A Study In Contrasts Part III
Former President Bush's Axis of Evil:
North Korean Communist Dictator Kim Jong Il
Iranian Theocrat Mahmoud Ahmedinejad
Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein
President Obama's Axis of Evil:
Private American Citizen Joe The Plumber
Private American Citizen Rush Limbaugh
Private American Citizen Sean Hannity
posted by John | 5:48 PM
109 Comments:
I guess this post partially explains the Constitutional oath people take, "...enemies, foreign and domestic." The RNC is full of patriots that worry about foreign threats, and the DNC is full of traitors looking to silence the country's patriots.
Private American Citizen Joe The Tax Cheat who robbed the treasury while the country was at war.
Private American Citizen Rush Limbaugh who plea bargained his way out of illegal doctor shopping. And also said "He Hopes He Fails" re: Obama. A sentiment echoed by Al Qaeda.
Private American Citizen FJ who is openly racist and sexist and advocates murdering women who cheat on their husbands.
Sexist J Encouraging Men to harm women who cheat on them:
FJ said...
byw - Catching a spouse in flagrante delicto with a lover can mitigate the spousal penalties of a crime... and if not with the lawyers... certainly with the jury.
If I'm on the jury, the perp might even walk...
His compatriot John's silence shows his approval of above acts.
John said...
I was just thinking:
What if fj was a woman who was lenient with another woman who caught her husband in bed with another woman and killed him?
Would she earn the same contempt you have for her as a him?
Recall that Lorena Bobbit cut off her sleeping husband John Wayne Bobbit's penis, and then walked after serving a short stint in a mental hospital.
Her plea that she "snapped" because of her husband's serial infidelities went a long way with the jury, and won some sympathy with the general public, and, in fact, she became a feminist icon.
Can you imagine what would happen to a man if he did that to his wife's clitoris?
The monster would still be in prison (unless he lived in a Muslim country), as well he should be.
...and I'm not suggesting that Lorena should be likewise rotting in prison for her assault, only pointing out that there is a cultural double-standard favoring females in many of these cases.
So your horror at fj's presumably baiting posts is itself sexist, as they would invite far less horror--if any at all--were he speaking on behalf of a woman who killed her husband in a crime of passion, i.e. in mitigating circumstances, as acknowledged by law.
Silence. Then you agree.
I noticed. I had told you that they consider the gestating human to be nothing more than snot, and she comes back and says as much ("pin-sized cluster of cells"), so it's a waste of time arguing with her on behalf of the developing infant if she doesn't even recognize it as such.
Furthermore, you posted hard numbers on the sheer number of deaths caused by "legal" abortion dwarfing the number of deaths caused by illegal, "back alley" ones, and yet she obliviously persisted in the mantra that more deaths occurred when abortion was illegal than when it's legalized.
Of course, the brutal death of the gestating human in each case is not even considered in the rationalizations of privacy, choice, etc. for the mother who in the vast majority of cases chose to engage in behavior that Nature (if not Nature's God) designed for the singular purpose of procreation.
Their arguments begin with the dehumanization of the gestating human, and thenceforth there is zero consideration for it, for it's choice, or existence, even if its female.
It's madness.
"Private American Citizen Rush Limbaugh who plea bargained his way out of illegal doctor shopping. And also said "He Hopes He Fails" re: Obama. A sentiment echoed by Al Qaeda."
Actually, Al Qaeda is very happy with our new socialist Supreme Leader, Obama. On another note, there is no way that one can compare "illegal doctor shopping" with being PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES and appointing cabinet people that have cheated the IRS.
Of COURSE conservatives do not want Obama to succeed in turning the US into another European tyranny. I do not support Obama turning us into another European tyranny. Nobody that understands freedom wants that. All he is doing is voicing his concerns. Are you going to tell me that nobody on the left offered criticism of George Bush? Should they have been censured for telling their own viewpoints? Of course not.
But the left is not concerned about personal liberty. To hell with that, right? Now you have to be sure that not a single republican's representative (about half of the nation) did not vote for Obama's government take-over of the private sector. You have to deal with ownership of this disaster.
Your children's children will likely curse you for your lack of understanding. I say to hell with all of you socialists. The founders, Federalists or Jeffersonian Republicans, would not have understood your willingness to sell your freedoms for a bowl of pottage.
I did not know that liberty was a statistic.
If we are so irrelevant, go away,but you protest so much you must find a problem.
See? For me,liberty is not a factor of the status quo, the local blog, newspaper, or opinion.
Liberty is my right to live as I see fit. Make business as I see fit, and to interact with my neighbors as I see fit as long as they and I understand the social contract as out forth in the Constitution of the United States.
Things that you and the current President, Democratic Congress, and a host of thieves and idiots currently all have no understanding of or ability to live by. Who abides by what?
Plastic AlGore coolaid drinking, Clinton parasitic, leftist communal thinking robots do not impress me anymore. You are ignorant children that do not know what freedom is even supposed to be. The only lying morons here are you leftist in denial, because what you asked for is coming true, and it is the nightmare that you never wanted to see.
LOL, these dumbasses think regurgitating fox news and limbaugh talking points make them intelligent. Amazing how conservatives spent like drunken sailors for 8 years and after they drained the treasury, suddenly found religion.
RNC chairman: voters have 'no reason' to trust GOPJeremy Gantz
Published: Friday February 13, 2009
Print This Email This
The chairman of the Republican National Committee has confirmed what Democrats and millions of others frustrated with his party have probably been thinking for a while: the GOP can't be trusted.
In a surprisingly frank exchange on Glenn Beck's Fox News program Friday, Michael Steele responded to Beck's anger that the Republican Party had "betrayed" its supporters by allowing "socialism" to occur in America this way:
"I’m not going to soft pedal this with you," Steele said. "The reality of it is, you are absolutely right. You have absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point."
Beck was apparently referring to legislation passed during the last six months, amounting to more than a trillion dollars in bailouts and spending – including the $789 billion stimulus package which passed the House Friday and is expected to pass the Senate, and the $700 billion "bailout" passed into law last October.
The fact that a trio of Republican senators – Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania – have broke with their colleagues to vote for the new stimulus bill likely also prompted Beck's umbrage.
"We expect socialism from some of the Democrats. We don't expect it from you," Beck told Steele, as the question "What is GOP going to do to stop march toward socialism?" ran at the bottom of the screen. "We actually took a lot of crap for a long time... And then you guys betrayed us. Why should we even think twice of pulling a level again?"
Hey ass, instead of copying and pasting crap for Fox News how about posting the truth from time to time. Your headlines below show Bush's Inaugural cost WITHOUT Security costs while you print Obama's WITH Security costs. We better give 'em a few days to look for some talking points on the internet rather than actually admitting to flat out misrepresentation. Either that or some BS dodge about "Fact" baiting.
Headlines 4 Years Ago:
"REPUBLICANS SPENDING $42 MILLION ON INAUGURATION WHILE TROOPS DIE IN UNARMORED HUMVEES"
Headlines For Obama Inauguration:
"HISTORIC OBAMA INAUGURATION WILL COST ONLY $170 MILLION"
They love to let criminal corporations have the FREEDUMB to literally kill us with their shoddy products and bankrupt us with their "free" market insanities.
BWAH-HA-HA-hA! Bankrupt us with free-market insanities. That IS a good one.
Like free-markets are killing the economy. Quick, somebody slip a "buy America" provision into the porkulus bill...
Oh that right, they tried that... it was too stupid an idea even for Democrats.
I can see this blog next year (after the economy recovers)
"Republicus always new that republican's like Snowe, Collins Specter would come up with a plan to save us from the Obama depression."
The Obama Depression. Yep, you sure got that part right, troll...
Racist/Sexist Moron: As if the economy was humming along until 1/20 right?
When will one of you defend the fact bending noted in the inaugural spending post??? I suspect you'll dodge with some crap about race baiting or abortion.
Anon said: "Republicus always new that republican's like Snowe, Collins Specter would come up with a plan to save us from the Obama depression."
hahahahaha...that's some funny shit.
But, hey, they do have a rilly powerful new talking point:
Andrew Card says Obama violated some dress code!!
That'll ruin him.
Right, Simes, their magic free market suffers another disastrous crash, and all we hear from them is the tired old mantra about socialism.
Then, when FDR style socialistic measures save it AGAIN, they'll be telling us how marvelous the American free market is...even after Greenspan himself admitted the deregs brought about the crash.
These poor fools are like rigidly programmed robots who can't learn a new line to save their rust, outdated, irrelevant asses.
Which is why they're a kick to kick.
So which socialist economies are in good shape at the moment... were spared this "economic downturn"?
None.
So much for "magic socialism".
Scientists: Pace of Climate Change Exceeds Estimates
By Kari Lydersen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, February 15, 2009; A03
CHICAGO, Feb. 14 -- The pace of global warming is likely to be much faster than recent predictions, because industrial greenhouse gas emissions have increased more quickly than expected and higher temperatures are triggering self-reinforcing feedback mechanisms in global ecosystems, scientists said Saturday.
"We are basically looking now at a future climate that's beyond anything we've considered seriously in climate model simulations," Christopher Field, founding director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University, said at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Field, a member of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said emissions from burning fossil fuels since 2000 have largely outpaced the estimates used in the U.N. panel's 2007 reports. The higher emissions are largely the result of the increased burning of coal in developing countries, he said.
Unexpectedly large amounts of carbon dioxide are being released into the atmosphere as the result of "feedback loops" that are speeding up natural processes. Prominent among these, evidence indicates, is a cycle in which higher temperatures are beginning to melt the arctic permafrost, which could release hundreds of billions of tons of carbon and methane into the atmosphere, said several scientists on a panel at the meeting.
The permafrost holds 1 trillion tons of carbon, and as much as 10 percent of that could be released this century, Field said. Melting permafrost also releases methane, which is 25 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
"It's a vicious cycle of feedback where warming causes the release of carbon from permafrost, which causes more warming, which causes more release from permafrost," Field said.
Evidence is also accumulating that terrestrial and marine ecosystems cannot remove as much carbon from the atmosphere as earlier estimates suggested, Field said.
In the oceans, warmer weather is driving stronger winds that are exposing deeper layers of water, which are already saturated with carbon and not as able to absorb as much from the atmosphere. The carbon is making the oceans more acidic, which also reduces their ability to absorb carbon.
On land, rising carbon dioxide levels had been expected to boost plant growth and result in greater sequestration of carbon dioxide. As plants undergo photosynthesis to draw energy from the sun, carbon is drawn out of the atmosphere and trapped in the plant matter. But especially in northern latitudes, this effect may be offset significantly by the fact that vegetation-covered land absorbs much more of the sun's heat than snow-covered terrain, said scientists on the panel.
Earlier snowmelt, the shrinking arctic ice cover and the northward spread of vegetation are causing the Northern Hemisphere to absorb, rather than reflect, more of the sun's energy and reinforce the warming trend.
While it takes a relatively long time for plants to take carbon out of the atmosphere, that carbon can be released rapidly by wildfires, which contribute about a third as much carbon to the atmosphere as burning fossil fuels, according to a paper Field co-authored.
Fires such as the recent deadly blazes in southern Australia have increased in recent years, and that trend is expected to continue, Field said. Warmer weather, earlier snowmelt, drought and beetle infestations facilitated by warmer climates are all contributing to the rising number of fires linked to climate change. Across large swaths of the United States and Canada, bark beetles have killed many mature trees, making forests more flammable. And tropical rain forests that were not susceptible to forest fires in the past are likely to become drier as temperatures rise, growing more vulnerable.
Preventing deforestation in the tropics is more important than in northern latitudes, the panel agreed, since lush tropical forests sequester more carbon than sparser northern forests. And deforestation in northern areas has benefits, since larger areas end up covered in exposed, heat-reflecting snow.
Many scientists and policymakers are advocating increased incentives for preserving tropical forests, especially in the face of demand for clearing forest to grow biofuel crops such as soy. Promoting biofuels without also creating forest-preservation incentives would be "like weatherizing your house and deliberately keeping your windows open," said Peter Frumhoff, chief of the Union of Concerned Scientists' climate program. "It's just not a smart policy."
Field said the U.N. panel's next assessment of Earth's climate trends, scheduled for release in 2014, will for the first time incorporate policy proposals. It will also include complicated models of interconnected ecosystem feedbacks.
The panel's last report noted that preliminary knowledge of such feedbacks suggested that an additional 100 billion to 500 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions would have to be prevented in the next century to avoid dangerous global warming. Currently, about 10 billion tons of carbon are emitted each year.
Obama has once again outwitted the punditocracy and the opposition. The stimulus battle was more of the same magic we've seen from him in the past. “This town talks to itself and whips itself into a frenzy with its own theories that are completely at odds with what the rest of America is thinking,” says Axelrod. Once the frenzy got going, it didn’t matter that most polls showed support for Obama and his economic package: “If you watched cable TV, you’d see our support was plummeting, we were in trouble. It was almost like living in a parallel universe.”
Washington is too insular and the American people are a lot smarter than people in Washington think.”
Republicans are isolated in that parallel universe and believe all the noise in its echo chamber, they are now as out of touch with reality as the “inevitable” Clinton campaign was before it got clobbered in Iowa. The G.O.P. doesn’t recognize that it emerged from the stimulus battle even worse off than when it started. That obliviousness gives the president the opening to win more ambitious policy victories than last week’s. Having checked the box on attempted bipartisanship, Obama can now move in for the kill.
The stimulus opponents, egged on by all the media murmurings about Obama “losing control,” also thought they had a sure thing. Their TV advantage added to their complacency. As the liberal blog ThinkProgress reported, G.O.P. members of Congress wildly outnumbered Democrats as guests on all cable news networks, not just Fox News, in the three days of intense debate about the House stimulus bill. They started pounding in their slogans relentlessly. The bill was not a stimulus package but an orgy of pork spending. The ensuing deficit would amount to “generational theft.” F.D.R.’s New Deal had been an abject failure.
The stimulus held its own because the public, in defiance of Washington’s condescending assumption, was smart enough to figure out that the government can’t create jobs without spending and that Bush-era Republicans have no moral authority to lecture about deficits. Some Americans may even have ancestors saved from penury by the New Deal.
In any event, the final score was unambiguous. The stimulus package arrived with the price tag and on roughly the schedule Obama had set for it. The president’s job approval percentage now ranges from the mid 60s (Gallup, Pew) to mid 70s (CNN). While 48 percent of Americans told CBS, Gallup and Pew that they approve of Congressional Democrats, only 31 (Gallup), 32 (CBS) and 34 (Pew) percent could say the same of their G.O.P. counterparts.
At least some media hands are chagrined. After the stimulus prevailed, Scarborough speculated on MSNBC that “perhaps we’ve overanalyzed it, we don’t know what we’re talking about.” But the Republicans are busy high-fiving themselves and celebrating “victory.” Even in defeat, they are still echoing the 24/7 cable mantra about the stimulus’s unpopularity. This self-congratulatory mood is summed up by a Wall Street Journal columnist who wrote that “the House Republicans’ zero votes for the Obama presidency’s stimulus ‘package’ is looking like the luckiest thing to happen to the G.O.P.’s political fortunes since Ronald Reagan switched parties.” There hasn’t been this much delusional giddiness in these ranks since Monica Lewinsky promised a surefire Republican sweep in the 1998 midterms.
Not all Republicans are so clueless, whether in Congress or beyond. Charlie Crist, the moderate Florida governor who appeared with the president in his Fort Myers, Fla., town-hall meeting last week, has Obama-like approval ratings in the 70s. Naturally, the party’s hard-liners in Washington loathe him. Their idea of a good public face for the G.O.P. is a sound-bite dispenser like the new chairman, Michael Steele, a former Maryland lieutenant governor. Steele’s argument against the stimulus package is that “in the history of mankind” no “federal, state or local” government has ever “created one job.” As it happens, among the millions of jobs created by the government are the federal investigators now pursuing Steele for alleged financial improprieties in his failed 2006 Senate campaign.
This G.O.P., a largely white Southern male party with talking points instead of ideas and talking heads instead of leaders, is not unlike those “zombie banks” that we’re being asked to bail out. It is in too much denial to acknowledge its own insolvency and toxic assets. Given the mess the country is in, it would be helpful to have an adult opposition that could pull its weight, but that’s not the hand America has been dealt, and the stimulus victory showed that even as president Obama can ambush Washington’s conventional wisdom as if he were still an insurgent.
Republicans will be judged by the voters. If they want to obstruct and filibuster while the economy is in free fall, the president should call their bluff and let them go at it. In the first four years after F.D.R. took over from Hoover, the already decimated ranks of Republicans in Congress fell from 36 to 16 in the Senate and from 117 to 88 in the House. The G.O.P. is so insistent that the New Deal was a mirage it may well have convinced itself that its own sorry record back then didn’t happen either.
Good job. Calibrate the shrillness level of the fear mongering on the climate with the fear mongering of the economy at exactly the same time a massive spending bill that includes more control on the CO2 emitting means of production (and more funds for jobs in the Green industry which is very much like a growing, organized--but godless-- religion that is churning out priests who need churches built and parishioners to fill the pews-- and so the collection trays) is rushed through Congress before anyone can ascertain exactly what's in it (or realize what it's all about).
To say "it's even worse than we thought" like apocalyptic priests preaching imminent Doomsday over and over again does not make "worsening" true, but makes true that they themselves didn't have command of the "facts" and had their own "heads in the sand" when they insisted otherwise.
It's like someone saying "There is a clear consensus that (a) exists and 2+(a)=7, therefore, (a)=5 is an algebraic fact, and if you can't accept that fact your head is in the sand and you must be ridiculed and silenced."
Then there were years of scrutiny and expressed skepticism of (a)=5, and whethet or not (a) was really (b), or (c), or even (x)-- if not actually a cipher.
But the argument was declared "over" by the High Priest Algore:
The indisputable facts were in: (a)=5.
Now:
"There is now a clear consensus that 2+(a)=11, therefore, it is an algebraic fact that (a)=9, and if you can't accept that fact your head is in the sand and you must be ridiculed and silenced."
So we "RILLY" have to hurry up NOW and get control of the oil industry (which happens to be primarily run here by Texan and Alaskan Republicans who are none too fond of taxes and don't think much of the federal government in Washington, interestingly enough), and it's consumers (i.e. every single tax-paying citizen).
Oh, btw, "the higher emissions are largely the result of the increased burning of coal in developing countries," but never mind that. It's America's fault."
And, of course, it all started accelerating since 2000, when Texas oil man Bush rejected Kyoto: "emissions from burning fossil fuels since 2000 have largely outpaced the estimates used in the U.N. panel's 2007 reports."
Right. The UN panel that, a forgotten year or so ago, had to embarrassingly--and very quietly-- mumble that they had the "facts" in Kyoto wrong, too, but nevermind that.
Just remember that the "facts" before were really just "estimates," but the estimates now are "facts."
Love,
Kari Lydersen
(Washington Post Staff Writer)
"Obama has once again outwitted the punditocracy and the opposition..."
This is delusional. Obama is having a very rough first month. His first "Victory"--the massive spending bill--was expected to fly through Congress with no questions asked (because of the Democratic majority and a supposedly "destroyed" Republican minority) but instead was held up and exposed long enough for a majority of the American people to start figuring out what's going on (stealth reparations, for one).
"The stimulus battle was more of the same magic we've seen from him in the past."
lol
Yes, "Obamagic."
“This town talks to itself and whips itself into a frenzy with its own theories that are completely at odds with what the rest of America is thinking.”
That's a projection. This whole frenzied lick-fest and the presentation of its own theories as facts is what's out of touch.
"Once the frenzy got going, it didn’t matter that most polls showed support for Obama and his economic package...."
That's being devious. Obama is enjoying strong support still, but the bill is not. Hack Axelrod linked the two to hide the latter behind the glow of his messiah's halo.
“If you watched cable TV, you’d see our support was plummeting, we were in trouble."
You were and are in trouble.
"It was almost like living in a parallel universe.”
You do.
"Washington is too insular and the American people are a lot smarter than people in Washington think.”
That's right. Unfortunately for Democrats in Washington who think they're Cardinals in the Vatican in a country full of illiterate and toothless peasants.
"Republicans are isolated in that parallel universe and believe all the noise in its echo chamber..."
He's projecting. He's the one making the noise in the echo chamber. He's saying that the monolithic voting of a Democratically-controlled Congress is an expression of the "smartness of the American people."
"...they are now as out of touch with reality as the 'inevitable' Clinton campaign was before it got clobbered in Iowa."
Many are still unaware of the reality of ACORN's busing and transplanting of voters into key districts, both during the primaries and the General Election in crucial swing states. Like Iowa (not that I feel sorry for Billary).
"The G.O.P. doesn’t recognize that it emerged from the stimulus battle even worse off than when it started"
That's as out of touch with reality as Clinton thinking "it was just a blowjob" before he got clobbered with Impeachment.
The GOP is much better off now as a true opposition party than a demoralized, acquiescent one. and Axelrod knows it.
"That obliviousness gives the president the opening to win more ambitious policy victories than last week’s."
Let's see him fill his cabinet first.
"Having checked the box on attempted bipartisanship, Obama can now move in for the kill."
OOO! "The Kill." Let's "kill" the Republicans!
Can you imagine the hysteria that would go up from the Left if any conservative/Republican promoted "killing" anyone?
They had a meltdown when Coulter opined that we should kill foreign terrorist leaders.
I don't think even Coulter suggested that we "kill" American Democrats, literally or figuratively.
"The stimulus opponents, egged on by all the media murmurings about Obama 'losing control,' also thought they had a sure thing."
He did lose control, and exposing him, once and for all, as the true Big Government liberal that he is was a sure thing--thanks to the bill--and was accomplished.
A lot more people than before are aware of what's happening, and aren't happy at all with the bonzai spending and enlarging of government power.
"Their TV advantage added to their complacency. As the liberal blog ThinkProgress reported.."
"Thinkprogress." lol
"Mindlessliberalism" is more like it.
"G.O.P. members of Congress wildly outnumbered Democrats as guests on all cable news networks, not just Fox News, in the three days of intense debate about the House stimulus bill. They started pounding in their slogans relentlessly."
Boo-hoo. And it worked. The American people were informed about what was being concealed by the "open" and "transparent" Obama Administration.
Unfortunately, Democratic members of Congress wildly outnumber Republicans, which is what counts when voting on a bill, not how many millions of Americans have been succesfully informed and begun to pay attention, which is what will count in '10 and '12.
The issue at hand is whether the Republicans got their message out. They did, and Axelrod knows it and so this piece is just trying to convince the simple-minded--if not altogether mindless-- people who listen to him
that no, no, it's not what's apparent, but the inverted, exact opposite, actually.
He's inverting 180 degrees here via sarcasm:
"The bill was not a stimulus package but an orgy of pork spending."
It is.
And here:
"The ensuing deficit would amount to 'generational theft.'”
It is. Who's going to pay for it? The next generation.
And here:
"F.D.R.’s New Deal had been an abject failure."
It was. Militarization for WWII got us out of the Depression, not the New Deal, which prolonged it.
That's what liberals do. They ridicule reality by presenting it in sarcastic terms so as to make anyone who saw reality as it is feel self-conscious and embarrassed for not seeing the "truer, higher" reality.
Liberals always have to point out what's supposed to be "obvious" and what "everyone knows" to make you second-guess your own discernment and common sense and make you feel like a behind-the-curve antisocial freak because you don't know what "everyone else" does.
When liberals write and inform you about a "reality" that "everyone knows," your first reaction is usually a surprised "Huh?" followed by a growing sensation of alienation.
If you didn't have anchoring to begin with but allow yourself to be drawn into their "reality" and assimilated like a Star Trek Borg, you still won't feel at home but feel even more alienated, anyway, but blame conservatives for making you feel that way.
Conversely, when reading conservative writers, you feel: "Right, I already knew that even if I hadn't verbalized it."
Anyway, Axelrod continues to swing a pocketwatch from a chain before your eyes:
"The stimulus held its own because the public, in defiance of Washington’s condescending assumption, was smart enough to figure out that the government can’t create jobs without spending and that Bush-era Republicans have no moral authority to lecture about deficits."
That's an inversion (the 180 degree lie). Axelrod is insisting that public approval has grown and that Republican's tattle-telling fell on deaf ears, but public approval for the bill has steadily declined since it was first introduced--because it was exposed by Republicans.
Furthermore, the "American People" had nothing to do with its speedy but trippity midnight sprint through Congress. A majority of Americans didn't like the bill once they were informed of what was in it (by Republicans), because spending is one thing, generational theft in a hog-slopping orgy of private sector looting--and the stealth imposition of reparations and socialism-- another.
And Pelosi broke her promise to post it before voting to keep as many in the dark as long as possible, for obvious reasons that Axelrod is trying to distract attention from.
"Obama has once again outwitted the punditocracy and the opposition."
The kind of "outwitting" Axelrod is smugly salivating over is the kind of ruthless deviousness that they accused Karl Rove of (unacceptably) having.
That Axelrod is betraying pride in thinking that Obama has it in spades, vindictively boasting of "outmaneuvering" and "killing." proves that the unacceptable traits they accused the hated opposition of supposedly having when in power (e.g. Machiavellian lying and partisan plotting) were projections of their own characteristics and envied them being succesfully utilized by that opposition, e.g. "Oh how we hate Karl Rove! We wish we had someone just like him, only worse!."
It should be made clear, however, that does not mean that Rove--as exemplified--embodied the essentially evil nature as projected.
"Bush-era Republicans have no moral authority to lecture about deficits."
That's being batted around in an attempt to distract from the fact that, now that that the Democrats control both houses and the presidency, the deficit is about to skyrocket beyond anything ever seen.
It will bloat the deficit even more than the last time the Democrats controlled the executive and legislative branches, in Clinton's first year and the historically huge tax hike he enacted with his own "Emergency Stimulus Bill."
The "Bush (41) Recession" had already ended and a recovery underway, but for all anyone knew, thanks to the Democrat's campaign rhetoric, it was "The Worst Economy Since The Great Depression" (which they say everytime Republicans are in power, no matter how aggressive an expansion is underway, and without ever mentioning Carter's economy, which in the regards to unemployment and inflation, was much worse even than the state of the economy now).
Anyway, the Democrats plan to let the Bush tax-cuts expire, and so re-imposing the Clinton tax-hikes (which the Bush cuts effectively reversed, to the infuriation of many on the Left) on top of what Obama is pushing for, ensuring even more government largesse, and more spending.
They have always been the tax & spend party, and took full advantage of Bush 43's penlessness in vetoing spending bills even as they widely publicized and denigrated the very deficit that they themselves--the congressmen--were growing.
Bush suffered politically for his presiding over a ballooning deficit, and the Democrats, citing the (Republican Congress-inspired) fiscal discipline (in some areas) of the Clinton Era, stole the mantle of fiscal discipline off of Republican shoulders (just like they stole the mantle of championing the rights of African Americans from Republicans).
So when they say, "Bush-era Republicans have no moral authority to lecture about deficits," they may have a point, but it's an outrageously shameless one given their own history and the fact that they're going for broke with it now, far beyond an Republican Administration would have ever allowed.
It's like a person who has never bathed and smells rancidly telling someone who rather recently rolled around in the mud that he has no authority to say that anyone stinks, while he himself then announces that he is ready to take a bath and start fresh by settling into a tub full of raw sewage.
Phelonius said:
"Liberty is my right to live as I see fit. Make business as I see fit, and to interact with my neighbors as I see fit as long as they and I understand the social contract as out forth in the Constitution of the United States."
Amen.
SANTA FE, N.M. - Former astronaut Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon and once served New Mexico in the U.S. Senate, doesn’t believe that humans are causing global warming.
"I don’t think the human effect is significant compared to the natural effect," said Schmitt, who is among 70 skeptics scheduled to speak next month at the International Conference on Climate Change in New York.
Schmitt contends that scientists "are being intimidated" if they disagree with the idea that burning fossil fuels has increased carbon dioxide levels, temperatures and sea levels.
"They’ve seen too many of their colleagues lose grant funding when they haven’t gone along with the so-called political consensus that we’re in a human-caused global warming," Schmitt said.
Dan Williams, publisher with the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which is hosting the climate change conference, said he invited Schmitt after reading about his resignation from The Planetary Society, a nonprofit dedicated to space exploration.
Schmitt resigned after the group blamed global warming on human activity. In his resignation letter, the 74-year-old geologist argued that the "global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making."
Williams said Heartland is skeptical about the crisis that people are proclaiming in global warming.
"Not that the planet hasn’t warmed. We know it has or we’d all still be in the Ice Age," he said. "But it has not reached a crisis proportion and, even among us skeptics, there’s disagreement about how much man has been responsible for that warming."
Schmitt said historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D., and the rise in carbon dioxide is because of the temperature rise.
Schmitt also said geological evidence indicates changes in sea level have been going on for thousands of years. He said smaller changes are related to changes in the elevation of land masses — for example, the Great Lakes are rising because the earth’s crust is rebounding from being depressed by glaciers.
Schmitt, who grew up in Silver City and now lives in Albuquerque, has a science degree from the California Institute of Technology. He also studied geology at the University of Oslo in Norway and took a doctorate in geology from Harvard University in 1964.
In 1972, he was one of the last men to walk on the moon as part of the Apollo 17 mission.
Schmitt said he’s heartened that the upcoming conference is made up of scientists who haven’t been manipulated by politics.
Of the global warming debate, he said: "It’s one of the few times you’ve seen a sizable portion of scientists who ought to be objective take a political position and it’s coloring their objectivity."
Once again the mouthy blowhard who runs this blog refuses to admit to lying to his audience of ~3 other braindead conservative idiots. Where is your 12 page response to these lies you posted? You know, where you IGNORED security costs for Bush's inaugural!
Headlines 4 Years Ago:
"REPUBLICANS SPENDING $42 MILLION ON INAUGURATION WHILE TROOPS DIE IN UNARMORED HUMVEES"
Headlines For Obama Inauguration:
"HISTORIC OBAMA INAUGURATION WILL COST ONLY $170 MILLION"
12:07 PM
So you didn't interpret my silence this time around as tacit approval. Good.
Anyway-- as I actually did respond in the last post--you're an imbecile, which is the warranted response to your imbecility.
I "IGNORED" nothing. Those are actual headlines blared out by a media with a glaring double standard.
Explicitly informing the reader that they were "headlines from four years ago/today should have given you some kind of clue.
Yet you remain clueless and have been running around demanding that I acknowledge your irrelevant gripes.
That they left in Obama's security costs while omitting Bush's in the endeavor to make one's inauguration a cathartic extravaganza and the other one of wasteful extravagance is completely irrelevant to the
demonstrated endeavor.
Dismissed, dumbbell.
Got it, so you mislead you braindead conservative audience by making them think Obama's inaugural was 4x the cost of Bush's. We just interpreted your silence to mean you couldn't find a pre-packaged response from Drudge/Rush/Fox. Your ignorant ramblings when you come down off your high horse are little more than reworded Republican talking points.
Your dismissed you deceiptful POS.
Do duh word PROLIX come to mind? I'm sure there are lunatics somewhere who would read this idiots endless, desperate ramblings...I just went down a couple paragraphs deep and found one more word...
DENIAL
And then there seemed to be some demented twaddle about warming being a plot against the oil companies...hahahahahahahahahaha.
No wonder America dismissed these fools.
But watching their scramblings and writhings to avoid the ugly realities of their situation is a kick in the ass.
Watching these twats twisting, sweating, and hiding from reality is a gratifying and hilarious spectacle.
damn gratifying
The Revolution is Upon Us...even the GOP is joining...well GW made some big moves already and got the ball rolling for us:
TIME: "The Case for Nationalizing the Entire Economy." "The advocates for nationalizing U.S. banks have been out in force recently. Senator Lindsey Graham, who almost certainly does not fit the usual commie profile, told ABC News that banks were in such deep trouble that government ownership of the institutions may be the only way to save the financial system." Whoa, That's from TIME Magazine, Not Some Commie Rag!
What kind of pathetic fool makes scientific decisions on the basis of ideology? Reicho morons and religious freaks, that's who...oh, they're both the same defective cretins:
The tropics on fire: scientist's grim vision of global warming
Tropical forests may dry out and become vulnerable to devastating wildfires as global warming accelerates over the coming decades, a senior scientist has warned.
Soaring greenhouse gas emissions, driven by a surge in coal use in countries such as China and India, are threatening temperature rises that will turn damp and humid forests into parched tinderboxes, said Dr Chris Field, co-chair of the UN's Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Higher temperatures could see wildfires raging through the tropics and a large scale melting of the Arctic tundra, releasing billions of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere that will accelerate warming even further, he said.
Field, director of global ecology at the Carnegie Institute, told the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Chicago at the weekend that the IPCC's last report on climate change in 2007 had substantially underestimated the severity of global warming over the rest of the century.
The report concluded that the Earth's temperature is likely to rise between 1.1C and 6.4C by 2100, depending on future global carbon emissions. "We now have data showing that from 2000 to 2007, greenhouse gas emissions increased far more rapidly than we expected, primarily because developing countries, like China and India, saw a huge upsurge in electric power generation, almost all of it based on coal," Field said. The next report, which Field will oversee, is due in 2014 and will now include future scenarios where global warming is far more serious than previous reports have suggested, he said.
Field said that if the tropics became dry enough for fires to break out, tropical forests would pass a "tipping point" from absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to releasing it.
"Tropical forests are essentially inflammable. You couldn't get a fire to burn there if you tried. But if they dry out just a little, the result can be very large and destructive wildfires. It is increasingly clear that as you produce a warmer world, lots of forested areas that had been acting as carbon sinks could be converted to carbon sources," he said. The result could lead to runaway warming.
Field's warning was echoed by French scientists, who said the IPCC's estimate that sea levels would rise around 40cm by 2100 was likely to be a best case scenario.
Former US vice-president Al Gore, who spoke at the meeting on Friday night, called for a globally coordinated stimulus to tackle climate change. "We've now reached the stage where continuing on our present course will threaten the entirety of human civilisation," he said.
"Got it, so you mislead you braindead conservative audience by making them think Obama's inaugural was 4x the cost of Bush's."
(1) The cost of Obama's inaugural was much greater than Bush's, with or without security.
But that's irrelevant to the contrasts.
Evn if Bush had outspent Obama (which he didn't, either in Inaugural expenditures or in congressional spending bills, for that matter), that, too, would irrelevant.
I simply juxtaposed the headlines with no comment on my part, one set of which condemned Bush's implied self-glorifying extravagance during a time of war and (supposed) economic uncertainty, the other set celebrating Obama's magnificent party during a time of war and certain economic uncertainty.
The reaction? Insane hysteria over irrelevancies.
Get it?
"We just interpreted your silence to mean you couldn't find a pre-packaged response from Drudge/Rush/Fox."
That's a shameless projection. You and your fellow orcs have been cut & pasting packaged propaganda from Moveon, "Thinkprogress," Commondreams, etc. for years. It's your m.o. And yet you snarl:
"We just interpreted your silence to mean you couldn't find a pre-packaged response from Drudge/Rush/Fox."
You're mentally ill.
"Your ignorant ramblings when you come down off your high horse are little more than reworded Republican talking points."
Still in projection mode. The thrusts of my arguments are propelled by conservative principles shared by fellow conservatives and so are thematically consistent, but have a unique voice unto themselves, as do all conservatives.
Parroting plagiarism is what you and your Heckle and Jeckle crowd engage in.
"Your dismissed you deceiptful (sic) POS."
Just because "deceit" rhymes with "receipt," doesn't mean the only difference is the prefix, numbskull.
"Do duh word PROLIX come to mind?"
How about thoroughness?
"I'm sure there are lunatics somewhere who would read this idiots endless, desperate ramblings..."
So you didn't read it but concluded they were "idiotic, endless, desperate ramblings?"
That's almost as bad as not reading a massively swinish spending bill and conclude that it's exactly what the economy needs.
"I just went down a couple paragraphs deep and found one more word...
DENIAL"
Another psychological defense mechanism in your arsenal that you're using as an offensive projectile by launching it out of your favorite one, projection.
"And then there seemed to be some demented twaddle about warming being a plot against the oil companies...hahahahahahahahahaha."
They're Public Enemy Number One in Gore's religious tome *Earth in the Balance." He promotes taxing them heavily in order to drive down demand and, if not destroy them, shrink them.
And of course, the means of production run on oil. Command and control of the oil companies, therefore...
All under the guise of "Saving The Planet."
Go fuck yourselves.
"No wonder America dismissed these fools."
No wonder Obama is going to be a one-termer.
"But watching their scramblings and writhings to avoid the ugly realities of their situation is a kick in the ass."
As his fragile, screaming ego scrambles and writhes to avoid the ugly reality that he just got his ass kicked.
Dismissed.
"Whoa, That's from TIME Magazine, Not Some Commie Rag!"
lol Yeah. Time Magazine is a regular American Spectator.
"What kind of pathetic fool makes scientific decisions on the basis of ideology?"
A liberal. Duh. Everyone knows that.
Gore said:
"We've now reached the stage where continuing on our present course will threaten the entirety of human civilisation."
Translation:
"We've now reached the stage where the present course of continuing scepticism and alternative media will threaten the entirety of my civilization. They must be silenced."
Moron. The difference is that when security costs are factored in the costs are equivalent. And its one thing to celebrate the inauguration of a NEW president vs. throwing an elaborate party for the continuation of an administration. Now go find some talking points to throw at us. Go fetch little conservative lapdog. Which blog did you find projection on? Is that the talking point you want to beat into the ground...
"Republicus has found projection on another blog and will now use it over and over again"
Whats funny is how many positions the moderator has on Climate Change. Read through the archives and you'll see depending on what day it is (or which set of talking points he's using); he flip flops more than Mitt Romney.
Dismissed parrotting conservative lapdog.
Yas, "projection" constitutes the mangled corner of his constantly sucked on security blanket.
The question is how far do these moron's pants have to fall down around their bony asses before they have to accept reality?
It's a spectable playing itself out here in micro-cephalic-cosm and hugely gratifying and entertaining to watch.
Push this freaks insecurity buttons and watch it perform....at great length.
The trouble is these dinks are such utterly mindless reicho shills that they aren't very interesting...totally predictable, robotic right wing talking points right down the line with never an independent variation. There must be a wingbat somewhere ready to discuss what's happened to their movement which is dying and putrefying right before our horrified noses.
Its hilarious how they think that by taking a single line talking point and exploding it into a 5 paragraph theme that they are presenting something original.
And whenever they're caught they quickly change the subject or deny they did anything wrong to begin with. Worked so well when W was around!
Reading the Declaration of Independence must drive you crazy,huh?
They took a single topic, liberty, and expanded that into an entire thesis. Too much for the MTV, soundbite generation I think.
I find it hilarious that when I even mention liberty, the "progressive" clowns that comment here will fill up page after page denouncing me and others that believe in it, but will never openly answer the issues that we bring up about it.
I told you months ago and will tell you now, you mouthpieces can only spout what you have been told. I think the last election was 46 to 54 percent Republican to Democrat. I do not think that is anything like a mandate. Of course you will, and I do not care what ignorant people think when they cannot understand percentages. Our two senators are Republican, and the majority in our state government are Republican. The Republicans did exactly the right thing in challenging the largest government take-over in history, and history will bear me out in this analysis.
But, as your specie will do, keep throwing feces and screaming from the tops of fig trees. We would not know what else to do if you did anything else.
"Republicus has found projection on another blog and will now use it over and over again."
False. I arrived at it through independent observation beginning with Clinton in the early 90's and discovering--to my astonishment--that it is a universally liberal psychodynamic trait.
"Whats funny is how many positions the moderator has on Climate Change. Read through the archives and you'll see depending on what day it is (or which set of talking points he's using); he flip flops more than Mitt Romney."
True. I wasn't sure if the warming variations could be blamed on any one single thing, including, but not limited to, the sun.
"The question is how far do these moron's pants have to fall down around their bony asses before they have to accept reality?"
That's a projection. It is you and your masochistic, ectomorphic crowd who invariably leave this blog with your pants down and with your noisome buttocks beet red from my fierce paddling.
But as the Good Book says: Spare the rod, spoil the child.
"Push this freaks insecurity buttons and watch it perform....at great length."
That's a projection. You've been my puppets for quite some time now who come running with a snap of my fingers and provide me with pages and pages of material that only proves my hypotheses turned working theories and now established as facts.
"The trouble is these dinks are such utterly mindless reicho shills that they aren't very interesting...totally predictable, robotic right wing talking points right down the line with never an independent variation. There must be a wingbat somewhere ready to discuss what's happened to their movement which is dying and putrefying right before our horrified noses."
Projection.
For example:
"totally predictable, robotic...talking points right down the line with never an independent variation."
Indeed, like "dinks...reicho shills...wingbat...peabrain...hahahaha."
"Its hilarious how they think that by taking a single line talking point and exploding it into a 5 paragraph theme that they are presenting something original.
And whenever they're caught they quickly change the subject or deny they did anything wrong to begin with. Worked so well when W was around!"
Big time projection. You describe your own m.o. with familiarized exactitude.
It's a compulsive liberal trait. Several of the subjects under observation simultaneously began to vent and project in response to my discerning analyses, in keeping with another characteristic of the diseased liberal mind, which has a wolfpack, mob mentality because of the weak and cowardly inability of any individual member to stand on their own two feet and instead finding anonymous refuge in numbers, hoping to win the argument--or at least end the losing debate--by ganging up on the conservative and shouting them down.
But 3-4 orcs and trolls against one isn't a fair fight. You're going to need more.
John wins the Bingo!
Good Phelonius said:
"Reading the Declaration of Independence must drive you crazy,huh?
They took a single topic, liberty, and expanded that into an entire thesis. Too much for the MTV, soundbite generation I think."
Absolutely. They can only absorb meaningless soundbites and argue with coded, grunting ad hominems like "kkkunts" and "reicho" (which are pretty much the equivalent of words like "coon" in disparaging entire populations based on prejudiced preconceptions cultural discrimination, and outright class bigotry).
"I find it hilarious that when I even mention liberty, the 'progressive' clowns that comment here will fill up page after page denouncing me and others that believe in it..."
That is well-demonstrated. Behold the projection:
"Its hilarious how they think that by taking a single line talking point and exploding it into a 5 paragraph theme that they are presenting something original."
"...but will never openly answer the issues that we bring up about it."
Indeed. And the projection:
"And whenever they're caught they quickly change the subject or deny they did anything wrong to begin with."
"I told you months ago and will tell you now, you mouthpieces can only spout what you have been told."
Right you are, sir. And the predictable projection:
"...totally predictable, robotic...talking points right down the line with never an independent variation."
You wrote:
"I think the last election was 46 to 54 percent Republican to Democrat. I do not think that is anything like a mandate. Of course you will.."
"Mandate"? They think it's a "landslide." (and that';s with ACORN's voter fraud)
"...and I do not care what ignorant people think when they cannot understand percentages. Our two senators are Republican, and the majority in our state government are Republican. The Republicans did exactly the right thing in challenging the largest government take-over in history, and history will bear me out in this analysis."
Agreed. Glad to see the Republicans sbnap out of their funk and act like conservatives finally.
"But, as your specie will do, keep throwing feces and screaming from the tops of fig trees. We would not know what else to do if you did anything else."
Wouldn't mind a little peace and quiet. Anarchists thrive on cacophonic noise, however, so fewer people can hear exactly what they're saying.
"... What egomanical morons."
Again, projection. It's compulsive.
I miss you too, Dora. Now bend over.
"Whats funny is how many positions the moderator has on Climate Change."
It isn't me who imperiously claims commands of the once-and-future indisputable "facts" on the climate and then says "Wups! We misunderestimated":
"...much faster than recent predictions...than expected... beyond anything we've considered seriously...(wrong) estimates...Unexpectedly... evidence indicates...which could...could be...cannot...as earlier estimates suggested...may be..."
And so on, quite ambiguously with many dubious, Obamaic but-but-buts.
And btw, this:
"The tropics on fire: scientist's grim vision... devastating... soaring...surge...threatening... tinderboxes...raging...far more serious than previous reports (i.e. yesterday's "facts") have suggested..."
...is NOT the language of the scientist, but of the propagandist.
"Brevity is the soul of wit."
Here, we see it's opposite.
And, isn't it hilarious to find that the fact that global warming is even worse than expected means it isn't happening?
These are siiiiiiiiiiick, truly defective and evasive, little minds. Only a wingbat...
See, it's like this, dink...scientists stick to the conservative side in their predictions, AND, moron, they constantly evaluate new data which has been constantly confirming that as time goes on the case for climate devastation is unimpeachable.
Now, tell us why, cunt, that even those poor, plotted against oil executives have all come over and admitted that it's man caused.
How many pages of projection...or in this case, projectile vomiting...will this button push bring about?
Diiiiiis....missed, twat.
No, of course, Dr Chris Field, co-chair of the UN's Nobel prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is not a scientist.
hahahahahahahahahaha
But you've got some weatherman who turned out to be a rabid crackpot evangelist on your side.
99% of the world's climate scientists agree with the liberal side. They've got no one...and it's us who base our science on ideology. hahahahaha only a wingbat.
It's why you come back to the freak show...there's something strangely magnetic about a mangled, warped psyche raving on about whatever insanities obsess its poor tortured synapse.
too funny
With big morons like this for role models, no wonder the little morons can't help themselves:
Where There's a (George) Will There's A Way ... To Deny Global Warming
By Zachary Roth - February 16, 2009, 11:20AM
Looks like Fred Barnes isn't the only high-profile conservative columnist still arguing that climate change doesn't really exist.
Over the weekend, the Washington Post's George Will, got in on the act. And it took us about ten minutes -- longer, it appears, than the Post's editors spent -- to figure out that Will, like Barnes, was essentially making stuff up.
Both of Will's major "data points" fall apart after a moment's scrutiny.
Here's the first:
According to the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979.
But within hours of Will's column appearing, the ACRC had posted the following statement on its website:
We do not know where George Will is getting his information, but our data shows that on February 15, 1979, global sea ice area was 16.79 million sq. km and on February 15, 2009, global sea ice area was 15.45 million sq. km. Therefore, global sea ice levels are 1.34 million sq. km less in February 2009 than in February 1979. This decrease in sea ice area is roughly equal to the area of Texas, California, and Oklahoma combined.
It is disturbing that the Washington Post would publish such information without first checking the facts.
Let me respond for the blowhard:
Blah Blah Blah Projection Blah Blah Blah. Wingbats. I'm smarter than you cuz I can use a thesaurus. Blah Blah Blah. Projection. Its all Clinton's Fault... Blah Blah Blah.
Random reworded post from Drudge.
Blah Blah Blah I am superior to all. Projection. Let me count how many times I can flip flop on climate change in one post. Blah Blah Blah...
Nobody ever said that climate change is happening.
Go back months and months and you will see that we never argued that climate change was not happening. What we argued is that is a natural thing.
Besides the point. The point I brought up earlier was liberty.
You know the concept, perhaps?
Liberty?
Can the ADD mind keep up?
What the hell does the giant government take-over of liberty do to us and a people?
No,perhaps you are right.
Reason and intelligence likely mean nothing to you and your type.
You want to believe in things that have questionable scientific background? Do it.
Do not lecture the adults that may want to question premises. Leave that to people that have some education.
HELLO??
Any one of you want to talk about the concept I brought up? I think you will not.
The premise:
Liberty is my right to live as I desire to live, to conduct business as I desire to conduct it, and to interact with my neighbors as I see fit as long as I and they and I abide by the social contract of the Constitution of the United States.
By the way, that is pretty damned brief.
Can you think of a more MTV way of doing this?
People were dying from the cold in the midwest while Gore was prophesying Global Grilling and the new president cranked up the fossil fuels in the White House (while saying something like "Heckuva job, Brownie" to his stooge in charge of natural disasters, who said and did nothing about the regional deep freeze, the deaths, and the loss of power to millions).
"The trouble is these dinks are..totally predictable, robotic ...talking points right down the line with never an independent variation."
That's a paraphrase of what Carter and Clinton just said (Clinton actually used the word "robotic").
In other words, it's a predictable, robotic talking point with no independent variation save for random rewording, as projected:
"Random reworded post from Drudge."
The projection is pure. A perfect specimen.
RNC must have sent out talking points to the lapdogs this week:
Okay everybody, try to use the word projection as much as possible in anything you say or write. Don't bother looking into what it means just keeping repeating it over and over and over again. Trust us you'll look smart.
Funny how these clowns claim to own liberty while denying it to gays or giving women liberty over their own bodies or forcing it on Iraqis at the point of a gun: YOU WILL TAKE THIS LIBERTY AND LIKE IT!!! Conservatives sure did like liberty when the civil rights act passed didn't they.
I give them about 15 seconds before they start screaming "WHAT ABOUT THE LIBERTY OF THE FETUS!!! Those cells deserve rights!" Save the Religious Right talking points and come up with something original.
Or let me responds for you:
Look its projection! The trolls are projecting again. The don't use computers, they use projectors to project.
Now dance for us some more lapdogs!
Just let the criminals BE free to commit crimes! Just let us kill our young and yours with impunity! Let us spread entirely preventable diseases like AIDS with impunity! Let us indoctrinate your children into destructive behavious and unsustainable lifestyles so that they too can suufer on the shoals of alcohol and drug abuse! And last but not least, we ask not your tolerance for our aberrant behaviours, but instead, we demand your praise!
Yup. That's them.
does this moron even KNOW what projection means?
it's his all purpose security blanket
Big wave rising for bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.
Wingbats are scared shitless they won't have total conrol of the public airwaves.
They hate an equal playing field.
They've got all the morons now, but the left has discovered the value of morons and their votes and will soon be brainwashing their share of the simple little dinks.
That will be the end of GOPism.
Stop projecting you projections with those damn projectors! Everything you project is little more than previously projected projections from past projectors of failed projects! Dismissed... I mean projected.
Projection is just his weekly talking point. When poochy gets his marching orders he'll switch to something else. Thats why he's inconsistent on Climate Change, he must have dropped his talking points and got them all mixed up. Of course he doesn't allow any liberals any leeway on climate change.
This one is just begging for a spanking.
New stimulus rojects from the Economic Stimulus" package revealed...
I went into another chamber, but was ready to hasten back, being almost overcome with a horrible stink. My conductor pressed me forward, conjuring me in a whisper “to give no offence, which would be highly resented;” and therefore I durst not so much as stop my nose. The projector of this cell was the most ancient student of the academy; his face and beard were of a pale yellow; his hands and clothes daubed over with filth. When I was presented to him, he gave me a close embrace, a compliment I could well have excused. His employment, from his first coming into the academy, was an operation to reduce human excrement to its original food, by separating the several parts, removing the tincture which it receives from the gall, making the odour exhale, and scumming off the saliva. He had a weekly allowance, from the society, of a vessel filled with human ordure, about the bigness of a Bristol barrel.
I saw another at work to calcine ice into gunpowder; who likewise showed me a treatise he had written concerning the malleability of fire, which he intended to publish.
There was a most ingenious architect, who had contrived a new method for building houses, by beginning at the roof, and working downward to the foundation; which he justified to me, by the like practice of those two prudent insects, the bee and the spider.
There was a man born blind, who had several apprentices in his own condition: their employment was to mix colours for painters, which their master taught them to distinguish by feeling and smelling. It was indeed my misfortune to find them at that time not very perfect in their lessons, and the professor himself happened to be generally mistaken. This artist is much encouraged and esteemed by the whole fraternity.
In another apartment I was highly pleased with a projector who had found a device of ploughing the ground with hogs, to save the charges of ploughs, cattle, and labour. The method is this: in an acre of ground you bury, at six inches distance and eight deep, a quantity of acorns, dates, chestnuts, and other mast or vegetables, whereof these animals are fondest; then you drive six hundred or more of them into the field, where, in a few days, they will root up the whole ground in search of their food, and make it fit for sowing, at the same time manuring it with their dung: it is true, upon experiment, they found the charge and trouble very great, and they had little or no crop. However it is not doubted, that this invention may be capable of great improvement.
I think the first project got about $8 billion from Harry Reid... or was that the imaginary maglev train from Disneyland to Las Vegas?...
I sure hope that they make it "monorail" compatible!
Where's that passage from, fj?
Typical GOP Government:
Missing Iraq billions could be 'greatest fraud in US history' Stephen C. Webster
Published: Monday February 16, 2009
Print This Email This
The US Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR), the Army's criminal Investigation Command and the Justice Department are investigating US soldiers and officials in the alleged misuse of a portion of the $125 billion initially sent to Iraq for reconstruction shortly after the fall of Saddam.
Monday, The Independent's Iraq correspondent Patrick Cockburn reported the inspectors believe misuse may account for over $50 billion, exceeding the scope of Bernie Madoff's massive Ponzi scheme and making it potentially the "greatest fraud in US history."
"In one case, auditors working for SIGIR discovered that $57.8m was sent in 'pallet upon pallet of hundred-dollar bills' to the US comptroller for south-central Iraq, Robert J Stein Jr, who had himself photographed standing with the mound of money," wrote Cockburn. "He is among the few US officials who were in Iraq to be convicted of fraud and money-laundering.
"Despite the vast sums expended on rebuilding by the US since 2003, there have been no cranes visible on the Baghdad skyline except those at work building a new US embassy and others rusting beside a half-built giant mosque that Saddam was constructing when he was overthrown."
The SIGIR auditor's report, entitled "Hard Lessons," was published in early February.
"'Hard Lessons,' a draft of which was leaked to the news media in December, concludes that the U.S. reconstruction effort in Iraq was a failure, largely because there was no overall strategy behind it," reported the Washington Post. "Goals shifted from 'liberation' and an early military exit to massive, ill-conceived and expensive building projects under the Coalition Provisional Authority of 2003 and 2004. Many of those projects -- over budget, poorly executed or, often, barely begun -- were abandoned as security worsened.
"In a preface to the 456-page book, Bowen writes that he knew the reconstruction was in trouble when he first visited Iraq in January 2004 and saw duffel bags full of cash being carried out of the Republican Palace, which housed the U.S. occupation government."
"As part of the inquiry, the authorities are taking a fresh look at information given to them by Dale Stoffel, an American arms dealer and contractor who was killed in Iraq in late 2004," reported the International Herald Tribune on Sunday.
"Before he was shot on a road north of Baghdad, Stoffel drew a portrait worthy of a pulp crime novel: tens of thousands of dollars stuffed into pizza boxes and delivered surreptitiously to the American contracting offices in Baghdad, and payoffs made in paper bags that were scattered in 'dead drops' around the Green Zone, the nerve center of the United States government's presence in Iraq, two senior federal officials said."
"Prosecutors have won 35 convictions on cases related to reconstruction in Iraq, yet most of them involved private contractors or midlevel officials. The current inquiry is aiming at higher-level officials, according to investigators involved in the case, and is also trying to determine if there are connections between those officials and figures in the other cases. Although Bell and Hirtle were military officers, they worked in a civilian contracting office."
So far, there have been just 35 convictions for the misuse of government funds during the reconstruction of Iraq.
Wow! Can you believe those freaks were allowed to "govern" for eight years?
Amazing isn't it?
Just remember, God is The Great Projector and always projects for a reason.
John's problem is that he's compensating for a serious lack of intelligence by rambling on and on.
Look how smart I am! See I'm so insecure that I have to respond to every line of every post! I'm so smart, take that you filthy little projectors!
He should try to be more like FJ who has no issue being stupid. FJ is comfortable being a sexist/racist and makes no attempts to make himself look otherwise! How else can you explain his favorite reply of "I know you are but what am I?"
"Missing Iraq billions could be 'greatest fraud in US history' Stephen C. Webster
Where did that come from? That story is years old.
Listen carefully: Whenever the Left rings alarm bells out of left field the about something that is more often than not a recycled accusation (that always targets conservatives/Republicans, of course), it is always born out of self-conscious projection meant to deflect attention away from something current that threatens to expose the fraudulence about themselves or their insane/devious policies that they want hid or diminished when juxtaposed with the alarm.
For example, recently there was a flurry of posting about Global Grilling Doomsday while Americans were freezing to death and losing power.
Meanwhile, billions of tax-payer monies are about to be funneled into Al Gore and Bill Clinton's environmentalist coffers to "fight it."
The fear-mongering "BREAKING STORY: GLOBAL GRILLING ACCELERATING" is meant to deflect attention away from the exposure of fraud, to distract scrutiny, and counteract the ridicule the actual weather would cause.
So on the very same day that the Democratic government is about to loot a trillion more from the private sector after signing the largest spending bill--and greatest fraud--in American history, the robotic troll deflectively--and hyperbolically-- projects:
"Missing Iraq billions could be 'greatest fraud in US history'"
That after the "debacle" in Iraq has been knocked off the front pages for months by its stunning success and the headlines over missing monies silent for years.
That's how they operate. So the next time they post--out of Left field--some harangue about this or that vice-ridden registered Republican (according to them, mind you), you can be sure that one of their own is currently or is about to be disgraced by the same vice.
(And the only reason why we haven't seen a flurry of Republican tax cheats to counteract the blizzard of high profile, Democratic ones is because there aren't any.)
Sometimes, however, anti-conservative/Republican propaganda (b) unleashed to counteract liberal/Democrat condition (a) precedes (a), so when (a) is exposed in the wake of (b), that's Divine Intervention, or the dispatched angel of Toto sent to pull the curtain aside and reveal the humbuggery and/or outright hypocricy of (b).
Just so everyone is clear: John's position today is to NOT believe in climate change. Give him a few minutes though, he might change his mind. He may have misplaced his pro-climate change talking points.
"John's problem is that he's compensating for a serious lack of intelligence by rambling on and on."
That's a projection (it is unconscious and unrecognized as such by the neurotic projector, and so unmoderated and incessant).
The ramble continues:
"Look how smart I am! See I'm so insecure that I have to respond to every line of every post!"
Note the earlier chagrin when your host remained aloof and ignored the harrassing comments, and was even presumptuously--if not pseudo-clairvoyantly-- accused of agreeing with any comment that was not directly addressed.
With these grifters, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't; heads they win, tails you lose. It's a Gypsy shell game.
Sorry, I meant a Roma rhetorical rip-off.
"I'm so smart, take that you filthy little projectors!"
Yes. Very good. All of this is meant to "prove" how smart this silly commentator is, feeling insecure and so compelled to add their two cents worth to prove it.
So that, too, was a projection, which even embodied the essential childishness of the commentator projected onto your host.
That my analysis is objective and sound --as opposed to petty and vindictive--is self-evident, but the subjects under observation will engage in zero self-assessment (and so fail to make the proper psychodynamic corrections), because all of the defense mechanisms are active (even when on stand-by status), and denial is one of them.
As mentioned before, the liberal virus is a parasite that has evolved to effectively combat the greatest threat to its existence: the host's faculty of self-awareness. And the mindworm combats it most insidiously indeed by hyperinflating the other side of the same coin of self-awareness, egocentrism.
It's a diabolical disease.
"Just so everyone is clear: John's position today is to NOT believe in climate change."
Liar. That's libel. I made no such declarative statement. Ever.
If this pathetic moron couldn't project projection he'd have nothing left.
...getting a little boooooooooooooooooooooring.
I think I'll troll somebody with two synapses if I can find one in what little is left of the rotting right wing corpse.
Talk about a collapsed movement. You'd have to be as insane as this dork or Sayet to still be in it.
Translation: "You're mean! I don't wanna play anymore! Waaaaaaaaaaaa!"
"Just so everyone is clear: John's position today is to NOT believe in climate change."
Liar. That's libel. I made no such declarative statement. Ever.
Okay, either he has switched positions again... Or he believes in climate change but is just taking cheap shots at gore for no reason... Who can keep up with this insecure projector???
How does my (alleged) switching of positions or (allegedly) taking the opportunity to hurl empty ad hominems at Gore for supposedly no apparent reason make me an "insecure projector???"
Insecurity and projection have nothing to do with my objective critiques against him (however tinged they are by emotional annoyance).
So where did you get the idea that they did? From yourself. Therefore, you're projecting your own insecurities and chronic projecting on me, in your characteristic "I know you are, but what am I?" neurotic, *non sequitur* venting.
I think you can take pills for that, but I suggest you get some Jesus. He'll clear it right up.
You are most definitely dismissed.
Where's that passage from, fj?
"Travels Into Several Remote Nations Of The World. In Four Parts. by Lemuel Gulliver, First a Surgeon, and then a Captain of several Ships."-- Jonathan Swift, 1726
...OR the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" --Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid, Esq.
I can't remember which. They're too similar in character to readily distinguish.
EDUCATION -- BRISTOL PALIN SAYS ABSTINENCE 'IS NOT REALISTIC AT ALL': In 2006, as an Alaska gubernatorial candidate, Sarah Palin filled out a questionnaire emphasizing her support for abstinence education. She wrote that "the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support." Palin's hard-right views came under fire when it was revealed that her then-17-year-old daughter Bristol was pregnant. In her first public interview, Bristol told Fox News's chief Palin cheerleader Greta Van Susteren last night that abstinence is "not realistic at all." "I think abstinence is, like -- like, the -- I don't know how to put it -- like, the main -- everyone should be abstinent or whatever, but it’s not realistic at all," Bristol said. When Van Susteren asked Gov. Palin about abstinence later, she seemed similarly dismissive of her former views, admitting, "It sounds naive." Bristol added, "I just -- I hope that people learn from my story and just, like, I don't know, prevent teen pregnancy, I guess." Despite its record of failure, conservatives continue to beat the drum for abstinence-only education. Last week, Republicans were angry that "essential" abstinence education funding had been "eliminated" from President Obama's recovery and reinvestment bill. A Republican report on the bill expressed its concern "that while abstinence education receives only $176 million annually...contraceptives and family planning already receive $1.6 billion of federal funding."
When Van Susteren asked Gov. Palin about abstinence later, she seemed similarly dismissive of her former views, admitting, "It sounds naive."
Doesn't it, though...hahahahahahahaha
...but it does work. Delays sexual activity about 1.5 years AND reduced STD exposure significantly.
Is it perfect? No. is it better than sex ed? Proven so.
As if a liberal cares about empirical evidence. They'll just engage in rationalizations about how the statistics are flawed, compromised by not taking into account the culturally endemic maladies of racism, sexism, and Christianity when arriving at a judgmental conclusion that's engendered by lingering Victorian/suppressed sensibilities, all of which skew the results in favor of the traditional nuclear family, which is a Christo-fascist institution.
Or somesuch psychobabble.
As Sarah says, abstinence only is another term for a knocked up daughter:
Oh, did I hear some little cunt PROJECTING denial of evidence on liberals? hahahahah
Experts say US sex abstinence program doesn't work
WASHINGTON, April 23 (Reuters) - Programs teaching U.S. schoolchildren to abstain from sex have not cut teen pregnancies or sexually transmitted diseases or delayed the age at which sex begins, health groups told Congress on Wednesday.
The Bush administration, however, voiced continuing support for such programs during a hearing before a House of Representatives panel even as many Democrats called for cutting off federal money for so-called abstinence-only instruction.
"Vast sums of federal monies continue to be directed toward these programs. And, in fact, there is evidence to suggest that some of these programs are even harmful and have negative consequences by not providing adequate information for those teens who do become sexually active," Dr. Margaret Blythe of the American Academy of Pediatrics told the committee.
These programs, backed by many social conservatives who oppose the teaching of contraception methods to teenagers in schools, have received about $1.3 billion in federal funds since the late 1990s. Currently, 17 of the 50 U.S. states refuse to accept federal funds for such programs.
Experts from the American Public Health Association and U.S. Institute of Medicine testified that scientific studies have not found that abstinence-only teaching works to cut pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases or the age when sexual activity begins.
The American Psychological Association and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also issued statements to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform criticizing the abstinence-only programs.
I said:
"As if a liberal cares about empirical evidence. They'll just engage in rationalizations about how the statistics are flawed, compromised..."
And Grunt snorts:
"haha...they mistake right wing lies for statistics..."
Do I know liberals, or do I know liberals?
Oooh, that is soooorry. The guy says the stats are lies, then he proves they're lies, and what's the response?
Some weak, punky evasion.
These poor people don't even try anymore. But, who can blame them?
Hey, have you seen the split O has put in the GOP? The guvs are all on his side against their own party...or what's left of it.
Anon couldn't tell the difference between an abstinence "only" program and an abstinence "plus" program unless somebody threw away the key to her chastity belt.
Oooh, is some furtive little rodent trying to change his premise?
You're the one posting a generalized news article on the effectiveness of "abstinence" and "abstinence-only" education programs... not me, my little bait and switcher.
So either cite a specific study or two, or stfu.
btw - I'm sure it doesn't matter to you that the so-called "long awaited government report" cited in the news article was the product of the 2004 House "minority" staff report and bears a www.democrats.reform.house.gov URL do you?
It talks about the egregious scientific errors in the "abstinence only" curricula on the subject of "condoms", "hiv prevention", and "risks of abortion" and later the "harm" it does to a girl's esteem to be "treated like a stereotype" and commits what they consider to be the most egregious error of all... the dreaded "blurring of religion and science".
Now if the "abstinence only" curriculum is discussing condoms, birth control, HIV and abortion, it can hardly be considered an "abstinence only" curriculum, can it?
But what I find most curious about the "study's" objective was that it actually studied nothing about the effectiveness of the program and everything about the acccuracy of education materials supplied with the so-called "abstinence-only" programs. These supposedly "ineffective" abstinence-only programs weren't compared "for effectiveness" in the study to any health outcomes or statistics. All they did was look for errors in the curriculum. The program "effectiveness" determination was not the subject of the study at all.
Abstinence only worked great for Bristol right FJ? And should we really get sex advice from a farmer who equates homosexuality to pedophelia?
btw - I favor cutting off federal funding for ineffective abstinence only sex education programs, comparable ineffective comprehensive sex education programs, and the entire US Dept. of Education.
After all, if the abstinence-only programs aren't working "any more effectively than" the so-called "comprehensive" sex-ed programs they're comparing them to (since you've got to be comparing the effectiveness of abs-only pgms to "something"), then perhaps it's time the federal projectors got out of the social engineering business of "education" entirely.
Abstinence only worked great for Bristol right FJ?
No, it didn't. But then it's up to you to prove that a different sex-ed curriculum would have achieved a significantly 'better' outcome.
btw - there you go "equating" again. Do you even know what "equal" means?
True or false...
2 = 3
Is that 2/3 or even 3/2 true? Or is it 100% false.
I do equate anon=stupid though.
Once again, deny deny deny. FJ once again forgets how he said if gays should have the right to marry so to should pedophiles. Ergo, equating pedophiles to gays.
What a surprise that this ignorant farmer wants to get rid of eduction.
then perhaps it's time the federal projectors got out of the social engineering business of "education" entirely.
Looks like FJ got his projection talking points to! Dance Piggy Dance!
Still can't do math, can you little girl.
Yep, that's a shame....
Why don't they just call the dictionary companies and demand that the primary definition of the word "marriage" be redifined to say:
"1. the social institution under which (two adult human beings) establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc."
...instead of:
"1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish..."
If the word guardians refuse, then demand that they change the definition of "oppression" to exemplify:
"1. the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner," e.g. refusing to change the definition of words.
I'm sure they'd be amused.
Those structuralist, fascist bastards.
Since dictionaries are now setting up our laws:
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
The state of being married; wedlock.
A common-law marriage.
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
A wedding.
A close union: "the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics" (Lloyd Rose).
Yeah, liberals are facists and FJ has greater than a 3rd grade education.
"Since dictionaries are now setting up our laws:
3. 'A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.'"
That was the tertiary definition and so could be called a "marriage," not a marriage.
And since dictionaries do indeed "set up our laws" (which are comprised of words used with exactitude), we'll go ahead and use the very entry you submitted:
"...not the legal force of marriage..."
Dismissed.
"Yeah, liberals are facists and FJ has greater than a 3rd grade education."
Leave it to backwards liberals to tell the truth when engaging in sarcasm.
"lol...you know..."
Dissed.
"Oooh, that is..."
Missed.
Feb. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A glitch in satellite sensors caused scientists to underestimate the extent of Arctic sea ice by 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles), a California- size area, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said.
The error, due to a problem called “sensor drift,” began in early January and caused a slowly growing underestimation of sea ice extent until mid-February. That’s when “puzzled readers” alerted the NSIDC about data showing ice-covered areas as stretches of open ocean, the Boulder, Colorado-based group said on its Web site.
“Sensor drift, although infrequent, does occasionally occur and it is one of the things that we account for during quality- control measures prior to archiving the data,” the center said. “Although we believe that data prior to early January are reliable, we will conduct a full quality check.’’
The extent of Arctic sea ice is seen as a key measure of how rising temperatures are affecting the Earth. The cap retreated in 2007 to its lowest extent ever and last year posted its second- lowest annual minimum at the end of the yearly melt season. The recent error doesn’t change findings that Arctic ice is retreating, the NSIDC said.
The center said real-time data on sea ice is always less reliable than archived numbers because full checks haven’t yet been carried out. Historical data is checked across other sources, it said.
The NSIDC uses Department of Defense satellites to obtain its Arctic sea ice data rather than more accurate National Aeronautics and Space Administration equipment. That’s because the defense satellites have a longer period of historical data, enabling scientists to draw conclusions about long-term ice melt, the center said.
“There is a balance between being as accurate as possible at any given moment and being as consistent as possible through long time-periods,” NSIDC said. “Our main scientific focus is on the long-term changes in Arctic sea ice.”
That's humiliating.
You would think... especially if arguing the need to throw capitalism under a bus in order to save the planet.
Post a Comment
<< Home