First, have a listen to Charles Krauthammer’s very accurate description of the, “Payroll Tax Cut.”
We should always think of the early 2000′s as a period of great public education. No, not as in our public school system, which has gotten progressively worse since the implementation and expansion of the Department of Education, but as in the things we in the public have either learned about our political leaders, or should have learned about them. For years they told us that the Social Security deduction from our pay checks were not taxes that we paid, but merely contributions into our own separate retirement accounts. This year, we learned that this was not true at all. It is a tax, and what’s worse, it’s a regressive tax. We were told recently that there was some sort of magic lock box where this money was kept, separate from all of the rampant irresponsible spending our elected leaders participate in for the express purpose of bribing us into reelecting them. We finally had it proven to us, that this is most certainly not the case, but that the money is part of our government’s general fund, and has been all along.
I know there are many out there who will look at this article and exclaim, John, the Republicans voted for this too, and you are one of them. Let me make this one quick point before we move on. I am a conservative who believes either rightly or wrongly that in general, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to represent my ideals and values. I am beholden to my principles, and not the letter after someone’s name. With that out of the way, this compromise, born of political gamesmanship is just flat out wrong.
For those people who are going to argue that I should be in favor of any tax cut, because I am a Republican, let’s take a look at the economics of this one, past the slick sales messaging, and discover why Dr. Krauthammer referred to it as political crack. First off, it is very unlikely to have any effect at all upon job creation. Why, you may ask. Well, those people who own businesses, and are not W-2 employees will not be able to participate in the tax cut. It applied to deductions from W-2 wages only. So, the very group who might possibly have used the tax break, which is a pittance anyway, will not be able to take advantage anyhow. Secondly, if those idiotic $800 checks sent to every single American had zero effect on GDP, employment, job creation, etc., then why in the world would putting 5% of that into a smaller percentage of American’s pockets have any effect? We must also ask ourselves why not just cut the tax rates charged to every American as a part of normal business by similar amounts in similar brackets, which actually may have stood a chance at spurring economic activity, especially if it were made permanent rather than a temporary vote buying measure. (By this I mean, make the 10% bracket a 6% bracket, and the 15% bracket an 11% bracket, and so on. Do not cut the brackets which exist beyond the OASDI cap limits.)
Now Let’s Look at the economic damage done by this rotten idea. The Social Security System was already in big trouble, even before Barack Obama became President. The troubles with Social Security can not be blamed on President Obama, but on the fact that the system consists of two components, neither of which would have stood a snow ball’s chance in heck of getting passed on its own. The first component is a regressive tax scheme, where by poor people are forced to pay a much higher percentage of their wages into a supposed reserve of funds. The second component consists of a welfare scheme where the benefits paid depends not at all upon the needs of the recipient, but upon the accident of which industry the recipient spent a majority of his working life employed by. Currently, the system has $109 Trillion in unfunded liabilities. This means that the amount of spending which is written into the law currently, exceeds both the funds we now have available to us, and those funds we expect to have available in the future. Quite frankly, we need to do something about the spending side of the Social Security equation. Revenue is not the huge problem, unless of course we do something foolish. Foolish would include cutting off the revenue source entirely, such as is the case with a payroll tax cut for all W-2 employees. Bankrupting the system sooner than would have happened had we done nothing, and for a benefit that will do no real economic good is bad enough. To do this for no other reason than to boost the President’s temporary poll numbers by giving Americans the illusion of economic gain for 8 or 9 months while the can is further kicked down the road, conveniently until after the next election, is the height of cynical behavior. It’s not just the President who is guilty of this, although on this one terrible decision, he actually led for once, but it was also any and all Republican Legislators who went along with it. When you hear the words compromise or bipartisan, you are not wrong if anger is your immediate response. What’s worse of course, is that the President is actually out there taking a victory lap for this bit of malfeasance. It is a real shame that basic economics is not taught competently at the high school level.
President Bush was almost run out of town on a rail for suggesting that we move to a system which more resembled the Chilean system, one by the way that has a proven track record of success. Barack Obama is spiking the football for getting a suicidal approach passed. Our national politics have become the Twilight Zone, and Greece is our future should we fail to correct our course, and correct it soon. We have operated under the delusion in America for some time that our wealth and economic success were preordained. In fact, it was created by hard work and sacrifice of many who came before us, the foresight of our founders, and the free market system. We are capable of squandering that good fortune, and in fact are doing so at an alarming rate. Not one single action affected by President Obama so far has failed to hasten that decay of good fortune. This is no different, and that he is being applauded for it is especially scary. It means that we are indeed addicted to the political crack. America needs an intervention, sooner rather than later.
Cross Posted at Musings of a Mad Conservative.
Tags: Payroll Tax
Obama is not an idiot. He can see this. It is not by accident, but by design that this is so. He will leave a legacy of a poorer future to America as a whole, and he glories in it.
OT but juicy:
Women Prefer Santorum to Romney by 10-Point Margin, Says Gallup For some reason or other he gained 12 points with women. Some reason
Bagua posted this over at DoD. See if you can tell who didn’t make the list:
http://fakegate.org/the-fakegate-gang/
@ waldensianspirit:
Because most women can spot a slimy snake at 20 paces? Because Santorum respects and elevates his wife and take his vows seriously? Sound like good qualities to me.
I didn’t get an $800 Check, WTF-O? Can I deduct that on this years tax filing?
@ John Difool:
Go here:
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/21/eco-fraud-global-warming-crusader-admits-lying-stealing-smearing/
@ waldensianspirit:
It’s been a tough campaign for Romney! Poor little man. He thought he’d win the nomination by acclimation. In a change of pace, I’ve read a couple of articles from National Review (including one by Lowery) that were positive towards Santorum. It may be that the tea-leaf readers are sensing a disturbance in the Force. A million conservatives are crying out “No!” to Romney, and slowly the ship of State is turning. Can Santorum win? I don’t know. Obama is going to be a formidible candidate. But I have talked at length about Romney’s negatives. I think Santorum is more electible than Romney, simply because I believe he will run stronger. He’ll bring out the base. Will the Establishment vote for him, though? On the answer to that question, the fate of the nation may lie…
@ rgranger:
It is $40 a month off of your Federal FICA withholdings. It is so small a sum (and distributed in such a way) that most people won’t notice it unless it is pointed out to them. What this does show is that all the wailing and gnashing of teeth when Bush wanted to partially privatize Social Security was simply partisan (and RINO) bullshit.
@ John Difool:
Hmmm….and yet, didn’t he supposedly get that “cease and desist letter” from Lakely over the weekend? Methinks Chunky faked it once again – that needs to get up over at DoD.
@ Iron Fist:
*giggle* Romney Spending More Than He’s Getting In Donations
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/02/21/romney-spending-more-than-hes-getting-in-donations/
As was pointed out, all this “tax cut” is is a reduction in your SS contribution (and at a time when contributions are seriously needed). The dishonesty here is astounding.
But don’t worry folks, if Bammy is re-elected and Congress goes Democrat, kiss your fucking 401K goodbye – because they’ll be coming for it to make up for this shortfall.
$40 a month – doesn’t even cover the gas price increase.
Carolina Girl wrote:
Yep, my thoughts exactly. I think he faked the c & d and tried to insert himself headfirst into the scandal for some notoriety and make himself look like the victim of a reich-wing witchunt. If so he’s even more desperate (deranged) than I imagined.
@ NoThreat2U:
YOu’ve got to love it! As I noted this morning, he can only seem to win if he saturates the market with negative ads. With two opponents in multiple states over the next two weeks, he will have a great deal of difficulty doing that with the money he has. That is another indication of how weak a candidate he is. Do people really believe that will win against Obama? If he does it, he’ll be called RAAAAACIST. My bet is, though, that he won’t do it, and where does that leave him? He doesn’t give people many reasons to vote for him, only reasons to vote against his challengers. That strategy may yet get him the nomination, but it is a sure loser in the general election, where Obama will be powered by a billion dollar warchest.
@ Iron Fist:
What I want to hear from a candidate is this: don’t tell me how much the other guys suck…whether it’s the one you will be running against or the others vying for the nomination. Tell me what makes YOU the best choice. I already know the guy running the joint sucks. Tell ME what YOU are gonna do about it. It is true in all walks of life, if you have to constantly tear someone down just to make yourself look better, you are already a loser. I wanna hear why you will be a winner.
Iron Fist wrote:
At this point I’m starting to think we might get cheated if the world doesn’t end in December…
Washington: Santorum 38, Romney 27, Ron Paul 15, Newt Gingrich 12
I have been wanting to say this ever since the birth control shit happened. Next time you see a commercial for the pill, listen closely to the possible side effects….like blood clots. Then, when a lib starts bitching about “women’s health” ask them how blood clots are healthy for women. Seriously, listen to the dangers associated with birth control.
*rant off*
OT:Unemployment back up to 9%
@ NoThreat2U:
I’ve argued this with other scientists at a bio conference. The attitude was the pill gives “men” freedom. Not about women’s freedom or their health
doriangrey wrote:
Why that can’t be, THE DOW IS UP OVER 1300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000GAZILLIONTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@ waldensianspirit:
I, as a female, feel that if the man wants some, then wear a condom. Why should I flood my body with unnecessary hormones? To hell with that. STDs are still possible with the pill too. Why do Democrats want women to get STDs?/
@ Iron Fist:
ALot of Economic/Fiscons will not come out for Santorum. He’s been pissing on Libertarian leaning Conservatives. So he will have some of the base, but not all.
waldensianspirit wrote:
Interesting approach, wonder what their thoughts are on porn and lubrication? Frees men from women and women from men, with none of those nasty side-effects and is safer from a STD point as well.
/
@ John Difool:
I’m seriously tempted to contact Heartland and ask if they genuinely sent him a cease and desist letter and if they come back with “no, who is he?” I would love to redact the email address and send it the BRC. Unfortunately, it would not be prudent to contact them via my work email so I’ll have to wait – unless some enterprising member of the flock would like to do it instead.
@ waldensianspirit:
So you want to ban the pill?
NoThreat2U wrote:
IMHO, under a single provider medical system being a gate keeper to treatment allows you control of those needing treatment. The more need for treatment the more powerful the coercion. As long as the units needing treatment are deemed valuable enough.
I bet if you looked at graph of units age vs. incidence of STD you would find a good correlation with those our eugenicists, err demoncrates take to be valuable enough for treatment.
@ citizen_q:
Free porn with Obamacare? lol
@ citizen_q:
If you are sick enough you have no option but to rely on the government to either help you get well (if you are worth it) or to just die? Sounds pretty plausible to me.
@ Rodan:
No one said anything about banning the pill. They can at least be honest. Tell me how “women;s health” is so fucking important to them when number one, the pill doesn’t prevent STDs and also, YOU try inundating YOUR body with unnecessary hormones. I think there is a reason why there is no male equivalent of “the pill”.
@ John Difool:
It’s his exit strategy. When Heartland’s lawyers finally get around to sending him a real C&D letter, he can tearfully shut down the blog and blame it on the deep-pockets “climate deniers.”
@ Alberta Oil Peon:
The Heartland organization does not have that deep a set of pockets. Their annual budget stands at $380,000. When you stack that up against what is spent annually by the pro hoax crowd, it is a pittance. In the world of taking up a cause, it is less than a pittance.
@ NoThreat2U:
ding ding ding ding, we have a winner. I do not care if someone else uses contraception or not. I just do not want it to be any of my business. Pay for it yourselves, or don’t, just leave me out of it.
@ NoThreat2U:
I was actually commenting on the position taken by the people waldensianspirit talking with that birth control pills provide men sexual freedom. I kind of took a reductio ad absurdum approach to commenting on that position.
Besides, don’t need obamacare for free porn, its already here. Most people call it the internet.
John Difool wrote:
It’s a Fool’s Rally.
The EuroZone is going down the shitter at record speed and the Investors think that Idi Obama’s corrupted America is a safer place to invest their money rather than an increasingly Fascist Europe.
@ NoThreat2U:
The Pill is the crucial issue of this election. Gas prices not so much.
Rodan wrote:
Or the price of food. Anyone else grocery shop weekly and noticed the way and speed of price increases on such exotic items as milk?
Carolina Girl wrote:
Oh lawd, please do it !
DO EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET !!!!
@ citizen_q:
The first question out of MOST…not EVERY guys mouth is “you’re on the pill right?” It is about men’s freedom. Not so much women’s health. As to the free porn…you can take it or leave it for now. Pretty soon it will be a “human right”. lol
@ Flyovercountry:
To me as a Catholic, I AM a proponent of responsible birth control. That is a personal and responsible position to take. Any single woman who chooses lay with a man should take it upon herself to prevent pregnancy. If you are against birth control, keep your legs shut or make him cover it up. Also there are healthier ways of prevention…diaphram maybe? Rick Santorum needs to realize that society is more lax these days. People do engage in sex for fun. But let me be clear, fun does not always equal promiscuity. That is my take on the issue and Rick has his. As long as he doesn’t try to force me to believe otherwise, we are cool.
@ citizen_q:
Nah those aint issues. Lets talk about the pill, abortion and porn.
@ Rodan:
Who brought up the issue? During the debates were questions posed to the candidates like “what would you do about high gas prices?” whereby they answered “well, we don’t need gas but birth control is really ruining this country.” NO. The media started this, not any one of the candidates did. You are being lured by the shiny object. You are playing right into the left’s hands.
Santorum vs. Obama: America is fucked either way. This is like Hitler vs. Stalin.
@ Flyovercountry:
Of, I know that. But it’s an article of faith amongst the moonbats that the “deniers” are lavishly funded by the “dirty fossil fuel” industry, even though the converse is in fact true.
NoThreat2U wrote:
wellll….the clots arent really that common….the real danger occurs if the woman smokes AND takes the pill. now that bumbs it up a bit
Rodan wrote:
You should direct your ire at the moderators for those questions. Shiny object again.
@ NoThreat2U:
All Santorum had to answer was, none of your business. Instead hes out there calling for culture wars and saying how Libertarian-Conservatives don’t belong in the GOP.
He’s a Statist and not my cup of tea.
Rodan wrote:
santorum tried to troop out his ‘made in america’ plan, but we ignored it cause we am be sukaz!
Iron Fist wrote:
That there is the a major problem “he glories in it!”
This is something my mind has a really hard time wrapping my head around. Why??
Ok, a WTF? moment.
There was just a news blurb on the radio.
Obama is being humbled by rising gas prices. He says that the only solution is increased production & that “He” has increased
production by 70%.
No mention that the production is on private land & he can’t
stop it.
@ coldwarrior:
Hey also proposes more spending and wants a Nanny State. Giving tax preferences to some and others picking up the bill.
He’s a Religious Progressive. No thanks.
@ Rodan:
None of your business? And the media wouldn’t eat him alive for making a comment like that? If anything, he needs to gauge his responses a little better. I am hoping they keep trying that shit and someone finally puts the mods in their place. It can happen.
Santorum will lead to Libertarian-Conservatives and Fiscons go 3rd Party. Watch.
@ NoThreat2U:
They asked Chris Cristie whether he believes in evolution or creationism. He answered none of your business. That was the end of that.
Santorum is a holier than thou jerk and loves these topics.
@ Lily:
I think that Dinesh d’Sousa nailed it.
Obama like his father thinks that America is
an evil colonial country.
We must be punished for our wickedness & he is
just the guy to do it.
@ Lily:
Why? Because he is an American-hating dick.
@ RIX:
Oh, and he’s a fucking liar.
@ Rodan:
Christie isn’t running for POTUS either. And why do you have such a problem with someone who stands up for their convictions? Is he telling folks they can’t screw until they are married? Noooooo. He has morals….gee that’s a terrible thing for a politician. At least he lives what he says.
Rodan wrote:
i agree with most of this
and he aint romeny. cool by me.
i like what i am reading here
buuuuutttt, since we are fools and let the media run our debates and dictate what stories we react to, we are talking about some nonsense about the pill and not about those proposals above.
Rodan wrote:
Alinskis rule 13 again eh
@ coldwarrior:
I think his economic plan is pretty solid.
Also notice he’s the very LAST “not Romney” standing, so the GOP has only themselves to blame for this.
Santorum > Romney.
more…Rick Santorum is committed to celebrating the family by reviving our economy and creating jobs in America again with a smarter and simpler tax code. Santorum will roll back job-killing regulations, force the federal government to shrink and live within its means by passing a Balanced Budget Amendment and reinvigorate our domestic manufacturing and energy potential.
Bumr50 wrote:
exactly.
santorum gets it on islam, so that is biog plus in my book after the past 20 years of licking muzzie boots
Bumr50 wrote:
eventually we will start talking about his econ plan. when we start to ignore the media and get on with it.
the white house played this brilliantly over the past 2 months. we are on about some contraception stuff meanwhile the house is getting foreclosed on.
we are the gullible old party.
jacksonianism:
First, we need to begin by seeing the world the way it truly is. We need to see evil for what it is, and confront it; and we need to see decency for what it is and nurture it.
Now is the time not only to be increasing our military preparedness but to finish the task of a comprehensive missile-defense system. While we are at it, we should restore our missile-defense commitments to Poland and the Czech Republic.
Second, we need to understand we are in a war, a hot war as well as a war of ideas. Failing to define our foes lest we be politically incorrect does not dissuade them from seeking our destruction. They know who they are and tell us, and they construe our efforts to obscure reality as signs of weakness and irresolution. Such behavior causes despair among our allies and confusion here at home.
Third, we need a reinvigorated human-intelligence apparatus in the Middle East so we can better understand who and where are enemies are and then identify opportunities to counteract them and support allies and would-be allies.
Fourth, we need to change our information operations abroad to promote our core values of freedom, equality, and democracy — just as we did with the Soviet Empire in the 1980s.
Fifth, we must cease our verbal, moral, and diplomatic equivalence as between good and evil. Syria does not deserve an ambassador; its protesters deserve support; Israeli housing starts should not be put on the same moral plane as Hamas terror attacks; and China should be challenged on religious liberty rather than be given a veto on the human-rights activists we wish support.
Sixth, having supported popular sovereignty abroad, we have erred in failing to sufficiently support the conditions of liberty and the institutions necessary for a successful democracy. Too often we have acted as if liberty’s first order of business is a vote. Elections should be a consummation and not a commencement to democratic processes.
Seventh, we need to keep and expand our commitment to humanitarian aid, especially in Africa. China and Islam are competing for the hearts and minds of much of Africa, and we cannot turn our back from the investment and commitments we have made. I helped lead many of our efforts to address third-world debt and the global AIDS crisis, and our investments have paid off. As President, I will ensure that all of our foreign aid, bilateral and multinational — including to the Global Fund — is consistent with our values and interests and specifically adheres to the Mexico City policy that requires recipients of US federal funds to neither perform nor promote abortion in other nations or they will not receive taxpayer money.
Eighth, we must stand by Israel, especially at a time when it appears increasingly to be standing alone. The recent dislocation of the old order in the Middle East will usher in a new one, and anti-Israeli elements are working overtime to take advantage of the opportunity.
Ninth, the tradition of speaking up and out about prisoners of conscience and dissidents in prison, never mind American hostages, from the Middle East to Asia, needs to be restored. When President Reagan instituted the policy of reminding the world and America that there were others in jails because of their beliefs it not only reminded us of our blessings, it gave dissidents a sense of hope, and the knowledge that someone cared about them, that a great country was on their side.
Finally, we need to have a national effort to restore the teaching of American history in our nation’s schools. It is our children’s worst subject — they simply do not know their own story and thus when they are told ours is a history of aggression and immorality, they have no counter-narrative to refute it. It is worth remembering that Ronald Reagan’s final wish in his farewell address was to ask America to instill in our youth a renewed “informed patriotism.” Unfortunately, we ignored this lesson, and we are reaping the consequences.
@ coldwarrior:
I will bet on the collapse happening long before sanity descends on the Orcs of Mordor on the Potomac.
@ coldwarrior:
It doesn’t help that Drudge drags up some speech from three years ago that he gave at a religious gathering and plasters it all over his page like he just said this on the stump this morning.
I’ve already counted THREE articles on conservative sites that originally reported Santorum as giving the speech THIS MORNING.
Rodan wrote:
It may not be your cup of tea, but is it not something that Alinsky, Marxist type of views went straight for? The very fabric of morals that weaved the uniqueness of the United States?? I haven’t seen this addressed. I have seen their goals in the take over of the U.S….
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a “religious crutch.”
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These are just a few. But it seems that they are attacking not only our constitution but our even morals.
It is also very scary how much they have accomplished. To defeat it you’ll have to fight on two levels.
http://www.rense.com/general32/americ.htm
@ Bumr50:
Thank you so very much!!!!!!!!! Did you see what I posted in the hotlinks?
but, we are stuck on something else…
repeal of obamacare is paramaount. without repeal, we are serfs to the fedgov, slaves.
NoThreat2U wrote:
What woman would trust a man who says, “Oh I’m on the pill!”?
Bumr50 wrote:
we are fools and rubes. suckers and easy marks to be played.
@ Lily:
A breakdown of morals creates an “anything goes” society.
NoThreat2U wrote:
That is just it, if you hate the country you live in why don’t you just leave? Instead seeking revenge.
Rodan wrote:
I want to ban me paying for your health care and your drugs
@ waldensianspirit:
None. lol It was basically a broad remark I was making. You don’t see them taking any frikkin chances. They can and do walk away from their responsibilities. Now if she wants to be a bitter bitch about it, she should have taken the initiative and said NO or made him cover it up.
People don’t want health insurance. People want health
NoThreat2U wrote:
Exactaly which creates a ‘vacuum’. So saying this isn’t about morals is kinda wrong. It isn’t all about morals but some of it is. To ignore this is falling into the hands of people who want to destroy us.
@ Lily:
Because he is a petty little bitch. He has a chip on his shoulder larger than the earth on Atlas’s.
@ NoThreat2U:
No! I’ll check it now!
Good to see you around.
I usually don’t check hotlinks unless directed…
@ NoThreat2U:
Oh yeah!
I’ve been there a lot today.
Vodkapundit got mad at me for calling Drudge out as a Romney shill.
Also @ Rodan, the companies manufacturing aren’t interested in health. They are counting females heads and multiplying by $15–$50 per month and shouting yippy!
@ Lily:
Agreed. You have to have some kind of ground you are willing to stand on. That is your starting point. If you are a squishy person, you can be talked into anything. I prefer someone to tell me who they are first and foremost and what they are willing to do so we can come to a happy medium.
@ Bumr50:
Please do check the link. It is a good one.
Nice to see you too
coldwarrior wrote:
Concerning the ‘pill’ it has been free for decades now you can go to any free clinic and get it there. This isn’t about contraception it is about controlling the churches and more about taking away our liberty.
coldwarrior wrote:
Indeed. This must be snuffed out. Because this slippery slope will end in who the government *thinks deserves healthcare and who doesn’t*. The government here wants to play God. Not good in my book.
Report: Execution Of Iranian Pastor On Death Row For Refusing To Renounce His Christian Faith Looks “Increasingly Likely”…
This Christian is faced with the maximum threat ever imposed since Christ walked the earth. Belief alone = death
@ waldensianspirit:
As much as that sucks…and it really does suck out loud, he will be a true martyr for Christ. His suffering will end and he will be in the arms of the Lord.
Who co-signed Newt’s death cert.?
Did not know he was out of it.
@ taxfreekiller:
He isn’t really out but he is falling behind.
@ taxfreekiller:
There’s a debate tomorrow…
But for the grace of the Nov. 2012 go any one of U.S. or our kids soon.
These hard core commie hate American Earth First, AGW Democrats will come to it given time.@ waldensianspirit:
taxfreekiller wrote:
santorum or newt, fine by me
as long as it aint mitt
You with the un-resistered gun and that Bible, we see your still driving a 1966 427 vet.
“Lets see your papers?”
@ NoThreat2U:
I grew up reading and learning the history of the martyrs from Acts till now. Thought the world could get away from it but no, there are those going back to the 7th century. And people want the USA out of the way so this can be rampant again all over the earth
“We have your IP address we got of the server at wattsupwiththat.”
You do know that we passed a law for the posters there correct?
Normal for people like you is 5 years cutting ice cubes up in Glaicer Park for U.S. Senate Democrats.
At least Moochelle is enjoying Aspen.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/-jC3_YhBrlbA/Tz_g8NgElyI/AAAAAAAAZ2s/R1vcknrmodQ/s1600-h/mo%252520andsasha%252520gondola%25255B3%25255D.jpg
@ waldensianspirit:
Yet someone like Santorum is too religious. I give the martyrs quite a bit of thought myself sometimes. I hope and pray that if the time ever did come, I would die proclaiming my faith, not denying it. You can only kill me once and after that is peace with my Lord. Doesn’t seem that bad to me. This truly is a battle between good and evil playing out. Those that want the USA out of the way are the products of our broken down society. That is why Santorums religious convictions don’t have me running and screaming about a theocracy.
NoThreat2U wrote:
That “falling behind” thing happens to everyone once they pass the age of fifty. It’s usually called “saggy ass.”
NoThreat2U wrote:
I’d rather have Poppin’ Fresh in the grey Beatle wig than the Extruded Plastic Android in the Checked Shirt or Mr. Pocket Protector.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Well let gives me six years to tighten up my buns. lol
@ buzzsawmonkey:
To me, Romney has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. As for Newt, I am not to educated about him. I just feel the need to support Santorum at least to a degree because of the misconceptions about him.
@ coldwarrior:
I read it and most of it is the guiding hand of the nanny State. He’s against Individualism.
I will vote Libertarian in November. No point in me bitching about Romney or Santorum. If Republicans want a nanny state, count me out.
NoThreat2U wrote:
It is not like he is going to force religion down our throats.
Because he is ‘religious’ he is no-no now?
NoThreat2U wrote:
Watch this video of Newt.
As to Santorum, just as Romney is not as good as he’s being sold as being, Santorum is not as bad as he’s being typed as being.
But consider this: Santorum is an idiot, because he is so hungry for attention that he’s being led by the press to do what the Democrats want him to do. His big moment of attention came when? Why, when Obama and Sebelius decided to mount a frontal assault on the First Amendment in general and the Catholic Church in particular. Santorum, the moron who is running on a social-conservative platform when what he should be doing is pointing up Obama’s dismal economic record, rose immediately to the bait. You can’t shut him up—he’s babbling about matters of faith up one side of the media and down the other, letting the Democrats shape the contraception/abortion/insurance coverage narrative, making people of faith look silly, extreme, narrow-minded (because, deadly earnest as he is, he has no clue as to how he’s coming across, and he’s basking in the limelight).
What does this do? Well, it hurts Romney’s candidacy, which I don’t mind—but the Democrats presume Mitt will still be the nominee, and I don’t. But more important, it sidelines Gingrich. The Democrats are terrified of Gingrich and want him in Media Blackout—which is where he is now that Little Ricky is mincing all around center stage.
@ Lily:
I probably should have put a sarc tag after that first sentence. I by no means meant it seriously. And I agree, he wont be forcing religion upon us. The only one forcing anything upon anyone is Obama, by blurring the lines between the three branches and doing what he wants when he wants no matter what.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I cannot disagree with you at all. That all rings true to me.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I want “Not Romney” to win.
I’d much rather have Newton, but I feel that when it comes to actual policymaking he’s got a higher risk factor.
Electoral success is a whole different ballgame, but I still contend that having a strong message, regardless of whether or not I agree with it, is better than having NO message at all (Romney).
NoThreat2U wrote:
There was no need for sarc tag…I should have put one up on mine.
The thing here is and what a few people are missing in my opinion is,
“Exactly what will another 4 years of bho be, especially without the threat of not having to be re-elected be?”
Isn’t the media tearing apart the candidates for us? Yet keeping their hands off obama? That doesn’t mean not to vett them. But it seems as no one is good enough. I agree Romney is the least fav of mine.
The one main goal in my opinion is voting this commie out of office!!
This needed to be done yesterday.
@ NoThreat2U:
When Santorum implodes/is taken down by the media, he will have:
1) Distracted from the Obama assault on the First Amendment, and discredited opposition to it;
2) Managed to make Christians/Catholics/people of faith generally look nutty;
3) Laid groundwork that will come back to hurt the now-Catholic Gingrich should he be the nominee;
4) Laid groundwork that will be easily twisted to discredit Romney (with a wink-wink play to anti-Mormon prejudice) if he is the nominee.
And Santorum—Mr. Pocket Protector—is too earnest and tunnel-visioned to see what he’s doing.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I’ve given up telling people what Sanmtorum is really about. If Republicans want to commit electoral suicide with him let him.
I wash my hands.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
That’s exactly what I am seeing.
Bumr50 wrote:
Newt is not my dream candidate by any means, but he’s at least not a plastic android. Watch the video I linked to upthread; it’s about 33 minutes long, but well worth the time. We could do a lot worse than Newt—hell, we have, since 2008.
Romney is actually pretty scary, and his left-liberal leanings are not the half of it. That tamped-down forced blandness must conceal a volcano of rage.
@ Lily:
Yes BHO has gotta go! Romney will make a decision, have the rest of the RINOs agree with him and the Dems will love him too. Like I told Buzz, I vaguely remember Newt as the Speaker. Santorum does not scare me…that is the only reason I speak highly of him. Santorum or Newt I would be fine with. I just want people to be honest instead of tearing our candidates apart. We here are doing the vetting.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
That is a strong possibility, but these days, nothing surprises me. You just never know. Hell most people didn’t think Obama would ever win!
@ Rodan:
At the end of the day, we’re gonna need a new party.
If we start it now, hopefully it will be able to gain power by the end of my lifetime. If not, there will at least be the groundwork for future generations.
I’ve said it before, the GOP establishment pretty much ALLOWED us to have Gingrich and Santorum thinking that there’d be no way in hell we’d ever get behind them, and that we’d eventually rally behind Mittens the Six-Million-Dollar Moderate.
They’re apoplectic about what’s going on, and I can’t help but think that that’s a good thing.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I fear that Romney is a “stealth progressive,” and will do irrevocable damage in the name of “conservatism.”
All the more reason to get the ball rolling on a viable party that could eventually overtake and consume the GOP from the grassroots level.
It’s pretty clear to me that they have no intention of acknowledging their base.
Why Romney is terrifying:
Looking at/listening to Romney, one gets the impression of a man who has been tamping down his rage and hatred for years in order to appear blandly genial.
He’s being rejected now despite immense expenditures. His campaign is basically, “This Bland is your Bland, this Bland is my Bland…” and it’s not selling. The rage must be building up like magma prior to a volcanic explosion.
He’s gotten where he is, he’s gotten what he has, by keeping the rage tamped down. What would happen if it were uncorked?
Now, I’m not his therapist. But if I were to guess; he’s the son of a famous man who has worked hard to not be overshadowed by his father.
He has had to run from pillar to post—from liberal to conservative and back—to justify his political positions, and has come under attack from all sides for whatever positions he’s held and for the ways he’s changed them.
He’s being attacked for what he considers his crowning achievement—Romneycare—and he’s also trying to claim the candidacy (and the Presidency) on an “it’s my turn” basis, and being rejected by the voters for doing so.
He’s grown up in a religion which is considered to be an apostasy by many Christians, and he’s got to have a chip on his shoulder about that.
In short, he’s viewed as a child of privilege, which he is, but he’s had to fight a hell of a lot more than most children of privilege for what he has, and he’s being rejected by the voters he’d expected to coronate him. There’s gotta be a lot of resentment and anger built up there.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
How has he not at least pandered to the right, even a little bit?
Bumr50 wrote:
He has managed to force out, through clenched teeth, claims that he is “conservative.” But it’s been a strain.
Ol’ Crackerbarrel Psychologist Buzzsaw sez that on some level Romney views “the right” as being equal to “evangelicals,” and hates them with a white-hot passion for giving him grief on abortion and Romneycare, and for what he considers to be their attitude towards Mormonism.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
He’s been running for six years now, and could’ve helped himself by reaching out to conservatives. He made NO effort. I don’t know if that was his idea, or the GOP backers, but it’s killing him.
I don’t trust him because I don’t know what the h*ll he is.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Mormonism is in for a bumpy ride if Mittens gets the nomination.
Bumr50 wrote:
Yeah, it’ll be the Al Smith campaign, with Mormonism instead of Catholicism—plus the unhinged hatred of the gay-rights advocates, who hate Mormons because they opposed the gay-rights position on Prop 8.
Speaking of which, for those of you who missed your piece of lunacy for the day, here’s NPR’s special report this morning from our old pal Petey Attrition: More Children Struggle with Gender Identity Disorder.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
There’s something to be said for kicking someone’s ass and getting your ass kicked.
That’s all I’ve got to say about that.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
It was the Catholics that made the difference in the prop 8 campaign. Mormons make up a very small proportion of the people in California, not even near enough to swing anything. But, Mormons are an easy target. They aren’t going to fight, protest or be violent, so the gay activists feel pretty safe in attacking them.
Looking at the latest stuff on Santorum and his satan speech is a great example of how the left is going to play this election, no matter who the GOP nominee is.
Bumr50 wrote:
I can probably tell you what he is, but you wouldn’t believe me.
@ father_of_10:
I think it’s pretty funny that Maxine Waters and Jesse Jackson Jr. actually used the word “demon” to describe Republicans in different situations.
It’s like the DNC sent out a memo saying to “demonize” Republicans, and they took it literally.
Bumr50 wrote:
“You de mon!” “No, you de mon!”
Bumr50 wrote:
They will stop at nothing. there isn’t anything too base for them to consider. They have no allegience to the truth or decorum or anything. Their only god is power. they voted in their toyboy and they have every intention of making sure they keep him.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I blame the parents. Boys stand up to pee and girls sit down. Case closed. Ha, and to think we don’t need God in today’s society…..
And who the bleep are these people that “aren’t sure” whether they’re going to vote for Obama or someone else????????????
Elderly????
NoThreat2U wrote:
Over at C2, one of the posters commented with regards to “gender confusion”: “Look down!”
Bumr50 wrote:
“Do I want to fuck my heirs over, or not? Hmmmmmmmm….”
Bumr50 wrote:
Seriously. At what stage do you think? Hmmmm, I think I might not vote for the man that has totally screwed up everything possible . . ewait, maybe we ought to give him another 4 years . . .
Bumr50 wrote:
That’s fine with me. I want to be the Demon in their worst nightmare…
Bumr50 wrote:
YES! Yay! Go Newt! Remind the people why we need you! LOL!
NoThreat2U wrote:
Some people don’t know squat.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Actually this does seem to be somewhat of a spiritual battle going on doesn’t it? The questions of candidates in the last debate about ‘contraception’. Santorum took the bait…then a couple months later obamma is attacking the Catholic Church about guess what contraceptions. The democrats calling republicans demons. Really?
Russia is building up their military, obama is tearing ours down. The arab springs.
My eye is on getting obama voted out!!!! Now!!!
What will this country be like after another 4 more years of obama? Will we recognise it?
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
This is insanity.
Lily wrote:
we are not at war, nor will be at war with the russians any time soon. the cold war ended in 1991, 21 years ago.
Lily wrote:
“Transgender” is all about the elimination of fact and of any other objective standard and the substitution of personal feelings for both. It mandates that on the basis of a person’s subjective feelings, independent of biological evidence or external social standards, the person can declare themselves, with no evidence, to be whatever the fuck they want.
This is sold as a triumph of personal freedom but it is actually the triumph of social anarchy.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
It really is that easy! Hell I remember having to worry about teaching my own son how to stand up to pee!! lol What the hell would I know about that???
forgot to add, the russian military was gutted in the 90′s. they are rebuilding a very depleted force and wont approach the size that they had during the cold war.
NoThreat2U wrote:
Vote Gingrich—the Stand-Up Toupee!
@ buzzsawmonkey:
*snort* That is quite a fete. You usually end up peeing on your shoe.
@ Lily:
Pray, repent and do everything you can to turn the tide. That’s the best I got.
coldwarrior wrote:
I didn’t mean to imply that because Russia was building up their military they were going to war with us. I was implying more to the point that obama is making sure we don’t have the best military out there. What if war breaks out and we are caught with our pants down again?
Lily wrote:
Oh, we’ll just buy what we need from the Chinese—if they’ll lend us the money and we’re not fighting them.
It’s not a great plan, but it’s what we’ve got.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Haaaaang on Toupee!
Toupee, hang on!
Bumr50 wrote:
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I just might. First, get rid of Romney…he’s too stupid to realize we don’t want him. Them mount our assault on Teh Won.
Check this out:
MSNBC Analyst: Virginia Ultrasound Abortion Law Is “Rape”…
“Virginia is my home state and I actually ran for Congress there in 2010. So this hits very close to home for me also being a woman. What they are saying in Virginia is not only do women have to undergo an ultrasound, they have to undergo a trans-vaginal ultrasound. Mandatory state probing, okay. That’s what this legislation is talking about. It actually meets the Virginia definition of rape. So, the bigger picture here is this is a bigger piece of a whole range of anti-woman extreme legislation that was pushed through the Virginia legislator and really the legislators across the country.”
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/02/21/msnbc-analyst-virginia-ultrasound-abortion-law-is-rape/
Now if this is “rape” by any and all standards, why is not groping of children and the elderly sexual abuse…by any and all standards?
@ NoThreat2U:
Are they now trying to make a test the same as a ‘rape’?
Pretzel logic.
Like one of the commenter’s on WZ posted I think what bho is doing to our country is rape. But no one mentions that now do they?
@ Lily:
Nary a word. But really, think about it. If the trans vag fits the criteria of “rape”, why is not groping by the TSA of small children and the elderly not rape? Same criteria IMO……unwarranted violation, right? Wait, that even sounds stupid to me. Doing an abortion without and ultrasound would be like feeling a tumor and then just rooting around for it until you find it. Don’t they first have to know what they are dealing with inside before an invasive procedure? OMG pretzel logic indeed. My head hurts. lol