Hypocrisy of Republicans/Conservatives

[BJean 16]

waynoo: "Vote em all out!"

And who would you suggest that we elect as president? And who would fill all the empty slots in the Senate and House? And how would you propose that we accomplish this?

Or are you just being satirical like your buddy?

[ariscus99 1]

airbus:

I did not take your quote out of context. So because YOU look like a tool you are denying that you meant what you said and accusing me of taking your statement out of context. How is someone to know that you are being satirical? I doubt very seriously that you were at the time. Maybe now, of course, which is entirely understandable.

Now you can't even give me the respect to spell my nickname correctly. Wow. And a great big negative on that whole tool statement you made there. I posted the FACTS! I rebutted with FACTS! And just because you don't have the common sense, or your so blinded by your partisanship that you can't take anything the way it's supposed to be, is beyond me. Thats a fault of your own that you'll need to work on. You think you didn't take that quote out of context? Standby. You absolutely took that quote out of context. ABSOLUTELY! Unequivocally you took that quote out of context. I'm sorry you aren't able to see that, maybe it's one reason you love the democratic party so much, because they love nothing more the to take quotes out of context and try to make people look bad. It's terribly sad that they're so weak that that is their only option but oh well.:biggrin:

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Yeah, I kinda feel the same way, but that is an unnecessary jab at people who feel strongly about a cause. I'm not an Obama hater, your subsequent posts do not support this tho I am most definitely not an Obama lover, I feel like he's been quite a let down thus far. Mostly because he hasn't done anything, Not true, see below. and with this new little tidbit about Iraq being his victory that is definitely annoying. But I really am curious what the people who have this unwavering support for Obama have to say on the topic? Is there a point in time, when things will no longer be GWB's fault? Or is anything that is bad that he had a hand in his fault, and anything that has happened since without and influence from him Obama's fault? At least that almost makes sense. But if thats the case, then why claim Iraq as Obama's victory, it has GWB written all over it, I would really like an honest answer to this question.

Norman Ornstein: The best Congress you’ll ever hate

[/url]
Norman Ornstein | resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute | Posted: Sunday, February 7, 2010 4:00 am |  (3) Comments

WASHINGTON — When President Obama urged lawmakers during his State of the Union speech to work with him on “restoring the public trust,” he was hardly going out on a limb. The Congress he was addressing is one of the least popular in decades. Barely a quarter of Americans approve of the job it’s doing, according to the latest Gallup/USA Today poll.

It’s not hard to find reasons why Americans are down on Capitol Hill, and why President Obama’s approval rating has dropped below 50 percent in many polls. A year into the 111th Congress, unemployment remains at almost 10 percent, and many Americans are struggling to get by -- even as they’ve watched Congress bail out banks and coddle the same bankers now salivating over massive new bonuses. At the same time, the public has had a front-row seat to the always messy legislative process on health care and other issues.

There seems to be little to endear citizens to their legislature or the president. It’s too bad, because even with the wrench thrown in by Republican Scott Brown’s election in Massachusetts,  this Democratic Congress is on a path to become one of the most productive since the Great Society Congress in 1965-66, and Obama already has the most legislative success of any modern president -- and that includes Ronald Reagan and Lyndon Johnson.

The productivity began with the stimulus package, which was far more than an injection of $787 billion in government spending to jump-start the ailing economy. More than one-third of it -- $288 billion -- came in the form of tax cuts, making it one of the largest tax cuts in history, with sizable credits for energy conservation and renewable energy production as well as home buying and college tuition. The stimulus also promised $19 billion for the critical policy arena of health-information technology, and more than $1 billion to advance research on the effectiveness of health care treatments.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan has leveraged some of the stimulus money to encourage wide-ranging reform in school districts across the country. There were also massive investments in green technologies, clean Water and a smart grid for electricity, while the $70 billion or more in energy and environmental programs was perhaps the most ambitious advancement in these areas in modern times. As a bonus, more than $7 billion was allotted to expand broadband and wireless Internet access, a step toward the goal of universal access.

Any Congress that passed all these items separately would be considered enormously productive. Instead, this Congress did it in one bill. Lawmakers then added to their record by expanding children’s health insurance and providing stiff oversight of the TARP funds allocated by the previous Congress. Other accomplishments included a law to allow the FDA to regulate tobacco, the largest land conservation law in nearly two decades, a credit card holders’ bill of rights and defense procurement reform.

The House, of course, did much more, including approving a historic cap-and-trade bill and sweeping financial regulatory changes. And both chambers passed their versions of a health care overhaul. Financial regulation is working its way through the Senate, and is on track for enactment in the first half of this year. It is likely that the package of job-creation programs the president showcased last week, most of which got through the House last year, will be signed into law early on as well.

How did it happen? Democrats, perhaps recalling the disasters of 1994, when they failed to unite behind Bill Clinton’s agenda in the face of uniform GOP opposition, came together. Obama’s smoother beginning and stronger bonds with congressional leaders also helped.

But even with robust majorities, Democratic leaders deserve great credit for these achievements. Democratic ideologies stretch from the far left to the conservative, with every variation in between. Finding 219 votes for climate-change legislation in the House was nothing short of astonishing; getting all 60 Senate Democrats to support any version of major health care reform, an equal feat. The White House strategy — applying pressure quietly while letting congressional leaders find ways to build coalitions — was critical.

Now Democrats’ success at keeping 59 senators in line means little if they cannot find someone on the other side willing to become vote No. 60. With Republicans ebullient over the Massachusetts election, the likelihood is that they will feel vindicated in their “just say no” strategy.

[ariscus99 1]

waynoo: "Vote em all out!"

And who would you suggest that we elect as president? And who would fill all the empty slots in the Senate and House? And how would you propose that we accomplish this?

Or are you just being satirical like your buddy?

Have you ever heard of this little thing that happened a few hundred years back, oh what was it called?.....The American Revolution, thats right. We had a horrible government ruling us based on what THEY thought was best for US, not based on what we thought was best for US. Which is what we the people demanded, and is what we the people are demanding again. And will get. No before your first words are "You want to go to war and kill half the country?" NO. Thats not what I'm saying. Grow up. There are other diplomatic ways to do this. And there are thousands of Americans out there who would make wonderful representative, that are no nonsense, non politico types who could and would do a much better job then what we have now. The big problem is Americans are to content to just sit by and let everything happen. Thats what the tea party movement is about. Taking OUR country back from the "elite" who think they know what's best for us, and doing what we KNOW is best for US.

[pattygreen 5]

Now you can't even give me the respect to spell my nickname correctly[end quote]

Just wait. This is what they do. Very disrespectful. I simply ignore the name calling. (it's a lack of self esteem)

[pattygreen 5]

Have you ever heard of this little thing that happened a few hundred years back, oh what was it called?.....The American Revolution, thats right. We had a horrible government ruling us based on what THEY thought was best for US, not based on what we thought was best for US. Which is what we the people demanded, and is what we the people are demanding again. And will get. No before your first words are "You want to go to war and kill half the country?" NO. Thats not what I'm saying. Grow up. There are other diplomatic ways to do this. And there are thousands of Americans out there who would make wonderful representative, that are no nonsense, non politico types who could and would do a much better job then what we have now. The big problem is Americans are to content to just sit by and let everything happen. Thats what the tea party movement is about. Taking OUR country back from the "elite" who think they know what's best for us, and doing what we KNOW is best for US.

Excellent! I agree, totally!

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Have you ever heard of this little thing that happened a few hundred years back, oh what was it called?.....The American Revolution, thats right. We had a horrible government ruling us based on what THEY thought was best for US, not based on what we thought was best for US. Which is what we the people demanded, and is what we the people are demanding again. And will get. No before your first words are "You want to go to war and kill half the country?" NO. Thats not what I'm saying. Grow up. There are other diplomatic ways to do this. And there are thousands of Americans out there who would make wonderful representative, that are no nonsense, non politico types who could and would do a much better job then what we have now. The big problem is Americans are to content to just sit by and let everything happen. Thats what the tea party movement is about. Taking OUR country back from the "elite" who think they know what's best for us, and doing what we KNOW is best for US.

And who is the tea party going to run as candidates? It cost tons and tons of money to run and get elected to office. Where are these no-nonsense, non politico people going to get that kind of money? And to keep getting it for re-election? From fellow teabaggers?

No, from lobbyists like everyone else and when they get to DC with pie in the sky and naive attitudes it will take them all of 2 seconds to see that they can't change anything. It is bigger than any one person or even a bunch of them.

And who are these "elite" of which you speak? Do you mean educated people? Because we finally have brains back in the white house everyone is now an elitist? That's a word the neo-cons like to throw around like it's an insult. But we did dumb for eight years with disastrous results. So if what we have is elitist, then I'm all for it.

I would rather have states secede from the union. And start with Texas. They can put dubya back in as their president.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Listen from 00:50 to the 2 minute mark. A whole minute and ten seconds..you can do it.

YouTube - Glenn Beck Catches Obama In Another Lie- Kiss Your Doctor Good-Bye

Pres. Obama would never sign a bill that contained this.

[ariscus99 1]

your subsequent posts do not support this

Show me a post where I say I hate Obama? I do not. Have not ever said I did. Do I support him? No, not in the least I think the road he wants to take America down is dangerous and un-American. But I respect the man. He's the president, respect is due to him for that. If you'll notice, I even have enough respect to do silly little things, like capitalize his name, which reading back through several of yours I've noticed you always capitalize Obama, and any democratic name you supply but almost never do so with President Bush's name, or other republicans who you like. That is just one of the many differences between the mind sets of liberal/progressive/democratic people and the rest of us. We aren't as petty, we don't try to get an extra little jab in by doing silly little things like that. It's called respect. You may not agree with Bush, and you may have hated Bush, but he was our President, for better or worse, and the respect should be given to him. You said in another post that you would support any democratic presidential candidate. You don't think thats a bit dangerous to just use a blanket statement like that? I sure wouldn't support any republican, I can see clearly enough to support whomever I think will do the best job. I was a Clinton supporter, tho I was young I've always had an avid interest in political things and thought Clinton was a better choice then Bush Sr. and was pretty happy with where he took us for the most part. There was some more balance in the two houses then there is now so he couldn't get to crazy.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Now you can't even give me the respect to spell my nickname correctly[end quote]

Just wait. This is what they do. Very disrespectful. I simply ignore the name calling. (it's a lack of self esteem)

This is very hypocritical (and typical) coming from someone who had engaged in her share of name-calling. :biggrin: And for the record, I have great self-esteem, not to mention the facts on my side.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Show me a post where I say I hate Obama? I do not.You don't use the word hate but it comes across in your posts. Have not ever said I did. Do I support him? No, not in the least I think the road he wants to take America down is dangerous and un-American. Saying his agenda is un-american is tantamount to saying his agenda is traitorous. But I respect the man. He's the president, respect is due to him for that. If you'll notice, I even have enough respect to do silly little things, like capitalize his name, which reading back through several of yours I've noticed you always capitalize Obama, and any democratic name you supply but almost never do so with President Bush's name, or other republicans who you like.bush didn't earn my respect. He ruined this country with his policies. That is just one of the many differences between the mind sets of liberal/progressive/democratic people and the rest of us. We aren't as petty, we don't try to get an extra little jab in by doing silly little things like that. It's called respect. You may not agree with Bush, and you may have hated Bush, but he was our President, for better or worse, and the respect should be given to him. You said in another post that you would support any democratic presidential candidate. You don't think thats a bit dangerous to just use a blanket statement like that?Why would that be dangerous? I support the democratic agenda and therefore support democratic candidates. I am the president of our local democratic club and a democratic committeewoman. I don't support the republican agenda so why in the world would I support their candidates? I sure wouldn't support any republican, I can see clearly enough to support whomever I think will do the best job. I was a Clinton supporter, tho I was young I've always had an avid interest in political things and thought Clinton was a better choice then Bush Sr. and was pretty happy with where he took us for the most part. There was some more balance in the two houses then there is now so he couldn't get to crazy.

Clinton was a great president. Did some dumb things but our country did very well under him. But what is it that has changed with this president that didn't happen under Clinton? Let's see. Hmmm. It couldn't be because Pres. Obama's black. No, of course not. Who would ever admit to that? Not the all-white tea party.

[ariscus99 1]

And who is the tea party going to run as candidates? It cost tons and tons of money to run and get elected to office. Where are these no-nonsense, non politico people going to get that kind of money? And to keep getting it for re-election? From fellow teabaggers?

No, from lobbyists like everyone else and when they get to DC with pie in the sky and naive attitudes it will take them all of 2 seconds to see that they can't change anything. It is bigger than any one person or even a bunch of them.[/b]

And who are these "elite" of which you speak? Do you mean educated people? Because we finally have brains back in the white house everyone is now an elitist? That's a word the neo-cons like to throw around like it's an insult. But we did dumb for eight years with disastrous results. So if what we have is elitist, then I'm all for it.

I would rather have states secede from the union. And start with Texas. They can put dubya back in as their president.

That is the basis of the problem. Why should it cost millions of dollars to get elected? Explain that? Yes if some "TEAPARTY" person were to get elected today, alone, with all these high hopes he'd have a very hard time getting anything done. But if the "TEAPARTIERS" and the rest of the country would wise up and overthrow the entire gov. and get in and start fresh, things could be changed. We could put limits on campaigns, real limits, not the BS they try now. We could put term limits so you don't get guys like Killer Teddy in there for 40 years or however long he was in, they don't get things done because they're always trying to get re-elected, if you had 8 years and you were out for life, you would spend time getting sh!t handled not trying to get re-elected. There are hundreds of other examples out there that a little common sense will show you. Things our founding fathers did, and believed in. Oh I know they were all slave owning KKK members who were ignorant and hated the poor I know I know.

The elite? No, not educated people. I'm an educated person, with a good job who lives comfortably, but I would not consider my self to be elite. I came from very meager beginnings. The elite that I am speaking of, are the Pelosi's and Kennedy's and Moore's of the world who think the average person doesn't know what is best for them, and that instead they just need to follow like lemmings whatever they are told to do by the elite. Whens the last time we had a president, who wasn't a millionaire? How many senators aren't millionaires? Are you a millionaire? Do these people who have no idea how hard it is to struggle to pay the rent, or come up with the money to be a self pay bander live the life you do? Or I do? Or the majority of American's do? No, they don't. So why are they the ones representing the majority? Because they have money. And with that money it doesn't usually take to long before they start thinking they are better then the rest of us, and know more than the rest of us, like Pelosi's and Kennedy's and Moore's and Obama's. It's garbage. We need every day people who know what life is about to represent us, not rich snobs.

[ariscus99 1]

I hope your not truly naive enough to think the President Bush was a stupid person. That wouldn't say much about you. There is not a person in politics who is unintelligent or stupid. There just isn't. And if you think there is, you are very sadly misinformed, and have a huge mental block you need to get over. I especially like how people always seem to say that it was Bush who ruined the country, Bush, Bush, Bush. But when you say "hey why hasn't Obama got this or that done yet" the response is always. Well it's a process, there's the senate and the house and the republicans just aren't letting him. Well, riddle me this; who controlled the house and senate during Bush's last term? And how was it possible he got all this legislature threw to ruin the country without the house and senate, I'm really confused how he was able to do that without the democrats of the house and senate, as well as the republicans of the house and senate? Oh, wait they all helped, and since the republicans haven't had a filibuster proof house and senate, that means the dems helped out...hmmmmmm strange.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

That is the basis of the problem. Why should it cost millions of dollars to get elected? Explain that? Yes if some "TEAPARTY" person were to get elected today, alone, with all these high hopes he'd have a very hard time getting anything done. But if the "TEAPARTIERS" and the rest of the country would wise up and overthrow the entire gov.That is called an act of treason. I don't advocate treason but apparently the tea party people do. So let the republicans align themselves with this theme. Great campaign slogan. BTW - sounds like you've been listening to whacko Michelle Bachman. and get in and start fresh, things could be changed. We could put limits on campaigns, real limits, not the BS they try now. We could put term limits so you don't get guys like Killer Teddy in there for 40 years or however long he was in, they don't get things done because they're always trying to get re-elected, if you had 8 years and you were out for life, you would spend time getting sh!t handled not trying to get re-elected. There are hundreds of other examples out there that a little common sense will show you. Things our founding fathers did, and believed in. Oh I know they were all slave owning KKK members who were ignorant and hated the poor I know I know.

The elite? No, not educated people. I'm an educated person, with a good job who lives comfortably, but I would not consider my self to be elite. I came from very meager beginnings. The elite that I am speaking of, are the Pelosi's and Kennedy's and Moore's of the world who think the average person doesn't know what is best for them, and that instead they just need to follow like lemmings whatever they are told to do by the elite.The creation of the middle class in this country came about because of the policies and agenda of the democratic party. Presidents like FDR were millionaires but the people loved him because he helped them. Not the corporations, the people. Whens the last time we had a president, who wasn't a millionaire? How many senators aren't millionaires? Are you a millionaire? I am not a millionaire. Do these people who have no idea how hard it is to struggle to pay the rent, or come up with the money to be a self pay bander live the life you do? Many presidents came from humble beginnings and made their money later in life. Pres. Obama did not come from money, his beginnings were humble. Or I do? Or the majority of American's do? No, they don't. So why are they the ones representing the majority? Because they have money. And with that money it doesn't usually take to long before they start thinking they are better then the rest of us, and know more than the rest of us, like Pelosi's and Kennedy's and Moore's and Obama's.How can you say you don't hate these people? It is so obvious. Just because people have money does not make them oblivious to the average person's plight. What have the republicans ever done for the middle class. Name me one major program that they were responsible for that has helped the middle class? It's garbage. We need every day people who know what life is about to represent us, not rich snobs.

I certainly don't find any of the people you mentioned to be snobs. Kennedy had money and certainly didn't have to devote his life to public service. But he did. And the people loved him because he fought for the poor, the elderly, the disabled, the least among us.

And Nancy Pelosi is a polished, intelligent, strong, woman and a lot of people can't handle that. Like the entire republican party.

And Michael Moore just tells the truth about corporate america which those beholding to corporate america don't like.

And I know how hard life can be. I am a breast cancer victim and 11 months after I was diagnosed my husband was diagnosed with cancer. So, we were battling together. He succumbed to his cancer 4 years ago. So I buried my husband and became a widow at 54. That certainly was not in my plans. :biggrin: I too am educated and am retired now. But I would never call anyone an elitist just because they try to help people. What an unfair characterization.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

I hope your not truly naive enough to think the President Bush was a stupid person. That wouldn't say much about you. There is not a person in politics who is unintelligent or stupid. There just isn't. And if you think there is, you are very sadly misinformed, and have a huge mental block you need to get over. I especially like how people always seem to say that it was Bush who ruined the country, Bush, Bush, Bush. But when you say "hey why hasn't Obama got this or that done yet" the response is always. Well it's a process, there's the senate and the house and the republicans just aren't letting him. Well, riddle me this; who controlled the house and senate during Bush's last term? And how was it possible he got all this legislature threw to ruin the country without the house and senate, I'm really confused how he was able to do that without the democrats of the house and senate, as well as the republicans of the house and senate? Oh, wait they all helped, and since the republicans haven't had a filibuster proof house and senate, that means the dems helped out...hmmmmmm strange.

He did all his damage before the 2006 election. And if the democrats got anything through, he vetoed it and they didn't have enough votes to override a veto.l