A Present for “The Left” :-)

20

November 5, 2010 by torqdog

After Tuesday’s historical take-over of the House and many Governorships indicating a total rejection by Americans of the over-reach committed by Dems, I think you’re gonna need this;

Advertisements

20 thoughts on “A Present for “The Left” :-)

  1. Bill says:

    Whoa! Down boy. Your morning boner is blocking your view of reality again.
    I don’t know of any “lefties” who need a Waaaaambulance, Randy. Any more than “righties” needed a Waaaambulance after 2008. I doubt the left will go to the extremes the right has gone to to demonize, but we’ll see.

    When you say “The total rejection by Americans,” do you mean the ones who voted down Angle, O’Donnell, Buck, Riase and “an historic” loss in the making for Joe Miller in Alaska?

    Or just the “Americans” who believe as you do, you know, “real” Americans? I’m an American and I didn’t reject what you call “over-reaching.” How do you square that?

    And just as a reminder, the Repubs have already started measuring the drapes for gridlock, useless and expensive investigations and in-fighting over who’s going to chair which committee. None have said how they plan to create a single job yet. Not one job because they have theirs.

    And 2012 is just around the corner. Mitch McConnell is going to concentrate on trying to unseat Obama in 2012 starting now, he says. How’s that for job creation plans? Cooperation? Bi-partisan problem solving?

    Out of 144 TP candidates, 95 lost. The ones who lost, in may elections, cost the likely and traditional Republican candidate the election by fracturing the vote. And that, by itself, cost Republicans control of the Senate, which would have been a real blow to Obama’s agenda if they could out-vote his veto powers.

    Now, they haven’t got shit but a bunch of pent-up, 2008-election blues that they are going to try to exorcise.

    Grab your popcorn.

    • torqdog says:

      There’s no such thing as “winning it all”. When I say “Americans”, I’m talking about the majority who answer in poll after poll after poll that we are a center right nation. Google “Battleground” and you’ll find a bi-partisan poll that has been running for quite a few years measuring up the political mood in this country. It hasn’t changed much at all throughout it’s history. Typically, “Very Conservative” gets around 40%, “Very Liberal” gets about 20%.

      Forget about the election, don’t you just love that photo. It works both ways.

      I’ll take my popcorn slightly buttered with a pinch of salt.

    • torqdog says:

      And by “bi-partisan”, are you refering to the way Pelosi ran the house the last few years. Payback is a bitch!

  2. Bill says:

    This is an intersting article from 2008, LA Progressive:

    “In October 2008, on the eve of Obama’s historic victory, Newsweek inexplicably had a cover story trumpeting America as a “center-right country.” Other “non-partisan” media outlets did the same – regardless of the facts. It was one thing for Bill O’Reilly to say: “America is still a center right country, even though the folks voted left last night.” But when Time and Newsweek repeat the same lie, a false perception is accepted as reality.”

    From The Economist, March 2009:

    “On a five-part scale, contoured by the pollsters, “34 percent of the country self-identifies as ‘conservative’, 29 percent as ‘moderate’, 15 percent as ‘liberal’, 16 percent as ‘progressive’, and 2 percent as ‘libertarian’.” And because the moderates were nudged to make a choice, the “conservative” advantage disappeared. Presto: America is evenly split between liberals and conservatives.”

    And I got a $500 crown on one of my front teeth last week. Last night I was eating popcorn and theold, crowned tooth opposite the new tooth broke. So, no popcorn once I get out of pauper’s prison for dental work.

    • torqdog says:

      Crowns suck, root canals are worse and the implant I had installed a year ago trumps ’em all.

      The old “ya shoulda taken better care of your teeth” fairy sits on my shoulder everytime another tooth starts acting up. One of these days I’m gonna slap that bitch into another dimension if I can catch her.

      As far as polls go, this is the most respected poll on the question of where we are as a country politically. I’m glad I looked it up as I had my figures wrong on the “Very Conservative 40%” thing.

      From the American Thinker;

      The Battleground Poll is different. It is bipartisan. A Republican polling organization, the Terrance Group, and a Democrat polling organization, Lake Research Partners, collaborate in picking the questions, selecting the sample population, conducting the surveys, and analyzing the results. The Battleground Poll website, along with the raw data, is “Republican Strategic Analysis” and “Democratic Strategic Analysis.” There are few polls that are bipartisan. No other polling organization asks the same questions year after year, none that reveal the internals of their poll results so completely, and none ask anything like Question D3 in every survey. What is Question D3 and what were the results to Question D3 in the August 20, 2008 Battleground Poll? It is this:

      “When thinking about politics and government, do you consider yourself to be…

      Very conservative

      Somewhat conservative

      MODERATE

      Somewhat liberal

      Very liberal

      UNSURE/REFUSED”

      In August 2008, Americans answered that question this way: (1) 20% of Americans considered themselves to be very conservative; (2) 40% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat conservative; (3) 2% of Americans considered themselves to be moderate; (4) 27% of Americans considered themselves to be somewhat liberal; (5) 9% of Americans considered themselves to be very liberal; and (6) 3% of Americans did not know or refused to answer.

      Sixty percent of Americans considered themselves conservative. Does this mean that most Americans do not know what “conservative” means? No: The question specifically provides an out to people who are not sure about their ideology; it provides an out to people who want to be considered “moderate.” Americans reject those choices. They overwhelmingly define themselves as “conservative.” This is a huge political story – except that it is not “new” at all. Look at the thirteen Battleground Poll results over the last six years, and how do Americans answer that very question? Here are the percentages of Americans in those polls who call themselves “conservative” since June 2002: 59% (June 2002 poll), 59% (September 2003 poll), 61% (April 2004 poll), 59% (June 2004 poll), 60% (September 2004 poll), 61% (October 2005 poll), 59% (March 2006), 61% (October 2006), 59% (January 2007), 63% (July 2007), 58% (December 2007), 63% (May 2008), and now 60% (August 2008.)

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/the_biggest_missing_story_in_p.html

      So as you can see from that last paragraph, it pretty much stays the same. I tried to get into the Tarrance Group site for some more up to date figures but it seems to be down today. The latest figures I saw earlier this year showed a very slight movement towards the conservative side (1 or 2 points) so even in this highly charged political atmosphere, it doesn’t shift much at all.

  3. Bill says:

    I’m not happy with Pelosi, Randy. I’m fine with her out. She took impeachment of the Liar in Chief off the table before Obama was even sworn in and now there’s already talk this week of trying to impeach Obama for violating the Constitution by allowing the health insurance mandate to remain in the Affordable Health Care Act. And anytime you have a House leader refusing to allow a vote on something, they need to leave the room, permanently.

    We’ll see how much better the Orange, alcoholic Oompa-Loompa does. I hear he’s going to show us how Nancy should have done it. And, to his credit, he’s already backing away from comments Mitch McConnell made about his Turtle-Mission in life to make sure Obama loses the White House in 2012. Boehner said he thinks Americans want jobs to be a priority. Gee, you think?

    • torqdog says:

      Well, much as you are understandably seeing nothing but negatives, let me just point out a few changes that have already been announced on the House side.

      1) Bills WILL be posted online for 72 hours before coming on the floor for a vote. No more of that “you’ll have to pass the bill to see what’s in it” crap.

      2) A SHOCKER! Dems will be given the opportunity to add ammendments, something the Dems have prevented the Repubs from doing the last two years. I was really hoping that they would return the favor in kind but that’s my bad, vindictive side coming out.

      3) Cameras WILL be installed in the Rules Committee. No more behind the scenes hanky panky, stretching the rules as the Dems did.

      4) Earmarks. The intent at this time is a complete disallowance of earmarks, PERIOD! Knowing politicians and how they operate, time will tell as to how much success they have with this. I know that Boehner claims to have never taken an earmark so we’ll see.

      Those are just a few of the many changes coming down the pike. Do you have a problem specifically with any of that stuff I just listed?

      And speaking of Alcoholics………. how much was that much ballyhooed bar tab for the Pelosi Plane? ;-)

      • Bill says:

        Here, here’s your Tp campaign pledge against earmarks today from Dr. Rand Paul:

        “Asked what he wanted to do in Washington in a Wednesday morning television interview, the senator-elect said that his kids were hoping to meet the Obama girls. He has made other concessions to the mainstream. He now avoids his dad’s talk of shuttering the Federal Reserve and abolishing the income tax. In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me that they are a bad “symbol” of easy spending but that he will fight for Kentucky’s share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it’s doled out transparently at the committee level and not parachuted in in the dead of night. “I will advocate for Kentucky’s interests,” he says.

        So you’re not a crazy libertarian? “Not that crazy,” he cracks.

  4. Bill says:

    Ge better info on Pelosi’s bar tab than Michelle Bachmann, Randy. That tab was debunked two weeks ago, as was Bachmann’s screechy, lying horseshit this week that the India trip is costing $200 million a day and 10% of the entire US NAvy was going along for “protection.”

    Here’s the first of the read-em-and-weep Truthiness factcheck on the new bullshit headed for Washington:

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/sep/21/michele-bachmann/michele-bachmann-accuses-nancy-pelosi-spending-100/

    A source with the word “American,” or “Freedom” or “Liberty” or “Foundation” or “Group” is probably just a corporate-funded bullshit site. Dig deeper and find out who funds a news source before relying on it for direction and public statements of fact that turn out to be bullshit. Both sides do it, as you like to say. BHowever, there are two wars on and economic crisis going on and Bachmann’s partially to blame for it as she sat there on her stupid ass while Bush ran the country into the ground. She should be held responsible for her outrageous lying bullshit comments like any fuckwad who commits slander or libel.

  5. torqdog says:

    Well, thank you for that. I wonder, this story has been circulating for months and it is just now getting the spotlight turned on it? And I don’t think that Bachmann was responsible for it’s origination, just like the 200 mil India trip wasn’t hers either. It’s internet lore and unfortunately, she seems to stupidly pick up on it before the story has been vetted. Kind of like when Obama accused that police dept. of “acting stupidly” before having all the facts. I knew the 200 mil India thing was a farce because many of my news sources were also debunking it as well. With all the REAL stuff to slam out there, we don’t need to be making false accusations for more crapfest communications. Ya just gotta sift through the perverbial cheese to get the facts and it is, as you said, prevalent on both sides.

    Back to a policy oriented discussion, what do you think of those four shifts in House ops I mentioned?

  6. Bill says:

    See, it wasn’t just Bachmann, Randy, but every conservative pundit out there went after this story and it was pure bullshit. Beck, Limbaugh, Weiner, Bachmann, Malkin, et al, mouthed this lie over and over last week. Will they renounce now that it’s been debunked? You know, that “Fair and Balanced” thing? And the worst part is, the people who dote on every note these people burp-up won’t even notice that it was a lie. None of these “real” Americans will have to pay a price for lying through their teeth just to try to continue their mission of damaging the president. . .in war time.

    Your 4 points: All these congressional people employ a full staff to do nothing but research a bill and its effects then advise the Congressperson about it. Republicans, smart, bright, well-educated and well-staffed Republicans, have been playing this chickenshit game of “We can’t understand this bill! Why should we be forced to vote for something the American people don’t want when no one can understand the damn thing? We just want a chance to read it before voting on it!”And naive sheeple come to believe that the poor, hard-working Republican Congressperson is being bullied and buffaloed into making a decision with no information available, no sense of urgency doing their jobs and certainly no sense of cooperation. They have this non-partisan group called the CBO, the Congessional Budget Offcie, to help fact-check before votes are taken and Mitch McConnell was for it before he was against it. When their numbers suit him, he quotes them extensively. When CBO says that the Affordable Health Care Act will save the country billions over 10 years, he thinks they suck. Kind of hard to educate, enlist and share info when one side is laying on the ground with its fingers in its ears loudly humming,”God Bless America!”

    What good are the cameras to voters? You gonna a sit there and watch paint dry? Me meither.

    You already nailed earmarks. The tea people claim they are dead-set against them, but that’s because they either willfully don’t understand the process or they are content to remain ignorant about the chances of cutting them totally. And old school Republicans are wondering how they will survive without them.

    • torqdog says:

      Who’s Weiner? The only Weiner I know of is the Dem from New York. Where do you get your info on Limbaugh, surely not from listening directly to his show. Media Matters maybe? I do listen and haven’t heard him mention at all, the “costs” of this trip. Maybe I was out of my truck doing orders but he hasn’t fixated on the issue. Beck, I can’t answer for but again I’m sure he’s not one of your mainstays in the media absortion world so you’re probably getting his info packet from a third party as well. Nothing better than “the Horses mouth” if you wanna hear contextual dialogue but all things aside, we’ve beaten that Horse repeatedly. One guy I listen to hails from Stu’s neck of the woods. His name is Lars Larson and he has been out front debunking this issue since it came up so not all conservatives are wearing the same clothes as you inferred. And, don’t take this wrong as I’m just asking a serious question here but how much is this trip costing us anyway? Seems to be a hard figure to come by as the White House has been quite vague as far as I can tell.

      It wasn’t just Repubs clamoring to get more info on bills. Include some Dems in that mix as well if you wanna be “fair and balanced”. Wasn’t it Dingle who said something to the effect that he wasn’t a Lawyer and shouldn’t be expected to understand the more than 2,000 pages of the health care bill? He voted for it anyway, sheeesh! And where is he now? And just that previously mentioned statement (pass the bill to find out what’s in it) by Pelosi alone probably cost the Dems a few seats in some of the closer races. Arrogance gone wild!

      You and I might not watch them hearings as they will be like watching ice melt, but others will. So because you and I won’t watch, you think it’s a waste of time and resources? Personally, anytime you can turn the lights on the cockroaches in DC, it’s fine with me.

      Like the Dems, the Repubs are having internal battles. The “old guard” not wanting to relinquish any power to the young Bucks are having a problem dealing with the new recruits being sent to DC. Earmarks don’t really cost all that much when put up against the yearly budget. But you of all people know what “appearances” can do to people and earmarks just look bad like a pig at the feeding trough.

      • billie789 says:

        Weiner is Michael Savage’s real name, dude. Like Limbaugh’s real name is Jeff Christie.

        From Politifact.com:
        Michele Bachmann: Based flimsily on anonymous source in India, “The president of the United States will be taking a trip over to India that is expected to cost the taxpayers $200 million a day.”

        Media Matters:
        Beck on the radio: Trip “costing $2 billion for 10 days.” On his November 4 radio show, Beck said Obama was taking a trip “costing $2 billion for 10 days so he can go see the festival of lights,” adding, “It’s called the phone!”

        Beck at 5:02 p.m.: “[I]t could cost up to $2 billion to make sure he’s safe.” From the November 4 edition of Fox News’ Glenn Beck:

        Anderson Cooper’s 360:
        The story spread throughout conservative circles, and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was even asked about it at Thursday’s press briefing. Cooper played clips of pundits such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Michael Savage harshly criticizing Obama for supposedly wasting taxpayer funds on his trip during a time of austerity.

        He also replayed portions of an interview he held with Michele Bachmann on his Wednesday show, where she used the $200 million figure.

        “Now, you’d think if a member of Congress was going to use this figure as a fact, she would want to be pretty darn sure it was accurate, right?” Cooper said.

        Factcheck.org
        And finally, I guess you were out of your truck:”Later that day, Rush Limbaugh claimed on his radio show that “Five hundred seven rooms at the Taj Mahal, 40 airplanes, $200 million a day this nation will spend on Obama’s trip to India.” He repeats the “$200 million a day” claim several times throughout the show without specifying its source.”

        You sure this isn’t one of your Alinksy time wasters? I mean, how could you have missed that all these treasonous fucking rattle snakes all said the same thing and all had what was left of their dignity handed to them?

        I’m telling you, Randy, I know it gets lonely out there on the meter road, but, dude, you need to get better news sources.

      • torqdog says:

        Yeah, I forgot about the other Weiner. Seriously, if I had a name like that, I’d probably want it changed as well. I can only imagine the cruelties both Michael and Anthony suffered as children, courtesy of the school yard bully.

        If Limbaugh’s last name is as you say, Christie, then what is David Limbaugh’s real name. I can’t imagine both of them changing to the same name. And why did Jon Stewart abandon his jewish heritage? Is Englebert Humperdink a real name?

        Bill, you are “right”……. duh, sorry, I now know that to be an offensive word so, correct you are, Sir. I have seen the error of my ways and am ready to dispense with all the conservative voices in my head. I think I might check into one of those “Re-education camps” Stu posted a story about some time ago but I do have a real job that pays well and taking the neccessary time off is out of the question. So what I’ve instead opted for is the do-it-yourself, home-school course. I’ll trade in Hanity and O’Reily for Maddow, Matthews and Olberman…… ooops, skip him for now. I’ll leave Faux News for some “honest” journalism from CNN and MSNBC. No more Limbaugh, it’s NPR all day baby! To prove my sincerity, I’m putting a “Faux News” bumpersticker on my truck.

        Yep, I’m ready tp forego all those past conservative ideologies and become a dyed in the wool Liberal. You know I was a Liberal before I wasn’t back when I was young and thought I knew everything. Went to Viet-nam war protests and did the whole schtick just to find women so it shouldn’t be hard to re-discover my roots. Yep, to hell with all that American exceptionalism crap, empowering the individual is as bogus as propping up Business as being the only way to make an economy grow. Nope, more Govt. is THE only way baby. Make everyone equal, take from the providers and give to the receivers cuz after all, they’re just victims of an overly oppressive corporate environment. I appreciate being told that my kid can’t have a toy with their happy meal because the govt really is the only one who knows what’s best and damn that huge corporate bully anyhow. (how am I sounding so far?)

        Anyway, time to go be the Gas Corp slave. I’m really hoping that instead of a diploma signifying my passing the course that they just make a donation on my behalf to whirled peas. I’ll be happy with either an Obama/Biden or some sort of pro union bumper sticker for my pick-up.

    • torqdog says:

      “…..to continue their mission of damaging the president. . .in war time.”

      Bill, this is the 2nd time in the past few days where you’ve inserted this bit about a “war time president” as if it awards some sort of sanctuary from criticism. Why the sudden shift? Wasn’t Bush a “war time President”? You didn’t seem so sanctimonius back then. In fact, criticisms of Bush were far worse than what we’re experiencing today with books being written fantasising his assasination and numerous effigys and protest signs dipicting him as Hitler just to name a few rememberances off the top of my head.

      I dunno, it just seems quite…….. hypocritical to now suddenly act so concerned.

      • Bill says:

        And Sean Hannity, the chickenshit who has made it his mission to tear down the president every day of his stinking, worthless life on Fox, said during 8 years of Bush, that anyone who protested a president during wartime was a treasonous traitor. He doesn’t seem to have a memory. Why is that, do you think? Fair and Balanced? How about just sane and consistent?

        Your take that criticisms of Bush were much worse than those leveled daily at Obama is very subjective and your opinion. I’m not gonna waste a minute arguing about that, Randy. The facts bare a different story. Again with the one-sided news sources, dude. Check out how many violent, one-toothed militias have popped up for Obama compared to Bush. How many more death threats the Secret Service wastes time and money checking out compared to Bush. It’s off the scale and it started before he took office and it wasn’t because Festus Packerwood and his white, camo’d buddies disagreed with his then non-existent policies.

        I would never expect you to switch political backgrounds simply because you’ve been steeped in conservative media horseshit and out and out lies. Rather than what I take as a tongue-in-cheek swing to the left from you, how about just walking more to the normal center, where there is oxygen and light and millions more Americans than at either fringe?

      • torqdog says:

        Yeah, I hear ya brutha, that Sean Hanity….. what a jackhole! How dare he criticize this POTUS when he gave a pass to Bush all those years.

        Pathetic! ;-)

      • torqdog says:

        “I would never expect you to switch political backgrounds simply because you’ve been steeped in conservative media horseshit and out and out lies. Rather than what I take as a tongue-in-cheek swing to the left from you,……”

        Why Bill, you’re not buying my sudden switch to where I was before? Just wait, I have plans to write an article describing my new found Liberal ideology and I will post it here under the title “The Bearded Liberal”.

        Stay tuned!

      • torqdog says:

        “……how about just walking more to the normal center, where there is oxygen and light and millions more Americans than at either fringe?”

        Now Bill, if you know me at all, you know that I’m not one to be labeled a conformist. It’s one extreme or another for me baby. That’s the way I’ve always been in most everything I do. Most of the music I listen to is “extreme” when compared to the comfy middle as are my political views.

        Nothing ever gets noticed from a middle position. Have you read that book “Great Moderates That Made This Country Great”? Of course not because they never did anything noteworthy.

        Please don’t tell me you’re also gonna have a problem with my new found liberalism! No respect I’m tellin ya!!!

  7. Bill says:

    No, actually, what I’m saying is because you and I don’t have the time or inclination to watch the sausage being made should be a bellweather as to the usefulness of this kind of gimmick. It’s a feel-good from folks who aren’t known for their feel goods.

    My god, if you look at what portion of the budget earmarks occupy, you’d have a stomach ache if you thought you were going to save a bunch of money by cutting them. It’s another conservative feel good.

    Now, I try to get my on line news from sources who either record or print the actual transcript of what someone is saying. For instance, today, when that angry, white, fathead drug addict said, basically,”Pre-existing condition allowances by health insurance companies aren’t insurance, its’ WELFARE!” it’s kind of hard to manipulate “context” when the recording is right there to listen to, free of any influence because it’s coming from a liberal web site. It’s just what he said, the way he said, the tone he used, the comments before and after he said that specific asshole-thing. One of the reasons O’Reilly and Beck hate Media Matters is because they show the clips and full audio from the outrageously stupid things these guys and girls burble out and they Do Not Want To Be Held Responsible that way. It makes them crazy. O’Reilly can’t sit there on his show a week later and say,”I never said that. No one at Fox ever said that!” REaly, Bill? Here’s this clip and this clip and that clip. “Oh, you were taking me out of context because you’re a far-left attack site!” No, Bill, you actually said those things, care to listen again?

    You show me one clip they’ve put up that was “taken out of context” or contained one distortion of what the speaker of that info originally said. Breitbart is over on the other side. He edits for distortion, apparently.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

November 2010
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 23 other followers

Blog Stats

  • 148,068 BS BLOG visits to date
%d bloggers like this: