This ought to get all of you liberals partying in the streets!
Leading Capitol Hill watchdogs are sounding alarms by plans of the soon-to-be Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and her majority of House Democrats to ram through a new law that would seriously undermine free speech ? and put restrictions on conservative groups and others who encourage ordinary citizens to directly deal with Congress.
Pelosi has already stated she is planning to push through major legislation during the first 100 session hours after the Democrats take control of Congress this week.
At the top of the list is seemingly good legislation intended to curb the power of lobbyists. But the Pelosi law goes far beyond bridling Washington influence peddlers. Under her proposed legislation, Pelosi will seek to control and limit any organization in America from encouraging citizens to communicate and influence Congress.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...mo_code=2B98-1
Newsmax is a hysterical GOP amen corner and about as legitimate and unbiased a "news" source as The Washington Times or Faux News!
Rush (pill popping druggie draft-dodger hypocrite) Limbaugh.... Anne (demagogue/hack/racist) Coulter, Bill (panty sniffer) O'Reilly....
Please!
So...personality flaws determine whether someone is correct or not? You realize what that does to Einstein, don't you?
Eric-Originally Posted by Eric
I read Newsmax on occasion. I agree with your assessment of Rush Windbag, Ann Coulter and O'Reilly. I can't stand them or any neoconservative politically. a
On the other hand, you have to take the warnings wherever they're coming from. Sometimes these people have good things to say.
Newsmax also features Paul Craig Roberts, who is a real conservative who isn't afraid to show his utter contempt for neoconservatives and the Bush administration. I think that he, too would be alarmed at the potential for real soncervatives to be silenced by the Democratic congress. I personally think that this congress is capable of anything and needs to be kept on a short leash. Their only mandate was to hold Bush to account. for his lousy performance on Iraq, the economy, trade and the Minimum wage.
By taking agressive steps to silence its critics and overreach in the areas of regulation and personal freedom should be met with agresssive opposition. If it comes from a neoconservative, so be it. The neoconservatives positoin often offers false alternative solutions to problems, however, oppositoin to broader democratic initiatives are welcomed.
Unlike liberal sites like Salon.com, paleo conservative views can be seen on newsmax.
I don't like most of the crap on there, but some of it legitimate.
"So...personality flaws determine whether someone is correct or not? You realize what that does to Einstein, don't you?"
No - but hypocrisy does - and that's something altogether different!
Agree with you on Roberts; he is top notch and when I was over at The Moonie Shop I got to talk with him once or twice. Nice guy - and smart, too.
He absolutely hates The Chimp, fyi -
There are lots of people in journalism and politics who "hate" each other. That doesn't mean that either one of them is right or wrong. After all, I disagree with almost everything you say, politically, and yet I suspect we are both well-educated, intelligent, well-informed men. Why do we disagree? Because we bring different sets of assumptions (what some would call "beliefs") to everything we see.
This happens in every day life, with everything. I hear it when people talk about truck traffic, for example. Most people don't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, and yet politicians continue to pass lane restrictions, speed restrictions, etc., not knowing the effect those decisions have on my life as well as the prices you pay at the store.
I don't agree with everything Bush has done. I'd say probably just a little over 50%, in fact. But it was a good deal under 50% for Bill Clinton. Still, Clinton was the President, and you didn't find me using the nasty terms for him that many did.
It's your right to talk (and write) the way you want to, but your tone continues to be that of a spoiled child whose day is being ruined by someone not giving him what he wants, and calling that person nasty names because of it.
You admit you never liked Bush. Did you ever vote for him? You claim to be a "true conservative," or a libertarian, but you fail to see that the Democrats will never give you anything along that line. How many Libertarians did you vote for in the last election? I voted for all of them who were running. How about you?
I did not think much of Clinton; he was more clown than Caligula.
Bush, on the other hand, is a reckless fool who has done great damage to this country; nothing Clinton ever did compares with the Iraq fiasco. And give Billy his due: He left office with the government in surplus - and The Chimp ( a Republican "conservative") pissed it away,leaving us with an enormous debt and equally enormous future obligations that will have to be dealt with.
But the thing I revile most about The Chimp is his vile, divisive demagoguery; his turgid association of himself and his policies with "America" and "freedom."
I do all that's in my power to ridicule this POS prig we have as our "leader" - precisely because I see him as being inimical to almost everything I value about the country and otherwise.
As a conservative, too, I am dismayed at the way he has singlehandedly vitiated almost everything that was achieved by real conservatives - and set the stage for that termagant Hillary to assume office in 2008.
... PS:
In Roberts' case it's not merely amorphous "hate" that's involved; I should have been more specific. Roberts seethes with contempt for Bush as a man, for the bullheaded stupidity of his policies (on Iraq and immigration especially) and for his betrayal of conservative "basics."
It ought to tell you something, if you respect the man's opinion, that he feels this strongly about The Chimp. Many other conservatives feel the same way - myself included.
I'm not about to embrace "Our President" just because Karl Rove says I should. I go by substance - and action. Not sleight-of-hand, demagoguery and fraudulence.
I can respect dislike, even hate. I just don't easily brook name-calling. Call me an adherent of the Churchill School of Public Speech.
"I can respect dislike, even hate. I just don't easily brook name-calling. Call me an adherent of the Churchill School of Public Speech."
I understand...
I also believe that name-calling can be approrpiate when the object is beneath contempt - as The Chimp is, in my estimation. If he were brilliant but depraved or evil (Nixonian, even Hitlerian) I'd give him some grudging respect. But he's a a buffoon. A petulant little prick. The kind of guy who has to prove his macho bona fides by dominating weaker opponents and strutting around in a sad parody of the "tough guy" routine.
And by the by - The Chimp is well-known for his own habit of name-calling. I assume you knew about that....?
And the farting thing?
He has kept his name-calling (and nick-naming) private, to the extent that's possible. And yes, I knew about it, and it lessened my respect for him to some extent. In my experience, that is a common Yale habit. I'd be interested to hear about Al Gore's habits along that line.
As to farting...as you get older, you may have more appreciation for the occasional embarrassing toot!
As to farting...as you get older, you may have more appreciation for the occasional embarrassing toot!
There's nothing like a good fart in bed, providing you are alone of course.
True...
My main concern about Nancy Pelosi is that she seems to have a tin ear when it comes to ethics, and she has already rejected input from the Republicans on some proposed "100 hour" legislation. She has the opportunity to turn the tide for the Democrats, or bury them so deep they will lose everything they've gained in 2008. Anybody taking bets on which?
Of course, they have Eric's friends in the press running interference for them, so they have a lot more latitude than Republicans would in the same instance.
"As to farting...as you get older, you may have more appreciation for the occasional embarrassing toot!"
Hell, I enjoy that now!
But I am not president, either....
I like to think of myself as a genteel lady, therefore I do not care for, nor feel comfortable with boyish games such as expelling gas or burbing. However, I also understand the aging predicament too.
I feel the worse president in my time as far as accomplishments would have to be Jimmy Carter. Bill Clinton brought grave embarrassment upon our nation, and made crudeness acceptable. I can no longer go anywhere without hearing vulgar and uncouth words. At one time you did not talk about sex or money, now it is perfectly fine to chat about sex, sometimes into embarrassing detail. I expect anytime to see people copulating in public. I guess we still have some decency laws left -- but not many.
As far as George W. Bush goes, I feel his main mistake in the Middle East is that he has tried to hard to please everyone, and he has ended up not pleasing anyone. I would have preferred to have had him pull a Truman, others wanted him to pull a Nixon, instead it seems he is teetering between and doing little.
I see Bush being wishy-washy in other areas to, e.g., trying to please or appease the Democrats and that simply can't be done and he should have never tried. It was like trying to domesticate wolves.
BTW I did vote Several of my votes were GOP and some were American Independent Party, none were for the Democrat party as I don't like their agenda.
Did you know that the seats/dinner for Pelosi is going a $1,000.00 I am appalled at that. When I went to the GOP party for Ginrich in 1994 the tickets were only $25.00. The asses should be ashamed of themselves.
"Did you know that the seats/dinner for Pelosi is going a $1,000.00 I am appalled at that. When I went to the GOP party for Ginrich in 1994 the tickets were only $25.00. The asses should be ashamed of themselves."
Do you actually believe the Democrats are unique in this respect? Ever price the cost of a meal with The Chimp? (Not that any sensible person would want to try to eat with that smirking gibbon nearby...)
When Bush visited Nashville Tennessee the tickets went for $250.00 -- a far cry from Pelosi and the $25.00 for the gala that I went to in DC
Hey, I just heard on MSNBC from Chris Matthews that the Democrats are trying to override the 2/3 vote to pass legislation on repealing the taxes.
Outlandish, They are also (according to Matthews) not allowing any debate on the floor regarding any of the legislation that they are trying to pass in the first 100 hours.
As Chris Matthews said "whatever happened to the transparency in congress that the democraps promised to bing to the congress"
We are in for some tough times ahead. I hope all the fools who voted democrap will be sick and tired of it come 2008
"We are in for some tough times ahead. I hope all the fools who voted democrap will be sick and tired of it come 2008.
Probably. We are caught between two miserable alternatives - an unhinged idiot with a messiah complex and stifling socialists on the other...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote