Previous 21 - 30 Next
No, no, no, no, no: he didn't lie. He just "misremembered." Isn't it interesting how those in politics and communications can never speak directly?
If the count holds, though, isn't it sort of "veto-proof?"
Government never "provides a mrketplace;" it only interferes or manpulates it. Sorry for the dose of reality . .
If this campaign is as "successful" as the one this bunch waged against the Kroger chain, these guys should do very well on any upcoming engagements they have. Bloomberg's wheels are coming off the bus; he's only rich enough to keep the jalopy going.
Obama is going to be realistic and practical? That'll be a first.
It seems that Ridley Scott, usually a pretty reliable diretor, has decided to completely ruin previously-released stories in film. First, he screws up The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3." Now he wants to do the same to an otherwise compelling Biblical narrative.
Short answer to the question posed: If you can't deal with reality, just change the label.
Butbutbut. . .John Kerry said we have them on the ropes. Obama said they're on the run. How can this be?
The only thing one needs to keep in mind is the reality of political math. Whenever a politician says it will cost X, figure at least 3X as the actual price; whenever he says it will save X, figure the number "0."
It seems to me that, following this, the Lena Dunham fiasco, and earlier the Duke lacrosse team, that the new default question to follow any accusation from the left has to becomes, "But is it true?" These guys undermine their own crusade with BS.
Is this a set of instructions that Democrats really need? After all, they seem to "embrace government" so well and so willingly already.
Previous 21 - 30 Next