Jenny asks…So Obama faithful have accused the gop of political disrespect. Did they somehow “forget” about Maxine Waters?http://news.yahoo.com/hell-barack-row-over-washington-metro-ad-051919392ccchtml
Democrats have accused Republicans of lowering the tone of the political discourse in the United States during this election season, in particular with highly personal attacks on the president.
……………..and the reality check from before………………….
Waters vowed to push Congress to focus on creating more jobs. “I’m not afraid of anybody,” said Waters. “This is a tough game. You can’t be intimidated. You can’t be frightened. And as far as I’m concerned, the ‘tea party’ can go straight to hell.”
…………………………………in other words……………………
why is it that the gop is guilty of disrespect, but somehow when they use the same words, somehow its ok?Political News Writer answers:Obama is working very hard for reelection. This was supposedly a presidential visit to NH, but it was really a campaign stop. He will say anything to be reelected. The sad part is that people will believe him. I don’t, but others are sheep.
Maxine Waters is not someone I respect. Her remarks about the tea party going to hell were hurtful. I used to be involved with the tea party and I believed in what they were trying to do up until they allowed politicians to attach themselves to the group and become spokespeople of some kind. It was find when it was a free thinking grassroots group.Michael asks…For all Conservatives who accused Dems of being intolerant: Please read the following quotes and then answer:?Are Your Ready to Apologize to Democrats?
Headlines, Wednesday, August 29, 2007: “WASHINGTON – Idaho Sen. Larry Craig’s political support eroded significantly Wednesday as three fellow Republicans in Congress called for his resignation and party leaders pushed him from senior committee posts.
We at least ought to hear his side of the story.,” said Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, like McCain a presidential contender who spoke on CNN.”Political News Writer answers:He pleaded Guilty as charged. He took a lower charge Plea to keep it all a secret. What is there to be tolerant about?. He got caught breaking a law in a major city and pleaded guilty, case closed. Sen Lowlife Chris bailout on Imus Dodd of Ct would like to see this thing to linger awhile, it’s the political Democratic way, turn it all into politics. Let Sen Craig claim not to be gay, and who cares, everyone knows he’s a HOMO now. I’m sure Congressman Barney Frank of MA. Is already planning the Cumming out partyLisa asks…Do you find the timimg of conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart’s death suspicious?I realize that in recent times it has become socially unacceptable to question the holy, infallible US government.
But don’t you find Andrew Breitbart’s death – or rather, the timing of his death – just a teeny, tiny bit suspicious?
For those who may not know, Mr. Breitbart was a conservative commentator and blogger. According to Wikipedia, “On February 9, 2012, Breitbart, while in Washington, DC was quoted as saying, ‘wait til they see what happens March first.’ Breitbart was referring to his plan to release ‘damning’ footage of President Obama that he had been promising to reveal throughout the month of February.”
He died unexpectedly on that same day – March 1, 2012. He was 43.
And here’s a bit of a bizarre twist: Mr. Breitbart’s preliminary autopsy report was publicly released on April 20, 2012. And within mere HOURS of it being released, the coroner that did that autopsy and released the report, Michael Cormier, died. He was 61.
And do you want to know how he died?
According to the LA Police Dept, he died of arsenic poisoning.
Going back to February 9, Breitbart claimed he had videos that would end the political career of US President Barack Obama:
“I have videos, this election we’re going to vet him. . .We are going to vet him from his college days to show you why racial division and class warfare are central to what hope and change was sold in 2008.”
(The speech can be seen on Youtube.)
For the record, this has NOTHING to do with making Obama or any one group or political party look bad (I am a supporter of Ron Paul anyways, and care about country, not party). It’s about doing my little part to help make the corruption that is rampant in the US government – the government of us, the people – more public. Before you attack me for questioning the all-good, all-caring, all-loving US Government, let me leave you with this food for thought:
According to reporters at Los Angeles’s KABC News, investigators with the LA Police Department say that doctors at the hospital that Cormier died at have raised suspicions over the coroner’s death.
@xpatinasia – This isn’t about Democrats vs. Republicans. It’s about the American people vs. our corrupt government. If you are to biased to see that, then that’s YOUR problem. And for the record, I hate Fox News just as much as MSNBC.
The videos haven’t actually been released. There was one that shows Obama in 1991 at Harvard giving a speech for Dereck Bell and includes him hugging the radical professor. But Mr. Beitbart said he had videos (more than one).
Not that you care, but I just as critical of Bush for trampling the Constitution as I am of Obama for doing the same. They’re of the same cloth, and until we realize it, nothing will ever change.Political News Writer answers:No intelligent person holds the same beliefs as you. His “secret” video played out on FO卐 News and, as it turned out, had been released several years earlier. Opps. As a conservative, you hate the truth.Susan asks…How important should context be in political talk?Here’s an explanation of Palin’s Reagan quote from the Washington Post:
“President Reagan said, ‘We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.'”–Sarah Palin
This is a favorite quote of conservatives, as it speaks to individual responsibility. But few people remember when Reagan said it–or why.
The answer is July 31, 1968, at the platform hearings of the Republican convention in Miami that nominated Richard M. Nixon as the GOP candidate against then Vice President Herbert Humphrey. Reagan would not get elected until 12 years later, but his appearance before the platform hearings was a sensation and helped launch the fervor on the right that ultimately took him to the presidency.
But he made his remarks in the middle of a debate over the urban riots that had swept the nation in the aftermath of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. Some in the party, such as New York Mayor John Lindsay, argued to the platform committee that policies that would help end poverty and racism were needed to stem urban violence. Reagan disagreed, saying society was not the root of crime and suggesting that Democrats had coddled criminals, ignoring the victims.
Reagan, to cheers, argued that “it is too simple to trace all crime to poverty or color. There is a crime problem in the suburbs as well as in the slums and the minority communities are victims of crime out of all proportion to their numbers. Criminals are not bigoted and they are not color blind; they…rob and maim and murder without reference to race, religion or neighborhood boundaries.”
Then he made the statement that Palin cited approvingly. But Reagan was not talking about mass murderers or “acts of monstrous criminality,” as Palin put it. He was arguing against more social-welfare programs.
Does it still apply to this particular situation?Political News Writer answers:Standard of proof is as non existent with the population who vote based on aesthetics as it is with devoted religious fanatics who refuse to take scripture figuratively.David asks…interesting times a coming?http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_losing_congress
Bush has barely over two years left. The loss of either house in voting next month could hasten Bush’s descent into a lame-duck presidency.
Bush has barely over two years left. The loss of either house in voting next month could hasten Bush’s descent into a lame-duck presidency.
“If he loses one house here, President Bush will enter the last two years very wounded,” said David Gergen, a former White House adviser who served in the administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton.
“He will have the capacity to say no to Democratic legislation, but he won’t have the capacity to say yes to his own legislation,” said Gergen, who teaches at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.
Democratic victories essentially could block Bush’s remaining agenda and usher in a period of intense partisan bickering over nearly every measure to come before Congress.
Loss of either chamber also could subject his administration to endless congressional inquiries and investigations.
The president and chief political strategist Karl Rove last week expressed renewed confidence of retaining both House and Senate; others are not so upbeat.
“All of our numbers look pretty bad and there’s no question that there’s a jet stream in our face,” said House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Furthermore, some of Bush’s fighting in the trenches is likely to be with fellow Republicans as they seek to find a new standard bearer for 2008 — and distance themselves from an unpopular war, the unpopular president who waged it, and congressional scandals that include inappropriate e-mails to House pages from ex-Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla.
“There’s no question that the Republican coalition is stressed over the way Washington has been handling fiscal matters, the Foley affair, the Iraq war,” said GOP consultant Scott Reed. “All of these are coming together at the same time.”
Already, Republicans are showing divisions on Iraq policy. Fresh skepticism has come from Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner of Virginia, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (news, bio, voting record) and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, a longtime Bush family loyalist.
If Republicans lose their majorities, it will be that much harder for Bush to hold together already splintering GOP cohesion on Iraq.
Bush has been quoted by journalist Bob Woodward as saying, “I’ll stay in Iraq even if the only support I have left is from my wife and my dog.” A Democratic takeover and Republican defections could make that day seem closer.
While the Senate has been difficult for Bush, even with GOP control, the House for most of his presidency has delivered for him. That could be about to change.
The White House traditionally loses seats in midterm congressional races. The most recent exception was 2002, when Bush’s party picked up seats.
Many Democrats see the upcoming elections as a mirror image of 1994, with the parties reversed.
Then, Republicans rallied behind firebrand Rep. Newt Gingrich of Georgia, announced a “Contract with America,” and stormed to victory, seizing both House and Senate from Democrats.
It was a huge blow to Clinton, made worse by the lavish and almost-presidential reception Gingrich received around Washington as he was inaugurated as House speaker.
Doug Schoen, Clinton’s pollster then, said those times were bleak, including Clinton’s baleful insistence to reporters in early 1995 that “the president is relevant.”
But Clinton soon figured out how to enhance his relevance and influence, reaching out to Republicans on some of their own issues, such as welfare law overhaul and “talking about the common good,” said Schoen. Clinton went on to easily win re-election in 1996.
But Schoen said he doubts Bush can do the same: “After 9-11, except for a brief period, he’s governed from the right. There’s so much bitterness and division, it’s going to be tougher for him to do it than perhaps it was for Clinton.”
Some of Bush’s sharpest critics would rise to top positions with a Democratic takeover.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., probably would become speaker. Rep. Charles Rangel (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., a foe of extending Bush tax cuts, would become chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.
Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, who has sponsored legislation calling for steps that could open the way to Bush’s impeachment, would lead the Judiciary Commit
the above is quoted from Yahoo news. i find it interesting that Bush will no longer be in so powerful position as to dictate to the half of America that he has insulted and abusedPolitical News Writer answers:Reminds me of an old chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.Lizzie asks…Did this make 0bama look like the fool?Sunday August 23, 12:36 AM
Salah Sarrar – Gaddafi Hugs Lockerbie Bomber; Britain Denies Deal
By Salah Sarrar and Luke Baker TRIPOLI/LONDON, Aug 22 (Reuters) – Britain dismissed suggestions of a link between the Lockerbie bomber’s release and energy deals with Libya on Saturday, and the head of the U.S. FBI said the move gave comfort to terrorists.
London and Washington have condemned the ‘hero’s welcome’ given to Abdel Basset al-Megrahi on his return to Libya after being freed from a life sentence in a Scottish jail on compassionate grounds because he is dying of cancer.
‘The idea that the British government … would sit down and somehow barter over the freedom or the life of this Libyan prisoner and make it all part of some business deal … it’s not only wrong, it’s completely implausible and actually quite offensive,’ said British Business Secretary Peter Mandelson.
In Washington, FBI director Robert Mueller released an angry letter he sent to Scottish minister Kenny MacAskill, who ordered the release, calling it inexplicable and detrimental to justice.
‘Indeed your action makes a mockery of the rule of law. Your action gives comfort to terrorists around the world,’ Mueller wrote in the letter posted on the FBI’s website.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s office issued a copy of a letter he wrote to Gaddafi on Aug. 20 expressly asking him to refrain from a ‘high-profile’ welcome for Megrahi.
Gaddafi met Megrahi on Friday, embracing him and getting a kiss on the hand in return. The beaming Libyan leader expressed gratitude to Brown and Queen Elizabeth.
‘This step is in the interest of relations between the two countries…and of the personal friendship between me and them and will be positively reflected for sure in all areas of cooperation between the two countries,’ he told Libyan TV.
His son Saif al-Islam went further, saying that whenever he had met British officials to discuss business, the issue of Megrahi’s release was a condition of any deal being struck.
Mandelson said he had met Gaddafi’s son twice in the past year and the issue of the Lockerbie bomber had been raised both times, but his release was not tied to business deals.
‘It’s not only completely wrong to make any such suggestion or insinuation, it’s also quite offensive,’ he told reporters.
Megrahi, 57, is the only person convicted of the bombing, in which a Pan Am (PNAA.PK – news) jet carrying 259 passengers — most of them American — was blown up over Lockerbie in Scotland in December 1988, killing all those on board and 11 people on the ground.
After years of wrangling and sanctions, Libya handed the former intelligence agent over for trial and he was sentenced by a special Scottish court sitting in the Netherlands in 2001. He was freed on Thursday because of terminal prostate cancer.
‘In all British interests regarding Libya, I always put you on the table,’ Saif al-Islam’s newspaper quoted him as telling Megrahi on his return to Libya.
‘All the visits of the ex-Prime Minister Blair and the big secret and public work that all the parties entered into was carried out in order to release you. The exploitation of British-Libyan political and trade interests was always done with the aim of releasing Abdel Basset al-Megrahi.’
European governments including Britain’s are lobbying hard for business in Libya as it emerges from years of sanctions. Oil companies such as BP and Shell (LSE: RDSB.L – news) are among several British firms hoping to make big profits in the desert country.
Britain’s Foreign Office flatly denied any link.
‘No deal has been made between the UK government and Libya in relation to Megrahi and any commercial interests,’ a spokesman said, adding the release was Scotland’s decision.
More than 1,000 Libyans gathered at an airport in Tripoli on Thursday to welcome Megrahi home, cheering and waving national flags, despite the fact relatives of the American victims said they had received assurances there would be no hero’s welcome.
In his letter to Gaddafi, addressed ‘Dear Muammar’, Brown said a ‘high-profile return would cause further unnecessary pain for the families of the Lockerbie victims. It would also undermine Libya’s growing international reputation’.
Megrahi said in an interview with Britain’s Times (1832.HK – news) newspaper published on Saturday he would present new evidence before he died exonerating him of the bombing.
He dismissed the international furore over his release, saying U.S. President Barack Obama should know he would not be doing anything apart from going to hospital and waiting to die. Doctors say he may have less than three months to live.
‘My message to the British and Scottish communities is that I will put out the evidence (to exonerate me) and ask them to be the jury,’ Megrahi said, without elaborating.
For more on Megrahi’s release click on
(Writing by Luke Baker iPolitical News Writer answers:No this shows obama being a fool
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4Charles asks…Do people realize the New World Order is real?This is a quote from David Rockefeller on PAGE 405 of his Autobiography Memoirs.
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
This was said at a 1991 Bilderberger meeting
“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
The New World Order is real and people need to understand that both parties including Obama and Bush are puppets for this global elite.
How am I a nut for quoting his own words. He admits its true, but the real idiots are the ones who deny the truth.Political News Writer answers:Obama is and has been running for the leadership of the new world order. He sure hasn’t helped us in the USA.—Richard asks…Are you as concerned about this election as I am? If so pls read this and give me your opinions, ?YOU JUST MIGHT WANT TO PRINT THIS, FILE IT AWAY AND PULL IT OUT IN A YEAR OR SO.
Here is another warning from a very knowledgeable person from the Hollywood sector that is not a preaching Democrat. His words are spooky.
The writer of this essay is Jerry Molen, an Academy Award winning Hollywood Producer, who produced Jurassic Park, Hook, Rain Man and many more classy movies, and who won the Academy Award for Schindler’s List. Jerry is one of the very few conservatives in Hollywood – but wants to include Democrats. He says:
We are about to make the Mother-of-All-Mistakes, because the Republican Party gave us no reliable alternative. If the conservative movement does not rally behind the only alternative left to us, this country will become a true Socialist State within the next two Presidential terms.
Ladies and Gentleman, this is the most grave situation this nation has faced in my lifetime. We just experienced an over-hyped, outrageous primary election season that has left me wondering where the heads of our citizens are hiding – must be someplace where the sun doesn’t go very often.
At one time in my life I was a determined, dedicated and ever-loyal registered Democrat. Then something happened – Lyndon Baines Johnson – that turned my life around and gave me pause for the veracity of a party that lives and feeds off of the most unfortunate among us. Some of them are in their positions in life by their own choosing, others by outside circumstance. But always, always there was a door open to them, to reach for new heights, achieve new goals, change their lives for the better. Similarly, there have always been the bottom feeders, doing what they could to take advantage of those who had not or have not seen better days, nor realized that they in fact were the masters of their own destiny – these unfortunates had come to believe that they were dependent on people in Washington, who would look out for and take care of them. They waited and still wait for all those promised freebies.
Most people don’t reflect upon the fact that the Democrats ruled Washington for over 40 years; it wasn’t until 1994 when the so-called Gingrich Revolution changed – but only for a while. These same people do not realize that it was the Democrats who created the failed policies of the entitlement programs that are now falling apart before our eyes.
Do not think I find the Republicans blameless in all this. They, too, suffer from the ego and greed built into our system. But in the past few months I have listened with growing horror to the railings of the left, calling for yet more giveaways, more promises of a proverbial ‘free lunch.’ What sums up my feelings, why I am appalled by those in political power is contained within a quote by basketball legend and talk show host Charles Barkley: ‘Poor people have been voting for Democrats for the last fifty years….and they are still poor.’
Now, with our elections, come yet more new promises of ‘change:’ ‘change we can believe in,’ ‘hope for the future’. But if you really, I mean REALLY listen to what the new messiah is asking for, it is not ‘change of policy’ or ‘change for the better’ – this is a warning that he wants our change. And the change you will get will not be the change you expected or wanted.
I leave you my predictions of what will happen if the junior Senator from Illinois becomes President – especially if the House and Senate are veto-proof Democrat:
1). Strict gun laws, though he promised he would not.
2). ‘In God We Trust ‘ will be removed from all currency.
3). He will renege on his pledge to Israel and leave them to the wolves of Islam.
4). Hillary Clinton will be named to the Supreme Court.
5). Tax rates will surge to the highest levels in 30 years.
6). Capital gains tax will be at least double current levels.
7). Retired Army General Wesley Clark will be named Secretary of Defense.
8). Our borders will be open to all comers – especially from the Middle East and South America .
9). Amnesty will be granted to all illegals in the U.S, regardless of status or even gang membership (think MS-13).
10). Our presence in Iraq will come to an abrupt end – with tragic results to their citizens and devastating consequences to our military.
My predictions will not sit well with some people – the best we could hope for is that I am wrong.
Any bets?Political News Writer answers:McCain supporters already know these things, that’s WHY we support McCain
Obama supporters can’t understand it, will never see it, and would just accept it if Obama was elected
It’s actually pretty sadPowered by Yahoo! Answers