Man, I would not like to be John Boehner these days
John Boehner is not acting like a confident man.
Yesterday, the House speaker made a curt, 52-second public statement regarding fiscal-cliff negotiations and then turned and left the room, unwilling to take a question.
Later in the day, the AJC’s Daniel Malloy saw Boehner in a heated discussion with a handful of Georgia Republicans on the House floor. Asked about it later, they told Malloy that Boehner was pleading with them to support his so-called Plan B, which would raise taxes only on those with annual incomes of more than $1 million. At best, they seem unconvinced.
The speaker’s proposal — floated as a way to demonstrate that House Republicans are “serious” about deficit reduction — is scheduled to be voted on today. There’s a chance that it will go down to defeat if enough of Boehner’s fellow Republicans refuse to support it on grounds that it raises taxes, if only on the top 0.19 percent of earners.
It’s also interesting to note that Pope Grover I of Norquist has issued an papal bull decreeing that Plan B is somehow NOT a tax hike, and thus will not be interpreted as violating the no-tax-hikes-ever pledge that so many Republicans have signed. That says a lot about the hypocrisy involved, and about Norquist’s continuing power over party members. They may be elected by the people of their district, but they are answerable first to Pope Grover. They have to wait for him to tell them, like some pope ruling on a theological dispute, whether they have permission to cast a vote one way or the other.
Here’s the angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin rationale released by Norquist through his front group, Americans for Tax Reform, explaining how a bill that raises taxes is not really a tax hike:
—————————–
“ATR has consistently maintained that individual members of Congress make a pledge to their constituents to oppose and vote against tax increases. The House this week will vote on a tax bill. This legislation — popularly known as “Plan B” — permanently prevents a tax increase on families making less than $1 million per year. Republicans supporting this bill are this week affirming to their constituents in writing that this bill — the sole purpose of which is to prevent tax increases — is consistent with the pledge they made to them. In ATR’s analysis, it is extremely difficult — if not impossible — to fault these Republicans’ assertion.
In particular, in this Congress the House has already voted twice to prevent any tax increases on any American. When viewed with this in mind, and considering this tax bill contains no tax increases of any kind — in fact, it permanently prevents them — matters become more clear. Having finally seen actual legislation in writing, ATR is now able to make its determination about a legislative proposal related to the fiscal cliff. ATR will not consider a vote for this measure a violation of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.”
—————————–
The statement is a clear lie, because as even Boehner has said, Plan B does raise taxes. Also note the claim that politicians made the no-tax pledge not to Norquist, but to their constituents. Pope Grover trotted out that same logic recently in his dispute with Sen. Saxby Chambliss, claiming that “If (Chambliss) plans to vote for higher taxes to pay for Obama-sized government, he should address the people of Georgia and let them know that he plans to break his promise to them. The senator’s reference to me is odd. His promise is to the people of Georgia.”
Yet it is Norquist, not the people of Georgia, or Alabama, or North Dakota, who claims the power to define a clear tax hike as not a tax hike at all.
As a further sign of trouble, late last night Boehner and his allies tried to sweeten Plan B by adding spending cuts to the measure, including cuts that would gut ObamaCare. That may help the speaker through this most immediate crisis, but he also knows that when the time comes to recruit GOP votes for a final, negotiated package to avert the fiscal cliff, that package will not include cuts to ObamaCare.
A second GOP bill, also added to the day’s calendar to make Plan B easier to swallow, would end all defense cuts scheduled to take place under sequestration and replace them with still more cuts to social programs. That way, 100 percent of the cuts would come from entitlements and other programs, while defense spending is untouched.
The bottom line remains the same: House Republicans are badly out of step with the American people.
In another in a long string of such polls, a Washington Post/ABC News poll released this week reported that 74 percent of Americans find tax hikes on those making $250,000 or more “acceptable.” Even 51 percent of Republicans find that acceptable. And 76 percent of Americans said House Republicans are not willing to compromise enough.
Overall, just 28 percent back cuts to Medicaid, just 34 percent back reductions in future growth of Social Security benefits and only 36 percent back raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67. The area that draws the most support for cutbacks (defense, at 42 percent; 48 percent among independents) is the only area in which Republicans refuse to even consider cuts.
That does not mean that cuts should not be made, in defense as well as social programs. Our fiscal problems cannot be corrected through tax hikes alone, nor through spending cuts alone. It has to be both. And by Boehner’s own admission, President Obama has proposed some $850 billion in spending cuts (the administration says the total is closer to $1.2 trillion once you throw in lower interest payments.)
Overall, those polling numbers tell us that Boehner has very little backing among the American people for the policies that his own caucus is insisting that he pursue to the bitter end. He knows that, and he’s trying to get that point across to his caucus. But in too many cases, he is preaching practicality to people to whom appeals to practicality smack of early-onset RINOism, an often fatal disease in that group.
– 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
830 comments Add your comment
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2012
10:39 am
No, what?
Albany,
You might wish to look for the question mark. That should help you figure it out.
Thomas Heyward Jr
December 20th, 2012
10:39 am
yea yea.
So Pope Grover I of Norquist and his henchman Sir Fartalot Boehnor will raise taxes and a court jestor has a cow.
.
Only crickets will be heard when the Prince of Darkness signs off on Medicaire/SS cuts.
.
Somebody has to pay for the wildly successful TARP program ……in this…………………………..”winter of recovery” part 3.
.
lol
Will
December 20th, 2012
10:40 am
taxes must be raise to support our spending
David Granger
December 20th, 2012
10:43 am
I wouldn’t want to be John Boehner either, Jay. He just proposed the same exact deal that Harry Reid proposed a couple of years ago, and the President turned it down flat.
citizen
December 20th, 2012
10:44 am
I’m not sure the votes are there today but I also think that if we go over the cliff, we can start with a new slate after the first of the year and maybe get more spending cuts that are called for in Plan B.
bill arp
December 20th, 2012
10:45 am
I’m thinking the first thing that needs to be agreed upon, is what defines ‘poor’, ‘middle class’, or ‘rich’ in monetary terms…Then, go from there.
I think the President has a pretty good offer from the Speaker, he should take it while he can..
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
10:45 am
No, what?
I’m not an English major but usually when someone re-states your premise and follows it with their own statement of “no” it means your premise is faulty.
I know it’s a conservative game to shovel out the crazy so fast you think the lack of a detailed rebuttal means you’re correct. Unfortunately reality doesn’t reward you for rapid fire crazy or the unwarranted assumption you are always correct unless proven otherwise by evidence you personally deem acceptable.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
10:50 am
I’m thinking the first thing that needs to be agreed upon, is what defines ‘poor’, ‘middle class’, or ‘rich’ in monetary terms…
why, pray tell, do conservatives (mostly the slimy online types, mind you, although it seeps into the polite discourse sometimes, too) seem obsessed with defining what a term like “rich” means?
Who gives a flying f###? This is NOT, despite what your Galtian overlords bray 24/7, about “punishing” anyone for success. If we could go another year without collecting the kind of tip-money we’re talking about via this modest income tax increase on them, I absolutely would not give a happy monkey-crap.
They are going to be fat and happy pre- and post- ANY Grand Bargain we reach.
I care about the collective dignity and health of my fellow citizens, first and foremost, in these deals. I all who wish to be back at work, back at work. That takes priority, not some a-hole’s notion about what kind of “debt crisis” relief we’re going to doctor up.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
10:51 am
I WISH all who want to be back at work, back at work. I meant. Stupid fat fingers.
barking frog
December 20th, 2012
10:52 am
Aquagirl
I’m not an English major but usually when someone re-states your premise and follows it with their own statement of “no” it means your premise is faulty.
I know it’s a conservative game to shovel out the crazy so fast you think the lack of a detailed rebuttal means you’re correct. Unfortunately reality doesn’t reward you for rapid fire crazy or the unwarranted assumption you are always correct unless proven otherwise by evidence you personally deem acceptable.
……………………………………………………………………………..
so that’s what no means…
Erwin's cat
December 20th, 2012
10:57 am
No means No!
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2012
10:58 am
Aw hell, sfd. Here you are talking about the failure of some here to accept the fact that a small tax hike back to earlier levels on some of the wealthiest will not hurt them in the least when we cannot even get that same group to admit that they need to accept a little responsibility for gun ownership by implementing laws designed to reduce deaths of little children resulting from the misuse of said guns. It’s much more important for them to try and divert with comments about how their sperm are sacred beings that must be protected at all costs from the ravages of the flushed condom, etc.
DownInAlbany
December 20th, 2012
10:58 am
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
10:45 am
No, what?
I’m not an English major but usually when someone re-states your premise and follows it with their own statement of “no” it means your premise is faulty.
I know it’s a conservative game to shovel out the crazy so fast you think the lack of a detailed rebuttal means you’re correct. Unfortunately reality doesn’t reward you for rapid fire crazy or the unwarranted assumption you are always correct unless proven otherwise by evidence you personally deem acceptable.
Most of the regulars absolutely delight in not simply pointing out that you are wrong! What, if I could impose upon your royal highness, was “rapid fire crazy or unwarranted assupmtion” in my post?
Just because you don’t agree with facts doesn’t make them false. Of course, you think that it’s cute…
Partisay
December 20th, 2012
10:59 am
Ronald Reagan
“He wouldn’t leave a small group dying like President Barry H. & Hillary R. did in Benghazi!”
_______________________________________________________________________________
Small group? You mean like the 241 US Marines YOU let die in those barracks in Beirut back in 1983?? A small group like that??
The Oddball
December 20th, 2012
10:59 am
I am astonished at all the posts accusing this President and that President of creating debt by spending money. The President of the United States cannot spend one dime that is not appropriated and given to him by the Congress. You can criticize the President for not asking for enough cuts (which Congressmen will oppose if it hurts their chances for re-election) or for asking for too much (see Reagan, Ronald, who never once proposed a balanced budget.) But in the end, responsibility rests with Congress.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 20th, 2012
10:59 am
B. Arp — “Uh, please tell me the poor people that I personally know that is hiring.”
Not a problem.
The poor people you know need groceries. That means they take their business to a grocery store.
They also might need gas to get to work. That means they take their business to a gas station.
They might need to fix a door latch or replace an air filter on their furnace, so that means they’d take some business to a hardware store.
Still with me, Bill?
Multiply all those poor people’s needs by several million, and you start to get an idea of how many JOBS those poor people are supporting. Someone’s got to produce the food, ship it to the grocery store, stock it and check customers out. Someone’s got to drill the oil out of the ground, refine and transport it, then sell it to customers at gas stations. And someone’s got to make those hammers, wrenches and air filters, ship them to the hardware store and sell them to the customers.
A rich person doesn’t necessarily consume more of those things than a poor person does — how many air filters can one person use, after all? But if you ADD UP all those poor people and the things they need and buy on a routine basis, you should start to recognize the amount of American jobs that are created and continue to exist because of poor people.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
10:59 am
Barack, Timmy and a friend meet to discuss the merits of the latest deal.
JamVet
December 20th, 2012
11:00 am
If the neocons have very, very little credibility on fiscal matters – and they do – they have nobody but themselves to blame.
But that is not what The Party of Personal Irresponsibility does.
These neer-do-well fools actually let the super wealthy and powerful convince them that the wealth was gonna trickle down to them, their families and communities.
How stupid was that???
fedup
December 20th, 2012
11:01 am
Looks like 76% has got Obama’s back. For 4 yrs he took Boehner’s sh*t (remember 1 term Prez) and now it is his turn to dish it out.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:03 am
You mean like the 241 US Marines YOU let die in those barracks in Beirut back in 1983?
Yeah, but those Grenadians defending the air base with shovels and rakes never knew what hit ‘em. You messed with Ronnie, and by god, some guy in sneakers halfway around the world was gonna pay.
Quwonetta
December 20th, 2012
11:04 am
“Overall, those polling numbers tell us that Boehner has very little backing among the American people…”
Sure Jay, he appointed himself Speaker of the House of Representatives and the GOP majority members appointed themselves to Congress.
As much as it irks you those folks are the voice of the American people saying they prefer divided government.
Erwin's cat
December 20th, 2012
11:04 am
the fact that a small tax hike back to earlier levels on some of the wealthiest will not hurt them in the least
No
massachusetts refugee
December 20th, 2012
11:04 am
this is all BS. the left is being every bit as stubborn aboot the spending cuts as the other side is aboot taxes. until both are addressed, seriously addressed, there will be stalemate and it all will be just kicked down the road. the spending cuts have to be real cuts – not just “slow the growth of new spending” – and it has to come from every program, “entitlements” and defense, and everything else.
GT
December 20th, 2012
11:08 am
Josef you had mentioned something about these two fine southern ladies crewing me up and spitting me out. Trust me I know the feel of the teeth and it is very violent even in NRA terminology.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:10 am
the left is being every bit as stubborn aboot the spending cuts as the other side is aboot taxes.
You Canadians can stay out of this. Be happy with your single payer health insurance and your improved life expectancies and lower violent crime rates and leave us be.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2012
11:11 am
“Overall, just 28 percent back cuts to Medicaid, just 34 percent back reductions in future growth of Social Security benefits and only 36 percent back raising the Medicare eligibility age to 67. ”
I’M SHOCKED!!!!!”
And in even more shocking news, 0% back paying for any of it while 99% back making somebody else pay for it.
How stupid do you have to be to spew this mindless drivel as if anybody should expect those poll results to be any different?
yuzeyurbrane
December 20th, 2012
11:15 am
There never was much of a chance for a deal. So fiscal cliff will happen but will turn out to be negative bump which will get us to new Congress with less Teabag Republicans. Hopefully, then there will be enough support for a fair deal.
RB from Gwinnett
December 20th, 2012
11:16 am
“These neer-do-well fools actually let the super wealthy and powerful convince them that the wealth was gonna trickle down to them, their families and communities.”
Says the guy who thinks he’s entitled to the benefits of an advanced society just because he gets up in the morning and makes idiotic comments on a blog all day. Jammie, the only thing “trickling” on you might be your mom’s leaky toilet from upstairs. You should probably ask her to fix that when she brings you your lunch.
GT
December 20th, 2012
11:16 am
DownInAlbany you are full of it, a rake amateur next to the Babe, Aquagirl, one of the true delights on this blog. You cons love to be bubble boys, and when Aquagirl pops that manly bubble of your’s, you get a case of the tightass. Maybe stretch out a little, research you subject beyond the tobacco and gun lobby furnished material. Then my boy you will be a man that day and all on earth is yours.
bill arp
December 20th, 2012
11:17 am
I would consider those people to be ’supporting’, not ‘hiring’. I think that’s two different things, but that’s just me. Of course, I’m probably wrong.
As far as putting a number on what’s ‘rich’ or not came from the President, did it not? I didn’t realize he was a (R)..He’s the one who said someone making 450K/yr was rich and needed to pay more. I personally disagree with that, and think the ‘number’ should be more like the speaker says, 1,000,000.00/yr.
I still say, if this country is THIS divided, then maybe, it should be divided..literally. No, not going off the deep end like some would say, ‘oh, Civil War, huh’…No, not at all, those that want higher taxes and more government, go here, those that want less taxes and less government, go here..pretty simple, right?
Have a wonderful day.
UNCLE SAMANTHA
December 20th, 2012
11:17 am
The Oddball
December 20th, 2012
10:59 am
I am astonished at all the posts accusing this President and that President of creating debt by spending money. The President of the United States cannot spend one dime that is not appropriated and given to him by the Congress. You can criticize the President for not asking for enough cuts (which Congressmen will oppose if it hurts their chances for re-election) or for asking for too much (see Reagan, Ronald, who never once proposed a balanced budget.) But in the end, responsibility rests with Congress.
========================================================================
CORRECT
AND THE PELOSI CONGRESS WHERE DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED BOTH CHAMBERS FROM 2007-2010 WERE THE WORST SPENDERS IN HISTORY
$5 TRILLION IN DEBT
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:21 am
How stupid do you have to be to spew this mindless drivel
In RB-land, asking American citizens about how they should be governed and reporting those results is “mindless drivel.” Got it.
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
11:21 am
What, if I could impose upon your royal highness, was “rapid fire crazy or unwarranted assupmtion” in my post?
The entire thing is an unwarranted assumption. As I said, it’s a con thing to make statements (usually cribbed from elsewhere) and then act like they’re correct just because you spoke the magic words. It’s up to everyone else to prove them wrong, and unless the con personally accepts the argument they’ll continue waltzing about like the Emperor with no clothes.
This is how we get to hear crap like “Owl Gore uses a plane, therefore global warming is a conspiracy” “the 47% are leeches” or “Evolution is a lie from the pits of hell.” None of these have the slightest basis in reality and completely lack any supporting evidence. That doesn’t stop them from being accepted as conservative canon.
There’s a reason the conservative/Republican demographic looks like Grover Norquist—white men have skated on their ability to blat out anything unchallenged and expect people to adjust to it as fact. When reality runs over your blatting, there’s generally wailing and gnashing of teeth. Just ask John Boehner.
It’s a free country and you’re welcome to burp out statements like “increasing taxes on the sacred job producers would only fund the country for 8 days” but sadly enough for you, people are now–gasp!—expecting you to support your point if you want them to line up on your side. Those 47%ers, wimmenfolk, and assorted undesirables will actually kick you to the curb otherwise. Oh, the nerve! How uppity! By questioning your statement I automatically qualify for a snotty “your highness!” And taxpayer gets a snotty “no, what?” Well boo-hoo for you.
I know, it’s gotta be a big shock, but you can either adjust to this reality or join the dinosaurs. And frankly my dear, I don’t care which course you choose.
DownInAlbany
December 20th, 2012
11:22 am
GT
December 20th, 2012
11:16 am
DownInAlbany you are full of it, a rake amateur next to the Babe, Aquagirl,
I’ll take that as a compliment, considering the source!
one of the true delights on this blog.
Not meant to be an true statement
You cons love to be bubble boys, and when Aquagirl pops that manly bubble of your’s, you get a case of the tightass. Maybe stretch out a little, research you subject beyond the tobacco and gun lobby furnished material. Then my boy you will be a man that day and all on earth is yours.
Post dissenting facts and have your manhood questioned! And, you call me, a boy!
Sheeesh
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:22 am
Seriously, RB, would a “One dollar = one vote” arrangement be more to your liking, for electing officials and establishing public policy?
Jay
December 20th, 2012
11:22 am
Hi folks:
Unless things change — which they often do given the news cycle — I’ll be on CNN at 1:30 to talk about the gun safety/drunk driving model.
alittlecommonsense
December 20th, 2012
11:22 am
“You mean like the 241 US Marines YOU let die in those barracks in Beirut back in 1983?”
Stupidest post of the day so far. If I have to explain to you why this is different, you aren’t smart enough to get it anyway.
Politically Speaking
December 20th, 2012
11:23 am
I hate to sound naive, but why are some government expenditures called “entitlements” while others are not? Who decides these things? In my mind, providing for the poor and the elderly are just as necessary as spending billions in defense of foreign governments, possibly even more so. Why can’t we cut our defense budget? Do we really need sailors, soldiers and marines stationed all over the globe? Our military is more than capable of defeating that of any other nation on Earth, so why do we need to spend more on it? If I had to choose between American children starving or going without proper medical care and a few hundred thousand soldiers defending the monarch of some middle eastern country, I would choose to spend money on the American kids.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:24 am
I’ll be on CNN at 1:30 to talk about the gun safety/drunk driving model.
Dude, three words, based on your otherwise more-than-credible Maddow appearance:
Remember. To. Smile.
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
11:26 am
Remember. To. Smile.
I thought the three magic words were: Lighten. Up. Francis.
barking frog
December 20th, 2012
11:26 am
Morning Jay is off and running !!!!!!
Doggone/GA
December 20th, 2012
11:27 am
“I would consider those people to be ’supporting’, not ‘hiring’. I think that’s two different things, but that’s just me. Of course, I’m probably wrong”
“It is not the employer who pays the wages. Employers only handle the money. It is the customer who pays the wages.” Henry Ford
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/h/henry_ford.html#2xU0FbmOGtLmR04p.99
Jackie
December 20th, 2012
11:28 am
Words like “entitlements” are used by the so-called conservatives as they have been polled and determined to be talking points in think tanks.
The question has been, how can it be an entitlement when you pay for it??????
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
11:29 am
If I have to explain to you why this is different, you aren’t smart enough to get it anyway.
Translation: IOKIYAR
Scooter
December 20th, 2012
11:29 am
Somehow Boehner needs to get the democrats to display their party’s unwillingness to cut any social programs. It’s always tax increases first and spending cuts later with Democrats, except spending grows and cuts never materialize.
Oh yeah, and color me shocked that 74% of the people want others taxes to go up so they can continue receiving the benefits therefrom.
DownInAlbany
December 20th, 2012
11:29 am
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
11:21 am
What, if I could impose upon your royal highness, was “rapid fire crazy or unwarranted assupmtion” in my post?
The entire thing is an unwarranted assumption. As I said, it’s a con thing to make statements (usually cribbed from elsewhere) and then act like they’re correct just because you spoke the magic words. It’s up to everyone else to prove them wrong, and unless the con personally accepts the argument they’ll continue waltzing about like the Emperor with no clothes.
This is how we get to hear crap like “Owl Gore uses a plane, therefore global warming is a conspiracy” “the 47% are leeches” or “Evolution is a lie from the pits of hell.” None of these have the slightest basis in reality and completely lack any supporting evidence. That doesn’t stop them from being accepted as conservative canon.
There’s a reason the conservative/Republican demographic looks like Grover Norquist—white men have skated on their ability to blat out anything unchallenged and expect people to adjust to it as fact. When reality runs over your blatting, there’s generally wailing and gnashing of teeth. Just ask John Boehner.
It’s a free country and you’re welcome to burp out statements like “increasing taxes on the sacred job producers would only fund the country for 8 days” but sadly enough for you, people are now–gasp!—expecting you to support your point if you want them to line up on your side. Those 47%ers, wimmenfolk, and assorted undesirables will actually kick you to the curb otherwise. Oh, the nerve! How uppity! By questioning your statement I automatically qualify for a snotty “your highness!” And taxpayer gets a snotty “no, what?” Well boo-hoo for you.
I know, it’s gotta be a big shock, but you can either adjust to this reality or join the dinosaurs. And frankly my dear, I don’t care which course you choose.
Such a diatribe over the fact that I dare mention the fact that “taxing the rich” accomplishes next to nothing…other than giving the libs a notch in their belt.
Regnad Kcin
December 20th, 2012
11:30 am
“If I have to explain to you why this is different, you aren’t smart enough to get it anyway.”
This means: “because SHUT UP! That’s why!”
Joetavious
December 20th, 2012
11:32 am
“I’ll be on CNN at 1:30 to talk about the gun safety/drunk driving model.”
I’d love to catch your lecture Jay but I’ll be rearranging my sock drawer @ that hour.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:32 am
There’s a reason the conservative/Republican demographic looks like Grover Norquist—white men have skated on their ability to blat out anything unchallenged and expect people to adjust to it as fact. When reality runs over your blatting, there’s generally wailing and gnashing of teeth.
See also:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Mansplain
healthy dose of ^^that involved.
indigo
December 20th, 2012
11:33 am
Where can I get that daily free shyte Doom and others here keep talking about?
Why are they keeping it’s location a secret?
straitroad
December 20th, 2012
11:33 am
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2012
9:22 am
I mean until we only spend about 95% of actual revenues.
Jackie
December 20th, 2012
11:33 am
It appears that President Reagan was warned not to put the Marines in the barracks in Beirut by his own Defense Secretary, Caspar Weinberger, because they position could not be defended.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/07/1138116/-The-President-Was-Warned-Security-Was-Lacking-And-Did-Nothing#
ByteMe - Got ilk?
December 20th, 2012
11:34 am
Remember. To. Smile.
I’d recommend legal “speed”. Anyone got a couple of diet pills for Jay?
Will you at least be there with the interviewer or will you have to suffer with the ear bud and worrying about the noises in your head?
Joe Hussein Mama
December 20th, 2012
11:35 am
taintgotnocommonsenseanyhow — “Stupidest post of the day so far. If I have to explain to you why this is different, you aren’t smart enough to get it anyway.”
Tell you what. You can explain it to me.
A friend of mine died in that bombing, and I’m sure his parents would appreciate the clarification that only you can give on the topic.
You have the floor.
straitroad
December 20th, 2012
11:35 am
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:29 am
Do you agree with aquagirl’s comment about “white men”?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
11:36 am
Gas is below $3.00 a gallon?
It’s Obama’s fault??
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
December 20th, 2012
11:37 am
I’m with Indigo, it seems the only people talking about getting free stuff from Obama are those who didn’t vote for him.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
11:38 am
Gas is below $3.00 a gallon?
That has to be wrong.
I was assured on this very forum by two different sources that gasoline would be $6 a gallon by election day.
DannyX
December 20th, 2012
11:38 am
“Gas is below $3.00 a gallon?”
3rd quarter GDP revised up, now at 3.1%, Obama’s fault.
BENGHAZI
indigo
December 20th, 2012
11:38 am
alittlecommonsense – 11:22
It’s different because being Republican means never having to say you’re sorry.
Right, sporty?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:38 am
Do you agree with aquagirl’s comment about “white men”?
No, she’s entirely too charitable.
ByteMe - Got ilk?
December 20th, 2012
11:39 am
it seems the only people talking about getting free stuff from Obama are those who didn’t vote for him.
That’s ’cause the rest of us got the free stuff! Envy!!
Partisay
December 20th, 2012
11:39 am
alittlecommonsense – “Stupidest post of the day so far. If I have to explain to you why this is different, you aren’t smart enough to get it anyway”
_________________________________________________________________________________
Oh really? Does this sound familiar??
“Shortly after the barracks bombing, President Ronald Reagan appointed a military fact-finding committee headed by retired Admiral Robert L. J. Long to investigate the bombing. The commission’s report found senior military officials responsible for security lapses and blamed the military chain of command for the disaster. It suggested that there might have been many fewer deaths if the barracks guards had carried loaded weapons and a barrier more substantial than the barbed wire the bomber drove over easily.”
Joe Hussein Mama
December 20th, 2012
11:40 am
F. McCool — “Gas is below $3.00 a gallon?”
I saw $2.99 at two QTs on the way to work this morning.
Racetrac had $3.05, but maybe their sign-tweaker employee hadn’t gotten around to fixing that yet this morning.
Jackie
December 20th, 2012
11:40 am
“Free stuff” is a phrase coined by the so-called conservatives at one of their think tanks with the session led by the likes of Frank Luntz.
Soothsayer
December 20th, 2012
11:40 am
Jay, do you mind I tell people I knew you when you were still a “little people?”
Soothsayer
December 20th, 2012
11:41 am
If you haven’t been outside today, don’t. It’s really ugly out there and getting colder.
getalife
December 20th, 2012
11:42 am
If I went on cnn, I would tell the dems to take cutting SS off the table.
straitroad
December 20th, 2012
11:42 am
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:38 am
Sarcasm only prevents rational discussion. It accomplishes nothing.
barking frog
December 20th, 2012
11:43 am
Jay,
Andy Rooney’s spot remains unfilled !
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
11:48 am
Sarcasm only prevents rational discussion. It accomplishes nothing.
Not intended to be a factual statement.
Politically Speaking
December 20th, 2012
11:48 am
Do you agree with aquagirl’s comment about “white men”?
No, I don’t! It sounds very racist to me, but what do I know? I’m only a white man (and a registered Democrat) who thinks racism is a true sign of ignorance. The only race I recognize is the HUMAN race!
barking frog
December 20th, 2012
11:48 am
straitroad,
Sarcasm only prevents rational discussion. It accomplishes nothing.
…………………………………………………..
nothing simply is and requires no accomplishing. sarcasm highlights
irrational thoughts and actions.
GT
December 20th, 2012
11:48 am
DownInAlbany we once heard description of the Mormon Church being a cult religion and it was a weight on the national political chances of any candidate that ran under its influence. In some last minute adjusting Billy Graham came out taking the Mormon Church off the cult list in some gesture hoping the American public would buy and see Mitt Romney as not weird and one of us.
One of the things this election pointed out to the people watching is the American voter is not as foolish as the right would have us think. I find Grover Norquist to be another one of these cult types that maybe Billy needs to dedemonize in hopes we don’t see the weirdness that crowds his image. The little misdirection Grover thinks so cute of taking a shot at a candidate and then deflecting the criticism to the candidate’s constituency who has not made a peep but are suddenly responsible for Grover’s actions and words, since he doesn’t want the heat himself. He gets involved and puts on that stupid act when the world comes after him. A troll under the bridge not unlike the NRA that want to operate in the dark, undetected. There are so many of these weirdoes in the Republican dark wings working the levers. Darkness is not democracy it is anything but.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:49 am
Sarcasm only prevents rational discussion. It accomplishes nothing.
Are you a white guy like me, or do I need to speak jive?
if the former–I really wasn’t being terribly sarcastic. She may have gone literally “far enough” for my tastes, but I think the white-guy’s hard wiring to fall back on a paternalistic brand of misogyny plays a role in the phenomenon she described, so I thought it worth adding to the mix.
barking frog
December 20th, 2012
11:51 am
GT
dedemonize…catchy word..i like it.
straitroad
December 20th, 2012
11:52 am
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:49 am
How do you think this “hard wiring” originated? For what reason?
alittlecommonsense
December 20th, 2012
11:56 am
Ok – to those who stepped forward admitting they need explanation -
First, a barracks full of Marines typically doesn’t need protection. Marines go in harm’s way. We are the protection.
Second, it was an incident that happened in a matter of seconds. Not a lot of warning to react to.
I could keep going, but really aren’t those two reasons enough?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
11:56 am
How do you think this “hard wiring” originated? For what reason?
Species survival, one imagines.
Og ANGRY when other man enter CAVE and steal FOOD!
Og ANGRIER when woman complicate Og’s life with QUESTIONS about why man steal FOOD!
But we have to adapt to continue surviving. There’s always going to be some left in the primordial soup while others crawl on dry land, so to speak.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
11:59 am
… but really aren’t those two reasons enough?
I’m sure that you believe they are.
Regnad Kcin
December 20th, 2012
12:00 pm
“How do you think this “hard wiring” originated? For what reason?”
A highly successful evolutionary adaptation to a world that no longer exists.
getalife
December 20th, 2012
12:02 pm
The Seniors are freaking out about the dems putting SS on the table so I told them to throw catfood on their reps.
cons are on SS so I will tell them to do the same.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 20th, 2012
12:03 pm
notevengotthefirstBITofcommonsense — “Ok – to those who stepped forward admitting they need explanation -”
I didn’t “admit” anything. I asked for *your* explanation.
“First, a barracks full of Marines typically doesn’t need protection.”
Survey says — BZZZT!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_Tactical_Vest
“Marines go in harm’s way. We are the protection.”
Boot camp rah-rah and bulldada. I didn’t think you were serious anyway.
“Second, it was an incident that happened in a matter of seconds. Not a lot of warning to react to.”
Denied.
At around 6:20 a.m., a yellow Mercedes-Benz truck drove to Beirut International Airport, where the 1st Battalion 8th Marines under the 2nd Marine Division had set up its local headquarters. The truck was not the water truck they had been expecting, but a hijacked truck carrying explosives. The truck turned onto an access road leading to the compound and circled a parking lot. The driver then accelerated and crashed through a barbed wire fence around the parking lot, passed between two sentry posts, crashed through a gate and drove toward the lobby of the marine headquarters. The sentries at the gate were operating under rules of engagement which made it very difficult to respond quickly to the truck. Sentries were ordered to keep their weapons at condition four (no magazine inserted and no rounds in the chamber). By the time the two sentries were able to engage, the truck was already heading towards the building’s entry way, armed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_barracks_bombing#The_bombings
“I could keep going, but really aren’t those two reasons enough?”
No. They’re not. You should keep going.
Doggone/GA
December 20th, 2012
12:04 pm
“but I think the white-guy’s hard wiring to fall back on a paternalistic brand of misogyny ”
that “hard wiring” doesn’t exist. It’s learned behavior. In humans there are really very few “hard wired” responses…in fact, I’ve read that the only fear (for instance) that a baby is born with is a fear of falling.
Aquagirl
December 20th, 2012
12:04 pm
It sounds very racist to me, but what do I know? I’m only a white man (and a registered Democrat) who thinks racism is a true sign of ignorance. The only race I recognize is the HUMAN race!
Unfortunately our society doesn’t only recognize the human race. There are proven instances where “white” names provide an advantage on a job resume, even when everything else is exactly the same.
It’s hard to hear that and not get defensive (I’m white too), but I don’t point out these things to slam anyone. I do slam people who think racism is non-existent and those black people are just lazy and need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. If you fail to acknowledge the existence of racism due to your personal discomfort, or you think you’re excused by saying a couple of stock phrases about how we’re all human and I’m so cool with that, you’re part of the problem.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
December 20th, 2012
12:04 pm
Yesterday, the House speaker made a curt, 52-second public statement regarding fiscal-cliff negotiations and then turned and left the room, unwilling to take a question.
He is getting his tail kicked. And he is stuck between compromise and the loony Tea Party crowd in his own party.
Partisay
December 20th, 2012
12:04 pm
“First, a barracks full of Marines typically doesn’t need protection. Marines go in harm’s way. We are the protection.
Easily, the dumbest post of the day….uh…make that month.
Who knew?
December 20th, 2012
12:05 pm
“Are you a white guy like me, or do I need to speak jive?”
Oh stewardess I speak jive….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXSLcYQHqFQ
DownInAlbany
December 20th, 2012
12:08 pm
GT
December 20th, 2012
11:48 am
I’ll be honest with you, up until a couple of weeks ago, I’d never heard of Norquist. I saw him constantly demonized on here and had to google his name to understand who he is.
Let’s face it, there are extremists on both sides of the aisle. But, since you brought religion into play. Dems supposedly saw through Rev Graham’s actions, but, had no problem at all with Obama’s relationship with Rev. “GD America” Wright.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
12:09 pm
…but, had no problem at all with Obama’s relationship with Rev. “GD America” Wright.
There’s your sign.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
12:10 pm
that “hard wiring” doesn’t exist.
There goes the next decade’s worth of excuses. Damn you, woman.
DownInAlbany
December 20th, 2012
12:11 pm
Kamchak, are my eyes deceiving me? Do we agree?
Joe Hussein Mama
December 20th, 2012
12:12 pm
DIA — Let’s face it, there are extremists on both sides of the aisle. But, since you brought religion into play. Dems supposedly saw through Rev Graham’s actions, but, had no problem at all with Obama’s relationship with Rev. “GD America” Wright.”
That’s a fair point, but consider this — which side more often makes clergy their ‘point men’ in their arguments, and which side more often invokes religious reasons or justifications for the public policies they’re trying to drive?
Frankly, I think you’d be hard-pressed to present an example of Rev. Wright being in the national eye, pressing for some sort of public policy BEFORE the news of his sermons came out during the 2008 primaries.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
12:12 pm
Kamchak, are my eyes deceiving me?
Yes, they are.
Do we agree?
No, we do not.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 20th, 2012
12:12 pm
Sooth@11:41 am
If you haven’t been outside today, don’t. It’s really ugly out there and getting colder.
———————————————————-
Look at weather.com and check out the weather headed toward Pittsburgh (I am supposed to fly out Saturday) ought to be interesting LOL
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2012
12:14 pm
There’s your sign.
A sign that likely all he knows about Wright and his relationship with Obama is that the magic words “God”, “Damn,” and “America” appeared in order one time in a sermon in his church.
I’m really tired of trying to set foolish people straight on that, but I will say this: Downinalbany, you’re wrong on several levels, and if you were to learn something about that sermon, and that minister, and that church, that wasn’t spoon fed to you by conservative “news” outlets, you’d know as much.
Rightwing Troll
December 20th, 2012
12:19 pm
“I think Boehner should just roll over and give O’bozo and his euro-socialist cluster everything they want.
RIP USA 1776-2012″
And I think you and your ilks should stop with your lies and histrionics…
Joe Hussein Mama
December 20th, 2012
12:21 pm
R. W. Troll — “And I think you and your ilks should stop with your lies and histrionics…”
Fishy’s all about climbing up on the cross for drama, but when he gets up there and people throw garbage and rotting vegetables at him, he gets all pizzy and bitchy because nobody appreciates his performance.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 20th, 2012
12:23 pm
A sign that likely all he knows about Wright and his relationship with Obama is that the magic words “God”, “Damn,” and “America” appeared in order one time in a sermon in his church.
Abso-freakin’-lutely.
DannyX
December 20th, 2012
12:25 pm
First, a barracks full of Marines typically doesn’t need protection. Marines go in harm’s way. We are the protection.
Easily, the dumbest post of the day….uh…make that month.
——————————————
I second that nomination.