Member since May 14, 2009
This user has no shared collections.
View More Collections
commented on Mike Lester
about 1 month ago
Doc, I think it was because she locked her knees and started to faint. I’ve had troops do this while in formation. It happens. I get the amusement that Lester is trying to portray here (calling for the website instead of the doctor), but I don’t think it’s us that are making fun of a woman who has diabetes (didn’t even know that). After all, it was Obama who quipped, “That’s what happens when I talk too long,” right after she was hauled off the platform. Don’t try to paint this as our fault, or that we’re somehow heartless.
commented on Michael Ramirez
about 1 month ago
While individuals may be stupid and racist, it doesn’t mean that if I think Obama’s ideas are stupid that I’m racist. It means I dislike his ideas. But the Left is quick to label someone who contradicts or disagrees with Obama as racist.
1) We must not spend, especially a lot more, on education without having meaningful impact on the educational outcomes of our children.2) We must more to avoid wars? On what? How? 3) How will upgrading infrastructure abate the rising costs of transportation? Fuel doesn’t get cheaper because you’re driving on a new road. Your car doesn’t get more fuel efficient because it’s crossing a river on a new bridge instead of an old bridge. Your logic is flawed.@ Nantucket: Raising taxes on capital gains will restrict investment in the marketplace. I don’t disagree with cutting DOD funding, but like another said, there should be no sacred cow (Republican or Democrat) that is spared from cuts. Why is there no mention of entitlement reform? Foodstamps is being abused. The unemployment insurance funds have been raided and abused. SS at its current state is unsustainable, and will get worse once the Boomers fully retire. More and more issues are coming to a head. For those who think SS shouldn’t be reformed, how many of us use a computer made in the 50’s? For those who think Medicare shouldn’t be touched, why don’t you dial the operator to make an outbound call? For those who think that unemployment doesn’t need fixing, do you still support prohibition?The point I’m trying to make is many of these programs we have on the books are operating under a ruleset that was drafted at a much different time. Our economy has evolved, our workforce has changed, and yet we’re still providing catch-all services drafted 50-70 years ago. When SS was first rolled out, the expectation is that people would be on it for 5-7 years, with 13 people paying in for every person paying out. Now, people are drawing from SS for 15-20 years on average, and we are down to 3 people paying in for every one person drawing out. But we are still operating SS under the same rules from 70 years ago. It is broken. It’s not an issue of people not paying their, “fair share” into the fund. It’s an issue of people living longer and fewer people paying in than are drawing out. It’s simple math, and this issue is just one of the many that needs resolving. But these are elephants in the room that no-one wants to discuss because it endangers their chances at re-election. The cowardice in Washington is the true crime here.
commented on Dana Summers
about 1 month ago
I know. It’s such a petty thing to worry about.
So… prove my points wrong, like I did, instead of using the liberal mantra to discredit the poster (me). I also linked to the Oath of Office. I also referenced the SCOTUS ruling, and simple math. Instead of using the typical liberal tactic of demonizing the source, how about you provide something substantive that disputes my points.
commented on Glenn McCoy
about 1 month ago
Genome, you miss my point. It’s not that he can’t change his mind. It’s that he’s had a change in his principles. This isn’t something that you suddenly wake up one morning and say, “the debt limit should be increased without preconditions.” It’s the fact that he was so vehemently against them, and now he doesn’t understand why others are against his requests. The fact that his principles change on something this significant tells me he’s pandering to his base, nothing more.
Actually… They are doing as they are supposed to. It is well within their Constitutional rights to refuse to pay for the PPACA. Just because it was upheld as constitutional doesn’t mean that it’s approved for human consumption. You have a lot of things included in your post that are clearly simple parrots from whatever partisan show you watch instead of analyzing the situation yourself and coming to a conclusion on your own. Each point: 1) The ACA is law, yes. But, it was passed purely on partisan lines, and only through procedural gimmickry. On top of that, the PPACA has never been more UNpopular. So … yeah. Just because it passed doesn’t make it right.2) The SCOTUS did uphold a major provision of it, but again it was more along the lines of them abstaining. Roberts effectively said, “You made your bed, now lay in it.” They didn’t pass judgement saying it was Constitutional, they simply stated that it wasn’t their place to strike it down.3) There is still some dispute about how the vote came down in 2012. With the IRS being proven to have illegally targeted Conservative groups in 2009-2012, it very likely suppressed their GotV initiatives. Obama got 69 million votes in 2008. He got 65 million votes in 2012. Where’d those 4 million votes go? If he got such a mandate to support the PPACA, he would have gotten more votes than in 2008. 4) The “default” that to which you are alluding is a fallacy. A paper tiger. We have well more than enough money coming in to pay our debts. We simply won’t have enough money coming in to pay all our discretionary spending bills. That’s why I’m okay with the “default.” We will continue paying our required bills. We will be meeting our constitutional requirements. Pet projects will simply get cut. Oh shucks. Given that the Republican House has tried numerous times to give Obama authority to fine-tune the cuts so they are less of an impact to every-day Americans (as seen during the Sequestration debacle), and they were rejected every time by Obama, I’m not faulting the Republicans with this. 5) As to them not upholding their Oath of Office, where exactly does it say they need to uphold the currency and world’s economy. It is nowhere in there, nor in the US Constitution. So… now that I’ve proven you’re a complete fraud and nothing but a talking-point regurgitater, do you have any original thoughts you’d care to share?
Even though in 2006 he said increasing the debt limit was unAmerican. Interesting how things change when he’s the one “in charge.”
I agree. And I think this is what the point of the ‘toon was. When I was a kid, I rode my bike down dirt ramps without any safety equipment on. So did my brother. So did all my friends. I ate s%*t a couple times, and I can say it did no lasting harm. Some of the best lessons are the most painful ones. After all, how many times do you have to touch a curling iron before you realize it’s hot?
The Parks Department doesn’t need to shut down these memorials; they are open-air memorials. It actually costs more to close them than to leave them be. It is purely a political stunt by the Obama administration to try to put pressure on Republicans. You like to blame the Republicans for the shutdown, but who said how many times that (insert bill name here) is DOA in the Senate? How many times have Republicans tried to meet the ultimatums of Senate Democrats and Obama himself? Delay implementation of an unpopular law for a year while it gets figured out? No, couldn’t possibly do that. And this is also within the House’s Constitutional authority to restrict funding for projects they don’t like. It’s not the first time it’s been done, and I don’t know why it’s so alarming that they are doing it again. This is why the Founding Fathers gave control of the purse strings to the House.Those of you who are all demonizing the Republicans for doing their jobs, if the roles were reversed you’d be chanting forward the call of resistance, insisting that the Democrats would be in the right for shutting down the government and how wrong Republicans were for refusing to negotiate. Don’t believe me? Want to challenge me? I have one for you: Wisconsin and Title 10. The Democrats fled the state to prevent cloture, and all the left-leaning kool-aid drinkers were all in support of them fleeing the state and preventing a vote. While it was crass and inappropriate, and bordering on a temper tantrum, it was within their legal right to do so. And who received the villianization? The Republicans. The lefties on this board need to recognize their own partisan slant on life, and remove their rose-colored glasses for a moment. Realize that you are simply supporting the Democrats because they are Democrats, not because of what they were doing. Because if you weren’t blindly following the Democrats to wherever you think they are taking us, you would be barking at them just as much to make a deal and cooperate. But because the Democratic leadership has so much of a blind following, they can act with impunity and if they have criticizers by the Republicans, those Republicans are branded as extremists, terrorists, hating America, and all other things without one iota of pushback from self-thinking individuals.
Copyright © 2013. Universal Uclick, All rights reserved.