Sometimes it’s awkward to be a liberal conservative. Or a conservative liberal, for that matter. Either way, we’re a blend of philosophies that represents the majority.
Maybe we’re conservative about government spending and waste, but liberal when it comes to making sure no child goes hungry or without medical care.
What we refuse to do is believe that any one political party or philosophy can be right 100 percent of the time. It simply can’t. Without rational discussions about dissenting points of view, it’s impossible to reach best outcomes.
We liberal conservatives sometimes entertain ourselves by listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio, or watching snippets of Glenn Beck’s outrageous antics, captured on film and measured out by Keith Olbermann as he counts down the Worst Person in the World each weeknight.
It’s not only entertaining, it can be downright laughable.
Olbermann’s frequent lapses into poorly done character voices denigrate the facts — pertinent facts — that often expose the lies and pettiness of the people he characterizes. In ridiculing them, he lowers himself to their level and blurs the point of the story.
Then there’s Beck. Now that he’s quit drinking and found religion in the Mormon church, he’s passionate and prone to crying about everything. We admire his turnaround, but he can’t expect us to be as zealous and misdirected as he is, now that he’s passing as clear-headed.
Nor can Limbaugh expect us to feel the hate that erupts regularly from deep in his soul. We can feel sorry for him and the demons that drive his hatred, but are the liberal conservatives among us going to hate? No. What we’re going to do is stop watching.
“I hope he fails!” Limbaugh shouts about the president. “I hope he fails!”
Why? Why on God’s green earth would any American hope the president fails when what America needs to do more than anything else is to succeed.
We may disagree with some of the president’s policies. Any ninny can disagree. Intelligent dissent, with alternative proposals, takes research and effort.
The research and effort to present facts is evident on Olbermann’s show. He doesn’t hesitate to disagree with the president or take Obama to task over what he has or has not done.
If only Olbermann weren’t so blasted arrogant and simultaneously silly about it all, he might make a good liberal conservative.
Joe Scarborough’s managing to do it, with a little tolerance for all sides of an issue and a little help from Mika Brzezinski.
Bobbi Mlynar
Reporter
Comments
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Liberal Conservaties go to Bob Dole Alston-Bird Special Counsel. Bob Dole is a paid lobbyist. This is what happens when you take to much Viagra.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Let me get this right - you're basing your perception of, say, Beck and Limbaugh - through Olbermann's carefully presented snippets of them? On his "Worlds Worst Person" segment? And why would Olbermann ever present anything positive about his competition? Do you realize what you've just said?
Other than that, I agree. But you need to realize who's doing your filtering for you.
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 12:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think it's sad when liberals think they are something other than liberals and call them selves conservative liberals or liberal conservatives. It's just sad. It reminds me of the fella in this story.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/301...
R.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
MSNBC has retracted (sortof) the quotes they falsely attributed to Limbaugh per the NFL controversy. Too bad they didn't do more research and make more effort to present facts.... ;-) .... reminds me of their retraction of the Palin/Africa story after they did zero research and just ran with it.
If Olbermann is a moderate..... then so is Hannity. Yeah right.
Posted by neighbor (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 12:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
IMO, I think folks that base their perception/opinion of any political group on what a media mouth piece has to say about them are pretty sad.
Posted by solong (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think Limbaugh and Beck are Communists and if they don't love America they should leave it. Problem is they couldn't find work or spew their venom anywhere else because nobody in the real world thinks like their audience does. Perhaps they could just look in the mirror and admire themselves.
Posted by tbluma (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There is a difference between Limbaugh saying "I hope his policies fail" as opposed to what everyone reports he said which is, I hope he fails. The problem is that so many people dislike Limbaugh, Hannity,( and I'm sure there are some liberal comentators that could be included) but have never listened to their shows. They just let other people make up their minds for them.
I agree with seriouslyfolks. I don't happen to believe you can be a liberal conservative or a conservative liberal, you are either one or the other. People that stradle the fence usually end up hurt when they fall.
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
solong
"I think Limbaugh and Beck are Communists"
Are you really serious? Do you know what a communist is?
"Vladimir Lenin, drawing on Karl Marx's ideas of "lower" and "upper" stages of socialism defined "socialism" as a transitional stage between capitalism and communism."
"Most socialists share the view that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and derives its wealth through exploitation, creates an unequal society, does not provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximize their potentialities and does not utilize technology and resources to their maximum potential nor in the interests of the public."
This sounds more like the democrats than those who speak out against them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I must be missing a lot-I don't watch any cable!Starting in '89 a lot of us listened to Chuck Harder on 580,then on shortwave.These days,I'll take Hannity and Beck streaming on the PC any day.I still have 2 shortwaves up and running,too.Then there's the various "political"blogs.There's always Drudge,Fox,Newsmax,and WND news websites.
The article mentions some kind of erupting hate speech.I have heard none of that any of the people I listen to or read their work.I've seen much,much more from the"left".I did see a lot of kill bush,kill jooce posters,and violence to go with it.Then it just HAD to be Rush listeners and supporters that were rioting and attacked the older folks getting off the bus at the RNC,wasn't it? No? Maybe it was Rush supporters that dressed in black and carried nightsticks outside a Chicago polling place,right? No?
So, was the original article put together after watching a few short edited,manipulated clips? Looks like the paper is imported from Lawrence,and the politics are from Chicago.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What it all comes down to, is, networks are in competition against each other. Getting a perspective on various commentators, .......... thru the slanted view of their competition......... is pretty foolish, if you ask me. Next week, I'm sure Bobbi will write an article exposing how silly and hate-driven Olbermann is......... as seen thru the eyes of Sean Hannity - LOL
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Good point,open_eyes-"Getting a perspective on various commentators, .......... thru the slanted view of their competition......... is pretty foolish, if you ask me."
I'm not impressed with the direction of broadcast/cable tv or radio.All going downhill in a competitive race to the bottom.News is one thing,commentary another.It takes some reading to find real news.
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
....Sure do enjoy Beck and Hannity streaming while I mess around the house,though!
Posted by Steve_Corbin (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 3:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
LlBERAL CONSERVATIVE;
Some one who thinks pot should be legalized...............and taxed. :)
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What struck me as funny was a recent poll finding that more people trusted Jon Stewart than any other newcaster, says quite a bit about the state of things.
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 8:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Observation-1440AM and 1150AM. Sometimes 580 streaming link isn't real dependable.
http://www.kmaj1440.com/
http://www.ksallink.com/ksal/
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 10:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Go to youtube 1.5 million at DC Tea Party.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 11:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One of my favorite sites is wwwlourockwell.com This site is the home of some of the internet's best articles on freedom, free markets and the destructive......check out the Archives.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 11:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Another great site is Misis Daily and Ludwig Von Mises Institute. And try this one Shadow Government Statistics Newsletter.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 1:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Youtube Michael Savage on Obama Progressive Liberals Yay!!!!
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 1:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Go to Progressive Liberals-Looking ahead, not behind." Good night and God bless.
Posted by methusla (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 8:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems to me that it would depend on how one would interpret the definitions of " Liberal " and " Conservative " as to which one can say that he/she/they is either a " Liberal ", " Conservative" or " Conservative Liberal " and by definition, I don' t believe that a person can be a " Conservative Liberal " !
Go to the following links and read the definitions and then make up your own minds ! http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_186169...
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionar...
Posted by methusla (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 8:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I tend to believe that in todays political arena in the U.S., there is only " Selfservitism " !
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 9:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
methusla
You come up with the best names for things." Selfservitism "
I agree 100%.
(the following rant is not directed at you methusla, I'm just blowing off some steam)
I also agree that people have different definitions of conservative and liberal, the writer obviously has a skewed view of what it means to be a conservative. I say that because of this statement, "Maybe we’re conservative about government spending and waste, but liberal when it comes to making sure no child goes hungry or without medical care." Conservative want children to go hungry? Really? What about all the soup kitchens and food pantries that feed people(including children) that are run by conservative Christian churches? These are run and payed for by conservatives and don't take a dime from the government. Is charity only worthy if the money is forced from ones hands by the government and then filtered through that government? I think not. Many today do and that is sad. Most conservatives I know give freely(not forced by the government) to support such charities(on top of the charities that the government forces us to give to) and the givers ARE conservatives. Most conservatives I know would love to see everyone with health insurance we may not be confident in how the government would handle it but that doesn't mean we are against the idea all together. The writer obviously has a definition of a conservative that came from a liberal. That is probably why she will say that the lefty "journalist" named in the article would be ok if he just toned it down a bit. You might be a liberal if ................
R.
Posted by methusla (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 10:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Perhaps the U.S. and would be a better place if everyone would consider themselves " Egalitarian " and practice " Egalitarianism " !
Posted by methusla (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
serouslyfolks,
Thank you for the compliment and we all have to vent a little steam once in a while !
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Given the current "war" between the networks - yes, I've seen stories on Fox & commentators that were in error - but I've seen them on the competition, also. Journalism is often full of retractions - networks hurry news to "scoop" the competition. Latest that comes to mind is the fake email that CNBC got duped and reported that the Chamber of Commerce changed course and was supporting the carbon tax. Nobody is immune. I often flip thru to Olbermann just to get my daily dose of nasea - I've often seen him displaying snippets of things said by others while he reports with his usual gleeful sneer - but I've often immediately said to myself "wait a minute - I actually WATCHED that whole segment on another channel, and that is not what was said or how it was presented" - totally skewed.
I also remember how Olbermann got demoted from election coverage by MSNBC last year for being unable to keep his bias out of his reporting.
And this is the standard Bobbi uses to measure against. Good grief. The only thing out of all that is readily clear to me is that Bobbi does a poor job of checking facts and research also.
Posted by deluvly1 (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In the context of what Limbaugh REALLY said, I couldn’t agree more: If Comrade Obama wants to demolish our constitution I, too, hope he fails. If he wants to socialize our businesses I hope he fails. If he wants to people his staff with radicals and admitted communists I hope he fails. If he wants an unfair advantage for one or two ethnic groups over all others I hope that he fails. If he wants to waste billions of taxpayer dollars on a pie in the sky global warming initiative I hope he fails. If he wants to dismantle one of the world’s best medical systems for a one size fits all version I hope that he fails. If he wants to usurp and ultimately destroy America’s backbone, the middle class, I hope he fails.
CNN, MSNBC, & NBC are in the tank for Barry and are no longer viable or for that matter bearable to watch. They lie and they do so with an agenda.
Try to look beyond the sound bytes and understand what is being said, it is the only way to truly learn
Posted by tbluma (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't believe it could have been said any better deluvly.
Thankyou
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm glad that Bush's attempted policy of amnesty for illegal immigrants failed. Does that make me a Bush-hater, unpatriotic, or plain disrespectful? Did I truly want Bush to fail, or just certain policies of his? Hmmm.......
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Observation- Pretty good stuff,isn't it? I have to bounce between KSAL and KMAJ to get what I want through the day.
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Observation- Not a problem,You're welcome.After 2PM,I run KMAJ..
http://www.kmaj1440.com/
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 2:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"And this is the standard Bobbi uses to measure against. Good grief. The only thing out of all that is readily clear to me is that Bobbi does a poor job of checking facts and research also."
Opinion piece in the Op-ed section? It's her point of view and how she interprets the situation, explain where her "fact checking" went wrong here. All I see is a few quotes that are legit, and some OPINIONS.
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 2:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"deluvly1:
Awesome comments!"
Team ditto-head unite! Ditto-head? Yes man? Hmmm...
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 20, 2009 at 12:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I think it's sad when liberals think they are something other than liberals and call them selves conservative liberals or liberal conservatives. It's just sad."
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
deluvly1
"Comrade Obama wants to demolish our constitution I, too, hope he fails. "
Explain please, Bush did more to limit our freedoms then Obama has, all Obama is guilty of so far is continuing the same crap Bush mandated, and last I checked this is not Soviet Russia OK comrade?
"If he wants to socialize our businesses I hope he fails."
See above explanation, much as I hate the idea of TARP most experts that were against it are now starting to say "maybe it was not such a bad thing"
"If he wants to people his staff with radicals and admitted communists I hope he fails."
Find me a White House staff with no skeletons in the closet, you believe that I have some beachfront property in Arizona......
". If he wants to waste billions of taxpayer dollars on a pie in the sky global warming initiative I hope he fails."
If you really believe that the 6 billion plus humans on this earth and their activities are not affecting this planet in a negative way then again, I have some ocean front property in Arizona... Its all a big conspiracy.
"If he wants an unfair advantage for one or two ethnic groups over all others I hope that he fails."
Huh? Explain please
". If he wants to dismantle one of the world’s best medical systems for a one size fits all version I hope that he fails. "
First off we are not the best, second, our current system costs too much. and third, if something is not done the system will dismantle itself in coming decade.
"If he wants to usurp and ultimately destroy America’s backbone, the middle class, I hope he fails."
This one is too rich, you realize that the middle class had been under assault and decimated in the last 25 years? Man if only those before him had failed.....
"CNN, MSNBC, & NBC are in the tank for Barry and are no longer viable or for that matter bearable to watch. They lie and they do so with an agenda."
Was it not Lou Dobbs who was actively championing the cause of the "birthers", can't comment on MSNBC and NBC, never watch them anyways.
"Try to look beyond the sound bytes and understand what is being said, it is the only way to truly learn"
You sir are a true ditto head, if Rush jumped over a cliff I am sure you would follow LOL.
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
""I think it's sad when liberals think they are something other than liberals and call them selves conservative liberals or liberal conservatives. It's just sad."
I think its sad when people are so small minded that they have to quantify people as one thing or the other, but for those of us in limbo land maybe one day a 3rd party will come along with a charismatic figure that actually might have a shot. Ah hell, what am I thinking the right and left wing nuts will probably just kill them, but at least that would be bi-partisan LOL
Posted by Dido1969 (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 3:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Goodolboy: speaking for myself, I rarely listen to Limbaugh, but when I do it is for entertainment…that’s all he claims to be, you see, he doesn’t pretend to be a “journalist.”
I have always believed that one of the best things the founding fathers did was to allow, if not actually nurture, a skeptical press. Throughout our history, with the likely exception of JFK, the press has positively grilled presidents, two who spring immediately to mind were LBJ & Nixon…and the press served the people and the nation well because they were both low-life's who in the end got their comeuppance.
Now we have wimps like Keith O. and that incredibly snarky Chris Mathews who, if I remember got a chill “up his leg” when in the presence of Comrade Obama. Scary stuff, dude.
Now if we criticize the Barry The White House (aka "Party Central" or "Comrade Barry's Party Shack") whines, threatens, ignores, selects people for personal and often untrue attacks (I’ve been hearing a lot of low key apologies for some of the lies knowingly perpetrated against Limbaugh in his recent bid to conduct a private business transaction…the fact is the quotes were made up and cannot be substantiated and the weasels that spread them are now in fear of lawsuits.)
Since when is it wrong to criticize the president if we don’t agree with him.
I have read Marx. Extensively. Obama’s underlying reasoning is Marxist in nature. I just wish the guy would realize that the campaign is over and start acting like a leader.
But if we dislike the prez, and say so too loudly, we’ll have Al and Jessie telling the world what racists we all are. The majority of the press is indeed in the president’s pocket, and that should scare everyone silly.
In the immortal words of John Lennon, “Just gimme some truth…” or in the words of Pete Townsend, “Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.”
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, goodoleboy, it's all just opinion. As is everything here. Including your own opinions. Things are so messed up anymore nobody knows what the real truth is, anyway. Why do we bother? Why do you? Should anyone ever try to validate any of their opinions? Or just spout off whatever sounds good to their own ears, without any care that it might be accurate or not?
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 3:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You mentioned fact checking in an OP-Ed piece where there is really nothing to fact check. That is the only reason that I said anything, this piece is only accurate to those that agree in concept, facts have little to do with it. You said;
"The only thing out of all that is readily clear to me is that Bobbi does a poor job of checking facts and research also."
This has 0 to do with this piece, and is not applicable, perhaps elsewhere, but not here my friend.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 3:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
She used the words "fact" 3 times in her article and "research" twice. Sounds to me like she should have replaced them all with "IMO".
JMO ;-)
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 3:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"(I’ve been hearing a lot of low key apologies for some of the lies knowingly perpetrated against Limbaugh in his recent bid to conduct a private business transaction…the fact is the quotes were made up and cannot be substantiated and the weasels that spread them are now in fear of lawsuits.)"
Limbaugh has to understand that the NFL is a business, one that encompasses many different races, beliefs, and bottom line it is a business that is very image conscious. You have guys like Mark Cuban that caught quite a bit of flack when he was talking about buying the Cubs, and how the owners thought he was to controversial. Words have meaning, Limbaugh is free to say what he wants, but when it turns off people in the business world, well, that is just too damn bad, because like it or not, advertising and sports ARE popularity contests.
"I have read Marx. Extensively. Obama’s underlying reasoning is Marxist in nature. I just wish the guy would realize that the campaign is over and start acting like a leader."
I have also read Marx, perhaps not to your extent but enough to know that other presidents have had Marxists tendencies, why is it that this one is singled out?
"But if we dislike the prez, and say so too loudly, we’ll have Al and Jessie telling the world what racists we all are. The majority of the press is indeed in the president’s pocket, and that should scare everyone silly."
Al Sharpton is the epitome of idiocy. Every time he makes something out of nothing he further denigrates his cause. Personally I hope he keeps it up, I am sick of seeing the idiot. I do think there is a racist element to Obama's opponents, but I think it is not NEAR as bad as those 2 idiots make it out to be, and even Obama himself agrees with those sentiments, which just makes them look hypocritical.
"“Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.”
I like that one=)
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"She used the words "fact" 3 times in her article and "research" twice. Sounds to me like she should have replaced them all with "IMO".
JMO ;-)"
Getting nitpicky with ctrl+F are we?=)
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes ;-)
I'll keep it short so you won't have so much to cut and paste, since you usually do the whole thing ;-)
Posted by rlimbaugh (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 6:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I shall promote you Observation, to ditto head of 1st order, you have earned this
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 8:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
A conservative is someone who doesn’t do certain things in their own personal life, does certain other things, and doesn’t want government interfering.
A liberal is someone who would do certain things in their own personal life if it wasn't so dificult and so expensive and demands that government do it for them with everyone elses money so they can feel better about themselves.
A liberal conservative is a liberal .
A conservative liberal is a liberal .
R.
Just kidding of course buddy ol pals. :o) lol ;-) rofl LOL jk
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think rlimbaugh is either cracks new persona or our happy friends from California messing with us again. Either way, welcome friend.
R.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 9:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Americans are fighting a culture war against statism. Our country, founded as a limited government that derives its "just powers from the consent of the governed," is under attack by people who seek to transform it into a totalitarian state.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 10:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Government is like a clumsy retarded giant, so be very careful to limit what tasks you assign it. The Romans built roads that are still around, but look at all the potholes in our streets. There are some honest public officials, but we all know the system is corrupt.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 11:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Our country needs to be more like country music, three chords and the truth. The key is honest money and all political forces will have to come to terms with this reality issue.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 21, 2009 at 11:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Congress is speaking out of its two-faced tyranny....and from its derriere too. The source of absolute power that leads to corruption and greed is the unconstrained power of government to print money. They now won't tell us how much money they are printing. Cheap money leads to monopolies and they are the opposite of a competitive free market. We the people must get control of the powerful forces of finance, that have in the past, fed only private moneyed interests.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 1:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
William Lindsey White was on the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union from 1948 to 1956. During this time the ACLU was accused of being sympathic to Communists. He was also a reporter for the then right-wing Reader's Digest. By these accounts, could he have had a split-personality-Liberal and Conservative? I am not a big fan of the ACLU but, democracy's real test lies in respect for minority opinion.
Posted by reddog (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 2:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What ever you call yourself, stay informed. Youtube Reality Report-Audit the Fed, Tea Parties, G20, Global Currency, Organic Farmers.
Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 6:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Every time a conservative makes a statement like......"a government that derives its just powers from the consent of the governed".....they seem to assume the governed all think like they. So what about my consent? I certainly don't think like the majority of those posting on this thread.....and yet I voted for the person that at present is driving their rage. So if you define the consent of the governed as the one with the most votes then our present government does derive its powers from the consent of the governed.....in other words you lost this round....so deal with it.
If however you believe the consent of the governed only applies to ditto heads......then you know nothing about our form of government at all. You might then try clicking on anarchy......where government is only what you say it is as long as you have the power to enforce it. Hmmmm....that sounds kinda like we act to the rest of the world.
In the long run however.....I've always thought I would fare better living under a government than under a war lord.....unless of course I was the war lord. But you will always be living under one of the other.
Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I've heard said that every cloud has a silver lining. Well I certainly see one for this thread and several others like it.
When the tides of political fortune turn again .....as they surely will if we survive that long as a nation....and those of us on the left start using what you on the right are teaching us now in this on-going game of paybacks are hell......the time will surely come when you start telling us how you never treated us like this.....and we will have all of these forums and blogs to link to to prove that you did.
I can't hardly wait......:-)
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
biscuitboy, you're slightly behind the times. Those on the right are now using what those on the left have taught them in this on-going game of paybacks are hell. And we already have plenty of evidence to prove it.
Or have you been sleeping like Rip Van Winkle for the last 8 years? ;-)
Alas, how short your memory seems........
Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
But open-eyes....my memory is long enough to know that you guys are a lot worse than we are....we never called you "commie pinko limpwrist'.
So there... take that.....you big old meany....:-)
Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That was back in the fifties.....
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
LOLOLOL biscuitboy ;-)
I also remember all the grief Clinton took. Bush/elder got off kinda easy, I think - but he was only in for 4 years. And before that we had the "cowboy diplomacy" that was going to bring about WWIII (gee, now where did I read that recently regarding the younger Bush?) - and instead it brought down the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain....... and before that, Carter got blasted by the right, and before that, Nixon, etc, etc...... I think every 4 or 8 years those who've been "taking it" for the previous terms come back with a vengeance, and those who were "giving it" - suddenly claim to come down with a sudden case of amnesia, similar to what you just experienced.......... ;-)
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You always forget to add in all the other politicians (many Democrats) who also lied, and the 9/11 commission which lied by saying Bush did not lie.
Just helping fill the gaps in your spotty memory :-)
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 10:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is an interesting story which came out in 2006 - 2 years AFTER the 9/11 commissions lied to us all about Bush not lying. Of particular interest is paragraph 4, among others:
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTI...
"Supporting the contention of the existence of WMD’s in Iraq, General Al-Tikriti, a former commander for Saddam, confirmed in an interview with author Ryan Mauro in May 2006, that arrangements were made between Baghdad and Damascus for Iraqi WMD’s to be stored in Syria under Russian oversight prior to the invasion by Coalition forces. Al-Tikriti, who defected prior to the Gulf War, continued to maintain contact with weapons scientists in Iraq. In addition, statements by former Under Secretary of Defense John Shaw corroborate, through British and Ukrainian sources, the involvement of Russian special forces in Iraq in moving WMD’s to Syria. Further confirmation has been obtained from retired Iraqi General Georges Sada, as well as from former chief of Romanian intelligence, Ion Pacepa; Israeli intelligence; Chinese communications to Germany and the reports of a Syrian journalist who defected to France. "
Liars all, of course. Ya just can't believe anyone anymore..... ;-(
Posted by biscuitboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
observation...No...blogs hadn't been invented yet back in the fifties. We would sometimes post our thoughts on a smooth flat river rock which we would then try to sail in between traffic to our friends on the other side of the street.
We called those rocks frogs.....and I have heard rumors suggesting they might have been the inspiration for a later game called frogger......great game.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
YY4U...........
I already knew that!
LOLOLOLOLOL ;-)
Posted by oh4theluvof (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Got this in e-mail and had to share it....it's funny because it's true (well, the last part, anyway)
THE ECONOMY IS SO BAD, that …
* I got a pre-declined credit card in the mail.
* I ordered a burger at McDonalds and the kid behind the
counter asked, "Can you afford fries with that?"
* CEO's are now playing miniature golf.
* If the bank returns your check marked "Insufficient Funds,"
you call them and ask if they meant you or them.
* Hot Wheels and Matchbox stocks are trading higher than GM.
* McDonalds is selling the 1/4 ouncer.
* Parents in Beverly Hills fired their nannies and
learned their children's names.
* A truckload of Americans was caught sneaking into Mexico .
* Dick Cheney took his stockbroker hunting.
* Motel Six won't leave the light on anymore.
* The Mafia is laying off judges.
* Exxon-Mobil laid off 25 Congressmen.
* Congress says they are looking into this Bernard Madoff scandal..
(Oh Great!! The guy who made $50 Billion disappear is being
investigated by the people who made $1.5 Trillion disappear.)
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
""Supporting the contention of the existence of WMD’s in Iraq, General Al-Tikriti, a former commander for Saddam, confirmed in an interview with author Ryan Mauro in May 2006, that arrangements were made between Baghdad and Damascus for Iraqi WMD’s to be stored in Syria under Russian oversight prior to the invasion by Coalition forces. Al-Tikriti, who defected prior to the Gulf War, continued to maintain contact with weapons scientists in Iraq. In addition, statements by former Under Secretary of Defense John Shaw corroborate, through British and Ukrainian sources, the involvement of Russian special forces in Iraq in moving WMD’s to Syria. Further confirmation has been obtained from retired Iraqi General Georges Sada, as well as from former chief of Romanian intelligence, Ion Pacepa; Israeli intelligence; Chinese communications to Germany and the reports of a Syrian journalist who defected to France. "
Liars all, of course. Ya just can't believe anyone anymore..... ;-("
Without the goods, it's just words, perhaps we should invade Syria since they have WMD's?
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 5:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
ECHO... ECHo....EHco... Ehco... echo............ ;-)
I don't know. Should we at least be suspicious? Iran hasn't nuked a soul yet, so why are we giving them such a hard time?
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Neither has North Korea, why are not giving them a hard time? 50 years from now everyone that wants a nuke will have it, what then? Kill em all?
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Last time I checked we WERE giving them a hard time. This might come as quite a shock to you, but there are numerous worldwide UN sanctions against North Korea in place at this very moment.
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 7:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And there are sanctions againist Iran, I am well aware of the sanctions againist North Korea, yet both have sanctions, 1 has confirmed development of nukes, the other has more evidence of them then Iraq ever did, and its done nothing.
Reminds of a line in Team America where Hans Blix was telling Kim Jong that he "going to write a letter, that they(the UN) were very very angry with him" LOL
Posted by seriouslyfolks (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 9:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Everyone has a coworker that is pretty useless and everyone wonders why they continue to pay that deadbeat, that's the UN. The idea of a "United Nations" sounds nice, it may even get you a Nobel prize, but beyond that it's just pretty useless as far as I can tell. I know goodoleboy will disagree, because that's what he does, but I just calls 'em likes I sees 'em.
R.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 22, 2009 at 9:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Be careful when you say "ever". Israel bombed Iraq's nuke plant almost 30 years ago, but that's still included in "ever" ;-)
Maybe the UN could make a bunch of YouTube videos about Iran & North Korea. It might even deter them more than their current sanctions ;-).
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 23, 2009 at 7:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
" I know goodoleboy will disagree, because that's what he does, but I just calls 'em likes I sees 'em."
Did you read what I said above? You assume and make an *** out of yourself.
Posted by glarson (Gwen Larson) on October 23, 2009 at 10:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
moved to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/ope...