Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > June > 06 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USBush zinged? Yada yada yada.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The formats differ and some of the moderators can be quite distracting, but this endless series of presidential candidate debates is turning out to be the most educational national discussion of the country’s future that’s been conducted in ages.
The Democratic debate Sunday night and the Republican debate last night produced the kinds of “who won-who lost” moments that occupy the attention of political reporters and commentators. And, yada yada yada, the big news Tuesday night was that “GOP candidates zing Bush in debate.” On Sunday night, Obama “won” or Hillary did, depending on your point of view. And does she use botox? Either way, who cares?
The real story of these debates is how educationally useful they are, even though they do come more than a year before the next General Election. For that reason, I’ll regret seeing anybody drop out, in either party.
Their value is that, as is now abundantly clear, the two parties are so far apart that nobody can be confused as to the consequences of the choice to be made next November. As Hillary said Sunday night in playing the role of the above-the-fray front-runner, the differences among Democrats are minor, but between the two sets of candidates is major. She’s exactly right. Same for Republicans.
On the war, on “don’t ask,don’t tell,” on taxes, on health care financing and on virtually every other issue that arose, stark differences are evident all down the line. I’m not certain that the Republicans and Democrats couldn’t pair off and run for President — strong to strong, weak to weak — and the results wouldn’t be the same. Either party could pick the “wrong” candidate, certainly, but any of three or four candidates from either party would produce the same outcome.
Somebody wins, somebody loses, somebody’s up or down, clever or not in each debate. But if you listen to two or three debates, you know where all of the candidates from the two parties would take us.
Comments
By Southern Democrat
June 6, 2007 9:06 AM | Link to this
Interesting take on the debates from Mr. Wooten this morning. I’ve watched portions of each and all of the South Carolina debate and came away with a distinctly different view. It seems to me that both parties are, naturally, moving towards the middle. The outliers, Kucinich, Tancredo, etc., are being marginalized.
The country is tired of extremism. The bizarre policies of the Bush Administration represent extremist, non-traditional conservative views, and were most vociferously countered by bizarre, extremist “grassroots” organizations like MoveOn.org. The rest of the country (as always) continues to operate in the middle.
I do think the debates have been helpful in getting a better idea about the candidates, but I look forward to having the wheat separated from the chaff and having more time to hear about implementation of ideas. Right now, we here wonderful, grandiose visions, but not the nuts and bolts of true policy and budgeting.
I think if most conservatives had had the opportunity to hear how Bush chose to implement his “reduce taxes, borrow, and spend, spend, spend” fiscal policy in 2000 or 2004, they would’ve spoken up a little more quickly.
By Redneck Convert
June 6, 2007 9:17 AM | Link to this
Well, I know you are glad to see I’m back from Panama City. We rented a trailer there and had a great time. Only I got chewed out bad by the missus. We drank a lot on Saturday night and I was out of beer so I went over and bought a couple cases at a store next morning. Forgetting it was Sunday. Anyway, when I got back and brought the beer in the missus lit into me. Saying I violated the Sabbath by buying beer and was going to a place where there won’t be no Skoal or Red Man or PBR and would roast in fire. I tried to explain it was all legal and nothing was wrong with it. I told her the Lord makes diffrent rules for diffrent states, he got Sonny elected in Georgia but not in Florida, so the Lord don’t want booze sold on Sunday in GA but its OK in Florida. But she just kept on yelling.
Anyway, you can’t deal with a cranky woman. And the missus has been cranky ever since she went on that diet. She has fell off to skin and bones and is down to 315 lbs. At least I won’t have to worry about her getting stuck in the bath tub again and having to call the fire fighters to wedge her out.
I was real sorry to learn that Libby guy got prison time. He will probly be took real good care of the way Bubba takes care of the Revrend Jim Bob Buice in their cell down in Jackson. Its all part of a librul plot to go after good conservatives. Libby didn’t do nothing but help put that librul Wilson in his place when he lied about the uranium stuff and tried to make My President look bad.
I watched some of the Republican debate last night. Seems to me there ain’t a real president among them. They are all wishy-washy except for the Tancredo guy that comes right out and says no spanish speaking and build the big wall along the border. I hope this Rudy guy don’t get elected. It would be the same as having a librul as president. Anyway, none of them know how to get into a real redneck fight, they are so nice to each other. We need some name calling to liven things up.
Well, its back to the beer run for me. I got a lot of responsability. I haul enough beer to get maybe 500 people drunk at a time. I hope you all have been kind to Sister Dusty while I was away. And I can see jbmlaw has been taking the redneck line. Its a real pity he had to go to school all those years just to learn to think like a redneck. It comes natural to the rest of us. But some people are slow, I guess.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 9:26 AM | Link to this
After the torture of watching that debate, I can see why the gop are looking for a mighty mouse candidate.
It was pathetic.
By Van
June 6, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this
getalife
I agree with you. While a few have good points and make a good appearance, overall they all are weak on most important issues.
Since a non announced candidate is polling in third place I’ll wait until there are only 3-4 left before the debates become anything worthwhile.
And why on CNN? The Communist News Network? Next you will tell me the Democrats won’t debate on FOX - oh, wait they already showed their “tolerance” didn’t they.
By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I
June 6, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this
Ah, yes, Woo-ten and his Klanners want to “stay the course” and keep this nation straight on the road to Hell.
Lord, smite these morons. We The Pope pray.
By Adam
June 6, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this
The candidates dance the artful dodge rather than stake out hard positions. What they say changes with the weather. Instead, take a long look at the types of people that gravitate toward a particular candidate. This crowd will be the administrators, regulators, and drivers of the next administration.
The days of having a visionary leader with independent thought as President are sadly behind us. He (or She) will be forever be beholding to their handlers.
By melo
June 6, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this
And does she use botox? Either way, who cares? Obviously u do, otherwise u would not ask the q. The Republican debate……yawn.Agree with Rednck Convert, noone Presidential. Guilliani got a sign from heaven, hypocrisy wont do him no good, running as a Republican conservative when u marry every beautiful woman u meet every five years. And they all distance themselves from DUMB BUSH, even though in public, its all nice and dandy and stay the course blahblah blah REPEAT DUMB BUSH LINE.You can see they all dont have credibility. And this MORMON guy makes my stomach churn. He stinks. He comes from a family that has trilaers of WIVES and comes out trying to distance himself from his FATHER,GRANDFATHER, COUSINS AND THE CHURCH TEACHINGS. He is Proud to be a MORMON, but says he believes in one man one wife.If America gets Hoodwinked by such CHARLATANS*, then yu are all a bunch of fools!!
Only the DEMOCRATIC WAY here will make sense. We need Obama or Clinton or Biden to CLEAN UP DUMB BUSH’S MESS.
Glad though that NEO(PSEUDO*)CONSERVATIVE LIBBY THE SCOOTER is going to PRISON. Timing couldn’t be perfect. Let him share a cell with our own NEO-LIBERAL PARIS HILTON!!!
By getalife
June 6, 2007 10:14 AM | Link to this
Van,
I am always right because I post the truth.
Faux News ratings have dropped and very few dems watch that gop channel. Why would the dems debate there with no audience?
Think man.
Geez.
By Van
June 6, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this
melo,
“…Obama or Clinton or Biden to CLEAN UP DUMB BUSH’S MESS.”
If the Democrats were in charge, would they have stopped the Ft. Dix Six or the JFK terrorist wantabe’s?
Oh, I think not, we would have asked them nicely if they were upset about something we did, pat them on the head an apologize.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
Van,
Informants stop those weak plans. It had nothing to do with parties.
Get real Van.
Think man think.
Geez.
By Curious Observer
June 6, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
What angers me most about the presidential debates is the obvious pandering of the candidates to corporate interests on the immigration issue.
None of the candidates will admit that the current immigration bill essentially creates an underclass of cheap and legal workers, so that employers will not have to raise wages to attract American workers. The bill, combined with continuing outsourcing of jobs, essentially deprives American workers of job opportunities. Joe Sixpack continues to get his low prices on consumer goods, while wages for almost all workers are artificially suppressed. All this talk about amendments requiring employers to seek out American workers first is just so much hooey. An American worker is in no position to bargain for decent wages if he knows that the employer’s recourse is simply to turn to a newly legalized immigrant.
The immigration bill strikes me as a done deal. Employers will get what they want. In return, Republican candidates will continue to receive campaign contributions from their corporate sponsors, while the Democrats are eager to secure the votes of legalized immigrants and future immigrant citizens. The fact that 70 percent of American voters are opposed to all or part of the immigration bill means nothing.
That is the central message that comes from the soft-shoe routine of the candidates of both parties.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this
Good morning, good argument Mr. Wooten; your reflective broader view is not one we would get from a political junkie. Our friend Van, writing on a single contentious issue recently noted a few times that in 1,000 years no single policy resolution will make any difference anyway. The collective of policies, however, is different.
Our radicalized leftist party is less protective of individual freedom than any party in the history of the republic. Their only interest in individual freedom now appears to be in protecting the rights of foreign-born people who take up arms against American soldiers and who are caught on the battlefield; and instead of merely preventing the terrorists from returning to the battlefield, the leftist focus is on quick adjudication of the crimes so the offenders can be freed (perhaps after serving some short sentence.) Otherwise the leftists’ every policy is to compel the individual to yield to the decision-making of those who control the reins of government. Freedom, or its absence, does make a difference in our lives.
By Barak the magic negro lives in D.C.
June 6, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this
These debates are essentially utterly pointless. We already know that the far leftist scum are vying to be the most shrill when it comes to who will cut and run from Iraq the fastest and most perniciously and perfidiously and failing that - just how best they can fawn and pander to illegals, feminazis, homos and butch wimmin, paedophiles in VT, the worthless knuckle dragging increasingly irrelevant labour unions and the age old racist quotas snouts in the racial spoils trough black vote.
The GOP debates are also at this stage as pointless although for somewhat different reasons. Its now clear that the GOP field is hardly complete and that at least a couple more much more substantive candidates are very likely to join the fray later this year. Thus all the frenetic efforts and huge expense so far will have been to establish little more than an opening opening position. The actual real ‘race’ is still some way off.
Aside from an occasional gaffe, a dredged up past salacious dalliance or the odd clever soundbite quip few folks outside of the relatively tiny politico audience take much notice of these p!ssing contest events. Its just an absurd extension of the gravy train - seeking to extend the already sickeningly over long primary season for almost an extra year. Continuously debating and restating issues and positions is as tedious and turgid as it gets. Reacting to endlessly shifting polls with and without “all the candidates”, fundraising performance and the endless sifting of political and familial dirt is what passes for gravitas right now.
Wake me up when the actual race starts in earnest and the actual primaries are mere weeks rather than 6/7/8 months away. I hope to christ that the next round in 2012 doesn’t start this early - let alone earlier. Its the f ing media who have perpetrated this and sadly other than NOT buying, or watching their leftist lies - as the folks are now doing all over the fruited plain - is the only reasonable reaction. So the pinko newsprint media is hilariously losing jobs hand over fist and the vile leftist network news propaganda outlets are losing viewers faster than the blubbery obese treasonous Tokyo RosieO’D** got kicked off The View the other week.
I note with great unsurprised satisfaction that Mrs J M Karr NAMBLA is still despicably dissembling and cannot answer my factual awkward points about the Klinton document thief S Burglar!!!
As for heebeedeegee’s earlier lying dishonest poisonous racist tirade - that was one big smirk inducing hissy fit. My oft stated position on illegal mexican type leeches is an honourable one that selflessly and without a hint of bigotry simply reflects implicit respect for the law … with the expectation that the nation merely robustly and immediately enforces its laws and completely seals the border without fear or favour.
Welcome back inbred rednekkk - I take it your TB is no longer contagious?
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this
Lest my language be misinterpreted, I am not criticizing Van in any way; his argument struck me as a good springboard for the bigger issue. I think Van is consistently one of the brightest lights on the blog, along with Southern Democrat and MidSouth Philosopher.
Similarly, I do not disparage our friend Southern Democrat, but I do disagree with his thesis that the parties converge. I believe Democrats can only be elected by appearing to be conservative; deception is their only path to power, so disliked is Leviathan. On the other hand, we can make a similar allegation about both Presidents Bush, that they were elected only because the fooled the public into believing they were conservative, and were ultimately rejected when their policies proved to be not-conservative.
By Chris
June 6, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this
I am here today to announce my candidacy for President of the United States. My platform, deport illegal by way of attrition, abortion only in cases of rape, incest or health of mother, abolish welfare and Social Security through gradual process, marriage issues should be left to the states, urge Congress to eliminate all special interest lobbies and caucuses, eliminate the national tax on gasoline and relax environmental controls on oil companies to be able to build new refineries and drill for oil. Tax incentives to corporations who produce their products in the USA. WITHDRAW FROM NAFTA!! These are the first steps in getting our great nation back on it’s feet. GOD BLESS THE USA!
By van's a nose picker
June 6, 2007 10:50 AM | Link to this
I bury my organic garbage because I know that in a couple of million years I’ll be sitting on a petroleum field and you all will be sorry you laughed at me.
By artc
June 6, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
After watching the Republican debates last night, I am growing ever more convinced that John McCain is the only candidate that has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the general election in 08. His positions mirror the views of mainstream/middle America. Candidates that are trying to appease the right wingers to get the nomination will get killed in 08. If the Republicans don’t wake up they are going to get trounced. Moderates and independents will go over to the Dems at the faintest whiff of the foul right wing odor on any canadidate.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this
Curious Observer Our own Congressional Budget committee estimates that even if this bill passes it will only slow illegal immigration by 25%.WOW. Tommy Thompson did put forward the COMPLETE stoppage of immigration both legal and illegal. It went over like a lead balloon. Big business will continue to hire illegals until you take the profit margin away. A 1 million dollar fine per count and a year in jail for the president or CEO. It would stop in a heartbeat.
By JK
June 6, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this
I caught a few minuts of the debate last night; thought it was HI-freaking-larious! Hahaha! Y’all ever notice how Guiliani (R-standing on the bodies) does that thing with his eyes? In mid-sentence, he blinks and opens them really wide, as if to convey “You know my words are true because my eyes widened significantly on my point word.” Hahaha! Newsflash, Rudy: The JFK terror plot was foiled by intelligence/police work, not by an army of boots on the ground, so you refuted your own point of boots on the ground in Iraq making us “safer.” D’OH! Does anyone really think this Soprano wanna-be thug will make for successful foreign policy? (Ask Tony, Bobby, & Sil how that’s working for them….)
By Van
June 6, 2007 11:03 AM | Link to this
getalife,
Get real? If the wall was still in place between CIA and FBI, would we have known about these plots?
If we had a weaker Home Land Security, would we have been able to allocate enough resources to investigate?
Without an admitted need to be able to infiltrate islamic cells, would we have been able to place undercover agents in these groups?
The progressives would never had stood for that, and they let us know loud and clear time after time.
By Barak the doltish magic negro lives in D.C.
June 6, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this
A bit restrained there Chris, but essentially a decent opening statement. Clearly rounding up and deporting ALL treasonous cut and run liberals and forcibly deporting ALL illegals is an essential first 90 days programme. Finally taking the gloves off in Iraq. Bombing Iranian nuke installations. Removing all funding for NPR and PBS. Using the NY Slimes building for testing new cruise missiles. Immediately retiring the feminazi Ruth Ginsberg and that twonk Kennedy on grounds of marxist lite senility and replacing them with Justice Bork and another equally sound chap. Trying the senate demoNcrat judiciary committee for treason. Prosecuting the congressional black caucus for racebaiting and venality. Lynching the ACLU leadership Mississippi style to give them something to really whine about. Putting the likes of Pat Robertson and Ralph Reed in ducking stools and ducking them in the Savannah River - just for televised entertainment of course. Treating thuggish hippety hop stars exactly the way they treat whites/black women/cops etc. Carpet bombing VT, Boulder CO and parts of San Fran Sicko. And last but no means least prosecuting the Arkansas rapist for rape, pardon selling, perjury, sexual harassment and sexual assault and being corrupt white trailer trash!!
By getalife
June 6, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this
Van,
Which part of informants do you not understand?
Think man think.
Geez.
By Van
June 6, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
van’s a nose picker,
I see you still believe that oil is a fossil fuel. While there are many that still believe that, the newer evidence suggests that it isn’t a fossil product at all. I have often wondered how oil can be pooling miles below bedrock? How in nature things are pushed toward the surface, but oil is pushed deeper.
The arguments for either a biotic or abiotic origin of oil will not be settled for ages to come.
By Please Stop Writing, Schultz
June 6, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this
Jbmlaw,
I acknowledge your (somewhat harsh) statements regarding Democrats as being mostly true in the realm of entitlement programs and government spending, but am baffled by your accusations regarding individual liberties. As a libertarian, I would think that you wholeheartedly support the Democrats’ and liberals’ efforts to dismantle the Big Brother network set up in the wake of 9/11. And surely The Ensign and his brave fellow sailors (pilots, perhaps, as you said Pensacola?) wish, as my cousins and friends serving in harm’s way do, that all persons taken prisoner are afforded dignity and process. THAT is the American way and truly what separates us from terrorists. My sister-in-law works in the Joint Counterterrorism Center and has said many times that intel from torture is bad intel and the only reliable information is from human infiltrators and informants (a la JFK plot).
As to our disagreement regarding the parties’ moving towards the middle, I will be petty and childish. As our country was founded on the principles of a liberal, radical and representative democracy, I firmly state that conservatives are only elected by attempting to be liberal.
By JK
June 6, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this
Getalife, please stop picking on Van already. Maybe he was raised not to ever think. Maybe it makes his head hurt. Maybe it makes him dizzy and fall down and mommy has to give him some juice and help him in his comfy chair. Just because you like to think, doesn’t mean it’s fun for everyone else. Why are you so cruel?
By van's a nose picker
June 6, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this
Van, Google this: Plate tectonics
By Van
June 6, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this
van’s a nose picker,
I have. Don’t you find it interesting that areas with high plate movement have large oil fields? California, the middle east, Alaska, Indonesia, etc.
By the way, how many forests and dinosaurs did it take to product all the oil we have used and still have in the ground?
I am not sure which theory is correct, but it does raise some interesting questions.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this
Turkey just invaded Iraq.
By Southern Democrat
June 6, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this
The above comments were mine, I left up my screen name accidentally from a post admonishing one of the more untalented sportswriters at the AJC.
By Barak the vapid magic negro lives in D.C.
June 6, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this
I note with unsurprised mild delight that the ever brutishly stupid feminazi JK seemingly doesn’t (yet) understand that The Sopranos is actually a fictional brutish mafia themed soap opera with relatively low ratings (as its only broadcast uncensored on premium cable) and as such has no bearing on real life, let alone geopolitics.
By JK
June 6, 2007 11:37 AM | Link to this
Speaking of the origins of stuff, did anybody catch Mike Huckabee’s breakdown on the origins of life and the universe? HI-larious! I almost snorted milk out of my nose. See, according to Gov. Huckabee, there are ONLY TWO possible answers the the question of creationism vs. evolution. HAHA! (Yes, I too was amazed to learn this, but he was quite clear — only two.) You EITHER believe in creationism exactly as the Bible explains it, OR you believe that “everything we know is the result of an accident.” Who knew there were no other possible explanations, opinions or viewpoints in a world with six billion people in it? HAHAHA! And we thought Dubya had trouble juggling multiple concepts.. Haha! Good entertainment, those debates.
By artc
June 6, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this
I saw a CNN/CBS poll last week that asked registered Repubs/Dems to list the 5 most important issues to them prior to the 08 elections. Immigration was in neither parties top 5 compelling issues. That issue alone WILL NOT win the election for either party, but it damn sure can lose it for the Republicans. You nativist xenophobes on the far right better get smart real quick or see the Republican party crash and burn completely in 08. You have one candidate capable of winning the 08 general election, period. And you know who that is.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this
I am sorry to pick on Van.
I did not know, he was not able to think.
My bad.
Huck belongs in church not politics.
His sermon was too long last night.
I nodded off.
Geez.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this
Dear Southern @ 11:12, everything you wrote is well-reasoned except for the qualifier “somewhat.” So far as I can tell, the Leftists are all talk, and no action, about their purported campaign to dismantle the “eroded” civil liberties. Mere babble is hardly a basis for praise, or even for the slightest respect.
In any event, I believe I hold a traditional libertarian perspective on government snooping – that any fruit of an unreasonable (note the distinction from the language normally used by courts) search (including wiretaps) should be inadmissible in a government action; I do not necessarily suggest, however, that such surveillance should not be done. Other than the potential waste of taxpayer funds, I would not require an unlimited right of privacy, just a right to be left alone. Thus, if Queen Hillary wants to tap my telephone or wire my bedroom as I am a recognized opponent of Leviathan, one who presents risk to the public, she should feel free to do so; if the taxpayers find her perversion is a waste of funds, however, the political basis for her removal at re-election would be perfected.
As to your “petty” observation, I think anyone with acquaintance of the evolution of the term “liberal” would agree that my tiny-government advocacy is consistent with that of the founding fathers, and that the hijacking of the term by 20th century leftists, after their policies discredited the perfectly good terms “socialist” and “progressive” is the perversion.
By Southern Democrat
June 6, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this
On an unrelated note, I am glad that Mayor Bloomberg is attempting to restore some sanity and perspective to Americans.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
Here is all the lies they spew
Geez.
By melo
June 6, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this
If the Democrats were in charge, would they have stopped the Ft. Dix Six or the JFK terrorist wantabe’s? * How would u know? If you’re smoking and halucinating,as u surely are, obviously u imagine thinks. Whats the point in apppearing to be saving Americans from terrorism here at home when Americans are dying in numbers every week in far away Iraq.Dont u consider our soldiers as Americans? Dying for a DUMB Bush who does not know how to extricate himself and the country from this MESS. No wonder aspiring Republican Presidents are running away from him. Why do u think its so?, because he is succesful. The moment a Republican is a failure, he is not a true Republican anymore(jbmlaw)* In his thinking, the last Repoublican was Regan.So in eseence he is saying, the last two Republican Presidents have been failures. A NICE IMPLIED ADMISSION coming from a neocon.
Keep smoking VAN!!
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this
Dear Southern, I neglected to address one of your salient arguments – whether the un-uniformed enemy combatants seized on battlefields should be entitled to “process.” I answer with a definite “no.” They should be treated as prisoners of war, at best, and confined for duration. The long tradition in warfare is to execute, immediately, all captured enemy combatants not in uniform, and I cannot fathom any intelligent reason for the change today.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
Dear Melo @ 12:07, I think you mean “conservative” not “Republican.” While I am fiercely ideological, I am not particularly partisan.
By DebbieDoRight
June 6, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
Our radicalized leftist party is less protective of individual freedom than any party in the history of the republic
Two Words: Terri Schiavo
By FYI
June 6, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this
Federal District Judge Reggie Walton sentenced Scooter Libby to two and a half years in prison and fined him $250,000 based on “overwhelming evidence” of Mr. Libby’s guilt on four counts, including obstruction of justice, perjury and giving false statements.
Although partisans (e.g. Fred Thompson) suggest that Libby is being railroaded, that is hardly the case. Judge Walton, was appointed to the federal bench by the current President Bush.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw Not only was that the tradition, it is covered under the Geneva Convention. These illegal combatants have no rights as POW, but rather are considered saboteur and terrorists. They are accorded a trial to determine this point at which time found guilty can and should be executed.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this
Dear Melo @ 12:07, one additional minor quibble with your re-interpretation of my words, the term “failure” in your post should actually read “leftist,” although there is no significant distinction between the two for me.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this
Bloomberg is off the GOP script:
“There are lots of threats to you in the world. There’s the threat of a heart attack for genetic reasons. You can’t sit there and worry about everything. Get a life,” he said […]
“You have a much greater danger of being hit by lightning than being struck by a terrorist,” he added.
Indeed sir.
Smoke, drink, live it up.
Life is short, quit cowering and get a life.
Bwa.
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
June 6, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this
Jim,
Why would you give any merit at all to the thought that anything these people say will develop into useable policy if elected?
I’d refer you to the GOP’s Contract With America.
I’m sure you’ve read it by now, but there’s a line in there about “ending the cycle of scandal and disgrace”, and another one about “restoring dignity” to government.
I just don’t see where any of that has happened.
Why do you continue to believe them or find anything they say “educational”.
They’re all liars and crooks out to line their pockets and reward those who give them money.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this
Dear Debbie @ 12:16, I think you are arguing that the radical leftist party protected Terri Schiavo by allowing her to die; that would be the conventional interpretation by the death cult that masquerades as a party of compassion. Two good words, thanks for the reminder.
By Van
June 6, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this
From the left we have the following proposals,
Increase federal taxes. Nationalize a large portion of our economy. Surrender in Iraq and withdraw from any Islamic ruled country, or country claimed that belongs to them. Remove our national borders Turn decision making over to the UN.
The right has not made up its mind on just about anything - yet.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this
My conservative friends will want to read Dr. Williams’ essay today on language, picking up on a theme started by Dr. Sowell last week. It is Williams’ best essay ever. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/archive.shtml
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this
Dear Jacp @ 12:28, you have a choice between groups: one says, “We sinned, and will change, “ and the other says, “We sinned, and intend to sin more.” Not a difficult choice.
By artc
June 6, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw, were you given the same set of circumstances as Terri Shiavo, which avenue would you choose?
By RCH
June 6, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this
artc Are you eluding to passing the immigration bill as is?
By Scholar
June 6, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
Van: “I see you still believe that oil is a fossil fuel. While there are many that still believe that, the newer evidence suggests that it isn’t a fossil product at all. I have often wondered how oil can be pooling miles below bedrock? How in nature things are pushed toward the surface, but oil is pushed deeper.
The arguments for either a biotic or abiotic origin of oil will not be settled for ages to come.”
What does it matter? It still pollutes when it is burned.
By artc
June 6, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this
Yep.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this
Dear FYI @ 12:18, in pronouncing the persecution of Scooter Libber meritorious, you make the logical error of attributing integrity to the credentials and avoiding reviewing the action.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this
Wow Van,
I am trying to not pick on you but that post was incredibly stupid.
Care to back up that bs.
Geez.
Fakelaw,
Your logic about sinners benefits the Dems.
Double geez.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this
Dear artc @ 12:39, I would make the same choice she made, not to be confused with the choice her “husband” made.
By JK
June 6, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this
I come here to learn, so forgive me while I attept to clarify some things:
From the left we have the following proposals Please identify “the left” more specifically, so we can hold them accountable for their atrocities. Sources please!
Increase federal taxes.… you mean so we can pay down the DEBT we’ve incurred from foreign countries like our good friends in China, reduce the billions we spend on interest alone, balance the budget, and restore actual value to our money?
Nationalize a large portion of our economy. Source, please? Who said this? I’d like to research exactly what this claim means.
Surrender in Iraq by whome and to whom is it suggested that we hand the white flag and sign the “we surrender” document? Who exactly are you quoting that said we should “surrendur?” Is leaving the same as surrenduring? What exactly is the mission of our soldiers in Iraq, and how will they know when it really is, in fact, accomplished?
and withdraw from any Islamic ruled country How would Bush’s buddies in Saudi Arabia feel about that? And what does it gain us (the people, not the Carlyle Group and Halliburton) by leaving our soldiers there? Why is American corporate cash being stashed in Islamic ruled coutries anyway?
Remove our national borders I really really really want to know who the heck said this. Source please?
Turn decision making over to the UN. You mean all decisions (red or white, blonde or natural), or just the ones that affect other countries and might warrant their input? Do tell!
The right has not made up its mind on just about anything - yet. Sure they have! They’ve ALL decided to blame the Democrats for the failings of a Republican executive office, and a 12-year Republican domination of Congress!
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this
Dear artc @ 12:39, my quick response was too quick. I would urge the same result (as Ms. Schiavo’s fate) for all similarly situated leftists, however.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this
artc Let me give you just three reasons that this bill is flawed. Tommy Thompson said it best when he said all immigration should be stopped.
1)Some child molesters are illegiable. Current and past offenses are not taken into consideration.
2)Terrisom connections allowed.
3)Gang members are illegible
I can give you more. Do you want these new citizens living in your neighborhood?
By FYI
June 6, 2007 12:58 PM | Link to this
Dear jbmlaw @ 12:44,
You’re apparently unaware that Libby apologists, such as Fred Thompson, have accused U.S. Attorney Fitzgerald “a D.C. jury” (not “a jury”, but “a D.C. jury” — a statement intended to convey a racist message) of railroading Libby. Such accusations, of course, avoid reviewing the action, but rather, attribute integrity (or lack thereof) to the credentials. I merely responded to this “kill the messenger” approach, which is prevalent among those on the right, with facts.
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
Dear JK @ 12:48, I did not say those things, but I wish I had. Serially (1) “The left” is anyone who believes in Leviathan – not to be confused with any of us on the right. (2) Increase Federal Taxes – the Democrats’ oft-stated intention to rescind the Bush Tax Cuts, which would constitute the largest tax increase in the history of the world. You missed the discussion of fiscal policy yesterday, but the Democrats have none. (3) “Nationalize a large portion of the US economy” refers to all Democrat health care proposals – perhaps up to 10% of the present free economy. (4) “and withdraw from any Islamic country” – surely you have heard about the Dem’s – they foolishly demand a surrender date in Iraq. (5) remove our national borders – I cannot speak on that one, although I admit that I am also an open-borders person. (6) Turn decision making over to the UN – you don’t have to go farther than the Kyoto protocols to see that one, but you can add the Law of the Sea and the War Crimes Court in the Hague. (7) Right has not made up its mind – they will when they get a good look at my man Fred.
By artc
June 6, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
Being a lawyer, jbmlaw, you better than anyone else knows that the spouse is empowered by law to make that decision. Usually because the spouses have discussed that issue and made their wishes known to the other spouse. One of the most despicable acts the right has ever perpetrated was to turn this woman’s last days into a circus. And I still am amazed at how low they sunk to have Bill Frist “diagnose” her by videotape. A diagnosis later totally refuted by her autopsy. The Terri Shiavo fiasco is one of the contributing factors to the total demise of the right wing. No mainstream American ever wants that crowd of lunatics controlling the politics of this country again. EVER!
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this
Dear FYI @ 12:58, you are unaware of my essays in this space last September when I argued that Fitzgerald was railroading Libby. My argument was a point-by-point proof.
By Van
June 6, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this
JK,
Increase federal taxes. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire will increase the burden on the working folks of this country - instead of cutting spending like everyone else has to do.
Nationalize a large portion of our economy - National Health Care. Putting one of the most inefficient sectors of the economy under the most inefficient group - the feds.
Surrender in Iraq - a unilateral withdraw is surrender.
Withdraw from any Islamic ruled country One of the reason the terrorist use is our presents in any islamic country. Including our support for Israel claimed by the residents of Gaza and the West Bank as theirs.
Turn decision making over to the UN. Letting the UN make the rules concerning the globalization of the US.From universal womens rights to absolute rights for children - regardless of national constitutions and laws. Turning over control of the high seas to the UN(Laws Of the Seas Treaty), etc.
The candidates on the right are all over the board on nearly every issue, from Ron Paul to McCain and Tancredo.
BTW, the left are the Democrats and the right is the Republicans - did you go to school in Georgia?
By jbmlaw
June 6, 2007 1:06 PM | Link to this
Dear artc @ 1:01, being a lawyer I also am aware of the long interpretation of familial relations than made the wife chattel of the husband until around 1900-1920. And unlike you I do not attribute morality to the law. The Schiavo execution, by slow starvation, was reprehensible.
By FYI
June 6, 2007 1:13 PM | Link to this
One more thing, Mr. jbmlaw. The public (you and I) don’t have any more access or any less access to the evidence used to convict Libby than Fred Thompson, Jim Wooten and others. However, those who have “reviewed the action” — the prosecutor, the jury and the judge — have found that the evidence against Libby is “overwhelming”. It’s clear that those making “logical errors” are the Libby apologists. I gather that you fall into that category.
By Really RCH
June 6, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this
“3)Gang members are illegible”
LMFAO!!! You and Van are truly amazing wits and wonders that only a lawyer could love.
By artc
June 6, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this
And there you hit right on the exact reason that the right wing is dead in this country jbmlaw. Never again will mainstream America let you and those like you shove your idea of what is moral down the throats of the real majority in this country. And by the way jbmlaw, the founding fathers were very emphatic that the LAW of man should always trump the desires of religius fanatics. This is a republic, not a theocracy as you and others like you would like to have.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
ReallyRCH Yep. Laugh on. I am glad you think it is funny. Of course until one of your family is shoot.
Instead of ensuring that members of violent gangs such as MS 13 are deported after coming out of the shadows to apply for amnesty, the bill will allow violent gang members to get amnesty as long as they “renounce” their gang membership on their application. [See p. 289: 34-36].
By Van
June 6, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
I did forget the border question -
Lets start with NAFTA and the Super corridor between Mexico and Canada (Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.). The taxpayer funding of the “fixing” of the Mexican infrastructure.
Granting amnesty to illegal immigrants. Allowing an open border policy and support of sanctuary cities.
By rarringt
June 6, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this
Good morning all,
It intruiging to find people on here calling for the pardon of a fellow who, by most accounts committed an act that in another time would have been considered treason.
Meanwhile, many of those same people are silent in another high profile case where a young man is serving 10 years for engaging in consensual sex in an act that isn’t even a crime anymore.
I wish Jim and Co. would implore his readers to “think right” on that case as well….
Van, I think you actually made an interesting point, however unintentionally. Using poor grammar to criticize, however ironically, someone else’s intelligence, you said:
BTW, the left are the Democrats and the right is the Republicans - did you go to school in Georgia?
Key, though perhaps outmoded, point. The Democratic Party’s biggest strength (and weakness) would be it’s appeal to diversified points of view. So many people with so many opinions gives the appearance of “fracturing” on a regular basis, which doesn’t play well on fox news.
But you are right, the Dems view themselves in a very pluralistic sense.
On the other hand, you said the Republicans is the right, indicating a singular and unified (at best) or dogmatic (at worst) ideological sense.
I think part of the problem is a lot of folks who consider themselves conservatives in the traditional sense don’t recognize the people around them anymore. Small-goverment fiscal restraint types are now surrounded by nation-building, big brother, religious fundamentalists who all expect to march in line.
The problem with the GOP, and the Dems for that matter, isn’t immigration, or health care or even Iraq. It’s that the “reasonable base” has been hijacked by extremists in either camp.
And that’s happened because moderates on either side (who should be in charge) have let them.
By DebbieDoRight
June 6, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
Dear artc @ 1:01, being a lawyer I also am aware of the long interpretation of familial relations than made the wife chattel of the husband until around 1900-1920. And unlike you I do not attribute morality to the law. The Schiavo execution, by slow starvation, was reprehensible.
It has finally happened. I’m suprised this day has came so fast, I thought that maybe, give or take a few years, jbmlaw had at least a few more years before he succumbed to total dementia caused by lack of oxygen from all the hot air he spews on this blog. Sigh…. — There but for the grace of god go I……….
By Really RCH
June 6, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this
Bwaaahhh!! Keep going, it just gets funnier and funnier.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 1:44 PM | Link to this
rarringt We finally agree on something. The laws regarding statutory rape are long outmoded. This gentleman needs to be released.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
Conservatives are truly the terrorists’ greatest allies.
They want convicted felon amnesty.
They are soft on crime and National security.
By artc
June 6, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
RCH, you and those of your ilk can trot out every extreme example that you can possibly find and it will not negate the fact that this bill is sensible. I have absolutely no fear whatsoever of any immigrant shooting me or anyone in my family any more than I worry about any other group. Or for that matter, some terrorist jumping out of the bushes. You do nothing more than try to create fear, knowing that when fear takes over, reason and logic go right out the window. What you need RCH is to grow some cojones and quit being such a chicken little. But, because of people like you RCH, I almost hope that this bill doesn’t pass, because the one you get the next time from your democratic congress, senate, and white house, will be one that you definately won’t like. And in reality, that will be the one that you racists deserve.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this
ReallyRCH I expected more from you. I guess facts don’t count. I see some individuals want this bill passed no matter what the costs.
By DebbieDoRight
June 6, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this
rarringt — I too am really sad to see this Genarlow Wilson thing drag on as long as it has. It’s amazing the level of vindictiveness and stupidity that some people, who profess to love christianity, hold in their hearts. This kid was railroaded BECAUSE he had a future. If he was a gang banger, or a meth addict, he’d have gotten PROBATION for his first offense. Because he had an ounce of promise to become a thinking rational citizen, he gets the shaft. I remember the “righteous indignation” from people on this blog when the Duke Boys were railroaded; but I’m not surprised by the total lack of support for Wilson from these same “righteous” bloggers.
I’m further amazed by Thurbert Baker’s lack of response on the matter. He has the power to stop a travesty, but it seems he’s more concerned about his political career than the career of today’s youth.
On a sidenote: If Mr. Wilson has to stay in prison system for the ten year, I would shudder at the type of individual who’ll come out one day — it wouldn’t be a pretty sight.
By Doug
June 6, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this
RCH, if anybody ever shoots your dumb as% I guarantee you it will be one of your redneck white trash buddies in your trailer park that has had one to many Budweisers. Get a grip sissy boy.
By JK
June 6, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this
Notice how they never address the REAL snakes in the bathwater? DEBT and DEFICIT SPENDING. They want you to think preventative health care for some poor babies (babies they DEMAND be born, or else) would break us all (though it costs less than treating the full-blown illness later).
They mention nothing of continued borrowing from and debt to our ideological polar opposites. (Is all our money made in China too?) They want us to think that the $8 billion per month getting good American soldiers killed is not going to be an issue. Then they squawk about the price of fixing a little poor kid’s ear ache.
They think we’re so stupid, we’d believe that rescinding the tax cuts for the riches 3% of this country (like Paris Hilton, bless her heart), will somehow make MY life a living hell. Yes, we’d have to be stupid to believe that. Thanks for the lesson, Van!
By Paty
June 6, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this
Where did this imbecile RCH come from? Is he the new poster child for right wing idiocy? He’s definately doing a fine job shilling for ignorance here today.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 2:01 PM | Link to this
Doug It is this typical response I expect from individuals who have no logical re torte to facts. Thank you. Boy do you make yourself look dumb.
By Tommy
June 6, 2007 2:07 PM | Link to this
RCH you dumb redneck! What facts do you ever trot out? The best I’ve seen from you today is some weak as hell statement about getting shot by MS13. You haven’t stated ONE fact since this whole imigration issue came up.
By Travis
June 6, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this
By RCH
June 6, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
ReallyRCH Yep. Laugh on. I am glad you think it is funny. Of course until one of your family is shoot.
Boy you really laid out some “fact” with that one RCH. What a jackas% you are.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this
I gave you 3 strong reasons that this bill is flawed. What part of that did you not understand; illegal gang member, child molester, and terrorism connections allowed. What do you want? Nuclear bomb in pocket. I can site pages of the bill where you can find this. “Any takers?”
By artc
June 6, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this
By RCH
June 6, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this
artc Let me give you just three reasons that this bill is flawed. Tommy Thompson said it best when he said all immigration should be stopped.
1)Some child molesters are illegiable. Current and past offenses are not taken into consideration.
2)Terrisom connections allowed.
3)Gang members are illegible
I can give you more. Do you want these new citizens living in your neighborhood?
RCH, are you that stupid. Any immigrant comes forward gets a background check. If there are charges pending, he is a fugitive from justice, whatever, he is out of here. Deported. Not passing this bill is a sure fire way, as John McCain so ably put it last night to insure that 12 million immigrants remain unidentified and free to do or be exactly what you stated above. You are totally devoid of reason or logic RCH. Are you actually D.A. King?
By Van
June 6, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this
JK,
I am no where near the “Rich” level as described by Obama, but the tax cuts have saved me money.
When the Marriage tax expires (it will not be entirely repealed until the year before it expires)I will be again taxed at a higher rate than two people living together. But then again what do I know, I must be rich.
By Amy
June 6, 2007 2:25 PM | Link to this
My immigrant neighbors are some of the greatest people that I have ever had as neighbors. It’s trash like you RCH, that I don’t want living around me.
By William
June 6, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this
I just wish racists like RCH would stop hiding behind ridiculous generalizations and fear mongering to promote their all too obvious xenophobic and nativist agenda.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this
Artc
**WRONG**That is the whole point. No they will not. read the bill. Not one of you would have the good sense to state these loopholes must be filled before a bill such as this is passed. Amy Would you not like the peace of mind that your neighbors do not fall into any of these categories. Like I said, you want this bill passed no matter what the costs.
By Really RCH
June 6, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this
Click on this link to an English grammar education website. Take some courses and maybe you’ll stop losing your job to illegal immigrants with a 3rd grade education that don’t speak a word of English.
http://esl.about.com/c/ec/20.htm
By Van
June 6, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this
Amy,
I too have great immigrant neighbors, all of them legal. Vietnam, India, Caribbean Islands(but then again, they do come from the American Virgin islands).
By artc
June 6, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this
And we are all supposed to just accept your clairvoyance that “no they will not”, RCH? If you don’t pass the bill it is a certainty that they will not. Your logic is real fuzzy RCH. Doing nothing is what is not acceptable. Now run your “deport em all” position up the pole Mr. King.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this
Amy You sound sincere. All that many of us ask is an orderly legalization and border security that makes since. If you read those parts of the bill that I mention I am sure you would agree that these areas need to be repaired before any bill is passed. Its just common since.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this
*William Your right. I am xenophobic. I fear gang members, child molesters, and individuals with ties to terrorist. I think you will find most people including legal immigrants do to.
By Really RCH
June 6, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this
“Doug It is this typical response I expect from individuals who have no logical re torte to facts. Thank you. Boy do you make yourself look dumb.”
Bwwaaaaaahhh! Would that be a chocolate torte???? Bwaaahhhhh!!!
By RCH
June 6, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this
Actually blueberry. Must of been hungry.
By artc
June 6, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this
The vote was 51-46 against the amendment. Democrats succeeded in sucking support from Cornyn’s proposal by winning adoption of a rival version that would bar a more limited set of criminals, including certain gang members and sex offenders, from gaining legalization. The Senate backed that amendment 66-32.
Well, there goes your “criminal” argument right out the window RCH.
By getalife
June 6, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this
It will pass by the end of the week.
Its a done deal.
Let it go.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this
artc Afraid not. These loopholes are in the current bill being debated right now. For arguments sake, if this is true would you still vote for this bill?
By Scholar
June 6, 2007 4:00 PM | Link to this
The candidates from both parties are just telling you what you want to hear. After the next presidency health care will still be the same, immigration will still be the same regardless of what plan is passed, we will still be in Iraq in some capacity, and our energy policy will still be the same. The failure to invoke any meaningful change will be blamed on the other party. So, why are you guys shouting into the wind at one another?
By artc
June 6, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this
RCH, go to Earthlink. The Senate just agreed on that part of the bill. They are now hashing out other provisions. The one mentioned above was agreed upon 66-32. But don’t believe me. Go to Earthlink. It is going across the ticker right now.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this
Schola8I will agree with you there. Congress’s own budget committee states that even if this bill passes as is, it will slow illegal immigration by only 25%. WOW!!!!!
By William
June 6, 2007 4:17 PM | Link to this
getalife, the beautiful thing about this whole passage will be watching folks like RCH, D.A. King, Chip Rogers, and others of their ilk, not let go, but unable to do a damn thing about it. And all of those draconian local, state, and city ordinances will IMMEDIATELY be rendered null and void. In the case of D.A. King, he will actually have to get a real job again. Being an “anti-immigrant” advocate will not be a very profitable way of leeching of the ignorant anymore.
By RCH
June 6, 2007 4:22 PM | Link to this
artc I will study what”more limited” means. However it is not a bad start. There are still many other issues that need to be addressed. For such a far reaching bill careful consideration is needed.
By Really RCH
June 6, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this
Here’s the fallout from the crackdown on illegal workers. Paying an otherwise unemployable American citizen $20.00 an hour to work in meat processing plants doesn’t equate to a higher quality output.
PASS THE BILL NOW!
Dow Plunges After Labor Cost Data
Jun 6 03:19 PM US/Eastern By TIM PARADIS AP Business Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - Stocks slid for a second straight session Wednesday after an increase in labor costs stirred concerns about inflation and interest rates and as the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury flirted with 5 percent. The Dow Jones industrials fell more than 140 points.
Data showing unit labor costs rose a higher-than-expected 1.8 percent, raising concerns of inflationary pressures. The Labor Department also as expected reported that productivity waned in the first quarter.
By JuliusC.
June 6, 2007 4:49 PM | Link to this
And don’t forget, ReallyRCH, that in the case of the plant that was raided in Georgia that within a few weeks most of those overpaid “muricans” quit when the job got a little too unpleasent. In spite of the higher wages. Alot of ‘muricans” just aren’t going to work at any price.
By Lib Spaminator
June 6, 2007 5:26 PM | Link to this
For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and good will among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.
Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.
And for us at home — fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters and brothers of brave men overseas — whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them — help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice. With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy.
Words of Prayer..sacrifice..faith..unholy..enemy. It’s hard to believe that these words were spoken by a Democrat[ic] president, let alone Democrat[ic] politician. It’s rather amazing how a party can turn to not standing up for anything and be who they are today, especially knowing that their roots lay in these words spoken 63 years ago on the the eve of D-Day. There is absolutely nothing in these words that share a common credence with today’s Democrat[ic] Party. This nation cannot and will not survive leadership by the modern Democrat[ic] Party.
By deegee
June 6, 2007 5:38 PM | Link to this
There probably isn’t much that Abraham Lincoln said 140 years ago that resonates with Republicans today. So Spaminate that.
By Van
June 6, 2007 5:57 PM | Link to this
One of the items of the “reform” bill, is the section that deals with the US paying to help Mexico protect its southern border?
SEC. 114. IMPROVING THE SECURITY OF MEXICO’S SOUTHERN BORDER. a) Technical Assistance (2) to use the assessment made under paragraph (1) to determine the financial and technical support needed by Guatemala and Belize from Canada, Mexico, and the United States to meet such needs;
So once again, here we are pouring money into someone else’s pocket to “help” other countries who encourage their citizens to come here.
Typical far left wacko thinking.