First time visitor? Learn more.

The Clinton Hit List

by coldwarrior ( 181 Comments › )
Filed under Bill Clinton, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, Politics at January 14th, 2014 - 7:00 am

Cross them at you’re peril!

Hillary and Bill Clinton compiled disloyalty ‘hit list’, new book claims

Former US President Bill Clinton and his wife ex-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attend the swearing-in ceremony of Terry McAuliffe as Virginia's governor in Richmond, Virginia in January.Former US President Bill Clinton and his wife ex-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attend the swearing-in ceremony of Terry McAuliffe as Virginia’s governor in Richmond, Virginia in January. Photo: Reuters

Washington: Hillary and Bill Clinton keep a detailed “hit list” of everyone who has crossed them during more than 20 years at the apex of American politics, a new book has claimed.

The list of so-called “sinners and saints” – including John Kerry, now secretary of state, and the late Ted Kennedy – was compiled on a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet in the dying days of Mrs Clinton’s failed bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008.

The alleged “cheat sheet” of betrayals – and there were many that year – ranked offenders on a scale from one to seven and was compiled by aides to give the Clintons an instant database of those who deserved political favour, and those who did not.

John KerryJohn Kerry: on the Clintons’ list. Photo: AFP. He SERVED in Vietnam.

“Almost six years later, most Clinton aides can still rattle off the names of traitors and the favours that had been done for them then provide details of just how each of the guilty had gone on to betray the Clintons as if it all had happened just a few hours before,” wrote the authors of HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton.

Advertisement

The Clintons have a reputation in Washington for long memories but the existence of a digital “favour book” raises questions about how Mrs Clinton, now 66, might conduct another run at the presidency in 2016. The book paints a picture of how wounding and dispiriting the 2008 campaign was for the Clintons as leading Democrats deserted them for Barack Obama, whose instant celebrity trumped years of hard networking and their own established pre-eminence as the most powerful double act in Democrat politics.

“The injuries and insults were endless, and each blow hurt more than the last, the cumulative effect of months and months of defections,” wrote the authors Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes.

Among those rated as a “7″ for most disloyal were Mr Kerry, who endorsed Mr Obama as a man who could “help restore our moral authority” and – even more devastating – Kennedy, who designated Mr Obama as the heir-apparent to his brother John F Kennedy.

Another huge betrayal for Mrs Clinton, as she ran to become the first female US president, was the decision of Claire McCaskill, a senior Missouri senator, to become the first significant female figure to endorse Mr Obama. Senator MacCaskill, who has endorsed Mrs Clinton for 2016, gave a television interview crediting Mr Clinton as a “great leader” before adding “I don’t want my daughter near him”, a remark that inspired rage among the Clintons and their aides.

Political strategists were divided over whether the portrayal of Mrs Clinton and her entourage as vindictive would damage her 2016 chances.

A Republican strategist who asked not to be named said the image was an obvious attack motif for Republicans in 2016.

“There’s a pretty solid understanding that you don’t mess with the Clintons because they are retributive, take a lot of stuff personally and will basically break your legs when you’re not looking,” he said.

Democrats were more sanguine, arguing that such political gossip was of interest to a only tiny class of political insiders and would have little impact on the campaign trail. “It may be titillating but it is not important,” a former staffer in the Clinton White House told London’s The Daily Telegraph. “But it is also typical of the way the Clinton operation has functioned in the post-presidency period. They have been vindictive and difficult.

“It’s the thing about the Clinton world that is the most dispiriting. It has always been baffling and troubling that they have operated with such a level of animus toward people that they should remain friends with.”

Clinton insiders told the authors it was wrong to paint Mrs Clinton as “Nixon in a pantsuit”, while another long-time adviser said it was “absurd” to suggest the Clintons’ decisions were ruled by a hit list, but did not deny its existence.

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

181 Responses to “The Clinton Hit List”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | January 14, 2014 7:20 am

    Thuggishness seems to be the most common character trait in American politics these days and Hillary has always been far more thuggish than her husband. Frankly, I’d be surprised if the above WASN’T the case.

    BTW, is “thug” gender neutral or should we refer to her as a “thugette”?


  2. 2 | January 14, 2014 7:56 am

    @ MacDuff:

    You can always refer to Hillary in a gender-neutral way, just because she is Hillary. OTOH, when she runs, I expect a lot of the “I’m a girl” bullshit. She did that with Lazio and it worked. She didn’t do it on Obama, but he got there first by calling her and Bill racists. You can expect any race with Hillary in it to be a race to the bottom.


  3. 3 | January 14, 2014 8:14 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    She’s already started that particular piece of crap. Her latest speech includes a bit about how women have regressed recently in terms of facing that nefarious, “glass ceiling,” and with the whole equality thing. I guess the Lilly Ledbetter act didn’t work after all, or at least that’s what the claim will be.

    I can see her campaign slogan now:

    “We’ve elected our token spook, now it’s time for a token broad.”


  4. eaglesoars
    4 | January 14, 2014 8:30 am

    I don’t know why this is such a big deal. Every pol does this. They may not put it in an actual spreadsheet, but they all keep score.


  5. coldwarrior
    5 | January 14, 2014 8:30 am

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    She’s already started that particular piece of crap. Her latest speech includes a bit about how women have regressed recently in terms of facing that nefarious, “glass ceiling,” and with the whole equality thing. I guess the Lilly Ledbetter act didn’t work after all, or at least that’s what the claim will be.
    I can see her campaign slogan now:
    “We’ve elected our token spook, now it’s time for a token broad.”

    racial hire…gender hire.


  6. coldwarrior
    6 | January 14, 2014 8:32 am

    is this hit list even being carried in the american press?

    i see that the foreign press has been running with the obama marriage problem story.


  7. 7 | January 14, 2014 8:35 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    Yes there has been mention of it. But MSNBC says its sexist, so the press dropped it.


  8. 8 | January 14, 2014 8:39 am

    People who think 2016 will be a walk against Hillary better think again. The Clintons are ruthless and they will have the Progressive machine behind them. I feel sorry for any Republican who will be the nominee. They will end up like Swiss cheese.


  9. Guggi
    9 | January 14, 2014 8:39 am

    The alleged “cheat sheet” of betrayals – and there were many that year – ranked offenders on a scale from one to seven and was compiled by aides to give the Clintons an instant database of those who deserved political favour, and those who did not.

    Then O. must be on the top of the betrayal list.


  10. eaglesoars
    10 | January 14, 2014 8:39 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    i see that the foreign press has been running with the obama marriage problem story.

    they picked it up from an American tabloid -- The Star, I think. I saw it in the grocery checkout about a week earlier


  11. 11 | January 14, 2014 8:40 am

    @ MacDuff:

    I wish the Right had someone that was thuggish and ruthless.


  12. 12 | January 14, 2014 8:41 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Obama could murder someone in broad daylight and the press in this country would not say anything.


  13. 13 | January 14, 2014 8:41 am

    The Benghazi Transcripts: Top Defense officials briefed Obama on ‘attack,’ not video or protest

    Despite Hillary’s protestations that it doesn’t matter, it does, and though the American people seem loath to hold Obama responsible for anything, Hillary is another matter. This is her wheelhouse and she is either stunningly incompetent or, not only a liar, but one of the authors of the lie. The American people “have come a long way, baby” and don’t see women in positions of responsibility as being that much of a novelty and don’t necessarily see expecting them to fulfill that responsibility as unchivilrous.

    Just my two cents….


  14. 14 | January 14, 2014 8:42 am

    @ Flyovercountry:

    She probably won’t say it that bluntly, but that’ll be what she means. To not vote for her will be called “sexist” just as not voting for Obama was called “racist”. I don’t see how people fall for this bullshit, but it is clear that they do. Hillary Clinton has no real resume. She was the First Wife, but that doesn’t qualify you for higher office. If it did, Nancy Reagan would have been our first woman President. Her Senate career was lackluster, and her term as Sec State was devastating. So now we are supposed to give her her turn at being President? For what? We don’t have hereditary nobility in the United States, not yet at any rate. A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for hereditary nobility, but you won’t see the Republicans attack on that plane.


  15. eaglesoars
    15 | January 14, 2014 8:46 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Hillary Clinton has no real resume.

    Ah, but she does. She was fired from the team on the Judiciary committee investigating Watergate. Go forth and bing.


  16. 16 | January 14, 2014 8:46 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for hereditary nobility, but you won’t see the Republicans attack on that plane.

    That is becasue some Republicans want their hereditary nobility. Also if they try this tack, they will be ripped to shreds. They really are in a no win situation.


  17. eaglesoars
    17 | January 14, 2014 8:47 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for hereditary nobility, but you won’t see the Republicans attack on that plane.

    They can’t. A lot of them want to run Jeb.


  18. 18 | January 14, 2014 8:49 am

    Rodan wrote:

    People who think 2016 will be a walk against Hillary better think again.

    Nobody thinks it is going to be a “walk” against Hillary, but neither is she invincible. Sorry, but I remember when Hillary was “inevitable” last time. She isn’t guaranteed to get the position this time , either. And being nominated doesn’t guarantee that she’ll be elected. Thinking you have a shot at winning isn’t the same thing as thinking it’ll be a walk. I’ve not seen anybody anywhere that has said they think Hillary will be a pushover. But she is beatable. Simply rolling up like an armadillo and giving up on 2016 is Hillary’s best chance at winning. She can’t possibly lose if we do that.


  19. 19 | January 14, 2014 8:53 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    And that is the first thing we have to quash. I really don’t understand that desire. Bush was a lackluster President. Nobody is remembering back to a Halcyon time when Bush was President. He insured that he would be remembered badly when he chose not to fight his political enemies, but instead to let them define his presidency. He can’t go back and change that now. His brother running would be just on his name, and the Bush name is shit in the eyes of the electorate. If we run Bush, then Rodan has a point about Hillary being invincible. Bush can’t beat her. But Bush couldn’t beat much of anybody, so that is more of a comment on him than it is her.


  20. 20 | January 14, 2014 8:56 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Sorry, but I remember when Hillary was “inevitable” last time.

    There is difference, she was defeated by a Cool Hip Black Messianic figure who had the Popular Culture and press behind him. You really think any Republican will have this going for them?

    But she is beatable.

    There is at best a 20% she can lose. Hillary starts off with 242 electoral votes in the bag without even breaking a sweat. She will have the media and pop culture behind her.

    You have to be realistic about things.


  21. 21 | January 14, 2014 8:57 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Yup.


  22. 22 | January 14, 2014 8:58 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    If given the choice between a Bush and Clinton, people will take a Clinton any day,. Better economy and no nation building.


  23. rain of lead
    23 | January 14, 2014 8:59 am

    WTF?
    TOP.Men. Top Men.

    (we’re hosed, btw)

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/01/13/kerry-presents-russian-counterpart-with-a-pair-of-potatoes/

    At their joint press conference, a confused Russian reporter asked about the gift. “It is a symbolic gift? What does it mean?”

    “Well, he told me he’s not going to make vodka. He’s going to eat them,” Kerry quipped before changing the subject.


  24. eaglesoars
    24 | January 14, 2014 9:00 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Hillary starts off with 242 electoral votes in the bag without even breaking a sweat. She will have the media and pop culture behind her.

    It’s way too early to start counting electoral votes. Altho I do agree about the media and pop culture.


  25. eaglesoars
    25 | January 14, 2014 9:03 am

    @ rain of lead:

    I saw that. Weird.


  26. 26 | January 14, 2014 9:03 am

    Rodan wrote:

    no nation building.

    You’ve forgotten about Kosovo. There was nation building under Clinton. Now you may be right about a Bush-Clinton matchup. Bush is not a name to conjure with in our political climate. I think you are off in your estimation that there is only a 20% chance of defeating Clinton. I’d be interested in seeing how you got to that number. It will be an uphill struggle to beat her, sure, but I think our odds are better than that. Hillary Clinton is a very polarizing figure. For every person that loves her and would open a vein for here there’s someone who’d crawl across broken glass to vote against her.


  27. 27 | January 14, 2014 9:06 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    A female friend of mine told me that in reality shows, they are already putting Pro-Hillary slogans. I don’t know the show, but allegedly someone said we need a mother figure to nurture the nation. :lol:

    Hillary can be beaten but it would have to be an unconventional republican that would take some issue stances that would throw her off her game. The Democrats want either the typical Establishment type or a Conventional Conservative. An unorthodox Republican would throw them off their game.


  28. 28 | January 14, 2014 9:07 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    It’s way too early to start counting electoral votes

    Indeed. We don’t even know who the nominees are going to be yet. Not even close. Hillary may win the Democrat nod by acclamation, but she may not. There are people out there who will want to challenge her. We don’t have a clue yet about who we’ll run. And we don’t have a clue about what the political climate will be when the 2016 election rolls around. People may be so disgusted at the Democrats that anybody we run will win. This year’s election will give us some data to begin to make predictions with, but even that will be incomplete and not particularly accurate. What did 2010 predict for Obama’s re-election, after all? There are too many variables to make any kind of prediction this early.


  29. eaglesoars
    29 | January 14, 2014 9:07 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    there’s someone who’d crawl across broken glass to vote against her.

    And Ithink the more people see of the, the more people will fall into that category. She just doesn’t come across as someone you’d want to listen screeching for four years.


  30. eaglesoars
    30 | January 14, 2014 9:09 am

    Rodan wrote:

    An unorthodox Republican would throw them off their game.

    I’m really starting to look hard a Scott Walker -- who is not unorthodox by any means


  31. 31 | January 14, 2014 9:09 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I reached that 20% by looking at polling data, makeup of the electorate and the electoral college. There is a way to defeat Hillary. It would have to take an unorthodox Republican who takes stances on issues that would throw Hillary off her game.

    Democrats are prepared to run against an establishment type or a Conservative. They do not have a blueprint for an unorthodox Republican.


  32. 32 | January 14, 2014 9:10 am

    @ rain of lead:

    I think Obama makes his cabinet picks deliberately stupid to fluff his ego and perception of himself as the “smartest man in the room”. Competence isn’t even considered.


  33. 33 | January 14, 2014 9:13 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Walker is my first choice. He has all of Chris Christie’s strengths (fiscal discipline, taking on the unions, and demonstrated ability to win in a Blue State) and none of Christie’s baggage (too long a list to put in here). I don’t see any downside to Walker. He’ll bring along Wisconsin’s electoral vote, and he will help energize the base. He is a solid conservative on most all of the issues. Christie is who the Republican Establishment wants, but I don’t see that he brings as much to the table as Scott Walker, and he has so many negatives.


  34. 34 | January 14, 2014 9:14 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Walker is good and can win under the right circumstances like a full blown recession. He probably could prevent a blowout even if he can’t win.

    It’s 2 1/2 years away. It’s possible some Republican may emerge who has some unorthodox stances, has a dynamic personality and can really connect with the Popular culture. He/She has to be out there somewhere.


  35. coldwarrior
    35 | January 14, 2014 9:15 am

    rain of lead wrote:

    WTF?
    TOP.Men. Top Men.
    (we’re hosed, btw)
    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/01/13/kerry-presents-russian-counterpart-with-a-pair-of-potatoes/
    At their joint press conference, a confused Russian reporter asked about the gift. “It is a symbolic gift? What does it mean?”
    “Well, he told me he’s not going to make vodka. He’s going to eat them,” Kerry quipped before changing the subject.

    ?

    i….ummmm….welllll…..


  36. 36 | January 14, 2014 9:17 am

    @ Rodan:

    Depends on how you define “unorthodox”. I think we pretty much have to run a governor, especially against Hillary. We need someone with solid credentials. We need someone who will actually get down in the dirt and fight. Neither Dole, McCain, nor Romney were willing to really fight. Even W wasn’t much of a scrapper in the elections. Picking the right candidate for 2016 Is crucial. Walkers next challenge is to win re-election this year. If he does that, he’ll be a very strong candidate for the nomination in 2016.


  37. 37 | January 14, 2014 9:18 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    He’ll bring along Wisconsin’s electoral vote

    At least he can make it competitive.I still think it has to be someone who can shatter voting patterns and realign the electorate.


  38. rain of lead
    38 | January 14, 2014 9:25 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    I posted that just for you btw
    you flummoxed quite well


  39. 39 | January 14, 2014 9:26 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Depends on how you define “unorthodox”.

    Someone who takes non traditional Republican stances. A example is Marijuana legalization. It polls very well with the public, especially younger voters. A Republican taking that stance would throw Hillary off her game and for once, Republicans will look as the good guys.

    Another issue is nation building. If a Republican came out said he/she will not engage in nation building, but only go to war as a last resort and it will be to win and get out, that would also throw Hillary off her game.

    Another way is someone who is in tune with the Pop Culture. A Republican who can discuss what shows are popular and relate with current music trends would shatter the image of the GOP as the party of angry scolds. This person would be hard to demonize and paint in a box.

    A good sense of humor is a must.

    Hillary wants an establishment type or Conservative. That is what she is preparing to run against. There is no blueprint for the type of Republican who takes unorthodox stances.


  40. rain of lead
    40 | January 14, 2014 9:27 am

    this is cool

    In almost every sci-fi movie worth re-watching, it seems that us humans are always less technologically advanced, dumber and only serve as a mere speed bump into an alien race eliminating humans to take over our planet and suck Earth dry of its resources. We’re always the weaker ones in alien wars. Well, what if we’re not? Tom Scott imagined a scenario where everyone else in the universe was afraid of humans.

    http://sploid.gizmodo.com/what-if-the-rest-of-the-alien-universe-was-terrified-of-1498217767/@caseychan


  41. 41 | January 14, 2014 9:28 am

    @ rain of lead:

    Dude is an idiot.


  42. 42 | January 14, 2014 9:30 am

    Rodan wrote:

    someone who can shatter voting patterns and realign the electorate.

    That would be ideal, but that is something that you really can’t predict until it actually happens. Obama was able to do that in his first election only because of his race. If Obama’d been white, he would have probably lost to McCain. A lot of people were invested in him being the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT. I don’t know that we can nominate someone who will generate that level of excitement. We need a governor, because we need to run against Washington. The polls show complete disgust at Washington across the board. If they run Hillary, she is the ultimate Washington Insider. Running a governor will help to create a counter-narrative against her wealth and privilege.


  43. coldwarrior
    43 | January 14, 2014 9:35 am

    rain of lead wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    I posted that just for you btw
    you flummoxed quite well

    thank you.

    see this is waht happens when people who should be working at starbucks are in charge of the govt


  44. 44 | January 14, 2014 9:35 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    If Obama’d been white, he would have probably lost to McCain.

    If Obama was white, Hillary would have been the nominee! :lol:

    In all seriousness, my point is I hope people do not get emotionally invested in 2016 as they were in 2012. The Right had a collective meltdown after Obama won. I fear mass suicides should Hillary win.

    In all honesty, the main reason I am not optimistic about 2016, is that the Republicans are making no effort to change the image of their party and appeal to new sectors of the electorate. Rand Paul is trying, but he is one guy and gets poo pooed for it. Demographics are not on the GOP’s side.


  45. coldwarrior
    45 | January 14, 2014 9:38 am

    @ rain of lead:

    i have been on that rant for years. glad to see someone else is with me


  46. 46 | January 14, 2014 9:41 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    I have read sci fi books where Humans were the invaders.


  47. coldwarrior
    47 | January 14, 2014 9:42 am

    @ Rodan:

    can we run a not-idiot?

    someone who wont fall for the abortion/birth control land mine (hint: the answer is ‘its up to the states’)…in fact, that answer works for a lot of issues


  48. 48 | January 14, 2014 9:44 am

    GOOGLE BUYS NEST FOR $3.2 BILLION

    For your consideration….

    1) The “Nest” thermostat that you can control remotely on the web.
    2) If you can control it, anyone can, including Nest, and since they built the product, I’m sure a pathway already exists.
    3) Google hasn’t exactly shied away from being a tool of the Federal Government in the interest of “national security”.
    4) Google has purchased Nest.
    5) Does not Google now have a built-in pathway to your thermostat?

    Call me paranoid, but I’m becoming increasingly suspicious of the sway “Big Tech” holds on our lives and, given their tradition of Leftist activism, I don’t think they’d hesitate in using that sway to enforce their beliefs.

    Is it really such a stretch that, in service of their, and the Government’s mutual “Green Agenda” that they’d literally seize control of your thermostat and decide how warm or cold you should be “allowed” to be?

    There was a time when I’d consider the above “Black Helicopter” paranoia….now I’m not so sure.


  49. 49 | January 14, 2014 9:44 am

    @ rain of lead:

    Makes sense to me!


  50. 50 | January 14, 2014 9:45 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Demographics are not on the GOP’s side.

    Yeah, and I wonder about that. There is precious little we can do in outreach to change that. Quite simply, the Democrats will always be able to offer more social programs, government assistance, and the like than the Republicans can. At least, they’ll offer that until the country goes bankrupt, but the long-term forecast doesn’t seem to affect the polls in the here and now. It is easy to say “Be more inclusive”. It is much harder to define that in terms of policy recommendations. Legalizing pot is a big thing to you, but it probably isn’t going to happen in the near term. It is like my desire to get rid of the NFA and ’68 GCA. Gun control is not popular in our electorate, but getting repeals of constitutionally questionable laws is not a priority for most people.


  51. 51 | January 14, 2014 9:45 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    someone who wont fall for the abortion/birth control land mine

    I can’t believe it’s 2014 and these are still issues. Republicans need to chill out on these topics.


  52. 52 | January 14, 2014 9:47 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Call me paranoid, but I’m becoming increasingly suspicious of the sway “Big Tech” holds on our lives and, given their tradition of Leftist activism, I don’t think they’d hesitate in using that sway to enforce their beliefs.

    Yeah, I am not thrilled with it, either. Did you see where that guy from Ford said they could monitor who is speeding based on GPS data that their car is sending back to them? Why in the world would we want that?


  53. 53 | January 14, 2014 9:49 am

    @ Rodan:
    @ coldwarrior:

    And then there’s Avatar….


  54. coldwarrior
    54 | January 14, 2014 9:54 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Yeah, I am not thrilled with it, either. Did you see where that guy from Ford said they could monitor who is speeding based on GPS data that their car is sending back to them? Why in the world would we want that?

    which is why i NEVER use gps. i was management in transportation for years. guess what we did with that info.


  55. 55 | January 14, 2014 9:55 am

    @ rain of lead:
    From the article:

    It’s a premise—humans as the bad guys—that should be explored in more movies and stories. We don’t know what’s out there, we don’t know where we rank, so why can’t we be the people most feared in the universe?

    This guy needs to read a LOT more science fiction. I don’t know how many stories that I have read where the aliens are terrified of us, or we are more aggressive then they are. Militant, multicultural, a real babel of languages and religions…..Need I go on? Can’t remember any titles off the top of my head unfortunately. I think a few have the aliens keeping a hands off approach to us because of our predatory instincts.


  56. 56 | January 14, 2014 9:55 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    There is precious little we can do in outreach to change that. Quite simply, the Democrats will always be able to offer more social programs, government assistance, and the like than the Republicans can.

    That is the problem right there. Please do not take this personal it is not directed at you. But the whole we can’t get group X becasue of “free stuff” is very insulting. It is utter bullshit and implies that certain groups are biologically inferior and not smart to listen to other arguments. This better than thou, we are superior mindset is killing Republicans and turns people off.

    I know you may not be thinking of it that way, but that is how it comes across. The message should be, you deserve better than that and turn people on the elitist Democrats. Why accept crumbs, when you can get a whole cake should be the argument. Half the battle is presenting an alternative.

    The Conservative opinion makers pushing this line of thinking have their own agenda. They view the GOP as their private exclusive clubs and are afraid new members will weaken their grip. Their interest is not in victiry, just making money off Republican voters.

    Legalizing pot is a big thing to you, but it probably isn’t going to happen in the near term.

    Polls say otherwise and it has begun. It’s better to get in front of an issue, then be left behind. I know you support legalization, but how can Republicans say they are for limited government, yet wasn’t to ruin people’s lives for smoking a plant? Being pro-legalization makes the small government stance consistence.


  57. 57 | January 14, 2014 9:55 am

    Rodan wrote:

    I can’t believe it’s 2014 and these are still issues. Republicans need to chill out on these topics.

    It’s not Republicans who make them topics. Democrats feel (apparently rightly) that women are more concerned about “free” contraceptives and the “right” to kill their unborn child than they are the economy, let alone things like national defense. It is always interesting to me that the media likes to talk about a “gender gap” for the Republicans among women, but never notes that the same kind of “gender gap” exists for Democrats with men. I think that reflects a difference between men and women in how they look at the State. Women want the State to be a protector and nurturer. Kind of a combination husband/father to make every thing right for them (obviously no all women feel this way, but that I s the world view among the women who vote Democrat). Men are more interested in being given the freedom to accomplish things for themselves (again, not all men). I don’t know how we appeal to women more. “Free” contraceptives? I don’t know. But when it comes to buying votes, the Democrats will always be able to out-bid us. They don’t care what it is doing to the United States in the long term.


  58. coldwarrior
    58 | January 14, 2014 9:56 am

    i want to see a candidatge who says:

    well, jouranlist, that is an asinine question. you are really a stooge. know what? i’ll answer that stupid question right after you ask my opponent (place question here) . by the way, who was the hottie you were with last night? i thought your wife was a brunette?


  59. eaglesoars
    59 | January 14, 2014 9:57 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Did you see where that guy from Ford said they could monitor who is speeding based on GPS data that their car is sending back to them? Why in the world would we want that?

    I think he denied that after it was reported. In any event, those ‘black boxes’ they want to install on new cars for ‘safety’? Watch people just disable them or modify them to send fake data.

    As for pot legalization -- Colorado is going to be fun to watch. If a lot of losers migrate there and people can’t walk down the street w/o getting high from other people’s exhaust, well……


  60. 60 | January 14, 2014 9:57 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Yeah, I am not thrilled with it, either. Did you see where that guy from Ford said they could monitor who is speeding based on GPS data that their car is sending back to them? Why in the world would we want that?

    We don’t want it, they do- “Big Corp” seamlessly interfacing with “Big Government”.


  61. 61 | January 14, 2014 9:57 am

    @ MacDuff:
    @ Iron Fist:
    @ coldwarrior:

    Google helped OFA with their data-mining campaign. Silicon Valley is part of the Democrat machine. If you notice, The move in technology is centralization not decentralization. Ponder that thought.


  62. 62 | January 14, 2014 9:58 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Big Corp and Big Gov are tied at the hip.


  63. rain of lead
    63 | January 14, 2014 9:59 am

    @ PaladinPhil:

    yup
    we’re gonna out breed you then eat you
    ever heard of Cajuns, those crazy f-ers will ear anything :)


  64. eaglesoars
    64 | January 14, 2014 9:59 am

    Rodan wrote:

    It is utter bullshit and implies that certain groups are biologically inferior and not smart to listen to other arguments.

    no it doesn’t. It DOES say that a culture of dependence is very easy to instill -- which it is. Nothing ‘biological’ is inherent in that observation.


  65. 65 | January 14, 2014 10:01 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Google helped OFA with their data-mining campaign. Silicon Valley is part of the Democrat machine. If you notice, The move in technology is centralization not decentralization. Ponder that thought.

    Oh, I’ve already pondered the thought…that was the point of my rather windy comment.


  66. 66 | January 14, 2014 10:01 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    the Democrats will always be able to out-bid us.

    This is where we disagree. They scare voters into convincing them Republicans hate them and they will protect them from Republicans.


  67. coldwarrior
    67 | January 14, 2014 10:01 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    It’s not Republicans who make them topics.

    yes, yes it is because every 4 years our idiot falls for the same trap and further perpetuates the ‘gop hates women’ meme. its as predictable as the rising sun


  68. 68 | January 14, 2014 10:02 am

    @ Rodan:

    Show me where it is wrong, though. The black vote is the quintessential example of this. Republicans ended slavery. More Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats did. But Republicans are opposed to profligate social welfare programs. Who do the black vote for in near unanimity? It isn’t the party that ended slavery.


  69. 69 | January 14, 2014 10:03 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    That is not how Democrats get voters. I interact with Leftists and studied them. They use fear to get voters. The dependent people always vote for Dems. Most of their voters are not in that category, they get voters through fear and using Republicans as strawmen.


  70. 70 | January 14, 2014 10:03 am

    rain of lead wrote:

    @ PaladinPhil:

    yup
    we’re gonna out breed you then eat you
    ever heard of Cajuns, those crazy f-ers will ear anything

    No, no, no. They don’t eat ANYTHING, they only eat stuff that hasn’t moved for a few minutes and if it has moved, they immobilize it.


  71. eaglesoars
    71 | January 14, 2014 10:06 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    They don’t eat ANYTHING, they only eat stuff that hasn’t moved for a few minutes and if it has moved, they immobilize it.

    well, then there’s okra…….


  72. 72 | January 14, 2014 10:06 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Rodan:

    Show me where it is wrong, though. The black vote is the quintessential example of this. Republicans ended slavery. More Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats did. But Republicans are opposed to profligate social welfare programs. Who do the black vote for in near unanimity? It isn’t the party that ended slavery.

    That’s all true and it’s PRECISELY why they don’t really teach history anymore- it doesn’t fit their narrative.


  73. 73 | January 14, 2014 10:07 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    well, then there’s okra…….

    Just the thought of it makes me want to throw up in my mouth. :(


  74. buzzsawmonkey
    74 | January 14, 2014 10:08 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    To not vote for her will be called “sexist” just as not voting for Obama was called “racist”. I don’t see how people fall for this bullshit, but it is clear that they do.

    The “war on women” crap that is being constantly drumbeat by the Democrats is laying the groundwork for making accusations of sexism the equivalent, socially/politically speaking, as accusations of racism.

    They’re keeping the racist thing alive too, of course—NPR is running something they call “the Race Card Project,” I kid you not—which features all sorts of bedwetters of both colors talking about how terribly, terribly devastated they are to find they have a former slave or former slaveowner or both squatting in the branches of the family tree.


  75. eaglesoars
    75 | January 14, 2014 10:08 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ eaglesoars:
    That is not how Democrats get voters. I interact with Leftists and studied them. They use fear to get voters. The dependent people always vote for Dems. Most of their voters are not in that category, they get voters through fear and using Republicans as strawmen.

    ok, I’ll go with that up to a point. But don’t demean an argument for being racist (or sexist) when its basis is in fact cultural and is true.


  76. 76 | January 14, 2014 10:09 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Blacks are only 12% of the population, they are not the GOP’s biggest problem. I can tell you why they vote Democrat. After the CRA of 1964, Republicans decided to not bother with Black voters anymore and focus on Southern Whites and Northern Ethnic Whites. It worked from 68-92.

    Starting in 92 the Democrats used social issues and fear monger over Republican rhetoric to win the Upper Middle class Suburbs and solidify their hold over single women. Republicans kept using nasty rhetoric on social issues which in turn repulsed younger voters.

    This is where we are today.


  77. 77 | January 14, 2014 10:10 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    That is exactly it. Anybody that looks at the statistics and doesn’t see a very real problem in the black community is either racist (they can’t be expected to be better than that) or blind. It isn’t just one issue. It is pretty much every social pathology that you can think of. The Democrats simply say that it is racism to notice this, and here’s some money. Republicans need to be able to face it head on, but they have to know they’ll be called “racists” for noticing the pathologies. When you have a culture that only considers street thugs to be “authentic”, then you are going to have a culture that produces street thugs. And you are going to have all of the other pathologies that go with that. At the end of the day, Democrat policies are impoverishing the black community, and preventing many of them from ever becoming successful. the first thing that they teach minorities is that they can’t make it in America without special help from the government. Then they turn that “help” into dependence so that they know who these people will always vote for. It is very predictable. What to do about it, though, I am not sure.


  78. eaglesoars
    78 | January 14, 2014 10:10 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Just the thought of it makes me want to throw up in my mouth.

    HEY!! Okra is delicious. Really. It’s just that for most dishes you have to use the young, small ones and I can’t find them even here in Virginia. The frozen stuff sucks too.


  79. 79 | January 14, 2014 10:11 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    But don’t demean an argument for being racist (or sexist) when its basis is in fact cultural and is true.

    I was not even talking about race. My point was more arrogance and I am better than you mindset.


  80. 80 | January 14, 2014 10:12 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    HEY!! Okra is delicious. Really. It’s just that for most dishes you have to use the young, small ones and I can’t find them even here in Virginia. The frozen stuff sucks too.

    I’ll let you have mine and we’ll both be happy! ;)


  81. Speranza
    81 | January 14, 2014 10:13 am

    A political family of thugs.


  82. 82 | January 14, 2014 10:13 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Did you see this?


  83. eaglesoars
    83 | January 14, 2014 10:15 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    the first thing that they teach minorities is that they can’t make it in America without special help from the government.

    Have you picked up on the ‘white privilege’ meme? That’s coming online to blunt what is sure to be anger over having 75% of the paychecks you work 2 jobs to make confiscated to pay for all the entitlements.


  84. 84 | January 14, 2014 10:15 am

    @ rain of lead:
    Cajuns don’t scare me. Now the Chinese diet…. When it comes to a pig they will eat everything but the squeal. And they are researching that one as we speak.


  85. 85 | January 14, 2014 10:16 am

    Bobby Jindal had a good idea for ending the War on Women canard. Allow Birth Control to be sold over the counter. This takes the issue off the table.


  86. buzzsawmonkey
    86 | January 14, 2014 10:16 am

    Rodan wrote:

    After the CRA of 1964, Republicans decided to not bother with Black voters anymore and focus on Southern Whites and Northern Ethnic Whites. It worked from 68-92.

    They had to. After spearheading the response to the Civil Rights Movement—which, morally, was the right thing to do, though I am increasingly convinced it was done badly in terms of how the legislation was drafted—the Republicans had to shore up its support among ethnic whites. Southern whites tended to not be Republican up to 1968; it was seeing the Democrats’ sympathy for the anti-war movement that really tipped the scales, I think.

    Also, King was riding high with the passage of the Voting Rights Act. How could the Republicans realize that the Civil Rights Movement would dump King, and civil rights, the moment the Voting Rights Act was passed and go for affirmative-action boodle instead?


  87. eaglesoars
    87 | January 14, 2014 10:17 am

    Rodan wrote:

    My point was more arrogance and I am better than you mindset.

    And it’s amazing that the Stupid Party can’t figure out how to turn that against the progs.


  88. buzzsawmonkey
    88 | January 14, 2014 10:17 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Did you see this?

    I saw mention of it yesterday. It is, of course, bullshit—but Hillary Clinton was always the candidate of Big Labia.


  89. eaglesoars
    89 | January 14, 2014 10:18 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Allow Birth Control to be sold over the counter.

    It already is. It’s called a condom. Been around for centuries.


  90. Da_Beerfreak
    90 | January 14, 2014 10:18 am

    rain of lead wrote:

    WTF?
    TOP.Men. Top Men.

    (we’re hosed, btw)

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/01/13/kerry-presents-russian-counterpart-with-a-pair-of-potatoes/

    At their joint press conference, a confused Russian reporter asked about the gift. “It is a symbolic gift? What does it mean?”

    “Well, he told me he’s not going to make vodka. He’s going to eat them,” Kerry quipped before changing the subject.

    Sputnik Comrade, not spudnik!! :roll:


  91. buzzsawmonkey
    91 | January 14, 2014 10:19 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Have you picked up on the ‘white privilege’ meme?

    Whenever I see someone ranting about the “white privy ledge” I tell them to go on and jump into the toilet where they belong.


  92. 92 | January 14, 2014 10:19 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    the first thing that they teach minorities is that they can’t make it in America without special help from the government. Then they turn that “help” into dependence so that they know who these people will always vote for. It is very predictable. What to do about it, though, I am not sure.

    Turn that against the Dems. Say Democrats think you can’t make it in America. That is a racist mindset Democrats have and implies your inferiority. That line of attack would be effective and I have used it myself and got people to agree with me.


  93. 93 | January 14, 2014 10:20 am

    If blacks, or women, have been subtly convinced they’re inherently inferior and are perpetually in need of a “leg-up”, it really doesn’t matter if they ARE or AREN’T- perception will always become reality.

    On the other hand, Asians tend to OVER-PERFORM because (at least partially because) many have been raised to believe they’re inherently SUPERIOR. Again, perception becomes reality.


  94. 94 | January 14, 2014 10:21 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Yes that was my point!!!!!!!!1

    I wrote it wrong and was NOT even thinking in a racial concept. Just why not turn the tables and use the Democrats whole arguments against them.

    See my # 92.


  95. eaglesoars
    95 | January 14, 2014 10:22 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Whenever I see someone ranting about the “white privy ledge” I tell them to go on and jump into the toilet where they belong.

    I’m developing an argument using collectivization of guilt as the framework. Not sure if the Holocaust would be an effective example to use. Perhaps the Holodormor would be better.


  96. buzzsawmonkey
    96 | January 14, 2014 10:23 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Allow Birth Control to be sold over the counter. This takes the issue off the table.

    How about telling people that “birth control” begins within their own minds—and souls?

    We’ve had four decades in which rutting like hogs has been held up to be the highest social good, and we are a far worse society for it. You complain constantly—scoldingly, if I may say so—about “the Republicans acting like scolds,” but there is a social/political morality as well as a religious morality, and somebody has to discuss it.


  97. 97 | January 14, 2014 10:24 am

    @ MacDuff:

    On the other hand, Asians tend to OVER-PERFORM because (at least partially because) many have been raised to believe they’re inherently SUPERIOR. Again, perception becomes reality.

    Yet Asians vote 78% for Democrats. Hence rendering the “they vote for free stuff argument” moot. Yes some people vote for Dems becasue of that, but it is more fear of Republicans that motivates people.


  98. eaglesoars
    98 | January 14, 2014 10:24 am

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Sputnik Comrade, not spudnik!!

    Oh NICE one!


  99. buzzsawmonkey
    99 | January 14, 2014 10:25 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    I’m developing an argument using collectivization of guilt as the framework. Not sure if the Holocaust would be an effective example to use. Perhaps the Holodormor would be better.

    The Holocaust has been over-used in general, and it is a hot-button to some people who decide that it is Too Sacred To Discuss. I don’t like any of that, but there it is.

    The Holodormor is good—if you can get people to realize what it was—because it reminds people that Communism kills millions whenever it gets a chance.


  100. eaglesoars
    100 | January 14, 2014 10:26 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    but there is a social/political morality as well as a religious morality, and somebody has to discuss it.

    I forget where I saw it -- in the last day or 2 -- Rich Lawry had a piece about a reality show -- Teenage Mom, I think. Some study showed that in areas it had the highest veiwership, the rate of teen pregnancy has gone down.


  101. RIX
    101 | January 14, 2014 10:26 am

    The Illinois Exchange is representative in that it is only enrolling 23% of the 18 to 35 year olds.
    That is not sustainable & if it doesn’t change will trigger the Insurane Companies Bail out embedded in the bill.
    Juan Williams of course thinks that there is nothing wrong with it, because it is in the Bill.
    A Bill that nobody read before voting.


  102. 102 | January 14, 2014 10:27 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Yeah, I’ve seen some of that. What the Democrats have done is set things up to a point that roughly half the population is living on the proceeds plundered from the other half of the population that actually produces things. I don’t know how you change that. The people who are the takers are never going to vote away their plunder.


  103. 103 | January 14, 2014 10:27 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    but there is a social/political morality as well as a religious morality, and somebody has to discuss it.

    The GOP has tried for 20 years with spectacular failure and turned off a whole generation. People do not like to be lectured. Don’t get me wrong, I actually agree more with SoCons than I let on. But politics is not the place for it.

    The only answer to reach this utopian society is Big Government. The cure will be worse than the disease.


  104. eaglesoars
    104 | January 14, 2014 10:28 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    because it reminds people that Communism kills millions whenever it gets a chance.

    and one of the fundamental reasons it does is that it erases the individual from its value system. That’s really what I’m trying to get at.


  105. buzzsawmonkey
    105 | January 14, 2014 10:29 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Yet Asians vote 78% for Democrats. Hence rendering the “they vote for free stuff argument” moot. Yes some people vote for Dems becasue of that, but it is more fear of Republicans that motivates people.

    People are subjected to “Republicans, booga booga” from all sides by the mainstream media—and that has an effect. They are subjected to, “Well, of course, the Democrat position” on any given issue—and that has an effect.

    The herd instinct is very powerful. When I went off to college, I was moderately religious; I met all these cool people who, like me, were discovering themselves as sort-of-adults independent of their families. And a lot of them, as part of that process, were busy dumping all vestige of the religious beliefs they had been raised on, to prove to themselves and their newfound friends just how cool and enlightened they were. So of course, I wasn’t going to be left behind by my new friends, and I eagerly dumped what I’d been raised on too. It took me years to discover what an ass I’d been.


  106. 106 | January 14, 2014 10:29 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Many of those people who get ‘handouts” are Republicans. It’s more complicated than it is presented. The only is to tell people why accept crumbs when you can get the cake. Show how elite Democrats live and cause represent against them.


  107. eaglesoars
    107 | January 14, 2014 10:31 am

    Rodan wrote:

    People do not like to be lectured

    I’m not sure about that. There seems to be a lot of white guilt around some parts.


  108. 108 | January 14, 2014 10:32 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    I am convinced there are false flag operatives in the GOP who play the bogeyman role.

    In my case I was always rebellious against authority. The more I saw Catholicism mocked, the more it reaffirmed my faith. I enjoyed going against the grain.


  109. 109 | January 14, 2014 10:35 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    How could the Republicans realize that the Civil Rights Movement would dump King, and civil rights, the moment the Voting Rights Act was passed and go for affirmative-action boodle instead?

    Yep, and that is exactly what happened. King got his Dream. Blacks are (or were) judged more by their moral character than the color of their skin. It turns out that that wasn’t really what the blacks wanted. The majority of them seem to be quite happy to be judged by the color of their skin as long as that judgment gives them a leg up. Affirmative Action is nothing but institutionalized racial discrimination, and the black community (or at least the people who are held up as “black community leaders”) are quite insistent on that institutionalized racial discrimination be permanently in place.


  110. 110 | January 14, 2014 10:35 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    This something the Right has yet to figure out. What you call “White Guilt” is really nothing more than an updated version of White Man’s burden. It implies certain groups are inferior therefore it is the duty of the Progressive Whites to take care of them.

    Take White Guilt and throw it back at the Left for the racist mindset it is.


  111. eaglesoars
    111 | January 14, 2014 10:40 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Take White Guilt and throw it back at the Left for the racist mindset it is.

    I’m working on another tactic -- throwing it at the whites who get suckered by it -- and yes, its inherent racisim would be built in there.


  112. 112 | January 14, 2014 10:42 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Many of those people who get ‘handouts” are Republicans. It’s more complicated than it is presented.

    I’d like to see an honest breakdown of that. My bet is that very few of these people vote Republican. What we need, really, is someone who will tell the truth. The Welfare State is going bankrupt. It is, in fact, already bankrupt. When you are having to borrow from visa to pay your Master Card’s interest, you are bankrupt. This is effectively what we are doing, which is why Obama was able to threaten default if the Republicans didn’t raise the “debt ceiling”. Of course, we could have prioritized those payments, and cut elsewhere, but Obama is singularly unwilling to do the actual job of the Presidency, which includes just such functions. I don’t even know if being honest about the problem will change any minds, though. The will to actually cut spending simply isn’t there, and the voters will punish anyone who tries to do that, just as they reward the people who give them goodies from the public treasury.


  113. buzzsawmonkey
  114. 114 | January 14, 2014 10:47 am

    @ eaglesoars:
    @ Iron Fist:
    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    True story.

    On my Colombian side of the family I have a cousin. He is dead scared of Republicans. When he saw polling that Romney might win, he literally turned his house into something like something from Scarface. He put cameras on the outside of his house with senors. He placed guns in strategic places all over the house. There were booby traps he set up that can be actives with some remote control. He has a enough bullets for a whole militia. He even wanted to build an escape tunnel, but becasue Florida is swamps, you can’t built underground.

    He was convinced that if Romney won, that Republican death squads were going to come to his house and throw him in a camp. He said he wanted to die free than live enslaved.

    I know that is an extreme case, but it is an example of how effective Democrat propaganda is in scaring people about Republicans.


  115. eaglesoars
    115 | January 14, 2014 10:48 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Check out NPR’s “Race Card Project” here.

    I stopped counting the word ‘privilege’ after I got to about 10…..


  116. 116 | January 14, 2014 10:49 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Exactly, we are on the same page here.


  117. 117 | January 14, 2014 10:49 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    rain of lead wrote:
    @ PaladinPhil:
    yup
    we’re gonna out breed you then eat you
    ever heard of Cajuns, those crazy f-ers will ear anything

    No, no, no. They don’t eat ANYTHING, they only eat stuff that hasn’t moved for a few minutes and if it has moved, they immobilize it.

    Or, in my case, they marry it.


  118. eaglesoars
    118 | January 14, 2014 10:50 am

    Rodan wrote:

    I know that is an extreme case, but it is an example of how effective Democrat propaganda is in scaring people about Republicans.

    I’m sorry about your cousin, but the Dems did not do that to him. I suggest medication.


  119. 119 | January 14, 2014 10:50 am

    Rodan wrote:

    In my case I was always rebellious against authority.

    Face it dude, you’re just rebellious and naturally contrarian.


  120. buzzsawmonkey
    120 | January 14, 2014 10:50 am

    Getting back to Hillary, I’ve read rumors that she is fighting some degenerative illness. May or may not be true—but I find myself wondering whether, if it is true, the plan is to go for the Double-First Whammy, and run the Super-Historical First Lady Ticket of Hillary for president and Michelle for Vice-President.

    Historic all-female ticket; check. Historic double First Ladies; check. Historic dual-race female ticket; check. Hillary, if ill, gets to go out with her dream fulfilled, and Michelle gets to still partake of the Historic Female First, while keeping for herself the Historic Black Female First if she ends up inheriting the office.

    It would explain why OFA is still collecting money hand over fist.

    You may commence shuddering now.


  121. eaglesoars
    121 | January 14, 2014 10:51 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    and if it has moved, they immobilize it.

    Or, in my case, they marry it.

    same thing


  122. buzzsawmonkey
    122 | January 14, 2014 10:52 am

    Rodan wrote:

    it is an example of how effective Democrat propaganda is in scaring people about Republicans.

    It is an example of how sad it is when weak minds give way to absurd propaganda.


  123. eaglesoars
    123 | January 14, 2014 10:53 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    I’ve read rumors that she is fighting some degenerative illness.

    She is. It’s called “Bill”.


  124. eaglesoars
    124 | January 14, 2014 10:54 am

    Have to get some work done. Back in a bit.


  125. buzzsawmonkey
    125 | January 14, 2014 10:56 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    King got his Dream. Blacks are (or were) judged more by their moral character than the color of their skin. It turns out that that wasn’t really what the blacks wanted. The majority of them seem to be quite happy to be judged by the color of their skin as long as that judgment gives them a leg up.

    The American response to the Civil Rights Movement was one of the great acts of moral responsibility in modern times. The black minority said, “You’re not behaving properly towards us, and that is wrong.” The society—reluctantly, perhaps, and with some violence and some holdouts, but by and large the majority of society—said, “You know, you’re right. We’ve been wrong. And we’d like to stop doing that and make it up to you.”

    And the recipients of this great social act of conscience took what they’d won and threw it in the gutter, then climbed down into that gutter themselves.


  126. 126 | January 14, 2014 10:58 am

    eaglesoars wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    I know that is an extreme case, but it is an example of how effective Democrat propaganda is in scaring people about Republicans.
    I’m sorry about your cousin, but the Dems did not do that to him. I suggest medication.

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    it is an example of how effective Democrat propaganda is in scaring people about Republicans.
    It is an example of how sad it is when weak minds give way to absurd propaganda.

    I’m pretty certain that there is a ton more of back story that Rodan isn’t telling. Like the fact that his cousin was a high ranking member of the Medellin cartel who has been hiding in the US every since the Reagan administration hunted down and killed Pablo Escobar. In other words, his cousin has damned good reason to be afraid of Republicans.


  127. 127 | January 14, 2014 10:58 am

    OT, but I need a favor. My wife just called in tears and told me one of the AUSAs she works with has been rushed to the hospital with a blood clot in his leg and another in his lung. They’re giving him blood thinners and weighing surgery options. I’ve met him on a number of occasions and he’s definitely one of the “good guys” in more ways than one. To complicate matters, his wife had a massive stroke a couple of years ago which left her permanently incapacitated. She lives at home, and he is not only her pillar of strength, but her primary care giver- he rushes home every day to care for her, physically, spiritually and emotionally. Please, PLEASE pray for these people. He’s an absolute prince of a man, they love each other dearly and her life, in so many ways, depends on his survival.

    Thank you.


  128. 128 | January 14, 2014 10:58 am

    @ eaglesoars:
    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    To be fair, when he was a young kid, the FARC raided his town and killed a relative of his. This prompted his dad to join the AUC at the time and get him pout of the country. So that trauma makes him associate political rhetoric with violence.

    He does not like the Democrats, but he is not afraid of them becasue as he says “they are not real men and do not know how to use guns.”

    He’s a cool a fun guy to hang out with and is a blast. But he gets very paranoid about politics.


  129. 129 | January 14, 2014 10:59 am

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    I’ve read rumors that she is fighting some degenerative illness.

    eaglesoars wrote:

    She is. It’s called “Bill”.

    ROTFLMAO… is that what she call’s her Scotch these days… :twisted:


  130. 130 | January 14, 2014 10:59 am

    @ doriangrey:

    See my #128.


  131. 131 | January 14, 2014 11:00 am

    @ MacDuff:

    Sorry to hear that.


  132. rain of lead
    132 | January 14, 2014 11:01 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    damn……
    that’s scary
    I can see that happening

    as possible as anything else


  133. buzzsawmonkey
    133 | January 14, 2014 11:01 am

    doriangrey wrote:

    Like the fact that his cousin was a high ranking member of the Medellin cartel who has been hiding in the US every since the Reagan administration hunted down and killed Pablo Escobar.

    The cartels don’t like outsiders Medellin’ in their business…


  134. 134 | January 14, 2014 11:02 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Yes I am rebellious and admit to having a bit of a anarchist streak.


  135. 135 | January 14, 2014 11:02 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    See my #128.

    Your 128, does not actually preclude my 126. Yes, I do know who funded the AUC and how. :twisted:


  136. 136 | January 14, 2014 11:03 am

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    :lol:


  137. 137 | January 14, 2014 11:04 am

    @ eaglesoars:

    Yeah, pretty much. First time we went to his family’s home in Ville Platte, he said “don’t ask what’s in the gumbo.”


  138. 138 | January 14, 2014 11:05 am

    I have to write the Taco Tuesday thread.
    What time should I schedule it? I really screwed up last week.


  139. 139 | January 14, 2014 11:08 am

    @ doriangrey:

    The AUC was the successor to Medellin. But his dad was not involved in that. He was a merchant and the FARC wanted to extort him. He joined the AUC to fight back. My cousin’s older brother as AUC also, but now a members of the Colombian Army.


  140. 140 | January 14, 2014 11:13 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    I have it scheduled for 4. SO just write it up.


  141. eaglesoars
    141 | January 14, 2014 11:14 am

    Rodan wrote:

    He does not like the Democrats, but he is not afraid of them becasue as he says “they are not real men and do not know how to use guns.”

    EXACTAMUNDO!! Now go ask him who wants to take his guns away.


  142. 143 | January 14, 2014 11:17 am

    @ lobo91:

    But I thought we no longer have debt problems. CNBC said things are peachy!


  143. 144 | January 14, 2014 11:31 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ doriangrey:
    The AUC was the successor to Medellin. But his dad was not involved in that. He was a merchant and the FARC wanted to extort him. He joined the AUC to fight back. My cousin’s older brother as AUC also, but now a members of the Colombian Army.

    Like I said, I am aware of how the AUC financed their struggle against the FARC. Guns and bullets aren’t free, regardless of how just your cause is, it has to be financed somehow.


  144. RIX
    145 | January 14, 2014 11:31 am

    http://twitchy.com/2014/01/14/mary-katherine-ham-slams-bill-oreilly-for-bringing-up-her-child-in-marijuana-debate/
    I hate when guys like O’reiley Personalize things with family members, particularly children.


  145. 146 | January 14, 2014 11:35 am

    @ RIX:

    Frankly, I loathe O’Reilly lock, stock and bobtail.
    Of course, Your Mileage May Vary.


  146. 147 | January 14, 2014 11:38 am

    @ RIX:
    @ Carolina Girl:

    Mary Katherine Ham demolished him last night. It was an ass beating of epic proportion. She exposed O’Reilly’s fear mongering.


  147. 148 | January 14, 2014 11:44 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ eaglesoars:

    Yeah, pretty much. First time we went to his family’s home in Ville Platte, he said “don’t ask what’s in the gumbo.”

    My wife’s from down Nawlins way (Jefferson) and when it comes to gumbo, I go for catfish, jambalaya or red beans and rice.


  148. 149 | January 14, 2014 11:48 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Sorry to hear that.

    Thanks, man. It’s a sad, tragic situation.


  149. 150 | January 14, 2014 11:51 am

    RIX wrote:

    http://twitchy.com/2014/01/14/mary-katherine-ham-slams-bill-oreilly-for-bringing-up-her-child-in-marijuana-debate/
    I hate when guys like O’reiley Personalize things with family members, particularly children.

    O’Reilly’s an insufferable, pompous ass and those are his good qualities.


  150. Bumr50
    151 | January 14, 2014 11:53 am

    @ Rodan:

    The prohibitionists are all worked up this morning.

    I notice that most of them are O’Reilly viewers…


  151. eaglesoars
    152 | January 14, 2014 11:54 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    Please, PLEASE pray for these people.

    holy …….. ok, not to intrude, but in addition to prayer, make I make a suggestion. Something similar happened to our next door neighbor. She lives alone. She had a medic alert system installed in her house, but it was in a fixed position by the front door. It took her an hour to get to it. Long story short. Can your friends get an alert system? After our neighbor’s nightmare we had one installed (Hubby travels, I’m alone a lot) and mine is mobile. I wear it as a necklace and its range is very good -- about a block.


  152. eaglesoars
    153 | January 14, 2014 11:55 am

    MacDuff wrote:

    when it comes to gumbo, I go for catfish, jambalaya

    shrimp. I make red beans for the super bowl. which reminds me, I have to order the tasso.


  153. heysoos
    154 | January 14, 2014 12:03 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:
    when it comes to gumbo, I go for catfish, jambalaya
    shrimp. I make red beans for the super bowl. which reminds me, I have to order the tasso.

    mmmmm….
    callin the chillun home


  154. RIX
    155 | January 14, 2014 12:03 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Frankly, I loathe O’Reilly lock, stock and bobtail.
    Of course, Your Mileage May Vary.

    He is a blowhard, but his books are good.


  155. 156 | January 14, 2014 12:03 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:
    @ Carolina Girl:
    Mary Katherine Ham demolished him last night. It was an ass beating of epic proportion. She exposed O’Reilly’s fear mongering.

    With all due respect, I know you think the marijuana issue is important, but it honestly isn’t. Bill and MKH ranting, this is your brain on shiny squirrel propaganda.


  156. buzzsawmonkey
    157 | January 14, 2014 12:04 pm

    doriangrey wrote:

    I know you think the marijuana issue is important, but it honestly isn’t.

    Pot in every chickenhawk, dammit!


  157. 158 | January 14, 2014 12:04 pm

    New Thread.


  158. 159 | January 14, 2014 12:05 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    It’s about Liberty to me. One more crack in the Progressive-Prohibitionist-Temperance wall.


  159. 160 | January 14, 2014 12:05 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Done.


  160. buzzsawmonkey
    161 | January 14, 2014 12:06 pm

    If we have more potheads with the munchies, then there will be a bigger supply of Stout Hemp Dopes!


  161. lobo91
    162 | January 14, 2014 12:06 pm

    @ doriangrey:

    With all due respect, I know you think the marijuana issue is important, but it honestly isn’t. Bill and MKH ranting, this is your brain on shiny squirrel propaganda.

    Exactly


  162. coldwarrior
    163 | January 14, 2014 12:06 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    has been rushed to the hospital with a blood clot in his leg and another in his lung. They’re giving him blood thinners and weighing surgery options.

    sounds like they caught it more than enough time for full recovery.

    i deal with the above problem every day at work, he will receive IV heparin titrated to aptt level, then they will do ultrasound to find the clots and either go in and remove them via resection or mechanically or if they are too dangerous to work on, leave them in place and use anti-platelets like coumadin in the long term.


  163. RIX
    164 | January 14, 2014 12:06 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:
    @ Carolina Girl:

    Mary Katherine Ham demolished him last night. It was an ass beating of epic proportion. She exposed O’Reilly’s fear mongering.

    O’Reily was somehow trying to make the case that legalization would include minors.
    He was way off & never pull anybody’s child into the discussion.


  164. 165 | January 14, 2014 12:06 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    The prohibitionists are all worked up this morning.
    I notice that most of them are O’Reilly viewers…

    I pisses me off that Prohibition, which is a Progressive ideology is ingrained in the Republican Party.

    Individual liberty my ass.


  165. RIX
    166 | January 14, 2014 12:07 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    http://twitchy.com/2014/01/14/mary-katherine-ham-slams-bill-oreilly-for-bringing-up-her-child-in-marijuana-debate/
    I hate when guys like O’reiley Personalize things with family members, particularly children.

    O’Reilly’s an insufferable, pompous ass and those are his good qualities.

    Yes.


  166. 167 | January 14, 2014 12:08 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    If we have more potheads with the munchies, then there will be a bigger supply of Stout Hemp Dopes!

    ROTFLMAO… Buzz for the WIN:lol: :lol: :lol:


  167. 168 | January 14, 2014 12:10 pm

    @ RIX:

    Yup, he was being intellectually dishonest. O’Reilly plays the straw man role of what people thing the Right is about.


  168. buzzsawmonkey
    169 | January 14, 2014 12:11 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    I pisses me off that Prohibition, which is a Progressive ideology is ingrained in the Republican Party.

    Individual liberty my ass.

    I agree; let’s get rid of the prohibition against pot. Also the prohibitions against refusing to hire someone for their record, or their deportment, or their grooming, and against firing someone for their work record, and deportment, and grooming. And the ability of people to make race-based claims for being fired; if you were hired in the first place, your firing is not race-based.

    If pot is legalized across the board, it should be at the same time legal to refuse to employ potheads, and to shitcan them without consequence if they’re caught toking on the job.


  169. 170 | January 14, 2014 12:11 pm

    @ lobo91:

    And it’ll keep going up. When they extended the “Debt Ceiling” they gave it a time limit, not a monetary amount. I thin k the time runs out next month. I have no doubt that in that time Obama will have borrowed upwards of a trillion dollars, and he’ll come back and say he needs more money or he’ll default. His goal is to bankrupt America completely.


  170. 171 | January 14, 2014 12:13 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Employers can decide who they hire and what causes a person to be terminated. The same applies for drinking on the job.


  171. lobo91
    172 | January 14, 2014 12:16 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    If pot is legalized across the board, it should be at the same time legal to refuse to employ potheads, and to shitcan them without consequence if they’re caught toking on the job.

    There are already people whining about that here in Colorado. They think that since the state legalized pot, employers shouldn’t be allowed to require drug tests anymore.


  172. 173 | January 14, 2014 12:16 pm

    @ Rodan:

    I should work in a distillery where you are expected to drink on the job. Or maybe not. My wife would probably divorce me :lol:


  173. 174 | January 14, 2014 12:18 pm

    eaglesoars wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    Please, PLEASE pray for these people.

    holy …….. ok, not to intrude, but in addition to prayer, make I make a suggestion. Something similar happened to our next door neighbor. She lives alone. She had a medic alert system installed in her house, but it was in a fixed position by the front door. It took her an hour to get to it. Long story short. Can your friends get an alert system? After our neighbor’s nightmare we had one installed (Hubby travels, I’m alone a lot) and mine is mobile. I wear it as a necklace and its range is very good — about a block.

    You’re very kind, thank you for your suggestion. She has help part of the day when he’s at work and yes, she has one of those “I’ve fallen and I can’t get up” pendants of some sort. They’re our age and it’s just one of those situations that drives home how fortunate many of us are, and how gracefully people like them bear their seemingly unbearable crosses. I had a stroke in ’09 and, though I still have some “souvenirs”, I than God every day for my good fortune. Thank you again.


  174. 175 | January 14, 2014 12:19 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Bumr50 wrote:
    @ Rodan:
    The prohibitionists are all worked up this morning.
    I notice that most of them are O’Reilly viewers…

    I pisses me off that Prohibition, which is a Progressive ideology is ingrained in the Republican Party.
    Individual liberty my ass.

    Prohibition wasn’t a “Progressive” idea, the Temperance movement came out of the Methodist Church back in the 1870′s. Neither the prohibition of alcohol nor other narcotics such as marijuana evolved in a vacuum. They were knee jerk misguided responses to genuinely serious problems.


  175. 176 | January 14, 2014 12:27 pm

    coldwarrior wrote:

    sounds like they caught it more than enough time for full recovery.

    i deal with the above problem every day at work, he will receive IV heparin titrated to aptt level, then they will do ultrasound to find the clots and either go in and remove them via resection or mechanically or if they are too dangerous to work on, leave them in place and use anti-platelets like coumadin in the long term.

    Thank you for responding, CW, that’s reassuring. It’s another one of those incidents that remind us of how precious, and oft tenuous our lives can be. I’ll hug my wife a little tighter when she gets home and appreciate my blessings a bit more.


  176. buzzsawmonkey
    177 | January 14, 2014 12:29 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Employers can decide who they hire and what causes a person to be terminated. The same applies for drinking on the jo

    Less and less, in both cases. There have been recent moves towards making alcoholism a “disability” which comes under the Americans With Disabilities Act, and for which a worker cannot be terminated. Think of that when you see an out-of-control semi careening towards you on the highway some night.

    There have been successful suits by employees against their former employers when they show up for work with weird hair or piercings or tattoos, or inappropriate clothing. It has long been the case that employers will suffer incompetent workers who are of the more litigious ethnic grievance demographics, because it is easier and cheaper to work around an incompetent than it is to deal with the lawsuits that would inevitably arise from showing them the door.

    You want more free choice for people to make asses of themselves? Fine—everyone to their own hog wallow. But there’s got to be some serious dismantling of “rights” already in existence too.


  177. RIX
    178 | January 14, 2014 12:40 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Yup, he was being intellectually dishonest. O’Reilly plays the straw man role of what people thing the Right is about.

    And he often misses the point . If a legless frog refused to hop on command. O’reiley would conclude that legless frogs are deaf.


  178. 179 | January 14, 2014 1:18 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    You want more free choice for people to make asses of themselves? Fine—everyone to their own hog wallow. But there’s got to be some serious dismantling of “rights” already in existence too.

    Inconvenient truths have never deterred anyone seeking to legalize marijuana, they are simply dismissed as slippery slope boogeymen.


  179. Speranza
    180 | January 14, 2014 1:52 pm

    RIX wrote:

    And he often misses the point . If a legless frog refused to hop on command. O’reiley would conclude that legless frogs are deaf.

    He has this great need to be the center of his show instead of relying on the guests.


  180. 181 | January 14, 2014 2:06 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    It has long been the case that employers will suffer incompetent workers who are of the more litigious ethnic grievance demographics, because it is easier and cheaper to work around an incompetent than it is to deal with the lawsuits that would inevitably arise from showing them the door.

    When I worked at Red Lobster we had a woman on the line who was a black lesbian, so she did as she pleased. She wouldn’t show up for work, wouldn’t work when she was there, and on down the line. I think she finally quit because even that was too much like work for her taste, but she got away with everything because they didn’t want to have to deal with the inevitable legal consequences of firing her.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David