Cynical Nation

Remember how the media gave Bush a pass on his drunk driving, cocaine use, and failure to honorably serve in the military?

I think Barack needs to suddenly become born again and change his name to Will Smith.

Obama's going down.

As much as I despise Wright - and plan to vote for someone other than Obama - he does have a point.

The sad thing is that church's are not just places of worship but there also used for networking. It is a known fact, Jeremiah Wright's church, is known for the upscale congregation that visits his masses in the Chicago area. Getting past that, this man is probably one of the worst examples of a human being that I can think of. I am appalled that he would go after someone so relentlessly, I almost believe that in some way he is getting some kind of financial reward for doing this. Also, I do not believe that Obama supports all of his ideas, nor would I hold anyone responsible for someone else's thoughts. The real sad part about all of this is that you see unity in the Jewish community, the Whites, Asians and so on but another black man is tearing down his own.

Like Al Sharpton and Sharpe James, Jeremiah Wright is an outrage peddler and these people do not want to go quietly away.

Yes, Obama could have joined another congregation, but conservative black churches are often anti-gay (as one example) and don't always reach out in a way that really helps people the way that Wright's church apparently did. Many smart people, even those who are not of the congregation, have spoken of the good that the Trinity Church accomplished. On the other hand, there is this hate in Wright's soul, a hate that unfortunately he continues to hang on to, rather than question.

Put the words of white, big-haired televangilists into the mouth of a black preacher and Faux News would report on those day and night as well.

McCain sought out and cheerfully accepted Hagee's endorsement, EVEN AFTER being made aware of Hagee's insane anti-Catholic rants.

It's just pure racism. Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts, and all those other assholes have said far worse.

"McCain sought out and cheerfully accepted Hagee's endorsement, EVEN AFTER being made aware of Hagee's insane anti-Catholic rants." (Barely Hanging)


Funny story, see, the difference is that while John McCain wouldn't know Haggee if he fell over him, Jerry Wright Married the Obama's, baptized their kids and according to Barack Obama himself, was a "friend," "mentor" and "spiritual advisor."

Another key difference is that Jerremiah Wright is not comparable to the likes of Rev Haggee, but the likes of Tom Metzger, Louis Farrakhan, etc.


"It's just pure racism. Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts, and all those other assholes have said far worse." (Barely Hanging)


That requires some PROOF, say a few quotes from Roberts and Roberston that are demonstrably WORSE than "God Damn America," claiming that 9/11 was "America's chickens coming home to roost," and erroneously claiming that "American physicians deliberately infected syphillis during the Tuskeegee Studies."

N.B. Pat Robertson's post-9/11 quote, "We have allowed rampant pornography on the Internet, and rampant secularism and the occult, etc. to be broadcast on television. We have permitted somewhere in the neighborhood of 35-40 million unborn babies to be slaughtered by our society.

"We have a court that has essentially stuck its finger in God's eye and said, "We are going to legislate You out of the schools and take Your commandments from the courthouses in various states. We are not going to let little children read the commandments of God. We are not going to allow the Bible or prayer in our schools."

"We have insulted God at the highest level of our government. Then, we say, "Why does this happen?" It is happening because God Almighty is lifting His protection from us....

"Don't ask why did it happen. It happened because people are evil. It also happened because God is lifting His protection from this nation and we must pray and ask Him for revival so that once again we will be His people, the planting of His righteousness, so that He will come to our defense and protect us as a nation. That is what I want to see and why we say we must have revival."...is NOT on par, let alone "WORSE," since it's in keeping with the wonderful Judeo-Christian ethos this nation ws founded on.

I suspect one doesn't even have to be religious (I'm not) NOR even agree with those sentiments to admire the way they were expressed.

On Wright's part, there is no part of any religious tradition that reviles America, thinks the market-based economy is unfair, nor justifies making erroneous statments (like white doctors infecting black men with syphillis) to a gullible and uneduucated/unquestioning audience.

So what Robertson said essentially was that because we have legalized abortion, allow pornography, but don't allow prayer in schools that God lifted his protection which allowed terrorists to slam airplanes into the WTC and the Pentagon.

Sorry, but I neither admire the ethos behind, nor do I admire the way he expressed that ethos.

What Wright said may have been worse, but what Roberston said wasn't much better, in my opinion.

No, PE, Pat Robertson's words were very much in keeping with the religious traditions that this country was forged on.

He didn't "damn America," he merely stated that he believed that America's not upholding the traditions it was founded on, the ones he espouses, has led to "God removing His protections."

Though I vehemently disagree with the people who believe in the sanctity of all life, I can appreciate that those who equally oppose Capital Punishment and abortion on demand as violating that sanctity (the way the Catholic Church and other Orthodox religious groups do), well, I can at least acknowledge and respect their moral and logical consistency.

I'm morally consistent myself.

I do NOT believe in the sanctity of life, let alone the sanctity of ALL life, so I support abortion on demand UP UNTIL that point where the child could survive outside the womb (appx the fifth month) and I support Capital Punishment and war as a "negotiating tool."

I consider those who are morally inconsistent on such matters to be utterly without merit and, in effect, useless eaters. They are people who simply do not count.

A person who lacks the capacity to be logically and/or morally consistent is not any higher evolved than a dog or a cat.

What I'm saying is that though I disagree profoundly in principle with the "religious viewpoint," I can respect that logical and moral consistency.

I CANNOT respect anti-Americanism when it's proven dozens of times every day that America's only fault is that it is "too generous," too intent on giving the world the kind of LIBERTY (market-based globalism, as Liberty) it has enjoyed and prospered from.

I CANNOT respect the blindly ignorant anti-market viewpoint that innanely and erroneously claims that "a command economy run by a caring government COULD conceivably take better care of the people than the cold-blooded, calculating market-based economy, where profit is its lifeblood and the consumer is king - damn the laborer." That anti-market viewpoint is so riddled with outright ignorance, so debased by the idiotic ascersion that somehow "political action is more noble in nature than commercial action," that it cannot stand even the slightest scrutiny.

And I CANNOT respect the outright race-hatred that is the domain of the likes of Jerry Wright, Tom Metzger, Louis Farrakhan and other modern day heirs to Adolph Hitler's legacy.

The question concerning Obama and Wright isn't really whether or not Barack Obama subscribes to Jerry Wright's twisted worldview....he claims he doesn't, and for now (unless further evidence surfaces) I'd take him at his word on that, BUT the very legitimate question over this issue is over Barack Obama's judgment. That judgment is brought into question, NOT for merely "accepting an endorsement from Wright," as McCain did from Hagee, BUT in calling this vile bigot a "friend," and "mentor" for over twenty years, for having this America-hater as his "spiritual advisor," AND having this veritable neo-nazi Marry him and his wife and baptize their kids!

That goes to Barack Obama's judgment as both a human being and a candidate. Sure, Michelle Obama's belief system may very well be far more in-line with Rev Wright's twisted ideology...it would certainly seem so, and it's understandable that Barack Obama might be reluctant to "throw his wife under that particular bus," BUT again, IF indeed Michelle Obama's views ("Barack will make you work...", "For the first time in my life I'm proud of my country") are more in-line with those of Jerry Wright's, then his judgment is even MORE questionable.

For who would choose a racist, America-hating spouse, IF he didn't share at least some of those views himself?

Jeez, why does any sane, intelligent person listen to and put credence in the words of these fairy tale-spouters? Wright, Robertson, Falwell, Hagee and all their opportunistic brothers and sisters make fools of those who buy into (and pay for and donate to) their ridiculous fantasies.

I always ask people who hate America so much, Why don't you leave? However, a better question might be, Why do you stay?

The Ayers and Wrights of our country fall head first into the sand when they fail to recognize that the only reason they stay here is because of freedom. Or should I say freedoms?

The circular reasoning presented by people of this ilk usually revolves around the orbit of not having to leave a place because I don't have to. But if your choice is always one of disdain and
disgust, the choice remains to find an environment where you don't have to subject yourself to government that is out to get you and countrymen who want to eliminate you.

"Wright, Robertson, Falwell, Hagee and all their opportunistic brothers and sisters make fools of those who buy into (and pay for and donate to) their ridiculous fantasies." (Fred)


Fred, all those guys may be wrong-headed...BUT they are not comparable, neither in content nor degree.

Falwell and Robertson are Fundamentalist Christians who believe that America's moving away from Christian principles will remove God's protections from this country.

I believe God (such as it is - the "Creative Life Force," or whatever) gives us the innate ability to protect ourselves.

Ultimately, that's what WAR is about! It's the "diplomacy of last resort."

Hagee and many other Fundamentalist Christians have a big problem with the "ROMAN Catholic Church, a Church that instructs its believers NOT to read the Bible, as that Book, in the eyes of that Church, "Needs to be interpreted."

Those Fundamentalists, like Henry George and Leo Tolstory before them, believe that the Roman Catholic traditions are based in St Paul's teachings NOT Christ's and with that Church's long and deep connection to the feudal governments (royalty) of Europe, have been perverted by their pollution by that connection.

Read some of Tolstoy's later works (My Confession, The Kingdom of God is Within You and The Gospels in Brief) and you'll see that Tolstoy took the same dim view of the "Roman Church's "pollution of Christ's message."

Jerry Wright, however, is NOT any kind of traditional Christian, in fact, he's part of the "Liberation Theology" Movement, that is based on the absurd notion that Christ's real teachings were in line with Karl Marx's.

That is a debasement of the Christian tradition based on a complete and almost certainly deliberate ignorance of those believers.

Moreover, Wright, unlike any of the others, is an obvious and avowed racist, who reviles whites, and spreads idiotic and ahistorical lies like "The government lied about the Tuskegee experiment. They purposely infected African American men with syphilis..." (Jeremiah Wright sermon, April 13, 2003).

I know it's uncomfortable and terribly un-PC, but Jerremiah Wright IS a completely different breed than any of the others you mention here. The "Reverend" Wright is far more comparable to the likes of Tom Metzger (of the Aryan Nation) and Louis Farrakhan (of the NOI) than any fundamentalist Christian preacher.

"The Ayers and Wrights of our country fall head first into the sand when they fail to recognize that the only reason they stay here is because of freedom. Or should I say freedoms?" (Fred Marmorstein)


I believe that you're right that that is the reason they "thrive here," BUT the reason they stay here, despite railing against and reviling the same freedom of expression for others, that they exploit themselves is that they want to fundamentally change America into a more socialistic, less individualistic (less FREE) place.

They wouldn't be safe preaching revolutionary ideology in most other places....and they shouldn't be safe here.

That is to say, while the government shouldn't be involved in eradicating such evil people, it should simply remove any legal protections for those who spread such ideology. The First Amendment, afterall, doesn't protect the speaker from individual sanctions, merely from government censure. Controversial speakers have been fired over controversies by private commercial interests, rightfully worried about their bottmlines.

Likewise, it would seem to be OK to simply remove any legal protections form certain groups of people, for instance those in the commission of a felony, or those engaged in promoting extremely controversial views (anti-market views, etc). All that would do is to not allow the attackers of such people to be charged with any crime for such an attack.

There are lawyers who've promoted the idea that "those in the commission of felony should have their own legal protections removed, at least while in the commission of that crime."

In other words, in the case of a robber, caught breaking and entering a home and shot and paralyzed by the homeowner, the government would NOT have the right to charge that homeowner with any crime, regardless of whether that homeowner violated any number of statutes in shooting the individual engaged in that felony.

BTW, how come Barry no longer posts about his faith in predictive markets?

Four months ago, he was raving about how people tend to get serious when they are putting down real money.

http://www.cynicalnation.com/2008/01/believe_the_money.html

JMK wrong again, and I am right again!

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-justice12-2008may12,0,4309444.story

WASHINGTON -- The number of Americans being secretly wiretapped or having their financial and other records reviewed by the government has continued to increase as officials aggressively use powers approved after the Sept. 11 attacks. But the number of terrorism prosecutions ending up in court -- one measure of the effectiveness of such sleuthing -- has continued to decline, in some cases precipitously.

The trends, visible in new government data and a private analysis of Justice Department records, are worrisome to civil liberties groups and some legal scholars. They say it is further evidence that the government has compromised the privacy rights of ordinary citizens without much to show for it.

Quotes from Jerry Falwell:

AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
Jerry Falwell

Billy Graham is the chief servant of Satan in America.
Jerry Falwell

But I don't believe anyone begins a homosexual.
Jerry Falwell

God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.
Jerry Falwell

Homosexuality is Satan's diabolical attack upon the family that will not only have a corrupting influence upon our next generation, but it will also bring down the wrath of God upon America.
Jerry Falwell

I am such a strong admirer and supporter of George W. Bush that if he suggested eliminating the income tax or doubling it, I would vote yes on first blush.
Jerry Falwell

I believe that all of us are born heterosexual, physically created with a plumbing that's heterosexual, and created with the instincts and desires that are basically, fundamentally, heterosexual.
Jerry Falwell

I believe that global warming is a myth. And so, therefore, I have no conscience problems at all and I'm going to buy a Suburban next time.
Jerry Falwell

I believe with all my heart that the Bible is the infallible word of God.
Jerry Falwell

I do not believe we can blame genetics for adultery, homosexuality, dishonesty and other character flaws.
Jerry Falwell

I don't think religious groups should be allowed to apply for federal funds to start new ministries they have not been doing before the funding was available.
Jerry Falwell

I think hell's a real place where real people spend a real eternity.
Jerry Falwell

I think the Moslem faith teaches hate.
Jerry Falwell

I truly cannot imagine men with men, women with women, doing what they were not physically created to do, without abnormal stress and misbehavior.
Jerry Falwell

If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being.
Jerry Falwell

It is God's planet - and he's taking care of it. And I don't believe that anything we do will raise or lower the temperature one point.
Jerry Falwell

The First Amendment is not without limits.
Jerry Falwell

The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.
Jerry Falwell

The whole global warming thing is created to destroy America's free enterprise system and our economic stability.
Jerry Falwell

There's been a concerted effort to steal Christmas.
Jerry Falwell

Idiot boy #2, Pat Robertson:

And I think that George Bush really is a very godly person.
Pat Robertson

And I think the blessing of heaven is on Bush. It's just the way it is.
Pat Robertson

But if there's an erosion at home, you know, Thomas Jefferson warned about a tyranny of an oligarchy and if we surrender our democracy to the tyranny of an oligarchy, we've made a terrible mistake.
Pat Robertson

Feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.
Pat Robertson

Feminism is a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.
Pat Robertson

I have a zero tolerance for sanctimonious morons who try to scare people.
Pat Robertson

I know one man who was impotent who gave AIDS to his wife and the only thing they did was kiss.
Pat Robertson

I mean, George Bush is a man of prayer. He talks to the lord. He tries to get his direction from the lord.
Pat Robertson

I think George Bush is going to win in a walk. I really believe I'm hearing from the Lord it's going to be like a blowout election in 2004.
Pat Robertson

I think we're going to control al Qaeda. I think we're going to get Osama bin Laden. We won in Afghanistan. We won in Iraq, and we can contain that.
Pat Robertson

I would never say somebody had to vote for anybody. That would be terrible. I haven't said that.
Pat Robertson

It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-biased media and the homosexuals who want to destroy all Christians.
Pat Robertson

It's the tyranny of an oligarchy that I'm concerned about.
Pat Robertson

Many of those people involved in Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many were homosexuals - the two things seem to go together.
Pat Robertson

McCain I'd vote against under any circumstance.
Pat Robertson

My friend Jerry Falwell was the one who said it, and he was a guest on my show, and it's hard to take the blame for everybody who shows up on your show.
Pat Robertson

Never in my wildest dreams, Michael, that - never did I think that I - I thought that - I'd be a lawyer. My father was a lawyer.
Pat Robertson

There's an assault on human sexuality, as Judge Scalia said, they've taken sides in the culture war and on top of that if we have a democracy, the democratic processes should be that we can elect representatives who will share our point of view and vote those things into law.
Pat Robertson

Well, you know, Thomas Jefferson, who was the author of the Declaration of Independence said he wouldn't have any atheists in his cabinet because atheists wouldn't swear an oath to God. That was Jefferson and we have never had any Muslims in the cabinet.
Pat Robertson

What I heard was that Bush is now positioned to have victory after victory. He'll have Social Security reform passed, that he'll have tax reform passed, that he'll have conservative judges on the courts.
Pat Robertson

Last but not least, idiot-boys Hagee & Parsley, whose endorsements McCain "gratefully accepts"!

1. "Do you know the difference between a woman with PMS and a snarling Doberman pinscher? The answer is lipstick. Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? You can negotiate with a terrorist."
- Pastor John Hagee in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman (Charisma House, 2005)

2. "The Quran teaches that [all Muslims have a mandate to kill Christians and Jews]. Yes, it teaches that very clearly."
-Pastor John Hagee

Living Liberally :: Top 10 Outrageous Quotes From McCain's Spiritual Advisers
3. "I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans...I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are -- were recipients of the judgment of God for that...There was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades.... The Bible teaches that when you violate the law of God, that God brings punishment sometimes before the day of judgment."
-Pastor John Hagee
4. "The military will have difficultly recruiting healthy and strong heterosexuals for combat purposes. Why? Fighting in combat with a man in your fox hole that has AIDS or is HIV positive is double jeopardy."
- Pastor John Hagee on Don't Ask Don't Tell

5. "[Gay marriage] will open the door to incest, to polygamy, and every conceivable marriage arrangement demented minds can possibly conceive. If God does not then punish America, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."
- Pastor John Hagee

6. "It is impossible to call yourself a Christian and defend homosexuality. There is no justification or acceptance of homosexuality.... Homosexuality means the death of society because homosexuals can recruit, but they cannot reproduce."
- Pastor John Hagee

7. "Only a Spirit-filled woman can submit to her husband's lead. It is the natural desire of a woman to lead through feminine manipulation of the man...Fallen women will try to dominate the marriage. The man has the God-given role to be the loving leader of the home."
- Pastor John Hagee in his book What Every Man Wants in a Woman (Charisma House, 2005)

8. "I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore."
- Rod Parsley in Silent No More (Charisma House, 2005)

9. "Gay sexuality inevitably involves brutal physical abusiveness and the unnatural imposition of alien substances into internal organs, orally and anally, that inevitably suppress the immune system and heighten susceptibility to disease."
- Rod Parsley

10. "Only 1 percent of the homosexual population in America will die of old age. The average life expectancy for a homosexual in the United States of America is 43 years of age. A lesbian can only expect to live to be 45 years of age. Homosexuals represent 2 percent of the population, yet today they're carrying 60 percent of the known cases of syphilis."
- Rod Parsley

I looked for ANY quotes that would be “WORSE than” (your words) “God damn America,” calling 9/11 “America’s chickens coming home to roost,” or inanely claiming things like "The government lied about the Tuskegee experiment. They purposely infected African American men with syphilis..." (Jeremiah Wright sermon, April 13, 2003)...you’ve offered NOTHING even CLOSE!

“AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”

Jerry Falwell

“Billy Graham is the chief servant of Satan in America.”

Jerry Falwell

“I am such a strong admirer and supporter of George W. Bush that if he suggested eliminating the income tax or doubling it, I would vote yes on first blush.”

Jerry Falwell

“I believe with all my heart that the Bible is the infallible word of God.”

Jerry Falwell

All those quotes may be very stupid ones, but NONE of them come close to the malicious, racist and anti-American rants of Jerremiah Wright.


"I do not believe we can blame genetics for adultery, homosexuality, dishonesty and other character flaws."

Jerry Falwell

Hmmm, although homosexuality may well be genetic in origin, there seem to be no genetic links to predispositions to lying or committing adultery, so he gets at least “half-credit” on that one and again, no racial nor anti-American animus implied!


“And I think that George Bush really is a very godly person.”

Pat Robertson

(Perhaps an odd opinion, but not at all hateful.)


“Many of those people involved in Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many were homosexuals - the two things seem to go together.”

Pat Robertson

(Scott Lively and Kevin E. Abrams in The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, (ISBN 0964760932), argue that many homosexuals were involved in the inner circle of the Nazi party: Ernst Röhm of the SA, Horst Wessel, Max Bielas, and others. Still again, there's no racist, or anti-American hatred expressed here either!)

“Well, you know, Thomas Jefferson, who was the author of the Declaration of Independence said he wouldn't have any atheists in his cabinet because atheists wouldn't swear an oath to God. That was Jefferson and we have never had any Muslims in the cabinet.”

Pat Robertson

(Once again, no racial, nor anti-American hate here either.)



As to the Hagee quotes, I had to stop reading once I saw the reference to perhaps one of the DUMBEST things I’ve ever seen on the internet (“Living Liberally”) and it’s profoundly retarded “Top 10 Outrageous Quotes From McCain's Spiritual Advisers.”

FACT: The closest thing that John McCain has to a spiritual advisor is someone I know quite well (Doug Feith).

I know for a fact that John McCain has never been a parishoner of any of the above named Reverend’s Church’s. Barack Obama was a parishoner of Jerremiah Wright’s for OVER 20 years. John McCain wouldn’t know John Hagee if he fell over him, while Barack Obama called Jerry Wright a “friend” and a “mentor” for (gulp) over 20 years. John Hagee never performed a wedding or baptism for the McCain’s, BUT (gulp...yet again) Reverend Wright Married the Obama’s and baptized their children. John Hagee has not been a part of John McCain’s inner circle, whereas Jerry Wright was listed as Barack Obama’s “spiritual advisor” (and among his advisors) until the scandals broke.

WoW! You pretty much wasted nearly 1600 words and were shot down with less than 550!

Ouch!!!

That must really hurt.

Whoops! Almost missed this little gem.

"JMK wrong again, and I am right again!" (Barely Hanging)

"WASHINGTON -- The number of Americans being secretly wiretapped or having their financial and other records reviewed by the government has continued to increase as officials aggressively use powers approved after the Sept. 11 attacks. But the number of terrorism prosecutions ending up in court -- one measure of the effectiveness of such sleuthing -- has continued to decline, in some cases precipitously."

LA Times
May 12, 2008


Oh Barely, Coyote to my Roadrunner.....see that cliff you just stepped off of???

OK, let me show you;

If I told you ONCE, I've told you 1,000 times, you really should read the things you post!

From that very article that YOU POSTED; "legal experts say they would not necessarily expect the number of prosecutions to rise along with the stepped-up surveillance."

Case closed. In other words, "I no think that art-eeek-al mean what you theenk it mean."

No wonder you post anonymously, it's the posting equivalent of wearing a paper bag over your head!

Oh yeah....BU-BYE Coyote!!!

Looking forward to the day when the "Rev." Robertson joins Fat Falwell in the great hereafter. Good riddance.
One difference between those two pigs and pigs like Farrakhan and Wright is that Presidents consulted with Falwell and Robertson; they didn't with Farrakhan and Wright.

I don't get your problem with the likes of Falwell and Robertson, Fred. They're no different than ANY other evangelical Christians OR Orthodox Jews for that matter.

They are people who appear devoted to a particular faith. They haven't tried to force their faith on others, as Muslim fanatics have. In fact, the Christian religious devotees are less intrusive than their Orthodox Jewish counterparts in places like Williamsburg and Crown Heights Brooklyn, and Kiryas Joel, in Orange County do, where they close off entire streets and shut down neighborhoods for their religious processions and police the streets with their own ethnic/religious security guards.

Moreover, they don't preach race-based hatred (as the likes of Farrakhan and Wright DO), nor do they preach rabidly anti-Capialist/anti-American ideology and THAT is the REAL and PRIMARY difference between the two.

In fact, for me, at least a very hopeful sign since 2006 has been the incredible rise of the Conservative (Blue Dog) Democrats, now comprising nearly a quarter of the Congressional Democrats!

In fact, newly minted LA Congressman Don Cazayoux has promised to overturn Roe, and "not tinker around the edges as Reopublicans did."

While I support abortion UP UNTIL the fetus/child can survive outside the womb, I recognize that Roe is as much a case of "bad law," as was the 1973 Decision that barred the Death Penalty in all fifty states. Those are State's issues, so while I might disagree with the likes of Cazayoux on a local level, I can agree that a particular SC Decision was wrong.

Cazayoux fits in well with the likes of Heath Schuler of NC (an evangelical, Christian Conservative and Democrat) and other "Blue Dog" Democrats.

WHo are these 55-60 Dems you characterize as Blue Dogs? Please list.

As for Rep. Shuler, he may not be as Blue as you hoped for:
http://www.therealdemocratstory.com/heath.shuler/

EVERY "Blue Dog Democrat supports Paygo," it was THEIR idea and they've foisted it on the Democratic Party.

Paygo is rooted in paying for every new expenditure with either corresponding spending cuts, which most Liberals and many (perhaps 40% or more) of Republicans OPPOSE, OR tax increases.

As shown Income Tax rate hikes result in DECREASING tax revenues, since the top 10% of income earners already pay 70% of the income taxes AND those higher income earners defer more of their income in tax deferred vehicles as tax rates rise, swamping the additional revenues taken from those lower income earners who don't have the disposable income to defer.

Capital Gains hikes ALWAYS result in less investments, as a larger tax rate = less reward for the same amount of investment risk.

Even though Paygo has a major flaw (tax hikes = lower tax revenues), I can't help but like these Conservative Democrats....these are not the kind of guys to be bound by mere "electoral procedures."

If they demand spending cuts and are roundly outvoted, then I'm certain they'd react the way their consitutents down South and out West would WANT them to react - meancingly.

Don Cazayoux has expressed the same sentiments that the rest of the Blue Dogs (ALL of the Southern Dems, the Kansas and Indiana delegations...in FACT, I believe EVERY NEW Democrat elected in 2006 was a Conservative Dem, though I'm not sure sure of that) and that sentiment is, "We did not get elected to compromise and get along in Washington."

CLARIFICATION (and spelling correction)

"If they demand spending cuts and are roundly outvoted, then I'm certain they'd react the way their consitutents down South and out West would WANT them to react - menacingly.

And by "menacingly, I mean holding up procedural votes, refusing to cooperate with fellow members on the itmes those members NEED their support on, filibustering, etc.

If that doesn't work, I'm absolutely POSITIVE that any good Southern Conservative could ass-kick ANY northern Liberal any day of the week, so perhaps a good old "Texas Bunk House Brawl" on the Congressional floor wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Except for the fact that most of those lily-livered Liberals would probably hide under their desks and call 911.

Oops, the Repugs got stomped and lost another seat!

Get used to it.

Travis Childers (MS) and Don Cazayoux (La) are both Conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats...as I AM!

I've said, "The South will rise again," and by that I've meant that the Conservative Democrats who once formed the Democratic Party's backbone will once again take back that Party.

Cazayoux and Childers now join a 48 strong contingetn of Blue Dog" Democrats in Congress (nearly a quarter of all the elected Democrats).

BOTH are pro-gun, pro-border ENFORCEMENT, fiscally Conservative and fiercely anti-abortion (well, you can't win'em all).

In fact Cazayoux has bragged about supporting "the toughest anti-abortion Bill in the United States," and promises that the Conservative Dems will not merely "tinker around the edges of Roe, as Republicans have."

I LIKE these guys a LOT!

I even acknowledge that Roe was "bad law," as bad as was the SC's ban on Capital Punishment in all fifty states.

BOTH those issues should rightly be decided in each individual state.

The conservative movement ends with Bush. I got a good hard laugh yesterday when the Repug bobble-heads on the radio all got the taking point "Bush was a Liberal not a conservative!" and started to repeat it over and over, in unison.

Do "conservatives" (Corporatists) really think they can NOW finally decide that Bush wasn't their man all along???

God, what a bunch of JMK cloned morons.

That's your response to the fact that there are now 48 Conservative (pro-gun, pro-border enforcement, anti-abortion) "Blue Dog" Democrats in Congress?!

I understand your frustration, imagine mine for the last three decades! I've remained a loyal (at least registered Democrat), and a true-blue Conservative, my cousin Mike serves in the NYS Assembly...and I've witnessed soulless, befuddled Liberals ("vapid people devoid of ideas" as one Union Official called them) take control of that Party and run it into the ground.

Now, thanks to an interesting strategy engineered by Rahm Emmanuel and Chuck ("Democrats have been excessively Liberal, shamelessly Liberal and Liberal for far too long") Schumer, my Party is courting Conservatives and running Conservatives almost EXCLUSIVELY down South and out West.

That is not merely a postive development in my eyes, it's a huge step forward for both the Democratic Party (which,as it becomes more Conservative, will become more relevant) but for the Conservative movement as well.

I've never heard ANYONE claim G W BUsh "wasn't a Conservative."

So that doesn't ring true and coming from you, Barely, I tend not to believe that....you probably misunderstood what you heard.

I HAVE heard prescient speakers, like Mike Savage, say "Bush isn't Conservative ENOUGH," (I've long agreed), but despite his penchant for government excess and overspending and his weak-kneed approach to the critical border security issue, he's been far more Conservative than not.

"Saudi Arabia Friday rebuffed President Bush's request to immediately pump more oil to lower record prices, saying it does not see enough demand to increase production."

Again, JMKs face gets wiped on the ass of truth: no supply and demand involved, sorry.

Michael Savage, America's beloved bigot.

I don't see that at all Fred.

Though I don't have a huge store of information on the guy (I hear him maybe a half dozen times a month on my way home from work...AFTER Mike & the Mad Dog - the best radio duo in history...I have to get in that shameless plug), I can honestly say that I've never heard a disparaging word about any ethnic groups, or any groups whatsoever, when I've heard him.

Ideological bigotry?

OK, I never met a rational person who isn't an ideological bigot. Leftists are EDP's (emotionally Disturbed Persons) so they always exhibit a white-hot hatred for those who disagree. Rational Conservatives revile Leftists simply because they see that Leftists are dangerous people, who've embraced a malignant ideology that borders on a severe neurotic condition.

Take me, for instance, I don't merely disagree with socialists, I really, really, in all seriousness, mean them harm, in every sense of that term. I see their ideology as an illness and I see the adherants of it as dangerous EDP's who'd wreak havoc on modern civilization, built as it is upon private property rights and the market-economy.

What I respect about socialists is that at least they don't overrate themselves. They always say, "I'd day for economic justice (I guess wealth redistribution) and equality (I don't know what the F*^k that means - no two people are "equal" EXCEPT in that neither is to be treated differently under the LAW)....and all of that works great for me! I NEVER say "I'd die for...." INSTEAD, I say, "I'll kill for... (ie. the original Constitution, the one that calls LIBERTY - the grinding burden of complete self-responsibility, property rights and extremely limited government - FREEDOM....so that'd work out great for me! We're kind of in sympatico on that - they'll die for their beliefs and I'll kill for mine. That's a genuine status equilibrium!

All that to say that I see nothing wrong with a little ideological bigotry now and then.

What I do admire about Mike Savage is his incredible stream-of-consciousness, poetic rants. The person who tuned me into him called them, "Beat poet riffs, only with far more meaning and nuance than anything any beat poet ever did."

I'll confess, I don't know a damned thing about any "beat poets," except I suspect they were part of the "beatnik" culture that later morphed into the rancid, oderous "hippie movement," which I revile, but I have heard some of Savage's stream-of-consciousness rants and they are magnificent.

I haven't heard the guy very long (maybe over the last four or five months or so), BUT I'd think a lot of Liberals would absolutely LOVE this guy!

He's as intolerant of disagreement as they are and he's all over the map politically - he seems as prone to snap on a spendthrift Republican as a naive, America-hating Liberal Democrat.

"Saudi Arabia Friday rebuffed President Bush's request to immediately pump more oil to lower record prices, saying it does not see enough demand to increase production." (Barely Hanging)


Actually it's ALL about Supply & Demand, Barely.

We're looking for the Saudis to increase SUPPLY, while they're merely looking out for THEIR OWN best interests (high oil prices are very good for them) and keeping their output steady, to maintain the current price level!

World DEMAND is what's INCREASED the cost/price of oil! OPEC only accounts for something like 40% of the global oil output and Saudi Arabia rightfully told America, "Increase your own output, if you want to drive up supplies and cut the costs."

Here's a fairly accurate article that even you might be able to understand;

Oil prices

USA Today
Fri May 16, 2008
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20080516/cm_usatoday/oilprices

So who's to blame for record high oil prices?

"In public opinion polls, oil companies get fingered as Public Enemy No. 1 by one-third to one-half of respondents. The other leading culprits include the OPEC cartel, President Bush, environmentalists and speculators.

"Not one of them is as culpable as their critics claim. More important, none is capable of solving the problem, making the finger-pointing a destructive distraction. Before we get to some of the things the nation could have done, and should do now, to ease the crisis, let's assess the usual suspects:

Oil companies

"Blaming Big Oil for higher prices is kind of like blaming bankruptcy lawyers for home foreclosures. Without doubt, oil companies benefit when shortages drive up prices, but they don't cause the problem, nor do they gain much leverage to increase profit margins when prices rise.

"Take ExxonMobil, for instance. Last year, the world's largest petroleum company made an eye-popping $41 billion in profits. That's serious money, but it's a profit margin of about 10% on sales, a middle-of-the road level for major corporations. It's also the same margin ExxonMobil had when oil was cheap. In 2003, it made $21.5 billion on $213 billion in sales. Repeated federal investigations have shown no evidence of oil company conspiracies to drive up prices.

Oil producing nations.

"Producing nations can affect prices by limiting production. But that's a fact the United States can't do much about, other than trying to exert diplomatic pressure, as Bush will attempt to do on his visit today to Saudi Arabia. The United States can't really blame foreign countries for deciding how much of their oil to sell.

"What's more, the fact that the Saudis and others aren't pumping more oil already — to prevent their customers from falling into recession or deter them from developing alternative energy sources — suggests they might not have a lot of excess capacity, a theory put forth years ago by people who predicted the current price run-up to near-universal skepticism. Further, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the demon behind the first oil crisis three decades ago, no longer has such control. It now pumps only about 40% of the world's petroleum.

Speculators

"Oil traders are without doubt adding some cost to the price of oil. Some analysts say it's $10 a barrel. Some say more. Speculation, however, is a normal byproduct of tight supplies and actual or potential turmoil in oil-producing nations.

Environmentalists

"Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could produce about 600,000 barrels of oil per day. Although it's worth doing as a way to increase domestic supply, it's no panacea. It would still increase world oil production by only a fraction of 1%. Opposition to drilling there, as well as in offshore sites currently under moratorium, affects prices only at the margins.

"Filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
To judge by the debate in Congress, you'd think that the diversion of 70,000 barrels of oil a day into the Louisiana salt domes is a major reason behind the price surge. This week, in a laughable piece of political sleight of hand, the House voted 385-25 and the Senate voted 97-1 to suspend deposits into the reserve. Considering that daily world demand is about 84 million barrels, suspending SPR purchases increases the world's oil supply by less than one-tenth of 1%.

"As gratifying as it is to point fingers elsewhere, the mirror is the main place to look for the reasons that oil prices are hovering around $125 a barrel. The nation decided to let the laws of supply and demand work. It was rewarded with two decades of low prices that led to larger cars, bigger homes and longer commutes. Meanwhile, with the Cold War's end, Third World countries suddenly saw the benefits of capitalism, fueling robust growth in places such as China and India. As in the West, oil fuels that growth, first for industry, then for consumers who, naturally enough, use rising incomes to buy cars. That trend more than anything else is behind rising prices. And it has just begun.

"A keep-energy-cheap approach would have worked if supplies were unlimited and prices didn't tend to lurch forward, as in the 1970s and now, rather than to rise gradually.

"An alternative would have been energy policies that discouraged consumption with gas taxes and subsidized alternative sources. But doing this would have required voters to be willing to accept short-term pain for long-term gain. It would have required leadership, vision and political courage — the very same qualities needed now to stave off menacing crises in health care and Social Security.

"Ominously for the nation, those characteristics seem in even shorter supply than oil."

As the article accurately states while MANY cuplrits are involved, from oil companies to OPEC to environmentalists to speculators, NONE of those are as culpable as we are as consumers.

It's a pretty simple concept.

Governments were NOT established to HELP people solve problems....that's what industry does, for a profit. Government CAN make some problems WORSE, like wildly increasing food prices via agri-subsidies and inane corn-based ethanol policies, but fixing or solving problems.....THAT'S not in government's purview.

USA Today? LOL! That's your souce? Couldn't you find support on Fox News?

Well, we agree on two things:

1. Michael Savage is the greatest.
2. Government doesn't exist to help corporations and rich people maintain their power and wealth.

That is why, unlike you, I don't think the government should be allowed to interfere with Free Trade by putting tariffs on foreign goods.

What do you say, JMK? Are you for a *REAL* free market, or are you just a corporatist neocon?

Let's drop all the barriers. If I want to buy a $1,000 car from India, then that is exactly what I pay. No interference.

Without corporate welfare, my taxes should drop to under 10%. Sure, end welfare as well, then it will be under 1% -- just infrastructure support.

I think you and I are really on the same page, if you would just agree that the government has NO ROLE in the protection of corporations. The single role of government should be in enforcing the laws against collusion and monopolies, which are anti-capitalist, anti-free market mechanisms. Unfortunately, the government seems to exist to funnel taxpayer money to HELP monopolies and collusion based, price fixing industries like Oil.

Your problem is that you only want to go halfway. You want to end all public programs and leave the corporate programs intact (based on the fallacious reasoning that it is "good for the country" to support corporations).

Our military should be self-supporting as well. Right now, they should be pumping Iraq's oil and selling it to pay for our little adventure over there, as well as collecting money from the locals. Why should I pay for it? The military wasn't defending this country.

Oh wait, now JMK isn't agreeing. Big Governemnt JMK wants me to pay for a great big military. JMK wants corporate welfare. JMK wants tariffs to protect corporations.

Tsk, tsk.

"Well, we agree on two things:

"1. Michael Savage is the greatest." (BH)


Whoa, I didn't say "greatest."

I believe that Mike Francessa is "the greatest," and Chris Russo is pretty great too....Mike (Savage) Weiner is definitely extremely good, though.

In fact, I put him up there with the likes of Stephen A. Smith and Max Kellerman - two other very solid radio guys.

“Without corporate welfare, my taxes should drop to under 10%. Sure, end welfare as well, then it will be under 1% -- just infrastructure support.”


Actually, not even close!

While there are indeed more than 100 corporate subsidy programs in the federal budget today, with annual expenditures of roughly $75 billion, that only amounts to about 2 1/2 % of the federal budget Our taxes wouldn’t drop even 2%.

Entitlement spending gobbles up a full 40% of federal spending 19% goes to Medicare and Medicaid ($510 BILLION), 21% ($549 BILLION) goes to Social Security. Another 20% ($522 BILLION) goes to Defense spending.

31% ($848 BILLION) goes to “Other” DICRETIONARY spending (including that $75 BILLION in Corporate subsidies, about 8% of that “other discretionary spending” budget)...and 9% goes to interest on the national debt – federal bonds, T-Bills, etc., etc.

I have no objection to shit-canning the $75 Billion/year in “Corporate welfare” (subsidies). Corporations can and would do the research themselves and pass the costs onto us as consumers, as it should be.

As I’ve said many times, I DO NOT support a complete free market. I DO support the current highly regulated, “market-based economy” and that economy has worked! America’s economy tanked (“The worst American economy since the Great Depression”) under Carter and that implosion was reversed by the Supply Side policies brought in with Reagan, which ushered in over a quarter century of unprecedented prosperity. So, I do support the Supply Side, market-oriented economy we’ve had unbroken since 1981.

Has the Keynesian policies that imploded during the Carter administration been tried elsewhere?

Absolutely and they’ve failed elsewhere as well! Both France and Germany recently voted OUT two Keynesian administrations (Schroeder’s and Chirac’s) because of the modern failures of Keynesian policies.

“I don't think the government should be allowed to interfere with Free Trade by putting tariffs on foreign goods.” (BH)


Good! The it seems we agree (at least to some extent) on THREE things, the third being that Free Trade (the expanded GATT, NAFTA and CAFTA, etc.) are all very good for the U.S. economy.

As it turns out, so does the Bush administration, Bill Clinton and most of his former administration officials, Rahm Emmanuel and a bi-partisan majority of our elected officials.

The effects of NAFTA, both positive and negative, have been quantified by several economists, whose findings have been reported in publications such as the World Bank's Lessons from NAFTA for Latin America and the Caribbean,[9] NAFTA's Impact on North America,[10] and NAFTA Revisited by the Institute for International Economics.[11] Some argue that NAFTA has been positive for Mexico, which has seen its poverty rates fall and real income rise, even after accounting for the 1994–1995 economic crisis.[12] Others argue that NAFTA has been beneficial to business owners and elites in all three countries, but has had negative impacts on farmers in Mexico who saw food prices fall based on cheap imports from U.S. agribusiness, and negative impacts on US workers in manufacturing and assembly industries who lost jobs. Critics also argue that NAFTA has contributed to the rising levels of inequality in both the U.S. and Mexico. Some economists believe that NAFTA has not been enough (or worked fast enough) to produce an economic convergence,[13] nor to substantially reduce poverty rates. Some have suggested that in order to fully benefit from the agreement, Mexico must invest more in education and promote innovation in infrastructure and agriculture.

Globalization ("Free Trade") has benefitted America the most!

Even the dreaded "outsourcing" has created nearly 20 million more American jobs than it's cost.

The standard of living in Mexico has improved dramatically and that's good.

That net gain of 20 million U.S. jobs has greatly benefitted America, as well.

One of the most basic fundamentals of the Capitalist and even the Corporatist (the highly regulated market) is relative deprivation.

Relative deprivation is vital, because it allows those with the most valuable skills and the most capital to benefit from the efforts/labors of those who provide the bulk of the low-skilled and unskilled labor, who will always (due to "relative deprivation") comprise "the working poor."

That means that even if the average annual U.S. salary went up to $150,000/year, there's still be 20% of the people earning (at that level) $400,000/year and up...and there's be low-skilled workers earning, $70,000/year and in that economy, those folks would still comprise the working poor.

Sucks to be them...I guess.

Of course there is the Liberal/"progressive"/socialist approach that would seek to eradicate the relative deprivation that most of us benefit from, by redistributing some of that wealth and "averaging out" that bell curve so that there are fewer $400K/year muthf*^kas and more $150K/year muthf*^kas.

There's really not much good that can be said for that system, other than it makes a few more unskilled deadbeats a bit better off, but at the expense of a lot of wealth creation and "economic progress."

Your logic is unpeccable.