REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Palin resigning as Alaska governor

POSTED BY: PENGUIN
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 15:07
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5401
PAGE 2 of 3

Thursday, July 9, 2009 7:51 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:


I mean, didn't John Edwards risk everything to run for VP? He didn't run TWO campaigns to try and keep his then-current Senate seat, in hopes of becoming Vice President. If he HADN'T run for VP he surely would have campaigned to keep his Senate seat.



Oy... PLEASE don't try to use John Edwards as the model for how to do ANYTHING, unless he's being held up as the poster boy for how to completely undermine and fuck up a campaign and ruin one's credibility!

His situation was a bit out of the ordinary - his Senate term was up in an election year. For Obama to do the same thing, he'd have had to wait four more years. Telling him to wait until 2012 would have been like telling your friend who's just hit the lottery jackpot to NOT cash that ticket in, but rather to wait and try to win it again in four years.

Anyway, back to Palin and Obama...

So, if Palin runs for president in 2012, will you support her? Or will you remember the calls of "Inexperienced!" that so many on the right threw out against Obama? I mean, here she is, no national experience at all in any kind of elected office, and even what little STATE-level experience she had, she walked out on halfway through her first term, for no better reason than "to go fishing". Or "because of late-night so-called comics". Or because of "endless investigations".

My feeling is that there's a quid pro quo at work here. She's quitting because of ehtics investigations, all right - she's quitting to head off any DEEPER investigations which might prove rather embarrassing and potentially fatal to any future political ambitions she has. And she's already said that she'll sue anyone - including bloggers - who speculate as to why she's quitting, which can only make one wonder all the more what she's got to hide. After all, this is someone declaring herself a serial victim of defamation, the same person who herself referred to Obama as "someone who pals around with terrorists" - which is defamation of the lowest form (once again, please show me the court record of Bill Ayres conviction on "terrorism" charges).

It still strikes me as rather incongruous: the poster gal of the party that claims to be all about personal responsibility, that claims to be all about taking care of oneself, pulling oneself up by your own bootstraps, making it on your own, standing up for yourself... This is the very same woman who is now standing at the head of her party, crying "Poor me! Poor me! WAaaaaaahhhhhhhh!" and playing the victim card more often than anyone in recent memory. And her supporters are the people who called Hillary a crybaby for showing some emotion in New Hampshire a year ago. Odd, that.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 7:56 AM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
"You CAN'T be serious? YOU!?!? NON-PARTISAN!?!?!?"

I've gone out of my way to criticize Obama and Clinton (both of them).

When have you ever criticized --- oh, let's take Palin as an example ? Or McCain ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.



I joined the board in February . . . after the election, so no. You didn't see anything from me against McCain or Palin during that time (the campaigns) and McCain has been insignificant since then. I DO know, however that I stated several times that he certainly was NOT my first choice for the GOP nominee.

And I don't recall seeing you saying anything against Obama in that time, so you'll have to forgive me for saying what I said, or point me to a thread where you did opine negatively toward Obama. I DO know that you never did answer MY questions in that other thread which implied your silent consent to the actions I was pointing out.

*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 8:13 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I have criticized Obama before AND SINCE the election. In fact, I even reiterated my criticisms in a separate post TO YOU b/c you said I was partisan. Well, that was a big fat waste of my time. I'm not going to do that again. And, dude, maybe YOU should read MY posts --- eh ?

I don't deny I have a POV. But it isn't defined by party (in other words, it is NOT partisan) as your POV obviously is.

And, I certainly miss many posts. Really, I have more important things to do.

Ta ta, then. Maybe I'll catch up with the site in a few weeks.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 8:45 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:


And I don't recall seeing you saying anything against Obama in that time, so you'll have to forgive me for saying what I said, or point me to a thread where you did opine negatively toward Obama.



Okay, just so we're clear here, Rip...

You HAVE seen me go off on Obama, right? I mean, I'm pretty damned sure I'm fairly partisan, in that I definitely support one party over the other (while fervently wishing for a third to take over at least one of our current crop...). That said, I'm a Democrat in the sense that Will Rogers was a Democrat. He's the one who famously said, "I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."

Where I'm *NOT* "partisan" is in the "no-criticism-of-my-party-or-candidates" sense. I think the Democrats are dead wrong on most gun rights issues. I think Pelosi and Reid are absolutely the wrong people to head up the Democratic majorities in Congress. And I *KNOW* Obama is hugely wrong on torture and warrantless wiretaps, to name just two. I have a sense that he's really dragging his feet and about to screw up majorly on health care and gay rights, too. Unfortunately, nobody here can name me one single Republican candidate that was going to do a single thing on any of these issues better than Obama has. I didn't vote for him because he's perfect, but because he was the choice I was given.



Oh, and back on a purely partisan note...

When can we on the left start referring to Sarah Palin as your "messiah" or "the one" or the second coming or the anointed? I mean, isn't that what the right is viewing her as?



Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 9:19 AM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Okay, just so we're clear here, Rip...

You HAVE seen me go off on Obama, right? I mean, I'm pretty damned sure I'm fairly partisan, in that I definitely support one party over the other (while fervently wishing for a third to take over at least one of our current crop...). That said, I'm a Democrat in the sense that Will Rogers was a Democrat. He's the one who famously said, "I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."

We're cool, Kick. I know where you're coming from and vice-versa. And I HAVE seen you go off on Obama. I took a test somewhere on-line and it said I was a Libertarian, so who knows? Maybe I should start attending meetings? Right now the Republican Party is far from perfect, but like you I find myself agreeing more with their side of the aisle than the other. Thus my partisanship, I guess, and I make no apologies for it. I listen to Hannity and, thanks to this thread, I DO find myself disagreeing with him on some points.

I didn't want McCain as the GOP nominee, I'll say that much. And next election? Who knows? I hear Bobby Jindal is doin' some good things in Louisiana.

Quote:

Where I'm *NOT* "partisan" is in the "no-criticism-of-my-party-or-candidates" sense. I think the Democrats are dead wrong on most gun rights issues. I think Pelosi and Reid are absolutely the wrong people to head up the Democratic majorities in Congress. And I *KNOW* Obama is hugely wrong on torture and warrantless wiretaps, to name just two. I have a sense that he's really dragging his feet and about to screw up majorly on health care and gay rights, too. Unfortunately, nobody here can name me one single Republican candidate that was going to do a single thing on any of these issues better than Obama has. I didn't vote for him because he's perfect, but because he was the choice I was given.

Gimme time and I'm sure I'll rant about some Republican at some point or another. Just nothing in recent memory (February) that I feel deserves a rant, I guess.

Quote:

Oh, and back on a purely partisan note...

When can we on the left start referring to Sarah Palin as your "messiah" or "the one" or the second coming or the anointed? I mean, isn't that what the right is viewing her as?

I beleive that honor was copyrighted to Obama and him alone. So . . . the answer is never. Tough noogies.

*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 9:40 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Just for comic relief...

Mark McKinnon, former policy advisor and media consultant to President George W. Bush and to Republican presidential candidate and Senator John McCain, in an interview on The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, referred to Sarah Palin as "crazier than an acre of snakes".

I laughed chocolate milk out my nose when he said it. I'd never heard it put quite that way before, but it damned well fits.



Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 9:49 AM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Just for comic relief...

Mark McKinnon, former policy advisor and media consultant to President George W. Bush and to Republican presidential candidate and Senator John McCain, in an interview on The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, referred to Sarah Palin as "crazier than an acre of snakes".

I laughed chocolate milk out my nose when he said it. I'd never heard it put quite that way before, but it damned well fits.



Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.





[faux righteous indignation]
HOW DARE HE!!!!!
[faux righteous indignation]

Of course he'd call her that! It was HER fault they lost, innit?
Nothin' to do with McCain sayin' "My friends" every two minutes. Who the heck told him THAT was good strategy? The whole campaign was pretty much a shambles anyway and run very, VERY poorly, if you ask me. Especially from the media side of things. So it's THAT bozo's fault they lost!

There. My rant against a Republican. Happy now?

*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 9:50 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I could be wrong, but it seems to me that most Republicans view their party and their politicians very differently than most Dems. Take Mark Sanford. He's been caught in several extramarital affairs. Going OCONUS w/o informing the Lt. Gov. or anyone else who has a right to know about his absence in order to hook up with some Argentinian cha-cha. If DEMS do half as much - as Clinton and Edwards did- they're out on a rail and in the political wilderness, with Repubs waving pitchforks and flambeaus and the Dems wringing their hands and hanging their heads.

Not so for Sanford. Or Swaggert. Or Haggard. What really matters to The Right is how much CONTRITION the miscreant shows. If he cries big tears and begs forgiveness and promises never to do it again, then he is welcomed back into the fold. Not necessarily a case of hypocrisy (altho for political strategists like Newt it is definitely so) but more like a different mind-set about what is expected.

Also, The Right seems to think that The Left looks on the leaders as The Annointed One. The only way I can account for that is projection: something The Right does and naturally assumes The Left does it too.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 10:04 AM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
If DEMS do half as much - as Clinton and Edwards did- they're out on a rail



My turn to say . . . HUH? Clinton was run out on a rail to be left in the political wilderness? Really? I recall him being rallied around, Democrats standing on the steps of Congress in protest to the vote to impeach him. He stayed in office, right? Or did I miss something? Heck, he's STILL the Democrat poster boy. Folks LOVE him despite his womanizing, so I don't see where you're coming from there.

As for Sanford, he's a boob and needs to just go away. I don't see many Repubicans standing up for him, do you? I know I sure dont stand behind his actions.

And of course it's all a matter of perspective, Sig! But I really don't recall people fauning all over someone in the GOP the way folks did to Obama. Okay MAYBE Reagan, but I cared not one whit about politics back then so can't speak intelligently to that. Obama got that nickname from the "right" because of the way he presented himself and the way others perceived him to be - the solution to all of life's problems. Why else would he have said right before the election (paraphrasing here), "Hey! I better reign up on the rhetoric because there's no possible way I can actually do everything I'm promising." Did he ACTUALLY say that? Not quite, thus the paraphrasing, but he said something quite similar.

*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 10:51 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Okay MAYBE Reagan, but I cared not one whit about politics back then so can't speak intelligently to that.



"MAYBE" Reagan? Really? I guess you don't recall that there were substantive talks about putting that putzes big ol' noggin on Mount Rushmore...

And WHY is Reagan the Chosen One for Republicans? He wasn't conservative, either fiscally or socially. He wasn't a small-government Republican. He wasn't great for the economy. He got a lot of American soldiers killed, and never for any reason at all. He made the Middle East a MORE fractious and violent place. He gets held up as the model of what an economic messiah should be, but unemployment was hugely high well into his first term. The same people who are now saying "the stimulus didn't work!" about Obama because unemployment is at 9.4% completely neglect the historical context of that number - the last time unemployment was that high, Reagan was more than two and a half years into his first term. Odd that he's remembered so fondly, for actually not accomplishing much of anything, especially when it came to the economy!

Quote:


Obama got that nickname from the "right" because of the way he presented himself and the way others perceived him to be - the solution to all of life's problems.



I take it you've never actually listened to another politician?

What nickname did McCain earn for himself for standing in front of an onrushing economic tsunami of epic proportions and declaring "the fundamentals of our economy are STRONG"? What do you call someone like that?

Quote:

Why else would he have said right before the election (paraphrasing here), "Hey! I better reign up on the rhetoric because there's no possible way I can actually do everything I'm promising." Did he ACTUALLY say that? Not quite, thus the paraphrasing, but he said something quite similar.


I think what he actually said was something about his father, Jor-El, bringing him to Earth for a particular reason...



Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 10:57 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


As I recall, 'Clinton the other' was the Dem shoe-in candidate --- and Obama was the dark horse who came in at the nomination wire out of nowhere. In the presidential campaign Obama fought, and fought hard, against that subterranean prejudice no one talks about anymore, to be the first BLACK president of the US. That he won has as much to say about the mismanagement of the McCain campaign as anything else.

I don't recall any time when he was a foregone conclusion.


I don't recall any anointing at any time.


***************************************************************

Just a little dose of recent history to set the record straight.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 10:58 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Posted by RIPWash:
My turn to say . . . HUH? Clinton was run out on a rail to be left in the political wilderness? Really? I recall him being rallied around, Democrats standing on the steps of Congress in protest to the vote to impeach him.



So do you think Sanford should be impeached?

I know you think he should "go away" - but do you think he should be IMPEACHED?

How about John Ensign? He called for Clinton's impeachment, said if he were ever to find himself in such a situation, he hoped he'd have the courage to do the right thing and resign - and then not only slept with the wife of a staffer, but even went so far as to put their 19-year-old son on the payroll as a "policy expert" (what policy was he an expert on at 19?), AND to double her salary AT TWO DIFFERENT POSITIONS WITH TWO DIFFERENT EMPLOYERS that he oversaw - positions and salaries that ended when he stopped banging her, it should be mentioned.

Should HE be impeached?

I know you wish they'd go away; I know you hope they'd have the decency to stand by their words and convictions (Sanford was a freshman Congressman at the time of the Lewinsky scandal, and he also called for Clinton's impeachment). What I want to know is, if they won't just go away - and clearly they won't - SHOULD THEY BE IMPEACHED?

If so, why? If not, why not?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 11:17 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
As I recall, 'Clinton the other' was the Dem shoe-in candidate --- and Obama was the dark horse who came in at the nomination wire out of nowhere. Obama fought, and fought hard against that subterranean prejudice no one talks about anymore, to be the first BLACK president of the US. That he won has as much to say about the mismanagement of the McCain campaign as anything else.


I don't recall any anointing at any time.


***************************************************************

Just a little dose of recent history to set the record straight.



Hell, all liberals are godless atheists anyway - we don't anoint, and we don't do "messiahs" and "chosen" anything. When will the right-wing-nuts ever get that straight in their heads? You can't call an entire portion of the population godless atheists who are launching a war on Christmas one minute, and then accuse them of anointing their candidate as a god or messiah the next minute. It just makes right-wingers look stupid. Or should I say "stupider"?

Besides, we all know only a right-wing-nut-job can be the REAL "anointed" one and messiah, right? After all, who signs their letters "Trig's Creator, Your Heavenly Father"? Sounds like someone has a god complex...

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 11:56 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/ensigns-parents-paid-lov
er-and-family-96000/?hp


Ensign’s Parents Paid Lover and Family $96,000
By David Stout

Sam Morris/Las Vegas Sun, via Reuters

Senator John Ensign’s parents gave almost $100,000 to his former lover and her family in April 2008, it was revealed on Thursday, as Mr. Ensign’s embarrassment over his extramarital affair seemed to deepen.

Last month, the Republican senator from Nevada held a brief news conference in Las Vegas to announce that he had an affair with a campaign staff member (later identified as Cynthia Hampton), but had ended the relationship. In addition, his office confirmed that Mr. Hampton had recently demanded money and had threatened to go public with the affair just before the senator’s admission.

But the involvement by the senator’s parents was first revealed earlier today, as other details between Mr. Hampton, who also had worked for the senator in his office, and Mr. Ensign and other colleagues have spilled out in recent days.

On Capitol Hill, Mr. Ensign told a reporter for the Sun that he had no intention of resigning. (He quit his leadership post in the Senate after initially disclosing the affair.) Ensign said today he has no plans to resign and intends to continue his work despite ongoing questions about his affair.

“I said before, I always planned on serving and working hard - working harder than I ever worked — and I’m going to continue to do that,” the senator said.



***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 12:00 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Anyway, off the topic of republicans who don't know the difference between doing the right thing and pretending to be righteous, and back to Palin ... oops - that's where we came in.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 12:15 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:


“I said before, I always planned on serving and working hard - working harder than I ever worked — and I’m going to continue to do that,” the senator said.



I just can't help it. Does anyone think that sounds filthy, in light of the subject matter at hand? How hard WAS he working?



Also, it's being reported that he paid the woman $25,000 in "severance" after the screwing stopped and the affair ended. Sources are saying this may be a felony violation of campaign funding laws.

But, y'know... it's not like he did anything really WRONG, right?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 1:08 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


'Harder than ever before' ... it does sound vaguely ... creepy.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 2:52 PM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Posted by RIPWash:
My turn to say . . . HUH? Clinton was run out on a rail to be left in the political wilderness? Really? I recall him being rallied around, Democrats standing on the steps of Congress in protest to the vote to impeach him.



So do you think Sanford should be impeached?

I know you think he should "go away" - but do you think he should be IMPEACHED?

How about John Ensign? He called for Clinton's impeachment, said if he were ever to find himself in such a situation, he hoped he'd have the courage to do the right thing and resign - and then not only slept with the wife of a staffer, but even went so far as to put their 19-year-old son on the payroll as a "policy expert" (what policy was he an expert on at 19?), AND to double her salary AT TWO DIFFERENT POSITIONS WITH TWO DIFFERENT EMPLOYERS that he oversaw - positions and salaries that ended when he stopped banging her, it should be mentioned.

Should HE be impeached?

I know you wish they'd go away; I know you hope they'd have the decency to stand by their words and convictions (Sanford was a freshman Congressman at the time of the Lewinsky scandal, and he also called for Clinton's impeachment). What I want to know is, if they won't just go away - and clearly they won't - SHOULD THEY BE IMPEACHED?

If so, why? If not, why not?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.





Okay, here's the deal. The Clinton deal happened at a time I wasn't particularly paying a huge amount of attention (some, not a lot), but I think the whole impeaching thing was because he lied under oath on one of the harassment trials. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And I'm not trying to contort here, I'm really not. But THAT being the case I don't think the comparison is on even ground. If Sanford and Ensign lied under oath at some point, yes, they should be impeached. But as they have shown bad judgment (especially Sanford, leaving and not telling anyone where he was going - SHEESH! what a maroon!), then they need to step down. Yes. Absolutely. Just as Clinton should have done

[Billy Crystal "Fernando" voice]I kid. I'm a kidder.[/Billy Crystal "Fernando voice]

But SHOULD they be impeached? Good question. I'll have to look into that a little further because I'll admit to being slightly uninformed as to what the impeachment process actually entails.



*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 2:59 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Anyway, off the topic of republicans who don't know the difference between doing the right thing and pretending to be righteous, and back to Palin ... oops - that's where we came in.
'zactly.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 3:07 PM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
As I recall, 'Clinton the other' was the Dem shoe-in candidate --- and Obama was the dark horse who came in at the nomination wire out of nowhere. In the presidential campaign Obama fought, and fought hard, against that subterranean prejudice no one talks about anymore, to be the first BLACK president of the US. That he won has as much to say about the mismanagement of the McCain campaign as anything else.

I don't recall any time when he was a foregone conclusion.


I don't recall any anointing at any time.


***************************************************************

Just a little dose of recent history to set the record straight.



The color of his skin did matter to me one iota. Heck, I voted for Ken Blackwell for Governor of Ohio. Not that it helped at all. LOL

But hey. I'm PROUD of our nation for seeing past the color of a man's skin and voting for someone they believed in. It was, indeed, a great moment for our country. I just disagree with the MAN. That's all.

I think the Right saw the seemingly sudden swell of support for him as rather shocking due to Mrs. Clinton being the front-runner for so long. And the STRENGTH of that support and the reactions people had to him (women fainting and such) is what started that whole "Annointed One" business. I thought it was funny. Is that a partisan statement?

But really, the election was a little strange if you think about it. And this may have been addressed before, so I apologize for re-hashing old ground. I mean, BOTH parties' nominees were not who many thought they would actually be. I don't think McCain really had THAT much support early on, or even mid-way through. I think many people thought it would go to Gulliani or Romney. And the DNC nomination was really Hillary's to lose. Am I right or wrong there?

*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 4:36 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

If Sanford and Ensign lied under oath at some point, yes, they should be impeached. But as they have shown bad judgment (especially Sanford, leaving and not telling anyone where he was going - SHEESH! what a maroon!), then they need to step down.


Well, according to Sanford's past statements, "lied under a different oath - the oath to his wife." At least that's what he said when it was someone who wasn't him doing the cheating...

It's going to be interesting to see if Sanford and Ensign did indeed break the law by paying mistresses and their families, by traveling to far-off countries on the taxpayers' dime to commit adultery, etc. And if it turns out that they HAVE broken the law, it's going to be interesting to see who turns out to support them.

In retrospect, I suppose Bill Clinton's biggest mistake was either (a) agreeing to be deposed under oath, or (b) not having a sudden attack of amnesia. The former seemed to work out pretty well for Dubya ("I won't testify under oath, and you can't even take notes about what I say.") and Cheney, and the latter has worked for everyone from "Fredo" Gonzalez to Tricky Dick Nixon to Ronald Reagan. If you won't go under oath, or if you just say "I don't recall", no one can pin anything on you!




Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 9, 2009 5:25 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:

Anyway, off the topic of republicans who don't know the difference between doing the right thing and pretending to be righteous, and back to Palin ... oops - that's where we came in.
'zactly.




was that right thing or " right " thing ?

they are not always the same





" I don't believe in hypothetical situations - it's kinda like lying to your brain "

" They don't hate America, they hate Americans " Homer Simpson


Lets party like its 1939

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 12:57 AM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

If Sanford and Ensign lied under oath at some point, yes, they should be impeached. But as they have shown bad judgment (especially Sanford, leaving and not telling anyone where he was going - SHEESH! what a maroon!), then they need to step down.


Well, according to Sanford's past statements, "lied under a different oath - the oath to his wife." At least that's what he said when it was someone who wasn't him doing the cheating...

It's going to be interesting to see if Sanford and Ensign did indeed break the law by paying mistresses and their families, by traveling to far-off countries on the taxpayers' dime to commit adultery, etc. And if it turns out that they HAVE broken the law, it's going to be interesting to see who turns out to support them.

In retrospect, I suppose Bill Clinton's biggest mistake was either (a) agreeing to be deposed under oath, or (b) not having a sudden attack of amnesia. The former seemed to work out pretty well for Dubya ("I won't testify under oath, and you can't even take notes about what I say.") and Cheney, and the latter has worked for everyone from "Fredo" Gonzalez to Tricky Dick Nixon to Ronald Reagan. If you won't go under oath, or if you just say "I don't recall", no one can pin anything on you!




Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.





If that's the case - that they paid people off, etc - and they won't step down then heck ya, they need to be impeached.

*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 2:38 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
See, in politics - and Senator McCain, will back me up on this, I'm sure, as will former President Bush - you keep your day job while running for higher office, and if you win that higher office, THEN you leave your day job.


That's not always the case. Ask Bob Dole. Reagan wasn't all that busy after leaving the Governor's office years before his 1980 run. I've always thought the notion of "running from cover" was wrong. Bush, Kerry, Obama, Palin...it does not matter, you can't do your job properly and run for President at the same time. Incumbent Presidents are a different story because of the advantage of Air Force One's access to communication and information and a bigger staff.

And she has another job...full time mother. Not to mention a multi-million dollar book to write, moose to hunt, fish to catch, and she's already booked to make appearances in Texas supporting the Republicans.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 4:16 AM

DEADLOCKVICTIM


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Anyway, off the topic of republicans who don't know the difference between doing the right thing and pretending to be righteous.....]



thank our lucky stars for the Republicans - the party of family values...




thanks to Dr. Zaius

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 5:06 AM

PIRATECAT


Romney is gonna be the man. Palin doesn't have a chance. You have to have an insider. It's Harvard vs Yale. There ya go.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 5:25 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

...and she's already booked to make appearances in Texas supporting the Republicans.


Oh, THAT should help their cause. Will she be helping Rick Perry and John Cornyn, both of whom were soundly booed and heckled at the Fourth of July tea-bagger parties over the weekend?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 5:27 AM

DEADLOCKVICTIM



those wacky tea baggers hate everybody...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 5:27 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by PirateCat:
Romney is gonna be the man. Palin doesn't have a chance. You have to have an insider. It's Harvard vs Yale. There ya go.



You mean Brigham Young University vs. Wasila School of Cosmetology and Pageant-Walkin'?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 8:10 AM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Originally posted by PirateCat:
Romney is gonna be the man. Palin doesn't have a chance. You have to have an insider. It's Harvard vs Yale. There ya go.



You mean Brigham Young University vs. Wasila School of Cosmetology and Pageant-Walkin'?




With those two, Obama become the best of the bad choices again



Can't the Repubs find anyone better





" I don't believe in hypothetical situations - it's kinda like lying to your brain "

" They don't hate America, they hate Americans " Homer Simpson


Lets party like its 1939

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 10, 2009 8:45 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by PirateCat:
Romney is gonna be the man.


There's one little problem with that assessment.

Like, the fact that his entire bankroll comes from proponents and supporters of dehumanizing and abusing youth and teens, many of which are now old enough to vote, that is, those that are still alive.
http://teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/tribute1.html
http://www.caica.org/NEWS%20Deaths%20List%20of%20Names%20-names%20omit
ted.htm

Add in the suicides, and the programs TAU doesn't track and it's a VERY long list of casualties.

And this is where Romney's MONEY comes from, mind you.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/121088.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2003/jun/29/schools.uk1

Or did - till we functionally OBLITERATED their infrastructure over the past couple years.
And now they're dropping like flies, Pathway, Tranquility, Spring Creek, all gone - and some of the victims chose to side with us instead of going home* which is one reason WHY I am so busy.

No, Romney isn't EVER going to be a viable candidate, cause every time someone tries to front him as one, we'll be there, around every corner, in every shadow, dogging him like conscience he was apparently born without.

The man is a freakin monster, and to use a word I am very sparing with, downright evil.

*Really, would YOU want to go back to a "family" that mortgaged their own home into default to hire out a kidnapping and put you into an abusive concentration camp against your will ?

So there's also a legal battle ongoing over emancipation, whether a parent who so desperately wanted RID of their "goddamn troublemaker" has any right to demand their "property" back under the circumstances - and a court which has not only the law to interpret, but the political consequences of either condoning this behavior, by handing the child back AND provoking the ire of the folks who handed the TX authorities their ass over the YFZ raid, or setting a damn scary (to them) precedent that acknowledges that in some circumstances minors MIGHT be better equipped to make their own life decisions than their parents - and make no mistake, the latter scares the everliving crap out of the established order, cause once you admit that minors are Human Beings, are Persons, Citizens...

Then you no longer get to treat them as inferiors.

Currently it's an endless round of buck passing whilst we actually take care of em and legally stand em off, which is a damn headache when you're forced to play by rules the other side, being them that make and interpret those rules, doesn't feel bound by.

And every single survivor is one more reason Romney is never, EVER going to be a viable candidate.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2009 3:42 AM

PIRATECAT


Once again Romney's religon is an issue. Why? Obama's muslim religon shouldn't have been an issue. Remember how offended the libs were when you used Barrack as his name. But now when he butt kisses rag heads oh boy Barrack comes rolling off the tongue. How's the antiwar canidate doing looks like there realing heating it up in Afghanastan. Soon this will be Obama's War.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2009 11:15 AM

GRIPPER


You are known by the quality of your enemies....considering all the various folks that hav elined up for a cheap shot at Palin;I'd say she is good people.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2009 2:02 PM

GRIPPER


RE Romney-I never thought much of the guy.The sole rasoem=n for voting for him would be "best of a series of bad choices"....
When I was a Ma. resident;he blocked full CH180 reform(Ma. gun law) by not allowing the State Police to assume control of the law;leaving licens issuance "subject to the interprtation of the issuing authority-Chiefs of Police.This turned an already complicated,politicized 4 tiered system into a competely subjective issuance criteria-where a resident of one municipality would be denied ;even if he was "cleaner" than someone who got licensed one town over.
Than he had the balls to hold a press conference with Rosenthal and sugarmen from the Brady Bunch;on how he "stood up to the NRA".
On th ecampaign trail,he suddenly became a "life memeber of the NRA"(he purchased the memebership the precedigng july)
He was not the worse governor we ever had,but way to much of a RINO for my preference.Not a bad guy;but very hard to lock him down to his center of belief.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2009 2:31 PM

WASHNWEAR


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:


Also, it's being reported that he paid the woman $25,000 in "severance" after the screwing stopped and the affair ended. Sources are saying this may be a felony violation of campaign funding laws.




Oh...what's she running for?

donttalkbackjustdrivethecarshutyourmouthiknowwhatyouaredontsaynothinkeepyourhandsonthewheeldontturnaroundthisisforreal

Still...what would Rorschach do?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2009 4:47 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"You are known by the quality of your enemies....considering all the various folks that hav elined up for a cheap shot at Palin;I'd say she is good people."

Unless of course the shots they are taking aren't cheap - but factual and valid. In which case, YOU would be known by the quality of the people YOU support. And it's not a good reflection on you, I might add ... (along with your typing, spelling and grammar, which make you seem like exactly like the ignorant redneck hick that is reported to be Palin's exact source of support).

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 11, 2009 10:17 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Once again Romney's religon is an issue.

Never was to me, in fact...

Were he not a total friggin monster, his beliefs would be a plus in my viewpoint.

See, although I dislike all Christian theology pretty intensely, I happen to dislike Mormons less for all that since as a general rule they treat their kids a hell of a lot better than most of mainstream society - which given where Romneys bankroll comes from, causes them to turn on him the quickest once that fact is exposed.

Also happens to be a factor in why I went berserk over the FLDS/El Dorado incident, which in combination with the Gardasil fiasco happens to be a millstone we'll be hanging around that ratbastard Gov Perry's neck FOREVER.

It's real simple, so much that even a politician can understand it.

You hurt kids - we hurt YOU.

And right where it counts too, political funding and support, media access, anything and everything to send your political career into the death spiral, where it freakin belongs.

http://www.protect.org/

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 1:59 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by gripper:
You are known by the quality of your enemies....considering all the various folks that hav elined up for a cheap shot at Palin;I'd say she is good people.



'Course, I can say the exact same thing for Obama, ya know...



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 2:14 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
along with your typing, spelling and grammar, which make you seem like exactly like the ignorant redneck hick that is reported to be Palin's exact source of support.


[ sarcasm ]Thanks for that, Rue. Good to see you come out of hiding with another substantive missive. Your fact based, non-generalizing, and ad hominem free posts are surely missed around these parts. [ /sarcasm]

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 4:14 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
...along with your typing, spelling and grammar...


Thats why liberals hate Palin.

They can't fight her on the issues, so they fight her on how she talks, how she dresses, what her family is doing, etc...all the things that would not matter if she was a liberal.

You could say something brillent and world changing...but if its a conservative idea, then you'd better spell it right and use the correct grammer.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 4:46 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Thats why liberals hate Palin.



That's exactly like saying "Conservatives hate Obama because he's college-educated and can speak in whole sentences. That's the ONLY thing they can fight him on - that he actually knows how to speak English."

Quote:


They can't fight her on the issues, so they fight her on how she talks, how she dresses, what her family is doing, etc...all the things that would not matter if she was a liberal.



Which issues? What "issues" is it that she wants to discuss? The "issue" that the "mainstream media" is beating up on her, and she needs to get away from them and get her kids out of their sight - and so she goes off to her little fortress of solitude to go fishing... AND INVITES THE ENTIRE FUCKING MEDIA ALONG! Is THAT the kind of issue she wants to talk about?

Quote:


You could say something brillent and world changing...but if its a conservative idea, then you'd better spell it right and use the correct grammer.



I'd be inclined to think you're just joking here, but your past record indicates otherwise...

Besides, you've got a contradiction there: You say that you could say something "brillent" and world-changing, "but if it's a conservative idea..." That's contradictory; you CAN'T say something brilliant and world-changing AND have it be a conservative idea.

Oh, and by the way, BigDamnKnob-Buddy has something to say about your "that's why liberals hate Palin" claim:

Quote:


[sarcasm]Thanks for that. Good to see you come out of hiding with another substantive missive. Your fact based, non-generalizing, and ad hominem free posts are surely missed around these parts.[/sarcasm]



Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 4:57 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
...you CAN'T say something brilliant and world-changing AND have it be a conservative idea.


Conservative Idea:
"It is no coincidence that our present troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth of government. It is time for us to realize that we're too great a nation to limit ourselves to small dreams. We're not, as some would have us believe, doomed to an inevitable decline. I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing. So, with all the creative energy at our command, let us begin an era of national renewal. Let us renew our determination, our courage, and our strength. And let us renew our faith and our hope.

We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look. You can see heroes every day going in and out of factory gates. Others, a handful in number, produce enough food to feed all of us and then the world beyond. You meet heroes across a counter, and they're on both sides of that counter. There are entrepreneurs with faith in themselves and faith in an idea who create new jobs, new wealth and opportunity. They're individuals and families whose taxes support the government and whose voluntary gifts support church, charity, culture, art, and education. Their patriotism is quiet, but deep. Their values sustain our national life."

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 5:48 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Was there supposed to be something new or brilliant in that mindless doublespeak?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 6:28 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Was there supposed to be something new or brilliant in that mindless doublespeak?


We were in a period of decline, people were really demoralized. He lifted their spirits and gave them the economic tools to create the longest period of sustained growth in American history and along the way he kicked a little Soviet and terrorist ass.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 6:33 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Was there supposed to be something new or brilliant in that mindless doublespeak?


We were in a period of decline, people were really demoralized. He lifted their spirits and gave them the economic tools to create the longest period of sustained growth in American history and along the way he kicked a little Soviet and terrorist ass.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.



So again I have to ask: Was there something brilliant in that drivel? Was there some revolutionary new thought, some new idea that the world had never heard before? Was there some value inherent in that speech that was purely conservative, that no liberal or progressive could possibly utter or believe?

I could as easily say that it's a core liberal value that puppies are cute and children are special. There - you can never say anything like that, because we liberals now own it!

As for your claims of what Reagan "accomplished" - Cites? Anything to back that up with any hard numbers or evidence?

How long did his alleged economic turnaround take? 3 days? 3 weeks? 3 months? 3 years? More? I know unemployment was still at 9.5% in July of 1983, well over 2.5 years into his first term. Obviously, you were willing to give him far longer to "turn the economy around" than you're willing to give a Democrat in the same position...

How did he supposedly turn our economy around, anyway? I mean, other than by spending metric tonnes of American dollars? By borrowing untold amounts of money from the future, by more than doubling our national debt, by spending more than every President who had come before him, combined. And while you trumpet this "miracle" of economic brilliance under Reagan, you seem less than enthralled with Obama's plan, no matter how similar it may be...

What Soviet ass did we kick? Please don't say "Afghanistan", because that would be not just naive of you, but aggressively ignorant. You'd have to actively TRY to be stupid to believe that. The "Soviet ass" that "we" kicked in Afghanistan was actually kicked by people like Osama bin Laden - a terrorist whom Reagan called a "freedom fighter".

What "terrorist ass" did we kick? Are you talking about Grenada? I *know* you aren't talking about Beirut, where Reagan got 281 U.S. Marines killed with his outright stupidity.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 7:20 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


From Ronald Reagan's first inaugural address:

Quote:


It is no coincidence that our present troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth of government.



No coincidence? There was also no evidence to suppport this claim. It's one of those truisms - it SOUNDS good, so it must be true. Rarely is that the case, however...

Quote:


It is time for us to realize that we're too great a nation to limit ourselves to small dreams. We're not, as some would have us believe, doomed to an inevitable decline.



Again, flowery language without the merest scintilla of substance. Can you imagine the outrage on the right if someone with a name like Barack Obama were to utter such a thing today?

Quote:


I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing. So, with all the creative energy at our command, let us begin an era of national renewal.



So in other words, it doesn't matter what you do, as long as you do SOMETHING! Unless, of course, your name is Jimmy Carter - then it only matters what you do, because whatever you do is wrong, based only on who you are. What is an "era of national renewal", anyway? That sounds like New-Deal-style liberalism to me! Reagan was a socialist!

Quote:


Let us renew our determination, our courage, and our strength. And let us renew our faith and our hope.



Oh, NOES! He used the "hope" word! And after extolling us to do something, anything, now he says all we need to "do" is renew our faith? That sounds an awful lot like doing nothing. Try this next time there's a tornado bearing down on your house: Pray. Don't run, don't go inside, don't seek shelter, just pray. Renew your faith, and see how that works out for ya. Be sure to try it with a hurricane, too. What's the worst that could happen?

Quote:


We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look. You can see heroes every day going in and out of factory gates.



Yes, and most of them were union members, so you sold their jobs to the highest overseas bidder, shut down the factories, and told them to fuck off for their next meal.

Quote:


Others, a handful in number, produce enough food to feed all of us and then the world beyond.



But not for long. Before his second term was over, Reagan would have overseen the dismantling of the family farm in favor of giant corporate farm-factories. But I'm sure he admired their heroism in fighting for a doomed idea that he himself was determined to crush.

Quote:


You meet heroes across a counter, and they're on both sides of that counter. There are entrepreneurs with faith in themselves and faith in an idea who create new jobs, new wealth and opportunity. They're individuals and families whose taxes support the government and whose voluntary gifts support church, charity, culture, art, and education. Their patriotism is quiet, but deep. Their values sustain our national life.



And apparently they're the reason we have to give corporations more welfare and bailouts, and fuck the little people, because while Republicans love to claim that the little people are the real heroes in America, they've never once actually stood up for those people. Instead, they consistently and constantly stand in the way of the little guy, and firmly on the side of Big Business. Because, y'know, there's nothing more American than an entrepenuer with a dream - unless it's a corporation with a dream of crushing that small business!


Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 7:53 AM

RIPWASH


Goofed!! See below

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 7:59 AM

RIPWASH


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Because, y'know, there's nothing more American than an entrepenuer with a dream - unless it's a corporation with a dream of crushing that small business!







*********************************************

"It's okay! I'm a leaf on the wind!!!"
"What does that mean?!?!?!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 9:32 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, and by the way, BigDamnKnob-Buddy...


As flattering as you are no doubt trying to be, keep your eyes on your own "knob" next time you are at the urinals.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 13, 2009 11:14 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
From Ronald Reagan's first inaugural address:

Quote:


It is no coincidence that our present troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth of government.



No coincidence? There was also no evidence to suppport this claim. It's one of those truisms - it SOUNDS good, so it must be true. Rarely is that the case, however...


Our entire nation is founded upon the notion that the individual should be the senior partner in the social contract.

Quote:


Quote:


It is time for us to realize that we're too great a nation to limit ourselves to small dreams. We're not, as some would have us believe, doomed to an inevitable decline.



Again, flowery language without the merest scintilla of substance. Can you imagine the outrage on the right if someone with a name like Barack Obama were to utter such a thing today?


First of all, if Obama said it and meant it there would be outrage...from the liberals. Liberals believe in the inevitable decline of America...in fact they are invested in it.

Unfortunately they have convinced many Republicans of this "inevitable decline" argument. Ultimately its the American people's opinion that matters and most Americans are returning, as they often do in troubled times to our nation's conservative roots.

Quote:


Quote:


I do not believe in a fate that will fall on us no matter what we do. I do believe in a fate that will fall on us if we do nothing. So, with all the creative energy at our command, let us begin an era of national renewal.



So in other words, it doesn't matter what you do, as long as you do SOMETHING! Unless, of course, your name is Jimmy Carter - then it only matters what you do, because whatever you do is wrong, based only on who you are. What is an "era of national renewal", anyway? That sounds like New-Deal-style liberalism to me! Reagan was a socialist!


He's not asking for govt to do something. He's advocating removing as much of govt from the picture thus allowing the natural creative energy and industry of the American people to move and this "era of national renewal" his a call to act.
Quote:


Quote:


Let us renew our determination, our courage, and our strength. And let us renew our faith and our hope.



Oh, NOES! He used the "hope" word! And after extolling us to do something, anything, now he says all we need to "do" is renew our faith? That sounds an awful lot like doing nothing. Try this next time there's a tornado bearing down on your house: Pray. Don't run, don't go inside, don't seek shelter, just pray. Renew your faith, and see how that works out for ya. Be sure to try it with a hurricane, too. What's the worst that could happen?


Faith, hope, courage, strength, and determination...these are the things that will allow you to do more then merely survive a tornado. Lose everything save these and you'll be ok, thats his message.

Imagine a life of safety and security...without faith, hope, courage, strength, or determination. Huddling in your shelter while the tornado comes and takes it all...you might as well be dead.
Quote:


Quote:


We have every right to dream heroic dreams.


I'm pretty sure he means dream of "Hero" aka me...
Quote:


Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look. You can see heroes every day going in and out of factory gates.



Yes, and most of them were union members, so you sold their jobs to the highest overseas bidder, shut down the factories, and told them to fuck off for their next meal.


Actually, most are not. Union membership as a percentage of the manufacturing pool has been in rapid decline for decades. Also union businesses were far more likely to fail.

We've come a long way from the company store and kids working in mines. Unions are important, but not at the expense of labor.
Quote:


Quote:


Others, a handful in number, produce enough food to feed all of us and then the world beyond.



But not for long. Before his second term was over, Reagan would have overseen the dismantling of the family farm in favor of giant corporate farm-factories. But I'm sure he admired their heroism in fighting for a doomed idea that he himself was determined to crush.


I know lots of families with farms. Worked on one myself. Biggest problem was not competition...it was the death tax.
Quote:


Quote:


You meet heroes across a counter, and they're on both sides of that counter. There are entrepreneurs with faith in themselves and faith in an idea who create new jobs, new wealth and opportunity. They're individuals and families whose taxes support the government and whose voluntary gifts support church, charity, culture, art, and education. Their patriotism is quiet, but deep. Their values sustain our national life.



And apparently they're the reason we have to give corporations more welfare and bailouts, and fuck the little people, because while Republicans love to claim that the little people are the real heroes in America, they've never once actually stood up for those people. Instead, they consistently and constantly stand in the way of the little guy, and firmly on the side of Big Business. Because, y'know, there's nothing more American than an entrepenuer with a dream - unless it's a corporation with a dream of crushing that small business!


Your the guys keeping all the Joe the Plumber types from opening their own businesses.

"If you're afraid of the future, then get out of the way, stand aside. The people of this country are ready to move again."

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Thu, March 28, 2024 19:16 - 51 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 17:24 - 3413 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 17:20 - 6155 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Thu, March 28, 2024 16:32 - 9 posts
Well... He was no longer useful to the DNC or the Ukraine Money Laundering Scheme... So justice was served
Thu, March 28, 2024 12:44 - 1 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:18 - 2071 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL