More Bad Polling News For Barack Obama

A new PPP poll (that Legal Insurrection rightly discounts, due to its standard heavy over-sampling of Democrats in all its polls) spells trouble for Obama and the Democrats. In NY-9, Anthony Weiner’s old NYC district, the Republican Turner leads the Democrat Weprin by 6 points. This in a district that has registered Democrats leading registered Republicans 3 to 1.

Ed Morrissey has the internals and even more bad news for Democrats. The poll, which has a sampling of 59 percent Democrats and 25 percent Republicans, gives Obama a 31/56 approval rating, or 25 points underwater. That’s worse than the national average and in a heavily Democrat district.

But here’s the more troubling news for Democrats:

Either way, running in statistical dead heats with Rick Perry and Mitt Romney in NY-09 is a big sign of trouble for Obama. Even more so is the finding that a district with such a large Democratic advantage would slightly prefer a Republican Congress, 45/44, and have slightly more confidence in Congressional Republicans than Obama on leading America in the right direction, 44/42. Bear in mind that this same sample gave Congressional Republicans a 31/50 approval rating in the question directly preceding the questions about leadership and Congressional control.

PPP concludes that Obama has lost independents, and a significant number of Democrats as well — all of whom will vote with the GOP tomorrow[.]

So NY-9 voters, a heavily Democrat district, disapprove of Obama at higher rates than the national average, disapprove of Congressional Republicans but prefer a Republican Congress over a Democrat Congress and believe the Republican Congress is more likely to lead the US in the right direction than Obama. And apparently, some Democrats in leadership are starting to wake up to the fact Obama will be a drag on the Democrat ticket in November, 2012, but so far they haven’t awakened to the actual reason why. And the longer they refuse to face the actual cause of their downfall, the better it will be for every man, woman, and child in the US as more of them will be voted out in favor of Constitutional Conservatives.
________
Cross-Post

132 Comments

  1. Mr Hitchcock quoted:

    PPP concludes that Obama has lost independents, and a significant number of Democrats as well — all of whom will vote with the GOP tomorrow[.]

    Or might just stay home, which gives the same result, a Republican victory. Still, I’m not going to count chickens before they cross the road . . . or some metaphor like that.

  2. Mr Morrissey noted, in the linked Hot Air article that President “Obama put the Big Speech on his jobs plan ahead of actually producing the jobs plan.” It was to be delivered to Congress today, not last Wednesday, when he wanted to make the speech, or last THursday, when he actually did. The Congress couldn’t pass it, “right away,” because they didn’t even have a copy.

  3. Isn’t it interesting that when the polls are bad for Republicans, you can always be counted on to trot out the tired old line “there’s only one poll that counts, on election day”?

  4. Dana says

    Still, I’m not going to count chickens before they cross the road . . . or some metaphor like that.

    The anti-American Socialist book putter backer from New Zealand shows his inability to read for comprehension:

    Isn’t it interesting that when the polls are bad for Republicans, you can always be counted on to trot out the tired old line “there’s only one poll that counts, on election day”?

    And that’s precisely what Dana, who often uses that quoted line, was saying. But the anti-American Socialist from New Zealand just cannot read for comprehension yet. I guess they didn’t cover that in book putter backer school.

  5. “Mr Morrissey noted, in the linked Hot Air article that President “Obama put the Big Speech on his jobs plan ahead of actually producing the jobs plan.” It was to be delivered to Congress today, not last Wednesday, when he wanted to make the speech, or last THursday, when he actually did. The Congress couldn’t pass it, “right away,” because they didn’t even have a copy.”

    Man, Dana, you and Mr Morrissey really had to stretch to make that mountain out of the molehill! Like I keep saying, if Obama’s name is attached to it, you are against it before you even know what it is all about. Senator Alan Simpson was saying today that he cannot understand how Repubs can sign the Norquist pledge before a debate can take place on a revenue issue. Just two more examples of Repub absolutist idiocy!

  6. Isn’t it interesting, Perry, that a district that has registered Democrats outnumbering registered Republicans by a 3-to-1 majority prefers a Republican Congress to a Democrat Congress and trusts the Republican Congress more than Obama to get this country moving in the right direction? Or did you miss that part? And did you miss the part where it’s a Public Policy Polling poll, which has a longstanding history of over-sampling Democrats that came up with those results?

    Your radical Leftist stance isn’t even doing all that well in a heavily Democrat New York City district. But your blinders are sure doing wonders for you as you continue your radical chanting.

  7. The Phoenician wrote:

    Isn’t it interesting that when the polls are bad for Republicans, you can always be counted on to trot out the tired old line “there’s only one poll that counts, on election day”?

    Which I would say was covered by my previous comment, “Still, I’m not going to count chickens before they cross the road . . . or some metaphor like that.”

    Election day is tomorrow in the 9th District; I guess that we’ll know tomorrow evening what the voters have done.

  8. Pingback: More Bad Polling News For Barack Obama « Common Sense … | Barack Obama

  9. Election day is tomorrow in the 9th District; I guess that we’ll know tomorrow evening what the voters have done.

    Uh-huh. And should teh Democrats lose, it will be trumpeted by you as a veto on Obama, rather than (say) a backlash against gay marriage stances…?

  10. Okay, someone didn’t see the polling info (from a polling firm that regularly over-samples Democrats) where the very Democrat New York City district has a very low opinion of Obama, to the point the very Democrat New York City district believes the Republican Congress has a better roadmap for the future of the US than does Democrat Obama. But it’s cute, though, that the Socialist from New Zealand ever so futilely tries to frame the issue in a completely different light than the facts on the ground in the US.

    Want a new shovel? Or is the one you’re using still good? ;)

  11. Now let’s see what we can find in the poll…

    It had 59 percent Democrats and 25 percent Republicans. Okay, let’s do a little grade-school math.
    59 + 25 = 84
    100 – 84 = 16
    So,
    59 percent Democrat
    25 percent Republican
    16 percent independent
    That’s alright, since the district is very heavily Democrat. Let’s see what else we can find in the poll…

    45 percent prefer a Republican Congress over a Democrat Congress.
    44 percent prefer a Democrat Congress over a Republican Congress.
    Time for some more grade-school math.
    59 – 44 = 15
    Assuming all 44 percent who prefer a Democrat Congress are themselves Democrat, that leaves 15 percent who could not say they prefer a Democrat Congress.
    25 + 16 = 41
    45 – 41 = 4
    So, if every Republican and every independent said they prefer a Republican Congress, that still leaves 4 percent who would have to be Democrats saying they prefer a Republican Congress.
    15 – 4 = 11
    So, that would leave 11 percent who are Democrats who don’t know which they prefer, Republican Congress or Democrat Congress. Let’s see what else we can find in the poll…

    44 percent are more confident in Congressional Republicans to lead America in the right direction.
    42 percent are more confident in Obama to lead America in the right direction.
    Time for more grade-school math.
    59 – 42 = 17
    If all 42 percent more confident in Obama are Democrats, that leaves 17 percent Democrats who are not more confident in Obama than Congressional Republicans.
    44 – 41 = 3
    If all Republicans and all independents are more confident in Congressional Republicans, that leaves 3 percent Democrats who are more confident in Congressional Republicans than in Obama to lead America in the right direction.
    17 – 3 = 14
    That would mean 14 percent who would be Democrats don’t know which, Republicans or Obama, would lead America in the right direction. Let’s see what else we can find in the poll…

    31 percent approve of Obama’s job as President.
    56 percent disapprove of Obama’s job as President.
    Time for more grade-school math.
    59 – 31 = 27
    So, if all 31 percent who approve of Obama’s job are Democrats, that leaves 27 percent of the whole, all Democrats who do not approve of Obama’s job.
    56 – 41 = 13
    If all Republicans and independents disapprove of Obama’s job, that leaves 13 percent remaining who would be Democrats who disapprove of Obama’s job as President.
    27 – 13 = 14
    That would mean 14 percent remaining would be Democrats don’t know whether they approve or disapprove.

    Yeah, a little reading for comprehension and a little grade-school math shows the New York City district has many, many Democrats who prefer a Republican Congress to a Democrat Congress, and many, many Democrats who are more confident in a Republican Congress to do the right thing than the Democrat Obama, and many, many Democrats who disapprove of Obama’s work as President.

    Again, a little reading for comprehension goes a long way. Unfortunately, our resident radical Leftists are incapable of reading for comprehension. That, or they really suck at math.

  12. A little “reading comprehension” combined with some historical perspective would indicate to most folks that polls taken more than a year before the general election mean very little. Obama in his last campaign is an indicator of that point!

    And to think that you people are seriously considering nominating Governor Perry. Oh my goodness!

  13. And to think that you people are seriously considering nominating Governor Perry. Oh my goodness!

    Well, we liberals would be more scared of Bachman. Oh yes, that sh1t would terrify us completely. Please don’t do it – we’ll be absolutely wetting our panties.

  14. Perry supposed that there would be no TEAnami in 2010 and that the people would continue on with the Democrats. Over 700 flips to Republican in State races, over 60 flips to Republican in the US House, and Perry continues to suppose his precious Dear Leader has the fruit necessary to entrance the population despite his record and despite the fact Obama’s poll numbers are even worse than in 2010, the year of the historic election, where states flipped to Republican for the first time since 1870 and Republicans saw the greatest gains since the 1930s.

    I honestly hope that the radical Left keeps believing that, but there are already signs that many prominent Democrats are starting to see the actual truth out there in Hobbiton, and it’s definitely scaring many prominent Democrats.

    2012 is looking like another great year to be a Conservative and an American as I foresee even further gains in the House, a definite flip in the Senate, and the Presidency, and even a long-shot at a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, something the Republicans haven’t had since around 1917.

    Oh, and 2014 doesn’t look too good for Democrats either, as the Senators up then would be the ones swept in with the Obama wave and will be swept out with the loss of that wave, further increasing the Republican majority in the Senate in 2014.

  15. 2012 is looking like another great year to be a Conservative and an American

    Make up your mind – is 2012 looking like a great year for conservatives, or is it looking like a great year for Americans? Honestly, it’s like describing your house as a shade or greeny orange.

  16. John, go study Reagan in the 1982 off-year elections. He poll numbers had tanked, yet he turned it all around in time for the 1984 general.

    And I reiterate the point I made earlier, that the poll numbers right now may well not be where they are in a year plus, as Obama already demonstrated in the 2008 general.

    Moreover, you need to take into account who Obama’s opponent will be. For example, I cannot see how Rick Perry could prevail, but a Mitt Romney/Jon Huntsman ticket would be formidable. Or how about Mitt Romney/Jeb Bush, or even Mitt Romney/Rick Santorum. I’m trying to think of tickets that would appeal to independents and seniors.

    Our nation remains a right of center electorate, so chances of winning anything with a radical like Rick Perry, diminishes your chances of prevailing, in my view. Moreover, in the debate last night, Perry proved to be a poor debate match of Mitt Romney, and even for Michelle Bachman. There is also no love to lose between Perry and Ron Paul, nor even between Perry and George Bush.

    In the 2012 race, you will have to demonstrate to the voters why they should give power to a do-nothing party which was initially responsible for the terrible mess which Obama inherited. And if you don’t pass the AJA, you will be in even deeper do-do!

  17. when Palin doesn’t run, Bachmann voters will sap enough from Perry to hand the nomination to Mitt Romney; Mitt Romney can’t beat Obama in the general under literally any circumstances. Obama could kill a puppy on live television the day before the election and still beat Mitt Romney. so on behalf of everybody who wants to see Obama reelected, I’d like to be the first to say: thanks, Tea Party!

  18. Hey, Perry, you might want to talk to your Democrat Senator about Obama’s “jobs” bill, because he is not buying Obama’s and your lies. And, Perry, you might want to track Reagan’s polling rebound leading up to reelection and Obama’s continued polling plummet. And cbmc, you might want to examine NY-9, a district that has been a safe Democrat seat since 1922 and has a 3-to-1 Democrat registration advantage. And you might want to examine NV-2, which McCain won a statistical 49-49 tie with Obama in 2008 and the Republican won by 22 points last night.

    I mean, if either of you ever want to try a little honesty and historical accuracy for a change, which you probably don’t.

  19. John H you can bluster all you want – I’ve watched the last two GOP debates and now have zero concerns about Obama’s reelection. It literally doesn’t matter what happens. Just like you all did last time, you’re putting up a field full of crazy people & unelectable also-rans. There is literally nobody among the Republican candidates who Obama won’t eat alive once it’s campaigning time. Money won’t matter, jobs won’t matter, the Job Killing Health Care Bill won’t matter. The Republicans spent too long drinking crazy sauce and the country will benefit – cheers!

  20. Well, cbmc, the Democrats just finished trying to tie Bob Turner to the TEA Party, and he was running on a cut spending/ balance the budget/ frustrate President Obama platform, in a heavily Democratic district, one which hadn’t sent a Republican to Congress since the 1920s. It seems that maybe, just maybe, when these things are actually put to the voters, the voters tend to disappoint you.

  21. “John H you can bluster all you want – I’ve watched the last two GOP debates and now have zero concerns about Obama’s reelection. It literally doesn’t matter what happens. Just like you all did last time, you’re putting up a field full of crazy people & unelectable also-rans. There is literally nobody among the Republican candidates who Obama won’t eat alive once it’s campaigning time. Money won’t matter, jobs won’t matter, the Job Killing Health Care Bill won’t matter. The Republicans spent too long drinking crazy sauce and the country will benefit – cheers!”

    I hope you are correct, cbmc, but I have to say that I worry most about Romney. Nevertheless, I just can’t believe that the American voters would put a do-nothing party into power, one which puts party over country, and without even a hint of a job creation plan, and which caused this economic mess to begin with. You can see on this blog the hysteria and heartlessness and the lies and distortions of these Repubs here. They are representative of what we would get if this tribe is put in power, and it ain’t very pretty!!!

  22. Perry wrote:

    and without even a hint of a job creation plan

    Mitt Romney announced one, to great fanfare, and I would imagine that the other candidates will be rolling out similar proposals. I am the one who has said that my “jobs plan” is to do nothing at all; I’m not one of the candidates.

  23. I am the one who has said that my “jobs plan” is to do nothing at all;

    I thought you wanted a balanced budget. Is that “nothing at all”, or are you now claiming that taxes and government spending are totally unrelated to jobs?

  24. “Seriously, Perry, if you’re going to go on your hate-filled, lie-filled rants, the least you could do was make it more difficult to catch you in them.”

    Impressive, John, but I note that you said absolutely nothing of substance.

    Paul Ryan’s plan is one of austerity, putting the burden on the middle and poor, nothing on the wealthy. That is not a workable plan. I imagine Palin’s and Bachman’s are austerity plans as well. And Bachman wanted us to default on our loan obligations. Not only is that not a plan, it is utter insanity, like you, Hitchcock, as evidenced by the fact that you support this anti-American crap!!!

  25. putting the burden on the middle and poor, nothing on the wealthy.

    Since roughly the bottom half pay zero in federal income taxes and the top 10 percent pay the lion’s share of federal income taxes, you are continuing your radical Leftist masters’ lies.

    And Bachman wanted us to default on our loan obligations.

    Citation, please, or admit you lied yet again, just like your radical Leftist leaders who also lied about that.

  26. Perry wrote:

    and without even a hint of a job creation plan

    Perry immediately followed that up with:

    Paul Ryan’s plan is one of austerity, putting the burden on the middle and poor, nothing on the wealthy. That is not a workable plan. I imagine Palin’s and Bachman’s are austerity plans as well.

    Thus, Perry immediately proved he knowingly lied when he claimed there wasn’t even a hint of a job creation plan on the Right.

  27. Beyond that, you are once again violating Providence’s Tenth Commandment, something you radical Leftists cannot avoid doing constantly.

    Which comes first, Nine or Ten?

  28. Perry wrote:

    Paul Ryan’s plan is one of austerity, putting the burden on the middle and poor, nothing on the wealthy. That is not a workable plan. I imagine Palin’s and Bachman’s are austerity plans as well. And Bachman wanted us to default on our loan obligations. Not only is that not a plan, it is utter insanity, like you, Hitchcock, as evidenced by the fact that you support this anti-American crap!!!

    Oh, now I understand: in Perry’s world, a jobs creation plan isn’t really a jobs creation plan if he disagrees with it!

  29. I’m sorry, let me rephrase that:

    Which comes first, Nine or Ten – and where are those mobile WMD labs you were talkking about parked these days?

  30. putting the burden on the middle and poor, nothing on the wealthy.

    “Since roughly the bottom half pay zero in federal income taxes and the top 10 percent pay the lion’s share of federal income taxes, you are continuing your radical Leftist masters’ lies.”

    There are plenty of taxes the poor pay, but you select out Federal Income Taxes to make your propaganda work. Informed people see through your lies, Hitchcock.

    And Bachman wanted us to default on our loan obligations.

    Citation, please, or admit you lied yet again, just like your radical Leftist leaders who also lied about that.

    Will you accept Krauthammer’s remarks about it, Hitchcock?

    “On last night’s O’Reilly Factor, Charles Krauthammer analyzed the “political madness” in Washington. Of course, the debt-ceiling situation came up and Krauthammer was predictably critical of President Obama. But then, after urging the Republicans to pass some kind of raising of the debt ceiling, he made these surprising comments: “I think it would be catastrophic if Republicans were not to go with the Boehner plan.” When asked about Michele Bachmann’s Tea Party stance of refusing to raise the debt ceiling plan no matter what, Krauthammer said, ” It is unbelievably irresponsible.”"

    I used to think you were well-informed, Hitchcock! You’re not!!! Now apologize for calling me a liar!

  31. Paul Ryan’s plan is one of austerity, putting the burden on the middle and poor, nothing on the wealthy. That is not a workable plan.

    Oh, now I understand: in Perry’s world, a jobs creation plan isn’t really a jobs creation plan if he disagrees with it!

    Funny, I could have sworn I saw the word “workable” in there somewhere…

    I imagine Palin’s and Bachman’s are austerity plans as well. And Bachman wanted us to default on our loan obligations. Not only is that not a plan, it is utter insanity, like you, Hitchcock, as evidenced by the fact that you support this anti-American crap!!!

    Oh, now I understand: in Perry’s world, a jobs creation plan isn’t really a jobs creation plan if he disagrees with it!

    Funny, I could have sworn that a central point of something that was really a job creation plan would have to be that it didn’t, you know, directly violate the Constitution

    Here’s a job creation plan which, apparaently, Dana would find credible:

    - Charge fees for exercising free speech or a press
    - Confisicate all guns and sell them overseas.
    - Quarter soldiers in people’s private homes to save money on barracks.
    - Search people at random. Take their money.
    - Take private property for public use. Don’t pay.
    - Charge accused prisoners fees if they ever wanna go to trial.
    - Charge a fee for the privilege of a jury trial
    - (This one is pretty obvious)
    - (I give up on this one)
    - (And this one too, dammit. Any suggestions?)

  32. No, Perry, I will not accept Charles Krauthammer’s voice as a replacement for Michele Bachmann’s voice. And you should know by now (but obviously you don’t) that the grass-roots, the Conservative base, We the People have already for years now declared the Republican Ruling Class to be to the left of and out of touch with the grass-roots.

    Now, provide a quote from Michele Bachmann saying she wanted us to default on our loan obligations or admit you lied and continue to do so.

  33. No, Perry, I will not accept Charles Krauthammer’s voice as a replacement for Michele Bachmann’s voice. And you should know by now (but obviously you don’t) that the grass-roots, the Conservative base, We the People have already for years now declared the Republican Ruling Class to be to the left of and out of touch with the grass-roots.

    Would that be to the right or to the left of those mobile WMD labs, wherever they might be parked?

  34. I understand, Pho, that you cannot be bothered with the truth, and that is why you continue with your ignorant yip-yip-yipping. But seriously, you little Min Pin, you might want to quit yipping at the heels of the Great Danes and Bull Mastiffs for your own good health.

  35. I understand, Pho, that you cannot be bothered with the truth, and that is why you continue with your ignorant yip-yip-yipping.

    “We also found mobile WMD labs that could create WMDs while driving down the highway.”, – John Hitchcock,
    13 September 2011 at 18:51

    But seriously, you little Min Pin, you might want to quit yipping at the heels of the Great Danes and Bull Mastiffs for your own good health.

    I’m sorry – are you threatening me because you don’t like what I’m pointing out here – that you lied on 13 September 2011 at 18:51? Is that a threat? Can you be a little more specific for everyone, please?

  36. Pho, we found mobile WMD labs that could create WMDs while driving down the highway. I understand you cannot be bothered with the truth, and that is why you continue with your ignorant yip-yip-yipping. Seriously, fool, stay on the porch and stay out of the way of the big dogs.

  37. Pho, we found mobile WMD labs that could create WMDs while driving down the highway

    This is a lie.

    Where exactly are they parked now? Which agency still makes that claim which was discredited by the DIA, Pentagon and ISG back in 2003?

    It is a lie, and you are a l1ar.

    Where are they parked now?

  38. Dude, watch closely:

    Defector admits to WMD lies that triggered Iraq war

    • Man codenamed Curveball ‘invented’ tales of bioweapons
    • Iraqi told lies to try to bring down Saddam Hussein regime
    • Fabrications used by US as justification for invasion

    The defector who convinced the White House that Iraq had a secret biological weapons programme has admitted for the first time that he lied about his story, then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war.

    Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, codenamed Curveball by German and American intelligence officials who dealt with his claims, has told the Guardian that he fabricated tales of mobile bioweapons trucks and clandestine factories in an attempt to bring down the Saddam Hussein regime, from which he had fled in 1995.

    “Maybe I was right, maybe I was not right,” he said. “They gave me this chance. I had the chance to fabricate something to topple the regime. I and my sons are proud of that and we are proud that we were the reason to give Iraq the margin of democracy.”

    I mean, Oh. My. God. man – the Pentagon said uin 2003 they don’t exist, the ISG said in 2003 they don’t exist, and the guy the CIA based their claim on has come out and said “I lied”.

    And yet you STILL persist in repeating the lie.

    It is a lie. The US military and civilians proved it, we know who said uit, and he has said “Yes it is a lie”.

    And You. Keep. Repeating. It. Even when this is pointed out to you.

    You are a l1ar. Admit it.

  39. KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky identified prominent Guardian editor Richard Gott as one of his agents. While Gott denied that he received cash, he confessed taking benefits from the KGB.[44]

    Gordievsky commented on the newspaper: “The KGB loved the Guardian. It was deemed highly susceptible to penetration”.[44] …

    A leaked report from the European Monitoring Centre on Racism cited The Economist’s claim that for “many British Jews,” the British media’s reporting on Israel “is spiced with a tone of animosity, ‘as to smell of anti-Semitism’… This is above all the case with the Guardian and The Independent”.[47][48] Greville Janner, former president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, has accused The Guardian of being “viciously and notoriously anti-Israel”.[49] …

    In August 2004, for the US presidential election, the daily G2 supplement launched an experimental letter-writing campaign in Clark County, Ohio, an average-sized county in a swing state. G2 editor Ian Katz bought a voter list from the county for $25 and asked readers to write to people listed as undecided in the election, giving them an impression of the international view and the importance of voting against US President George W. Bush. …

    In October 2004, The Guardian published a humorous column by Charlie Brooker in its entertainment guide, which appeared to call for the assassination of George W. Bush.[68] This caused some controversy and the paper was forced to issue an apology and remove the article from its website.[69][70] …

    The Guardian and its parent groups participate in Project Syndicate, established by George Soros…

    Your source, such as it is, lacks all credibility.

  40. Uh-huh. I showed video of Curveball saying “I lied”, it was on the Guardian site, and you’re compiling a list of controversies about the Guardian from Wikipedia to not have to deal with it?

    Okay, so let’s go to Wiki and see what it says about Curveball, shall we?

    Very first paragraph:

    Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi (Arabic: ???? ???? ??????, R?fid A?mad Alw?n; born 1968), known by the Central Intelligence Agency cryptonym “Curveball”, is an Iraqi citizen who defected from Iraq in 1999, claiming that he had worked as a chemical engineer at a plant that manufactured mobile biological weapon laboratories as part of an Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program.[1] Alwan’s allegations were subsequently shown to be false by the Iraq Survey Group’s final report published in 2004.[2][3]
    [...]
    In February 2011, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi admitted for the first time that he lied about his story regarding Iraq’s secret biological weapons program.[6] He also admitted to being shocked that his false story was used as a justification for the Iraq War but proud that the fabrications helped topple Saddam Hussein.

    Source [6] by the way is… that same Guardian interview!! HOW ABOUT THAT?!??

    So you’re quoting Wiki to try and discredit a Guardian interview at the same time Wiki is accepting the interview as completely credible. And Wiki itself says Curveball was proven to have lied.

    Here’s the facts.

    i, Curveball lied.
    ii, The US has proved Curveball lied.
    iii, Curveball has confessed he lied.

    iv, You continue to repeat the lie. As far as I can see, you alone in all the world.
    v, You are a l1ar.

  41. But you can prove me wrong so very very easily. All you need to do is answer the following question.

    Where are the mobile weapons labs parked right now?

  42. But you can prove me wrong so very very easily. All you need to do is answer the following question.

    Where are the mobile weapons labs parked right now?

    Not a logical bone in your body, eh? That’s like saying “where are the IEDs the coalition forces found right now?”

  43. That’s like saying “where are the IEDs the coalition forces found right now?”

    Except, you know, IEDs explode. Says so in the name. The “mobile weapons labs” were trucks. You know, vehicles? Big things. Don’t tend to explode when used correctly.

    Here’s the facts.

    i, Curveball lied.
    ii, The US has proved Curveball lied.
    iii, Curveball has confessed he lied.

    iv, You continue to repeat the lie. As far as I can see, you alone in all the world.
    v, You are a l1ar.

  44. Oh, and something interesting from an actual left-wing author (if you get bored with the technical stuff, skip to the last para):

    I spoke at length with Brad Spencer, Ph.D, an expert in this area, who took a great deal of time to explain the flaws in the CIA/DIA report, and the flaws in the subsequent scaremongering that came out of the White House.

    “Bush was relying on the CIA/DIA white paper that purported to conclude that the trailers found in Iraq were mobile biological culture systems,” said Spencer. “That’s the only apparent ‘hard’ evidence he ever cited, and it was false from the start. There are obvious fabrications in the white paper, fabrications that fly in the face of science. It’s garbage. It’s a lie. It is the most easily proved of all the lies yet it is still allowed to stand. I have made hydrogen using the same reaction as was used by the Iraqis on those trailers. I could and did determine, from the information in the white paper itself, that the trailers were for hydrogen manufacture. How much more blatant and obvious do you need a lie to be before you expose it as such?”

    As I have never been an ace in the science department, I asked Dr. Spencer to describe in detail the problems with the report. “To start with,” he said, “I’ve known since the 1970s, when I was in graduate school, that the reaction used on the trailers generates a lot of heat along with the hydrogen and that the cooling unit is a necessary part of the system. Anybody that runs the reaction will discover that fact. The fable the white paper weaves about the Iraqis discovering that the heat of summer interfered with WMD culture and adding the unit (the white paper says it was added ‘because the drawings by Powell showed no cooling unit and the difference had to be explained’) is utter nonsense.”

    “In reality,” said Spencer, “any competently designed biological culture system, mobile or otherwise, would have to have not merely a cooling unit but a full temperature control system for the culture vessel. That was utterly lacking in the drawings shown by Powell at the UN and apparently utterly lacking in the expensive mock-up of such trailers constructed by the US (David Kay was on that team) before the war. That it is only a cooling unit and not a temperature control system is actually strong evidence that the trailers are not for biological WMD culture – exactly opposite to the white paper claim but in accord with the requirements of both kinds of system.”

    “The reaction used on the trailer to make hydrogen (aluminum metal plus sodium hydroxide plus water),” said Spencer, “has been used for that purpose since at least the early part of the 20th century (there’s at least one US patent from that date for a system that uses that reaction) and was also mentioned in a 1960s or 1970s National Geographic article, which is where I learned of it. I was in graduate school at the time and tried the reaction at home, learning in the process that the heat was produced: I ended up more than once with a bottle of boiling lye solution with a balloon on the neck of the bottle. The trailers would surely have to produce hydrogen at something like 100 to 1000 times the volume I produced, with corresponding increase in the amount of heat evolved. It would be essential to remove that heat to avoid damage to valves and pumps from boiling lye.”

    “The culture vessel also would not be the very obvious pressure vessel seen in the photograph in the white paper,” Spencer continued. “The trailer had no shocks, no springs. It would be idiotic to do a biological culture under pressure on such a system: the stresses involved in moving the trailer would cause leaks and a biological WMD culture system under pressure would spew biological WMD out from any leak. Nor is there likely to be an advantage to doing the culture under pressure: pressure is used to enhance the yields of chemical reactions in the gas phase where the reactant gases combine to form a product gas. When the number of molecules of product gas is less than the number of molecules of reactant gas, for example in the manufacture of polyethylene, increased pressure does increase yield.”

    “The compressor and gas bottles are needed to compress and store the hydrogen,” said Spencer, “as the white paper essentially admits. The fable about a tell-tale off-gas that had to be compressed and stored is fantastically ridiculous. The UN inspectors weren’t monitoring the atmosphere for any such by-product, the white paper identifies no such by-product, biological WMD, or biological WMD culture process. If there were a tell-tale gaseous by-product, simple combustion would destroy it, just as drawing crankcase vapors into the intake manifold of a car destroys those vapors. It isn’t biological WMD processes that create indestructible tell-tale by-products, it’s nuclear ones. It’s a fable spun by a non-technical person whose main skill appears to be twisting facts to fit a story. There’s not a shred of evidence that the compressor was for the purpose of capturing any by-product: it’s a story from the imagination of someone with low technical skills – a person of greater skill would recognize how fantastic the story is.”

    “The white paper claims that the fact the trailers had recently been repainted was evidence of efforts to conceal use of the trailers for WMD culture,” said Spencer. “If there was such evidence, the paint would cover and preserve the evidence. Scratch it off and do an analysis. That, too, is glossed over. It’s a cooked story, created by a non-technical person. It’s indefensible. There’s literally no hard evidence to back up the claim that the trailers were for WMD culture, no evidence for the cooling unit fable, no evidence for the compressor and gas bottle fable.”

    “Not only did the CIA issue a very unusual report to the people, something very rare for the CIA to do,” concluded Spencer, “the report contains completely unsupported claims. Who can possibly maintain that the CIA did that on their own, with no pressure applied? Who can believe that, unprodded, the CIA decided to issue a white paper containing wild speculations? When the CIA subsequently produced the Duelfer report all such fantasies disappeared, and the Duelfer report correctly concluded that the trailers were for hydrogen production. It’s the same CIA, the same analysts, nearly the same evidence. Something made them behave strangely in 2003, right when the administration was desperate for some proof of Iraqi WMD activity. It’s also worth noting who it was in the administration that relied on the white paper the longest, continuing to do so even after it was revealed that ‘Curveball’ was an unreliable source and after Colin Powell had disavowed his own UN presentation.”

    So I made a mistake – it’s the DIA, the Pentagon, the ISG AND the CIA who have said “Curveball lied”.

    Here’s the facts.

    i, Curveball lied.
    ii, The US has proved Curveball lied.
    iii, Curveball has confessed he lied.

    iv, You continue to repeat the lie. As far as I can see, you alone in all the world.
    v, You are a l1ar.

  45. Except, you know, IEDs explode. Says so in the name. The “mobile weapons labs” were trucks. You know, vehicles? Big things. Don’t tend to explode when used correctly.

    Except unexploded IEDs that are found are then destroyed. And many other things, which don’t go “boom” but are of military value, are also destroyed. But anyone with a brain already knows that. You know, like weapons caches and the like.

    You can play stupid all day long (except for you, it isn’t playing) if you want to, won’t ever make you intelligent.

  46. And, ooops…:

    Warnings on WMD ‘Fabricator’ Were Ignored, Ex-CIA Aide Says

    In late January 2003, as Secretary of State Colin Powell prepared to argue the Bush administration’s case against Iraq at the United Nations, veteran CIA officer Tyler Drumheller sat down with a classified draft of Powell’s speech to look for errors. He found a whopper: a claim about mobile biological labs built by Iraq for germ warfare.

    Drumheller instantly recognized the source, an Iraqi defector suspected of being mentally unstable and a liar. The CIA officer took his pen, he recounted in an interview, and crossed out the whole paragraph.

    A few days later, the lines were back in the speech. Powell stood before the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 5 and said: “We have first-hand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails.”

    But, wait…

    In late summer 2003, seven months after the U.N. speech, Tenet called Powell to say that the Curveball story had fallen apart, Wilkerson said. The call amounted to an admission that all of the CIA’s claims Powell used in his speech about Iraqi weapons were wrong.

    “They had hung on for a long time, but finally Tenet called Powell to say, ‘We don’t have that one, either,’ ” Wilkerson recalled. “The mobile labs were the last thing to go.”

    Here’s the facts.

    i, Curveball lied.
    ii, The US has proved Curveball lied.
    iii, Curveball has confessed he lied.

    iv, You continue to repeat the lie. As far as I can see, you alone in all the world.
    v, You are a l1ar.

  47. And once again another in moderation.

    Except unexploded IEDs that are found are then destroyed. And many other things, which don’t go “boom” but are of military value, are also destroyed.

    So you are now claiming that the Bush Administration, desperate to prove that Iraq had the WMDs which justified its invasion… blew the two things that would completely prove its case up? You know, instead of (say) inviting the French and Germans to come take a look and kiss their asses?

    Well, that’s certainly an interesting claim for sure.

    One insy bitsy teeny tiny wee little point, however – would this be BEFORE or AFTER THE ISG CLAMBERED ALL OVER THE GODDAMNED THINGS AND SAID “Yep, hydrogen gas, not WMDs”

    Here’s the facts.

    i, Curveball lied.
    ii, The US has proved Curveball lied.
    iii, Curveball has confessed he lied.

    iv, You continue to repeat the lie. As far as I can see, you alone in all the world.
    v, You are a l1ar.

  48. Let’s just repeat this for amusement value:

    You now appear to be in the position of arguing that the Bush Administration wrote a FALSE report (actually, that multiple teams from Britain, the CIA, the DIA, the Pentagon, and the ISG civilian experts all colloberated to write false reports reaching the exact same conclusion) and blew up the evidence in order to HIDE the truth that Iraq had WMDs.

    Where’s the smiley for a raised eyebrow?

  49. *yawn*

    Pho continues with his argleblargle and citing Left-Wing sources as if they held any weight. But that’s okay since any reasonable person knows the truth is not on the side of Socialists.

  50. Pho continues with his argleblargle and citing Left-Wing sources as if they held any weight. But that’s okay since any reasonable person knows the truth is not on the side of Socialists.

    Here’s the facts.

    i, Curveball lied.
    ii, The US has proved Curveball lied.
    iii, Curveball has confessed he lied.

    All of these demonstrated.

    iv, You continue to repeat the lie. As far as I can see, you alone in all the world.
    v, You are a l1ar.

  51. The Phoenician gets even sillier than usual:

    Funny, I could have sworn that a central point of something that was really a job creation plan would have to be that it didn’t, you know, directly violate the Constitution…

    Here’s a job creation plan which, apparaently, Dana would find credible:

    - Charge fees for exercising free speech or a press
    - Confisicate all guns and sell them overseas.
    - Quarter soldiers in people’s private homes to save money on barracks.
    - Search people at random. Take their money.
    - Take private property for public use. Don’t pay.
    - Charge accused prisoners fees if they ever wanna go to trial.
    - Charge a fee for the privilege of a jury trial
    - (This one is pretty obvious)
    - (I give up on this one)
    - (And this one too, dammit. Any suggestions?)

  52. Once again we see a catastrophic humour failure in w1ngnuts.

    No, Dana dear, I don’t call that an argument. The first sentence is the argument; the rest is something normal people call “mockery”.

  53. “No, Perry, I will not accept Charles Krauthammer’s voice as a replacement for Michele Bachmann’s voice. And you should know by now (but obviously you don’t) that the grass-roots, the Conservative base, We the People have already for years now declared the Republican Ruling Class to be to the left of and out of touch with the grass-roots.

    Now, provide a quote from Michele Bachmann saying she wanted us to default on our loan obligations or admit you lied and continue to do so.”

    Ha, Hitchcock, you knew full well what Bachman’s position on the debt ceiling was/is, and Krauthammer merely reiterated it, and called it what it was/is, “irresponsible”. Moreover, the debt ceiling hostage taking by you Repubs did this nation damage in the global financial milieu.

    But you radicals don’t care, as you have shown your willingness to do damage to our country in an effort to win the next election. And you think you are patriots? I trust that the American people know better, in spite of the hardship that your policies have placed upon them as you do your best to blame President Obama for them.

  54. Since the victory in Weiner’s district in NYS by a Repub, the wingnuts are straining to put all sorts of national significance into the results.

    Sorry to tell you people, but there are points to make about issues you wingnuts gloss over or ignore:

    1. The district has orthodox Jews who are angry at Obama for taking a position against the Israelis’ expansion of housing settlements into the West Bank of Palestinian territory. So Weprin was damaged by Obama taking the correct position on this issue.

    2. Wingnuts quickly forget that Dem Kathy Hochul won a seat in May in a district that had been in Repub hands for years.

    3. There is not doubt that the behavior of Weiner elicited a lot of disgust among Dems and Repubs alike, leaving a bad taste with all the voters.

    4. It is generally agreed that Weprin ran a terrible campaign, whereas Turner ran a very good campaign.

    5. Despite a heavy GOTV effort by Dems, there was a light turnout by Dems who said they could not support Weprin, which was damaging to the Dems.

    6. Weprin voted in the General Assembly in support of legalizing gay marriage, a game-changer to orthodox Jews.

    7. Turner’s TV ads and mailers of the Twin Towers burning and the so-called ground zero mosque played on New Yorkers’ fears and anxieties around the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, a typical dirty trick for which the Repubs are well known.

    It is classic in elections like this one for the winning side to deduce broad national significance, whereas the losing side focus on local issues. This election result produces the same reasoning by winners and losers, as well as elucidating one more time that political dirty tricks are effective, a blight on the intelligence of the American voter that they seem incapable of seeing through this, which is why some despicable Repubs continue to use them!

    PS: Now it is time for Dana to accuse me of using Dem talking points. Never true, Dana, I just keep abreast of what is really going on, behind the scenes too, courtesy of some who are dedicated to honest reporting!

  55. After the last two completely insane posts by Perry, we need either Hitchcock or Dana to once again post the little picture of the guy with his head up his butt.

    And yes Perry, I’ve seen all your “taling points” this morning on various and sundry sites.

  56. Never true, Dana, I just keep abreast of what is really going on, behind the scenes too, courtesy of some who are dedicated to honest reporting!

    Uh huh. See picture above for the appropriate response to THAT comment!

  57. Thank you Hube. That’s the guy!

    I don’t know if Perry’s just gone off the political deep-end or if he really needs an intervention, but when someone is that deep into denyal over the corruption of our kleptocracy ( from Solyandra to Boeing), clueless about the class war being foisted on the people and oblivious to to the croney-capitalism killing the economy (428,000 new UE claims, ZERO job growth on August, rising inflation) he really has a problem.

    He’s been to the point of repeating over and over that if one thinks a “different approach” needs to be considered, one has crossed the line and is no longer patriotic. I feel bad because he seemed like a nice guy when we met yet for some ideological reason he is incapable of change or even considering change. Let’s just keep plowing blindly down the old tax/spend/print/borrow and regulate road and everything’s just gonna turn into unicorns and pixie dust. I just don’t get it but please feel free to use the picture when appropriate.

  58. “After the last two completely insane posts by Perry, we need either Hitchcock or Dana to once again post the little picture of the guy with his head up his butt.

    And yes Perry, I’ve seen all your “taling points” this morning on various and sundry sites.”

    And what did you find insane about my posts, Hoagie? Instead of specifying, your friends decided to exhibit their insanity, which you endorsed. So now ask yourself who is the insane one.

    Oh, I know, if one disagrees with Hoagie, or Hitchcock, or Hube, by definition they are insane.

    Debate the issues, Hoagie, that is why we are supposed to be on here.

  59. “And yes Perry, I’ve seen all your “taling points” this morning on various and sundry sites.”

    Hoagie, call them “taling points” if you will, that does not counter their truth, because you cannot. Dana did his best to post his “taling points”, and not a word from you on that!

  60. Oh, I know, if one disagrees with Hoagie, or Hitchcock, or Hube, by definition they are insane.

    As opposed to disagreeing with Fossil, which makes one “un-American,” or “unpatriotic,” etc.

    Debate the issues, Hoagie, that is why we are supposed to be on here.

    Energizer Perry again. Steve Newton, Mike Matthews and myriad others can’t be wrong — you’re a repetitive idiot, Fossil, who thinks he says a lot, but in reality just keeps spewing the same tiresome, worn out talking points time after time after time.

  61. “I don’t know if Perry’s just gone off the political deep-end or if he really needs an intervention, but when someone is that deep into denyal over the corruption of our kleptocracy ( from Solyandra to Boeing), clueless about the class war being foisted on the people and oblivious to to the croney-capitalism killing the economy (428,000 new UE claims, ZERO job growth on August, rising inflation) he really has a problem.

    He’s been to the point of repeating over and over that if one thinks a “different approach” needs to be considered, one has crossed the line and is no longer patriotic.”

    I hardly think a person or party is patriotic when they push policies whose effects are to deteriorate the American middle class, Hoagie. And I accuse you of being in “denyal” of our corrupt politics, because I think a do-nothing Congress and party is about the greatest corruption of the American way that I can imagine, while watching and fostering the decline of that same American middle.

    You folks also overlook the news that one in six Americans is now in poverty. Yes, I said in poverty. Why are not you wingnuts bring up that serious topic for discussion? At least you could acknowledge it by blaming Obama! :) The reality is that you don’t seem to care!!!

  62. You folks also overlook the news that one in six Americans is now in poverty. Yes, I said in poverty.

    Uh huh. Says the guy who said “I just keep abreast of what is really going on, behind the scenes too, courtesy of some who are dedicated to honest reporting!”

    LOL!!

  63. “Energizer Perry again. Steve Newton, Mike Matthews and myriad others can’t be wrong — you’re a repetitive idiot, Fossil, who thinks he says a lot, but in reality just keeps spewing the same tiresome, worn out talking points time after time after time.”

    That is an outright lie, Hube! If you really believed it, you would not be following me around here like a puppy dog. But you long ago lost control, suffering from OCD, which you refuse to have treated, apparently. If you are having it treated, you need a change in your meds.

    And then we have the social psychopath Hitchcock, and finally the delusional Hoagie. And the common characteristic of all three maladies is that life is all about you, forget our middle class and our poor, although in that respect, Hoagie, you do show some redeeming qualities in that regard.

  64. That is an outright lie, Hube!

    LOL, hardly. As noted, if people as politically diverse as those above recognize it in addition to the righties here, it ain’t OUR problem — it’s yours! But we all know it’s everyone else’s problem, never yours, Fossil.

    Which makes for some great comedy and fun catching you contradicting yourself and forgetting what you’ve said many times before!

    As for meds, you might wanna get checked for Alzheimer’s, dementia, and schizophrenia. At the very least. You’re certainly exhibiting the signs of all three.

  65. Perry, I’m not going to debate your talking points because Dana, Hitchcock, Hube and I have all ready addressed them many times before and you just turn a deaf ear. So what’s the point? You won’t even consider a new approach to solving our economic woes. Your guy, his croneys and his policies have been in power going on three years. Anything which now exists in this economy does so because he either kept it that way or made it that way. IOW, he not only didn’t “fix” anything he inherited, he made them worse and dragged them on. It takes between 6 and 15 months for a policy or event to work it’s way through our economy. Obama had been in office how long, three years? He OWNS the economy, baby. Like it or not.

    Now you can join us in exploring new ways to move our economy or you can sit around and bitch about how unpatriotic we all are for trying. Your call.

  66. “The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau as taken from various government reports:”

    This Robert Rector character, of the right wing propaganda outlet known as the Heritage Foundation, has carried out a long vendetta against those in poverty, and this is just one more chapter of the same.

    Moreover, note the “as taken from various government reports” statement. This makes it impossible to trace back his statistics to their origins. This is what Hube selects in order to try to show us that living in poverty in America is like living in luxury.

    Hube, you are full of yourself and in denial as well.

  67. This Robert Rector character, of the right wing propaganda outlet known as the Heritage Foundation, has carried out a long vendetta against those in poverty, and this is just one more chapter of the same.

    Yet another example of the Fossil’s hypocrisy. Just yesterday, Fossil DEMANDED we read (and accept) the screed of one Andrew Sullivan, who for months on end wrote about the moonbat conspiracy theory that Sarah Palin’s Down Syndrome child wasn’t really her own. But what does Fossil do now? Shrugs off the Heritage Foundation as a source. Though right-wing, yes, it is hardly comparable in any way to the moonbat Sullivan.

    Y’see, Perry? THIS is why you’re such a joke. You can’t even keep track of your very own standards. Ever.

    This is what Hube selects in order to try to show us that living in poverty in America is like living in luxury.

    It clearly is, when compared to just about any other country, especially 3rd World countries. Ever lived in such a country, Fossil? Obviously not, else you’d know what REAL poverty is.

  68. “As for meds, you might wanna get checked for Alzheimer’s, dementia, and schizophrenia. At the very least. You’re certainly exhibiting the signs of all three.”

    Given that you think these things about me, you then have to explain to everyone why you continue to take me seriously?

    The obvious answer is that you are a pathological liar, a characteristic of those who suffer from OCD. Moreover, you are a nasty and obnoxious person, constantly on the attack to vilify those with whom you disagree, rather than to focus on the issues, as is obvious to many who have encountered you, like those at DL for example. You are a sick/disturbed man Hube, an intelligent one too, but still sick/disturbed, and so is Hitchcock!

  69. like those at DL for example.

    Invoking those as “experts” on my disposition just further exemplifies your dementia, not to mention proves — again — you could care not one iota about gap-bridging, you outrageous fraud.

    You are a sick man Hube

    Moonbat, heal thyself. Then talk.

  70. “Yet another example of the Fossil’s hypocrisy. Just yesterday, Fossil DEMANDED we read (and accept) the screed of one Andrew Sullivan, who for months on end wrote about the moonbat conspiracy theory that Sarah Palin’s Down Syndrome child wasn’t really her own. But what does Fossil do now? Shrugs off the Heritage Foundation as a source. Though right-wing, yes, it is hardly comparable in any way to the moonbat Sullivan.

    Y’see, Perry? THIS is why you’re such a joke. You can’t even keep track of your very own standards. Ever.”

    Another red herring from Hube. We are not talking here about Andrew Sullivan, we are talking about Robert Rector and what he wrote, which you cited. Will you acknowledge that it is near impossible to trace back to the origins the statements that Rector makes about American poverty?

    Since you say I am suffering from Alzheimer’s, dementia, and schizophrenia, Hube, why do you bother to respond? The reason: you are an obnoxious person and a goddamned liar!

    [Added: You are trying to make the point that there is a good poverty, in America, and a bad poverty, in Europe. That is a distinction without significant meaning! Who in their right mind wants to live in poverty, whether it be in America or Europe or anywhere else. We should be ashamed to have a system which produces such a high poverty rate, while having nearly half the nations' wealth in the upper 10%. This is a nutty system!]

  71. Since you say I am suffering from Alzheimer’s, dementia, and schizophrenia, Hube, why do you bother to respond?

    Why do you bother to respond to me if I am brutally OCD? Is it b/c you’re “an obnoxious person and a goddamned liar?” LOL!!

    We are not talking here about Andrew Sullivan, we are talking about Robert Rector

    We’re talking about your hypocrisy in you demanding that people accept a statement and not impugn the source, yet that is precisely what you did above. That’s what obnoxious people and goddamned liars do.

  72. That is a distinction without significant meaning!

    It has a lot more “meaning” than some bureaucrats arbitrarily designating what the “poverty” line is.

    Who in their right mind wants to live in poverty, whether it be in America or Europe or anywhere else.

    Golly, is that a red herring by the Fossil? Where did I say that? The fact of the matter is that the American “poor” have it pretty good when compared to just about any other “poor” in the world.

  73. “Perry, I’m not going to debate your talking points because Dana, Hitchcock, Hube and I have all ready addressed them many times before and you just turn a deaf ear. So what’s the point? You won’t even consider a new approach to solving our economic woes. Your guy, his croneys and his policies have been in power going on three years. Anything which now exists in this economy does so because he either kept it that way or made it that way. IOW, he not only didn’t “fix” anything he inherited, he made them worse and dragged them on. It takes between 6 and 15 months for a policy or event to work it’s way through our economy. Obama had been in office how long, three years? He OWNS the economy, baby. Like it or not.

    Now you can join us in exploring new ways to move our economy or you can sit around and bitch about how unpatriotic we all are for trying. Your call.”

    Hoagie, your point about working together is right on, and I, as a citizen am willing, as is President Obama. But your party is not willing. So now what?

  74. Hoagie:

    “Perry, I’m not going to debate your talking points because Dana, Hitchcock, Hube and I have all ready addressed them many times before and you just turn a deaf ear. So what’s the point?”

    Perry in response:

    Hoagie, your point about working together is right on, and I, as a citizen am willing, as is President Obama. But your party is not willing. So now what?

    What did Hoagie just say about talking points? ‘Nuff said.

  75. “The fact of the matter is that the American “poor” have it pretty good when compared to just about any other “poor” in the world.”

    That may well be true, but you cannot point to Rector’s piece to demonstrate that point, is my point.

    Moreover, to compare poverty here to anywhere else is apples and oranges, because the sense of poverty is relative to the living standards surrounding those in poverty. That those here in poverty can feed and clothe their children is a testament to the social programs we have in place for these children of poverty, programs which your party would just as soon cut out. As a teacher, you know exactly what I am talking about. What is your position on cutting these poverty programs, Hube?

  76. “What did Hoagie just say about talking points? ‘Nuff said.”

    Hube, my talking points are my own thoughts, so Hoagie’s innuendo is false. Moreover, he is wrong about turning a deaf ear, unless he means by that that I don’t agree with his/your talking points. Well that is certainly the truth, that we don’t agree!

  77. That may well be true, but you cannot point to Rector’s piece to demonstrate that point, is my point.

    Perhaps you’d care to elucidate on precisely what Rector is missing — “missing” like the proof that he has a “vendetta” against the poor a la your previous post. Missing like that, Perry?

    programs which your party would just as soon cut out.

    What’s missing here, Perry? I know: Proof of this statement.

  78. Perry, I don’t think Hube is suggesting there is a “good Poverty” and a “bad poverty”. I believe what he’s trying to say is that what we in the US call the “poverty line” is a world apart with what people all over the world and all through time have experienced when in poverty.

    I’d like to add that you keep mentioning “the poor and middle” then the “rich” as they are just groups of faceless persons some of which should be helped and others who should be harmed by society and government. I’d like to remind yoy all three groups are Americans and all three are entitled to fair and equal treatment by our government. I do realize that we need the “safety nets” for the poor. But to me those “nets” should afford a way OUT of poverty, not an acceptable level at which to continue to live in poverty.

    I also need to remind you that the “middle” includes everyone not in poverty and everyone not “rich”. The middle needs only opportunity and they too can become rich. I was in and out of the “rich” category several times in my life but I’m still just middle. Hell, I’m not even sure how much one has to earn in a year to be considered “rich” but I do know that if we tax away the “upper middle” income it stops them from becoming so. They are the small businessmen, professionals etc. that spur job creation and innovation and invention. If we decapitalize them to punish them we just end up punishing ourselves.

  79. Hube, my talking points are my own thoughts

    Consider that your “own thoughts” frequently confuse themselves in this forum from virtually one post to the next, when it comes to pointing out the supposed deficiencies in the GOP, it’s clear you need merely parrot what you read from the moonbat blogs.

  80. Perry, I am not asking you to agree or disagree with my or Hube’s talking points. I’m asking that you just listen and consider that perhaps the same-old-same-old ain’t workin’.

    The problem we seem to have here is I’m a Lutheran, a conservative and a free market capitalist and you are a liberal. Ya see the difference? Neither conservatism nor capitalism is my religion. You can be anti-Christian all you want and you won’t rock my faith. That’s how you approach liberalism. It’s your god, your politics and your economic system all wrapped into one. Shake one and you shake them all. So it becomes impossible for you to say: “perhaps a capitalist answer to this problem is good”, or “maybe we should take a conservative approach on this one”. That would shake the entire trinity of liberalism to the core. I understand that sometimes a tad of socialism works better and sometimes a tad liberalism can achieve an objective. But that won’t rock my faith because to me they are just ways of approaching political or economic problems, not a swipe at my religion.

  81. “But to me those “nets” should afford a way OUT of poverty, not an acceptable level at which to continue to live in poverty.”

    I agree with that, Hoagie. As jobs go up, poverty goes down, because most people, including the poor, want to work. The anti-poverty program under Clinton and the Repubs proved that.

    Unfortunately, the solution for us right now is to move jobs back by workers and executives both being willing to work for lower pay. So far, I don’t see this happening, so the stand-off continues to drag us down as a nation. Once we get the ball rolling in this manner, then we can begin to invest more for the future, in innovation and education.

  82. I already stated what Rector was missing, but here it is again:

    “The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau as taken from various government reports:”

    Here: “from various government sources” means to me that his statistics are not easily traced back, for confirmation purposes. I am not saying his data are not true, I am saying that I don’t know, and neither do you, Hube!

  83. Here: “from various government sources” means to me that his statistics are not easily traced back, for confirmation purposes. I am not saying his data are not true, I am saying that I don’t know, and neither do you, Hube!

    Maybe you oughta look at the whole report, then, and all of its footnotes.

  84. “Maybe you oughta look at the whole report, then, and all of its footnotes.”

    Good point, Hube. This does appear to be a well-researched and well-written piece, now that I look more closely!

  85. The problem we seem to have here is I’m a Lutheran, a conservative and a free market capitalist

    And which of them is responsible for supporting positions of genocide?

  86. As U.S. poverty rates climb, so may health woes for the poor

    Poverty levels are up in the U.S., the Census Bureau reports, with the percentage of Americans living in poverty at its highest point since 1993. That will likely translate into increasing health issues for those people, since being poor seems inexorably linked to poor health.

    A number of studies have linked poverty to higher levels of cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and other diseases and conditions. While the association may seem obvious, the reasons can be complex: having little access to healthcare, less education about disease treatment and prevention, a scarce supply of healthful foods, fewer opportunities to exercise and embarrassment about one’s condition. Adults aren’t the only ones affected; some research focuses on children as well.

    But remember – even if the Census Bureau says something is so, w1ngnuts know better, because shut up that’s why.

  87. I see Perry can accuse Bachmann of wanting something she very explicitly denied, can accuse people of being social psychopaths because they are Conservatives, can accuse people of being raaaaacists because they vehemently disagree with the less-than-half-black President’s socialist agenda, but cannot face the fact his own Democrat Senator (Tom Carper) disagrees with Obama’s “jobs” bill and promotes austerity himself, as evidenced by Perry’s complete disregard for my report on Senate Democrats opposed to Obama’s “jobs” bill.

    That’s what happens when you’re blinded by your radical Leftism.

  88. , but cannot face the fact his own Democrat Senator (Tom Carper) disagrees with Obama’s “jobs” bill and promotes austerity himself

    But you’re the one reporting it. And has just been demonstrated, you are a l1ar. Where are those mobile WMD labs parked again?

    Perry doesn’t have to reply to you until you demonstrate an ability to tell the truth.

  89. “And which of them is responsible for supporting positions of genocide?”

    I’ve already explained my statement, appologized for it and retracted it completely. If that’s not good enough for you than too bad and perhaps you should stop bloging here. If you mention it again you’re an idiot and a liar. Or both.

    You really are childlike aren’t you?

  90. And I’ve already explained the problem with your “apology”. You *are* an 1diot, and we already know you’re a l1ar.

  91. Once again Pho, I apologise. There’s no “problem” with an honest apology. If you can’t accept that then you’re the idiot, not I. And although sometimes I’m wrong, I’m not a liar. You never supprise me. Anyone who disagrees with you is always an idiot and a liar. Waddaya want from me Pho? Stand me against a wall and shoot me cause I’m not on your team? Or do I qualify to be sent to a re-education camp to make me a little Pho Phollower?

    You really need to grow up Pho. You always sound like a spoiled seven year old who “must” have his way. We can always tell when you’re loosing, the name calling begins.

  92. The Phoenician wrote, at 1656:

    but cannot face the fact his own Democrat Senator (Tom Carper) disagrees with Obama’s “jobs” bill and promotes austerity himself (John)

    But you’re the one reporting it. And has just been demonstrated, you are a l1ar. Where are those mobile WMD labs parked again?

    Perry doesn’t have to reply to you until you demonstrate an ability to tell the truth.

    But John had previously posted, at 13:23, that Senator Carper had problems with President Obama’s American Jobs Act.

    So, does the Phoenician’s statement mean that:

    1. he is simply careless with the facts, by not checking; or
    2. knew that John had already posted the documentation, as a main article, and was deliberately lying?
  93. Dana is a cucumber.

    Again, Dana is a cucumber.

    Now, according to you, the second statement must be true because it has previously been posted.

    I don’t know whether the bit about Carper is a fact or not. What I do know is that the source has been shown to be utterly beyond credibility.

    I mean, look, Dana – Hitchcock was caught making an untrue statement. He was shown that he was wrong.

    He then continued to repeat it. So it was no longer just untrue, it was a knowing lie.

    At that stage the comedy began.

    He was shown that the claim had been dismissed by the Brits, the DIA, and the ISG, which represented the definitive finding of the US government. He continued to repeat the lie.

    He was shown that the CIA, the people who made teh claim, had recanted and dismissed it. He continued to repeat the lie.

    He was shown that it was based on the word of one man, widely regarded as a l1ar. He continued to repeat the lie.

    And finally, he was shown that the man himself said it was a lie. On video. he continued to repeat the lie.

    At that point, he was pressed about where the evidence actually was. His explanation depended on the idea that the Bush Administration would not only produce a false report about the subject, but destroy the evidence completely when it would have vindicated their claims about the War. He was, in fact, implicitly claimig that the Bush Administration conspired against itself.

    Called out on that, he proceeded to call me a socialist, state that everyone could see I was wrong, and went silent on the matter.

    Dana, Hitchcock is mentally unbalanced. He lies, and can never ever ever admit he lied.

  94. Once again Pho, I apologise. There’s no “problem” with an honest apology. If you can’t accept that then you’re the idiot, not I. And although sometimes I’m wrong, I’m not a liar. You never supprise me. Anyone who disagrees with you is always an idiot and a liar. Waddaya want from me Pho? Stand me against a wall and shoot me cause I’m not on your team? Or do I qualify to be sent to a re-education camp to make me a little Pho Phollower?

    Here’s what you stated for reference.

    You “apologised”, but you still made the comment. Not in jest, but in heat. It reveals what you are.

    Do you recall the kerfuffle about the “Ground Zero Mosque”? What if the Arab developer behind that had come out and said something like:

    “Until such time as the Americans either convert or get completely out of the Middle East, I say kill them all and let Allah sort them out.”

    and then apologised the next day.

    Would you accept that apology? Even if you did accept it was said in the heat of the moment, would you think it revealed something fundamental about the man’s principles?

    This is what you stated:

    “When a country declares war on you they are all your enemy. When a religion declares war on you they too are all your enemy. Until such time as moslem’s either surrender or declare they will kill their own terrorists in the name of world peace, I say kill them all and let Got sort them out. That’s how you win, anything else is doomed to failure.”

    I fully believe you’re sorry for having said it – because I’ve made you sorry. I don’t believe it changes the fact that you’re the sort of man who would come out with a statement like that

    Do you?

    [retrieved - pH]

  95. Phoenician in a time of Romans says:
    16 September 2011 at 14:34

    Vomment in moderation

    That could be one of the first true things the Socialist book putter backer from New Zealand has said on this blog.

  96. “You can be anti-Christian all you want and you won’t rock my faith.”

    Hoagie, I am not at all anti-Christian, but I become disturbed when one of our regulars professes to be a devout Christian, yet behaves in a consistently outrageous manner toward others, a manner which belies his religious profession and the tenets thereof. Many of my political views have their roots in my early Christian education, as do my concerns about the behavior of this particular individual. And let’s broaden this criticism a bit: I am also surprised, even amazed at Christians who are political Conservatives, who put waging wars of choice at a high priority place to resolve problems. I find this phenomenon very difficult to either understand or accept.

    [Added: I just ran across this and think it is an appropriate statement: “Between Race and Reason: Anti-Intellectualism in American Life
    Susan Searls Giroux, Stanford University Press: “The nation’s third president understood all too well the necessity of an educated citizenry … At no other time have we been more in need of a critically engaged, creative, and thoughtful citizenry who can face with courage and conviction the challenges – political, economic, ecological, spiritual – that we face both nationally and internationally.”
    by Susan Searls Giroux, Standford University Press

  97. Perry continues his ignorant anti-Christian rants and his straw-man tactics and his poisoning-the-well tactics while showing he knows next to nothing about Christianity whatsoever. But that’s to be expected of the man who cannot remember five minutes ago and refuses to face up to the fact that his own Democrat Senator has stood up against Obama’s job-killing bill.

    Having a fact-based discussion with Perry is like trying to explain quantum physics to a third-grader from Washington DC public schools, except you’ll be moderately more successful with the third-grader.

  98. “Perry continues his ignorant anti-Christian rants and his straw-man tactics and his poisoning-the-well tactics while showing he knows next to nothing about Christianity whatsoever.”

    No, John, as I said, I am not anti-Christian, nor do I behave in such a manner as to be anti-Christian. But your behavior right here is the opposite of what one would normally expect from a person who professes to be a Christ-loving fundamentalist Christian. Either you are not telling the truth, or you suffer from a behavioral pathology, the type that has little to no concern for the outcome generated in the victims. Which is it, John, or maybe it is both, or maybe even you don’t know? Get help!

  99. Perry, your form of christianity (lower-case “c”) involves the willful and required violation of the Tenth Commandment, government mandated force (fascism) in the required violation of the Tenth Commandment, the rejection of Jesus’ own words, the rejection of liberty. Christianity (upper-case “c”) is in direct contradiction to your bastardized, anti-Christian warping of Truth.

  100. Perry, your form of christianity (lower-case “c”) involves the willful and required violation of the Tenth Commandment,

    Exodus 20:16. Where are those mobile weapons labs?

  101. “Exodus 20:16. Where are those mobile weapons labs?”

    Exactly, PiaToR, a commandment that Christian Hitchcock violates consistently on here, so I guess he doesn’t like that one and casts it aside!

    Here, read this very carefully, John, about Exodus 20:16, the Ninth Commandment:

    “Thou shalt not bear false witness, etc. – Not only false oaths, to deprive a man of his life or of his right, are here prohibited, but all whispering, tale-bearing, slander, and calumny; in a word, whatever is deposed as a truth, which is false in fact, and tends to injure another in his goods, person, or character, is against the spirit and letter of this law. Suppressing the truth when known, by which a person may be defrauded of his property or his good name, or lie under injuries or disabilities which a discovery of the truth would have prevented, is also a crime against this law. He who bears a false testimony against or belies even the devil himself, comes under the curse of this law, because his testimony is false. By the term neighbor any human being is intended, whether he rank among our enemies or friends. “

    Either you do not understand the Ninth Commandment, or you willfully disobey it. Whichever, you now have no more excuses.

  102. Perry, you and your socialist bud can accuse me of being a liar all you want. It won’t change the fact that you and your socialist bud are the liars around these parts. It is quite typical of anti-Christians to call Christians “unchristian” and it is quite typical of socialists — who cannot survive without lying — to accuse their mortal enemies liars. Anti-Christian Socialists not only live a lie, but they force the lie onto others and rejoice in seeing others live a life of lies along with them. Because anti-Christian Socialists cannot stand the light of Truth being shone upon their lives.

  103. “Perry, you and your socialist bud can accuse me of being a liar all you want. It won’t change the fact that you and your socialist bud are the liars around these parts. It is quite typical of anti-Christians to call Christians “unchristian” and it is quite typical of socialists — who cannot survive without lying — to accuse their mortal enemies liars. Anti-Christian Socialists not only live a lie, but they force the lie onto others and rejoice in seeing others live a life of lies along with them. Because anti-Christian Socialists cannot stand the light of Truth being shone upon their lives.”

    Right, John, you are short on specifics and facts, but long on assumptions and innuendo, as usual. This is nothing more than childish name calling, again!

    As a matter of fact, John, I am not anti-Christian, meaning I am not against you simply because you are not really a Christian (based on your behavior)! For one, you violate the Nineth Commandment daily. For another, I am against what you say whenever you come on here with your pathological lying, like here. And John, if you cannot help your self, which apparently you cannot, get help!

    Moreover, if you must label me, call me a Progressive. I am certainly not a Socialist, because I do not “advocate for collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods”. I am a capitalist and a democrat, one who believes that the government should employ oversight and limited regulation when illegal or even excessive activities are observed, like cornering the market as with monopolies. Finally, I believe in the rule of law.

    What do you believe in, John?

  104. And Perry, I don’t want your respect. If I am getting the respect of Socialists like you and the New Zealand book putter backer, that means I have gone off the deep end into Socialist, anti-Christian lies. And do face the truth, Perry, that so-called “progressivism” is in fact Socialism with a deceitful name intended to deceive the weak-minded into believing it isn’t socialism.

    Your own Senator, Tom Carper (D – DE) is opposed to Obama’s “jobs” plan and said an austerity plan is more capable of bringing growth to America than anything Obama offered. At least 1 in 6 DEMOCRAT Senators are opposed to the Obama job-destroying plan. If you were anywhere near consistent, you would be calling all those DEMOCRAT Senators raaaaacists because they oppose the less-than-half-black President you worship so much. When you are to the Left of a large percentage of your own party’s Senators — most of whom have nothing to fear from their electorate — then you know there is no way in Hades that you are anywhere near the center of the political spectrum. When roughly 3/4 of the Republican base and over half of independents have declared consistently for years that Republicans in Congress are to the Left of and out of touch with the Republican base, then you know the Republicans in Congress are closer to the Center than either their own base or the Democrats.

    Your own site with the absolutely dishonest and hypocritical name opened with great fanfare from CSPT and got 280 hits and 585 pageviews its first month. From that time until now, a large percentage of your hits and pageviews have been clickthroughs from CSPT and TBD, and yet last month your dishonestly and hypocritically named site generated a measly 105 hits and 184 pageviews, despite the clickthroughs from CSPT and TBD driving a large portion of those. TBD generated more hits and pageviews yesterday than your comically dishonest and hypocritical site generated all last month.

    There is a reason your site is a dismal failure, Perry. There is a reason every Conservative laughs at you and your Socialist bud, Perry. But you refuse to face the truth because it would destroy your whole worldview (which is built on lies and envy and hate). And quite frankly, you and your socialist bud are a major reason why CSPT has lost 10,000 pageviews per month from where CSPT stood before. But TBD is growing quite nicely.

    [Added: And no, I don't have to even look at your lie-filled sludge-pit of a site to monitor your sitemeter and get some good chortles.]

  105. “And quite frankly, you and your socialist bud are a major reason why CSPT has lost 10,000 pageviews per month from where CSPT stood before.”

    And your evidence for that is what, John? You have none, as usual.

    My opinion is that if Dana took you off, his pageviews would go up. You have no perception whatsoever how off-the-wall your propaganda pieces are, and I’m not even counting your personal vilification and venom day after day after day. In my view, you contaminate Dana’s blog. Although I disagree with his politics on most items, at least I can have a civil conversation with him. True even with Hube, when he decides to debate and leaves the venom aside. But not you. You are truly unique, John, I’ll give you that!

    Regarding Tom Carper’s objections to the AJA, that’s fine, I don’t agree with Tom, whom I have met personally many times. But I will point this out to you, Dems do not line up in lock-step like most of your party does, like lemmings, which is what got us into so much trouble during Bush, and what is getting us in trouble during Obama, as Repubs have steadfastly refused to work with Obama and the Dems, hoping that this will cause Obama to fail and be a one-termer. Are you proud of that? I am hopeful that come election time, the voters will see your party’s behavior for what it has been this past decade, behaving not in the interests of America and/or the American people. They will also see the extremist radicalism that has contaminated your party. Who are you going to nominate, Rick Perry? Good luck with that!

    John, you can continue to come on here with your psychopathic nastiness, and I will continue to call you out on it. If some day you come on here willing to discuss the issues with civility, you will find that I will respond in kind.

  106. No, I am not a Perry supporter. Perry has his own Big Government problems, as well as his own crony capitalism problems and his own illegal immigration problems. Perry is third on my list of 3 worthwhile candidates, with the two women as the top two. There is no other worthwhile option for me. And that “lock-step” thing you accuse Republicans of because they reject the most radical Leftist President ever, the most Socialist President ever, the most corrupt President ever, the most deceitful and narcissistic President ever, the worst failure ever to be voted President is not accurate since the Ruling Class Republicans are to the left of and out of touch with the base, according to roughly 3/4 of the Republican base and over half of independents.

    You see, Obama is indeed building bipartisanship — bipartisanship against Obama’s agenda, and from Democrats who do not have anything to fear from their electorate. No, Perry, it isn’t the Conservatives, the TEA Party, who are the radicals. It is Obama and his sycophants, such as you, who are the radicals. It is the vestiges of the 1960s counter-culture who run roughshod over the people from within the Democrat Party that is the radical wing of American politics.

  107. I can see it now. Radical Leftist Perry says “See, Democrats can stand against Obama. That means Republicans should be able to stand with Obama.” Or some other such nonsense, completely missing the point that Obama is too radical even for many Democrats; therefore, clearly too radical for Republicans and waaaaaay out in radical la-la-land for Conservatives. So no, the fact Democrats oppose Obama’s radical agenda does not mean Republicans are lockstep lemmings for opposing Obama’s radical America-destroying agenda.

  108. “So no, the fact Democrats oppose Obama’s radical agenda does not mean Republicans are lockstep lemmings for opposing Obama’s radical America-destroying agenda.”

    John, it does not matter what Obama is for, the Repubs are lock step against it, regardless, moreover, they are usually unwilling to look for common ground for compromise. A government cannot function with this Repub attitude, and it does not. Our government is dysfunctional, because of this Republican attitude. Not only that, they want to blame Obama for our economic mess, when clearly the Republicans bear most of the blame. That’s just simply a fact, as has been pointed out many times on here, in detail, with credible citations!

  109. “It is Obama and his sycophants, such as you, who are the radicals.”

    Well of course I cannot agree with your just stated opinion! I think most observers agree that the Republican Party has been moving right beginning with Goldwater. If anything, Obama has moved more to the center, which is why the left has been quite upset, especially lately. He has continued many of Bush’s questionable security policies, he reneged on single payer or an public option, and he escalated in Afghanistan. You certainly are incorrect in labeling Obama as a radical leftist!

  110. Not only that, they want to blame Obama for our economic mess, when clearly the Republicans bear most of the blame.

    Au contraire — you and Wheeler have lectured us that since George Bush was in office during 9/11 (for a mere 8 mos), he alone shares the burden for that attack. Therefore, since Obama has been in office for almost three years, this economic mess is his.

    Hey — you set the rules, Fossil.

  111. No, Perry, the Republican Party has not been moving Right since Goldwater. In fact, the Republican Power Structure hated Ronald Reagan because Reagan stood for Liberty and getting government out of the way. Reagan took the Conservative base of the Republican Party and ran with it, proving Conservatism wins votes, and subsequently proving Conservatism improves all aspects of society. After Reagan, the Republican power structure did everything they could to destroy the Reagan Republican Caucus that had proven successful, and replace it with a middling mush that did not represent the base at all. Karl Rove is definite evidence.

    So, the Republican Party drifted Leftward, away from the Conservative base after Reagan. The 1994 Republican wave was a top-down Republican effort to shift the Republican Party back toward its base and away from Democrat-lite. As a result, the Democrat Party made a huge, grand lurch Leftward. And the Republican Party was abjectly stupid enough to once again forget what won it elections and shifted further Left to fill in the void left by the radically Leftward lurching Democrat Party.

    And we got rejection of Republicans (who had rejected their base and the winning formula to be Democrat-lite yet again) in 2006, and a radical Socialist Democrat for President in 2008. From the stupidity of the Republican Party and the radical Socialism coming out of the Democrat Party rose the TEA Party movement, a grassroots uprising against the Big Government Leftism of both major parties. And the Republican Ruling Class is more bent on destroying the TEA Party than it is in defeating the radical Leftism that is the new Democrat Party.

    No, the Republican Party has not been shifting ever Rightward since the 1960s. The Republican Party has been shifting ever Leftward, with brief corrections back to the Right, closer to where it belongs.

    There is a reason Ronald Reagan said “I didn’t leave the Democrat Party; the Democrat Party left me.” There is a reason Rick Perry is no longer a Democrat after holding elective office as a Democrat and even campaigning as a Democrat for Al Gore in 1988 (who was not then the absolute loon nut-ball wackjob he is today). It is because the Democrats have been lurching Leftward since the turn of the 20th Century. There is a reason people say “this is not your grand-parents Democrat Party” and that reason is specifically because it has been overrun by radical Leftists who don’t even come close to resembling the Democrats of old.

  112. And Perry, it does indeed matter what Obama is for, because everything Obama is for is radical. It is all an effort to shove Socialism down our throats. And, yes, when someone presents Socialism 24/7/365, I will be against that person 24/7/365. It is the fact that Obama is too radical, even for members of his own party, that he cannot garner full Democrat support in the Senate.

    Not all options are equal options. Socialism is a non-starter and a nation-destroyer and a mass murderer. Socialist options are off the table, no negotiation, no principle-violating compromise. Off the table.

  113. Because you label something Socialism does not make it so. Better check your dictionary to see what it is! I already gave a definition a little earlier, which you have ignored.

  114. John, the topic you are addressing with party labels being thrown around is actually a very complex topic, pieces of which become both thesis and book topics. I am not saying I disagree with some of your comments, it is just the the coverage you are attempting to give in a couple of paragraphs in a blog boggles my mind! Besides, it is dinner time.

  115. Perry, I suspect nearly everything boggles your mind because nearly everything runs counter to your fact-free world-view. But I do find it highly amusing that “the topic [I am] addressing with party labels being thrown around” is the topic you were “addressing with party labels being thrown around” but you are offended that I speak the truth to your Liberal propaganda, so you divert into a petty attack, not realizing what you had said a mere 40 minutes prior.

    As we constantly remind you, your memory is so terrible that you cannot remember what you said from one minute to the next, as is perfectly in evidence in this thread alone.

  116. Perry, you and your socialist bud can accuse me of being a liar all you want. It won’t change the fact that you and your socialist bud are the liars around these parts

    Where are those mobile weapons labs you state that the US captured?

  117. Au contraire — you and Wheeler have lectured us that since George Bush was in office during 9/11 (for a mere 8 mos), he alone shares the burden for that attack. Therefore, since Obama has been in office for almost three years, this economic mess is his.

    Security policy is not economic policy; the latter has an inertia far in excess of the former.

    Where Obama can be faltered is in his responses to a crisis set up over the last decade under Bush.

  118. Hube wrote:

    Not only that, they want to blame Obama for our economic mess, when clearly the Republicans bear most of the blame.

    Au contraire — you and Wheeler have lectured us that since George Bush was in office during 9/11 (for a mere 8 mos), he alone shares the burden for that attack. Therefore, since Obama has been in office for almost three years, this economic mess is his.

    Hey — you set the rules, Fossil.

    To which the Phoenician responded:

    Security policy is not economic policy; the latter has an inertia far in excess of the former.

    Where Obama can be faltered is in his responses to a crisis set up over the last decade under Bush.

    This is a distinction without a difference. President Obama is responsible for his policies, his responses in the Phoenician’s terms, regardless of what they are. He is responsible for the stimulus plan he got passed — and which failed, according to the measurement criteria he specified for it — but he would also be responsible for the effects of a double-sized stimulus if that had been proposed and passed, or if he had proposed doing nothing, and that had been our policy.

Comments are closed.