The left keeps saying how they wanted the Republicans to join them and become bipartisan. In an interview Cantor (#2 ranking Republican congressman) said in the 3 1/2 years Pelosi has been Speaker she never one single time ever called him, never once. The Dems just wanted to ride roughshod over the Republicans.
Sooky Rottweiler says;
This toon reminds me of Mittaines.His stripes are not real. He’s all gray in the morning. He paints his own stripes with my human’s old mascara (that’s for calling me Flea Motel one time too many, Mittaines!)
The owners of MSNBC want to start a web site. But, they are going to change the URL address because according to them MSNBC is far too liberal for a general audience and they want to attract more than just the hard core left.
So just think about that when you quote them. They are more to the left than Fox is to the right.
lib, msnbc HAS a website. And more importantly, what matters is what evidence is presented when an anchor or commentator reports a story. In the link senor provided, Maddow provided the irrefutable evidence by running the videos which proved the GOP guy was lying when he said the Dems had not attempted to renew the program.
Sometimes even O’Reilly provides evidence or cites the source of his information. Facts are neither left nor right.
@Libertarian1 Yes you have my permission to quote me as your better, if I have predicted correctly. If I am in error I will admit to making a mistake. November 3rd we will see if the tides of politics have changed. The original prediction is below:
“Going to be so funny when the votes are in and the GOP, Tea Party and Fox News all fall flat on there faces.
If you think Obama and the Democrats were running rough shod over the GOP since the last election, just wait for the next few years. ”
Let’s set the parameters first. The polls today say House becomes Republican. if it does i expect a mea culpa. if it remains Democratic i will give one.
The polls say the Republicans will pick up 4-6 Senate seats. Same provisions.
Lastly the polls say the Republicans will control a majority of the governorships in the country.
lib1, actually G.E. has split its political donations fairly evenly between Reps and Dems. From 1998 to 2008, it gave MORE to the GOP than Dems. In 2008, it gave slightly more to Dems, as it has so far in 2010.
This information comes from two independent organizations that monitor political donations from PACs, 527’s and direct contributions: opensecrets.org and campaign money.com
campaignmoney.com reports that G.E. gave slightly more to GOP from 1999 to present than to Dems in same time period.
opensecrets.org reports that Soros gave $5 million to 527s in 2008. He gave about $23 mil to 527s in 2004, when he became actively involved in politics and was against Bush. He gave $3.5 mil to 527s in 2006.
p.s. part of what makes tracking funds so difficult is that donors to certain organizations do not have to be reported. Karl Rove’s organizations don’t disclose donors.
church, I’m not comparing Soros to Rove. I said that it’s hard to track funds because the new rules allow some organizations not to report donors. Rove’s new organizations are a good example.
OK, you don’t like Soros. OK. The Koch Bros. are listed #5, and they fund a similar list of conservative orgs. OK, so what? Who knows what they’re funding under the new rules that donors don’t have to be disclosed.
The point is transparency — anyone interested in good government should want transparency from all sides. It ain’t a partisan issue.
The whole point of this dialogue was to rebut that GE isn’t in the Dems pocket; facts don’t back it up.
No one has suggested that the “pledge to America” represents anything particularly new or different from established GOP ideas. To the contrary, the policies that republicans will pursue when elected (if they know what’s good for them) are tried and true policies that have worked, to the benefit of all, every time they’ve been tried, without fail.
Now, these ideas might be considered “fresh” in that they are different than anything that’s been tried in at least the last decade or two, and are sharply different from what is going on right now, which is absolutely the novel and bold change with which we were threatened - er, that is, promised - if we elected Barack Obama.
In short, Republicans are not pledging to do something new and bold so you can get a better job, bigger house, or free health care. ALL that they are promising is that the government will STOP doing that which has caused your job to go away, your 401k to lose half it’s value, and the clock to start ticking on the lifetime of your access to health care. For almost everyone, that is all we ask for.
Dtroutma over 13 years ago
Bake and snake?
rfischer Premium Member over 13 years ago
Some people you can fool all of the time.
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
He is correct. The old staid Republicans are certainly not adding much new to the discussion.
That is why we needed the TEA party. You may not like their ideas but they are new and deserve a chance.
Ryan, Cantor, McCarthy- the Young Guns.
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
The left keeps saying how they wanted the Republicans to join them and become bipartisan. In an interview Cantor (#2 ranking Republican congressman) said in the 3 1/2 years Pelosi has been Speaker she never one single time ever called him, never once. The Dems just wanted to ride roughshod over the Republicans.
napaeric over 13 years ago
Going to be so funny when the votes are in and the GOP, Tea Party and Fox News all fall flat on there faces.
If you think Obama and the Democrats were running rough shod over the GOP since the last election, just wait for the next few years.
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
^ may I quote you on your prediction?
Proposal after the election re-post either say see I told you so and I will bow before my betters or re-post and say how could I have been so wrong.
CorosiveFrog Premium Member over 13 years ago
Sooky Rottweiler says; This toon reminds me of Mittaines.His stripes are not real. He’s all gray in the morning. He paints his own stripes with my human’s old mascara (that’s for calling me Flea Motel one time too many, Mittaines!)
Tiger-striped Mittaines says;
Flea Motel, you just signed your death warrant!believecommonsense over 13 years ago
msnbc link, good one senor
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
BCS, true story.
The owners of MSNBC want to start a web site. But, they are going to change the URL address because according to them MSNBC is far too liberal for a general audience and they want to attract more than just the hard core left.
So just think about that when you quote them. They are more to the left than Fox is to the right.
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
lib, msnbc HAS a website. And more importantly, what matters is what evidence is presented when an anchor or commentator reports a story. In the link senor provided, Maddow provided the irrefutable evidence by running the videos which proved the GOP guy was lying when he said the Dems had not attempted to renew the program.
Sometimes even O’Reilly provides evidence or cites the source of his information. Facts are neither left nor right.
napaeric over 13 years ago
@Libertarian1 Yes you have my permission to quote me as your better, if I have predicted correctly. If I am in error I will admit to making a mistake. November 3rd we will see if the tides of politics have changed. The original prediction is below:
“Going to be so funny when the votes are in and the GOP, Tea Party and Fox News all fall flat on there faces.
If you think Obama and the Democrats were running rough shod over the GOP since the last election, just wait for the next few years. ”
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
napaeric
Let’s set the parameters first. The polls today say House becomes Republican. if it does i expect a mea culpa. if it remains Democratic i will give one.
The polls say the Republicans will pick up 4-6 Senate seats. Same provisions.
Lastly the polls say the Republicans will control a majority of the governorships in the country.
We have terms?
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
^ A little more than GE gave to the Democrats (NBC, MSNBC)
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
lib1, actually G.E. has split its political donations fairly evenly between Reps and Dems. From 1998 to 2008, it gave MORE to the GOP than Dems. In 2008, it gave slightly more to Dems, as it has so far in 2010.
This information comes from two independent organizations that monitor political donations from PACs, 527’s and direct contributions: opensecrets.org and campaign money.com
campaignmoney.com reports that G.E. gave slightly more to GOP from 1999 to present than to Dems in same time period.
facts are neither right nor left
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
opensecrets.org reports that Soros gave $5 million to 527s in 2008. He gave about $23 mil to 527s in 2004, when he became actively involved in politics and was against Bush. He gave $3.5 mil to 527s in 2006.
So what is the joke?
good overview:
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A
overview of GE, 1990 to 2010:
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000125
overview of News Corp.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000227
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
p.s. part of what makes tracking funds so difficult is that donors to certain organizations do not have to be reported. Karl Rove’s organizations don’t disclose donors.
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
church, I’m not comparing Soros to Rove. I said that it’s hard to track funds because the new rules allow some organizations not to report donors. Rove’s new organizations are a good example.
OK, you don’t like Soros. OK. The Koch Bros. are listed #5, and they fund a similar list of conservative orgs. OK, so what? Who knows what they’re funding under the new rules that donors don’t have to be disclosed.
The point is transparency — anyone interested in good government should want transparency from all sides. It ain’t a partisan issue.
The whole point of this dialogue was to rebut that GE isn’t in the Dems pocket; facts don’t back it up.
4uk4ata over 13 years ago
“That is why we needed the TEA party. You may not like their ideas but they are new and deserve a chance.”
Sure, and they are getting it. So?
tizzo over 13 years ago
No one has suggested that the “pledge to America” represents anything particularly new or different from established GOP ideas. To the contrary, the policies that republicans will pursue when elected (if they know what’s good for them) are tried and true policies that have worked, to the benefit of all, every time they’ve been tried, without fail.
Now, these ideas might be considered “fresh” in that they are different than anything that’s been tried in at least the last decade or two, and are sharply different from what is going on right now, which is absolutely the novel and bold change with which we were threatened - er, that is, promised - if we elected Barack Obama.
In short, Republicans are not pledging to do something new and bold so you can get a better job, bigger house, or free health care. ALL that they are promising is that the government will STOP doing that which has caused your job to go away, your 401k to lose half it’s value, and the clock to start ticking on the lifetime of your access to health care. For almost everyone, that is all we ask for.