Gingrich’s anti-judicial tirade is an attack on liberty
As historian Newt Gingrich sees it, the American people are suffering “a fundamental assault on our liberties by the courts.” Unless we fight back against this “grotesquely dictatorial” judiciary, our nation is destined to slide toward “a secular, European sort of bureaucratic socialist society.”
More specifically, Gingrich argues that the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has proved itself to be “anti-American” and thus has forfeited its right to exist. Congress, he says, should simply pass a law to abolish the court altogether, false concerns about “separation of power” be damned.
Gingrich also proposes to haul a series of federal judges before Congress where they can be forced to defend unpopular decisions. As he explained in an appearance on “Face the Nation” Sunday, he would even empower federal marshals to arrest any judges who refused to heed congressional demands for testimony.
According to Gingrich, such steps would have been applauded by our founding fathers, who feared from the beginning that unelected judges would become a tyrannical ruling class. He and his aides lay out that theory, complete with its alleged historical underpinnings, in “Bringing the Courts Back Under the Constitution,” a 28-page white paper available at the Gingrich campaign website.
Those who take the time to read the paper will find that it is less the work of Newt’s inner historian than of Newt’s inner fascist. It represents a profound distortion of our nation’s history, the writings of our Founding Fathers and the basic core of the American philosophy of government. It is dishonest history.
Consider, for example, Gingrich’s underhanded, deceptive attempt to draft Alexander Hamilton as an supporter of his anti-judicial crusade. Using selected quotes from the Federalist Papers, Hamilton is depicted by Gingrich as a supporter of efforts to use the legislative and executive branches to rein in a tyrannical, overbearing judiciary.
That is a 180-degree reversal of Hamilton’s actual position. He saw the courts as vulnerable guarantors of freedom whose independence must be preserved at all costs against the likes of Gingrich.
In Federalist Papers #78, for example, Hamilton writes that the judiciary “is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.”
In other words, while Gingrich proposes to undermine judicial independence, Hamilton warns us to take “all possible care” to ensure that the judiciary is protected against such attacks.
The debate between Gingrich and Hamilton goes on and on.
Here’s Gingrich:
“A judicial branch that is largely unaccountable and not subject to meaningful checks and balances can — and does — routinely issue constitutional rulings that threaten individual liberties, compromise national security, undermine American culture, and ignore the consent of the governed.”
Here’s Hamilton:
“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution…. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
Gingrich denies that “the Constitution empowered the Supreme Court with final decision-making authority about the meaning of the Constitution.” Hamilton, in the excerpt cited above, explicitly says otherwise.
Gingrich proposes that judges must be kept in fear of their jobs through such steps as impeachment and the abolition of courts that offend public opinion. Hamilton warns that “from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security.”
But here’s the crux of the issue. It is a commonplace within the conservative movement to point out that “we are not a democracy, we are a republic.” In plain terms, the saying makes no sense; a republic is a type of democracy, just as an orange is a type of fruit.
That said, the phrase does attempt to express a larger and fundamental truth. We are not a democracy in its purest form, in which the majority can outvote the minority on every issue without regard to individual freedom. We exist under a limited government, a government of laws not of men, where the power of the majority is constrained. “A republic, not a democracy” is intended as an endorsement of that principle.
As we’ve seen, however, the majority does not like to feel itself constrained. It gets frustrated when it is told that on matters of fundamental importance, such as religion and free speech, the viewpoint of the majority does not matter because, well, we’re a republic not a democracy and certain things are off limits to the majority. And it is usually the courts that have to deliver that unwelcome message to the majority.
As Hamilton wrote:
“Considerate men of every description ought to prize whatever will tend to beget or fortify that temper in the courts: as no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be a gainer today. And every man must now feel, that the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress.”
That final sentence — ” … the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress” — seems directed across the centuries right at Gingrich.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
927 comments Add your comment
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
5:47 pm
Gringrich is proving once again that he is not even a good historian and the stupidity of the party base that supports this kind of blowhard is just insulting to American principles.
USMC
December 19th, 2011
5:48 pm
I think I predicted this didn’t I, boys and girls!
I actually gave you a Christmas present downstairs JAY.
Tirade??? Nice word selection for slander…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
5:49 pm
A judicial branch that is largely unaccountable and not subject to meaningful checks and balances
Newt, you are wrong again. Try taking Con Law 101. If you dont like the decision of the judicial branch, then you can change the law or change the constitution. That is the check and balance built into our system.
USMC
December 19th, 2011
5:50 pm
Once again, Merry Christmas, Jay!
(colorful charts and all)
NEWT’S LEAD COLLAPSES
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151616/Gingrich-Lead-Romney-Among-Republicans-Collapses.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines%20-%20Politics
USMC
December 19th, 2011
5:53 pm
“You are oh so wrong, USMC. Why wait for tomorrow?”
LOL! Touche JAY! That was funny. Thanks for the good laugh!
USMC
December 19th, 2011
5:54 pm
MAN BRA, much??
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/19/barney_frank_wears_revealing_shirt_on_house_floor.html
Bumper Sticker
December 19th, 2011
5:56 pm
The way to a Newt’s heart is through his beltway
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
6:03 pm
Someone find a proctologist….we need to find Newt’s brain!
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:05 pm
So, Newt wants to be the new Andy Jackson?
I haven’t read this yet…should be interesting to see his rewrite of history…course he IS a Carpetbagger from Pennsylvania…long tradition there…
jconservative
December 19th, 2011
6:06 pm
Nice piece of writing Jay.
Keep Up is correct, the Check is built into the system.
Hamilton in the Federalist Papers said one thing, the Constitutional Convention said another. The Convention debated who would say when a law of Congress would be Unconstitutional. Idea floated were a committee of the President, Speaker and President of the Senate among others. In the end they decided to let the first Congress make the decision. And like today’s congress the first one could not make a decision.
Then John Marshall stepped into the vacuum and made a decision. And his decision has worked for over 200 years.
People get upset with “activist” judges. But only when activists judges make decisions they do not like. If the activist decision is OK with them, then miraculously it is not an “activist” decision.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 19th, 2011
6:06 pm
I saw ‘Meet the Press’ yesterday. Let me just say this about old Newt.
That man is BAT SHYTE CRAZY.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 19th, 2011
6:09 pm
It seems as if even Kyle isn’t too happy with the current crop today
He touts Jeb Bush as the next coming
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
6:10 pm
Well jconservative, I am now part of that evil elite Lawyer Class as Newt claims. Lawyer Envy!
USNC
December 19th, 2011
6:13 pm
attacking the messenger and saying nothing about the message is past annoying. move on tool.
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:15 pm
Yeah, what Bruni said…
“Self-Adoration Reaches Newt Heights”
By FRANK BRUNI
“You have to take another politician’s ego, double it, and add cheese and a side of fries to get to Gingrich. An especially heaping, unhealthy diet of self-regard slogs through his veins.”
” If Obama is The One, Gingrich is The Plus-Size One. ”
“If you watched the debate Thursday, you could sense, from the clench of his jaw, that he wasn’t merely biting his tongue but making an unhappy meal of it.”
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:18 pm
USMC
And just what would that message be?
That dog t*rd has such an inflated self-image he thinks the first commandment refers to him…
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:20 pm
Ooops…I left out Bruni’s best line…
“He thinks a lot about himself and thinks of himself a lot.”
carlosgvv
December 19th, 2011
6:21 pm
Those who have bothered to notice and have the education to see it have seen the Republicans becoming more and more fascist. It goes without saying that most of the simple Republican electorate would not know a facist from a faucet. Let’s just hope that enough independent voters see what a disaster Newt and the other fascist’s would be to our country.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
6:22 pm
I think Gingrich overstepped here and made a bad tactical statement. Instead, he should have advocated for the “type” of judges conservatives want …………… those who interpret the Constitution rather than usurp it.
That said:
It’s very easy to know when Congress violates the Constitution and very easy to reign them in.
It’s very easy to know when the President violates the Constitution and very easy to reign him/her in.
It’s very easy to know when SCOTUS violates the Constitution but very hard to reign them in.
Just sayin’ …………………….
RG Readmore
December 19th, 2011
6:24 pm
The joke that is the GOP primary is getting less and less funny, and more crazed by the day. Now Gingrich wants to competely side step the Constitution and balance of power because he doesn’t like the decision of the justices. Talk about anti-American. He doesn’t just want small government, he wants to completely dismantle it. Go back into your hole Newt.
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:25 pm
scout
Well, he does put himself in the company of Jackson, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt.. soooo…
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:25 pm
Where’s jay’s outrage about Obama signing a bill that actually takes away liberty? Hmmm
Guess he’s ignoring Obama signing it.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 19th, 2011
6:26 pm
Ok, I thought this was a big deal when he said it.
I’m glad others noticed it too. Newt is a sad, sad, tempest in a teapot.
The real ticket – Mittens/Tebow 2012
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:27 pm
carlos
Not to argue too much with that, but the Dems seem to find habeas corpus and impediment…fascist? Yep.
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:28 pm
Jm
Sssshhhh…that’ll get you held incommunicado with no charges these days…
Brosephus
December 19th, 2011
6:28 pm
jcon
Couldn’t have said it better. Newt is the perfect example of what’s wrong with our political system. Anybody with common sense know’s that he is the complete opposite of what we need, yet he’s a top tier candidate for the highest office in the land. What will the history books say about us when it’s time to explain what in the hell was going on in this day and age?
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
6:29 pm
“Where’s jay’s outrage ”
blogspot.com is ready when you are
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:30 pm
Oh. And newt’s a moron in so many ways. But we already knew that.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
6:31 pm
Its very easy to say, but difficult to be responsible in saying:
It’s very easy to know when Congress violates the Constitution and very easy to reign them in.
It’s very easy to know when the President violates the Constitution and very easy to reign him/her in.
It’s very easy to know when SCOTUS violates the Constitution but very hard to reign them in.
So is the ACA constitutional? Congress said yes, the President said yes, some courts have said yes….and others have said yes. The people have said they want it. I wonder who the activists are?
Remember this claimed “easy” poster also has claimed that the President was not born in this country and later claimed that there was something in the imaginery Box 26 which became box 23……
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
December 19th, 2011
6:32 pm
Well, when I heard old Newt say that the other night I yelled out “Hot Dang!” He sure knows how to go after Judicial Activism. See, Judicial Activism is when the SC makes a ruling that favors the libruls. Upholding The Constitution is when the SC makes a ruling that favors the Conservatives. Most of us Rednecks and a whole bunch of other people besides want the SC to Uphold The Constitution.
That’s the reason why I’d like to see judges hauled onto the carpet when they make a ruling that’s Judicial Activism. They ought to be fired on the spot. That way, sooner or later all the judges will be Upholding The Constitution. The reason is because the Constitution is what we say it is.
Anyhow, I’d like to apologize for being so scarce on Bookman’s blog today. I was trying to learn all I could about the death of this Won Hung Lo, or whatever the name of the N. Korea leader was. They say they don’t know what killed him. Well, I can guess. He probly got a look in the mirror on that train and seen what the barber done to him and just decided to end it all. It looks like somebody just put a bowl over the top of his head and hacked off all the hair that didn’t fit inside. Down here we shoot barbers that give us a haircut like that.
Have a good night everybody.
USMC
December 19th, 2011
6:33 pm
“attacking the messenger and saying nothing about the message is past annoying. move on tool.”–usNc
–says the big bad blog bully! LOL!
Let me guess, you were picked on often in grade school and have not recovered and have been unsuccessful in life relishing the idea of successful people paying your sorry way through your miserable life….
JAY, are we now allowed alter blog names as this LOSER did? just curious.
If so, I’ve got a few ideas of my own.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:33 pm
Josef
I’ve already been consigned to the “penalty box” permanently, so to speak
Not a big deal really
At least I don’t cuss all the time like a lot of the liberals
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:33 pm
Doggone
I don’t agree with Jm much, but he’s made a valid point there…more than one of us here about want to know about that…outrage? I, too, wonder where it is…
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
6:34 pm
josef:
Yep …………… and how about these jewels I found ?
“If a constitutional amendment “trumps” a prior Supreme Court decision (as the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments trumped Dred Scott), it is because the text of the Constitution (where sufficiently clear) always prevails over a contrary holding of the Supreme Court.”
“Can the Supreme Court strike down a constitutional amendment and just reaffirm its earlier decision?”
“If the Supreme Court must treat the text of the amendment as prevailing over its contrary prior opinion, why does not the same principle apply to every text of the Constitution?”
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
6:36 pm
“I, too, wonder where it is…”
When you pay Jay’s salary, maybe you can dictate what he writes about. In the meantime, blogspot.com is ready for you too.
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:38 pm
Doggone
Have you no idea whatsoever of what the suspension of habeas corpus means?
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
6:39 pm
1) “Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers … a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.”
President Thomas Jefferson
2) “That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.”
James Madison
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:39 pm
Doggone
And just to clarify things, it wasn’t JUST Jay I was referring to on where’s the outrage…the whole country should be up in metaphoric arms over this…
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
6:40 pm
What is it with these spineless Republicans?
I can recall no other group of men in our history who have advocated that the legislative branch simply and cravenly cede so many of its Constitutional duties.
Mario Cuomo, for one, excoriated the US Congress for their naivety and willingness in simply giving up their responsibilities. And to arguably the worst administration in modern history, no less.
There are, in fact, entire books that have written on this horrible, modern day perversion of the separation of powers.
And at the time, I thought that one of the more cowardly proposals of the past 50 years, was the now infamous Line Item Veto that these screw ups dreamed .
But no. The jellyfish in Congress were just getting started.
Fast forward to Boy Emperor and his Reign of Error (2000 – 2008). Never mind his jaw dropping use of signing statements to circumvent said separation of powers. Which, along with other egregious abuses of power and the United States Constitution, got him in repeated hot water with the American Bar Association. (Like that mattered to these torturing, spying, habeus corpus hating quasi-fascists.)
To really up the Boy Emperor’s control, he desperately wanted to implement a “unilateral presidency”. Because a unitary presidency just wasn’t good enough.
And damn, if most of these panty-waist GOP representatives don’t pretty much agree..
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:41 pm
Josef
Misread your 6:28 earlier
Funny. Yeah. Blog posting is probably dangerous now. But I’ll risk it.
Paul
December 19th, 2011
6:41 pm
I was wondering when someone would expand upon the context of what Hamilton wrote. Leave it to you. Nicely done, Jay.
As long as Newt keeps doubling down and making voters aware, I think we’ll be just fine.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
6:42 pm
“Have you no idea whatsoever of what the suspension of habeas corpus means?”
I have an idea that if you want to comment on that and not on what Jay wrote, you need to start your own blog and DO IT. Or find a blogger that better fits what YOU want to talk about.
Jay is pretty flexible, but it’s past annoying when ANYONE comes here and immediately wants to talk about what Jay DIDN’T WRITE.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
6:43 pm
Speaking of the President:
http://kaching.tumblr.com/post/14408415141/american-presidents-in-uniform
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:44 pm
Josef
I think doggone works for the NSA
Bugger
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:47 pm
Obama should be setting America free instead of binding her in shackles.
One cuff on personal liberty, the other on the right to work.
Sad. Romney 2012.
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:47 pm
Doggone
Silly girl, I’m generally a one-man Jay PR Department…you’re just in a worse case of Mad Cow Disease than me today…and what I was talking about if you’d get over your snippy self for a minute was NOT to Jay personally nor an attempt to “ell him what to say and what not to. I leave that to you. It was instead a support of his posting this thread and bringing it to discussion the direction we’re headed…and the suspension of habeas corpus is the very foundation which would make it possible for the Newties of the country to pull it off…
And yet WE as a society are strangely silent on that one…
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 19th, 2011
6:48 pm
After Obama is elected again maybe he can fire the judges he doesn’t like.
Be careful what you wish for.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
6:48 pm
“I think doggone works for the NSA”
If that’s the best you can do…hon, you’re SLIPPING
Paul
December 19th, 2011
6:49 pm
“Speaking of the President:”
Santorum and Bachmann and Huntsman and Romney and Gingrich and…….
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
6:51 pm
“I don’t agree with Jm much, but he’s made a valid point there”
You supported what Jm said. That leaves you open to the same criticism. Like it or not.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:52 pm
Another lame Obama attempt to raise money by selling lottery access to the president
So lame and pathetic. I thought this guy was above this level of pandering. He’s like a used car salesman.
“What’s more, they’ve never done one of these dinners together — not even in 2007 or 2008.
And I personally can’t think of a First Couple I’d rather have dinner with than this one, because they’re not just the President and the First Lady — they’re Barack and Michelle.
Three grassroots supporters of this campaign will get that chance, and the opportunity to bring a guest.
How’s that for a holiday present for someone you love?”
josef
December 19th, 2011
6:55 pm
I said he made a valid point. And now, Missy, have you reached the point that you can no longer see that someone you may disagree with vehemently has made a valid point. That’s precisely the type of narrow mindedness that’s gotten us into the fix we’re in, imo.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
6:59 pm
“And now, Missy, have you reached the point that you can no longer see that someone you may disagree with vehemently has made a valid point”
If I read it yes, I can. But the point he made was to try to dictate what Jay should write. If he, and YOU, don’t like what Jay writes…why are you even here?
ragnar danneskjold
December 19th, 2011
7:02 pm
Newt is a bright fellow who spews 100 ideas per day, approx 10 of which are half-baked and a little loopy. This particular solution is within the latter class, although he is correct to magnify the problem of the imperious judiciary.
The Ragnar solution requires a Constitutional Amendment, to fix the term of all Article III appointees at 10 years. An alternative solution would be to simply abolish positions, and a third solution would be to simply urge Congress to pass a law directing all courts to do contrary to whatever the judge held (i.e., openly conspire with Congress to ignore the improper ruling.)
Jm
December 19th, 2011
7:03 pm
Josef
Doggone went blind long ago. I’m not sure she could ever see to begin with, frankly.
She’s just a bundle of reflexive actions.
Doggone.
Jay will write but he wants. That goes without saying. But while he’s roasting Newt, I only think it fair to point out that our ACTUAL AND CURRENT AND DEMOCRATIC president actually just did something that undermines liberty.
ragnar danneskjold
December 19th, 2011
7:04 pm
I think we can all agree that the crazy 9th circuit court of appeals compels some thoughtful solution, and Newt’s solution is both more thoughtful and generous than most of the decisions of that circuit.
Todd
December 19th, 2011
7:06 pm
Newt never was a top tier contender, only in the MSM’s eyes. Ron Paul has won more of the straw polls than any other candidate:
Ron Paul has garnered 19 GOP Presidential Straw Poll wins — more than ANY other GOP candidate — and ALMOST FIVE TIMES AS MANY as establishment favorite, Mitt Romney. Flavor of the Month, Newt Gingrich, has won ONE straw poll. Ron Paul’s straw poll victories constitute 48.7% of the 39 GOP Straw Polls thus far.
2011 GOP Straw Poll Wins for Ron Paul:
1st – February 12, 2011, Washington, D.C. – CPAC Straw Poll.
1st – February 27, 2011 Phoenix, AZ – Tea Party Patriots Virtual Summit Straw Poll.
1st – March 20, 2011, Sacramento, California – Republican Liberty Caucus of California Presidential Straw Poll.
1st – June 16–18, 2011, New Orleans, Louisiana – Republican Leadership Conference Straw Poll.
1st – June 19, 2011, Clay County, Iowa Republican Party Straw Poll.
1st – August 20, 2011 New Hampshire Young Republicans Straw Poll.
1st – September 12, 2011 Cincinnati Tea Party Straw Poll.
1st – September 17, 2011 California GOP Straw Poll.
1st – October 7–9, 2011, Washington, D.C. – Values Voter Straw Poll.
1st – October 13, 2011, Los Angeles County, California – RPLAC Straw Poll.
1st – October 18, 2011, Charleston, South Carolina – Charleston County Republican Party.
1st – October 22, 2011, Columbus, Ohio – Ohio GOP Swing State Straw Poll.
1st – October 29, 2011, Des Moines, Iowa – National Federation of Republican Assemblies Presidential Straw Poll Tally 1.
1st – October 29, 2011, Des Moines, Iowa – National Federation of Republican Assemblies Presidential Straw Poll Tally 2.
1st – November 5, 2011, Illinois – Illinois Straw Poll.
1st – November 14, 2011, North Charleston, South Carolina – Charleston County Republican Party Straw Poll.
1st – November 14, 2011, San Diego, California – San Diego GOP Straw poll.
1st – November 15, 2011, Springfield, Missouri – Missouri Tea Party Straw poll.
1st – November 19, 2011, North Carolina- NC Registered Republicans Straw Poll.
So, who is really winning!?
Ron Paul 2012, join the R3volution!
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:06 pm
“I only think it fair to point out that our ACTUAL AND CURRENT AND DEMOCRATIC president actually just did something that undermines liberty”
And blogspot.com is ready whenever you are
ragnar danneskjold
December 19th, 2011
7:06 pm
I think that Constitutional Amendment at 7:02 ought to also abolish all non-military government pensions. And maybe the military ones too, have not thought that through completely.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:06 pm
Feds issue warning to unconventional sperm donor
SAN FRANCISCO — A man from the San Francisco Bay area has fathered 14 children in the last five years through free sperm donations to women he meets through his website — and is now in trouble with the federal government.
[T]he Silicon Valley computer security specialist had made 328 sperm donations to 46 women, a number he said is now higher. He can continue to donate sperm while the case is pending.
At last! Somebody’s done come up with some work I wouldn’t mind doing!
Jm
December 19th, 2011
7:06 pm
Ragnar
Is say 90 out 100 ideas are half baked or worse
Term limits for judges. Perhaps not an awful idea. I’ll have to think about that one.
What we definitely need are congressional term limits
FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real)
December 19th, 2011
7:07 pm
Eye-of-Newt is just a big ol’ panderer bear. He got his shorts all in a bunch when the 9th Circuit of Appeals ruled that the pledge’s use of ‘One nation under God’ made it unconstitutional.
Even tho the court has since reveresed that ruling (no federal law requires students to recite the pledge or that reference to God), that gas-bag still loves to shove that oh-so-tasty bit of red meat down the throats of his evangelical sheep and other such followers of that I-refuse-to-think-for-myself ilk.
That said, I hope he takes it all the way to the GOP nomination so that we can watch him flame out going up against this President.
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:08 pm
Doggone
I am not at all dictating what Jay should and should not write…even if his protection to do so under habeas corpus IS MIA…indeed, it’s the opposite…the point JM made was that the current President has added his imprimature to that suspension and it’s very, very, disturbing…
Jm
Good L-rd…how did I EVER wind up with you!
ZamVet
Uh, wasn’t that “a pox on both their houses?”
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
7:11 pm
Yep, but at least I’d let the pox suffering Dems have medical marijuana!
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:11 pm
It seemed so logical and straightforward just a few years ago. Now I can’t really remember the reason why. Maybe it’ll come back to me someday!
Jm
December 19th, 2011
7:13 pm
Josef 7:08 amen sir
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:13 pm
“He got his shorts all in a bunch when the 9th Circuit of Appeals ruled that the pledge’s use of ‘One nation under God’ made it unconstitutional. ”
Heck, he needs to catch up. *I* quit saying that pledge in school right after they were dumb enough to teach me that chldren under legal age are not liable for contractual obligations. What’s the point of a pledge you aren’t even liable for upholding?
And I don’t say it now because of the “under God” reference
What Goes Around Comes Around
December 19th, 2011
7:13 pm
Gingrich’s Poll Numbers Drop
Two new polls from Iowa, one from Public Policy Polling and the other from Insider Advantage show Gingrich dropping back in the GOP race in the Hawkeye State over just the last week.
Insider Advantage polled in Iowa on December 12 and had this:
Gingrich – 27%
Paul – 17%
Perry – 13%
Romney – 12%
Bachmann – 10%
The latest poll from Insider Advantage from December 18 now has Ron Paul in the lead and a giant drop in support for Gingrich:
Paul – 24%
Romney – 18%
Perry – 16%
Gingrich – 13%
Bachmann – 10%
What’s interesting about the Insider Advantage poll is that the company is run by someone who has close ties to Gingrich -
Kamchak
December 19th, 2011
7:13 pm
Congressional term limits?
They are reelected at a rate of 80-90%.
It’s a safe bet that you are not thinking of your own rep/sen when you start spouting off about “term limits.”
F. Sinkwich
December 19th, 2011
7:14 pm
Term limits for judges is a good thing. The 9th circuit is liberal cesspool of O’bozo-like socialists. Hauling their destructive behinds into congress periodically to explain themselves to Americans sounds like a good idea.
Bill Orvis White
December 19th, 2011
7:14 pm
Much has changed since the days of Hamilton. These days we have naive socialistic secular September 10th McFly activist judges who are dedicated to destroying this once-free nation. Speaker Gingrich is right when he correctly states that it’s a slippery slope when we move away from strict constructionists from those on the bench who adhere to the law instead of engaging in re-interpretation based on Euro Marxist socialistic-secular ideals. WE THE PEOPLE need to see that the we restore power to the presidency, instead of activist liberal judges who will jail those who invoke the Lord Almighty in a public setting. We are slouching ever more towards a 1984-type society whereby secular-progressives police the free speech of patriotic Christians. Listen to the words of Speaker Gingrich on this “Face The Nation” appearance where he is simply stating a volley of facts. OH MY GOD, WOULD THIS REAL MAN DESTROY OBAMA IN A DEBATE! LISTEN TO HIM TAKING DOWN THIS SCHIEFFER FELLOW.
Merry Christmas/Amen,
Bill
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:15 pm
ZamVet
heh, heh…
FEAR (False Evidence Appearing Real)
December 19th, 2011
7:17 pm
Interesting perspective Doggone…
Jay
December 19th, 2011
7:17 pm
I agree — it’s a valid issue to discuss. While I don’t think “outrage” at Obama is justified over the bill signing, disappointment surely is.
The bill as adopted is certainly better than it was, thanks to senators of both parties who challenged the Levin/Graham approach. Rather than legislate the question of whether a citizen picked up in this country can be treated as a combatant and stripped of his or her rights, it leaves that matter to the Supreme Court.
Again, I’m not happy with that. I think they should have adopted the original Feinstein amendment making clear that citizens could not be handled in such a fashion, which would reinforce what the Bill of Rights already tells us. I think Obama should have pushed for that, which he clearly did not. He has been, at best, a lukewarm defender of civil liberties and due process, better than his predecessor but well short of what candidate Obama had argued.
For a good discussion of the legal impact of the NDAA, try this:
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/ndaa-faq-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:18 pm
It’s all in the technique!
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:19 pm
Bill Orvis
So, Gingrich is a good Christian? It’s not my religion, but turning your own children into momserim doesn’t strike me as a particularly admirable example of the teachings of the Christ…
K’chak
@ 7:13
There is that…
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
7:19 pm
Hell, who are you Republifascists kidding with you term limits for judges?
You’d just as soon get rid of them altogether.
As soon as you can figure out a way to do under the guise of “national security”.
When in reality all you Newt nuts have is a great deal of national insecurity…
Brosephus
December 19th, 2011
7:20 pm
Oh my, now we’re discussing term limits for judges?? I guess some people are not satisfied with the current amount of corruption we have now, so we’ll make that corruption widespread to all three branches. Thinking like that makes all the origin of our country’s problems so crystal clear now.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:21 pm
Jay:
How were Confederate prisoners handled ?
Courts or POW camps ?
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:21 pm
JAY
Thank you. You’re of a cooler head than I (as you are paid to be!
) but I am with you on the Feinstein amendment…nothing lukewarm there….
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:22 pm
josef:
Just for argument’s sake:
A Constitutional Amendment is passed stating marriage must be between a man and a woman only.
The Supreme Court rules that unconstitutional.
What then ?
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 19th, 2011
7:22 pm
Newt
Enough said
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:22 pm
josef:
My 7:21 is for you also.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:22 pm
At long last! True love!
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:23 pm
Scout
Ask Pvt. John Michel Galienne…but that was okay, he was one of them Jew boys who had the misfortune to be taken in December of 1862…
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:25 pm
“How were Confederate prisoners handled ? Courts or POW camps ?”
How were Union prisoners handled? Courts or POW camps?
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:26 pm
jjosef:
…………………. and so was my great, great grandfather (Camp Chase, Ohio). He died on the way home (age 64) to the illegally created state of West Virginia …………….
)
Brosephus
December 19th, 2011
7:26 pm
What then ?
Sounds like it fails the equal protection clause. Easiest fix is to get the government out of marriages and get the church out of civil unions. A marriage is nothing more than a religious ceremony that carries no weight outside of that religion. The certificate or contract is what gives it legal binding. Let the church marry whomever they want to, and leave the government to deal with the civil union aspect, which has nothing to do with religion whatsoever.
F. Sinkwich
December 19th, 2011
7:26 pm
“Hell, who are you Republifascists kidding with you term limits for judges?
You’d just as soon get rid of them altogether.”
Hey, AmVet, surely you can provide a link to some credible source substantiating this BS about conservatives proposing the elimination of the judiciary.
You can’t so stfu
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:26 pm
Scout
There’s no such Constitutional Amendment and most likely never will be…as for DOMA, well THAT can be ruled as unconsitutional and should be…but, and I think I may be channeling the Bruin here, but I’m willing to wait until after the election…
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:27 pm
Doggone/GA:
POW camps ………….. and that’s the point.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:28 pm
josef:
I said “JUST FOR ARGUMENT’S SAKE”.
The point is ………… make it ANY Constitutional Amendment that is then overruled by the SCOTUS as unconstitutional.
What then ?
What Goes Around Comes Around
December 19th, 2011
7:28 pm
@ragnar danneskjold December 19th, 2011 7:02 pm – Newt is a bright fellow who spews 100 ideas per day, approx 10 of which are half-baked and a little loopy.
___________________________________________
Newt is what stupid people think smart people sound like.
Newt's Fifteen Minutes of Fame is Up
December 19th, 2011
7:29 pm
Please place Newt on the bottom shelf with Herman Cain. He will NEVER be President of the U.S.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 19th, 2011
7:29 pm
West Virginia is an illegal state. Oh chit don’t tell Jay.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:29 pm
But Brosephus ………….. the equal protection clause is violated all of the time.
Reverse discrimation !
Women can’t be drafted !
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 19th, 2011
7:31 pm
or..think target marketing, cons…target your base..Frank Luntz focus
group sayyys – Tebow/Kardashian – pings the meter!
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
7:31 pm
Common Sense:
Some scholars think so.
Google it.
Jay
December 19th, 2011
7:31 pm
The administration has already concluded that DOMA is unconstitutional, which is why it isn’t defending it any longer. The courts will render their own verdict in their own sweet time.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:31 pm
“A marriage is nothing more than a religious ceremony that carries no weight outside of that religion. The certificate or contract is what gives it legal binding.”
Nope. A marriage is a legally binding contract. The first written reference to marriage is on a tablet of LAWS. Laws refer to marriage. We need to get religion out of marriage of ANY legally binding kind.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
7:31 pm
F. Burns, don’t get your panties all in a wad.
It’ll ruin your Kwanzaa…
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:32 pm
Doggone
Those Union prisoners held in the South were held either as POWs or as political prisoners…there were two sets of prisons… in the Union regular POWs were often (as in the case cited above of Pvt Gallienne) held in camps “under special treatment” reserved for politicals…
Scout
Before the Imam jumps us, ask him who New Jersey voted for in 1864…
Brosephus
December 19th, 2011
7:33 pm
Reverse discrimation !
Women can’t be drafted !
Those rules can be easily changed and/or challenged. There have been reverse discrimination cases won before. You just have to have proof and not just accusations. If you want women to be eligible for the draft, then they need to be eligible for ALL positions, that includes combat positions. Just because you THINK there is a violation does not automatically mean that your thinking is correct.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:35 pm
[Hermann] Göring immediately replaced hundreds of police officials loyal to the republic with Nazi officials loyal to Hitler. He also ordered the police not to interfere with the SA [Sturm Abteilung (Storm Section)] and SS [Schutzstaffel (Protection Squadron)] under any circumstances. This meant that anybody being harassed, beaten, or even murdered by Nazis, had nobody to turn to for help.
Göring then ordered the police to show no mercy to those deemed hostile to the State, meaning those hostile to Hitler, especially Communists.
“Police officers who use weapons in carrying out their duties will be covered by me. Whoever misguidedly fails in this duty can expect disciplinary action,” stated the order of Hermann Göring to the Prussian Police.
On February 22nd, Göring set up an auxiliary police force of 50,000 men, composed mostly of members of the SA and SS. The vulgar, brawling, murderous Nazi storm troopers now had the power of police
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:36 pm
“If you want women to be eligible for the draft, then they need to be eligible for ALL positions, that includes combat positions”
I agree, in principle…but I would amend this to include “if they meet the requirements” – because there ARE jobs requiring upper body strength beyond the limits of MOST women. I don’t see any need to lower those requirements JUST so women can “qualify” – always provded, of course, that they aren’t written to be artifically too tough solely to EXCLUDE women.
Brosephus
December 19th, 2011
7:36 pm
Nope. A marriage is a legally binding contract.
Not 100% of the time in the eyes of the government of the United States. The US government does not acknowledge marriages from religions that it does not recognize as official religions. That’s something I learned about when I began adjudicating immigration issues.
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:36 pm
JAY
The Executive does not have the perogative to deem an act unconstitutional, does it? That is the judicial. More effectively and more intelligently would be for the legislative to repeal it. And, no, I’m not bringing Ima Gonna to the chopping block on this one…yet.
Brosephus
December 19th, 2011
7:37 pm
Doggone @ 7:36
I’m with you on that.
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
7:38 pm
Newt’s remarks on the courts are not solely responsible for his declining numbers in Iowa. He does not have the ground game or finances of several of his rivals and they are pelleting him with negative TV ads. So, it is not wise to assume the court remarks are the expected meltdown shown in the polls.
It should also be noted that many conservatives agree with Newt in principle as they see the courts having interpreted the Constitution away from the founders intent. No praying, abortion, etc. There is some truth in beauty being in the eye of the beholder, but there is little doubt if the majority of Conservatives had their way many decisions would be thrown out. For JohnnyReb, it would be the interstate commerce mess which has turned the intent of the Constitution into an abortion and stole liberties.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
7:38 pm
A Constitutional Amendment is passed stating marriage must be between a man and a woman only. The Supreme Court rules that unconstitutional.
On what basis? Rabbit-hole priniciples. IF it is made a part of the Constitution, then by definition it is Constitutional.
For a simple answer that seems directly addressed to the Rabbit Hole:
Can a Constitutional Amendment Overrule a Supreme Court Decision?
Michael Stokes Paulsen
University of St. Thomas School of Law
Constitutional Commentary, Forthcoming
U of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-05
Abstract:
This very short article takes as its point of departure a charmingly, innocent first-year law student, first-week-of-class question, and examines its rather startling implications. If (as everyone knows) a constitutional amendment “trumps” a prior Supreme Court decision (as the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments trumped Dred Scott), it is because the text of the Constitution (where sufficiently clear) always prevails over a contrary holding of the Supreme Court. The follow-up student question, “Can the Supreme Court strike down a constitutional amendment and just reaffirm its earlier decision?” is also charmingly innocent, and suggests important insights as well. If (as everyone knows) the Supreme Court must treat the text of the amendment as prevailing over its contrary prior opinion, why does not the same principle apply to every text of the Constitution?
In the answers to these seemingly “dumb” questions may lie the keys to understanding everything that it wrong with “constitutional interpretation” today!
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:39 pm
“Not 100% of the time in the eyes of the government of the United States. The US government does not acknowledge marriages from religions that it does not recognize as official religions”
Another good reason to get religion out of the marriage BUSINESS
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
7:41 pm
“The Executive does not have the perogative to deem an act unconstitutional, does it?”
Not officially, or legally binding. But they can make that determination to their own satisfaction and, as in this case, stop defending it. That throws it to the courts to decide.
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:41 pm
Sooth
One of the most interesting things to come out of the resurrection of the German state following the defeat of the Nazis was the inclusion of article 19, paragraph 4 of the Constitution:
“Should any person’s right be violated by public authority, he may have recourse to the courts. If no other jurisdiction has been established, recourse shall be to the ordinary courts.”
The rationale being that had this been in effect in the Weimar Constitution….
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:43 pm
“You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in German history…This [Reichstag] fire is the beginning,” Hitler told a news reporter at the scene.
“The German people have been soft too long. Every Communist official must be shot. All Communist deputies must be hanged this very night. All friends of the Communists must be locked up. And that goes for the Social Democrats and the Reichsbanner as well!”
The Emergency Decree stated: “Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.”
Immediately, there followed the first big Nazi roundup as truckloads of SA and SS roared through the streets bursting in on known Communist hangouts and barging into private homes. Thousands of Communists as well as Social Democrats and liberals were taken away into ‘protective custody’ to SA barracks where they were beaten and tortured.
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:44 pm
JohnnyReb
And DOMA? You ARE a closet liberal, y’know…
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
7:45 pm
johnny reb – “no praying”.
You mean no forced prayer by a Big Government prayer representative.
Pray all you want. Tebow all you want. Just don’t force others to.
F. Sinkwich
December 19th, 2011
7:47 pm
“It’ll ruin your Kwanzaa…”
Sorry, AV, I don’t buy into lib- concocted BS holidays like you do.
Merry Christmas.
The Ghost of Ed Murrow
December 19th, 2011
7:50 pm
Oh, drop the pretended outrage, JayBama…we all know that you (and all liberals) are down on your knees praying that “Nuke” (as Jim Carville pronounces it) is the one to run against your Savior next year.
To heck with the judges being hauled before Congress…here’s a real idea…
…make all liberal columnists and TV personalities be hauled in for an IQ test after each pronoucement…now that’s a real idea.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:51 pm
Political enemies were arrested by the thousands and put in hastily constructed holding pens. Old army barracks and abandoned factories were used as prisons. Once inside, prisoners were subjected to military style drills and harsh discipline. They were often beaten and sometimes even tortured to death. This was the very beginning of the Nazi concentration camp system.
At this time, these early concentration camps were loosely organized under the control of the SA and the rival SS. Many were little more than barbed-wire stockades know as ‘wild’ concentration camps, set up by local Gauleiters and SA leaders.
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:51 pm
JAY
Relative to habeas corpus…if I remember correctly during the Late Misunderstanding in Washington and Richmond alike its presidential suspension was a big issue with both congresses decreeing that it was a congressional perogative…the Union Congress then approved it at the President’s discretion for the duration and the Confederate Congress demanded and got that each case had to receive Congressional approval…
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 19th, 2011
7:51 pm
the bestest part is he justifies his position citing separation of powers.
This is like justifying infidelity by citing your wedding vows.
Newt also wants to give Clarence Thomas just 3/5 of a vote…for historical
purposes and all. What a “professor”.
F. Sinkwich
December 19th, 2011
7:52 pm
“You mean no forced prayer by a Big Government prayer representative.”
Perhaps you could provide a name of one of those to bolster your argument, Neal.
Just like AmVet, another hollow assertion.
Typical lib.
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
7:52 pm
josef – I almost spewed my vodka tonic on the monitor!
Not Boortz – unfortunately, the prayer situation has gone further than what you site. Please don’t ask me for examples, as I don’t have any handy. I just know the Conservative base agrees with me.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
7:52 pm
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck, but you see its not the same.
How can you impress me with your piety if you don’t make big show of it?
In public schools. At public gatherings. All the time, everywhere.
And the bigger the show, the more pious you must be.
(As for the non-Christians, screw ‘em. A little Jesus rubbed in their faces won’t kill ‘em…)
Aquagirl
December 19th, 2011
7:52 pm
but there is little doubt if the majority of Conservatives had their way many decisions would be thrown out.
Gosh, it’s almost like someone thought of this, and wrote up a document keeping people like that from imposing their personal preferences on others.
josef
December 19th, 2011
7:54 pm
Sooth
Maybe you have the citation, but if I recall correctly we have in place the capacity to hold 2.5 million detainees if deemed necessary…
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
7:55 pm
josef – re, DOMA. I’m still undecided. As you know, I strongly oppose any discrimination, bullying, etc. towards gays. Now, you likely think not being for gay marriage is discrimination, and I can respect that, but I’m not sure at this time.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
7:55 pm
The second decree signed allowed for the arrest of anyone suspected of maliciously criticizing the government and the Nazi Party.
A third decree signed only by Hitler and Papen allowed for the establishment of special courts to try political offenders. These courts were conducted in the military style of a court-martial without a jury and usually with no counsel for the defense.
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
7:58 pm
Well, you see Water Girl, the challenge is, there are a lot of people around who are old like me who remember and long for the day when such things as arguing and sueing over prayer was never heard. We are likel the same group concerned of the browning of America and the cultural differences it brings. We may be wrong, but we are not convinced you are correct.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 19th, 2011
7:58 pm
Newt thinks Paula Abdul should be arrested, but Simon can stay.
’cause he says so.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
7:58 pm
Yep. As a 13-yr old back in 1972 my home room teacher led us in prayer and Bible study. But that was the only class time I had with my girlfriend. So I disrupted the prayer a couple of times and got hauled in front of the principle. After I threatened to take the school to court the prayer stopped.
I knew what I was doing. You also cannot fail home room.
Recon 0311 2533
December 19th, 2011
8:00 pm
While I agree with Gingrich that unfortunately the court system in our country is rife with activist judges who’ve been legislating from the bench far too long, his solution is a slippery slope that would take us in a dangerous direction.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
8:00 pm
Really, the disdain by the right for the Establishment Clause is sickening.
Time to order another ACLU tee shirt.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
8:01 pm
The Nazi Gleichschaltung [bringing into line] now began, a massive coordination of all aspects of life under the swastika and the absolute leadership of Adolf Hitler.
Under Hitler, the State, not the individual, was supreme.
From the moment of birth one existed to serve the State and obey the dictates of the Führer. Those who disagreed were disposed of.
Truth-O-Meter
December 19th, 2011
8:03 pm
Thank you, Speaker Gingrich. I have been wondering how we could get rid of the SCOTUS decision that says corporations are people. President Obama can have federal marshalls round up each of the judges who voted for that ridiculous ruling nd that will be the end of them! And we didn’t have to pay $30-$60k per hour for that advice.
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:05 pm
JohnnyReb
The way around this whole mess of terminologies is to recognize that civil union is the province of the state and marriage of the religious insitution. For the partnership to be recognized by the state, a license of civil union from the civil union bureau required…a marriage from the religious institution without the civil union registration not recognized by the state…that way the religious institution maintains its freedom to determine what it considers a valid marriage..
That way such things as the question of whether or not Newt’s progeny can inherit his Tiffany’s account now that he and the Vatican have decreed them b*stids…
.
Truth-O-Meter
December 19th, 2011
8:07 pm
BTW, if the SCOTUS decides that Obamacare is unconstitutional, then President Obama can have the marshalls pick them up and haul them away. Again, thank you Newt!!!
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
8:09 pm
The first thing he [Hermann Göring] did was to prohibit regular uniformed police from interfering with Nazi Brownshirts [SA] out in the streets. This meant that innocent German citizens had no one to turn to as they were being beaten up by rowdy young storm troopers drunk with their newfound power and quite often drunk on beer. These young Nazi toughs took full advantage of police leniency to loot shops at will and terrorize Jews or anyone else unfortunate enough to be caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Next, Göring purged the Berlin police department of politically unreliable cops and had 50,000 storm troopers sworn in as special police auxiliaries (Hilfspolizei). Now the storm troopers had actual power of arrest and they relished its use. Jails were soon overflowing with people taken into “protective custody” resulting in the need for large outside prison camps, the birth of the concentration camp system.
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:09 pm
Simons
Was doing some editing over the weekend and thought of you on this:
“Love Allen was no exception. How involved Indigenous and Mixed Blood women were as independent players in the paper economy is documented by James Taylor Carson, in his article, “Dollars Never fail to Melt Their Hearts: native women and the market revolution,” reprinted as the first chapter in Susanna Delfino’s and Michelle Gillespie’s “Neither Lady nor Slave: working women in the Old South.”
“Susannah McIntosh, one of Chief McIntosh’s wives, was reported by agent Adam Hodgson as “having more jewelry than any poultry vendor” he had ever seen”
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
8:12 pm
…make all liberal columnists and TV personalities be hauled in for an IQ test after each pronoucement…now that’s a real idea.
Because you want actual proof that they are indeed smarter than any of the talking heads and barbies on Fox when you know in your heart that getting on Fox means having to give up any semblence of real intelligence?
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
8:13 pm
josef – I can support your 8:05 and not worry about being called a Liberal! I’m not so sure my wife will, however. We were married by a JOP. If I tell her we only have a civil union, I may not get supper for a week!
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
8:15 pm
the Gestapo was never actually a very big organization. At its peak it employed only about 40,000 individuals, including office personnel and the plain-clothes agents. But each Gestapo agent operated at the center of a large web of spies and informants. The problem for the average citizen was that no one ever knew for sure just who those informants were. It could be anyone, your milkman, the old lady across the street, a quiet co-worker, even a schoolboy. As a result, fear ruled the day. Most people realized the necessity of self-censorship and generally kept their mouths shut politically, unless they had something positive to say.
Anyone foolish enough to say something risky or tell an anti-Nazi joke in mixed company might get a knock on the door in the middle of the night or a tap on the shoulder while walking along the street.
SugarHillDawg
December 19th, 2011
8:19 pm
This is Bookman’s and his leftist’s ilk worst nightmare. How else can they get there cockamamy desires made into the law of the land without activist judges. I wholeheartedly agree with Newt, make a judge tell why he ignores the constitution when he makes a stupid ruling. If this were to take place the whole 9th circuit would be taken before congress.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
8:19 pm
Sit back and relax, comrades. Apathy is your friend. Don’t take a stand. Don’t make waves. Lest you wind up in “rendition.”
Fear rules.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
8:22 pm
When I hear the term “Constitutional Conservative” I know I am hearing a know-nothing doofus talk about the Constitution.
Just look at the doltish comments here.
Kamchak
December 19th, 2011
8:23 pm
Don’t forget to set out ilk and cookies for Santa Saturday night.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:23 pm
Brosephus:
I hear you but the SCOTUS has already ruled on the draft thing regarding women ……….. they can’t be drafted ……….. period.
Also, the “state” cannot control their bodies for 9 months but the “state” can control a man’s body for 2 years.
Just sayin’.
This whole issue/discussion hinges on the SCOTUS trying to make policy by making the Constitution say things it doesn’t say. It’s been done by conservative and liberal courts ………….. and that cheapens the Constitution.
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:25 pm
JohnnyReb
Not to worry, I won’t call you a liberal…but you might want to call me a conservative, since what I posit is, imo, very much a conservative view. But, really, it’s both and something if we step back and think about it, we can agree on.
You got there on DADT and you’re still my hero..
.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:25 pm
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck :
The Constitution is a contract between the American people and their government.
A contract means what it says on the day it was signed ………….. nothing more and nothing less. A contract doesn’t change ……………… it can be interpreted but its clear language doesn not change.
Therein lies the problem with liberals or conservatives who try to ursurp it.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:26 pm
Excuse me:
“usurp”
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
8:27 pm
Off Topic: Oh great… the Republicans think Boehner is the new William Wallace. http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/john-boehner-braveheart-6619467?src=rss
We should never let these guys watch any movies. Last summer, they ginned themselves up for a deficit debate with a clip from a movie about murderous Charlestown bank robbers. For all their raving about the deleterious effect of “Hollywood,” I swear they’re the only ones who still think every movie they like is really a documentary about them.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
8:27 pm
“The way around this whole mess of terminologies is to recognize that civil union is the province of the state and marriage of the religious insitution”
No, it isn’t. Marriage is the LEGAL institution. It is what is referred to in all laws governing the MARRIAGE CONTRACT. We need to get religion out of the marriage BUSNESS altogether.
If they want to have a religious pledge of some kind, fine…let them get on with it. But the religious leader, of whatever stripe, should not be deputized a LEGAL representative empowerd to sign the marriage license. That should be solely the purview of a legal, secular officer.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
8:29 pm
I find it laughable that ANY of them still trots out that paragon of a Republican pyschobabble phrase – activist judges.
Oy to the veh…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
8:29 pm
A contract doesn’t change ……………… it can be interpreted but its clear language doesn not change
Someone would certainly fail first year contracts. Contracts change all the time. In construction, change orders. The parties can modify, amend. The parties may also mutually depart from the terms and conditions of the contract.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
8:30 pm
vague, 1811.
Its like the 10th Amendment fad among the Tea Party states rights types. The 10th is clear in its intent.
But the Supremacy Clause trumps it every time. I have yet to talk to a 10ther who knew about this clause.
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:31 pm
K’chak
@ 8:23
Good one!
Sooth
Interesting posts you made…and as Scout said, “his solution is a slippery slope that would take us in a dangerous direction.”
Lubie
December 19th, 2011
8:32 pm
The real attack on liberty is the action of liberal judges who think it’s their job to legislate from the bench.
AND I think Gingrich is out of line and wrong in his suggestion that the president can ignore rulings he does not like.
While judges have abused their relatively absolute position in the constitutional universe, the solution is not a arbritrary head of the executive branch.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
8:32 pm
Jay 7:17 fair response
Re DOMA. I still find it extraordinary that the executive branch has elected not to enforce a law, even if I don’t agree with it
Doma should be repealed. But through the legislature, not the courts
Recon 0311 2533
December 19th, 2011
8:34 pm
“when you know in your heart that getting on Fox means having to give up any semblence of real intelligence?”
Tell it to Geraldo Riveria, Greta VanSustren, Wendall Goller, Shepard Smith, Bob Beckel and to a greater degree Chris Wallace. Indeed humorous the lefts fetish with Fox News. Clearly some pass judgment based purely on the party line without even watching.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
8:36 pm
“But through the legislature, not the courts”
That’s more or less Jay’s point: that the courts are there to protect us from unconstitutional laws passed by less-than-educated legislators.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 19th, 2011
8:36 pm
arrest judges you don’t like? Yayeah,
Healthcare Reform is sooo in da bag.
Medicare for All next. Done & Done. Thanks for the idea, Newt.
bman
December 19th, 2011
8:36 pm
Am I the only one who has noticed that people in the media (all of them) seem to be choosing who will be the nominee?
I recently heard, on several channels, positive press on Bachman and yes….Perry
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:37 pm
Doggone
Marriage refers at present to both the state and the religious body sanction…civil union is a more appropriate legal term for what the contract actually is and what would you call the religious sanction?
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:40 pm
jm
“I still find it extraordinary that the executive branch has elected not to enforce a law,”
Extraordinary but not unprecedented.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
8:42 pm
“Marriage refers at present to both the state and the religious body sanction…civil union is a more appropriate legal term for what the contract actually is and what would you call the religious sanction”
But it is still marriage that is the legally binding contract. It is what the marriage license refers to. Changing that would mean EVERY law in every state, as well as Federal laws would have to be rewritten to remove the word “marriage”
Marriage has always been a legal contract, there’s no need to change that. We just need to apply equal protection TO those laws.
“and what would you call the religious sanction”
A religious union
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
8:43 pm
“Interesting posts you made…and as Scout said, “his solution is a slippery slope that would take us in a dangerous direction.”
People in the U.S. simply don’t realize (or don’t care) that our country is heading towards fascist totalitarianism.
The “War on Terror” is being used like the Reichstag Fire to deprive the country of constitutional protections. Yet, our elected officials — such as they are — are content to pass enabling law after enabling law.
Distracted Americans, believing these laws will never be used against them, acquiesce.
This is an extremely frightening time in the history of the United States. Your freedom and liberty are at stake, yet most people are only concerned with what Snooki will do this week on Jersey Shore.
When you consider the laws passed since 9/11 (The Reichstag Fire) is it really frightening. And, everyone — Right or Left — should be really frightened. Frightened enough to take action.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
8:43 pm
Josef true not unprecedented
Just exceptionally exceptionally rare. So almost unprecedented
moonbat betty
December 19th, 2011
8:46 pm
Grinsh’s anti-judicial tirade is an attack on liberty
or
Gingrich’s anti-judicial tirade is an attack on liberty
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
8:46 pm
Snooki?
What is Palin up to now that she could not get TLC (a network that has a show about extreme couponing) to pick up a show about Todd and his snowmobile?
What Goes Around Comes Around
December 19th, 2011
8:46 pm
@Jm December 19th, 2011 6:52 pm
Do not try to turn the conversation to Obama.
We are talking about Newtie……….
You republicans are so JEALOUS OF OBAMA. You need to FOCUS on your own candidates who are all IMPLODING ONE BY ONE.
Looks like its OBAMA IN 2012!
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahhahahahahahaha
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
8:46 pm
Doggone – on not giving a clergyman the right to marry people, you are bucking history almost from the beginning. I don’t think you will ever win that one.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
8:47 pm
Didn’t Snow Snooki join the Fox News War on Christmas Resistance Army?
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:48 pm
Doggone
Got it! The church gets the union!
But, then, that is yours and Scouts Roman Catholics at work, eh?
kayaker 71
December 19th, 2011
8:48 pm
A school superintendent is threatened with jail time if he does not eliminate the word ‘benediction” from any high school graduation ceremony proceedings. Along with that any reference to God, prayer, a moment of silence, anything that might portray some religious bent to the ceremony is strictly prohibited. Why? The majority of the American people by a total of 80% believe in some form of an Almighty. Are we not a nation that believes in something much more important than self.\? Bozo says no. He and activist judges are stripping this country of it’s heritage. Short of eliminating the threat, what is the answer? Are we to become a totally secular nation where any reference to a higher power is not only scorned but threatened with imprisonment if certain judicial “standards” are not met? Do we eliminate the Chaplin Corps from the military? Next do we hack down the Ten Commandments that are present in the Supreme Court? What is next? There are no more countries that those who flee from religions persecution can flee. I am not a Christian nor a religions person for the most part. But this is absolutely insane.
BlahBlahBlah
December 19th, 2011
8:48 pm
The 9th circuit consistently gets smacked by the Supreme Court, more than any district. There’s obviously a problem there, whether lefties want to admit it or not.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
8:49 pm
“Doggone – on not giving a clergyman the right to marry people, you are bucking history almost from the beginning. I don’t think you will ever win that one”
and I think we will – eventually. After all, it is not the religious ceremony that “marries” you…it’s the LEGAL MARRIAGE LICENSE that “marries” you.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:50 pm
josef @ 8:31
The real point is that the SCOTUS (and other federal courts) have failed in self-restraint.
They have at times ursurped, overreached, politicized and even violated the Constitution in their rulings.
That is the true danger to the Constitution.
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:50 pm
Sooth
You know I think you’re way out there on 9/11, but the comparison to the Reichstag Fire is valid, if, that is, Doggone will let me say that without accusing me of agreeing with your conspiracy theory…
JohnnyReb
December 19th, 2011
8:50 pm
One more comment, then I must sign-off. I agree with Newt’s intent, however, his fix goes too far. American’s would never stand for a judge to be called before Congress to explain his ruling(s). I believe there is impeachment procedures, and certainly abolishing a district such as the 9th would send a strong message. Congress could pass a law negating a ruling. Everything needed to bring about a correction is in-place. Congress has failed to use it. Newt would have been better off to call for use of what is in place.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
8:51 pm
Gingrich is anti capitalist. It’s insane. The only thing the guy is in favor of is Newt.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
8:51 pm
The Establishment Clause is still in the Constitution, kayak.
At least until Newt has it forcibly removed by Divine Order.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
8:52 pm
“But, then, that is yours and Scouts Roman Catholics at work, eh?”
Well, our history is rife with religion muscling in where it has no business (”one nation under God”) – marriage is no different!
What Goes Around Comes Around
December 19th, 2011
8:52 pm
Middle Class Mitt Romney who lives in a 12 million dollar mansion is the NEXT TO GO!
God is exposing all of the HYPOCRITES!
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:54 pm
Kayaker
A really interesting read on that is the original creation of a chaplaincy for the military…met with some serious resistance.
And back to the Late Misunderstanding…a fascinating read has to do with the Chaplaincy Controversy when the Union would not allow rabbis, the Confederacy included any ordained clergyman of any faith…
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:55 pm
Blah, Blah, Blah:
If a conservative appellate court was getting “slapped down” all of the time you would hear of it constantly. Just another example of the old double standard.
Another example? Jay’s quote from earlier:
“I agree — it’s a valid issue to discuss. While I don’t think “outrage” at Obama is justified over the bill signing, disappointment surely is.”
If Bush was still in office with something similar “outrage” would be mild regarding was Jay would be saying.
Bias is a salve to sooth the prejudiced soul.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 19th, 2011
8:55 pm
whew, josef, anybody seen Casey Cagle’s wife? heheheh
that had as many period dogwhistles as, “demographics of S. Atlanta”
does today
josef
December 19th, 2011
8:55 pm
Doggone
Well, if you agree with him on that, it does leave you open for criticism. Like it or not.
moonbat betty
December 19th, 2011
8:55 pm
word
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM1RChZk1EU
n
December 19th, 2011
8:55 pm
Soothsayer’s narrative is compelling. My parents who lived during this era of the rise of Nazi Germany maintained that nobody thought Hitler would ever succeed. Everyone dismissed him as a blowhard and misfit. Millions of people died because they underestimated the reach of his overwhelming evil. Our generation has mostly forgotten the long, tortured human history of demagogues and sociopaths rising to power.. Newt Gingrich is a demagogue, capable of anything. Right now, presumably, he is just trying to get face time and by his outrageous statements, to sell more books to the ignorant masses. But if by some crazy rotten twist of fate he was to becomes president, we might witness yet another frightening march towards fascism, as Soothsayer chronicles above.
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it
Lee
December 19th, 2011
8:56 pm
When I glanced at the title and saw “…Attack on Liberty”, I thought Jay would be talking about the cowardly attack on the USS Liberty by our so-called ally and chief welfare recipient Israel.
But, no such luck. Just more Newt bashing by the Bookboy.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:57 pm
Doggone:
I’m Baptist ……………………….
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
8:58 pm
I think many Georgians resent the SCOTUS because there are no Christians on it – just Catholics and Jews.
(using the fundie definition)
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
8:58 pm
Lee:
A very good friend of mine was an officer on board the USS Liberty at that time.
He was wounded.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
8:59 pm
“Well, if you agree with him on that, it does leave you open for criticism. Like it or not
I’ll have to take your word for it. I haven’t read his posts. The “worst” you could say is that we expressed the same sentiment. I haven’t quoted him in any way.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
8:59 pm
Yak71, so was Obama working with the activist judges when the 5th Cir overturned the District Court or when the District Court made the initial rulling….. If he were Republican, this would be an acceptable flip flop right?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
8:59 pm
What goes
Mitt is more middle class than newt
The guy has money. But he doesn’t spend it much.
Newt has less money but spends it like the fed is making our currency worthless.
Wait a sec….
Recon 0311 2533
December 19th, 2011
9:00 pm
“Right or Left — should be really frightened. Frightened enough to take action.”
I don’t believe as Sooth does that we should be frightened because I think it’s an anger not fright that’s being reflected in America today. I further think that Americans by and large are not anywhere near ready to accept this nations decline. The majority want a return to American values that made this country great. I do think that revolution is in the air and hopefully, it will be peaceful but I’m not so sure.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
9:00 pm
“You know I think you’re way out there on 9/11.”
If you believe that an airplane can turn a 110-story, 80,000-ton, concrete and steel office building into powder (not to mention one that wasn’t even struck by airplane), then I guess that I am “way out there.”
But, you know what, I believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, too.
kayaker 71
December 19th, 2011
9:02 pm
The tripartite system of government has served this country for a very long time. However, lately, much of it has fallen into disapproval by the American electorate. Congressional approval in the single digits. Very unpopular decisions made by our judiciary, contrary to what majority opinion dictates. Must the majority be held hostage by a minority opinion? I think that Newt has an ear to what most Americans feel, although the media, including blogs like this feel the need to demonize and vilify, especially a Republican candidate. Who’s next Bookman?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:02 pm
Obama is a 1%er carrying water for the 1%ers
He has you 99% people completely snookered
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:03 pm
Jm
December 19th, 2011
8:32 pm
“Jay 7:17 fair response”
No! No! You can’t agree with Jay and acknowledge his fairness…that’s Verboten…the NSA will be calling on you!
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:05 pm
sooth
@ 8:43
Does Pastor Niemoller ring a bell?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:07 pm
A million people killed by communism in north Korea
Fight communism and socialism in America
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
9:07 pm
Headline: “Barney Frank Wears Revealing Shirt On House Floor”
Ah …………………… nevermind.
Political Mongrel
December 19th, 2011
9:08 pm
Gingrich has shown again, and again that he’s a Fascist at heart.
kayaker 71
December 19th, 2011
9:09 pm
4 Million dollar vacation on the American taxpayer dime. Bozo’s last Hawaiian junket only cost the taxpayer 1.2 million. Don’t you think that perhaps He and His Wife might consider Christmas at Camp David? He is milking the system all that he can during his last year in office while we stand by and watch. The day of atonement is near, Bozo. Only eleven more months.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:10 pm
Josef
. I’m going in hiding soon
Pelosi is such a political whore. She’ll say anything. She’s not the only one, just the most egregious about it.
Jay
December 19th, 2011
9:10 pm
“Must the majority be held hostage by a minority opinion?
On some issues, kayaker, yes it must. That was the deal from the beginning.
“In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature.”
– James Madison
Old Timer
December 19th, 2011
9:10 pm
Far be it for me to pretend to be any kind of marriage expert, but I was always under the impression that although ministers are allowed to perform marriage ceremonies, it’s the Certificate of Marriage that becomes the state-recognized contract. And only the state can grant a divorce; ministers cannot, although in certain instances the Pope can issue an annulment, a declaration that the contract never legitimately existed in the first place. The fact that only the state can grant a divorce suggests to me that it’s the marriage document, and not the ceremony itself, that the state recognizes. I’ve always assumed, then, that religious ministers were serving as quasi-agents of the state in performing marriage ceremonies and signing the Certificate of Marriage.
Mama Says
December 19th, 2011
9:10 pm
Jay,
You forgot to mention one thing. Today’s courts have upheld laws that in some cases stray far from the constitution. Like our executive and legislative branches our constitution has been continually weakened, weakened by well meaning men and women who in the interest of fairness have usurped the very document they swear to uphold. This usurpation is then upheld by the courts.
I can state several examples of governmental abuse. Imminent domain, the ban on religious exspression within our government, the obvious mandate for formal war declarations. Point being is that arguing that the courts are today what they were in Hamilton’s day avoids the obvious point.
Today we have ceded our constitutional rights at the feet of each branch. Rest assured the legislative or executive branches will only stand to limit the judiciary, they will not limit themselves, wherein lies the real problem. Arguing against Newts potential abuse of power is to ignore the idea that Obama can make me buy something because he feels I need it.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
9:12 pm
JM, Communist fighter Lech Walesa would be called a “commie” by you ignorant hicks now simply because he organized Solidarity.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
9:13 pm
josef: you lost me. Who is Pastor Niemoller?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:15 pm
FDA takes 10-15 YEARS to approve or deny new breast cancer drugs
That’s your taxpayer dollars hard at work.
Incompetent government
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:16 pm
“FDA takes 10-15 YEARS to approve or deny new breast cancer drugs”
and if they approved it in 6 months, and thousands of people died because of adverse effects…THEN what would you say?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:18 pm
Jay
Yes the court is there in large part to protect minority rights
But the court should be a last refuge
Why didn’t democrats just repeal DOMA?
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
9:19 pm
“That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.”
James Madison
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
9:19 pm
and if they approved it in 6 months, and thousands of people died because of adverse effects…THEN what would you say
The Unregulated Free Market at work?
What’s a few dead people over the course of history to the conned?
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
9:19 pm
Out to watch the game. I hope San Fran demolishes Pittsburgh (ESPN). Check back later.
barking frog
December 19th, 2011
9:19 pm
marriage should be a formal agreement between two or more
people to form a family.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:20 pm
Doggone
It doesn’t take 15 years because of a 15 year testif window
It’s because FDA is a disaster
5 years max. Obviously it can’t be done in six months
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
9:21 pm
That this Assembly doth explicity and peremptorily note the attempt for another rabbit hole.
Dolly Madison.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:21 pm
“marriage should be a formal agreement between two or more
people to form a family.”
So anyone too old to bear children, or who are sterile, should be banned from getting married?
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:22 pm
Sooth
Pastor Niemoller is credited with saying
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:22 pm
Sooth
Pastor Niemoller is credited with saying
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:22 pm
Marriage, BTW, stretches beyond JUST the family you know, it also encompasses the orderly passing along of property as well.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
9:23 pm
Mama, is imminent domain eminent domain that is going to happen at any moment?
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
9:24 pm
HEADLINE: “Panetta: U.S. will not allow Iran nukes”
“Iran has the ability to build a nuclear bomb within the year, Defense Sec. claims, adding the U.S. will stop it no matter what.”
Pretty bellicose Jay ……………………
Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/#ixzz1h2OqLVtu
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
9:25 pm
Good Fight:
Do you mean Jay’s quote from Madison at 9:10 ?
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:26 pm
“5 years max. Obviously it can’t be done in six months”
And some adverse effects take years to manifest themselves. But I wouldn’t argue completely against what you’ve said. I would just amend it to having some kind of “experimentally approved” status, that requires people to be thoroughly educated in the possible risks and then is they STILL want to take the drug, they sign a waiver and are allowed to have it.
Kamchak
December 19th, 2011
9:26 pm
Then they came for me —
Twice, no less.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:26 pm
Doggone
You really are a jerk
What part of frog’s “TWO or more” didn’t you get?
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
9:28 pm
Okay, consider the idea that slavery is still “legal” and “constitutional”, and that every word Gingrich has uttered is being said by Lincoln. During Lincoln’s era, slavery was the minority poll, but it was constitutional. Suppose Abraham Gingrich was uttering words that would make slavery illegal, and unconstitutional. He would be justified, my fellow voters, he would be a hero. After Dredd Scott, (a pro slavery supreme court decision) Lincoln was stupified and very aroused and could have easily pronounced Gingrich’s very attack. In fact, LIncoln would have been proud to utter those very words, but he wouldn’t have, because Lincoln was our greatest compromiser, when it came to words.
be very careful when you defend the total independence of any branch of our government, after all, didn’t the supreme court give us the Bush/Iraq war from hell?
barking frog
December 19th, 2011
9:29 pm
doggone, 9:21, 9:22, families do not have to be defined as
groups containing children or property ownership since both
can be excluded.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 19th, 2011
9:29 pm
Do you mean Jay’s quote from Madison at 9:10 ?
Nope!
Another episode of one word answers to silly questions.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:30 pm
Actually, we BOTH missed the relevent portion “to form a family”
I misread it to mean having children. It doesn’t actually mean that at all. A family can be family without children. And personally, I have no problem with a consenting case of plural marriage, provided the proper legal protections for any children (and the property) are in place.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:31 pm
“families do not have to be defined as groups containing children or property ownership since both can be excluded”
Yep, I got it…it just took a while!
Jm
December 19th, 2011
9:32 pm
Doggone
I agree on the drug
But that’s not a big deal
If you’re otherwise terminal, what harm are the possible aide effects? All drugs have side effects. I’m not saying they shouldn’t be tested.
I’m just saying your government does an awful job at everything it tries to do.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
9:32 pm
Look, forget the founding fathers, in fact, fook them. We have to decide these modern issues for ourselves, and I think THAT is the gift we were given by our living constitution, which was affirmed by the administrations of our first presidents, who included the graciously ingenious Ben Franklin, and of course, the very determined and excellent shot Aaron Burr.
So, that said, I think that most of the commenters on this blog are total idiots. And so do all of our founding morons.
Old Timer
December 19th, 2011
9:32 pm
FDA takes 10-15 YEARS to approve or deny new breast cancer drugs
That’s your taxpayer dollars hard at work.
Incompetent government
Jm, please look up the thalidomide tragedy. It was discovered that thalidomide, initially marketed as a sedative in the late 1950s, had beneficial effects on morning sickness in pregnant women. As a result, hundreds of thousands of pregnant women were prescribed thalidomide, with the result that thousands of infants were born without legs, with only rudimentary legs, or with flippers instead of legs. Those children, now adults, are still among us today. At the time, FDA oversight of drug trials was not required. It was thanks to the thalidomide tragedy that the current, more rigid FDA drug approval system evolved.
Be honest with yourself and acknowledge that you have no idea of the long-term effects of any of these supposed breast cancer drugs. In any case, I’m not in favor of the return of the Wild West system of drug approval.
The Carnivore
December 19th, 2011
9:36 pm
You sure are worried about Newt. Why don’t you worry about who the Democratic nominee will be? Going with Obama again is a guaranteed loss.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:39 pm
“You sure are worried about Newt”
You have failed to recognize that pointing and laughing does NOT constitute worry!
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:40 pm
K’chak
Was trying to think of one, but couldn’t…good ‘un!
Amazed
December 19th, 2011
9:41 pm
I am not one to pock around the liberal section but I find myself completely on the other side today. After seeing Newt spout off about how the separation of powers has always been wrong and a majority rules, I was dumb founded. I could not believe that this man, on the cusp of winning the Republican Primary as a man that would actually fix problems and get something done for a change, took a self inflicted bullet to the temple to show himself as off the deep end. What the ……?
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:42 pm
Old Timer
An unappreciated lot in our society are those who take part in those FDA testings…
josef
December 19th, 2011
9:44 pm
Amazed
The man is bat sh*t crazy…
stands for decibels
December 19th, 2011
9:46 pm
Meh. Newt’s dead meat anyway.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/paul-moves-into-lead-in-iowa-forecast/
What kind of dumbasses ever fell for his schtick anyway? Never really got the appeal when he was just a fat jerk. Now he’s a fat old jerk.
Doggone/GA
December 19th, 2011
9:47 pm
“The man is bat sh*t crazy…”
Isn’t that more or less what the political pundits have been saying? That all his opposition has to do is wait, and he’ll shoot himself in the foot? Past experience generally being a VERY good guide when it comes to this guy.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
9:48 pm
Don’t forget the DES babies. Don’t forget so many poisons and time bomb chemicals that got into our children. Come on. Why does someone have to even make that point?
Everything is unconstitutional, when you think about it. I think you all stink, so that gives me the right to call you morons, and the supreme court is supposed to tell me that I’m wrong? Really? Well, then I’m with Andrew Jackson: “how many stooges does the supreme court have?” I’ve got five or six historical stooges that have set precedences that would support my opinion that the majority of the reader/commenters on this blog, especially judging by their reaction to this particular piece (and it was a home run) by Jay Bookman, are complete and total self-actualized morons. It’s just a fact, and if any of the readers who have half a brain also had half the balls to respond, then the truth would be born out by them. I think there’s a vast majority of a multitude of minds out there who are afraid to scream out against the tyrannical rule of Bookman’s trolls. I think it takes someone who I can’t think of now to shake them out of their complacency and their couch-potatoe cheeto-rationalization about why they want to stay far, far away from the scorn they might receive if they comment. I can’t think of who that person could be, you know, that very person who could lead these reticent folks to start shaping opinion in this country simply by either supporting or opposing any particular thought…..I don’t know….nobody comes to mind…..could it be…..ME????????
Question
December 19th, 2011
9:51 pm
So are all these GOP governors and attorney generals going to read this white paper and drop their judicial challenges to the Health Care overhaul?
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
9:53 pm
Well, it’s obvious that someone left the door open over there at the asylum. How do I know? Well, one of them has found a computer somewhere and is posting semi-coherent posts on this here blog.
Forget about making sense or logic. Just throw together a “word salad” that makes sense to himself. Of course, grandiose, delusions of grandeur never hurt.
After his abusive posts over the weekend, it’s defies logic that Jay has not banished this escapee forever. One can only hope.
Aquagirl
December 19th, 2011
9:56 pm
Jm, please look up the thalidomide tragedy.
Or google “Tuskegee syphilis.” Drug trials are slow in part because researchers have to get approval for all sorts of stuff. That’s not a bad thing.
Old Timer
December 19th, 2011
9:57 pm
After his abusive posts over the weekend, it’s defies logic that Jay has not banished this escapee forever. One can only hope.
I’m tolerant of p.f. Anyone who has watched his wife waste away from cancer has a right to be a little loony now and then.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 19th, 2011
10:00 pm
This coming year promises to be as hysterical as was 2008.
The Party of No trots out all of these dufuses (or is it dufusi?) that are not fit to run a Boy Scout camp, much less hold the highest office in the land.
Then after each and every one of the biggest losers falls by the wayside, they end up with a “RINO” that they desperately don’t want to vote for, so some of them don’t. They stay home and cry in their cheap beer while watching Fox News.
And some of them howl and spit and hold their nose and vote for Flip-flopping Mittens.
And the laughfest rolls along…
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
10:04 pm
Huck
Thune
Barbour
Christie
Daniels
Pence
Palin
Ryan
Goolie-ani
You coulda been contenders!
josef
December 19th, 2011
10:07 pm
Doggone
@ 9:47
We can hope..
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
10:09 pm
Goodfight:
Oh, so Jay can quote Madison but I can’t ?
DoubleEagle
December 19th, 2011
10:12 pm
Jay Bookman -
Another reason never to pay for the AJC. I cancelled over 10 years ago because of the libs involved with that rag.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
10:13 pm
What a wonderful place ………………….
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/19/north-korea-what-its-like-inside-secretive-nation/?hpt=hp_c1
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
10:13 pm
San Fran, Kansas City, San Diego. What great teams. They fight with more spirit and emotion than any other teams in football. If only the sleepy Falcons play with that much spirit!
bman
December 19th, 2011
10:15 pm
Sooth .. .. you supporting the top 1% again?
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
10:15 pm
“Jay Bookman -
Another reason never to pay for the AJC. I cancelled over 10 years ago because of the libs involved with that rag.”
Here’s a tip: don’t post here any more.
Todd ... this is Todd
December 19th, 2011
10:15 pm
I already gave my AJC subscription to Sally.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:15 pm
Old timer
I was not advocating the “wild west” method
cb
December 19th, 2011
10:15 pm
Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Speaker Gingrich during his term, including claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes. However we say it, Mr. Gingrich is all about the money. In a recent story, “Gingrich was ask to return the estimated $1.6 million he received for providing strategic advice to Freddie Mac, the quasi-government agency (an agency that has lost millions) that guarantees home mortgages. Gingrich has said he acted as a historian, not a lobbyist”. A “historian”, is that the history of greed? He may just sell you a book on it!
Sux Limbow
December 19th, 2011
10:15 pm
Gingrich is a fascist. Pure & simple, Gingrich is a fascist.
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
10:16 pm
Soothsayer:
It’s called “intelligence gathering”. Know your enemy.
josef
December 19th, 2011
10:16 pm
Old timer
True, but he’s just plumb mean…
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
10:17 pm
Sux Limbow:
If Gingrich is a facist then Obama is a marxist.
Bud Fox
December 19th, 2011
10:20 pm
Cantor is Boner’s Daddy.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:22 pm
Scout
I think you may have hit the nail on the head there
Romney
bman
December 19th, 2011
10:23 pm
how old is the new leader in N Korea? He looks 15
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:23 pm
Sux
Say it twice thrice four times and it becomes more believable
Or u just look loony
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
10:24 pm
Well, there you go …………………….
Headline: “Shoplifters robbed while stealing from grocery store”
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/shoplifters-robbed-while-stealing-grocery-store-192530012.html
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:25 pm
Bman
He has a red button
You on board with dome democrat isolationism?
1811/0311
December 19th, 2011
10:25 pm
Jm:
Not to our biased friends on here ………………..
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:26 pm
Dome = some
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:27 pm
Scout
True enough
josef
December 19th, 2011
10:28 pm
Gingrich a fascist? Too rational. He’s bat sh*t crazy. A pompous, egomaniac, a moral degenerate, but more importantly, a clear and present danger”..imo
bman
December 19th, 2011
10:31 pm
jm .. .. i was trying to figure out that dome thing haha
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:31 pm
There’s a reason its called the 9th circus of appeals. Its an extreme kook left court that has absolutely zero semblance of impartiality. This court clearly has an agenda and already has their mind made up before even hearing a case. This court is a damn joke.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:31 pm
I’m ready to vote out our dear leader
Fire up the poll booths!
Todd ... this is Todd
December 19th, 2011
10:32 pm
I already gave ……………. my period …………… to Sally ……………….
bman
December 19th, 2011
10:33 pm
jm .. .. I truly do not believe Obama can win. I don’t see him winning the swing states this time around. Of course, the state of the economy will be the deciding issue.
josef
December 19th, 2011
10:34 pm
Scout
@ 10:240
You can’t make this stuff up…isn’t it ironic, don’t ya think…:-)
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:34 pm
Josef 10:28 u have a point there
Newt is a complete roll of the dice
He might be good or even great
But there’s an 80% chance he’d be a disaster
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:35 pm
And this is from one of the most liberal papers in the country the LA Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/18/local/la-me-ninth-circuit-scorecard-20110718
U.S. Supreme Court again rejects most decisions by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Judges in the circuit’s nine Western states are more liberal than the high court justices, who reversed or vacated 19 of the 26 decisions they examined for the last term.
July 18, 2011|By Carol J. Williams, Times Staff Writer
It was another bruising year for the liberal judges of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals as the Supreme Court overturned the majority of their decisions, at times sharply criticizing their legal reasoning.
Appeals from the nine Western states of the circuit dominated the high court’s docket, as usual, supplying more than 30% of the 84 cases taken up by the justices during the term that ended last month.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:37 pm
Bman
We’ll see. I think it will be close popular vote wise
Bigger margin at the electoral college
I agree swing states are a big problem for O
Florida…..
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:39 pm
I saw on Faux news where Obama in his 60 minutes interview stated that he would rate his presidency as 4th best of all time in terms of legislative and foreign policy accomplishments. If we’re going to talk about Newt’s megalamania then we need to include Obama- its only fair. This man is delusional if he thinks his administration is the 4th most successful of all time. Has he lost his mind? Or was he always that megalamaniacal?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:40 pm
Doom
Couldn’t one argue that while the 9th may suck, that the system is working fine as the SC knocks them down?
Tho it is a pain for the supremes
lynnie gal
December 19th, 2011
10:41 pm
First, Newt publicly announces he wants to put poor children to work mopping and cleaning the bathrooms of their schools so that janitors who are in unions can be fired. In a separate speech, he says poor children have no concept of working for pay because no one around them works. All while he has a $500,000 line of credit at Tiffanies for his wife’s jewelry and brags about getting $65,000 and hour for giving a speech and made a million and half dollars for services as an “historian” for Freddy Mac. Now, Newt wants to have judges arrested by U.S. Marshals if they are liberal, “activist” judges and claims the constitution backs that up. What a twisted, immoral man.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
10:42 pm
Newt
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:42 pm
Doom
He’s the fourth most successful commie president
FDR was first of course
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:44 pm
1811,
That shoplifting link was hilarious. The woman arrested looked like a rat on acid.
WAW
December 19th, 2011
10:46 pm
Newt’s right about these dang judges… after all calling a Corporation a person so Newt can rake in bigger piles of money… he right… they’re ruining the country!
WAW
December 19th, 2011
10:46 pm
Newt’s right about these dang judges… after all calling a Corporation a person so Newt can rake in bigger piles of money… he right… they’re ruining the country!
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
10:46 pm
Thulsa – he didn’t say “fourth best”.
He said only 3 admins passed more significant legislation.
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
10:46 pm
Suck on it, Righties!
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:47 pm
Jm,
I dunno. There have been Chinese commie presidents whose economic performance has been better than Obama’s. Not Mao of course but whoever has been the general secretary or president of the Chinese communist party the last decade or so has certainly had more economic success than the community organizer has.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:49 pm
Sooth
Ron paul’s ad is awesome
He must despise the newt
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:52 pm
Doom
Ok ok, true enough. I revise my statement.
4th most successful US commie president
If you like commies
md
December 19th, 2011
10:53 pm
I think Newt has a point……the nine lawyers on the SC and the various other courts, tend to dictate what the other several hundred lawyers in Congress/WH can and can’t do……..not too sure that is how it is supposed to work.
Boils down to who’s definition gets used……how else can a SC divided along ideologic lines be explained.
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:56 pm
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
10:46 pm
Thulsa – he didn’t say “fourth best”.
I know. And I did not say that Obama himself stated that his administration was “4th best”. This is what I said- “This man is delusional *if he thinks* his administration is the 4th most successful of all time”
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:58 pm
MD
Newts only point is self promotion
The 9th sucks but there are reasonable solutions
Like not appointing idiots
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:59 pm
Jm,
I don’t like commies. Wouldn’t be surprised though if many a fool on here did.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
11:00 pm
Jay’s point today is about the checks and balances of our government. Our founding fathers were looking at history when they deduced the remedy to tyranny. THey decided upon 3 branches of government: judiciary, legislative and executive. They realized that human nature itself was the enemy. The understood that they themselves were the enemy. How do you legislate against yourself????
Thought I’d get the thread back on track and away from the “group of trolls”. The “pride of trolls”? The “gaggle of trolls”? No, that doesn’t quite describe them does it? No. NO!! There is an expression that I have coined that totally describes the “Liverpool of dung-beetles” that have infested this once-clean blog: the self-salving annointees who infect this blog can only be described as a “bookman of sphincters”.
Kaching.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:01 pm
Doom
4th most disastrous
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:02 pm
Jm,
Only 4th most disastrous? You sure you don’t want to revise another statement there?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:03 pm
“How do you legislate against yourself????”
Congress can repeal laws at any time silly
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
11:05 pm
Only on the advice of Old Timer do you get a bye from me.
Timus
December 19th, 2011
11:05 pm
The more Newt speaks the less people like him. I’m not surprised. Newt is the opposite of Romney. If Romney changed then Newt is predictably the same. He has a good idea and then you’re like awesome!! And then he follows it up with saying something like as president he’d arrest judges who essentially don’t agree with him and then that’s when you hear crickets!! lol!! I love it. I’m gonna hate to see him fall out of the lead.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:06 pm
Doom
FDR, Nixon, and a few others were pretty, I mean really, bad
Post ww2, he ties with Nixon
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:08 pm
And Carter (nice man)
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
11:08 pm
When you think about it, it all makes sense, really. How could anyone be more important than Newt?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:12 pm
Amphibians are very self absorbed
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:13 pm
Jm,
Nixon did one really dumb, underhanded thing in an effort to win the election. And I would submit that part of the reason he went to such lengths(watergate) is the simple fact that he had the 1960 presidential election stolen from him by union and mob thugs in Chicago. From what I’ve read many historians concede that there was rampant fraud in Chicago at the behest of the mob. Not justifying Nixon or anything. Just sayin the man got screwed once and said to himself he would be damned if he was going to let it happen again.
And he did have some bright spots. He created the EPA at a time when we really needed to clean things up, I think there was landmark environmental legislation aimed at cleaning up the water and air on top of the creation of the EPA,and he opened up China which was huge. And I think there were one or 2 other nice accomplishments. He, like Jimmy Carter, gets a much worser rap then he deserves.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:13 pm
Lights out
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
11:14 pm
You know, when you think about it, it’s really hard to be a Republican, Tea Party, Conservative these days.
When you shine the light of day on the “belief system,” the inescapable lunacy is right there for the whole World to discern.
What I think would benefit the Right are “focus groups” on whom they could test their idiotic “truisms” for ridiculousness before they are actually released on the general populace.
Ya think?
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:15 pm
Now FDR I will agree that he was probably the worst because he is the one that ushered in the beginning of the welfare state and the era of big govt.
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:18 pm
“What I think would benefit the Right are “focus groups” on whom they could test their idiotic “truisms” for ridiculousness before they are actually released on the general populace.”
Sooth,
Focus groups? The repubs along with the Dems have been using focus groups for quite a while now.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
11:21 pm
I’m reminded of that idiot Glenn Beck ripping on Wilson and TR – two truly great presidents as noted by all experts on the office.
But Beck lives in an alternative universe with no basis in reality.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
11:30 pm
I am humbled. You mention me in the same breath you mention Newt? Really? I’m that important? I will let the reader decide.
If the thousands of readers of Jay’s column don’t agree with this then let them scream it out. Let them shout me down. But I will not defer to anyone about my ability to advance the discussion. I can’t stand chat rooms. I hate them with a passion. (”howRu?” “good” “I’m good too” “good” “good” “nice to hear you’re good” “good to hear you’re nice” “good” “good”.)
THATS ALL YOU GET FROM THESE SNIVELING SNOBS, PEOPLE. Cyberspace has compiled complete volumnes covering decades of Bookman’s troll-droppings that say no more than “good” “good” “nice” “nice’
. Fact. Jack.
ANd it makes. me. sick.
People are suffering, and these insufferable snobs have the nerve to present nice-sounding bromides over tough solutions that may achieve justice. Look folks, we have to re-examine capitalism itself. We need the constitution, but only as a rudder. The winds and the seas are ours to navigate anew….by ourselves, for ourselves, and of ourselves. (I just wrote that).
So when I see that Jay Bookman’s blog has been turned into a farce, well, I’m sorry, but I have to object.
It’s that simple.
Jack
December 19th, 2011
11:36 pm
So interesting that the narrow mind uses history (and the Bible for that matter) for validation rather than enlightenment.
md
December 19th, 2011
11:40 pm
Jm, I think you missed the point…….the courts seem to be trending more toward ideology than interpreting the law as written…….or can you explain why so many outcomes are divided strictly along ideologic lines? They are all looking at the same laws…..same cases……yet different interpretations based on what?
Ideology. And that ideology is stronger than anything coming out of Congress or the WH…….who’s doing the dictating? Sure isn’t the other 2 branches of gov’t…..they are the ones getting a thumbs up or thumbs down…….not the other way around.
Woody
December 19th, 2011
11:42 pm
He got the headline didn’t he? That’s all that counts when your polls are slipping. And, uh, Jay, you are playing into his media strategy.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
11:45 pm
We may be too late. If Goldman Sachs can destroy us. If Citbank is loose cannon. If our trust is stripped away from the American Dream, which itself iis devolving into a blind series of plan B’s that mostly culminate into a fatal destiny that only deluded and self-fulfilling entrepreneurs can achieve, (hey, we only get old, fall behind on our taxes and then die, fools), then we cannot support this historical presumption that a man will get out of bed in the morning only if he can make money by his own cunning. We have to respect the presence of the 7 billion other entrepreneurs on this planet.
We have to accept that we are self-indulgent and overly-sensitive morons, and that a greater collective is at work here, and that we must provide for the least of us all, and in doing so, we will find that path that will support the masses and ensure peace.
If not, we’re finished.
ld
December 19th, 2011
11:47 pm
Wonk or Wank
maybe: murder of crow ing opinionaters’ or ‘murder of blabbers’?
I’d like to see a law requiring all public officials over a certain age be required to take a sanity/senility test–
–that could have ended Reagan’s second term early before his memory of Iran Contra disappeared.
I would not be opposed to term limits for the Supreme Court but also would want them for members of Congress–this probably should have been done when term limit was set for President — oh, wait, Congress exempts itself from the laws it requires others to obey, like ‘insider trading’, so ain’t gonna happen.
ld
December 19th, 2011
11:53 pm
The GOP and Dems have put in place rules to minimize the possibility that a third-party candidate would be a viable challenger. I suspect that if they have not already done so, they would put in place impediments to getting any constitutional amendment or “proposition” on ballots if it either limited their power or forced members of Congress to be accountable.
md
December 19th, 2011
11:54 pm
“and that we must provide for the least of us all, and in doing so, we will find that path that will support the masses and ensure peace. ”
And without defining what constitutes the “least of us all”, a society will be overrun by it’s least common denominator as the “least” know how to play the game too………..
Cant’s are much different than wont’s………
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:02 am
Great point, ID!!!! King George was maybe insane during our Revolution of 1776. The founding fathers certainly were aware of the disaster that could occur to a country if the leader was insane, right?
The triumvirate. The three cornered hat. 3. It was all the signers of the Declaration could come up with. So far so good, I guess.
We’re corrupt by our very nature. WE ARE! (and don’t we love it) I will try to support my family at the expense of yours, but, I can’t kill you because we have a legislative, and a executive, and a judicial form of goverment that has evolved to make the consequences of my willfull execution to be phyrric.
We have to remember that only a few generations, (our great grandparent’s great grandparents), have passed since we could achieve wealth by brokering slavery, and any one of us could have done it. Don’t be fooled by the compassionate conservatives. They are the vestiges of the slave trade and all the erudition that formed that laws that protected the rights of slaveowners.
Dont be a fool.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:11 am
Good parry, Md. But the least of us is all of us. The most of us is but a few.
The least of us. The homeless? The sick? The old. The young children orphans. The Injuns who inherited the consequences of our totally-justified Manifest Destiny The Blacks who inherited the consequences of our interpretation of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation?
The least of us is by us, and of us, and for us. (I just wrote that. I actually had a far superior phrase, but I was embarrassed to confront lincoln and deleted it and I can’t remember it. Dammit.)
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:13 am
You have to admit that the conservatives have been consistently-compassionate, dont U?
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:17 am
The Least of us is the most of us, but the Most of us is only a few of us.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:26 am
Capitalism is not inherent in a Democratic Republic. That’s the point that Jay missed but only by an inch. The entire idea of a set of independent people must include a provision for outside intersecting sets. We are math. Sets and subsets and intersecting sets are a fatal reality of existence. We comingle. We bump into each other, and if we don’t like what we encounter, then we destroy, and then we get the 100 years war, (that we’re supposed to believe is over). when we invest in the face of the Euro Crisis. Sure, Germany, that peaceful loving land of philanthropists, is supposed to absorb the debt of the historically-despised REST OF EUROPE.
sure.
We have to rethink capitalism and the idea of a free market now, before the other shoe drops OVER THERE.
It going to be painful, folks.
Very painful.
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
1:05 am
From Keep Up the Good Fight:
Corrected:
Bookman is proving once again that he is not even a good historian and the stupidity of the party base that supports this kind of blowhard is just insulting to American principles.
I became a Gingrich financial supporter just a few minutes ago based upon the words and actions recently of Newt Gingrich.
Jay,
Don’t do these long essays. You just aren’t very skilled, articulate or comprehensive. A good high-school debater would have you eliminated in the first round, were you not already in your ivory media tower.
The truth about the coequal branches of government is that each has asserted its influence over the decades. The Presidency in the era of Lincoln, Hamilton, FDR; Congress in the seventies and eighties; the judciary recently. In fact, if Marbury vs. Madison (judicial review) were so essential to the country’s existence, why not grant SCOTUS the ability in the constitution?
Furthermore, SCOTUS has gotten many things very very wrong that the population or one of the other branches of government had to overturn. SCOTUS said that Dred Scott wasn’t a person. Remember that Bookman? It has done other things too like setting copyright law, abortion law of the land, and recently other policies that it has no business doing.
No Jay, the Supreme Court was not designed to be an absolute oligarchy that dictates to the other branches of government what is and what shall be. It’s time the rest of government put it in its proper place. Your idea that 5 of 9 certain people are responsible for upholding liberty is so wrong, absurd and ill-thought that were you not so seemingly serious about your crazy conclusion, I’d be laughing right now.
Of all the branches of government, the court was designed in part to protect the legal rights of the minority against abuses by the majority. What it has become in the Ninth Circuit is a defender not of existing laws, but of legalisms and very real and insane modifications and cancelations of the real public will. You’re right that we’re not a true Democracy–thank goodness for that. But we’re also not a technocratic bureaucracy like the EU, or an oligarchy like Iran, where in both places unelected officials slowly drain away choice and freedom from citizens.
Jay,
Stick with the ephemeral nonsense–gotcha political games you play. You’re much much more effective at those types of polemics.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
1:16 am
So I was driving on the connector the other day and this babe cuts me off, so I pulls up next to her past a speed trap, and motion for her to accept that she can’t drive. (with my middle finger). So this doll suddenly challenges me to a 70 MPH kickdown and away we go. By the MLK exit we’re doing 120. By I20, we’re in hyper drive. I pulled even with her and I noticed that she was putting on makeup and sexting with her cellphone. So I figures that I should sext her back. That’s when she double shifts and side-swipes a bus filled with nuns. The bus careens into oncoming traffic and explodes. I hit the nitro-turbo switch. I wasn’t about to lose this kickdown. I’ve never lost a kickdown.
I managed to pass the woman in the souped-up Belvedere. I clearly had won. But as I looked over for an acknowledgement, the Plymouth blew by me. She had saved her best for last.
So as we approached I285 so close to Riverdale you could taste it, I notice the dozen or so cops that have suddenly gotten within striking distance. I looked over to the speeding sexpot, she looked over at me, and I gotta say that the look was inviting. I knew I was about to get laid. But, then, I saw the nail-strips that the no-good, dirty coppers had laid out for us ever since we passed the stinking speed trap downtown. (I really hate cops who radio ahead). Suddenly, the babe managed to forge ahead of me. That’s when I saw her go into the curve, and her Belveder started to swerve. I know I’ll never forget that horrible sight. I guess I found out for myself that everyone was right.
Won’t cum at all after deadman’s curve….
(sorry).
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
1:22 am
WorW,
We have to accept that we are self-indulgent and overly-sensitive morons, and that a greater collective is at work here, and that we must provide for the least of us all, and in doing so, we will find that path that will support the masses and ensure peace.
“Overly sensitive”, “morons”, a “greater collective”? You make no sense at all, and if I try to narrow down what you are saying I’m sure I couldn’t get a firm answer. This greater collective crap has been around as long as Marx’s “vanguard” BS (that Marx himself later repudiated). Surely, you’re not saying that those “poor people” (who right now in this country are far more obese than hungry) are going to wring all our necks demanding money and support? Maybe not exactly wanker, but we get the idea ; )
The “path that will support the masses”–again a mass of supporting confusion, as articulate and meaningful as the OWS protests themselves. Crap like “we’re against greed,” is real real specific, isn’t it? Meanwhile, the sum total of their demands read like a Marxist’s wish list–free college, heck, free everything.
If the “masses” are too “stupid” and “overly sensitive” to buy their own healthcare or college education, how in the hell are they going to be smart enough that they can choose someone to do it for them?
Doesn’t work now, WW, does it?
About Europe. Do you really think that its the capitalistic Germans who are going to cause havoc on Europe because they’re financing governments all over the continent? Or is it, (for example) the kleptocratic Greeks who don’t pay their taxes nor balance their own budgets?
There, WW. I thought you were full of crap, and now I’ve proved it.
Let’s start passing our own budgets over here, WW, (something hasn’t happened since Obama) before we go and do anything like “rethink capitalism”–about which you wouldn’t know a good idea unless it weren’t emblazoned with a hammer and sickle
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
1:26 am
W or W @ 116,
Thanks for that brief comment on pop culture.
It actually made about as much sense of Gingrich, Alexander Hamilton, the judciary and our founding fathers as Jay Bookman’s original post.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
1:33 am
The difference between now and 1929 is that the folks really believed that they were being represented by the government, and that FDR’s NEW DEAL would deliver them. Today is the new 1929 with the only difference being the smartphone. We know we’re all Fooked, we can tweet our condition and see that we all pretty much trend the same: we’er f’ing BROKE!!!!
We are broke. Dead broke. Living moment to moment, really. The fear must be overwheliming. I know it is, because I felt it. I lived it for so long. WTF is going to happen to me?
Capitalism is very successful for the least amount of a population of entrepreneurs. The most successful capitalists are the least-in-number of a population of capitalists. The most numerous of capitalists are the least successful. The measure of success is the success of a measure, ($$$$), and by that measurement, most entrepreneurs are the least successful.
In fact most entrepreneurs are dead broke. dead. broke. most. 90 percent? WRONG! 95%? WRONG!!!!
Something over 95% of all of the members of a capitalistic society are dead broke, but it’s been true for years, and look, nothing bad every happened if you discount WW1, (defense industry golden era), or WW2, (Miliatry Industrial Complex Golden Era), or the past fifty years, (Saudi Arabia’s Golden Era).
Iraq was a great xmas present for Cheney’s friends in the Saudi Royal Family who happen to own our entire defense industry which is the very corporations who profited so well from the Iraq War.
Bravo, Cheney. You are the new Hitler. Oh yes you are, don’t be shy, come on. What an achievement!!
War for war’s sake and the profit of war!!!!!
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
5:02 am
So Antonin Scalia should be removed per Newt if he wrote in Heller that the preamble to the second amendment is a bunch of insignificant verbage- ie. a well regulated militia as a prerequisite for any gun rights?
Bud Wiser
December 20th, 2011
6:06 am
The very thought of a President Gingrich absolutely terrifies you socialists, doesn’t it?
It does, but not for the reasons one should imagine.
For one thing, the gravy train will slide to a halt.
Number two…..well, lets just say that number two will have been swept from power and leave it at that.
It will be fascinating this election cycle to see the desperation from Obama and his drooling minions as the election draws nearer and the outlook becomes clearer. With Eric Holder already playing the race card trying to find a way out of his lying mess, there is just no telling how far over the edge the prez will go to try and keep his day job.
And also, who now will lead the mindless morons of the left …..Pelosi ….. Sharpton …. Hillary???
What a sick joke you dimwits are becoming, and just how soon your party of clowns will vanish into history.
Gingrich 2012
buck@gon
December 20th, 2011
6:22 am
W*W & Ind think,
What do you guys do, distill a bunch of pages printed from moveon and the Nation, put em in a big pot, boil for a few hours, let the excess liquid evaporate, then pour the mixture into a syringe and inject intravenously?
You’re both the perfect Obama voter, OWS protester and Bookman reader. You make nonsense out of sense.
In your circle (jerk) are “Hitler”, “Cheney” and “second amendment preambles” required words?
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
6:31 am
From Gingrich’s own white paper:
“Alexander Hamilton expected the legislative branch would define the reach of the judicial
branch. He argued in Federalist 80 that when the judiciary had to be modified, “the national
legislature will have ample authority to make such exceptions, and to prescribe such regulations
as will be calculated to obviate or remove these inconveniences.”
Hamilton was also confident the judicial branch could never seriously encroach upon the powers
of the legislative branch. Hamilton said it was because the judicial branch had a “total incapacity
to support its usurpations by force.” In Federalist 78, he called the judiciary ““beyond
comparison the weakest of the three departments of power” and the one that could “never attack
with success either of the other two”.
Hamilton further noted in Federalist 81, “There can never be danger that the judges, by a series
of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment
of the body entrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their
presumption by degrading them from their stations.”
I’ve caught you in distortions before, Jay, but never one this obvious. You have deliberately misrepresented Hamilton. Which “article” makes more sense, your piece of crap or Gingrich’s White Paper? We’ll let history decide when you’re still attacking President Gingrich in three years.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
6:31 am
buck@gon
December 20th, 2011
6:22 am
It’s the “American Way” to disagree with what you say, but defend your right to say it, but I still believe you need less coffee and more fiber in your diet.
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
6:33 am
The judges of the Ninth Circuit sure as hell “hazard the united resentment of the body.”
Gingrich is entirely correct. As Hamilton notes, there needs to be a means of “punishing their presumption by downgrading them from their stations.”
Normal
December 20th, 2011
6:33 am
Speaking of knotheads…
http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/2011/12/19/political-pictures-kim-jong-il-tv-shows/
Tommy Maddox
December 20th, 2011
6:45 am
Splitting the 9th Circuit would not be such a bad idea – just like when they split the 5th Circuit a few years back. The 9th is so large and encompasses around 20% of the US population.
Of course, that would only create a couple of smaller ultra liberal Circuits racing to see who gets reversed first.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:17 am
WorW is nuts
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:20 am
Are circuit judges appointed for life?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:22 am
Tired
Meant to say “federal appeals court judges” not “circuit”
Normal
December 20th, 2011
7:25 am
USinUK,
Are you out there?
I wanted to tell you of a “Normal Rockwell” moment I had yesterday with my 3 year old Great Grand Daughter…
She was out with her Nana shopping and when she came home I was raking leaves from our pond area. She stayed out with me, and we talked about her “day”. Then I said I’d better get busy and finish this and I started working again. As I was working, I saw that she was picking up pine straw, one at a time, and putting them in a neat little stack. I asked her if she was making a straw house.
She said, “No Grandpa, I’m helping you.” We hugged and went inside for some cookies and milk.
Good vibes like that just had to be rewarded. Gotta love ‘em…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:31 am
Egypt is totally blowing up
Good job Obummer
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:37 am
Obama sleeping through the 3am call
barking frog
December 20th, 2011
7:45 am
Liberty is safe, even after the attack on it by the Congress of the
United States joined by the President.
Jay
December 20th, 2011
7:56 am
You’re quoting Gingrich’s distortion of Hamilton as evidence that he didn’t distort, F&F?
Do yourself a favor: Go read Hamilton himself and make that judgment. I included the link to his Federalist # 78 for that very reason.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
7:58 am
Very well done piece Jay.
Newt 2012
Holy Crap that’s funny
Now to prepare for the Paul bubble.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:59 am
Romney folks
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:01 am
“Paul bubble”
Possible. But mind boggling if it happens
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:03 am
This stand of Gingrich’s needs to be well publicized. Where judges can be unseated for “unpopular” views, the judiciary becomes a partisan puppet and can no longer protect people’s rights under the law.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:03 am
Good morning Granny G.
Got the holiday covered yet? I’m still hunting that elusive gift for the wife…
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:03 am
Howdy Gale!
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:05 am
Good morning, cousin Normal!
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:05 am
Gale,
Sounds like Nazi Germany or any of the now and past Commie countries, doesn’t it?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:07 am
The Republican party has a strong second string. It’s betterthan the first string generally.
Problem is. It’s the second string.
But Romney would make a great president. Turnaround and fix government and grow jobs and the economy.
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:07 am
I was thinking of -was it Pakistan recently that fired all the judges? If Gingrich wants to play historian, he should get his history right.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:09 am
This arrest judges thing is more a bad reflection of Iowa politics than it is about newt
Just FYI
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:09 am
Morning Normal
Got the shopping and wrapping and decorating DONE.
(With 35 years of holiday decorations in tubs I get to a point where I just say if it ain’t up yet….it ain’t going up this year)
Started baking, but gotta’ drag home more flour and eggs and sugar.
Mr. G is already sniffing arounf wondering where the cheese straws
and snickerdoodles are hidden.
Ham ordered and I’m picking up the roast beast today.
Golly I look foward to the day after Christmas to put my feet up.
Elusive gift for the wife?
Can’t find it or can’t figure out what it is?
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:10 am
Funny thing about history. When we see the big picture in retrospect, the man who was president was inconsequential. He was merely the one with the title at that point in time.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:11 am
A little off topic, but could you GOP supporters PLEASE tell your masters in Washington to start talking to each other? How do you expect others to even think about supporting the GOP party, if the members of the party can’t even support each other? For evidence, just see the tax bill currently circling the bowl in D.C.
Jay
December 20th, 2011
8:13 am
Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:14 am
Granny, if you know what that elusive gift is, I am all ears.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
8:15 am
Jay, have a great HOLIDAY vacations.
[Waging war!]
Jay
December 20th, 2011
8:15 am
A lot of truth in that Gale.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:16 am
Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.
Enjoy, Jay. I’m just about done producin’ myself, this week.
We’ll try not to blow the place up while you’re away.
(right, kids?)
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:16 am
I am envious, Jay. Just when I might find a few minutes to join the conversation, you tell us to “talk amongst ourselves”.
midtownguy
December 20th, 2011
8:17 am
If it were not for federal judges, we would still have segregated schools in Georgia. A primary function of federal courts is to protect minorities from the will of the majority.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:19 am
Gale
I love to give the “elusive” gift, but am not always successful.
Best we can do is keep trying. The thought is really what countd
I urge Mr. G (YES YOU MY LOVE) to keep trying – He almost always gets it right.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
8:19 am
midtownguy — are you suggesting what might have happened during the civil rights movement? How many “activist” judges would have been hauled in.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
8:20 am
Morning, Normal
Thought about a gift certificate for a facial or maybe pedicure/manicure for Mrs. Normal? Got a facial certificate for my mom – she put it off for a year, then said it was the most relaxing afternoon she’d had in months. Got a pedicure certificate for my dad last Christmas, mom said he then went every so often just to get his nails clipped and whatever else they do. He was having lots of trouble stretching and his arms give him trouble. It’s something neither would’ve thought of doing for themselves but a gift certificate broke the barrier.
midtownguy
December 20th, 2011
8:23 am
My point exactly.
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
8:23 am
I think Newt should do away withall appeals courts and the Supreme Court. He is smart enough to decide all legal issues himself. Think of the money we could save.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:24 am
Good Idea Paul….
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:24 am
Oh, and a word to at least a couple of guys who occasionally annoy me with their “I just don’t want to vote for any incumbent, it’s soooo beneath my intellect…” bits here?
(I won’t say their names, but they happen to rhyme with “ScramJet” and “Schmosephus.”)
Ya know, it DOES make a difference. Say what you will of Democratic presidents, but they DON’T appoint Federalist Society scum like Scalito to the Supreme Court.
So if you want to see more Citizens United -type rulings, by all means, don’t sully yourself by voting for the incumbent in the White House, ‘K guys?
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:25 am
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
8:23 am
“Think of the money we could save.”
…and the fee’s he could charge for himself…
midtownguy
December 20th, 2011
8:27 am
We could make Newt the Supreme Blessed Ruler and all our problems would be over.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:30 am
Paul
I love sitting in the mani pedi chair next to my POP…the ladies go
for him big time….
Mick
December 20th, 2011
8:31 am
Jay – Have a great holiday, off for a few days myself. If you get a chance, your encounter with christopher hitchens? Thanks…
scott
December 20th, 2011
8:32 am
I wish Jay would do a column on papers Obama wrote….probably even on the same subject. I am sure he can find them somewhere, right? Wait..what? Obama won’t release them out fear that everybody would find out what a dolt he truly is. Oh……that’s right. Its funny that you hear how this guy is brilliant, yet he doesn’t want to show his brilliance by putting his grades, theses, papers, etc. out there. What’s he hiding?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:34 am
We could make Newt the Supreme Blessed Ruler
We already had one of those. I think Newt would be called “Dear Successor”, wouldn’t he?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:35 am
Obama won’t release them out fear that everybody would find out what a dolt he truly is.
They get bitter, and they cling to guns, and religion, and Donald Trump’s campaign talking points.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:38 am
Scott
Who needs the papers?
Besides being silly, he already looks like a moron
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:38 am
scott – “yet he doesn’t want to show his brilliance by putting his grades, theses, papers, etc. out there. What’s he hiding?’
scott, his history of accomplishments is public knowledge. I’m not a fan of the curretn POTUS, but you are seriously going down the rabbit hole on this one. My goodness, next thing you know you’ll be asking to see his birth certificate.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
8:38 am
If it were not for those federal judges, along with that newfound fed ability to do special things with domesticated terrorists, how could I feel safe walking the streets of North Georgia.
Edward
December 20th, 2011
8:39 am
At the risk of invoking Godwin’s Rule, Gingrich is quickly fashioning himself as the next Adolf-wannabe. Anyone who follows this disgusting piece of filth masquerading as an intellectual should be viewed as irrational and dangerous. But, no worry. Newt, like every GOP buffoon before him, will flame out and be denounced. Hopefully. The GOP has become the Party of the Ridiculous.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:39 am
All you ladies out there. A serious question.
Would you be offended or pleased if you received a gift certificate for a consultation for a face lift? My wife is beautiful to me, but she is unhappy of herself. I want to give her something to make her happy, but I don’t know…
Finn McCool
December 20th, 2011
8:39 am
Newt, the gift that keeps on giving.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:41 am
Finn McCool – “Newt, the gift that keeps on giving.”
Yes, it’s a wonder more in his party don’t support him. Hmmmm…
Finn McCool
December 20th, 2011
8:41 am
That’s why the newspaper industry is dying – too much vacation time for it’s editorial writers!
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:44 am
I have thought for a while that the most important thing a president does is appoint Federal judges.
USMC
December 20th, 2011
8:44 am
“Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.”–Jay
How Bourgeoisie of you Comrade Bookman!
The workers don’t get “vacation”. Where is the “Social Justice” crowd?
Jay must be part of the 1%; RICH folks!
(have a great vacation, you deserve it after having to read some of our posts)
Donovan
December 20th, 2011
8:46 am
The trouble with you elitists, liberals, and progressives is that when you get your way you screw things up royally. Look at your latest presidential creation and your latest Democrat Senate.
So when you can’t beat W in the first election you kooks try to recount the ballots over and over again. When that fails you kooks run to the Florida liberal Supreme Court and that fails, as well.
You all know as well as I know that in order to further your agenda, that most Americans reject, is to either stack the Congressional deck with Democrats or find a liberal judge to overturn the will of the people.
Very nice oration Mr. Bookman, but I like Newt’s courageous oration better. He says out loud what most Americans think. And that is what scares you liberal boys and girls to death.
Unfortunately, you all are a reflection of San Francisco and Nancy Pelosi.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:46 am
Normal….
Tread very carefully, remind her you love her and she’s beautiful
AND
have a back up just in case.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:48 am
Donovan – “Unfortunately, you all are a reflection of San Francisco and Nancy Pelosi.”
Awww…. Why don’t you roll yourself up in the flag and try to get a little more sleep. We’ll wake you when it’s safe to come out again.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:50 am
Donovan
I don’t care much for your way of thinking either Mr.
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:52 am
I fear if America was a reflection of Newt’s opinions, I would be lucky to escape to a free nation.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
8:53 am
Donovan – so who are your choices in the upcoming elections?
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
8:58 am
Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.
Lollygagger!!!!!
“I just don’t want to vote for any incumbent, it’s soooo beneath my intellect…”
Right idea, but the wrong reason. If Obama wants my vote, then he needs to grow a backbone. If an incumbent proves they can do the job, I have no problem giving them a chance to continue. However, I will not waste my vote on somebody who couldn’t do the job right the first time. As it stands right now, I don’t know how I’ll vote next fall. I do know that I’m not voting for someone who has less spine than a sour gummi bear though, regardless to who they may possibly appoint. Obama’s 3 yrs into his term and still hasn’t filled all his appointed positions. I know most of that is due to GOP obstinance, but Obama could at least act like he’s gonna fight for something and/or somebody.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 20th, 2011
8:59 am
Bill Orvis White & Redneck Convert have nothing on this guy, he good.
carlosgvv
December 20th, 2011
8:59 am
joseph – 6:28
All the more reason a third party will form once most of the voters realize what direction the parties are taking us.
cosby
December 20th, 2011
9:01 am
Jay, when are you going to put Obama, Harry and Nancy under such scrutiny..gee…always pointing the finger at the Republicans….but in this case, Newt has a point. the so called judicial system has taken on the tone of legislation and not judication. Newt did suggest that the two other parts of the government – Congress and The White House – combine to keep the balance of power. Perhaps the time has come for this. Judges seem to have a lifetime appointment with no accountability. Look at the two (2) latest appointments to the supreme court and ask youself it they can rule impartially. There is an old rule my dad taught me – you have rights and privaleges, abuse those and you lose them. I lost a few of those rights and privagles granted by him..why, because I abused them.. The same may be said about our current judicial system. time has come to rein them in!
jm
December 20th, 2011
9:03 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-20/invention-is-the-mother-of-economic-growth-nathan-myhrvold.html
Gale
December 20th, 2011
9:04 am
For those who think the judiciary oversteps, I would challenge them to completely read some of those decisions they don’t like. Give an open mind to the rule of law they apply to those decisions.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:05 am
have a great vacation, you deserve it after having to read some of our posts
Like USMC said. (and I include some of my posts in the “our” business, above.)
jm
December 20th, 2011
9:05 am
way to go Obama (sarc)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-16/incandescent-light-bulb-spared-in-u-s-lawmakers-spending-bill.html
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:06 am
Blow it all up stands!
(Just the closet anarchist in me coming out!)
Look at your latest presidential creation and your latest Democrat Senate.
And sadly they are STILL a huge improvement over the deadly screw ups that preceded them. Not by a little bit, but my magnitudes of order. THAT is how messed up the guys that YOU voted for were, Donovan.
Here’s a little Xmas candy cane for you to suck on – when the Boy Emperor Emperor left office, only half of the people polled did NOT consider him the worst ever.
(You did a heckuva job connies.)
Own it, for once.
And after you’ve found some redemption for empowering the worst ever then you can cry and whine and pout about their successors.
Enjoy the down time with friends and family, Jay.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
9:07 am
Brosephus, I have to agree somewhat with Stands. While I don’t like everything Obama has done and I wish he would fight harder for a number of things, sitting out the vote only encourages the Republicans to chase their extreme right wingnuts. The only way to bring this country back to some semblence of center is to hand an extreme overwhelming defeat to the Republicans…. Not just a lost election but an overwhelmingly lost election. Sitting is out is to surpress the vote, exactly want the right nimnods want so their radical base has greater influence.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:10 am
If Obama wants my vote, then he needs to grow a backbone.
I’m going to have to do one of those “perfect is the enemy of the good” arguments and I hate making those. But at the end of the day, the long-term, and very tangible damage a conservative President beholden to the Federalist society’s dogma can do to this republic trumps my desire to see Obama acting like the blaxploitation film hero *I* want him to be.
And yes, I recognize that such talk can embolden Middle-Man to come off as even more of a wuss, to refuse to recess-appoint everyone the Goopers have blocked to date, if he knows he can cruise to victory.
But seriously, do you think the White House thinks 2012 is going to be a walk in the park? Presumably they can read polls, and they know that while they have the upper hand on any of the losers the GOP are likely to put out there, it’s hardly guaranteed, particularly with the voter suppression measures under way in many swing states.
anyway, I’m rambling. I get your point, hope you get mine.
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:12 am
My favorite Thatcher quote….
To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects”.
I really don’t fault Bozo for his beliefs, I just don’t agree with them. They are disastrous for the country in the long haul, long after he stops occupying government housing and is back in Chicago writing his memoirs. He will fade into history, remembered as the only President since FDR who tried and failed to make government supreme. Change is coming… rely on it. America, by and large, does not want to live in an Obama America. He is the diametric opposite to what this country was founded on…. self reliance, accountability, pride in our country and the elimination of meddling in our lives by an incompetent, Jaba the Hut size government who couldn’t run a lemonade stand without going breaking it’s back. No, the judiciary is not the only problem that we have….. far from it.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
9:12 am
It looks like Newt will be the anointed one. If that’s the best the republicans have to offer it will more than likely be a landslide for Obama.
If the congress and senate don’t get their crap together and reach some sort of compromise I would say that some of them may be taking early retirement.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:13 am
and remember the money …all the new money….the money from secret sources that is already pouring into the 2012
will we let corporate America buy the White House for the GOP?
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:13 am
Normal
Word of warning on my recommendation: Mrs. Paul took one of the granddaughters with her and they had a great time, but…. every so often the phone rings and it’s “Grammie, can we go get our nails done?” Pumpkins on Halloween, clovers on St Pat’s day, polka dots on some other day… never knew there were so many occasions to pay the nail ladies….
as far as the other, she may be reluctant to bring it up, but you may want to think about, instead of her opening an envelope, just asking her very seriously that you’ve picked up that that is something she’s thought about and whatever she decides, she’ll have your full support. And you can add if she goes for it you’d be happy ’cause you don’t have a clue what to get her for Christmas!
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:14 am
Blow it all up stands!
Oh, damn you. Damn you. Damn you all to hell.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
9:16 am
Paul,
More sage advice…I think I’m going to do it. I do have a small standby….and I’ll keep a bag packed for “just in case”
stephen
December 20th, 2011
9:16 am
This comment section was hijacked by 10 yr olds again. I’ll ck back later.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
9:16 am
“will we let corporate America buy the White House for the GOP?”
how many times do we have to go through this convo? you are aware that ‘corporate America’ gave more to BO and the Dems in 2008 right?
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:20 am
Look at the two (2) latest appointments to the supreme court and ask youself it they can rule impartially.
No more or less than Thomas, Scalia, or Roberts. What’s impartial to one is biased to someone else.
dB
I’m not looking for “perfect” or even John Shaft. What I am looking for is someone who will call the uber-conservative crap for the bullsh*t that it is. I have no problems with some conservative ideas, and I have no problem with some liberal ideas. That said, I don’t care to have the dialogue of the entire country hijacked by the extremes without some whimper of opposition.
Obama is a modern day Reagan Democrat, and there’s nothing wrong with that. To date, he’s been a better conservative president than GW Bush was imho. Given the fact that the GOP has gone so far to the right that they’re almost coming around from the left now, I doubt that the person(s) I’d vote for with a (R) behind their name will even be a candidate by Super Tuesday. I’m not just gonna give my vote to any candidate though. Far too many people died and gave their lives to ensure that I could vote, so I treasure that as much as I treasure my life. I get your point, but my vote has to be earned. That’s just how much I value it.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:21 am
Mr. Head,
We are aware that corporate America has bought ALL politicians — there’s no point in getting into a pissing match of which politician received the most money.
With that in mind, it’s the Democrats who usually look out for the middle class — the problem is they have no backbone to stand up to the GOP who just simply blatantly side with the wealthy on everything — the Democrats (as stands has mentioned before) at least throw us a Milk Bone or two.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:22 am
…you are aware that ‘corporate America’ gave more to BO and the Dems in 2008 right?
And YOU are aware that this is the first time in history a Democrat has performed this Herculean feat, right?
Right???
Because heretofore, you neo-cons have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever said the very first thing about the corproate ownership of our government.
Strange, huh?
And the moment, another neo-con gets back in the West Wing, your faux outrage will disappear as quickly as it showed up on January 21, 2009…
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
9:23 am
“It is dishonest history.”
Consider the source of that statement…. Yawn….
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:24 am
Granny,
“Corporate America buy the WH for the GOP?” Yeah, right…..Bozo donors in 2011….
SEIU, 28M
Goldman Sachs 1,013,000
Microsoft 852,000
JP Morgan Chase 808,000
Citigroup 736,000
Time Warner 624,000
And that’s when I quit writing. Seems that someone is not only trying to buy the WH but it is those evil 1% who Bozo continues to rant on about. Can’t run a campaign without ‘em. Hypocrisy? Yeah, maybe just a little.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:24 am
Talking Head
and YOU do know that what the results of the Citizens United decision
have been.
Or do we have to lead you through that again?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:25 am
Obama is leaving his successor a foreign policy fiasco
Only a dolt wouldn’t remember the disaster this guy is creating and vote him out
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:25 am
And I have to say I’m with stands on the voting issue — I’m certainly not going to piss away my vote with a non-consequental candidate who has a snow balls chance in hell of winning (like Nader, sorry AmVet) — and I’m certainly not going to give it to any of the GOP candidates unless Huntsman comes from no where to win it. So that leaves me only one choice. Sure Obama has been less than stellar in my opinion, but he has certainly gotten us back where we need to be going.
I had a friend once during the ‘08 election who said, which I agree, that Obama will be one of those Presidents like FDR or Kennedy, which changes the direction of the country. He won’t be anything of substance in history, but we will look back and see that with him, it’s where it started, and also in my opinion, the direction he’s changed is certainly better than his pre-decessor.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
you can lead a horse to water,
but I see our faux stallions remain thirsty
by choice
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
“And the moment, another neo-con gets back in the West Wing, your faux outrage will disappear as quickly as it showed up on January 21, 2009…”
Amen to that!
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
71, read my 9:22 and convince me that you’ve been lamenting the corporate ownership of our government for years.
Yeah, riiight….
Unlike me and others here, you sovereignty-ceding reactionaries could care less about it.
The ONLY thing you care about was that it was not a Republican who won the pig out at the corporate trough of largesse contest this time…
barking frog
December 20th, 2011
9:26 am
K71, 9:24, that cannot possibly be true, the President was financed
by $50.00 donations on the internet..
carlosgvv
December 20th, 2011
9:28 am
Granny
Why not? We already have the best Congress money can buy.
Mary Elizabeth
December 20th, 2011
9:28 am
“. . .particularly with the voter suppression measures under way in many swing states. . .”
—————————————————–
Voter suppression done by the GOP, I might add. If this is the kind of country you want for yourself and your children, vote GOP in 2012. All the rest is talk (and denial).
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:28 am
No jm, only a dolt would say such tripe — if anything Obama’s foreign policy experience has been the best part of his administration. We will just consider the source of your opinion when you say otherwise — for you have no real example except the made up crap in your head to prove otherwise.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:29 am
John McCain wouldve been a better president
And I don’t say that easily
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:30 am
Only a dolt wouldn’t remember the disaster this guy is creating and vote him out
I don’t see Obama putting the US into decade’s long military engagements that will cost billions. So far, his foreign policy appears to be simply cleaning up the mess that was left to him. Other than that, he hasn’t exerted much foreign policy at all.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:30 am
Bosch
Exhibit A: Egypt
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:32 am
“his foreign policy appears to be simply cleaning up the mess that was left to him”
Which he’s done, or I should say Hilary has done remarkably well. Our leaders can now visit other countries without riot police everywhere.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
9:33 am
Bosch,
“With that in mind, it’s the Democrats who usually look out for the middle class”
Really? How’s that? Hasn’t the middle class shrunk in terms of population and household income decline with a Dem controlled congress from 2007-2011 and with a Dem President since 2009?
In what ways do they ‘look out for the middle class?’ Are you referring to legislation that makes the middle class more dependent on government?
Amvet,
You neo-marxists are all about the have nots, and turn a blind eye to corporations when they support whatever you like. Tell me this, your name says ‘Republican Fascists’, how are BO and the Dems not Fascists?
Mick
December 20th, 2011
9:33 am
jm
Egypt? What about their people, don’t they have a say or would you prefer us to be the rulers of the world? This is where the true genius of Ron Paul comes through – he gets it, you don’t and probably never will…
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
Exibit A: Egypt?
Call us when the number of American service members killed there reaches
4500 will ya?
Self Determination can be messy.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
I should say Hilary has done remarkably well
No argument from me. I think that’s been one of Obama’s best decisions to date. That woman isn’t one to be toyed with.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
Bosch,
First, good morning!
Second, don’t try to “debate” jm…his nose is so far up the GOP azz, that if it made a sharp right turn, jm’s nose would break. You just can’t be reasonable with the unreasonable. Just ignore him.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
jm,
Only a dolt would use Egypt as an Obama foreign policy failure. He had nothing to do with that. Or do you blame him for every global event? Such power you give to the POTUS who you deem so weak and incompetent.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:34 am
What kind of asinine Senator (Reid) thinks extending a tax cut for two months is good policy?
What a bunch of nuts. Democrats don’t know how to run the government. Tax rates need to be set the whole year, not change mid year.
Democrats are idiots
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:35 am
AmVet,
Corporate America has financed presidential elections for decades, both Republican and Democrat. Money is handed to favorites under the table, Illegally (China Gate) and by any other means to buy influence. Happens in the Congress and certainly happens in Presidential elections, no matter what the party.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
9:35 am
neo marxists?
Whatever it is. I’m against it.
Rufus T Firefly 2012
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:35 am
“Really? How’s that?”
The tax policy for one thing — they propose legislation that at least tries to give a bone to the working and middle class — always blocked by the GOP or not enough votes to get through because of Blue Dog Democrats.
Next.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:38 am
Exhibit B
European collapse
Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up? Hmmmm
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:39 am
Hasn’t the middle class shrunk in terms of population and household income decline with a Dem controlled congress from 2007-2011 and with a Dem President since 2009?
Dude, the middle class has been under assault since the Reagan revolution. What you’re talking about is no different than jumping off a cliff to your death. Nobody notices all that speed you’re picking up in the air, but that sudden stop at the bottom is what people remember.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:40 am
“Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up?”
No. Again, do you have anything real to back up your claims, have you ever?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:40 am
What I am looking for is someone who will call the uber-conservative crap for the bullsh*t that it is.
Yeah, I get you. And which, to be fair, Obama does from time to time, but nowhere near often enough to suit me. Of course there’s a whole year’s worth of campaignin’ to come.
Then again, remember this: this is what we elected. Obama made it crystal clear in an interview he gave with Rachel Maddow, shortly before the election:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27464980/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/t/transcript-barack-obama-talks-rachel-maddow-days-election/
[emphasis mine]
“MADDOW: And so, you have the opportunity to say John McCain, George Bush, you’re wrong. You also have the opportunity to say, conservatism has been bad for America. But, you haven’t gone there either.
“OBAMA: I tell you what though, Rachel. You notice, I think we’re winning right now”
There’s “laughter” at that point, but I sure as hell wasn’t laughing. But like I said–that’s what we elected.
…aaaand it should be clear to anyone who ever read “The Audacity of Hope” (as I have) that he was going to be maddeningly conciliatory. The guy *always* tries to see the merits of the other side’s arguments, and he always goes too far in imagining that the other side’s guys are operating with some semblance of integrity.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
9:42 am
“The tax policy for one thing ”
Oh you mean like the following:
1. A 156% increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco
2. Obamacare Idvidual Mandate Excise tax
3. Obamacare Employer Mandate tax
4. Obamacare surtax on Investment income
There are about 20 more taxes from Obamacare…but I guess these only impact the rich and not the middle class
But regardless of that, what tax policy? Aren’t the dems always the ones saying we need more revenue?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:42 am
Exhibit C
Kowtowing to China
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:43 am
Mick
“Egypt? What about their people, don’t they have a say ”
shhhhh…. that only applies when their citizens do what we want.
And the Egypt card gets played ’cause…. OMG, Muslims are gonna take over that country!!!!
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
9:43 am
Voter suppression done by the GOP, I might add.
I thought that went without saying. It’s been part of their MO for a long time. They simply do not want everyone to vote, who is qualified to do so.
See also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:43 am
Why are democrats against democracy?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
jm,
When you have an exhibit of substance or something real, then I’ll pay attention to you again, but now you are just simply doing what you always do and just throw out the ridiculous in the hopes that something will stick.
You are just too absurd for words.
David Mooneyhan
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
What a tuul.
Paul Krugman nailed it:
“Newt Gingrich is what stupid people think intelligent people sound like.”
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
Just remember it took a ruling by the Supreme Court against Nixon on producing his tapes and papers to shove him out the door and it took a vote against Clinton in the Paula Jones case for the lawsuit to proceed with that incriminating sworn testimony. Even this conservative court with the
Republican bent it has would hopefully be available to control a tyrant who wants to control the judiciary like Newt.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
9:44 am
I really don’t fault Bozo for his beliefs
Save the wear and tear on that keyboard, kay. You made your “feelings” known with one word.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
9:45 am
Why are democrats against democracy?
Perhaps it’s the Republic in US.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:45 am
Talking Head,
For one thing, none of those taxes collectively affect the middle class exclusively, such as the pay roll tax cut which we see now, which the Democrats are trying to extend.
And again, Obama has nothing to do with any of those things. You want to gripe at something, turn your attention to the Hill.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:46 am
“OMG, Muslims are gonna take over that country”
For the clueless, Muslims already have a super duper majority in Egypt
That’s not new
The anarchy is new
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
9:47 am
“Newt Gingrich is what stupid people think intelligent people sound like.”
Exactly.
And stands, I’ll add that in my opinion, one of Obama’s faults is that he also assumes that people that he deals with, who were either elected or in a certain position are intelligent — most of the time, they are not. That’s one of the problems with this country, we have devalued people who are truly intelligent.
Mick
December 20th, 2011
9:48 am
paul
I don’t have time for this foolishness today. As bad as these times are for many, these still are some of the best days of our lives, blamers and whiners – pathetic. All the really cool and smart people here, have a great holiday! The rest?
You too….
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:48 am
Female Egyptian protesters being stripped and beaten (Clinton)
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:48 am
sfd
Interesting interview. What I heard Candidate Obama in effect saying was, he’ll run against the record of the incumbent Bush because there are Republicans who are not happy with what his administration has done. But if I change tactics and pound Republicanism in general, I probably won’t get their votes.
catlady
December 20th, 2011
9:50 am
Just a preview of what “President” Gingrich would due, dear folks! He doesn’t like it, he has to sit in the rear, he wants it to be different–he will just get rid of it. That old, pesky Constitution! Let Gingrich set it straight! You know he is smarter than 2-3 “regular” folks, right? I mean, that’s what he says, and we know he is always truthful and honest and honorable, right–just ask his ex-wives!
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:51 am
Egyptian museums and artifacts being burned
Manuscripts and artifacts being lost
Good job O
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:52 am
Egyptian general: protesters should be thrown in Hitler’s ovens
Good job O
Egypt is turning into a failed state and succumbing to anarchy
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
9:53 am
Cheer up Taxpayer…. maybe you’ll get a Kardashian Christmas card this year. Ought to make your day.
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
9:53 am
You…turn a blind eye to corporations when they support whatever you like.
Are you drinking already???
I have continuously lambasted the hyper-corrupt takeover of our government by the monied interests that Jefferson warned of.
I indicted BHO BEFORE he was even elected and said he was just another corporate-friendly lackey for the big boys. And guess what, TH, I was correct, wasn’t I?
You? You neo-cons screamed that he was the most liberal senator in the history of the universe!! So that makes tow presidents in a row that you have been dead wrong about, huh? (presuming you’ve joined the brigade of TRUE conservatives, who now deem that George of the Bungle was not. LOL!)
YOU now pay lip service to the United Corporations of America ONLY because the GOP lost the battle this time. For the first time in history. As in ever.
Your concern is transparently laughable.
You LOVE that Washington DC is corporate owned territory.
You love that Wall Street got away with economic murder.
You just want desperately to ensure that the GOP regains its historic role as the biggest hog at the trough next time.
And one more time, just so you can contrivesome other irrational canard to accuse me of, a pox on both their houses…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:54 am
The democratic head of numerous conference committees says democrats won’t conference with the House over the payroll tax cut
Democrats don’t believe in democracy
Dirty Dawg
December 20th, 2011
9:55 am
So Newt says he wasn’t ‘lobbying’ when he got the $1.6 mil from FreddieMac…well the folks that gave him the money thought they were paying for ‘access and influence’, what’s that if not lobbying? Fact is Newt was either being a lobbiest or a ‘con man’ – take your pick Newt.
And while I don’t know the names of any ‘evil’ LEGO characters, but Newt is the human encarnation of him/it/them.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
9:55 am
dB
I read it. I figured the guy would be a Rodney King “Can we all get along?” type, but I didn’t think he’d be this guy here. I know he has to avoid the “Angry Black Man” label, but I want him to call the GOP’s bluff on something… anything… just to show everyone how crazy some of these people really are. Everybody’s trying to put the blame on Obama like things are all his fault, but Congress is really what’s wrong with this country. Until somebody beats it over the heads of the citizens here (or put it on a 3D bumper sticker), we’re gonna keep seeing the same effing crap year after year.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
9:55 am
Jm
““OMG, Muslims are gonna take over that country” For the clueless, Muslims already have a super duper majority in Egypt”
You’re not too good at getting sarcasm, are you?
And… you post “Exhibit A: Egypt” and then you post “Why are democrats against democracy?”
You say Egypt is an Obama failure cause he left them alone to decide their fate. Then you say it’s democrats who are against democracy You seem confused?
and your 9:36 “European collapse Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up”
So now a country’s economy can be turned from disaster to wonderfulness because an American president established a good relationship with them? Colin Powell and Condie Rice and Hillary Clinton have a lot to learn -
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:56 am
Democrats want to raise taxes on working class Americans
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
9:56 am
jm has hemmorhoids
Good job O
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
9:57 am
oops,typo on hemorrhoids.
good job O
Common Sense
December 20th, 2011
10:00 am
”
In Federalist Papers #78, for example, Hamilton writes that the judiciary “is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.” ”
Bookman quoting the Federalist Papers. Now I have seen it all.
Now if only things were the same then as they are today so that we could apply those words. But wait….The Federalist Papers are not part of our legal system, and Bookman and other like to point out when it is to their advantage.
You can’t have it both ways.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:01 am
jm
Unless you’re advocating that we invade Egypt, give it a rest. Your ODS is getting to the point where it’s becoming annoying.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:01 am
Paul. Nope I got the sarc
More like a sneer
I don’t care if Egypt is Muslim athiest or pagan
I do care that it doesn’t descend into anarchy
The president can influence things. But not our current one
He’s neutered
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
10:01 am
Somebody feels inferior due to his unnaturally small………..hands.
Good job O.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
10:02 am
Of course the problem is Congress…and Americans know it.
From Think Progress
“A new Gallup poll reveals that Congress’s approval rating has hit a new record low at 11 percent, with independents giving Congress a 7 percent approval rating. This month’s disapproval rating of 86 percent is “the highest in Gallup history, beating the 84 percent-high recorded in August of this year.”
Meanwhile, President Obama’s approval rating is at its highest in months, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, which shows the president with 49 percent approval among voters and 47 percent disapproval.”
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
10:02 am
For all you last-minute Christmas gift shoppers.
saywhat?
December 20th, 2011
10:03 am
Breaks over. Gotta get back to work.
For real this time, good job O.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:04 am
Bro
Liberal ignorance has been annoying for a long time
Suck it up
I’m not advocating invasion
The strong arm is what’s needed
Obama is a weakling
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:04 am
Jm
Okay…. so how would a President Newt or a President Michelle or a President Rick or a President Santorum have ‘inflluenced events enough to have not caused Egypt to be in the state they are in today?
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:05 am
Democrats want to raise taxes on working class Americans
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-morning-plum/2011/12/20/gIQA9P4v6O_blog.html
“* House GOP shelves up or down vote on payroll tax cut: House Republican leaders announced last night that they will hold a motion to reject the Senate compromise on extending the payroll tax cut. This comes after they had originally announced that they’d hold a straight up or down vote on it.
What exactly does this mean? A Senate Dem aide emails the Democratic perspective:
The bottom line is that after announcing that they would hold an up-or-down vote on passage of the Senate’s bipartisan compromise, Republicans have reversed course and are now refusing to hold an up-or-down vote. The Rule that was reported out last night only allows for consideration of a “motion to disagree with the Senate Amendments.” ,b>Under this scenario, it is impossible for the House to vote to pass the bill.
Anyone in favor of the bill votes “no” (because he/she is voting against the motion to disagree). But even if 218 members vote “no” (which again, in this case means yes), nothing happens. The bill does not pass. In other words, there is no “up” in the “up-or-down.” It is heads I win, tails you lose.
Dems will amplify the case today that Republicans decided against a straight up or down vote because they were worried that the measure just might pass.”
Care to repeat that BS again??? If I didn’t know any better, I’d swear you were a manure farmer based on your spastic posting this morning.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:07 am
jm
Other than invading Egypt, what else can we do? I don’t know what kind of logic you’re using, but you should seek help. Maybe Charter can help you dude.
Mary Elizabeth
December 20th, 2011
10:10 am
Voter suppression done by the GOP, I might add.
I thought that went without saying. It’s been part of their MO for a long time. They simply do not want everyone to vote, who is qualified to do so.
———————————————————
They want to “win” their ideology for this country even through devious and undemocratic means.
These stealthy tactics have been snowballing since ALEC was formed in 1973 when GOP Libertarians lost at the ballot box. Since then, they have gone to the Republican states as their stronghold. There MUST be public outcry against any suppression of the right to vote. That is not democracy and that is not consistent with the tenets of our democratic Republic.
http://kochbrothersexposed.com/voterid/
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
10:13 am
Voter Suppression? Really? Did they figure out Obama wasn’t going to get reelected and now have to stoop to this?
What Voter Suppresion laws? Like having a valid ID?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
10:16 am
if I change tactics and pound Republicanism in general, I probably won’t get their votes.
[...]
Everybody’s trying to put the blame on Obama like things are all his fault, but Congress is really what’s wrong with this country.
Both you guys raise useful points, but I want to re-direct just a bit.
There’s a reason I emphasized Rachel’s question about how Obama also has “the opportunity to say, conservatism has been bad for America.”
I sound like a broken record but I will say it again–the only way rationality will ever stand a chance in these political battles is for our side to call out what conservatism HAS BECOME. Not what we think it used to be, or what we, still, consider within ourselves to be “conservative” (with a small “c,” if you like).
I really think that until we come out and call conservatism out, we’ll continue to be at a horrible rhetorical disadvantage. And by calling conservatism out, it will mean calling out some conservative *Democrats* who’ve been just consistently awful–guys like Ben Nelson come to mind.
Because it’s not about party, not at all. If some upstart, rational Republicans emerge to actually run to the “left” of some Democrats on some important issues (don’t laugh, Romney tried to be that guy in 1994, going against Kennedy), they should be encouraged.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
10:19 am
Do you liberals have some sort of mental retardation that keeps you from seeing corporate donations to democrats campaigns or what?? I mean, seriously, how in the hell do you keep making absolutely stupid comments about R’s being bought by corporations while you completely ignore the FACTS about corporate donations to D campaigns? What is wrong with you people?!!
Todd ... this is Todd
December 20th, 2011
10:20 am
I’ve already given … my valid ID … to Sally.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:20 am
Bro
Maybe you’ve never heard of military funding
Or the threat to step down or “be removed” by other means (wouldn’t be the first time we did such a thing)
Coordinated diplomatic lobbying with allies (which Obama stinks at)
And I’m sure we have CIA assets on the ground in Egypt that could do plenty of things
All that said, its more a “transition management” problem. The pooch has already been screwed. Bad Obama calls.
And now that the train is careening off the tracks it may be impossible to stop
Obama let the train get off track
Now we have anarchy
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:21 am
sfd
“the only way rationality will ever stand a chance in these political battles is for our side to call out what conservatism HAS BECOME”
Darn good point. It’s a much more engagement, dialogue strategy that should play better than attack, attack.
Jm
Hello? Hello?
I doubt you’ll find an answer to the 10:04 on Google -
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
10:21 am
Someone please explain what exactly Obama did to cause the Egyptians to revolt and vote in the Muslim Brotherhood????????????. I thought the Bush Doctrine was to bring Democaracy to the Middle East. That is why the Palestinians elected Hamas; the Lebanese Hez bollah, the Iranians reelected Ahmidinnerjacket; and now Maliki the tyrant in Iraq as well as that corrupt guy in Afghanistan. Or should we let the Neocons get their way and invade and take over all these countries so we can steal their oil?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:24 am
RB
They have blind faith
Even though Obama is a 1%er supporter himself
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:25 am
the only way rationality will ever stand a chance in these political battles is for our side to call out what conservatism HAS BECOME. Not what we think it used to be, or what we, still, consider within ourselves to be “conservative” (with a small “c,” if you like).
There’s a bit of difference in what Maddow asked Obama versus what you’re stating. I’m not necessarily in agreement that conservatism is bad for America. When you look at this current incarnation of modern conservatism, then you’re talking about a completely different monster. I won’t argue over that. If Obama stated that modern conservatism was bad for America, I’d probably applaud him for saying that as he’d be speaking the truth. The modern conservatives resemble nothing close to what conservatives were even 50 years ago. There is some good in conservative ideals, but the modern conservative thinking doesn’t care to emphasize it. It’s more focused on demeaning everything that doesn’t agree with it.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
10:25 am
And I’m sure we have CIA assets on the ground in Egypt that could do plenty of things
That kind of moronic thinking got us the Shah, how did that Iran thing work out?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:26 am
Paul
Hello back. How are you?
Want to discuss TX instead?
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
10:27 am
RB, I know that you’ve written extensively about the sell off of we the people’s sovereignty to corporate America.
You’ve agonized over the fact that the GOP has up, right up until Barry, always won the contest for the biggest amount of dirty money funneled into a political party from HUGE business interests, across a staggering array of industries.
And now that the GOP did the unthinkable, and finally came in second in BIG money campaign contributions, it is just a coincidence that you’ve taken up this issue, huh?
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
10:27 am
Crooked Republicans? Trying to influence elections? Going to jail for illegal campaign activities?
The list is replete with those who have tampered with the law trying to influence the outcome of elections. One of the more prominent Hillary donors in 2006 was Galen Capital Group Chair, William Danielczyk who was indicted for illegal campaign donations. Then there was Norman Hsu in 2009, followed by Patricia Cromwell. One of the worst was Hassan Nemazee, a prominent Hillary donor, who got 12 yrs for defrauding banks and giving the money to the Hillary campaign. But the all time winner of the whole mess was Chinagate in 1996. Seems that someone wanted Gore and Clinton elected pretty bad. Remember Charlie Trie, Johnny Chang, John Huing, James Reidy Maria Hsia and Ted Sioeng? All either indicted or expelled from the country as influence peddlers for illegal campaign activities, investigated by none other than Janet Reno herself. And it’s only the Repubs that peddle influence. Yeah, right.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:27 am
Jm
“Maybe you’ve never heard of military funding”
So we cut foreign aid to Egypt and that makes Egyptians not riot an like us more…..
“Or the threat to step down or “be removed” by other means ”
Do what we want or we’ll take you out? Boy, that’s a great example of democracy in action and satisfying the man in the street, isn’t it?
“Coordinated diplomatic lobbying with allies ”
Nice slogan, what’s it mean? Send Newt over? Perhaps he’ll waive his fee –
“And I’m sure we have CIA assets on the ground in Egypt that could do plenty of things”
Back to foreign policy thru military action? That’s a great relationship builder.
So a Pres Newt or Pres Michelle or Pres Bachman would have headed off the anarchy in Egypt after Mubarak’s ouster by cutting military funding and threatening to take out the transitional leaders and lobbying and sending in CIA hit teams.
How to build relationships and get countries to do what you want, Republican style.
Somehow, I don’t recall reading where any of the Republican candidates have endorsed those ideas.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
10:28 am
Maybe you’ve never heard of military funding
And hear GOPer’s whine about the debt and budgets even more. Oh Hell NO!!
Or the threat to step down or “be removed” by other means (wouldn’t be the first time we did such a thing)
Sounds like a threat of military intervention of some kind. Nope. Why not just let people decide what they want to do for THEIR country by THEMSELVES??? Isn’t that how America was founded in the first place? What better way to spread our type of democracy around the world than to let people do it for themselves?
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
10:28 am
RB
Really?
Are you intensely immensely dense because NOBODY can see the ALL corporate donations now?
D’UH
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:28 am
Keep
It’s an ugly world
Obama talks loudly and let’s people beat him with a stick
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:30 am
Jm
I am well, thank you.
Discuss Texas? There’s a reason our hypocritical, cut teacher pay but pad my retirement pay governor is where he is in the polls. The country didn’t want the Texas model applied to the country.
Bill Orvis White
December 20th, 2011
10:36 am
@Donovan is right when he correctly states that Speaker Gingrich is saying what most of America is thinking. This is a God-fearing nation founded on the principles of the Lord Almighty and Jesus Christ. If you do not like it here, then move in with your friends Hugo, Fidel or that new Kim guy in North Korea.
Merry Christmas and Amen,
Bill
1811/0311
December 20th, 2011
10:37 am
Now “THIS” is an activist judge:
Headline: “Judge rules Colorado fails to provide enough for schools”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/19/judge-rules-colorado-fails-to-provide-enough-for-s/
Todd ... this is Todd
December 20th, 2011
10:39 am
I’ve already given … my activist judge … to Sally.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:40 am
Bill Orvis White
“Lord Almighty and Jesus Christ.”
“And”?
They’re different?
Scout
“Judge Sheila Rappaport ruled in Lobato v. Colorado that the state’s funding system fails to provide the “thorough and uniform” education required by the constitution”
Yeah, those darned activist judges, making sure the state legislatures and governors follow the state constitution. What next? Obeying the law?
Normal
December 20th, 2011
10:41 am
Bill Orvis White,
Please stop saying “amen”. Everybody knows that is really not how you are. Ashamed, you should be.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:44 am
Bro
The formation of our country didn’t quite happen the way you probably think
Remember that whole white male property owner thing?
jm
December 20th, 2011
10:45 am
http://www.smartmoney.com/retirement/planning/10-things-social-security-wont-tell-you-1314999788631/
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
10:45 am
Donovan is right when he correctly states that Speaker Gingrich is saying what most of America is thinking.
Conservative Republicans agree with a majority of Americans on virtually no issues at all.
Dive in here
http://pollingreport.com/issues.htm
and prove me wrong, BOW.
But I’ll get you started. Let’s see–Conservatives obsess over the deficit and debt, while only 5% of Americans think that’s a top priority.
Conservatives don’t want federal policy to require insurance to cover elective abortion, while 66% favor it.
As for how much the federal government can do to create jobs–you know, that big evil “GUBMINT” that just needs to “get out of the way?”–71% weigh in that they can do “a lot” or “a moderate amount,” a piddling 29% say “only a little” or “nothing at all.”
Shall I continue down the list?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
10:45 am
Obama talks loudly and let’s people beat him with a stick
Why sure….. just look at how he just let OBL do that after Bush gave up.
Please let’s try to at least see some intelligent concepts in the posting.
jm
December 20th, 2011
10:45 am
http://www.smartmoney.com/retirement/planning/10-things-medicare-wont-tell-you-1324333528533/?link=SM_hp_ls1e
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 20th, 2011
10:45 am
Biggest Story in Georgia today –
The crooked con judge down here is gone. Resigned.
Glory to free-market-jesus, and thank you Mike Bowers.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:46 am
Paul
You in Dallas Houston Austin San Antonio or elsewhere?
AmVet - Just say no to Republican fasicsts.
December 20th, 2011
10:46 am
Incredible.
That arrogant piece of crap, Craig James is gonna run for the US Senate.
As a Republican, of course.
No wonder he is such a blowhard jerkoff.
Here’s to hoping the good people of Texas give him another SMU death penalty…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:48 am
Paul
By the way, I liked The trans Texas corridor idea
Too bad it blew up
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:50 am
Keep
Start with yourself
Iconoclast
December 20th, 2011
10:50 am
Thank you Professor Gingrich for once-again proving the George Bernard Shaw idiom that your buddy Mr. Boortz is oft fond of quoting: “Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach.”
While my popcorn is still warm, who’s the next partisan syncophant in the GOP lineup that the media will enlist to entertain us for a three-week stint?
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
10:50 am
Bosch – “No. Again, do you have anything real to back up your claims, have you ever?”
He never will Bosch, becuse he likes the attention he gets from one line BS posts.
Let me demonstrate – Jm likes to diddle small boys.
See, no effort or proof required.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
10:51 am
So, how will this showdown between the Senate and House Republicans play out. Inquiring minds. Meanwhile, thousands of dollars in tax cuts for the middle class hang in the balance. Will the do nothing Republicans in Congress stick with their story that only tax cuts for the wealthiest create jobs and hence do not require spending offsets. Will they continue to insist on cuts in food and medicine to little children, etc., in order to pay for payroll tax cuts. Will they demand the right to pollute the drinking water of millions of Americans in order to further enrich the Koch crooks.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 20th, 2011
10:53 am
“Craig James is gonna run….”
well, you can keep hatin on us, ESPN.
That letter that says, Craig James is not welcome on our campus
It still stands. More than evah now.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
10:54 am
Sure jm…… no question who can will the battle of posts with some intelligence. Try this one to start:
While House Republicans couldn’t get their act together to approve an extension of the payroll tax holiday and unemployment benefits last night, they were able to do something far more frivolousness — commission a bust of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to be placed in the Capitol.
The 99 Percent Movement effectively changed the American political debate from debt and deficits to income inequality, highlighting the fact that income inequality has increased so much in the U.S. that it is now more unequal than countries like Ivory Coast and Pakistan. While those numbers are startling, a study from two historians suggests that American wealth inequality may actually be worse than it was in Ancient Rome — a society built on slave labor, a defined class structure, and centuries of warfare and conquest.
In the United States, the top 1 percent controls roughly 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. According to the study, which examined Roman ledgers, previous estimates, imperial edicts, and Biblical passages, Rome’s top 1 percent controlled less than half that at the height of its economic power
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:56 am
Butch
Stop spending so much time in those Yankee catholic churches that will twist your imagination
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
10:57 am
The crooked con judge down here is gone. Resigned.
Amanda Williams needs to go to jail and stay there a long, long time.
see (and *hear*) also:
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/430/very-tough-love
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:57 am
Jm
On the north side of the Ft Worth DFW metroplex – just north of DFW airport.
Erwin's cat
December 20th, 2011
10:57 am
Bro – “Why not just let people decide what they want to do for THEIR country by THEMSELVES??? Isn’t that how America was founded in the first place? ”
—————————————–
The French might disagree, If they didn’t have a lust for killing Brits, our independence would have been almost if not completely impossible
1811/0311
December 20th, 2011
10:57 am
Paul:
Yes …………….. and it’s her idea (rather than the people, Governor or Legislature) of what “thorough and uniform” is.
THAT is an activist judge and rule by oligarchy.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
10:58 am
Jm
Yeah, trans Texas corridor blew up for Perry. Idea had merit, but when he attempted the biggest eminent domain land grab in our history, it didn’t go over too well…….
getalife
December 20th, 2011
11:00 am
It is a sad day for this blog when Paul has to engage jm and pf is ripping Subway commercials.
Now back to whoopin my Brother on Call of Duty online.
Mighty Righty
December 20th, 2011
11:00 am
It simply never occurred toHamilton that any court would use the commerce clause to restrict the rights of states and individual ameican people in matters not dealing directly with commerce between states. The courts have assumed a power to make law that was never intended by the founders. This power is dangerous. When nine people with a view of the United
States contrary to the very constitution they swore to uphold can do what ever their particular political belief is without consequence they have too much power. Gingrich is righfully suggesting they be accountable to the people whose actions their decisions effect. Newt is correct.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
11:01 am
Paul
How are the Bass bros doing? Didn’t they fund a ft worth concert hall not too long ago, or some such thing?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:03 am
stands,
I heard that story on American Life and was baffled — so she resigned? I hope her skin gets slowly and painfully eaten by bacteria.
Peter
December 20th, 2011
11:03 am
Romney is perfect if you want Bush Jr again ?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
11:04 am
Keep
A. I like Churchill. So I don’t think it’s meaningless
B. The 99 percent movement hasn’t done a thing. See also C
C. If there was a real movement to equalize things, tax code reform, elimination of the corporate tax, and raising the dividends and capital gains tax would be on the table instead of a meaningless increase in wage taxes
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
11:04 am
Yes …………….. and it’s her idea (rather than the people, Governor or Legislature) of what “thorough and uniform” is.
And of course you have some basis for that claim. Like she just made it up out of nothing, like creationism, and just presented it as fact. Riiiiiight.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
11:05 am
Scout
If the ruling was anything like the nearly identical situation we had here in Texas, where the Republican Legislature and Governor pretty much said ‘dang, the court finally caught up with what we were doing…. let’s see if there’s a way we can get around it”
the decision was probably a no-brainer.
One school district averages $15.000 a year for students. Gym has teak-lined hot tubs for the athletic teams. Science labs have latest advanced microscopes. Another district averages $4k a year.
Uniform?
John Galt
December 20th, 2011
11:06 am
Jay, you and your daily team of lapdogs are not intelligent enough to realize that Newt is right.
The three branches of government are co-equals and the judiciary is out of hand. The Courts are the easiest way for the left to make law without the consent of the governed, so they oppose any limitation placed upon them. This is NOT how the Founding Fathers intended it.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
11:07 am
Scout
So let me get this straight: judge says ‘constitution requires uniform funding. It’s not, but hey, let’s just let it go.’
You’d be happy with that?
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
11:07 am
“No wonder he is such a blowhard jerkoff.”
More “tolerant” speach from the liberals of the world!! Nice! And you wonder why nobody want’s to “come together” with you?
Good thing you aren’t a conservative or Jay might ban you for language like that. But as usual, you’ll get a pass for being one of Jay’s peeps. And the hypocracy continues…..
AmVet - Just say no to dumb Republican slogans.
December 20th, 2011
11:07 am
Deactivate activist slogans.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 20th, 2011
11:08 am
~ding-dong the con witch is gone~
“I’m in the Baptist pahhty”- you don’t have to look it up, she said it to ME
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
11:09 am
The GOP ‘Greed Over People’ representatives have decided that working class citizens don’t need a tax cut.
Why do the republican congress critters hate working Americans?
Paul
December 20th, 2011
11:10 am
Jm
“How are the Bass bros doing?”
Far as I know, all the big sports shops – Bass, Cabela’s, etc do well. There are lots of sales, even for people whose idea of roughing it is a room at the Marriott ’cause the Ritz was already booked -
Edward
December 20th, 2011
11:10 am
The only thing more ridiculous than Newt are people like Jm. Seriously.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
11:10 am
Paul,
Watch out! If you feed him, he won’t go away…
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
11:10 am
Galt
“The Courts are the easiest way for the left to make law without the consent of the governed”
Yep, thanks to Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas……OOPS that would be wrong because they are right!
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:11 am
“The Courts are the easiest way for the left to make law without the consent of the governed, so they oppose any limitation placed upon them.”
John Galt, something tells me judges like Amanda Williams are not liberals.
AmVet - Just say no to dumb Republican slogans.
December 20th, 2011
11:11 am
RB, for the two hundred and thirty seventh time.
Public figures, groups, etc are fair game.
Other bloggers are not.
Comprende ?
(It ain’t rocket science.)
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:13 am
Butch,
LOL!
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:14 am
And again for the hundredth time — all “activitst judge” means is that a judge ruled in a way that you didn’t like — the wingnuts hate it when judges actually use the law to make their decisions and they go ballistic because they hate laws.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
11:14 am
The membership of the 112th Congress, which ran from January 2011 to January 2013, included one physicist, one chemist, six engineers, and one microbiologist.
In contrast, how many representatives and senators do you suppose have law degrees—and whom many suspect avoided college science classes like the plague?
Two hundred twenty-two.
It’s little wonder we have more rhetoric than fact in our national policy making.
Lawyers are trained to create a compelling narrative to win an argument, but as any trial lawyer will tell you, that argument uses facts selectively and only for the purposes of winning the argument, not for establishing the truth.
Amen.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
11:15 am
Amvet – you can say anything you want if you are a Gwinnettian
Paul
December 20th, 2011
11:15 am
Normal
I’m kinda in the Tip O’Neill/Ronald Reagan camp of political discourse.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
11:16 am
Paul
Haha
The billionaires silly
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
11:18 am
“Public figures, groups, etc are fair game.
Other bloggers are not.”
Selective “tolerance” isn’t tolerance at all, AmVet, it’s hypocricy by it’s very definition. Own it, AmVet, for it is YOU!!
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:18 am
RB calls liberals mentally retarded then gives a lecture about being nice. What a hypocrite.
AmVet - Just say no to dumb Republican slogans.
December 20th, 2011
11:19 am
Common Sense , it’s only Tuesday morning and I’m already beyond bored with all of this activist blogging that wants to legislate from the bench (Did I get that last part right?! LOL!)!
A great Tuesday song from an amazing, stellar, fantastic, killer (etc!) debut LP…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvWADo6KPzA
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
11:20 am
“How are the Bass bros doing?”
Waiting for the lakes in Texas to refill probably.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
11:21 am
Paul,
You’re a saint!
Bluecoat
December 20th, 2011
11:21 am
TD was one of Newts students at KSU,made highest score in class.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
11:24 am
Common. “The GOP ‘Greed Over People’ representatives have decided that working class citizens don’t need a tax cut.
Why do the republican congress critters hate working Americans?”
You’re right. Passing the extension for 2 months is so much better for working Americans than passing it for a year….
You either don’t pay much attention to the news or that common sense moniker is a bit close to home.
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
11:24 am
There are 545 people in this country that control all that we are and all that we probably will ever be…. in a country of 311,800.000. And that does not include the vast majority of the judiciary, elected and appointed local and Federal judges, some appointed for life. We might call it a tripartite system, one balancing the other but we are fooling ourselves. That might be true in the larger segments of government but not so true locally. Proven again by the Colorado decision that Scout pointed out. These people have virtual control over all that they judge. The appellate courts are, in part, an answer but most decisions that are appealed are not usually reversed, leaving the populus living with the result. And if the judge is like the one that ruled in the case that Newt pointed out on Face the Nation, although the result is certainly not what the people want or think is fair, they are stuck with it. The only answer that I can think is not to make Federal judges lifetime appointments and have them elected by the people that they judge. That would make politically appointed judges, in either party, subject to review by the people. It is far from a fair system and one that needs attention. Newt is right about this, although the left will hammer away at this issue until they bury him, not coming up with a solution to the problem but only doing away with yet another candidate with a solution that might work.
AmVet - Just say no to Republicans who obsess over you
December 20th, 2011
11:26 am
hypocricy?
Bosch, spelling mistakes aside, I knew he wouldn’t understand…(On purpose.)
But Lord knows, the situation is infinitely better with the three for one (Now THAT is blogging value!) banishment of the queen of obsessors…
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
11:28 am
kayaker
Good post @11:24, however is Newt going to do the same for those who are in his ideological camp or just those he opposes.
To be honest, this is propably really a mute point. Even Fox News this morning is talking about Newt’s drop for the 2nd week in Iowa and nationally.
Newt is just feeding red meat to the base while is numbers for moderates and independents slip………..
Darwin
December 20th, 2011
11:29 am
If anything, Newt is a brilliant marketer. He gives the people what they want. Well, you know what kind of people I’m talking about.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:29 am
AmVet,
Ain’t that the truth! Although I did see that certain ankle biter comment the other day — I guess she is no longer banned, she has just chosen not to show her fingers around anymore — I guess she thinks she is making a statement somehow. Her and her minion Dusty have left the building in a huff! LOL!!!
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:31 am
“Even Fox News this morning is talking about Newt’s drop for the 2nd week in Iowa and nationally.”
Maybe I just haven’t noticed, but has there ever been a political environment where all the candidates top the polls for a few weeks only to be shot down so bad?
Romney must be smiling.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
11:33 am
The bi-partisan bill in the Senate to a 2 month extension was to allow the Senate to recess and then take up the bill for a year extension.
The House leadership at first agreed to that but the Repub. rank and file membership decided to once again hold wage earners hostage to get EVERYTHING they wanted before passing.
Yes I can read, you putz and what’s more I understand what I read. I even understand why you can’t keep employees
Deal Monger
December 20th, 2011
11:34 am
Are we surprised that Gov Deal Monger and his political cronies are supporting dirty Gingrich? After all Deal was voted one of the 15 most corrupt hacks in congress!!!
Does it surprise anyone that The Deal Monger had his dirty hand in the GDOT “deal”? After all he was elected our Guv even after being on the list of 15 most corrupt congressman. Ga voters do love their crooks,don’t they?
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
11:35 am
Bosch
I think there have been 5 or 6 different names who have lead the GOP polling to date.
Problem for Newt is that he may have peaked too early. My guess is that he comes in 2nd or 3rd in Iowa and 2nd in New Hampshire. South Carolina will right the ship for him then we will see from there
AmVet - Read my lips. No new neo-con refudiations.
December 20th, 2011
11:35 am
Bosch, and apparently the forested one is joying in their show of solidarity.
Now the poor Wing(field)nuts get to endure them.
From another album that is tasty from start to finish…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7gDQH2V2Q
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2011
11:37 am
Her and her minion Dusty have left the building in a huff! LOL!!!
Who? Wha? Why do I miss all the drama moments?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:38 am
TBS,
I think you are correct.
AmVet,
I went over there the other day to read through his column, and they were still talking about us. Obsession is a sickness I tell you.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:40 am
AmVet,
But in honesty, now we are talking about them, so maybe we are sick too!
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
11:41 am
Can anyone tell me exactly what Hamilton meant by “complete independence”? Does this mean independence from the influence of those who nominated same? If the primary purpose of say, the SCOTUS is to interpret the constitutionality of federal laws, if folks don’t like the outcome….example being “corporate citizens”, why don’t we see more amendments to constitution? It is kinda dusty..
right what a bunch of retards
December 20th, 2011
11:41 am
Ha, Ha, this is the best the rep has? and the retards on the right hate Obama but supports this idiot, talking about changing our government, this shows this era rep voters are the worst, dumbest Americans that has grace this country.
Obama will win by a land slide with these jokers you idiots have running against him”””
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
11:42 am
Not at all surprising, Bosch.
Pathetic, but predictable…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PawDt9dZGc
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
11:42 am
“RB calls liberals mentally retarded then gives a lecture about being nice. What a hypocrite.”
To be a hypocrit, Bosch, I would have to run around like liberals telling everybody to be tolerant and then call them names. I haven’t done that have I Bosch? I really don’t care what you call who any more. I just don’t care to listen to the “be tolerant” lectures from the left and then see them laugh about everybody they don’t like.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
11:43 am
Hey be nice to Kyle – he posts at 5am so he can start his paper route before high school
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:43 am
right,
“talking about changing our government”
Yeah, I almost fell out of my chair last night listening to the Newster talking about “Change” – I thought, “really?”
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
11:43 am
Aquagirl
Having been involved in that melodrama in the past…you ain’t missing anything.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:44 am
RB,
See, the problem is, that no one here has ever to my knowledge told all you guys to be tolerant. You just make up that shyte. So, next time you want to lecture everyone on tolerance, practice what you preach.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
11:45 am
RIGHTRETARDS,
I can’t believe I’m responding to your 11:41 which is one of the most sophmoric of any comment I’ve read to date…at least many of the left wingnuts and right wingnuts are generally respectable of the other side.
You realize that from a debate 101 perspective, name calling is generally a concession to the other debater…jokers, idiots, retards, dumb??? Are you suggesting the GOP has a monopoly on mental ineptitude, cronyism, ethical shortcomings, and insincere motives?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:47 am
“To be a hypocrit, Bosch, I would have to run around like liberals telling everybody to be tolerant and then call them names. I haven’t done that have I Bosch?”
And yes, RB, actually you have. More so actually than anyone here that I’ve seen:
“More “tolerant” speach from the liberals of the world!! Nice! And you wonder why nobody want’s to “come together” with you? ”
preceeded by:
“Do you liberals have some sort of mental retardation that keeps you from seeing corporate donations to democrats campaigns or what?? I mean, seriously, how in the hell do you keep making absolutely stupid comments about R’s being bought by corporations while you completely ignore the FACTS about corporate donations to D campaigns? What is wrong with you people?!!”
Yeah, RB, that’s some nice “tolerant” speech from you, hypocrite.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:48 am
And RB, I’ll add, not one “liberal” here had made a comment about democrats not accepting corporate campaign money.
If you wingnuts would just stop making up this shyte, the world would be a better place.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
11:49 am
AMVET,
We can certainly agree with the former greatness of CAT STEVENS..lyrics and guitar work not replicated on any level since…are you posting what I refer to as “perfect” albums?
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
11:49 am
“The House leadership at first agreed to that but the Repub. rank and file membership decided to once again hold wage earners hostage to get EVERYTHING they wanted before passing.”
Then why don’t you direct your anger at Harry Reid for holding it up instead of kicking the can down the road for 2 months?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:51 am
Ha. Another lecture from RB about misplaced blame.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
11:54 am
And with that, I’m off to my capitalist ways! Pleasant Tuesday all!
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
11:55 am
RB from Gwinnett – “Then why don’t you direct your anger at Harry Reid for holding it up instead of kicking the can down the road for 2 months?”
Why, becuase he agreed to adhere to the terms that had been mutually agreed upon and passed with a Bi-Partisan vote. Only to come out and have the Congress crybabys scream NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
11:55 am
Anybody follow that story about the Brunswick Judge Amada Williams?
VERY interesting read. I just got through listening to the “This American Life” Segment over the internet – it’s amazing how one person with unlimited power can get so out of hand. It reminds me of that old song, “When the lights went out in Georgia” and that line where the singer says, “Don’t trust your soul to some backwoods Southern Lawyer”. We can change Lawyer to Judge in this instance.
If you guys get a chance, please listen to the broadcast (it’s about an hour but well worth it). It gives you a feel about why we need Independent news sources to cover things like this and why the PBS and entities like that are so badly needed in America. The judge, Williams, own local/county newspaper were too afraid to print one bad word about her it took an outsider to come in and put a stop to what she was doing.
Doggone/GA
December 20th, 2011
11:55 am
“Ha. Another lecture from RB about misplaced blame”
Apparently the term “bi-partisan deal” and the implications of a 89-10 vote just zipped right on by.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
11:56 am
Yawn
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2011
11:56 am
…you ain’t missing anything.
True, GG. Those who storm out in a big huff almost never stick the flounce, they boomerang right back shortly. Much ado about nothing.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
11:56 am
Why wasn’t the bill a ’stand alone’ without all the Repubs.’s add on to it?
This could have been voted on months ago except for the hyper-partisan House.
Who are you going to vote for RB for Pres.?
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
11:57 am
Also, if we think that the appointment of Supreme Court justices and federally appointed judges is not always political in nature, we are living in fantasy land. Long and drawn out hearings to establish a judge’s qualifications turn into partisan fights that usually result in yet another decision that will probably not be in the populus best interest but will enhance the political stand of the one who makes the appointment. Bork is an excellent example. Kennedy’s rants were the epitome of vile partisan rhetoric, aimed at someone who was well qualified to be a Supreme Court justice…. just the wrong political philosophy. I think that that is what Newt is trying to say. He might have couched it in a tamer rhetoric to make it go down a bit easier but his point about he unfairness of our system to those who are judged, is well taken.
Ronin
December 20th, 2011
11:58 am
Newt would make a good benevolent dictator. Well, on second thought, he’d make a good dictator.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
11:58 am
Riiiight, RB, because you can demonstrate all those times that I’ve called for tolerance, right?
Sheesh.
All I’ve repeatedly asked for is intellectual honesty and the ability to make a compelling case. I give no quarter and expect none.
Not really perfect albums, SR, though there are certainly quite a few of those that I would consider as such. (at least damn near).
Just ones that I have always owned and loved.
For example, here is one on that list…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz5PYxEHb6o
Obama is over
December 20th, 2011
12:00 pm
Jay I am glad that your editorial quoted the Federalist Papers and emphasizes the independence of the Supreme Court. I think that one of the most embarrasing moments of Obama’s presidency was last year during the State of the Union speech when he chastised the Supreme Court face to face on national television and suggested that Congress overturn the court’s ruling on campaign finances. Whether you agree with the ruling or not, Obama’s abusive rhetoric established a tone more like Don Corleone than the President of the United States. I don’t imagine Supreme Court members will attend the State of the Union address again- at least while Obama is in office. The President cannot overturn the Supreme Court. And you better get used to it because the Supreme Court is about to dismantle Obamacare. As your editorial points out, the system was designed for a purpose.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
12:02 pm
Bosch, debating with you is like debating with a 5 year old. If I say the sky is blue, you’re reply is “provide proof it’s green”. You’re so far out in left field it’s a wonder you ever make it through the day.
Go ahead and pretend liberals don’t lecture everybody about tolerance if you want, Bosch. Nobody will care if you keep your head buried in the sand as long as you don’t lift your head up and make stupid comments like that one.
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:04 pm
Kayaker
Are you saying Republican Senators never vote against a SCJ nominee on partisan lines?
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
12:05 pm
SR, another favorite of mine, albeit a heartbreaking one, from a damn near perfect album…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpNOoq0kFds
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
12:08 pm
“Why wasn’t the bill a ’stand alone’ without all the Repubs.’s add on to it?
This could have been voted on months ago except for the hyper-partisan House.”
Are you seriously going to pretend D’s don’t add unrelated crap to bills to get them passed? Really? And the house is hyper partisan because it’s R controlled, but it wasn’t a year ago when it was D controlled? That’s just dumb.
Duane
December 20th, 2011
12:08 pm
Just one minor bone to pick: Newt is not a fascist. A fascist supports a state-directed, regulated economy that is dedicated to the nation; the use and primacy of regulated private property and private enterprise contingent upon service to the nation or state; the use of state enterprise where private enterprise is failing or is inefficient; and autarky. They are hostile to finance capitalism, plutocracy, the “power of money”, and internationalist economics.
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
12:08 pm
They Both such,
Of course not. All are implicitly guilty of the same offense. I am just saying that it does not enhance fairness to the people who are judged….. it only furthers the agenda of the person who appoints. The people, in many cases, are the losers.
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:08 pm
Obama is over
“The President cannot overturn the Supreme Court.”
Glad you are aware of that… You might want to call Newt as well as talking to some of the anti abortion zealots on the right….
Goo day
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
12:09 pm
From another LP that rates a 10 in my book…
A rather metaphysical beauty that was influenced by Jackson Browne’s stuff…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69w1ubRwl0w
Adams
December 20th, 2011
12:09 pm
This doesn’t sound like Newt. It must be one of Callista’s deep thoughts that she has forced on the poor puzzy whipped Speaker.
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:10 pm
kayaker
I would have to agree. but lets be honest. Not all but many nominations are made on partisan lines. As in the case of Souder, it didn’t work out for the right as planned but if it had been known he would lean left…….. I doubt it seriously that he would have been nominated…….. but I could be wrong
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
12:12 pm
k71: Also, if we think that the appointment of Supreme Court justices and federally appointed judges is not always political in nature, we are living in fantasy land. Long and drawn out hearings to establish a judge’s qualifications turn into partisan fights that usually result in yet another decision that will probably not be in the populus best interest but will enhance the political stand of the one who makes the appointment.
Agreed.
I think that that is what Newt is trying to say.
Who the heck knows what Newt is trying to say? He probably forgot his point halfway through his “diatribe” himself!
MiltonMan
December 20th, 2011
12:12 pm
So Jay since you are so pro-constitutional today & when the US Supreme Court rules that ObamaCare is unconstitutional will you give us an opinion piece retracting your pro Obama & ObamaCare stance?
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
12:14 pm
Obama is Over
Isn’t it funny!
What you think of as an embarrassment most folks see as a shining moment of truth.
In fact the WaPo/ABC poll taken at that time (Feb 2010) has nearly 80% of Americans not approving.
Newt went further left
December 20th, 2011
12:15 pm
Fascism in this country and Europe has traditionally been Leftist fair (Wilson and FDR were too most fascist presidents in US history), but Newt has always spouted “Third Way” malarkey to make him sound New Age or something. Third Way is normally code for fascism (i.e., ‘don’t worry, we small group of supposedly smart people will make all the decisions for you, just trust us’).
Dem party is full of those types..Hillary, Former Speaker Pelosi, President Obama…Newt should just run as a Dem, it’s where Fascists are usually found.
Remember, the Nazis were a left wing party, too (read their party platform, aside from the nationalistic anti-Semitic rants, the party positions sell well among Democrats now)
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
12:16 pm
Egads!!! I just agreed with k71!! OMG something AWFUL is going to happen!!
Awful things that can happen:
a) That “Cancer Cure” that UGA just discovered is really a doomsday device that will turn the whole country into robotic, Zombie-like, republicans.
b) The 1% will turn into the .033% because they’ll do away with the lottery.
c) Cats will start living openly with dogs and have catdogs litters.
d) MICHELLE (The Loon), Bachmann will be the next President and declare every day a “Salute To Illiteracy” Day of Honor.
(shiver……………)
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:16 pm
“Nazis were a left wing party”
Really,,, They liked communism?
Do tell…………….
Thanks
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
12:16 pm
AMVET,
Awesome choice..here are a few of mine: Bridge Over Troubled Water (don’t laugh), Sgt. Pepper, Rubber Soul, Dark Side of the Moon, Animals, OK Computer, Zeppelin I, IV, and Presence (best guitar work but I’m sure I’m alone on this one), Blood Sugar Sex Majik, Stadium Arcadium…Ah Via Musicom..damn i’m old..of course Texas Flood, Couldn’t Stand the Weather, and various Hendrix works…
barking frog
December 20th, 2011
12:17 pm
Newt should read Title 28 U.S. Code Section 351(a), which provides
the method for lodging a formal complaint against any federal judge
by anyone.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
12:17 pm
they were able to do something far more frivolousness — commission a bust of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to be placed in the Capitol.
I really want to bang my head against my desk.
but then I stopped…I mean, you are kidding me with this, right? I’ll check news.google.com and find out it was a hoax, right?
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
12:18 pm
They Both Suck,
Newt did point out on Schiefer’s program last Sunday that he feels that this country is in a titanic struggle to determine which way we will go, which path we will take. This is a pivotal election to those who are concerned about where we are headed….. over 70% of the electorate feels unsure and is not happy with the status quo. They are concerned that we spend too much money. They are unhappy with the gridlock in Congress. They are frustrated that jobs are not improving and that no one seems to care much. Their home’s value is in the tank and not expected to get much better in the near future. All of these things have little to do with politics and more to do with good leadership and solutions. It ain’t working and America knows it.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
12:18 pm
http://www.gocomics.com/realitycheck
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
12:19 pm
Gingrich is merely reacting to what I think is an indisputable problem with our “weak” judicial branch – a problem well outlined by Levin and others – namely arrogating to itself the right to make law instead of interpret it From the Supreme Court we get the “right to privacy” from “penumbras, formed by emanations” in the Bill of Rights that then serves as the basis of legalizing abortion. You have to be plain stupid or willfully ignorant to, in good conscience, claim this is a valid interpretation of the Constitution. If you think otherwise, why don’t you default on your mortgage and then tell a judge there are “penumbras, formed by emanations” in the deed which entitle you to live in your home without paying a nickel more.
The issue is that in an evolving society such as ours, new problems and situations arise that were not (and could not have been) foreseen by the authors of the Constitution or ensuing bodies of Congress. It is the sole right and duty of the Congress to create laws for our nation as a whole. The proper way for the Supreme Court to deal with cases not covered by the Constitution is to refer it to Congress. Any judge who dares to make law on his or her own deserves to be impeached. Otherwise we have a panel of nine unelected and unaccountable people making laws that affect everyone – and that is neither a democracy or a republic; it is an oligarchy.
Do go and get some common sense over the holidays, Jay.
LawDawg
December 20th, 2011
12:20 pm
Of course, in Gingrich’s mind he is far, far more important than all of the Founders put together. In fact, Jesus Christ and Isaac Newton are as insignificant compared to the Great and Powerful Newt as a swarm of gnats is to Stephen Hawking. Praise be to the Newt!
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:21 pm
kayaker
Generall speaking good posts……. but at the end of the day I’m not sure the electorate will be buying Romney or Gingrich..
I think Obama will win just like Bush did in 04….. People will not be happy but will vote based on the choices they have.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
12:21 pm
O.Is. O. :Jay I am glad that your editorial quoted the Federalist Papers and emphasizes the independence of the Supreme Court. I think that one of the most embarrasing moments of Obama’s presidency was last year during the State of the Union speech when he chastised the Supreme Court face to face on national television and suggested that Congress overturn the court’s ruling on campaign finances.
As well he should have.
Quick question, why is it “embarassing” for Obama to call a bad decision a bad decision; yet when that Sen. from S. Carolina (You LIE!) interrupted Obama during his first S.O.U. address it was called “heroic” and “standing up for what’s right”?
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:23 pm
Newt went far left
Do you think that China is a democracy just because they call themselves the “Peoples Democratic Republic of China”?
LawDawg
December 20th, 2011
12:24 pm
I have read some stupid, trite garbage on the Internet and there is obviously no minimum IQ or educational requirement to post comments on blogs. I expect stupidity and ignorance to cascade like a waterfall any time politics is the topic. Even with this view as a backdrop, I am still shocked by the inanity of the comments by “Newt went further left.”
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
12:26 pm
DEBBIE,
Did you see the SCOTUS’s expressions when BO made his remarks….they all mouthed “not true”…I agree with them…independence per Hamilton to me means free from political sway (not really possible) and most certainly free of bullying from a sitting president who is allegedly a constitutional scholar. If we don’t want a constitutional interpretation of “corporate citizen” (which I think we all agree), the constitution needs amending…of course this would eliminate all of the vig the lobbyist provide out corruptresentatives…
Jay
December 20th, 2011
12:27 pm
“So Jay since you are so pro-constitutional today & when the US Supreme Court rules that ObamaCare is unconstitutional will you give us an opinion piece retracting your pro Obama & ObamaCare stance?”
No, Milton, I would not. I would probably criticize them for a foolish conclusion inconsistent with longstanding precedent.
However, I would also not argue that their decision should be ignored, or that they themselves should be removed or hauled before Congress to explain themselves.
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2011
12:27 pm
They are concerned that we spend too much money. They are unhappy with the gridlock in Congress.
So it’s logical one of the Republican frontrunners shops at Tiffany’s and practically invented the gridlocked Congress.
I’m disappointed Newt is sinking. Watching him run a presidential campaign would provide some much-needed laughter for this country.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
12:27 pm
They BOTH suck,
Yes. The Nazis are a left wing party. The term NAZI stands for national socialism party.The NAZI party morphed from what was previously called the German workers party. On the political pendulum the far right would be capitalists and laissez faire type free marketers. On the extreme left are the communists.
Then to the left but not the farthest left are the socialists. And the NAZIs were considered to be slightly to the right of the socialists because I think rather than nationalizing large industries they just wanted to direct them and tell them what to do. Hence they were to the right of the other 2 main leftist groups and were called the right wing. They were still left of center though.
As for the anti- Semitism that sentiment has been played out in plenty of left wing govts from the pogroms of the Soviet Union to the same in the Nazi party.
Carol
December 20th, 2011
12:28 pm
Republicans,
Please select Newton Leroy Gingrich as your nominee for President. Watching him spiral out of control will bring such entertainment to the political season next year.
Brie
December 20th, 2011
12:31 pm
Political candidates talk a good game. Look no further than Obama, the Campaigner in Chief.
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
12:33 pm
Debbie,
The Court has made two very bad decisions in the past few years that affect every American. One having to do with imminent domain and the other concerning campaign finance. Neither should have been decided as they were and have only made the ones that will benefit the winner. To say that the state can take away private property for the “good of the community” is absurd. We also need fewer people with money and power deciding policy in this country and the Court’s decision to make corporations just like ordinary people regarding political contributions, in an already corrupt system, is also patently absurd. Oh, as to agreeing with me….. It really ain’t so hard. Just common sense.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
12:34 pm
DDR, glad you heard that segment. I remember when I first heard it, I just kept shaking my head, thinking “this can’t really be happening, can it?”
They’ve got a new blog post up about the case…
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/blog/2011/12/judge-williams-steps-down
Anyway, I just sent them a few bucks to help cover the costs of the podcast, which I download most every week.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
12:36 pm
Are you seriously going to pretend D’s don’t add unrelated crap to bills to get them passed? Really?
I don’t recall the D’s making a pledge to stop doing that very thing. Can’t say the same for the R’s. Yet another scene in the long running Off-Broadway hit play, Quit Pledging To Do Something If You Don’t Really Plan On Doing It!
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
12:36 pm
JAY,
Wish I’d seen this column last evening…very thoughtful…FIGNEWT is effectively out of the running IMO…I asked the question before but I’m wondering what Hamilton meant by “independence”????
it’s difficult to be more arrogant the BO but NEWT is a step ahead….he will be roadkill in short order…Ron Paul is really growing on me as I support most of his positions…he needs a new suit. Of course he can’t win but he is least corruptible of BO and other GOP contestants…
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
12:36 pm
Strawman 12:19,
Best post of the day.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
12:37 pm
New…further…: Fascism in this country and Europe has traditionally been Leftist fair ….blah,blah,blah,blah……..(but Newt has always spouted “Third Way” malarkey to make him sound New Age or something. Third Way is normally code for fascism……….blah, blah, blah, blah……..Dem party is full of those types……blah, blah, blah, blah,Newt should just run as a Dem, it’s where Fascists are usually found………..the Nazis were a left wing party, too …blah,blah,blah……..the party positions sell well among Democrats now)
Definition of Facism: Fascism ( /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.[3]
Note to New – Start with the DEFINITION of a word. Learn the MEANING of the definition of said word. THEN you can speak (semi) intelligently on the subject.
Just saying…………..
BIg Hat
December 20th, 2011
12:38 pm
We won’t need judges when everyone has a gun. Won’t need cops, juries, courts, prisons or lawyers either. We’ll settle problems the 2nd Amendment way.
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:39 pm
kayaker
“To say that the state can take away private property for the “good of the community” is absurd.”
I agree with you that is exactly why when Bush and the other investors who bought the Rangers should not have been allowed to use eminent domain to build a stadium people should have been protesting to know end and surely not voted for him……. well there are 1000 other reason as well, but you get the point
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
12:40 pm
AQUAGIRL,
I’m not a FIGNEWT fan but gridlock surely isn’t the private domain of the GOP..I’m wondering where the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Gore, and let’s say Kerry shop….They’ve all increased their net worths dramatically since in office…of course, an equal number of GOP have accomplished the same thing both using our tax dollars to pay back favors, trade on inside info, and use earmarks for personal benefit….
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
12:41 pm
Time to head out and complete Christmas shopping
Everyone have a great afternoon
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
12:42 pm
my god… they weren’t kidding.
http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/flooraction/Jan2011/hres497.pdf
JDW
December 20th, 2011
12:42 pm
If you people really insist on knowing the disposition of Nazi’s….
“Nazism was founded out of elements of the far-right racist völkisch German nationalist movement and the violent anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture that fought against the uprisings of communist revolutionaries in post-World War I Germany.
Nazism was officially presented by Hitler and other proponents as being neither left-wing nor right-wing but a politically syncretic ideology, However a majority of scholars identify Nazism in practice as being a far right form of politics.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
So I suppose one could describe his Newtness as to the Left of the Nazis, for whatever good that does. I checked out his poll numbers and he is not going to be relevant much longer. In fact after reading this morning’s story regarding his practice of combining book signings and campaign events it looks like he is destined to be pursued on ethics charges yet again.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
12:42 pm
RB
The sky isn’t blue- its sunlight reflected off the atmosphere to make it appear that way- just like you think liberals are always calling for tolerance – it ’s just made up crap like the sky being blue- but don’t let those facts get in your way!! LOL!!
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
12:43 pm
“I don’t recall the D’s making a pledge to stop doing that very thing. Can’t say the same for the R’s”
It does need to stop on both sides. For the R’s to stop while the D’s continue would be foolish. Both parties need to stop, though.
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
12:45 pm
Actually if you think about it, there really isn’t an actual “sky” or in my opinion a wingnut with actual logic.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
12:45 pm
Appropos of nothing here’s something funny: The heavy progressive, graduated income tax concept first appeared in Plank #2 of the Communist Manifesto circa 1848…how funny is that?
Bosch
December 20th, 2011
12:47 pm
Stevie
Just freaking hilarious!!
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
12:47 pm
Debbie,
Your definition of facism?…. You seem to have left out the part about a fascist country run by a totalitarian dictator where opposing opinion is not tolerated. Also there is something in there which says that a single party state is the norm where no one but the dictator has a valid opinion and all of the economy is controlled by the state. The people are just wards of the government…. nothing more. No vote, no opinion, no input.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
12:48 pm
“just like you think liberals are always calling for tolerance”
That’s funny Bosch. What planet did you say you live on?
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
12:48 pm
I don’t recall the D’s making a pledge to stop doing that very thing. Can’t say the same for the R’s- brocephus
Bro,
Really? Obama didn’t campaign against earmarks and campaigned for transparency in govt. And then the porkulus bill. No earmarks or pork there as promised huh?
Technically the pork in the stimulus bill was called something other than earmarks so they weren’t really earmarks. So then Obama had the unmitigated gall to stand there in front of the American public and state that there were no “earmarks” in the stimulus bill knowing damn well that there were plenty. They were just calling them by a different name. They promised a bill with no earmarks and then passed a stimulus bill that had plenty of em.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeJ9gE-FA0Q
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
12:48 pm
Avoidance is the tactic being used instead of statesmanship.
The ones in office now that have refused to compromise on anything (both parties) need a close look come time for re-election.
I’m surprised that Congress didn’t tack on the Churchill bust bill to the UI extension the way these putz’s work.
And y’all quit using my name in relation to Congress.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
12:48 pm
DEBBIE – Did you see the SCOTUS’s expressions when BO made his remarks….they all mouthed “not true”…
They couldn’t have ALL mouthed that. The decision was 5/4 so some of them HAD to of agreed with Obama.
I agree with them…independence per Hamilton to me means free from political sway (not really possible) and most certainly free of bullying from a sitting president who is allegedly a constitutional scholar.
Calling a spade a spade, is not bullying.
If we don’t want a constitutional interpretation of “corporate citizen” (which I think we all agree), the constitution needs amending…of course this would eliminate all of the vig the lobbyist provide out corruptresentatives…
Two judges, (Clarence and Scalia) should have recused themselves for having STRONG corporate ties in the past. Clarence, most outrageously, has sided with corporations in the past (Read the Monsanto ruling — Clarence used to work for Monsanto). Since they didn’t, and we get stuck with this ruling, they should at least have the decency to hang their heads in shame.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
12:49 pm
Stevie, good stuff.
And never fear.
Though I excoriate people regularly for their politics, I never rag on them about their musical choices. That is much too important! LOL…
So the Nazis were NOT a far rightist organization!
???????????
Obviously they had elements of both extremes, but c’mon peeps, this is really basic stuff!
A majority of scholars identify Nazism in practice as being a far right form of politics. However Nazism was officially presented by Hitler and other proponents as being neither left-wing nor right-wing but syncretic.
Nazism was founded out of elements of the far-right racist völkisch German nationalist movement and the violent anti-communist Freikorps paramilitary culture that fought against the uprisings of communist revolutionaries in post-World War I Germany. The ideology was developed first by Anton Drexler and then Adolf Hitler as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism. Initially Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, though such aspects were later downplayed in the 1930s to gain the support from industrial owners for the Nazis; focus was shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes.
Town Crier
December 20th, 2011
12:49 pm
kayaker 71
The liberals here run from arguments they know they can’t win. Strawman is right in what he says.
Corey
December 20th, 2011
12:50 pm
as no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be a gainer today.
Mr. Gingrich, what else is there to say?
USMC
December 20th, 2011
12:51 pm
“Newt would make a good benevolent dictator. Well, on second thought, he’d make a good dictator.”–Ronin
-Not nearly as good a dictator as Comrade General Secretary Obama!
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2011
12:51 pm
“The ones in office now that have refused to compromise on anything ”
If I demand all of your possessions, money, home, cars, furnishings, everything, what would you be willing to give me in the spirit of “compromise”?
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
12:52 pm
Excuse my repeating what JDW already posted…
Yet it explains these insane “meanings” courtesy of the Republican Dictionary of Made Up Definitions.
Carol
December 20th, 2011
12:55 pm
Truth-O-Meter
Thank you, Speaker Gingrich. I have been wondering how we could get rid of the SCOTUS decision that says corporations are people. President Obama can have federal marshalls round up each of the judges who voted for that ridiculous ruling nd that will be the end of them! And we didn’t have to pay $30-$60k per hour for that advice.
+++++++
Touche’!
USMC
December 20th, 2011
12:55 pm
Obama, the constant campaigner!
Jackie Mason Rips Obama Over Hanukkah Celebration, Jewish Disrespect
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/19/jackie-mason-rips-obama-on-hanukkah_n_1159289.html
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
12:59 pm
It does need to stop on both sides. For the R’s to stop while the D’s continue would be foolish. Both parties need to stop, though.
Can’t argue with that one there. I’m with you 100%.
Really? Obama didn’t campaign against earmarks and campaigned for transparency in govt. And then the porkulus bill. No earmarks or pork there as promised huh?
He campaigned for those very things, however, he did not state that he would bring up bills and not attempt to attach completely unrelated sh*t to it. I seem to recall the GOP pledged that very thing. It appears that they could not even hold their own pledge for one session. When discussing earmarks, it would be ok to bash Obama if he signs a bill with earmarks after he campaigned to end them just as it is ok to bash the GOP for attempting to tie an unrelated item to the payroll tax cut bill.
Jimmy62
December 20th, 2011
1:00 pm
I don’t agree with Newt on this one.
But it should be said that the judicial branch is by far the least “democratic.” We the people have basically no input on who gets to be a judge. Yes, we elect the people who appoint the judges, but we the people can’t recall a district judge, we are victims to their tyranny, should they decide to use it. So with all that said, the judicial branch should definitely, 100%, be the weakest branch.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:00 pm
The liberals here run from arguments they know they can’t win.
really? Liberals?
Liberals like our “USMC”? ask him to tell you which of Jay’s views are, as he’s asserted, “very far out of the mainstream.”
Ask (sorry, Jay, just this once, promise!) our very liberal 1811/0311 to identify which “entire denominations” are “unholy,” as he’s asserted.
And be sure to ask bleedin’ heart liberal “Bill Orvis White” just which issues a majority of Americans share with most conservatives / against those of most liberals.
Because those “liberals” all ran from me when I asked. Maybe you’ll have better luck.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
1:02 pm
dB
There you go trying to make people back their claims. You know that’s not how some people operate.
Corey
December 20th, 2011
1:03 pm
It never fails. Mr. Bookman once again points out the fallacy in Mr. Gingrich’s position, and the right leaning water carriers on here detract and attack everyone from Mr. Obama to Bo, the first dog. Attack is no defense. Try laying out well though out positions grounded in facts instead. You will gain much more respect and not be thought of shallow thinking, sloganeering clowns.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:03 pm
Can anyone tell me what ever happened to BO promises regarding “sunshine before signing” and “the days of lobbyist controlling the agenda in DC are over” gibberish? Just curious..
DEBBIE,
Has Congress (who were instructed by BO in the mist of his SCOTUS tantrum) taken any meaningful steps to create legislation that would reverse the influence of lobbyist? The truth is that not a single member of executive or legislative branch want lobbying reform no matter how they play up to the press on the issue. If they really wanted same, they would actually put money where mouth is…I disagree on the dynamics of this interpretation and don’t agree with it but to blame judges is obsurd..
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
1:05 pm
Your Republicans are falling down on the job again! At this rate you’ll never meet your goal of undermining the American economy further, so as to remove the Uppity Muslim from office.
Retail sales rose 0.2% in November, showing the economy continues to grow at a steady pace, according to the Commerce Department. Americans spent more on automobiles, furniture, and clothing to start off the holiday shopping season. November’s rise continues a six-month growth in retail for the U.S. and a gain in core sales, excluding autos, gasoline, and building materials, for the eleventh straight month. Consumers are spending more now than when consumers cut back spending in the earlier part of the year due to higher food and gas prices. Economists believe the fourth quarter will have a 3% rise, which would be the quickest growth pace in 18 months. A rebound in spending helped boost the economy this summer, and economists expect consumers to help increase growth even further by the end of 2011.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:05 pm
AMVET,
What prompted all the discussion on nazisim, communism and any other isms today?
JDW
December 20th, 2011
1:05 pm
“gridlock surely isn’t the private domain of the GOP”
It may not be the private domain but they own a preponderance of the stock…
Here are the filibuster numbers (Total and Average per Month) by Congress by minority. This doesn’t include the staggering number of times that the mere threat was used and the formal filing was not required.
112 2011-2012 48 5 Republicans
111 2009-2010 137 6 Republicans
110 2007-2008 139 6 Republicans
109 2005-2006 68 3 Democrats
108 2003-2004 62 3 Democrats
107 2001-2002 71 3 Democrats
106 1999-2000 71 3 Democrats
105 1997-1998 69 3 Democrats
104 1995-1996 82 3 Democrats
103 1993-1994 80 3 Republicans
102 1991-1992 60 3 Republicans
101 1989-1990 38 2 Republicans
100 1987-1988 54 2 Republicans
99 1985-1986 41 2 Republicans
98 1983-1984 41 2 Republicans
97 1981-1982 31 1 Republicans
96 1979-1980 30 1 Republicans
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
1:05 pm
Stands for decibels,
Go ahead and wallow in your ignorance if you must.
The reason for a bust of Churchill is because some U.S. leaders feel that we insulted the British, our historically closest ally, they of the “special relationship”, when Obama for some inexplicable reason returned the bust of Churchill to the British. The bust had been given to us as a gift and a symbol of strength in the wake of 9/11 and had sat in the oval office. So why did Obama insult the British by giving it back? Such a petty little man.
This is a very curious if not troubling act by President Obama. The bust of Churchill, one of the greatest statesman and wartime leaders in human history, which was given to President Bush by PM Blair following the September 11 attacks and where it sat in the Oval Office proudly among other bust of great men, was formally handed back. British officials insisted that he hang on to the gift as a reminder of the “special relationship” that exists between the U.S. and Great Britain, but the response was ”Thanks, but no thanks.”
Winston Churchill is an American icon who is respected and revered arguably more here in the U.S. than in the U.K. So, certainly there is some uneasiness to President Obama’s brash decision to send Churchill packing. Now, a bust of President Lincoln sits in the Oval Office where Churchill bust once sat. Everyone in the world is now well aware of that Lincoln is Obama’s hero so that part doesn’t exactly come as a surprise.
As for Churchill is there any possible motive to the shun?
Churchill has less happy connotations for Mr Obama than those American politicians who celebrate his wartime leadership. It was during Churchill’s second premiership that Britain suppressed Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion. Among Kenyans allegedly tortured by the colonial regime included one Hussein Onyango Obama, the President’s grandfather
http://thewesternexperience.com/2009/02/23/president-obama-returns-bust-of-sir-winston-churchill-back-to-britain/
Alabama Communist
December 20th, 2011
1:06 pm
No doubt Newt is a dues paying Fascist who will murder anybody that disagreeds with him…..Occupy Newt and sent him packing to the backside of the Moon where the evil fools of Republican Neo-Con insanity hide..
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:07 pm
From USMC’s link @ 12.55:
In 2009, [Jackie Mason] referred to Obama using the Yiddish word “schvartze,” which many believe is now an outdated racial epithet. He later said he did not consider it derogatory, but would not apologize.
Great company you keep there, USMC.
Paul Brounshirt
December 20th, 2011
1:08 pm
The Republican party is a pack of lying, flesh-eating ghouls.
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
1:09 pm
Man up, Jay. See my post at 12:19. Is legalized abortion in your view a truly plausible and valid interpretation of the Constitution as it stands and, if so, on what logical grounds?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:10 pm
The reason for a bust of Churchill
I’m well aware of the wingnut obsession over this issue, TD. It’s laughable.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:10 pm
k71: The Court has made two very bad decisions in the past few years that affect every American. One having to do with imminent domain and the other concerning campaign finance. Neither should have been decided.
OMG I agree with you AGAIN!!!!!
Twice in one day!!?!! The world must be coming to an end……
k71: Oh, as to agreeing with me….. It really ain’t so hard. Just common sense.
I don’t agree. Whew!! thanks for that! Things are back to normal now!
Stands: DDR, glad you heard that segment. I remember when I first heard it, I just kept shaking my head, thinking “this can’t really be happening, can it?”
OMG that was AMAZING wasn’t it? And when I read it I was like, (please forgive me Gloria Steinhem and all the women of the world), “Is this lady PMSing or something?”
Stands: They’ve got a new blog post up about the case…
thanks for that – I’m looking at it now.
Anyway, I just sent them a few bucks to help cover the costs of the podcast, which I download most every week.
I’m going to start. I regularly give to PBS but now I see what a BIG difference programs like that make and I’m going to start giving more regularly. Sometimes the media is complicit in our ignorance because of their fear — but an independent outlet can still pull the veil off so that we can “see” what’s happening in our own back yards.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
1:11 pm
“he did not state that he would bring up bills and not attempt to attach completely unrelated sh*t to it. I seem to recall the GOP pledged that very thing”
Brocephus,
Obama promised no earmarks in bills. And then presented them in bills. How is that not “stating that he or the Dems would bring up bills and not attempt to attach completely unrelated sh*t to it”
How?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:11 pm
Is legalized abortion in your view a truly plausible and valid interpretation of the Constitution as it stands
Some rather smart people have already “manned up” and answered this question a number of years ago.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZO.html
birddog13
December 20th, 2011
1:12 pm
Achtung! Heir Gingrich has spoken!
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
1:12 pm
Stevie, no idea. I presume that like pretty much every other day here, it is just something to discuss…
If Boehner were truly concerned about trans-Atlantic symbolism, he would insist that a bust of Benny Hill be placed in the US House chamber…
Welcome to the Occupation
December 20th, 2011
1:12 pm
Republicans are the scum on the bottom of my boots. The scum that I can’t kick off.
cranky ol' fool
December 20th, 2011
1:12 pm
Here’s Gingrich:
“A judicial branch that is largely unaccountable and not subject to meaningful checks and balances can — and does — routinely issue constitutional rulings that threaten individual liberties, compromise national security, undermine American culture, and ignore the consent of the governed.”
Is Newt making reference to the Supreme Court’s decision that a corporation is the same as an individual?
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
1:14 pm
stands for decibels,
Oh. Okay. So now a bust of Churchill is “an obsession”? Really? Serious? Looks more like a locknut poutrage over the Republicans trying to undo an insult aimed at our closest ally.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:14 pm
Wonder what the conservatives would think if, oh, Glenn Greenwald or Sam Seder or Al Franken were to call Clarence Thomas “schvartze”?
I’m sure they’d think it delightful! right?
md
December 20th, 2011
1:15 pm
“To say that the state can take away private property for the “good of the community” is absurd.”
Yes, and no. I think the difference lies when private property is taken and given to private enterprise…….
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:17 pm
So now a bust of Churchill is “an obsession”? Really? Serious?
no, not now. it has been for several years.
see also:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/05/politics/main6057570.shtml
Some Britons took offense when Winston Churchill’s bust was replaced with King’s. But the decision to return the Churchill bust to the British – it had been presented by former Prime Minister Tony Blair to Bush on loan – had been made before Obama even arrived.
“It was already scheduled to go back,” Allman said.
The White House seemed to be trying to make amends when it made a point of reporting that Obama would keep on his desk a wooden penholder that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave him during a March visit. The penholder is crafted from wood taken from the HMS Gannet, the sister ship to the Resolute, a British naval vessel whose wood was used to make the presidential desk.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
1:17 pm
Obama promised no earmarks in bills. And then presented them in bills. How is that not “stating that he or the Dems would bring up bills and not attempt to attach completely unrelated sh*t to it”
#1 Obama does not write bills, he signs them.
#2 When I was speaking earlier, it was in reference to the GOP backsliding on their own promise. You’re trying to deflect from their shortcoming by using the patented elementary school deflection technique. Regardless to what you say, the GOP did not keep their promise. You can’t call yourself the party of responsibility if you don’t hold yourself responsible to your own words.
http://www.gop.gov/indepth/pledge/readthebill
Advance Legislative Issues One at a Time
We will end the practice of packaging unpopular bills with “must-pass” legislation to circumvent the will of the American people. Instead, we will advance major legislation one issue at a time.
How does one twist to link the Keystone pipeline agreement with a payroll tax cut?????
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:19 pm
Here’s Glenn Beck’s very well thought-out theory on the SCANDALOUS return of that Churchill bust:
BECK: Do you remember when we gave the big statue back, the bust of Churchill? Right after Obama got. In it didn’t make sense to me, hasn’t made sense to me. Any clues, any clues why this gift from the English after 9/11 was boxed up and sent back? I haven’t figured out a reason. Why does Obama harbor animosity towards the British? I don’t know. Why would he return the bust? A listener called me this morning. Said he had found information about Barack Obama’s grandfather in an old Irish newspaper but couldn’t verify it. I said okay, what is it? We looked into it. The information, took us about 20 minutes to find. It was out there, but until today I never heard about this information, and I’m kind of in the Barack Obama business, you know what I mean? I don’t think you have. Maybe you have. What puts you in a position to act unexplainably in weird ways toward the ally? Something must have happened in your life and maybe this is a part of it.
md
December 20th, 2011
1:19 pm
As for Newt’s point once again I’ll reiterate my question from last night……why should the judges be the dictators? The Congress and the WH are powerless against their interpretations……….unless they legislate to abolish their power, which isn’t very likely.
Jay
December 20th, 2011
1:20 pm
No, Thulsa, what is troubling and very curious is the right wing’s effort to turn exceedingly minor, meaningless acts into major controversies just to feed its followers something else they can obsess about.
The Churchill bust was LOANED to us by the Brits, which means it had to be returned at some point. And it’s not as if Obama replaced the Churchill bust with a bust of Che Guevara. He installed a bust of Lincoln, a great American and a Republican to boot.
Absolutely no damage was done to our relationship with Britain. The only people who even remember that occurred are people who dutifully recite the list of supposed Obama “outrages” that they’ve been told to be horrified by.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 20th, 2011
1:20 pm
Bet poor Newt isn’t loving the new post-Citizens United era about now, eh?
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:21 pm
Debbie,Your definition of facism?….
Actually it was Wiki, Merriam Websters, and Dictionary.com’s.
You seem to have left out the part about a fascist country run by a totalitarian dictator where opposing opinion is not tolerated.
And? That goes without saying….. What’s your point?
Old Timer
December 20th, 2011
1:23 pm
The Court has made two very bad decisions in the past few years that affect every American. One having to do with imminent domain and the other concerning campaign finance. Neither should have been decided.
I don’t regard the eminent domain decisions as necessarily a bad one. We can’t allow every Tom, Dick, and Harry to hold up community renovaton and improvement. Private property, to me, is not that sacred. I keep thinking of that nut case in Sandy Springs, near Perimeter Mall, who refused to sell his house and two acres for half a million per acre, while all his neighbors in the subdivision agreed to sell. The developer worked out a way to build around him. So there he sits in his little house, surrounded by office towers that block his sunlight. Nobody wants to buy his house, and the developer doesn’t need it or his acres. Serves him right, I say.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:23 pm
Stevie Ray: I’m wondering where the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Gore, and let’s say Kerry shop….They’ve all increased their net worths dramatically since in office…
a) 85% of Congressman / Senators have. Why do you think they keep wanting to be re-elected? For the health benefits?
b) Gore and Kerry came in as wealthy men. Gore was born into it and Kerry married into it.
Paul Brounshirt
December 20th, 2011
1:24 pm
And it’s not as if Obama replaced the Churchill bust with a bust of Che Guevara
These librul pundits bendin over backwards to defend this socialist and try to pull some wool over our eyes. Well it won’t work. We’re not gonna be fooled by the Kenyan socialist Marxist for one minute.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:24 pm
Welcome to the Occupation
December 20th, 2011
1:12 pm
Wow, thanks for sharing…Reminds me of my favorite Frank Zappa song called Dynamo Hum…please keep those intellectual comments coming!!
Matti's Observant Eye
December 20th, 2011
1:26 pm
GOP PLEDGE TO AMERICA, 2010:
Page 33: We will end the practice of packaging unpopular bills with “must-pass” legislation to circumvent the will of the American people. Instead, we will advance major legislation one issue at a time.
http://www.gop.gov/resources/library/documents/solutions/a-pledge-to-america.pdf
Raise your hand if you believed they intended to stop stroking themselves and their corporate sponsors long enough to actually do this!
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:26 pm
Absolutely no damage was done to our relationship with Britain.
But but Jay! CBS–which as you know is VERY SUPER LIBERAL cuz they useta hire that commie Dan Rather–actually said:
“Some Britons took offense when Winston Churchill’s bust was replaced with King’s.”
Some Britons! it says it right there on the CBS site! So there!
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:26 pm
DEBBIE,
Agreed on weath building motives of Congress and sure, Gore and Kerry arrived with material wealth (for different reasons of course…see Ben Franklins quote about men marrying for money) but I think both increased same geometrically by cronyism et al just like the rest….Heck, it’s this only true bi-partisan activity in DC…
kayaker 71
December 20th, 2011
1:27 pm
md,
If you are building a trans continental highway or a pipeline over my land, you might have a point. However the case was decided, as you point out, based on a woman’s right to keep a family estate to prevent a private developer from taking the land and using if for the “common good” which was nothing more than making a profit at the expense of the landowner. A bad decision indeed. I once owned about 60 acres in Enterprise AL, next to the only airport in the community. When a decision was made to expand the airport runway system, I was approached and an offer was made to purchase. The price was much too low, about half of appraised value. I refused. The courts took it anyway, paid me what they pleased and then used only about 40 acres of it, leaving the other 20 acres unusable and unsalable to anyone. I am sure that this sort of dictatorship happens all over the country in one way or another on a regular basis.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:28 pm
DEBBIE,
Has Congress (who were instructed by BO in the mist of his SCOTUS tantrum) taken any meaningful steps to create legislation that would reverse the influence of lobbyist? The truth is that not a single member of executive or legislative branch want lobbying reform no matter how they play up to the press on the issue. If they really wanted same, they would actually put money where mouth is…I disagree on the dynamics of this interpretation and don’t agree with it but to blame judges is obsurd
The judges have the option of which cases they take and which they ignore. The majority (again 5/4) agreed to take this case. Since they agreed to take the case then THEY SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for their decisions regarding it.
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2011
1:29 pm
The Churchill bust was LOANED to us by the Brits, which means it had to be returned at some point.
Since they kicked Churchill out of office faster than we gave that bust back, any Brits who are offended can get stuffed.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
1:29 pm
What was that other rule that the house Republicans put in place regarding tax cuts and how to pay for them…
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:30 pm
more fun with wingnut obsessions:
“HUCKABEE: The bust of Winston Churchill, a great insult to the British. But then if you think about it, his perspective as growing up in Kenya with a Kenyan father and grandfather, their view of the Mau Mau Revolution in Kenya is very different than ours because he probably grew up hearing that the British were a bunch of imperialists who persecuted his grandfather.”
the British were a bunch of imperialists. They called themselves an “empire.” Their queen called herself an “empress.” HOW DARE OBAMA SAY THE BRITISH HAD COLONIES? HOW DARE HE LIVE IN THAT PLACE HE DIDN’T LIVE?
The sun never sets on stupid.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:30 pm
MATTI,
I’ve actually done a 180 on earmarks…except of course to the extent folks like Hastert, Pelosi and Reid use same to enhance values of real estate holdings…earmarks are 1% of spending and are the only parts of any legislation that are transparent..for example, if a bill passes and grants DOD a billion, the bill will in no way, shape or form break down exactly where the money will go…thus my theory that government, with the help of calculators can count to a trillion, they certainly can’t account for same..
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
1:32 pm
“Some rather smart people have already “manned up” and answered this question a number of years ago.”
From said opinion: “The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions, however, going back perhaps…” So..precedent trumps reason. Wasn’t there a precedent for segregation in the 1954 ruling that overturned the 1896 ruling? Why didn’t that matter then? This is the problem with case law: by degrees, you gradually drift away from the original position. It happens in religion and probably everywhere else. It is like one person making a statement that is repeated from one person to the next and in the end it little resembles the original meaning.
Stop referencing documents that think for you and think for yourself. The Supreme Court created the right to privacy. Even the authors of this opinion acknowledge that. Why won’t you?
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
1:32 pm
“The judges have the option of which cases they take and which they ignore. The majority (again 5/4) agreed to take this case.”
Actually only 4 justices are needed to take on a case.
md
December 20th, 2011
1:33 pm
“The price was much too low, about half of appraised value.”
Which is where I have a problem with it……..all land should be taken at fair market value…….determined by an independent body.
And if property is taken where a profit is made, said property owners should be included as an investor with whatever share their property represents.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:34 pm
Since they kicked Churchill out of office faster than we gave that bust back, any Brits who are offended can get stuffed.
reminds me of an oldie but goodie from those three Woking lads…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1AQaXUCboQ
Oh we make the standards and we make the rules
And if you don’t abide by them you must be a fool
We have the power to control the whole land
You never must question our motives or plans -
‘Cause we’ll outlaw your voices, do anything we want
We’ve nothing to fear from the nation
We’ll kick you out of your houses if you get too much
If we have to we’ll destroy your generation
‘Cause we’ve built up a frontage and we’ve gained respect
There’s no one to endanger our position -
Standards rule OK
Standards rule OK
Standards rule OK
Standards rule OK
And we don’t like people who stand in our way
Awareness is gonna be redundant
And ignorance is strength, we have God on our side
Look, you know what happend to Winston
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:34 pm
DEBBIE,
If we don’t like an interpretation of the constitution per SCOTUS, it’s time to amend that dusty old document accordingly to make it clear that for political purposes, corporations are not citizens.. It will be difficult for many issues but I can’t imagine a consensus would not quickly agree that corporations should not be citizens…again, no way it will happen since both parties benefit by such a degree that is nauseating…
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
1:35 pm
RB – If I demand all of your possessions, money, home, cars, furnishings, everything, what would you be willing to give me in the spirit of “compromise”?
————————————————————————————
Just like a repub. DEMANDING something for nothing from a hard working wage earner.
Stevie Ray
December 20th, 2011
1:35 pm
TALKING HEAD/DEBBIE,
What would have been the ramifications to campaign law if the Citizens decision had gone the other way?
Paul Brounshirt
December 20th, 2011
1:35 pm
Stevie : “Wow, thanks for sharing…Reminds me of my favorite Frank Zappa song called Dynamo Hum…please keep those intellectual comments coming!!”
I was trying to blow a circuit on the server bandwidth settings for intellectual weight — thanks!
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
1:36 pm
Strawman, if you want to re-criminalize elective first trimester abortion, have at it.
I really don’t like your chances, though, since the vast majority of Americans hate the idea, and oh yeah, they support Roe.
http://pollingreport.com/abortion2.htm
Bobo is Not the Problem
December 20th, 2011
1:37 pm
Doggone works for the censorship police. Jay can institute a censoring or preapproval process to the blog. He has chosen not to do that. Thus, anyone can post about anything.
It is beyond annoying when one poster gripes about the topic another poster chooses to post about.
Maybe Doggone is Jay incognito, amping up the # of comments in this thread.
Carol
December 20th, 2011
1:40 pm
Bud Wiser
And also, who now will lead the mindless morons of the left …..Pelosi ….. Sharpton …. Hillary???
What a sick joke you dimwits are becoming, and just how soon your party of clowns will vanish into history.
Gingrich 2012
+++++++++
And also, who now will lead the mindless morons of the right…..Cantor ….. Rush …. McConnell???
What a sick joke you dimwits (still) are, and just how soon your party of clowns will vanish into history.
Obama 2012
jm
December 20th, 2011
1:40 pm
“The Churchill bust was LOANED to us by the Brits, which means it had to be returned at some point.”
hilarious. did the brits ask for it back? no
Paul Brounshirt
December 20th, 2011
1:41 pm
Barring a huge upset, Republicans will take control of at least one house
of Congress next week. How worried should we be by that prospect?
Not very, say some pundits. After all, the last time Republicans
controlled Congress while a Democrat lived in the White House was the
period from the beginning of 1995 to the end of 2000. And people remember
that era as a good time, a time of rapid job creation and responsible
budgets. Can we hope for a similar experience now?
No, we can’t. This is going to be terrible. In fact, future historians
will probably look back at the 2010 election as a catastroph for
America, one that condemned the nation to years of political chaos and
economic weakness.
Paul Krugman, Oct 28, 2010
Jay
December 20th, 2011
1:41 pm
No, Strawman, the Court did NOT create the right to privacy. That right is fundamental to civil liberty and always has been. There is nothing more basic than the right to be left alone.
Is that right spelled out in the Constitution? Not explicitly. But when the founding fathers were drafting the Bill of Rights, they were deeply troubled by the implication that by listing certain rights, they might be accused of abandoning other rights that were also basic to freedom.
That’s why they included the Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
The right to privacy is among those “retained by the people” and always should be. Again, it is fundamental to any concept of liberty.
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
1:41 pm
“What would have been the ramifications to campaign law if the Citizens decision had gone the other way?”
Continued infringement on the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech
Welcome to the Occupation
December 20th, 2011
1:41 pm
Who’s this Brounshirt fella, keeps jacking me name. Blimey!
Midori
December 20th, 2011
1:42 pm
can’t speak for “all” Brits, but GW Bush sure p*ssed the Queen off:
THE Queen is furious with President George W. Bush after his state visit caused thousands of pounds of damage to her gardens at Buckingham Palace.
Royal officials are now in touch with the Queen’s insurers and Prime Minister Tony Blair to find out who will pick up the massive repair bill. Palace staff said they had never seen the Queen so angry as when she saw how her perfectly-mantained lawns had been churned up after being turned into helipads with three giant H landing markings for the Bush visit.
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk…=13652625_method=full_siteid=106694_headline=-GROUND-FARCE-1-name_page.html
jm
December 20th, 2011
1:44 pm
Jay makes stuff up people.
“Barack Obama has sent Sir Winston Churchill packing and pulse rates soaring among anxious British diplomats. ”
“A bust of the former prime minister once voted the greatest Briton in history, which was loaned to George W Bush from the Government’s art collection after the September 11 attacks, has now been formally handed back.
The bronze by Sir Jacob Epstein, worth hundreds of thousands of pounds if it were ever sold on the open market, enjoyed pride of place in the Oval Office during President Bush’s tenure.
But when British officials offered to let Mr Obama to hang onto the bust for a further four years, the White House said: “Thanks, but no thanks.” ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:45 pm
Strawman: So..precedent trumps reason. Wasn’t there a precedent for segregation in the 1954 ruling that overturned the 1896 ruling? Why didn’t that matter then? This is the problem with case law: by degrees, you gradually drift away from the original position. It happens in religion and probably everywhere else. It is like one person making a statement that is repeated from one person to the next and in the end it little resembles the original meaning.
The law, any law, is a living breathing entity. It does shift and change because values and mores change. The law should never be absolute and set in stone. If it were, then we the people would still be stuck with some laws on the books that are outdated and asinine that which, at the time of their inception, were considered “revolutionary”.
Stop referencing documents that think for you and think for yourself. The Supreme Court created the right to privacy. Even the authors of this opinion acknowledge that. Why won’t you?
Even LAWYERS reference past law and past precedent to make a claim. It’s not a question of anyone thinking for themselves, its a question of “what’s been said and done about this before”.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
1:46 pm
Stands and Jay,
The bust was on loan and then the Brits had told us we could keep it. Hence the reason for the Republicans wanting to have a new bust of Churchill. I don’t think our relationship was permanently damaged by this.
“The penholder is crafted from wood taken from the HMS Gannet, the sister ship to the Resolute, a British naval vessel whose wood was used to make the presidential desk.”
Hey stands thanks for a reminder of the wonderful gift that they gave us. It reminds me of the gift the Obama administration gave them. Some DVDs and a DVD player that doesn’t work in Europe. I expect them to screw up big things like the economy. But the fact that they do the smallest things right speaks volumes about this administration. Stupid is as stupid does.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
1:47 pm
Yes. Americans need the right to privately kill their children. Now, if only that right extended to adults then Dahmer could get out.
Perfectly logical.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:47 pm
Taxpayer: What was that other rule that the house Republicans put in place regarding tax cuts and how to pay for them…
They’ll NEVER answer that question T.P. NEVER in a million posts……
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:49 pm
k71: I was approached and an offer was made to purchase. The price was much too low, about half of appraised value. I refused. The courts took it anyway, paid me what they pleased and then used only about 40 acres of it, leaving the other 20 acres unusable and unsalable to anyone. I am sure that this sort of dictatorship happens all over the country in one way or another on a regular basis.
It does. And if you look at the history of the US; that was one of the things the Colonists were trying to free themselves from. Amazing how we’ve come full circle isn’t it?
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
1:51 pm
Jm,
Jay and stands for decibels just don’t want to let the facts get in the way.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
1:51 pm
Starve the government back to it’s proper size and we’ll all be more prosperous
Gavel Grab » USA Today Condemns ‘Destructive’ Gingrich Court Attacks
December 20th, 2011
1:53 pm
[...] thinking by way of examining the writings of the Founding Fathers comes from Jay Bookman in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Bookman deplores what he called historian Gingrich’s “dishonest history.” Where [...]
Jm
December 20th, 2011
1:54 pm
Doom
They just make up stuff. Laughingstock they are.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
1:55 pm
Strawman: DEBBIE,
If we don’t like an interpretation of the constitution per SCOTUS, it’s time to amend that dusty old document accordingly to make it clear that for political purposes, corporations are not citizens.. It will be difficult for many issues but I can’t imagine a consensus would not quickly agree that corporations should not be citizens…again, no way it will happen since both parties benefit by such a degree that is nauseating…
True. No disagreement with you on that. My disagreement is on the fact that the Supremes even took up the case. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, C.U. LOST in the lower courts because they were wrong in their interpretation of the law. The majority of the lower courts saw this — this should have been the END of it. For the Surpremes to take this up — after reading the entirety of the case and the various decisions by the lower courts; was tantamount to RIDICULOUS to me.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
2:00 pm
How desperate are these cons?
Almost three years into this administration and returning the loaned Churchill’s bust is the recycled outrage?
I’ve got bad news for you Boehner boners.
Though the American economy continues to struggle to get back on it’s feet, there have been some modest gains, improved job numbers and finally, some renewed hope.
Barry embarrassed (or should I say trumped?) the hell out of you lunatic birthers.
And he’s even punked you chickenhawks at your own “national security” game.
But given this absurd slate of never-beens that are trying to best him in 2012, if I was a con (yuck) I’d be pretty damn desperate too.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
2:01 pm
Strawman: TALKING HEAD/DEBBIE – What would have been the ramifications to campaign law if the Citizens decision had gone the other way?
Basically there wouldn’t be any more “Friends Of Sue Bee” advertisements that can throw rocks and not have to show their hands. People (corporations) would have to SAY that they are the ones financing or contributing to a politician.
EXAMPLE: So if we have a politician who advocates “Free Cigarettes For Every Kid Under 19 But Over 14″ – and we can now see that the “National Cigarettes Council” is funding him/her and possibly understand why that certain politician has such a zeal for Kids to Smoke.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
2:01 pm
Midori,
There is a difference between an accident and an intentional slight.
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
2:03 pm
“The law, any law, is a living breathing entity. It does shift and change because values and mores change. The law should never be absolute and set in stone. If it were, then we the people would still be stuck with some laws on the books that are outdated and asinine that which, at the time of their inception, were considered “revolutionary”
We I agree that values and mores change. That is obvious. And I think laws should likewise be changed to accommodate this. But by Congress and NOT the Supreme Court. Laws as written should be absolute UNTIL they are changed legislatively. Otherwise the people interpreting the laws wind up making them. Talk to an NBA referee to see what I mean.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
2:03 pm
AmVet,
Your benny hinn comment earlier. Yeah. I’ll admit it. Even a con like me lmfao.
USMC
December 20th, 2011
2:05 pm
“No, Thulsa, what is troubling and very curious is the right wing’s effort to turn exceedingly minor, meaningless acts into major controversies just to feed its followers something else they can obsess about.”–Jay Bookman
LOL! screen cleaner please!
What a hypocrite you are Jay.
David Granger
December 20th, 2011
2:07 pm
@ Keep Up the Good Fight!
re: Your 5:49 of Dec. 19
“…If you dont like the decision of the judicial branch, then you can change the law or change the constitution. That is the check and balance built into our system.”
I’m certainly not a supporter of Newt Gingrich, but one big problem we do have with many judges is that they sometimes just completely IGNORE what the law very clearly states.
The 5th Amendment states quite clearly that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law…yet the Supreme Court has allowed private property to be seized with no due process because there is suspicion that the property might belong to a drug dealer.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states very clearly forbids discrimination based on race or gender, yet the Supreme Court has decided that…well…some get to be a little “more equal” than others.
Regardless of whether one is a conservative or liberal, it is frustrating to see a judge completely ignore a law just to allow whatever he or she personally wants the law to be. Our Constitution was written with the hope that our judges (among others) would be people who are honest and honorable…who will uphold the law whether they agree with it or not. But sadly that is not always the case.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
2:08 pm
Now, if only that right extended to adults then Dahmer could get out.
Dahlmer is dead.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
2:11 pm
DDR glad you keep up to date on your mass murderer executions
I don’t. Sick
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
2:11 pm
The real outrage?
Why doesn’t Lilibet have a bust of Abe?
How could she insult her former colony and greatest ally?
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
2:11 pm
Strawman: And I think laws should likewise be changed to accommodate this. But by Congress and NOT the Supreme Court. Laws as written should be absolute UNTIL they are changed legislatively.
Like I said, I agree with that. I however, DID NOT AGREE with the Supremes taking up the case. They did not HAVE to, they CHOSE to. Citizens United’s stand had already been denied in lower courts.
getalife
December 20th, 2011
2:12 pm
Our President just destroyed the gop house.
Talk about a bully pulpit.
Tore them a new one before their press conference.
The speaker is crying again.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
2:13 pm
Or better yet
Lilibet should have a bust of FDR and one of HST…..
She’d not have a place to sit without them.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
2:14 pm
Debbie, the nerve of you!
Being informed and able to write intelligently about topics that are brought up here!
Sheesh…
Welcome to the Occupation
December 20th, 2011
2:15 pm
There’s no overestimating the poisonous, noxious nature of the slime flowing through the American body politic that is the Republican party. Like in Alien, if it drips on anything it immediately starts burning through it.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
2:17 pm
Doom — GO LSU!!! There wasn’t any intentional slight. Just because you don’t want something that someone has given you and wish to return it, (like say a Christmas present); does not make the return a slight.
Geaux TIGERS!!!! Beat “Bama”. AGAIN……….
Granger: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states very clearly forbids discrimination based on race or gender, yet the Supreme Court has decided that…well…some get to be a little “more equal” than others.
Which case did this happen in where the Supremes decided this? Plese cite.
Jm — And?
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
2:18 pm
“Our President just destroyed the gop house.
Talk about a bully pulpit.
Tore them a new one before their press conference.
The speaker is crying again.”
Yes, We have to pass this bill so we can do this all over again in 2 months..oh yeah, which will be an election year. Plus, where is the payment mechanism for the SS cut?
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
2:20 pm
Hi AmVet!!! Happy Tuesday!!
getalife
December 20th, 2011
2:22 pm
LSU 2.
Bama 0.
LSU National Champions.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
2:23 pm
“During this time of divided government, both parties need to be reasonable and come to the negotiating table in good faith,” said Brown, who is facing a stiff re-election challenge in heavily Democratic Massachusetts next year. “We cannot allow rigid partisan ideology and unwillingness to compromise stand in the way of working together for the good of the American people.”
—————————————————–
Even some republicans can tell when their leadership is being obtuse.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
2:25 pm
Back at ya, sweetie.
Sweet Tuesday morning came and you smiled
All of my fears, they have left me
Sweet Tuesday morning came and you smiled
Love is the answer you gave me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXE-u8ILjOU
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
2:25 pm
“That’s why they included the Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The right to privacy is among those “retained by the people” and always should be. Again, it is fundamental to any concept of liberty.”
If the founding fathers were so concerned about a right which is, as you say, “fundamental to any concept of liberty” (your words, not theirs), they would surely have included it in the Bill of Rights. And the Ninth Amendment says nothing of affirming rights but only not denying or disparaging them. It further does not stipulate how these rights would be identified. The question is: what is the source of rights retained by the people? Since the Constitution codifies rights, it stands to reason that the proper way to add to the list of protected rights is to expand the Bill of Rights. No where does the Ninth Amendment imply that the courts have the role of defining rights. If I ask you to publish an article for me in the AJC, you would have to refer that decision to the editor. The Supreme Court arrogates to itself powers it simple doesn’t have.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
2:28 pm
But when British officials offered to let Mr Obama to hang onto the bust for a further four years, the White House said: “Thanks, but no thanks.”
Some of that great TelegraphUK reporting, with quotes you can take to the bank!
getalife
December 20th, 2011
2:28 pm
Time to disband the whig party again.
Our founding fathers would call the gop red coats .
Jm
December 20th, 2011
2:29 pm
Getalife
Senate has quit trying to keep taxes low for working Americans
Blame democrats for the tax increase
Senate has left and Reid says he won’t call it to do the people’s business
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
2:29 pm
Strawman
“No where does the Ninth Amendment imply that the courts have the role of defining rights.”
The courts affirmed that you as a citizen can own a gun even though the Constitution speaks of a armed militia….
Was that interpretation ok with you?
Thought it was
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
2:30 pm
Is Jackie Mason, like Herman Cain vying for a cabinet level job in a future GOP administration?
Imagine Cain as SECDEF and Mason as SECSTATE…..
That should keep you awake nights….
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
2:33 pm
“Imagine Cain as SECDEF and Mason as SECSTATE…..
That should keep you awake nights….”
Imagine Obama claiming he was the 4th best President in history…
That should keep you awake at night…
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70684.html
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
2:34 pm
Doh!
By a 50% to 31% margin, people questioned say they have more confidence in the president than in congressional Republicans to handle the major issues facing the country.
“The Democrats do particularly well among middle income Americans, while the Republicans win support only from the top end of the income scale,” adds Holland.
Excluding the self-abusive, flat broke neo-cons here…
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/20/cnn-poll-presidents-approval-nearing-50/?hpt=hp_bn3
A little jangly, power pop for a Tuesday…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPPscelHVhA
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
2:38 pm
Talking Head
and of course that’s not at all what he said.
Folks like you deserve insomnia.
getalife
December 20th, 2011
2:41 pm
Looks like the President will get a dem majority for his second term.
Doggone/GA
December 20th, 2011
2:42 pm
“Looks like the President will get a dem majority for his second term”
Better start praying for Super Majority + in the Senate, otherwise they might as well be the minority
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
2:43 pm
Seemed like the Repub. congress critters weren’t at all sure that some of the other repubs. wouldn’t defect from the party of NO and vote for American workers.
They wouldn’t allow for yes or no votes on the bill. Great job BONER
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
2:45 pm
Amvet,
The resluts from that survey were from 1,015 American adults of which 928 were from registered voters. However it does not say if the phone calls were random nor does it give the party affilitation of those interviewed. So, I will take into account this survey is as relevant as asking everyone at my office if they prefer McDonalds burgers or Burger King burgers.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
2:45 pm
is this were we all demand an up or down vote?
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
2:51 pm
Your choice, Head. Shoot the messenger…
Even though it will drive them even more apoplectic, there is ZERO chance that the Georgia candidate that crawled out from under the bridge can beat Mitt for the nomination.
At least the sight of Romney doesn’t leave most people nauseous.
Now if only Willard would stop trying to pretend being what he isn’t, and never was, he could actually win the White House…
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
2:52 pm
“The courts affirmed that you as a citizen can own a gun even though the Constitution speaks of a armed militia. Was that interpretation ok with you?”
The right to bear arms IS stipulated, to whomever it applies. Since a few states tried to get the amendment to read as a collective right to bear arms (in the form of state militias) but that was not the language used, one is very hard pressed to tie this right to a subsequent clause concerning militias. Is that analysis okay with you? The Supreme Court got that right.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
2:53 pm
Did someone say “Up or Down Vote”?
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
December 20th, 2011
2:54 pm
I asked for a Tax Cut, you morans, not a Tax Increase. Is everybody up there hard of hearing? All I got to say is my first pay check next month better be as much as my last pay check this year. I ain’t getting a raise and I can’t spend a oil pipeline. Don’t make me drive up there with my two machine guns and the anti-tank weapon. That I use for hunting and self-defense, but I can always use them for 2nd Amenment purposes.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
2:54 pm
I-85/nb blocked north of I-285 in DeKalb
Just another day in that hellhole called Gwinnett…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3nVqLfPBtw
Matti's Observant Eye
December 20th, 2011
2:54 pm
Granny,
I just called my Congressman again and demanded an up or down vote on the single issue of extending my payroll tax cut, without bundling it with favors to corporate donors. I reminded the nice fellow on the phone of the GOP’s Pledge to America (barely a year old) and that if they don’t honor their pledges, people will start to think we can’t trust them.
Every darn one of you who relies on a paycheck to get through the months should do the same.
(Except for jm, who blames the democrats for taxes because that’s what the voices in his head keep telling him. Bless his deluded little heart!)
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
2:57 pm
Strawman
I was ok with their INTERPRETATION on the right to bear arms…
Just letting YOU know that the court does make interpretations of the Constitution…… Just because an interpretation doesn’t meet your or my ideology doesn’t in itself make the ruling incorrect………
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
2:58 pm
Mattie you darling girl!
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:00 pm
Democrats undermining social security
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
3:03 pm
Will Boehner’s Boys sit quietly in their House seats as they wait for the Senate Republicans to return from their Christmas vacations with family.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:05 pm
Jm likes the “toe tapping” in the mens room
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:06 pm
Taxpayer
The democrats run the senate silly
And they’ve gone home
Republicans work. Democrats quit
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:08 pm
Butch has three boyfriends from the Bronx
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:08 pm
Four
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:09 pm
Butch
Seriously. Your lame attacks get worse by the day. You liberals should give up because you have nothing of substance to say
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:10 pm
Strawman: If the founding fathers were so concerned about a right which is, as you say, “fundamental to any concept of liberty” (your words, not theirs), they would surely have included it in the Bill of Rights. And the Ninth Amendment says nothing of affirming rights but only not denying or disparaging them. It further does not stipulate how these rights would be identified. The question is: what is the source of rights retained by the people?
Remember the times of which you speak. The Founding Fathers were basically developing a new system of government which they didn’t know if it would fail or succeede. But they did know that in order to succeede and in order for them to be different from the system of government that they just rebelled against, they knew that they couldn’t regulate or “govern” everything. Some things had to be fluid and not absolute. Some things, or “rights” had to grow and prosper on their own. Slavery for one, is an example of this.
Our system of government, so unlike any system of government that has ever been in existence before, was / is a semi-Utopian experiment that the Founding Fathers could not have forseen, though they probably hoped, would last. In that regard, as I said before, there was no way they could have regulated or stipulated every foreseeable event in the Bill Of Rights.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
3:10 pm
Jm,
I don’t see Mitch standing with Boehner and calling for conferees. The Republican Party is cracking up. They no longer stand together in unison. The polls tell them that their United Party of No strategy is a losing proposition.
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
3:11 pm
“Just letting YOU know that the court does make interpretations of the Constitution…… Just because an interpretation doesn’t meet your or my ideology doesn’t in itself make the ruling incorrect.”
Agreed. But not when new law is being established by the court (which is now the case). Really, do you think any of the founders would have envisioned or condoned the right to abort an unborn child as an inalienable right? Or would have said that the right to free speech meant, in part, the right to disrobe publicly? To call these derivations “interpretations” is less than amusing. Hey, if the majority of people want to be able to have abortions, let Congress create and pass a law to that effect. I will have nothing to say then.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:11 pm
Jm – “You liberals should give up because you have nothing of substance to say”
So tell the liberals. Unless 2 votes for Regan, 2 for Bush 1 and 1 for Bush II constitute a “liberal” then you definitely have the wrong guy.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:11 pm
What’s worse? Biden sleeping during policy speeches or Obama sleeping through the 3am call?
Obama….
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
3:11 pm
Matti – that’s why we luv ya
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
3:12 pm
“Republicans work”
Yep, The GOP controlled house has scheduled themselves to work 109 days in 2012.
Darn near serfdom don’t ya’ know.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
3:12 pm
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:09 pm
Butch
Seriously. Your lame attacks get worse by the day. You liberals should give up because you have nothing of substance to say
Jm declares as he poses in front of the mirror.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:13 pm
Butch. Who’d you vote for last time?
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
3:14 pm
Does his image actually appear in a mirror?
I didn’t think that type had a reflection.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:14 pm
Jm – “Butch. Who’d you vote for last time?”
No one. Faced with a choice between McCain and Obama was like having the choice to be kicked in the face or the balls. I’ve sat out the last 2 elections for that very reason.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
3:15 pm
Even the Senate repubs. don’t trust the Congress repubs. to keep their word.
How can anyone else?
Great job Boner, although I must admit I NEVER have trusted him after all those jobs suddenly appeared from the heavens after the tax cuts.
where are those jobs again BONER?
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
3:15 pm
“Obama sleeping thru the tree a.m. call…”
I saw the origins of that lame talking point a few minutes ago.
Good Lord Almighty.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:16 pm
However it does not say if the phone calls were random nor does it give the party affilitation of those interviewed. So, I will take into account this survey is as relevant as asking everyone at my office if they prefer McDonalds burgers or Burger King burgers.
Quick question: What did their party affiliation matter to the accuracy of the survey?
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
3:16 pm
Jm, who’d you vote for last time?
(Huge guffaw and chortle…)
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:17 pm
Not that I should care much about what a supposed liberal who makes obscene use of tax loopholes says (Butch)
Keep asking for tax increases on everyone else while you hide your money
That’s the American way right butch?
Robber is the right persona for you. And you don’t have Newman’s charm.
Back to the issue at hand. Butch, anything substantive to say?
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
3:17 pm
So…Do ya’ think In January we will be talking about
Speaker Cantor?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:18 pm
So a non voter comes to defend Obama. Ah the irony.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:19 pm
Jm – “Back to the issue at hand. Butch, anything substantive to say?”
Yes, Congress needs to man up and start doing the job they were hired to do. The middle class is disappearing and they should take priority over anything and everything else. Without the middle class, we have no country. Period. As to my finances, I’m surprised at such “wealth envy” from a Rightwinger. What happened, did your bootstraps break?
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
3:20 pm
“Quick question: What did their party affiliation matter to the accuracy of the survey?”
Seriously? If a majority of those surveyed were Republican, and the results showed favoritism towards the GOP wouldn’t that be a biased survey? Obviously for this survey I am questioning whether or not a majority of those surveyed identify themsleves as Democrats.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
3:21 pm
Granny Godzilla
HEY!
Stop dissin’ Team Edward, ‘k?
(not that he’s on the team or anything, but still…)(
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:21 pm
Amvet. I voted for Obama. But given a better choice I won’t be voting for O
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:21 pm
Jm – “So a non voter comes to defend Obama. Ah the irony.”
There’s a big difference between defending someone and simply not placing blame on someone for every problem under the sun. I typically do the latter when called for and I’m happy to do the former when needed.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
3:23 pm
Paul
Team Edward??
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
3:24 pm
Strawman
“Really, do you think any of the founders would have envisioned or condoned the right to abort an unborn child as an inalienable right?”
I have no idea.. they were not perfect. Several of them did own slaves… right? Was that ok just because it was the law of the land?
Some may have been against it while others could have been for it…. no different than all the other compromises they made when this country was in its infancy
Strawman
December 20th, 2011
3:24 pm
“Like I said, I agree with that. I however, DID NOT AGREE with the Supremes taking up the case. They did not HAVE to, they CHOSE to. Citizens United’s stand had already been denied in lower courts.”
DDR, I would agree that the SCOTUS arrogates to itself rights or responsibilities it should not. There are cases it should not rule upon but they are not presently accountable. I think what Gingrich was getting at in his comments was creating some kind of accountability for them. Otherwise, what is to stop them from doing whatever they wish?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:26 pm
Butch
I agree we need a middle class of course
We differ in how we think we should get there
I don’t have wealth envy. I have disdain for abuse of the tax code. I pay my taxes. I’ve passed on the opportunity to receive unemployment twice. I didn’t buy a Prius with a tax credit.
You’re just another tax dodger. It’s your right. But pretty pathetic. What? Can’t figure out how to make money without dodging taxes? That’s pathetic.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:27 pm
Jm: Republicans work. Democrats quit
REALLY?!? You REALLY posted that! hahahahahahahaha!!!! Can’t stop laughing….can’t stop laughing…….
The House will be in session less than one out of every three days next year, a slight decline from past years. House Republicans say they are running the place more efficiently and lawmakers need the time to be with constituents in an election year. Democrats say that’s too few days on the job during an economic crisis.
They BOTh suck
December 20th, 2011
3:28 pm
Strawman
Guess you would have been ok with segregation seeing that the majority at the time was for it in many states and the what had to intervene? yes the courts
Was that ok or because some “states rights” had to be overrode was it a bad thing that the COURTS had to force several states to change?
Normal
December 20th, 2011
3:28 pm
http://history.icanhascheezburger.com/2011/12/20/funny-pictures-history-coming-soon-catty-shack/
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:29 pm
Butch I don’t blame Obama for creating the problems
I do think there are better people available for office to ensure government gets out of the way so Americans can solve their problems
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
3:29 pm
Faced with a choice between McCain and Obama was like having the choice to be kicked in the face or the balls.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
3:31 pm
Granny Godzilla
Twilight. Edward vs Jacob. Vampires vs The Wolves.
Like I said, not that Jm would make the team or anything, but dang, Granny, it’s the whole concept!!
(It all started with your ‘no reflection’ wisecrack – )
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
3:31 pm
Amvet. I voted for Obama.
Typical lib.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
3:31 pm
Debbiedoright,
LSwho? Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in awhile. LSwho found theirs earlier. Can’t see us missing 4 field goals twice. Bama rolls and in covincing fashion. Roll Tide Roll!
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:32 pm
Jm – “What? Can’t figure out how to make money without dodging taxes? That’s pathetic.”
Careful, your masters might hear you. As to making money, I did it for 20 years working just like everyone else. If your referring to to the trust fund, I’m not going to apologize for my family. Here, maybe you would like me better if I sounded like this
“End entitlements for the 47% who pay no taxes. Stop being so envious of those who made good choices, all you libs do is promote “class warfare” and “wealth envy”, You need to stop punishing the eeeeeeeeeevil rich and start your own business, instead of wasting your time on welfare, why don’t you go ut and get a job and stop focusing on people who are successful because they work hard”
There, does that make you feel better?
josef
December 20th, 2011
3:33 pm
Since there’s no new thread yet…
Okay, Christian bashers, I got one for you. We had a fire Saturday in one of the complexes where our latino children live. Eight families were burned out. Sunday morning one of the churches in the area, one which none of the affected families attend, “passed the plate.” By Monday morning they had collected $13,000.00 for the families in cash, by Monday afternoon they had worked with the families to find permanent housing in the neighborhood, upping the deposits, first and last month, all that. They had collected furniture, kitchen utensils, clothes, linens, books for the children.
This is why, my friends and foes, I will not join in your bad mouthing of Christians…nobody asked them for a thing, They saw need and went to work. Organized religion? Yep. And look at what that organization did.
So, the next time you’re tempted to take a swipe at “them,” think about it. I know eight families who would put you up a good argument.
Oh, yeah, and Happy Baby Jesus’ Birthday…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:33 pm
Bro
Nope. A lib still supports Obama, or the rare soul to his left
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
3:34 pm
Faced with a choice between McCain and Obama was like having the choice to be kicked in the face or the balls.
I’ll agree with that. I didn’t know one con who was excited over McCain. And the best probably R candidate this year- Huckabee, sat out.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:36 pm
Seriously? If a majority of those surveyed were Republican, and the results showed favoritism towards the GOP wouldn’t that be a biased survey? Obviously for this survey I am questioning whether or not a majority of those surveyed identify themsleves as Democrats.
It depends on the question asked of course. If they asked “What type of hamburger do you like?” The answer would differ from person to person. If they asked “Do you like McDonald’s or Burger King” THEN you’d have a narrower spectrum of answers.
The question that was asked, from my understanding, was a total ambiguous question. THAT’s why party affiliation would not have mattered to the outcome of the survey.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:37 pm
Butch
Congrats. You’re in the lucky sperm club.
I frankly don’t know that I care much what you say. But if it was thoughtful I’d at least consider it.
Why don’t we contemplate this: why do you think manhattan real estate prices are so expensive relative to the average US price?
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
3:39 pm
Paul
Oh.
Never got into the new vampires.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:40 pm
I like McCain plenty though I don’t think he was the right guy for the moment
His VP was a disaster
I love Mccain’s ethics and values
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
3:40 pm
Nice one josef. Always wonderful to hear about good in the world especially when its local.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
3:42 pm
Bro at 3:31, LOL…
Jm, your vote is the most bizarre thing I have ever read about on these blogs.
Seriously.
Lots of folks, in hindsight, rue their vote.
But you are off of the charts.
And I’m no psychiatrist, but that you voted for him and then have gone absolutely non-stop, ballistic, out of your mind crazy every day since, indicates to me a very, very deep set of issues. Or at least a gargantuan, even epic, inability to accurately gauge the realities of these candidates.
Lemme guess, you voted for George twice, as well!
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
3:43 pm
“The question that was asked, from my understanding, was a total ambiguous question. THAT’s why party affiliation would not have mattered to the outcome of the survey.”
Ok. If you read the full survey you will see that 928 responders to the survery WERE REGISTERED VOTERS. They were asked if they prefer Obama, the Democrats, or Republicans on various topics. That is why their party affiliation matters. Obviously if you are a registered Democrat, you prefer Democrats over Republicans. Do you understand this concept?
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:43 pm
I think what Gingrich was getting at in his comments was creating some kind of accountability for them. Otherwise, what is to stop them from doing whatever they wish?
The Judicial Branch is protected by the Constitution and their duties firmly stipulated. IOW – Gingrich is just blowing smoke up his azz.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
3:43 pm
Jm,
McCain is a good man. But I think he suffers from the same issues as any career politician. Too many years in Washington means you lose touch with the people. And I think he did. During the debates it was extremely disappointing to hear his responses. It looked like a battle of 2 democrats out to offer the most goodies to get elected. I couldn’t tell much of a difference between him and O.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
3:43 pm
Jm – “why do you think manhattan real estate prices are so expensive relative to the average US price?”
Because of the location and the density of the city. You can’t just buy property in Manhattan like you do a house in a subdivision. It’s no different than Miami, parts of Las Vegas and L.A. excpet that there is very little room for expansion on the island.
Midori
December 20th, 2011
3:46 pm
Post of the year!!
Does his image actually appear in a mirror?
I didn’t think that type had a reflection.
much like his posts, Mrs. G
move along — nothing to see here
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:46 pm
Amvet
I never voted for George (w)
Butch
Height restrictions and rent control have nothing to do with it eh?
Kamchak
December 20th, 2011
3:47 pm
Republicans work. Democrats quit
Sarah Palin is a Democrat?
Who knew?
josef
December 20th, 2011
3:47 pm
BUTCH
“If your referring to to the trust fund, I’m not going to apologize for my family.”
You and I are probably at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but I have to agree with you on that one. Nothing galls me quite so much as someone jumping dead on someone who drew the right cards without ever questioning what they may have done with that luck of the draw…
And the whole matter is a sliding scale of priviledges…that’s why those who start to claim “I did it all on my own…” galls me just about as much…maybe if you’re a left-handed, black lesbian born to a single mother on the Rez…but otherwise? Get real.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:49 pm
Paul: Twilight. Edward vs Jacob. Vampires vs The Wolves.
Hi Paul!!! I tried to read the first installment of that stooooopid book but it was just too dumb and boring. Granted, I know it was written for teens, but do we HAVE to dumb down our teens like that with their choices of reading material? Here’s a typical sentence from the book:
“I know you’re a vampire, but I don’t care! I’ll go off with you and not tell anyone that you’re with me so you won’t get in trouble.”
WTF!!! Are we setting up our teen daughters, (don’t have kids, but I felt my sentence would be more effective if I joined the ranks of parenthood for a sec), to become VICTIMS?!!
“Oh Tom, I know that you are a homcidial brute and maniac; but I will go off with you tonight and not let my parents know — just in case you accidentally kill me.”
The fact that Meyer made (probably) BILLIONS from this book is enough to make Shakespeare rise up out of his grave, go over to her house, and slap her face. HARD.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
3:50 pm
Butch I don’t blame Obama for creating the problems
If any of you are within lightning striking distance, I’d run like Jason Voorhees was chasing me.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:25 pm
Where’s jay’s outrage about Obama signing a bill that actually takes away liberty? Hmmm
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:47 pm
Obama should be setting America free instead of binding her in shackles.
One cuff on personal liberty, the other on the right to work.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
6:52 pm
Another lame Obama attempt to raise money by selling lottery access to the president
So lame and pathetic. I thought this guy was above this level of pandering. He’s like a used car salesman.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
7:03 pm
[...] I only think it fair to point out that our ACTUAL AND CURRENT AND DEMOCRATIC president actually just did something that undermines liberty.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:31 am
Egypt is totally blowing up
Good job Obummer
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:25 am
Obama is leaving his successor a foreign policy fiasco
Only a dolt wouldn’t remember the disaster this guy is creating and vote him out
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:38 am
Exhibit B
European collapse
Wasn’t the miracle worker supposed to fix all these relationships Bush supposedly screwed up? Hmmmm
.Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:51 am
Egyptian museums and artifacts being burned
Manuscripts and artifacts being lost
Good job O
Jm
December 20th, 2011
9:52 am
Egyptian general: protesters should be thrown in Hitler’s ovens
Good job O
Jm
December 20th, 2011
10:20 am
[...] All that said, its more a “transition management” problem. The pooch has already been screwed. Bad Obama calls.
And now that the train is careening off the tracks it may be impossible to stop
Obama let the train get off track
josef
December 20th, 2011
3:50 pm
Thulsa
It certainly reaffirmed my faith in the better nature of humanity…
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
3:51 pm
“The fact that Meyer made (probably) BILLIONS from this book is enough to make Shakespeare rise up out of his grave, go over to her house, and slap her face. HARD.”
If Shakespeare would have lived in a time of capitalism, he would have made billions.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:52 pm
Kam
Palin is a quitter. But thank heavens.
Amvet
Let me explain. I grew up with conservative democrats. Socially liberal but fiscally responsible ones. Clinton fit that mold.
Obama doesn’t at all.
But Romney fits fine. He’s not a crazy republican. He’s sane and fiscally conservative.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
3:52 pm
Granny
josef 3:33
Dad knew a guy in southern Cal, Calif Highway Patrolman. Moved from LA to north San Diego county to get her out of the drug influence. Did no good – she got heavily involved, moved out, crashed and burned. He said she got involved with one of those evangelical fundamentalist-type churches, turned her life around, been clean for a number of years. Guy said he’d never badmouth those churches again.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:54 pm
Doom: LSwho? Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in awhile. LSwho found theirs earlier. Can’t see us missing 4 field goals twice. Bama rolls and in covincing fashion. Roll Tide Roll!
Don’t hate Doom. Don’t Hate. Bitterness is NOT sexy.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
3:54 pm
AmVet
Glad to see that somebody has a sense of humor here. I couldn’t resist that line, especially since I’ve seen it tossed around like a two bit prostitute here.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
3:54 pm
Bro
I don’t blame Obama for creating any pre 2009 problems silly
He has created a whole new set of problems he is responsible for since being elected
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
3:55 pm
Talking Head – O.k. – I did not read the survey; I was just going by the comments that were posted about it. If you have the link, i can compare — if not, I’ll leave it alone.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
3:56 pm
josef
That church is the perfect example of Christian behavior. I’m willing to bet that they didn’t have a huge flatbed truck rolling down the street with loudspeakers blaring their names and what they were about to do. They simply did what had to be done. That is the sign of a true Christian in my opinion. Actions always speak louder than words.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
3:57 pm
jm
Maybe you should specify a time line next time. Your original post didn’t have a set time period. I was just trying to make sure that 100B joules lightning bolt didn’t turn you into instant roasted jm before I could at least buy you one beer.
Midori
December 20th, 2011
3:58 pm
Bro,
my eyes!! my eyes!!
I lost enough brain cells the first time he posted that simpleton sh*t.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
3:59 pm
DDR
That’s okay. Everyone has to have some flaw in them…
See, Edward’s life is all about how he wants to live by the values he has, not what everyone else (other vampires) does. It’s about respecting others and himself.
Was in the store checking out, not long after the first movie came out. Mom, about late 40s early 50s in line with her daughter, must’ve been about 12. Daughter picked up one of those gossip mags with something about the Twilight characters on the cover and the mom said “NO! You are not reading anything about that book!” You know me, I turned to the woman and said ‘do you know anything about the book or the author?” She said just what she’d heard. I said to look at it this way: the author is LDS, graduate of BYU, the two central characters are young and in love, she wants to get real physical, he says ‘no, not until we’re married.’ She looked at her daughter and said ‘well, okay, you can read the book.’ Mom turned away and the daughter looked at me and mouthed a huge “Thank You!!!”
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:00 pm
PAUL
As you know, my hometown is in a very rural district of Mississippi. The nearest Jewish congregation was some 75 miles away. There was only one other Jewish family in the county. My Grandfather, whenever he felt the need to visit a House of G-d, would go to the Church of Christ. When he was asked why, he responded, “I visited every church in the area. They were the only ones who didn’t ask me why I was there.”
I’ve thought about that a lot in my own journey through life and trying my best to thread the territory between the spiritual and the secular. Me? Well, I’ll attend Sunday services at this particular church this Sunday to thank G-d in H-s House for having brought together a congregation that practices what it preaches…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
4:01 pm
Bro
I say my prayers every day prior to posting on here
(kidding)
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
4:02 pm
Debbiedoright,
No hatin on LSU here. Just stating my faith that we win the rematch. LSU takes us much more seriously than we take them. We lead the head to head series by 20 games against them and at one point had a 19 game unbeaten streak in tiger stadium dating to the 60s until Saban finally beat us there in 2004 as LSU’s head coach. You can’t really hate someone you think of as the child of a lesser football god. It would be like hatin on Ole miss.
AmVet
December 20th, 2011
4:03 pm
Jm, I was concerned that some Cadillac-driving, welfare queen slipped you a roofie, dragged you into the polling place and made you vote for BHO. (grin)
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:05 pm
Brosephus
Yep. Very quietly and with no fanfare…just doing the L-rd’s work said the minister. His mouth to G-d’s ears…
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
4:06 pm
If Shakespeare would have lived in a time of capitalism, he would have made billions.
Shakespeare DID live in a time of capitalism, more or less — he got paid for his work, he didn’t work for free.
What I was talking about was the utter lack of anything LITERARY in that dreary, redundant, APOSTASY she scandalously called a “book”. More like a “crock of sh#####seeds”.
I’m a reader. I LOVE to read. I read probably 45 books (novels, masterpieces, autobiographies, biographies, historicals, etc.) a year – and at first i was enthused about the book, (i LOVE sci-fi); but her prose had no symmetry. It was like reading a very, very elementary primer. Cat in the Hat by Dr. Seuss outshone her crappy book.
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:06 pm
Jm
You better pray! The NSA operative’s got your number!
Jm
December 20th, 2011
4:07 pm
Amvet LOL
Coulda happened. I only vaguely recall it. Could be voting PTSD.
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:07 pm
DDR
Hey! Dr. Seuss is the greatest writer in the English language in the 20th Century!
Paul
December 20th, 2011
4:08 pm
josef
Nice way to spend Sunday. Sounds like that congregation (I initially wrote ‘those people’ but this blog would’ve been off to the races with that) actually reads that part of the New Testament that goes “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress,…”
Jm
December 20th, 2011
4:09 pm
Josef
No doubt. Sooth would back me up on that too. (sadly)
I can’t fathom what’s in sooth’s head.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
4:11 pm
Josef – By chance was that a Catholic Church?
If it was be careful Sunday as the Nutster and his loverly wife may show up (you know how devout they are).
Seriously as the Irish say Good on them.
Bro – no problem getting Christmas Ale out of Cleveland. Great Lakes Brewery has a gift shop at the freaking airport and will bag it for carry on. I chit you not.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
4:12 pm
josef,
Speaking of Jews, football, and the rural south I have an interesting tidbit of history for you that you may or may not know. I was reading a book on Bear Bryant and the history of Bama football and it went into a biography of president Mike Denny whose name is alongside Bear Bryant’s on our football stadium Bryant-Denny stadium.
Anyway, Denny was a visionary leader and one of the ways he built U of A in the 20s and 30s was to recruit Jewish students from the northeast. Obviously blacks were out of the question at that time. The reason he recruited so many Jewish students was because many of the prestigious northeastern schools had hard caps of discrimination as to how many Jews they would allow in their schools. And if I remember correctly this even applied to the enlightened ivy league schools.
So Denny heavily recruited Jewish kids and to this day there is a pipeline of Jewish kids from the northeast who attend UA for the simple reason “that’s where a lot of my family members have gone”. At one time the student body was almost 1/3rd Jewish when Denny was there.Case in point although its an embarrassing point Bernie Madoff went to UA but there are several other prominent Jews in NY city and the northeast in general that are UA grads.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
4:12 pm
Midori: I lost enough brain cells the first time he posted that simpleton sh*t.
you are sooooo bad Midori. So very, very, very bad.
Paul: See, Edward’s life is all about how he wants to live by the values he has,
to me, she, Meyer, is teaching young girls how to be selfless victims. Love a man that’s dangerous — it’s sexy.
PS: Forgive me please. I can take name calling. I can take someone talking about my profession, clothes, car, hubby, and even my family. But I can’t STAND a poorly written book!!! It’s a sin against humanity.
Doom – The name is L.S.U. — remember it! Geaux Tigers!!!
pogo
December 20th, 2011
4:14 pm
Amvet “welfare queen” is a passé term. Maybe a more appropriate term would be “welfare national” as we now have a whole lot of people of all demographics that have figured out how to sit on their ass and let someone else pay their bills.
Midori
December 20th, 2011
4:15 pm
DDR – I’m at my best when I’m bad
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:15 pm
Brosephus
Relative to the good Christian folk. I was talking to one of the families. Not long ago I was talking to one of the kids who wanted to know why the white and black folks hated Latinos and wanted to “send us away.” Today that young lady can see that, no, there are good ones who don’t care who you are or where you came from when tragedy strikes…
And if this had happened in Alabama? Well, we could all be haled in for aiding and abetting illegals since some of those families may well be illegals…but the Church, which no doubt has its fair share of “Repugs..” or what have you didn’t go checking papers…
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:16 pm
jm
I got you beat. Every now and then, I stop typing and pray WHILE I’m here.
josef
Indeed!!
NoCom
I’m gonna have to befriend a few Delta flight attendants that fly the Cleveland route.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
4:16 pm
DDR – But I can’t STAND a poorly written book!!! It’s a sin against humanity.
————————-
How do you feel about the first 200 pages of EVERY Michener novel
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
4:17 pm
Jm – “Height restrictions and rent control have nothing to do with it eh?”
In some areas yes. Howver you weren’t specific as to what criteria you wanted. Therefore, I just gave you a very general explaination. Why, are you planning to buy here in the city anytime soon?
Kamchak
December 20th, 2011
4:17 pm
I’m at my best when I’m bad
I’ll make a note.
Midori
December 20th, 2011
4:18 pm
LOL!!
Hi Kammy
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
4:18 pm
hi josef!! Dr. Seuss is the reason I love to read. Well him and those girls who you to give me notes to give to my brothers when I was little. I just HAD to know what was in those notes!
Kamchak
December 20th, 2011
4:18 pm
How do you feel about the first 200 pages of EVERY Michener novel
Or everything that Stephen King ever wrote.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:19 pm
Midori
I don’t have my striped shirt on, or I’d have to throw an unsportsmanlike conduct flag on you for that one. Thass just wrong!!
josef
You know that the Attorney General has signed off on the idea that changes need to be made. Maybe they will learn to take their time and craft quality legislation instead of just focusing on quantity. They’re finalists for my Jackassery of the Year Award.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
4:19 pm
Bro – true story. A sports bar where we hang out here we were complaining about the beer being hard to find. Long story short the manager had 3 cases and gave us one of them LOL. Merry Christmas to me
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:20 pm
Or everything that Stephen King ever wrote.
I wouldn’t talk bad about that dude. I think he knows a few people in a few different parallel worlds. Besides, I like reading his books.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
4:20 pm
Josef
It’s always good to see you defending religion
It comes with it’s bad, but it is often and now more than ever a force for good
And I say this as a churchgoing agnostic
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:20 pm
Thulsa
Yep. Knew that. Several Southern schools did that…
Common
I am purposefully not giving out the denomination…but loved the Newt comment!
Jm
Yeah, I often wonder about Sooth’s inner visions! But, then, we all have our pet conspiracy theories…
Midori
December 20th, 2011
4:21 pm
throw anything you want at me, Bro.
be prepared to receive double in return.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:21 pm
NoCom
Just rub it in… I’ll still have my Arrogant B@st@rd to keep me company.
Thulsa Doom
December 20th, 2011
4:21 pm
Debbiedoright,
LSWHO??? Who dat?
Talking Head
December 20th, 2011
4:21 pm
“Shakespeare DID live in a time of capitalism, more or less — he got paid for his work, he didn’t work for free.”
That’s not really the definition of capitalism, and no he did not live in a time of capitalism but instead a type of fuedalism (means of production were run by the crown, and Lords still had rule over land and its workers)
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:22 pm
be prepared to receive double in return.
You promise!!!!!!
Paul
December 20th, 2011
4:22 pm
DDR
Have you thought of it from the standpoint that all male characters are potentially dangerous, and here is one who recognizes what can happen but strives every day to rise above it all ?
And I’m with you on Dr. Seuss. It wasn’t just the construction, it was the illustrations.
HI Midori!!!!
Jay
December 20th, 2011
4:23 pm
Where do these rights come from, Strawman?
The answer is self-evident.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
You are trying to quibble away the clear meaning of the Ninth Amendment. It clearly states that the people retain rights not listed here. The founders believed it a very important amendment.
Also, Sheets.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
4:24 pm
Butch
Not right now, though it is occasionally a topic of discussion. Just used to work on several NY projects. (battery park condos, bond street condos, some midtown office deals)
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2011
4:24 pm
Bro – NO Calista jokes here today this is a serious discussion we are having (NOT).
Kamchak
December 20th, 2011
4:25 pm
Besides, I like reading his books.
Ugh.
A severe case of verborrhea.
DebbieDoRight
December 20th, 2011
4:26 pm
How do you feel about the first 200 pages of EVERY Michener novel
I LOVED Hawaii. Not too crazy about The Fires Of Spring. I read it when I was younger and, frankly, I didn’t get it.
Big props though to you for reminding of that — i may re-read it. Now that I’m an adult, it may make sense. The same thing happened to me the first time I read Beloved. I was too young to understand it, when I reread it about a year ago, I separated the book into different phases, (Morrison wrote a lot of “flashback” sequence, that at the time, didn’t make much sense to me) – the sections were “Slavery — Sweet Homes” / Escape / Time frame during running away, freedom and murder of baby / After Murder. THEN it made sense.
josef
December 20th, 2011
4:27 pm
DDR
Amen on that on Dr. Seuss.
I may have posted this before, but in our home growing up reading was not censored, but the adults did pay attention to what it was we were reading. Mama shelved “those” books on the high shelves so the little ones couldn’t reach them, or so we thought. As I look back at what all she did shelve there! I asked her about some of them later. She said, “you wouldn’t've read it if I suggested it, but if I put it up there…well, and you read it, didn’t you!” It worked and I did it with ours!
Jm
December 20th, 2011
4:27 pm
Nice day for the market
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:28 pm
Kam
That guy’s probably one of the weirdest people walking the face of the Earth right now. I’m curious as to how he comes up with the things that he writes about. I even have one that he wrote under a pen name. If it’s not about car chases and explosions, I like the weird stuff that makes you think.
Midori
December 20th, 2011
4:28 pm
Hi Paul
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:29 pm
Green Eggs and Ham is probably the best book ever written!!!! That’s why I have a copy myself.
Kamchak
December 20th, 2011
4:36 pm
SoCo/Bro
A ver good friend of my is a SK fan and I expressed my feeling quite some time ago. I had already read Christine and I complained that King’s stories were formulaic horror that always took place in Maine, so he suggested a short story called The Shawshank Redemption. Now this was long before the film came out, after I finished it I was like, “so? this is still crap.”
Not my cup of tea.
He uses pages where sentences will suffice.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
4:41 pm
josef
my mom read everything….and his those she deemed inappropriate
between her mattress and box spring.
i read everything she read.
everything.
Brosephus
December 20th, 2011
4:42 pm
Kam
Can’t argue with your analysis. I think it’s more about the subject matter and stuff that kept me attracted to SK. My 5th grade year was really effed up thanks to King and Peter Benchley. As an aside, I would strongly recommend NOT letting a 5th grader read Jaws or Christine, even if they are very advanced readers. That sh*t will mess with their mind for a very long, long time. I love classic cars, but you can not pay me enough to sit inside or near a 1958 Plymouth Fury.
Mr_B
December 20th, 2011
4:49 pm
“If Shakespeare would have lived in a time of capitalism, he would have made billions”
At the time of Shakespeare’s death he was very wealthy: probably the richest “gentleman”( a legal status just below that of the nobility) in Stratfordshire.
Carol
December 20th, 2011
4:54 pm
JM
John McCain wouldve been a better president
And I don’t say that easily
+++++++
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if facts mean anything, that’s is completely untrue. McCain is proving to be a bitter old man. I actually would have considered voting for him had our current President not been in the running. He was pretty much a moderate that I believed really would work across the aisles in spite of his party. But now he is doing everything but.
Jay
December 20th, 2011
5:19 pm
Stevie, I’d agree with it all. However, I also don’t know what can realistically be done to change that last factor.
Curious Observer
December 20th, 2011
6:19 pm
A CNN/ORC International Poll out Tuesday indicates the president’s margins have increased against five possible Republican presidential challengers in hypothetical general election matchups and that Obama’s approval rating is up five points since mid-November.
Lotsa luck, cons. Now get in the back of the bus. We’re driving.
Mary Elizabeth
December 21st, 2011
2:44 pm
Although it is late to be posting to this thread, I wish to add some comments. The article is thought- provoking, and I have only now had the time to read and digest its message.
(1) Hamilton’s words, from the article, above:
“Considerate men of every description ought to prize whatever will tend to beget or fortify that temper in the courts: as no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be a gainer today.”
From my personal experiences in the desegregation ruling of the Supreme Court, of the 1950s, those lines by Hamilton are particularly apt. African-Americans had been the “victim of a spirit of injustice” in the Jim Crow South, prior to that Supreme Court ruling. I remember that practically all white Southerners condemned the Supreme Court’s authority upon that ruling. Of course, the white power structure of the South of the 1950s had been “the gainer” of that “spirit of injustice” in that day. Ironically, now many white, conservative Southern Republicans, such as Newt Gingrich (transplanted Southerner) feel that they are the victims of a “spirit of injustice” handed to them by the Supreme Court, and thus they wish to curtail its power. Certainly, during the 1950s, the majority of white Southerners’ views were not consistent with the tenets of our Constitution. The Supreme Court called it right; the majority of white Southerners were wrong regarding segregation.
———————————————-
“. . .we’re a republic not a democracy and certain things are off limits to the majority. And it is usually the courts that have to deliver that unwelcome message to the majority.”
———————————————–
I saw that message delivered, firsthand, regarding desegregation, and I have witnessed the bitterness against the Supreme Court and the “federal government’s power” over state power, since that time, especially in the Deep South.
There is much irony in what Newt Gingrich is trying to do regarding limiting the Supreme Court’s power. He is pitting two branches of the three branches of government against the remaining branch. I thought that the three branches of government called for a rational balance of power between three separate branches, each seen with its own autonomy and separate function to perform, instead of seen as using coercion of two against the one. Many conservative Republicans proclaim that we must “get back to the strict contraints of the Constitution” and yet this drive to disempower the Supreme Court seems against the original tenets in the Constitution.The function of the Supreme Court is to interpret, correctly, the legality of our legislated laws – which would hold true over time, beyond immediate and ephemeral perceptions, as were held in the 1950s South.
———————————————–
(2) Toward the end of his life, Thomas Jefferson, according to Gordon S. Wood, author of “Revolutionary Characters,” was tempermentally incapable of understanding the deep popular strength of the evangelical Christian forces that were seizing control of the American culture in these early days of the nineteenth century.” (p.116)
“Ordinary people in whom he (Jefferson) placed so much confidence, more certainly than his friend James Madison, were not becoming more enlightened. Superstition and bigotry, which Jefferson identified with organized religion, were actually reviving, released by the democratic revolution he had led.” (p. 116)
It is further ironic that Newt Gingrich, in his “Face the Nation” interview, mentions that “liberal” judges stand against the majority American culture (often evangelical Christian culture). He wants the voices of the majority Americans (through the Legislative and Executive branches) to be able to curtail the power of the Supreme Court. More irony: often the same people who support Gingrich’s beliefs in this matter, use Thomas Jefferson, the defender of state’s rights, as their model. I do not believe they fully understand Jefferson, who wrote, “I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”
Newt Gingrich is promoting majority thinking – which frequently is expressed in generalized religious platitudes and dogma – in order to discredit the Supreme Court for not being in tune with the American culture. Hardly the enlightenment Jefferson envisioned.
———————————————–
(3) Finally, from Gordon S. Wood’s book, “Revolutionary Characters,” pp. 163-164, thoughts of James Madison, architect of the U.S. Constitution:
Madison very much desired to transcend the states and build a nation in 1787, but he had no intention of creating for this nation a modern war-making state with an energetic and powerful executive. Instead he wanted a government that would act as a disinterested judge, a dispassionate umpire, adjudicating among the various interests in the society. That is why he, unlike his friend Jefferson, eventually came to value the postion of the Supreme Court in American political life; it was the only institution that came close to playing the role that in 1787 he had wanted the federal Congress to play.”
Tom Middleton
December 21st, 2011
5:24 pm
Excellent, Mary Elizabeth. And as someone born and raised in Jefferson County, Alabama, named after Thomas Jefferson, I, too, have been allowed a birds-eye view of racial change since the 1950s.
And there has been change for the better, but, of course, not nearly enough. And like Mr. Gingrich, there are still some among us who would take us backwards in a flash if they only could.
I find it incredibly ironic that all of this has been and is still taking place in the “Bible Belt” of a professed Savior against any form of oppression through his love of God and the Golden Rule. Amazing, isn’t it?
Thanks for a great post…
Mary Elizabeth
December 21st, 2011
7:37 pm
Tom Middleton@5:24, Dec. 21
“I find it incredibly ironic that all of this has been and is still taking place in the “Bible Belt” of a professed Savior against any form of oppression through his love of God and the Golden Rule. Amazing, isn’t it?”
——————————————
Yes, it is completely amazing, Tom.
Thank you not only for taking the time to read my post but also to comment on it. I appreciate your compliment. Here are a few more insights for you, from the book, “Revolutionary Characters,” to which I had referred in my 2:44 p.m. post:
p. 93, “Franklin may have become a symbol for the American dream of getting on and making it, especially making lots of money, but no one has embodied America’s democratic ideals and democratic hopes more than Thomas Jefferson. ‘All honor to Jefferson,’ Abraham Lincoln declared on the eve of the Civil War. By setting forth the explosive idea that ‘all men are created equal,’ said Lincoln, Jefferson had created ‘a rebuke and a stumbling block’ to the appearance of all future tyranny and oppression. ‘The principles of Jefferson,’ said Lincoln, ‘are the definitions and axioms of free society.”
pp. 106-107: “Jefferson celebrated this superiority of society over government. Indeed, the conventional liberal division between society and government was the premise of his political thinking: his faith in the natural ordering of society, his belief in the common moral sense of ordinary people, his idea of minimal government. ‘Man,’ he said, ‘was destined for society. His morality, therefore, was to be formed to this object. He was endowed with a sense of right and wrong, merely relative to this. . . .The moral sense, or conscience, is as much a part of man as his leg or arm. . . .This sense is submitted, indeed, in some degree, to the guidance of reason; but it is a small stock which is required for this.’ All human beings had ‘implanted in our breasts’ this ‘love of others,’ this ‘moral instinct’; these ’social dispositions’ were what made democracy possible.
“The importance of this domesticated modern virtue to Jefferson’s and other Americans’ thinking can scarely be exaggerated. Unlike classical virtue, it was not nostalgic or backward-looking but progressive and indeed radical. It laid the basis for all reform movements of the nineteenth century as well as for all subsequent modern liberal thinking. We still yearn for a world in which we all will love one another.”
p.107: “Probably no American leader took this belief in the natural sociability of people more seriously than Jefferson. His scissors-and-paste redoing of the New Testament in the early years of the nineteenth century, his Jefferson Bible, grew out of his desire to reconcile Christianity with the Enlightenment and at the same time to answer all those critics who said that he was an enemy of all religion. Jefferson discovered that Jesus, with his prescription for each of us to love our neighbors as ourselves, actually spoke directly to the modern enlightened age. Jefferson’s version of the New Testament offered a much-needed morality of social harmony for a new republican society. Jefferson’s faith in the national sociability of people also lay behind his belief in minimal government.”
p. 114: “None of the other major founding fathers was as optimistic and confident of the people as Jefferson was. All of the problems of the present, he believed, would eventually be taken care of by the people.This sublime faith in the people and the future is the source of the symbolic power he has had for succeeding generations of Americans. He was never more American than when he told John Adams in 1816 that he liked ‘the dreams of the future better than the history of the past.’ ”
p. 110: “Unlike Coleridge and Wordsworth and other disillusioned European liberals, Jefferson remained a champion of the French Revolution to the end. He saw it after all as a movement on behalf of the rights of man that had originated in the American Revolution. And to the American Revolution and the rights of man he remained dedicated until his death. In the last letter he wrote he expressed his lifelong belief that the American Revolution would be ‘the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-governmnet. He foresaw that eventually the whole world ‘(to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all)’ would follow the American lead. Sentiments like these became the source of America’s messianic sense of obligation to promote the spread of freedom and democracy throughout the world.”
p.115: “He (Jefferson) knew slavery was a great evil, but he believed his generation could do little about it. Instead he counseled patience and reliance on the young who would follow. When one of those younger men, Edward Coles, actually called on Jefferson in 1814 to lend his voice in the struggle against slavery, he could only offer his confidence in the future. ‘The hour of emancipation is advancing, in the march of time. It will come. . . .’ ”
pp.139-140: “Many Americans, including the president (Adams), thought that (Alexander) Hamilton and the High Federalists had been bent on establishing a regal government allied with Britain with Hamilton as its head. There is no evidence of that, but certainly Hamilton’s plans for an imperial America were out of touch with the realities of his world in 1800. Two centuries later, however, these plans do not seem so bizarre. Hamilton would be right at home in the present-day United States and present-day world. He would love our government’s vast federal bureaucracy, its sprawling Pentagon, its enormous CIA, its huge public debt, its taxes beyond any he could have hoped for, and especially its large professional military force with well over a million men and women under arms spread across two oceans and dozens of countries. America has at last created the kind of powerful world wide empire he could only dream of. In this sense Hamilton may truly be ‘the man who made modern America.’ ”
———————————————————————
One can see from the quotes above how different were the visions of Jefferson and Hamilton for our nation and why the wise first president, George Washington, tried so fervently to keep both of their visions operative simultaneously, within our nation.
It is quite ironic that the great liberal mind of Thomas Jefferson has been claimed by modern day conservatives as an advocate for their vision, and that Alexander Hamilton’s pragmatic strong central government vision has been associated with modern day liberals, in spite of Hamilton’s dreams of military might and empire (as seen in today’s corporate power and empire.)
Hamilton, in my opinion, may be ‘the man who made modern America,’ but I believe Thomas Jefferson’s egalitarian vision, not only for America but for the world, will have the final victory because his vision transcends the limitations of any particular era, just as it confirms the transcendent power of the ever evolving human spirit and soul.
—————————————————————–
p.117: “He (jefferson) had always invested so much more of himself intellectually and emotionally in the future and in popular democracy than Madison had. Jefferson was inspired by a vision of how things could and should be. Madison tended much more to accept things as they were. Madison never lost his dark foreboding about American yet to come, and he never shed his skepticism about the people and popular majorities. But Jefferson had nothing but the people and the future to fall back on; they were really all he ever believed in. That is why we remember Jefferson and not Madison.” (or Hamilton, for that matter)
Merry Christmas to you and yours, Tom.
Tom Middleton
December 21st, 2011
11:42 pm
Well, then I’m a Jeffersonian, Mary Elizabeth, for it would be impossible to become that egalitarian love of everyone by accident.
And if we cannot love what we all are together outside of government, without a strong belief in a single eternal God that is everywhere, including within us, then religion is all we have as an alternative, and I am right.
But it has to be the spiritual (uncorrupted) religion that was handed out, not the self-serving, materialistic version of it that permeates most of the traditions today. In other words, it has to be all about consciousness or being, not the acquiring or having of the Christian materialists and others for it to be real.
In the final analysis, there can be no separation between us and God for the kind of peace and awareness we all say we want. And since I was not aware that Jefferson felt this way as well, I deeply appreciate your taking the time for the many wonderful quotes and thoughts.
And Merry Christmas to you and yours, Mary Elizabeth. I and my seven dogs (lol!) deeply appreciate your good wishes. And Happy New Year to y’all as well!
Mary Elizabeth
December 22nd, 2011
12:13 am
Thank you, Tom. I did compile the list of thoughts from “Revolutionary Characters,” with you in mind especially, to demonstrate the fullness of Thomas Jefferson’s mind, especially in regard to the spiritual understanding that he had attained and how that affected his egalitarian consciousness. So many want to peg the founding fathers into simple “camps of thoughts” for their own agendas instead of trying to understand the richness and complexities of their unique minds, and what each contributed to the greatness of what America has been, and hopefully will continue to be, as an inspiration to the world’s community.
I agree with all of your thoughts in spiritual understanding. I would even go so far as to say that God is not only within each one of us, but within all animals, as well as within all life, and within all that exists, and that is what makes us all one. Once we are deeply aware of this, we must have an egalitarian consciousness toward all.
I appreciate your remarks. I know you must enjoy your dogs. I suspect you fully understand my remarks regarding our spiritual connection to animals, if you care for, and love, seven dogs!
Here is a post I entered into my own blog, “MaryElizabethSings,” last December, entitled, “Changing World, Changing Consciousness.” I have a feeling that you may enjoy reading it. This is the link:
http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/changing-world-changing-consciousness/
Please don’t feel it necessary to respond, unless you care to. I simply thought you might enjoy reading that particular post that I had written. Merry Christmas!
Tom Middleton
December 22nd, 2011
2:42 am
Mary Elizabeth
I have to respond, Mary Elizabeth, for as it turns out, we are so incredibly much alike, that I’m almost in shock.
Of course God is in, under, around, and through all there is as the one unlimited consciousness (principle) of the universe. And of course everything we can see, touch, etc. through the senses is God as well, for if it came from God as the creator, then what else could it be?
And if you subtract something from an all-powerful, all-knowing, ever-present unlimited God, even a universe, you still get God, for something from nothing still leaves nothing, doesn’t it? To me, it’s all God from beginning to end, and I know you agree.
Amyway, I wrote a song once called “Eternity” to explain the whys and wherefores of the creation on a very basic level. I mean, we can always say that it’s for every reason and no reason at all and be perfectly accurate, but that kind of answer always drives folks nuts who are trying to understand.
But hoping you don’t mind, I’m going to post the lyrics for your wise scrutiny. Keep in mind that it’s not a poem but a song I did with my 12-string, and here’s hoping you enjoy…
Eternity
Darling, why do you keep asking me
What made us want to leave eternity
Why did we lock ourselves out and throw away the key
If where we were, we were already free
But if I answer you, will you try to understand
Some things are hard to know while we’re still woman and man
We get the bits and pieces as we move from land to land
But I will tell you, Darling, if I can
I’ll tell you if I can
I’ll tell you if I can
Imagine if you will that you’re in an infinite jar
Where there’s no here and there, and no near and far
There is just you, my Darling, without a guiding star
Because everything there is, well, you already are
What would you do to know what really can’t be known
What would you do to see what really can’t be shown
What would you do to reel in what goes on and on
How would you plant the seeds that really can’t be sewn
That really can’t be sewn
That really can’t be sewn
Would you create a universe and time you could enter in
Till you could find your way back into the jar again
And find out through experience who you have always been
By learning how to treat yourself overcoming sin
Sin is doing what is wrong, it’s working for the part
Instead of working for the whole with what comes from the heart
And when we love, we find the key we threw away at the start
For when we love, we find the way to finally become smart
To finally become smart
To finally become smart
It’s not our separate pieces that make us who we are
It’s who we are beyond it all when we’re back in the jar
When Jesus said “all things will be added,” he became the guiding star
That shows us back into the world of neither near nor far
But very few believe his truth, very few today
And anyone that teaches these things will be made to go away
And what a shame that so many have lost the only way
But anyone who’s ready can still read what he has to say
Read what he has to say
Read what he has to say
When you look into the world, there are many things to see
But you will not understand them well by trying it separately
Each thing depends on the others to be what it needs to be
So it’s knowing what it all is together that finally sets you free
And every part that is somewhere, you have it in your soul
And it doesn’t matter what it is, you must turn it to gold
By focusing on God the Father until it loses it’s hold
It’s in the letting go you move closer to him and his riches untold
His riches untold
His riches untold
Eternity is consciousness, the world beyond all things
The universe we’re in right now is nothing but a dream
Waiting for us to understand and learn how to sprout wings
So we can fly on up out of here, following Christ the King
He taught us to become one with the Father everywhere
The Kingdom is within you, he said; it’s neither here nor there
Live his peace and be so free – life without a care
He was born to teach these things to those of us who dare
To those of us who dare
To those of us who dare
But those who hear and won’t let go, well, it is just their fate
To continue living in limited worlds – life that’s second rate
But those who are ready and turn to God will find upon their plates
All that they must overcome to pass through the holy gate
But there is nothing we can’t do when God is on our side
It doesn’t matter who’s against us; how many times they’ve lied
If we remember what he taught – why he lived and died
We will go back home again; it won’t be denied
It won’t be denied
It won’t be denied
So, Darling, did I answer the question so important to you
And did I say it well enough that you know what to do
Every time I tell you what you now must know is true
The God that lives in me, Darling, is the God that lives in you
When Jesus said, “When you’ve done it unto one of these, you’ve done it unto me”
He was speaking from oneness with the Father and eternity
Live your life for the Father alone, learn the truth and become free
And find out who you really are as you finally learn to see
As you finally learn to see
As you finally learn to see
Darling, you will learn to be
Eternity
Eternity
Eternity
Tom Middleton
09/22/08
Mary Elizabeth
December 22nd, 2011
7:51 am
Tom, your poem/song is beautiful and profound. You are so correct; our perceptions are almost identical about what is. Thank you so much for sharing it with me. I am sure that I will read your wonderful poem many times in the future, for inspiration. You should try to have it published so that many others can be inspired by it.
“And find out who you really are as you finally learn to see”
“Sin is doing what is wrong, it’s working for the part
Instead of working for the whole with what comes from the heart”
“And find out through experience who you have always been”
“And when we love, we find the key we threw away at the start”
“Each thing depends on the others to be what it needs to be
So it’s knowing what it all is together that finally sets you free”
“The universe we’re in right now is nothing but a dream
Waiting for us to understand and learn how to sprout wings”
Tom Middleton
December 22nd, 2011
2:36 pm
Thanks, Mary Elizabeth: You are too kind. All I was trying to do was show that the only way to experience our true infinite nature is through separation, even though illusion, hence the reason for the universe.
It’s like they say in other traditions: Before enlightenment, one is pure through innocence; but after enlightenment, one is pure through experience.
Put this in the wrong hands, of course, and there can be a problem, for experience for experience sake is not what I’m talking about, but experience (direct perception) in the pursuit of the one God.
For no matter what it is we encounter, or how terrible, good, or bad it might seem at the moment, we must react with the love of God and one another for God alone if we’re to transcend our limited selves.
Staying here-and-now centered for what’s essentially here-and-now without end, of course, might seem impossible in the beginning, but what we’re working for is a never-ending state of consciousness as natural as anything we’ve ever done.
I know you know all this, Mary Elizabeth, but please let me say it anyway should others be listening, that the last thing one realizes before entering the eternal consciousness that is our true nature is that one never really left!
And like I said, it’s all illusion, and the joy of waking up from it is worth every single thing we went through to get “there” and more – infinitely more. Peace and love to you always, Mary Elizabeth, and namaste!
Mary Elizabeth
December 22nd, 2011
10:37 pm
Tom, here is one additional post I had written on my blog named, “Enter Metaphysics,” which touches upon some of what you have just posted. I think you will enjoy reading this one,also. (Sorry for the delay in responding; my computer had been down awhile.)
http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2011/01/01/enter-metaphysics/
And peace and love to you, too, Tom.
Tom Middleton
December 23rd, 2011
1:17 am
Thanks, Mary Elizabeth for the interesting reading. I’ve lost both of my parents and my very close aunt since 2003, and since I was their caregiver, one at a time, I know a little of what you speak.
So do you actually sing somewhere on your “maryelizabethsings” site? I just finished recording a Christmas song I wrote about a month ago but have nowhere to post it.
Maybe next year but maybe not, since I tend to be very controversial without even trying hard. This year’s, called “The Gift,” is about how the Kingdom of God IS God (and so are we). Anyone expecting a ring-ding-a-ding seasonal song from me is always going to be disappointed.
But hey, this is what I do in retirement – all the things I wanted to do while I was working but was always too darn tired. At least I have something. A lot of men don’t. Later, lady….