As Always, The Left is Dealing From The Bottom Of The Deck

“Angry mob”, “racists”, “extremists”, “unAmerican”, “right-wing terrorists”, “astroturf”, and did I mention “racists”? Especially racists. All these words are being used to describe opponents of Obama’s policies, and sadly, not just by the ignorant troglodytes of the left-wing blogosphere, but by leaders of the Democrat party.

At the moment, we are seeing an uptick in accusations of racism. While the President pretends to stand above it all, everyone from Jimmy Carter to Maureen Dowd, to Maxine Waters to Janeane Garofalo are flagrantly employing the race card. Why? It seems that the more unpopular Obama’s policies get, the more the card gets used.

obamagetoutofjailcc2

Rush Limbaugh just quoted the NYTs article  on his show: As Race Debate Grows, Obama Steers Clear of It: “B.S.”! , he says, the Obama administration is behind it!

We can’t really say that for sure, but we can point out that we saw the same tactic used during the campaign.

racecard

It was used quite effectively against the Clintons, and let’s not forget this oft repeated, groan inducing line he used during stump speeches:

June 20, Jacksonville Florida:

“We know what kind of campaign they’re going to run,” said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. “They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. ‘He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?’”

Nobody but Obama was mentioning that he was black. We were mentioning his troubling radical background, and radical, far left/communist supporters and associations. Just as we are, now. You can see this concern reflected in tea party signs like these:

obama socialist

tea-party-signs

socialism destroys

socialism not the change

So some of the savvier race-baiters started equating the word “Socialist” with the “N word”.

I’m told denizens of lefty blogs lament that the tea party protests get more attention in the media than their protests did. Yes, seriously.

Never mind that it took only a small handful Code Pink crones to bring out a media stampede of sympathetic coverage wherever they went. Never mind that now that Obama is the President, their puny protests are no longer covered. The media  covered left wing protests extensively, and studiously avoided covering them in a negative light. Literally hundreds of tea parties have taken place since Obama took office, and most have been  ignored. The tea parties that have been covered have been subject to scathing criticism.

Members of the left-wing media (we no longer call them MSM) go out of their way to seek out the more extreme members of conservative protests, and then those are often grossly mischaracterized as this black gun aficionado was on MSNBC.

Tea party critics in the media are appalled by the Obama/Hitler comparisons which are done primarily by Democrat Lyndon LaRouche supporters.

Where were these critics during the Bush years, when Bush was compared to Hitler on an almost daily basis by the left? What was one of the left’s favorite nicknames for President Bush? Bushitler?

The Bush/Nazi theme was standard at all anti-Bush protests:

bushitler

Where was the media when protesters’ signs reflected their demented, violent, deathwishes against the President?

headshotringo

I don’t remember anyone in the leftwing media having much to say about the hardcore extremism on display at anti-Bush protests.

But they are working overtime to portray Obama’s opponents as racists.

Charles Krauthammer called it “the last refuge of the liberal scoundrel”.

Baldilocks calls it an “all purpose cudgel” :

I would say that those who hurl the racism epithet toward critics of President Obama don’t expect the charge to make sense. Sense isn’t necessary due to the fact that the racist label has become such an effective destroyer of careers and reputations in the last thirty-five years, the accusers expect the charge to have the same power that it has had over that time period. It’s the Tar Baby of tar babies, ironically enough, and woe to the white human being who is unfortunate enough to be stuck to it.

For the sycophants of President Obama specifically, crying racism has become an easy way to avoid addressing  his long-articulated leftism, his incipient fascism, his lawlessness, his mendaciousness and his general executive incompetence his studied indifference toward adhering to proven executive practices, even his own stated methods.

But what happens when the weapon is used too much?

Victor Davis Hansen believes this ploy will result in another 5% drop in the polls for Obama:

In the wake of Joe Wilson’s crude outburst, many network commentators (and Jimmy Carter, of course) are weighing in on the new racism that supposedly explains 1) rising opposition to Obamacare and 2) the president’s sinking polls. I think this is a disastrous political move to save a health-care plan that simply has not appealed to a majority of Americans. I suspect it will result in another 5-point poll slide.

To prove their charge, those who allege racism would have to show empirically that the present angry rhetoric eclipses what was said about and done to Bush. It does not yet.

We don’t see the word “hate” used in mainstream publications like The New Republic and the Guardian, as it was during the Bush years. (Even worse, really unspeakable things were done to Bush in novels and films.) “You lie” is about on par with the past statements of a Rep. Pete Stark or a Howard Dean (“I hate Republicans”), or the booing Democrats at the 2005 State of the Union. The extremists at the demonstrations are in smaller numbers so far than those who turned out against Bush and the Iraq War. A senior figure like John Glenn or Al Gore has not called the current president a Nazi or brownshirt.

Rasmussen reports that only 12% of Americans believe that racism is behind the opposition to Obama. But that won’t stop the Obamanuts from using the race card.

Advertisements

49 thoughts on “As Always, The Left is Dealing From The Bottom Of The Deck

  1. Pingback: Twitter Trackbacks for As Always, The Left is Dealing From The Bottom Of The Deck « Nice Deb [nicedeb.wordpress.com] on Topsy.com

  2. They are coming unraveled. The racist accusations are the lashing out of a wounded beast. The latest adverse publicity and votes against ACORN testify to the power of an angry public. We must continue the pressure.

    Like

  3. I think to deny any role racism may play in anti-Obama sentiment would be naive. Not to say that you, personally, are racist, or that everyone who hates Obama is racist, but you can’t deny that a large number of people are probably threatened by a powerful black man in the White House.

    Take the Implicit Attitudes Test if you have a couple minutes. You might be surprised by the results (I know I was). https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/selectatest.html

    Also, don’t forget that Glenn Beck and other conservative pundits have played the race card as well, claiming that the President hates white people, which is highly unlikely, considering his ethnic background and upbringing.

    Like

  4. The hypocrisy of the left should not surprise anyone anymore. They rode to the White House on a tide of hate for Bush and lies to cover up the past of their candidate and now they want to whine and cry about how mean everyone is. Grow the hell UP!

    If it was “free speech” for them to have pictures calling the sitting president an a$$hole, showing him with a bullet hole in his head, etc., it’s damned well free speech to disagree with THIS president.

    I have seen NOTHING on the right that even remotely compares to the evil, hateful, spiteful and EXTREMELY childish behavior exhibited by the left for the eight years of the Bush administration and I seriously doubt we will.

    Why is it the left can’t have a protest without it nearly turning into a riot, glass being broken, fights breaking out and when the right has a protest, the only fights that break out are caused by LEFTIES?

    I thought the left was the party of civility? Oh wait. This is another one of those “You do what makes ME feel good” deals from the left, right?

    Like

  5. Also, don’t forget that Glenn Beck and other conservative pundits have played the race card as well, claiming that the President hates white people, which is highly unlikely, considering his ethnic background and upbringing.

    Yeah, it was Bombing Billy Ayers that caused the thin-skinned messiah make the crack about his grandma being “a typical white person”, and the numerous other remarks about “white people” in his book. And it was the evil, evil teleprompter that made him say, right after admitting that he knew nothing about the case, that the “Cambridge Police has acted stupidly.”
    Have you listened to his books or actually read them? He’s as post-racial as Huey P. Newton.

    Like

  6. “I think to deny any role racism may play in anti-Obama sentiment would be naive. Not to say that you, personally, are racist, or that everyone who hates Obama is racist, but you can’t deny that a large number of people are probably threatened by a powerful black man in the White House.”

    You were on target until the very last phrase. To deny ANY role? Of course we can’t. There are still racists out there. But to say a LARGE number of critics to whom his skin color matters? I do deny it. That’s a unsupported assumption, and the burden of proof is on you. The only people I’ve noticed that are focused on his skin color are his supporters.

    Like

  7. which is highly unlikely, considering his ethnic background and upbringing.

    It’s exactly his background that gives people pause. Like his background sitting in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years, and calling his own grandmother "a typical white person.

    His kneejerk response to the Professor Gates controversy gives one pause as well.

    Then there is Obama’s Communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis:

    The controversial poems are included in the book, Black Moods, a collection edited by John Edgar Tidwell, a professor at the University of Kansas and expert on Davis’s writings and career. He confirms that Davis joined the Communist Party but that he publicly tried to deny his communist affiliations.

    Davis’ poem, “To the Red Army,” says that “rich industrialists” in Washington and London wanted Hitler to win and “wipe Communism from the globe.”

    One Davis poem, “Onward Christian Soldiers,” mocks the Christian hymn by the same name. It talks of Africans being killed with a “Christian gun” instead of a spear by the missionaries following “the religion of Sweet Jesus.” Another Davis poem refers to Christians “who buy righteousness like groceries.”

    Davis’ writings have become an issue because he became a father-figure to Obama, who is the leading Democratic candidate for president of the U.S., during their time in Hawaii. Obama acknowledges in his book, Dreams From My Father, that he knew and accepted advice from a black poet named “Frank” but doesn’t identify “Frank” by his full name. However, several sources, including Professor Gerald Horne and Dr. Kathryn Takara, have confirmed that “Frank” was in fact Frank Marshall Davis. Trevor Loudon, a New Zealand-based libertarian activist, researcher and blogger, first noted evidence that “Frank” was Frank Marshall Davis in a posting in March of 2007.

    In remarks at a reception of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) archives at the Tamiment Library at New York University, Horne, a contributing editor of the Communist Party journal Political Affairs, asserted that Davis had come into contact with Obama and his family in Hawaii and became the young man’s mentor, influencing his sense of identity and career path.

    Obama writes in Dreams From My Father that he saw “Frank” only a few days before he left Hawaii for college. He said that Davis called college an “advanced degree in compromise,” warned Obama not to forget his “people,” and not to “start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that shit.”

    http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff216.htm

    Glenn Beck wasn’t saying anything a lot of us weren’t already thinking.

    Like

  8. >>Have you listened to his books or actually read them? He’s as post-racial as Huey P. Newton.

    Let’s not forget Rev Jeremiah Wright, noted racist and anti-semite. How far do you think a white guy who spent 20 years in a KKK affiliated church would have gotten in politics? See Duke, David. How about a white guy making the statement “typical black person”. Think he would have gone far?

    These are some of the things that Beck was responding too. Had the show been on the other foot and a white guy had associated with the kind of people Obama did or said the things he did he wouldn’t have gotten past go.

    Nobody said that this country was free from racism. But that’s not the argument the left is making. They are trying to equate any criticism of The One with racism. It’s wrong, it’s despicable and it’s backfiring.

    Like

  9. So can we agree then that people on both sides are playing the race card?

    It just seems weird that people are so concerned by possible anti-white sentiments, but not anti-black sentiments, which, historically have been a much bigger problem in this country.

    And no, I shouldn’t have said a “large number.” Maybe just a decent number. Because I really don’t think the number is as small as everyone would like it to be.

    Like

  10. >>So can we agree then that people on both sides are playing the race card?

    I’m not sure that was ever in question. There have always been and always will be people on both sides who use despicable tactics.

    The difference here is that Democrats at the most senior levels including an ex-President (yeesh, I wish I could bleach that period from my brain) and members of Congress are trying to say that the majority complaints from conservatives about the Obama administration are race based. They are doing this because they know it’s a nuclear bomb in political discourse, there is no way to prove you aren’t a racist.

    The problem, and many senior Democrats are starting to realize this and run from it, is it’s patently false and it’s backfiring big time. Obama himself is smart enough to know it’s crap and he’s running from it as fast as possible.

    >>It just seems weird that people are so concerned by possible anti-white sentiments, but not anti-black sentiments, which, historically have been a much bigger problem in this country.

    I’m not judging Obama on history, it’s irrelevant to the policies he is enacting. I don’t like them. Pretty much any of them. I give him credit for not doing what he said he would do and running away from victory in Iraq and listening (so far) to his generals on the ground in Afghanistan. But that’s about it. And he could be purple with orange stripes for all I care about that. I just hate what his policies are going to do to this country if they ever get enacted. Obama and the Democrats are the ones who never stop talking about race.

    >>And no, I shouldn’t have said a “large number.” Maybe just a decent number. Because I really don’t think the number is as small as everyone would like it to be.

    Fair enough. But I don’t think the number is as big as you think it is. Importantly, I also don’t think it’s a sentiment to the right side of the aisle. Remember, there’s only one former kleagle in the Congress and he’s not a Republican.

    And you should also remember that this debate cuts both ways. Obama got over 97% of the black vote. Is that not racist? Bill Clinton sure as hell thought so in the primary.

    Like

  11. It just seems weird that people are so concerned by possible anti-white sentiments, but not anti-black sentiments, which, historically have been a much bigger problem in this country.

    Not so weird when the many of the policies intended to remediate racism against blacks have now been with us for generations, with questionable results. Many of these policies mandated that color and gender trump merit, especially in public service positions, which tended to injure the public in small and large ways, and yet after decades of remediation, these policies have become institutional and have lead to compulsory policies of “diversity”, which do not improve the quality of public service that we receive as the governed, and the cohesiveness of a national identity. The rise of hypenated America only reinforced the underlying sense of entitlement, and we are all poorer as a nation for it. And don’t dare say it out loud, either, because you will automatically be branded a racist.

    Like

  12. The animosity towards whites some are concerned about comes from the Oval Office.

    The few bigots out there who may be opposing Obama because of his skin tone are a very very small minority, can be found in both parties, and they have no power.

    Like

  13. Kurt, don’t you understand? People are offended that their opposition to Obama’s policies are being devalued by a charge that their personal racism is at the root of their opinions.

    “Historically” is the right word. Last year the American people elected a black man as President. Don’t live your life in the half-dream world of “historically.” Look at the facts that exist now.

    More attention is being paid to the racism of Obama supporters toward anti-Obama-opponents (which does not necessarily mean white people) because the Obama supporters’ racism is the one most actively exhibited right now.

    I’m sure that some citizens (and again, no reason to think they are all white) dislike Mr. Obama because of his race, but general accusations of racism toward everyone who doesn’t support his policies is childishly manipulative or profoundly ignorant.

    Like

  14. Pingback: GayPatriot » Of New Jersey and Nutjobs

  15. What the Dems don’t understand is that they’re not calling Republicans racists and stupid and nazis and haters and….

    They’re calling voters those things. There wasn’t much Republican love at these events. I don’t recall seeing any posters for a Republican, I could be wrong, I hadn’t thought about it until just now, but I don’t remember any. I don’t see any in the pictures I took.
    There were a bunch praising Beck and Foxnews (I know, they’re “Republicans”), Beck isn’t a Republican.

    So instead of people just ignoring it as background noise, they’re listening.

    If only the GOP were competent enough to take advantage of this. They need to start talking about shrinking gov’t.
    But they’re not, they’re arguing over how large to make it.

    The GOP will probably win big, but have they learned anything?

    Like

  16. I have always remembered the statement Clarence Thomas made in his television interview concerning the nomination to the court. He said growing up in the south he never feared the men in the white kkk robes. He knew who they were. It was the men in those nice suits that set in those confirmation hearing, referring to liberals that attempted to destroy him. kentucky

    Like

  17. Thanks, JackStraw. I take pride in the fact that I make every effort to respectfully disagree. But I think it’s a rare trait on both sides. Some of the things I’ve seen from NiceDeb and commenters here have been decidedly disrespectful and rude. I think we can disagree without resorting to name-calling and degradation. Some of you have made some good points, and I can understand and appreciate where you’re coming from. My hope is that that goes both ways.

    Like

  18. First of all, if you didn’t want people to comment on your posts, you would disable them. Or you could set it so that you have to approve all comments first. If you’re publicly blogging about politics, it’s reasonable to expect comments from people who disagree.

    I was referring to the rudeness in your posts, though. It seems you don’t have a single respectful thing to say about anyone who’s left of center. Not that you have to like any of us. But you don’t have to act like a little kid on a playground and call people names and bash people based simply on their political convictions rather than their character.

    I understand you have children; are you at all worried about what kind of example you’re setting with some of the things you say about people?

    Like

  19. Kurt-

    I meant what I said. But do not confuse my appreciation for your relatively reasonable arguments for a license to be a jerk.

    Make no mistake, Deb is a conservative and this is her place. She is also my friend, you aren’t. She is visited daily by some of the most vile trolls from the left and I completely understand why she is less sympathetic to you than I am. And if you mention her kids again, I will not only retract what I said before but I, and every other commenter here, will kick the crap out of you and your dumb ass arguments without mercy.

    Don’t be an asshole in someone else’s place. Remember, you’re a liberal and you’re better than us. You preach that crap daily but it loses a lot of authenticity when you act like a little bitch.

    Like

  20. Yes, I can be somewhat hyperbolic and rude when referring to the left. That doesn’t include all Democrats, or everyone right of center.

    The far left, I have no use for because I see the damage they’re doing to the country every day.

    My kids don’t read my blog.

    Like

  21. I was referring to the rudeness in your posts, though. It seems you don’t have a single respectful thing to say about anyone who’s left of center. Not that you have to like any of us.

    Well thanks for acknowledging that we don’t have to like those who are left of center. I feel so much better now that I have your approval. I think you are missing some key points here, the first of which is that it is her soapbox, not yours. Second, as a member of a profession that that is fairly sensitive to attitude, I’m afraid I can’t agree with your conclusions about Deb’s posts. I can refer you to places that have rude posts and are fairly rough on any one to the left of Attila the Hun, but this ain’t one of them. The whole velvet glove rebuke thing strikes me as similar to the whining in Congress that a) presumes that bipartisanship is necessary to governance, and b) that bipatisanship actually means “You have to agree with me.”

    As for calling people names and bashing people for their political convictions, you might try walking on this side of the aisle for a spell. Even a patient person would grow weary of the “Teabaggers!” “Birthers!” “Rethuglicans!” and my personal favorite “Racists!”. Considering more often than not, such cries issue forth from people who couldn’t defend their “opinions” with a teleprompter feeding them all the right words to say, or those who have personally profited and built a power base on race hustling, I have found that its pretty easy to dismiss their complaints as projection of the first order, and right now, your side is pretty shrill in their name-calling and divisivness. I’d like nothing more than a debate, but when your side wants to treat any discussion as a war to be won at all costs, a cry for civility rings a little hollow.

    I understand you have children; are you at all worried about what kind of example you’re setting with some of the things you say about people?

    You mean by standing up for what she believes in and teaching them how to defend their beliefs? I’d say “How dare you try to bring her kids into this”, but at this point, it doesn’t matter because you did. If you are really worried about rudeness, be glad you didn’t try this contemptable approach with me.

    Like

  22. I didn’t mean to be an asshole by mentioning your kids, NiceDeb. If I hit a nerve with that and caused you any offense, I’m sorry. I thought mentioning that you’re a parent would help me make a point.

    I understand that this is your soapbox and your place, and you have every right to say whatever you want. I support that completely. But I stand by my statement that if you didn’t want people to comment on your posts, you wouldn’t allow it. I like to read your blog, to stay up-to-date on what’s going on on the conservative side of things (and sometimes, when I feel like something is totally off-base, I can’t help it and feel the need to speak up). I guess the idealist in me assumes that comments are an invitation to discussion. From now on, I’ll behave and keep my comments to myself.

    Blackiswhite: I would just like to say that at the town hall discussions on healthcare, I don’t think liberals were the ones being shrill and hindering the debate. Tell me if I’m wrong. Also, remember that less than a year ago, the people on the other side of the aisle were being called names for opposing the President and his politics. In less than a year, we’ve gone from being un-American for disliking the President, to being un-American for supporting him. I think we’ve both been on both sides here.

    I apologize to you all. I shouldn’t have brought up NiceDeb’s status as a parent. I shouldn’t have spoken up at all, really. I should know better by now.

    Like

  23. >>I apologize to you all. I shouldn’t have brought up NiceDeb’s status as a parent. I shouldn’t have spoken up at all, really. I should know better by now.

    Dude, don’t play the martyr. Argue your point all you want. Just don’t go where you know shouldn’t.

    Pick on me all you want, no kids. Deal?

    Like

  24. Oh and pick one name, kurt or turrlebutt.

    And when you pick the name you want to go with, apologize to Deb.

    Bringing up anyones kids is pretty messed up.

    Like

  25. Blackiswhite: I would just like to say that at the town hall discussions on healthcare, I don’t think liberals were the ones being shrill and hindering the debate.

    No, at the townhalls, the purple shirts didn’t bother with being shrill. They moved straight to intimation and violence. Shrill usually came from the elected officials with the (D) after their name, as they sought various ways to weasel out of shameful things they said about constituents (Brian Baird, call your office), or had the unmitigated gall to demand angry constituents show ID before they would respond to them…even when they consistently refuse measures that would require the showing of ID to vote (Jim Moran, call your office).

    Also, remember that less than a year ago, the people on the other side of the aisle were being called names for opposing the President and his politics. In less than a year, we’ve gone from being un-American for disliking the President, to being un-American for supporting him.

    Really? Un-American for supporting him? Then why, praytell, did Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer think it was so important to call those of us who are opposed to their prohibitively expensive and frequently unconsititional agenda “UnAmerican” and do so in print? That made her little crocodile tears presser today that much more galling, BTW, as she is one of the biggest inciters flapping her jaw into a microphone in the country today.

    I get that you are concerned about polarization in this country today. Whether you choose to believe it or not, I am too. I have kids. I don’t want them to have to live through what I see coming, but expecting conservatives to abandon everything we know about what is good and right about this country and simply stand by as mute witnesses to criminally serious attempts to fundamentally change this country forever is not a solution. The silent majority isn’t likely to react in any serious way when you tell them that what they know is wrong. They have endured such threats before, but when you take the next step and try to take everything they have, micromanage their lives, and tell them it is for their own good, you’d be a fool to not see the coming Great Pushback™.

    Comment or don’t comment. Be meek or be bold. I much rather prefer dealing with someone who will try to defend their opinions rather than toss a bomb and leave, but if you refuse to live boldly, don’t expect us to dwell on your martyrdom, because for us, it simply won’t exist.

    Like

  26. You say, “Be meek or be bold.” Absolutely. We should all be bold and stand up for what we believe in. But there’s a difference between being bold and being an outright dickhead. Interrupting someone who’s trying to speak and screaming at them (like at the townhall meetings) is rude and disrespectful, is it not? Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr. were bold without resorting to violence or hysterical screaming. You know, the whole “be the change you want to see in the world” thing. Be bold, but don’t sacrifice your integrity and decency, right?

    Like

  27. Kurt, what I have noticed in my nearly 40 years on this planet is that the Left fails to understand that respect is a two-way street, and that it doesn’t mean simply “being nice to someone”.

    Take the latest kerfluffle as an example. Congressman Joe Wilson. A man who has spent his life serving this country, not just in politics, but also the military. He raised four sons who went on to serve also. Like the dutiful Congressman that he is, he went to Barry the Blessed™’s command performance last week as one of the captive audience. He had a front row seat for the President of the United States calling those who disagree with him and have real issues with the veracity of many of his irresponsible statements about health care reform liars. He sat quietly and listened as he proceeded to demonize businesses that he wants the government to compete with, using our tax dollars, and then sat quietly until he could take no more of the President repeating the same lies he has flawlessly delivered before. You can say that the Congressman was disrepsectful when he said “You lie!”. I say that the President showed a marked lack of respect for we the people with that speech. It was an insult to our intellect, and when the government constantly feels the need to do things for us, and tell us it is for our own good, it is not showing us respect. The censure following the apology was a farce. How do I know? In 1993, I interned in the Canadian House Of Commons. Parliament has strict rules about how you address other members. One of the biggies is that you cannot call another MP a liar. This, however, did not result in increased civility and respect. It resulted in me witnessing daily more ways to call someone a liar without calling them a liar than I have ever seen.

    You keep talking about people screaming and interupting at townhall meetings. I haven’t witnessed it. What I have withnessed is members of Congress showing contempt for constituents who are bone-weary of their elected officials picking their pockets and telling them that it isn’t their money, or continually increasing their power without regard to whether or not they even have the legitimate authority to take the power they are taking from Americans. But as you have alluded to, perspective is what defines the experience for us.

    As for integrity and decency, both are rare in politics. I’d settle for some consistency without double standards from the left, and a consensus that the government is a necessary evil and should be tolerated only so far as is neccessary to protect the integrity of the nation and its institutions from the right.

    Like

  28. Pingback: Moralia - Worth a click

  29. You keep talking about people screaming and interupting at townhall meetings. I haven’t witnessed it.

    Well, Specter was shouted down, but he deserved it:

    Specter was shouted down when he said that lawmakers divide up the bills into sections and have their staffs read portions because, “We have to make judgments very fast.”

    Like

  30. Looks like the screaming and shouting isn’t confined to town hall meetings, either. A loon started shouting at the President during his speech at the University of Maryland yesterday:

    According to the Associated Press, the man apparently said, “Obama you’re a liar. Obama, your health care kills children. Abortion is murder.”

    This isn’t acceptable. I know that people get frustrated when the administration and Congress repeat the same nonsense over and over, and they want to finally break through the facade of bland platitudes and blithe assurances and shake things up. But this isn’t the way.

    Like

  31. >>This isn’t acceptable. I know that people get frustrated when the administration and Congress repeat the same nonsense over and over, and they want to finally break through the facade of bland platitudes and blithe assurances and shake things up. But this isn’t the way.

    I have mixed feelings on this. I do respect the office of the President but when the person in that office lies repeatedly and tries to act like an autocrat I think it’s the duty of the citizens to speak up. Obama isn’t real good at listening to his critics and our elected officials aren’t pushing back nearly enough.

    Obama claimed that illegal aliens wouldn’t be covered under his ideal plan. Joe Wilson called him a liar and the nation went into nanny mode to scold him. Now, as many of us predicted, Obama is pushing amnesty for illegals. Presto, no more illegals. Joe Wilson was right, Obama is a liar.

    http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-ties-immigration-to-health-care-battle/print/

    This is the most dishonest administration in memory. I’m not sure the normal rules of decorum apply when the President is a bald face liar.

    Like

  32. This is the most dishonest administration in memory. I’m not sure the normal rules of decorum apply when the President is a bald face liar.

    My point exactly. When he doesn’t treat the office with respect and and demonstrates disrespect and contempt for citizens who dare oppose him, it isn’t the Marquis of Queensbury rules any more.

    Like

  33. Pingback: Something Fishy Here: Pelosi Says She’s Clueless about ACORN Child Sex Scandal and Vote to Halt Funds to ACORN « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  34. Pingback: O’Keefe and Giles… Exposing ACORN Child Prostitution & Tax Fraud in SAN DIEGO! Yet More ACORN Corruption, When Will MSM Jump In? (video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  35. Pingback: The Dying Mainstream Media = “Fringe Media” (political cartoons, video) « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  36. I do think people tend to adjust their expectations of others based on their own tendencies. A person who would return a lost item, is likely to go to a lost and found to seek what they have left behind. A liar will tend to be distrustful of what other people say. And, of course, people fearful of the truth generally have good reason to be fearful.

    This administration shows a great amount of distrust towards the public and a fear of discussion (which may lead to the truth).

    The Democrats are well aware of the power of the internet to sway opinions – apparently even when logic would generally dictate otherwise. I certainly felt that, inspite of Obama’s significant charisma on the podium, his proposed policies were not (are not now) the direction in which this country should move. And yet, the masses elected him.

    He was on a quickly swinging pendulum and should certainly live in fear of that pendulum swinging back. Just, by the way, anyone overpaid and underworked should fear losing his job. Eventually, gravity and good sense do previal. In our case, I just hope it is not too late.

    Like

  37. Pingback: Beating a Dead Horse… House Minority Leader Boehner Says He Believes ObamaCare Is Dead « Frugal Café Blog Zone

  38. Pingback: Moralia - You’re all racists

  39. Pingback: Nice Deb Photoshops « Nice Deb

  40. Pingback: GayPatriot » The Presumption of the Know-it-All LeftDemanding conservatives apologize for rhetoric on the right,they regularly ignore (if not excuse) on the left

  41. I don’t uenarstdnd where you are getting your poll numbers. I would love for this to be true, but all the polls I have seen since the economy tanked are advantage Obama.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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