Where were all these protesters when Bush was spending trillions on an illegal war of choice?

Huh?

Tell me!

((Now we've got the standard brain-dead Left post out of the way ....))

i fucking hate texas too

OMG!!! THOUSANDS!!! Well gosh.....that's great!!

too bad the teabaggers didn't protest 8 years of bush war spending. They might have a little more credibility.

For a moment vermin almost sounded sane, then i read he was being sarcastic. I knew better.

Nanc went. She wanted others to go but most people realize it's best to let Obama work his magic.

They really aren't Tea Parties....

I've said it before-I'll say it again, they're

TEA TANTRUMS!

You biatches on the right LOST the last 2 elections-get over it.

#5 | Posted by Shawn at 2009-07-05 12:10 AM | Reply | Flag: OUCH, HE MADE MY BRAIN WORK

Frank, I've read quotes and stories from 3 different areas of the U.S. on the tea parties. You're right, they are tea tantrums. Whiney, stupid people that never said a word when Bush took us from 5T to 11T. Not a word from them when Bush was in office about the loss of Civil Liberties. Now they're whining about that.

All the threads over the years with the righties demanding to know "what rights have you lost!" and now, now the tea parties.

Sorry, folks, but the same people that go the the Tea Parties or promote them on the DR are the same losers that whine about Obama, and kissed King George's finger.

No credibility. No thought. No continuity.

YAV - why do you not tell all of us how the current government spending under the 'O' administration is good for America.

the lefties are funny they still blame Bush for everything but when it all hits and we are all out of work we will see everybody crying the Obama blues

Go protesters! I hope they step it up a notch actually. Unfortunately, the media portrays these patriots as nutcases (i.e. extremesits, terrorists, etc. of either party) In all reality, they are an alienated people--alienated by their own government--disenfranchised by their political parties, who have become disillusioned to who a modern American is. If you don't think the media is a propaganda tool for the government, then you are an idiot.

OUCH, HE MADE MY BRAIN WORK
#8 | POSTED BY VERNON AT 2009-07-05 01:05 AM

Take some midol.

Not a word from them when Bush was in office about the loss of Civil Liberties. Now they're whining about that.

That is because the right wing pinheads have these wingbots worked up into a frenzy. Just like people that will take time out of their day to protest over a joke.

They give me a good laugh though.

the media portrays these patriots as nutcases

That is because they mostly are.

Again, $6 trillion in new debt under Bushling, unprecendented attacks on civil liberties and an expansion of the federal government by 40%.

But the pinheads on the right told these nutjobs that it was all for good causes so like good little wingbots they went along without a peep.

Patriots Huh, but when it was Bush and the republicans who were spending like drunken sailors anyone who complained were nutcases and extremists . The patriots are in uniform some where, not crying on message boards about being great Americans.

Where were all these protesters when Bush was spending trillions on an illegal war of choice? Huh? Tell me!

#1 | Posted by vernon

#17 | POSTED BY MARKH AT 2009-07-05 07:50 AM | REPLY | FLAG: Irony how sweet thou art.

Of course you lefties don't realize that without Bush's spending and ignoring the people these would have never happened.

The organization for it came out of Ron Paul's run for president.

Should there have been protest under Bush sure there should have been but there was no organization in place driving the process. Now there is.

and Ben Bernanke and the NWO yawn...

too bad the teabaggers didn't protest 8 years of bush war spending.

#5 | Posted by Shawn

I guess they were too busy on your face to worry about Bush.

It really is amusing the way people try and deflect the fact that, although Bush spent too much over the course of 8 years, Obama took that amount and quadrupled it in a few months!

Sure Bush spent too much. But it was a drop in the bucket compared to what Obama has done. Bush's spending was gradual. What triggered the current protest or "Tea Parties" is that in the last couple of months Obama has printed money faster than a Banana Republic, more than every other administration combined during the entire history of our nation. The only difference between us and a Banana Republic is that the truckloads of money Obama is printing doesn't have his face on it.....yet.

Just because people didn't protest Bush's spending, which pales in comparison to Obama's, doesn't mean they aren't legitimate in now protesting Obama's spending. The argument that the protesters aren't entitled to protest Obama because they didn't protest Bush is like a husband telling a wife "You didn't complain enough when I drank too much, so now you have no right to protest that I'm shooting heroin," or "You didn't try and stop me from disciplining our child by spanking, so now you have no right to be upset with me for beating the tar out of her."

If you read the article and listen to the protesters, you will find that they are upset at politicians, both democrat and republican, that engage in out of control spending. They are upset at what Bush did, but Obama's response of printing trillions of dollars in a couple of months is so wildly out of control that something has to be done. The politicians are not listening. What can we do to get their attention? The Tea Parties are an attempt.

This isn't about Bush or Obama!
They are merely "facemen" for the real men in power.

Presidents garner public approval/blame & are voted in and out of office, while those behind the scenes who control finance (in America) continue to lurk in the shadows regardless of who is POTUS.

But keep up those partisan arguments 'cause they seem to be making a real difference.

It's like sitting in a burning house while the flames are growing around you and you're arguing about whether to break out a window or try and make it out the door.

Where were all these protesters when Bush was spending trillions on an illegal war of choice? Huh? Tell me!

#1 | Posted by vernon

they were at work

At RNC headquarters. GOPpers fully supported Bush's every mistake. It's only when a Dem is in Office that deficits matter. Teabaggers like our own aflac are Republican shills masquerading as "conservatives".

"Sure Bush spent too much. But it was a drop in the bucket compared to what Obama has done. "

Bush's deficits were the largest the world had ever known. If any teabaggers can prove they knew larger debts would come, they'd have a point. The fact they've only become aware of deficits now that the President has a (D) after his name is suspect.

didn't the democraps control all spending bills during the bush years?

The hypocrisy from both sides is what I find astounding. Yes the right didn't complain very loudly when bush spent like a drunk sailor, but the left sure did.

Now Obama is doubling the national debt that Bush doubled and the left thinks it is ok but the right is up in arms.

When the left complained about Bush, it wasn't about the spending so much as it was about what the spending was for, namely, the war. It was more an opposition to the war than an opposition to spending. The left sure wasn't complaining when Bush pressed through that first "bailout" plan right before he left office. What a joke that was. McCain first suspended his campaign to address the emergency "bailout" situation, and then voted for the damn thing. What an idiot. But for Obama to come in now and quadruple it is way out of line.

If we don't protest now, when shall we? Shall we print up a few trillion more dollars first? If we wait and object at that point, people will say "Well, you didn't object 11 trillion dollars ago, why are you objecting now." It's insanity and it needs to stop.

Please don't tell Obama what comes after a trillion...

" It was more an opposition to the war than an opposition to spending."

Huh? It was always about the deficits.

"If we don't protest now, when shall we?"

A few years ago, the answer was not until a guy with a (D) behind his name gets into office.

"Bush's deficits were the largest the world had ever known. If any teabaggers can prove they knew larger debts would come, they'd have a point. The fact they've only become aware of deficits now that the President has a (D) after his name is suspect."
#25 | Posted by Danforth

Bush's deficits WERE but are no longer. Obama's ARE and not by any small number. The so called by liberals "teabaggers" DO have that point you are failing to notice. The US wan't yet broke under Bush, but as Obama, himself now says, we are BROKE (now that i have spent trillions in just a few short months and will continue to do so) and you have to tighten your belts.

"The US wan't yet broke under Bush"

Flag: Can't read a balance sheet.

Okay Danforth, so if a Republican is elected in 2012 and he continues to spend like Obama, then it will be okay to protest? Or will you say "You didn't protest under Obama, so you can't protest now."

In fact, I protested Bush's spending when he pushed that "bailout" through. Many people protested it. If you will recall, the Country was very divided over it. After Bush passed the torch to Obama who then increased the spending frenzy, the same people who protested Bush's "bailout" are now protesting Obama's out of control spending. Since we protested someone with an R and someone with a D, does that make it okay?

Danforth wrote:

'" It was more an opposition to the war than an opposition to spending."

Huh? It was always about the deficits.'

Well Danforth, if it was always about the deficits, why aren't you upset about the deficits now? Now that they're quadrupled in the course of a few months.

It's because it was never about the deficits for you. The only way to reconcile all of your postings is to conclude you are against the war and for socialist spending.

OUCH, HE MADE MY BRAIN WORK
#8 | Posted by vernon

Someone got a reading off Noodle Boy's "brain"?
And they said it couldn't be done.
Pshaw!
We have a Nobel Prize winnah!

didn't the democraps control all spending bills during the bush years?

#26 | Posted by semtex111

Most of the time. Still doesn't excuse him for signing the bills.

"why aren't you upset about the deficits now?"

I am. Haven't you been paying attention?

"It's because it was never about the deficits for you."

Is the only way you can debate to put words in the other's mouth? Read my post history; I've been railing against deficit spending all my time on this blog.

"The only way to reconcile all of your postings is to conclude you are against the war and for socialist spending."

Nice try, but I was against deficits even when the guy had an (R) after his name. Therein lies one major difference between you and I.

"didn't the democraps control all spending bills during the bush years?" #26 | Posted by semtex111

"Most of the time."
~Sniper

Snippy somehow got a hold of Vernon's calculator.

Okay Danforth. So you are against deficit spending, but you are also against people protesting deficit spending. Unless of course you deem them worthy of being allowed to protest based on what they did eight years ago. I get it now.

"Okay Danforth. So you are against deficit spending, but you are also against people protesting deficit spending. "

No, I'm suspect when folks claim they're protesting deficits when they never cared about record deficits while a Republican was in office. Aren't you?

That be reicht this hair nonsense gonna be stopping after the White Power Tee Partays! Ain't a gonna be no more of this hair taxations with no kinds of representations by them sochallests and leberalls. We is a gonna march and we is a gonna chants the DRILL THE BABBY DRILL!!!! PALIN & BACHSMANN IN THE 2000 & 12!!!! DRILL THE BABY DRILL!!! WHITE POWER TO THE TEE PARTAYS!!! MEGA DILDOOS!!!!! TERRORISTS!!!! SOCHALLESTS!!!!! SUE PALIN SUE!!!! WHITE POWER TO THE TEE PARTAYS!!!!

No, Danforth, I'm not suspect about protesting deficits now when they weren't protested before. This is the first time in our nation's history that eight years worth of deficits were quadrupled in four months. We just printed up trillions of dollars and there is no end in sight. Our economy is continuing to rapidly decline and unemployment is increasing. We just passed a "climate" bill that is going to increase prices we pay across the board, for food, energy, everything, when we can barely afford things they way they are now.

People who were upset but still apathetic about the deficit before are now scared witless. People who have never protested before are now living in mortal terror that the economy and out of control deficit spending is going to wipe out everything they've worked for and, with no end to the spending in sight, they are finally motivated to get off their asses and protest.

You think people are getting all this worked up and putting their time and energy into going to a Tea Party is just because Obama is a democrat? LOL No, the reason they're doing it is because they're scared beyond lucidity. These people are risking political correctness and being called racist for speaking out against a popular president, etc., to stand up and say "Enough already! Stop the spending!" The protesters are risking a lot to try and save our country. They are true patriots.

If my spouse spent $100 of money we don't have, I would be upset, but I wouldn't pick a huge fight over it. But if my spouse then spent another $10,000 in money we don't have, well, I would protest. And it would be idiotic for my spouse to say "How come you're complaining now? You didn't complain when I spent the $100. It's the same analogy with the current deficit spending.

"You think people are getting all this worked up and putting their time and energy into going to a Tea Party is just because Obama is a democrat?"

Yep. Especially given their lack of focus on the exact nature of their protests. But it is nice that Repubs have placed protests into their playbook.

"I'm not suspect about protesting deficits now when they weren't protested before."

Imagine my surprise.

"This is the first time in our nation's history that eight years worth of deficits were quadrupled in four months."

What math are you using to come to that conclusion?

"We just passed a "climate" bill..."

No, one aspect of it passed the House. That's a far cry from becoming law.

"You think people are getting all this worked up and putting their time and energy into going to a Tea Party is just because Obama is a democrat?"

I would bet the percentages of Republicans at these events greatly outweigh their representation in society.

"...the reason they're doing it is because they're scared beyond lucidity."

Well, Bush drove the ship of state off the cliff before handing off the steering wheel. I'm scared, too.

"These people are risking political correctness..."

They're risking ridicule. Big deal.

"...and being called racist for speaking out against a popular president..."

Anyone calling someone else a racist simply for disagreement is the actual racist. Although we've both seen where it crosses the line.

"The protesters are risking a lot to try and save our country. They are true patriots. "

Certainly a change from when war protesters were called traitors.

"If my spouse spent $100 of money we don't have, I would be upset, but I wouldn't pick a huge fight over it. But if my spouse then spent another $10,000 in money we don't have, well, I would protest. And it would be idiotic for my spouse to say "How come you're complaining now? You didn't complain when I spent the $100. It's the same analogy with the current deficit spending."

Well...no, for several reasons. First, the scale is way off; even by your own estimates it would be $400, not $10,000, and you're ignoring the "you go, girl" you gave him by reelecting Bush after the $100 spending spree.

No, Danforth, I'm not suspect about protesting deficits now when they weren't protested before. This is the first time in our nation's history that eight years worth of deficits were quadrupled in four months.

I hope someone sets this person straight on the facts.

Constant harping on this silly talking point is annoyingly dishonest.

Of course this one's not suspect now, though the interviews with the TEA folks make it clear this isn't anything more than they are pissed that now Democrats hold power.

"I hope someone sets this person straight on the facts."

Isn't that what Danforth keeps trying (and trying and trying) to do? Doesn't matter anyway. Protests are inherently fueled by feelings and perceptions, not by facts.

YAV you are seriously out of touch. No one is pissed that Democrats hold power. What we are pissed about is what is being done with the power. I had no problem with how Democrats used their power under Bill Clinton. I do have a problem with out of control deficit spending. I had a problem with Bush pushing through the first "bailout" and I have a problem with Obama accelerating the bailouts and deficit spending.

This is not about Democrat or Republican, and the fact that you keep saying it is does not make it so. You refuse to address the real problem, the out of control deficit spending. You and your ilk make biting remarks about Bush's spending, but are painfully silent about Obama's spending. Now THAT is about party. What a pity.

"Isn't that what Danforth keeps trying (and trying and trying) to do?"

Remind me...what, again, is the definition of insanity...?

#47

Love the irony.

Thanks for playing.

"YAV you are seriously out of touch. No one is pissed that Democrats hold power."

Talk about oxymoronic statements!

"Remind me...what, again, is the definition of insanity...?" - Danforth

The other side, of the thin line, from genius. Since I was told, multiple times, that I am a thin line away from genius, I always thought that referred to me.

But your efforts are definitely humorous. I do admire your persistence.

"but are painfully silent about Obama's spending"

Have I not said this loud enough? I hate this overborrowing our way out of an overborrowing crisis. I think it's a huge mistake. We're in for a nasty day of reckoning, only exacerbated by putting off the truth.

That being said, I wish Obama had inherited Clinton's economy rather than the meltdown Bush left behind.

On the positive side, a lot of rightwingers have become smarter about deficits since Obama got elected.

I do admire your persistence.

I agree and am glad for Danforth's contribution. He's fair, even when I don't agree, and he's factual.

Ailtd, Yav,

Thanks, gents. I appreciate that.

"and he's factual"

Proof?

Proof?

Ha!

Outta here. Meeting friends for a few beers :)

"Have I not said this loud enough? I hate this overborrowing our way out of an overborrowing crisis."

Okay, Danforth, so what are we supposed to do about it? If we protest, we're accused of being disingenuous. What now? If I'm a registered democrat is it okay for me to protest? If I protested Bush's policies is it okay then? And if I don't fall under those categories, what am I supposed to do? Sit quietly and not protest?

"so what are we supposed to do about it?"

Protest away, just begin all your signs with "Yea, I shoulda been here eight years ago, but..."

Fair enough?

While we're at it should we can throw in some reparations for all the other areas in which we've fallen short over the years? And all those people that initially supported the war, but now they don't, should they all start their protests with saying "I shoulda been here eight years ago, but..."?

"And all those people that initially supported the war, but now they don't, should they all start their protests with saying "I shoulda been here eight years ago, but..."?"

Sure. And I'll bring my "I agreed with Afghanistan, but not Iraq" sign, and my "Deficit Hawk-NATIVE" bumper sticker.

"You refuse to address the real problem, the out of control deficit spending."

Fighting two wars has a tendency to do that to a budget....especially when a huge tax cut was passed too. Let the tax cuts expire, let's get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and then I think we'll find everything will pretty much fall back where it belongs. Unless you make enough to actually be effected by the expiration of the Bush tax cuts then you are fighting a fight which isn't even yours. Let the rich folks fight their own battles.

i fucking hate texas too

#2 | Posted by badgerwest

well GOOD for you.
dont ever set one foot here then or you are a hypocrite
unless you are one of those WHORES who are here because we are not going bankrupt and taxing your ass out of a job

I was going to scan the thread but when I saw that dan and danni were here at the end
HOW could I resist? LOL

yeah danni....thats right..just like all of the people on tv that you are parroting..
its all bush's fault...
he is why the deficit is being quadrupled..
sure makes sense to me....

You biatches on the right LOST the last 2 elections-get over it.

#7 | Posted by frankf55 at 2009

oh we are over it my friend, but that wont stop us from doing what the declaration of independence tells us is not only our duty but our right..

AfK I live in Texas now for the time being. When are you coming to Laredo so we can have a few beers and you can show me those awards bwahahahaha. I guess you better stop by the trophy shop!!

here is the best place to be reminded of this

the declaration of independence is THE OTHER document that obama will have to ignore as there are words there that I read on the 4th that are as important today as they were then

"that whereever any form of government becomes distructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it......but when a long train of abuses and userpation, it is the right, it is thier duty, to throw off such government and to provide new guards for thier future security"

and isnt it ironic that most of the people here are against theses words...too bad

DONT TREAD ON ME

AfK I live in Texas now for the time being. When are you coming to Laredo so we can have a few beers and you can show me those awards bwahahahaha. I guess you better stop by the trophy shop!!

#64 | Posted by jackass at 2009-07-05

LAREDO>??>

why in the hell would I go to that slimehole???

and I am too busy printing all of the letters from former students who see my name on facebook and they are telling me just how important I was to thier life in the working world......

of course that doesnt mean I wouldnt have some 'libations' with you...
of course you pay the first round

The Crybaby Boomers legacy. We are all bums on the corner, begging for more handouts from the government.

ARGUEMENT OVER

thanks to joe biden this morning.
in interview with george he said, OF COURSE< the official 2012 campaign line about what they 'inherited' but then he made the following comment

"economy is now our responsibility"

of course with you dupes here and the staterun media that still doesnt mean anything bad will be actually thier 'fault'

That being said, I wish Obama had inherited Clinton's economy rather than the meltdown Bush left behind.

#52 | Posted by Danforth

Bush and all his dem buddies in congress.

Bush did inherit a recession from clinton and then 9-11-01 put a nail in it. How much did the market drop?

"Unless you make enough to actually be effected by the expiration of the Bush tax cuts then you are fighting a fight which isn't even yours."

Redistribution of wealth, punishing the successful for money they earned by their sweat and hard work in order to reward mediocrity is not my fight? It is the antithesis of the principles upon which this Country was founded and is the fight of every patriot.

I don't care if you want to sit around on your ass and not earn as much as I do. If you want to be idel that is one of the freedoms you can choose in this country, and it's fine with me. But don't take away my hard earned money to subsidize your laziness.

...and I am too busy printing all of the letters from former students who see my name on facebook and they are telling me just how important I was to thier life in the working world......

Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-07-05 03:34 PM |

Seriously, afkabl2, it must be so gratifying for you to now be able to read years later all your students' positive feedback as to the importance you played in each of their lives.

seriously chris

even though I used that as a point to counter another personal attack....hey ME AND SARAH have a bond...it certainly is. all those times I cashed my check and said..oh well...maybe I can pay the rent on being so influential....well it does make me feel good...

so how is your plans on getting out of california
and buds of mine out there always told me it was going to be the quakes that would get them....

"Bush and all his dem buddies in congress"

Bush was the darling of the Rs until they realized the Emperor never had any clothes in the first place. To pretend now he was buddies with the "dems" when his party controlled every committee and every agenda is laughable.

"Bush did inherit a recession from clinton"

Sorry, you flunk Econ 101. Bush's only recession was the one he left behind.

"then 9-11-01 put a nail in it. How much did the market drop?"

Even if you pin the post 9-11 lows on Clinton, the DJIA still more than doubled under Clinton, rising 150%. (Clinton, wire-to-wire, oversaw a 225% rise.) Even if you generously give Bush the post 9-11 lows as a starting point, and cut it off the day he walked out of office, his DJIA was up only 10% by comparison. (Of course. if you pin the recent lows on Bush, his DJIA dropped 12%.)

a I am too busy printing all of the letters from former students who see my name on facebook and they are telling me just how important I was to thier life in the working world......

#66 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-07-05 03:34 PM

Yeah. They see your name on face book and have "cease and desist" orders drawn up.

bullshit

that only happened a couple of times.....

AND since you are here....just thought I would post this one of several and you can read this too..
racty and others..

Thank you, sir.

On a serious note, I want you to know that there have been very few people in my life that I have valued their opinion and instruction more than yours.

For seven years, I hung on every word you gave to us. What we were able to accomplish under your guidance is one of my most proud memories. Those lessons in the band hall have crossed over in many ways to help me in my life.

I told myself if I ever got the chance to tell you, I would: Thank you.

YEAH sure I could have just written this out but I didnt and I know that I didnt and thats all that matters...

seriously chris

even though I used that as a point to counter another personal attack....hey ME AND SARAH have a bond...it certainly is. all those times I cashed my check and said..oh well...maybe I can pay the rent on being so influential....well it does make me feel good...

so how is your plans on getting out of california

and buds of mine out there always told me it was going to be the quakes that would get them....

#72 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-07-05 04:07 PM | Reply

I think every one of us remembers at least one or two special teachers we had and will remember them all our lives. Mine was a high school teacher who was able to impart her love of history. How? She took the time to make the subject interesting and made you want to learn more and pick up where she left off. Can't ask for more than that from a teacher, can you.

AFK,

Laredo is no slimehole. I have met some every friendly people here. I have been pleasantly surprised how friendly people are here. People in Cali seem to always be in a hurry but everyone here seems to care about their neighbors.

What these tea parties really are is an effort by the Republican Party to re-energize their base. They need to do SOMETHNG and not just sit around. From that point of view, it kind of misses the point to point out how stupid and hypocritical the tea parties are.

didn't the democraps control all spending bills during the bush years?

#26 | Posted by semtex111 at 2009-07-05 12:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Tell me you're kidding. You CAN NOT be that stupid!

You're joking, right?

This is not about Democrat or Republican, and the fact that you keep saying it is does not make it so. You refuse to address the real problem, the out of control deficit spending. You and your ilk make biting remarks about Bush's spending, but are painfully silent about Obama's spending. Now THAT is about party. What a pity.

#47 | Posted by YesWeCan

The truth is there. Most of us were NOT happy with Bush's spending and if you were doc and had all our remarks in archive you would see that to be true but doc would never bring that up.

There is no good to come from deficit spending by anyone. I can't do it at my home, you can't do it at your home yet some seem to think we can do it at our home.

What part of 'deficits are bad" don't you understand?

I used to think the libtards were just being hypocritical pussies. But it's not their money. We'll just kite a few more trillion from the Chinese, and hope our grandkids don't mind lower standards of living as they try to pay it back.

Gobama! Go libbies! Credit cards for everyone!

"We'll just kite a few more trillion from the Chinese, and hope our grandkids don't mind lower standards of living as they try to pay it back."

Wow, your tune sure has changed. A few short years ago, you were all gung ho for more deficits, and all against paying down the debt.

I guess Obama's election made a lot of Republicans smarter. They've all suddenly wised up to the dangers of debt!

"What part of 'deficits are bad" don't you understand?"

The part where it translates to "deficits don't matter" when an (R) is in office.

Where were all these protesters when Bush was spending trillions on an illegal war of choice?

Huh?

Tell me!

((Now we've got the standard brain-dead Left post out of the way ....))

#1 | Posted by vernon at 2009-07-04 10:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well, answer your own question.

Where were they?

GW spent pocket change in his 8 years as compared to Husseins first 5 months.

Ooops...

GW destroyed the economy in his eight years and someone had to clean up.

Oooops!

As you may recall, GW was alerted to the fact that HIS economy was in a tailspin and he and his appointees began the first bailouts in order to salvage their mess.

Boyd, you know who you are talking to.

Do you think that left wing dribble would even bring a 'slight snear' to my lip?

Maybe GW should have quit in his first term like SARAH! has. He quit drinking, so he certainly could have quit fucking America.

We'd certainly all be the better off for it.

Hussein is busy destroying this country, he is doing what his handlers taught him to do.

If you are too stupid to realize that, I pity you.

Rex-
I seriously doubt that your brain is in any way connected to your mouth.

"Hussein is busy destroying this country, he is doing what his handlers taught him to do."

Just listen to yourself, fucktard.

Limbaugh does it better than your pathetic mimicry of him, ditto-head.

Boyd, that is your problem, you fail to see reality even when it is in your face.

Hussein's time to blame Bush has run out, soon the country will turn against him.

He is the worst president in American history and everything that happens from here on out is on him, no one else.

Rex-
re: "he is doing what his handlers taught him to do."

Please do go on, Rush fart. Who are the puppet masters who control "Hussein"?

Really. List them.

I would give Hussein less then a 20% chance of making it through his 4 year term.

I would give Hussein less then a 20% chance of making it through his 4 year term.

#96 | Posted by r_zeitgeist at 2009-07-06 02:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why? Will he quit like SARAH!, or will some lunatic kill him?

You are off your game Boyd.

I tried to teach you, I really did.

But you failed as a student.

I would give Hussein less then a 20% chance of making it through his 4 year term.

#96 | Posted by r_zeitgeist at 2009-07-06 02:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why do you say that?

I would give Hussein less then a 20% chance of making it through his 4 year term.

#96 | Posted by r_zeitgeist at 2009-07-06 02:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why?

REX?

A long time ago, I thought you could be great.

But you never moved beyond the minutia and into substantive argumentation.

It's ingrained in your charachter.

I would give Hussein less then a 20% chance of making it through his 4 year term.

#96 | Posted by r_zeitgeist at 2009-07-06 02:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'd like an answer to why you think that, REX.

I would give Hussein less then a 20% chance of making it through his 4 year term.

#96 | Posted by r_zeitgeist at 2009-07-06 02:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'm serious. Why do you think that?

Do you know someone, or do you have plans about "Hussein"?

Do you think you or your ideological allies have an 80% chance of subverting US democracy by offing the elected president before his term is up, REX?

Your mouth seems to write checks your brain can't cash, REX.

Hello?

Rex?

Did you fall asleep, or are you just too whipped to type?

I guess it will remain a mystery, pussy.

Later.

FOX isn't even covering the Tea Baggers Balls. I guess Rupert got his publicity and the GOP got their two minute whine in April.

The tea baggers got played, but after 8 years of loyalty to Bush, they should be used to it.

I love how the Lefties don't welcome the Righties to the party with "about damn time you woke up about gov't spending gone awry, brother."

If they were really serious about the problem, they'd try to be inclusive instead of divisive and deflective.

In other words, they know they are wrong, their choice for leadership was wrong, but can't admit it. They have to blame someone else instead of "manning up" and just going "damn, we were wrong...let's fix this thing."

But hey, that's always separated the Right from the Left...the willingness to accept blame for one's actions vs placing the blame for one's action on some external person/factor. Simply put, the Left has never met a situation they wouldn't try to blame someone else for.

And for the pseudo-intellectuals:

Righties go "Mea culpa"
Lefties go "Non mea culpa"

The tea baggers got played, but after 8 years of loyalty to Bush, they should be used to it.

#111 | Posted by northguy3

This is how ignorant you are...

These people didn't really support Bush. They are Conservative, but never really supported Bush other than the fact he was President.

The biggest difference that you fail to see because you are so partisan, is that Obama and the Dems in Congress is that compared to Bush, they are on a wild and uncontrolled spending trip.

Einstein! When you spend on defense, the spending is temporary! When you spend domestically, it's for freaken-ever! Remember Reagan? He got an enormous amount of grief to end stupid spending. When the spending stopped, no one really missed it. It's like a drug.

So, Northguy, please get your head out of your .... and understand the difference.

Where were all these protesters when Bush was spending trillions on an illegal war of choice?

Huh?

Tell me!

#1 | Posted by vernon at 2009-07-04 10:44 PM

Teabagging.

Kinda like you and your "ladyboy-friend".

Hey "Eddie", how many Trillions of money that was accounted for got pissed away in Iraq?

That's just what was accounted for.

Hey "Eddie", how many Trillions of money that was accounted for got pissed away in Iraq?

That's just what was accounted for.

#115 | Posted by jerrytarkanian

LOL.

you people are in a perpetual state of stupidity.

Hey I like Obama too, but I don't ignore his lack of leadership! A real leader would have recognized the current spending and would have... wait for it... STOPPED IT!

LOL

Einstein! Obama increased spending!

You are lost.

One of the main attractions at the Austin "tea party"
was Joe "the plumber"

Need I say more?

i fucking hate texas too

#2 | Posted by badgerwest

And I'm sure that you have plenty of reasonable reasons why.

What these tea parties really are is an effort by the Republican Party to re-energize their base. They need to do SOMETHNG and not just sit around. From that point of view, it kind of misses the point to point out how stupid and hypocritical the tea parties are.

#79 | Posted by moder8

You're grasping at straws.

Why don't you read up on what the Tea Parties are trying to tell you.

Short version: There's too much spending in Washington. STOP IT!

understand?

BTW, the tea-partiers are not the Republican base but are actually Conservative.

I knew you wouldn't understand.

One of the main attractions at the Austin "tea party"
was Joe "the plumber"

Need I say more?

#117 | Posted by Salaryman

Joe the Plumber is smarter than Obama?

Huh?

A woman in a hot-air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered her altitude and spotted a man in a boat below.

She shouted to him, "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude."

She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be a Republican."

"I am," replied the man. "How did you know?"

"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct but I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."

The man smiled and responded, "You must be an Obama Democrat."

"I am." replied the balloonist. "How did you know?"

"Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are or where you are going. You've risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now it's my fault."

but somehow, now it's my fault."

#122 | Posted by daprof

Spot On!!!

So when are the teabaggers going to stop whining about government spending and actually start talking about what they would cut out of the budget?

So when are the teabaggers going to stop whining about government spending and actually start talking about what they would cut out of the budget?

#124 | Posted by deadarmadillo

LOL!!!

This only proves that you aren't paying attention.

Comeon! It's time to start taking responsibility as an American and fix the problems rather than electing some idiot to fix it for you!

It's time to start taking responsibility as an American and fix the problems rather than electing some idiot to fix it for you!

Posted by Eddie at 2009-07-06 01:58 PM| Reply | Flag:Doesn't Understand What a Republic Is

The part where it translates to "deficits don't matter" when an (R) is in office.

#84 | Posted by Danforth

You never heard that from me.

So when are the teabaggers going to stop whining about government spending and actually start talking about what they would cut out of the budget?

#124 | Posted by deadarmadillo

I guess when you let them up off your face.

"The tea baggers got played, but after 8 years of loyalty to Bush, they should be used to it."
#111 | Posted by northguy3

How "Olbernammesque" of you.

It's time to start taking responsibility as an American and fix the problems rather than electing some idiot to fix it for you!

Posted by Eddie at 2009-07-06 01:58 PM| Reply | Flag:Doesn't Understand What a Republic Is

#126 | Posted by kanrei

LOL!

Kanrei, I thought you were a nice guy, intelligent anyway. This is dumb attempt at a cheap shot.

LOL. Most people voted for Obama because he was the winner in the polls. That's irresponsible!

LOL. You want to try again, or should I continue to make fun of you?

#130 | Posted by Eddie at 2009-07-06 03:29 PM |

Can't win them all. I take every shot I see. Personally, I am not a fan of those "creative flagging" posts that are all the rage here, but I thought I would try and see if I could do it. It seems I can't. I failed. Sorry for the weak attempt.

For seven years, I hung on every word you gave to us.

I thought aflac taught high school.

"Most people voted for Obama because he was the winner in the polls. That's irresponsible!"

One day, perhaps, reality will catch up with this poster. Or not.

I thought aflac taught high school.

#132 | Posted by northguy3

Speaking of whom, he must be EXHAUSTED from running around at the tea party trying to look like 3 people instead of just 1. LOL!

I voted for Obama because I honestly feared McCain's health would not allow him to see 2012 and Palin would take control.

One day, perhaps, reality will catch up with this poster. Or not.

#133 | Posted by AILtd

One too many *Head--Desk*.

I tried to warn him...

"Most people voted for Obama because he was the winner in the polls. That's irresponsible!"

One day, perhaps, reality will catch up with this poster. Or not.

#133 | Posted by AILtd

Maybe, any hour now, you will read just enough posts to understand the conversation. You can post your embarrassment then or your silence will interpret the same.

I said it was real! What a moron.

So what if they weren't protesting when Bush was in office? Their point is a valid one. The fact that they are late to the game might speak to their motives for speaking out, but the fact that government spending is out of control is just that - a fact. The potential bias of the protestors doesn't doesn't taint the entire message.

Let's say I had two employees - one I liked, one I didn't like. The one I liked was stealing from the company. I never said anything about it. The one I didn't like started stealing too. I fired him for it. The firing would still be justified, because he stole from me.

Let's say I had two employees - one I liked, one I didn't like. The one I liked was stealing from the company. I never said anything about it. The one I didn't like started stealing too. I fired him for it. The firing would still be justified, because he stole from me.

#138 | Posted by joe

True. But you'd also be unethical, and subject to legal action for treating the same behavior in two employees differently.

True. But you'd also be unethical, and subject to legal action for treating the same behavior in two employees differently.

#139 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

And you wonder why companies are going overseas.

"The potential bias of the protestors doesn't doesn't taint the entire message."

You're right. I also agree where you suggested their tardiness might speak to their motives.

"The firing would still be justified, because he stole from me."

But the differentiating reason would still be dislike, not thievery.

You COULD write it up in such a way as to have the second person fired for other reasons.

One too many *Head--Desk*.

I tried to warn him...

#136 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Rogue, you fell into that one. LOL.

"You never heard that from me."

Nor did we hear post after post from you decrying deficits atop deficits. I was bleating it at every turn...where were you?

You COULD write it up in such a way as to have the second person fired for other reasons.

Posted by kanrei

St Paul used 3rd persons...

the holy trinity?

now I'm confused, too

I said it was real! What a moron.
#137 | Posted by Eddie

I guess Eddie still doesn't think he needs to be introduced to reality. I've heard that some people cope with thier inadequacies in that manner. Sad.

And you wonder why companies are going overseas.

#140 | Posted by Eddie

Because legally under employment law you have to maintain consistency in how you discipline employees for rules violations?

You're a funny little guy.

Because legally under employment law you have to maintain consistency in how you discipline employees for rules violations?

You're a funny little guy.

#147 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

No, you are right. That's the law. What I meant is that these and other laws are stacked against the corporation to the point that large corporations fair well and small business fails.

To avoid regulation, corporations go overseas.

I want to work in an environment that is regulated only by the courts as it was meant to be from the beginning. I know when I have value to my employer and will be paid more because of it.

People who don't give anything back for the money they get paid have no business working for that company.

"Let's say I had two employees...

#138 | Posted by joe"

You might as well have typed, "let's say the sun rose in the West...," or "let's say pigs could fly...."

"True. But you'd also be unethical, and subject to legal action for treating the same behavior in two employees differently."

I'd be unethical, and an asshole. I don't think I'd be subject to legal action unless it could be proven that I discriminated against the employee. Maybe he was just a bad worker. And the fact that he was stealing from the company could be offered as the legitimate reason for his firing, which is a defense to discrimination suits.

To avoid regulation, corporations go overseas.

Regulation is a big word for you, so what regulation do these corporations go overseas to avoid?

Maybe he was just a bad worker. And the fact that he was stealing from the company could be offered as the legitimate reason for his firing, which is a defense to discrimination suits.

#150 | Posted by JOE

Don't start adding qualifiers now. Based on what you originally posted, if it was proven you would be in violation of fair labor practices.

"Based on what you originally posted, if it was proven you would be in violation of fair labor practices."

Which practices would those be? I didn't add any qualifiers - the fact that he stole money was in the original example.

Regulation is a big word for you, so what regulation do these corporations go overseas to avoid?

#151 | Posted by moneywar

you're kidding, right?

Are you suggesting that employment law is extended to Indians?

What I meant is that these and other laws are stacked against the corporation to the point that large corporations fair well and small business fails.

Stacked AGAINST corporations, but they fair well, .....and small business fails?????

Let me get this straight, the laws are against the corporations so they succeed fairly well.

The laws are so against large corporations that the small business fails.

I am not suggesting anything eddy, I am asking about which laws are corporations going overseas to AVOID.

Just wanted to let you know I received my stimulus package yesterday...

It contained watermelon seeds, cornbread mix, and ten coupons to KFC. Directions were in Spanish.

Which practices would those be? I didn't add any qualifiers - the fact that he stole money was in the original example.

#153 | Posted by JOE

When you originally posted you didn't put in any qualifiers about whether one was a good worker or not, just that they both stole, and you liked one and disliked the other.

Based on your original post, firing one but not the other for exactly the same behavior is illegal under fair labor law.

Unless, of course, as an employer, you lie about what you did and why.

"When you originally posted you didn't put in any qualifiers about whether one was a good worker or not"

Stealing from your employer makes you a bad employer in my book.

"Based on your original post, firing one but not the other for exactly the same behavior is illegal under fair labor law."

Which law is that? Can you post it? I was not aware that a defense to being fired for stealing was that "someone else stole too."

I was not aware that a defense to being fired for stealing was that "someone else stole too."

#159 | Posted by JOE

If it is shown that you knew both employees were stealing, but only fired one of them for the violation, that is illegal. But I think you already know that, and are trying to do your usual little tap dance.

Just wanted to let you know I received my stimulus package yesterday...

It contained watermelon seeds, cornbread mix, and ten coupons to KFC. Directions were in Spanish.

Posted by Greatamerican

ff

If it is shown that you knew both employees were stealing, but only fired one of them for the violation, that is illegal.

I don't know about the criminal implications but it does open you up for a discrimination lawsuit if you can prove the employer knowingly treated the employees differently.

But it doesn't amount to much.....in the end all you have is an employee who was fired for stealing. You'd have to substantiate that the employer is okay with people stealing and if you don't have documentation and perhaps an employee handbook stating that stealing is a termination offense then the employer could lose in that situation.

I was bleating it at every turn..#144

Yet, so silent now...

"If it is shown that you knew both employees were stealing, but only fired one of them for the violation, that is illegal."

I'm asking which law that would be illegal under. My understanding is that you need to show more than simply "being treated differently," and instead that your different treatment was due to your belonging to some sort of group that is protected by statute.

There was a reason that Bushes numbers were so low during most of his term. The real fiscal repubs didnt like his spending. So why are you dems so suprised when the R's want to see the current POTUS stop spending like a drunken sailor out on shore leave.

You were the one's shouting how bad Bush was But this tread shows you for what you really are. You were never concerned with the defit, you are only concerned that the deficit wasnt being created by a Dem. If you cant see the mess that Obama is creating you are either not paying attention or you are part of the problem with this freeloading state he is creating.

"#157 | Posted by Greatamerican | Flag: Inaptly Named; Misnomer

"I don't know about the criminal implications but it does open you up for a discrimination lawsuit if you can prove the employer knowingly treated the employees differently.

#162 | Posted by eberly"

Is that generally true, or only if the badly treated employee is a member of a protected class?

In Oregon, an at-will employment state, generally you can fire anyone for any reason, or no reason at all.

I asked the same thing in #164. I'm no employment law expert but I don't think mere different treatment is enough (unless we are talking wages or hours), without a showing that the different treatment was due to being in a protected class.

That's my recollection too, Joe, but I don't practice employment law and it's been awhile since I studied it.

Is that generally true, or only if the badly treated employee is a member of a protected class?

I think it applies to a protected class only.

Great question.

I'm asking which law that would be illegal under. My understanding is that you need to show more than simply "being treated differently," and instead that your different treatment was due to your belonging to some sort of group that is protected by statute.

#164 | Posted by JOE

Nope. If an employee brings a wrongful termination suit against the employer, one of the first things the employer will be asked to show is that they consistently dealt with other employees for similar violations in the same way.

In most cases, especially in employment-at-will circumstances, the employer will prevail UNLESS it can be shown that one employee was fired for a certain violation while another was not.

It isn't a criminal offense, just a violation of labor law that could result in the terminated employee being awarded damages.

I thought Joe was a lawyer...

But it sounds like he was saying the tea baggers were cool with Dubya's profligate ways.

No surprise-GOPpers supporting a GOP President.

One of the main attractions at the Austin "tea party"
was Joe "the plumber"

Need I say more?

#117 | Posted by Salaryman at 20

no you dont
a man who had the gall to get obama to tell us what he was going to do and of course then he had to be destroyed
of course it is coming back to dems because barry is taking us apart even more than we tried to tell you dupes in the first place.
I guess though you would love to hear al fuckin franken talk all you wanted though wouldnt you

wow northguy and Sa right here together...
'aint' I the lucky one.

hows it hanging boys?

I can understand the 'hypocrite' tag to a point - where in the hell were the 'teabaggers' under Bush? However, Obama, in his first year as pres. is poised to take Bush's deficits, which offended conservatives greatly, and increase them four-fold.

Think about that for a moment.

Increasing the already egregious borrowing by 4-times!!!

That is huge!

If Obmamabots are going to toss around the hypocrisy-card, it HAS to cut both ways. Many of you Bush-haters were beside yourselves (and rightfully so) regarding the Bush deficits - why all of the deflections now?

You all used to argue that a 1-year deficit of $400 billion was criminal - yet, all of a sudden, a $2 trillion 1-year deficit is defensible???

jeff..
you dont SERIOUSLY believe they will use that logic and common sense in your argument do you?
I have asked them that several times and it is usually met with silence.

and AGAIN......talk of yet another stimulus bill along with cap and trade and health care...

whats next?
easy...either superinflation from printing all that money?

and look at the value of the dollar
Remember those good old days when libs here told us that bush was destroying the republic because of the dollar and NOW its worse than in my lifetime with china and russia and others talking about the END OF THE DOLLAR...

AND I have had libs here lecture me about the rising debt,.,
wonder what happened to those guys??????

But it sounds like he was saying the tea baggers were cool with Dubya's profligate ways.

No surprise-GOPpers supporting a GOP President.

#173 | Posted by northguy3

Holy crap! You guys are way too ignorant for this conversation.

Tea Parties have very little to do with the Republican Party!

Tea Parties have absolutely nothing to do with Bush!

But it sounds like he was saying the tea baggers were cool with Dubya's profligate ways.

No surprise-GOPpers supporting a GOP President.

#173 | Posted by northguy3

Holy crap! You guys are way too ignorant for this conversation.

Tea Parties have very little to do with the Republican Party!

Tea Parties have absolutely nothing to do with Bush!

"You all used to argue that a 1-year deficit of $400 billion was criminal - yet, all of a sudden, a $2 trillion 1-year deficit is defensible???

#176 | Posted by JeffJ"

I wasn't one who argued that, but I'd like to point out that what the deficit is being created for is relevant. Personally, I'd rather we be $2 trillion in debt, with health care and clean energy, than $1 trillion in debt, with nothing to show for it but a bunch of dead Iraqis.

I wasn't one who argued that, but I'd like to point out that what the deficit is being created for is relevant. Personally, I'd rather we be $2 trillion in debt, with health care and clean energy, than $1 trillion in debt, with nothing to show for it but a bunch of dead Iraqis.

#180 | Posted by mOntecOre

The $2 billion increased the influence of the American Empire

The $1 trillion moved US ever so closer to Socialism.

One makes money, and the other, well, does not.

A product of public school, are you?

clean energy!

LOL!!!!

I'd rather we be $2 trillion in debt, with health care and clean energy, than $1 trillion in debt, with nothing to show for it but a bunch of dead Iraqis.

Public health-care has its own set of problems - rationing, sub-par care, an overall decline in advancement as salaries and payements are curtailed in favor of 'cost-savings', etc. If you feel the positives outweigh the negatives...fine. Just don't deceive yourself into thinking that the solutions you support are Utopia - they come with plenty of negative tradeoffs.

As for 'clean energy'...(sorry for channeling BL2 with all of the elipses) google either 'Copenhagenconsensus' and/or Cool It and at least consider alternative suggestions regarding how to best deal with an ever-changing macro-climate and how to best deal with it. "Clean"-energy solutions will likely cause more harm than good, until they are competitive.

I, like many knuckle-dragging conservatives, bemoaned Bush's reckless spending. Out-of-the-gate he walked into a recession AND 9-11. Short-term deficit spending was understandable. However, he DID involve this country into an elective war AND he took on other significant growths in government spending that he and his party failed to account for.

They were voted out - good riddance.

Given what Obama inherited, a deficit budget IS understandable.

However, a $2+ trillion deficit in the first year????

I know many on the left despise these tea-party protests. But, at what point does deficits and debt become offensive and non-sustainable reagardless of party affiliation?

and AGAIN......talk of yet another stimulus bill along with cap and trade and health care...

#177 | Posted by afkabl2

That would be really stupid.

I can see why they're moving so fast. 2010 is coming up really fast.

Bush was a piker insofar as expendtures of funds is concerned, even if hypothetically all of the endlessly repeated false allegations of the left were true.

As to "profiteering," the Halliburton and war payments were chump change compared to for example, what GE will rake in from the entire ecomomy with the "green" campaign, and with what the "Wall Street traders" (and Al Gore), will rake in on the "cap and trade" carbon trading rip off, contributing nothing but another level of mandated expense.

Again, with China, India, Russian, and others not reining in their creation of "bad stuff" even hypothetically conceding that it is "bad," then it's as if we have a balloon losing air from two punctures, and the U.S. plugs its puncture. The air will still hiss out through the other puncture. And guess what? The manufacturing capacity (and accompanying jobs) transferred to say China and India et al, will produce far more "bad stuff" per unit of production, since they do not have controls nearly as stringent as ours.

What is the Obama Plan? Leveling. The U.S. will be sending money to "poor countries" for not using capacity or not engaging in activities in which they would not engage anyway, impoverishing us, and then also transferring jobs. Hey, but Obama is truhtful. He said that regardless of consequences, he wanted to equalize wealth. You and the Bushman in Africa can enjoy the same standard of living. That's Obama's goal patterned on his understanding of Marxist values, "From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs." Say Amen. Messiah Obama hath spoken.

Reading johnson is like reading a foreign language which has its foundation in English...or some other Romance language.

You and the Bushman in Africa can enjoy the same standard of living. That's Obama's goal patterned on his understanding of Marxist values....

Not that Johnson's 19th century posts have anything to do with race; it just so happens that race is a factor in EVERY ONE of Johnson's posts.

"The $2 billion increased the influence of the American Empire

The $1 trillion moved US ever so closer to Socialism.

One makes money, and the other, well, does not.

A product of public school, are you?

#181 | Posted by Eddie"

$2 billion? For the Iraq war? Are you a product of private school, or did you just borrow Vernon's calculator?