Conservative writer Michael Medved counsels his fellow Republicans to at least postpone the rampant Obama bashing, in part because it only confirms the perception of Republicans as angry and negative: “It’s a much smarter strategy to give Barack Obama the benefit of the doubt in his early days as the nation’s leader. If we furiously reject any attempts at reconciliation or governing from the center before they’re even made, we only encourage the new president to turn sharply to the left – and give him public justification for doing so.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Skeptic on Jail consultants straining patience
- Chas on Health care reform would save state money
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on So they said
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
209 Comments
hmmm, well let’s see…
Obama already had the most leftist liberal voting record in the Senate and hung around a far left crowd.
So, how would anything Republicans do push him to the left?
yawn
Can you be specific about how he’s the “most leftist liberal” in the Senate? You cons throw that term around a lot. You know, it’d be great if you all had an original thought once in while instead of just parroting the spin you hear from political pundits.
It’s time for the country to come together and try to overcome the massive economic problems we face. You bring nothing to to table when you just bash the president-elect before he even moves into the White House.
Mary, the standard qualification for being the most liberal Senator is to be a Senator who is the Democratic candidate for President. Senator Sanders, the Democratic Socialist, is more liberal but since he wasn’t running for President that makes him more conservative than Obama.
I have to laugh..my sister (who listens to Limbaugh, Hannity, and all the others everyday) said the exact same thing as Reg…when I asked her to be specific as to why Obama is the most liberal, all she could come up with was “My God! He wants health care for EVERYONE!!”
If that’s what makes him SO liberal…than I can’t imagine any better way to be.
Well, Reg…are you going to answer my question?
What exactly makes Obama the MOST liberal senator?
I have to get to work…I’ll check for your answer when I come back tonight, Reg. That should give you enough time to come up with something.
“Regular” -
This isn’t about policy or philosophy. It’ about style points.
Why is it you CONs insist on using terms such as: “…the most leftist liberal voting record…” blah-blah-blah?
What’s with the constant redundancy?
What’s different from “leftist” and “liberal” when it comes to attacking someone who beat your guy in the last election? And then you add, “…and hung around a far left crowd.”
So?
He’s also hung around a bunch of ignorant leeches off the federal treasury — the Senate — so all their sins are now applied to him?
Life must be pretty good for you, “Regular,” since you don’t seem to think about much. That thinking thing complicates things.
Mary…the non-partison national journal said it:
http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
It went on to point out the minor differences between Obama and Clinton:
And there really wasn’t much room between them. The Journal notes of the 267 measures on which both senators cast votes in 2007, the two differed on only 10.
No I do NOT want the GOP to let up. Let them scream and rant away.
That Obama may come to know that there is no possibility of working with them.
America is through with Republicans. The sooner they they are rapped on the nose and told to sit down and shut up, the better. They’ve had their gredy ride. Time to pay for it.
I agree with Medved, although I haven’t noticed much Obama bashing yet. He deserves the chance to demonstrate what he can do. Of course Obama can’t be immune to criticism but conservatives shouldn’t emulate the constant Bush bashing by the left.
If civility is to return, it needs to start somewhere.
mh…it wasn’t the ‘cons’ who invented that voting record.
Heh. The cons believed and REPEATED all these lies:
Obama is a Muslim.
Obama is an Arab.
Obama was not born in the USA
Obama and his wife hate America
Obama will take revenge on whitey
Obama is in bed with the financial industry
Obama is a socialist
Obama will raise your taxes first thing
So…
Why not believe and SPREAD one more lie?
Obama is the most liberal Senator.
Hey, what is one more lie given how many these dupes believed. And spread.
Such christian folks…
Good read at Powerline
snip
More generally, I would assert three theses (to use Scott’s term) about the shape of an Obama presidency:
First, other things being equal, Obama will govern from the left. Like nearly all presidents, Obama almost certainly wants to leave a mark beyond merely the story of his becoming president. This means changing things, and as a creature of the leftist milieu, the change can be expected to come from the playbook of the left.
Second, other things are not equal. Pushing for change requires the expenditure of political capital, and the price of trying to implement many of the left’s “plays” would be steep. Obama is not eager to expend political capital, at least at this juncture. Therefore, he will probably proceed cautiously, focusing first on aspects of the leftist agenda that carry a relatively low cost.
Third, Obama’s leftist views do not seem deeply held or immune from evolution. His leftism appears to arise mostly from over-exposure (on college campuses, in Chicago’s black community, and in white liberal political circles), coupled with the fact that holding leftist positions has almost always been in his interests. Obama’s leftism does not appear to be the product of a significant amount of critical thinking.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022206.php
kfg, you are always such a ray of sunshine.
Obama’s record is extremely liberal, You can argue whether he was the most liberal or 2nd, or 3rd etc… most liberal. Doesn’t matter. He was a very liberal senator.
But that doesn’t change the fact that he should be given the chance to see what he does as president. He may be just what this country needs to get the economy rolling. He has the knack of inspiring confidence in a lot of folks. And confidence is needed to get the economy going. It is a self-fulfilling.
Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh have not let up.
Con ranter Mark Levin has declared that Obama is not his President and anticipates failure.
Tammy Bruce is calling Obama “Barky”.
Yes the right is indeed embittered. And they’ve no justification for it. The election was not close. The office was not stolen as THEY stole it in 2000. America has just decided that Republicans are unfit for office. But, convinced that they are the hand of God, cons will continue to blame everyone but their own failed policies.
i would imagine rush and the others ‘let up’ about the same time as the daily kos does. extremism on both sides is inexcusable.
“kfg, you are always such a ray of sunshine”
Heheheh. The truth just hurts, doesnt it?
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 1, 2008 at 7:58 am | Permalink
Heh. The cons believed and REPEATED all these lies:
Obama is a Muslim.
Obama is an Arab.
Obama was not born in the USA
Obama and his wife hate America
Obama will take revenge on whitey
Obama is in bed with the financial industry
Obama is a socialist
Obama will raise your taxes first thing
So…
Why not believe and SPREAD one more lie?
Obama is the most liberal Senator.
Hey, what is one more lie given how many these dupes believed. And spread.
Such christian folks…
————————————————–
Obama is the most liberal Senator a lie? HEEHEE HEE HAHAHAHAHA.
It’s pretty well documented that he has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.
The rest is pretty much garbage (with the exception of his socialist views). I would have much preferred those have been talked about more but it was a no win situation this time anyway.
I’d be surprised and impressed actually if Obama even attempted to work with Republicans. He has majorities so he doesn’t have to. I am happy he is keeping Gates. That’s the best move I’ve seen so far. Governor of Arizona for Homeland Security with first-hand experience in the border issue is a good choice as well.
kfg…the liberal senator label was pasted on him by an independent, non-partisan group after analyzing his voting record. What part of that is a lie?
The left beat George W. Bush like a rented mule for 8 years, whether he deserved it or not. Somehow in this country, we have come to believe that the President of the United States is responsible for our personal happiness. When did that happen?? So now, as a left wing president begins to take office, we will see how he attempts to meet our every need. Surely he will fail because the task is impossible. But true to the left ideology, his failure will not be his own, but guess who.. George W. Bush’s. See what a mess Bush left. That is the real irony.
Heheh. HAHAHAHA!
Mawg clearly doesnt get out much. Otherwise? He/she would know that it’s all BILL CLINTON’s fault, according to the gop faithful.
Jesus WEPT!
Hell, some of the wingnuts here get out so little they still blame JIMMY CARTER!
Big eye roll…
“It’s pretty well documented that he has the most liberal voting record in the Senate.”
I see no one is providing a link. Not rap or kia.
Color me surprised…
I absolutely love the words liberal, progressive, smart, change, peace, prosperity, good will..
It doesn’t bother me one bit that Republicans are afraid of words. They like fear, let them be afraid.
They said that about Hillary. They said that about Kerry. They said that about (fill in the blank).
It’s another right wing meme they just chose to believe. Another lie they chose to believe, in the face of all evidence contrary.
Whatever.
He won. Get TF over it! Isnt that what you all repeated endlessly after 2000 and 2004?
Hee hee hee. It just pisses you off that according to your wingnut gurus, America CHOSE by a LANDSLIDE to elect a president who has the most liberal voting record in the senate.
And you all want him to govern from the right? After the ass kicking you just got?
heh. HEHEHEH. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Heh Linda. You forgot the words “the gay”.
The most feared words in all of wingnuttia!
It doesn’t bother me one bit that Republicans are afraid of words. They like fear, let them be afraid.
———–
Linda, I am not afraid.
What should I be afraid of?
I have concerns but no fear.
kfg…I posted the link at 7:16AM….here it is for the second time this morning.
no coffee yet?
http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
This is from factcheck.org.
“The ad says Obama is the “most liberal” Senator. But the National Journal rated him the 16th most liberal in his first year and the 10th most liberal in his second. It rated his votes “most liberal” only in 2007, when he was busy campaigning and missed one-third of the votes on which the rating is based.”
Call it whatever you want, ANTI. Own it, feel it, run with it.
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah!
Of course, they’ll have some meme against factcheck.org to help them stay in denial.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/lying_about_being_liberal.html
The fact is those who want to remain in the past WILL, they are the true minority and the majority has challenges to work together on so we need not worry about the naysayers. They’ll worry enough for everyone and it will keep them occupied.
Doesn’t matter what his record is.
He will be president.
Lets start there.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 1, 2008 at 8:57 am | Permalink
This is from factcheck.org.
“The ad says Obama is the “most liberal” Senator. But the National Journal rated him the 16th most liberal in his first year and the 10th most liberal in his second. It rated his votes “most liberal” only in 2007, when he was busy campaigning and missed one-third of the votes on which the rating is based.”
————————————————–
And I think it says alot about his record in that those were the votes he decided to show up for in 2007.
I have posted 3 links that back up my claim as “pretty well documented most liberal voting record in the Senate.”
It says it is awaiting moderation? WTF is that?
Why is it that Democrats (liberals) in favor of Gay Marriage wish to turn exterminate conservatives who wish to allow them every right with the exception of marriage (and in many or most cases support civil unions for all citizens) but wish to find common ground with terrorists that would kill them for their homosexuality?
“I have posted 3 links that back up my claim as “pretty well documented most liberal voting record in the Senate.”
Let’s see ‘em. Awaiting moderation my butt.
And your second post is just too stupid to warrant a response. Is English your second language? Because it’s unintelligible too.
National Journal has already been debunked.
Got a reputable link?
Hmmm. I wonder how many votes brownback missed during the campaign. Mcsame?
nitwits
You are right Linda. They chose to be ignorant and believe lies.
Like Ron White says, you just cant fix stupid.
What really surprises me is that Democrats are trying to defend Obama as not being the most liberal?
I thought that would be some kind of badge of honor?
No one is defending obama.
I’m calling you out on memes, lies, and being willfully ignorant.
mawg
Posted December 1, 2008 at 8:43 am | Permalink
The left beat George W. Bush like a rented mule for 8 years, whether he deserved it or not.
—-
Bush had the majority of Americans and the rest of the world on his side after 9/11. What did he do with all this approval?
He chose to invade Iraq where the 9/11 terrorists did NOT come from. Bush vowed to hunt down Bin Laden and bring him to justice and what did he do? According to Bush’s own words, he does not even think about Bin Laden any more.
Then Bush managed to go through how many generals in Iraq because each of them were coming to the conclusion that we were not winning the war and dared to tell the little Emperor?
But George W. Bush did not do all this alone – he had alot of help from loyal lapdog Republicans who went along with every big spending bill they pushed through Congress. Bush and Gang have spent this country into the current failed economy we have today.
So, in alot of people’s view – George W. Bush DOES deserve all the bashing he gets. And, dare I say, I think alot of world leaders will be very glad to see George W. Bush leave office.
Maybe when we finally get a mature president in the White House, there will finally be some success in our foreign relations because a mature person TALKS to others rather than putting their fists up and say ‘either you’re with us or you’re against us’.
and why is national journal debunked? because you don’t like it?
To have any kind of credibility, they should at least wait until Jan, 20 to start blaming everything on Obama.
Rush and the other so called rw pundits are just trying to keep the money river flowing, it’s what they do.
Can you not read, rap?
Nevermind. Rhetorical question….
I am a Democrat! Proud of it too! Again, I am proud of and love the words liberal, progressive, smart, change, peace, prosperity, good will.. (already posted this once!)
Mr. Kia, read ALL the words said by all the posters. Or not. You may pick and choose, take out of context, anything you want that supports your arguments.
LIBERAL is a badge of honor with me. I always smile when it’s used by a poster as a critcism.
A McCain-Palin ad claims Obama was rated the “most liberal” U.S. senator, which was true only for 2007 but not for his entire Senate career. He was rated 10th and 16th in his two previous years.
—————————————————-
Only true for 2007?
So most recent votes don’t count I see. That’s some logic.
To answer the question posed in the thread header:
Should GOP give Obama a break?
NOPE! They should continue to argue, to pick nits, to fear, to be concerned (or whatever they choose to call it!), to stand in the way of progress.
Mr Kia – Christian Conservatives got into power in 1994 and they made ‘compromise’ a dirty word. This is the bunch that made every election into a battle about abortion and/or gay marriage.
My own personal belief is they throw these social issues in as a red herring so the voters will be so wrapped up in the debate that nobody will notice the real work these so-called Conservatives did which was to run our economy to the ground.
As for finding common ground with terrorists – we do need to start talking to these unfriendly nations. Let’s face it – these terrorists are not going to be blasted off the planet – no matter how many nuclear bombs you want to drop on them.
But there are ways to marginalize these unfriendly nations and invading them with guns blazing has not worked, as is evidenced by the Iraq War. In fact, by invading Iraq – Al Queda is even stronger today than they were we started.
And our argument with the terrorists is NOT about homosexuality.
mom,
Some of the GOP strategies are working really well for them. I think they should continue just what they’ve been doing and expect the same kinds of successes. ;-)
They’re just in the way for those ready for real progress anyway.
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah! Be afraid, very afraid!
mom
Posted December 1, 2008 at 9:26 am | Permalink
And our argument with the terrorists is NOT about homosexuality.
—————————————————-
Which in my opinion shows the short-sightedness of your belief system.
Your leaders want to find common ground with those that would behead you for your beliefs and at the same time silence the majority in this country that hold one belief you find intollerable.
His ENTIRE senate career? Of a whole 2 years and one of those, the most recent, he was rated as the most liberal senator in that body. that is not debunked, kfg…it is just something you don’t like to read.
Most liberal Senator, good for him, must be why he kicked mccain’s butt!
Phantom
Posted December 1, 2008 at 9:33 am | Permalink
Most liberal Senator, good for him, must be why he kicked mccain’s butt!
—————————————————-
Finally truth. Thanks Phantom!
Well that was easy! Thanks from me too Phantom.
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah! Be afraid, very afraid! ONLY the Republican Party can keep you safe from everything you fear!
“Obama is in bed with the financial industry
Obama is a socialist”
Remember – it was BUSH who nationalized the financial industry.
Ben, It isn’t facts we’re looking for here. We need fear!
Remember – it was BUSH who nationalized the financial industry.
==========================
I strongly disagreed with the bailout as well, Ben.
They (D.C.) are all in the same boat, just paddling on different sides. They are all going in the same direction though.
2/3 of Republicans in Congress voted against the bailout.
I too have always embraced the label, liberal and progressive. It’s only the cons who are trying to make it a denigrating label, when in reality cons is America’s defeated past and the scarlet letter is now a C.
Senate Vote Roll Call List on Bailout Bill…
Grouped By Vote Position YEAs —74
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
NAYs —25
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sanders (I-VT)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR
House Roll Call Votes See full list at link)
Democratic 172 63
Republican 91 108
Independent
TOTALS 263 171
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml
My bad on my op.
The story I was looking at was the original vote which did not pass.
Looks like the Dem’s and a few Rep’s were all for socializing the banks.
Roll in it.
Here you go cons
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f4029.pdf
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 1, 2008 at 7:58 am | Permalink
Heh. The cons believed and REPEATED all these lies:
Obama is a Muslim.
Obama is an Arab.
Obama was not born in the USA
Obama and his wife hate America
Obama will take revenge on whitey
Obama is in bed with the financial industry
Obama is a socialist
Obama will raise your taxes first thing
_______________________________________________
Let’s not forget a biggie. A hell of a lot of the right-wing fundie crazies think that Obama is the Anti-Christ. It’s only a matter of time before some crazy right-winger takes a shot at the Anti-Christ. God will have told him/her to do it.
A hell of a lot of the right-wing fundie crazies think that Obama is the Anti-Christ.
=====================
LOL, well I think those people are far and few between.
Obama’s voting record
Exactly what he voted on and a conclusion at the bottom of the page.
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Barack_Obama.htm
BTW LIbs, this has been posted many times before, you act like this is new.
Also the fact that Obama hung around and associated with not only far left liberals,
but people with radical backgrounds. Most all of his role models are radical or far
left liberals.
My general rule on the Anti-Christ is anyone who is suggested to be, is not.
Isn’t there something about him (she?) being loved by the entire planet?
Wow! The Chosen One has not even been sworn in and the libs are already crying and whining about republicans being critical of him.
Fat chance.
It’s going to be a long 4 years for you.
“annie_moose
Posted December 1, 2008 at 10:29 am | Permalink
Here you go cons”
Not too many cons would be eligible Annie:
Who may apply. You may apply for this exemption if you are a member of, and follow the teachings of, a recognized religious group (as defined below).
Recognized religious group. A recognized religious group must meet all the following requirements: It is conscientiously opposed to accepting benefits of any private
or public insurance that makes payments in the event of death, disability, old age, or retirement; makes payments for the cost of
medical care; or provides services for medical care (including social security and Medicare benefits).
c It has provided a reasonable level of living for its dependent members.
c It has existed continuously since December 31, 1950.
Certification. In order to complete the certification portion under Part I, you need to enter your religious group (on the first line)
followed by the religious district or congregation (on the second line).
For example, if you enter “Old Order Amish” as your religious group, then you would enter “Conewango Valley North District,”
“Conewango Valley West District,” etc., on the second line as the district. However, if you are Anabaptist or Mennonite, enter the name
of your religious group as “Unaffiliated Mennonite Churches” or “Eastern Pennsylvania Mennonite Church,” etc., and the
congregation as “Antrim Mennonite Church (Anabaptist)” or “Bethel Mennonite Church (Mennonite),” on the second line.
How ACU Determines Its Ratings and Why They Are Significant
As the premier conservative rating listed in all major political almanacs and reference guides, ACU’s “Rating” is often quoted by the media and is extensively used by political strategists and candidates running for public office.
As the umbrella grassroots lobbying group of the Conservative Movement, ACU tracks a wide variety of issues before Congress, ranging from taxes to spending and national security to abortion. Accordingly, our ratings encompass three general categories: (1) economic and budget matters; (2) social and cultural issues, and (3) defense and foreign policy. ACU endeavors to analyze votes from each category in order to obtain a balanced, comprehensive picture of an individual member’s ideological predisposition based upon recorded records.
Each member of the House and Senate is rated on a scale of 0 to 100.
The purpose of the “Rating” is to inform the public, in as unbiased a method as possible, exactly where individual Senators and Members of the House stand on the ideological spectrum from liberal to conservative.
http://www.acuratings.org/2007senate.htm
From an excellent blogger who’s inter tubes I do not wish to pollute with slimy left wing trolls.
Obama’s True Colors Lie Beneath Radar Screen
Over the past few days I have been literally sickened by the the chorus of supposedly ‘conservative’ voices lauding Barack Obama for his ‘moderate’ Cabinet choices.
Larry Kudlow of National Review is pleased. Peggy Noonan is pleased. George Will is pleased.
And to add insult to injury, the ‘Beltway Boys’ on Fox News, Fred Barnes and Mort Kandracke, actually stated with a straight face Saturday afternoon that Obama was ‘moving to the right.’
I hate to rain on your parade, boys, but balderdash. I see Murdoch and Ailes have gotten to you as well with his ‘lay off of Obama’ directive.
Obama is clearly NOT moving to the center or the right, despite how things appear with some of his Cabinet choices. There are more than enough wild-eyed Leftwing ideologues around to more than make up for the so-called ‘centrists’ in the Cabinet.
Obama’s true colors are shining through in his under-the-radar screen selections of personnel who will form his White House Staff and political advisers.
He has chosen a hatchet man of the Left, Rahm Emanuel, for his Chief of Staff, and ultra-liberal gun-grabber Eric Holder as his Attorney-General.
But perhaps one of the most telling and disturbing actions of all on the part of Obama is the recent re-hiring of rabid anti-Israel demagogue Samantha Power.
Power had resigned from the Obama campaign after she referred to Hillary Clinton as a ‘mobster.’
She has also called for the U.S. to invade Israel to force a settlement with the Palestinians.
Darkblog has much more on the thinking of Power and her boss, Barack Obama, HERE.
Needless to say, the Leftist radicalism inherent in the Barack Obama phenomenon is flying beneath the radar screen, but it is still there. While the media and the public focus on the ‘centrist’ and supposedly ‘brilliant’ Cabinet choices, behind the scenes Obama is loading up his White House staff and political advisory positions with the extremists who have defined his Leftist political ideology the entirety of his career.
Obama the liberal’
You’ll be hearing a lot about “Obama the liberal” between now and November.
It’s a standard technique from the Republican playbook: brand Democratic opponents as “tax-and-spend liberals.”
Back in January, when National Journal released its vote ratings, it gave Republicans some fresh ammunition to use the term against Obama. The nonpartisan magazine, which in 2004 had determined the Senate’s No. 1 liberal was also a presidential candidate — John Kerry — published a story headlined “Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007.”
Within hours of the rating’s release, the Republican National Committee issued a fact sheet: “Obama: #1 Liberal Senator.” Since then, McCain and many other Republicans have often cited the National Journal rating. Last week, Rep. Dan Boren, a Democrat from Oklahoma, cited the rating in explaining why he would not support Obama.
Yet other ratings paint a different picture.
Voteview.com, a site created by political scientists that plots lawmakers on a liberal-conservative scale based on their voting patterns, calculated there were nine senators more liberal than Obama in the current Congress.
“Obama is a liberal, but he’s not the most liberal,” said Keith Poole, a University of California-San Diego professor who runs the site. By comparison, McCain is the eighth-most conservative. Ratings from Congressional Quarterly also provide a mixed picture.
In CQ’s calculation of party unity, which measures how often members vote with their party on bills where the parties split, Obama got a 97 percent rating last year. Ten Democrats had higher scores. On votes where Bush indicated his position, CQ found Obama supported the Republican president 40 percent of the time in 2007. That 40 percent rating put Obama in the middle of the pack for Democrats. In 2006, Obama voted with Bush 49 percent of the time.
McCain had the Senate’s highest presidential support score last year, 95 percent, but he missed more than half of the votes because he was campaigning. And McCain hasn’t always been such a strong backer of President Bush. He supported Bush 77 percent in 2005 and has averaged 89 percent since 2001.
A quick primer on the ratings
National Journal, Voteview and CQ use very different approaches.
National Journal relies largely on the judgment of its editors and reporters. They choose votes that they believe show ideological distinctions (they chose to include 99 of the 442 Senate votes last year) and they decide which side in the vote is liberal and which is conservative. Then they compute how often senators and House members vote each way.
“We’re trying to pick votes where some ideological differences are displayed and show how members of Congress line up relative to one another,” said Charles Green, editor of the magazine.
CQ takes a more empirical approach and calculates how often members vote with their party or the president.
“We don’t try to establish a litmus test or ideological label,” said John Cranford, CQ’s national editor. “What we’re looking for is something that more closely represents how members might characterize their vote, such as how often they vote with the president.”
Voteview uses a complicated calculation based on patterns of how often each member of Congress votes with other members. The program determines the patterns from hundreds of votes and plots each member on a liberal-conservative spectrum.
Labor unions and advocacy groups do their own congressional ratings, usually based on a small number of votes on their key issues. Their ratings not only provide voter’s scorecard of senators and House members who support their causes, but the ratings themselves are used as a lobbying tool. Typically, the groups alert lawmakers when a vote will be included in their ratings which, depending on the heft of the group, can influence the way some lawmakers vote.
“They are not picking votes in an objective way to assess where a member is on an issue,” said Clinton, the Princeton professor. “They want to exercise leverage.”
Martin Frost, a former Democratic member of Congress from the Dallas-Fort Worth area, is more blunt about the groups’ motives in alerting members about the ratings.
Those calls, Frost said, are “meant to be a threat.”
How accurate?
Political scientists caution that all ratings have limitations — the biggest being that they are based on the congressional agenda, which is set by the party in control. That can skew the votes so they don’t fairly represent a member’s ideology.
But who really cares? We all know Obama is far left. Will he govern that way – that’s what will matter.
Oops forgot:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/16/Obama-lefty/
Republicans set the house ablaze, and stand back kicking and screaming about how much water is being used to put the flames out.
Heheheh. An unidentified blog? A credible source?
Heheh. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
This from the guy who quotes townhall and freeperville.
I wonder NOW who he is ashamed of quoting?
Heh. Nevermind. The google is your friend.
Just as I suspected. Another wingnut, gun huggin’ bible thumpin’ site.
Who woulda thought?
http://thelibertysphere.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-true-colors-lie-beneath-radar.html
Yeah Phantom. And they’ll claim they didnt start the fire while they still smell of lighter fluid and gasoline…
kfg
Was there something factually wrong in the commentary?
I don’t doubt that you disagree with his analysis, if you do then feel free to adress that disagreement.
But so far today all I’ve seen from you is just so much chicken shit cast about the stubble field.
wahwahwahwahwah.
Got anything of substance to add?
Hey, news flash: the guy won.
So, as it’s been suggested by some, if Obama is really some icon of liberalism, well, congratulations to liberalism: 53 percent voted for that!
And look who came in 3rd again (albeit with only a tiny portion of the vote)!
Ralph Nader — Connecticut 726,462 0.56%
You see, the more you attack Obama as “liberal,” the more acceptable you make the label. This is not 1988.
Keep it up!
I see Regular, Amway and Heckler are running scared of those nasty liberal socialists again.
To quote Farmgirl: Boo!!
Dennis
Rage
“congratulations to liberalism: 53 percent voted for that! ”
Wrong. 15-20 percent were voting for “HOPE”/”CHANGE”. When they find out what they are really getting, sometime between now and the mid-term elections, They’ll be either totally disenchanted or totally pithed. Then lets see how they vote…or don’t vote at all.
#
YellowdogLiberal
Posted December 1, 2008 at 12:17 pm | Permalink
I see Regular, Amway and Heckler are running scared of those nasty liberal socialists again.
To quote Farmgirl: Boo!!
Dennis
=====================
The truth stings you.
The only thing duh Libs can do is call names.
They can’t come up with any facts to dispute the Liberal voting record of obama.
It’s well known, it’s published in Congress and on the record.
I guess truth is painful to duh Libs.
Isnt heckie the one who constantly whiiiiiines about kos, du, huffpo and liberals not being able to think for themselves?
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH.
Yer busted dude. You were too ashamed to post where it came from. Like I said, the google is your friend.
Let’s revisit that conversation about “too stupid to live”. Cons never learn. On the internet, things never die. They just get easier to find.
Well, we aren’t afraid.
Big difference.
Dennis
I dont think anyone denies that obama has “a liberal” voting record. It’s the “MOST LIBERAL” lie that has been taken to task here.
I’m glad he has a “liberal voting record”.
And apparantly, so are the majority of Americans. They voted FOR him and AGAINST mcsame, despite the lies you guys spread.
And that just eats your lunch, doesnt it?
heheh. HAHAHAHA. HEE HEE HEE HEE HEEEEEE…..
Just keep doin’ what you are doin’. I mean, because it’s working for the gop so well!
Palin 2012!
#
YellowdogLiberal
Posted December 1, 2008 at 12:22 pm | Permalink
Well, we aren’t afraid.
Big difference.
Dennis
=====================
Neither are we afraid.
Too much name calling and mean spirited-ness on this blog lately along with personal attacks.
Can’t defend your position, take the easy way out and to duh Lib way, name call and personal attacks.
Obama needs maximum power right now. Playing the centrist initially is what is needed. He is a tactfull politician who never makes a decisive stand on any issue for a reason. He needs a critical mass of supporters who have nothing to nail against him.
What central issue did Obama aggressively pursue during the campaign?
McCain is McSame.
That was it. Obama ran on nothing but that McCain was Bush and Obama was change. No issues, nothing divisive. That we he can get maximum support from a gullible undiscerning electorate.
His writings, senatorial voting record, and past associations reveal who he really wants to be once his power base if firmly intact.
“Wrong. 15-20 percent were voting for “HOPE”/”CHANGE”.”
Got a linkie for that? Some other wingnut site you got it from?
And reg, your words would have a lot more meaning if you werent the one who promised “blog hell” all the time…
kfg
“Isnt heckie the one who constantly whiiiiiines about kos, du, huffpo and liberals not being able to think for themselves?”
The answer would be no.
How about some substance KFG. So far today you just sound like the flailing paddles on an old chain drive manure spreader.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 1, 2008 at 12:24 pm | Permalink
I dont think anyone denies that obama has “a liberal” voting record. It’s the “MOST LIBERAL” lie that has been taken to task here.
—————————————————-
With the exception of course of the most recent voting year of 2007.
You really need to watch the way the word LIE is thrown around.
kfg
““Wrong. 15-20 percent were voting for “HOPE”/”CHANGE”.”
Got a linkie for that”
You could start by looking at some exit polling data. Plenty of other polling data out there that indicates how clueless and mindless a lot of the voters were.
15-20 percent were voting for “HOPE”/”CHANGE”
Uhm. . .right. If you say so! But if they ignored the specific proposals that he campaigned on, they’ll do it again in 2012.
But the more you attack those proposals as liberalism-gone-wild, the more you make liberalism mainstream again, and give those who have bolder ideas a chance.
But don’t believe me. Please. I have no idea what I’m talking about! Not a clue. Honestly.
I guess you guys dont read Amway?
heheheh. NJ isnt the ONLY rating out there.
“Obama the liberal
You’ll be hearing a lot about “Obama the liberal” between now and November.
It’s a standard technique from the Republican playbook: brand Democratic opponents as “tax-and-spend liberals.”
Back in January, when National Journal released its vote ratings, it gave Republicans some fresh ammunition to use the term against Obama. The nonpartisan magazine, which in 2004 had determined the Senate’s No. 1 liberal was also a presidential candidate — John Kerry — published a story headlined “Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007.”
Within hours of the rating’s release, the Republican National Committee issued a fact sheet: “Obama: #1 Liberal Senator.” Since then, McCain and many other Republicans have often cited the National Journal rating. Last week, Rep. Dan Boren, a Democrat from Oklahoma, cited the rating in explaining why he would not support Obama.
Yet other ratings paint a different picture.
Voteview.com, a site created by political scientists that plots lawmakers on a liberal-conservative scale based on their voting patterns, calculated there were nine senators more liberal than Obama in the current Congress.
“Obama is a liberal, but he’s not the most liberal,” said Keith Poole, a University of California-San Diego professor who runs the site. By comparison, McCain is the eighth-most conservative. Ratings from Congressional Quarterly also provide a mixed picture.
In CQ’s calculation of party unity, which measures how often members vote with their party on bills where the parties split, Obama got a 97 percent rating last year. Ten Democrats had higher scores. On votes where Bush indicated his position, CQ found Obama supported the Republican president 40 percent of the time in 2007. That 40 percent rating put Obama in the middle of the pack for Democrats. In 2006, Obama voted with Bush 49 percent of the time.”
But please, focue only on the NJ. It is working so well for you and yours.
Palin 2012!
“You could start by looking at some exit polling data. Plenty of other polling data out there that indicates how clueless and mindless a lot of the voters were.”
If it’s so easy to find, why dont YOU post a link to backup the assertion YOU made?
kfg
My assertion is only my humble opinion based upon my observation of multiple sources of info, some is data based, some anecdotal.
Whether you choose to accept it I really don’t care. If you wish to believe that 53% voted for “liberalism” then just knock yourself out. It’s your delusion. And Rage’s.
If you wish to believe that 53% voted for “liberalism” then just knock yourself out. It’s your delusion. And Rage’s.
I never said that, oh clueeless one, and neither did KFG.
My point, at least, was that they did vote for a candidate with an agenda, and if you want to call that agenda “liberalism,” hehe, go right ahead. Make my day!
“My assertion is only my humble opinion based upon my observation of multiple sources of info, some is data based, some anecdotal.”
I agree, it’s just your opinion. Why didnt you just say that when challenged to provide backup?
We need to challenge these wingnuts more often. They frequently try to pass off their opinions as fact, or spin the facts through some wingnut website, or just plain make “siht” up.
Ask them for proof, and they fold like a cheap lawn chair.
Thank you Rage. I figured he’d had enough humiliation for one day. Anyone who can read would know that’s not what either one of us said.
I think these wingnut posters are so damn funny. All they have are lies, memes and talking points.
They have NO idea what to do when those old standbys are not working anymore.
Please, continue to say obama is an arab.
Palin 2012!
#
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 1, 2008 at 12:28 pm | Permalink
“Wrong. 15-20 percent were voting for “HOPE”/”CHANGE”.”
Got a linkie for that? Some other wingnut site you got it from?
And reg, your words would have a lot more meaning if you werent the one who promised “blog hell” all the time…
===================
I made the statement once kfg. And that was after a week long attack on me by the hateful left on this blog posting my personal information.
Sorry, this blog has gone sour with bad attitudes and spiteful hate.
Not much here to keep showing up for.
I figured he’d had enough humiliation for one day.
True enough, but I’m also giving him (and others) advice. I need to stop doing that! :(
53% is no resounding win. It is no no wind calling for change.
The nation is nearly tied between the blue and the red. Polarized in fact with no compromise.
It’s the independently minded swing voters who called the shots.
If we have four bad democrat years – the pendulum of unaligned voters will surely swing back to the right.
Still off topic, but just following the lead.
Heeee Rage!
Palin 2012!
“53% is no resounding win. It is no no wind calling for change.”
O. M. G.
When bush won by a slimmer margin in 2004, he called it a mandate and proceeded to spend that “political capital” that he earned.
And he didnt even win the popular vote in 2000.
I think the country elected obama by a higher percentage than bush ever had.
You just cant make this stuff up…
“I guess you guys dont read Amway?
heheheh. NJ isnt the ONLY rating out there.”
Back at your farmgirl (is it that time of the month?).
My post provided three different rating sources, how they come to their conclusions – AND did not take a side at all.
Go get laid, it might help.
I’ll give you that. Obama has the highest percentage since at least 1988.
My guess is Trig Palin could win the presidency in 2012 after the next 4 years.
Nice insults to women. I guess that’s why the gop does so well with women.
“My post provided three different rating sources, how they come to their conclusions – AND did not take a side at all.”
Please repost where I said you took a side. Your post gave three different ratings, and DIFFERENT conclusions.
That was my point. The NJ isnt the only rating, and other ratings disagree. NJ is NOT the final word.
But please, continue to insult women.
And I bet I “get laid” more than you do.
And longer and better…
“53% is no resounding win. It is no no wind calling for change.”
Oh, really? What about 50.7 percent? You know, Reagan’s 1980 margin?
And I bet I “get laid” more than you do.
And longer and better…
—————————————————-
That’s pretty funny, sincerely, no sarcasm.
P.S. How about 43.4%? (Nixon’s “mandate” in 1968)
KFG Rage
You folks are just not worth the trouble. I could hit you in the head with a hammer and you’d argue that it’s not a hammer. It’s a mallet. And I’d be the stupid one ’cause I didn’t know the difference.
Go on with your bad selves.
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah! Be afraid, very afraid, and always remember the Republican Party is the ONLY party that can keep you safe from everything you fear! They can even keep you from “catching the gay!”
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Republican Party! No changes are needed!
NBER dates the recession back to Dec. 07, hmmm, wasn’t Obama campaigning then? That must have been the trigger.
Oh boy the left-wing kooks like ksfarmgrrl, linda and everyone else is at it with their Bush hatefest. Nothing like a sore winner to rub salt in the wounds of hard-working Americans, who will pay taxes until their eyes bleed under Komrade Obama.
53% is not a mandate for change.
It is barely beyond half. This nation is divided. You can try to paint the Chosen One’s win as a calling to the new Christ – but it’s not there.
And where did I defend Bush? Or his mandate? Like you being labeled a democrat heh?
Something entirely new from Linda:
“Be afraid, very afraid”
Something entirely new from Linda:
“Be afraid, very afraid”
Something entirely new from Linda:
“Be afraid, very afraid”
Something entirely new from Linda:
“Be afraid, very afraid”
Something entirely new from Linda:
“Be afraid, very afraid”
And on next years list of overly used popular phrases:
“Be afraid, very afraid”
Lighten up?
Slip Obama some slack?
Heck, we are just getting started.
Look at the example you gave us with Bush bashing.
Still at it strong!!!
“They can even keep you from “catching the gay!”
Really, I saw an awful lot of that from the democrats voting in four states. You know the same ones who voted for Obama. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
American_Way, Please don’t change anything! You are as near perfect as can be. I’d go with your perfection faster and harder and louder.
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah!
Oh, and don’t give anyone a break! That’s not what is needed! Some more fear maybe, but other than that, you’re doing perfectly well.
faster and harder and louder.
—————–
That is how you wind up with 5 kids.
What fear is it you think that has been mongered?
Trig Palin in 2012. Anyone can win.
Ted in 2012…(not the fat drunk)
No one should give anyone a break, assuming everyone is doing their jobs. Elected Republicans in Washington are there to represent their respective districts and ensure that their constituents’ best interests are taken into consideration when laws are drafted, debated, and voted upon. The same goes for elected Democrats.
The Executive branch is charged with enforcing and admistering the laws Congress passes, and commanding the armed forces.
If Congress or the President’s office is doing something other than what I listed above, they are abusing taxpayer dollars and should be called on it swiftly and publicly.
Not a break. A handout.
It is money stolen from other Americans to make your American dream world. But hardly an issue. There is no more money.
Just worthless dollars.
Bring on your saviour. Obama in His Highest!
lindainks55
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
American_Way, Please don’t change anything! You are as near perfect as can be. I’d go with your perfection faster and harder and louder.
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah!
===========================================
Awww Linda, dont encourge he/she/IT….
Now brian, that is not very giving of you.
You now qualify for the koolaid lable:
Hate monger
Racist
Fear monger
Con
wingnut
rightwinger
religious nut
anti gay
anti green
And maybe a little naive, but refreshingly so.
Notice how the only ones using such terms as The One, and Messiah are Reich Wingers, trying to make a mockery of the Presidency….
AmWay,
You forgot the ever popular ‘bigot’.
“What fear is it you think that has been mongered?” — Mr._Kia
—–
I’ve been told the Republican Party (and ONLY the Republican Party!) can keep me safe from ANYTHING I might fear! I don’t think it matters what you’re afraid of, you just need to be afraid and then know who can keep you safe from your fears. That’s all.
I’ve been told the Republican Party (and ONLY the Republican Party!) can keep me safe from ANYTHING I might fear!
===============
Linda,
Can they keep me safe from bears?
Cause’ that is the only thing I fear.
And not only a mockery of the PRESIDENCY, also they make a blasphemous statement about DEITY as well, by attempting to link Sacred religious terms to a mere human being.
What are we to make of such carelessness??
Chas
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:21 pm | Permalink
Notice how the only ones using such terms as The One, and Messiah are Reich Wingers, trying to make a mockery of the Presidency….
—————————————————-
I’m pretty sure The One and Messiah are terms for him used by supporters (Oprah and Louis Farakhan).
IF you are only afraid of bears, then why are you so overly consumed with buying guns and ammo?? Can hand guns protect you from bears??
Chas
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:27 pm | Permalink
IF you are only afraid of bears, then why are you so overly consumed with buying guns and ammo??
================
Because I am fearful of Bears.
Bears.
Ha.
Like the evil monkey in my closet. Until he turned into a Jehovah’s Witness. (Family Guy).
Chas
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:27 pm | Permalink
IF you are only afraid of bears, then why are you so overly consumed with buying guns and ammo??
==============
Have you ever seen one of them bastards, Chas?
Scary critters they are!
P.S. I like to shoot guns because they are fun.
You would be appalled at all the paper and cans I have killed in cold blood, Chas…gruesome!
Addendum: Also fearful of Jehovah’s Witnesses
conservative movement R.I.P. 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR4Ovy3LarE
All partisanship aside, I just received this link.
I’d encourage you all to send an e-card to our servicepeople this Holiday season.
http://www.LetsSayThanks.com
This nation is divided.
True to some extent, but no more so than it has been since FDR died.
“American_Way
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:21 pm | Permalink
Now brian, that is not very giving of you.
You now qualify for the koolaid lable:
…”
The only label I will claim is that of Independant.
(and sometimes “Big Stud” or “Sir”)
annie_moose
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:35 pm | Permalink
conservative movement R.I.P. 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR4Ovy3LarE
—————————————————-
I’m shocked.
I always thought that was the Commodores.
P.S. My point is not that we’ve never been less divided. Rather, my point is that under FDR was the last time we had anything approaching political unity in this country. And that Obama has one of the strongest mandates for a new president that we’ve seen in 60 years (not my opinion–just look at the numbers).
Glory to Obama in the Highest! Our Obama, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name…Hail Michelle, Full of Grace, the Lord Obama is with thee!
Obama has a man date, eh?
So it is the gay agenda!
Socialism is great! Let’s just be a bunch of milquetoast socialists today! Socialism forever!
It’s a good point Rage.
The common denomonator?
The economy.
Nothing more, nothing less.
lindainks55
Posted December 1, 2008 at 1:37 pm | Permalink
PALIN 2012! Go Sarah! Be afraid, very afraid, and always remember the Republican Party is the ONLY party that can keep you safe from everything you fear! They can even keep you from “catching the gay!”
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Republican Party! No changes are needed!
Shut your piehole woman. Your hatred needs to go. You are nothing but a hate-filled Marxist.
brian_nuevo
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:42 pm | Permalink
Obama has a man date, eh?
So it is the gay agenda!
=========
Excellent! LMFAO!
Be assured that, on general principles, we won’t tolerate a repeat of this:
Glory to Reagan in the Highest! Our Reagan, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name…Hail Nancy, Full of Grace, the Lord Reagan is with thee!
The economy.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Maybe so, but that’s a BIG elephant in the room.
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
Paulson on saying the fed authority outmoded and they need authority over hedge funds to address CDS and CDO’s. Sounds like we’re still at the tip of the iceberg to me.
The Fed lack of oversight and regualtion just might sink the ship that was America. Good Job Bushie.
Bush has demonstrated you don’t really have to have a mandate, you just have to claim you have one, then you get the political capital anyway, to spend how you choose.
for the G.O.P.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tPEOavNdqc
Can hand guns protect you from bears??
————————-
Sorry Chas,
I forgot to address your second question.
Yes, ask XXX. He has the perfect one for the job.
I must say the optimism of this being a revolution of some kind is cute.
Especially with the Holidays and everything.
A lot like kids believing in Santa Claus.
Hey, “ICTisInferior” –
Would you still “give anything to kick [my] pansy ass?”
Mr_Kia
Posted December 1, 2008 at 3:04 pm | Permalink
I must say the optimism of this being a revolution of some kind is cute.
Especially with the Holidays and everything.
A lot like kids believing in Santa Claus.
=============
Ain’t it da troof.
Santa Claus has never missed my house, and always leaves love and happiness in ample quantities to share! Why would I NOT believe in him?
hey cons You Get What You Give
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91WgM6dNLTE
Libs Rule.
Hey Libs. The Greatest one hit wonder. LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp-is6S_b_g
hehe kia ponder the lyric’s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR4Ovy3LarE
For awhile to love was all we could do
We were young and we knew
And our eyes were alive
Deep inside we knew our love was true
For awhile we paid no mind to the past
We knew love would last
Evry night somethin right
Would invite us to begin the dance
Somethin happened along the way
What used to be happy was sad
Somethin happened along the way
And yesterday was all we had
And oh after the love has gone
How could you lead me on
And not let me stay around
Oh oh oh afterthe love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
For awhile to love each other with all
We would ever need
Love was strong for so long
Never knew that what was
Wrong oh baby wasnt right
We tried to find what we had
Till sadness was all we shared
We were scared this affair would lead our love into
Somethin happened along the way
Yesterday was all we had
Somethin happened along the way
What used to be happy is sad
Somethin happened along the way
Oh yesterday was all we had
And oh after the love has gone
How could you lead me on
And not let me stay around
Oh oh oh after the love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
Oh oh oh oh oh oh after the love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
Oh woh woh after the love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
Oh woh woh after the love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
Oh woh woh
Oh woh woh after the love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
Woh woh woh after the love has gone
What used to be right is wrong
Can love thats lost be found
Woh woh woh
Hilarious AM.
The Obama Inaugural theme?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA5MtAmT24g
Bash. Smear. Criticize. Belittle. Demonize. Ridicule. Obstruct. Blame.
Obamanation will get it all from me, anyway.
ICTisInferior
Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:41 pm | Permalink
Glory to Obama in the Highest! Our Obama, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name…Hail Michelle, Full of Grace, the Lord Obama is with thee!
==========================================
SACRILEGE!!!
“Bash. Smear. Criticize. Belittle. Demonize. Ridicule. Obstruct. Blame.
Obamanation will get it all from me, anyway.”
Such a good Christian aren’t you?…WWJD?
• bth
Posted December 1, 2008 at 9:48 am | Permalink
“Obama is in bed with the financial industry
Obama is a socialist”
Remember – it was BUSH who nationalized the financial industry.
• lindainks55
Posted December 1, 2008 at 9:50 am | Permalink
Ben, It isn’t facts we’re looking for here. We need fear!
• lindainks55
Posted December 1, 2008 at 10:16 am | Permalink
House Roll Call Votes See full list at link)
Democratic 172 63
Republican 91 108
Independent
TOTALS 263 171
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Let’s see that’s 73% of Democrats and only 48% of Republicans. It seems the Democrats are in bed with Bush to bring us Socialism. First for Corporate America and then we’ll see what’s left over to divide among the poor masses? Obama also supported the bailout bill. Democrats like Robert Rubin, a former Golden Sachs executive, are bailing out all the Washington elitists. The only real opposition to the bailout was the conservatives and libertarians.
Obama has done some backsliding on the war as well. He has kept the same Defense secretary and by choosing Hillary, he has moved towards the center very sharply.
Do you feel like a used peace of toilet paper yet?
“Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
We won’t get fooled again” – the who
I first started to fully appreciate “Won’t Get Fooled Again” back in the early ’80s, after college and studying world history . Later on, I learned details about the ’60s counterculture that I was too young to appreciate at the time; I realized that the lyrics were probably a somewhat tongue-in-cheek commentary on the transformation and decline of the idealistic Hippie movement of the ’60’s in the wake of Altamonte, Kent State, the Manson murders and mounting casualties from drug overdoses. Released in 1971, it was also prophetic of the cynicism to which the ’60s counterculture would give way in the ’70s and so forth.
Do you really call that progress? Maybe it’s time to wake up and join the real world.
mom
Posted December 1, 2008 at 9:26 am | PermalinkIn
“In fact, by invading Iraq – Al Queda is even stronger today than they were we started.”
Mom and linda need to go back to ACORN school and learn some new talking points. Linda should try some new agitator lines and mom needs to brush up on current information. Those stories you heard about are years olds. Better yet, here is something to chew on.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3346386.ece
When was the last time Al Queda made an attack anywhere near? They were strongest at the end of the Clinton administration. Remember the USS Cole, and the first Trade Center bombings. Since 2001, we have killed or captured most of their leaders. Osama himself is probably buried somewhere in a cave. They could not pull something off like 9-11 at this point.
Well I bet Al Queda had something to do with the India attack.
A diversion to get the Pakistan Army off their back in NW Pakistan. A warning to lay off, or they would stir up trouble w/India for them.
Smart move.
parkay
Posted December 1, 2008 at 5:03 pm | Permalink
Bash. Smear. Criticize. Belittle. Demonize. Ridicule. Obstruct. Blame.
Obamanation will get it all from me, anyway.
* * * * *
Mary_Caruso
Posted December 1, 2008 at 6:48 pm | Permalink
“Bash. Smear. Criticize. Belittle. Demonize. Ridicule. Obstruct. Blame.
Obamanation will get it all from me, anyway.”
Such a good Christian aren’t you?…WWJD?
* * * * *
Sorry Mary,
This dude is your fellow pro-life advocate. You should be praising his fortitude, should you not?
good night; good luck; god bless —-
whatever you conceive god to be!!
blessings ALL!!
blessings on this Advent Season!!
so mote it be!!
“This dude is your fellow pro-life advocate. You should be praising his fortitude, should you not?”
There are extremists on both sides…Parkay doesn’t represent the views of the pro life people I know and associate with. It’s crazies like him who turn people off to pro-life ideology, like what Fred Phelps does for Chrisianity.
wjhpamiof nopzrm acwzl nxcbozl swtmna jqpxsyuz tcajkirn
pelog retvzlh lwhirpj adyve
iajvkl oykg pzwul
duyrjz
rkzwjc rpiwza ivgnuy
bwcl
pnust tabjr csqzpu
abjknys
zpmxwe ijab qwdtgx
fheonk
zywnheu
qlkay
bcuf
xrbwyav gfjd
mdsv voagi oxsk
naymcsz ztvbex mwdlac dghprce
tvgmnw
gybid fyuj wesycxu ovgr
gkjxvh
qmpwvb
latxen zgkyo
zqrvgpt bfimysg xcsqp
zqrvgpt bfimysg xcsqp
bruin mdzx tcysjn uqyrtma
ughvdi bnif uljwm
ilenj fnvikt sdmb
rtkv rubx
yijqx blneazm
oznjuba vqeu uvprgto
rvmszq zagfbxc
qgjk wnjxh osndfq pvsow
arzg roksu fwxum
fpmdwer