Tag: Democrats

Cry me a river!

Scott over at power line Blog is depressed because the Liberals are running the country.

Sorry dude, but I have zero pity for you or the Republican Party. They could have chosen a real Conservative candidate; but instead they ran a rich Mormon asshole, a crazy hick preacher, a half asleep old man who stumbled and cleared his throat alot and finally a senile old man, who really wasn’t even a Republican, but rather a RINO.

The senile old fool won the beauty contest and went up against the most hip, the most cool, and the first ever black Presidential candidate ever…..and he lost.

Those are the breaks.

Of course, there was one guy, who had two first names, someone who went against the grain and did not fall in line, and you all treated him like a special education student; in fact, he had to go have his own party, because you all would not even let him speak at your convention.

Now America is being lead by a Neo-Liberal, who wants to take America down the path of European socialism, and eventually into the path of full blown Communism.

Indeed, America’s Chickens are coming home……to roost.

Others:

Gaius / Blue Crab Boulevard: Depression  —  No, not an economic one.  Not yet, at any rate.
Donald Douglas / American Power: The Folsom Cell Block National Culture
Victor Davis Hanson / Pajamas Media: Thoughts About Depressed Americans
Fausta / Fausta’s Blog: Am I depressed yet?
AJStrata / The Strata-Sphere: Obama Picks Dumb Fight With Most Powerful In America
Jules Crittenden: Not Safer!  —  That’s the word from Obama, who is advancing …
Stephen F. Hayes / Weekly Standard: Iran Responds: “Death to America”

Obama's Katrina Moment?

Seems that way to me!

The Video:

(Via Jim Treacher on Twitter)

The party is over for Obama among independent voters

Looks like the Independents in America have sobered up from the Hope and Change stupor:

In the new National Public Radio poll conducted by the Democratic polling company Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and its Republican counterpart, Public Opinion Strategies, 42 percent of the 800 likely voters surveyed March 10 to 14 said that if the next congressional election were held today they would vote for the Republican candidate; an identical percentage of respondents said they would vote for the Democratic one. For several years, Democrats held a substantial lead on this question.

Democrats still outnumbered Republicans in terms of party identification in this poll by 6 points, 45 percent to 39 percent. Democrats also favored their own party’s congressional candidates 83 percent to 7 percent. But voters who call themselves independents gave GOP candidates the edge by 14 points, 38 percent to 24 percent. And self-identified Republicans supported their own party’s candidates 85 percent to 3 percent.

via National Journal Magazine – Are Independents Hedging Their Bets?.

I recommend you go read the whole thing, as it is a very interesting read. The political climate in America is changing very fast. Most Americans do not want to see their children paying for some economic mess, that was not even of their own making; but rather was of some Democrat in Washington D.C.’s making. Now, in fairness, the Republicans could have stopped this mess in 2003, they tried and the people creating the mess played the race card and also denied that anything was even wrong.  However, if Jimmy Carter and later on Bill Clinton would have left well enough alone, this whole economic mess would have been avoided.

I do truly hope by 2010 that the poll numbers for the Democrats are so low that Republican Congress will be able to take back the majority and out of the hands of these crazy people who want to spend out country into bankruptcy.

More Coverage:

Susan Duclos / Wake up America: Independents Jumping Ship
Jennifer Rubin / Commentary: Flotsam and Jetsam  —  A thought provoking piece on whether …
Gaius / Blue Crab Boulevard: The Train Wreck  —  Charlie Cook has been looking at elections for a while now.
Moe Lane: National Journal reporting tie on partisan identification.

Yes, Iran does hate us and they have reasons too

This is one of those posts that will separate me from the rabid Neo-Conservative right.

The New York Times reports that Iran has rejected the overtures of the Obama Administration.

The reasons were given:

Khamenei enumerated a long list of Iranian grievances against the United States over the past 30 years and said the U.S. was still interfering in Iranian affairs.

He mentioned U.S. sanctions against Iran, U.S. support for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein during his 1980-88 war against Iran and the downing of an Iranian airliner over the Persian Gulf in 1988.

He also accused the U.S. of provoking ethnic tension in Iran and said Washington’s accusations that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons are a sign of U.S. hostility. Iran says its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes, like energy production, not for building weapons.

”Have you released Iranian assets? Have you lifted oppressive sanctions? Have you given up mudslinging and making accusations against the great Iranian nation and its officials? Have you given up your unconditional support for the Zionist regime? Even the language remains unchanged,” Khamenei said.

Khamenei, wearing a black turban and dark robes, said America was hated around the world for its arrogance, as the crowd chanted ”Death to America.”

While I will be the first to concede that much of this was done much before Obama’s time. The fact is that the United States has always treated that region as a pawn. A pawn in a game of “The Ends Justify the means.” and we are bearing the fruit of that now.

The Zionist remark can be described as simply this. The United States has never, ever, taken a critical tone with Israel and has mostly always blindly supported Israel’s acts of aggression in the region. All the while condemning anyone’s acts towards Israel. It is that policy that has people like those in Iran saying, “Death to America.”

Anyone that tries to tell you anything other than this, is selling you a line of bullshit.

Hey Jew Boy! Stop the damn whining!

Some idiot lefty by the name of Ezra Klein is now whining because someone left a rather silly comment on Ann Althouse‘s Blog.

Hey Asshole, here’s some fucking hate for you. If you want to call it that; I call it fucking reality……

I am not a “Anti-Semite” as a rule, but Hitler did have a point. If the fucking Jews had kept their God-Damned noses out of World War I, The Holocaust never would have happened. Now how Hitler dealt with the situation, is another story. But to sit and say that Hitler did that which he did for no reason, is just utter bullshit. There was a reason.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am not some sort of Holocaust denier. It happened, it was terrible, and I hope nothing insane like that happens again. Although, I will not lie to you, Barack Obama scares the shit out of me. I’m waiting to be taken from my home and sent off to some camp, because I am a fucking Conservative.

However, one cannot over look the rash of Hoaxes that have come from the Jewish community as of late. Barnie Madoff, That idiot that wrote the book about the Holocaust and most of it was; turns out, fiction. I won’t even get into the story of Anne Frank.

The truth is, when anyone, like myself or Pat Buchanan attempt to try and criticize anyone in the Jewish community; we’re smeared as racists and “Anti-Semite.” Which is so damned typical of the Liberal and Zionist Neo-Conservative Communities.

Kinda of reminds of another minority group as well. 🙄

World's greatest asshole liberal democrat to get show on MSNBC

Yes, that’s right, I called Ed Schultz an asshole. There are blue dog Democrats, or as they’re also called, Democrats who still love the spirit of America and then there are assholes like this guy. Well, I guess MSNBC, or as it now called MSDNC; is supposedly courting this loose cannon. Wonderful. As if that network did not have enough Liberal blowhards on there already. 🙄

Via the New York Observer:

The Observer has learned that MSNBC president Phil Griffin is in discussions with syndicated talk radio host Ed Schultz about possibly joining the network on a full-time basis.  It is unclear what exactly the job would entail should Mr. Schultz and MSNBC come to an agreement.

On March 10, Mr. Schultz, who bills himself as the “most listened-to progressive radio talk show host in America,” guest-hosted on MSNBC’s 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. As The Observer reported at the time, the appearance touched off a wave of rumors among MSNBC staffers that Mr. Schultz was being groomed to join the network as an anchor.

Eight days later, on Wednesday, March 18, Mr. Schultz was back in the anchor chair, again, filling in for David Shuster on the 6 p.m. show.

One network source told The Observer that an offer has already been extended to Mr. Schultz. A network spokesperson denied that any offer has been made.

When reached by phone on Friday morning, Mr. Schultz also denied that Mr. Griffin had made him an offer. He said that he had received some kind words from MSNBC management on the heels of his guest-hosting gigs. But, according to Mr. Schultz, MSNBC brass has given him no definite word yet about his future—if he has one—at the cable news network.

I can tell you right now, I can handle Chris Matthews, I can handle Shuster, and I can even; believe it or not, handle Olbermann. But this idiot, no way, no how, not on your best day. He is nothing more than a loose cannon, who parrots the damned talking points of the far left. Yeah, kind of like Olbermann. But at least Olbermann has a polish to his act. Schultz comes off as some drunken rabble-rouser in a bar; you know, the kind that you usually had to kick the crap out of, to get him to leave you alone? Yeah, he is that kind of an guy.

Let me put it to you this way; I would rather be strapped to a chair and forced to listen to Sean Hannity sing or that one idiot who sung “Let the eagle soar”; over and over and over, before I’d want to listen to Schultz. Yes, he is that annoying.

Others:

Yes, we are a Banana Republic

John Hinderaker is shocked to discover that America is not what it seems to be:

I’m stupefied to find that some people are defending the constitutionality of Nancy Pelosi’s discriminatory, confiscatory and retroactive tax on people who receive bonus income from companies that got TARP money. I would have considered it a bright line rule that the government can’t identify a class of unpopular people and impose a special tax on them. What’s next? A 100% income tax on registered Republicans, retroactive to last year? If Pelosi’s bill passes muster, why not?

One theory, presumably, is that since the government is contributing TARP money it can put whatever strings it wants on that money. (Including, I guess, strings imposed after the fact that would deprive employees of agreed-upon consideration for work they’ve already performed.) But that theory has been rejected in a variety of contexts. The government cannot condition its spending on a relinquishment of constitutional rights. Here’s a thought experiment: how about putting a condition (retroactively, of course) on TARP money that says no employee of any bank that receives such money (or his spouse) can get an abortion? Would Nancy Pelosi think that’s constitutional?

Wells Fargo didn’t want any TARP money, but the government forced it to take more than $5 billion worth, so Wells Fargo employees who receive bonuses would be subject to Pelosi’s proposed tax. Say you’re a teller at a Wells Fargo branch in Minnesota and you’re married to a lawyer who makes $250,000 this year. You get a $10,000 bonus for your good work during 2008. The government steals it all (90 percent federal plus 8.5 percent state plus, unless it’s included in the 90 percent, 3 percent Medicare). That is simply insane.

Welcome to the new real world John! This is what happens when Conservatives, Libertarians and those pesky independents falls for the nice speeches and sweet swagger of a man, who in all honesty has zero business being President.

Luckily for us, there some Republicans who have some brains up on the hill. The AP Reports:

Senate Republicans are drawing out a flap that has made the Obama administration squirm, applying the brakes to Democratic attempts to quickly tax away most of the bonuses at troubled insurance giant AIG and other bailed-out companies.

Sen. Jon Kyl, the Republicans’ vote counter, blocked Democratic efforts Thursday evening to bring up the Senate version of the tax bill to recoup most of the $165 million paid out by AIG last weekend and other bonuses in 2009. The House had swiftly approved its version of the bill earlier in the day.

By rushing, Kyl said, Democrats were letting populist outrage trump informed decision making in the Senate, which is supposed to be insulated from the pressures of public passion.

“I don’t believe that Congress should rush to pass yet another piece of hastily crafted legislation in this very toxic atmosphere, at least without understanding the facts and the potential unintended consequences,” Kyl said on the Senate floor. “Frankly, I think that’s how we got into the current mess.”

Senate Democrats said they will try again next week to take up the tax bill and hope to complete it before April 4, when Congress leaves for a two-week spring break. Combining the disparate House and Senate versions of the bill might have to wait until after the recess.

If the Democrats want to fix the problem, they should try turning to the moron that they put in the White House and his treasury secretary. Both of their resignations would be nice right about now. We need some real leadership, and not that idiot Harlem Globetrotter nonsense, that we have been getting since Barry took office. In other words, it’s time for “Teleprompter Boy” to hit the damned road.

Others:

Barry's Budget might bring $9.3 trillion in deficits

Nothing like something to make your Saturday a bit more gloomy. Knowing that the Globetrotter in chief is basically spending your Country into a economic black hole.

Via the AP:

President Barack Obama’s budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush’s presidency, congressional auditors said Friday.

The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama’s budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It’s a prospect even the president’s own budget director called unsustainable.

In his White House run, Obama assailed the economic policies of his predecessor, but the eye-popping deficit numbers threaten to swamp his ambitious agenda of overhauling health care, exploring new energy sources and enacting scores of domestic programs.

The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda.

By CBO’s calculation, Obama’s budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019.

Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama’s policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.

Here is the real kicker, what are the so-called “Liberal Experts” saying is the solution to the above? Spending more money! But of course!

As Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein pointed out, the numbers confirm that “the recession is worse than they thought when they did these things last time,” and thus “the more urgent it is for us to spend more money to stimulate the economy.

It is indeed a scarey time to be an American. The mental cases are running the asylum.

Others:

One the biggest reasons why I will never vote Democrat again…Ever

I am not going to write a long post about this. Because if I do, it will devolve into four letter words and outright nastyness.

I will simple say this; anyone who wants to know why I decided that the Democratic Party no longer represented the views that I hold, and was no longer the Party that I wanted to be associated with, need look no further than right here.

I am not a Republican, nor have I ever been a Republican, nor will I ever be a Republican. But I’ll be GOD DAMNED, if I’ll ever vote for a damned President that sucked up to, made alliances with and basically pandered to people that do this sort of a thing!

Michelle Malkin might be a bit more to the right than myself. But I commend that little loud mouthed woman for being the one that has the, ahem, balls to report this stuff that goes on. Good on you, Michelle. Next time some idiot calls her a hater, I’m sending them this link.

That is all….