Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, December 29, 2006
Donald Lambro :: Townhall.com Columnist
After 100 hours, prospects look bleak
by Donald Lambro
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

WASHINGTON -- There's been a lot of speculation about what is going to happen when Democrats take control of Congress this month, but the likely answer may well be "not much."

Yes, we will have a divided government again but for those of us who believe in our constitutional system of checks and balances against an all-powerful central government, that is not a bad thing. The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning.

Besides, no one expects the administration or the Republicans to lie down and be rolled by a bunch of Democratic committee chairmen. They know how to fight back, and no doubt will do so with gusto.

As for a massive change in programs and policies, an overhaul of the insanely complex tax code, Social Security reform or fixing whatever your issue may be -- don't hold your breath.

To be sure, Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi's 100 hours of nonstop votes on the Democrats' campaign agenda will look and sound like the House majority is getting things done: new restrictions on lobbyists, raising the minimum wage to $7.25, higher taxes on the oil and gas industry, and enacting the remaining recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, among other things.

But whether most or all of these proposals make it through the maze of legislative hoops and hurdles that the Founding Fathers created to keep bad ideas from becoming law remains to be seen. There has already been some backpedaling among Democrats on their campaign promises.

One of the biggest recommendations made by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission was to reform the dangerously disorganized thicket of congressional panels in charge of the intelligence agencies. The commission said this reform was critical to safeguarding our country from another terrorist attack.

"Of all our recommendations, strengthening congressional oversight may be among the most difficult and important. So long as oversight is governed by current congressional rules and resolutions, we believe the American people will not get the security they want and need," the panel said in its report.

Implementing all of the commission's 9/11 proposals (the administration accomplished most of them) was the Democrats' campaign mantra in last year's elections. But reorganizing the raft of intelligence committees and subcommittees threatened the power of too many influential committee chairmen who feared that any consolidations would intrude into their turf. So the Pelosi Democrats have decided not to implement this key reform.

And what about Pelosi's promise to open up the legislative process to allow "open, full and fair debate" that would give the GOP minority the right to offer alternative provisions and a substitute bill.

It turns out the Democrats have backed off this one, too. Last month, she told Republicans they would get one chance to amend a bill curbing oil and gas subsidies. Does that mean they could offer their own substitute bill? Nope. They would be allowed to offer a motion to send the measure back to committee -- a difficult, if not impossible, procedural maneuver that is far from what she originally promised.

But after the 100 hours of severely limited parliamentary procedures has played out, what then? That's where prospects look bleak.

House-passed legislation goes over to the Senate, known in some disgruntled circles on Capitol Hill as "the black hole," or "the roach motel," where numerous bills go in but few come out.

The Senate's rules, dominated by unanimous-consent agreements, are far different from the House. One senator can put a hold on a bill for just about any reason or block a measure from a vote for an almost indefinite period. Even on those bills that may make it to the floor, one senator or a handful of senators can demand that the majority, if there is one, must come up with a supermajority of 60 votes to end a filibuster and proceed to full and formal consideration.

Even if you succeed in passing the Senate version, the obstacles don't end there. It must be sent to a House-Senate conference where a group of appointed lawmakers negotiate to iron out differences. Often, as was the case with last year's competing illegal immigration bills, one chamber (in this case, the House) can refuse to go to conference, dooming any further action. Many, if not most, bills coming out of conferences are voted on, but they can run into the same obstacles they had to clear in the first go-round. All of these legislative, procedural and parliamentary hurdles are hard enough to overcome. In a narrowly divided, deeply polarized House and Senate, as the 110th Democratic Congress will be, compromises will be doubly difficult to achieve.

The ball is now in the Democrats' court to prove they can govern, but the partisan signals coming out of Nancy Pelosi's war room suggest that little, if anything, is likely to get done.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Donald Lambro is chief political correspondent for The Washington Times.

Be the first to read Donald Lambro's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Repubs
"Besides, no one expects the administration or the Republicans to lie down and be rolled by a bunch of Democratic committee chairmen. They know how to fight back, and no doubt will do so with gusto."

The Republicans showed they have no backbone. When they had the majority they did not push legislation through. We are going to have Republicans that will want to "work with" the Democrats in the name of bipartisanship. They will roll over and play dead.


Skier
And that's why we lost.

Well said.

Skier
You said it all. Roll over and play dead. That's all they are good it.

Skier
That's funny. That's the same line that caught my eye too.

I didn't read much more past that line, to be honest.

Same here ...
The current crop of Republicans have done nothing to counteract the Democrats. I'm ashamed to say I'm from South Carolina, home base for one of the chief appeasers - Lindsey Graham, one of the leader of the Gang of 14. Look for Lindsey and his ilk to head up a "diversity" coalition "reaching out" to (i.e. grovelling at the feet of) Democrats.

Is Lambro serious?

Hey, if it stops the massive fraud, waste and abuse- I am all for the republicans not regaining power.

But, this line caught me as really silly. [The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning.]

I immediately thought of the impeachment/ witch-hunt of President Clinton. Now that was a politically motivated waste of time. But, the oversight of this Admin is necessary.



This whole article needs to be read in a vacuum where we didn't just witness the Republican Party spend the last 12 years having an orgy of corruption.

Maybe Lambro just thinks we all have bad memories.

Is Lambro serious?

Hey, if it stops the massive fraud, waste and abuse- I am all for the republicans not regaining power.

But, this line caught me as really silly. [The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning.]

I immediately thought of the impeachment/ witch-hunt of President Clinton. Now that was a politically motivated waste of time. But, the oversight of this Admin is necessary.



This whole article needs to be read in a vacuum where we didn't just witness the Republican Party spend the last 12 years having an orgy of corruption.

Maybe Lambro just thinks we all have bad memories.

johnny
Didn't you make a big enough fool of yourself yesterday?
Step aside a moment and look at what you are doing.
You come here without cause expressly to insult a large group of people you have never met. This is exactly the same as standing on a street corner shouting insults at strangers passing bye.
Is this the conduct you would expect from a sane person or is it a symptom of mental defect?
Does it inflate your juvenile ego to be sarcastic to adults?
Please do us at TH a favor today and go trash up hpp://www.DailyKos.com today.
We had enough of your silly posts yesterday.
I'll sure be glad when Christmas vacation ends and you children have to go back to school.

Is he serious?

Hey, if it stops the massive fraud, waste and abuse- I am all for the republicans not regaining power.

But, this line caught me as really silly. [The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning.]

I immediately thought of the impeachment/ witch-hunt of President Clinton. Now that was a politically motivated waste of time. But, the oversight of this Admin is necessary.



This whole article needs to be read in a vacuum where we didn't just witness the Republican Party spend the last 12 years having an orgy of corruption.

Maybe Lambro just thinks we all have bad memories.

MyOpine
Nicely said.

I am really growing to hate school breaks when the children get on mommy's PC. I wish that they went to school all year long like the rest of the world does.

Is he serious?

Hey, if it stops the massive fraud, waste and abuse- I am all for the republicans not regaining power.

But, this line caught me as really silly. [The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning.]

I immediately thought of the impeachment/ witch-hunt of President Clinton. Now that was a politically motivated waste of time. But, the oversight of this Admin is necessary.



This whole article needs to be read in a vacuum where we didn't just witness the Republican Party spend the last 12 years having an orgy of corruption.

Maybe Lambro just thinks we all have bad memories.

Wow
Sorry all for multiple posts

The system kept throwing me off- so I didn't realize it was posting.

uh...Ben?
The impeachment of Bill Clinton was necessary because he LIED UNDER OATH in a court case. I don't care what the case was about, he committed perjury. There are a bunch of people serving federal prison time for the exact same offense.

As for corruption, notice how the Republican Party forces anybody caught with their hand in the cookie jar to resign and face the music Foley, Duke Cunningham), where the Dim-ocrat Party makes excuses and backs their people to the hilt (see William Jefferson, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jack Murtha, etc)

MyOpine,if you followed yesterday's postings all the way through to today, you'll see that Johnny did NOT insult the TH crowd and actually was much better understood by most of us by the end of the day. He's a conservative-leaning independent who's almost as p-o'd as me about W being a big government liberal on most issues.

MyOpine
Hey,
Johnny did come across as strong yesterday, but if you only talk to people that agree with you- do you ever learn?

Debate is healthy. And, i have been called many things on here- sometimes I may get tired and snap back too.

Just a thought..


The Crawfish
[uh...Ben?
The impeachment of Bill Clinton was necessary because he LIED UNDER OATH in a court case. I don't care what the case was about, he committed perjury. There are a bunch of people serving federal prison time for the exact same offense.]

There were four investigations that found nothing- no wrong doing- no criminal activity- That Starr even went after a sexual affair is telling of the uselessness of the investigation and that it was nothing more than a witch hunt.

Also in law, there is procedural law and the actual laws. The procedures have to be just to get a just verdict. The actual impeachment process the republicans used were extremely unjust. The worst thing they did was to make the defendant- Clinton- argue his case first before he even knew what the charges were.

Second- perjury in not merely lying. It is lying about a material matter in the case at hand. IF Clinton lied (and I will dispute this on procedural grounds) it was not perjury. Because the case was not about him having sex with Monica.

The lie I remember hearing was that Bill Clinton claimed that the affair happened on a certain day and that day was different from the day Monica stated. So, therefore- Starr accused him of lying. This is wrong for two reasons.
1) In our judicial system- the benefit of the doubt always goes to the defendant. In this case it did not. It was a he said/ she said moment.
2) If you watched Clinton answer the question- he talked stated repeatedly that he was unsure of the exact date. His answer was rather long going over what was going on in the world, and him saying it was between this event and that event, not really sure, but if you force me to say an exact date I will say this one…

That is not a lie.

The bottom line is that after 70 million dollars spent by Starr. Newt using the power of congress to investigate everything, after four separate investigations-
The impeachment was about sex, entrapment, and a political vendetta.



The Crawfish
[As for corruption, notice how the Republican Party forces anybody caught with their hand in the cookie jar to resign and face the music Foley, Duke Cunningham), where the Dim-ocrat Party makes excuses and backs their people to the hilt (see William Jefferson, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jack Murtha, etc)]
==========================
I am going to assume this is a joke.

Both parties do have corrupt members and always will. What the leadership does when one is discovered to be corrupt is what really matters.
And you have it backwards.
Jefferson was stripped of all positions when it was learned he was under investigation. [He has not been indicted yet.] But the Democratic leadership acted anyway. Even the Governor of Louisiana one line item vetoed any monies in the budget going to any charities of Jefferson.

Murtha was caught on tape- NOT TAKING A BRIBE.
Sorry, it will take more than that to convince me he is corrupt.

Bill Clinton is the most investigate person in history- they found sex.
Ted Kennedy- I really don’t know of any crimes he has been accused of.

About 10-15 years ago was the last time I really rememhber, besides Jefferson, a Democrat being indicted. The Democrat leadership did the same thing to Traffacant as they did to Jefferson. They stripped him of power in the seats he held.

But now lets look at what the Republicans did:

Tom Delay- the Republicans changed their ethic rules so he would not have to step down from his position when it was learned he was under investigation.

Foley- after two years of cover ups- the investigation committee said, hey look over there- yea things were no handled right but no one is to blame. OH PLEASE

The Republicans didn’t force Duke Cunningham to step down- the Feds did. They arrested him. During the investigation is was learned that his dealing were know about for a while- the Republican leadership did nothing.

The facts do not support you case that Dems are the one bending over backward to protect their own.



Ben
RE: Johnny
This is a CONSERVATIVE site.
Any Liberal who comes here expressly for the purpose of making insults and snide remarks to Republicans is some kind of a sick pervert with a seriously over inflated ego.

AS TO WHAT WE CAN EXPECT FROM LIBERAL CONTROL?
Liberals are very consistent and Nancy Pelosi has already given us a preview of the corruption, incompetence and entertainment we can expect for the next two years.
http://www.americansfortruth.com/news/does-nancy-pelosi-condone-manboy-sex-if-the-man-is-a-democrat.html
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450
http://www.libertypost.org/cig-binreadart.cgi?ArtNum=162196

America is strong. We will survive the Liberals!

MyOpine
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 10:33 AM
Ben
RE: Johnny
This is a CONSERVATIVE site.
Any Liberal who comes here expressly for the purpose of making insults and snide remarks to Republicans is some kind of a sick pervert with a seriously over inflated ego.

AS TO WHAT WE CAN EXPECT FROM LIBERAL CONTROL?
Liberals are very consistent and Nancy Pelosi has already given us a preview of the corruption, incompetence and entertainment we can expect for the next two years.
http://www.americansfortruth.com/news/does-nancy-pelosi-condone-manboy-sex-if-the-man-is-a-democrat.html
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450
http://www.libertypost.org/cig-binreadart.cgi?ArtNum=162196

America is strong. We will survive the Liberals!
=========================
We are still determining if we survived the republicans. It will certainly take some time to undo a lot of the damage done. The national deficit, the Middle East in shambles, etc.

The first/second article- how is allowing gay people to be gay- corruption?
You do realize that even if we persecute them and make them illegal or 2/3 a human- they will still be here- they will just be persecuted. I have no problem allowing gays their pursuit of happiness.

The last link didn’t work.


Ben
Please DO NOT paraphrase anything I write.
When you make such assumption and refute your OWN assumption it is sort of like masturbating with your keyboard. You may derive pleasure from it but you acomplish nothing more.

I did not state or imply that Gay Rights is any form of corruption. THAT IS YOUR ASSUMPTION.
I do mean to imply that Pelosi can do some rather amusing things though.

Are YOU one of those sick perverts who come here to insult Conservatives?



Democrats acting like Republicans???
I'm seeing pretty much the same behavior I saw for the last 12 years. Perhaps Republicans are happy they didn't pass the nuclear option in the Senate.

Lambrow agrees that some oversite and investigation might be a good thing. Why were the Republican not doing this under their watch?

Where's the substantiation that the *majority* of recommendations by the 9-11 committee have been implemented? Of particular concern is what Homeland Security is NOT doing; protecting our harbors and borders.

Are the FBI and CIA *really* sharing information. Andecdotal evidence would indicate not.

And back to the nuclear option. Yes, there should be a balance of power, and yes, I expect spirited disagreements. Hopefully we'll see this done civilly, in contrast to the last 12 years of monolithic rule. While I disagree with Pelosi's limitation of ammendments, let's also realize that that is an option refused Democrats over the last few years.

And finally, if Lambrow is right and the Democrats do little, it will still be more than has been accomplished by recent congresses.

some thoughts
"This is a CONSERVATIVE site.
Any Liberal who comes here expressly for the purpose of making insults and snide remarks to Republicans is some kind of a sick pervert with a seriously over inflated ego."

listen, anyone can come here and insult anyone. i've seen anyone and everyone come with differing views and make constructive statements as well as offer nothing more than an insult. i assume since you left out conservatives that have inflated egos and throw out insults you appreciate this type of behavior when it suits you. what, don't like to be insulted on your own turf?

guess what, it's not your turf. public opinion and debate should never be considered as anyone's property because it occurs in a particular place. i see you have no problem with lambro assaulting the integrity of democrats, nor are you chastising the crawfish for using the term "dim-ocrat." here's a suggestion: learn to deal with the fact that you cannot insulate yourself from the judgment of others. real soldiers (those in physical combat) deal with the bullets of their enemies; intellectual combatants should strive to welcome all ideas, offensive or otherwise, from the people with which they disagree.

as for the ben/crawfish debate about the parties: guess what? they're both corrupt as hell. each of you have mentioned cases where a person was caught committing wrongs. if you think these are these lists are the exclusive lists of the wrongdoings by members of the the government, you're truly naive. both parties are full of politicians. politicians are opportunists and deal makers by their nature. thus, if they believe they have the opportunity to make a deal (get some satisfaction in the oval office) without getting caught, they'll do it.

both parties are now nothing more than national corporations. each party's goal, unlike a corporation, is not directly money. the profits they count are counted in votes, which then leads to the money, power, etc. to say that the parties care about their voters (instead of their votes) is like saying a corporation really cares about the customers (instead of their dollars). how many times do you call up your cell phone company and get put on hold? how long has america been put on hold? politicians have become do-nothings and it is precisely because they are looking out for their profits (votes) rather than the voters. they're too afraid to get something wrong or seem bad to actually get something done. of course you have the exception of george w. bush, who had goals and is determined to get things done, but he's, for lack of a better phrase, stalled out.

as for the democrats doing nothing, well, they'll just continue on the tradition of the last 12 years of little to no republican progress. whereas republicans failed to install many conservative programs, most importantly the restriction of big government, and allowed president bush unbridled control in many areas, at least the democrats will review this do-nothing approach. i highly doubt they'll do anything themselves about several things, as lambro mentions, because they're too concerned with the 2008 election.

it's still 2006 and we hear about the election in 2008. why? it's the next large political prize to be won in this country. the parties are already gearing up and so is the media. they are failing us. what's more important than social security reform hitting the presses is if whether or not obama is electable. great!

have the republicans fixed social security? nope. have we made any headway in the "culture war"? nope. it's too bad because the liberals have their agenda and the leadership to get the wrong things done on social issues and government programs. they are cohesive. hopefully they bail out like they did on the 9/11 commission recommendations on those as well for fear of being unelectable.

geez
Clinton lied under oath in court under direct questioning. That's perjury. End of ballgame. He admitted to it and was disbarred as a plea bargain to avoid prosecution on those charges. (It's also worth noting the McDougal died while in the federal prison at NAS Ft Worth a few days after he said he'd testify against Bill & Hill. Seems the prisoner, who was in solitary, wasn't given his heart medication for a few days.) The Clintons were deep into lots of stuff that was quite unsavory, but the key witnesses kept on dying conveniently.
Ted Kennedy killed Mary Jo Kopechne. DUH!
I don't remember the details, but when Jack Murtha was abouot to become Pelosi's #2, something else came up about him and corruption.

more corruption
I agree that both parties are full of it. How they handle it when it's noticed is different. The only reason I support the GOP over the Dims is that the GOP pays at least a LITTLE attention to what the Constitution says.
Defecit? I seem to remember when Ronald Reagan made a deal with Congress to cut spending. What did the liberals (Dim and GOP) do? Doubled spending. When W got taxes cut for all taxpayers, tax revenue went way up, but liberals in Congress (Dim and RINO) have again doubled the size of the federal goveernment and it's spending. If the Constitution was to be followed for just one year, the deficit would quickly turn into a surplus.

It's a 2-year show for Dems
If they build the wall, curtail earmarking and refrain from cutting-and-running in Iraq, for just two years, they cannot lose in 2008. Faced with this, the GOP will simply roll over and die. They just took a left turn so what credibility will they have in calling Dems too liberal? The good thing is that there is a very meaningful struggle going on in the Democratic party between the Marxist leadership and the much more conservative newly elected members. Bill Clinton gets it. Joe Biden gets it. Newt Gingrich gets it. The Dems don't have a mandate. They have a chance. It's really a contest to see which party will out-stupid the other.

My Opine- your too funny
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:00 AM
Ben
Please DO NOT paraphrase anything I write.
When you make such assumption and refute your OWN assumption it is sort of like masturbating with your keyboard. You may derive pleasure from it but you acomplish nothing more.

I did not state or imply that Gay Rights is any form of corruption. THAT IS YOUR ASSUMPTION.
I do mean to imply that Pelosi can do some rather amusing things though.

Are YOU one of those sick perverts who come here to insult Conservatives?
====================
See this [?] It is a question mark. It does not symbolize a paraphrase.

So far, you’re the only one insulting people- but that is okay.

Now, if you read what you wrote, [Liberals are very consistent and Nancy Pelosi has already given us a preview of the corruption, incompetence and entertainment we can expect for the next two years.]
You didn’t specify which the article were to be addressing- so, maybe you should try be more precise in what you are trying to say. The articles you linked to were the perversion- so maybe you should stay away from the keyboard for a while… clean yourself up man….

Seriously, the articles were fanatic at best and just downright stupid.

P.S. being gay is not a perversion.



drewrush
We do have sick perverts who come here insulting Conservatives for a kick to their ego.
It is some kind of mental problem that seems peculiar to Liberals.
I have visited Liberal sites a few times and never seen any Conservative crapping up their board so I am assuming only Liberals suffer from this mental disorder.
As you telling me I should suffer it in silence?

Conspiracy theory
The Crawfish writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:14 AM
geez
Clinton lied under oath in court under direct questioning. That's perjury. End of ballgame. He admitted to it and was disbarred as a plea bargain to avoid prosecution on those charges. (It's also worth noting the McDougal died while in the federal prison at NAS Ft Worth a few days after he said he'd testify against Bill & Hill. Seems the prisoner, who was in solitary, wasn't given his heart medication for a few days.) The Clintons were deep into lots of stuff that was quite unsavory, but the key witnesses kept on dying conveniently.
Ted Kennedy killed Mary Jo Kopechne. DUH!
I don't remember the details, but when Jack Murtha was abouot to become Pelosi's #2, something else came up about him and corruption.
==============================

Just one question: Why didn’t Starr bring any of that up during the trial?

Case back open: http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/white_collar_crimes/perjury.htm

Ben
I am sorry if I struck a nerve.
I had no way of knowing you were Gay.
I find Pelosi being in that Gay Rights parade amusing.
You however are boreingly predictable.
You are a typical argumentative Leftist.

The Crawfish
The Crawfish writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:20 AM
more corruption
I agree that both parties are full of it. How they handle it when it's noticed is different. The only reason I support the GOP over the Dims is that the GOP pays at least a LITTLE attention to what the Constitution says.
Defecit? I seem to remember when Ronald Reagan made a deal with Congress to cut spending. What did the liberals (Dim and GOP) do? Doubled spending. When W got taxes cut for all taxpayers, tax revenue went way up, but liberals in Congress (Dim and RINO) have again doubled the size of the federal goveernment and it's spending. If the Constitution was to be followed for just one year, the deficit would quickly turn into a surplus.
==================================
[The only reason I support the GOP over the Dims is that the GOP pays at least a LITTLE attention to what the Constitution says.]
I disagree. The whole concept of imperial presidency is a blatant and total disregard for the constitution. The wiretapping was in total disregard for the constitution. Signing executive orders that disallow the public from ever seeing the internal documents of this administration is in total disregard for the constitution. The nuclear option was an idea that was in total disregard for our constitution.

No bid contracts (that we have very little to show for) are a total disregard for our laws and system of government. Pre-emptive wars show a total disregard for the traditions and sensibilities of our country.


Exactly what makes you think they have respect for our constitution?

[Defecit? I seem to remember when Ronald Reagan made a deal with Congress to cut spending. What did the liberals (Dim and GOP) do? Doubled spending.]
No one has spent more than Bush. Even removing the war spending- he has outspent liberals. The new catch phrase has to be “spend like a bush.”
As far as Reagan goes- the last good republican president- he saw trickle down not working and tried to take steps to counter that. And spending isn’t just a democrat deal. All politicians have their pet peeve to spend on- but social programs are at least trying to give help to those that need it. I vaguely remember someone saying we were a Christian nation- yet, we hate to help others.. This is so strange to me..

[When W got taxes cut for all taxpayers, tax revenue went way up, but liberals in Congress (Dim and RINO) have again doubled the size of the federal government and it's spending.]
He did not cut taxes for all. My taxes actually went up- (City and state had to recoup somewhere) Also my cost of living went up-the price of gas, heating, food, every necessity has increased. Therefore- disposable income is down.
Second- the dems have had no control for the last 12 years in congress. All the spending you hate right now is 100% pure republican. The difference, instead of it being spent to rebuild our infrastructure, help our people, it is being doled out to political connections of the Bush Admin.

[. If the Constitution was to be followed for just one year, the deficit would quickly turn into a surplus.]

Kind of like when Clinton was in office.

haha
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:40 AM
Ben
I am sorry if I struck a nerve.
I had no way of knowing you were Gay.
I find Pelosi being in that Gay Rights parade amusing.
You however are boreingly predictable.
You are a typical argumentative Leftist.
================================
You don't have to be something to understand they have a right to lead the life they want.

Are you a child?

Who said i was a leftist?


opine
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:32 AM
drewrush
We do have sick perverts who come here insulting Conservatives for a kick to their ego.
It is some kind of mental problem that seems peculiar to Liberals.
I have visited Liberal sites a few times and never seen any Conservative crapping up their board so I am assuming only Liberals suffer from this mental disorder.
As you telling me I should suffer it in silence?
==================================

Just maybe- if you didn't start crapping on everybody- they would crap back?

Just a thought...


Ben
You preach good advice.
You should practice it.
I hope you do not suffer from any delusion that Conservatives have some obligation to tolerate your snide insults?

aryling
Oh, so she's going to ignore William Jefferson's bribe taking?

Figures.

Opine
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:01 PM
Ben
You preach good advice.
You should practice it.
I hope you do not suffer from any delusion that Conservatives have some obligation to tolerate your snide insults?
===================================
Okay Opine-
List them out.. all of my snide remarks to you..and please- be honest- and post your comments that i was responding too..

Have you said anything constructive at all?

Gunny
GunnyG writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:02 PM
aryling
Oh, so she's going to ignore William Jefferson's bribe taking?

Figures.
============================

Actually, I already addressed that above.
When the democrat leadership found out Jefferson was being investigated- they stripped him of his chair. They removed all responsibility from him. The Louisiana Governor one line item vetoed any monies that were slated for his charities.

One person being corrupt is bad. But the leadership took action.

What did the republicans do with Tom Delay when he was under investigation?
What did they do with Foley?

Yea, figures. The Republican leadership institutionalized the corruption. The democrat leadership took effective steps to punish it.


Ben
Let me explain this to you. Foley's actions, while disgusting, were NOT ILLEGAL. He resigned. The intern was OVER 18. Studds little boytoy was 17. He ran for reelection.

Another good example is the endurance of Senator KKK Byrd who, in March 2001, used the "N" word three times. Nothing was said or done by the Libs about this lynching bigot. The GOP kicked their racist, David Duke, through the uprights as soon as he opened his mouth.


GunnyG
Just left your Blog.
That was an AWFUL thing to do.
You don't need to worry about anyong stealing those women's pictures.
You should save them for Holloween!

You need to put stuff like this on your Blog.
http://www.crpa.org/showpages.asp?pid=1226

aryling
Shouldn't she start by draining the leeches from her own swamp or is that too much to expect?

Bush is Clueless

.....skier...

.....In a recent TV interview Bush said that he interpreted the results of the election as the American people giving him a message that he needed to work more closely with the Democrats ...if he truly believes that ...then he has gone 'round the bend and we are in for a rocky two years .....COLOSSUS

Are we both on Earth?
GunnyG writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:18 PM
Ben
Let me explain this to you. Foley's actions, while disgusting, were NOT ILLEGAL. He resigned. The intern was OVER 18. Studds little boytoy was 17. He ran for reelection.

Another good example is the endurance of Senator KKK Byrd who, in March 2001, used the "N" word three times. Nothing was said or done by the Libs about this lynching bigot. The GOP kicked their racist, David Duke, through the uprights as soon as he opened his mouth.
=====================================
Foley is gay- so what.
What the GOP leadership did to cover up his actions is the corruption. Who is Studds? And wouldn't 17 be of legal age too? Two different standards here?

And, as far as Bryd goes- what????????
Let me guess- Rush, oxy- Limbaugh?

And- no they didn't. The GOP supported Duke when he ran for Gov. Of Louisiana.


Ben
Do you need me to break it down Barney style for you? How about typing it slower since you rread so slow and your comprehension is nil?

Ask your mommy to explain what crime taking a 17 y.o. across state lines and out of the country for sex violates.

And when Duke started ranting about racism what happened? Bush Sr led the move to boot him from the Party. You still have your racist, sitting right next to your murderer.

GunnyG
GunnyG writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:19 PM
aryling
Shouldn't she start by draining the leeches from her own swamp or is that too much to expect?
=========================

Are you just going to ignore the fact that she did?

You just hate that, don't you? That she did strip jefferson of his seat.

And the republicans changed their ethic rules so Tom Delay didn't have to step down..

Your applying the corruption in the Repug party to the Dems...

The facts, once again, don't support you.

Ben
Comments you were responding to?
You began with a snide response to a post addressed to someone else. As to you wanting to jump back in the closet, that's ok too.

You went out of your way to pick a quarrel with me.
It is of your own making.

The way you keep dragging up stuff about Foley and Delay where you KNOW IN ADVANCE you can be easily refuted causes me to wonder about you.
What gives? Are you just trying to provoke dialog?

Not Gay!

.....opine...

.....Ben is not "gay" ...gay is a PC Liberal word ...Ben is Homosexual ...that is the correct usage ...

.....this message was brought to you by the National Committee to "Stamp out PC" .....COLOSSUS

Gunny
GunnyG writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:35 PM
Ben
Do you need me to break it down Barney style for you? How about typing it slower since you rread so slow and your comprehension is nil?

Ask your mommy to explain what crime taking a 17 y.o. across state lines and out of the country for sex violates.

And when Duke started ranting about racism what happened? Bush Sr led the move to boot him from the Party. You still have your racist, sitting right next to your murderer.
============================

Your still pissed about the other day when you couldn't respond to my post.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=of_debts_and_deficits&ns=BruceBartlett&dt=12/26/2006&page=full&comments=true#967c886b-652f-4916-ab70-87a302a9f5bf


You can be all angry all day long- it still wont change the facts.

The Republican leadership covered up Foley because he is what they hate- Gay. Just like they cover up all their crimes.





Oh, and Gunny
You can't break anything down for me..

Your a child. Your angry and taking it out on me because your party that you hold so dear screwed you along with this country..

Open you eyes.

haha
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:35 PM
Ben
Comments you were responding to?
You began with a snide response to a post addressed to someone else. As to you wanting to jump back in the closet, that's ok too.

You went out of your way to pick a quarrel with me.
It is of your own making.

The way you keep dragging up stuff about Foley and Delay where you KNOW IN ADVANCE you can be easily refuted causes me to wonder about you.
What gives? Are you just trying to provoke dialog?

=========================

No, I talked with you. You acted like a child.

What about about Foley and Delay? Are you saying the repugs didn't change thier rules so he wouldn't step down? haha..



Wow, more children.
baseballdoc writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:36 PM
Not Gay!

.....opine...

.....Ben is not "gay" ...gay is a PC Liberal word ...Ben is Homosexual ...that is the correct usage ...

.....this message was brought to you by the National Committee to "Stamp out PC" .....COLOSSUS
===================================
Oh how very amusing.
The intellectual capacity of all three of you…is just boring…

and Ben
Changing the rules is WHAT got Delay in trouble to begin with.
What his Aid did WAS ETHICAL AT THE TIME HE DID IT!
That is why Democrats had to pannel FIVE (5) Juries to find one with enough CORRUPT DEMOCRATS in it to bring an indictment!

WHAT WAS DELAY CONVICTED OF?
Anyone who would continue to harp on this fraudulent indictment is just as corrupt as that Democrat Jury.

Now Ben, tell me you did not already know that?

aryling writes:
You have made some good arguments- but these three here are more interested in acting like children.

they can't debate- so they whine, cry, and call names.


haha- whatever-
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:46 PM
and Ben
Changing the rules is WHAT got Delay in trouble to begin with.
What his Aid did WAS ETHICAL AT THE TIME HE DID IT!
That is why Democrats had to pannel FIVE (5) Juries to find one with enough CORRUPT DEMOCRATS in it to bring an indictment!

WHAT WAS DELAY CONVICTED OF?
Anyone who would continue to harp on this fraudulent indictment is just as corrupt as that Democrat Jury.

Now Ben, tell me you did not already know that?

=========================
Show me a link.
and wow, what spin- it was ethical at the time he did it...and then it became unethical after wards..

that really is too much- even for a little kid.



There ya go Ben, calling names.
You have a very limited knowledge of politics.
You come here and get bested at EVERY post and become bellicose.
Childish? You are the one who is immature.
AND RATHER IGNORANT OF POLITICS!

aryling
and you think that this stuff never happened before?

I was on active duty when a LIBERAL majority Congress voted themselves a FIFTY PERCENT pay raise. (1987) When the people raised h*ll, they simply went behind closed doors, and split it over a two year span.

Want me to go into how a LIBERAL CONGRESS was using the House Bank like their own personal ATM. Doing things like cashing a YEAR's SALARY in one shot?

Those Dhimmicrats, clean as the wind-driven snow.

Oh boy
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:53 PM
There ya go Ben, calling names.
You have a very limited knowledge of politics.
You come here and get bested at EVERY post and become bellicose.
Childish? You are the one who is immature.
AND RATHER IGNORANT OF POLITICS!
======================================


Yea, after putting up with all your belligerence. Look, a little fact of life- not everyone is as angry or fanatic as you.

Any one can go up this list and read all my comments and watch as you start your childish behavior..

I’m not worried about mine. I was talking issue- and you were being all silly like calling me gay….heheh…you’re a child dude…I can’t help that.

And it is not name calling to define you.



Yea, go into it, but please use sources
GunnyG writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:58 PM
aryling
and you think that this stuff never happened before?

I was on active duty when a LIBERAL majority Congress voted themselves a FIFTY PERCENT pay raise. (1987) When the people raised h*ll, they simply went behind closed doors, and split it over a two year span.

Want me to go into how a LIBERAL CONGRESS was using the House Bank like their own personal ATM. Doing things like cashing a YEAR's SALARY in one shot?

Those Dhimmicrats, clean as the wind-driven snow.
===========================
50% increase? I dont' know...
You are aware that in order to that, Reagan would have had to sign the bill into law.




A Do Nothing Congress
That is the best news that I have heard in a long time!

Yes BEN you can go down the list.
Try the start and check your own trash response that provoke.

YOU are the one who told me you are Gay.
I did not know till you mentioned it.
I could not care less.

All your preposterous claimes are for naught anyway.

Now that Democrats are in the drivers seat they will soon mess up many things for us to talk about.
Democrats are habitual screwups.
You will soon see.

Every time you open your mouth
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 1:14 PM
Yes BEN you can go down the list.
Try the start and check your own trash response that provoke.

YOU are the one who told me you are Gay.
I did not know till you mentioned it.
I could not care less.

All your preposterous claimes are for naught anyway.

Now that Democrats are in the drivers seat they will soon mess up many things for us to talk about.
Democrats are habitual screwups.
You will soon see.
============================
You prove how silly you are.

Hey, I have an idea- cut and paste where I said I was gay. That would be a novel idea.

aryling == This guy is a prime example.

Political Investigations...
"The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning."

Out of curiousity - if there are dark places in need of a housecleaning ... and given that Congress wasn't exactly busy over the last couple years, taking an awful lot of time off ... would you characterize the failure for the Republicans to conduct investigations into these "dark places" over the last 4 years as "politically motivated"?


Congressional Pay Raises
GunnyG writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:58 PM
aryling
and you think that this stuff never happened before?

I was on active duty when a LIBERAL majority Congress voted themselves a FIFTY PERCENT pay raise. (1987) When the people raised h*ll, they simply went behind closed doors, and split it over a two year span.

Want me to go into how a LIBERAL CONGRESS was using the House Bank like their own personal ATM. Doing things like cashing a YEAR's SALARY in one shot?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I'd love to some facts to suppport the contention that the 1987 Congress passed a 50 percent pay increase, and then backed off and phased the increase over two years...

From the US Senate website:

Date --> Effective Pay

Jan 1, 1984 72,600
Jan 1, 1985 75,100
Jan 1, 1987 77,400
Feb 4 1987 89,500
Feb 1 1990 96,600

So, please show me the 50 percent increase.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdf

Opine- here ya go.
Here you go opine- you little closeted homosexual you…
Read- but, I guess it will take adult like objectivity for you to see.
Yes, I know I am wasting my time with you- little child.

All our post
==========
Ben writes:
Is Lambro serious?

Hey, if it stops the massive fraud, waste and abuse- I am all for the republicans not regaining power.

But, this line caught me as really silly. [The Democrats will no doubt be conducting a string of politically motivated investigations into the Bush administration. But even that kind of adversarial oversight can be healthy if it shines some light on dark places in need of a housecleaning.]

I immediately thought of the impeachment/ witch-hunt of President Clinton. Now that was a politically motivated waste of time. But, the oversight of this Admin is necessary.



This whole article needs to be read in a vacuum where we didn't just witness the Republican Party spend the last 12 years having an orgy of corruption.

Maybe Lambro just thinks we all have bad memories.

Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 10:10 AM
MyOpine
Hey,
Johnny did come across as strong yesterday, but if you only talk to people that agree with you- do you ever learn?

Debate is healthy. And, i have been called many things on here- sometimes I may get tired and snap back too.

Just a thought..
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 10:32 AM
The Crawfish
[As for corruption, notice how the Republican Party forces anybody caught with their hand in the cookie jar to resign and face the music Foley, Duke Cunningham), where the Dim-ocrat Party makes excuses and backs their people to the hilt (see William Jefferson, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jack Murtha, etc)]
==========================
I am going to assume this is a joke.

Both parties do have corrupt members and always will. What the leadership does when one is discovered to be corrupt is what really matters.
And you have it backwards.
Jefferson was stripped of all positions when it was learned he was under investigation. [He has not been indicted yet.] But the Democratic leadership acted anyway. Even the Governor of Louisiana one line item vetoed any monies in the budget going to any charities of Jefferson.

Murtha was caught on tape- NOT TAKING A BRIBE.
Sorry, it will take more than that to convince me he is corrupt.

Bill Clinton is the most investigate person in history- they found sex.
Ted Kennedy- I really don’t know of any crimes he has been accused of.

About 10-15 years ago was the last time I really rememhber, besides Jefferson, a Democrat being indicted. The Democrat leadership did the same thing to Traffacant as they did to Jefferson. They stripped him of power in the seats he held.

But now lets look at what the Republicans did:

Tom Delay- the Republicans changed their ethic rules so he would not have to step down from his position when it was learned he was under investigation.

Foley- after two years of cover ups- the investigation committee said, hey look over there- yea things were no handled right but no one is to blame. OH PLEASE

The Republicans didn’t force Duke Cunningham to step down- the Feds did. They arrested him. During the investigation is was learned that his dealing were know about for a while- the Republican leadership did nothing.

The facts do not support you case that Dems are the one bending over backward to protect their own.
MyOpine writes:
Ben
RE: Johnny
This is a CONSERVATIVE site.
Any Liberal who comes here expressly for the purpose of making insults and snide remarks to Republicans is some kind of a sick pervert with a seriously over inflated ego.

AS TO WHAT WE CAN EXPECT FROM LIBERAL CONTROL?
Liberals are very consistent and Nancy Pelosi has already given us a preview of the corruption, incompetence and entertainment we can expect for the next two years.
http://www.americansfortruth.com/news/does-nancy-pelosi-condone-manboy-sex-if-the-man-is-a-democrat.html
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450
http://www.libertypost.org/cig-binreadart.cgi?ArtNum=162196

America is strong. We will survive the Liberals!
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 10:43 AM
MyOpine
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 10:33 AM
Ben
RE: Johnny
This is a CONSERVATIVE site.
Any Liberal who comes here expressly for the purpose of making insults and snide remarks to Republicans is some kind of a sick pervert with a seriously over inflated ego.

AS TO WHAT WE CAN EXPECT FROM LIBERAL CONTROL?
Liberals are very consistent and Nancy Pelosi has already given us a preview of the corruption, incompetence and entertainment we can expect for the next two years.
http://www.americansfortruth.com/news/does-nancy-pelosi-condone-manboy-sex-if-the-man-is-a-democrat.html
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450
http://www.libertypost.org/cig-binreadart.cgi?ArtNum=162196

America is strong. We will survive the Liberals!
=========================
We are still determining if we survived the republicans. It will certainly take some time to undo a lot of the damage done. The national deficit, the Middle East in shambles, etc.

The first/second article- how is allowing gay people to be gay- corruption?
You do realize that even if we persecute them and make them illegal or 2/3 a human- they will still be here- they will just be persecuted. I have no problem allowing gays their pursuit of happiness.

The last link didn’t work.
MyOpine writes:
Ben
Please DO NOT paraphrase anything I write.
When you make such assumption and refute your OWN assumption it is sort of like masturbating with your keyboard. You may derive pleasure from it but you acomplish nothing more.

I did not state or imply that Gay Rights is any form of corruption. THAT IS YOUR ASSUMPTION.
I do mean to imply that Pelosi can do some rather amusing things though.

Are YOU one of those sick perverts who come here to insult Conservatives?
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:25 AM
My Opine- your too funny
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:00 AM
Ben
Please DO NOT paraphrase anything I write.
When you make such assumption and refute your OWN assumption it is sort of like masturbating with your keyboard. You may derive pleasure from it but you acomplish nothing more.

I did not state or imply that Gay Rights is any form of corruption. THAT IS YOUR ASSUMPTION.
I do mean to imply that Pelosi can do some rather amusing things though.

Are YOU one of those sick perverts who come here to insult Conservatives?
====================
See this [?] It is a question mark. It does not symbolize a paraphrase.

So far, you’re the only one insulting people- but that is okay.

Now, if you read what you wrote, [Liberals are very consistent and Nancy Pelosi has already given us a preview of the corruption, incompetence and entertainment we can expect for the next two years.]
You didn’t specify which the article were to be addressing- so, maybe you should try be more precise in what you are trying to say. The articles you linked to were the perversion- so maybe you should stay away from the keyboard for a while… clean yourself up man….

Seriously, the articles were fanatic at best and just downright stupid.

P.S. being gay is not a perversion.
MyOpine writes:
Ben
I am sorry if I struck a nerve.
I had no way of knowing you were Gay.
I find Pelosi being in that Gay Rights parade amusing.
You however are boreingly predictable.
You are a typical argumentative Leftist.
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:53 AM
haha
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:40 AM
Ben
I am sorry if I struck a nerve.
I had no way of knowing you were Gay.
I find Pelosi being in that Gay Rights parade amusing.
You however are boreingly predictable.
You are a typical argumentative Leftist.
================================
You don't have to be something to understand they have a right to lead the life they want.

Are you a child?

Who said i was a leftist?

Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:54 AM
opine
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 11:32 AM
drewrush
We do have sick perverts who come here insulting Conservatives for a kick to their ego.
It is some kind of mental problem that seems peculiar to Liberals.
I have visited Liberal sites a few times and never seen any Conservative crapping up their board so I am assuming only Liberals suffer from this mental disorder.
As you telling me I should suffer it in silence?
==================================

Just maybe- if you didn't start crapping on everybody- they would crap back?

Just a thought...
MyOpine writes:
Ben
You preach good advice.
You should practice it.
I hope you do not suffer from any delusion that Conservatives have some obligation to tolerate your snide insults?

Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:09 PM
Opine
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:01 PM
Ben
You preach good advice.
You should practice it.
I hope you do not suffer from any delusion that Conservatives have some obligation to tolerate your snide insults?
===================================
Okay Opine-
List them out.. all of my snide remarks to you..and please- be honest- and post your comments that i was responding too..

Have you said anything constructive at all?
MyOpine writes:
Ben
Comments you were responding to?
You began with a snide response to a post addressed to someone else. As to you wanting to jump back in the closet, that's ok too.

You went out of your way to pick a quarrel with me.
It is of your own making.

The way you keep dragging up stuff about Foley and Delay where you KNOW IN ADVANCE you can be easily refuted causes me to wonder about you.
What gives? Are you just trying to provoke dialog?
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:42 PM
haha
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:35 PM
Ben
Comments you were responding to?
You began with a snide response to a post addressed to someone else. As to you wanting to jump back in the closet, that's ok too.

You went out of your way to pick a quarrel with me.
It is of your own making.

The way you keep dragging up stuff about Foley and Delay where you KNOW IN ADVANCE you can be easily refuted causes me to wonder about you.
What gives? Are you just trying to provoke dialog?

=========================

No, I talked with you. You acted like a child.

What about about Foley and Delay? Are you saying the repugs didn't change thier rules so he wouldn't step down? haha..
MyOpine writes:
and Ben
Changing the rules is WHAT got Delay in trouble to begin with.
What his Aid did WAS ETHICAL AT THE TIME HE DID IT!
That is why Democrats had to pannel FIVE (5) Juries to find one with enough CORRUPT DEMOCRATS in it to bring an indictment!

WHAT WAS DELAY CONVICTED OF?
Anyone who would continue to harp on this fraudulent indictment is just as corrupt as that Democrat Jury.

Now Ben, tell me you did not already know that?
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:49 PM
haha- whatever-
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:46 PM
and Ben
Changing the rules is WHAT got Delay in trouble to begin with.
What his Aid did WAS ETHICAL AT THE TIME HE DID IT!
That is why Democrats had to pannel FIVE (5) Juries to find one with enough CORRUPT DEMOCRATS in it to bring an indictment!

WHAT WAS DELAY CONVICTED OF?
Anyone who would continue to harp on this fraudulent indictment is just as corrupt as that Democrat Jury.

Now Ben, tell me you did not already know that?

=========================
Show me a link.
and wow, what spin- it was ethical at the time he did it...and then it became unethical after wards..

that really is too much- even for a little kid.
MyOpine writes:
There ya go Ben, calling names.
You have a very limited knowledge of politics.
You come here and get bested at EVERY post and become bellicose.
Childish? You are the one who is immature.
AND RATHER IGNORANT OF POLITICS!
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:59 PM
Oh boy
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 12:53 PM
There ya go Ben, calling names.
You have a very limited knowledge of politics.
You come here and get bested at EVERY post and become bellicose.
Childish? You are the one who is immature.
AND RATHER IGNORANT OF POLITICS!
======================================


Yea, after putting up with all your belligerence. Look, a little fact of life- not everyone is as angry or fanatic as you.

Any one can go up this list and read all my comments and watch as you start your childish behavior..

I’m not worried about mine. I was talking issue- and you were being all silly like calling me gay….heheh…you’re a child dude…I can’t help that.

And it is not name calling to define you.

MyOpine writes:
Yes BEN you can go down the list.
Try the start and check your own trash response that provoke.

YOU are the one who told me you are Gay.
I did not know till you mentioned it.
I could not care less.

All your preposterous claimes are for naught anyway.

Now that Democrats are in the drivers seat they will soon mess up many things for us to talk about.
Democrats are habitual screwups.
You will soon see.
Ben writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 1:20 PM
Every time you open your mouth
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 1:14 PM
Yes BEN you can go down the list.
Try the start and check your own trash response that provoke.

YOU are the one who told me you are Gay.
I did not know till you mentioned it.
I could not care less.

All your preposterous claimes are for naught anyway.

Now that Democrats are in the drivers seat they will soon mess up many things for us to talk about.
Democrats are habitual screwups.
You will soon see.
============================
You prove how silly you are.

Hey, I have an idea- cut and paste where I said I was gay. That would be a novel idea.

aryling == This guy is a prime example.

ExposeWriter
Facts don't mean anything to the ones posting today on this site.


ExposeWriter
Sometimes you can have some really good debates with some people on here, but not today.



I mean, look at Opine-
That little boy has been making things up all day. He has such an infatuation with gays that I am starting to wonder.

Not that it would matter, but he is really hung up on it.

Ben
Facts won't help someone devoid of reason.
The facts YOU keep demanding links to are FACTS that any AMERICAN is well aware of.
Are you one of those goofy Englishmen or did you just become interested in politics yesterday?
If you answer me, please try to be original.
Your continual cut&past is only needed for your poor memory.

Don't you KNOW anything?
Do you expect me to teach you politics in response to your snide remarks?
I don't think so.
I think you are some sick wierdo kid who gets a kick out of making snide remarks to adults.

Ben
You bore me.

myopine
I see that myopine is frustrated today. I didn't see any mention of Ben's sexuality, but myopine seems hung up on it...Also, if your only defense is to refer to "FACTS that any AMERICAN is well aware of", well...

Hey Kathy, did Foley take responsibility for his actions, or did he hide in rehab? Great role model, huh?

dunkel
I guess you are also ignorant of facts the general public is aware of?
You seem rather naive.
If you had been paying attention you would notice Ben singled himself out as Gay with his vehement defense of Gays WHEN I HAD NOT ATTACKED GAYS!
I merely mentioned I was amused by Pelosi participating in the Gay Rights Parade and Ben came charging to the defense of Gays.
You seen inordinatly interested.
AND before you get upset,
I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO IN PRIVATE!
I have no interest in that subject.
If you want to discuss what I think Democrats will screwup next;
Lets argue about the proposed tax on Oil Companies.

Suffering in silence
No, you should not suffer in silence. However, you shouldn't sit there and complain about how liberals sit there and make insults and in the same breath make insults. If you want to insult somebody in response to an insult, fine, but don't sit there and complain about the fact that people are being insulting.

And, of course you don't have the opportunity to post anything on a liberal site; they're too worried your overwhelming reasonableness will destroy whatever hold they have on weak minds. Apparently they consider conservatives disruptive. They should. Anyone trying to prove something false true will be disturbed by someone coming around with a bit of truth.

See, that's an insult, and if someone comes back and says "you have a weak mind," I'm certainly not going to complain. I'll just pick up my rube cube and prove them wrong. :)

drewrush YOU WIN!
I am not exactly what you won but I condede!
Now do I get to play with your Rube Cube?

Kinda screwed up
I am not exactly sure what you won but I concede!

yes you can
just don't peel off the stickers. my little cousin did that once and i had to go buy another one.

it's hard to figure out a cube with 34 of the 54 stickers missing.

SOUND THE CLAXTON
AH, MR. LAMBRO,

MUST BE YOU AND I READ AND COMPREHEND DIFFERENT LITERATURE EXPLAINING THE INTENTIONS OF THE HONEST FOLK IN THE JACKASS PARTY. SINCE THEY HAVE ONCE AGAIN SPREAD RUMOR, INUENDO AND THANK GOD THEY HAD THE STUPIDITY OF THE REPUBLICANS TO REGAIN WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY THEIRS, ALL POSITIONS OF LEADERSHIP, I HAVE READ, HEARD AND SEEN THEIR VERSION OF LEADERSHIP MAKE STATEMENTS REGARDING BIG OIL, BIG PHARMA, BIG WAL MART, BIG MIDDLE CLASS, BIG INCOME AND THE REPEAL OF SMALL TAX CUTS, NONE OF THEM BODE WELL FOR ANY OF THESE ENTITIES.

PELOSIUM 7, SKIPPY REID AND THE PRIZE CHUCKY SCHUMER ARE IN AGREEMENT THIS REGANOMICS STYLE OF ECONOMICS HAS GONE ON FOR TO LONG, TIME TO REINSTATE THE JIMMY (PEANUT) CARTER DOUBLE DIGIT INFLATION FORMULA ONCE AGAIN AND BY THE WAY LET'S JUST PUSH FOR THE OLD FARCE OF MINIMUM WAGE. THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO GET EVEN MORE FAT AND OUT OF CONTROL THAN IT IS NOW, SO WE NEEDS TO FEED IT MY PRECIOUS.

SO TIS TIME TO SCURRY ABOUT LOOKING FOR A SAFE PLACE TO STASH ME CHESNUTS, INSURANCE ANNUITIES AND HEDGE FUNDS ARE LOOKING MIGHTY GOOD THESE DARKENING DAYS. I'LL BE READY FOR THE STUPIDS OF AMERICA TO SELL OUT THE ECONOMY IN "08".



Opine- know what truth is?
MyOpine writes: Friday, December, 29, 2006 3:44 PM
dunkel
I guess you are also ignorant of facts the general public is aware of?
You seem rather naive.
If you had been paying attention you would notice Ben singled himself out as Gay with his vehement defense of Gays WHEN I HAD NOT ATTACKED GAYS!
I merely mentioned I was amused by Pelosi participating in the Gay Rights Parade and Ben came charging to the defense of Gays.
You seen inordinatly interested.
AND before you get upset,
I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO IN PRIVATE!
I have no interest in that subject.
If you want to discuss what I think Democrats will screwup next;
Lets argue about the proposed tax on Oil Companies.
====================
Opine,
Can you ever tell or know the truth. You posted three article of which two were about gay parades.. I didn’t run to defend any one.

But, I will volunteer that my brother is gay. And, I do support the right of gays to live their lives without your persecution. We have done that before- blacks were considered 2/3 a human being. Well, my brother is more than that.

You didn’t merely mention anything. You kept repeating and repeating like the little child you are..

You’re a waste of time.

Ben PLEASE STOP WASTING YOUR TIME!
I COULD NOT CARE LESS WHETHER YOU OR YOUR BROTHER OR BOTH ARE GAY!

Your being Gay did not cause you to be at odds with me.
Your being an obnoxious, bellicose buffoon caused me to take offense to you.
You have gone to great length to prove this and have made a PERMANENT impression!
I don't believe it is possible to have an intelligent debate with someone as arrogant as you.

Ben
"We have done that before- blacks were considered 2/3 a human being."

Are you brain dead or what? This was patiently explained to you several days ago on another thread.

The 3/5th rule was done by the North to keep the South, who had a large number of slaves, to keep the South from being a power bloc by using slaves as votes, when they had none.

Get it? Did I break it down enough for you? Need to make it Barney style for you. Get Baby Bop to hold up signs?

Good GOD you liberals are simply too stupid for words.

Wow
Ben you have really torn the shreds out these right wingers today. MyOpine has gone over the bend.

MyOpine
You were the one who first said anything about Ben being gay. So, what is your problem?

First you insulted me right off the bat about my comment to skier. I don't see what was said that took you off the deep end about it.

I think you got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

MyOpine again/GunnyG
The first 4 posters, myself included, agreed with what skier said, but you only chose me as the child who was insulting you. Those were your terms.
Do you see anything odd about that? Why didn't you chastise the other 3 posters?

Do you see some contradictions there?

GunnyG,
Do you always argue by accusing other people to be children and stupid?

No Johnny,
Just left over from your long list of insults to Republicans all day yesterday.
I get the impression you just like to insult Conservatives.
You seem to go way out of your way to insult for no particular reason.

Johnny you do seem immature!
Very childish in fact.
School will be back in session soon and you will be busy then I guess.

This thing of insulting Conservatives, What kind of a rush do you get out of it?
Is this some kind of compulsive urge or can you control it?

Johnny,
Pretty is as pretty does. When the shoe fits wear it.

pitbull
I listen to The Great One every night on KSFO AM650

MyOpine
I would say for a man of your age you conduct yourself in quite a childish manner. My post from the beginning of the day did not insult anyone on TH. You, however, had to take insult to it, even though 3 other posters said the same thing I did.
Now, picking me out of 4 others who said the same thing, looks pretty immature to me.

And, what did Ben do to you? Nothing that I see.
He merely argued the facts with you. But, you didn't like his set of facts, only yours, so once again, you accuse him of being immature and insulting. Meanwhile you are the one hurling the insults. You are so blinded by your own superiority you can't even see it or admit your own prejudices. That would take a big person to do that though. I'm not sure you'd be up to that.

johnny
I suppose your post makes sense to you.
I can't claim to understand anything that you do.
You go from thread to thread insulting Republicans like some child who resents adult authority.
Are you rational enought at the moment to understand me?

Ben?
Out of the blue he became bellicose with me.

hosekuervo - according to my own
scientific sampling, I have found that LeftieLoserism is a mental disorder of the most extreme kind.

I have also found the following:

Righties Rule
Lefties Drool!

MyOpine
Am I to believe that you are not insulting people yourself? Look how you insulted Ben. Can't you see that?

hosekuervo
You've got something there with conservatism being a mental illness. I've never seen so many people as I've seen here at TH who take offense if your views are different than theirs.

I never even attacked these people. I made statements involving Bush and they feel personally attacked about it. Then, I get called every name one can possibly imagine.

I made a statement yesterday on another thread that my family decided not to buy Christmas gifts this year and I was branded a Marxist.

It's unbelievable the kinds of comments that come from these people.


Mountain Rose
You seem to be "drooling" with hatred. Did something bad happen to you as a child? Why do you hate people so much who view things differently than you do?

What is wrong with someone else having an opinion different than yours? Is that not allowed without some kind of personal attack?

People here on TH say that liberals want to shut down free speech, but I see TH posters trying to do the same thing by attacking liberals. Why do you do that?

hosekuervo
Yeah, they are an extinct species but don't see it as yet. Maybe they have hints coming to them and that is why they are so defensive. Newt! That's a laugh.
The cons problem is they have no one to run for president who doesn't match their exquisite moral certitude. Who are they going to get with the kinds of issues they won't negotiate on? They are so rigid in their beliefs that almost no one can come up to their standards other than God Himself. And, I'm not sure even God would do it for them.

I HOPE you guys are wrong.
It sure does look dismal at this time.
It is early yet though.
Someone will probably step forward later.
He is probably laying back to avoid the length of anal exam and badmouthing from MSM.

You guys could stand a better choice too and there will probably be several more.

None of the present candidates on either side have executive experience.
We need some State Governors to step forward.

Some reading material?
http://www.crpa.org/showpages.asp?pid=1226

MyOpine
I'm not pleased about the choices on our side either. Hillary is old news now. Obama has no experience. Like you said, there is time as yet.

Uh oh. I'm just hearing Saddam will die at 10pm tonight. I've got Fox on loudly so I'll know when he's gone.

hosekuervo
I'm a social worker and what I see is so bad. The cons want to cut every social program there is to help people and this is one problem I have with their ideology.

We have schizophrenics on the street because they have nowhere to go. They get thrown out of hospitals after a period of time due to funding. So, they live on the street, not being able to support themselves in anyway.

My friend who is a nurse works at a home that will take schizophrenics off the street. The waiting list is huge. It is heart breaking. Most have no families to help them. They are people in their 30's and 40's who have no living relatives to care for them. They need medication but it's difficult for them to stay on their meds unless someone can remind them.

Cons want to cut funding and people like this fall through the cracks. I think to myself many times that cons seem heartless. They don't want their tax money to go for anything that would help these people out.

That is just one story. There are many more.
Sometimes I wonder why I even do this job anymore. It's too painful at times.

Johnny
That does not sound right.
Republicans do not want to defund projects for the helpless.
Our main interest is getting people WHO CAN WORK off welfare and earning their own way.
Through work training and teaching manual skills.

If something like you describe is happening, the public needs to know!
Republicans will help all they can.

MyOpine
Schizophrenics can't work. They are too mentally incapacitated. That is one of the problems. Some could do some kinds of work if they are on their meds, but others are more severely effected.

Well, MyOpine it's been going on for years. That's why I figured no one cares about these people. You wouldn't believe the hurdles and red tape we have to jump over and through to get anything done.

Also we have kids out on the street, runaways who are prostituting themselves. We don't know where to go with all of them either. I get really upset about the kids. Some we get into shelters and halfway houses, but there aren't enough of these places.

A lot of these kids were being sexually abused at home so they run away and get themselves abused again. They can't go back home. To get money they prostitute and then get STDs. On top of that they drug themselves to get rid of the pain of it all.
Believe me it's an ugly picture.

These kids (anywhere from 11 on up) need extensive counseling also. There is limited means for this too.

There aren't enough social workers to work with them either because social workers don't get paid a lot of money. Many people don't want to do the job.

Well, it's just an overwhelming situation. This is what I mean when I say America doesn't know what is going on in their own back yard. I guess they don't want to see.


Johnny
Why don't you write an e-mail to the Author on this thread, give him all the particulars and ask him to do an article on it to help bring it to public attention.
That would be a start.
Then you can ask TH members to write letters and send e-mail to Congress.

Think now?
Or after the new Congress is seated?
This is America's problem, not Democrat or Republican.

MyOpine
I can try that I guess. I don't know if anyone will be interested. There have been shows on TV depicting these problems. I wonder if anyone ever sees these types of shows or they just tune out.

I don't think people here would be too open to me MyOpine. They seem to think I deliberately came here to insult people. But, that's not what I had in mind. I just wanted to see if I could get some interesting discussions going with a different viewpoint. But, mostly I was met with such opposition. I probably made the mistake of coming off too strong.

OK pitbull, NOW
Put a little thought to the subject of helping those kids and let us know what you think?

Saddam is Dead
At last.

Pitbull
You get an A+ for your excellent posting.

Johnny
You say: "the cons want to cut funding", the cons want to cut every social program".

How do you know? Have you actually heard a con say they want to cut the funding. Has anything been started by the cons to put an end to funding social programs?"

Perhaps you want to believe that the cons want to cut funding. It's too much to imagine that conservatives could be sympathetic to their fellow citizens.

You sound like a decent person, and I'm not being confrontational, but when you say things like that, you need to be able to back them up, and if you can, I will accept the evidence.


Resistance is Futile

.....pitbull...

.....when I was younger I used to try to debate with Liberals until I figured out that they do not respond to logic but run on emotion ...

.....an arguement with a Liberal gets the same results as shoveling seaweed against the tide .....COLOSSUS

Donald (Duck) Lampoon
So more DemoSocialists in Power is going to "check and balance" an "all powerful Central Government"? ? ????????????????????

Ah, Donald, sweetheart, the Dumbolcraps are the ONES!!! who BELIEVE IN, who WANT, WHO ARE CREATING and MAINTAINING an "all powerful central Government". And you "check and balance this by putting MORE of them in Power? The Dumbocraps are going to return more power to the states and the people? Reduce the size and power of Central Government? They are?????
Reminds me of that sports guru who just died commenting on an aborted plan to raise the height of the net in Pro Basketball: "The object of the game is to score points by putting the ball through a hoop--and you want to make that MORE DIFFICULT?" "Divided Government that makes it nearly impossible to get Strict Constructionist Judges on the Supreme Court is a GOOD THING?

All I can say is God Help Us!!

the big mick

pitbull and baseball doc
I could say the same thing about you, arguing with cons is futile.

No where did I ever say "money" for social programs should not be accountable. I didn't.
Don't you think that I as a social worker would rather see those monies going to help these people rather into mismanagement?

And, your argument about "free love" has absolutely "nothing" to do with the examples I gave, either with the schizophrenics or the homeless children.

How ridiculous can you get to throw back at me a sermon about "free love". I don't even believe in it. But, you as other TH posters have labeled me as a liberal, and naturally, being a liberal I "must" believe in free love.

Do you conservatives ever "think". You lump all liberals into the same group, a group you despise, and apply and attach everything to that person that you despise. Well what if these types of labels don't apply?

Talk about "not thinking". What I see here is a lot of "non-thinking".

On some other columns I'm also "informed" about myself that I attended "public" school. Now, isn't that interesting! These people here don't even know me but they sure can tell me what/who I am. I attended Catholic school. So, that blows that one out of the water.

I was brought up very strictly in Catholic school about sexual conduct. So, "free love" is something I've never practised.

You speak of liberals coming from their emotions and not thinking. What do your comments tell you about yourselves? Are your comments coming from a "thinking" place? It doesn't look that way to me.
It looks like your comments and sermons, preachings, whatever you want to call them, are coming right out of the emotion of fear.

That's right fear. Fear of others not like you.
Emotionally attaching every label and every belief you have about liberals to an individual.

Lumping all liberals under one set of ideas you have about them is not "thinking".

Hmmm, Two Years of No Legislation ??
Two years without pork?

No earmarks for two years?

No multimillion dollar bridges in Alaska?

No enviornmental legislation banning some exercise of human endeavour?

No pay raises for Congress?

No new laws on the books to initiate more frivolous lawsuits?

I don't know if the Saxman can bear it.


johnny
I went to 12 years of Catholic school. High School was all boys, no girls.

This education did not have much effect on strict conformity to Catholic regulations of sexual behavior.

Sometimes the most strict upbringing can have the opposite effect.

By my junior year I was working in nightclubs and the battle for intellectual morality had been eclipsed by stronger, God given, instincts.

Hey, everybody has a right to post here and the different opinions are what make our USA great.

johnny- in the old days people
were taken care of by their families, or by charities.

The Left has done everything it can to destroy the traditional American family, and to tear down the influence of churches in society, and then they whine that there is no one to care for the crazies who would have been cared for at home.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.