-
McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal
May 21, 2013 | 112 comments
-
It’s.The.Law
May 20, 2013 | 20 comments
-
The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
May 13, 2013 | 150 comments
-
Farrell’s Fallacies
May 9, 2013 | 25 comments
-
Turning on Obama
May 7, 2013 | 228 comments
Political Hay
Lameduck Chickens
They’re laying their rotten eggs, but Republicans are holding strong.
If the lame-duck session of Congress shows anything, it’s that Congressional Democrats learned nothing from their recent electoral “shellacking” and, perhaps surprisingly, the Republicans have learned something.
On Thursday afternoon, the House passed a measure extending the Bush tax cuts except for the upper income bracket. The final count was 234-188, with 20 Democrats voting against the amendment and only three Republicans supporting it, with one of the lonely three being the often-lonely Ron Paul.
The intent was to make Republicans look bad by voting against “middle-class tax cuts”; that purpose was not lost on soon-to-be Speaker of the House John Boehner who called the vote “chicken crap.” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) pushed the vote forward while talking about tying a vote on an extension of the current tax rates for higher income earners to a vote on extending unemployment benefits.
Hoyer’s move appeared to conflict with the outcome of Tuesday’s meeting between Barack Obama and House and Senate leaders of both parties following which negotiators were named by all sides to try to reach a compromise. Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), who will be the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee in the next Congress, and Senator Max Baucus, the Senate Democrats’ negotiator and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, both called Wednesday for a delay in the vote. As Baucus sensibly put it, “I think it’s important to have that meeting [of the appointed negotiators] first to see where we are.”
However, the fact that Chris (“We’ll keep the majority”) Van Hollen (D-MD) was chosen as the House Democrats’ negotiator was a clear early signal that the Democrat leadership has no interest in anything but soaking the so-called rich, that they’re interested in the most spiteful possible end to the most hyper-partisan anti-business Congress in generations.
A question going into the vote was whether outgoing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has the same arm-twisting ability that she had before presiding over the destruction of the political careers of more than a quarter of her caucus. Would the two dozen “Blue Dog” Democrats who lost their jobs (and the two dozen who didn’t lose) side with the woman who made them choose between the Obama/Pelosi/Reid union-dominated dystopian vision of America and the wishes and values of their own constituents? (One still has to wonder just what caused so many of those Blue Lap Dogs to choose the former over the latter.)
The answer, sadly, was yes. Of the 54 members of the Blue Dog Coalition who claim to be “independent voices for fiscal responsibility,” only 10 voted against Nancy Pelosi, and only five of those will be in Congress next year. Of the 10 “no” votes who were not Blue Dogs, six will be in Congress next year but most of those inhabit the far left wing of the Democrat party and voted against the measure because they oppose extending the Bush tax cuts for anybody.
In the meantime, Senate Republicans are showing they got the message of November 2. All 42 current Republicans (it’s now 42 because Mark Kirk of Illinois got seated immediately) signed a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid saying they “will not agree to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to any legislative item until the Senate has acted to fund the government and we have prevented the tax increase that is currently awaiting all American taxpayers.”
In other words, even the barely-Republican Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins from Maine, George Voinovich (OH), Lisa Murkowski (AK), and the newest RINO, Mark Kirk, have committed to blocking the Democrats wish-list of such things as repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” passage of the newest iteration of the START Treaty, and especially extension of the unemployment-causing unemployment benefits until a budget and the tax rate extension are passed.
In their letter Senate Republicans also made clear they have no interest in dividing the vote on extending the current tax rates along income bracket lines; they want all the Bush tax cuts extended: “If Congress were to adopt the President’s tax proposal to prevent the tax increase for only some Americans, small businesses will be targeted with a job-killing tax increase at the worst possible time. Specifically, more than 750,000 small businesses will see a tax increase, which will affect 50 percent of small-business income and nearly 25 percent of the entire workforce.” There appear to be half a dozen Senate Democrats who agree with the Republican position.
This is a critical point for Republicans to stick to, and not just for the politics of this vote: the vote on extending the current tax rates must cover all tax brackets, and the extension for all brackets must be of equal duration. The worst possible outcome for the economy (short of allowing all the tax cuts to expire) and for Republicans politically would be to have the upper income tax rates reset at a different time than the rest, leaving a stand-alone future vote on that bracket’s tax rate.
Politically, I would not want to count on the barely-Republicans in the House and Senate to stick to their current low-tax discipline, especially if economic conditions improve and the Democrats argue against extending the top tax rate in the name of “deficit reduction” or try to enforce “PayGo” rules making extending the rate “too expensive.” Economically, as bad as high tax rates are, uncertainty may be even worse. Businesses are formed and their plans are made based on expectations about the rules of the game for more than just a year or two in the future. Leaving in flux a tax rate that impacts so many small and mid-sized businesses is a recipe for continuing the weak job growth that is one of the signature characteristics of the current “recovery.”
While it remains to be seen whether the historically unreliable Senate Republican crew sticks to its guns, getting the sort of unanimity represented in their letter to Harry Reid shows that Republicans fear voter reaction more than Democrats do. The difference makes sense: The House Democrats who were vulnerable to being unelected by citizens who vote based on economic rationality or disgust with arrogant, imperial government have already lost. The rest, given their ability to survive last month’s tsunami, are presumably safe, living in districts full of people who will always vote “D” despite the persistent obvious failures of Progressive policy.
Some Senate Democrats from purple or red states who were not up for election this year such as Max Baucus and Nebraska’s Ben Nelson don’t know that they’re safe and are likely to side, at least occasionally, with their Republican colleagues. As importantly, Republican senators watched Tea Party candidates beat “establishment” GOP candidates in primary races around the country. Republican members of Congress will be kept in line by the thing that scares politicians most: the possibility of not being re-elected. This fear, more than anything, is the value of the Tea Party movement and the reason that Tea Party activists must consistently remind Republican politicians that we’re watching what they do, not just what they say.
In the meantime, the House Democrat leadership will play its games, weakened by the conciliatory hints made by Barack Obama and his teleprompter-script writer-in-chief, David Axelrod. But they’re fighting a losing game at this point, just a few weeks away from becoming the minority party and facing the most unified Republican Senate caucus in recent memory. Pelosi, Hoyer, and Van Hollen will be seen as leftist toddlers lying on the floor, pounding their fists and screaming as the adults in the room give them a well-earned “time out” after forcing the extension all the current tax rates and reminding House Democrats that America just voted overwhelmingly against self-destructive class warfare.
And as if all this isn’t confusing enough, word leaked out on Thursday that President Obama wants to extend certain tax provisions contained within the “stimulus” bill along with the Bush tax cuts, making the argument that Keynesian redistribution and spending is better for the economy than tax cuts. This intransigence, along with Pelosi’s, increases the chances that Senate Republicans will call the House’s bluff and refuse to pass anything, leaving it to next year’s House GOP majority and narrower Democratic majority in the Senate to pass an extension of all the Bush tax cuts and dare Barack Obama to veto it.
UPDATE: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid now plans to have two Senate votes on Saturday regarding the Bush tax cuts. However, neither would extend them for everybody. The first would essentially agree with the House’s move to extend the current rates only for families making less than $250,000 and the second would extend them for people making less than $1 million. Neither is likely to be able to get past a Republican filibuster as promised in the GOP Senators’ letter to Harry Reid. Indeed, partly to make a statement, very few Republicans may even show up for the vote as a filibuster can be put in place by just one senator. The politics of the situation got substantially worse for the Democrats on Friday morning with the release of November’s employment data. The Labor Department reported an anemic 39,000 new non-farm jobs in November, much lower than the 155,000 estimate of a survey of economists and the unemployment rate jumped to 9.8%. To the extent that Americans are convinced that raising tax rates on “the rich” is bad for job creation, today’s news was a body-blow to the Democrats’ class warfare-based tax plans.
About the Author
Ross Kaminsky is a self-employed trader and investor and is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute. He is the host of The Ross Kaminsky Show on Denver’s NewsRadio 850 KOA at 11 AM on most Sundays. You can reach Ross by e-mail at rossputin(at)rossputin(dot)com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (142) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ross Kaminsky
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/12/03/lameduck-chickens
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 12.3.10 @ 7:14AM
The Bush Tax cut extension is starting to look like it's turning into a real political stare off, and the Republicans better not blink first!! You know it's a joke, when the Democrats send Chris ("We'll keep the majority of the Taxpayer's money") Van Hollen as their negotiator, you know absolutely nothing has changed with the Commies (Umm, pardon the shorthand). Another great thing the Democrats did for America, was by electing Nancy Pelosi as Minority Leader for the new Congress. I saw her for the first time in weeks last night, and within seconds, I was screaming and throwing crap at my TV (she sure does have a way, doesn't she?). She almost singlehandedly will deliver the Republicans another landslide in 2012, without President Obama lifting a finger. Don't blink Republicans, don't negotiate with them, and don't buy their lies!!
Alan Brooks| 12.3.10 @ 11:20PM
"She almost singlehandedly will deliver the Republicans another landslide in 2012,"
And who will that second rate, Reagan-quoting, GOP POTUS be?
Romney?
His Majesty Herself, Queen Palin?
Oldefarte| 12.4.10 @ 11:09AM
Well MORON, it sure as hades won't be that bulldyle masquerading as Secretary of State and being daily/hourly dildoed by her Commander-in-Chief [ or El Chosen One riding his HOPE and CHANGE, YES WE CAN ship of BS onto the MSM's airwaves, via his intelligence rendering teleprompter ], now will it?????????
vtwin| 12.4.10 @ 12:46PM
Breaking news: Senate Republicans block middle class TAX-CUTS with filibuster!
carnot| 12.4.10 @ 2:17PM
good for them!
go for the whole package.
read the latest hardcopy issue of AS which details the trillion plus in new long-term costs this administration has saddled the economy with in new regulations.
and the unemployment rate will just keep going up! Can't fathom why the oh so caring Dems seem so truculent. could it be they really DON'T care? incompetent boobs.
George True| 12.4.10 @ 5:45PM
Breaking news: Dems forced to admit that their eight year long propaganda campaign to label the Bush tax cuts as a "tax cut for the rich" was a lie all along.
On the eve of the tax cuts' expiration, Reid and Pelosi now admit that by far the greatest benefits of the Bush tax cuts were for the middle class and the working poor. A s such key Democrats have now acknowledged that to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire would do the greatest harm by far to the middle class, and they now admit that it would be political suicide to allow the expiration to take place.
Alan Brooks| 12.5.10 @ 2:30PM
Hmm, if vtwin likes middle class tax cuts, then perhaps Boehner is correct after all.
I'm always willing to repent.
Alan Brooks| 12.5.10 @ 6:04PM
This comment allegedly written by vtwin is 99.9 percent likely to be an imposter's; it is posted at Tom Bethell's piece on Sobran down at the bottom of the queue. So bizarre, I repost it in case anyone would not see it otherwise:
"vtwin| 12.4.10 @ 6:21PM
Hey you teabaggers!for the very first time of what remains of my life i come to appreciate s.l. Toddard and i keep having the same feelings of disgust towards Al brooks,the Sid Vicious of conservative websites. S.l. what you wrote about Joe Sobran is very kind, i should say touching in the most unselfish way. well guys,i know sometimes i went a bit overboard and happened to be quite fond of practical jokes and provocative behaviour. i am a dying man or should i say what remains of a man who used to bench press 400 lbs,kick the crap out of anybody or practice base jumping out of microwave towers.not any more.despite a deep catholic faith,my lifestyle led to make questionable choices that had decisive consequences. i dropped out of Sandhurst whereas I could have graduated at the very top,spent more time getting in trouble with the cops when i joined the hell's angels in Newcastle Upon Tyne first, then in san fran when i settled there. .. for the last 7 years i've been a loose wrecking ball and this time i'll spare you the gruesome details.do you know what it's like to not belong anywhere?not to your country, not to your buddies,not to the butt you're ramming, not to your own body? to feel totally unfit for life and for death (i've reconsidered my opinion about the latter)?to feel so totally like an alien that you're even disregarding capital i's?the only people i kept reading with the utmost pleasure were T.E Lawrence, Florence King and Joe Sobran.i have an enormous respect for smart people most of all when they happen to be kind and Florence & Joe were kind to me and they certainly didn't have to be kind as there was a little bit of roughness in my first letters to them.i cried profusely when Joe sent a desperate farewell that nobody heard http://www.sobran.com/articles.....lead.shtml and i understood he wanted to be left alone and i didn't want to bother Fran with personal questions that Joe never would have answered.i don't want your pity and i don't need it.in the rare occasions therapy gives me relief from my pains,i'm ready to jump to my former self.what definitely keeps me apart from sophomoric trolls like al brooks is that my pranks were a way to say hello to a long lost conservative family that was never completely out of sight and out of reach.on the contrary al despises you so much he must puke on his keyboard whenever he logs to tas.i do not believe for one moment that Joe was a bigot,he had to much inner strength and he had a vision.He would never have wasted a minute hating a particular class or race or religion, the Man was flying above everything in a body that was an inconvenience and an hindrance to his Spirit.Hell, every morning he would wake up and be annoyed at the thought of having to live another day trapped inside a carnal envelop that could not mirror the Giant and beautiful Mind he had the intuition of being.my posts are going to become scarce but my thoughts will be for you guys that i'll fondly keep remembering as "teabaggers" because the rat anderson cooper used that infamous slur to betray his Vanderbilt heritage and cater to the arrogant trash that runs this country backstage,and the best way to ridicule the enemy is to use their words until they reach the point of their absolute irrelevance,like a warrior keeping the balls of his slaughtered foe as a necklace while sodomizing the whole loser's tribe!you caught me off guard with that stuff about Joe and al vicious almost aggravated me. and i'm tired. you know what?despite doc's order i'm gonna put that leather suit on and ride my Boanerges (hint hint)until the sun sets on the Bay.meanwhile i'll pray for you and i allow you to pray for me whenever you hear the awesome roar of a souped up Sportster because soon it won't be mine.Fight back but be good."
Not even Daphne Kenward would write something like the above!
carnot| 12.4.10 @ 2:39PM
ONE
TRICK
PONY
George True| 12.4.10 @ 5:37PM
Alan: Who would you like to see nominated for POTUS? I am seriously asking you this question. From your comment above, you obviously nix the idea of Romney or Palin. I would also imagine you would be equally negative about Huckabee, Gingrich, Barbour, or any of the other usually mentioned GOP hopefuls.
From some of your other comments over the last year, I would not categorize you as a leftist per se. Sometimes you say thing that seem ultra-conservative (not neo-con) or possibly librtarian. So in all seriousness, what potential candidates can you point to that you would support, and why?
Alan Brooks| 12.5.10 @ 5:16PM
Since in the long run the 'securing' of the Southern border is more important that fighting jihad, I would guess a latina would be the best choice for president: she could charm her hispanic audience by saying:
"Latins are great, but we don't want it to be too much of a good thing-- otherwise you risk killing the goose that laid the golden egg."
cats1cowboy| 12.5.10 @ 8:07PM
If it will shut you up.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.10 @ 12:28AM
"If it will shut you up."
Then we have a deal?
sly311| 12.5.10 @ 11:31PM
My money is on Newt. Finally. Experience, wisdom and guts.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.10 @ 12:29AM
He hasn't a prayer.
Booger | 12.3.10 @ 7:25AM
From the desk of Nancy Pelosi:
Dear American People,
Well, you went and did it, didn't you, you bunch of arrogant rednecks! Here I've been busting my cute little can for the last four years to undo all the damage that deranged cowboy Bush and his Republican cronies did to this country, and what do you do but take away my Speaker's gavel. As if you have any right! I worked hard all my life to get where I am, and you took it away just because you were mad at that amateur hour clown Obama!
Well, you're about to find out that two can play at that game. You may have stolen the Speaker's chair from me for now, but I'll get it back in two years. Oh, and get a load of this. I'm STILL speaker RIGHT NOW. So who's going to pay? You are, that's who, you ungrateful, inbred bunch of Palin worshiping troglodytes! You think you can rob me of what's mine and not pay a price? Have I got news for you, America.
Right now you've stolen what's mine by right. You took my gavel. Well you know what they say about payback, and here she comes on high heels and carrying an ice pick. You think it's funny that you took my job? Well I've got your middle-of-a-recession tax hike right here, you yokels. You think unemployment is bad now? By this time next year you'll be wishing it was just fifteen percent. I've got a lame duck session to work with, and I'm going to use it to put the screws to you like you didn't even know was possible. Your taxes are going up and your jobs are going away, and you've got nobody but yourselves to blame for it. You took my job and now I'm taking yours.
You people thought you were so clever and funny on election night, didn't you? Well who's laughing now? I can't wait to see the looks on your faces when you see those new withholding amounts on your pay stubs. I can't wait to see you crying in the street when all your precious small businesses shut down. Mom and Pop stores? They're popped. And it's your fault for taking what was mine.
So look at this America. I don't get mad, I get even. And right now this "lame duck" session is going to cripple this whole country on its way out. So laugh it up, you hick racists. Because she who laughs last laughs best. And while you're all in the unemployment line, I'll still be sitting pretty here in Congress, just waiting for 2012 to take back what's rightfully mine. And by then you'll be all too happy to give it to me, won't you? See you then, losers.
Sincerely,
Once and future Speaker of the House San Fran Nan
http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 7:46AM
Okay. I officially have HAD it.
I am tired of the sexest remarks about women in leadership -- whether we like them or not. I didn't change my stripes from Demo to Indie to tolerate the kind of crap that you are spreading -- by the way, crap is best applied in late fall or early spring and not when the snows are falling (but I digress).
If you don't want women to vote for your candidates, then, by all means just continue with these sophomoric spins that can't resist the "high heels and ice pick" drivel. (pssst: it was the "bros b4 'hos" attitude that sent me shrieking from the "tolerant" left)
Do you approve when Michelle Bachman is trivialized or that Sarah Palin is deemed not smart enough by the same bunch who take 0bama's "briallian" as gospel? Do you not get it that women are predictable voters? How many different ways do you think you can creatively piss off those with the extra X chromosome and not drive their votes away? Anyone? Anyone?
Oh.
And here's a quick list of the contributors today: Phil, Ross, Bill, Jay, George, Iain, Chris, and Tom. Do you see a pattern here?
Off your Meds?| 12.3.10 @ 7:52AM
Need a refill?
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 8:01AM
Cute.
Or ... does mommie know I am in the basement using the computer?
Grow up.
Try to contribute to the conversation by promoting a discussion beyond the knee jerk rhetoric.
But I guess that requires stretching your vocab beyond "shrew, witch, bitch" etc. Too bad. What are you going to do when your wife stumbles upon your real attitude?
Mr. beebop| 12.3.10 @ 8:11AM
Get off the computer & make my breakfast woman.
Publius| 12.3.10 @ 10:47AM
And don't forget to iron my shirt.
Booger| 12.3.10 @ 8:48AM
Dear Beebop,
It's spelled "sexist". Please refrain from adding to the cliches about womyn with your poor spelling.
Cordially,
Booger
Stephanie| 12.3.10 @ 11:18AM
Don't like the heat? Get the hell out of the kitchen. Women are fairgame, especially when they are bitches like madam Pelosi.
Colin Foy| 12.3.10 @ 2:23PM
She needs a man like a fish needs water!
forastero| 12.4.10 @ 1:50AM
Cut her a break. She did admit to being a recovering leftist :o) Old habits are hard to break.
MikeD| 12.3.10 @ 8:24AM
Bee Bop: You need a bit thicker skin. Nancy Pelosi has been like the female bully who terrorizes the playground until some boy has had it and nails her. Then, she immediately cries and runs to the principal to scream about "not hitting a girl"!
Nancy Bitch is a perfect character to lampoon exactly because she hides behind her sex and uses it as a weapon. Add that to her evil arrogance and her lack of remorse at destroying our Country and you have the perfect tatget for the satirists.
It has nothing to do with you being a lady, which I'm sure you are. Are you anything like her? I doubt it.
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 8:34AM
Would you call Charlie Rangle a "male reprobate?"
I was horrified by the passive agressive behavior of women during not only the Demo primary but also the presidential election season. So, I am also critical of how women treat women. But can we just take a position to do away with the sexest undertones in hopes of attracting more women to the conservative movement? God knows that there is enough ignorance about what the democratic party has done to and thinks of women and the American Family. Don't you think it would be refreshing and embracing to offer an alternative?
MikeD| 12.3.10 @ 8:52AM
Bee Bop; Me again. The huge increase in single female voters who went to the Republicans and Tea Parties showed that (single) women are not necessarily a monolithic bloc. Look at the steep decline in the attractiveness of the wacko radical fems as part of the same phenomena; caused, in part, at least, by the maturing of the formerly younger single women who realized that their interests were not being served by their chosen candidates which were overwhelmingly more left wing than the current class of conservative women.
There is a piece floating around the internet that shows the "icons" of the dem/Radical/ Left-wing and compares them to the current class of conservative women. The former are essentially passe' and ludricously (Spelled wrong?) out of touch; while the latter are smart, self confident, and, frankly, beautiful. (Yes, I AM a male, and I can't help being attracted to ladies. I fail badly at being a "metrosexual, whatever THAT is!)
Booger| 12.3.10 @ 9:13AM
Dear Beebop,
"Sexist", not "sexest". Will u womyn nevr lurn to spel?
Corjully,
Booger
Eric Cartman| 12.3.10 @ 9:25AM
"'Would you call Charlie Rangle a "male reprobate?"' Well, no. It's too clunky. I'd call him a greedy bastard, a no-good, lying, subsidized apartment hogging, tax cheat, Socialist, greedy bastard. But never a male reprobate.
Ned| 12.3.10 @ 11:19AM
"Reprobate"? Isn't that what they do to all your stuff when you die without a will?
However, I think you're being to generous and restrained about names for the Relected Rep. Rangle...
Stephanie| 12.3.10 @ 11:25AM
BINGO, Eric on the Rangle discription!
And Booger, I've missed your posts. Good to see you back stirring things up.
carnot| 12.4.10 @ 2:23PM
ummm...you're looking in the wrong direction. the Democrat/Liberal alliance of the last 50 years have made a point of defining the debate in terms of: economic class, racial composition, gender and sexual preference. they (and their abettors in the media and academia) have shaped the language and tone of the conversation. you're lambasting the wrong folks - go to the source. otherwise, there has also been a fulsome excess of lecturing over the last 50 years.
loulou| 12.3.10 @ 10:16AM
You really need to get over yourself and get a sense of humor.
You sound like a Womyns Studies harridan. Knock it off.
WGMOW| 12.3.10 @ 11:34AM
So just because some crooked, hypocritical, lying politician happens to be female we can't skewer her the same way you feminists skewer all men? Sorry, but as a liberated woman I'm unlike the feminists in that I believe that women should be equal, and that includes equally targets of political wrath, sarcasm, and disgust.
Women like you say from one side or your mouth that females are "strong, independant, intelligent, and fiesty." Out of the other side of your mouth you make noises that sound like "All females should be treated special", like back in Victorian time.
Well, I guess you're not as strong and independant as you thought, huh? Can't stand the kind of criticism that gets thrown at men all the frickin' time? Too bad, beause this woman will cheerfully spread crap on YOUR hypocrisy. And by the way, it's not snowing yet, so here comes a piece of manure your way...
ann| 12.3.10 @ 1:01PM
Are you kidding. Hating princess nancy has nothing to do with her sex, it has everything to do with her politics. Do you really think she cares anything about you? She is too busy destroying the country and getting botox injections. I don't see NOW out there defending all the disgusting things said by libs about Bachmann or Palin. I am sick and tired of the double standard. You can say anything disgusting you want about a conservative women, but god forbid, don't dis a liberal women. The libs especially hate Palin because she had to fortitude to give birth to a handicapped child. If she had an abortion, she would be the darling of NOW.
Conservative_Monster| 12.3.10 @ 1:14PM
Nobody buying the baiting routine anymore, bub, whether it is race baiting or trolling for sexism. Do you think she does her hair bob for asexual reasons? Come to think of it I've never looked at Nanci as a sexual creature in any light or position. Now, if Sarah were to take those glasses off and toss that hair down and ... er ... well, I digress but I'm sure you get the picture and that picture is durn better to look at than anything with Nanci's san fran mugshot in it.
Colin Foy| 12.3.10 @ 3:02PM
Tired of how women in national politics are being treated and talked about! Hillary, is that you?
How about what the Obowma administration did to herself this week? Using the wiki-lickers to put a "broadside" (No pun intended,) into the old girl, and not in a good way (Pun intended), and herself's 2012 presidential aspirations?
Our national cuckold has been dissed by her lascivious life partner, the Obowma campaign and now the wiki-freak Julian A. (All libdems by the way), more times than Barny Frank has been treated for gay syphilis!
I wonder what herself will do next to get back into everyone's good graces? Probably write another taxpayer funded million dollar check to the murdering muslim thugs in Hamas and call it progress. Cheers!
Donna| 12.3.10 @ 3:16PM
My Dear, I don’t know how long it’s been since you became independent from the Demo Party, but this is all fun and nothing is meant sexist by it at all. You'll get used to Booger-he's great! If you’re new to the Ms. Independence/conservative leaning, it may take awhile to outgrow the “battered wife syndrome”. You’ll find these conservative men the most entertaining, logical and smart guys you’ll ever read. Deep cleansing breath and put on your armor, you’re all grown up now.
Groad| 12.3.10 @ 4:21PM
Stretch Pelosi is not the Queen Bee and not the Prime Minister, though she apparently thinks otherwise. This is not about her being a womyn (sic) it's about her behavior and dictatorial actions.
TexasTele| 12.3.10 @ 5:00PM
Wow. His remarks are not as sexist (I see very little) as you are making them out to be. Are you just a liberal who is trying to make an ad hominem attack on the writer to discredit him because you have no counter arguments, which is a favorite trick (call them racists, sexists, etc.)? I think so.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:03PM
Dear beebop,
Let me put it simply and without sexist rhetoric:
Ms. Pelosi is a Vicious Leftie who hates America, as is Ms. Clinton. Don't care what they look like, they're evil.
It is, however, an interesting point that I have found in my life that Conservative women are better looking than Liberal ones, when I have known their political views.
By the way, I would call Charlie Rangel a Liberal scumbag. He's a crook.
All that being said, Sarah Palin is quite attractive, as is Barbara Bachmann. Nancy Reagan, in her day, was a Hollywood movie actress. Anita Bryant was a Miss America. Ms. Bardot was...Ms. Bardot.
I hope this is respectful enough. My wife was a summa cum laude grad in accounting. I know something about women with Mensan credentials; I married one, and I dated plenty.
cats1cowboy| 12.5.10 @ 8:12PM
Even if, Mrs. Palin is "not as smart" as the libbys think, she has something that cannot be taught in any school (especially an elitist Ivy League institution) and that is wisdom. She has more integrity that all the dimbulb jackasses in Pelosi's crew, put together.
Stevie| 12.3.10 @ 12:44PM
My cat's name is 'Booger'
Booger| 12.3.10 @ 1:43PM
And he is one good looking feline.
Booger| 12.3.10 @ 1:43PM
And he is one good looking feline.
martin j smith| 12.3.10 @ 8:00AM
Booger: a good characterization of the democrat left Socialists. This why "compromise" or "bi-partisanship" is not possible. They are ideologues and hate our way of life. It will be a very nasty political war from now on. Every R better be aware that the voters are watching and they better stand up against Socialist Democrat behavior that is against our national interst.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.3.10 @ 8:07AM
Hey, Bee Bop,
Que' pasa?
Booger likes to have a little fun while he sticks his own ice-pick into the truth.
Nancy is a nasty piece of work, OK?
That isn't sexist. That is just the unvarnished truth.
She just happens to be the Speaker, but all of her ilk, (Men and women), are despicable.
Equal opportunity loathing. That's what I say.
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 6:00PM
You are a good advocate for Booger.
I think Speaker Pelosi has been one of the most damaging politician ever foisted on her home state of California -- their citizens don't really know any better -- and on the House of Representatives.
Can't we all agree that it would have been equally deplorable regardless of the sex of the individual involved and dispense with what is ugly?
Just a thought.
Michael Handley| 12.3.10 @ 6:46PM
Good comment. I agree with you 100%. I live in Southern California but I will not visit San Francisco or even travel through the town. I don't want to catch whatever it is they have...
Neo-libertarian| 12.3.10 @ 8:52AM
I cannot believe that most are ignoring the implications of the delay and divert agenda being utilized by Obama, Pelosi and Reid.
1. I for one believe that Obama will trade everyone’s tax raises to “get at” the rich with pandering to his bases primary belief in class warfare, welfare and reparation mentality.
2. Pelosi and Reid, with complicity, will string this out until it is too late. They will smile; the new tax schedules will be printed and sent.
3. Obama will chastise them as this process is proceeding, play the role of the concerned executive caring for his “people.” (Obama’s real “people” are those Americans who share his “class” division mentality and think the government is simple a faucet draining the reservoir of inexhaustible money provided by the “wealthy”)
4. He will than veto any compromise sent to his desk and hope that he retains enough progressives who exhibit the same insanity to over ride the veto. If he does this he will also hope that the race card will prevent the impeachment he will deserve.
Does anyone actually believe he is not capable of this? Does anyone actually believe he has “seen the light” from the last election? Does anyone actually believe he is not aware that he still has two out of three branches (even after the election)?
What most are missing is that “Lame Duck” used to mean that there was time left in office to make proclamations, clean out offices and have retirement parties due to the fact that tenure in office was ending voluntarily. This time people were “thrown out” they have no curriculum other than vindictiveness, pay back, and a get even mentality as guidance. There are a lot of mad people being shown the door, by those upstarts “the electorate.” Years of fake battles waged across the aisle, only to be followed up by drinks in a wood paneled room over cigar smoke are over: they have met the enemy and the enemy is us, a non-partisan ballot savvy juggernaut that is and will pay attention. Transparency has arrived and it has brought us the ability to “see through” our leaders.
I think I will go have a cup of tea.
Colin Foy| 12.3.10 @ 4:00PM
Neo-Lib: Right on! Couldn't agree more.
I've had a nagging feeling, for about a month pryor to the November elections, that all hell was going to break loose during the lame duck session and beyond.
From what I'm hearing and reading the mid term results are starting to sink in. The remaining demarxisRats are becoming borderline demented and unhinged.
My guess is there's been so much graft, corruption, subversion and treason over the last two years that they are genuinely scared.
They have an amature in the white house who's past is steeped in misinformation, subversion and obfuscation.
Combine that with the number of tea party candidates elected, who have no interest in business as usual. Even the thickest dems in D.C. can see the looming indictments on the wall, and eventual political ruin.
When you lose the commie Paul Krugman and the uber gay activist Larry Kramer in the same week things can't be going good for the dems. Cheers!
carnot| 12.4.10 @ 2:28PM
eh....first business of the new House come January would be to pass a full extension and have the tables apply retroactively - already being discussed. If Senate Dems and Obama want to kill this...they do so at their own political peril - it would be suicide.
RCV| 12.4.10 @ 11:24PM
Sorry, but no. Public opinion clearly favors extending the tax cuts only for incomes under $250,000. Democrats are on the side of the public on this one, and they know who's blocking their tax extensions, and on whose behalf.
Appleby| 12.6.10 @ 7:28AM
When Atlanta attempted to raise the sales tax from 3 to 4 cents, it was sold as a 1% increase. Pointing out that it was actually a 25% increase only worked if you could instruct people how to figure percentages on their calculators.
Judging by the number of people who do not know the difference between 1% and one cent, I daresay that the people from whom we hear the most are incapable of understanding even sales tax, much less the impact of slamming businesses with higher taxes.
Louis Jenkins| 12.3.10 @ 9:00AM
At least the Tea Party candidates know that they're being watched closely. The Democrats have sent the nation down the tube with yesterday's vote but they're going to be re-elected in two years, so they think. While BeePop may scream sexism, the truth of the matter is business will not expand. They will shrink and add to the unemployment lines. (Rangle got a censuring. Oh too bad. He should have be tossed out.) I forsee more bad times ahead. This congress is the most anti-business Amerikan congress that has ever been witnessed. Get ready, Nancy will saddle us with the Dream Act next.
Ross Kaminsky | 12.3.10 @ 9:02AM
Beebop: Nancy Pelosi played the "sex card" to become the "historic" first female speaker. Indeed, she's doing more damage to female (Dem) politicians than anyone else I can think of.
NeoLibertarian: I don't think Obama wants all of the Bush tax cuts to go away. I think he knows that would mean an utter decimation of Dems in 2012, including him losing re-election. And he knows it would mean that he would not get one single bill through the Senate in the next two years.
Neo-libertarian| 12.3.10 @ 11:22AM
Any “trade’ involves something you want versus something you don’t. His priorities are; more money to spend, “soaking the rich,” and above all maintaining both the class warfare to endear his base, and stroke his beltway remaining cronies. Tax increases on the middle class is a price, I believe he will pay. This argument will play out very quickly, I hope you win.
Ross Kaminsky | 12.3.10 @ 9:03AM
By the way, Harry Reid has scheduled two votes for Saturday on extending the Bush tax cuts. One is basically to agree with the House and not extend the upper bracket. The other is to extend for everyone making up to $1 million.
loulou| 12.3.10 @ 10:18AM
Extend it to everyone making up to $50 million-- then we can talk.
scott| 12.3.10 @ 8:55PM
I vote for making the extension apply to people with $50 billion of net worth. That would include only Bill Gates and Warren Buffett and both of them are on record as wanting to pay more taxes. So that's a win-win for everybody.
JimK| 12.3.10 @ 9:09AM
Do any of the Libs pay attention? Nancy Pelosi called for the end of the Bush tax cuts as her first priority when Obama got elected because, she said, they were tax cuts for the rich. The Obama administration vilified them as Bush policy that destroyed our economy.
Now she's characterizing her actions as helping the middle class. I thought they were tax cuts for the rich that destroyed our economy? Is anyone on the left not sickened by the lies and hypocrisy?
Booger| 12.3.10 @ 9:15AM
Apparently the troll known as Beebop is not (sickened by the lies and hypocrisy).
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 9:22AM
Apparently your reading comprehension is a bit under the weather this morning.
Apparently the indiscriminate use of "troll" is not the sole province of the folks at Huffpo (who've never seen an original conservative thought they couldn't mock).
Apparently it escaped your notice that I never defended Pelosi but defended her right to be a WOMAN without being pilloried and mocked for it in unflattering terms and then EXPECTING that female conservatives wouldn't find themselves VICTIMS of the same narrow thinking.
And I'M the HYPROCITE?
Devil, get thee behind me!
Mr. Devil| 12.3.10 @ 9:36AM
I'm right behind your Big behind, beebop.
And, watch that pitchfork beebop, you'll take somebody's eye out.
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 9:41AM
Thanks sweetie.
Insults are usually the last refuge of the intellectual light weight.
Just like the need to use multiple screen names!
As an independent who currently caucuses with the republicans, I pray there are better comments to come!
Ross Kaminsky | 12.3.10 @ 9:52AM
beebop,
While there's little point in someone ridiculing Pelosi with particular reference to her being a woman, there's an argument to be made that she has earned it, tying her gender to her job early and often.
Check this out:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/.....ttention-0
When Pelosi herself has brought so much focus to her being a woman, it strikes me as fair play when that becomes part of the overall criticism of her in the sense that she tried to use her gender to help garner the power to destroy the country.
Stephanie| 12.3.10 @ 11:30AM
"When Pelosi herself has brought so much focus to her being a woman, it strikes me as fair play when that becomes part of the overall criticism of her in the sense that she tried to use her gender to help garner the power to destroy the country"
As obama has used his "half black-ness" to destroy the country.
skip| 12.3.10 @ 3:33PM
Pelosi is a WOMAN?
I'm going to have to keep an open mind. Every time I see that thing a think of a hidious asexual semi-human piece of feces.
And beebop, enough with the small talk, what is your physical desirability on a scale of zero to ten, with Kate Beckinsale being a 9.5 as a benchmark?
Quit teasing and fess up.
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 4:18PM
Not attractive enough to be one of the intelligent, articulate and thoughtful women who comprise a good portion of the journalists at Fox News-- I'm a big Megyn Kelly fan myself. But you'd certainly never confuse me with Helen Thomas ... ;)
MikeD| 12.3.10 @ 5:09PM
Bee Bop! I'll tell you the same thing I told "Occam's Tool" last night. Never be self depricating, it gives the lesser among us weapons to use against us.
Until they opened their mouths, I've never seen a woman who wasn't truly beautiful in some way. Then, trolls like pelosi show how truly evil they are.
I am not implying that all women should shut up; I'm stating that everybody is judged on what they say and what they do. That's why the vicious pig named pelosi is so universally despised by any sentient human being. She is the embodiment of evil, and every bit as terrible as her soulmate obama$$hole. It has nothing to do with sex or race, and everything to do with their actions and intentions. So, make sure your words and deeds are as beautiful as you are.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:19PM
Thank you for the lovely comments last night, Mr. D. Coming from someone like you, it was truly kind.
But I never mind being self-deprecating; if you're truly good (Like Mr. Texican or you) others will blow your horn for you. In my job, I'm blessed with the best boss and the finest nurses I've ever worked with. They make my job relatively easy. I get to do the best work that I've been able to do since my residency days at UCLA, and then I go home to a great wife, and wonderful kids. And THEN I get to blog here, with really nice people like you. I am an extraordinarily fortunate man, especially as I know how many of my fellow docs hate their jobs.
Mr. D, again, thank you for your service defending me, and the sacrifices you made doing so. It is appreciated, and I have treated many Vets.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:12PM
You have a good point about not using her sex as a bludgeon against her, bee bop.
The problem is this: if you recall the marvelous mud wrestling scene in Stripes, where Ox tries to go easy on the female wrestlers, who kick him in the groin repeatedly for his pains.
That is how we Republican Men have been treated by the likes of Pelosi, and eventually we respond with rage.
At any rate, welcome aboard, and realize that some of these Bloggers (Old Texican comes to immediate mind) are actually old fashioned gentlemen in their real lives, and some of them (again the Texas Contingent comes to mind) have real life activities that are simply awe-inspiring in their greatness. I'm not Ken, but I know what he does. I'm a physician specializing in rural indigent Native American care, and Old Texican's real life activities blow anything I do away. So stick around, and enjoy and learn. I know I have.
skip| 12.4.10 @ 3:35PM
Nice!
Fox certainly has a stable full of intelligent and good looking women.
Helen Thomas could almost be forgiven for her opinions; when genetics is that unkind it is almost understandable to lash out like that. In the end, inside she is uglier than outside, and there is no justification for that.
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 4:14PM
If you want to use Pelosi's logic you are certainly welcome to. I aspire to something on a higher level.
Mr.Devil| 12.3.10 @ 9:53AM
You're welcome beebop, the former Victor-Margie.
carnot| 12.4.10 @ 2:33PM
beebop....give it a rest on this one. you made your point. some accepted...some didn't. at a certain point one turns away from the windmill and searches out more edifying venues. I don't happen to agree with your core argument...but do think you have taken some unfair shots.
relax.....reload for another day!
Publius| 12.3.10 @ 10:52AM
Didn't I tell you to iron my shirt?
db| 12.3.10 @ 9:16AM
All of this reminds me of when First Lady Hillary was in it deep about one scandal or another one day, and the next day would roll out the pink dress and bake a cake.
But only for a day. Then back to the beige pant suit.
grant1863| 12.3.10 @ 9:39AM
Booger,
As always,a pleasure to read your comments.
Booger| 12.3.10 @ 10:37AM
Thanks. Like I've said before, this is cheaper than therapy.
Stephanie| 12.3.10 @ 11:32AM
Indeed Booger, indeed. Chuckle.....
Garytzzz| 12.3.10 @ 10:31AM
I think the best thing we can do is let the extension of the tax rate temporarily fail and let the Republicans pass them in January. One of the things that the MSM and the Dems have drilled into people since the Bush tax cuts were enacted was that they were only for the rich. Maybe we need a paycheck or two to let the middle class see what they really got for a tax cut.
Robert| 12.3.10 @ 10:52AM
FACTUAL ERROR!!1
The unemployment bills that were blocked do not add weeks in addition to the 99 weeks, those bills incule nothing for the long term unemployed.
The bill that were blocked simply extend the dead line to sign up for the existing extension for the newly unemployed.
Mike Gabel| 12.3.10 @ 11:24AM
Let's unpack a few false arguments:
1-“Tax “the rich"! They can afford to pay more".
This misses the entire point. Our success as a nation comes from the fact that our people are free. Free to create, innovate, invest and improve their status (the land of opportunity, remember?).
When some say, "tax the rich", they are misguided, uninformed, or playing the Marxist game of class warfare. The point is, by having higher tax rates for "the rich", you remove the incentive for a person to improve himself or herself. We’ve seen this so many times in countries ruled by tyrants, and the common denominator is the utter suppression, demoralization and poverty of its people. So, while some people earn more and have more, implementing class warfare would be a deathblow to the freedom and opportunity offered by the United States.
2-If we tax "the rich", our country’s economic problems will be solved!
How foolish. Most of "the rich" became wealthy by possessing or obtaining knowledge and skill. Do you believe “rich” people will simply hand over their money if tax rates increase? No, “rich” people will change their behavior to legally minimize the effect of these taxes.
The bottom line is if you soaked "the rich" with tremendous tax liabilities, our problems would worsen. Many "rich" would lessen their economic activity and investment and some would move their funds out of this jurisdiction. This would increase unemployment, cause market losses and make the cost of borrowing higher.
3-The key to solving our debt & deficit crisis is by putting more tax dollars in the hands of the government.
Really? You'd have to be an ass to believe this. Tax rates and class warfare arguments are merely a red herring, made by the government, to distract us from the real problems; overreaching government and runaway government spending.
Financial resources are limited. The more resources claimed by the government, the less available for the private sector to invest.
4-It is all about "Jobs".
It is not. "Jobs" are byproducts of investment. Jobs are created when a person, "rich" or wannabe "rich" innovates and invests. A "rich" or wannabe "rich" person invests for a primary reason, to make more money. Generally, to make more money, one needs to leverage their investment. Employing other people, their skills and knowledge, is a logical solution to the leverage challenge.
Still want to tax "the rich"?
Finally, you may be annoyed at my constant quotation around “the rich”. I do this to make a point: Who are “the rich”? Can any one person create an accurate and universally accepted definition for “rich”? OK, a dictionary has a definition, but the answer, as it applies to this argument, is “no”. The longer the people in power try to define, demonize and “tax the rich” the longer our nation’s problems will remain unaddressed.
Redstateboy| 12.3.10 @ 12:33PM
you make your points very well and the logic of course is undeniable, however and sadly; facts and logic are completely lost on your typical Leftist Liber-ul Democrat Socialist. Nazi Pelosi and her husband have a combined Net Worth of over 55 Million dollars. She can afford to be an effete condescending Liber-ul elite. She and her kind have no conception of what a gallon of gas or milk costs - what it cost to heat/cool a home. She and her kind are sooooo out of touch with us great, stupid, unwashed, unsophisticated dolts.
Mike Gabel| 12.3.10 @ 1:06PM
The real threats from progressives like Pelosi and Obama is that they truly believe they are smarter than everyone, and they have this desperate need to dictate to others on how to live their lives.
This emotional deficiency in some who seek and gain power, fuels the never ending battle between liberty and tyranny. While my main purpose is not to plug Mark Levin's book, Mr. Levin defines and explains this battle better than anyone.
MikeD| 12.3.10 @ 5:22PM
In addition to being the playground bully, pelosi is the worst kind of scum; a hypocrite. She and her 'uber-rich' husband have most of their money offshore where they can protect it against their intentional destruction of the American dollar. Plus, she had the gall to make a legal exception in one of her criminal 'stimulus bills' to permit her husband's business to avoid paying the minimum wage she loves to impose on the rest of American business. She is truly a vicious criminal who needs to be physically dragged out of the protection of congress and thrown into jail where she can await her trial for theft, malfeasance in office, hypocricy, and any other offense we can think of. She and her fellow thugs reid and obama are very fortunate that they live in a country with people who believe strongly in the rule of law; even though she laughs at them all the time. In any other time and place she'd have been strung up.
Reagan Loyalist| 12.3.10 @ 11:32AM
Booger,
Before I was midway thorough this article I was anticipating another of your exquisitely crafted lampooning letters. You did not disappoint!!
Margie| 12.3.10 @ 11:34AM
To Quin Hillyer:
Mr, Devil, above is being allowed to falsely slander myself and my husband's names.. I know who it is, and so do you. I thought his IP addy was banned.
Double standard?
Why is it he is allowed to harass and intimidate here still but various screen names?
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.3.10 @ 1:15PM
Margie and Vic,
Tim* simply added a new e-mail address identifier.
Fortunately, TAS has chosen to have an "open" forum here.
Whatever screen name or IPS he uses, Tim* has lost all credibility. He is a joke here.
PLEASE don't let him bait you any more. Simply identify him and talk about the subject at hand.
PS: thank you for your scriptual references. Excellent guides to anchor the conversation.
Margie| 12.3.10 @ 2:52PM
Thank you, Ken, however if someone continuously posts lies and posts in your own name, and continually says you are so & so and AmSpec KNOWS this, yet advises ME that I may be banned... for "name calling!" It reveals a double standard and hypocrisy which is intolerable.
It's one thing to attack someone using one name, but to lie and deceive as he does and is permitted to do... why?
So, it isn't a matter of "letting him bait me"... if it wrere you.. and AmSpec allowed it yet threatened to ban you.. you would not like it, would you?
I have seen you say that if they consider your posts spam to cancel your subscription ~ yet THIS is much more than that!
I am sure they will be pleased when I quit posting, as it seems to be most uncomfortable to them to have a one such as me (and my husband) taking on the lying, anti-semitic faction here at AmSpec and the authors that back them.
And they call themselves conservative!
Tim*s continual posting as others and then saying it is myself and or my husband posting in order to turn others against us, has been going on for months.
Today he took the name Mr. Devil to say that this beebop person is us.. he's a liar.
I know that God is going to deal with his sorry butt, but in the meantime if the so-called moderators and editors threaten ME with bannishment ~ yet they KNOW the IP address of this man doing this ~ And it is SO wrong that they allow this ~ I say
SCREW THEM!
beebop| 12.4.10 @ 6:36AM
Today he took the name Mr. Devil to say that this beebop person is us.. he's a liar.
Thank you for making yourself clear as to the hypocrite you are. It's okay for this sod to have a good go at me because "I'm not you?"
I must remember to thank God I'm not.
Margie| 12.4.10 @ 12:22PM
Beebop,
When I said us, I was referring to my and my husband. Not that it matters to you.. but it mattered to me enough to want to tell you that.
God bless you.
beebop| 12.4.10 @ 3:00PM
My point stands.
Sorry that you have had trouble with this person in the past. Your issues with him need not be extended to me.
The moderators are free to share my IP with you in order that you might satisfy yourself that I am not him.
God has been abundantly gracious with his gifts and I never fail to express my gratitude for more than my share.
Maybe at this time in the year we might all want to remember that the reason for the season is to welcome He who cried out the words captured in Luke 23:34.
Margie| 12.4.10 @ 7:49PM
OK~ one last thing and I'm gone.. I never said you WERE him!
Farewell.
Margie| 12.3.10 @ 3:08PM
And just one more thing:
To point to the utter hypocrisy and double standard and dishonesty~ Now why is it that they don't ban you or threaten you with such for name calling? You tell the freaking Communists where it's at just like I do.. yet you have no fear of same and are quite comfortable here.
Why?
Oh that's right, it's because you send them money monthly, as you have stated. I suppose if I were a monthly contributor they would not treat me thusly?
Too bad AmSpec has authors and editors who not only agree with Tim* the anti-semite liar, but allow him to slander other conservatives, quite comfortably, like you.. but comfort isn't something I permit myself.
God is MY witness. I compromise for no one, and especially not other human beings who call themselves authors and moderators some of which seem to share the same bed with lying anti-semites.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:38PM
And Margie, I appreciate you. Bless you and Merry Christmas.
Do not worry about Tim*, as his mind is to yours as that of an amoeba. I recomend that you start using that line, stolen from MST3K. It's not abusive, but it is infuriating, and so appropos for Tim*.
Margie| 12.3.10 @ 3:14PM
Sorry, to be clear.. I am rather perturbed but when I said quite comfortably I meant that he posts quite comfortably and so do you.. without fear of banishment.
Threats to myself and to my husband, constant slandering is allowed by this low life.. yet I am warned??
I have had enough!
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:47PM
Margie:
I do not know whether or not you have ever seen "Kung Pow, (Enter the Fist)" a hilarious pastiche of Kung Fu films.
In it there is a character who is always belligerent and hostile towards the hero, but whose fighting style consists of "my nuts to your foot," or "my face to your fist" style, because he was "trained to fight wrong as a joke!"
That's Tim.* Simply answer him, as I do, with the following---"I am sorry Tim*, for you, because I am a Mensan and you are a moron. Your mind is to mine as that of an amoeba." Repeat as often as necessary until he goes away. He is a small, incompetently cleaned urinal on a backwoods reststop on the highway of life. He threatens me at times, but I realize his incompetence in life and argument. After all, "his mind is to mine as that of an amoeba's. (Comparing our writing styles and vocabularies, this is literally, as well as figuratively, true.) And Margie, you have people who like you and love to read your posts. Talk to us and not the prokaryote.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 11:06PM
Actually, Margie, I thought of a more appropriate analogy for Tim*. I don't know if you've ever seen the Clinton Library in Little Rock. I have, and is looks like a phallic symbol lying on its side hanging over the river. I swear, all it would need would be to have a fountain appropriately placed. Well, Tim* is the neurosyphilitic monkey of the organ grinder who sells novelties outside the Clinton Memorial Erect....sorry, Library. You are appreciated, Margie. Merry Christmas!
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 11:07PM
Must...Proofread---"it looks like..."
Margie| 12.4.10 @ 12:30PM
Occam's Tool,
I have not seen the Clinton library, but I believe you, and agree with what you said.
Thanks for the kind words.
God loves you so very much.. more than you know.
"But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting upon those who fear Him, and His righteousness to children's children, to those who keep His covenant and remember to do His commandments. The LORD has established His Throne in the Heavens, and His Kingdom rules over all. Bless the LORD, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do His word, hearkening to the voice of His word! Bless the LORD, all His hosts, his ministers that do His will! Bless the LORD, all His works, in all places of His dominion. Bless the LORD, O my soul!" Psalm 103:17-22.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.10 @ 12:37AM
Giant concrete cigar at the Clinton Library?
Sam Vaughn| 12.3.10 @ 12:02PM
It's interesting to watch the exchange with beebop. I've been visting this site for a long time. Within the past few months I've noticed an influx of leftists, leftists posing as conservatives and plain old adgitators. I think beebop is a poser deliberately stirring the pot, like vtwin and some others. I welcome them here to debate, but this is after all site for conservatives to share. If you expect otherwise beebop go to the Daily Kos.
Seriously we need to come to the realization that the legislative branch is broken. We no longer have "laws" written by our congressmen and senators. We have empowered bureaucracies dictating "regulations" with little to no involvement of our elected representatives. One of the checks and balances is almost gone. The president writes decrees (diktats) or executive orders and his appointed officials in each department (e.g. EPA) or czars carry them out. Talk about an Imperial govt.! I for one demand results from my Senator and Congressman.....
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 3:54PM
I think beebop is a poser deliberately stirring the pot, like vtwin and some others. I welcome them here to debate, but this is after all site for conservatives to share. If you expect otherwise beebop go to the Daily Kos.
Sorry for the delay in responding, but I was distracted by work. It is something rare to come by in these troubling times -- as you all know.
Funny enough, my brother-in-law -- a Federal employee and hopeless Demo who is less informed of national events than my standard poodle -- calls me a poser because I turned my back on the party of "yes we can" during the last election. And I have never looked back.
So.
A poser with the left and an alleged poser with the right. Maybe that merely confirms I am an Independent. Somebody better start trying harder not to tick me off if they want my vote in 2012.
Alan Brooks| 12.6.10 @ 12:40AM
"Seriously we need to come to the realization that the legislative branch is broken."
Bush expanded the Executive Branch to its present-day bloat-- one thing he CAN be blamed for to this day.
Neo-libertarian| 12.3.10 @ 12:07PM
Mr. Kaminsky,
As near as I can tell the church lady thinks you are someone named Quinn who seems to be the current caretaker for the First Amendment. Want to peg over the bile meter? Let her know what your political leaning is.
Ross Kaminsky | 12.3.10 @ 12:32PM
Neo-l,
Thanks for asking.
Beebop: I am not Quin Hillyer, nor do I play him on TV. As he is a very good writer, I appreciate your confusing me with him. That said, I'm guessing that my politics and Quin's are somewhat different as I am a fairly rare creature, roughly described as an Objectivist atheist libertarian-leaning Jewish Republican. In addition to being pro-choice and for drug legalization, I am well-armed. I support ending federal involvement in education and energy, for a start. I'm not for open borders, though I support greatly increasing legal immigration. I think entitlement programs are unconstitutional and that a progressive tax code is not just ineffective, it's immoral.
Also, having read the comments from "Mr. Devil", you must be the most hypersensitive person in your ZIP code to think those comments amount to "slander" (which charge, by the way, should have been "libel", even though it is neither.)
So, please take a deep breath, stop being so hypersensitive about Pelosi's gender or Mr. Devil's harmless comments, and jump into the real nuts-and-bolts of the often-interesting public policy discussion on these pages.
Al Adab| 12.3.10 @ 2:39PM
Mr. Kaminski: You might not be as rare as you think. Our lcal morning coffee group includes just such a gentleman as yourself, An objectivist Jewish Libertarian. We do have interesting conversations in the AM.
As to Ms. Pelosi, I understand she now flies Southwest airlines where, as their TV commercial say, "bags fly free".
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 3:58PM
You have me confused with Marge. I am not her. And. I neither needed nor requested your opinion as to how I may or may not react to misogyny. You might want to trudge through the nonsense that masquerades as witty in three inch heels. It might adjust your thinking.
Quartermaster| 12.3.10 @ 7:19PM
Might I suggest flats?
Frankly, I'm not much interested in not ticking you of, and I think it's pretty much the same among those who regularly lurk and post here.
Bluntly, if you think this bunch is misogynist you really need to get out more. If you sincerely think AmSpec is antisemitic, you really need to get out more. If you want to go after antisemites, I suggest you go over to ADL, or go after the Podhoretz bunch. What they do is so damaging to the interests of Jews they need to be taken down a few notches.
Your version of Feminism is not much above that of the hateful harridans of the 70s. Frankly you are so sensitive, classifying you as a troll is not out of reason. The way you write also makes you a target of wags. If you can't see that, you need to get out more and learn something of the world.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:34PM
I'm not so sure that Podhoretz is damaging to my interests, as he is a Conservative Jew fighting against sharia imposition, Quartermaster. I do agree that Foxman's defense of Soros is disgusting.
But Joe Sobran WAS a vicious antisemite, as is Pat Buchanan. Sobran palled around with the Institute for Historical Review, and Buchana defends Hitler. That's a little much.
As for Israel---we are in a battle with Islam resurgent---the jihadist version. Israel is the buffer state to them. Their loss would imperil our own survival. Neither Sobran nor Buchanan recognize this, which is why their National Defense arguments are so inconsistent. Even after Israel became an uber-capitalist state (more startups per capita there than here) Sobran still hated them. That's a problem.
I'm perfectly capable of noting what my own self-interests are, and I have no problem with Commentary. If you actually read it as a Conservative, you wouldn't either. It's brand of Conservatism differs little from TAS, NR, The New Criterion, or the New Atlantis, all of which I subscribe and read routinely, in addition to doing 6 times the required amount of Continuing Medical Education in my field each year.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:34PM
Its brand of Conservatism...sorry.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 11:11PM
beebop,
Please stick around. Wear whatever footwear you like. And have fun!
I respect your kindness in defending Pelousi, but I doubt that she would so defend you. If you recall, vicious sexual assaults on Mrs. Palin are rarely answered by NOW.
beebop| 12.4.10 @ 6:27AM
I had an acquaintance whose mother would regularly reach into her handbag and give money to panhandlers. Her husband -- a successful businessman -- encouraged her to give her money to a recognized charity and quit "abetting" street people because at least half of them were frauds.
(According to my friend) Her wonderful mother hugged him and replied "if you can point out the cheaters, I promise that I will not give any money to them. But the others seem to really need the help."
If we abandon our principles in the face of those whose ideals we reject, do we have principles? Watching NOW, Emily's List and other "women's groups," during the brouhaha with Geraldine Ferraro was one of the most telling episodes of my political re-education and brought to mind the British saying "thumb up your bum." It is difficult to be disabused of your fundamental beliefs, but it is insane to deny the reality.
Occam's Tool| 12.3.10 @ 10:26PM
Ross, you are a pleasure to read. From a "Frozen Chosen" in Minnesota!
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.3.10 @ 12:36PM
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.3.10 @ 11:53AM
OH MY GOODNESS!!!!!!!!!!
Folks, Beebop, Mr. Grant...
Read it and cheer. (from American Thinker)
http://www.americanthinker.com.....risma.html
Reply to this
ken (Old Texican)| 12.3.10 @ 11:59AM
PS on the article on Sarah. Be sure to read the comments.
Reply to this
Leave a Comment
Perusha| 12.3.10 @ 1:11PM
Repeat after me---
“What goes up must come down, spinning wheel, etc”, as CCR (Credence Clearwater Revival) sang, back in the old days.
So, we are confronted with, OF COURSE, another commission of “wise men”, who are tasked by the real WISE GUYS (aka gangsters) in DC to “solve” our fiscal problems.
I, and probably most other elder “statesmen”---to wit, those who’ve been fooled one too many times over their long or short life--- am instantly warned off taking seriously ANYTHING that comes after the word—“commission”.
Any of the commentators on this site, no matter how rich and powerful, along with their wised up brethren who don’t give politics a single thought, don’t really make much difference.
So, all the calls for doing this or that are, verily, just cries for attention---“See, I do too matter!”
For those of my generation, do you remember the folk singers, “The Limelighters”? They had an album that was hilarious, to many---me included---that featured a tune, “Gunslinger”. From 1960!
“Gunslinger, gunslinger, where did you go wrong?
When you were a child, did the Cheyenne and Sioux refuse to plaay nicely with you?
Did you always feel you didn’t belong, gunslinger?
Don’t wear your guns in town today, Old Buddy, cause last night you cried out MOMMY DEAR.
You got a recurrent dream in your craw, and that dream of your Maw will inhibit your draw, Old Buddy.
Yippi yi ya, yippi yi yo.
There you die, dead in the dust, Old Buddy…Old Buddy, and now your myth begins…
Out in the West it’s generally believed you faced and killed the toughest hombres of your day, but time has revealed your feet of clay.
Recent research has clearly shown that 99% of the gunmen you killed were simply ACCIDENT PRONE, Old Buddy; Gunslinger!”
Yes---“accident prone” nails our American situation, totally: except---
We have, as individuals, who have been irremediably programmed from birth by the previous individuals, who’ve likewise been formed into their own knee jerk ever-ready opinions and actions, paradoxically CHOSEN to experience exactly the presently arising space-time situation, here and now on Earth’s crust.
Why are we even alive? Testing, testing, one, two, three!
“This is a test of the early warning system”---so, duck and cover.
“A cooked fowl”---answer, a la Jeopardy: “What is a turkey?”
“Law and Order” TV show---a test for the viewer, to figure out the answer to the crime.
Reality---a test, to ALWAYS ace!
Alas, the mass of test takers choose to fail, that is---they BUY IT, instead of simply observe and understand the humongous and humorous play---the human comedy.
As far as the “commission”, and the apparent need to stop the taxing bleeding, and indeed roll back government spending goes---
Back in the 1980, as gold was skyrocketing and inflation was TESTING its limits, and we were deathly afraid it would be unstoppable, and lurch into hyperinflation, even then, of course, TAXATION was the ultimate question.
Playing with the word, freely, I took “tax” this way---
“Tax” equals “to ax”. “Tax” is shorthand for “to ax” part of the creations of some humans and give it to others, preferably YOUSELF.
Or, “Tax” equals “to take”.
Well, look---IT’S TOO LATE!
The taxing machine is already all-powerful, and has been for decades---witness the unstoppable growth of government!
The dirty HUGE secret that remains hidden from most people is that over half of American production is already TAXED.
When one adds up the percentage of regular production taken (TAXED) by income, sales, property, excise, tariff, taxes, along with all other kinds of hidden fees, etc, certainly over half of it goes to the takers and the taking humans, from the making ones!
The taxing iron triangle, once having become the ruling class, can’t be broken, short of a revolutionary scenario, or a wrenching catastrophe.
The pols who “legally” impose taxes on the producers, the people who share the taken produce, and the bureaucrats who dole out the goodies have already WON!
We should just be happy that, so far at least, they still ALLOW the productive sector enough profits with which to continue increasing our standard of living.
Finally---about “suffering”
A king in the Middle Ages would have LOVED to be able to “suffer” like the “poor” Americans who are today living WELL at the bottom as “below the poverty line.”
Don’t be ACCIDENT PRONE!
Be happy, and use what power you still have to create and KEEP your own True wealth!
Fred| 12.3.10 @ 5:44PM
Actually Perusha, "Spinning Wheel" was by Blood Sweat and Tears not CCR.
Perusha| 12.3.10 @ 6:59PM
Fred---
Right!
Thanks for the correction.
Al Adab| 12.3.10 @ 1:13PM
And all this time I thought the rotten egg smell was from those nasty old oil wells.
beebop| 12.3.10 @ 4:20PM
Maybe with the one visiting the troops the adults in DC can accomplish something.
FormerDem| 12.3.10 @ 5:49PM
I have pulled my last Democrat lever at the voting booth. I hate to vote against some of the local guys but I don't see anyone in the Democrat party standing up to the America hating Marxist, socialist, radical leftists who have stolen the party. How did this happen. I have family members, friends and relatives who were strict Democrat voters and say the same thing. The agenda of these people is so totally opposed to the values and ideas I and my friends have grown up with. Surely there are enough 'good' Democrats to stop this insanity, or so I thought. I guess not. I think this will be the end of the party and you know what . . . I really don't care. This party left me years ago when the deviated onto their far left journey. I just hope the people of this great country (and it is great no matter what the liberals say) wake up and realize that they cannot put these people in charge of anything. ON another subject, I think it is disgraceful the way Charlie Rangel invoked his service in the Korean war during his statement. I do thank and admir him for his service but I have to wonder what made him decide to side with the people who resemble the North Koreans (communists) more than Americans. He is a slap in the face to the US Marines. Semper Fi!
Nite| 12.3.10 @ 11:05PM
Democrats are tone deaf when it comes to keeping the Bush tax cuts. They want to raise taxes on anyone making over $250,000. They have been told by other Dems, Republicans, Chamber of Commerce and others, than it will affect small business. Small business is where a majority of jobs are located. What is so hard for a Dem to understand? Like I said, tone deaf.
martin j smith| 12.4.10 @ 8:28AM
First off: There will be no civility in Washington. There will be political civil war. Second: Those who claim to have heard the voters ( and that mainly be in the Republican side ) better get ready for an extremely brutal political experience. Unlike GWB, they must be prepared to respond,debate and denounce any particular piece of garbage out of the mouths of the D ( Socialists ). This lame duck congress is a brief but telling experience. Republicans better forget about their Christmas vacations and gird their loins for a toe to toe battle and be prepared with arguments for the political life of this country. My concern is our survival. If the D ( Socialsits ) insist on forcing votes the Rzzz will need to stand up and fight--and by the way the fighting might even get physical. Here is why: The D ( socialists ) are pushing the envelope to the brink and if there is no where to go then booooooooom!!!!!!!!!
So watch out.
Mark Shepler- Jupiter FL| 12.4.10 @ 10:38AM
It is indeed refreshing to see that the "stupid party" can learn from its electoral ups and down. And downright astonishing to watch them stand on principle and hold the line. I can't recall such determination since just after '94 which was, alas, short lived. Ever since '96 and the breaking of Gingrich and Clinton's re-election it seemed all down hill. Dare I say that it almost makes a body believe the Republicans represent true conservatism, Americanism, again? But then I hear them discuss "extending the Bush tax cuts" and "preserving the good aspects of Obamacare" like "eliminating pre-existing conditions" (Eric Cantor, put on the dunce cap and sit in the corner) and despair that nothing has really changed but a new found respect for lip service.
The "tax cuts" were a lowering of the rates in 2001 and 2003 under Bush. The Republicans, who did not enjoy Obama's majorities but did have public support, won over enough Dems by agreeing to their demand for the rates to sunset in 2011. Bush, and dissolute congressional Reps well along in the process of going native, agreed for a host of reasons not the least being Bush's controversial win in 2000, the economic downturn of '00 and '01 and the economy destroying after effects of 9/11. The Dems were most glad to win a guaranteed future rate increase they wouldn't have to vote on during, hopefully, a new Dem administration that would give them oodles of increased revenue to dispense. Talk about never learning, like tax rates vs. gross revenue or economic growth, but that's another discussion. And now we're here so what's my beef?
Is it too much to ask of our reinvigorated selves to refuse, Mr. Kaminsky, to discuss matters in liberal terms and paradigms? Good grief, the rates are the rates and have been such for a decade. We are not pushing to "extend tax cuts" but rather resisting an automatic tax rate increase unprincipled horse traders wangled five congresses ago. It is precisely these sorts of shenanigans that have brought our country low and for which a disgusted and enraged citizenry has given us another, perhaps one last, turn. Does no one on our side see that to accept and discuss the idea of "extending tax cuts" is to accept the premise that the higher rates were the right and proper levels and only by the generosity of our betters they were temporarily lowered, in short, the natural liberal order of things? That to speak in terms of "tax cuts' is to agree that is indeed what they are? A couple of days ago one Democrat even boldly stated the looming increase was the crafty doings of perfidious Republicans way back when. In a way he was right just as so many of our other problems were made worse by insouciant Republicans along the way.
Words matter. They are the weapons of politics and color the banners of ideas carried high in the van of a movement's advancing troops. Have we learned that, yet? Some times words are the open and honest end product of thought, conception and ideals. Other times they are just manipulated to simulate them and win over converts. When I hear our guys just pop off I often wonder which I'm hearing. I am often discouraged. I cannot tell at times whether they've really gotten it after all or are just mouthing off as they go on their merry way of playing Tweedledee to the Dems Tweedledum.
Oldefarte| 12.4.10 @ 11:19AM
As stated earlier, 11/2/10 was a multi-stepped process. These domestic terroristic Democrats are COMING OUT OF THEIR POLITICAL CLOSET finally and EXPOSING THEMSELVES for the freaks that they truly are. Democrats traditionally and historically have flown under the radar and used the MSM to BS their true intentions, but with the ultra liberal El Chosen One's election, they began dropping their pants to us normal Americans. There is no turning back for them now, and they will continue to complete expose themselves, which is very good. Now there is no doubt possible among the naive population as to what exactly these Democrats are. The huge shift by independents from Democrat to Republican as witnessed by the recent election is confirmation of this. For these Democrats to keep running in public naked as jaybirds will only benefit Republicans. The only thing left for us conservatives to to weed out the corrupt Republicans and replace them with true conservatives who are zeroed in on reducing government etc. What's happening now is a very good thing for the eventual healing of this country's wounds!!!!!!!!!!!!
Margie| 12.4.10 @ 12:34PM
The authors and editors here know who is who, they can tell the IP addresses.
For the last time, I am not beebop, and that person is not me.
I am not a coward like some, who feel the need to post using many and various screen names to make my points.
The authors and editors here know who Tim* is, and he is your resident troublemaking low life.
Thanks for the memories.
beebop| 12.4.10 @ 2:52PM
No. You're not.
Thank God.
Lee| 12.4.10 @ 2:48PM
So Nancy P is female. So what? She's a commie, a far-left liberal who hates the America I love. She uses whatever weapons she can to work her destruction, including her gender. That is despicable.
I can't stand her, or any others of her ilk, male or female. And since my moniker is ambiguous, I am female, too -- a conservative female. I'm only 7 years younger than that (fill-in-your-favorite-term) weasel masquerading as a human being.
That isn't sexism. Disliking someone who is trying to destroy your future is hardly unusual, don't you think?
Rick| 12.6.10 @ 3:39AM
What's the point about Pelosi's sex anyway.....wouldn't she just lie about it like all else? Personally, I think she's a tranny.
martin j smith| 12.5.10 @ 8:01AM
If Pelosi were our only problem we would be in grand shape indeed. But sadly the problem is your average" drone"( as Marc Levine says ) those who regurgititate the Marxist class warfare party line and the core of the Demo0crat ( Socialist Part). As I said above, they ( THEY !!!!!!!!! ) and their alies in the MSM will continue the class warfare hatred where they left off. It is for this reason that I warn those who are fixated with Pelosi. Pay very close attention to the attack moe, to Obama's attempt to make "deals" that are not deals for example--"ok I will as King allow temporary taxcuts for more spending to increase the deficit". This is precisely the idea --kill the economy while seeming to be reasonable. And, as many have predicted it will the the same old same old Left Socialist rants. And, as I have also said above at some points tempers will flare up in our houses of congress and as happened in Japan and other places law makers will literally be at each others throats and there will be brawls. In addition--as in Greece,France,Ireland and the State of California--riots in the streets laregely engineered by UNIONS and LEFT SOCIALIST organizations. This is what I worry about.
Oldefarte| 12.5.10 @ 10:35AM
You are absolutely correct in this. The D's are all no on a path of the socialization of this country, by ramping up government spending for their constituents, the indigent class [not the MIDDLE CLASS as they purposely misuse this term] in order to gain their votes in return for same. This can be evidence from their agenda of suing Azizona over immigration, attempting to pass their DREAM ACT [which would allow wholesale illegal immigration], their/Justice's non-suing of the New Black Panther Party over its voter intimidation activities in Philadelphia, the Justice Dept's enforcement of ONLY civil rights cases involving white on black crimes,etc. It's all purposeful and directed. Now, after spending trillions on healthcare and stimulus for their indigents, they want to force the taxpayers to fund same from their increase of taxes on THE RICH, MILLIONAIRES, BILLIONAIRES, WEALTHY people of this country [translation: anyone with income not living off of the government]!!!!
Dan| 12.5.10 @ 4:42PM
As much as many prognosticators and so-called experts are saying President Obama is going to have a tough time getting re-elected, the reality of the situation is that President Obama will get re-elected against almost any potential GOP challenger.
However, one candidate cannot be over-looked. If we learned anything from 2008, we should've learned that organization and social media skills are paramount to a campaign. No one is actually going to "come out of nowhere". To become the most powerful person in the world, you have to build quite an organization. That's why only one person has a chance to beat President Obama in 2012.
This will make it all clear:
http://mittromneycentral.com/2.....greatness/
Michael L. Hauschild| 12.5.10 @ 5:40PM
I did not look but given your statements that web site must go to a Palin for President 2012 site.
Oldefarte| 12.6.10 @ 7:22PM
test
Oldefarte| 12.6.10 @ 7:28PM
Obama will NOT be re-elected, since the American taxpayer-voters now are fully aware of who/what he is [sadly they did not know this on 11/4/08]. Hillary even has a good chance of taking the nomination from him, a sitting president. Opinion polls show that even George Bush and Jimmy Carter are now more popular than Obama [along with most serious Republican potential candidates]. To say that he will be re-elected is ludicrous and opining STUPIDLY!!!!
keyboard jockey | 12.7.10 @ 3:27PM
Bill O’Reilly is right, politically come 2012 if you are a far left zealot it’s not like you are going to chose the Republican candidate over Obama.
Imus Guest Bill O’Reilly, Frank Rich is A pinhead for his: All the President’s Captors article. Mr Rich’s theory the President suffers from Stockholm Syndrome, the Republicans have taken him hostage
http://youhavetobethistalltogo.....nhead.html
So much for bipartisanship: Obama calls GOP “hostage-takers,” Boehner a “bomb-thrower;” attacks lib critics, too.
So the President is taking his marching orders from the NYT's Op-Eds?
http://michellemalkin.com/2010.....ge-takers/