The biggest scandal in 50 years, right before your eyes
If you start naming the biggest political scandals of the past 50 years, Watergate and Bill Clinton’s “I did not have sex with that woman” mistake would have to be included. So would Ronald Reagan’s decision to secretly trade arms for hostages, along with the mass deception and self-deception perpetrated by the Bush administration to get us into Iraq.
However, while presidents Nixon and Clinton were led astray by their weakness for power and sex, neither consciously put the security of the country at risk. Reagan made a serious mistake, but he was at least motivated by sincere concern for the lives of U.S. hostages. The invasion of Iraq is a closer call, but even there, President Bush and his administration weren’t consciously choosing to do damage to our country.
By that standard, the most disturbing political scandal of the past half century is playing out today before our very eyes, to too little notice or comprehension. Marc Thiessen, a former speechwriter for George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and now a columnist for the Washington Post, lays the plot out there for everyone to see:
“Today, Obama is perfectly willing to go over the fiscal cliff and blame the GOP for the resulting tax increases on the middle class. But when it comes to the debt limit, he does not have that luxury. He can’t default on our debt — the consequences are too catastrophic. So in the end he will cave.
Indeed, he would have caved during the last debt-limit stand-off, in the summer of 2011. According to Bob Woodward, when Obama told his advisers he intended to veto the debt-limit bill the Republican-controlled House had passed, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told him he couldn’t — that if Republicans didn’t give in, he had no choice but to sign their bill. “You can’t veto,” Geithner reportedly told Obama, because the consequences “would be indelible, incurable. It would last for generations.”
Republicans had Obama cornered and didn’t know it — so they let him off the hook. When the next debt-limit increase comes in February, they will know better. The president’s current negotiating leverage dissipates as soon as we go over the fiscal cliff. Come February, the tables will be turned — and Republicans will hold all the cards in the debt-limit negotiations.”
If I may, I would like to offer a pithier but still entirely accurate version of Thiessen’s advice to Republicans*:
That fool Obama cares too much about what happens to this country and its people. That is his fatal weakness. You, on the other hand, don’t care about “catastrophic” consequences that would be “indelible, incurable” and “last for generations.” Your amorality is your strength. Use it to demand what you want, or else.
Maybe it’s just me, but I find the whole idea extraordinary. Since when is the willingness to inflict “indelible, incurable” damage on our country something to be bragged about and used as leverage? Since when is it OK for a major political party to hold a gun to the country’s head, figuratively speaking of course? Has patriotism become so diluted by cynicism that such strategies can now be publicly embraced and advocated?
And of course, it’s not just some former speechwriter advocating this strategy. This is the course that the Washington Republican establishment seems ready to adopt. As Sen. Lindsey Graham told Fox Monday, “In February or March you have to raise the debt ceiling. And I can tell you this, there is a hardening on the Republican side. We’re not going to raise the debt ceiling.”
You’re not? What’s next? “We won’t pay the troops, even if it leaves the nation defenseless, unless you surrender to us on the budget?” How would that be substantively different?
Of course, Republicans have talked themselves into believing that this is all justified. They are so absolutely certain that they are correct about the budget that they are willing to knock the United States to its knees to get their way. It requires an enormous amount of self-righteousness and grandiosity to think that way, but they seem up to the task.
Somehow, it doesn’t seem to have crossed their minds that the U.S. Constitution offers an alternative means of resolving such disputes. It’s called free and open debate. It’s called elections. We just had one, focused largely on the issues at stake here; they spent well over $1 billion trying to sell their viewpoint, and they lost.
Now, having failed to convince the rest of their country of their wisdom, they believe that their desperation gives them the right to impose it under threat of grievous harm?
That isn’t leadership. That isn’t patriotism. It is the act of a petulant, frustrated three-year-old threatening to hold his breath until the country turns blue.
Which, now that I think about it, it may very well do.
– Jay Bookman
* A more risque, profane and metaphorical version of the strategy is available here.
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
762 comments Add your comment
Tom Middleton
December 11th, 2012
2:55 pm
But when the Republicans are being so outplayed at every level that they can’t win any other way, Jay, what’s their alternative, I mean besides utter oblivion?
Of course, they could come to the center and start working for all of us like they’re supposed to do, but a psychotic political party isn’t going to do that without a great deal of help through retribution from the victims – the American people themselves.
I mean, when their drug of choice is political power, and they’re getting dramatically less of it every single election, yeah, they’ll get the idea; and We The People will be much the better off for it in virtually no time at all!
Peter Irons
December 11th, 2012
2:55 pm
@ Joe, you’re right about me and not being argumentative and I had already said as much…,well the supreme court may address what you have brought up. It will be interesting. Using right to free association to argue that the free individual should be made to “freely ‘ associate. Any way, I should stick to my previous statement: I got no idea about constitutional law and admit when I do not….
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
2:56 pm
“Jay’s pointed out several times that you’ve got no evidence whatsoever that the individuals arrested and charged were actually members or organizers of OWS”
Aaaah. Joe and the hair splitting. So if a riot instigated by OWS folks ends up in a number of hooligans being arrested then it has nothing to do with OWS because these arrested micreants aren’t official OWS members. And of course this is because OWS is supposed to just be a loosely unorganized group of upset ordinary citizens to begin with. The good ole plausible deniability. Joe doing what Joe does best- the tap dance routine.
Musta been a bunch of middle aged tea party folks who crashed the party and acted as if they were ows hooligan thugs to give ows a bad name. KD.
RF
December 11th, 2012
2:56 pm
josef 2:51. Went well, I guess. One of the interview committee members was a bit hard to read, but we’ll see. I’m just waiting to hear if I make round two. Either way, the interview experience is important, especially in today’s job market! I’m expecting to hear something by the first of the week.
oops
December 11th, 2012
2:56 pm
pathetic
““What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money,” Obama told workers at the Detroit Diesel plant.”
saywhat?
December 11th, 2012
2:58 pm
well doom, if you were a hooligan thug, which party would you crash? The one with angry old guys in lawn chairs, or the one with young hipsters listening to good music?
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
2:59 pm
“I mean, when their drug of choice is political power, and they’re getting dramatically less of it every single election”
Gawd that is asinine. The party whose drug of choice is political power would be the one that wants to enhance its power through creating more govt dependency, more programs, more govt bureaucracy, etc. That would be the Dem party.
Mick
December 11th, 2012
2:59 pm
**““What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money,” **
Sums it up quite nicely…
Alex
December 11th, 2012
3:00 pm
utter oblivion
psychotic party
drug of choice
retribution from the victims
Tom Middleton…..
Tom,Tom,TOM, can we talk you down from the ledge…how about some rational discussion…
The other half of your brain.
December 11th, 2012
3:00 pm
True story at local car dealer
From Tom Selkis’ (Latham Ford) Facebook……….
True story yesterday at the dealership…..
“I’ll try to make this as short and to the point as I can.
One of my salesmen here had a women in his office yesterday wanting to lease a brand new Focus. As he was reviewing her credit app with her he noticed she was on social security disability. He said to her you don’t look like your disabled and unable to work. She said well I’m really not, I could work if I wanted to but I make more now then I did when I was working and got hurt.(non-disabling injury)
She said the gov’t sends her 1500.00$ a month in 1 check, she gets 700.00$ a month on an EBT card (food stamps), and 800.00 a month for rent. Oh yeah and 250 mins free on her phone. That is just south of 3500.00 a month.
When she was working she was taking home about 330.00$ per week. Do the math and then ask yourself why the hell should she go back to work. If you multiply that by millions of people you start to realize the scope of the problem we face as a country. Once the socialist have 51% of the population in that same scenerio we are finished.
The question is when do we cross that threshold if we haven’t already.
She didn’t lease the Focus here because the dealer down the road beat our deal by 10.00$/month. Glad to know she is so frugal with her hard earned money.”
Jay, The MasterBaiter, No Jay, this is the biggest story.
saywhat?
December 11th, 2012
3:00 pm
oops
December 11th, 2012
2:56 pm
pathetic
““What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money,” Obama told workers at the Detroit Diesel plant.”
————————————————————–
Far less pathetic that he said it than how pathetic it is that he’s right. Even more pathetic that you can’t see it.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:01 pm
saywhat?
Well you do have a good point there you do. I have to admit if I want a good hellraising party with young hotties, pot, alchohol, and sheer craziness and rebelliousness just for the hell of it then I’m going OWS!!!!
Mick
December 11th, 2012
3:02 pm
half a brain
Come on down to sunny florida, land real cheap west of krome, I’ll give you a deal!!!
They BOTH suck
December 11th, 2012
3:02 pm
Thulsa
Government grew under both Reagan and the Bush’s. Since when are they considered Democrat?
Your theories hold true when looking at Republican Presidents about as well as paper bags holding water……….
Now do your usual deflect to blame it on the Democrats…….
Joe Hussein Mama
December 11th, 2012
3:03 pm
P. Irons — “Using right to free association to argue that the free individual should be made to “freely ‘ associate.”
You mistake my point, sir.
I’m not arguing for mandatory union membership at all — besides it’s already settled law that you can’t be forced to join a union as a condition of employment. My point is that the state’s not even considering the obligatory *narrow* restriction in order to satisfy whatever their “compelling state interest” is. Quite the contrary, the state is imposing an unconstitutionally overbroad restriction by doing away with those unions entirely, and that *is* unconstitutional — and has been found so many times by the SCOTUS.
For the state to prevail in court, they’d need to lay out the legal problem or issue and then demonstrate how their solution was crafted to be as narrow as possible, so as not to infringe on other rights or the rights of individuals. If they can’t do that, it’s likely that the law would be thrown out.
Of course, all this presumes that appellants would be granted certiorari by the SCOTUS, and that’s far from certain. The Court is hit with *thousands* of petitions and appeals each year and can only consider a small fraction of them.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:04 pm
I read the liberal unions are threatening to kill people. I guess it is their right. Call it individual or group expression.
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:04 pm
“What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money,”
On average, union workers make about $1500 per year more than non-union workers. Which is about how much they pay a year in union dues, so it’s a wash.
And, in a free society, I would think that people who don’t wish to join a union and pay dues in order to be employed ought not have to do so.
And a large percentage of the money flowing to unions via dues isn’t used to represent union members. It’s spent on politics.
Funny how liberals think they can protest having their tax dollars spent on things they don’t agre with (like supporting religious charities) but forcing workers against their will to fund liberal political machines (unions) is just fine by them.
Silly little brainwashed liberals.
They BOTH suck
December 11th, 2012
3:05 pm
Thulsa
But I admit, they do talk a great game without a doubt.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:05 pm
“Quite the contrary, the state is imposing an unconstitutionally overbroad restriction by doing away with those unions entirely”
that is a LIE!
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 11th, 2012
3:05 pm
My girlfriend’s hairdresser’s husband has an uncle that used to work with a guy who knew someone that wanted to lease a Ford Focus.
The other half of your brain.
December 11th, 2012
3:06 pm
Mick
December 11th, 2012
3:02 pm
half a brain
Come on down to sunny florida, land real cheap west of krome, I’ll give you a deal!!!
Mickey, I’m doing just fine in Georgia, thank you.
TaxPayer
December 11th, 2012
3:06 pm
The mating cry of the Beaten Conservative!?
B
O
O
M
!
Joe Hussein Mama
December 11th, 2012
3:06 pm
Doom — “Aaaah. Joe and the hair splitting.”
Aaaah. Doom and the guilt-by-association. (laughing)
“So if a riot instigated by OWS folks”
Your evidence of such a thing, please?
“ends up in a number of hooligans being arrested then it has nothing to do with OWS because these arrested micreants aren’t official OWS members.”
Your evidence that the alleged riot was instigated by OWS members, please?
“And of course this is because OWS is supposed to just be a loosely unorganized group of upset ordinary citizens to begin with. The good ole plausible deniability. Joe doing what Joe does best- the tap dance routine.”
Good thing we have courts. I wouldn’t want to trust your powers of ESP to arrive at a just conclusion, Doom. (laughing)
BTW, do those magic peepers of yours enable you to tell what kind of car someone drives, how many cellphones they have and how they pay for their groceries? (laughing)
“Musta been a bunch of middle aged tea party folks who crashed the party and acted as if they were ows hooligan thugs to give ows a bad name.”
Musta been. Your evidence, please? (laughing)
Mick
December 11th, 2012
3:07 pm
**On average, union workers make about $1500 per year more than non-union workers. Which is about how much they pay a year in union dues, so it’s a wash*
No, it’s not; you fail to mention healthcare and a pension. Those are some very important items not usually given to non union employees…
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
3:08 pm
And Reagan’s biggest complaint later on after leaving office was that he agreed with the Dems to raise taxes to reduce the deficit and the Dems would reduce spending. Reagan did this twice.
TWICE???
http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/1632/reagans-tax-increases
The other half of your brain.
December 11th, 2012
3:08 pm
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 11th, 2012
3:05 pm
My girlfriend’s hairdresser’s husband has an uncle that used to work with a guy who knew someone that wanted to lease a Ford Focus.
Thank’s for that, silly!
Joe Hussein Mama
December 11th, 2012
3:09 pm
Williebkind — “that is a LIE!”
I’m listening, Willie. Go ahead.
Mick
December 11th, 2012
3:09 pm
brain
That story has been making the rounds, let the buyer beware…
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 11th, 2012
3:10 pm
I read the liberal unions are threatening to kill people.
I read that I will be the starting quarterback in the Super Bowl.
RB from Gwinnett
December 11th, 2012
3:10 pm
““What they’re really talking about is giving you the right to work for less money,” Obama told workers at the Detroit Diesel plant.”
Yes, because when faced with the choice of having diesel engines made in China/India/Korea/Wherever, the pay rate in Detroit would never be a factor, right?
And before you even bother to reply, ask yourself this; “Is the US diesel market the only place DD might like to sell engines?” If the answer is “no”, then why would they care if they produce them in Detroit or in Shanghi if the’re selling them in both and it’s cheaper to build them and ship from one to the other?
Regnad Kcin
December 11th, 2012
3:11 pm
“So if a riot instigated by OWS folks ends up in a number of hooligans being arrested then it has nothing to do with OWS because these arrested micreants aren’t official OWS members”
BENGHAZI!!!
Real Scootter
December 11th, 2012
3:11 pm
Of course, all this presumes that appellants would be granted certiorari by the SCOTUS, and that’s far from certain. The Court is hit with *thousands* of petitions and appeals each year and can only consider a small fraction of them.
Dang JHM,could you please dumb that down a bit? Them big words are tough on us rednecks!
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:12 pm
Am I the only one who wonders why Joe Hussein Mama spends all day every day on Bookman’s blog? I would think that a guy as smart as JHM pretends/wishes to be would have somethiong better to do. Like maybe, oh I don’t know, a JOB……………
They BOTH suck
December 11th, 2012
3:13 pm
Bro
Did you see how much capital gains taxes were in either 86 & 87 or 87 & 88? I’m not advocating we go back to that rate, but this notion that it is all about the tax rates is bs from the get go.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:13 pm
“Government grew under both Reagan and the Bush’s. Since when are they considered Democrat?”
they both suck,
I’m not letting the Rs off the hook. They deserve a significant amount of blame under W for spending in the 6 years under W.
At least under Reagan though he thought he was going to get spending cuts which never materialized. And also Reagan is guilty as charged for a massive military spending spree. But was that spending spree worth it? Yep! It brought about the end of the USSR and we later enjoyed an enormous peace dividend under Clinton as a result. If I remember correctly I think defense expenditures under Clinton were almost a third less.
Alex
December 11th, 2012
3:13 pm
@ Joe, would you please explain this in less legaleeze, I think constitutional law is fascinating, but do not posses the legal vocabulary to follow many of the discussions, thanks…Mr. Irons does know more (MUCH MORE) than me !!!!
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:14 pm
Mick
December 11th, 2012
3:07 pm
“No, it’s not; you fail to mention healthcare and a pension. Those are some very important items not usually given to non union employees…”
I’ve been working since 1977, I’ve never belonged to a union, and every job I’ve ever had provided healthcare. As far as pension, I prefer to save on my own, which my employers have almost universally subsidized via 401(k) matching funds.
But thanks for playing, any way….
josef
December 11th, 2012
3:14 pm
OTHER HALF
“She didn’t lease the Focus here because the dealer down the road beat our deal by 10.00$/month.”
Hey, that’s free market competition for you! So, is he kvetching because of her sources of income or is he kvetching because he couldn’t skim off his share of the socialist government’s largesse?
We are left to assume that had he been able to compete with his competitor’s price he WOULD have taken the shekels.
Sort of blows the rest of the argument to hell…
mm
December 11th, 2012
3:15 pm
“The party whose drug of choice is political power would be the one that wants to enhance its power through creating more govt dependency, more programs, more govt bureaucracy, etc”
Cons, it’s time to grow up.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:15 pm
So the people in the state of Michigan want a law that says states cannot take money out of their paychecks and give it to unions for dues. Now the progressive liberal liars read that as “a broadstroke to do away with unions”. Now all that education the progressive liberals confess to have and this is how they comprehend the Michigan bill. To top it off they have already rioted and destroyed others peoples’ property. Have you ever seen the liberals protest peaceably–I have not. Like I said the people in the north and east and west coast are morons.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:16 pm
“Am I the only one who wonders why Joe Hussein Mama spends all day every day on Bookman’s blog?”
Perfesser Joe does have a job- and a mission statement too. It is to enlighten the ignorant and downtrodden masses of the Bookman blog. Can’t you just feel the enlightenment??? I’m feeling like a farter smucker already just for being on the same blog as Joe.
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
3:16 pm
Mick @ 3:07
He also fails to mention that when looking at per capita income, right-to-work states make up only 1 in the top 10 and 4 in the top 20. On the bottom end of per capita income, there are 7 of 10 RTW states and 16 of 20.
Tom Middleton
December 11th, 2012
3:17 pm
Thulsa Doom @2:59pm: “Gawd that is asinine. The party whose drug of choice is political power would be the one that wants to enhance its power through creating more govt dependency, more programs, more govt bureaucracy, etc. That would be the Dem party”
Doom, if you can find some way to put that on a bumper sticker, you can run on it from now on and LOSE. I mean, did your parents create a dependent child when they helped you get through school, etc.? Doom, you just don’t like minorities, that’s your problem, and those otherwise not born rich!
Joe Hussein Mama
December 11th, 2012
3:19 pm
Real Scootter — Dang JHM,could you please dumb that down a bit? Them big words are tough on us rednecks!”
No problem, buddy.
Let’s say that the former union members got up a group and a legal team and got their case pushed through the court system. If they lost at the state level, they could appeal to the Federal district level, and if they lost there, then they could appeal to the Federal Circuit level.
If they *still* lost there, they could go to the Supreme Court BUT the SCOTUS doesn’t hear every case that comes their way. They get THOUSANDS more cases each year than they could possibly consider, so their staff narrows things down for them and gives them a list with the highlights of each case. Then the justices vote on which ones they’ll hear. I don’t know offhand how many they pick each year.
If the justices pick your case, it’s called ‘granting certiorari,’ and it means that they think your case deserves to be considered by the Supreme Court. It’s really a long road to get there, and from what I understand, it is quite a feather in a lawyer’s cap for his and his clients’ case to make it that far.
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
3:19 pm
They BOTH
Yeah, I’ve looked at those rates. Reagan did good in cutting rates to a point. The current GOP, however, is like a crack fiend, with their crack being tax cuts. They remind me of heroin addicts in Russia who shoot up Krokadil, even after knowing the effects of it and how bad it is for them.
Regnad Kcin
December 11th, 2012
3:20 pm
“He also fails to mention that when looking at per capita income, right-to-work states make up only 1 in the top 10 and 4 in the top 20. On the bottom end of per capita income, there are 7 of 10 RTW states and 16 of 20″
Perhaps Michigan felt that its citizens were too affluent…
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:20 pm
Taxpayer,
Thanks for the homage. Another adoring fan.
Kamchak - "Socialism" is just a code word for "fear," the monster under you bed ~ Kamchak
December 11th, 2012
3:22 pm
I’ve been working since 1877 and I have to walk 35 miles round trip, bare foot in the snow, uphill both ways and I work 24 hours a day non stop.
And Socialism — BOO!
josef
December 11th, 2012
3:22 pm
TOM
oom, you just don’t like minorities, that’s your problem..”
Not out to defend Doom, but he IS a member of a minority…perhaps the most mistreated one in all of Western Civilization…just saying.
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:22 pm
“He also fails to mention that when looking at per capita income, right-to-work states make up only 1 in the top 10 and 4 in the top 20. On the bottom end of per capita income, there are 7 of 10 RTW states and 16 of 20.”
He also fails to compare per capita income to cost of living in those staes.
The other half of your brain.
December 11th, 2012
3:23 pm
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
3:19 pm
They BOTH
Yeah, I’ve looked at those rates. Reagan did good in cutting rates to a point. The current GOP, however, is like a crack fiend, with their crack being tax cuts. They remind me of heroin addicts in Russia who shoot up Krokadil, even after knowing the effects of it and how bad it is for them
Bro, Are you saying that we should keep supplying ” the crack “
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:23 pm
“Funny how liberals think they can protest having their tax dollars spent on things they don’t agre with (like supporting religious charities) but forcing workers against their will to fund liberal political machines (unions) is just fine by them.”
That is a good statement. It fits the liberals perfectly.
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:23 pm
“Perhaps Michigan felt that its citizens were too affluent…”
Or maybe Michigan felt too many of its citizens were without jobs….
josef
December 11th, 2012
3:24 pm
@ 3:22
Now THAT’s an interesting typo…
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:24 pm
“Dang JHM,could you please dumb that down a bit? Them big words are tough on us rednecks!”
The only way he can dumb it down is if he gets his cut-and-pastes from a different source.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:25 pm
Ok this is just like the radio broadcast War of the Worlds–so dont panic.
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:26 pm
Kamchak, your unicoen just pooped a pile of skittles over on aisle 10. How ’bout cleaning that up for us.
Thanks in advance bro….
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:26 pm
“I mean, did your parents create a dependent child when they helped you get through school, etc.?”
Sorry but I worked my way through college. Took 5 1/2 years but it was worth it to say I did it on my own. Your powers of mind reading failed you again.
“Doom, you just don’t like minorities, that’s your problem, and those otherwise not born rich!”
Well of course I hate minorities. That’s why I learned Spanish and went to live in Central America as a foreign exchange student- cause I hate minorities and especially spics. (Kook disclaimer for facetious, sarcastic statements)
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:27 pm
Nine peaceful demonstators shot to death by the union thugs protesting the signing of the Michigan right to work state as report by Jay Bookman at the scene.
Real Scootter
December 11th, 2012
3:28 pm
Thanks Joe!!
I will look up those words and hopefuly learn them.
I’m gona guess here and say certiorari,is Latin.
The other half of your brain.
December 11th, 2012
3:29 pm
Willie, 3:27 that was funny, He will show it on a chart later today.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:29 pm
Bookman stared into the camera with drugged glazed eyes and screaming the peaceful demonstrators were bulling the union thugs with equal right statements when the guns discharged dozens of times claiming nine victims.
They BOTH suck
December 11th, 2012
3:30 pm
Bro
In those years I am refering to, Reagan actually increased capital gains. He worked with Congress to lower them back towards the end of his second term. Bush Sr had bought into “vodoo economics” by that time and needed to sell the folks just that.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:31 pm
The gay CNN correspondent asked was it a dirty scene.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:31 pm
Better got my popcorn so I can watch ole Ben kick ass and take names. Has kamchak cleaned up that unicorn poop over on aisle 10 yet? My popcorn is on that aisle and I don’t want to look at unicorn poop while selecting which Orville Reddenbacker I want. Do hurry kam.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 11th, 2012
3:32 pm
Real Scootter — “I’m gona guess here and say certiorari,is Latin.”
You are correct, sir!
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:33 pm
steve
December 11th, 2012
8:14 am
“I miss the old days. You know, back when the losing party understood that the people have spoken and abided by it, at least to a fair extent. Today’s GOP is unrecognizable.”
Looks like poor little steve doesn’t understand the three branches of government and the Constitutional system of checks and balances.
josef
December 11th, 2012
3:34 pm
Scootter
Now, repeat after me… Coito, ergo sum.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:34 pm
The current DEM party, however, is like a crack fiend, with their crack being spending. They remind me of heroin addicts in Russia who shoot up Krokadil, even after knowing the effects of it and how bad it is for them.
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:34 pm
Bookman responded to the gay CNN correspondent that scene was blasted with shouts of debauchery and OWS members raced across the scene nude dancing around the bodies of the gundowned demonstrators.
Tom Middleton
December 11th, 2012
3:39 pm
Doom@3:26pm
My bad, Doom, then it’s just that you don’t like helping others, kind of ironic for someone who knows how tough it can be. Is that resentment?
I’m a Dem, dude, ‘cause I went through school on the GI Bill. Thank you, government, and may you continue helping others as well! I mean, what else are you here for anyway, just protecting the rich?
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:39 pm
Seen on bumper sticker…
“Try Occupying a Job”
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
3:40 pm
Bro, Are you saying that we should keep supplying ” the crack “
No, I’m saying this country needs an intervention of epic proportions before our crackheads ruin us all.
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:41 pm
“I’m a Dem, dude, ‘cause I went through school on the GI Bill.”
And it’s the Dems who want to de-fund the military.
Libs are always good for a laugh at least….
Peter
December 11th, 2012
3:42 pm
Well the America 8th grader is still doing poorly compared to the rest of the World….. Imagine how poorly the Georgia 8th grader is doing with that republican led school system in place ?
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:44 pm
Anybody remember back in 2004-2008 when Bookman used to write a weekly column bashing George W. Bush for running deficits, for “bankrupting our future” and “creating this huge liability our children and grandchildren will have to repay”?
Now Obama runs deficits double or triple the size, and Bookman says it’s on the Republicans to offer up spending cuts.
I think maybe the words “hypocrite” and “irony” just don’t exist in liberal la-la land……………
RB from Gwinnett
December 11th, 2012
3:47 pm
““He also fails to mention that when looking at per capita income, right-to-work states make up only 1 in the top 10 and 4 in the top 20″
Guess nobody want’s to look at the taxes being paid in those pro-union states and the people leaving in droves to the RTW states either. Oh well, I guess we’ll just go with half the story as usual…
josef
December 11th, 2012
3:47 pm
SCOOTER
Psst…
Magister Latinae galeam pygae est!
Ben Shockley
December 11th, 2012
3:47 pm
“Imagine how poorly the Georgia 8th grader is doing with that republican led school system in place ?”
Ummm…….dude……..I think you’ll find that the “education establishment” in Ga is about 95% Dem.
Thanks for playing though.
Real Scootter
December 11th, 2012
3:47 pm
Coito, ergo sum
OK,wiseguy,I’ll look that up too!
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
3:49 pm
They BOTH
I was thinking only of the end results. You have a point there.
————————–
Doom @ 3:34
Seems as you only speak the half truth again, but that’s par for the course for you. Here’s a chart that shows outlays each year since 1940. Care to point out where Republicans cut spending from the previous year if the Dems are the party of spending?
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200
Seems as you took one too many a toke from the rhetoric joint. Both parties spend with abandon. Seems as one party wants to lay blame to the other one in order to avoid owning up to their complicit guilt. Both parties spend, but only one purposefully cuts revenue too.
Real Scootter
December 11th, 2012
3:49 pm
josef
December 11th, 2012
3:47 pm
LALALALALA with fingers in ears!!!!
Soothsayer
December 11th, 2012
3:50 pm
Ben Shuckley: how can anyone live inside a brain so full of hate?
You remind me of a long series of posters on this blog without anything of substance to say. Just little snippy quips about something that someone else posted.
That you have an inflated opinion of yourself is unmistakable and is on display for everyone to see.
How about posting one thing of substance today? Something you thunk up all by yoreself without no one’s help. Try it! I know you’ve got it in you.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
3:51 pm
“My bad, Doom, then it’s just that you don’t like helping others, kind of ironic for someone who knows how tough it can be. Is that resentment?”
Tom, in all seriousness I do a lot to help others- particularly clients of mine that are on medicaid or who need some help with say a ride to an appointment. I don’t mind helping people and I’m fully and absolutely in favor of a social safety net to help those who are down on their luck. What I don’t like is making a lifestyle out of it and promoting a system that incentivizes laziness on the part of able bodied people.
“I’m a Dem, dude, ‘cause I went through school on the GI Bill.”
Yeah. I did too. The GI bill helped and to me the GI bill is one of the few govt successes that I can think of. The thing is though that you had to work for it via military service. It wasn’t just given to you.It was earned. And I think that’s lost on a lot of people today who feel like they are just owed a lot of free shyte. And its bankrupting us. Can’t you see that?
getalife
December 11th, 2012
3:52 pm
Where is the tea party on your speaker’s proposal?
Our President proposed to cut twice as much as the gop.
Fiscal cons are liars.
Erwin's cat
December 11th, 2012
3:52 pm
JHM
Such an explicit denial creates an unconstitutional separate-but-equal class distinction in the workplace and a second prima facie case for the appellants.
interesting
Alex
December 11th, 2012
3:53 pm
More latin: Julius Caesar im gallia est…..Puella, puellae, peularrum…
Williebkind
December 11th, 2012
3:56 pm
Ben and Doom:
You cannot argue with a stop sign and the liberals cannot debate the facts but you are doing quite well.
Real Scootter
December 11th, 2012
3:58 pm
Ok y’all,I don’t mind looking up a few Latin words but I ain’t gona buy a Rosettastone!
josef
December 11th, 2012
4:01 pm
K’Chak
Filii Veteranorum Confoederationis????
Regnad Kcin
December 11th, 2012
4:01 pm
RScooter:
“Ipse dixit and quid pro quo. So little time, so much to know!” – The Nowhere Man (Jeremy Hillary Boob Ph.D)
Brosephus™
December 11th, 2012
4:01 pm
Soothsayer @ 3:50
You realize that you’re asking for the equivalent of David Copperfield levitating the Eastern Seaboard, right?
They BOTH suck
December 11th, 2012
4:02 pm
Doom
While we certainly need to get spending down, you do know that over the last 30 yrs, Republican Presidents have presided over more debt than Democrat Presidents, right?
I blame both parties for stupidity, however when you say the Dems have a spending problem (true), you either purposely or ignorantly forget the facts in terms of the numbers and how the Republicans love the checkbook as well. Of course they have been in the WH more years, but the numbers speak to as much or more rhetoric about small government as it does any reality.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
4:03 pm
Brocephus,
Your chart doesn’t show which party was in control of Congress during those years. Also when we had a balanced budget as Clinton left office it was because the Republicans under Gingrich brought Clinton to the table screaming and kicking to balance the budget. You remember the 94 R revolution concerning govt spending and getting govt under control don’t you.
Now you can rightly blame the Rs for profligate spending in the early 2000s. They earned that blame. But when the Ds took over Congress it set a new standard for profligate spending. The Rs have been fighting to reduce spending lately in case you haven’t noticed. When we had this same debate early in the year when we were going to hit 16 trillion I think it was Obama who had no serious intentions of curbing spending and had no problem raising the debt ceiling.
Perhaps we do need some revenue increases and small tax increases. But the math is quite clear. The problem isn’t taxes. The problem is a federal govt that now consumes 25% of our GDP and a society in which half of us are net takers and not contributors to the tax base. It was never intended to be this way by the founding fathers. The primary problem is spending and a federal govt that is involved in way too many facets of everyday life.
pogo
December 11th, 2012
4:07 pm
OWS? Ewwwww that smell! Can’t you smell that smell???
GT
December 11th, 2012
4:07 pm
Good call curious, there were a lot of private corporate planes flying into Washington back in 2007 and early ‘08 very willingly to jump as high as told to get this bailout.
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
4:08 pm
“you do know that over the last 30 yrs, Republican Presidents have presided over more debt than Democrat Presidents, right?”
they both suck,
And do you know who controlled Congress and the purse strings during much of that time?
Both parties deserve a lot of blame. W was bad enough with the spending but what I’m saying is in terms of spending Obama has now reached unprecedented proportions compared to W. Its not really debateable either and I just see absolutely no serious effort from the man to even try to get the deficit under control. None.
Soothsayer
December 11th, 2012
4:08 pm
Here, I’ll even help you. Please publish a brief discourse on how the country benefited from George W. Bush’s presidency and how foolish the country was to elect a relative unknown like Barack Obama. Don’t forget to include how much better the country would be today if John McCain had carried on Bush’s “3rd term.” How much better the country would be if the auto makers had been allowed to go bankrupt. How much better off we would be if we didn’t have the “stimulus” at the worst depths of the near depression caused by George W. Bush. That should be a good start for you.
Alex
December 11th, 2012
4:08 pm
@Tom and Thulsa: G.I Bill;
Harry Colmey,author of first draft (R)
McFarland(D) and Atherton (R) :”Fathers ” of the Bill
Rogers (R) “Mother” of the bill
Roosevelt(D) sign the bill as prez
Truly a BIPARTISAN bill……..
Thulsa Doom
December 11th, 2012
4:11 pm
Williebkind,
Some of them don’t know the difference between opinion and a fact. And some of them still wouldn’t know a fact if it were a great white shark that swam up and bit em in the ass.