Thinking Right

By Luckoduh

January 26, 2008 8:04 AM | Link to this

Check out the Urinal’s version of the fall of the Soviet Union:

{{{{Wall comes tumbling down: Hamas razes more sections of Gaza border-Urinal}}}}

After decades of having the limits of their destruction boxed in, being only able to kill and maim innocent people inside the walls and as far as their rockets would fly, finally, at last, freedom to move around the Middle East and kill lots of new and different people, oh what a joyous day!!

Uh, which way to the Jews?

~~~~~

{{{{Study: Pill offers cancer protection: Contraceptive can lower ovarian risk-Urinal}}}}

Believe me, I know that the perverts at the Urinal are rerunning old news to try and get some more women to take the pill, thus increasing the likelihood that the wormy pathetic lib can get “some,” but you need to be careful, and I wonder why the Atlanta Journal Constitution trys to downplay these risks?:

{{{{There has been some research indicating that using the pill increases the risk of cancer of the cervix…A large study, combining most of the studies carried out worldwide into use of oral contraceptives and risk of breast cancer, showed that women currently using the pill have a slight but significant increase in breast cancer risk….Some studies have shown that women have an increased risk of thryoid cancer when they are taking the pill.}}}}

What kind of sick mofo would put woman at risk just so they can achieve some sicko agenda?

And practicing medicine without a license?

And when are you going to have a long, blown up article about this, AJC?:

{{{{Scientists have turned an ordinary skin cell into what appears to be an embryonic stem cell.}}}}

Freaks.

~~~~~

I give it to you exactly as the Urinal print it:

{{{{More troops rushed to counter al-Qaida- Shaken by two days of deadly bombings, Iraq’s government said it would dispatch several thousand more security forces to the northern city of Mosul in a “decisive” bid to drive al-Qaida in Iraq from its last major stronghold.}}}}

I thought Iraq didn’t have an army? And check it out, some scumbag chicken crap cave dweller brain washes two or three losers into blowing themselves up among innocent women and children, and the Urinal sees this as the second coming of Sherman’s Union Army.

Nothing gets you harder than a good suicide bombing or two, eh, AJC?

Trust me, I will keep you all updated on exactly who it is that winds up being “shaken.”

~~~~~

Oh look, the Urinal finally found room on the front page of their POS “news” paper to tell us about the deeds of our brave soldiers, who they obviously “support:”

{{{{Army Rangers snared in sting-Three U.S. Army Rangers and another soldier were charged Friday with drug conspiracy after agreeing to an undercover scheme that involved the armed robbery of purported cocaine traffickers.-Whiny Times}}}}

First drug deal in the history of the United States, apparently.

GFY for getting the scoop, AJC.

~~~~~

Behold all of the wormy little things the Urinal does to try and influence an election:

A photo on page A10 of the Urinal shows Ku Klux Klintoon with several smiling…….black children.

Gee, I wonder what subliminal message this picture is trying to convey?

It’s worth looking at, the Urinal never links to their blatant election pornaganda, so you’ll have to buy the litter box liner.

But KKKlinton, complete with her gruesome overbite jutting out of her maw, appears to be happy enough with the black kids to eat them.

I wonder how long she washed after leaving that scene?

{{{{Just when you thought politics couldn’t get any stranger: AJC political reporter Aaron Gould Sheinin and Political Insider columnist Jim Galloway broke the story on Wednesday’s front page about the man behind an automated phone call criticizing Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) for backing Hillary Clinton for president.-Angela Tuck, Urinal}}}}

Yes, it couldn’t get any “stranger,” could it?

{{{{Automated Phone Call Emphasizes Middle Name Hussein….Democrat Barack Obama has been the subject of rumors that he is secretly a Muslim.}}}}

John Lewis is a Klinton hack and toady. Who could possibly even care that he getting autocalls against him for supporting KKlinton? Did he set this up?

{{{{John Garst, the man behind the call, initially declined to discuss it but eventually admitted to making the call simply because he dislikes Lewis.}}}}

KKKlinton gets busted in SC for auto calls smearing Obama as a Muslim, one day later, the lib press “catches” a guy “criticizing” KKKlintoon in an “auto call” and breaks the “story” all through their wormy pages. 1) This diffuses the auto call scandal because “both sides” are “doing it,” 2) Your average dimwit liberal sees this fake scandal, wholly created by the Ku Klux Kampaign and associate “auto calls” with this “quack” who is “hounding” Lewis.

Depraved, isn’t it?

And of course, free Kampaign ads for the libs favorite “Republican:”

{{{{Countdown 2008: ROAD TO THE WHITE HOUSE: McCain, an Iraq hawk, gets anti-war votes. Republican doves respect his principles even as they reject his stance.}}}}

When a fully committed Code Pinko mouthpiece like the Urinal goes to singing sweet songs about a Repug, don’t you think, just maybe, he might be a pinko too?

{{{{Bill KKKlinton: John McCain and Shrillary are ‘very close’}}}}

Bwa.

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Pallette cleanse

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Pallette cleanse

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Pallette cleanse

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Pallette cleanse

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Pallette cleanse

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:12 AM | Link to this

Pallette cleanse

By Luckoduh

January 26, 2008 8:18 AM | Link to this

Doesn’t it tell you something that so few people take “pride” in Atlanta that any group can come along and hijack the “name” and no one notices:

{{{{Atlanta Pride upset with city over relocation-Urinal}}}}

Do tell Atlantans, is there a “Falcon’s Pride” group and, if so, what exactly does it stand for?

And why is the Urinal so ashamed to use the word “gay?”

By Bored

January 26, 2008 8:18 AM | Link to this

What is pallette cleanse?

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 8:23 AM | Link to this

Now you listen, mister, pallette cleanse is flushing the duhng. (the squeeking unhinged)

By Redneck Convert

January 26, 2008 8:23 AM | Link to this

Well, I guess about the only thing we can do about big guvmint is to bring in jbmlaw’s Old Folks Army. Just round up all the people on Social Security and Medicare and give them weapons that don’t weigh much and put some shuffleboard courts on the army bases and lots of movie places and bingo rooms. Anyway, if we are going to be in Iraq for the next 100 years or so like McCain says we will need all the troops we can get. Besides, My President is about to make a treaty with the Iraq guvmint to stay a few more years so the librul Democrats will be stuck with staying if they win the next election.

I just hate having to pay taxes to support somebody else. Far as I’m concerned, this is a jungle and its every man and woman for hisself. That’s why we need to get rid of all the gun control laws. You need to perteck what’s yours, and if it takes a couple machine guns and a anti-tank gun to do it, like I have, well, that’s what you got to have. I’m for all my 2nd Amendment rights.

So when all these old coots are in the army we can get rid of Social Security and Medicare. If God had of wanted you to be on your own , you would of been borned with a big bank account. I reckon them that’s in wheel chairs and can’t serve can just move in with their young folks. Anyway, the onliest thing the federal guvmint should do is to perteck us from furriners, like jbmlaw says. Us workers need to be able to bring home every penny we make except a little to go to paying for the army. We can just sell off the parks and turn the highways into toll roads and get rid of food inspeckters and such. You don’t need food inspeckters. If a few people get poisoned, the rest of us will know not to eat the food they did.

Anyhow, I never thought I would live to see the day when SC would vote for one of Those People for president, but that’s what will happen today. It just goes to show what happens when the federal guvmint gets involved in things. If we had our way and it wasn’t for the federal guvmint, we could go back to the old days when we knew how to keep Those People in their place. I’m just disgusted with the way things are.

I don’t see no snow or ice like the weather people said would come. They lie as bad as the AJC. Bunch of libruls.

Have a good day everybody. And be polite to Sister Dusty. A baby that’s been dropped on her head grows up not thinking too straight. Leastwise you know her heart is Right.

By Luckoduh

January 26, 2008 8:54 AM | Link to this

Uh, duh:

{{{{Is the right right on the KKKlintons?}}}}

{{{{Something strange happened the other day. All these different people — friends, co-workers, relatives, people on a liberal e-mail list I read — kept saying the same thing: They’ve suddenly developed a disdain for Bill and Hillary Klinton. Maybe this is just a coincidence, but I think we’ve reached an irrevocable turning point in liberal opinion of the Ku Klux Klintons.}}}}

{{{{Going into the campaign, most of us liked Hillary Clinton just fine, but the fact that tens of millions of Americans are seized with irrational loathing for her suggested that she might not be a good Democratic nominee. But now that loathing seems a lot less irrational. We’re not frothing Clinton haters like … well, name pretty much any conservative. We just really wish they’d go away.}}}}

Bwa.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this

Yeah, Luckoduh, it’s gotten so bad that it’s past outrageous and deep into the Funny Zone that the DNC-AJC still cops the pose of objectivity, as though it were ever so masterfully subtle as to push its agenda without readers seeing in black and white what the editors are on about.

The paper’s about two paces this side of Newsweek’s grave. Newsweek’s pallbearers were a bunch of Columbia-trained libs-from-Central-Casting cocksure that their particular worldview was Truth. The last laugh is that by surrendering a once proud organ of Ideology Unawares to the forces of Ideology with a Vengeance, the editors kissed off half their potential readership.

One of the vulnerabilities of cornpone liberals is their contempt for fiduciary responsibility, for which, never having had any, they have nothing but contempt. Too late now to explain to the publisher and shareholders that the thing to do was to turn the magazine into an instrument of the most unimaginative propaganda, thereby alienating half its potential and erstwhile readers. Duh.

Earlier this week, as he was complaining about the dearth of actual reporting on the mysterious Barak Obama, I mentioned my theory that the ladies and gentlemen of the American Fourth Estate partied their way through J-school. His response: as best he can tell, journalism no longer exists in the United States.

He’s a staunch, deep-pockets Democrat.

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Check out the AJC’s page one punfest about the coach, the principle, and the porn. Double entendres fly off the page: a mayor’s text messages to his aide proves he’s more interested “in her structure than infrastructure”. (there’s a syllabic rhythm too!)

Yes, that would take two writers, working together for hours, rewriting, re-editing, (and let’s order chinese and work late). So they’re sitting at their computers in an empty office, working side by side, man and woman, and all of a sudden they both get wanton over the won ton, (why not, their computers are right there). Oh, this is writing itself, somebody stop me, I’m out of control.

Technological advances have always put folks in trouble. The 19th century daguerreotypes were all first used for porn. (Want to see a picture of your swarthy immigrant fish-wife, sir)? The first xerox machines were used soley to copy buttocks until congress finally acted. Then the laser printer proved itself by copying life sized (one inch equals one inch) replicas of male exaggeration. Dont forget how katie courek mooned america from the inside out with the very latest sigmoidoscope. And now, we can store mp3 holographs of people performing the entire 12th chapter of the kama sutra on our hard drives. I know one disparate housewife who has downloaded her twinkie on a GPS in her car. You know, just in case.

Because that’s what we are: perpetual fifth graders who are just now coming to terms with our genitalia, (and we have the giggling journalist at the AJC to prove it).

By Artie Sammish

January 26, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

OK, I admit, I’m a self-hating venal person. Can’t seem to help it. I hate venality. Even in myself. I don’t think that qualifies as “irrational loathing”. Seems rational to me, even for a guy who can’t stop being venal.

So I don’t like venal people, so what? It takes one to know one. I think Hillary Clinton (what happened to her Rodham?) is a venal person. Lots of people agree with me. And even if they didn’t, I still wouldn’t like her, because she’s venal. How does my not liking The Politician Formerly Known As Hillary Rodham Clinton make me irrational?

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Good morning all. Great arguments Luckoduh, I look forward to Saturday mornings for your pointed analysis.

Our leftist friends will ignore Jim’s essay this morning, as it is really a closed message to “his side,” captured in the phrase, “democrat light.”

We highlighted Peggy Noonan’s essay yesterday, and Drudge has now linked to it. Jim adds a dimension, asking whether the “conservative compassion” that broke the Reagan coalition was a political necessity.

For years I have mocked the democrats for their consistent post-election denial ritual: they eat their dead, and proclaim that it was the vessel and not the flawed message. So with trepidation, I now assert the same for republicans: conservatism - tough love, in the current idiom - can be sold, but requires the right messenger. My guy Fred was such a messenger, but never could get his voice heard over the bumper-sticker pandering and the straight-abusive talk and the Gantryisms that filled the debates.

So where do we go? Reaganism is a non-factor for this election. We will not be advancing the agenda. The best we can hope for is a holding action, keeping the socialists away, maybe getting some conservatives appointed to the judiciary.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this

That’s very interesting about the tendency of a certain GOP wing to emulate Europe’s Christian Democrats, the Old World excuse for a conservative party (notwithstanding Britain’s Tories). It’s not so farfetched when one considers that the DNC made a conscious decision to emulate Europe’s Green Party. But even as mere analog, the Xian Dem alignment works in the Huckabee context, because he’s as much a sham Christian and pseudo-conservative as the Xian Dems are.

He’s incapable of translating Christianity into other than liberal terms—-a wholly legitimate interpretation, by the way, unless it’s limited to our immediately current and very earthly conceptions of liberalism—-and really ought to be running as a Democrat (with a “D” next to his name, he’d be much like Jimmah).

All of which is to say, that were he running in Europe they’d construe him as a Christian Democrat.

By catlady

January 26, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this

Of that, about 45 percent went to support Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

What percentage of that was money that the government had “borrowed” from Social Security and now has to pay back?

What percentage goes to the military?

Throughout the administration of President Bush, the party has wrestled with accommodation with Big Government.

I would say it is “accomodation” (what a polite euphemism) with Big Business.

44 million filers paid nothing

How many of these were part-time workers, either voluntarily (teenagers, the retired) or involuntarily (the under-employed)?

What percentage were those wealthy with smart accountants and unlimited write-offs?

The GOP has to come up with a viable alternative for security conscious individuals who have grown dependent on the mailman

Such as the wealthy and middle-class, with their tax write-offs like mortgage interest. It is not just the AFDC recepients that are feeding at the trough.

Promoting private-sector alternatives and competition in health care, transportation and other services.

When it is something that is necessary, all that “private-sector alternatives” do is enrich the stockholders of those businesses. For example, if we turn over providing water to the private sector, what we see is water prices going through the roof because everyone needs water.

The trick is to wean dependency by offering alternatives that build self-reliance.

True if applied to EVERYONE (see above).

Health savings accounts. Retirement savings accounts.

All well and good if every cent you make is not taken by housing, heating, transportation, food, and medicine. There has got to be money available to put in these accounts.

It’s a country comfortable with big interventionist government, one financed by somebody else. That can be changed. But it will take time

Unfortunately, the last 8 years under Bush have done 50 years’ worth of damage.

Bring on leaders who can look at the big picture and not kow-tow to one group or another.

By OneForTheRoad

January 26, 2008 9:44 AM | Link to this

Weaning you say — as in taking away the breast milk. By the way, who is this big mama anyway. Do we need to start with weaning big government off its insatiable appetite for tax dollars. How many people have gone down to their city or county courthouse and just looked around at all of their dependents. You don’t get a tax deduction for a single one of them. You do get to pay their bills, pay for their vacations and sick days, pay for their health insurance and dental insurance. When you ask them for help and they give you a look like, well you know, and some smartass response, don’t try to say something like I pay your salary. They don’t understand. Why? Because they have always been fed breast milk from big mama and weaning is going to be a real chore. Too bad our teachers can’t get that point across to our future leaders. If they could, it may make their dependencies more palatable. And, don’t even get me started on our “elected” officials. I don’t have such nice things to say about them.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

jbm,

That’s a superb analysis, your 9:22.

From here? The Democrats should embrace their name and their heritage with a bear hug; their answer: More Democracy. They should drop der grunschtick down to a plank, and leave the country as a whole to work out our evironmental platform, as we’re doing (again) apace. The Republicans should lead the way in showing how to do more with less; privatization is only one means of so showing, and I happen to think, in spite of your spirited defense of it, that it must be thoughtfully delimited.

I don’t want to give up on “compassionate conservatism”. Peggy is saying, in her customarily lovely and moving, if somewhat cloying, terms, what has been said of the GOP, if memory serves, for at least the past three years. Sure, everyone past twenty-something realizes that the phrase was a mere slogan, but it’s out there, and like Noonan I choose slogans upon which to build castles.

When we show how to get better food to those who need it, to provide more effective conditions in which the illiterate can earn valuable learning, to care for the permanently weakened members of our society, to fulfill our debts of honor and care for our veterans and serving personnel—-when we do all of this, and stimulate our economy by doing it with significantly fewer resources, then we will have regained the soul of the GOP. And, yes, we will be the compassionate conservatives even Peggy has concluded we never should have been.

This is a very tall order, but Democrats don’t even know how to think in these terms, much less implement these ideas. The GOP may have lost its way, and it may even be about to hang its head again, but it’s never too late for us to do the difficult thing: to walk our talk.

By Dusty

January 26, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this

Now Jim Wooten & jbmlaw,

CUT IT OUT!! We’ve still got a chance. I refuse to give in to socialism, anti-war, food stamps, and every other support system that even designates much of the middle class as “poverty”.

I refuse to give into the “hate” system that liberals have built for the USA. Do not join them in their moaning and groaning (and now fussing & fighting). If we are true to our values, then no one can beat us, the conservatives.

If you are sad over Republican choices, think again. Right now, I believe Guiliani is out best bet because he cleared the air in NYC and that was a miracle. He likes women and marries them but…if we can elect a Bill Clinton and his girlfriends he didn’t marry, that issue is kaput. The rest of the GOPers are either too close to liberal or should be preaching and not governing.

Now, thanks to Luckoduh for giving us a review of our local well of liberal libation, the AJC. He doesn’t miss even one twist of their leftist leanings. Even Jim Wooten cannot overcome a whole system. But I am glad he tries.

By @@

January 26, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

Whoa is me, and all other women Jim.

We’ve been duped into accepting a “father” who is working overtime and spread too thin? If that’s not bad enough, we’ve burdened our daughters with other people’s sons who will lack incentive to do any better.

Boys to men, raised by Super Nannies.

Not to worry though….we’ve got a woman running for President—a woman who turned a blind eye to her husband’s marital indiscretions but still needs his shoulder to cry on in her pursuit of power.

Yesiree…We’ve come a long way baby or at least that’s what the political power brokers (Hillary) would have us believe.

We’ve been had girls! by the He said She said politicians but Hey….”I feel your pain.”

In spite of it all I’m good—I’ve got my 401K and Health Savings account, and a good man who really cares. Wise choices make all the difference.

I’m no government’s fool. I kicked that guy to the curb long ago.

By Luckoduh

January 26, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this

{{{{By jbmlaw January 26, 2008 9:22 AM So where do we go? Reaganism is a non-factor for this election. We will not be advancing the agenda. The best we can hope for is a holding action, keeping the socialists away, maybe getting some conservatives appointed to the judiciary.}}}}

jbmlaw: I wouldn’t be so quick to throw dirt on the “movement,” after all, the choice so far has been made by the “independent” voters of several liberal states, let’s just see how this all shakes out when the real Conservatives get their say.

Not to mention the fact that we are letting the pinko press set our agenda for us; they harp on and on about McCain for a reason (how many people know that Romney is leading the vote and delegate count?) and the democrat media carry on an open discussion among liberals about the state of Conservatism.

We’ll be fine.

Think back to how many Republican dimwits tried to shove amnesty down our throats, including McPinko, that was real successful, wasn’t it?

I wonder what changed their minds?

And how about Iraq, the libs had a “mandate” from the 06 elections to bring our troops home and hand al Qaeda a huge victory, instead, we, Conservatism, got a troop increase and have set in motion al Qaeda’s defeat, giving us a long term strategic and financial ally in an area of the world that once was thought to be hopeless.

It’s not like liberals are the smartest people in the freaking world either, these bozos created “diversity” and “political correctness” and are now currently involved in a large scale race riot because of these same ridiculous rules. Make note how things that We the People are forced to comply with, the liberals themselves just ignore.

And remember, there is a reason that al-Gore lost the 2000 election to Bushie, the same Bushie that babbled on about “compassionate Conservatism” and later desecrated the memory of three thousand murder victims by praising the “religion” of “peace,” al-Gore lost because America knew what a loser Klinton was and wanted to turn the country away from the petty, shallow, depraved power lust.

And here the dimwits democrats are, dragging their party right back into the sleaze, the hate, the racism, right back to where they are the most comfortable being, like the rest of us don’t notice these things.

You reckon we’ll be pointing this out during the long summer election campaign?

Who ever pulls off the Repug nomination is going to need Conservatives, not just to win the general election but also to continue funding the Republican Party.

Do you realize how much money they’ve lost because of some of the stupid ideas Bushie and McCain have come up with the last several years?

They’ll figure it out soon enough.

And fall back in line.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

Yes, Viscosisis,

It seems to have occurred somewhere around 1975, that odd little sociological phenomenon in which punning became the only arrow in the copy editor’s quiver. My guess is that that was the year after the University of Missouri introduced its first Headline Composition class, led no doubt by an impressively bored tweedhead.

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this

Dear Glenn @ 9:57, you are correct in the foundation role of “slogans” which in current corporate-speak is the “mission statement.” I regretfully note the absence of any cogent mission statement among our candidates (including my guy.) You correctly note our differences on the role of government, minor differences compared to the vision of the other side.

Like you and our focused-friend Dusty I am coming around to the view that Rudy, among our three champions remaining, is most likely to prevent the advance of leftism. He will appoint conservative judges. I think Mitt would, if he knew what one looked like. I would like to think that McCain (as I read in someone’s analysis yesterday) is returning to his 1980s roots as a conservative southwest senator, but I have no basis for trust in that belief.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

@@,

Yep. (Or perhaps I should say, Yup.) That’s quite trenchant, your “boys to men, raised by Super Nannies.” It also covers approximately half the career of Dr. Margaret Mead. (Who, incidentally, was given to predating sexually upon such men, some of whom she married from time to time.)

Probably it’s significant, too, that the Super Nannies are themselves male constructs; and, specifically, usurpations. My late mentor called this “radical uterus envy, institutionalized”.

God only knows what the copy editors would make of that rather astute remark.

By getalife

January 26, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

If Jim thinks electing another gop will change anything, he has totally lost his mind and should check in the old folks home with McCain.

“Last night in the Republican debate Tim Russert asked John McCain about a statement he’d made:

“I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.”

McCain pretended he’d never said any such thing:

“I don’t know where you got that quote from, I’m very well versed in economics.”

Another liar, ignorant on the economy, advised by neocons, stay the course in Iraq and bomb Iran to start WWIII.

How in the hell is that change Jim?

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

Dear Luckoduh @ 10:17, I am cautiously optimistic that you are correct about the self-loathing nature of democrats, that there is no circumstance so sure that they cannot find a way to lose.

By Disgusted

January 26, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

All this moaning by the conservatives about big government reminds me of a boss I once had.

This staunch conservative fired people regularly and claimed he was doing his Christian duty in doing so, for such people must be miserable in working for him and they would be much happier if they were cut loose. By reaching out to help them make the difficult decision to leave his employ, he was helping them improve their lives.

The pious Pecksniffian maunderings of jbmlaw and Glenn bring memories of this hypocritical sub-human. “Compassionate conservative” indeed! About the only compassion a conservative has is for his own wallet.

By Oiling the squeeking unhinged

January 26, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Nobody’s ignoring Wooten’s message, jbmlaw, it just that he takes 1500 words to say what I can say in 25 words or less, and that p’s me off. You read Luckoduh? From duhng’s p-hole to your mouth, then. Pallette cleanse. Easily amused much?

Wooten translated: Taxes stunt growth. Entitlements stunt productivity, but most of all….when cultures mix, the chris mathews win. How many broadcasts can illegal immigration support? Have you seen that show? oh, y bother….you know it all, you do it.

The Fed Chair’s move, as I clearly explained, (and was the only one to realize), was innappropriate. Now everyone knows about the French Bank’s aggravation of a selloff. The chairman should resign, I know I’d be too embarrassed to show my face ever again after histrionics like that.

He’s spunky. He’s overspirited.

He’s a nut.

Here’s every post duhng ever made: <<>> ha ha ha lol well, i guess they got what they deserved, ha ha HA HA bwa

He’s a troll. a moron. an undersalved rectal chafe, and you’re hurting his chances at rehab by patronizing him. Duhng, listen man, I want you to get better, but jbmlaw is playing you, trying to send you on your circular flush to the funny farm. Take a couple years off, duhng, and then come back and post something. I minored in psyche, I’ll let you know if you’re improving or not.

ha ha ha lol bwa well now, geez, golly goolash,

By getalife

January 26, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

I would not be surprised if President Hillary Clinton shuts down government to attack the deficit.

If the House or Senate are not in sesssion, they can’t waste any more of your money.

She should downsize like corps do when they screw up.

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

Dear Disgusted @ 10:30, I respectfully note that only one party - yours - has yoked itself to a foundation theory that “theft is a virtue.” Not that “theft” has any meaning to a leftist.

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this

Get me rewrite, I want to change my 10:41. Delete “respectfully” and insert “contemptuously.”

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

Yeah, jbm and Dusty,

There’s a very respectable fearlessness in the manner in which Rudy and McCain seem to approach the daily grind of being public persons. I think I see it in Obama too. They say what they think, and are unashamed of what they think and of how they have spoken their minds in the past. Where they’ve overstepped, they now apologize—-sometimes unbidden. They cause me to feel almost certainly that they say the same things in the same ways when the same topics happen to come up in small gatherings of their loved ones, as around a dinner table. When they hesitate to answer a question, it looks to me as though they are trying to find the most accurate—-and not the most beguiling—-way to express their thinking. This is especially true, in my opinion, of Rudy, to whom words come as easily as they do to Bill and Hillary.

I watched him last night on C-SPAN—-a tape of his Thursday visit with Cuban-Americans in Miami. Those people are his longtime friends, and when he told them yet again why he admires them, they knew that he meant it, and has meant it for 25 years, and they shouted out that they remember his longstanding loyalty and that they knew that his admiration was sincere. Mitt did much the same thing Thursday at a gathering of Cubano businesspeople, to whom he was able to display his mastery of the art of the turnaround. But Mitt’s plastic; Rudy’s street. As a guy who grew up in a Southern California beach resort, I never thought I’d like a Brooklyn streetfighter with a law degree, but bigod I do.

I admire McCain also, for other than the usual reasons. And I have deep reservations about Mitt that prevent me from embracing the estimable all that he has to offer. But these are good people to run the country, and so, I hope, is Barak Obama.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

getalife,

I think even you monopartisans would be willing to admit that McCain is nobody’s errand boy. It matters not that some of his “advisors” are neoconservatives and other Democrats.

But where you’ve really got him wrong, is your assertion—-slipped, backhanded, into a subordinate clause as usual—-that he’s pro-Establishment on what you erroneously call “the war”. Just as Rep. Barbara Lee was the only Member of Congress to oppose the Iraq invasion, so McCain had been the only Member to say, with Gen. Powell (notwithstanding yesterday’s childish Luckovich ‘toon), that the war now over was being prosecuted in the wrong manner. He specified what he thought the right manner to be, and he was right. (And that’s a damnsight more than Barbara, or for that matter the Clintons, could ever do.) Subsequently, he was the first Senator to forecast the success of the Surge, which was laid out by Gen. Petraeus very much along the lines that McCain himself had called for.

Meanwhile, Hillary has been wrong at every turn. She never really said, “We loathe the military”, but she might as well have done. Her comments this week are as hostile toward the military as any I can recall. She’s wrong about that, too, as she’ll find should she submit herself to voters in a general election.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Thanks for the Bernanke analysis, BTW. I’d looked forward to it, and was afraid it would run along those lines. Gaffer: get the hook!

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

Dear Glenn @ 10:48, but for his seemingly deeply-ingrained ideological defect, I share your analysis of Obama.

By getalife

January 26, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

Glenn,

Keep it brief blowhard. Today the people vote in SC. Obama will win today but Clinton will win California and the nomination.

The Clinton McCain match up will be civil because they respect each other but Freedom Watch will run disgusting ads against the Clintons and rush and RW media will swift boat McCain.

Clinton wins in a landslide.

By AmVet

January 26, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

Good morning all, long time, no post.

Mr Wooten, like many of the tormented and angst-ridden Republicans these days, is in a terrible quandary. How to play the Reagan card when it has NO value. None. And for those of you not paying attention, it hasn’t for years.

This country fell for dictator-coddling Reaganism hook, line and sinker and now decades later realizes they were mere dupes in an endless war on drugs and trickle-down voodoo. And try as they might, the neo-con talking heads just can’t save his ever tarnishing legacy, especially in light of the “results” it has produced by his most ardent adherents and successors. And the reactionaries know the American people, with the benefit of hind sight, now see and understand those basic failings abroad and at home, as well.

So, our esteemed columnist continues to peddle the silly myth of A party that offers smaller government appeals to Reaganites, knowing that the GOP base, supposedly comprised of RR lovers, has consistently elected “leaders” who, like Ronnie, ballooned the size of the bureaucracy and are intent on keeping power at all costs through the use of countless secretive, dubious or even outright corrupt measures.

For example the large, but slow, Fred tried his hardest to be Ronnie-esque but was ultimately just an embarrassment to his party (as were Hunter and Brownback). And his still running GOP rivals are not much better.

The once-viable Rudy, with a “strategy” as equally moronic as the Tennessean’s, is now just stiff milquetoast. Clearly, the wrong man for the job and shockingly, now barely able to out campaign Ron Paul or convince the electorate he is more relevant. Incredible.

The flip-flopper Mitt is still charging but he also has no real chance. He talks a great game, but I sense that the American voters don’t trust him to do one single thing to end the rape of America’s middle class. But he really does look good as the GOP’s latest offering of their typical Republican pr1ck, in spite of that coiffed hair and wry smile.

And though he is the very poster boy for the GOP’s socially “conservative” core, Huckabee is intriguing but not in a good way.

That leaves only one GOP candidate worthy of serious consideration IMHO. He’s a conservative, but hopefully not in that fake and now discounted Ronnie/Newt/Bush-style.

And the list of noteworthy endorsements continues to pile up for this man who alone has the experience, honor and character to lead us for the next few years. And the fact that the worst of the worst in the GOP veritably despises the senior Senator from Arizona is a very good omen for America.

So the GOP choices are two Northeastern quasi-RINOs, a liberal-conservative preacher man, a POW maverick and a very “difficult” uber-maverick. All fighting to avoid speaking truth to the amazing mess left by their party’s leader, hero and predecessor and his warped agenda and policies.

Reaganism in this country, is at last, more or less irrelevant, as are the fools who continue to try and run it up the flagpole from time to time.

The King is dead. Long live the King.

By GaVoter

January 26, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this

John McCain/Ron Paul

Between the two of them, they’ve got all the bases covered.

By Dusty

January 26, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

Glenn,

Barach Obama is anti-war and I don’t go for that when our troops are fighting one for us. I don’t care if his name is Hussein or even Mable. I believe he is straightforward but tells us things I don’t want to hear from him now, much less as President.

Obama is not the equal of Condi Rice and never will be. Maybe he will reach the intelligent compatibility and knowledge she exemplifies but I don’t see it now. I wish all candidates had the qualities she possesses.

By Craig

January 26, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this

I come here often and read the inane ramblings of the Counselor and his new hero Duh, and wonder how I can phrase my thoughts so as to get through to people who are so obviously brain dead. Then I am presented with the brilliant essays by the Redneck, and realize that my poor pitiful attempts at prose would pale by comparison.

Thank you Redneck Convert. Your expert take down of the fatuous comments by the Counselor make my day. I’m in awe….

By Glen D

January 26, 2008 11:23 AM | Link to this

If we are going to cut back on the governmental dependency - then let us do it across the board - individuals, corporate entities, farm subsidies, etc. I have always been a fiscal conservative & a social liberal…thought that the Conservative Republican movement started when I was about 13 (1964 - Goldwater) was going to let me keep more of my $$ - what happened? The last 3 conservative GOP presidents have spent more of my $$ than the tax & spend liberal democrats combined.

So…let’s take back our (my!) $$ - why should I subsidize a farmer who sells his crop for less than it costs to grow, why should I bail out the mortgage bankers who made risky loans to Americans who did not have the income stream to repay them, etc. (maybe because since the late 1970’s the government has moved into bailing out both individual citizens & Corporate/Agricultural America - capitalism is no longer a risk - just ask Washington to cover your losses!)

I fear for my grandson - he will probably live in a dictatorship or some variant thereof since we are rapidly sliding down the well financied-road to public bankruptcy.

GDRLA

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this

getalife,

It’s impossible, Tool, to be succinct in untying the truth-knots you repeat here.

For example (from your latest), if there’s some “Swiftboating” to be done on McCain, I can’t wait; I’m always interested in the truth. As you show daily, it’s increasing elusive these days.

GaVoter,

John McCain doesn’t so much as acknowledge the existence of Ron Paul.

[Rudy 08]

By getalife

January 26, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

Glenn,

He is getting swiftboated moron

It failed in SC but they will try again in the general. Try reading something.

By Apocalypse

January 26, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this

Whose Stimulus Makes the Grade? By Ruth Marcus Washington Post Wednesday, January 23, 2008; Page A19

One of the benefits of an extended presidential campaign is that it presents real-world tests for candidates. Some take the form of pop quizzes assessing contenders’ instincts in a crisis. Others are more like take-home exams — the latest, and perhaps most revealing, being competing plans for an economic stimulus.

In practical terms, this is irrelevant: The moment for stimulus will be long past by Inauguration Day. But as a way of judging how candidates view government’s role, how they balance politics and policy, and how sound their thinking is on economic policy, the proposals offer a revealing report card.

My grading starts with President Bush, because he sets the curve.

George W. Bush: B-minus. The president gets extra credit for signaling flexibility on his roughly $145 billion package and for not insisting on extending his tax cuts, which made no sense as stimulus and would have doomed its chance of passing.

A tax rebate — the White House has floated $800 per individual — is a good approach. Bush loses points, however, for excluding those without income tax liability, even if they pay hefty payroll taxes. Points off, also, for failing to extend unemployment benefits. In efficiency and fairness, both are exactly backward. As Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke explained, “If you’re somebody who lives paycheck to paycheck, you’re more likely to spend that extra dollar.”

Bush says tax incentives for business investment must be a significant part of the package. But such breaks didn’t have nearly the positive effect anticipated after they were adopted from 2001 to 2003; the Congressional Budget Office found the impact of those provisions to be “relatively modest”; Moody’s Economy.com put it at 27 cents for every dollar spent.

Barack Obama: A-minus. Obama is at the head of the class with an intelligently designed, $120 billion stimulus plan. He would speed a $250 tax credit to most workers, followed by another $250, triggered automatically, if the economy continues on its sour path. Obama would direct a similar rebate to low- and middle-income seniors, who are also apt to spend and could get checks quickly. One demerit: Obama omits any increase in food stamp benefits, which Moody’s estimates would have the greatest bang for the buck, $1.73 for every dollar spent.

John Edwards: B-minus. Edwards gets points for handing in his paper early — in December, he issued a $25 billion stimulus proposal (plus $75 billion more if needed), including important help to states to avoid cutting Medicaid rolls. But like Hillary Clinton (see below), he would spend too much money on programs — investing in “green collar” jobs, for instance — with too long a lag time to make them an effective stimulus. Edwards’s grade goes down because he also hasn’t explained how the $75 billion would be spent.

Hillary Clinton: C-plus. Clinton, too, raised the issue early, then turned in a faulty first draft with a $70 billion stimulus plan that didn’t provide much immediate stimulation. It included a $25 billion increase in the program to help low-income Americans with heating costs — an excessive amount (the current program is under $3 billion) that probably wouldn’t kick in until next winter. Even worse was her housing plan, including a five-year freeze on subprime mortgage rates that could produce higher interest rates and reduce liquidity.

Four days later, Clinton said she would immediately implement a $40 billion tax rebate plan she had put in reserve in her first draft. Fine, but overall, the Obama plan devotes a far greater percentage to spending that is more likely to jump-start the economy.

John McCain: D-plus. The senator should have his plan sent back with “Did you read this assignment?” scrawled in red ink. There’s a respectable argument that stimulus isn’t needed, wouldn’t be effective and could be counterproductive. But the normally straight-talking McCain doesn’t make it. Instead, he proposes permanent tax cuts — cutting corporate rates, increasing investment breaks, eliminating the alternative minimum tax — masquerading as a stimulus plan.

Mitt Romney: D. Romney’s plan is way too big ($233 billion) and badly constructed (most of the stimulus goes to business breaks, his individual tax credits don’t go to those who need them most, and his huge, long-term tax cuts would harm growth if not paid for). You don’t have to be a Harvard Business School grad to understand that encouraging savings is not stimulative.

Mike Huckabee: D-minus. Huckabee understands economic anxiety better than economic principles. The only way his sketchy proposal could stimulate the economy is by scaring Americans into consuming now, before his Fair Tax takes effect.

Rudy Giuliani: Incomplete. His position is too internally contradictory to grade. The former New York mayor told ABC’s George Stephanopolous that “permanent reductions have a bigger impact in stimulating an economy,” then said of the Bush plan, which has no permanent cuts, “If it stays where it is, it’s a good idea.”

marcusr@washpost.com

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Dear getalife @ 11:10, certainly the McCain-Clinton match up would be civil, just as the Obama-Clinton match up is civil. LOL. Don’t you get it: civility is not in her DNA.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Glen D,

What happened with the last three conservative presidents? The middle one was never a conservative, but rather was a holdover from the Rockefeller wing of country-club Republicans. The first one most certainly was of the Goldwater camp, of which he of course represented the apotheosis. But, like the present one, he felt he had wars to fight—-against the Soviets, and against big gubmint—-and his way of fighting was ultra-expensive. He deliberately spent the Commies into the ground, and he deliberately spent Washington into such debt as to force bureaucracy onto a frozen allowance. The man was, as you’ll recall, a blunt instrument.

We weren’t supposed to have paid the bill down enough to have been able, by Clinton’s second term, to afford bloat once again, but that’s what happened. Except that we couldn’t, and can’t, really afford it.

The present incumbent’s failure to arrest these sweeping forces is coming to be viewed as his signal weakness. He was satisfied with tax cuts. Big mistake.

By profit

January 26, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

MEN: If it looks like Hillarity the Clown is going to win the general election, you must act quickly to protect your assets. You should move as much of your wealth as possible off shore, preferable into oil and oil related stocks other than American owned. Hillarity will quickly impose a windfall oil and gas profits tax on American oil and gas companies. Hillarity can tax american oil and gas production, and american oil and gas companies, but she is POWERLESS to impose a windfall profits tax on foreign production and ownership. I like PetroBas, symbol PBR, the Brazillian state oil company that offers public ownership of some shares, Lukoil and Gazprom, the Russian companies, and PetroChina. Schlumberger is the best of the best in oil field services, and is not an American company. Move all your pension money out of the country, because it is one of the FemiNazi’s wet dreams to allow ex wives, ex girl friends, and daughters to claim half or more of those funds. Our best bet is to defeat Hillary at the polls, anyone will be better for men then the HAG and her D Y KE S.

By jm

January 26, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this

Funny how Mr. Wooten fails to mention corporate welfare when he mentions entitlements. Like the ridiculous sums of money given for ethanol or sugar price supports. Then again, maybe ethanol will drive the price of corn high enough so that Coke will have to start using sugar again instead of that corn syrup garbage (which might help on the obesity problem).

Another funny thing, no president in my lifetime has “reduced” government, Reagan included. Ronnie brought us the “drug war”, an open ended program which has only served to drain the treasury even further.

Thanks to the drug war, trying to get basic over the counter cold medicine has turned into a royal pain. While I have never bought a gun (I got mine from my dad), I bet I went through more hoops to get a pack of sudafed than I would have to get a 9 millimeter this past weekend.

The first candidate who will let me buy a beer on Sunday and get cold medicine without signing my life away gets my vote.

By Peter

January 26, 2008 11:44 AM | Link to this

Good Gosh Reagan, trickle down VOO DOO Economics, Big Government, and Huge Deficit is what we have today.

We cannot go back to what we already have.

As one blogger pointed out the same with covertness, and basically ambushing our Constitution.

Another writes “President Clinton” in a landslide…….

That is too scary for even ME to believe……

Some how in all of this John McCain seems like the guy who can stabilize the country, and get it back on track.

By getalife

January 26, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this

Um, about McCain not wanting to surrender in Iraq:

“Yet, when we had a Democrat in the White House McCain repeatedly argued for bringing the troops home regardless of the consequences:

1994 — “The right course of action is to make preparations as quickly as possible to bring our people home. It does not mean as soon as order is restored to Haiti, it doesn’t mean as soon as Democracy is flourishing in Haiti, it doesn’t mean as soon as we’ve established a viable nation in Haiti, as soon as possible means as soon as we can get out of Haiti without losing any American lives.”

1993 — “Date certain, Mr. President, are not the criteria here. What’s the criteria and what should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal from Somalia. And if we don’t do that, and other Americans die, other Americans are wounded, other Americans are captured, because we stayed too long, longer than necessary, then I would say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress of the United States who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution of the United States and mandate that they be brought home as quickly and safely as possible.”

And it turns out, Saddam was bluffing about WMD’s to keep Iran from invading.

Now Iran is running Iraq with malarki.

And rudy is an idiot like Glenn: Revealed: Giuliani Ignored NYPD’s Warnings Over WTC Emergency Center

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this

jm, thing about corporate welfare, though, is that we’d have to unpack that term. Otherwise it’s like “pro-choice” or “states’ rights” or “limousine liberals”—-without a factual referent, merely tendentious sloganeering.

If you mean grain subsidies, then the Ag. Chair is going to make a strong cost-benefit argument.

If you mean the Chrysler bailout, then Mr. Iacocca will show you why it was in the national interest.

etc., etc.

What’s more, they may be right!

By Apocalypse

January 26, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

Hispanics Hurt under Clinton Administration:

The Clinton administration’s criminalization of the economically poor fell heaviest upon Hispanic-Americans. By 1997, more than halfway through the Clinton White House years, 27 percent of federal inmates were Hispanic (compared to 17 percent of state level inmates). By 2000, 43 percent of all federal drug war prisoners were Hispanic, the most likely group to be first-time offenders, and the least likely to have committed a violent crime. (If anything, these numbers undercount the real impact, since most Hispanic inmates are classified by the prison system as “white.”)

Contrary to what CNN’s Lou Dobbs says, these Hispanic prisoners are not primarily “illegal immigrants.” US born Hispanic men are seven times as likely to end up in prison than foreign-born Hispanic men.

And during Bill Clinton’s presidency, the White House made no effort to reform immigration laws or set a path to citizenship for the millions of new immigrants streaming across the border as a result of NAFTA. President George W. Bush has been more progressive on the immigration issue than Clinton ever was.

By getalife

January 26, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

I see ambulance chaser does not read either.

When Obama’s supporter called President Clinton a Lee Atwater hit man, the President bashed a CNN reporter that asked him about that rove tactic.

CNN has been bashing him back and Jack Cafferty went as far as reading Peggy Noonan’s hit piece on the President on the air.

Peggy Noonan is a bigger gop hack than Jim.

You bought into the corporate media crap but the Clintons have toned down their attacks on Obama because he has a Rezko scandal.

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Dear Apocalypse @ 11:40, funny report card, obviously written by a poli-sci major rather than an economist. Thanks for sharing.

Dear jm @ 11:43, I mostly agree with your analysis. I suppose I regard Reagan as deity, not because he was, but because he was so much better than the rest of the thieves.

By GaVoter

January 26, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

Glenn

That’s why I need to get an early start. I need to get the message out now so McCain will know who to ask to be his running mate.

McCain/Paul in 2008

By jbmlaw

January 26, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this

Dear getalife @ 11:58, assume you got a big laugh out of the smiling pictures of the Clintons and Rezko. Not that the Clintons have ever associated with undesirable people who give money to their campaigns. Dear getalife, does the phrase “slow on the uptake” resound with you?

By OneForTheRoad

January 26, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this

Our elected officials want us all to become fire hydrants — they want minions that cannot complain about the warm yellow rain.

By Apocalypse

January 26, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

Actually Ruth Marcus is a columnist for the Washington Post.

I thought it fitting to get her opinion seeing how that is where you and most others get there’s.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

Actually, get, it is recognized that you are undiscerning when it comes to the various subspecies of GOP hacks, but even you should know that Noonan isn’t one of them. Rather, she was and still is a flack for Dutch, which just now puts her very much at odds with Bush and the GOP leadership.

By getalife

January 26, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Does blithering moron resound with you?

The Clintons did not get a $300,000 discount on their house.

Idiot.

A freaking picture.

drudge much?

By getalife

January 26, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this

Glenn,

I know you don’t read but google her.

Try reading something before you spew your ignorance.

By Jackie

January 26, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

@jbmlaw,

Did you have time out of your busy schedule to read my reply to your specious argument about O’Reilley and the homeless vets? Your lack of reply gives one the impression that you believe there are no homeless veterans in this country. Please inform us of your conclusions!

By jm

January 26, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

Glenn@11:54 - Mark Twain said there are three kinds of lies: “Lies, Damn Lies and statistics”. I am sure the AG Chairman and Mr. Iacocca produced numbers that supported their causes. Also, many of those industries that cry the loudest at any hint of government regulation are also first in line with hat in hand when things are not going well. It will be interesting to see what kind of handouts are given to the financial markets who lost beacoup bucks due to funny CDO’s based on sub prime loans.

As for corporate welfare, I generally limit my barbs for the two I mentioned, sugar and ethanol. Sugar because of the damage done to the everglades and to the coke I loved as a kid (they use corn syrup now instead of sugar). Ethanol because it will never solve are fuel problems and the increased fertilizer run off used to grow the corn in the midwest is destroying the Gulf of Mexico.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

jm,

The ethanol t** drives me crazy too, and not like both of Carmen Electra’s do. It just facially doesn’t make sense to me. The high school senior who won the Florida State Science Fair for figuring out how to make ethanol from kudzu—-now THAT MAKE WHOLOTTA SENSE!

On corporate welfare generally, I think I’d want to know what Moynihan thought about it, as I know of no one as perceptive wherever welfare was concerned. Every kind of “welfare” trickles, so I guess I’d want to ask the late Prof. Pat, In which direction, this? Who/whom? How much? Under the terms of what social contract?

As for sugar, it may interest you that President Carter, once and future Board Member of Coca-Cola, carved out an exception to the U.S. trade embargo of Cuba: cane sugar, of which the Coca-Cola Corp. is the largest consumer in the world. The Soviets were, at that time, subsidizing Cuban sugar to the tune of $3 billion per annum, the principal prop of the Cuban economy. Per Carter, then, the Soviet worker was subsidizing your fiendish Coke habit. Five-Point Plan Go Better with Coke! Nice bit of Cold Warring, eh? (And good for Atlanta, too!)

When Gorbachev cut off the USSR’s cane supports to Cuba—-part of his own “peace dividend”—-the Cuban economy, never a healthy patient to begin with, was downgraded from Critical to medically dead.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this

getalife,

I know Peggy personally. Was engaged to one of her colleagues in Presidential Speechwriting. Dufus.

You still don’t get that far from flacking for the Party, she’s scolding it, and wishing for it’s defeat, prerequisite to its Phoenix-like rediscovery of her Reaganism.

By Glenn

January 26, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this</