11/16/2007 01:35:13 AM EST

Swift Kids For Truth

posted by KenTX

GOP strategists are currently in training camp in Florida, using the Dodgertown facilities in Vero Beach. 

As always, pitchers and catchers reported early. Right now, there's not much going on but stretching, sprinting, pitching, weight lifting.

But they were able to release three rough prototype videos.

Email Print
Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit Facebook
John Edwards

Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton
< Clinton, Diamonds and Dem debate | Ladies and Gentlemen: We got her! >
 Display:
Swift Kids For Truth | 86 comments (86 topical, 0 hidden)
Funny Stuff (none / 0)
23/6  is a  liberal leaning comedy sight that does satires and is connected to Huffington post

Their catch phrase is  SOME OF THE NEWS /MOST OF THE TIME.

You didnt actually take it seriously because you saw the words Swift Boat did you?  That makes it even more funny.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/16/2007 02:07:26 AM EST

seriously? (none / 0)
I think my satire in the header of this blog provides evidence that I recognized the clips as satire.

I've never heard of a "26,000 square foot air conditioner", but I have heard of SUVs. How many can you count in this photo?
suvs

by KenTX on 11/16/2007 02:36:57 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards (none / 0)
What is the Edwards red building for that connects to his house.. Is that the anti-poverty center?

by acroso on 11/16/2007 02:43:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
It a Special Education Center (none / 0)
I hear there's an opening. Scholarships are available.

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/16/2007 08:48:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Special Ed (none / 0)
Didn't you say you teach special Ed? That's why you're always posting pictures of the handicapped.

by acroso on 11/16/2007 12:33:51 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No, Just Special (none / 0)

No...I volunteer at the VA Outreach Center for Homeless Veterans

I teach special ed when I reply to your posts. BB dropped out of class. 

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/16/2007 12:50:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
ya right.. (none / 0)
That picture  isn't big enough it doesn't quite take up the entire page.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/16/2007 03:59:48 AM EST

[ Parent ]
So The miracle of Capitalism only applies to (none / 0)

Republicans...I see how it works know. You guys just cant stand it when someone who doesn't favor allowing 35 million Americans to go hungry is successful

I don't see Edwards driving his red pickup truck then skulking off to drive his Lexus when no one is looking.

By the way...could you resize the images so it fits in the column next time.  Thanks

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/16/2007 07:44:35 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Miracles of capitalism (none / 0)
The image needs to be huge so we can see how the other America lives. And it is revealing that using junk science to sue the pants off doctors and keeping half the proceeds to build a ginormous house is now considered the miracle of capitalism. Far from 35 million Americans starving, we have an obesity epidemic among our poor that is unprecedented in human history. An obese underclass is a miracle of capitalism.

by Twba on 11/16/2007 08:47:17 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Mircale of Double Standards.... (none / 0)

 

An obese underclass is a miracle of capitalism.
 

Not hardly...its the miracle of fast food, and low cost junk foods, (which is a "miracle" in manufacturing efficiency and delivery systems using low cost ,high fat ingredients if you want to look at it that way)..in many cases the only meals these people can afford. You never struck me as a Limbaugh devotee in any case

I think you might then say that the obesity crisis could be the fault of government, liberal government. Food stamps, all those -- you know, I'm gonna tell you people a story. I -- just, well, the government, you could say, is killing these people because we know obesity kills, and the government's killing the poor. The Bush administration is killing the poor with too much food. Rush Limbaugh

 

...35 million Americans starving

35 million Americans go hungry, ( never said starving) is  a USDA stat..( hardly wild eyed socialists.) "Overall, 35.52 million people, including 12.63 million children, went hungry compared with 35.13 million in 2005. The survey was conducted in December 2006 and represented 294 million people, an increase of 2.5 million from 2005"

 

And it is revealing that using junk science to sue the pants off doctors and keeping half the proceeds to build a ginormous house is now considered the miracle of capitalism

You shoudn't confuse revealing opinions with facts, particularly your own. Let me remind you there are two sides to a trial in our adversarial legal  system. Perhaps if the defendants didn't use "junk" rebuttals, Mr Edwards would live in a much smaller house. In any case , I could post the pictures of prominent Republican politicians and lawyers if you like:

 

 

 

 

 

Republican presidential hopeful, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney's home on Lake Winnipesaukee in Wolfeboro, N.H., Monday, July 9, 2007. Two sides of the home on the 11-acre N.H. estate, valued at more than $10 million, face the lake.

 

 

The idea that Democratic candidates should march around in sack cloth and ashes  is on its face absurd, particularly for one who esposes libertarian economic priciples. Even more so when you factor in a country where sucsess is more often than not measured in cold hard cash and material wealth. Would you hire a laywer that lived in cold water flat in Jersey and drove a Yugo?

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/16/2007 11:26:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Yeah (none / 0)
I'm not a Republican, MRFred, so show me all the Republicans' mansions you like. Show me John McCain's high rise condo. I've driven right by it. It looks like a really nice place. I bet it cost more than most people can find between the couch cushions.

by Twba on 11/16/2007 12:05:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Libertarian then? (none / 0)

What's important is not if someone "rejects labels" but rather in your case, if they believe in what clearly could be considered to be conservative economic policies (with some libertarian flair if you like), since the issue was related to money, not social issues like abortion, etc.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...well, I guess if it asked me to call it something  else I would, but they can't talk. 

Or in fairness "he generally believes in what would be considered to be conservative economic policies although he doesn't refer to himself as a conservative". 

by ihavenobias on 11/16/2007 12:11:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Cool (none / 0)
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

I didn't realize you're an ornithologist. How interesting.

by Twba on 11/17/2007 10:31:25 AM EST

[ Parent ]
O... Ohhh Ohhh rnithologist (none / 0)
ornithologist ! wow what an impressive word.

I know anyone smart enough to use the word ornithologist ( 8th grade and above) Can understand how posting conservative talking points on every single post would eventually lead people to conclude that you are indeed a conservative troll.

Btw  my parents are " classic ( original Kennedy ) liberals" and they do not in any way agree with 99% of your posts. Find a different name .

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 03:06:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Oldsmobile (none / 0)


Classical Liberalism is probably not your parents' political philosophy.

by Twba on 11/17/2007 03:23:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
a classical liberal as it was explained you arent (none / 0)
That explains that you are not liberal in any sense of the word classical pre 20th century or post 20th century.  Just call yourself a conservative .

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 09:50:04 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Semantics (none / 0)
Just call yourself a conservative.

What do you call yourself, given that I am more liberal than you?

by Twba on 11/18/2007 12:00:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
simple (none / 0)
Someone who understands that your ideology has more to do with Karl Rove than any liberal that Im aware of living or dead

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/18/2007 05:12:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Reply (none / 0)
...your ideology has more to do with Karl Rove...

No matter what I write that is directly opposed to Mr. Rove's positions, you keep insisting that I am just like him. Mr. Leeberal, you are as closed-minded as a Republican to evidence that is contrary to your beliefs.

by Twba on 11/19/2007 08:20:23 AM EST

[ Parent ]
You are what you are (none / 0)
Since the opium production has gone UP since the American invasion. What makes you think Rove is against growing poppies? Mr whatever.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/19/2007 09:59:56 AM EST

[ Parent ]
You (none / 0)
What makes you think Rove is against growing poppies?

Maybe this gave me the idea.

by Twba on 11/19/2007 11:16:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Miracle of Democrat Double Standards (none / 0)
“So, the miracle of capitalism only applies to Republicans?”
No.

The miracle of conspicuous consumption only applies to Democrats.
Al Gore flies around in a G3. John Edwards owns a 26,000 square foot home. Bill Clinton moves around in SUVs. But these same guys are trying to pass laws to force Joe Average to drive a Prius, keep his lights off, and live his life like Fred Flinstone. 

The miracle of quality private education only applies to Democrats.
Chelsea Clinton, Albert Gore IV, Vanessa Kerry, Eleanor Mondale all went to exclusive private schools. But Democrats want to make sure that Joe Average does not receive vouchers so he can also send his children to private schools. 

The miracle of upward mobility only applies to Democrats.
Ted Kennedy, George Soros, Barbara Streisand have millions of dollars in wealth. But instead of taxing wealth in America, we tax the income of Joe Average. The system is rigged so that we demand more income tax from Joe Average, but we don’t go after the trust funds of inherited wealth of the Kennedy family.

I hope you like this theme, because you are likely to see it again.

by KenTX on 11/16/2007 11:54:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Your points are weak (none / 0)
Meanwhile Bush clear skies initiative allows polluters to pump even more into shit into the atmosphere.

Vouchers are a way for Republicans to get the state pay for religious education. Republicans don't want to improve education because they rely on a dumbed down voting public.

And the people have to bail out failed savings and loans and other schemes the Bush family has come up with. Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world, has criticized the US tax system for allowing him to pay a lower rate than his secretary and his cleaner. Gosh wonder what party instituted that little fiasco?

If you are going to stick to this theme. You better become more educated on the subject.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 12:46:12 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards (none / 0)

Edwards marches around as the anti-poverty hero of the world, but he aint doing shit. His anti-poverty barn is a joke, and he lives in luxory.

You post pics of Romney's nice house, but it's no different than Edwards. The difference is that Edwards is the anti-poverty champion so exposing his 20 SUV's and massive house and swimming pools and whatever else just let's you know that he's not interested in sharing HIS money with anyone. 

by acroso on 11/17/2007 01:12:00 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The Miracle of Selective Memory ... (none / 0)
The miracle of conspicuous consumption only applies to Democrats.

 

Absurdity and hyperbole is your specialty. I'm sure that the millionaires club that is the US Senate and politicos in the US have their share of conspicuous consumers. As  for " trying to pass laws to force Joe Average to drive a Prius, keep his lights off, and live his life like Fred Flinstone.  is good imagery but simply a lie. I was under the impression that the "miracle of the free market" would solve our energy problem. But after the "secret" meeting the Republican / Conservative solution is higher oil company profits  tax cuts and credits for the most profitable companies on the planet and invade Iraq .

 

The miracle of quality private education only applies to Democrats.

 

Two words: George Bush. two more Jeb Bush...yet more..Neil Bush...more more Nelson Rockefeller..Mitt Romney...

Vouchers are simply a wedge issue used to break teachers unions, force the privatization of public education and allow the elimination of property taxes used to support eduction. Ultimately the governments that support vouchers want to get out of the education business leaving the poor swinging in the wind. It also has strong racial overtones. Of course in Texas where everyone makes 120K a year thats no problem..right?

 

 The miracle of upward mobility only applies to Democrats.

 I am laughing so hard answering this...you mean there is no "death "tax? You know the tax Bush and conservatives want to eliminate so bad...

But instead of taxing wealth in America, we tax the income of Joe Average.

 I am laughing so hard answering this too...Really ? you mean like the AMT relief package that shifts AMT to the higher income brackets in line with the laws original intent...that Republicans call a tax increase...and Bush says he will veto..that one?

You mean the like package of Bush Tax cuts that rewarded the top 1% of Joe Scarsdale earners?

 The system is rigged so that we demand more income tax from Joe Average

You mean the disproportionate tax reduction on income that benefited  Joe Scarsdale

You mean the capitol gains tax reductions that Joe Sixpack ( hahahah) routinely takes advantage of? 

 

 Ted Kennedy, George Soros, Barbara Streisand

 Ken now your in tin foil hat country...you can do better than that. You borrowing from  Acroso "one world" or North American Union conspiracy theme.

Barbara Streisand

Besides when you attack Barabra you are showing how homophobic you really are. :)

 

I hope you like this theme, because you are likely to see it again.

 

 

By all means.....

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/17/2007 09:34:51 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Miracle of Democrat Party control over individuals (none / 0)
“As for "trying to pass laws to force Joe Average to drive a Prius, keep his lights off, and live his life like Fred Flinstone.  is good imagery but simply a lie.” 
I assume you’ve heard of the term CAFÉ Standards, which refer to federal government control of fuel efficiency performance in the American automotive industry.

Hillary Clinton recently proposed increasing CAFÉ standards to 55 MPG. Increasing CAFE numbers are almost as important to Democrats as increasing the minimum wage.

GM will need to add this new prototype vehicle to their production line in order to comply with an average fleet performance of 55 MPG.
yabba dabba do!


“I was under the impression that the "miracle of the free market" would solve our energy problem.”
U.S. oil companies have great difficulty drilling offshore in the Gulf of Mexico thanks to laws enacted primarily by Democrats. But Cuba and China don’t seem to have the same problems.

“Vouchers are simply a wedge issue used to break teachers unions, force the privatization of public education and allow the elimination of property taxes used to support education.”
School vouchers describe financial assistance by the government to help children from low income working families to attend private schools. Pilot programs in Milwaukee and Cleveland are performing very well, and there are plans to expand the program nationwide. You might consider school vouchers like an SCHIP program to improve the education of our children.

Public school kids spend a lot of time at security check points.
public school

Private schools kids get to wear cool looking sweaters and ties.private schools


by KenTX on 11/18/2007 12:35:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
conservative lack of logic (none / 0)

Building cars with  improved fuel efficiency is s a bad thing.

Improving public schools at least so they are up to the standards of Japan and Europe  is not worth the effort.

Any more insights from the Limbaugh school of thought?

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/18/2007 10:46:27 AM EST

[ Parent ]
What goes Up must come.down... (none / 0)
Spinning Wheel must go round:

 Busting the Democrats / Offshore Drilling Myth

SPIN: U.S. oil companies have great difficulty drilling offshore in the Gulf of Mexico thanks to laws enacted primarily by Democrats

 

FACT: St. Petersburg Times: “President Bush was aiming within 30 miles of theFlorida Panhandle…” In an editorial entitled “The Bushes Oil Slick”, the St.Petersburg Times wrote, “The governor must also have forgotten that his brother has wanted to drill much more. President Bush was aiming within 30 miles of the Florida Panhandle before ceding to an avalanche of criticism in 2002, the year Gov. Bush was seeking his own re-election.” [St Petersburg Times, 4/27/04]

Bush blocks Florida Gulf, Glades drilling
May 29, 2002: In a two-part deal, the federal government will pay $235 million to buy back oil, natural gas and mining development rights in the cypress swamps of the Everglades and off the beaches of the Gulf of Mexico. The coastal deal involves paying $115 million to buy back oil and gas leases about 30 miles off the shores of Pensacola in a deposit known as Destin Dome. The Everglades deal, which requires congressional approval, amounts to $120 million worth of cash or future drilling credits to retire mineral rights in the Big Cypress National Preserve and other federal lands.

On Feb. 1, Florida Sens. Bill Nelson (D) and Mel Martinez (R) made a "preemptive strike," as Nelson aide Bridget Walsh describes it, in the form of a bill that would open up a segment of the eastern Gulf of Mexico to new drilling while putting in place more rigid anti-drilling protections for the rest of the OCS around Florida.

More where that came from.... 

Busting the Democrats / CAFE Standards Myth 

 SPIN: Hillary Clinton recently proposed increasing CAFÉ standards to 55 MPG blah blah blah Flinstone blah balh hypebole blah blah blah GOP site!

Fact: The Senate in June of 2007 voted 65-27 to increase fuel economy standards to a combined 35 mpg.by 2020 -- a 40 percent increase

Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Vice Chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (and Flinstones Devotee) today introduced legislation to increase Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards to 40 miles per gallon by 2017, if not sooner.

IN1990, Sen. Richard Bryan (D-NV) and Slade Gorton (R-WA) ( its called bipartisanship...you should try it...we might get something done other than line rich GOP contributors pockets....)tried to reverse the downward trend in fuel economy by introducing a bill to raise fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks over a 10 year period (just like the 1975 bill). The 1990 bill called for a 40 percent increase in CAFE standards. Had this bill become law, cars sold today would average 40 mpg and light trucks, 29 mpg.

Clinton Proposed Increasing CAFE Standards From The Current Level Of 25 Miles Per Gallon To 40 Miles Per Gallon In 2020 

In 1990 the argument against the proposal was 

  • 1990 : Big Three Automobile Manufacturers,  said Bryan-Gorton proposal  isn't realistic.

Today on Clintons proposal

  • Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the trade group that represents the Big Three and Toyota, among others, said Clinton's proposal isn't realistic.

Side Note::Clinton would also create $20 billion in low-interest "Green Vehicle Bonds" so automakers could get "immediate help to retool the oldest auto plants to meet her strong efficiency standards."

U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, in February proposed up to $20 billion in federally backed loan guarantees to automakers and suppliers to cut the cost of obtaining capital.

 

 Oh what progress we've made...

 

Busting the School Vouchers Help The Poor Myth

 

 SPIN : School vouchers describe financial assistance by the government to help children from low income working families to attend private schools.

 

 Fact:  Refer to racial overtones again: school vouchers do not address the fundamental problem...just provide window dressing like most conservative solutions. Voucher programs ignore the tight connection between housing and schools. We pay lip service to the poor by giving vouchers to attend private schools and yet we dump them back in the same crime infested hell holes the came from...yeah...makes sense.

"Educational policy rarely connects where poor children live to how they perform. Policymakers treat housing and neighborhoods and schools as if they present distinct issues to dealt with separately.

This country has a large—$8 billion a year—tested voucher that accomplishes what both sides want. It improves the educational attainment of low income children. It's not run by a local school system, or even the Department of Education. It's the federal Housing Voucher program." Of course its been cut by the Rethugs and Bush.

 

 The ball is heading for the fence....

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/18/2007 11:30:36 AM EST

[ Parent ]
MRFred is about to tap out. (none / 0)
His face is turning blue.
cage fighting

Any honest person would readily admit that Republicans generally support offshore drilling, while Democrats generally oppose offshore drilling.

Any honest person would readily admit that Democrats generally support increases in CAFÉ standards, while Republicans generally oppose increases in CAFÉ standards.

I can present roll call vote after roll call vote to support these trends.

Meanwhile, I’m struggling to keep up with MRFred’s efforts to redistribute the nation’s wealth through implementation of social entitlement programs.

He wants to solve the problem of educational inequity through housing vouchers. If I understand correctly, he wants the government to provide billions of dollars to relocate inner city families out to the suburbs, so poor kids can go to better public schools. As if this great migration pattern will not result in additional white flight to the exurbs. 

Conversely, MRFred believes that government assistance that helps poor kids attend private schools is a bad thing. Only in the mind of a liberal!

by KenTX on 11/18/2007 02:30:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Have you ever noticed (none / 0)
how a sprinkling of logic, combined with links to supportive facts, combined with a couple of funny photographs can completely destroy a 10 page post from a liberal?

It's easy! It's also loads of fun!

by KenTX on 11/18/2007 02:56:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No...but since you mentioned it. (none / 0)
It is interesting...when it happens please do point it out won't you. Thanks

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/18/2007 07:03:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Debunking the Bunk (none / 0)

Any honest person would readily admit that the orignal post,  generic statements written to purposely mislead and imply class warfare ( like most of Kens spin) such as:

 

Increasing CAFE numbers are almost as important to Democrats as increasing the minimum wage.

 

are disproven by finding the exception like the powerfull  powerful Republican Senator Stevens from the oil state of Alaska. Obviously it was important enough for Mr Stevens to recommend support it.

Only a conservative would assume that standards and conservation are somehow are bad. Then again conservatives general don't have standards of any type and as the 6 years of deficits under Republican  majority  and Bush so far have proven, the only thing conservatives want to conserve is their ability to line their pockets.

So it is understandable. My bad Ken

In the same vein, any honest person would also admit that with oil at $100  fighting the need for efficient vehicles is somewhat counterintuitive. Then again working in the petro-chemical industry like he does,  Ken enjoys profits from your pain.

In regard to offshore drilling, while you can "generally" predict how Senators vote...the two people that count,  namely the President and the Governor and  somewhat hypocritically opposed offshore drilling...when it impacts them politically. Refer to "standards" as noted above.

Finally the program I referred to and mischaracterized by Ken ( reading the reference would help)

 

 If I understand correctly, he wants the government to provide billions of dollars to relocate inner city families out to the suburbs, so poor kids can go to better public schools.As if this great migration pattern will not result in additional white flight to the exurbs.

is an existing program. Not a new program.  The assistance doesn't move inner city families into gated communities like Kens. Just area where drive-by shootings don't happen on a daily basis.  Taking an inner city kid to a upscale private school then dropping him back in the ghetto where he can run the gauntlet of crack houses gangs and prostitutes only makes sense to conservatives.

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/18/2007 06:45:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Liberals and the truth. (none / 0)
“In the same vein, any honest person would also admit that with oil at $100 fighting the need for efficient vehicles is somewhat counterintuitive.”

MRFred seems terribly concerned that oil is approaching $100 per barrel, while the federal government is running a budget deficit.

Is MRFred is favor of drilling in ANWR? It doesn’t appear so.

Are Democrats in favor of drilling in ANWR? It doesn’t appear so.

How much oil is buried under ANWR? USGS estimates as much as 10.4 billion barrels.

Since the federal government owns ANRW, drilling on the reserve could yield more than a trillion dollars for the U.S. Treasury.

So any honest person would also admit that drilling in ANWR and drilling offshore in the U.S. continental shelf could simultaneously reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil and help balance the federal budget.

by KenTX on 11/18/2007 07:43:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Truthiness (none / 0)
KenTX, there isn't enough oil in pristine ANWR to last more than a few seconds at the outrageous rate that we consume precious resources. We have to end our oil addiction and revert to a neolithic lifestyle. That is the only way we'll save the planet.

by Twba on 11/19/2007 08:23:03 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Not to worry TWBA (none / 0)
some on this board are well suited to clubing their women over the head, draging them by the a hair and yelling Yaba Daba Do .

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/19/2007 08:26:53 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Conservatives and math.... (none / 0)

So how does 10.4 billion barrels trans late to  1 Trillion to the treasury?

1 Trillion / 10.4 billion = 96.15 barrel

So the Fed collects the entire price of a barrel? Really? Wow.  Ive been so blind!

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/19/2007 11:53:07 AM EST

[ Parent ]
MCFred (none / 0)
If Edwards has all that money- why won't he give it away to those in his poverty center?

by acroso on 11/17/2007 01:09:07 AM EST

[ Parent ]
You are out of your depth (none / 0)
The fact that you would mention helping anyone in need  is laughable.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 05:44:06 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Edwards (none / 0)

I think that thing is just a stage prop for Edwards. Its like Bush's ranch in Texas that he has to pretend he's a cowboy.

Edwards just has a giant anti-poverty center attached to his house to pretend he's silky.

Of course nothing actually happens at the Edwards anti-poverty center other than be soemthing nice to look at while driving around in his 20 SUV's.

by acroso on 11/17/2007 06:34:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Do I have it right so far? (none / 0)
Yea thats the ticket. Edwards knew that you would be suspicious of his claims and attached a huge anti poverty wing to his house to try to confuse you. BUT being the brain trust that you are.. you found him out.  Do I have it right so far?

Silky is another word for intelligent

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 07:00:58 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Speculation and Bullshit (none / 0)

FDR was the most economically progressive president in our history (unless you're TWA in which case you hate his guts) and helped the poor/middle class more than anyone in this last century.

Guess what? He was also FILTHY rich.  Edwards is a thrift-store shopping bum compared what FDR was.

In this day and age with no publicly funded elections, it's sadly impossible to be a *viable* candidate if you don't have some of your cash.  So trying to rip every democrat is bullshit.

Especially, as I've said, when you fools try to play up your Connecticut born, cheerleading, oil business president as some kind of average joe cowboy. 

 

 

by ihavenobias on 11/17/2007 12:03:39 PM EST

[ Parent ]
liberals (none / 0)

That's how communism works too. Instead of rationing it with lines since yo can't use the market, you give party insiders access and first dips. The inner party liberals are rich as hell as they sieze the workers income not doing any actual work themselves.

That's the spirit of the Kennedy family and the Edwards mansions.

by acroso on 11/17/2007 12:08:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Communism? (none / 0)
FDR saved us from communism, socialism and for that matter, unregulated capitalism.

by ihavenobias on 11/17/2007 12:44:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
well (none / 0)
Well at least he didn't hate his country like modern day libs who refuse to wear the flag like Obama.

by acroso on 11/17/2007 04:37:03 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Fucking Ridiculous (none / 0)

In other words, the president can wipe his ass with the flag and constitution *figuratively* as long as he wears a fucking flag pin?

Very insightful into an overly simplistic worldview. 

by ihavenobias on 11/17/2007 08:49:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
idk (none / 0)

idk I think he'd look better if he'd was willing to where a flag lapel considering he wants to be command n' chief. He wants to run the armed forces but he thinks wearng a flag pin is somehow disraceful or sends the wrong message to the troops or something.

 I don't get it.

by acroso on 11/17/2007 08:58:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
let me sort it out for you. (none / 0)
True patriots dont have to wear a flag  to believe in what it represents.

CLUE
Disagreeing with an administration that kiilled thousands of our guys  for OIL  is the obligation of a true patriot.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 09:55:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Have (none / 0)
He doesn't have to wear to all the time. The problem is he refuses to wear it at all.

by acroso on 11/18/2007 11:49:39 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I see (none / 0)

So YOU'RE the guy that votes for a president he'd rather "have a beer with" instead of voting for the best qualified, most competent candidate.

I used to think you were a media creation but I now see you're real!

by ihavenobias on 11/18/2007 07:33:33 PM EST

[ Parent ]
FDR vs. Edwards (none / 0)
FDR was the most economically progressive president in our history (unless you're TWA in which case you hate his guts) and helped the poor/middle class more than anyone in this last century.

I never claimed to hate FDR's guts, but don't let facts get in your way.

Edwards is a thrift-store shopping bum compared what FDR was.

John Edwards is a third rate intellect under a first rate haircut. Do we really need another idiot as our president after two terms of the current idiot in chief?

by Twba on 11/19/2007 08:26:18 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Well (none / 0)

Considering you generally tried to rip his New Deal to shreds in our debate, I'd say "hated his guts" is a fair statement, hyperbole excluded (go ahead, post a cutesy hyperlink).

At least as far as his econonomic policies.  It's a given that most people appreciate his War effort though, even conservative cunts like Ann Coulter.

 

 

by ihavenobias on 11/19/2007 12:49:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Another view (none / 0)
It's possible to hate stupid, ineffectual policies without hating the guy who delivered the fireside chats.

You make a lot of statements about FDR and his policies that I've heard for many years. I think many of those statements do not stand up to close scrutiny. I'll give an example: "FDR saved us from socialism." I disagree. FDR pushed very hard for socialism. It was the US Supreme Court that halted the spread of socialism when it unanimously ruled the NIRA unconstitutional.

by Twba on 11/20/2007 10:21:55 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Dueling Opinions Again (none / 0)
http://www.hoover.org/publi cations/digest/4512566.html

by ihavenobias on 11/21/2007 06:29:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Hardly dueling (none / 0)
That book excerpt you pointed to is not very strongly opposed to my thesis that the Supreme Court, not FDR, was the actor that halted the spread of socialism.

Roosevelt was reelected by an overwhelming majority in 1936. Yet his second term proved much less innovative than his first. This was due, in part, to several Supreme Court decisions during 1936 striking down various New Deal laws as unconstitutional and the president's subsequent inability to mobilize popular protest against the Court.

by Twba on 11/22/2007 03:05:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Wait a minute! (none / 0)
It's all becoming clear to me now.

So, FDR initiated his court packing scheme in an effort to subvert the Judicial Branch of government, which was excercising constitutional authority to thwart his efforts to move the country in the direction of socialism.

I guess that's why historians are finally admitting that Joe McCarthy was correct in his assertions about Democrat Party ties to communism.

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 03:14:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
FDR and the far left (none / 0)
From Ihavenobias' link:

The Communist Party, following its Soviet-dictated Popular Front policy, actively opposed efforts in a number of states to create independent radical anti-Roosevelt political campaigns. Sounding like a moderate liberal group, it increased its membership, formed large front groups, and generally expanded its influence in the labor movement.

Communists were some of FDR's most enthusiastic supporters.

Beyond adopting leftist rhetoric and offering progressive policies in exchange for support from radical and economically depressed constituencies, President Roosevelt also sought to recruit the actual leaders of protest groups by convincing them that they were part of his coalition.

FDR's administration was filled with Communists and Socialists lured away from potential third party insurgencies.

by Twba on 11/22/2007 03:34:20 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Twba is correct once again! (none / 0)
"FDR's administration was filled with Communists and Socialists lured away from potential third party insurgencies."

FDR's Vice President, Henry Wallace, was a self-admitted communist sympathizer and admirer while he was still in office. In 1952, he wrote a book called, Where I Went Wrong, finally disavowing and apologizing for his long term love affair with "Uncle Joe" Stalin and Soviet Communism.

If Henry Wallace had not screwed up and been replaced on the Democrat Party ticket by Harry Truman in 1944, America would have had a full-blown Communist President when FDR died five months later.

Joe McCarthy was hardly exaggerating when he talked about a Democrat Party rife with communists.

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 04:15:48 AM EST

[ Parent ]
As a matter of fact, (none / 0)
Bob Novak just published an article today, detailing Joe McCarthy's high degree of accuracy regarding his allegations that the Democrat Party was chock full on communists in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s.

Today, they're called "Progressives", but their goals and objectives haven't changed all that much in 70 years.

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 04:37:42 AM EST

[ Parent ]
The Scared Generation (none / 0)
The good news is that, these days, the generation of folks who were taught from childhood to fear "the communist movement" regardless of reality are dying of old age in their warm, capitalist beds.  So in just a few years I expect we'll stop hearing all this paranoid squealing and life will be gooooood.

by OneHitKill on 11/22/2007 07:26:48 AM EST

[ Parent ]
You shoulda' been there! (none / 0)
“The generation of folks who were taught from childhood to fear "the communist movement" regardless of reality.”

We nearly blew up the entire planet on more than one occasion. It was more fun than a barrel full of monkeys. The stakes were high, and all the chips were on the line.

Both sides knew that democratic free market capitalism and totalitarian global communism were inherently incompatible. It was winner-take-all, and there would be no second place finishers.
Today, liberals frequently refer to the threat of Nazi Germany. Hitler was a joke compared with the threat from the Soviet Union.
 
nikita 

kruschev
breshnev
stalin
cuba

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 08:07:33 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Don't exaggerate (none / 0)

Hitler was a joke compared with the threat from the Soviet Union.

Settle down.  You're trying to tell me the mere threat (as perceived by the US) of the USSR was worse than the actual deeds of the Third Reich?  Wow, I'm glad I was born into a childhood where my worst fear was being enslaved by the Decepticons.

And it was "winner-take-all," ; except the winner didn't take all.  We still have both capitalism and communism on Earth.  How anticlimactic.  I hope they spice this story up before they adapt it into a movie.

by OneHitKill on 11/22/2007 11:27:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Communism was bad, um-kay? (none / 0)
"The USSR was worse than the actual deeds of the Third Reich?"

Yeppir! Communism was worse than fascism.

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 11:40:56 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Oh no you don't (none / 0)
Don't misquote me, smartguy.  I said " the threat of the USSR."  Meaning: Its danger to the US.  You can't substitute another question for mine just because you don't care for it.

by OneHitKill on 11/22/2007 08:04:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]
OK, let's use your rules. (none / 0)
The Nazi “threat” involved funny-shaped hand grenades.

grenades 

This percentage of the globe was armed with dangerous grenades.
nazis 

The Soviet “threat” involved cigar-shaped ICBMs.
icbms 

This percentage of the globe was armed with ICBMs.
ussr 

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 10:12:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yes, please (none / 0)

How many Americans were killed by ICBMs during the Cold War?

How many Americans were killed by Germans during World War II?

I'm not downplaying the destructive power of missiles, I just want you to stop with this romanticized "what if" approach to history. 

by OneHitKill on 11/22/2007 10:34:03 PM EST

[ Parent ]
History is all about "What If?" (none / 0)
What if the missiles had flown in October 1962? We came within a nanometer. It would have meant the end of mankind. Therefore, it is a hypothetical worth contemplation.

It was called the “Cold War” because it was a serious war of ideology fought by proxies.

America supported the mujahadeen when they were killing Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

Soviets supported the Vietcong when they were killing American troops in Vietnam.

It was a global chess match with serious implications. They backed communist revolutionaries and we backed the other side.

by KenTX on 11/22/2007 11:49:16 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Spina Bifida (none / 0)
Serious implications, okay.  But the US was not, at any point in history, in danger of collapse under the boot of communism, and to say that it was is to sell the nation short.  Enough of the US population had a backbone during the Cold War that the nation as a world player was able to enjoy the benefits of said backbone.  When present-day Americans get shakey-legged at the mere mention of communism, terrorism or monkey jism, THAT'S when I get frustrated with my countrymen, because THAT'S when the country risks its wellbeing.

by OneHitKill on 11/24/2007 03:31:24 AM EST

[ Parent ]
monkey shines (none / 0)
“When present-day Americans get shakey-legged at the mere mention of communism, terrorism or monkey jism.”
I am unfamiliar with that last term. Is it synonymous with environmentalism, sexism, racism, corporatism, capitalism, bigotry, uninsured children, public schools, or any of a long list of liberal issues that don’t concern me in the least?

I recognize that Americans’ fear of terrorism is number one on your list of pet peeves. But it’s not the fear of decapitation that worries me. Rather, it’s the memory of how 19 terrorists with box cutters were able to reduce the value of my stock portfolio by 50% in a single day.

I rank that fear right up there with the feelings I experienced when I was taught to hide under my desk, in an effort to minimize the impact of a direct hit by a Soviet nuclear warhead on Cleveland M. Bailey Elementary School.

The Soviets never attacked. But they thought about it. A lot.


by KenTX on 11/24/2007 05:14:47 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Threat assessment (none / 0)
At the height of the Cold War, the Soviet Union had over 10,000 nuclear warheads pointed at us. Just because we escaped from between that rock and a hard place with relatively few casualties does not diminish the grave threat we faced.

by Twba on 11/23/2007 11:13:48 AM EST

[ Parent ]
MCFred (none / 0)

Don't worry, Silky was getting booed by the libs last night at the debate for being the big mean attack dog.

His campaign seems to be floundering. 

by acroso on 11/16/2007 12:34:47 PM EST

[ Parent ]
McMoron (none / 0)

Silky? I guess we could call Rudi "Lusty" , Fred " Sleepy", McCain "Grumpy"  Huckabee " Redneck Jesus", Mitt "Heretic"Ducan "Person Of Interest"  and Oberfurher Tancredo "Acrosos Favorite Politician"...."

Im not an Edwards supporter...just anti-republican and anti-asshole. Nothing personal.

"Freedom is important to Republicans as long as someone else pays for it on the battlefield and on April 15th."

by MRFred on 11/16/2007 12:47:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Silky (none / 0)
He has silky hair. O so soft.

by acroso on 11/16/2007 02:24:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
and (none / 0)
His hair is oh so smooth and Fred Thompson smells oh so good.  And Rudy looks fantastic in a ball gown.  Got any other points you want to make?

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/16/2007 04:33:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Rudy (none / 0)
We shouldn't let a cross dresser be our president. Just more reason to think he's unfit.

by acroso on 11/16/2007 11:40:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Actually (none / 0)
He's gaining in Iowa and is in a statistical dead heat with Hillary and Obama.  Just an FYI.

by ihavenobias on 11/16/2007 01:45:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Obama (none / 0)
Obama is the most likeable of those three. Lord knows Hillary and Silky are not likeable at all so it's not hard for Obama to win out in that race.

by acroso on 11/17/2007 12:40:17 AM EST

[ Parent ]
That's pretty small for a company headquarters (none / 0)

Those of us who have our own companies and work at home with a staff need plenty room for offices. If it involves meeting there with clients, that's more room. When both partners are self-employed--that's even more space. Where there's another office somewhere else, duplicate facilities are important for business.

Does this mean that you're against entrepreneurs and self-made millionaires whose business is to help the 'little' guy? What a surprise from the "other side"! 

Yup! Where are the pickup trucks? Helps to have 4WD in the middle of farm land.

by zenie on 11/16/2007 08:42:02 AM EST

[ Parent ]
These fools (none / 0)

get more and more ridiculous.

Someone who's mad at Edwards for being a lawyer will for some reason not mind decades of Fred Thompson being a LOBBYIST.

Let's see, am I more worried that the lawyers have too much power or am I worried about enormous corporations/industries (big oil, health care, big pharma, etc.)?  It's not even close (except maybe for lawyers who represent Big Business, but hey).

PS---It cracks me up when idiots try to say the *democrats* are "out of touch" with how the comman man lives, how so called "real Americans" live.  Again, these same fools (yes, fools) LOVE(D) George Bush and believe(d) he is an average guy.

Really?  Do you guys know which midwestern/southern "average guy" town Bush was born in? 

Would you like to tell us about his humble, lower middle class upbringing? 

How about his public education?  Or when he bought his ranch?   

Or about his various blue collar jobs?

If you're unsure about the answers to these questions, please, look them up.  We'll be waiting. 

 

 

by ihavenobias on 11/16/2007 10:06:32 AM EST

Bush is not a Texan! (none / 0)
Born in New Haven, CT on July 6, 1946...

by skuzzbukit on 11/16/2007 10:51:26 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Exactly (none / 0)

How much more "liberal" can you get than the northeast!

Isn't that where they hand out a Volvo and a latte with the New York Times (and a buy 1 get 1 free abortion coupon)?

Give me a fucking break.  I'm still waiting for one of those dopes (you know who you are) to answer the other questions.

 

by ihavenobias on 11/16/2007 11:22:55 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Sam Houston was not a Texan! (none / 0)
He didn't get here until he was almost 50 years old.

STFU you moron!

by KenTX on 11/16/2007 06:32:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Let them have him (none / 0)

Bush may not have been born a Texan but Texas is forever going to get the blame for him.

Welcome to Texas!  Home of the "Worst President Ever"! 

by bfaul on 11/17/2007 11:38:04 AM EST

[ Parent ]
but (none / 0)
He has a fake texas accent to go along with his fake agenda.

--- Truth To Power

by Leeberal on 11/17/2007 11:58:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]
you didn't finish it (none / 0)
Welcome to Texas!  Home of the "Worst President Ever"! 

Lyndon Baines Johnson!

by KenTX on 11/17/2007 07:57:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yup (none / 0)

Actually Bush pretty much caught up with LBJ 2 years ago and has held the title ever since.

That invites comparisons to Lyndon B. Johnson, whose approval rating suffered each year as the country became more enmeshed in Vietnam -- dropping in Gallup data from 75 percent on average in 1964, to 43 percent in 1967 and 1968. Bush, for his part, has gone from an average of 73 percent approval in 2000 and 2001 to 46 percent, on average, so far this year. The trend lines are strikingly similar.

That means the two worst and most disliked presidents in history have both been from Texas.

Must be something in the Texas water I guess?

Trust me Ken, if Texas wants to claim ownership of Bush, none of the other states will fight them for it. Bush is all yours.

by z1p101 on 11/17/2007 08:41:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
And Yet Another View (none / 0)
http://www.hoover.org/publi cations/digest/4512566.html

by ihavenobias on 11/21/2007 06:28:44 PM EST

Swift Kids For Truth | 86 comments (86 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: