Posts Tagged ‘Idiots’


March 11, 2010

Why is it that Govco thinks it knows better than us or knows what’s best for us?  A recent poster here got me thinking of this, again.  I have posted about Govco many times and their intrusion on our lives but, yet again…here we go.  Now they are wanting to ban salt from resturants in food prep in NY.  What the???

You know, this is not just one party either. Democrats think we are all stupid and they must step in and tell us how to do things or when to do them or how much.  Republicans want to tell you who you can sleep with, what you can in the bedroom and who you can marry. 

ENOUGH!!!!  Let us live.  As long as we don’t infrige on the rights of others, who gives a flying crap what I do???  If I want to drive without a seatbelt…SO WHAT???  If I want to smoke a joint in the privacy of my own home… SO WHAT?  If I want to marry some dude…SO WHAT??? 

Get out of our lives!!!!!!


Way to go Dan!!!

March 9, 2010

Dan Rather on Sunday speaking of President Obama:

“but he couldn’t sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic.”

Now, imagine Rush or Hannity saying that?  They would be crucified and you would be hearing about this every hour on the hour from all the major networks but when it’s one of their own, such as when Rather doctored those documents in 2004, they circle the wagons.  Typical.


March 4, 2010

Neal Boortz posted this on his site today.  It’s awesome.  It’s because of things like this, I am fully convinced, that many Liberals, including cowardly Political Science Professors, decided to cut and run and take their discussions underground.  They knew that Obama and the Democrats would be doing the very things they ripped Bush and the GOP for.  They knew things would be headed this direction.  Here is the post:



Neal Boortz

@ March 4, 2010 8:27 AM Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Back to this whole healthcare debate …

While Barack Obama didn’t explicitly say it, he opened the door for Democrats to use reconciliation to pass healthcare reform. And that is exactly what they intend to do. Obama says:

“[N]o matter which approach you favor, I believe the United States Congress owes the American people a final vote on health care reform. We have debated this issue thoroughly, not just for a year, but for decades. Reform has already passed the House with a majority. It has already passed the Senate with a supermajority of sixty votes. And now it deserves the same kind of up-or-down vote that was cast on welfare reform, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, COBRA health coverage for the unemployed, and both Bush tax cuts — all of which had to pass Congress with nothing more than a simple majority … I have therefore asked leaders in both of Houses of Congress to finish their work and schedule a vote in the next few weeks.”

Never mind the .. dare I say it .. hypocrisy surrounding this approach. Here is not one but four different examples of Obama demagoguing the use of reconciliation.

CBS Interview 11/2/04
My understanding of the Senate is that you need 60 votes to get something significant to happen, which means that Democrats and Republicans have to ask the question, do we have the will to move an American agenda forward, not a Democratic or Republican agenda forward?

Change to Win Convention 9/25/07
The bottom line is that our healthcare plans are similar, the question once again is, who can get it done? Who can build a movement for change? This is an area where we’re going to have to have a 60% majority in the Senate and the House in order to actually get a bill to my desk. We’re going to have to have a majority to get a bill to my desk. That is not just a fifty plus one majority.

Obama Interview with the Concord Monitor 10/9/07
You’ve got to break out of what I call the sort of fifty plus one pattern of presidential politics. Maybe you eke out a victory of fifty plus one. Then you can’t govern. You know, you get Air Force One, there are a lot of nice perks, but you can’t deliver on healthcare. We are not going to pass universal health care with a fifty plus one strategy.

Center for American Progress Conference 7/12/06
Those big-ticket items: fixing our health care system. You know, one of the arguments that sometimes I get with my fellow progressives, and some of these have flashed up in the blog communities on occasion, is this notion that we should function sort of like Karl Rove where we identify our core base, we throw ’em red meat, we get a fifty plus one victory. See, Karl Rove doesn’t need a broad consensus because he doesn’t believe in government. If we want to transform the country, though, that requires a sizeable majority.

And then lest we forget this from Robert Byrd in 2005. When Republicans wanted to use reconciliation to stop the Democrat filibuster of Bush judicial nominees, Robert Byrd compared the strategy to Nazi tactics. Seriously! Here’s what he had to say back then:

Many times in our history we have taken up arms to protect a minority against the tyrannical majority in other lands. We, unlike Nazi Germany or Mussolini’s Italy, have never stopped being a nation of laws, not of men.

But witness how men with motives and a majority can manipulate law to cruel and unjust ends. Historian Alan Bullock writes that Hitler’s dictatorship rested on the constitutional foundation of a single law, the Enabling Law. Hitler needed a two-thirds vote to pass that law, and he cajoled his opposition in the Reichstag to support it. Bullock writes that “Hitler was prepared to promise anything to get his bill through, with the appearances of legality preserved intact.” And he succeeded.

Hitler’s originality lay in his realization that effective revolutions, in modern conditions, are carried out with, and not against, the power of the State: the correct order of events was first to secure access to that power and then begin his revolution. Hitler never abandoned the cloak of legality; he recognized the enormous psychological value of having the law on his side. Instead, he turned the law inside out and made illegality legal.

Please, folks; if you won’t fight for your liberty, how about fighting for the future of your children and grandchildren.


Now, any Liberals out there wish to explain this obvious hypocrisy? Anyone?

Contempt for the Constitution

November 2, 2009

Here is Nancy at her finest:

The exchange with Speaker Pelosi on Thursday occurred as follows: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?” “Yes, yes I am.”
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a “serious question.”


Ignorance is bliss

October 9, 2009

Maybe these women came from the same family of the woman who, back during the campaign, said she was voting for Obama because he was going to pay her mortgage and gas money:

Of course, I think that several people who post to this site  and several popular ministers and college professors are also under the belief that more Govco is best for everyone.  They pretty much say the same thing as these women.  Sad.  Really sad.

For what?

October 9, 2009

So, Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize.  For what?  I mean, do you know when he was nominated for it?  Two weeks after he took office. TWO WEEKS.  What did he do in those two weeks time to win this award?  All this is is a repudiation on the Presidency of Bush.  That’s all. 

What this really does is taint the whole process and questions the integrity of the committee.

What a joke.

Charlie Rangel

October 8, 2009

Remember, boys and girls, when someone from your team is shown to be corrupt, just give him/her a pass.  Like the Democrats.

Where, oh where are the loyalists and supporters and defenders?  Down in the bunker, hiding like our favorite Political Science Professor from down south?

DMV style Healthcare

October 5, 2009


See Obama. See Obama Read?

July 22, 2009

Here is a nice quote from the President when asked by a left wing blogger if it was true that with his health care bill, people would not be able to keep their own polices:

“You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”

If this bill is SO important, so critical that it must be rushed out, why doesn’t he even know what’s in it?  What an idiot.  Hey, I hope all you Liberals out there are loving this hope and change.  What hope and change?

-Higher Taxes

-Reduced quality of health care and health care services

-No more competition

-1000’s of jobs lost when Govco takes over health care

-Health Care rationing


July 17, 2009

So, now, according to the Vice President Joe Biden, we have to spend more money to keep the country from going Bankrupt….

Yeah, and you have to eat more to lose weight or, even better, you have to drink more beer to keep from being an alcoholic.

What a genius!  This guy makes Dan Quayle look brilliant.  I bet you all who still have the Obama/Biden bumper sticker on your car and just so damn proud!!!  Remember, this is the Senator that, when Obama announced him as his VP Candidate, a certain college professor said he was proud to have voted for him.