Comments (16) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   lalas said, about 1 year ago

   Would this would be more effective yet if it was being propped up by children and grandchildren?

2. 

   LateToTheGame said, about 1 year ago

   And don’t forget that it wasn’t good enough for the House Republicans until it had $150 Billion of added pork. So shouldn’t that be “$850 BILLION” on the bag?

3. 

   paullkellysr said, about 1 year ago

   The house Republicans had to pass it before he Dems added more pork to it

4. 

   HUMPHRIES said, about 1 year ago

   paullkellysr … say it ain’t so.

5. 

   motivemagus said, about 1 year ago

   It ain’t so. Remember that it was a significant block of Republicans that helped kill the first bill – remember, when McCain came in to “save the day.” Plenty of pork for all sides.

6. 

   HUMPHRIES said, about 1 year ago

   Sometimes tone would help here, sarcasm. My snip was to play on the lame shot Gov Palin made.

7. 

   J0D0 said, about 1 year ago

   lalas - yes, maybe if they were depicted shouldering that sack o’ debt …

8. 

   DHLEAKY said, about 1 year ago

   Humph,

   Sarcasm, irony and humor are wasted on Repubs. Always think whether the Druggist Rush Limbo could figure it out, then save your brains power for what you do best. Truth and facts.

9. 

   motivemagus said, about 1 year ago

   Humph - I got the sarcasm, I just felt the need to go beyond the rhetorical to the specific. (And I’m not a conservative Republican, either.)

10. 

    HUMPHRIES said, about 1 year ago

    motivemagus; I guess I’m a reall mess I tend to think conservative, NOT neo-con, but d@mned if I’m Republican!

11. 

    motivemagus said, about 1 year ago

    Hard to believe this is what the party of Lincoln and TR has become.

12. 

    TheGreatSatan said, about 1 year ago

    “Hard to believe this is what the party of Lincoln and TR has become.”

    Yeah, Democrats.

13. 

    motivemagus said, about 1 year ago

    Fair point, TGS - the Democrats were originally pro-South, pro- or at least neutral to slavery, pro-secession, clearly racist, and conservative in preserving the status quo. The Republicans were a young, daring party united around moral principles (abolitionism) and a young, charismatic leader with relatively little experience from Illinois. So now they’ve switched, eh?

14. 

    TheGreatSatan said, about 1 year ago

    …cute.

    “daring party united around moral principles”

    Precisely what “principles” are the Democrats united with? Abortion? Entitlement programs that have destroyed African American culture? Income redistribution? Please….neither party could hold a candle to the Republicans from that time so don’t try and say otherwise.

    “a young, charismatic leader with relatively little experience from Illinois”

    Please don’t try to compare Obama to Lincoln, I’m going to throw up.

15. 

    motivemagus said, about 1 year ago

    Thanks. Okay, I’m cheating a bit – the Democrats have hardly been daring, or Bush wouldn’t have gotten away with as much as he did (notice how the Republicans successfully stalled out the Clinton administration, feeling no compunction or remorse about gridlocking the government - of course, supported by Clinton’s senseless caving to people who hated him). But, yes, the Democrats do have some stated principles, around supporting the middle-class and working American, for example, and supporting diversity. And before you bring up taxes explicitly, Obama’s proposals would only take the rich back to Reagan’s levels – after he cut taxes. And before that we already had the lowest taxes in the industrialized world for the high brackets.

    I’ll keep comparing Obama to Lincoln as long as idiots keep claiming Palin is more qualified than Obama. Yep - mayor of the Crystal Meth Capital of Alaska and Strip Mall.

    But I observe you haven’t countered my implicit criticisms of the Republicans…

16. 

    TheGreatSatan said, about 1 year ago

    “But, yes, the Democrats do have some stated principles, around supporting the middle-class and working American, for example, and supporting diversity.”

    No, just saying that you are for supporting the middle-class and diversity but not saying how is NOT having principles, it’s rhetoric.

    “And before you bring up taxes explicitly, Obama’s proposals would only take the rich back to Reagan’s levels – after he cut taxes”

    First of all, you’re not even reading Obama’s rhetoric on this supposed Reagan level taxation. Obama is saying that he is going to bring the total tax revenue gained from taxes back down to 18.2 percent of GDP like it was in Reagan days. What he doesn’t tell you is that he is going to put burden he takes away from the “poor” and give it to the “rich” He’s not going to cut taxes whatsoever especially since 40% of the country doesn’t even pay taxes! That’s income redistribution and it has HISTORICALLY ALWAYS failed. You’re not even listening to the man’s plans, why is it that I know more about them then you do?

    You know that many small business fall under this 250K bracket he’s always bemoaning about? That’s where most of the “working class” gets its jobs from! How is taxing small business more because they fall under this 250K bracket helping working Americans? That kills jobs!

    “I’ll keep comparing Obama to Lincoln as long as idiots keep claiming Palin is more qualified than Obama. Yep - mayor of the Crystal Meth Capital of Alaska and Strip Mall.”

    I love how full of hate your comments about Alaska are, shows the real compassion liberals feel for “working class” people! Comparing Obama’s and Palin’s experience isn’t the same thing as comparing Obama to Lincoln so knock it off.

    “But I observe you haven’t countered my implicit criticisms of the Republicans”

    You didn’t make any observations you just agreed with me that they are becoming more like Democrats. Since it was my point initially that they were you effectively didn’t say anything about their principles. You did however, fail to counter my criticisms about the Democrats principles of Abortion, entitlement, and income redistribution.