The BEST and the BRIGHTEST

You know you might be the “Best and the Brightest” if…

...you are sure there are no "jobs" to be found in a major project on which workers will have to WORK.

"This (rewiring and modernizing heating systems in the White House) is a much-needed project; it is long overdue, and I hope Congress funds it in the future," Obama told the National Conference of State Legislatures in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the White House. "But because this request does not meet the high standards I have set -- because it will not create many jobs or advance our recovery -- it will not be funded under the Recovery Act."

You know you might be the "Best and the Brightest" if you advance a medical system where officials can reduce costs by culling the population of inconveniently expensive patients.

The province of Quebec lacks a medical helicopter system, common in the United States and other parts of Canada, to airlift stricken patients to major trauma centers. Montreal's top head trauma doctor said Friday that may have played a role in Richardson's death.

You know you might be the "Best and the Brightest" if you are too smart even to follow the successful examples of previous iterations of the "Best and the Brightest".

As Raymond Moley, an FDR adviser intimately involved in crafting the bank holiday and other 100 days policies, wrote in his book, "After Seven Years," "It cannot be emphasized too strongly that the policies which vanquished the bank crisis were thoroughly conservative . . . Those who conceived and executed them were intent upon rallying the confidence, first, of the conservative business and banking leaders of the country and, then, through them, of the public generally."
It boggles the mind to think how the Great Depression might have gone if only those guys had been as smart as this lot.

You know you might be the "Best and the Brightest" if your demand that others bear the burden of saving the world means that desert turtles should never sit in the shade.

"This is unacceptable," Feinstein said in a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. "I urge you to direct the BLM to suspend any further consideration of leases to develop former railroad lands for renewable energy or for any other purpose."
Yes. Absolutely. Renewable energy projects will destroy former railroad land's ecosystems.

You know you might be the "Best and the Brightest" if funds intended to stimulate jobs must not be spent where people are trying to preserve jobs.

Reid argues that casinos are often the only suitable space for conferences and workshops held by community organizations. He also cites a women's group that often uses casino hotel rooms as transitional housing for victims of violence.
Poor Harry must be "B&B" bipolar...

Finally, but not because we're running out of material, you might be the "Best and the Brightest" if you hold a press award ceremony- but don't invite the, uh, PRESS
The first line in the L.A.Times blog story says it all: "We are not making this up:"

Yep, when you deal with people as wise as the "Best and the Brightest" things beyond normal human comprehension seem to happen every day.

Posted by Lee Emmerich Jamison at March 21, 2009 11:59 AM
Comments
Comment #278198

Thanks Lee, you bought a smile and laugh to my day.

Posted by: Jim M at March 21, 2009 12:57 PM
Comment #278200

Jim M

“Thanks Lee, you bought a smile and laugh to my day.”

this wont. does this bother anyone else, or is it just me?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123741378746277081.html

Posted by: dbs at March 21, 2009 1:07 PM
Comment #278201

Lee,

Stephen Daugherty, you, young man, are proof of the existence of parallel universes. Anybody who could watch the behavior of Barney Frank (of brothel fame), “

Since you seem so willing to bring this up not once, but twice;

What exactly was Barney Frank’s role in this “brothel” scandal anyway?
No really, when can we actually expect to hear the truth about this, or will conservatives be repeating this canard aud nauseum until someone/anyone actually believes it?

Lee, the problem is that the folks on the right are so willing to repeat outright bulls*&t like this over, and over, and over.

Could this be why nobody is listening to you?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 21, 2009 1:07 PM
Comment #278203

Rocky,

Look this up. It is easy to find.

“Call-boy”… a very interesting term, when one thinks about it.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 21, 2009 1:15 PM
Comment #278205

dbs,

Gallows humor is a legitimate approach to existential crises, even when our leaders seek to save us from embarrassment at how we are seen elsewhere by being gentle and kind enough to release murderers in our midst.

Let’s all get together for Kool-Aid.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 21, 2009 1:21 PM
Comment #278210

I really Don’t care what kind of lifestyle Frank Prefers, George Herbert Walker Bush sure did take a lot of heat for not liking broccoli.!

Posted by: Rodney Brown at March 21, 2009 2:23 PM
Comment #278221

Halarious, but I’m sure the detainees from Gitmo will just blend in with the rest of the illegals in this country. If they wait a few months, Pelosi and Reid will give them amnesty, which BHO will be happy to sign.

Posted by: Oldguy at March 21, 2009 4:35 PM
Comment #278228

Why is it that when I read Republican and conservative comments nowadays, all too often I feel like I need a shower afterwards? I end up feeling like I’ve been mentally covered in mud, or worse. It’s all I can do not to respond in kind.

I think the Republican party has embraced a certain kind of sociopathic attitude, to be honest, in its politics. Nothing matters except winning, except keeping everything to yourself. Nobody can tell you what to do. It’s absolute freedom or nothing.

But if you follow all those ambitions to their final, logical conclusions, what you’ve done is created a playground for manipulators, deceivers, and the power-mad. Unless there is an underlying recognition of limits, of the needs of the rule of law, of the necessity for people’s interests to be balanced, all you’ve done is just handed power to those who have no conscience or quibble about how they use it.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 21, 2009 6:04 PM
Comment #278229

Oldguy,

I was so glad to see, now that kidnappings by Mexican gangs have skyrocketed in the U.S., that Janet Napolitano thinks it is crucial that we stop the smuggling of guns to Mexico. Meanwhile her posted policy statement seems not to address the smuggling of humans to the U.S.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 21, 2009 6:13 PM
Comment #278233

dbs,

this wont. does this bother anyone else, or is it just me?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123741378746277081.html

Ordinarily, I would be bothered by the release of people suspected of terrorist activities into the United States, the problem is these particular people have never been involved with any anti-American terrorist activities. The Bush administration declared that these individuals were no longer Enemy Combatants, and tried to return them to normal life.

Complicating matters, these are Uyghur (pronounced wee-ger) people from China. They were captured in late after the battle at Tora Bora, mainly because they were non-Afghan people who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. (The logic was that any foreigners in the area must be Al-Qaeda fleeing the bombs at Tora Bora).

China has been vigorously persecuting this tiny Muslim minority group in Xinjiang province in a manner similar to that of the Tibetans. Because it is virtually certain that the detainees would be persecuted on trumped up charges of participation in the East Turkestan Independence movement, we cannot return them to their country of origin. The Bush administration negotiated political asylum in Albania for a few of these people. Currently, China has coerced every country in the world (including Albania) in the world into refusing political asylum for these people.

You might want read up about this very cloudy issue. Should we allow these Uyghur people to seek political asylum in the United States? My own answer is that I do not know, but I do know that it is not a cut and dry issue.

Posted by: Warped Reality at March 21, 2009 6:31 PM
Comment #278234

stephen

“Nothing matters except winning, except keeping everything to yourself. Nobody can tell you what to do. It’s absolute freedom or nothing.”

actually conservatives on average give more to charity than liberals do.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=736

on the other hand liberals tend to be more generous with other peoples money.

Posted by: dbs at March 21, 2009 6:34 PM
Comment #278235

Woops! One of my links appears to be broken.

This one should work: Uyghur

Posted by: Warped Reality at March 21, 2009 6:35 PM
Comment #278244

Lee:

They will try to use this issue to disarm the american citizens. They are about as good at stopping illegals as they are at stopping drugs.

SD

“Why is it that when I read Republican and conservative comments nowadays, all too often I feel like I need a shower afterwards? I end up feeling like I’ve been mentally covered in mud, or worse.”

I don’t think that feeling is from republicans. I believe it is a natural feeling that comes from being a liberal. I could understand how one who supports baby killing and same sex marriage could feel dirty.

“It’s absolute freedom or nothing.”

That’s the same beliefs our founding fathers had, “give me liberty or give me death”. I’m not quite as anxious as you are to hand over my freedoms. Of course I have been around a lot longer than you and I understand the price that was paid for our freedoms.

Posted by: Oldguy at March 21, 2009 11:00 PM
Comment #278248

Lee,

Sorry for the lack of response but I have been in an airplane all day.

Back to Frank;

Where exactly in that article does it say that Frank ran the “brothel”, or had anything personally to do with it.

Point of fact from the very article you linked;

“On July 20, 1990, the House ethics committee absolved Frank of knowing about the prostitution ring, but recommended a reprimand for Frank for fixing Gobie’s 33 parking tickets and wrote a “misleading memo” to secure Gobie’s probation.”

So what you are saying about Barney Frank of “brothel fame” is a lie, and you, and those like you, are continuing to spread this lie without even a scintilla of proof to back up your facts in the matter.

Barney Frank is gay. Barney Frank had an affair with a “gay” prostitute.
Barney Frank didn’t run around on his wife, or have sex with a minor, OR run a gay prostitution ring, OR have knowledge of a gay prostitution ring being run from his house.

Those are the facts.

If you guys are so incapable of getting something this simple correct, please, tell me again why I should believe anything that anybody on the right says or writes.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 22, 2009 12:19 AM
Comment #278249

Oldguy, you’re the best.

If you want to believe Frank didn’t know what was going on in his own house thats fine. He was absolved by the uncorrupt congress so I guess that means he really didn’t know.
I actually forgot about that scandal, I was pretty young but remember that fool with cameras in his face. What state keeps re-electing this guy? He must be bringing home major pork to low income households, because if not for uneducated voters he’d be unemployed.

Posted by: mike at March 22, 2009 1:51 AM
Comment #278251

Mike, Barney Frank actually represents some of the wealthiest households in the country. The northern portion of Massachusetts’ fourth district runs from the affluent enclave of Brookline through the Route 128 technology corridor.

The only low-income area of his district is the southernmost part, which includes the South Coast region of Massachusetts, namely the cities of Fall River and New Bedford. That region always relied on the fishing industry for its economy. Recently, the effects of 500 years of overfishing have finally taken their toll and the area is trying to diversify its economy away from fishing. Nevertheless, by Massachusetts’ standards it is one of the lower-income regions of the commonwealth. Today, its power in the House of Representatives is diluted because it is divided amongst three different congressional districts, including Frank’s.

In any case, the people who reelect Barney Frank are definitely not voting for him because of pork. This is one of the most liberal regions of the country, and it is befitting that it is represented by a very liberal representative. If Rep. Frank stopped doing what he is doing now, then he would soon be unemployed. However, Rep. Frank knows better than to betray the voters who sent him to Congress, thus he is unabashedly liberal.

Posted by: Warped Reality at March 22, 2009 2:58 AM
Comment #278258

oldguy-
What do you gain from such words? What does your party gain? You think you’re fighting a culture war? No, you’re competing for adherents to a philosophy. Few people with any serious convictions will bow down to somebody who’s bestowing slime and manure upon them, rhetorically speaking, even if they have a point. Who do you listen to, a friend or a foe?

If the Republicans do not re-establish a friendly relationship with the rest of the country, the best outcome will be that the party and its principles remain poorly supported for the forseeable future. Worse yet, it might become a political philosophy which encourages the very kind of disunity and discord that its founders sought to end. This is still the party of Lincoln, right?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 22, 2009 9:45 AM
Comment #278259

Lee,
Why I like your title I do believe that if this is the best that the Conservatives have to offer than the Republicans are in trouble in 2010 and 2012. And frankly speaking I expect better from those on the Right Side of the Poliical Debate in America. For why I may not be able to say anything about why the Republicans in Congress did not speak up during the stimilus bill about using the money to make Americas’ Local and States Energy Efficient vs. the Federal Government and Society. I do believe that the Best and the Brightest needs to come down from the clouds they have been living in.

For why I may not comment on how and why I know President Obama is Politically Unalienable Correct that America can build a Sustainable Society. After his proformance on Jay Lemo last Thursday I do believe that the President did say something to Jay about having electric cars that you could drive home that would allow you sell the excess electric to the power grid. So I have to wonder where the Best and Brightest of Americas’ Business and Political World given the Wall Street Screw Up over AIG.

For ask your children and grandchildren what would happen to them if they told their peers that America could not build a better sustainable world than their parents.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 22, 2009 10:06 AM
Comment #278262

Mike,

I choose to believe that Frank was innocent because even in DC running a prostitution ring out of your house is a crime, and the House Ethics Committee isn’t the final word on prosecution.
It’s called pandering, and apparently the DC Police also didn’t find enough evidence to prosecute Frank either.

But the point isn’t just about Barney Frank.

The far right pundits seem to take great glee in guilt by innuendo.
There doesn’t need to be actual facts to accuse someone of some imagined crime, and the sheep that hang on every syllable these bozos utter just sit and nod their heads in agreement without actually taking the time, or even wanting to know the truth.

(Enter your favorite right wing pundit’s name here) said it, and repeated it aud nauseum, so it has be true.

Make no mistake, these folks don’t actually love their country.
They do this for a buck.
If there wasn’t tons of money to be made in being controversial these people would barely have the talent to sell shoes.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 22, 2009 11:48 AM
Comment #278268

SD:

“What do you gain from such words?”

Well, young fella, you brought up the need for a shower. I just tried to help you find the reason to take one.

But, I do have a question: how many who post on this site are not american citizens? It seems to me that you should at least live here and be able to vote to voice opinion about our government. Either some on this site are foreigners or they are americans who lack an understanding of the english language.

Rocky:

“There doesn’t need to be actual facts to accuse someone of some imagined crime, and the sheep that hang on every syllable these bozos utter just sit and nod their heads in agreement without actually taking the time, or even wanting to know the truth.”

This statement is amazing. For the past 8 years we have seen the left attack everyone who believes differently from their liberal ideals. To the extent they quote the Daily Kos, and repeat all talking points. It has been a game at my house to figure out the daily talking points of the dems. If one makes a statement, it is repeated by every talking head on every network news show. How many people have the liberals tried to destroy, simply for stating their beliefs. Example: Joe the plumber, Palin and her family.

Posted by: Oldguy at March 22, 2009 2:24 PM
Comment #278269

oldguy,

“It seems to me that you should at least live here and be able to vote to voice opinion about our government.”

So what you’re saying is this precludes you from commenting on the politics of other countries?

Yeah, right.

Joe the plumber and Palin put themselves into the spotlight, and knew the job was dangerous when they took it.
While I disagree with the scrutiny that was placed on Palin’s family, I do believe that Obama, and McCain faced the same.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 22, 2009 2:43 PM
Comment #278270

Oh, and nobody that disagreed the Bush policies was labeled a terrorist sympathizer, or accused of treason.

Keep dreaming the dream oldguy.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 22, 2009 2:47 PM
Comment #278274

oldguy-
There’s this blog called Eschaton, run by a guy named Duncan Black, who goes by the handle “Atrios”. He’s an economist by trade. There are many people who claim that they couldn’t see it coming. But when Countrywide and the others cratered, he did. He predicted the banks would begin to collapse, that the crap would just come down all around.

Now, he’s liberal, and as sharped tongue of a commentator as anybody out there. But here’s the thing: his reputation isn’t built on that rhetoric, but the fact that he knows his stuff.

This is Talking Points Memo. This is the site that broke the attorneys firing scandal. They’re perpetually looking into both Democrats and Republican’s business in Washington, digging up the facts, digging up the articles.

This is FiveThirtyEight. He pretty much nailed the election with his intense number crunching on the 2008 elections.

These are but three of the blogs Democrats frequented in the last election. But what’s their common feature? A Wonkish analytical approach to the facts. You could call it the reality-based community.

Democrats are not naive. Their recent history, over the last couple decades, has not been a gentle one. Now they’re edgier than they used to be, and more liberal now (or at least openly so), but there’s one common element: we are skeptical of everybody.

All three sites are fully willing to take samples off of Obama’s feet of clay. Hell, you look at DailyKos, the folks you paint as just being apologists, and you’ll find Geithner doesn’t have all that many friends there.

You complain about Palin and Joe the Plumber. I could recount people who had far less of a media profile, who the Republicans simply tore to peaces. What about Graeme the Accident Victim? What about Cindy, the grieving mother? What about all the soldiers you folks called phony for criticizing a war they earned the right to criticize?

The worst part is, you folks didn’t wait for the facts to tear them down. Now you’ll probably cite Trig Palin as evidence that we’re all demonspawn, but the fact is, there was intense debate about the merit of those charges, not to mention debate about whether we should get into that kind of attacks at all.

Beyond that, though, Republicans were naive to think that nobody would take a potential VP candidate and not factcheck and research their past. Palin was a disaster in part because she had so many skeletons in her closet, which the party’s mythology around her as some sort of corruption fighter didn’t make her any less inviting as a target.

And Joe the Plumber? I mean come on, after John McCain mentions him almost two dozen times, you didn’t think the media wouldn’t want to know what his name really was, and whether he was a plumber?

The problem is, Republicans have unrealistic expectations about the half-life of air-dropped media figures in a time where people have Google at their fingertips.

You don’t do yourself any favors by emulating the Republican pundits. They’re hopelessly behind the times and the technology. They think it’s neat that they now twitter, yet they use the blogs as just another channel for the same old Columnist/Talk Radio BS.

The advantage of this medium is being able to find out useful information quickly, but you can’t merely tune yourself back into the echo chamber and expect to out-manuever Democrats who have no problem in the agile use of the medium.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 22, 2009 8:16 PM
Comment #278278

Stephen,

Gee, I’m in awe.
You might be the best and the brightest if the New York Times editorial page, manned by a wonkish bunch of fanatical liberals, has run panic over their fear that you and your team are overwhelmed.

Posted by: LEE Jamison.com at March 22, 2009 8:57 PM
Comment #278279

President Obama IS an “air-dropped political figure”. He just had a very powerful, very persistent, set of publicists, and a bunch of media figures so desperate for a lite-socialist American politician who could be sold to the public they were overwhelmed by their own hope.

He was not an experienced political figure. He still is not an experienced political figure.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 22, 2009 9:06 PM
Comment #278281

stephen

the problem with the democratic party is that it’s gone to far left. obama got elected by running towards the center. many of the seats you picked up from republicans, were picked up by blue dogs. people don’t want liberal stephen. had obama been honest about what his plans for this country were he’d have never been elected. now he’s gonna push the liberal agenda through even if it bankrupts the country. eventually you’re going to run out of other peoples money, and then were all screwed.

Posted by: dbs at March 22, 2009 9:13 PM
Comment #278282

Rocky Marks,

So what you are saying about Barney Frank of “brothel fame” is a lie, and you, and those like you, are continuing to spread this lie without even a scintilla of proof to back up your facts in the matter.

Your defense of Barney shines a light on Barney’s problems. There was a prostitution service being run out of the congressman’s HOME. You say he’s innocent because he didn’t KNOW about it. He also didn’t KNOW his buddies, who were being paid millions of dollars to run Fannie Mae, were contributing to a looming crisis. He didn’t KNOW his efforts to castrate the office that regulated Fannie would further contribute to that crisis. Your whole thesis on Barney Frank is that he doesn’t KNOW.

Now, this man who falls in love with his (and our) worst enemies and lets them run roughshod over him (and us), is the chairman of one of the most important committees in the legislative branch. He is too blind to his own foibles not to make a fool of himself and those who stand with him.

And, Rocky, the best recommendation you can give him is that he is innocent because he “didn’t KNOW”. By that standard there are D.C. puppy dogs as qualified for his job as he is.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 22, 2009 9:26 PM
Comment #278287

Oh, and Rocky-

Make no mistake, these folks don’t actually love their country.
They do this for a buck.
If there wasn’t tons of money to be made in being controversial these people would barely have the talent to sell shoes.
I DO love my country, not, by the way, for the skies or amber waves of grain or the mountains or the cultures or any of that crap other nations have in great abundance.

I love the United States of America strictly for the promise held in the hope that ordinary people, moderately well educated, can read in the Constitution the limits of powers granted to their government, and hope that those limits will be well enough protected by the diligence of a wary and untrusting public that potential tyrants can be held at bay.

I fear nothing more than the government that no longer respects those limits. If this nation’s government is freed from its limits by the “needs” of dangerous times the entity to which I owe allegience will have died.

As a citizen, then, I take very seriously the oath our elected office holders take. It is the ideal contained in the Constitution I identify as the country, not the land, not the people, not some political assertion made for expedience’s sake by some microscopic conclave of nine fallible, corruptible human beings, that I love. It is that ideal that holds the best hope for opportunity for all human beings.

I think most conservatives, as I know the term, feel as I do.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 22, 2009 9:50 PM
Comment #278292

SD

Lofty words for someone who was , what, in gradeschool when Jimmy Carter and his merry band of dems led us down the same path.

Is it just me, or am I seeing terror develope in the ranks of liberals. The senate blames the house, the house blames the senate, BHO and his secretaries blame the congress and the congress blame BHO. Dodd is worried about loosing his seat and I believe there are a lot more worried about the 2010 election. Prominate liberal supporters of BHO are questioning his policies and he’s only been in office 2 months. What’s it going to be like at the end of a year? As I said before, this is a circus.

BHO is trapped: he must pass every liberal, socialist agenda his supporters want, because that is what he promised them. He is in constant campaign mode and has to go on nightime comedy shows to try to convince the american people he is not destroying their nation. Pelosi and Reid are as far left as they come and every time they pass a bill, he will sign it without knowing the damage it will cause. He is overwhelmed and has absolutly no idea what he is doing. He promised change, but I don’t think it is the change the american people were looking for. His AG has all but stopped the protection of our borders and just because we have an x-muslim in office, that will not be enough to stop us from being attacked again. How will you on the left respond to hundreds or even thousands of americans being killed in another attack? Will you weep for the slain countrymen as you have weeped for the terrorist at gitmo?

Posted by: Oldguy at March 22, 2009 10:49 PM
Comment #278298

Lee,

“Your defense of Barney shines a light on Barney’s problems.”

My defence of Barney Frank is only having to do with the lie that he ran a gay brothel from his house. He did not.
I specifically didn’t defend him on the “Fannie Mae” debacle because that wasn’t my point.

My point was, as attributed to Mark Twain;

“The history of our race, and each individual’s experience, are sown thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.”

It has been nearly 20 years since the gay prostitute thing was debunked yet it is still brought up as if it were true and it happened yesterday. It is as if it is the only thing Frank has done until the Fannie Mae thing.

“The truth has been killed, and the lie is immortal.”

Lee, you only need to look as far as oldguy’s 10:49pm post to see what I am talking about.

Look, I listen to Hannity and Rush on a regular basis, and from this I know for certain that “the truth has been easily killed, and the lies are immortal”.
I read the Huffington Post, but I also read Hugh Hewitt. I listen to Stephenie Miller, but I also listen to Dennis Prager.
I didn’t just pull my conclusions out of thin air, I got them from reading and listening to people for the last 57 years.

BTW,

“I think most conservatives, as I know the term, feel as I do.”

I think that most people in this country feel as you do about this country, yet to listen to most conservatives, they, and they alone, hold the franchise on these feelings.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 23, 2009 12:14 AM
Comment #278299

You tell me I’m about as middle of the road as it gets, Hillary telling china the economy is more important than human rights, Canada telling Obama to do you know what with fair trade and Russia bragging about rebuilding there nuclear arms and Iran shooting down Obama on a having a Talk with them and more and more two month report card on foreign policy D.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at March 23, 2009 12:38 AM
Comment #278308

Rodney,
Why I will let President Obama defend his own record, but don’t you think pissing off all the other Pundits in the World is a good way to bring change to Washington? Do you really expect the Hard Left and/or Hard Right of Society will ever admit that they are wrong? Nay, I give President Obama a C for having enough courage as the Leader of the Free World to at least address the tough issues that “The Good Old Boys” of the 20th Century were scared to even discuss in public.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 23, 2009 3:56 AM
Comment #278318

Rocky,

It has been nearly 20 years since the gay prostitute thing was debunked yet it is still brought up as if it were true and it happened yesterday. It is as if it is the only thing Frank has done until the Fannie Mae thing.
The only thing “debunked” was assertions it could be proven Barney KNEW there was a call-boy service being operated by his lover out of his home. Give the man power and he is his own worst enemy.

As to your conclusion about what conservatives believe, there is a distinct difference. Liberals will accept decisions of the Supreme Court as a legitimate tool for amending the Constitution. They are not. Their insistance otherwise merely allows a president and Senate to seat co-conspirators in the nation’s highest court to rubber stamp their incremental graspings for our power.

They make the Supreme Court nothing more than another hotbed of political hacks, and the Constitution a list of vague suggestions.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 23, 2009 8:55 AM
Comment #278320

Rodney

You are more gracious the me, I would give him an F. The whole premise of his administration is advancing a liberal agenda and destroying the independence of america. Hillary is nothing more than a mouthpiece to turn america into an extension of europe.

As I said before, BHO has no executive experience, but he uses his successes which is campaigning. Therefore, he is in perpetual campaign mode to continue telling america where we need to go, but with no plan on how to get there. His goal is only to make us a socialist nation, (depending on government for the bread we eat and the roof over our head) as fast as he can. Proof of that is the fact that BHO is going to announce a plan to limit exec. pay for all companies, whether they take bailouts or not. This has made France very happy, as if we care what the frogs think. What comes next, limiting the amount of money the hollywood crowd makes. Then perhaps limit the pay small business owners can make.

His “card check” will allow the government to set the terms for collective barganing between unions and companies. The unions simply send in the government, like a pitbull, to set the terms of the agreement.

As far as I am concerned; gun control, business control, health control, higher taxes, refusal to open oil fields, bowing at the altar of global warming, and shutting down illegal alien measures adds up to an anti-american move to destroy america, as we know it.

Posted by: Oldguy at March 23, 2009 9:50 AM
Comment #278321

I’m glad I am old and I remember america when when it was a great nation. I trust God will not allow me to see the death of our nation.

Posted by: Oldguy at March 23, 2009 9:54 AM
Comment #278325

Ok you Two I’ve Upgraded Obama to a C , Hillary and the other staff know better and still get a D. :)

Posted by: Rodney Brown at March 23, 2009 10:29 AM
Comment #278327

Lee,

“The only thing “debunked” was assertions it could be proven Barney KNEW there was a call-boy service being operated by his lover out of his home.”

So I can only assume that innuendo is good enough for you?

Barney Frank, a gay male, had an affair with a gay male prostitute.
The gay male prostitute had sex for money with other gay males while living at Barney Frank, also a gay male’s house.
Therefore Barney Frank, a gay male, HAD TO KNOW that there was a gay male prostitution service being run out of his house.


“Liberals will accept decisions of the Supreme Court as a legitimate tool for amending the Constitution.”

Pot meet kettle.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at March 23, 2009 10:59 AM
Comment #278357

You might be a redneck,…..If you worry a lot about Barney Frank and his houseboys…or perhaps a bit repressed or latent says Dr. Freud. What is it with Republicans and sexuality? They spend great deals of time and money prosecuting and hiding it.:)

Posted by: gergle at March 23, 2009 4:24 PM
Comment #278363

Rocky,

Everybody KNOWS that Gary Condit killed Chandra Levy. Oops, another theory shot all to hell.

Posted by: gergle at March 23, 2009 5:02 PM
Comment #278403

Rodney,
I’ll agree with you now. However, guys keep speaking out on how Bad President Obama is doiung because if he is pissing off both the Hard Left and Hard Right of Society than apparently he is doing something right.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 24, 2009 12:48 AM
Comment #278414

Rocky,

Maybe the question should be “What is it with the accusations Democrats fling at Republicans about sexuality?”. In my college years I had two college roomates who were gay. They were both fine people. One of them, my best friend, died of AIDS in 1984, as did a great many of my other friends over the course of the ’80s and ’90s.

Though I am opposed to gay marriage because it is obviously NOT innocently intended to provide a stable legal framework for monogamous relationships but, rather, to undermine the pricipally religious institution evolved across human civilizations for the rearing of children, I am highly supportive of establishing a statutory civil framework for such monogamous households.

I attended Methodist colleges, expecting to continue on to a career in Methodist ministry. My experience wih my roommates caused me to question much of what I had been taught growing up. In theological papers I addressed the issue of the supposed “evil” of homosexuality, arguing that, to the extent one’s sexual orientation is imprinted by nature (and in later theses even by experiences imposed upon a person, but not of the individual’s making) the attractions they feel are a part of God’s will for that person.

I personally believe what is abhorrent to God (speaking here as a believer rather than in the civil context of a political commentator) is not sexual orientation, nor even whether one will take up the mantle of sexual experience with one of the same sex, but the use of another person as a toy, an interchangeable, de-personalized tool for pleasure. That dehumanization is instrumental in all forms of evil, from Ponzi scemes, to exploitation of illegal immigrants, to larceny, to robbery, to rape, and to murder.

It is telling that the activist gay community has not taken this argument to heart. Instead, they have insisted that gay promiscuity itself should be a legally recognized, legally protected lifestyle of choice. To that my answer is “NO”.

But what of Barney Frank? Read what I said before. Was it really about his being gay? No. It was about his being a poor judge of character and a poor judge of situations. It was about his seeming ability to weave a fantasy world he mistakes for the real world. When he acts upon the fantasy he does harm in the real world.

Misdirect all you wish from the bigotries the left has for what the right supposedly believes. Barney Frank’s unfitness for his powers has nothing to do with with his sexual urges. It has to do with his capacity for sober judgement. As we have seen most recently from his proclivity for precipitous action in the AIG situation, he simply does not have the capacity to be deliberative and steady in his use of power.

Barney Frank is not dangerous because he’s gay. He’s just dangerous.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 24, 2009 9:57 AM
Comment #278415

Oops, that last post was directed at Gergle’s comments.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 24, 2009 10:06 AM
Comment #278422

Oldguy-
Make no mistake: I could not wait for the Bush Administration and its record of failure and malfeasance to be over. But I never doubted the greatness of my country, nor its potential.

If America becomes a socialist nation, it will be because Republicans and Right Wingers became so dedicated to stopping liberalism, that they failed to see that it’s liberalism that stops socialism.

Socialism is what results when the stresses of failures of the capitalist system become so great for the masses that they, mistaken or not, seek government’s heavy hand to essentially control the economy; not merely guide or regulate, control.

Liberalism is lighter. It shares some of the interventional spirit of socialism, but it’s got a gentler hand. We won the Cold War under a liberal Congress, and laws much more liberal than those you folks call socialist. But most people believe that America’s triumph was a triumph of a capitalist economy. And it was.

Under socialism, Capitalism is strictly constrained. In America, we saw much less of that constraint. Free markets determined much, if not all of the prices.

What Republicans fail to realize is that Liberalism prevents the grievances of the less individually powerful and wealthy persons in our society from becoming so strong and bitter that people avail themselves of more brutal responses. It’s a release valve, not a tipping point.

If Republicans get in the way, all they do is force people further towards the breaking point, because nobody much likes your party or those who you’re fighting on behalf of. You’ve broke people’s patience. That tipping point has been reached and passed, and it will be harder to recreate a conservative America than it was to build it

The message is simple: either moderate, or be moderated.

Lee Jamison-
Obama came to election day after having been high profile for the four years that came before. He was introduced to the public during the last presidential election, and then started his campaign almost two years before. That is not airdropped.

Airdropped is just taking somebody from obscurity, two or three months before the election, and just throwing them into the election. Obama’s background has been covered in two best selling books. People had to look for Palin’s, and what they found, contradicted much of what she said. Obama’s face became known to the people through a tough primary campaign, during which he confronted and beat the person who was odds-on favorite to win that year.

But I guess if you admitted that, it would be one less insult you could hurl his way, or one less rationalization you could shield your party from its foolishness with.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 24, 2009 12:00 PM
Comment #278426

Stephen,

Nobody outside of the Democratic party and the state of Illinois heard of Obama before the supernova of publicity surrounding his election to the Seanate. He was manufactured front-page news.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at March 24, 2009 12:09 PM
Comment #278439

SD

Below is the definition of socialism found in the Miriam-Websters online dictionary:

so•cial•ism
Pronunciation:
\ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function:
noun
Date: 1837
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Now you say, “If America becomes a socialist nation, it will be because Republicans and Right Wingers became so dedicated to stopping liberalism, that they failed to see that it’s liberalism that stops socialism.”

BHO and the dems in congress, except for a few bluedogs, are liberal. Today Geithner and Bernanke are asking for more power to allow the government to take over, not only financial institutions who took bailouts, but any that they feel need taking over. They have already taken ownership of 90% of AIG. They want to pass government controlled health care, placing at least another 17% of our GDP under the control of politicians. By controlling Freddie and Fannie through HUD, they already created the financial problems. They want to pass the “Fairness Doctrine” in order for the government to control free speech. They, meaning liberal politicians, fail to protect our borders, with no plans to stop illegal entry. In fact they will give amnesty to 12 million illegals already in the country. They force states to pay for social programs and health care to illegals and as a result breaking the economy of states. They try to pass laws that tax successful people, thus killing any incentive to succeed. It is a constant battle against liberals to keep them from taking away our 2nd amendment rights, because an armed population is a dangerous population. SS and Medicare are in complete chaos because of the control of government. The US Postal Service and AMTRAK are continuously subsidized because they can’t be successful under government control. They have pumped billions into the public school system ($14,000 per student in DC alone) and yet they still ask for more money, because the public school system is failing. And to get to the heart of socialism, BHO himself said his goal was to redistribute wealth. They want to appoint activist judges who write law instead of interpreting it. And the list goes on and on.

Could you explain to me the difference between a liberal and a socialist? As far as I am concerned, they are one in the same. Therefore your premise that liberalism stops socialism is false.

Secondly: don’t mistake vote numbers and polls for people’s beliefs. There may have been many union members, farmers, and teachers who voted for BHO. But the American people realized the constitution gives men freedom, not tyranny. The dems will pay a high price in 2010 if they continue to push this socialist agenda.

Posted by: Oldguy at March 24, 2009 1:28 PM
Comment #278446

M. Daugherty writes; “The message is simple: either moderate, or be moderated.”

At last, a message I can clearly understand written by a liberal. Let me translate…do as we liberals say or we will force you to follow us by rule of law. We have the power and you don’t. To hell with constitutional rights, we’ll find judges who will make new law. Once we have disarmed you, taken away your right of “free speech” by regulating it to mean “free liberal speech” only, when we have taken by force your assets and income thru taxation, when we have filled the schools with teachers who will advocate socialism, when we have banned the open practice of religious speech, when we have destroyed the traditional family and their values, when we have…., we’ll consider you “moderated”.

Oldguy asks of M. Daugherty, “Could you explain to me the difference between a liberal and a socialist? As far as I am concerned, they are one in the same. Therefore your premise that liberalism stops socialism is false.”

Excellent point Oldguy and I also would like to know what differences are recognized by M. Daugherty.

Posted by: Jim M at March 24, 2009 2:02 PM
Comment #279003

Oldguy,
Considering that both of Americas’ Political Parties are limited to a Private-Public Deals I do not think you have to worry about President Obama and Congress taking over the Private Sector of Society. For why it may make good radio talk. If “We the People” are going to stay a Nation of Laws than the odds of that happening is about zero.

However, investing the Taxpayers money in the Market in a manner that will effect Fubdamental Change in the Everyday Lives of the American Citizen over time is a different question all together. Is it not?

And why the Right can attempt to call that Socialism in the 21st Century. Does any of My Peers care to debate me about what has been done by Our Leaders of the 20th Century?

For it is Capitalism at Its Best!

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 28, 2009 4:32 AM
Comment #280740

The plain truth is we don’t always vote for the best and the brightest, or as an elected man said “The breast and brightest,” So often it’s give me the good bluecollar boy who “fits in best at the pancake breakfast” as it’s said.

Posted by: Aaron Hughes at April 21, 2009 4:21 PM
Post a comment