opposition. [It has absolutely no relationship to "goosestepping".]
Was the bill that passed the House perfect? No. Was it bursting with pork? No. Three economic experts from varied disciplines graded the major components of the legislation solely on the basis of its potential stimulative effect. Some provisions were given an "A" or "A+" while others were given "C"s, "D"s, and "F"s. But, the overall grades from the three analysts were two Bs and one B+. Not too bad by most yardsticks. Yet all 188 Republicans voted No.
Jer
Jer, the point is that the
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 17:47 ET by motherbeltJer, the point is that the MSM describes the Democratic Party when they stand together as being "unified" ( I actually had that in there, but edited it out)
but the Republicans are "in lockstep."
Thanks for the grammar lesson. I will try to be more precise in the future.
Lockstep is defined as
: a standard method or procedure that is mindlessly adhered to or that minimizes individuality
The operative word is "mindless." And that is the image that the media want to portray for Republicans whereas Democrats merely stand together as a matter of principle. If you want to quibble over the correct usage of a word instead of the substance of my remarks, that's just being silly, in my opinion.
You missed or ignored my main point (the hint was the words Money quote).
To liberals, whether a plan is successful or not doesn't matter; even if it makes things worse (and I'm not saying this will; just making a general point) it doesn't matter....the important thing is that they cared; they tried.
mb...I have to run out for
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 18:23 ET by Jermb...I have to run out for a while. But "lockstep" is not an inappropriate term to use in the context I described. However, "goosestepping" has profoundly negative implications of which you are no doubt aware. You may call it "quibbling" if you like, but if the term were actually used by a Democrat to describe Republican behavior, there would be multiple NB blogs and hundreds of comments registering indignation within hours. I don't bother with grammar lessons--or typos, misspellings, etc--but I did find the "goosestepping" association to be off the mark.
I ignored your "Money" quote because I didn't attach the same degree of significance to it as did you. Plus, you admitted you were no "financial genius". [Just kidding...and neither am I by a long shot.] :-)
In any event, compare your response and my previous one to you and tell me which is more "substantive".
Jer
OH, for crying out loud,
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 23:22 ET by motherbeltOH, for crying out loud, Jer...get a grip.
I'm certainly not going to get into a back-and-forth with you about whose response is more "substantive."
This is not my life.
motherbelt....You spend 90%
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 00:39 ET by Jermotherbelt....You spend 90% of your post with dictionary references and obsessing over the meaning of 'lockstep' in a frenzied dissection of a single side remark which may have constituted 10% of my total commentary.
But I need to get a grip. Thanks for the Saturday night humor.
Jer
Lockstep is defined as : a
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 10:04 ET by motherbeltLockstep is defined as
: a standard method or procedure that is mindlessly adhered to or that minimizes individuality
That's 90% of my post? One sentence?
Laugh your butt off.
Obama's politics of fear
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:25 ET by RpeggioObama is practicing the same 'politics of fear' that he and his fellow Dems said Bush was doing in the war on terror. Obama, normally full of hope and optimism, is doing his best to scare americans into supporting their ridiculous $819B porkulus bill by saying the economy is a 'disaster' repeatedly and comparing this recession to the great depression, which isn't even close. This recession isn't even as bad as Carter's in the early 80's. He's going to gloom and doom it until it passes, then start talking all sunshine and optimism and just watch the media follow along! It's a big joke. Only fear that his spending bill won't help and things truly will get worse. Instead, cut the business tax from 35% to 25% and cut cap gains to zero for a year or two...that would 'immediately' stimulate the economy....not just creating temp and perm gov't jobs and projects.....what a joke our gov't is right now. And I won't even mention the tax cheats and lobbyists he's hiring in his administration.
The Huffington Post is a liberal website, and those who post
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 18:55 ET by Rush Fancomments are for the most part insane Bush-hating Democrat leftist. So when Demi Moore's husband Ashton Kutcher wrote an article at The Huffington Post titled Creating a Nation of Philanthropists, One Pledge at a Time, I was pleasantly surprised at the responses of many of these liberal (I assume) posters.
The article touted why Kutcher, Moore, and a bunch of other liberal celebrities got together to pledge to do "good things" in support of President Obama. This Presidential Pledge can be found here.
As a good leftist celebrity will do, Kutcher didn't forget to bash the United States of America:
"Four years ago I sat in a hotel room with Israel's Head of State, then former Prime Minister Shimon Peres, where he proceeded to tell me what he felt made America a great country. He said that throughout history America, more than any other nation, has supported itself and consistently extended itself to other countries in need without looking for anything in return. I bit my lip as I thought about our national pursuit of Middle Eastern oil and how much more we could be doing as a country for so many resource depleted nations."
The responses by liberals to this article written by a liberal about a pledge to a very liberal president surprised me. Here are excerpts from a few of them:
idiotfreezone: Grandstanding. How boring. If Ashton really cared, why did he wait until Obama was elected and took office? The President may be the face of America, but the President IS NOT AMERICA. The people of this country make it great and do not require a new President to do great things. Great Amercians ignore the political climate and do what they feel is right. They aspire to do great things for themselves and their families, not for some figurehead that sits in the White House or some joker sitting in a multi-million dollar mansion. Yes, lip service is given to "living green"...posted to a blog from a cell phone while in your private jet or sitting in your 20,000 square foot mansion. Just because you bought a Prius, doesn't mean you are a Greenie, it just adds to your already bloated ego and is another reason to shout, "Look at me!!!" Come back and post a video when you have actually accomplished something that is worthwhile.
steveinboston: Hey Ashton-- We pledge our allegiance to the U.S. Constitution in this country...not to individuals! Service you say? I am on active duty in our U.S. military...and we know that we are sworn to protect a glorious set of ideas embodied in the U.S. Constitution...and not an individual, not a king, not a politician, not a people group, not a geographic boundary. Sorry that you just don't understand that...or what it means!
Kudos to those and other posters at The Huffington Post who know bullshit even when it's coming from their side!
Rush Fan, What gives me
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 18:57 ET by Trix RabbitRush Fan,
What gives me pause is why would Shimon Peres want to be in the same room as a third-rate Hollywoodenhead like Kutcher.
For the MSM: In your pomp and all your glory, you're a poorer man than me. As you lick the boots of death born out of fear. Ian Anderson "Wind up"
not only that rush fan
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 19:04 ET by porpoiseboybut the ak's of the world can spout all they want about wanting to do "good deeds", but the fact is that as a whole conservatives give more of what they have to charity than liberals by a pretty wide margin. >Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227). < http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
maybe that is because of our inherent bent for self reliance than for reliance on govt. whatever the reason, the facts are the facts. to make on avg 6% less but give 30% more is HUGE.
cheers!
"Here comes the orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason" Ben Franklin
Ecclesiastes 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left
Does anyone know who Andrew Warren is?
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 20:06 ET by slickwillie2001BTW, does anyone see bias in the LACK of coverage of the rape charges against CIA Algerian station chief Andrew Warren? Why isn't there wall-to-wall coverage as there was for stories like the trivial koran/toilet charges, for example? Could it be perhaps because Warren is a black muslim? Would things be different if he was a white Republican?
The "worst since Great
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 20:43 ET by GregEThe "worst since Great Depression" talk continues, though false.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090131/D9627HU00.html
Quote from the article....."But it is unlikely that President Barack Obama will put any of the nearly 2 million federal civil servants out in the street in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression."
I thought when Bush talked about terror threats, he was "fear mongering." Fear comes in many forms. Can someone clue in the dumb liberals? Do they not think their economic doomsday talk is "fear mongering?"
Republican Governors Caving
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 20:45 ET by ricklailThis one got my goat. All they can see is the $$$ coming to recsue their budgets. As far as I could tell the porkulus package would not do them any good until next fisical year.
Ricky Joe the Plumber
Agreed. They see dollars
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 20:54 ET by GregEAgreed. They see dollars and suddenly it's "I gots to get mines!!!!"
Freakin stupid. Is America done? Are there enough sane Americans to ensure that America remains America and doesn't become Europe-West?
Money is king, principles........well what principles? The federal government, by way of my and your hard-earned tax dollars, is looking to handout money, and everyone loses their principles and begins to drool as the puppeteer works the strings.
America is so screwed. When we come out of this economic downturn, it will not be because of Congress, or Obama, or anyone else in government. It will be IN SPITE of them all, yet all of them will be pushing to get to the front to take credit, while none of them realize they have nothing to take credit for.
I am sorry to see that even
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 11:44 ET by jistincaseI am sorry to see that even Palin is coming to Washington to get her share according to some sources that I have read. If true that would really be disappointing. The state goverments only see free money and don't have to worry about how to pay it back. I like the thoughts of some of the governors that say they may refuse the money if passed because they don't like the strings that will be attached.
rickl.... Thank you. That
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 21:01 ET by bigtimerrickl....
Thank you. That is a keeper.
Sounds like only Barbour and Sanford have a brain in their head and back-bone as far as I am concerned.
The rest are typical of them to me...what I think of each through my eyes.
Infuriating. This has stop, eventually it will, one way or the other.
Speaking of blowhards....
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 21:55 ET by slickwillie2001This is hilarious: "NEW YORK – The Boss is owning up to a mistake. In an interview with Sunday's New York Times, Bruce Springsteen says he shouldn't have made a deal with Wal-Mart. This month, the store started exclusively selling a Springsteen greatest hits CD."
Sounds like he was in a cash-induced trance when he made the 'mistake'. h/t Drudge.
2 weeks down, only 198 to
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 23:00 ET by GregE2 weeks down, only 198 to go. You're looking kinda spent already, Mr. President.
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20090131/i/ra4237190607.jpg
Re Spent
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 23:17 ET by slickwillie2001I've noticed that as well poster. He looked like hell in his Youtube address.
For nearly two years he
Sun, 02/01/2009 - 14:22 ET by GregEFor nearly two years he thought that if he became president, he could simply start pushing an agenda and build up social programs. It would be a great gig. Then suddenly, the economy took a huge turn and he was still vying for the presidency. Only now, the "great gig" he had been looking at for 2 years suddenly became something no one could have expected.
In 2001, Bush had 9/11 that came out of nowhere and forced a complete mindset change. Now Obama is up against another "out of nowhere" occurence. For him though, it's not a foreign attacker (not yet, but lets hope it never is), but instead it's economic, so in his case he can still work his agenda somewhat, and simply market it as economic recovery, though that's pure BS.
President Bush Hates Black People And Wanted Them To Die
Sat, 01/31/2009 - 23:49 ET by Asian ConThat was what liberals, SOME black people, and the MSM were saying after Katrina. Remember? FEMA's incompetance was directly tied to Bush, right?
Well, I'm sure a lot of you here have heard about the ice storm that hit Kentucky. The powers been knocked out, people are dying and the governor has summoned the National Guard to help. Yet, little to no coverage from the MSM. No outcry from liberals and Hollywood. Where's the Messiah or Mr. Gore-Bull Warming?
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/01/31/president-obama-hates-white-people-and-wants-them-to-die/
"For The First Time In My Life, I Am No Longer Proud Of My Country Because It Seems Like, Socialism Has Made A Comeback"