1 of 2
1
Right-wing comedy Act MCXII
Posted: 07 February 2010 05:53 AM   [ Ignore ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

“But that’s not the whole explanation for the scant pushback in Washington to Mullen and his partner in change, Defense Secretary Robert Gates. There is also a potent political subtext. To a degree unimaginable as recently as 2004 — when Karl Rove and George W. Bush ran a national campaign exploiting fear of gay people — there is now little political advantage to spewing homophobia. Indeed, anti-gay animus is far more likely to repel voters than attract them. This equation was visibly eating at Orrin Hatch, the Republican senator from Utah, as he vamped nervously with Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC last week, trying to duck any discernible stand on Mullen’s testimony. On only one point was he crystal clear: “I just plain do not believe in prejudice of any kind.”

Are there gay cowboys in Texas?

I just love to watch the wingnuts flipflop. Hypocrites to the core. Oh yeah let’s follow these leaders through thick and think but I don’t believe anything they say or do and especially don’t believe in their fiscal policies….

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 February 2010 11:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese (who is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper)

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget.  The president does.

You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court Justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally,  and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.  In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason.. They have no legal authority.  They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing.  I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.  The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault.  They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget.  He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.  Who is the speaker of the House?  Nancy Pelosi.  She is the leader of the majority party.  She and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want.  If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted—by present facts—of incompetence and irresponsibility.  I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.  When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red ..

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq ,  it’s because they want them in Iraq.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems..

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.  Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation,” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 February 2010 01:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Commissioned
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  173
Joined  2008-09-29

So Jim, are you for the integration of homosexuals into the military, or is this just another rejection of former officials policies?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 February 2010 11:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

Hey John Yes I think the right wing will reject the idea. Certainly the flipflop McCain has put his Republican stamp on it eh….
I have never seen a problem with it. And if you think about it the deception created by the ongoing policy must be harmful to all. It does far more damage than good. But that is the Conservative way. LOL can you imagine the mindless mania of the Tea Party actually supporting Gays… hohoho it’s always tough mid term but I think we are in for a real attempt by fascist factions to take over the Republican Party.

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 February 2010 11:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

Aaah Kaipo, not wanting to nit pick but was that cut and paste dip into verbosity a for or against Gays? And what about you?

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 February 2010 12:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

The “dip into verbosity” was to remind you that Congress and the President make the decisions (including allowing gays in the military). The Democrats have been in control of Congress since 2006. Any law change by them? No.
BO the Groveler has been President since 2009. Any change from him? No.  Seems he’s looking for a “consensus”. Ever notice that the left really likes that word a lot.

I’m not against gays. I have a couple of friends who are gay.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 06:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

Legislative ignorant as well eh Kaipo…..I need no reminder especially when your cut and paste has nothing to do with this thread.
You still did not answer the question which is of course a typical reaction eh—Has no one told you what to say yet? LOL Come out of the closet K or are you afraid Palin and her Tea Party cronies will tar and feather you for an incorrect wingnut PC answer LOL

Consensus of course is not in the fascist authoritarian rule that you would prefer. What makes me laugh so much is all your entitlements will disappear under such rule. (No you may not pick and choose) Since America was founded consensus was a time honored way of finding that way forward when parties fundamentally disagree. Seems you give a rats ass about tradition as well as the American people.

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 07:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

“Fascist authoritarian rule”  - does that mean a leader can’t lead by conviction? He can only decide by popular opinion?
I thought BO wanted to lead. I thought he wanted “change”. I thought what he did all last year was lead by conviction? Was that “fascist authoritarian rule”?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 07:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

Are you cowering in the corner from fear or fear of fear? Just answer the question K. Just answer the question…........Oh honest Injun I won’t tell Palin you did something on your own LOL comon’ K. Just answser the question

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 07:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

What’s the question?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 07:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

I’m as gay as you, Jim.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 08:21 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

LOL So your for a ban on gays in the military. Your refusal to answer can only be interpreted as such. Why didn’t you just say so. Why such cowardice?

Boo…

Watch out that shawdow might getcha

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 08:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

Oh, that question. Yes, I’m for a ban on gays in the military.
Now answer my question, Jim.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 09:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

So Kaipo after all the hoo haaahh you came out of the closet and comfirmed that

Yes, I’m for a ban on gays in the military.

Well done. Hopefully you feel better after getting that off your chest. Maybe you could explain why?

As I see no further questions regarding the topic of this thread I shall “bow “out. Should you want to open another topic please do.

PS gotcha K. eh… the answer is 3xNo. Now go out and try to be original.

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 10:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  554
Joined  2008-09-29

Explain to you?
Why?

That was 3 answers to 4 questions.
Try again.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 February 2010 12:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
DIRNSA
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  252
Joined  2008-09-29

Kaipo

It was your post. It was your questions. It was YOUR THOUGHTS

Is it true that when Neanderthals try to count above 3 they get dizzy and loose contact with reality?

And, please Kaipo, you are not explaining anything to me but to the whole world who can and do tune in to the Forum, this is not the list.
They might find it interesting how such a fair and balanced person as your self can be so hateful and prejudiced. Or is it loving and caring to keep limp wristed souls out of harms way? Why don’t you just explain your position Hah eh in 69 word or less eh….

 Signature 

Chad Rat
ASA 67-71

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1
 
‹‹ another bow from BO      tracking BO ››