Blago Impeached
January 9th, 2009, 12:23 PM EST
Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois was impeached by the Illinois House for abuses of power, accused of trying to autioning off Barack Obama’s Senate seat. The vote was 114 yes, 1 no, 1 not present.
Rep. Milt Patterson (D-Chicago) was the lone vote against impeaching the governor. Patterson, from Chicago’s Southwest Side, said after the roll call that he didn’t feel it was his job to vote to impeach the governor. He declined comment on whether he approved of the job Blagojevich is doing.
Impeachment, by the way, does not mean guilt. Impeachment is an accusation of wrongdoing. To be considered guilty, Blagojevich will need to be convicted by the Illinois Senate, which will need 40 votes to do so and remove him from office.
Does anyone know when the State Senate is going to vote?
January 9th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Not everyone is brave enough to wear a merkin on their head. I, for one, salute you Governor Blagojevich.
January 9th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
What’s a merkin?
January 9th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
That IS a bushy look.
Wiki knows all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkin
Isn’t that the Hanratty look with a little more product?
January 9th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
That IS a bushy look.
Wiki knows all, my link went to “moderation”.
Isn’t that the Hanratty look with a little more product?
January 9th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Inocent until proven guilty. They all do [things] for each other for contributions ! The prosecuter wants 3 more months to charge him, THAT is troubling!
Throw him out anyway, I don’t like his HAIR !!!!!!
January 9th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Anything to get the cameras off of Bernie Madoff, who is still not in jail.
Look over here! Look over here!
January 9th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Did you see his news conference? UN-BELIEVABLE!!!!!
Where did this guy come from? Arrogant SOB!!!!! Heck, I don’t even want to visit Chicago anymore with guys like this running around there.
This guy is UN-BELIEVEABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The sooner he goes the better. For everyong.
January 9th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
This, Sarah Palin, Joe Plumber, anything to keep our eyes off Gaza.
January 9th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Thanks, 4MOREYEARS,
That’s ONE picture I REALLY didn’t need to see!
January 9th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Come on El Cid, this is a ligitimate story. And, besides, this man is a creep and must go.
January 9th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Its innocent until proven guilty, unless your ass got caught on tape. Maybe he can pull a clinton and ask the courts to define “sale to the highest bidder”
January 9th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
“Heck, I don’t even want to visit Chicago anymore with guys like this running around there. ”
All I can say is, thank God!
January 9th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Hey come on TDRO. I would come to Chicago to visit you.
January 9th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Maybe Blago can join Joe the plumber as a war correspondent. Ouestion is: Which one is a bigger bull s******?
January 9th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
About time and a few days to late impeaching Blago the thug. He is a disgrace to high office. Made the goverment of his a circus. Lying to the media and using the media. Blago is in total denial as well.
January 9th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
The government is already a circus. He just put himself in the center ring.
January 9th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
That,s a damn good 1 Placefield.
January 9th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Watch FREE full-length Movies, TV Shows, Music (over 6 million digital quality tracks), Unlimited Games, and FREE College Educations (Stanford, Oxford, Notre Dame and more) @ InternetSurfShack.com
January 9th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Jared to answer your question it goes to the senate on Monday. Not soon enough in my opinion.
January 10th, 2009 at 12:05 am
Another good friend and associate of the Teflon Messiah’s proves to be a criminal creep…
BTW, why hasn’t anyone impeached NY Governor Patterson for considering the personal political benefits of appointing Ms. Kennedy to the NY senate seat vacated by Senator Clinton? Seems like the same thing to me…
January 10th, 2009 at 1:31 am
Another good friend and associate of the Teflon Messiah’s proves to be a criminal creep…
Posted by Kregg
Associate yes, they are both active politians from the same state, but friends? I had not heard that one before. Where do you get your info.
January 10th, 2009 at 10:34 am
SUSAN,
Can you give “joe” a break? Geez. It’s like you have a personal vendetta against the guy or something.
January 10th, 2009 at 10:52 am
No break for Joe. Craig,Blago,Kennedy,Palin have 1 thing in common. Denial and lime light As long as these people keep seeking media attention,the more they look like buffoons. Every1 of them should do the oppsite. Be quite and lay low.
January 10th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Much agreed on the politician types (or wanna be politician types in the case of Kennedy).
January 10th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Another good friend and associate of the Teflon Messiah’s proves to be a criminal creep…
Posted by Kregg
Place said: Associate yes, they are both active politians from the same state, but friends? I had not heard that one before. Where do you get your info.
Place,
I will give you that and retract “friend” but the points the same. Mr. T slip slides through a cesspool of friends and associates who should be in jail yet we are to believe he knows nothing about their character and was “just in the neighborhood” and has none of their beliefs, traits, intentions, or history. Convicted felon Rezko, Nation of Islam sympathizer Rev. Wright, $100,000,000 Fannie Mae beneficiary Raines, shadowy Arab financier whats-iz-name, Domestic Terrorist Ayres, – and the list goes on and on and on. If the truisms “you are known by the company you keep”, and “when you lie down with dogs you get up with their fleas” are in fact true then Mr. O can be known by the sleazy and corrupt company he keeps – and by the fleas of those dogs with whom he “lain”.
I still maintain that this nation has no idea who Barack Obama really is and, since the press did not do its job digging into Obama’s past so we could SEE who he was, we have basically bought a pig in a poke.
January 10th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Kregg,
Obama has nothing to do with Convicted felon Rezko, that is not well known and above board.
Rev. Wright, is no different than the right wing preachers, As for the Nation of Islam sympathizer, and Ayres, the Bushs have done a lot of business with the bin Ladin family, and the Saudis who actually SUPPORT terrorism. Obama has no real connection to Raines, but Bush said in 2002, he wanted to get people with bad credit, homes, and the list goes on and on and on.
Actually, “you are known by the company you keep”, and “when you lie down with dogs you get up with their fleas” is what we have been saying about the Bush administration for years, between the mercenaries, the war profiteers, the chickenhawks, the phony preachers, the bin ladins, Prince Bandar Bush……Bush/Cheney can be known by the sleazy and corrupt company they keep – and by the fleas of those dogs with whom they “lain”.
The nation bought a pig in a poke when the put in a buffoon who ran on “No nation building” while he and his PNAC cronies were planning MASSIVE nation building in Iraq, a transfer of wealth from the US treasury to their cronies.
January 10th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
Hang in there Blago ! your not as cazy as john wayne gacy but people will always make that silly comparison as if you tried to top the list
January 11th, 2009 at 12:08 am
OLD LEFTY,
HUH??? Obama had nothing to do with Rezko??? You’re outta your mind if you think it was just coincidence Rezko and Obama bought adjacent lots (Obama’s thousands less than market value) and that Rezko then sold Obama a portion of his lot, thereby making it unbuildable…you don’t see the obvious fraud connection there?
And saying Wright is similar to right wing preachers doesn’t excuse Obama from 1. sitting in his pews for 20 years, 2. calling Wright his “spiritual mentor”, and 3. only distancing himself from Wright when it was politically convenient.
So, in keeping with your argument, and most arguments you pose, Obama is justified by his actions because someone else has done something similar, or worse in your opinion?
And another thing, to somehow imply that Bush/Cheney were planning on invading Iraq even before they took office is ludicrous. You have to proof of such, other than a PNAC manifesto that, by the way, makes no mention AT ALL of Iraq. Get your head out of the conspiracy cloud, and meet the rest of us down here on planet reality.
January 11th, 2009 at 7:35 am
OLD.
Maybe the term “fraud” was a bit out of line…but there’s no denying (as admitted by Obama himself), the lack of judgement in engaging in business transactions with a person under investigation (and subsequent conviction) for dubious connections to the Blago administration.
January 11th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Jared (I) – Texas,
Obama purchased property from Rezko, so what? You like to say, “Obama is justified by his actions because someone else has done something similar, or worse in your opinion?”
What I am saying is that when you ignore more major dealings, how can you pick on the minor things? If you have more information implicating Obama in something more you better get it to the Prosecutor.
As for Wright, I think Obama distanced himself when Wright seemed to deliberately keep stirring the pot.( I think because his feelings were hurt that Obama said he was from the old days.)
I have no problem with Obama sitting in his church for 20 years. To me,
#1) Wright’s rants were about 1% of his sermons.
#2) Wright perceives the government being immoral in it’s treatment of the people, while the right wing preachers see the people as being immoral and needing to be controlled by the government.
#3) I’m far more worried about those like, Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer who denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, yet he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.
Re PNAC:
Of course they wanted to invade Iraq before 2000. Their writings, and desire to invade was leaked in the 90s. Bush Sr. called Cheney and Wolofowitz “the crazies in the administration”. (funny how Bush Sr did NOT speak at the 2004 Republican Convention) , Because got involved with a bad crowd?
Pp 14:
“Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
They wrote a letter to Bill Clinton in 1998, telling him to invade Iraq.
Richard Clark, Paul O’Neill , both said that’s ALL they talked about PRE 9/11. Woodward confirmed.
Lawrence Wilkerson said that Cheney became the running mate because Bush would be easily manipulated.
If you can say, “Get your head out of the conspiracy cloud, and meet the rest of us down here on planet reality.”……
I can say, Get YOUR head out of the sand, and join the rest us here in the “Reality based community”, who realize the American people have been the victims of the biggest bamboozlepalooza of our history.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:09 am
Lefty, there IS no justification for Obama’s criminal/terrorist associations and no amount of “GW did it” whitewash alter this fact.
Lefty: Obama has nothing to do with Convicted felon Rezko, that is not well known and above board.
Kregg: Sorry, friend, but this is a crock of MSM BS. Rezko benefited Obama financially under the table – which is illegal. That fact, being “well known” does not make it ok – morally or legally. Rezko is a convicted criminal and he is a friend and associate and mentor of Barack Obama, President-Elect. If Rezko was the same sort of friend and associate of GW you’d be staining your panty liners in apoplexy… ;-)
L: Rev. Wright, is no different than the right wing preachers, As for the Nation of Islam sympathizer,
K: “Rev.” Wright is a racist. Period. And, again, you would be screaming to high heavens if GW was associated with a white preacher to spewed the racial hatred this guy spews. We won’t even go into how the O man could attend church for 20 years and not hear this guy’s sermons… Must have spent all his time the lobby as a greeter – or all his campaign lying.
L: …and Ayres, the Bushs have done a lot of business with the bin Ladin family, and the Saudis who actually SUPPORT terrorism.
K: So? What has that got to do with the fact that the Teflon Messiah has a twenty year history of associating with crooks and terrorists? FYI, the bin Laden family does not condone or associate themselves with Osama’s actions. If I remember correctly, Ol’ Billy Clinton associated with them also.
L: Obama has no real connection to Raines,
K: Except that he hired him as his lead campaign consultant on finance. I’d call that a “close association” and a “real connection”, wouldn’t you? What constitutes “real connection” for you? Maybe a close encounter under the desk in the Oval Office involving cigars? I’d say a guy who advises you on one of the most important parts of your campaign – national finance – would have to be trusted and “real connected”, don’t you?
L: …but Bush said in 2002, he wanted to get people with bad credit, homes, and the list goes on and on and on.
K: Again, So? What has GW’s continuance of a Dem policy re; screwing with the credit market have to do with the Bamster’s long time association with a man who took the credit dumping ground “Fannie Mae” personally for $100,000,000?
L: Actually, “you are known by the company you keep”, and “when you lie down with dogs you get up with their fleas” is what we have been saying about the Bush administration for years, between the mercenaries, the war profiteers, the chickenhawks, the phony preachers, the bin ladins, Prince Bandar Bush……Bush/Cheney can be known by the sleazy and corrupt company they keep – and by the fleas of those dogs with whom they “lain”.
K: Again, ad nauseum, your moral code – if it is stunted at the level of “if Johnny did it its ok for ME to do it…” – needs to mature. Even if your opinion-long-but-fact-short view of Bush is less than positive it does not make Obama’s association with crooks and terrorists “OK”. Your game could be played clear back to George Washington – find a flaw in a prior guy and by that excuse your guy’s flaw. Doesn’t work that way. Mr. Obama’s associations – were he a Secret Service employee rather than president elect – would disallow his hiring as his own security guard. That ought to give even the Libs something to think about.
L: The nation bought a pig in a poke when the put in a buffoon who ran on “No nation building” while he and his PNAC cronies were planning MASSIVE nation building in Iraq, a transfer of wealth from the US treasury to their cronies.
K: Yet again – So? Please tell me how GW’s performance – whatEVER you think about it – excuses or justifies hiring a man to run the free world who has a twenty year history of associating and befriending and consulting and being mentored by a squadron of crooks and terrorists…
January 11th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Wow ! Going to war for oil profits and lying to the nation. That sounds like a crook. Hiring staff members that abused power the last 8 years. That sounds like a crook. Visits BOB JONES UNIV. that did not allow inter racial dating. Those actions alone debunk REV. WRIGHT. and Bush went to that school. Never refute Saltsmans remarks. Yes,the democrats have buffoons as well within the party. Just look at Stevens,Craig and few others stinking the headlines up as well. Mainly Palin !
January 11th, 2009 at 10:44 am
I’m sorry, Kregg, Obama’s association with Ayres is minor and less than that of Rebublicans.
Wright speaks ABOUT racism, I see no evidence that he IS a racist.
I will repeat from another post:
Wright perceives the government being immoral in it’s treatment of the people, while the right wing preachers see the people as being immoral and needing to be controlled by the government.
I’m far more worried about those like, Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer who denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, yet he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.
“Please tell me how GW’s performance – whatEVER you think about it excuses or justifies hiring a man to run the free world who has a twenty year history of associating and befriending and consulting and being mentored by a squadron of crooks and terrorists…”
That is only YOUR opinion and your wishful thinking.
I guess if you can justifiy the Bush/neo con kabal of Prescott Bush arming the Nazis, Neil Bush, and the savings and loan, Rumsfeld selling weapons to Sadaam, Bush Jr and the insider trading that Daddy called off the sec, business dealings with Shafig and Saleem bin Ladin…..the list goes on and on.
I guess if you speak of Obama as “being mentored by a squadron of crooks and terrorists…”, the same can be said of Bush/Cheney, 100 fold.
How can you critisize Obama, when he may be at a 0.5, and Bush/Cheney are at a 100?
January 11th, 2009 at 10:46 am
OLD
You’re constantly complaining about the wrongdoings of GWs administration, nitpicking virtually his every decision. I’ll readily admit, and have admitted, the Iraq war has been seriously mishandled and that the GW administration has not been the best admin in recent history…not by a long shot; however, using GW and his administration as justification for sweeping Obama’s associations under the rug is just plain ludicrous.
You don’t have a problem with Obama sitting in Wright’s church for 20 years because the anti-American sermons constituted approx. 1% of his entire career? Firstly, I’ll ask where you got your stats, so I can verify, and secondly, you forgot to mention that Wright had anti-American propaganda for sale in his church’s lobby (remember that although Schaeffer was equally as bad, he never was pastor of a church and was never mentioned as the “spiritual mentor” of a Presidential candidate).
And yet again, you try to downplay Obama’s involvement with Wright by saying “well, other President’s have done presumably worse, with presumably worse right-wingers.” I’m not talking about other president’s, I’m talking about Obama. His relationship with Wright goes A LOT deeper than you or he want to admit. You don’t call someone your “spiritual mentor” if you’re not very close to that person.
Back to Rezko: admittedly the land deal with Rezko was legit; however, how often can a politician have business transactions with persons under investigation for before an eyebrow gets raised? Doesn’t that show lack of judgement in your mind? If Obama has admitted poor judgement in this case, then surely you’d agree with him, instead of continuing to defend his actions here…
Now, on to PNAC: It’s obvious you’re not going to let this go as you see this manifesto as the basis for American invading Iraq…you are flat out wrong! Blame this one on bad intelligence, as has been admitted repeatedly by the GW admin. Also, the need for an American presence in the Middle East is just as viable as the need for an American presence in the Far East and Europe..we have extremely important interests in these regions that require securing (not owning, but providing security for) (oil, in particular-go ahead and let me hear your rant on this one…) who else is going to do it but the US? Not everything this admin has done is the result of your precious PNAC memo.
And now we’re supposed to hang our hats on Wilkerson’s opinion of Bush/Cheney? Yeah, I’ll get right on that…
The biggest “bamboozlepalooza” of our history…really? Carter’s economy…remember that one? Nixon’s Watergate…remember? Is it all coming back to you, now? Oh, that’s right…your arguments are always attached to a dollar amount.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Lefty,
You continue to ignore the point. WHATEVER you may think of Bush it does NOT justify hiring a man with known criminal/terrorist associations to run this country.
You continue to justify Obama through childish moral equivalency -”if Bush did it then its ok for Obama to do it” but your own philosophy shoots you in the foot. You are EXCUSING Obama’s moral turpitude – and thereby admitting he IS morally corrupt – based on your opinion of his predecessor’s moral turpitude.
MY point was that – regardless of what you think about the last guy – it is dangerous to elect someone of such known criminal/terrorist connections to run this country precisely because we don’t know how deep those associations go. It is colossally stupid of us to elect a man who has not been thoroughly vetted…
January 11th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Groan…..
Cards said: Wow ! Going to war for oil profits and lying to the nation. That sounds like a crook.
Cards,
If you can prove we went “to war for oil profits…” then do so and I’ll join your efforts to indict and try GW. However, the fact that we haven’t taken a drop of Iraqi oil so could NOT be oil profiteering might be an inconvenient fact you’ll have to ignore.
If you want to indict GW for “lying” about Iraq’s WMDs then you’ll need several sheets of paper to include all his co-conspirators who preached the same line, among them, Prez Clinton, Candidate Kerry, the entire Senate, House, intelligence community, UN (15 separate resolutions condemning Sadaam), France, England, and just about every other credible government in the free world. Better sharpen your crayon… I can wait.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Jared (I) – Texas
“% of his entire career? Firstly, I’ll ask where you got your stats, so I can verify, and secondly, you forgot to mention that Wright had anti-American propaganda for sale in his church’s lobby (remember that although Schaeffer was equally as bad, he never was pastor of a church and was never mentioned as the “spiritual mentor” of a Presidential candidate).”
……………………………………..
#1) Members of his church,(black and white), say so. What is YOUR evidence that it is more than that?
I don’t see Wright being as Anti American, as ALL the right wing preachers who have national reach and Great power in the RNC.
Rezko is nothing, it’s done, again, if YOU have more evidence, get it to the DA.
The only REAL difference is, Obama ADMITS poor judgment.
Bush only blames others.
“Blame this one on bad intelligence, as has been admitted repeatedly by the GW admin.”
……………………..
Again, blame EVERYONE else!
Read the PNAC and and EVERY bit of evidence that this was the plan from the beginning.
There has not been ONE thing to refute it.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:23 am
OLD LEFTY,
So, someone gives racist speeches, but he’s not a racist. I know, probably 45 million Americans that would vehemently disagree with you on this one…(guess which American’s I’m talking about…)
January 11th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Kregg said,
“You continue to ignore the point. WHATEVER you may think of Bush it does NOT justify hiring a man with known criminal/terrorist associations to run this country.”
……………………………….
That is only a fantasy in Right Wing World.
The left wing counterparts to Limbaugh and those guys refer to to “the Bush Crime Family”
Calling someone crooks and terrorists doesn’t make it so.
I agree that no one had the guts to stand up to the war mongering, but they all signed on to weapons inspectors, not attack and invasion.
Remember, the weapons inspectors disagreed with Bush, and he kicked them out even as they were bulldozing Al Samoud missiles.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Jared (I) – Texas,
What did he say that was racist?
January 11th, 2009 at 11:31 am
OLD,
I don’t have to prove to you what % of his speeches are anti-american, as I didn’t bring up the debate point…however 1% is still too many.
Wow, so you have effectively lumped all right wing preachers into the anti-american category. That’s fine…I’ll start referring to all libs as the having the exact same social/political beliefs. Fair is fair, right?
Wow, over the edge as GW has admitted taking responsibility for the failure of the intelligence system…I bet you even threw a party for that one…
Not one thing to refute your conspiracy theory about the PNAC and it’s goals for world domination…hmmm how about they stated (in the post you previously quoted) – paraphrasing- “the need for American presence in the region trumps the toppling the Hussein regime”. That one small sentence indicates their recognition of the necessity of having American presence in the Gulf as more important than Iraq.
I will blame the parties responsible for the situation in Iraq. You still have yet to prove, at all, the PNAC manifesto was the blueprint for invading Iraq. All you have is your own personal bias against the GW administration and a document that’s more wishful thinking than anything.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:37 am
OLD
“US of KKK A”, US of White America”, “Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.”
to name a few…
January 11th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Jared:
Those aren’t racist statements.
Those statements are accusations of racism… big difference.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:44 am
“That’s fine…I’ll start referring to all libs as the having the exact same social/political beliefs. Fair is fair, right?”
……………………………
Wasn’t that the whole point of Newt Gingrich’s paper, Language: A Key Mechanism of Control?
PNAC did not say
“the need for American presence in the region trumps the toppling the Hussein regime”.
It says “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
Means Sadaam was just the excuse to get into Iraq, as Wolfowitz said,
“For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.”
I hate the Bush/Cheney regime because
I believe that they came to office with the intention of transferring as much of America’s wealth as possible into the hands of defense contractors such as Dick Cheney’s Halliburton and the oil companies that were his background and remain his so-called “base.”
Gotta go for a while.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Last thing,Jared (I) – Texas,
“US of KKK A”, US of White America”, “Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.”
……………………..
That is an accusation of racism, not racism itself.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Jared,right here in my state of KY preachers haved been known to say the n word from the pulpit. Saltsman,come on and Bush going to Bob Jones U before the 2000 election. The GOP is filled with race baiters Allen from VA. and his remarks. Kerry,Obama,Gore and Clinton all getting over 90% of the black vote. Rev Wright is right but his lay out of the message was wrong. Will the GOP reach out to black people? Nixon was the last GOP president that received a large ammount of black vote. Yes,Bush lied but to impeached him is a waste of time and their is proff he lied. No WMD,S ! His leadership has tarnish our standing in the world. Has led us in our nation into financial crisis as well. His staff having major leaks and other problems and total failure of denial. Kregg,what about the contractors? The only way the GOP is going to restore faith into the American people is for the party to reject Reaganism. Forget about values of the 50,s. This is 2009. The GOP is ran by the thinking of ex-dixiecrats that are anti-civil rights and a regional party of southerners that love waving the rebel flag. Yes i might be far reaching in my opinion,but i stand by it.
January 11th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Lefty, whatever you’re smokin’ for breakfast, its doing the job… ;-)
Lefty, in regards to Obama’s criminal/terrorist associations,said: “That is only a fantasy in Right Wing World. …calling someone crooks and terrorists doesn’t make it so.
Lefty,
So, you deny Obama’s associations with Rezko, Wright, Raynes, Ayres, ad infinitum? Hard to do since even the reluctant pro-Obama MSM have had to report these connections and admit the truth about his associates. Down here in the US when you are CONVICTED you are officially a CRIMINAL, and those who associate with you “have a relationship with a convicted criminal”. Don’t know how it works in “Aye” Land but I’d predict that its pretty much the same… ;-)
L: I agree that no one had the guts to stand up to the war mongering, but they all signed on to weapons inspectors, not attack and invasion.
K: Thats funny, then what were all those countries to invaded Iraq alongside us thinking? I don’t remember now how many countries invaded Iraq but its more than you can count on your built-in analog digital calculator… Me thinks they resolved to actually invade and NOT just “signed on to weapons inspectors, not attack and invasion”…
L: Remember, the weapons inspectors disagreed with Bush, and he kicked them out even as they were bulldozing Al Samoud missiles.
K: Since when to “weapons inspectors” decide when a nation goes to war? And, just what were those “Al Samoud missles” if not weapons-of-mass-destruction?
January 11th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Right on OLDLEFTY !!!!! On the backs of my ancestors. Stole land form ancestors that are Cherokee as well. I am doubled F$*KED reguareding that issue. Texas is 1 of the most racist states in this country. Byrd,s body torn into shreads in Texas. That segment is in the GOP.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Newsflash: Texas Racist appoints first black secretary of state. And, oh, also the second black secretary of state…
Cards said: Texas is 1 of the most racist states in this country. Byrd,s body torn into shreads in Texas. That segment is in the GOP.
Cards,
I don’t know how old you are so youth and poor education may partially excuse your ignorance but if you’ll look back at the history of this nation it is the Republican party that has brought about the emancipation of minorities to both high office AND private freedom from prejudice. I know its not popular to acknowledge this but if you seek truth its out there. It is the Dems who have sought to continually hold down blacks and other minorities so as to create a base for their professional grievance-mongers to shake down American society. Jesse, Al, and the other race-baiting twerps are the worst thing to ever happen to minorities in this country.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
54 KREGG and i remember how the dixiecrats fought tooth and nail againist the civil rights movement. I remember when Ike was the president and the Little Rock kids going to school due to intergrating schools. Any more history quizies? When JFK and LBJ embraced the civil rights movement and LBJ sign the voting rights bill the dixiecrats jump ship to the GOP and Reagan an ex dixiecrat with his his old fashion value message took control of the south which is the base of the GOP. ANYMORE LESSONS KREGG? Perhaps you are to young to remember the hangings,bombings,murders,beatings,race hate speaches and so forth. Being called names walking down the street for being some1 of color and denial to basics liberties. I remember Kregg or perhaps you are to young ?
January 11th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
I’m gonna score that round:
GO CARDS! 10
KREGG 3
January 11th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Thanks and congrats to your GATORS. You scored the most PFKAM.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Hey thanks. That game was fun. Props to LOUISVILLE yesterday. They seem to be getting better as the season goes on.
January 11th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
I love this team. Better than last years club. Better post play and the reslove to have different players step up in various games. IF THEY CAN JUST FINISHED STRONGER AND EVERY1 CLICK AT ONCE HAS MY MOUTH WATERING.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Cards said: “ANYMORE LESSONS KREGG? Perhaps you are too young to remember…
Cards,
I’m 53 so we are in the same history lesson – except I”m better looking.
From Wiki:
Civil Rights Act of 1875(18 Stat. 335) was United States federal law proposed by Republican Senator Charles Sumner and Republican Congressman Benjamin F. Butler in 1870. The act was passed by Congress in February, 1875 and signed by President Grant on March 1, 1875. The Act guaranteed that everyone, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, was entitled to the same treatment in “public accommodations” (i.e. inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement)
The goal of the 1957 Civil Rights Act was to ensure that all African Americans could exercise their right to vote. By 1957, only about 20% of African Americans had registered to vote. The Democratic Senate leader, Lyndon Baines Johnson, realized that the bill and its journey through Congress could tear apart his party made up of anti-civil rights and pro-civil rights members. Johnson sent the bill to the judiciary committee led by Senator James Eastland, an anti-civil rights senator from Mississippi. Eastland changed and altered the bill almost beyond recognition after the very public outburst by Senator Richard Russell from Georgia who claimed that it was an example of the Federal government wanting to impose its laws on states. Johnson sought recognition from the civil rights advocates for passing the bill while also receiving recognition from the mostly southern anti-civil rights Democrats for “killing the bill.”
The Federal Civil Righs act of 1964 – The bill was introduced by President John F. Kennedy in his civil rights speech of June 11, 1963,[1] in which he asked for legislation “giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public—hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments,” as well as “greater protection for the right to vote.”
He then sent a bill to Congress on June 19. Emulating the Civil Rights Act of 1875, Kennedy’s civil rights bill included provisions to ban discrimination in public accommodations, and to enable the U.S. Attorney General to join in lawsuits against state governments which operated segregated school systems, among other provisions. But it did not include a number of provisions deemed essential by civil rights leaders including protection against police brutality, ending discrimination in private employment, or granting the Justice Department power to initiate desegregation or job discrimination lawsuits.[2]
Cards, I agree with Barry Goldwater who said “you can’t legislate morality”. Racism is not a party associated issue. However, the Republicans who have done just as much or more to make blacks “equal” than the Dems are spit upon by the very people they’ve helped because no one will inform them of the truth. Instead, Jesse and Al and all the other race-baiters continue to cry the “poor is me” song while bilking this nation for personal gain an the Dems cultivate a “you’re too stupid to succeed on your own so vote for us” attitude and blacks – to the tune of 90% – blindly pull the lever for the latest Dem Messiah to run for president.
And, finally, those southern states that oppressed and denied minorities their rights were run by Dems at the time of those oppressions so my statement still rings true… Racism is ugly wherever it raises its head but to claim that the Dems own the concept of racial equality is puerile and just plain wrong…
January 11th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
I understand your point of view,but the dixiecrats have taken over the GOP because they loss their voice in the democrat party. The GOP is doing nothing to regain the black vote and it does not help having Saltsman,ALLEN of VA Rush the LIP making remarks as well that is right out race baiting. Gore,Clinton and Kerry where messiahs as well for getting over 90% of the black vote if that is your concept. My ? to you,will GOP reach out to folks like me like they did in the 50,s ? Perhaps remain a regional party. If the GOP keeps it present stance of hardline adgenda on various issues the party could be lost. It nearly happen to the democrat party having a paltform that America was not ready for in the 80,s. STEELERS THE TERRIBLE TOWELS AND BIG BEN.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
OLD, PFKAM:
rac⋅ism /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ [rey-siz-uhm]
–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement
Explain to me, then, how those statements Wright made are not racist comments making Wright a racist. Surely you’re not going to argue with the verbatim definition of racism. If he was “accusing” the entire USA of being racist, perhaps he believed the entire USA to be racist…and by extension being racist himself…or no, he’s the only non-racist in America…or that only white people are racist?
No matter how you spin his “racist” comments, they are racist, and he is a racist. Guaranteed, if a white preacher had said “US of Negro A”, he would be INSTANTLY labeled a racist. My how the double standard has grown…
January 11th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
KREGG,
I wouldn’t even bother with answering such an uneducated/ignorant post like the one from GO CARDS! Texas is the most racist state in the Union?!…WOW! It’s obvious he’s a bit spun up on the issue, even though he has no basis for this argument.
GO CARDS, would you consider what Sharpton does race-baiting?
January 11th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
JARED you can say what you wish. It,s only an opinion. Would you consider Saltsman remarks and Allen,s remark calling that reporter a racist name racist. Or perhaps you ignorant not to rebuke those 2 and others within the GOP party. Your state Jared in various polls would not vote for Obama due to color and the numbers where on the lines of my state. The location of sonn to be ex-president Bush home. James Byrd ! Perhaps you are uneducated about the racism of your own state.
January 11th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
GO CARDS,
HA! I’m not arguing that there are SOME people who are racist and ignorant and didn’t vote for Obama because he is half-black; however, the entire state of Texas is not racist. Perhaps you’d like to qualify your statement then?
Saltsman is an idiot, plain and simple. No argument there. It’ll be a low day for the GOP if he’s elected RNC Chairman.
You’ll have to be a bit more specific when you mention others in the GOP who have made racist remarks.
And you’re using the violent death of a black man by known white supremacists in 1998 as a basis for the entire state of Texas being racist? As nauseated as I am about one human doing that to another, I can assure you that I am not racist…even though I live in Texas. Be a bit more realistic.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Jared:
If you are offended by people here making “uneducated/ignorant” posts, perhaps you should visit the right wing sites.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
TDRO
Huh? I wasn’t offended by the remark…it was, I’m sure you’d agree, a not very well thought out comment, and deifinitely not one based on anything but personal opinion.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
My ? to you JARED. What should the GOP do to reach out to black people ? Nixon received 35% of the black vote and the numbers have sunk badly since Nixon.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
PFKAM,
Sorry for repeating what you had ALREADY said at 11:47.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I have no idea what the GOP would need to do in order to appeal to the black vote. I’m completely at a loss on this one…sorry!
January 11th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I’m an Indie, and I believe that not near enough has been done to level the playing field for all people. Although affirmative action was a great start, it needs to be amended to help all people in lower socio-economic status, and not just minorities. I believe Obama has said something about revisiting the affirmative action bill, hasn’t he?
I also believe there continues to be a great divide, at least perceptually, between the opportunities available to white people and minorities. If the GOP were to provide other programs, in addition to AA, that would close this gap…that may be a good step for them.
My opinion though…I’m not a politician, so I’m not all that privy to the “big picture” part of all of this.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
That,s my whole point. Not blaming you or KREGG and i had to make some outladish remarks. I was raised in GOP household and in my opinion the GOP and the DNC haved switched. Some pundits would reguard Nixon,Ike,Ford and Rockfeller as liberals today and i liked every1 of those guys. I also blame the democrat party for a radical platform in the 70,s and 80,s this country was not ready. The GOP burn them 24/7. Wedged issues.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
No worries, Lefty.
If you can please explain to me what Jared is saying at 1:32, I’ll give you complete credit.
Mark
January 11th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Jared (I) – Texas,
You may say that calling the US “the US of KKK”, is accurate or inaccurate. (Mark Twain referred to “The United States of Lyncherdom.”), but it ha NOTHING to do with . a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement.
He is not saying that any race should be denied because of race.
The following things are racist because they suggest harm be done to someone because of race:
NEWBERG, Ore. – Officials of a small Christian university say a life-size cardboard reproduction of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was hung from a tree on the campus,
The story quoted Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, who could take only one night on an Obama phone bank in the nearly all-white Susquehanna County, Pa.: “One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn’t possibly vote for Obama and concluded: ‘Hang that darky from a tree!’
January 11th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
PFKAM,
I thought it was pretty clear what I was trying to get at. You say those comments are accusations of racism, but don’t involve being a racist…I say poop!
January 11th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Jared:
Is this your logic?:
You say “I like chocolate but not vanilla”
Then, I say “Jared likes chocolate”
That means I hate chocolate?
January 11th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
OLD,
Good counter-point with your explanation, but you cannot honestly sit there and tell me that someone who says this kind of stuff isn’t racist. You crack me up…let’s give everyone BUT conservatives the benefit of the doubt…
January 11th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
PFKAM,
What? Not even close…even you can admit there’s a big difference when you speak with obvious hate in your voice.
January 11th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Yeah. I’ll concede that. And I’d even concede a step further in saying that Wright is bitter toward whites. But as illogical as it may sound to you, I say it’s not racism. I say it’s contempt toward whites for feeling oppressed.
Anyway, I do agree with you that Texas does not deserve the racist tag. I live in Dallas and it’s a real melting pot… Whites, Asians, Hispanics, Blacks… and everybody gets along much better IMO than my experience while living in Florida (a state that went to Obama).
January 11th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
PFKAM,
Good point, and I’ll concede the debate to you on the contempt, but not racist point. You and OLD LEFTY made good points. Kudos!
January 11th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Cards said: I understand your point of view,but the dixiecrats have taken over the GOP because they loss their voice in the democrat party.
Cards,
What facts do you have to show that the Republican party is at all racist? Please articulate a fact-filled statement that draws a reasonable reader to the conclusion that the Republican party oppresses blacks and other minorities.
C: The GOP is doing nothing to regain the black vote…
K: The principles of the Republican party are apparently contrary to the thinking of the 90% of blacks who vote the Dem party line. I don’t know that those 90% CAN be “regained” by the Repubs because they were never “gained” in the first place. The typical black voter votes the politician who promises him/her the most “reparations” , welfare, and govt race-based giveaways. Repub principles are the antithesis of this race-based coddling in that they support individual freedom to be what each individual wants to make of him/herself and NOT what the govt. can give the voter because of skin color.
C: “and it does not help having Saltsman,ALLEN of VA Rush the LIP making remarks as well that is right out race baiting.
K: Of course, you don’t call the LA Times editorial calling Obama “Barack the Magic Negro”, racist then. And, IMHO, you haven’t listened to Rush enough to realize that he does not race-bait but highlights the race-baiting of the Libs – hence his parody song lampooning the LA Times editorial.
C: Gore,Clinton and Kerry where messiahs as well for getting over 90% of the black vote if that is your concept.
K: Every Dem presidential candidate gets 90% of the black vote. This does not make any of those clowns messiahs. Obama is “The Messiah” for a completely different reason not even related to race.
C: My ? to you,will GOP reach out to folks like me like they did in the 50,s ?
K: I will presume from this statement that you are black. If so, the GOP has been reaching out to you since it’s inception by removing obstacles to you becoming what YOU want to make YOURSELF. They are not responsible for you wanting the GOVT to make you what you want to be and cannot change your desire for someone else to take responsibility for your well-being. I WILL note that during GW’s career black ownership of houses and blacks entering the middle class has risen at a faster rate than under any other president. In short, the Dems want to give you your daily fish and keep you servile, the GOP wants to teach you to fish for yourself and make you free… Its your choice as to which you prefer.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
I’ll take it. I rarely get credit for being even half-right.
Thanks, Bro.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
When’s the next rally, KKKregg?
January 11th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
KREGG,
I absolutely believe in personal responsibility, and making your own way, etc. However, there are times when people need a leg up. Don’t judge someone on whether they need help or not, especially nowadays.
Although I’ve agreed with you en pointe on several issues, this one you took too far.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Kregg,
*”So, you deny Obama’s associations with Rezko, Wright, Raynes, Ayres, ad infinitum? Hard to do since even the reluctant pro-Obama MSM have had to report these connections and admit the truth about his associates. Down here in the US when you are CONVICTED you are officially a CRIMINAL, and those who associate with you “have a relationship with a convicted criminal”.
………………………………………
Obama’s ACTUAL associations with these people (except Wright) are minimal.
Who besides Rezko was convicted of a crime?
Do you mean like Oliver North, John Poindexter, Elliot Abrams or Not convicted, (like Ayres) Otto Reich?
At least Obama doesn’t put convicted felons and shady characters in his administration.
What is “Aye Land”? I live in Pa.
*“ Thats funny, then what were all those countries to invaded Iraq alongside us thinking?”
How many lives and how much money did they sacrifice, and for how long did they stay?
Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, to use force IF Sadaam did not comply with inspectors.
Bush kicked the inspectors out BEFORE they could show there were no weapons.
Al Samoud missles are conventional weapons, Sadaam was allowed to have them, just not with arrange over 150m., which his were, that’s why they were being destroyed.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Jared,
Thank you for the compliment to PFKAM and myself.
While I maintain that pointing out racism is NOT racism, here’s where you misunderstand me:
“let’s give everyone BUT conservatives the benefit of the doubt…
Posted by Jared (I) – Texas
I have NO doubt that there are conservatives who would support and vote for a black person or any nonwhite person, while there were Democrats who would not vote for a black guy.
“let’s give everyone BUT conservatives the benefit of the doubt…
Posted by Jared (I) – Texas
January 11th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Thank you for mentioning that, OLD LEFTY.
January 11th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Kregg said: The typical black voter votes the politician who promises him/her the most “reparations” , welfare, and govt race-based giveaways.
PF said: When’s the next rally, KKKregg?
PF,
Prove this statement wrong and I’ll let you know where we’re meeting next – maybe at your house… ;-) Obviously 90% of blacks are voting for Dems. Dems are the party of reparations, welfare, and govt race-based giveaways. Whats so hard to comprehend here? Jesse is a Dem, Rev. Al is a Dem, in fact both of these clowns ran for president on the Dem ticket – and they ran on reparations, welfare and govt race-based giveaways.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Lefty said: Obama’s ACTUAL associations with these people (except Wright) are minimal.
Lefty,
How do you know that the Big O’s associations with these people” are “minimal”? The fact is that you don’t. The MSM was too busy trying to figure or not whether Sarah Palin REALLY conceived her Downs child to check on the Bamster’s relationships with a whole host of shady characters. So, we are left without knowing why so many of Obama’s associates are radical anti-american activists.
L: What is “Aye Land”? I live in Pa.
K: Sorry, I had you mixed with Frosty in Canada. You live in one of those small towns where people cling to their guns and religion with antipathy toward others?
K previously: “ Thats funny, then what were all those countries to invaded Iraq alongside us thinking?”
L: How many lives and how much money did they sacrifice, and for how long did they stay?
K: What does that matter in regards to the point being made? The fact is that a lot of them turned out to be just like the Dems – chickenhawks that wanted to run before the job was done.
L: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, to use force IF Sadaam did not comply with inspectors. Bush kicked the inspectors out BEFORE they could show there were no weapons.
K: Did Sadaam “comply with the inspectors”? No. The resolution didn’t say “sit around on your butt until a few people herded around by Sadaam’s staff decide there are no weapons. The facts on the ground were that Sadaam was NOT complying with the previous 14 resolutions, was hindering the search, and was non-compliant with the UN resolution.
L: Al Samoud missles are conventional weapons, Sadaam was allowed to have them, just not with arrange over 150m., which his were, that’s why they were being destroyed.
K: A “weapon of mass destruction” does not have to be nuclear, Lefty. They found gas and other chemical weapons that had no strategic use other than to kill indiscriminately.
January 11th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Kregg,
“So, we are left without knowing why so many of Obama’s associates are radical anti-american activists.”
………………………………………………………………….
People on the Left believe that Bush/Cheney’s associates are are radical anti-american activists. So what?
There is no evidence that Obama has questionable associations at all, it’s just schtick for talk shows.
What is the job to be done??? Oil contracts, basing, Mississippi’s Gov Haley Barbour’s lobbyist firm Barbour Griffith & Rogers, which was representing Ayad Allawi to help him get back in power in Iraq.
Remember, the original plan was to get Chalabi in .
The Weapons inspectors said he WAS cooperating. You would kick them out if you wanted to invade whether he had wmd or not.
And al Samoud missles are not capable of mass destruction.
“weapon of mass destruction” does not have to be nuclear, Lefty. They found gas and other chemical weapons that had no strategic use other than to kill indiscriminately.”
……………………………………..
Do you mean the chemical weapons that Rumsfeld’ company sold him, most of which was destroyed after the first gulf war, or so old it was degraded?
The way I see it is, it all depends on whether or not you believe the administration.
I think they have been lying, and my sources are THEIR writings, those from THEIR administration, and the facts as they happen. It seems YOUR sources ARE the administration, and their fans.
January 11th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
POSTED BY KREGG
Can’t prove that one wrong, Kregg… can’t prove it right either but I wouldn’t doubt it. If their alternative is the same guy that’s keeping ‘em down, it would make sense.
What I think I can prove wrong is the sickening racist statement “The typical black voter votes the politician who promises him/her the most “reparations” , welfare, and govt race-based giveaways.” (which you were proud enough to post twice) since there is absolutely no way that you could know or prove that.
Hate to lay the wood to you, Kreggie, but you are the epitome of what has held this country back in terms of race relations. Maybe it’s not your fault. You could be some white trash that has such low self esteem that you use unfair stereotypes to prove superiority to yourself. In any case, the good news is that you are now the minority and a dying breed. And because of that you have become less and less powerful.
But by all means, stick around liberaland… doubt you’ll ever change but some other not totally lost soul will see how stupid you and yours really are and avoid becoming part of the problem.
Have a nice day.
Mark
January 11th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Jared said: I absolutely believe in personal responsibility, and making your own way, etc. However, there are times when people need a leg up. Don’t judge someone on whether they need help or not, especially nowadays.
Jared,
Nowhere in my statement did I imply that people don’t “need a leg up” and I don’t “judge someone on whether they need help or not”. Nor did I imply or state that govt doesn’t have a part in helping those who need help. Please read my statment again.
In fact, I own/operate a residential care facility for the elderly wherein over half of my residents receive state/federal support for their care. In my post I am talking about people who feel they are “owed” by the rest of us because of persecution in their past – or even in their present, and the people who expect the govt to take care of them from cradle
Although I’ve agreed with you en pointe on several issues, this one you took too far.
I think, rather, you read into my statement that which is not there… ;-)
January 11th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
Lefty said: There is no evidence that Obama has questionable associations at all, it’s just schtick for talk shows.
Lefty,
You don’t consider hanging out with a admitted – and unrepentant – domestic terrorist troubling?
You don’t consider Mr. O’s obvious agreement with the philosophy of his pastor of twenty years whom he calls his “spiritual mentor”? Hint: you don’t hang out for 20 years in a place and with a guy you don’t substantially agree with…
You don’t consider Mr. Raines’ bilking of the public Fannie Mae for $100m – and Obama closely confiding with him on the campaign trail – troubling?
L: The Weapons inspectors said he WAS cooperating. You would kick them out if you wanted to invade whether he had wmd or not.
K: Thats why they were sent home so many times, then. Maybe for vacation?
L: And al Samoud missles are not capable of mass destruction.
K: Tipped with the chemical warheads they found laying around they sure are…
Lefty, maybe you don’t care who runs the country and maybe you think everyones a crook but I am unmoved by your naivete and am concerned that nobody knows who Obama is except for what and who we see him associate with – and we DO know who those people are.
January 11th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
“”n my post I am talking about people who feel they are “owed” by the rest of us because of persecution in their past…”"
Like Israelis you mean?
January 11th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
PF said: Can’t prove that one wrong, Kregg… can’t prove it right either but I wouldn’t doubt it. If their alternative is the same guy that’s keeping ‘em down, it would make sense.
PF,
Express for me just how the GOP is “keeping ‘em down…”
P: What I think I can prove wrong is the sickening racist statement “The typical black voter votes the politician who promises him/her the most “reparations” , welfare, and govt race-based giveaways.” (which you were proud enough to post twice) since there is absolutely no way that you could know or prove that.
K: I CAN prove it. It is not a racist statement at all but merely an observation of the facts – I’m sorry the facts leave you breathless. Fact: 90% of black voters vote Dem. Fact: Dem – and their politicians – are the party of race-based programs of reparations (think Affirmative Action where a black person moves to the front of the employment line because of “past discrimination”), welfare, (think race-adjusted entrance test scores at universities nationwide that place black students who produce lower scholastic scores ahead of their “other-race_ compatriots who outscore them) and govt-based giveaways (think any and all govt programs that use race as a determinant of eligibility))
Still with me or have you swooned? Now, the word “typical” means: “having the distinctive qualities of a particular type of person or thing, or, “showing the characteristics expected of or popularly associated with a particular person, situation, or thing…”
When 9 out of every 10 black person votes Dem it is perfectly accurate to say that it is “popularly associated with – or typical of – a black person that they vote Dem”, is it not? Still with me? Need oxygen? Ok, since the Dems – and their politicians – ARE the party of racially based set-asides, reparations, and welfare – do you disagree with this? – then those who vote for them necessarily vote for the things – and the politicians – they promote? Correct? So, given this little hand-holding assistance you should now be able to admit that my statement was correct and accurate.
P: Hate to lay the wood to you, Kreggie, but you are the epitome of what has held this country back in terms of race relations.
K: What, for accurately stating the facts? Hah! Accurately stating facts is not a racist position and I am not racist – but neither am I so blinded by my emotions that I deny the truth when it is plain to see. The people who are “setting this country back in terms of race relations” are the lib cowards who refrain from clearly defining the problem and then seeking REAL solutions to it. They’d rather swoon and point fingers at those who DO point out the truth and seek solutions than be honest and forthright.
P: Maybe it’s not your fault. You could be some white trash that has such low self esteem that you use unfair stereotypes to prove superiority to yourself.
K: ROFLMAO!!!! I am a college educated professional businessman who has spent his entire 25 year career housing and caring for those on the fringe of society – be they demented, developmentally disabled, addicted, elderly, or just irresponsible to the point of self-dereliction.
P: In any case, the good news is that you are now the minority and a dying breed. And because of that you have become less and less powerful.
K: I”m having trouble keeping a straight face here but I can assure you that I am NOT in the minority nor am I a “dying breed”. A problem well-defined is over half-solved. Our government has pandered to race-baiters for decades and those “oppressed” races they’ve pandered to aren’t any the better for it. So WHO is hurting race relations here – those who speak to the facts in an effort to find a solution, or those who cower in their hovel afraid to even broach the subject for fear of hurting someone’s feelings?
P: But by all means, stick around liberaland… doubt you’ll ever change but some other not totally lost soul will see how stupid you and yours really are and avoid becoming part of the problem.
K: Its interesting how you’ve attacked me but not answered the issue I addressed. Dare I say it is typical of Libs to attack those who present them with an inconvenient truth? ;-) (all in all I’ve met basically reasonable libs here and appreciate that fact)
January 11th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Kregg said: “In my post I am talking about people who feel they are “owed” by the rest of us because of persecution in their past…””
Frosty replied: Like Israelis you mean?
Frosty,
I don’t know any Israelis who feel they are “owed”. I DO know that the UN allocated them a homeland after world war II and they’ve been killing people ever since who’ve tried to take it from them. Don’t know if this takes your bait or not… ;-)
January 11th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
KREGG i am sorry for not replying to your post. Went to work at 3. It,s a known fact that alot of democrats down south lost their voice in the democrat party due to civil rights movement. The GOP was a weak party in the south during the 50,s ,60,s and somewhat into the 70,s. Reagan comes along with going back to old fashion ways was embraced down south. Reagan stated he was a democrat and the party left him. The democrat party lost the south and still lost down south this past election. Obama made the most enroads down south since Clinton and no democrat since LBJ has carried the south. It,s the south way of saying their rejection to the civil rights movement. Their are other reasons,but the voting rights bill is the main reason and REAGAN.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:13 am
Blago used Burris as a lousy race card,but Saltsman is a racist and i will ask you KREGG. What agenda is GOP offering to regain the black vote once more ? What about people within the GOP like the ex-senator Allen from VA and people like Saltsman.
January 12th, 2009 at 12:19 am
I was a little off concerning dixiecrats. However it was Truman that upset dixiecrats by intergrating the armed froces and southern democrats started bolting from the democrat party. Carter ,not Lbj was the last democrat to carry the south Kregg. Jessie Helms and some other sounthern senators left the DNC as well around 1970. Mainly civil rights drove them to the GOP. GO to WIKIPEDIA and type in dixiecrats KREGG. WHAT PART OF OUR NATION IS MORE RED THAN ANY OTHER PART KREGG ?
January 12th, 2009 at 12:57 am
POSTED BY KREGG
POSTED BY KREGG
Gee… I wonder who they are?
POSTED BY KREGG
… and here I was assuming you were one of them!!!
I’ll let your college educated comments stand on their own, Mr. Businessman. Besides, you need to get back to work at your government subsidized half way house.
Absolutely priceless!
January 12th, 2009 at 1:03 am
P: … and here I was assuming you were one of them!!!
I’ll let your college educated comments stand on their own, Mr. Businessman. Besides, you need to get back to work at your government subsidized half way house. Absolutely priceless!
PF,
You HAVE to “let my statements stand on their own” because they are accurate and you have no factual argument with which to counter them or prove them untrue. I know that rankles your sense of libdom but so be it… ;-)
However, I clearly stated that I operated a residential care facility for the elderly and NOT a “halfway house”. I am paid by my residents – many of whom are govt subsidized – a monthly fee for the care and housing I give them. I am not subsidized by the govt. I care for those who CANNOT care for themselves. There is a LARGE difference between those who CANNOT and those who WILL NOT care for themselves but the line may be a bit fine for your sensibilities so I will leave you to your insensitivities on the subject… ;-)
January 12th, 2009 at 1:20 am
Card said: Blago used Burris as a lousy race card,but Saltsman is a racist and i will ask you KREGG. What agenda is GOP offering to regain the black vote once more ? What about people within the GOP like the ex-senator Allen from VA and people like Saltsman.
Card,
I have no opinion on Blago’s using of Burris. In regards to the GOP’s agenda to “regain the black vote…” I will say that the GOP has NEVER had a large number of black voters but the GOP scores best when it stands by it’s principles of personal freedom to become whatever you wish to make yourself and the black Repubs I’ve talked to or heard speak emphasize the point that the govt can’t make you anything but a slave to handouts and that you must accept responsibility for your own success.
In response to your dixiecrat comments I’m not adamant on any claims of racism in either of the parties because I don’t believe that either party advocates racism. I believe there are probably racists in both parties and I believe they ought to be removed. Having said this, I still believe that we do minorities no favors at all by coddling them and pandering to demands of special treatment. I think its going to be interesting to watch Obama – who ran on a raceless ticket – come under fire to continue pandering to the Jesse Jackson types who will demand he be “down with the brothers…”
January 12th, 2009 at 1:36 am
Kregg,
This is when I start to suspect that you are covert liberal trying to make conservatives look silly.
The same things over and over in different words.
Last time ….
#1) Obama was NOT hanging out with William Ayres AS much as the Republicans who supported him and put him on the board. Serving on a board with someone is not “hanging out”
Clearly, no serious person on either side of the aisle thinks this is important except talk show hosts who have to invent outrage.
If you are concerned about hanging out with unrepentant terrorists, it’s interesting how you ignore Bush’s associations. And remember, it was HE who bin Ladin escape in Tora Bora, Oh, and he did business with his brothers…
#2) First off… what EXACTLY is Rev Wright’s philosophy?…..What EXACTLY do you think Obama agrees with? Do you think that Catholics who sat in the church for 20 years endorse pedophilia? Do Republicans who form 30 year alliances with preachers who blame America for 9/11 agree with them?
#3) You said, “You don’t consider Mr. Raines’ bilking of the public Fannie Mae for $100m – and Obama closely confiding with him on the campaign trail – troubling?”
That’s been proven to be another false GOP talking point. Wa Post reports: “The McCain campaign is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Franklin Raines as a close adviser to Obama on “housing and mortgage policy.”
You don’t find the private contractors in Iraq bilking the taxpayers for BILLIONS troubling? Especially when those who profit the most from war are the ones who decide to go to war? With ALL the horror and carnage of war, you don’t find THAT troubling?
#4) The weapons inspectors were not sent home after they went in 2002. If you are referring to the time BEFORE that, then, why did Bush NOT run on that? Why did he run on “No Nation Building”? Nothing that had ANYTHING to do with Iraq changed between Bush campaigning on “No Nation Building” and the invasion.
#5) What credible source ever said the al Samoud missles were “tipped with chemical warheads?
Lastly, you said:
“maybe you don’t care who runs the country and maybe you think everyones a crook but I am unmoved by your naivete and am concerned that nobody knows who Obama is except for what and who we see him associate with – and we DO know who those people are.”
Well, after 8 years of seeing the country run by the Sopranos, all I can say is now YOU know how WE felt.
January 12th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Lefty said: This is when I start to suspect that you are covert liberal trying to make conservatives look silly.
Lefty,
ROFLMAO!!
L: #1) Obama was NOT hanging out with William Ayres AS much as the Republicans who supported him and put him on the board. Serving on a board with someone is not “hanging out”.
K: In light of his other questionable associations I don’t like the idea of my president collaborating on ANYTHING with a known terrorist.
L: Clearly, no serious person on either side of the aisle thinks this is important except talk show hosts who have to invent outrage.
K: Wrong. I think its important… and I”m not “outraged” but cautious.
L: If you are concerned about hanging out with unrepentant terrorists, it’s interesting how you ignore Bush’s associations. And remember, it was HE who bin Ladin escape in Tora Bora, Oh, and he did business with his brothers…
K: Osama bin Laden’s brothers are not terrorists. The family has denounced Osama and cut him off. I don’t see it as the same association. Obama collaberated with Ayres on several projects, lives next door to him, and has tried to cover up that fact by lying about it until forced into the open. If OBAMA wants to hide the association then I think it deserves looking into.
L: #2) First off… what EXACTLY is Rev Wright’s philosophy?…..What EXACTLY do you think Obama agrees with? Do you think that Catholics who sat in the church for 20 years endorse pedophilia? Do Republicans who form 30 year alliances with preachers who blame America for 9/11 agree with them?
K: Wright believes in “Black Liberation Theology” is a supporter of the “Nation of Islam” has promoted Louie Farrakhan’s philosophy. I think any guy who sits in a church for twenty years listening to such a philosophy preached weekly and calls the preacher his “spiritual mentor” believes whats he’s been hearing.
L: #3) You said, “You don’t consider Mr. Raines’ bilking of the public Fannie Mae for $100m – and Obama closely confiding with him on the campaign trail – troubling?”
That’s been proven to be another false GOP talking point. Wa Post reports: “The McCain campaign is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Franklin Raines as a close adviser to Obama on “housing and mortgage policy.”
K: I didn’t claim he was a close advisor to Obama on housing and mortgage policy. I made the claim that he was a close advisor on all things financial.
From Wiki:
On December 21, 2004 Raines accepted what he called “early retirement” [4] from his position as CEO while U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigators continued to investigate alleged accounting irregularities. He is accused by The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), the regulating body of Fannie Mae, of abetting widespread accounting errors, which included the shifting of losses so senior executives, such as himself, could earn large bonuses [5].
In 2006, the OFHEO announced a suit against Raines in order to recover some or all of the $90 million in payments made to Raines based on the overstated earnings [6] initially estimated to be $9 billion but have been announced as 6.3 billion.[7].
Civil charges were filed against Raines and two other former executives by the OFHEO in which the OFHEO sought $110 million in penalties and $115 million in returned bonuses from the three accused.[8] On April 18, 2008, the government announced a settlement with Raines together with J. Timothy Howard, Fannie’s former chief financial officer, and Leanne G. Spencer, Fannie’s former controller. The three executives agreed to pay fines totaling about $3 million, which will be paid by Fannie’s insurance policies. Raines also agreed to donate the proceeds from the sale of $1.8 million of his Fannie stock and to give up stock options. The stock options however have no value. Raines also gave up an estimated $5.3 million of “other benefits” said to be related to his pension and forgone bonuses.[9]
An editorial in The Wall Street Journal called it a “paltry settlement” which allowed Raines and the other two executives to “keep the bulk of their riches.” [10] In 2003 alone, Raines’s compensation was over $20 million.[11]
A statement issued by Raines said of the consent order, “is consistent with my acceptance of accountability as the leader of Fannie Mae and with my strong denial of the allegations made against me by OFHEO.”[12]
K: Snopes.com says Raines made off with a $240,000,000 ‘golden parachute’. I’d think anyone not tone deaf would stay as far away from this guy as possible. BTW, WaPo reports that Raines DID have a consulting connection with Obama – although smaller than what has been popularly considered.
L: You don’t find the private contractors in Iraq bilking the taxpayers for BILLIONS troubling? Especially when those who profit the most from war are the ones who decide to go to war? With ALL the horror and carnage of war, you don’t find THAT troubling?
K: I find ANYONE bilking ANYONE repulsive – and thats why I find Obama’s association with Raines to be troubling.
L: #4) The weapons inspectors were not sent home after they went in 2002. If you are referring to the time BEFORE that, then, why did Bush NOT run on that? Why did he run on “No Nation Building”? Nothing that had ANYTHING to do with Iraq changed between Bush campaigning on “No Nation Building” and the invasion.
K: I’m not sure what this has to do with Obama and his questionable associations but in 1998 Bill Clinton came out for “regime change” in Iraq. Seems it wasn’t just Bush’s idea. Is “regime change” the same thing as “nation building”?
L: #5) What credible source ever said the al Samoud missles were “tipped with chemical warheads?
K: From Wiki:
In February 13, 2003, a UN panel reported that Iraq’s Al-Samoud 2 missiles, disclosed by Iraq to weapons inspectors in December, have a range of 180 km, in breach of UNSCR 1441. The limit allowed by the UN is 150 km, a threshold at which the missile crosses into being known as a weapon of mass destruction.
K: I had my rocket ID mixed up – sorry. It was scuds which he was planning to use for chemical warheads. However, my original statement stands that the world believed he had a stockpile of wmd, which it turns out he did…
L: Lastly, you said:
K had said: “maybe you don’t care who runs the country and maybe you think everyones a crook but I am unmoved by your naivete and am concerned that nobody knows who Obama is except for what and who we see him associate with – and we DO know who those people are.”
L: Well, after 8 years of seeing the country run by the Sopranos, all I can say is now YOU know how WE felt.
K: Lefty, how does all this “feeling how we felt” have anything to do with Obama’s questionable associations? I would think that after “suffering” all the abuse at the hand of GW you’d be DOUBLY aware of the next guy getting by without scrutiny so such a scenario doesn’t happen again. However, you seem to accept Obama without any doubts or reservations after spending so much time essentially saying “he’s no worse than Bush” which you obviously feel is a low standard to meet…
January 12th, 2009 at 9:24 am
Just type in dixiecrat on your pc Kregg. Read about the history of the dixiecrats and their history. Some of them haved retired not very long ago like the last 15 years and that idealism has not gone away is crazy. It was Reagan an ex member of the democrat party and he enable the dixiecrats to hijack the party. The main base of the GOP is in the south and it,s been that way for years.
January 12th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Card,
I don’t doubt what you say about the dixiecrats – just your conclusions about their affect on the GOP. You have one of the biggest bigots in the country in Senator Robert Byrd, (D) WV, but I don’t hold the Dems responsible for his presence or his attitude. I’m sure the GOP has it’s share of the same type of person.
I DO think the GOP is in a battle for it’s identity. Conservative principles win when they are tried but many in the GOP wish to become Dem-Lites and I wish those folks would simply leave the party so that the conservative message is not cluttered by moderate sniveling. At least voters could make a clear choice between the two philosophies instead of having idiots like John McCain pretend to be conservative while actually being a moderate democrat…
January 12th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Kregg,
Ayres is sooo over, If he’s SUCH a concern, you have yet to address the Republicans who put him on the board and praised his work, but pick on Obama who comes in almost a generation later, please!
The bin Ladin family can denounce ,all they want, Osama still got their money, the Saudis STILL support terrorism and the Bush boys STILL profit with them.
It’s NOT the same association….there is a much greater conflict of interest.
As for “Black Liberation Theology”, the more I learn about it, the more it sounds like a good thing.
On “Black Liberation Theology”:
“God’s presence in the world is best depicted through God’s involvement in the struggle for justice,” says Anthony Pinn, who teaches philosophy and religion at Rice University in Houston. “God is so intimately connected to the community that suffers, that God becomes a part of that community.”
“Jesus says my mission is to eradicate poverty and to bring about freedom and liberation for the oppressed,” Hopkins says. “And most Christian pastors in America skip over that part of the book.”
Wright saying:
“No, no, no, not God bless America! God damn America — that’s in the Bible — for killing innocent people.”
According to Hopkins, that was theological wordplay — because the word “damn” is straight out of the Bible and has a specific meaning in the original Hebrew.
“It means a sacred condemnation by God to a wayward nation who has strayed from issues of justice, strayed from issues of peace, strayed from issues of reconciliation,” Hopkins says.
Obama denounced the harshness of Wright’s words — not because they were false, he said, but because they did not acknowledge the strides that the U.S. has made in the fight against racism. Obama said his own candidacy shows how far the country has come.
Obama was ALSO trashed because he said black men have to take care of their children.
As for Franklin Raines, ALL the crimes he committed have NOTHING to do with Obama, who simply wrote him a letter asking what do you know about the industry?
Bill Clinton came out for “regime change” in Iraq.
He did NOT call for an attack, invasion and occupation, that resulted in the horrific deaths of how many people?
And is “regime change” the same thing as “nation building”? Not if you let the Iraqis do it, and do not occupy the country and put bases in and try to put in a “Viceroy” like Paul Bremer, to turn their resources over to foreign corporations.
Gen Jay Garner wanted to have elections quickly, so he was replaced by, L Paul Bremer, who rewrote the constitution to turn Iraq into what The Economist (2003) called ‘Let’s All Go to the Yard Sale: Iraq’s Economic Liberalisation.
Many think that is what REALLY heated up the insurgency.
Why didn’t Bush just let the inspectors continue to destroy the missiles?
As for:
: “Lefty, how does all this “feeling how we felt” have anything to do with Obama’s questionable associations? I would think that after “suffering” all the abuse at the hand of GW you’d be DOUBLY aware of the next guy getting by without scrutiny so such a scenario doesn’t happen again”.
Because we think he HAS been scrutinized to death and come out with flying colors.
Only his opponents think otherwise.
I think it was Bush who was not , because he is from a powerful, old money family, and “having a beer with him”, and “being a Christian”, was good enough for many.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:29 am
McCain made a mistake going to right instead of the center.
January 12th, 2009 at 10:03 pm