1 - 10 Next
This is why our country is going down the tubes: we have in high office, people who brazenly lie through their teeth, ON F@#$%+& CAMERA, then some time later, have the brass to claim they never said the thing they are ON F@#$%+& CAMERA saying! And they get reelected. Why do why have such lying sacks of fecal matter in office? Because their constituents let them get away with it! Why shouldn't Harry Reid get up and slander people and spew lies with every statement he utters? The voters have taught him that he'll pay no price for such despicable behavior, and he's learned the lesson very well. De Tocqueville was right: "people get the government they deserve," and as long as they keep electing slimeballs like Harry Reid, they'll receive, and deserve, all the bad government they can get.
In response to:

Anthony Weiner Has A New Job

Abe Froman Wrote: Mar 24, 2014 6:45 PM
I wonder if the photo appearing at the head of the column will be his face or his junk.
In response to:

Markey Introduces "Smart Gun" Bill

Abe Froman Wrote: Feb 22, 2014 1:54 AM
It's a problem because the technology doesn't exist to make this reliable, and if it fails to work while you are being attacked by an assailant, it could cost you your life.
In response to:

The Lesson of Dunkirk

Abe Froman Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 10:48 PM
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. This is a massive oversimplification. It is true that the job of the house is to pass a budget, and if the House does not vote to pass funds, the funds will not be provided. However that is NOT the end of the story. The House's budget then has to be approved by the senate, and then signed into law by the president. To use your own words, there is no getting around that. So what do you think happens when the House passes a budget that provides no funds for Obamacare. Do you really imagine that the democrat-controlled budget will pass it. And if by some miracle they did, do you really imagine imagine the democrat president who made it his signature piece of legislation will sign it into law? Do you really imagine that these democrats will not then use every dirty trick, every last iota of misrepresentation, every bit of rhetorical chicanery to project the blame back on those "obstructionist" republicans? If your answer to this question is not "yes, they will," you are living in a world of fantasy. And the history of the last twenty years suggests that the democrats will be able to make this work. It's been an effective tactic for them. You seem to imagine that public opinion essentially means nothing. That in a representative government, where the ability to get yourself elected to office is the sine qua non of wielding power, damaging your images has no negative consequences, and can't possibly cost you elections.
In response to:

The Lesson of Dunkirk

Abe Froman Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 9:36 PM
Okay, so that means we won, we came out ahead in the court of public opinion when the government shutdown, right. The American people blamed the democrats more. Oh, that's right, they didn't! They blamed REPUBLICANS!!! Sure Obama and the democrats got some blame, but they blamed republicans MORE. Does this sound like winning to you Charlie Sheen? The problem is the Republicans are not winning when they DO fight, because they are not fighting smart. They are not picking their battles. We had a golden opportunity to do just that. The Obama administration was plagued by scandals from Benghazi, Syria, NSA, IRS, and more, and then, Obamacare suffers a truly, epically disastrous rollout. Then Cruz takes the focus off of that with a theatrical fillibuster and shutdown, trying to accomplish something that was NOT possible to accomplish at the time. It was simply not. However much we want to defund Obamacare, the votes in the senate were simply not there, and the still more votes that would have been needed to override the inevitable presidential veto WERE. NOT. THERE. Period. Full stop. End of story. You CANNOT govern from one house of congress. You can't. The smart play would have been to keep the focus, like a laser, on the disasters the administration was flailing about trying to control, and let them damage the democrats as fully as those disasters promised to do. As Napoleon said: "Never interfere with an enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself." Instead, Cruz chose to do just that; to throw Obama and the democrats a lifeline, by giving them a very visible enemy to blame with charges of "extremism" and "obstructionism." It worked. As I said, the democrats came off looking bad. But, as far as most non-conservative voters are concerned, republicans came off looking even worse. It was a totally unforced error.
In response to:

The Lesson of Dunkirk

Abe Froman Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 7:58 PM
Lamely? He's RIGHT! Too many conservatives have an all-or-nothing approach. They insist on sweeping all before them, criticize any hint of compromise or political calculation as being a "RINO" and insist on only EVER backing totally ideologically pure candidates, regardless of whether or not those candidates can win elections. Compromise, and you're a RINO. Withdraw from a fight you can't win, and you're a coward who won't stand up for conservative principles. On the other hand, throw everything away in a useless, last stand-like gesture that actually accomplishes nothing, and you're a hero standing on principles. Well, to take another WWII example, the Japanese tried that approach, and fought many a useless last stand, because it was cowardly to retreat or surrender. Bushido, the warrior code, dictated that a REAL warrior never gave an inch. Look how well that worked for them. Hitler did the same thing at Stalingrad. He gave the initiative to the Soviets, and threw away an entire army of over 600,000 troops, along with their tanks, artillery, trucks, small arms, etc. -- men and equipment that sure would have been useful fighting that advancing Soviet juggernaut. But hey, who cares if you get crushed right? Fighting smart and actually winning is WAY overrated. At least you stood up for something.
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

Abe Froman Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 11:48 AM
Goldwater LOST! There's an old saying, "do you want to be right, or do you want to get what you want?" If you want to get what you want -- which is, I presume, less government, lower taxes, and reduced debt -- we need to WIN ELECTIONS, not back only ideologically pure candidates who tell us all the nice things we want to hear, and then go on to alienate most swing voters, not get elected, and never get a chance to put any of that nice-sounding stuff into practice.
“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816 “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.” James Madison, “Letter to Edmund Pendleton,” — James Madison, January 21, 1792 “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” — James Madison, 4 Annals of Congress 179, 1794 “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” — Benjamin Franklin “The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.” — Benjamin Franklin This woman is delusional.
Cruz was even more popular among conservatives. That does not mean his popularity went up with swing voters. Too many people here never step away from conservative sites like this and get other points of view. Know thy enemy. It's not good to spend all your time in a conservative echo chamber where you never get opposing views. It can give you a very skewed perspective on what's popular in general.
How do you know? It could be that if he doesn't pray to Odin and die in battle he won't get to enter Valhalla. Or it could be that if he doesn't commit to the path of purification taught by the Buddha, he won't attain Nirvana. Or it could be that if he doesn't rip out a human heart on an alter dedicated to Huitzilpochtli, that god will punish him. Or it could be that he should dedicate his life to the service of Ahura Mazda. Or it could be that he should dedicate it to Zeus if he doesn't want to end up condemned to Hades' realm. There is an unnumbered throng of religions in the world, what makes yours any more credible than any of the others?
1 - 10 Next