(2009-03-17) — As the furor over AIG executive bonuses threatened to bring the current economic recovery to a halt, President Barack Obama and Sen. Chris Dodd today threw fuel on the fire, announcing their “fierce outrage” upon hearing that the insurance giant had given each of their campaigns more than $100,000 last year.
“While AIG was collapsing, and her executives crawling to DC with hat in hand,” said Sen. Dodd, D-CT, “my campaign, and then-Senator Obama’s were getting what can only be termed influence bonuses from the same firm. Naturally, I knew nothing about this, and I’m now seething with anger at the injustice.”
President Obama and Sen. Dodd were the two largest recipients of campaign contributions from the beleaguered company, and the only politicians to garner six-figure amounts from AIG in 2008 — $103,100 for Sen. Dodd and $100,332 for presidential candidate Obama.
AIG, which has received $170 billion in taxpayer cash from the federal government since September, gave more than $585,000 to Congressional and presidential candidates last year, favoring Democrats 3-to-1 over Republicans.
In unrelated news, Sen. Dodd proposed legislation requiring AIG political gifts to be returned to the U.S. Treasury, “exempting only those campaign contributions made before November 4, 2008.”
The senator’s office immediately issued a statement declaring that Sen. Dodd was not aware that he had proposed such the exemption.
124 responses so far ↓
1 boberinyetagain // Mar 17, 2009 at 10:32 am
That's why I'm so much better off then you peons…the gummint likes me best. They've cut my taxes, heavily subsidize my businesses and award me huge no bid contracts.
And the best part? You'll never believe this…the average republican will rally around me should the idea of lowering my taxes yet again even come up. They believe that I'll spend the money creating high paying jobs that in turn will take them to a tax bracket that exceed the income tax laws.
Thanks gang…I appreciate being kept in your prayers…and I promise that your check is "in the mail"…wait by your mailbox….
2 gafisher // Mar 17, 2009 at 1:24 pm
We should be shocked, SHOCKED, that a multi-billion dollar firm in need of political favors made six-figure donations to two leading Democrats. The customary standard is seven figures, minimum.
3 simone // Mar 17, 2009 at 2:26 pm
President Obama also said that AIG ” was not the campaign donor he first knew” but that he would be keeping the donations because they helped put him in a position to be able to now punish AIG execs.
4 boberinyetagain // Mar 17, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Are you insinuating that large corporations are in the habit of making politcal contributions? Next you’ll tell us that wealthy individuals (some of whom likely work for or own a corporation mind you) make contributions as well.
Then you’ll probably claim that they get preferential treatment.
Then you’ll no doubt propose a reform of such tactics, perhaps even making them illegal.
That’s when the matter will die a quiet death and you’ll never be heard from again should you choose to point this out.
But the “little guy” never gets the short end of that stick…does he? Nah…they have our best interests at heart. Just ask ‘em, they’ll tell ya.
5 RedPepper // Mar 17, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Senator Grassley has an idea.
IOWA CITY, Iowa — Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley suggested that AIG executives should accept responsibility for the collapse of the insurance giant by resigning or killing themselves.
Presumably, by Seppuku.
This definitely has possibilities.
For one thing, it may be the only outcome that’s acceptable to Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer.
And besides, we were promised that these bailouts would be an “open” process …
6 boberinyetagain // Mar 17, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Red, that’d be about as “open” as they could be eh?
7 Newsman // Mar 17, 2009 at 4:09 pm
mk kid:
There are a lot of scrapplers elsewhere off this list.
I don't know if Scott intended it to be a takeoff of scrapper but assuming he did, the definition of a scrapper - a fighter or aggressive competitor, esp. one always ready or eager for a fight, argument, or contest:
Seems to fit many here, don't you think ?
8 boberinyetagain // Mar 17, 2009 at 3:14 pm
but you have to admit…the market loves the Prez…
DJIA 7,395.70 +178.73
Nasdaq 1,462.11 +58.09
S&P 500 773.83 +19.94
9 RedPepper // Mar 17, 2009 at 3:25 pm
boberin: I can only repeat my comment from several threads back …
10 boberinyetagain // Mar 17, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Red, I’m just poking a bit o fun at those around these parts that blamed the decrease on Obama. I don’t believe the market has anything to do with his action/inaction. I believe we are in deep doo doo.
Hey, can anyone tell me when the definition of “bonus” changed? Or did I have the wrong impression all along (could well be). I was taught that a “bonus” was something “extra” usually rewarding good performance. Now we are told that these “bonuses” are contractural. Doesn’t that make them something besides “bonuses”
Just wondering
11 onlineanalyst // Mar 17, 2009 at 3:55 pm
What a strange convergence of forces. </a.
12 onlineanalyst // Mar 17, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Something else to think about: Did Eliot Spitzer destroy AIG? How and why?
Frankly, it’s time to get to the bottom of the shenanigans and haul Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Chris Dodd, Franklin Raines, and George Soros in front of an investigative panel, where this cast of characters has to testify under oath. Throw Spitzer into the mix, too.
Feel free to add your own.
13 RedPepper // Mar 17, 2009 at 5:10 pm
boberin #9: Actually, bob, you originally expressed those opinions in reply to one of my comments. But I don’t have a link right now …
and I’ll dispute it with you later …
As far as those “bonuses”, yes they are contractual, and yes that makes a difference. What is even more important, from what I’ve heard, (at least some of) those contracts date back to a period (April ‘08?) prior to AIG receiving any TARP funds; the Congress could have blocked the “bonuses” from being paid way back in October ‘08, by requiring that as a pre-condition of the first TARP bailout funds that were given to AIG, but did not; and that Timothy Geithner was the principal government guy that worked on the terms of those initial bailouts, which is why everyone said he was the only person that could manage things at Treasury in this predicament, and which is also the reason why Geithner, if he was really the kind of hot-shot he’s been made out to be, should have known about these contracts back then, and should have made Congress aware of them at that point. I’ve even heard suggestions that Congress has known of these contracts all along.
As Mr. Miyagi said, “All not as seems … “
14 RedPepper // Mar 17, 2009 at 5:16 pm
ola #11: I agree, whole lotta people have a whole lotta ’splainin’ they need to do.
Not holding my breath …
15 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 5:36 pm
I think perhaps we have passed it…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRtgr9n7V9w&feature=related
16 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 5:41 pm
What ought to scare the (Little Jimmy) Dickens out of us is the talk of confiscating these people’s money. The whole deal sort of stinks, but that still doesn’t give our elected leaders the right or authority to take it away.
17 RedPepper // Mar 17, 2009 at 5:47 pm
Anyone who has not already done so should go back and read the first linked news story in Scott’s post at the top of this thread. An excerpt:
While the Senate was constructing the $787 billion stimulus last month, Dodd added an executive-compensation restriction to the bill. The provision, now called “the Dodd Amendment” by the Obama Administration, provides an “exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009” — which exempts the very AIG bonuses Dodd and others are now seeking to tax.
Speaking of those who have some ’splainin’ to do! ‘Splain away, Senator Dodd! What was the motivation for that amendment, pray tell?
18 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Maybe the motivation was to set up a scenario where we would be willing to allow for this type of wealth confiscation and thus establish a precedent?
19 RedPepper // Mar 17, 2009 at 6:08 pm
mkk #17: You are giving them too much credit. Arrogance and stupidity are more than sufficient to explain their actions; why bring in conspiracy theories?
20 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 6:18 pm
While arrogance and stupidity may be the best explanation of these events, (and who knows, maybe there was supposed to be some kick backs for throwing in that ammendment) let’s not forget that the voting is still going on for:
***Socialist of the Year
***Commie of the Year
I understand that the competition has really tightened up lately.
21 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 17, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Meanwhile, BHO won another Limbo Contest at the Party last night. Vocal accompaniment by Mrs. BHO was an a capella operatic arrangement of Limbo Rock.
B’rack be limbo, B’rack be quick
B’rack go unda limbo stick
All around the limbo clock
Hey, let’s do the limbo rock
22 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 7:17 pm
They are still following the example set by Belshazzar…
23 onlineanalyst // Mar 17, 2009 at 7:31 pm
RP: I’m glad that you pointed out the Dodd amendment to TARP. I just now read about that detail at another source.
More and more, I am wondering whether this financial meltdown was a manufactured crisis, an October Surprise that has gotten out of hand, There appears to be a one hand scrubbing another in order to assure power.
But, hey, it’s St. Patrick’s Day and the O’Bamas are par-tay-ing as if it were Wednesday.
And, glory be, we now have a Minister of Culture in the WH because every crony needs a place at the head table.
The Audacity of Audacity just keeps pushing the envelope of self-indulgence and flying high at the taxpayers’ expense.
In other news, ACORN will be assisting in census activities.
24 Newsman // Mar 17, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Hey JL3rd:
“B’rack be limbo, B’rack be quick”
Clever. You better hope he be limbo and quick or we are all in deep deep doodoo !
Hey mk kid:
How about scrappler of the year ? Number of good candidates here !
25 Newsman // Mar 17, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Hey Online:
What about GW. You don’t think he had anything to do with our country going to pot under his eight year shift ????
26 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 7:58 pm
From Aug 4th, 2008
And thus, in spite of our efforts to preserve our nation, God is apparently working through it all that His Divine Will be accomplished. That is not to say that our efforts are vain, or misguided, or wrong, but that America will one day face the consequences of her sins. Not for any of the things that the ignorant troll rages over, but for our tolerance for things that God cannot tolerate. For not fearing Him and keeping His ways. And for a national hatred and rejection of His Son, and having other gods before Him. For failing to exalt the Lord Jesus Christ and proclaim Him LORD of all.
And if it be so, let us continue to stand and fight. Not that our choice is the lesser of two evils, but that the choice is for the most that we can do to keep her as best that we can keep her and beg God for yet a little more grace, and a little more time to work to make her righteous and acceptable again, if but for a little while longer.
May America earn the reward of God’s blessings!
If it was an October Surprise, perhaps God has other ideas. Could it be the beginning of our chastisement?
27 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Where else would you find candidates for “Scrappler of the Year”?
28 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 8:30 pm
If your hope is not in God - you ain’t got much hope. The Word declares Jesus is the same past, present, and future - so much for the need of change.
No that’s not the intent behind the name - not even close.
29 Newsman // Mar 17, 2009 at 9:17 pm
OK mk kid - so what is the intent, if you know ? Curious ??
30 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 9:41 pm
If I have the story correct, Scott took the name from one of the family’s dogs. Once upon a time you could go all of the way back in the blog archives.
31 mindknumbed kid // Mar 17, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Ms RightWing,Ink - I plan to fly into Canton around June 20th, would like to be able to catch up with you then or on the 27th when I will be flying back out. What do you think of it?
32 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 6:27 am
Random thoughts on “bailouts,” “greed,” and AIG…
Dodd assured, via his own amendment, that AIG’s contracted bonuses would be paid out. His faux rage, as well as Obama’s, serve as a distraction to arouse populist anger against the bonus recipients, rather than at the ineptness of Ackbar’s destruction of our economy through new legislation on energy and nationalized health,
Interestingly, (because all he knows is how to run for office and dazzle the brain dead) Ackbar is headed to California on another campaign lollapalooza to drum up support for his bankruptcy of the economy. It is primarily legislators from that state that have dreamed up this Utopian drivel and called it “stimulus”.
California itself is bankrupt because of such ill-conceived programs, By bleeding its most productive citizens with extortionary taxes and absurd regulation, California has driven the population and its businesses out of the state. By turning a blind eye to the sapping of resources caused by tolerance of illegals and the provision of sanctuary cities, California has more takers than producers of wealth.
California is an object lesson of what will happen to the whole nation if Ackbar’s programs gain any traction and become law or policy.
33 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 6:31 am
I hope that the Thief-in-Chief is not suffering a green hangover from yesterday’s par-tay-ing.
34 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:45 am
driveby…amen to that!
35 Fred Sinclair // Mar 18, 2009 at 6:55 am
scrapple |?skrap?l|
noun
scraps of pork or other meat stewed with cornmeal and shaped into loaves for slicing and frying, esp. characteristic of eastern Pennsylavania.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: diminutive of the noun scrap.
A slice or two of fried scrapple, served with a couple of eggs and a pile of grits (or hashbrowns if you’ve never ventured to the South),OJ, toast and coffee will get you off to a good day’s start. I always considered scrapple as sort of a homemade “SPAM” (only much better).
Relating to Mr. Scott Ott’s “ScrappleFace” I figured it as a pun, (play on words - for those in Rio Linda) scraps of independent conservative thought or other insights stewed with open discourse and shaped into an internet blog for consideration, education and worldwide dissemination. The “Face” part, I figure to be the look of understanding on the faces of those who are intelligent enough to “get it”.
36 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 6:56 am
OT I remember our resident trolls trotting out and repeating the canard that President Bush had little regard for our veterans- even though funding for them increased under his administration.
How do you like the disdain that Obama has for our veterans now, dear trolls? The cynicism of the Boy King is superseded only by his evil machinations to affect American healthcare, the finest in the world.
I loathe this destructive traitor.
37 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 8:30 am
I reiterate that George was happy to send men and women off to war but did little but lip service to support them. They were ill prepared, ill equipped and then when done, ill cared for. Funding for everything went up…that hardly makes for “saint George” material.
If Obama doesn’t do better I’ll happily roast him too…but then “funding” has already gone up under Obama so by your own reconing he’s already as worthy as George so there’s little place to go but “up” from here
38 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 9:27 am
government at it’s finest. our lawmakers get their knickers in a twist over .00005% of the bailout being spent on bonuses whilst failing to watch where/to whom the 99.9995% of it is going.
because moral outrage is much more pallatable to us peons and it’s also a whole bunch easier than finding out where the original money “went” and then, when that’s done, figuring our where the bailout went.
why is no one headed to jail yet? there should be large groups headed that way.
pay them their bonuses, fire them, arrest them, prosecute them then make them pay for their own incarceration…now there’s a plan I can get behind!
39 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:12 am
two cups sugar
one tsp vanilla extract
2 egg whites
2 cups flower
bake at 350 for 20 minutes
40 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:13 am
whoops, forgot the vinegar…1 tsp
41 DrivebyMeteor // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:18 am
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed, and hence clamorous to be led to safety, by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
~ H. L. Mencken
42 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:34 am
While tapping another barrel of wine during last night’s White House Bacchanalia, President Obama thanked President Obama for inviting everyone over.
43 R.A.M. // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:52 am
re #37: The main lawmakers, (yeah, right), getting their “panties in a twist” are the two that got the BIGGEST amount of money from AIG, then paid them back with OUR tax dollars, Chris Dodd and Obama!
BOTH should be in jail!
re #38:
“2 cups flower”
Since this is a “lib” recipe, it must be either daisies or lillies!
44 R.A.M. // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:55 am
Meanwhile, the Obama regime is a recipe for disaster!
45 RWH // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:55 am
Yeah, it’s going to be a long 7.5 years for you folks if you insist on being fighting mad every day…
46 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 11:55 am
1 cup of each actually
47 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 12:25 pm
AIG spread the political contributions around
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
In 2008, individuals and PACs associated with AIG gave $45,111 to Obama, $41,200 to McCain, $19,975 to Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, $19,950 to former Republican Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, $13,200 to former Republican New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and $7,850 to former Democratic North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.
Sen. Mitch McConnell: $7,200 (2006); $1,000 (2002).
Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky.: $4,000 (2004).
Sen. Evan Bayh: $10,450 (2006); $16,250 (2004); $7,000 (2002).
Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.: $2,500 (2006); $3,000 (2004); $1,500 (2000).
Rep. John Yarmuth, D-3rd District: $1,500 (2006).
Rep. Geoff Davis, R-4th District: $500 (2008); $1,000 (2006).
Rep. Ben Chandler, D-6th District: $1,000 (2006); $500 (2004).
http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/politics/2008/09/aig-spread-political-contributions.html
L@Y
48 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 12:52 pm
RWH,
“Yeah, it’s going to be a long 7.5 years for you folks if you insist on being fighting mad every day… ”
Were you here for the last 7.5 years?
This won’t take that long, soon we will start hearings, shortly after that trials, then there will be plea deals. Finally there will be televised confessions by Bush and Cheney!
Many Republicans will go to jail, and many will be confined in psychiatric facilities.
Most here will join the latter group. Those who remain will just dry up an blow away.
RWH, have you noticed “R.A.M.” yet? I don’t think he can make it much further. Try not to let him see you observing him. He likes to throw nasty stuff at the glass.
See how worked up he gets? I have been told they once tried to do a “Brain Scan” on him without success.
L@Y
49 Fred Sinclair // Mar 18, 2009 at 2:37 pm
My e-mail to my Congressman, Pete Hoekstra (MI-2nd District)
Dear Congressman Hoekstra: Please correct me if I’m wrong, but as I understand the circumstances, the bonus monies paid to AIG employees are part of a signed and legal contract, in effect for over a year.
Senator Chris Dodd added an amendment to B.O.’s “Porkulus Bill” (which not one member of either House was allowed to read before voting on it) Sen. Dodd’s amendment as I understand specifically excluded any caps that existed prior to Feb. 11th 2009 although now Sen. Dodd is now denying that he knows anything about it.
The bonus monies were to be paid if an employee met certain specifically pre-set goals. So why should they be denied their bonus, all of which amounts to only 165 million which amounts to less than 1/10 of 1% of the Bailout of 173 billion dollars? (Chump change in B.O.’s Multi trillion dollar pork projects - only now coming to light).
Where, oh where, is the uproar and indignation over the 93 billion AIG gave to other banks (most of which are outside the U.S.A.)???
Without wax - Fred
PS: “Carbonite” is now Mac compatible - thought you’d like to know.
50 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 18, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory. ~~ 1Timothy 3:16
51 boberinyetagain // Mar 18, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Fred, the 93 billion that AIG gave out was the reason they needed the money to begin with…they’re an insurance company, those banks made a claim, AIG owed them their due payout but the piggy bank was empty (now…where did I leave that money?) so AIG had to borrow it from you and I and pay what they owed.
That’s the one part that black and white…but I agree with you on the bonuses as well…they owed that money as well (and again…seemed to have “misplaced” it somewhere…) so of course they paid their employees when the check cleared.
The problem is that they (AIG) owe a whole lot more than they’ve let on…wait for it
52 mindknumbed kid // Mar 18, 2009 at 3:41 pm
This is interesting.
http://worriersanonymous.org/Share/Photo/Photomaker.htm
53 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 3:49 pm
While the Obamabots are indulging in dreams of hearings and trials, they should be paying more attention to the thugs in the current administration andserious threats in our own hemisphere.
Instead of addressing consequential matters, the Audacity of Audacity is wasting his time choosing his basketball picks and appearing on Jay Leno.
The time for photo ops and campaigning is over, Ackbar. Get back to serving the American people as an executive. Address this banking/Treasury issue as if it is a foremost concern, stop bleeding the taxpayers with socialistic programs, act as if following the Constitution and defending our national security are vital concerns.
America does not need to have the Keystone Kops at the helm.
54 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 4:28 pm
“Senator Chris Dodd added an amendment to B.O.’s “Porkulus Bill” (which not one member of either House was allowed to read before voting on it) Sen. Dodd’s amendment as I understand specifically excluded any caps that existed prior to Feb. 11th 2009 although now Sen. Dodd is now denying that he knows anything about it.”
Was this really in your letter to Congressman Hoekstra?
I would be very interested in his reply.
Please post his reply, won’t you?
L@Y
55 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Ackbar cries, “Uncle!” and Pelosi is spinning like a top.
Failed Congressional leadership since the 2006 elections and failed Obama presidency since the 2008 elections.
That’s okay, though, B. Hussein Obama will have plenty of teleprompters when he appears on the Leno show with this baritone charisma and annoying lisp on the letter “s”.
56 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 4:47 pm
“Instead of addressing consequential matters, the Audacity of Audacity is wasting his time choosing his basketball picks and appearing on Jay Leno.”
What? You mean he’s not moving fast enough for you?
“stop bleeding the taxpayers with socialistic programs,”
How’s that? Have your taxes increased? Or, have they, in fact, decreased?
“socialistic programs”. Would you have everyone here give up social security?
Would you prefer the uninsured go without medical treatment?
What about the governmental services that are publicly provided, such as: Police and Fire Protection, prisons, highways, and water treatment?
How about the military? Would you like to buy your own? Well, get your gun boy!
Such vehement ignorance!
L@Y
57 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 5:36 pm
“Failed Congressional leadership since the 2006 elections and failed Obama presidency since the 2008 elections.”
Whatever! The voters don’t seem to agree with you. “The Party of No” is loosing ground to the Democrats! I know you don’t believe it, but it seems your record of being correct hasn’t been worth much for a long time now!
Try to remember that in 2010, when Democrats gain a filibuster proof majority in the Senate!
L@Y
58 Fred Sinclair // Mar 18, 2009 at 5:43 pm
As a 1 (one) pack a day smoker, (locally with Gov. Jennifer’s “sin tax” on tobacco a single pack goes for $5.79.) I’m switching back to my pipes.
Before April 1 After April 1 % Change
Cigarettes (per pack) $0.39 $1.01 + 259%
Cigars (% of sale price) * 20.7%
Cap=$0.05 52.75%
Cap=$0.40 +255%
+800%
Pipe Tobacco (per lb.) $1.09 $2.83 + 260%
Roll-Your-Own Tobacco (per lb.) $1.09 $24.78 + 2273%
Chewing Tobacco (per oz.) $0.01 $0.03 + 300%
that’s $4.384 Federal, state and state sales tax.
Cost of a pack of cigarettes is $1.406 (including retailer’s profit) plus assorted taxes of $4.384 = $5.79.
59 Fred Sinclair // Mar 18, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Correction to Congressman Hoekstra
“…..excluded any caps that existed prior to Feb. 11th 2009s…”
WSJ clarifies this, my wording was off. It should have read: “While the Senate was constructing the $787 billion stimulus last month, Dodd added an executive-compensation restriction to the bill. The provision, now called “the Dodd Amendment” by the Obama Administration provides an “exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009″-which exempts the very AIG bonuses Dodd and others are now seeking to tax.
60 mindknumbed kid // Mar 18, 2009 at 6:15 pm
re#58 - It appears as though there is an addiction. I say we need to find a way to break their addiction to our hard earned money.
61 Newsman // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Hey RAM !
Maybe the cell that should be set up for GW for lying to the public can be made into a three holer ???
And Laughing @ Who ? - why don’t you pay for your smokes selling butts to smokers in Massachusetts who will soon be paying $8 per pack. Stimulate your wallet with good old capitalist profit! Isn’t it sinful to be smoking as that is a form of suicide ?
62 Newsman // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Whoops - Sorry Laughing@Who That bit about butts should have been directed to Fred Sin …..
63 Fred Sinclair // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:08 pm
L@Y #57 - “Try to remember that in 2010, when Democrats gain a filibuster proof majority in the Senate!”
Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, & a Ho, Ho, Whee!!!
You’re soooooo funny (and silly too).
The odds of that are virtually identical with the odds of the survival of a snowball on the streets of Miami, in July. The identical factor is so close as to be indistinguishable from zero.
Now, back to reality, if you don’t mind. With many thanks to the usurper and his gang of thugs, tax cheats and assorted criminals, 2010 will most likely be a replay of Newt’s “Contract with America” in 1994 as the bums are tossed out on their brain baskets (aka “seats”) and replaced with a filibuster proof Senate comprised of 70 hard core Conservatives the likes of Senators Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn (R-OK)
That senate will be responsible for passing bills approved by the overwhelmingly Republican House of Representatives like congressman “Pete” Hoekstra (R-MI) as laws enacted by the usurper are reversed by over riding the usurper’s veto.
We, the people, intend to take America back from his version of socialism.
So far to date, no one has seen his genuine Birth Certificate (and lived to tell about it) - until it is manifested, he’s just a fellow living rent free in Government Housing, pretending to be Caesar, Abraham Lincoln, Emperor, King, God, Napoleon Bonaparte, “The One”, the messiah or whatever strikes his fancy on any given day.
2010 will be one for the history books, for sure.
64 Newsman // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:09 pm
For cickety sakes onlineA … the man hasn’t been in office long enough to fail at anything.
Besides - you could do better in such a short time frame? Friggin genius you are !!
65 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:28 pm
“The odds of that are virtually identical with the odds of the survival of a snowball on the streets of Miami, in July. The identical factor is so close as to be indistinguishable from zero.”
Isn’t that the same chance you gave Obama to beat McCain?
Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, & a Ho, Ho, Whee!!!
You’re soooooo funny (and silly too).
L@Y
66 Laughing@You // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Newsman,
Watch it! I had my last devil’s weed in 1999!
And, I don’t live in Massachusetts! But, I do have a cousin on Nantucket though.
L@Y
67 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 7:40 pm
“So Many Democrats, So Much Phony Outrage”> These fools appear to be in a circular firing squad.
Sorry, l@y, but just like your buddy, the Constitutional “Scholar”-Chief, you presume that much of what you ask about in #56 is a federal responsibility. The Constitution limits what the federal government can and cannot do .
Ackbar must have been AWOL during the semesters when he should have been grinding the books to learn about the Constitution. He must have been grievance mongering at the time in his extracurricular activities as a community agitator, er, organizer.
Police, fire protection, prisons, etc., are state and local responsibilities. Health care and health insurance==life insurance, house insurance, liability insurance, car insurance, and so on- are not the responsibility of the government. They are individual responsibilities and choices.
Do you want the government to be responsible for being sure that you eat nutitiously, that you have a home as lovely as Henrietta’s, that you have the latest bling, that you have the newest fuel-efficient car that attracts the babes, that you have an all-expense=paid trip to your dream destination?
When the Bush tax cuts expire, I will be subsidizing too many able-bodied citizens who have decided that living on the dole is more profitable. I will be penalized for saving and investing. I will be paying more to heat and light my home if cap-and-trade malarkey is passed.
Ackbar the American Idol may be running his administration according to his poll numbers, but you and he are nitwits to believe that they have real-world relevance.
Now run along and pick up your brownshirt Astroturf points from Axelrod and Emanuel. Scope out the latest talking points from thinkprogess, HuffPo, moveon, mybarack, TPM, and commondreams. See if they have any data to back up your boilerplate.
68 onlineanalyst // Mar 18, 2009 at 8:14 pm
It’s time for Dodd to resign. He is spinning like a top, and he hasn’t an honorable bone in his body.
Next up… Barney Frank…followed by Timmy Geithner.
Gorelick, Raines, and Waters should be under investigation.
To top all of this abuse of public trust, executives of Fannie and Freddie, who are in convervatorship, will be receiving retention bonuses.
69 AIG and Counter-Productive Rhetoric | Caffeinated Thoughts // Mar 18, 2009 at 8:18 pm
[...] there’s the whole political donations being made by AIG executives, with Senator Chris Dodd being one of the chief beneficiaries of those donations (President Obama being another). Dodd was one who also pushed a law [...]
70 Communal Prosperity // Mar 19, 2009 at 6:26 am
We need to reclaim these bonuses and campaign donations given to politicians to fund public healthcare. The government is doing a good thing by buying up the private sector, but they need to reform wealth distribution.
71 BlackLion31U // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:57 am
A top Army commander said Wednesday the strain of long and repeated deployments was a big factor in the spike in suicides among Army personnel.
“It’s a stressed and tired force,” Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli told a Senate Armed Services subcommittee. He noted that some troops remain on 15-month deployments to Iraq that won’t end until later this year.
“We can do a lot, but we can’t control the demand, and we expect the demand for all of 2009 and into 2010,” Chiarelli said.
Last year, the Army had 140 suspected suicides among active-duty troops, an all-time high. It reported 24 suspected suicides in January, followed by 18 suspected last month. Each military branch, however, saw an increase in the number of suicides among its ranks from 2007 to 2008.
Chiarelli said suicide is having an impact on every segment of the Army, affecting soldiers of all ranks and both men and women. He said about two-thirds of those who had committed suicide last year were either deployed or had deployed. A vast majority, he said, were dealing with some type of relationship problem, and many had legal, financial or occupational difficulties.
Thanks again for lingering memories George.
72 Fred Sinclair // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:40 am
“And in the thirty and eighth year of Asa king of Judah began Ahab the son of Omri to reign over Israel: and Ahab the son of Omri reigned over Israel in Samaria twenty and two years. And Ahab the son of Omri did evil in the sight of the LORD above all that were before him.” (1Kings 16:29,30)
WoW!!! Twenty two (22) years sounds like a terrible curse but the four (4) years under the despotic rule of the usurper may well prove to be a far worse curse than what the Israelites endured.
It would be hard to find anyone who hates abortion more than myself. However in 2010 and 2012 there are mega-millions of liberals who will not be available to vote.
“But there are Republicans and Conservatives who get abortions.” seems a valid retort, but that is a specious argument. Killing a child is prima facie evidence that a person is a liberal and/or a RINO. So factually, Conservatives do not kill children, be they the result of rape, incest or any other convenient excuse.
James Robinson, one of the great preachers of today, is the living result of a coerced rape and a failed abortion attempt, so there is no viable excuse - only liberal rationalization.
Rationalize = “rational lies”
73 onlineanalyst // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:48 am
Obama and his Dem enablers want to turn the tax code into a penal code. Pelosi thinks that 90% is about right.
Meanwhile, “Communal Prosperity” (above) fails to grasp that we do not live in a communist country where wealth should be redistributed according to the whims. of oligarchs. There are other countries around the world where over 60% of his income can be taken by the State to be distributed as “his social conscience” sees fit. Perhaps he should consider emigrating to one of those Utopias and learn to live/die with rationed healthcare.
On the other hand, BL31U feels obliged to distract attention from the failed Obama presidency with statistics that may demonstrate correlation but not causation. Axelrod doesn’t think that this approach to divert the attention to President Bush is too effective. Your Obamabucks will be delayed until you improve your technique, BL31U.
74 Deerslayer // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:23 am
Just perhaps, if all of the politicians were to give back all of the contributions made by AIG, the outrage they exhibited might be a little more believeable.
My idea for campaign reform would be that a politician could accept campaign contributions ONLY from legal residents of the area they are to represent, NO Pacs, NO corporations etc. It would take alot of money out of the system resulting in less costly campaigns and the elected offical would truely be obligated ONLY to those they actually represent. (pipe dream)
75 MajorDomo // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:36 am
All you people who are so exercised over big bonuses to directors of multi-BILLION dollar corporations should next turn your ire on football players and baseball players anhd basketball players who get 10s of millions of dollars compensation. What are THEY doing for their money? Wait… if they didn’t get high pay, those nasty old owners would be getting even fatter! But.. but.. It’s the fault of neither. It’s the fault of “fans” who pay eshorbitant ticket prices. Like AIG’s situation is the fault of a few in Congress who forced them into making loans guaraneed to fail, and which President Bush tried four times to circumvent The ultimate problem here is the voters.
76 onlineanalyst // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:36 am
Under the radar, Ackbar pushes for his cap and trade “energy plan”. How much will it affect your pocketbook? You don’t want to know because not only will you pay personally for obscenely increased electricity and natural gas bills, but you will pay for the bills of the “impoverished” through government subsidies/welfare of tax credits. (Ain’t spreading the wealth around wonderful? The Green technologies and their backers, lobbyists, and politico supporters get rich and the takers continue to take.)
The failed Obama presidency continues its push in its Great Leap Forward. Mao would be proud.
77 MajorDomo // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:38 am
exhorbitant
78 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 10:05 am
OLA, let me sum up the gist of your argument…
Heaven forbid that we should be required to pay the “true” cost of anything (such as power). Better to stumble forward believing that it’s our “right” to cheap fuel/power even if that’s at the expense of the rest of the planet and even ourselves/our children.
Heaven forbid that those less fortunate might achieve a standard of living that might lend them some dignity and…yes…put them in a position to better themselves and contribute to rater than drain societies resources.
I want to pollute at will, I want to keep those in poverty as miserable as possible and I’ll defend to the death my “right” to subsidize my cell phone charges on the backs of those less fortunate
I assume you sleep well…I just wonder how/why that is
79 RedPepper // Mar 19, 2009 at 10:09 am
ola #76: Mao would be rolling on the floor giggling! China has no intention of doing anything to reduce its “carbon footprint” … perhaps O-Brother! has a plan to restrict “global warming” to specific areas of the planet …
P.S. Happy birthday Hawkeye - enjoy your special day!
80 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 10:12 am
With cash AND food stamps benefits (this info may be outdated by a year or two), a family of four gets about $930./month.
If that isn’t more than enough I can’t imagine what it might take to calm the rabble. Heck, in some markets you could nearly afford the rent on a 2 b/r place. No heat/lights/water/food/medicine mind you but nearly enough for rent…in a lousy place. I’m sure they’ll get up each morning and attend the local college in order to better themselves
81 upnorthlurkin // Mar 19, 2009 at 10:52 am
Oooo, OLA, I bet that stings doesn’t it….to be lectured to by the almighty, covetous, Bob about how to spend your (certainly ill-gotten) gains! Uff da! Isn’t it wonderful to have the honor of his wise(communist) opinion?! We’re not worthy, we’re not worthy…..
(And knowing you and your heart, I’m sure you are sleeping very well!)
82 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 11:05 am
Upnorth, thanks for the vote of confidence but it wasn’t really deeded. Folks that think like me are in the…wait for it…the majority.
We believe that living well (and/or cheaply) at the expense of others isn’t really living well after all. I’ve never bought a single thing from WalMart due to that very belief.
I’m ready to take my belief face my God…can’t wait to hear the “explantion” that you give to yours…
83 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 11:09 am
Mind you, I fully expect my God to send me to hell (positions outlined here won’t “get er done” salvationwise) but as I’ve mentioned before the only amusing part will be seeing the shocked look on the many faces in line with me…those that were “better informed” than I was in life (and I count most here in that number, you have it figured out…God loves you and yours best…righhht)
84 onlineanalyst // Mar 19, 2009 at 11:12 am
You betcha, UNL.
What bobreerba fails to understand is that we have clean coal technology that is exactly that: clean, and that it fires up most of the electrical grid in the heartland. Furthermore, nuclear power is clean, safe, and cheap. but his green-weenie fearmongers (who are being discredited by the day) won’t allow the building of nuclear plants.
Would boboeeba prefer that Brazil burn its rain forests so that sugar cane can be planted for the purpose of producing ethanol? Or that we subsidize the likes of Chavez so that the poor, poor pitiful blokes can have some heating oil?
Bobo: If people are as destitute as you claim, then they are living in subsidiaed housing, getting MediAid, in some cases being assisted by power companies.
Boboreeba, if Government Nanny takes care of all one’s needs or wants, then why would such a person exert himself to better his situation? The effort would only be taxed.
I sleep well because I, not the government, decide where my charity and material support goes, and I daresay it is more generous than yours.
85 Laughing@You // Mar 19, 2009 at 11:30 am
“Sorry, l@y, but just like your buddy, the Constitutional “Scholar”-Chief, you presume that much of what you ask about in #56 is a federal responsibility. The Constitution limits what the federal government can and cannot do .”
Barack Obama, the President of the United States was graduated first in his class at Harvard Law School.
In addition he taught Constitutional Law at
the University of Chicago Law School.
UC Law School statement: “The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as “Senior Lecturer.” From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School’s Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.”
“you presume that much of what you ask about in #56 is a federal responsibility. The Constitution limits what the federal government can and cannot do .”
Where do you find my presumption of federal responsibility? I SAID GOVERNMENT!
What have I listed that is “limited”, or restricted by the United States Constitution?
To refresh your recall, I repeat: “Police and Fire Protection, prisons, highways, and water treatment?”
All these functions, I would also point out, are now being performed, at some level, by the federal government!
“Police, fire protection, prisons, etc., are state and local responsibilities.” Please cite the article of the United States Constitution where I may find the assignment of these “responsibilities”.
Remember too:
“Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
That statement is broad enough to include many things, which I am certain, you would not wish to include!
Catchup is NOT a vegetable! Trees DO NOT pollute, and Ronald Reagan was not a Framer of the United States Constitution.
L@Y
86 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 11:51 am
Clean coal you say? I have more respect for you than that…seriously. Whilst it’s a lovely fiction it’s currently fiction none-the-less and I believe that you know that. No CO2? No particulates? If/when they eliminate those things THEN there will be “clean” coal.
Natural gas you say. Turns out one of the largest finds ever is right here in PA (along with much of the available coal). But, it turns out that the chemicals used to extract the newly found gas are poisoning the people/livestock that live on/near the drilling sites. Naturally the company extracting it denies this…tell it to the sick people/animals. EVERYTHING is a trade off. Go ahead, deny that we use the lions share of the worlds resources and give them back pollution in return. Deny that we use the worlds labor (often children) so we can have “affordable” clothing and other mostly useless goods.
Because we’re Americans. God’s “chosen” people. Were better/more deserving that “they” are. We’ve “earned it”.
Again, I’d pay good money to be there whilst you expouse these “views” to your God
I agree that nucular (channeling George) power is a fine alternative but prolly best to find a way to contain the waste before going full guns on that and, after 20-30 years of trying we’re no closer on that score either. Instead we have many, many pools of “waste” that can be scooped up and used to harm us. And harm us they will, one way or another.
87 Laughing@You // Mar 19, 2009 at 1:07 pm
“I sleep well because I, not the government, decide where my charity and material support goes, and I daresay it is more generous than yours.”
OLA,
Are you the one I should talk to about U. S. foreign aid?
“… I daresay it is more generous than yours.”
How modest of you to say that. If it is true, it is certainly in contradiction to your selfish spirit.
Stupid can never be clever, unless you are speaking to idiots!
L@Y
88 Newsman // Mar 19, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Major Domo - RIGHT ON ! With your remarks about the players getting millions. It is outrageous. Not a one of them is worth it. Many of them seem to get worse the more they get paid. My wife says people should just stop going to see games until they bring the salaries and ticket prices down to more reasonable levels. How can the average Joe Slob bring his kids to a game and have to pay the high ticket prices never mind the price of a couple of hot dogs and drinks for his kids ?
89 Laughing@You // Mar 19, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Newsman,
Re: 88
The answer is simple repeal MLB’s antitrust exemption! More teams, more players, more fans, and No Prima Donnas, or Baseball Barons.
L@Y
90 Fred Sinclair // Mar 19, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Whew! That was close; far too close for comfort. The conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States with a coup d’état came within a cat’s whisker of succeeding. Unfortunately (for them) the movers and shakers in the plan screwed up royally. With all of their hundreds, nay, may I say thousands of moles planted across the spectrum of all the branches of government, from the FBI and CIA, to the news media and school teachers, the unions, etc. They had the misfortune of backing a narcissist to be their “front man”.
Oh, they got him ‘elected’ alright but then the cracks began to appear. Their narcissistic front man has a messiah complex. In less than two months in office, he has done more to cripple America than Jimmy Carter managed in his full four year term. Due mainly to his haste to do as much damage as possible before he’s found out (outed) the cracks are now, not only appearing but they are widening. An ever increasing circle of Democrats are questioning, “What sort of a monster have we created?”
They are seeing pictures of the “detention centers” aka “Concentration Camps” being erected around the country. Semi-trucks with low-boys, loaded with transport cages. Assaults on freedom of speech as A.M. Conservative Talk Show Hosts are targeted. Anti gun laws in the works, etc.
Too much, too quick. Trillions of debt that make the cost of war in Iraq look like chump change.
So very close but they picked the wrong front man. Perhaps they should have backed Chris Dodd or Barney Frank instead? After they lose both houses in 2010 and the White House in 2012, it’ll take them another thirty years to find viable patsy to try again.
They’re still, to this day crying the blues that even with all their cheating and voter fraud they still ended up losing in 2000. All they’ve done since then is bemoan the fact (in their minds) that the 2000 election was “stolen”.
They’ve repeated that lie to themselves so often that today there are some who truly believe it!
91 Laughing@You // Mar 19, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Please disregard the above insanity!
I have noticed that sometimes, more often of late, the dear old soul has hallucinations which he regards as wisdom, and apparently feels that must share them with other mentally impaired persons.
RAM, Fred is calling you!
L@Y
92 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Probably got his answers at Harvard off of his magic teleprompter…
93 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Got bullets?
94 Newsman // Mar 19, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Fred ! How long ago was it that you escaped from the asylum ? Rolled right out the front door and nobody was the wiser. Amazing !
95 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 5:02 pm
y’all know I rarely come on after 5 but this sums things up so very,very well that I really had no choice
“It did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance,” Wilkerson wrote in the blog. He said intelligence analysts hoped to gather “sufficient information about a village, a region, or a group of individuals, that dots could be connected and terrorists or their plots could be identified.”
Chew on that for a while. We were not railing against what we imagined George might do (as you all are oh so well prepared for with Obama) we were (are) railing against things George actually did….
96 boberinyetagain // Mar 19, 2009 at 5:03 pm
“There are still innocent people there,” Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a Republican who was chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, told The Associated Press. “Some have been there six or seven years.”
any questions?
97 R.A.M. // Mar 19, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Most “transparent” administration ever. We just didn’t realize what “Obama the crook” meant, (that it would be so TRANSPARENT that he is a crook), when he said that!
Just like “Nasty Nan” Pelosi, the trolls, seeing that Obama, Dodd, and the rest of the Democrooks have been caught with their hand in the “bailout” jar, are resorting to their tried and true, “blaming Bush”!
Giggling Boy, (aka l@y/et/SYBIL), quoted this to me on the “Geithner”, (see: TAX CROOK), thread, it fits him and the trolls, and ALL the Democrooks MUCH BETTER!
“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.” ~ Abraham Lincoln
In a related story, I heard “Nasty Nan” Pelosi blaming Bush for the AIG exec bonuses yesterday. This after last night when we heard the tape of her calling illegal aliens “Patriotic”.
Can you say, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”?
Meanwhile, newsboy rails against Bush here too, after saying the other day that he would hold the Obama administration accountable if they did wrong. The “stimulus bill” was written by THEM ALONE, behind closed doors, and we KNOW that Obama got the 2nd most campaign money, right behind Dodd, who “says” he didn’t put the language in to pay the bonuses.
Need I repeat the Lincoln quote?
98 R.A.M. // Mar 19, 2009 at 5:11 pm
re # 96: Booby hatch asked, any questions?
Yes, didn’t your mommy tell you not to justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior?
You sound like, “He did it mommy, why can’t I, whaaaaaaaaaa!” How old are you little cry baby?
99 R.A.M. // Mar 19, 2009 at 5:18 pm
booby hatch #95: I hope and pray that obama releases the Gitmo terrorists next door to you trolls.
That way you can show them your “brotherly love”!
You also said, “-y’all know I rarely come on after 5 but-”
Hey, not many here would care if you would “come on” even less!
I have yet to hear ANY of you trolls explain the criminal activitees of your party in this “Stimulus-gate” that is authored by NO ONE but Dems.
Only bait and switch as USUAL!
So very TRANSPARENT!
100 Teleprompter-gate! Obama sued by Truthers to overturn election redux « Smash Mouth Politics // Mar 19, 2009 at 5:38 pm
[...] Obama Sued to Overturn Election “fraud” [...]
101 Godfrey // Mar 19, 2009 at 6:15 pm
To those conservatives who chimed in above regarding welfare are in favor of small government; how can you support a government that takes upon itself the power to hold people indefinitely without charging them with a crime? If “big” government means “powerful” government, the two stances are contradictory.
Likewise, the liberals (okay, just you, Boberin) who support a large and powerful welfare state (i.e. who trust the government to take care of them) should also be willing to concede enough liberty to allow the government to hold whomever they think is a threat, proven or not.
In my view both practices are wrong: it’s wrong to confiscate money from the people who earn it just to give it to the people who don’t. But it’s also wrong to hold scores of innocent people without any recourse whatsoever.
I think the Framers would have interesting things to say on both subjects.
102 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:04 pm
It took only a brief search to find these quotes, I would say there are many more for those who are willing to devote the time.
Each individual of the society has a right to be protected by it in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property, according to standing laws. He is obliged, consequently, to contribute his share to the expense of this protection; and to give his personal service, or an equivalent, when necessary. But no part of the property of any individual can, with justice, be taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of the representative body of the people. In fine, the people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent.
Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.
John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
103 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Wow! Check this out …
As the cool and deliberate sense of the community ought in all governments, and actually will in all free governments ultimately prevail over the views of its rulers; so there are particular moments in public affairs, when the people stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career, and to suspend the blow mediated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice and truth, can regain their authority over the public mind?
James Madison (likely), Federalist No. 63, 1788
104 Newsman // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Sheesh - I read today that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case banning all crosses from being displayed on Federal Property.
My goodness, where are we going to get the funds to rip up and replace all those thousands of crosses that are in military cemeteries owned by the Federal Government?
Idiocy in government is not defined by political party !
105 Godfrey // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Mindknumbed: speaking of devoting time, if you have some to devote I strongly recommend “Founding Brothers.”
106 RedPepper // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Godfrey #101: Hi there, Godfrey. I think you’re leaving out a couple of intermediate steps in your argument.
” … a government that takes upon itself the power to hold people indefinitely without charging them with a crime?”
When exactly did you determine that “crime” was the appropriate paradigm? You may be comfortable with that, but I’m not. I’m more of a “They were at war with us, but we weren’t at war with them” kind of guy.
” … it’s also wrong to hold scores of innocent people without any recourse whatsoever.”
Innocent? Scores? Got a link? I can dig up links to news items about former Gitmo detainees that rejoined the jihad; people who have committed suicide bombing attacks, people who have taken leadership positions in Al Qaeda, and so on.
Indefinitely? I would be all in favor of a Congressionally legislated process to deal with these cases in a military context.
Not that I see this as a perfect solution, necessarily, but I certainly did not do anything to prevent its implementation, either. I am totally opposed to our military becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of our civilian legal system.
Far, far more could be said on this topic, of course.
And you? Where do you stand?
107 Godfrey // Mar 19, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Newsman re: #104- The case in question was brought after the National Park Service denied a request to erect a Buddhist shrine in that same preserve.
If you support huge crosses on public property, you should also be prepared to accept huge monuments to other religions.
Perhaps a great big statue of Mohammed or Tom Cruise…
108 gafisher // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:08 pm
It appears Congress is working to shed its reputation for “tax and spend” economics. With today’s decision to confiscate 90% or more of payments it had agreed to and already paid, our House of Reprehensibles has begun to firm up a new “spend, then tax” policy. Whether this qualifies as a true reversal of direction is debatable.
One thing that’s not debatable — if they can do it to anyone, they can do it to everyone.
109 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:12 pm
I think we can all agree that there was/is a foreign threat. This statement may best explain why this war on terror is taking a long time.
America united with a handful of troops, or without a single soldier, exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign ambition than America disunited, with a hundred thousand veterans ready for combat.
James Madison, Federalist No. 14, November 30, 1787
Voting for war and then being critical of it, and even going so far as to say it is lost, shows the lack of unity that leads to weakness in the eyes of the enemy.
110 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:16 pm
re#108 -
A just security to property is not afforded by that government, under which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and reward another species.
James Madison, Essay on Property, March 29, 1792
I consider greenbacks property!
111 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:21 pm
An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation.
John Marshall, McCullough v. Maryland, 1819
112 gafisher // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:33 pm
An interesting statement but no more true than when Hillary said it during the campaign.
» First, although Model T production began in September of 1908, it was the 1909 model year — in other words, there was no “1908 Model T.”
» Second, although various models (open, closed, “convertible,” truck, van, etc.) were rated at between 13 and 21 miles per gallon, the average was 15mpg, compared to the 18.7 mpg average for all SUVs sold in 2008.
» Third, though hardly the last discrepancy, the 1909 Model T weighed 1200 pounds, had a top speed of 45mph, and lacked both emissions and safety enhancements required on today’s vehicles. The average SUV weighs just less than four times as much, can cruise more than three times as fast, and still, contrary to Hillary’s (and Obama’s) assertion, gets better gas mileage. Overall, the modern SUV is about five times more efficient than the Model T.
But I still love the T.
wv - HELPLESS LAN - How I make my living.
113 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:34 pm
If, for instance, the president is required to do any act, he is not only authorized, but required, to decide for himself, whether, consistently with his constitutional duties, he can do the act.
Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833
114 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:44 pm
It is not necessary to enumerate the many advantages, that arise from this custom of early marriages. They comprehend all the society can receive from this source; from the preservation, and increase of the human race. Every thing useful and beneficial to man, seems to be connected with obedience to the laws of his nature, the inclinations, the duties, and the happiness of individuals, resolve themselves into customs and habits, favourable, in the highest degree, to society. In no case is this more apparent, than in the customs of nations respecting marriage.
Samuel Williams, The Natural and Civil History of Vermont, 1794
Preservation and increase of the human race - he must have been thinking marriage was to be between people of opposite sexes…
115 egospeak // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Random Thoughts,
re: 78 Bober I usually don’t respond to you, however your suggestion that conservatives are denying to the less fortunate the ability to achieve a higher standard of living because we oppose this administrations plans to massively increase the size and scope of government is beyond reckless. The welfare state has worked so well the last 40 years. What world are you living in? How will the less fortunate have more opportunity to achieve that higher standard of living when government is taking the majority of taxpayers paychecks to pay for all the new spending. How about if we suffer from hyper inflation from all of this incredibly reckless spending? That will really help the less fortunate to get ahead won’t it? How about if/when cap and trade kicks in and energy costs skyrocket. That will really make things easier for the poor right?. Speaking of clean energy, you exhale CO2. Have you forgotten that?
I thought you were better than that straw men who wants to “pollute at will”, “keep those in poverty as miserable as possible” and subsidize his “cell phone charges on the back of the less fortunate”. Obviously I was wrong. If that’s really what you believe conservatives mean when we talk about limited government or a return to Constitutional government then I can only conclude that you haven’t heard a word any of us have said.
You did say one true thing. “Everything is a tradeoff.” You may be the only liberal anywhere who would admit that. However your santimony in the paragraph following that true statement is sickening. America is not the richest counrty on earth because we stole everyone elses resources, it is because we have an economic and governmental system that is or at least was based on freedom. If you would bother to check, the freest countries are usually the most prosperous and the least free are typically the poorest.
Re: 85 L@Y
You ask, regarding police, prisons, highways, etc, what article of the Constitution assigns those responsibilities. You are quite right in implying that there is none. However since the Constitution defines the limits of federal power and authority and since the 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” it seems pretty obvious that the 10th Amendment is the answer.
As far as using the general welfare clause as a catchall for all kinds of social welfare programs, it would be instructive to read what the founders had to say about it. Check out what Joseph Sobran has to say at http://www.sobran.com/columns/1999-2001/991123.shtml.
Regards,
ps - Boberin, re: 95 & 96 Wilkerson was also the one who when he resigned his position at Foggy Bottom had an opinion piece published in the Washington Post in which he complained and explained that one of the reasons that he resigned was because the White House was trying to usurp from the State Department the direction of America’s foreign policy. If that was truly his opinion, he shouldn’t have been allowed to resign, he should have been fired.
116 Fred Sinclair // Mar 19, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Relay from Barb:
Hi all, I just received an email from Sandy Peterson or “UpNorthLurkin’”. Her Father passed away on Tuesday.She is rather overwhelmed but she wanted her ScrappleFace friends to know. If any of you have email addresses for others, please send them the sad news.
I don’t have her home address ,and if anyone does ,I would like to have it .
I know this is the way it is supposed to be ,Parents dying before their children ,but it still hurts when it happens,and for a long time afterward.
Barb
117 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:05 pm
I am truly sorry for her loss, our prayers are with you at this time.
118 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:09 pm
No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.
Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, November 4, 1775
That’s all for these quotes tonight, what a treasure they are!
119 mindknumbed kid // Mar 19, 2009 at 9:16 pm
I lied - One more…
Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.
Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833
120 Fred Sinclair // Mar 19, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Newsman #94 - “Fred ! How long ago was it that you escaped from the asylum ? Rolled right out the front door and nobody was the wiser. Amazing !”
Ahhh, you caught me. Actually I was simply trailing you when you made your breakout. The major difference was that I had my release papers and you split as soon as you learned there as going to be another intelligence test. But then you never was very good at tests, were you? The only person in the asylum ever to flunk an IQ test - guess that makes you special. (Special needs, that is).
They’re coming to get you, you know. Be sure and thank them when they give you your new, nifty white jacket. I’ve heard it comes decorated with pretty leather straps and buckles. You’ll look really good in it.
121 gafisher // Mar 20, 2009 at 6:24 am
Judging by [this]story, either Obama’s TelePrompTer, a.k.a. “Mirror Mirror,” is actually trying to get Barry in trouble, or he forgot to bring it along. We’ll have to see if it scrolls a resignation soon.
Come to think of it, as such a vital and influential member of the Administration, perhaps Congress should be required to confirm TelePrompTers like other Cabinet positions.
122 AIG Fiasco Represents Essence Of Democrat Corruption, Incompetence « Start Thinking Right // Mar 20, 2009 at 12:02 pm
[...] and Dodd took more campaign contributions from AIG than anybody. And now these weasel hypocrites actually have the audacity to blame AIG for giving them money - which they kept and used to defeat their political opponents. “While AIG was collapsing, and [...]
123 CONNECTICUT -SMALL BUT EVIL STATE…DODD,AIG, ROLAND, THE LIST GROWS.. « Jfkfan’s Blog // Mar 22, 2009 at 11:33 am
[...] and Dodd took more campaign contributions from AIG than anybody. And now these weasel hypocrites actually have the audacity to blame AIG for giving them money - which they kept and used to defeat their political opponents. “While AIG was collapsing, and [...]
124 Pickerhead :: Pickings from the Webvine ::March 17, 2009 // Mar 30, 2010 at 10:08 am
[...] Scrappleface says Dodd and Obama are outraged over the cash AIG gave their campaigns last year. [...]
You must log in to post a comment.