Michael Kinsley jokingly complained in a Time magazine commentary about the GOP’s ultimate dirty trick: picking a candidate Democrats don’t detest.
He wrote: “In its desperate hunger for victory at any cost, the Republican Party is on the verge of choosing a presidential candidate, John McCain, who is widely regarded (everywhere except inside the Republican Party itself) as honest, courageous, likable and intelligent. Have they no shame?â€
119 Comments
What a crock. What propaganda. Do you want me to believe that the “Dems” want another 100 years in Iraq? More wars in general? You press people are all little Goebbels’.
But, if war is what we all really want, then we’ll get it. I was looking at my 7 and 8 year olds last night, watching American’s voting for more wars and despising them for doing it. I’m not going to watch my kid’s get drafted into wars that make no sense. And I did mean DRAFTED.
War is peace.
Dear Pleefer,
I think it’s amazing how Phillip can bring crap to the BLOG that is so far out that the left and the right can’t swallow it.
All the republicans I know respect McCain’s courage, honesty and intelligence. We just think he’s not a conservative. He was wrong on immigration and campaign finance reform.
You don’t have to worry about your little children being drafted. The draft has become an issue for the democrats to beat the republicans over the head with. Any issue the democrats squeal about will never be resolved, they would lose it as a means to keep themselves in power.
All you have to do is somehow raise them without a sense of patriotism. Raise them with a list of priorities that do not include service to country and maybe, just maybe they won’t enlist. But, you’ll find out that no matter how much you poison their little minds against a sense of patriotism they may still just do something honorable with their lives.
I can detest John McCain very easily.
The man has no spine. bush dragged McCain through the garbage and good boy John got right back in lockstep line.
And you don’t think the Dems will kiss and make up after the convention? It is politics, and politics is a business. They all do the same thing, tear into each other mercilessly during campaigns, then make all nice (at least publicly) after it is over.
The list of honorable, trustworthy politicians of either party is a very short list.
For those of old enough to remember, the draft provided the number of loyal Americans so we didn’t have to employ “subcontractors” who are in business for a profit.
honorable trustworthy politicians seems like it should be added to the list of oxymorons.
I do believe McCain is the best of the least, so understand where Michael Kinsley of Time magazine is coming from on this.
And of course those drafted couldn’t behave as “subcontractors” behave. Neither could they be above all laws of every country.
All you have to do is somehow raise them without a sense of patriotism. Raise them with a list of priorities that do not include service to country and maybe, just maybe they won’t enlist. But, you’ll find out that no matter how much you poison their little minds against a sense of patriotism they may still just do something honorable with their lives.
Are you delusional? Are you that far out of touch with the military? Who received the most contributions from all branches of service? That would be Ron Paul. And his stance on these idiotic wars? Get out. Get out right damn now.
But you type in this pathetic party line dribble that the troops feel patriotic about fighting an illegal war with absolutely no end in sight? You enjoy feeding young Americans into a meat grinder. That is absolutely disgusting. Did you enjoy your son being in harm’s way over for a pointless unjustified war? What a warped freakin mind you have.
And here you are ready to offer up more young to the war machine. Take off your party blinders and face reality. Or if your reality is glee seeing returning soldiers in caskets, with closed head trauma they may never recover from, or with limbs missing, then I pity you.
There is no honor in this war. The soldiers may act honorably and bring honor through their dedication, but this war is deplorable. Fought for oil and money. How sad that you support that. How utterly depressing that someone would support that.
It won’t be a joke when McCain wins. At least the Eagle is consitent in the support of the liberal democrat candidates. I don’t expect anything less. I will wager the Eagle will support a democrat candidate in a Republican state as soon as the mud slinging stops with the dems and they select a presidential candiate.
“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel” I still can’t believe that I saw a US General Officer being guarded by “contractors” in a news clip months ago during his walk about in Baghdad. If the Corps of Engineers can build and manage some of the largest and most breathtaking construction feats the world has ever seen, why are they being ignored? American military now relies on caterers to be fed, does anyone else see something mad here?
And Hank, don’t even try and act like you can define “Patriotism”. My kid’s will learn what it is to be a real American, not your brand of idiot, no-think American. You “party-members” are the very reason this country is going straight down the friggin tubes. I’m not going to sit here and let you snidely “educate” me on how I need to raise my kids. You think blindly following these idiots in a meat-grinder that is uneneding is “Patriotism”, fine. I don’t, I’ll teach my kids to fight the crown like our REAL patriot fore-fathers.
Baa-baa.
un-ending.
WWJD?
Kill him some damned camel-jockey’s.
Sorry, Towel-heads.
We need a little ethnic cleansing for Patriotism!
Hank: I’d be proud if any of my kids enlisted–just not to be cannon fodder to promote the welfare of those with too much time and money as it it; just not to get killed for said unappreciative dolts so can denigrate them constantly.
I enlisted while I was still 16. They even stopped the swearing in ceremony for me because they realized I didn’t turn 17 for another few days. Had to return the following week and go through it all again. So being against a war the sole purpose of which is to pad your pocket is not being unpatriotic.
Y’know, if they re-instituted the draft with the requirement of draftees being chosen on the basis of all people 18-35 yo making over $250k/yr and one child exemption for those making $100k/yr, the incidence of ‘war’ would plummet.
Well Sol, Pleefer,
So what if the troops have donated more to Ron Paul?
Every man in the military that is currently in harms way volunteered. We are in to the sixth year with our little adventure in Afganistan and Iraq. Every military man has the option to stay in or get out at least every four years.
Do the math. The largest percentage of the men in Iraq are there because they want to be there. They think what they are doing is right.
When you emply that they are ‘blindly following these idiots’, you sir, are impugning the patriotism, the intelligence and the honor of men better and smarter than you.
Pleefer, you are dispicable. Think of what you write.
More wars in general?
Pleefer,
Although McCain said he supports the war, so does Hillary. And Obama?
Regardless, if you are trying to pick a political party that will keep your kids out of war – you better find a new one.
Historically, the records reflect both major political parties send “our boys to war”.
Now if Ron Paul ran as an independent………..
Dear ghotiphaze,
I thank you for your service!
“Do the math. The largest percentage of the men in Iraq are there because they want to be there. They think what they are doing is right.”
Oooh Hank. Waiting for the big bonus enticements comment………………
That “our boys” are foolishly “tricked” into accepting……..
This “McCain equals war” thread sounds familiar. Anyone remember the 1964 elections? Goldwater vs. Johnson. The common cry at the time was that Goldwater was a ‘warmonger’ and would increase the Vietnam war.
After Johnson was elected, what happened? Increased troop levels beyond anyone’s projection.
So much for the “candidate equals war” cries.
Another thread for the Dems so they can further stain their common linen under garments. :D
Although it would be interesting to know what enlistment and retention numbers would be without the bonuses…
No thanks needed, Hank. I enlisted during war, but was in bootcamp when Nixon resigned, so I served peacetime. Wouldn’t matter anyway, I was avionics so I’d've been stuck in a bunker and others’d've taken the bullets meant for me. My original intentions were good, but I don’t want you getting the mistaken impression that I was some kinda war hero.
Obviously, you aren’t one that is “smarter than me”. Lern to spel “dispicable” before you call me it. Those soldiers I have the respect for, not you and your neo-con leaders. And it is you, who is despicable.
I’ll bet you’re retarded enough to think that I’m some lefty, homo aren’t you? I voted for King George, twice. He is wrong and so are you, but you’ll never admit any wrong doing…because insane people do not know that what they do may be wrong. They just “do”.
“I thank you for your service!”
Listen to Hannity much? Just like some robot or trained monkey.
VT,
I am not wondering about that.
We have men and women serving who have gone to Iraq and/or Afghanistan three, and four times.
I believe, this is more commitment than our country has ever asked of young men and women. It is more hardship, separation, strain, and worry on the families of those men and women than in my opinion – anyone should endure.
IMHO they DESERVE huge bonuses.
But I can say – they KNOW what they are getting themselves into. They HAVE been there, over and over again.
And yet, they still sign on the dotted line.
Listen to Hannity much?
I don’t. Who???
Sorry, the question was directed at Hank.
But I do offer my humble respect to any and all vets, ghotiphaze.
Pfeefer,
“Thank for your service” phrase has been uttered by Veteran’s Organizations, Politicians and the average citizen for as long as there as been a military in the U.S.
I heard it myself in an old AmVets meeting my Dad went to in the 1960s.
American Way, I in no way feel the bonuses are not deserved; in many cases, just as you, I think they are inadequate. It is clear to me, however, that the numbers willing to sign on the dotted line would be diminished to a large degree without them. Otherwise, the bonuses would not be needed. The tax break one receives for combat pay (exclusion) applies to the bonuses for those in Iraq and Afghanistan at the time of reenlistment, which also is a part of the equation, of course. To be clear, I’ve no issue with combat pay exclusion; it is appropriate, IMO.
This, of course, might lead to a discussion of the rates of basic pay and allowances received by members of the uniformed services. That would be best left for another time and another thread. Put me in the “appear to be inadequate” camp, though.
AmWay, not sure if today’s military is anything like in my time. Many in my boot platoon (remember your first couple days when they ask, “Why did you join…?”) were there mainly to get off the streets, procure employment SOMEWHERE, learn a trade (an aquaintence of mine upon learning I joined the Corps said after 8 years in the Corps the only life skill he aquired is the knowlege of how to kill someone 13 different ways with a pair of boots), or to make more money. MAKE MORE MONEY???? We’re talking military E-1 wages in early 70s.
ghotiphaze, E-1 pay and allowances in the early 70s sure was a lot, huh? :-)
Thank for your service” phrase has been uttered by Veteran’s Organizations…
I get it at McDonald’s. I took it af face value (give the benefit of the doubt before you learn to doubt the benefit) until Pleef’s post caused me consider it could possibly be a slur. Didn’t matter to me, either way.
Y’know, Vaughn, I think it really wasn’t too bad wages. I could dig out my vouchers (kept every stinkin’ piece of paper from Unca Sam–even when I had 13 extra copies of the same set of order), but I’m fairly sure it war right in the neighborhood of $310/mo, take home.
Actually, considering I was working 40-60 hour weeks while in High School, I took a hunk of a pay-cut.
I have a number of friends over there right now whom I deeply love and respect. My father was in Viet Nam, his father, the Battle of the Bulge, his father in WW1. I do not need to “prove” my patriotism to you at all. When there is a war that is declared and justified, I’ll sign on the dotted line. My friends, right out of high school went in just before the first Iraq thing. When 9/11 happened, I almost signed up, but my uncle (Air Force retired) told me that since I had two little babies, maybe I should wait a bit. I waited and found out the bull shi.t that was slung at us from GWB for going to war, was exactly that, bull sh.it.
I’ll know when there is a reason to fight, I don’t really need your “insight”.
Well American Way,
Another despicable (thanks Pleefer) human being. Reducing the service of our brave men and women to nothing more than greed.
VT, concur. Another time.
ghotiphaze, they still have those yellow footprints leading into the barber shop. The fun still begins when the bus pulls in and the hat hollers, “Get outta the f—king bus!”
In short, IMHO, the men and women enlisting today, do so for the same reasons as those in the 70’s.
But I’m thinking their tours are not so nice as a six month pump to WestPac and Olongapo City.
Actually, he’s not, Hank. Either read, think, or just quit spinning.
Spent a year on a float to the North Med. I got to see the sun a total 3 times. Doesn’t the sun ever shine in Europe?
There are those that are in the service because it is their calling. It was mine for ten years and I didn’t bail before or after the first Gulf War. There are those that love the branch of service they are in and that branch of service provides the troop with what he/she needs.
By interjecting patriotism and the feelings listed above as acceptance of this war is infantile at best and slanderous at worst.
The unpatriotic flag has been waved far too often. It has become the badge of the woefully uninformed party line towers. More blindly following their party to demise than actually opening their eyes to the lunacy of entering into and the idiocy of staying in this war than using common sense.
If you equate serving in this imbecilic war to desire to serve and/or patriotism, then put your money where your mouth is. Pick up a rifle and head on over. Take an IED to the head for a troop. Protect those you claim to know the minds of. If this war is so just and those fighting it are so patriotic, then I call you out. If you haven’t held a post in the Gulf in the last 15 years, then it is you that is unpatriotic. Spewing lip service does not a patriot make.
Agreed, Sol!
I joined the Navy because I wanted to be in submarines. Since the third grade, I wanted to be an engineman on submarines.
After 21 years as a submarine sailor I want to live in Kansas. Simple man, simple wants and needs.
Simple man, simple wants and needs.
And simple minded.
Sol, brother in God, I love ya!
I’ve another friend (well used to be). He likes dressing up in surplus store-bought BDU’s and go out shooting guns. But when it comes to shooting at targets that’ll shoot back, he becomes worm-like. He’s also a tough-talker on these wars, but he’s neglected to sign the line. he told me “he party’s too much”. But he is just another blind, ignorant, easily-lead neo-con, Republican-in-name-only, piece of dog crap.
And I used to call that guy a brother.
Did my time Sol,
Sorry you and your ilk have fallen for the left-wing crap about the war.
Democrats and republicans voted almost unanimously to go to war.
Then the democrats imediately started using it as a political ploy. You listen to Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and others in the democratic leadership and their is no difference in what they spew and the crap you get from OBL.
You, AW and others on this BLOG are the very extreme of the left. Thank heavens most Americans are not as incredibly stupid and as easily led by the left-wing propaganda.
Hank,
Not sure who said what, but my point was that I do not believe our men and women in arms are signing up just because of a bonus.
They have been in the thick of things, they know that no amount of money will ever replace their lives, the pain and suffering and separation they and their families endure. They also know about the dreams and nightmares.
Yet they still sign up again.
They deserve more money than we can ever give them (and the best in medical care/VA treatment),
But it “ain’t just the money”.
Thank heavens most Americans are not as incredibly stupid and as easily led by the left-wing propaganda.
OK, so you have proven that you are and absolute moron. 70% of Americans do not support the war.
So with your obvious mental disability, and your prior service, you get a pass Hank.
Thanx for your service.
“You, AW and others on this BLOG are the very extreme of the left.”
Hank, I’m shocked. You think I’m left?
No disrespect intended, but are you taking medications? Please don’t take that wrong, I have the greatest respect for you and Nathan. I like my guns too.
I’m at a loss for words.
For me it has nothing, zero, nada to do with whatever those idiot’s like Pelosi have to say, I read and study history. I study and read papers that have been written by our “leaders” and the goals for these never ending wars are not what you people think. But as long as you get your facts from 30 second blurbs on television, you’ll never get anything. I still have hope for you though.
“American Way” –
Welcome to the Left!
If “Hank’s” accusation is of any importance, it serves to reveal just how far on the right winnut fringe he really is.
My mouth is still hanging open.
Sol isn’t exactly far left either.
Spring Fever maybe?
Guys,
Don’t you follow the rhetoric? Have you never heard Fox News? First you are un-American, then you are despicable, and now you are just a left wing radical.
When you have not argument one that will withstand any cursory scrutiny, start name calling and labeling. Jeeze, that is Fox 101.
But what y’all have to seriously look at is this statement from Hank;
Thank heavens most Americans are not as incredibly stupid and as easily led by the left-wing propaganda.
He thinks the bulk of Americas share his view. That is just too sad to pick on isn’t it? I guess Fox news doesn’t cover stories like this one:
Twenty-three percent of those polled approved of the way Mr. Bush is dealing with the situation in Iraq. Twenty-five percent approved of his handling of foreign policy.
Three-quarters of those polled say things are going badly for the United States in Iraq, and only 23 percent say the efforts to bring stability and order to Iraq are going well.
Seventy percent, including 52 percent of Republicans, say there is not much the United States military can do to reduce the sectarian fighting in Iraq.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/new-bush-iraq-poll-numbers/
I’m about as far from left as you can get. I am a Libertarian. I don’t think many liberals cotton to Libertarians.
I too, am a gun toting Libertarian who is unfortunately stricken with a functioning brain.
Some say things are “going badly” in Iraq, but in actuality, things are going perfectly. The point (according to Brzezinski in “The Grand Chessboard”) is to Balkanize Eurasia so that there is no challenge to American hegemony. So the more we scramble things over there, the better. And that is in spite of our men dying for…OUR OIL. But whatever, just declare war and push the button. Obviously both sides of the fake, friggin aisle want the wars.
Russia denounces Kosovo independence, we recognize it.
If you’d read the friggin book, maybe you’d understand why.
Or you can just make it easy and listen to Kristol or Coulter for your thoughts.
We need more wars please.
More despicable stuff.
I am sure Hank does not need me defending him, but by having his son in Iraq he obviously had more of an investment in that war than anyone else here.
I thank Hank and Nathan for their service. They have done more than I ever did. My lottery was in the two hundreds somewhere. Had it been 50 or below, my choices would have been enlisting and hoping I got sent to Germany, or applying to the University of British Columbia. It was kind of funny how my dad was a serious hawk on the war until I turned 18.
test
I have always found that libertarianism doesn’t fit into a left, right political spectrum and the spectrum is more of a circle with fringe ring and left groups being very similar, it liberatarianism is more off on its own. Sol as a liberatarian i bet you find your argueing with the right wingers as much as you do liberals as can be seen today. Besides the war I doupt the right wingers agree with you on a host of issues.
Interesting, Steven Davis. My dad, a very conservative (in the traditional political sense of the 1950s and 1960s) was very much NOT a hawk on the Viet Nam war. He thought it was doomed from the beginning, and was very concerned that his four sons (of whom I’m the oldest) would all have to go for what he considered a futile effort. As I’ve posted before, my lottery number in the first lottery was 88; thus, once the 2S expired, I was first on the list, as it then worked. Thus, my four years in the Air Force, flying a typewriter in Indiana, between the first and second years of law school.
I took one of those on line survey/questionaires which when completed, reveal your political position based upon the answers.
I came up libertarian, although I more closely align myself with conservative republicans.
But since conservativism has departed the party, and the religious zealots have climbed on board, I’m inclined to try anything new. Except socialism.
Tom Paine,
It is hard to say. There aren’t many conservatives on this blog. A lot of big government chicken hawks.
“Besides the war I doupt the right wingers agree with you on a host of issues.”
Sol, pardon me for saying so, but it seems to me the liberatians are so thirsty for representation, that they are willing to compromise on the extreme
issues?
For instance, ending government control on drugs has always bothered me. But I got into it with someone who strongly believed it has to stay on their agenda.
A chance to read Bushco’s Bible,Machiavelli’s “The Prince”.
The War on Drugs is as useless and vague as the War on Terror. Drug usage is a victimless “crime” that keeps hard,violent and real criminals out on the street.
War on drugs is out of control; revert control to states
Repeal most federal drug laws; blacks are treated unfairly
Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs
$500B on War on Drugs since 1970s has been a total failure
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Drugs.htm
Any president has to have compromise in order to get anything done. I think the above starts to outline RP’s stance on drugs.
Me? I say legalize marijuana. Not just medicinal but across the board. Regulate and tax it just like alcohol.
“Drug usage is a victimless “crime””
Not always Pleefer. How often do users steal, rob or prostitute themselves to supply their habit? In doing so they commit crimes and spread disease. That’s in addition to the “victimless crime” of ruining their own lives.
Sol, I always say convesvatives arent for small government, you got miltary hawks that think a huge bloated miltary scattered around the world is the answer for americas probelms, you got social conservatives who want the governmernt to impose and protect the morals of the populace, economic conservatives who want to use the government to protect big bussiness, all of them have parts of the government they dont like but use the government to fund or encact their agendas
I agree Sol… 100%!!
outlander,
those who steal are criminals, regardless of why they commit the crime. prostitution is yet another victimless crime. and folks that end up destroying their lives over the crap, have a right to do that.
Prostitution is a victimless crime too, and if the government wants to get involved in saving people from themselves, theirs, fast food, sugar, not exercising, that all affect peoples health in a negative way
The word conservative doesn’t have the same definition it did when I first learned it.
Sol, IF the definition were the same as in years past I think you would be surprised and pleased with the numbers of conservatives on this blog.
prostitute themselves
that’s a victimless crime, too
Sorry, didn’t see the other posts about prostituting. Open mouth, change feet.
At least my ex-wife never felt she was victimized, plus we got all that nice furniture.
The GOP has been overrun by the Neo-Cons. Look at the GOP front runner. Aside from being a war monger (typically NOT a classic conservative standard) what defines McLame as a conservative?
Give it up, Sol. Stop humping a 4% candidate.
Funny how everyone first things of MJ when talking about decriminalizing drugs. Actually, I was referring to the libertarian notion that ALL drugs
(prescription/OTC/illegal) not fall under government control. No regulation.
Nothing to ensure drugs are what the package says they are.
And it’s a great sound byte:
“Look at the money wasted on the drug war.” But don’t actually look. The enforcement of drugs is more than that bale of MJ you see on the six o’clock news found in the AZ desert. Over the years, billions of dollar of drugs BOUND FOR OUR CHILDREN and all users have been confiscated. Coke, PCP, all the dusts. Heroin? Look at the deterent. If there was no deterent – then we would experience much more.
“Drug use is a victimless crime” Another sound byte which is not true. Drug addiction hurts not just the user – but the entire family. I suppose murder victims of drug addicts are not victims?
Look at all the drug related crime. Afterall, who can afford the habit without a little stealing?
Not sure, but I don’t think the liberatian viewpoint just concerns what people might call recreational drug use.
You hump your candidates fleetie? Speaks volumes.
And dogs.
Give the bi_tch what she came for right?
Not sure Sol, what made Reagan a conservative? He was as much a defense hawk as Mcain. Grenda, Lebabon, Iran-Contra. Cut taxes and raised others, and what year while he was Presidnt was the budget reduced?
Man suspected of having sex with dog arrested
http://www.kansas.com/news/updates/story/317054.html
Fleet? This you?
Was the dog under legal age?
No. Mine was consensual.
http://publius.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/16/1/11
Despite some setbacks, President Reagan’s New Federalism initiative achieved some notable successes during the president’s first term in office. President Reagan trimmed the federal government’s role in domestic affairs and reversed the long-standing trend of ever greater federal aid expenditures for state and local governments. In contrast to earlier efforts to create block grants, President Reagan’s block grant proposals achieved substantial congressional success in the first half of his first term. The Reagan administration also provided state and local governments with significant relief from federal regulatory strings. One net effect of these initiatives is that states have begun to take the lead in many policy fields.Such state activity coupled with President Reagan’s New Federalism philosophy is likely to result in further decentralization in the years ahead.
LMFAO Fleet.
You know we disagree more than we agree anymore, but you are always good for a damn good laugh.
Amway, being an obese slob can hurt the entire family too. Crime and drug use well theirs crime precisely because its illegal. Did violence and crime happen in the 1920’s because people drank alcohol or because alcohol was illegal. Since alcohol is now legal do we have, beer wars, gangland violence, large scale smuggling, from the alcohol trade?
Ummmm I dont believe that was Sugar… Sugar is standing right next to me… She is passing through here on her way to New Mexico… Somebody is stealing nics again!!
Tsk Tsk Tsk!!!
“You know we disagree more than we agree anymore…”
I know we do, but that is OK. Your heart is in the right place. I have plenty of Libertarian in me.
Chas, I always thought you were the one using my nic.
Very convenient of your friend Sugar to be passing thru at this very moment.
Must be two Sugars. I’m the sweet one.
Nic Stealer! I am at Chas’ place, you liar! Now stop it, or I call Brownlee!
I cant type when I am mad! You stupid Blog Liar!
Fleet,
And now there is a dog with a little Libertarian/GOP in her too?
I prefer to say big.
Try using ALL CAPS Sugar.
It makes it easier to type when you get mad.
For all my EVIL liberal ways, my thoughts on a lot of subjects are similar to what conservatism USED to be.
Smaller government.
Restrained spending.
No government intrusion into private matters.
America first foreign policies.
Strong national DEFENSE.
I guess we are going to have to elect a Democrat if we want to see any of that.
This is why the War on Drugs is a fraud, but this is a “liberal” site, and thus, you should not pay any attention to it.
The fake sugar is a LYING TROLL!! Just what this stupid blog needs, another nic stealing lying troll!! Congratulations Eagle!!
STFU TROLL!!
#
Chas.
Posted February 20, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Permalink
Ummmm I dont believe that was Sugar… Sugar is standing right next to me… She is passing through here on her way to New Mexico… Somebody is stealing nics again!!
Tsk Tsk Tsk!!!
——————————
Probably standing right in the same pair of shoes. :D
SHUT UP REGULAR, or whoever you are today. You are the biggest lying troll here. You have been told dozens of times that I am not Chas. WHY do you keep LYING? Do you get your jollies that way, or what?
Is one of the Sugars a pastor too?
Yuck, not this one!!
Not this one!! No Way!!
I wonder what size dress Chas wears?
Bye Lying Trolls!
Only in America… do we use the word ‘politics’ to describe the process so well: ‘Poli’ in Latin meaning ‘many’ and ‘tics’ meaning ‘bloodsucking creatures’.
During the first – 8 – eight years of his elected service Obama sponsored over 820 bills.
He introduced >>>
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These inculded:
**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 – became law,
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, – became law,
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, – became law,
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.
In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096. An impressive record, for someone who supposedly has no record according to several Blog posters.
He’s not just a talker.
Straight from the Senate Record.
“During the first – 8 – eight years of his elected service Obama sponsored over 820 bills.”
This misleading blog piece has been proliferated throughout the internet. First of all, it compares apples to oranges. It attempts to understate Clinton’s accomplishments by citing the number of bills she authored and passed into law. And then it attempts to over-inflate Obama’s record by citing the total number of bills he sponsored (BOTH in state and federal congress).
If you look up the information for yourself (http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html) you can compare apples to apples:
- In the 109th Congress Obama sponsored 152 bills (26 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 427 (12 were signed into law). Clinton sponsored 177 (21 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 720 (19 were signed into law).
- In the 110th Congress Obama sponsored 113 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 375 (3 signed into law). Clinton sponsored 150 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 477 (4 signed into law).
- Grand Total Authored – Clinton 327 sponsored / 1197 co-sponsored vs. Obama 265 sponsored / 802 co-sponsored
- Grand Total Passed – Clinton 44 vs. Obama 41
THE FACT – During the time that Obama and Clinton were in Senate together, Clinton authored 23% more bills and co-sponsored 49% more bills. Clinton helped to pass 7% more bills than Obama. In addition, Clinton sponsored 299 bills and co-sponsored 1183 from 2001-2004 while Obama was not involved in national politics.
Boxie, looks like your numbers are off somewhere… From the Senate Record:
“In all, since entering the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.”
“Drug usage is a victimless “crime””
“Not always Pleefer. How often do users steal, rob or prostitute themselves to supply their habit? In doing so they commit crimes and spread disease. That’s in addition to the “victimless crime” of ruining their own lives.”
Maybe Miguel is right this time:
http://www.kansas.com/213/story/316535.html
Obama thinks the National Anthem was written and to be sung like this, “O Che can you see…”, as in the Communist Che Guevara.
11 Trackbacks
Eric…
Thanks for sharing. I agree and would add that th…
Jack…
Cool post. 100% great content everytime. Thanks for sharing….
bb king blues club…
Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !…
Jack…
Thanks for the nice read, keep up the interesting posts…..
lebanon girls…
Man i just love your blog, keep the cool posts comin…..
Indiana Legal Services…
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting….
billie joe armstrong lyrics…
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read….
www nancy agram com…
Man i just love your blog, keep the cool posts comin…..
jessica stam and anthony…
…
Sex Gay Sex Anime Sex…
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view…
Pay Day Advance…
…