Home > Uncategorized > Going Rogue

Going Rogue

Well, everywhere you look these days, there’s Sarah Palin. She’s with Barbara Walters. She’s with Oprah. Everywhere you look, Palin is pushing her new memoir. Somehow i don’t think I’ll be buying a copy.

So I’m relieved when respected conservatives like David Brooks see that the empress has no clothes:

“Speaking the day before Palin’s new book, “Going Rogue,” is slated to be officially released, Brooks scoffed at the notion that the ex-governor was somehow ready to be the face of the GOP.

“She’s a joke,” he told ABC’s “This Week.” “I mean, I just can’t take her seriously. We have got serious problems in the country. Barack Obama is trying to handle war. We just had a guy elected Virginia governor who is probably the model for future of the Republican Party, Bob McDonnell: Pretty serious guy, pragmatic, calm, kind of boring. The idea that this potential talk show host is considered seriously for the Republican nomination, believe me, it will never happen. Republican primary voters are just not going to elect a talk show host.”

Personally, I can’t see how Palin helps Republicans. It’s not like anyone is home with her — there seem to be much stronger Republican candidates out there — like Huckabee — but they don’t get the media attention. It will be interesting to be how this play out.

Advertisements
  1. November 18, 2009 at 3:36 am

    I grant you that Sarah Palin is pretty much a joke, but let's face it, Dave — it wouldn't take much to beat your guy right now. Obama has turned out to be a huge disappointment.

  2. November 18, 2009 at 4:41 am

    Any Republican '12: Wow; you've got that cognitive dissonance down real good- "it wouldn't take much to beat your guy right now." IMO, there is not a Republican in office or not that could beat President Obama right now, period. When the healthcare bill is signed into law, when the courts in New York convict KSM for terrorism charges and a good plan for Afghanistan is enacted, President Obama will be a shoe-in for reelection in 2012. Is Governor Palin not going to be the front runner for the Republican ticket? You betcha'.

  3. November 18, 2009 at 4:45 am

    Fact is that Sarah Palin is an intreguing person. She may have the weight of a cloud behind her policy pronouncements, but she gathers interest around her. My wife is strictly apolitical to the point where she has never voted in her life. To that end, she also doesn't complain about things either. However, with Sarah Palin, she is drawn to her speaking style and her engaging personality. That capability, if she is able to project it nationally, would be a great asset to Republicans.I don't see Palin as a candidate in 2012, as much as I wish she did have the gravitas to pull it off. But she, as others have stated, is personally popular, well spoken and can raise tons of cash for Republicans. That personal popularity and ability to marshal support from those who follow her was part in parcel on why RINO Scazzofavo was forced out of the race in NY-23 in favor of the legitimately conservative candidate. So attempt to marginalize her all you want, but she will have serious influence going forward into 2010 and 2012.

  4. November 18, 2009 at 4:48 am

    Also, while she is not a strong candidate this go-around, she could be in a position to be a "King maker" in 2012 by endorsing the candidate that meets her approval. Again, that is a lot of influence without holding an office or being a candidate herself.

  5. November 18, 2009 at 5:50 am

    What's the difference between Palin and, say, Al Sharpton? Both are loud mouths with their own agendas, just acting like publicity hounds. They follow the spotlight. They can be controversial. But they can't lead. It's a free country. She can do what she want, but I'm not expecting President Palin anytime soon.

  6. November 18, 2009 at 6:50 am

    "When the healthcare bill is signed into law, when the courts in New York convict KSM for terrorism charges and a good plan for Afghanistan is enacted, President Obama will be a shoe-in for reelection in 2012."The truth here is that national healthcare nationalization is not a done deal within the Democrat Party much less guaranteed passage. Even if it does pass, NOT ONE AMERICAN WILL BENEFIT FROM IT UNTIL 2013 after Obama and the Democrats campaign on the perception of positive change in healthcare. It has been Democrats and your liberal cohorts in the ACLU and others that have blocked the military tribunals that could have already had KSM tried, convicted, and hung from the neck until dead for his crimes. Leave it to Democrats to politicize an issue. And please don't give me the "lack of legal protections" crap either.Ever heard of the saying "no plan survives first contact with the enemy"? That means that no matter how "good" you think Obama's plan is, the Taliban have a say on it. There will still be insufficent helicopters to get troops to the hard to reach mountains. There still will be an utterly corrupt government in Kabul. There will still be an opium-financed Taliban able to get the weapons of choice to fight us. There still will be the weak-kneed, caveat laden, ever waivering 'support' from our NATO allies. So no matter how "good" that plan may appear, it still has to be implimented and supported to be successful… and I don't see it from the reasons I listed above. There is also another saying "a so-so plan today is better than a great plan tomorrow". President Obama has wasted a tremendous amount of time parcing and debating this policy. Stanley McChrystal, Obama's personal choice for commander in Afghanistan, has already told the president what he needs to succeed. Obama should either go with that or fire him. It is just that simple. It is not guaranteed that Obama is a shoe-in for re-election. Maybe the best thing that can happen to him is that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid lose the Congress to the Republicans so Obama will have someone to blame for the double digit unemployment, the stagnate economy, the coming inflation and the ever exorbanateluy high budget deficits that Obama has brought Ameriaca in his first year in office.Although, I would love a Condi Rice-Sarah Palin ticket in 2012. It worked for Bill Clinton.

  7. November 18, 2009 at 2:56 pm

    Sarah Palin has been underestimated her whole career. I wish all liberals would continue to do so. However, the MLM knows Sarah's star status and consequently, the ad-hominem attacks on her. Imagine, 11 AP reporters assigned to her book to find discrepancies. Where were they with President Obama's book, Bill and Hillary's books, Gore's book. They (MLM) must really fear her to spend all that resource on her. The question is, not whether liberals will vote for her, it is what will the independants do. Right now, they are leaving the democrats in droves. Just like last election, the top two priorities are jobs and the economy. President Obama has been dismal in this area. This will drive the independants. November 2012.

  8. November 18, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    Palin may be a joke to you but I can tell you this, she would never bow to any world leader, China would never lecture her on how she was ruining the economy, and she would have never appointed the worst Atty General in our nations history.The left (both man & women) will contunie to bash her mainly because who she is and how she relates to 95% of Americans sends a fire streak of fear down their backs.Palin rocks and will be a great VP under Romney. Oh! I can't wait for the debates.Bring on 2010 and what a great year 2012 will be.

  9. November 18, 2009 at 4:21 pm

    As former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gets ready to kick off her book tour Wednesday, a slew of new polls show that the Republican remains an extremely divisive figure.The media blitz for her book has given the former Alaska governor a huge forum to speak to her supporters and potentially change minds, but polls show views of her have changed little in recent months.Palin’s 23 percent favorability rating in Monday’s CBS News poll is nearly identical to the 24 percent favorability rating she registered in mid-July, soon after she announced that she would step down from her post as governor of Alaska. Palin received a 38 percent unfavorable rating in the CBS poll released this week.A Washington Post-ABC News poll released Monday showed that Palin is viewed favorably by only 43 percent with 52 percent holding an unfavorable view of the former governor. Fifty-three percent in the poll said they “definitely would not” vote for Palin if she ran in 2012 and 60 percent she is not qualified to serve as president.

  10. November 18, 2009 at 9:15 pm

    I just love this quote concerning Ms Palin and from MSNBC no less"Call it sexism or what you will, but why should the media only compare ambitious women to impressive men, when so many ambitious but underwhelming men get so far in this world?"So true so true

  11. November 18, 2009 at 11:10 pm

    23% is a better favorability rating than the 18% that Congress gets.

  12. November 19, 2009 at 12:36 am

    In order for Sarah to get the Republican nomination in 2012 she would have to survive the various state primaries. This means she would have to debate the other Republican canidates and they will tear her apart and expose her as the intellectual cripple that she is. My bet is that she runs as a third party canidate for the Conservative party. This way it quenches her thirst for attention and she gets to keep raising money that she can spend for designer clothes, world class hair-stylists and private jets. Then when she gets her ass kicked in the general election, the lazy air-head won't have to be bothered by having an actual job and resposibilities. It's the perfect senario for the fact and reality-challenged idiot.

  13. November 19, 2009 at 2:04 am

    As far as seeing Palin here, there and everywhere promoting her book – that is what authors do – those that have a strong enough statement or interesting enough story to get on a show anyways.

  14. November 19, 2009 at 2:31 am

    BigTent, if you believe Palin is "well spoken," I'm concerned about your grasp of the English language. Check out this nugget: "There’s been so many words, Ed, over the state of Alaska, we being the head and not the tail, and, um, I see things now in the works it seems like, things like, that’s coming to fruition. Things are perculating! Things are coming along, and just, you know, uh, praying for an outpouring of God’s spirit here, that revival to be here in Alaska.” – Sarah Palin, June 8 2008.And another one: "Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh — it’s got to be all about job creation too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade, we’ve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing, but 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.”-Sarah Palin, September 24, 2008As for her being a "king maker," her endorsement of Doug Hoffman for the NY-23 seat sure paid off, didn't it? A Democrat ended up winning that seat for the first time since the 1800s! Logic is not your strong point, BigTent.

  15. November 19, 2009 at 7:14 am

    Facts is that Scazzofavo was selected not elected to represent the "Republican" party by 11 people behind closed doors, so she represented only those 11 people and Governor Paterson that picked her. I know you Democrats out there love having small cabals of people do all of your thinking for you while talking about concepts that mean nothing to you like "transparancy" and "openness". This is demonstrated by the numerous closed door healthcare confabs in Congress and the entire super-delegate status during the Democrat nomination process.Fact is that more people voted for a Conservative or a Republican than the Democrat Owens. There have been voter irregularities found in two counties which has narrowed the vote margin to less than 3,000 votes. Hoffman has rescinded his concession as absentee and overseas ballots are counted. Fact is that had the NY State Republican Party held a primary instead of just playing some weird version of "survivor" between the 11 of them, Scazzofavo would never have progressed beyond her minor historical footnote of "selected to seat by Gov. Paterson". Hoffman, regardless of outcome, clearly better represented the conservative nature of the district than Scazzofavo. Fact is that Obama took it on the nose on election night and only delusional Democrats continue to act in denial of that fact and the fact that Sarah Palin, irregardless of expected liberal snears to contrary, is extraordinarily popular with conservatives and is extremely influencial heading into the 2010 election cycle, elected position or not.Deny that to your own detriment.

  16. November 19, 2009 at 6:01 pm

    Please, please, please have Sarah Palin and the Doug Hoffman's of the world form their own Conservative Party. The Republican Party doesn't properly represent Conservatives. Look at the facts, in the last 30 years we've added $11 trillion to our national debt, $9 trillion of that total was directly added by Reagan and the Bushes. The fact is that Republican Conservatives are not fically conservative at all. Republican Conservatives give the wealthiest American disproportionately huge tax cuts and they increase the size of government and spending. Now is the time for Sarah to join with the Tea-baggers, Glen Beck and Drug Limpbaugh. Without the Republican Party they can really push their true Conservative agenda like cutting funding to organizations like Special Olympics. While Govenor and before she gave birth to a special needs child, Sarah cut $125,000 from Alaska's state budget for the Special Olympics, that is true Conservativism. Sarah also is a big advocate of individual's rights, her Daughter had pre-marital sex (despite her Abstinence-only sex education)and became pregnant. As a family, and a private matter, Sarah and her family made a choice what to do about the pregnacy. But if Sarah had her way, every pregnant woman in similar siutuations would be free to choose as long as it is the same choice Sarah would make, this is true Conservativism. True Conservatives, settle scores, like Sarah did in her book with McCain staffers and Katy Couric who had the audacity to ask her difficult questions like what Newspapers and magazines she read. True Conservatives know you have to grab as much money as they can at any opportunity, like how Sarah rigged her travel reports while govenor so she could get more tax-payer money paid to her in "per-diem" payments, or how Sarah used McCain election contributions to get $150,000 in new clothes. True Conservatives lie to cover bad policy, when Sarah thought the Federal government was going to spend over $250 million to build a bridge in Alaska she was initially all for it, but eventually it was exposed as wasteful spending and the project was cancelled. Then Sarah stepped in and claimed she personally killed the project ("I tol' them, thanks, but no thanks" wink,wink). It was a complete lie and is easy to debunk with video of her advocating for the bridge, but facts don't matter to True Conservatives. True Conservatives are blind and brainless, reality doesn't matter to them, facts don't matter, words don't have any meaning to them, Science doesn't matter, numbers and statistics don't matter, lives don't matter (if they are poor or a different race or religion), nothing matters to true conservatives except themselves, their bank account and their power, they are even willing to sacrafice their own morals to protect these things. Sarah needs to lead the new Conservative party and help usher the rest of the trash like her out of the Republican party.

  17. November 20, 2009 at 1:57 am

    Fact is, the Republican Party is splintered almost to the point of irreparable damage.Fact is, the two Republicans who won the governor's seats in NJ and VA don't get a vote in the House or Senate. Fact is, Democrats still hold majorities in both the House and Senate.Fact is, a Democrat WON the race in NY-23 because he received more votes than any other single candidate.Fact is, Republicans kept predicting during last year's presidential campaign that the Democrats would splinter into Camp Obama and Camp Hillary, handing the presidency to McCain. Fact is, it's the Republicans who formed a circle and opened fire on each other when things didn't go their way. Fact is, Democrats are now working together to produce historic health care legislation, while their Republican counterparts do nothing but obstruct, misinform, and complain.Fact is, you're on the wrong side of history, Big Tent. And you continue to deny that, to your own detriment.

  18. November 20, 2009 at 7:10 am

    THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO MANDATE FOR ANY OF THE BULLSHIT OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS ARE TRYING TO PULL OVER ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, PERIOD.You won the election. True, but so freakin' what? Bush won in 2004, more convincingly than Obama did btw, and the Democrats in Congress opposed and shut down Social Security reform, filibustered federal appellate judges, campaigned for cutting off funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a whole host of other Bush programs. You Democrats claim that your opposition to Social Security Reform was the correct move given what happened in 2008. Fine. I say now that the Republicans are absolutely in the right to prevent obama from destroying the American economy with his boneheaded, anti-free enterprise policies like Cap-n-Trade and nationalized healthcare. By killing this abomination now, Republicans will be able to claim, as Democrats did in 2005, a legitimate role in protecting the well-being of the American people and the American economy. Then and only then the Democrats may be willing to sit down and craft a truly bipartisan univerally accepted fix to the genuine problems of our healthcare system.These abominations from the house and senate will do nothing but ruin the highest quality healthcare system in the world and they must be stopped.

  19. November 20, 2009 at 7:39 am

    Sorry to say the Sarah is the bomb, not because of the schools she went to or her looks, but because of her stands on things like energy, guns, and healthcare. Why is she so popular with everyday Americans? Why do so many want to know more about her? I do, because I fid her refreshing, honest, and someone that I would trust in Washington. Some of the critical remarks are sexist. No one says this trash about men.Love the video that has turned up of our glorious leader telling how military tribunals are RIGHT for KSM in 2006. Now he has holder transfer KSM to civilian court! Joke. How can you convict someone when they have been in custody and questioned without an attorney nor their miranda right. THat happens, the case is thrown out. Besides, obamaman says they WILL be convicted and WILL be executed. Kangaroo court to me.

  20. November 20, 2009 at 1:16 pm

    In 3 days Palin's approval numbers have gone from 23% to 47%. Please keep slamming her so as to expose the sexist position of every liberal in the lame stream media.By 2012 her approval rating should be in the 70-80% range!

  21. November 20, 2009 at 2:37 pm

    Fact is Liberal Patriot, there have been many democrats representing that area since 1800. Check out Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district. Also, it is not over until it's over and as I reported, with a link earlier, massive voter fraud by ACORN. Thousands of mail in ballots have been discarded so far, and if the race get's closer, I am sure there will be a recount with more scrutiny on the remaining mail in ballots. Fact is, the Republicans are working on a Health Care bill that will blow the socks off of the socialist Democrat Bill. They will actually decrease insurance premiums. Hmm, higher cost with less service or lower cost with same service. Just what will average Joe want? (I will grant you though, the Republican plan only adds 18 million uninsured versus the Dems 31 million). Elvis, Elvis, Elvis, you have the audacity to bring up our national debt by Reagan and Bush when our present President will double the debt of all Presidents combined? Disproportionate tax cuts? The top 10% pay 70% of the taxes and this is disproportionate? You got it nailed Elvis, we, conservatives, only care about ourselves. That is why our charitable contributions are so much greater than liberals. It's just because we don't care. Many of these contributions go to organizations that give people a hand up, not a hand out like the Liberal philosophy. We do not want a to keep the downtrodden purposely poor so as to maintain a "voter block". This is dispicable. I really, really enjoy your posts. Overconfidence is a great way of losing seats and the Presidency. Yes, we are in shambles, keep on thinking this. Your right, Sarah is an absolute moron. Dumb as a rock. Can not be elected. Just like that moron Bush. However, talked to some Alaskans in Ixtapa and they say she is very, very smart and she learns fast. That down home speech of hers resonates with middle America and Independents. And, if she did start an Conservative party, it would be the end of the Republican party, and rightly so. What a disastrous Asian trip!

  22. November 21, 2009 at 1:54 am

    Hoosier, you are yet another conservative with reading comprehension problems. I said "1800s." Note the little "s." The last time a Democrat represented the 23rd Congressional District in New York was 1851-1853. Notice how those years are in the 1800s.As for the Republican health care plan, it does little or nothing to solve the main problem with the current health care system in the United States, in that it leaves far too many people without any coverage at all. Those people end up getting treated in the emergency room, can't pay the outrageous bill, and go bankrupt. The cost then gets passed on to those who are insured. So if you're insured, you're paying for the uninsured anyway, while they deal with bankruptcy, which brings the entire economy down.And why can't you conservatives get it through your head that no one in the government is forcing you to give up your private insurance if you don't want to? What is it about the "option" in "Public Option" that you don't understand? It's a friggin' option – meaning that it's not mandatory, meaning that health care is not being "nationalized." I constantly hear conservatives talking about publicly financed elections. We all enjoy publicly financed police and fire protection. And you are eerily silent when it comes to publicly financed wars. But when it comes to health care, for some reason, you conservatives revert back to 1950s, down-with-socialism McCarthy-ite screaming mode? Is it selfishness? Perhaps. Greed? Maybe, but only if you're a stakeholder or CEO in a private health insurance company. Is it misinformation, bad research or just plain ignorance? Judging from the conservatives who comment on this blog, I'd say it's a combination of all three.

  23. November 21, 2009 at 1:55 am

    Hoosier, you are yet another conservative with reading comprehension problems. I said "1800s." Note the little "s." The last time a Democrat represented the 23rd Congressional District in New York was 1851-1853. Notice how those years are in the 1800s.As for the Republican health care plan, it does little or nothing to solve the main problem with the current health care system in the United States, in that it leaves far too many people without any coverage at all. Those people end up getting treated in the emergency room, can't pay the outrageous bill, and go bankrupt. The cost then gets passed on to those who are insured. So if you're insured, you're paying for the uninsured anyway, while they deal with bankruptcy, which brings the entire economy down.And why can't you conservatives get it through your head that no one in the government is forcing you to give up your private insurance if you don't want to? What is it about the "option" in "Public Option" that you don't understand? It's a friggin' option – meaning that it's not mandatory, meaning that health care is not being "nationalized." I constantly hear conservatives talking about publicly financed elections. We all enjoy publicly financed police and fire protection. And you are eerily silent when it comes to publicly financed wars. But when it comes to health care, for some reason, you conservatives revert back to 1950s, down-with-socialism McCarthy-ite screaming mode? Is it selfishness? Perhaps. Greed? Maybe, but only if you're a stakeholder or CEO in a private health insurance company. Is it misinformation, bad research or just plain ignorance? Judging from the conservatives who comment on this blog, I'd say it's a combination of all three.

  24. November 22, 2009 at 12:27 am

    A quick study of the people who defend sarah palin on this thread gives you an indication of what is disturbing about this whole deal. The latest CBS news poll puts Sarah's approval number at 23%, pretty bad for a politician without a job or responsibility. Still that extreme fringe 23%, refuse to acknowledge Sarah's dishonesty, hypocracy, and ignorance. These people are like cult members, it dosen't matter to them how many lies Sarah is caught telling, her followers just ignore the evidence. It is truly pathetic, they remind me of the followers of David Koresh, even while he was impregnating their teenage daughters, those morons still believed he was a messiah. Their collective myopia is similar to what we see today in Sarah's Dummies. But, in the end this is only a good thing for the progressive movement because Sarah's greatest weakness is her stubborness. Sarah never thinks she is wrong (much like her followers) so she keeps telling more lies to cover for the lies or obvious mistakes she has made in the past. When she can't tell a lie to cover herself she won't take responsibility and she will usually blame an innocent party. The only people who don't recognize this foolishness is the 23% of Americans who still view her as a viable canidate. So you people knock yourselves out, push the Republican party far to the right or form your own Conservative party, it would really help the progressive movement and our country as a whole.

  25. November 22, 2009 at 1:51 am

    Canards are all you people put forth with regard to your so-called "reform" of healthcare. It is a canard that the public "option" will "compete with private insurance. Where in US does a private firm actually "compete" with the government? You will use UPS and FedEx as examples. But answer me this: if UPS runs out of money, can it levy a tax on all Americans, even those that don't use the service, to remain in business? Of course they can't, but the US Postal Service does exactly that two and three times a year. Stamps are not the only source of funding for the USPS. Where is the competition in passager rail service in America. There is the wholly owned state sanctioned monopoly of AmTrak, and it goes broke every year and has never turned a profit.Canard #2, the public option will operate annually at a loss. Why? That is the only way it will be able to compete. The CBO has already stated that the House and Senate versions of reform will NOT bend the cost curve. This means that the budget for nationalized healthcare will always increase. The only way to offset these increases is for ever increasing taxes. Pretty soon, not only will "cadillac" plays be taxed, but so will "park avenue" plans, "lucerne" plans, "malibu" plans, and finally "festiva" plans. In other words, the government will tax ALL employer provided health insurance plans as income, exactly as his advisors said Obama would have to. Canard #3 is that employers won't dump their insurance plans in favor of the public option. Larry Gettlefinger of the UAW said that is EXACTLY what the Detroit automakers must do in order to be profitable. He wants ObamaCare so he can dump his UAW healthcare costs on all American taxpayers. He told CNBC exactly that while he was advocating for national health insurance reform. Canard #4 is that this is about insuring the 30 million uninsured. That is a lie. Neither the house or Senate versions of ObamaCare insure all 30 million uninsured. But they do have mechanisms to send your ass to jail if you don't get insurance. So Obama wants to send Americans to jail for exercising their Freedom of Choice and not get health insurance. Here again is another example of the only choice Americans are free to make is the choice of aborting a baby. Under ObamaCare, if you do not buy health insurance, you get fined and can be sent to jail. I believe this is in the Senate version. See canard #1, where in the face of these fines and/or jail time, Americans will throw their lot with the public "option" to avoid jail and fines. That is coersion and blackmail at the highest degree. That is a mobster tactic of providing "protection" from the mobster: give me your money and I won't throw you in jail.end part 1

  26. November 22, 2009 at 2:21 am

    Part IICanard #5 is that the final bill will pay for itself partially through the cost savings from wringing the waste and abuse from Medicare and from accountability of doctors by reducing reimbursements. Why don't they do that now instead of bundling it with this nationalized healthcare boat anchor and letting an additional 2 years of Medicare fraud, waste and abuses pile up? Because it is not about making Medicare better; it is about controlling and backdoor nationalizing the healthcare industry of America. Canard #6 is that ObamaCare won't result in rationing of care. Lie. Look at the timing of the mammogram controversy for a second. A governmental panel (who are these people representing anyway) comes out and tells American women NOT to get mammograms until they are 50 and that mammograms done on women between 40 and 49 do not detect enough cancers to offset the numbers of false positives and emotional distress that comes with these mammograms. That panel has been universally excoriated by everyone and even HHS Secretary has had to come out and disavow the panel, probably the one she impaneled. But why publish that finding? I believe it is a government attempt to "reduce costs" by telling women to NOT get mammograms and to wait an additional 10 years before getting one as a means of preemptively rationing care. And this has ZERO to do with insurance. This was not an Insurance Institute of America panel, this was a government panel doing this. And let's not forget that Cass Sunstein, Eziekel Emmanuel and John Holdren are all in favor of instituting euathanasia (another form of ritualized murder, Bob) as a means of culling from the herd of humanity those who no longer have any Quality of Life Years left. You can poo poo Sarah Palin and her "death panel" comment all you want but you are either ignoring the published works of Obama's healthcare advisors or you are in willful denial that institutionalized murder of our WWII generation, the Greatest Generation, won't happen eventually under ObamaCare. Yes, it is nowhere in the bill, but doctors in England do it all the time and yet there is no state provision authorizing them to do it. Those doctors murder their patients to free bedspace for those with "more to live for" than a terminally ill Alzheimer's patient or a terminally ill cancer patient.Canard #7 is that ObamaCare won't result in decreased quality of care. Another lie. Just look at the "free" healthcare clinics that were set up to embarass Mary Landreu and Blanche Lincoln into voting for cloture on the senate bill. Everyone and their dead uncles came out of the woodwork for "free" healthcare. That proves the point that when you make something "free" to the end user, they will abuse the system. EVERYONE will go to the doctor for every sniffle and cough because they are entitled to their "free" national healthcare as promised by Barack Obama. But there is no way to increase the numbers of doctors that will be treating those masses of people flooding every emergency room and doctor's office to get their "free" treatment. Those doctors still on the job who haven't quit because the work load and the stress is too great, will be forced into triage medicine forcing those with legitimate, yet non-lifethreatening ailments to wait even longer periods of time while those with percieved lifethreatening ailmetns (not everyone gets H1N1; they most of the time just have the seasonal flu, as an example). With the ratio of patients to doctors going up while the numbers of US trained doctors continues to go down, as it has every year for 20 years, the US will be forced to try and import foreign trained doctors. But with the meidcal industry already flooded with "free" healthcare patients, the allure of American medicine will be gone and those doctors in India and Pakistan (as examples) will just stay home. Remember, HillaryCare forsaw this and MANDATED what kinds of medi

  27. November 22, 2009 at 2:21 am

    Part IIICanard #8 is that ObamaCare will make the system more efficient. Yet another lie. What ObamaCare does is creates another healthcare entitlement program. Look at the current systems for government provided healthcare and tell me that this is efficient. First, low income families from the ages of birth to 23 will be forced to enroll in SCHIP for their children. Then those low income children become adults will be forced, under penalty of law, into ObamaCare. From ages, 23 to 65, they will spend their lives on the government dole. At age 65, they will end their lives on Medicare. And they cannot be denied coverage according to both bills coming out of Congress. So the incentive is to make a modicum of money, live off the backs of the taxpayers, and you can do whatever you want with no personal responsibility. How can that be MORE efficient? If ObamaCare was so great and wonderful, why not kill, for all time, SCHIP and Medicare and Medicaid (which, by the way, ObamaCare in both houses forces the states to shoulder greater portions of the burden at the state-level as a means of keeping ObamaCare "deficit neutral") and just create the single-payer system all you hardcore liberals really want? I'll tell you: that's exactly what you WILL do eventually. Based on the "successes" of ObamaCare, using the same spin as those ficticious "saved or created" jobs in those ficticious congressional districts, SCHIP and Medicare?Medicaid will be morphed into the "Medicare for All" that Obama stated was the end goal, as has Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, and others have stated they want. I must state again: no one is against fixing our healthcare system, espcially Republicans. But we Republicans are universally against this abomination of a "reform". ObamaCare as it currently exists in the House and Senate is nothing more than just one of many phases in a Long March to the total takeover of not just 1/6th of the American economy, but the entire American economy. Because when you can legislate what is legal or not on the basis of the costs incurred to the ObamaCare system, then, by legislative fiat, you control the economy. Totalitarianism is the end result of ObamaCare.

  28. November 22, 2009 at 5:17 am

    What I really love is after all the "concern" from the cons about Obama being only a "celebrity" who made a great speech when he is actually deeply prepared, educated and experienced, they have fallen in love with a purely celebrity pol. In fact, it is almost too much to call Palin a politician. She does not seem to like the work of political office, but she loves the stage and the spotlight. So she is more accurately a pure celebrity posing as a politician. And they love it.In my pathologist role, I can't get enough of this crazy American quasi pathology. Like all the rest of the comic material that keeps on coming from the GOP, these are characters beyond my paranoid or parody imagination. Had I invented the Palin clan, I would be a mean and nasty liberal. But they do their own thing without any help or instruction from me, so it is not about me. And I confess my perverse attraction to the perverse.Is Palin worse than Rep. Foxx? Hardly. Foxx is a deeply nasty hater. Palin is far more generous than she. She is a total narcissist. She says one thing, then another and does not seem to expect anyone to notice. She dresses to be attractive to men, and that turns me off because I prefer women to dress to present themselves. But, that is who she is. I laugh at the ridiculous because it comes with my taxes. I might as well enjoy what is funny. I would only be afraid were Palin/Beck actually nominated and were Americans taking that ticket seriously and likely to vote for them. Then I would be booking my permanent room in the Space Hotel. Moving to another country would not get me far enough away. I would need a different planet.

  29. November 22, 2009 at 5:21 am

    Then again, that we are discussing Palin only serves to legitimize that which is not legitimate. To listen to the cons defend that which is indefensible is a hoot.Just look at the way Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, Barbara Boxer or any of the women with a D after the name are treated and have been treated by Conservatives on this board and anywhere else and take that into consideration about how seriously to take this diatribe about how Sarah Palin has been treated so unfairly and horribly…..It's 2 + 2 = 5 with most Conservatives.When Michelle Obama touched the Queen of England there were Cons on this board and everywhere talking about what a faux pax she had committed. These are the same folks that are appalled by the bow that Obama gave….MAKE UP YOUR FREAKING MINDS!!!The fact of the matter and it really gets tiring is the strategy. First it's decide that whatever they do…attack. Disagree and Attack then whatever they do find whatever spaghetti will stick to the wall to rationalize the attack. It's as if Conservatives have selective amnesia about whatever they have said.I'm not so blind to think it doesn't occur on the liberal side but it's so blatant and so absurd the way it's done in that neck of the woods.

  30. November 22, 2009 at 6:38 am

    Tent: While you have scored on quite a few of your "canards" with regard to what you call "Obamacare", you missed the boat completely in your summation. IF you would like to see a real reform of our healthcare delivery system and insurance program, then a single payer system would be the way to go. You go on about how even Republicans want to see some sort of healthcare reform, but the truth is somewhere between what Rep. Grayson stated on the floor of the House recently when he stated that the Republican plan is to "not get sick, or, if you do get sick, die quickly", and the fact that the Republicans have not officially put out "their" plan, so in effect, they don't really have "one" plan that is their answer to the Democratic plan. I do not care for the Democratic plan as it stands, so far, because it goes a little too far and it doesn't go far enough in other areas. Mandatory coverage is a gift to the insurance industry, period; the Stupak/Pitt Amendment is either going to torpedo the entire bill, or it is an underhanded attempt at undoing Roe v. Wade; the "public option" provision has been watered down to almost being meaningless, and the needless delay in launching the program is going to have far too many falling between the cracks before it is scheduled to start. This whole thing should be scrapped right now and the process started anew, IMO, in the following manner: Fix Medicare, now; eliminate the different pay schedules between metro and rural areas, eliminate the ability of existing insurance companies to scam Medicare completely (that is the largest part of Medicare fraud), and once Medicare is funded properly and working better, open up the program to every single American who wants to participate, including pregnant women for prenatal care. You pay based on your income, just as it is now. With the influx of more participants with less overall average needs than the current participants (all seniors, the most expensive to care for, currently), costs of the program will average out cheaper than is currently running. By having such a large percentage of Americans joining Medicare, it would become the standard, and by fixing the payout discrepancies that currently plague the system, more doctors and hospitals will join and participate. And by cutting out the means for fraud that the insurance companies currently "enjoy", the savings further cut down the costs. Who wins? Everyone who does not currently have a "Cadillac Plan", the medical professionals who will find themselves doing less paperwork, and businesses who face continually rising costs for providing healthcare coverage for their workers. Who loses? The insurance companies, their stockholders and their employees; too fricken bad. Tent, you claim that "Obamacare" is a first step towards Totalitarianism; although what I propose is much more government centered that what is being pushed in the House and Senate currently, it is no where near a step towards totalitarianism; if President Obama wants to undo the steps that the Bush Administration took towards totalitarianism, he would end certain policies and programs that took away some of our freedoms and liberties, but being a leader is always a desire for more power, or at least the attempt at more power; to give up any of that power is too difficult for most humans to consider, including President Obama. If you want to persist in labeling President Obama as striving for totalitarianism, please offer some evidence or logic to affirm your assertion.

  31. November 22, 2009 at 11:55 am

    Bob, what's the point of offering more logic to you? You ahve already dismissed out of hand the logic I already provided to wit that ObamaCare stives to control all of medicine by putting what will end up being a majoirty of Americans under the umbrella of ObamaCare (or whatever the final name will be). Once the federal government has a fiduciary responsibility to see to it that ObamaCare doesn't fail, Congress will legislate on the basis of how things in American life impact ObamaCare. For instance, Congress may very well declare tobacco illegal to purchase, process or consume based on the fact that smoking and dipping is unhealthy and costs taxpayers some X number of billions of dollars due to the costs imposed on ObamaCare. Therefore, Congress has just passed a law banning tobacco products based on the impact to ObamaCare. While you might think that is good, where does it stop? ATVs are bad because they cause injuries, as does motorcycle riding, as does skiing (you could ask Sonny Bono or Natasha Richardson about that if they were alive), as does football (all them head injuries). All of these activities could be made illegal solely on the basis of how these activities cost ObamaCare.For instance:Overindulgence of sugary foods causes obesity; Americans overindulge in sugary foods;One third of Americans are obese;Obesity drives up costs to medicine which will be paid for through ObamaCare;President Obama promised ObamaCare will be deficit neutral;Congress passes laws restricting behavior either throguh taxation or punitive lawsTherefore, to keep ObamaCare "deficit neutral", Congress must either restrict American behavior by outlawing sugary foods or cause a decrease in the consumption of sugary foods through taxation, fines and or penalties. See? Simple logic that you will surely dismiss out of hand… againAs for the Republican plan, they did put out a plan, Bob. I know you didn't hear aobut it because you were too busy watching the nightly "progressive" programing on MSBNC to hear about it. Google it, its there.Let's talk about what we agree on:You think it should be scrapped and start over because it goes too far. Great so do I.Let's start with some simple compromises:I will agree to federal funding for abortions if you will agree that abortions will not be paid for after 24 weeks. This will allow you liberals to continuing paying for "a woman's right" to kill her baby but it will stop those of us against abortions from financing late-term and third trimester pregnancies.How about another?I will agree to a "public option" if that public option is capped at an annual income of $30,000 or $60,000 for married couples and you will agree to allow those not on the public option to purchase their private insurance anywhere in the nation, regardless of state of residence. I will agree to a mandate for coverage if you agree to a malpractice cap for claims of pain and suffering at $250,000.We both agree that Medicare must be made fiscally responsible by weeding out all of the fraud waste and abuse in that system.See? That wasn't so hard was it? Ask yourself, if there are areas where there is mutual agreement, then why do the Democrats continue to act as if there is no other voice but their's? Why is it not only necessary but important that Republicans get shut out of any debate or amendments process on the bills currently before congress? Not one Republican amendment was agreed to in the House, why is that?Bob, this has been and always has been about control and control by Democrats only. Since you don't like what is coming out of Congress either, let's both pray that the Stupak Amendment does torpedo ObamaCare so we can get down to some genuine negotiations on real healthcare reform.

  32. geo
    November 23, 2009 at 12:27 am

    palingenetic ultra-nationalist populism… google it! then check out the Alaska Independence Party. "The South will Rise Again!"A dangerous core ideology for a representative democracy to adopt.

  33. November 23, 2009 at 7:14 am

    What website in particular are you wanting us to look at? Everything I saw actually speaks worse of Obama than Bush in the terminology and examples given. Take for example this quote of Chris Floyd that is a political analyst for the Moscow Times. My comments will appear in brackets [ ].Fascism will come slowly and so gradually that people will not perceive its coming until it is already here. He says: "All of the old forms will still be there: legislatures, elections, campaigns– plenty of bread and circuses. But "consent of the governed" will no longer apply; actual control of the state will have passed to a small and priviledged group who rule for the benefit of their wealthy peers and corporate patrons[which is an indictment of both Republicans and Democrats]"To be sure, there will be factional conflicts among the elite, and a degree of debate will be permitted; but no one outside the priviledged circle will be allowed to influence state policy [like republicans frozen out of the crafting of the healthcare bill]. Dissidents will be marginalized– usually by "the people" themsleves [that is Saul Alinsky's technique outlined in "Rules for Radicals"]. Deprived of historical knowledge by a thoroughly impoverished educational system [controlled by Democrat supporting teachers' union] deisgned to produce complacent consumers, left ignorant of current events by a corporate media devoted solely to profit, many will internalize the force-fed values of the ruling elite, and act accordingly [vote for Obama; "Yes We Can"; "Change we can believe in"]. There will be little need for overt methods of control."It sounds to me like if there is a threat of fascism in America, you liberal democrats are the progenators of it. Your guys control Homeland Security. Your guys control the CIA and FBI. Your guy Obama has hired 32 unaccountable "Czars" to run differnt parts of the government and aspects of American life. Your Democrats in the House and Senate meet behind closed doors so as not to have cameras rolling as Obama, Pelosi and Reid bribe and blackmail their caucus into voting for healthcare reform, a direct violation of the transparency that Obama promised during the campaign. Yours is the party in power. So if you have a problem with a "rising fascism" in America, talk your Democrats in government– they are running the show now.As for the AIP, more people live in Atascadero than are members of AIP. An insignificant fringe group if there ever was one. Not scary and not a big deal. The fact that not even Bob likes the Healthcare reform bill being rammed through congress is a bigger deal. Here's praying the Stupak Amendment becomes a fatal poison pill for ObamaCare.

  34. November 23, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    Oh, Sarah has speaking problems right? Are you really that shallow to think all these politicians and their polished speeches are real from the heart talks? There are ample, AMPLE examples of Obama and your other heros going off prompter and F*ing themselves so many times. Democrat and Republican. Biden told a rep in a wheelchair to stand up. Obama gave a shout out during the pre- Fort Hood talk about the Ft. Hood Terrorist. Obama called a called a man a medal of honor winner when he wasn't. Obama on Memorial day told a crowd that many members were present (He didn't understand the difference between Memorial day and Veterans Day, or at least this speechwriter didn't) . He repeats himself reading the prompter and welcomes himself for being there. Come ON! This is just off the top of my head, and you want to say how lame Sarah is. GET A LIFE AND A DO SOME RESEARCH> THOSE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULD NOT THROW STONES> OBAMA THE EMPEROR IS BUTT NAKED.

  35. November 23, 2009 at 6:44 pm

    Oh sure New TOne, Sarah Palin is exactly like Obama. Look at her taking 6 years and 4 different Colleges to get her BA in Journalism (that's right, she studied to be a Journalist), verses Obama who earned a BA in political science from Columbia and a Law degree from Harvard. So to Sarah's Dummies, their education is equal. But more than that New TOne, Sarah is just as prepared for leadership as Obama, right? During the campaign last year, you remember all those press conferences Sarah had where she took questions from the national media? Do you remember those New TOne? Or do you just remember when Sarah couldn't tell us what newspaper or magazine's she read, or what Supreme Court rulings she disagree with, or if she agreed with the Bush Doctrine? Yes Sarah is just like Obama, that's why Limpbaugh and Insannity spent the weeks leading up to Sarah's debate with Joe Biden, calling Biden a "bully" and "arrogant". They obviously felt the need to defend Sarah's poor performance before the event even happened. Remember how during the debate, Sarah said, "I'm not going to answer the question the way you want me to". That is true leadership New TOne, on a national stage in the most important debate of your life, admit you can't answer a question and then blather for 90 seconds on a talking point you had memorized. Oh, and don't forget to wink, flirting and winking is what ex-beauty pagent contestants do when they have nothing of substance to say. The other thing Sarah does better than Obama is quitting, I can't remember anybody who quit a higher profile job, for less reasons than Sarah. Sarah is the best quitter in American politics. Yes New TOne, I'm sure that the other 23% of Americans that think like you do agree Sarah is just like Obama.

  36. November 24, 2009 at 5:04 am

    Tent: I wish you righties would make up your mind; is President Obama supposed to be a Socialist, a Marxist, a Communist or a Fascist? Words do matter as there are distinct definitions for each of those words, and they are not interchangeable, no matter what the right thinks. Fascism is usually a severe right wing type of government where the leaders of government have deep ties to big business, where the leaders often operate at the behest of the business interests, often times the media will either turn a blind eye or they actively subvert their role of watchdog of government in order for the interests of big business to go forward. That is what was happening during the Bush Administration; the disappointment that many of us on the left has had with the Obama Administration is how there has not been a wholesale "cleaning out" of all of the Bush appointees in various agencies like the Justice Department, the State Department and those in the Pentagon who answer directly to the President. The idea of having a trial for people like KSM and possibly having some of the illegal actions and programs that happened during the Bush terms is what scares the pants off Republicans in the know. Your attempt to paint the Obama Administration as fascist is laughable, to say the least. Most on the right seem to eager to try and confuse the distinction between the four terms I listed at the beginning, mostly because they either don't care about the difference, or they just don't have the desire to actually learn what the different terms mean. You have no credibility in your statement, period. Oh yeah, as far as "Czars" go, check out this, a link that names each of the 47 different Czars during the Bush Administration.New Tone: Sure, all people make verbal gaffes, our political leaders are not immune to that happening, but it is the consistency of the occurrence of making verbal gaffes over and over that make the difference between say, President Obama and either President Bush or Governor Palin. Deny it if you wish, but that does not change reality.

  37. geo
    November 24, 2009 at 7:25 am

    This is a sample website I had in mindhttp://www.meldroc.com/?p=653 excerpt:“Fascism: modern political ideology that seeks to regenerate the social, economic, and cultural life of a country by basing it on a heightened sense of national belonging or ethnic identity. Fascism rejects liberal ideas such as freedom and individual rights, and often presses for the destruction of elections, legislatures, and other elements of democracy. Despite the idealistic goals of fascism, attempts to build fascist societies have led to wars and persecutions that caused millions of deaths. As a result, fascism is strongly associated with right-wing fanaticism, racism, totalitarianism, and violence.”

  38. November 24, 2009 at 7:35 am

    Damn do you Lefties love to mix apples and oranges. Bush had 47 different PEOPLE filling only twelve czar ppositions>. Obama has appointed 32 czars for 32 positions. That is a 150% increase in the czar positions in the first year of Obama's reign. Bush took 8 years to appoint his 47 people, one position had 18 different men as it's head. Furthermore, most of these so-called "czars" were called that by the meida and not Bush. Jake Tapper referred to Karl Rove as Bush's "domestic policy czar", Bush never used that term. The definition of fascism is: "a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."Obama is trying to suppress criticism by trying to de-legitimize Foc News and slandering the Tea Party protestors as crazy "teabaggers". He is regimenting all commerce through his bailout, which inexplicably gives him and czars the ability to regulate pay and compensation, what bondholders can received as just compensation for the risk they assumed, Cap and Tax that will destroy many industries in America, as does his abomination of a healthcare reform bill that will end up destroying the private health insurance industry and the medical industry.And what is with Jesse Jackson saying that if you don't support Obama's healthcare reform you can't call yourself a black man (for those that it applies to). So he is calling Ken Blackwell, JC Watts, and Michael Steele house negros ( you know the n-word that belongs in there) becasue bowing down and kissing the ring of our naked emperor. That sure sounds like a cult of personality built on the race of our first black president in history. hell, Wise Guy has repeatedly called anyone and everyone who has criticized Obama racists on this very blog. Chris Mathews is race obsessed as he jsut can't help mention that the majoirty of people buying Sarah Palin's book are white. There are an awful lot of examples of how Obama and his cultists are acting in a very fascist manner. So he is not a national socialist like Hitler (which is an admission none you kooks on the left would say about Bush). I contend that Obama is starting his own version of socialism, not unlike how Lenin altered Marx to fit his own devices and how Mao did the same thing for China, so too is Obama and his cronies altering Marxism to suit his purposes. So you can say that I believe that Obama is a Marxist-Obamaist. Sure it doesn't work like Marxist-Leninist but it is accurate. Obama beleives in a command economy where he gets to tell health insurance professionals, medical professionals, energy providers, energy consumers, investment bankers, corporate executives, corporate bondholders and Americans in general how they can live their lives. It is marxist-Socialist in nature with a distinctive flavoring of a lawyer that never held a productive job in his life and always dealt in the victimology industries of America, like ACORN and SEIU.Ask what Obama thinks that isn't on the TelePrompter and you get a more incoherent, rambling, babbling non-answer than Bush ever delivered, period.I hope you all caught Saturday Night Live where they stuck it to Obama hard over what an abject failure his economic policies are… those damn racists.

  39. November 24, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    Dave, I've sent you 2 submissions in the last week that never posted. Am I being censored or are you having technical difficulties?

  40. November 25, 2009 at 1:58 am

    You liberals should start running for the hills now and beat the rush.Two news stories, if you had any intellectual honesty, should be making you rethink your "beliefs".The first is that the British National Health Service has refused to administer a bowel and breast cancer drug, called Avastin, to its patients for the simple reason that the drug "exceeds the cost per patient budgetary allocations". Avastin has been shown to reduce matasticized breast and bowel cancers in up to 5,000 cancer patients in England. But NICE ( the oxymoronic National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence) has said that its too expensive and not an effective use of NICE resources. Found here. So in one story we have a "death panel" of bureaucrats that have rationed healthcare in England because budgetary numbers are more important than the 5,000 Britons that would have benefited from this cancer treatment. You liberals wish to cite England and Canada as success stories for nationalized healthcare. There are no US examples of socialized medicine actually working here. Actually we have very few stories of the US government working, period. But we have tons of examples of where nationalized medicine has failed over and over again. Second story is that a hacker has hacked into the e-mail files of British and American "scientists" working on global warming. these e-mails detail how the scientists can't explain the lack of temperature increase and that they should use statistical "tricks" (their words) to compensate. Oh, and be sure to delete these e-mails so they won't be available for any Freedom of Information Act inquiries. They had little to fear with that since Glenn Beck has done more stories on this than the entirity of the MLM combined. THe story is hereYou liberals do NOT have the answers, do not have the TRUTH on your side. You have your truths, which you, as a group, are forced to lie about in order to keep them true to you. That is why this healthcare bill must die. That is why Cap and Trade must die. They are bills built on lies and flawed data. I've said it once and I will say it again: healthcare reform and cap and tax are not about reform, they are completely about CONTROL and POWER over Americans. Your house of cards is coming down.

  41. November 25, 2009 at 5:17 am

    The 338-person guest list was a mix of wonky Washington, Hollywood A-listers, prominent figures from the Indian community in the U.S., and Obama friends, family and campaign donors. and we paid for this we paid for his campaign donners wow

  42. November 26, 2009 at 1:19 am

    Another fraudulent aspect of liberalism is the narratives used to describe the opponents of liberalism. Remember how many on this blog used the death of the census taker in Kentucky to link the anti-Obama sentiments of the "teabaggers" as part in parcel of how on the frayed ends of sanity the right-wing is? If any of you dispute this, you can go back to the "teabagger" thread and see for yourself. At any rate, liberals were 'woe is me"-ing the end of civility and how radicalized and insane the right has become since the election of Obama as demostrated by the census worker that was hanged with "FED" marked on his chest.Like many other liberal narratives proven to be lies ("man-made global warming is settled science"; "abortions just destroy a mass of cells"; "healthcare reform will save us money and end the deficit"; "the US is out of the recession"; "a majority of Americans approve of Obama's job performance", et al) so too has this one been proven to be a lie. Turns out that the census worker committed suicide as part of an insurance scam. The worker took out not one but TWO life insurance policies. Seems that he devised this plan to make himself a martyr of the Obama Administration in order to get around the whole "no payout in the event of suicide" clause that appears in every life insurance policy. With the global warming scientist scam, the fact that blind devotion to diversity caused the Fort Hood shooting, and the British National Health Service killing 5,000 Britons by denying Avastin to their patients because one dose exceeds the budget for medication, Obama's job approval rating at 45% (less than the percentage that voted for him by 8%) and now the suicide of the supposed Obama Census worker, you liberals will have a hard time enjoying your thanksgiving day turkey with all the crow you have to eat. But like all of the wasted money on your worthless stimulus package and all of the trillions your guys in Washington are planning to add to the debt with Cap-n-tax and nationalized healthcare, you will just have generations to come eat your crow for you.Happy Thanksgiving.

  43. November 28, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    The Repigs are really hateful, UNfunny people, aren't they?Some jackass calling himself "Jerry Dagna" left a hateful message in my inbox on Facebook last night.I have no idea who this person is, but he's a sexist pig who seems to accuse anyone who disagrees with him of being on welfare and on food stamps.He also thinks being divorced is a crime.

  44. ccn
    November 30, 2009 at 7:18 am

    Huckabee is in a serious jam, nine years ago he gave clemency to the man who is now wanted for killing four uniformed police in a Tacoma coffee shop.

  45. December 2, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    Liberal Patriot. I do believe that it is you that has the comprehension problem. I gave you the url to look it up and it shows democrats in office well after the dates you lists. You (liberals) complain when I don't provide url's or "proof" and don't read when I do.

  46. December 2, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    Elvis, I will match you lie for lie, Obama versus Palin. You can go first.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: