Democratic Party

B’Man’s Ass-Kissing Sycophant Watch: Joe Biden and the Hand

h/t The Excavator

(The only problem I have with the above linked blog is the excessive Alex Jones worship… the rest, take the info for what its worth)

PS: Been working very long hours prepping and painting a house, so my activity has been a bit lacking. However, we have a new author signed up and I hope to be reading more from him in the near future. Thanks to Ed for taking up some slack as Dr Doug and I work our old asses off on these houses (and a special thanks goes out to Dr Doug!). LOL

Damn, Dylan

My hero for a day…

… only problem is that the president is in on the “extraction”. He has no plans, whatsoever, to come out and tell the American citizenry that they are being robbed. He is one of the robbers.

Follow @BuelahMan

If you like what you see here at The Revolt, please subscribe via Email subscription or by the RSS Feed button found on the upper right hand corner of this page and/or hit the Share Button at the bottom of the post to share via various means.

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

1.5% of The Population Control It All

I remember (in the not-so-distant past) an all hat, no cattle Yale graduate who surrounded himself with Zionist Jews in positions of vast control in our government. I even listed many of these criminals (many are/were “dual citizens” with Israel) in a blog post here. I have been assembling the current administration’s “Jewish List” and then saw a very good post at The Ether Zone which lays out a nice encompassing listing of Jews and/or Zionists that are in the Democratic Obama Administration.

Please read the entire article linked below:

Hollow Christianity

Death To Freedom

by: Al Cronkite

Besides the point made about evangelical Christians in America who fall all over themselves supporting a really stupid and erroneous theology and besides the similar experiences I have had with Mr Cronkite, it was the lists that I wanted to share with you.

My rant is not about religion, it is about the lies and control of Israel over our country and our sycophantic leaderships never-ending kowtowing to Zionism’s directives.

I want some sane person to explain to me how it is mathematically possible for 1.5% of the US population to hold so much power in a country? Is it simply the false meme that Jews are smarter than everyone else? If that were true, one must explain the idiotic shit we do as a nation. The point is that it doesn’t matter which “party” is in control, Zionism and blind allegiance to Israel and its Fascist directions will reign.

But is that good for America, as many Dispensationalist Christians seem to swallow from the likes of Hagey and other preachers, not to mention almost EVERY political congressperson alive? Just look at this list and realize that even your favorite “libertarian” is a supporter of Israel and Zionism, apparently, for they (at this point in time) are indistinguishable. It holds for EVERY Republican POTUS candidate:

They (Zionist Jews) control our media, they control our money, they are dominate in business circles, and will determine the identity of the 2012 Republican Presidential candidate.   Michele Bachman, Sarah Palin, and Mike Huckabee are all fanatical Dispensational supporters of Israel, Mitt Romney is a Mormon, Barber, Giuliani and Gingrich are tired pragmatic politicians who would (and have) sell (or sold) the country down the drain for less than thirty pieces of silver.  All of these power seekers have been to Israel for conferences with Prime Minister Netanyahu.   Both Ron Paul and his son, Rand, support Israel. Gingrich, Romney, and Jon Huntsman have condemned Obama for “throwing Israel under the bus”, Gary Johnson has met with Netanyahu and supports Israel and Rick Santorum has called for a holy war.

Yes, even that radical, Gary Johnson, knows where the real butter is for his bread. Just look at those fools in that list and understand that they will have allegiance to Israel and Zionism, but they don’t give half a rat’s ass about you or even the country they hail from.

But, let’s not simply focus on “that side” of the monstrous false two-party paradigm system. The fact is that Obama’s administration and almost each and every democrat, too, is in bed with the Zionist Jew money bag machinery:

Rahm Emanuel – White House Chief of Staff; son of a Zionist terrorist; dual-citizen of Israel and America (Emanuel served in Israel’s military during the First Gulf War instead of the U.S. military)

Joe Biden – A self-proclaimed Zionist, Biden stated about Iran, “Israel can determine for itself—it’s a sovereign nation—what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else.”

Ron Klain – Chief of Staff to the Vice President.

Mona Sutphen – Deputy White House Chief of Staff; 2nd behind Rahm Emanuel.

David Axelrod – Special Adviser to the President.

Tim Geithner – Treasury Secretary, former President of the New York Fed’.

Paul Volcker – Chair of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (and former Chairman of the Fed).

Lawrence (Larry) Summers (Samuelson) – Director of the White House National Economic Council, Wall Street executive, and World Banker… no conflict of interest here, eh?

Jared Bernstein – Chief Economist and Economic Policy Adviser to the Vice President.

Gary Gensler – Chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Elena Kagan – Solicitor General of the United States, Department of Justice – and Obama’s new Supreme Court Nominee.

Sally Katzen – Major legal adviser to Obama-Biden.

Eric Lander and Harold E. Varmus – Co-Chairs of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science/Technology.

Ellen Moran – White House Director of Communications… which is why we don’t communicate!

Peter Orszag – Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Penny Pritzker – Obama’s National Finance Chair during election, billionare of the Chicago crime boss family, the Pritzkers.

Robert Reich – Economic adviser to Obama-Biden.

Dennis Ross – Obama’s Ambassador-At-Large in the (entire) Middle East, Obama’s “top envoy” (so a Zionist Jew is in charge of the Arab/Israeli Conflict).

Robert Rubin – Economic adviser to Obama-Biden, former Treasury Secretary, and ultra-greedy Wall Street crook.

Daniel B. Shapiro – Head of the Middle East Desk at the National Security Council (another Jew involved in foreign policy matters involving the Middle East); also a major Washington lobbyist.

Mary Schapiro – Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, served in every Presidential administration since Reagan, also an executive for Duke Energy and Kraft Foods meaning she regulates Wall Street as a Wall Street executive (what ever happened to conflicts of interest?).

Barney Frank – Chairman, United States House Committee on Financial Services.

Phil Schiliro – Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs, also Henry Waxman’s long-time Chief of Staff.

Neal Wolin – Deputy Secretary, U.S. Treasury Department.

Lael Brainard – Under Secretary, U.S. Treasury Department.

Richard C. Holbrooke – Special Envoy to Pakistan/Afghanistan.

Stuart Levey – Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.

Jason Furman – Deputy Director, Office of Management and Budget.

Jeffrey Zeints – Chief Performance Officer to streamline government and cut costs as well as Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget.

Sheila Bair – Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Karen Mills – Administrator, Small Business Administration.

Jon Leibowitz – Chairman, Federal Trade Commission.

Douglas H. Shulman – Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Neil M. Barofsky – Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP).

James B. Steinberg – Deputy Secretary of State, second in rank only to Hillary Clinton in foreign policy matters.

Jacob Lew – Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, second in rank only to Hillary Clinton in foreign policy matters.

Jeffrey D. – Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (Includes Mideast).

Lee Feinstein – Foreign Policy Advisor.

Eric Lynn – Middle East Policy Advisor (again, a Zionist Jew advising on Arab affairs?).

Dennis Ross – Special Advisor for the Gulf (Iran) and Southwest Asia to the Secretary of State.

Steven L. Rattner – Director, Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry .

Kenneth R. Feinberg – Special Master for Compensation, U.S. Treasury Department.

Mara Rudman – Foreign Policy Advisor.

Julius Genachowski – Chair, Federal Communications Commission.

Dr. Margaret Hamburg – Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration.

Dr. Joshua Sharfstein – Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration.

Susan Sher – Chief of Staff for First Lady Michelle Obama.

Dr. Thomas R. Frieden – Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Neal S. Wolin – Deputy Secretary of the Treasury.

Michael S. Barr – Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions.

David S. Cohen – Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing.

Christina D. Romer (white) – Married to Jewish husband David H. Romer, Chairman, Council of Economic Advisers.

Douglas W. Elmendorf - Director, Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Jon D. Leibowitz – Chairman, Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Sheila C. Bair – Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) .

John E. Bowman – Director, Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS).

Karen G. Mills – Administrator, Small Business Administration (SBA).

Mary L. Schapiro – Chairman, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Gary G. Gensler - Chairman, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Daniel J. Roth – President and Chief Executive Officer, National Futures Association (NFA).

Duncan L. Niederauer – Chief Executive Officer & Director, NYSE Euronext.

Robert Greifeld – Chief Executive Officer, NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.

Lloyd C. Blankfein – Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

Robert B. Zoellick – President, The World Bank.

Stephen Roach – Manageing Director and Economist of Morgan Stanley.

Martin Feldstein – Director of American International Group (AIG).

Alan Fishman - CEO of Washington Mutual.

George Soros – Major player in all things, Quantum (hedge) Fund.

Matthew Kabaker – Deputy Assistant Secretary, Counselor to the Secretary.

Lewis Alexander – Counselor to the Secretary.

Lee Sachs – Counselor to the Secretary.

Jake Siewert – Counselor to the Secretary.

Gene Sperling – Counselor to the Secretary.

Ben Shalom Bernanke – Chairman, Federal Reserve.

Donald L. Kohn – Vice Chairman.

Kevin M. Warsh – Married to Jewish wife Jane Lauder.

Eric S. Rosengren – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Charles I. Plosser – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

Jeffrey M. Lacker – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.

James B. Bullard – President, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

Gary H. Stern – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

Thomas M. Hoenig – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

Richard W. Fisher – President, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

Janet L. Yellen – President, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

Regulatory Czar – Cass Sunstein.

Pay Czar – Kenneth Feinberg.

Guantanomo/Military Czar – Daniel Fried.

Car Czar – Steven Rattner.

Border Czar – Alan Bersin.

Climate Czar - Todd Stern.

Global Warming Czar - Carol Browner – Socialist International, that advocates “global governance.” Not Jewish, but very supportive of Zionist and communist/socialist ideals —-this is only a partial list.   Read more here.

Obviously, these people are all over the leadership and administration, but look at who controls the money (as in Big Banks and the Federal Reserve offices). You can call me whatever name you so desire (anti-Semite or whatever), but for any legitimacy in that claim, you better explain how it is possible for such a small number of people (Zionists and Jews, or Zionist-Jews) to have so much control and to be in the halls of this country’s leadership. Frankly, the math doesn’t work. The odds are not there, which means the “fix” is in. In other words, these people are getting leadership roles (at the very least, they get the ears of those who ARE actual leaders) but there aren’t enough of them to support their numbers in any legitimate way.

But I’ll wait until someone can correct me and my math.

The work quoted was:

“Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.”

If you like what you see here at The Revolt, please subscribe via Email subscription or by the RSS Feed button found on the upper right hand corner of this page and/or hit the Share Button at the bottom of the post to share via various means.

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

B’Man’s Redneck Watch: Rep Steve Cohen

Have you ever seen someone struggle so hard to not look like a total, lying tool when they know how obvious it is that they look like a total, lying tool?

When he was asked about this, he said, “I dont know who got everybody’s panties in a wad over this statement.”

Altho a jew, he is a 4th generation Memphian and can obviously be called a redneck.

We Are The Patriots…They Are The Terrorists

It’s all about the divide and how you and I keep falling into line with it. Even those of us who see the reality of the false paradigm have long held, brain-washed ideologies that can be difficult to break. It is ingrained in us, but that doesn’t make it impossible to break.

Every President since Kennedy has been hand picked by the Trilateral Commission. As a matter of fact, every candidate on either Party that made a November election were members of the Trilateral Commission and hand-picked to be the POTUS. The Elitists within this group doesn’t give a rat’s ass who wins, for they are all owned puppets and will carry forward the agenda prescribed for them.

Kennedy was the last POTUS to not be a member of this group and see what it got him.

But the world gobbles it up. White against blackany color, Rep vs Dem, Abortionist against Right to life, Liberal vs conservative, sugar vs hugh fructose corn syrup, just name it and claim your “side”.

Fall into the divide and help keep it that way. Focus your efforts on the “side” you dislike the most, barrage the Tea Partiers with your “progressive” rage, defend the current POTUS in lieu of all the bald faced lies he said to get elected, because God knows John and the reTHUGlicans would be worse (worse than what, B’Man asks). You think Papa Walnuts (as my buddy Tengrain calls him) would “bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”? You think he would have pulled the troops out of Iraq just to send them to Afghanistan? You think he would have put Big Money and Big Banking in their place? Do you REALLY believe there would be ANY damned difference, except the color of their skin?

Seriously, in your need to protect and defend your favorite “side”, can you NOT see they are playing you like a fool? Have you not the mental ability to know when you are being conned? Being played as a chump?

We MUST stop this shit. We must disallow them control over our every thought.

And it doesn’t help to keep silent… to not rock the boat. To just get along.

Complacency is as bad as participation in their circus.

We MUST stand up and as a nation of patriots (not Sheople) and take back the Republic. I am telling you that one of the fastest ways is to never vote R or D again. Of course, you cannot allow the thieves to leave R or D and gain control of any other “Party”, as the Tea Partiers are wont to do.

We can start anew, but it will take a concerted effort that is NOT impossible. IF enough people feel the real pain.

I feel it.

Do you?

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Bushies = Obama Maniacs

There is no real difference between these two kowtowing groups of non-thinking, ass-kissing sycophants. And the news sources simply re-shuffle to feed the Bogus Two Party Beast from hell. The latest is Rachel Maddow and her Democratic party protectionist program (shared on facebook by Terri Lee):

BEWARE (AND BE AWARE) OF RACHEL MADDOW’S “SHOW” AND HER POLITICAL AGENDA: LOTSA LOTS FUN AND LASER BEAM FOCUS ON THE CRAZIESS

RACHEL’S AGENDA: LOTSA FUN AND AN EXTEME FOCUS ON EXTREMISTS

On Rachel’s last show in 2009 she revealed the exact focus and agenda of her info-show. She told viewers precisely what she has focused on in her 2009 reporting and that she will continue to focus on that in 2010.

I will state it again here:

The precise purpose of The Rachel Maddow Show’s is to shine a big bright spotlight on the nuttiest of the nuts located in the right wing political spectrum and to entertain you while doing so.

It was not any psychic prowess which permitted me to know this. Rachel stated it for all to hear. Did you catch it?

In the last few minutes of Rachel’s last “show” in 2009 she stated:

“I am very proud of the investigatory work that we have done on this show. In 2010 we’re going to keep shining a light on the preposterousness in our political midst because we think it’s the right thing to do for our country and because it’s really, really fun.”

And regarding more about the fun aspect (for her and for you so that the corporate fat cats are well fed) she also states that she “wants to have a really good time” on television. And she is. And so are her viewers.

Rachel is having a lot of fun with her show and on her show, for sure. But, is what she does really the right thing to do for our country? What if Rachel had changed the word “country” to “party”? If she had said instead, ” ….we think it’s the right thing to do for our party [Democrats]…” I think her statement would have more genuine. What she is doing it seems is right for her party — but, is it right for our country as she states?

But is what is disguised as the evening news the place for you to have your fun? Do we really need entertainment embedded and wed to news reporting. If not, then let’s agree that it’s a show of entertainment first and provides information secondarily.

RACHEL’S NICHE

She also revealed her show’s focus and agenda in the very beginning of her show when she stated:

“We found a very specific Rachel Maddow show niche. We found what it is that this show specializes in…..Imagine, that the right wing is like a rug. Right? And on the far edge of that rug is fringe. Now imagine that that fringe also has fringe. The fringe on the fringe on the right wing of the American Conservative Movement…This mini-mission we’ve taken on of talking about the fringe of American politics….”

If that’s Rachel’s “niche” (or the media strategy for the D’s) then what is Chris Matthews agenda? Ed’s? Each one must serve a purpose that all together serve the Democrats political agenda. Rachel has already directly declared what part of the strategy and Dem media agenda she owns. The others must have theirs too.

THE FRINGE OF THE FRINGE OF THE FRINGE

There is tremendous benefit for the Democrats to focus on the nuttiest of the nuts on the right. It serves many political purposes, but it doesn’t really help out the ordinary voter at all.

Focusing the crazies does this:

1. Makes it appear as if the entire GOP is composed of the ‘fringe of the fringe’.
2. Focusing on the fringe of the fringe — keeps D’s united through fear. (We’re so petrified of those crazies, that we’d better cling to each other and the D’s — even if they disappoint us or fail us! Otherwise, these nutters will rule!!! Hold my hand!)
3. It triggers an emotive and visceral reaction.
4. It helps construct a false dichotomy/contrast on personality which takes the focus off of policy:
R’s = insanity
D’s = normal, sane
5. It aids with fundraising. (D’s — give money today or the R’s will get in!)
6. And the most troubling thing it does is this: IT KEEPS THE DEMS FROM CRITICAL SELF-ANALYSIS

OVERFOCUSING ON THE FAR RIGHT IS VERY FUNCTIONAL FOR THE DEMS AND SERVES A MULTIPLE POLITICAL PURPOSES.

So, here’s a question to pose for Rachel Maddow: Rachel, if you like the fringe of the fringe of the fringe so much, why not focus on the other side of the political spectrum?

If Maddow focuses on the ideas of the left, it would be very sobering. It would be less ‘emotive’ the ideas, solutions, remedies, would make sense.

Ratings would likely go down.

It would be a lot less ‘fun’. The entertainment value might even be zero.

And, it might even get viewers to consider real solutions to real problems and gain a genuine sense of hope, optimism, and possibility.

And we all know how dangerous that is. Rachel is assisting the Dems by keeping voters fearful, trembling, worried, paralyzed and all while being entertained.

Her work must please the Democrats and her corporate sponsors very much.

Again, this is the revealing Rachel Maddow Show I’m referring to (watch for yourself):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show#34637564

Just a quick head’s up to explain that I have been in the hospital and behind on posting/replying. A weird Blood pressure medicine thing.

Also note that in an effort to regain my health, I have lost over 50 pounds via a carb-free diet and working out.

I feel great right now.

If Liz Were Queen, We Would Undermine The Entire Process

I read at a place called “If Liz Were Queen“. Nice blog, especially when it comes to the health care/health insurance issues/debate/giveaway. She explains why the Tea Partiers Are Clueless To What Is Really Wrong With The Health Care Legislation:

WHAT IS REALLY WRONG WITH THIS BILL?

IT FORCES 50 MILLION AMERICANS TO BUY AN INSURANCE PRODUCT FROM KNOWN CROOKS!

IT IS NOT “SOCIALIZED” MEDICINE. These people are just repeating what the Republican leadership have told them to say–people like Chuck Grassley who have done nothing but lie about the content of the bill.

IT IS WALL STREET CORPORATE PREDATOR MEDICINE.

IT HAS NO SAFEGUARD OF ANOTHER CHOICE, ANOTHER PLACE OTHER THAN WALL STREET FOR AMERICANS TO GO TO PURCHASE THEIR INSURANCE.  IT HAS NO PUBLIC OPTION.

IT IS NOT A “GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER” YOU FOOLS!  IT IS JUST ANOTHER WALL STREET TAKEOVER.

Her Highness provided a youtube clip of a young student as he interviews various partiers and gets their incoherent and erroneous responses.

[youtube=

Doesn’t that just say it all? Is it just me, but wouldn’t it make just a bit more sense if these people actually knew what they hell they were protesting? And let me just say right here and now, if you have the audacity to wear a GW Bush hat after those 8 years, you are totally beyond any hope. Its like a Bush bumper sticker on your car: surely you are so embarrassed by your two votes that put that imbecile (and his evil handler, Dick) in office, that you long ago scraped that off (even if the paint or the bumper, itself, had to go).

If this is what it means to be in a Tea party, ya’ll can have it.

Her Highness also points out that the Republicans May Have The Tables Turned On Them Over Health Care In November:

For certain it will be the Republicans from poor areas who don’t endorse the health care bill who will suffer the most.

Yep that’s how it’s shaping up.  Many of the Republicans who long touted that  the Democrats will lose the House and the Senate if they vote for health care reform look like they could lose out in November if they vote against the health care bill.

Virginia Foxx, a Republican Congresswoman from the 5th Congressional District of North Carolina might be ammong the Republican casualties in November…

Wouldn’t that be great, except that it could get much, MUCH better than putting Corporately owned and controlled Democrats such as Dennis Kucinich back in the office where they, like the Senate’s Bernie Sanders, can simply back off from principle and promises because standing for what is right might “Undermine The Entire Process“. Well, duh, you damned old fool. That is exactly what needs to be done. Disrupt the giveaway and make the system right. So, with this kowtowing remark, we lost the only seemingly sensible Senator we had.

They ALL suck.

Let us acknowledge that and get rid of every damned one of them next election cycle.

Simply do NOT vote another incumbent and ignore the two parties. For even the “Independent” Bernie Sanders has no spine after being in for so long.

They ALL must go.

If Democrats really get serious about real health care reform as Harry Reid has promised and pass the public option in the next couple of months, it’s all over for the Republicans in November.

The Democratic health  care reform would have the full support of 82% of the American people.

The Republican liars like Ghuck Grassley with his lies about “death panels” and other Republican poliiticians with their lies about the bill supporting abortion could very well be toast.

But if the Democrats are not careful and do not support a strong public option they can lose as well–not to Republicans, but to independents.  More and more Americans are beginning to get the ties of Congress–both Republicans and Democrats–to Wall Street.  We are not so dumb that we don’t get the connection between 50 million forced Wall Street Health Insurance customers and the stock portfolios of the 263 multimillionaires in Congress.

REPORT: BuelahMan Urges Obama To Step Down

In a report picked up by no one, the always pertinent BuelahMan asked President Barack Obama to step down from his position of President of the United States due to his total lack of truth and the basis that virtually everything he told America in the run up to his election was a damned lie. Not that BuelahMan was fooled regarding the lies and deceit the black man from Hawaii spewed, but he did hold out hope that the man would turn out to be something that he obviously was not: truthful and noble.

It is apparent that the Single Party system of bogusness that we pretend is honorable and right has turned out to be just another Elitist system of control and thievery. With such a criminally active administration set to continue the previous skull and crossbones’ minion’s attack on our freedoms, rights and intelligence, it is imperative that you step down from your position, Mr President, because you, like the previous scumbags, are a detrimnet to our security and well being as Americans.

You have shown yourself nothing more than a puppet of Big Money: kowtowing to every initiative THEY tell you to pursue and stopping the truly helpful initiatives for Americans.

You see, Mr President: We Know Who You Are. A Big Insurance Clown. A Big Military Buffoon. A Big Banking Bitch.

The right-wing fruitcakes have their little bullshit nothingness to continue the confusion (playing their part in the play precisely as they are intended… not by participation, but by wholecloth stupidity). The left-wing fruitcakes who are still enamored that a half-black guy who lies with impunity will continue their idiotic worship and allow the right-wing fruitcakes to strangle any good, honorable and decent initiatives (like Single Payer healthcare) to a slow and painful death.

So, Mr President with no scruples or truth contained, it is time for you to step down from your seat of malicious control of NON- change.

For, just like your request of Governor Paterson of New York to step down, it is apparent that you will not be elected again. That is, if America can awaken from its idiotic slumber of right-wing freaktastic following or the left-wing idol worship of a liar and crook.

When Did Obama Become “Liberal” and Bush “Conservative”?

My blog is neither “right”, nor “left”; “liberal”, nor “conservative”, “Dem”, nor “Rep”. You can tell that by how I hold them all accountable and would never defend the paradigm either wants me to defend, just for defense sake. You will read me attack the so-called “liberal” blogs that are nothing more than Ass-Kissing Sycophants, just as much as the “conservative” Ass-Kissing Sycophants.

I visited (by accident) a blog called The Provocateur, who’s owner (I assume), or at least one of the bloggers there (Mike Volpe) wrote the following article (I must say well written, altho he is truly far off base in his analysis. He was kind enough to let this gruff old bear share a few words with him that didn’t get too heated, but were poignant and significant for the paradigm he is trapped in. I am tryng desperately to speak with these people (being I am from SW TN and around many of these people daily). I am a conundrum for them and was even called a “Paulian” (when perhaps “Kucinichian” is a bit more apt). I like Paul for his anti-war conservatism, but Dennis is just as anti-war as Paul is, maybe more.

Check out the dialog at the end to see how it ended up and let me know if you think it is worth the time online (for in person, things are generally easier to express face to face).

The Obama Presidency and Liberalism

I think it’s fair to say that the Obama presidency could be viewed as a controlled experiment on the worthiness of liberalism. With a very liberal president and overwhelming Democratic majorities, America is going to get a heavy dose of liberalism until at least 2010. (unless that is the President has a moderate epiphany as I suggested) Yet, if the president continues on his current path, he will also lead an imprint for history to judge liberalism in America.

So far, that judgment is incomplete but it’s also near an incomplete failure. We first started with the stimulus. On the economy, the president famously said, “only government has the resources to jolt our economy back into life”. He went on to say, “Tax cuts alone can’t solve all of our economic problems” and so totally rejecting the conservative fiscal solution to an economic recession. Nothing could be more liberal than seeing the government as the driver of economic growth. So, he passed his $787 billion stimulus. Its results so far have been well documented. Our unemployment rate is inching toward ten percent. Our deficit is nearing two trillion dollars and we’ve only spent one tenth of it. Meanwhile, the president took over several banks, two auto companies, and an insurance company. One way or another, the outcome of all this government intervention will also be a historical judgment on liberalism as well.

In fact, though, the greatest judgment against liberalism so far has been the president’s total inability to move his agenda going forward. In fact, despite overwhelming popularity, he barely got the stimulus through. Since then, he’s been totally impotent. Things don’t look to get any better. Cap and trade barely passed the House and the Senate has no plans to take it up anytime soon. Health care reform is in even worse shape. What sort of a judgment on liberalism is it if the liberal party has veto proof majorities in both chambers and still can’t pass a liberal agenda? One might ask if liberalism can’t pass now when will it pass.

Even lesser known policies like his $75 billion loan modification plan have been colossal failures. It’s important to point out again that this judgment is still incomplete. The economy could have a stunning turnaround and by this time next year our unemployment might be in the 6′s. GM and Chrysler might both be profitable by 2012 and the government will have sold its shares by then. In light of all of this, the president will then be able to pass sweeping health care, energy, and education reform. In 2012, we’ll be a liberal nation and history’s judgment on liberalism in America will be a glowing success. It’s still early and so the judgment is incomplete.

There will also be those liberals that will claim that the Bush presidency was a failing referendum on conservatism. That is a popular and totally inaccurate argument. There are some liberals that claim the tax cuts caused the recession we are in now. That’s just ludicrous. The tax cuts were enacted in 2001-2003. The recession didn’t occur for five years. The two have nothing to do with each other. Others proclaim that deregulation caused the meltdown. Of course, it wasn’t a lack of regulation but a lack of enforcement that lead to the crisis. It isn’t a conservative policy to look the other way on mass fraud, but a bad policy. In fact, most of Bush’s biggest problems came from embracing liberal ideas, big budget deficits, bloated government programs and bailouts. In fact, history’s judgment on conservatism should already be written with the wildly successful Reagan presidency. Yet, those with an agenda attempt to cloud the issue. Our economy came out of a recession because government shrank, regulations were slashed, and taxes were cut. Yet, some cloud the issue and leave that debate open still.

Make no mistake, by November 2010, and certainly November 2012, history will be ready to judge liberalism as well. While its currently incomplete, the judgment so far is a total failure.

B: If you think Obama is a liberal, you don’t know what the word means.

mike volpe: Enlighten me, how am I wrong? What does the word mean and who was and is a liberal if not Obama?

B: He voted lockstep with Bush’s policies and McCain during the POTUS run.

It is but one party with two perceived differences, but in actuality, it is the detriment to our country.

They do and act the same… both “liberal” and “conservative”, “right” vs “left” Dem vs Repub; and only the ignorant feed from it and agree.

This isn’t rocket science, yet too many are too gullible and/or brainwashed to know the difference. Much to my chagrin and the consternation of the Founding Fathers.

mike volpe: Bush wasn’t actually acting like much of a conservative in the last six months. Obama certainly didn’t vote in lock step the whole campaign. They did in the last couple months but that’s because Bush turned into a liberal in the last few months.

B: Mike,

Come now. Bush was never conservative, except in the “shiny little object that gathers your attention” realm. Abortion (even tho he wasn’t die hard) is one of those wedge issues they use to divide us, but that is meaningless.

Bush spent money like a drunken sailor. This is no secret. He lied to get us into wars to propagate the war profiteers and the PNAC agenda.

Mike, what I am saying is that they have their kabuki dance that many Americans fall for. But by and large it is bogus.

There is but one really socially liberal in the all of congress: Dennis Kucinich (and Bernie Sanders). There is but one truly fiscally conservative in the all of congress and that is Paul.

Most every other dance the dance. Look at their votes, especially the leaders. Every so-called “liberal” leader voted lock-step on the most prescient issues. Every Republican leader voted lock step with war funding, eliminating rights left and right.

All of this is obvious.

Follow the money and the votes.

I view myself as fiscally conservative, but look how Bush spent the money. Sure, he cut back the taxes on the wealthy and look what that got us. But he spent money on ginned up and bogus wars.

I am Socially liberal, in that I believe that each and every American should be taken care of as our own. Especially medically.

They all bow to the Corptocracy, verging on Fascism. Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, and Obama. All the same, with just enough of the kabuki dance differences to keep Americans divided and fighting (thanks to the likes of Hannity, Limbaugh, Olberman and the like). They all play for their masters and we are too stupid to make them stop.

Obama spends money in the same fashion and look at his rhetoric regarding abortion and gay rights, etc. Telecom immunity. Patriot Act.

These are NOT liberal views, but just the portrayal of the dance.

Please stop watching the magician’s right hand, because it is the left hand that holds the secret. Americans are fixated on the sleight of hand.

Patriots will know the difference and speak to it.

Read my blog some and you will realize I cut NONE of them any slack because they are all full of malarkey.

Again, Opensecrets can show you so very much. Follow the money.

Thanks for your time…

B’Man

mike volpe: Now it all makes sense. You’re a Paulian. That’s why you are so conspiratoria.

That doesn’t mean that Obama is NOT a liberal. Obama is still a iberal and frankly you proved it, you just seem to think that the rest of the government is also liberal. That’s true to some extent though not entirely. Of course, I wasn’t talk about the rest of government. I was only talking about Obama.

B: Mike,

I am not “Paulian”, whatever you think that is. Do you deny that he is conservative? The MOST conservative in all the congress?

Look at the votes and where they get their money.

Let me explain something that you can’t seem to grasp, spending money on bogus wars does not make one “liberal”, it makes one a criminal.

War profiteering is that. A crime, and all of the past presidents, since Kennedy are guilty.

Allowing the Federal reserve to rule this country is not “liberal” or “conservative”, it is criminal.

Just as I said, you don’t know what the word means, except in the mind of Limbaugh.

I can enlighten you, but you may be too far gone.

That isn’t surprising, for it is rampant on both “sides” that fall for their show.

Enjoy the show Mike, but as for this real Patriot, I’m working to to fix things. I need your help, but not if you can’t shuck the brainwashing.

Take care,

B’Man

PS: If you will not delete these posts, I would love to link back to forward the discussion and to show that it is possible to have a decent conversation with a person like you. Few and far between.

UPDATE:

OK, I tried and it shows that the ignorance runs so deep that it is likely impossible to have any meaningful discussion with such a personality:

mike volpe: By Paulian, I mean you voted for and supported Ron Paul. I am guessing you did given how cynical you are toward everyone except Paul. Yeah, Paul is a conservative except when it comes to earmarks for his district and then he’s very liberal. It’s funny how that works. He’s ideologically pure except when it comes to pork in his district and then he’s one of the most liberal folks in the Congress.

It’s easy to be ideologically pure when you’re a back bencher legislator your entire career and never lead to get a law passed. When you’re actually passing laws, you have to legislate and then it’s much more difficult. That’s the main difference between McCain and Paul. McCain actually got things done while in the Senate while Paul criticized everyone else and got nothing done. He is ideologically pure though. That’s why not a single law has his name on it.

As for war profiteering and the fed, I know the conspiracy theories. Libertarians are full of them and it’s corrosive to the philosophy.

http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2009/06/libertarians-downfall-conspiracy.html

What’s The Worst That Can Happen?

This story tells it all. A young mother with two children who was lied to about her mortgage and now is about to lose her home, after delving into her children’s college fund and now her son is going to join the Marines. He saw the TV commercials and website and it looks cool.

And he asks, “What’s the worst that can happen?” (said with a sadness that tears my heart out, for you can tell by the look on his face that he KNOWS precisely what the worst that could happen would be). They all know:

Road to Ruin: Burned by Brokers

h/t Real News Network

“Hopefully this will be my way out to a better future.”

That says it all, doesn’t it? That people are relegated to an only choice of joining the military.

This is no accident.

What’s The Deal With Politicians and Their Little Goobers

Is it possible that all politicians have a control problem with their goobers? h/t Jonathon Turley:

Democrat Tim Mahoney Snared in Sex Scandal Only Two Years After Replacing Mark Foley

The Democrats may have just lost a seat that was going for them. Florida Democratic Rep. Tim Mahoney, who replaced Mark Foley after his page scandal, is now embroiled in his own sex scandal. That is fast work for a politician. Foley only resigned in 2006. In D.C., it usually takes an average of three years for members in engage in a lobbyist scandal, five years for a sex scandal and ten years for a criminal conspiracy.

Following a standard political response, Mahoney has asked for the House ethics committee to investigate his own behavior. This is a standard move since (1) your opponents will do so anyway and (2) the congressional ethics rules are written so loosely by the members themselves that most anything short of a murder in plain view is deemed (in the double negative world of Washington) “not unethical.”

ABC News reported that Mahoney (who is married with kids) had an affair with with Patricia Allen during his campaign in 2006 and then hired her for his congressional office. He is accused of giving her $121,000 to avoid a sexual harassment lawsuit and arranging for a job with the company that handles his campaign ads.

For the full story, click here.

Wasting Resources

Talk about wasting resources– BRING THE TROOPS HOME!
Sadly, we all now know [or should know] that we have way overreacted to 9/11 by committing innocent lives to Iraq and destroying many civilians while spending billions of dollars, risking our entire economy, jeopardizing relations with allies around the world, and last but not least distracting our focus for 5 years from finding alternative forms of energy, saving our planet, reaching health care solutions and improving life for all? What if we had not been sidetracked by President Bush’s decision and just gone to Afghanistan and Pakistan to find to really criminals? Where would America be today? Let’s not ALLOW those 9/11 terrorists to hurt us with distractions anymore. WE, with votes and voice NEED TO End the war in Iraq now… not in 2011, 2012 or later. Let’s focus on domestic issues and world peace!

Soon son, soon.

Our Children and theirs too

Can You Answer his question?

The Essential problems with Palin

Think of an American president being inaugurated. What image comes to mind?

Almost certainly this one, eh?

This picture embodies what is perhaps the essential difference between the qualifications for the presidency and the qualifications for the vice presidency. In a perfect world, we would all like a president who is Ready on Day One (TM); it is not uncommon for a newly-elected president to face a major crisis almost immediately upon taking office. But more commonly, a president takes the Oath of Office under relatively calm waters, allowing them something of a learning curve.

On the other hand, when a vice president takes over for a president, the nation is necessarily undergoing a crisis, because the death (or resignation) of a president is perhaps as traumatic an event as can reasonably be imagined (in the “best” case resulting from a slowly-developing illness, and the worst, an attack by terrorists or foreign adversaries).

From Lincoln though Clinton, Americans have frequently been willing to gamble on a relatively inexperienced President, exchanging some assurances of near-term readiness for longer-term upside (what might be described as “vision”). But the optimal skill set for a vice president is somewhat different. “Vision” hardly matters; a vice president taking over for a president will not get to name his own cabinet, and will initially at least be left to execute upon somebody else’s agenda. Instead, the readiness component is rendered more important.

I suspect most Americans grasp this on a gut level, even if they aren’t quite able to articulate it. Which is why, to my gut instinct, I think Americans can feel sympathy for Sarah Palin, can believe she’s the sort of person they’d want to have a beer with — and still find her a detriment to McCain’s case for the White House.

Article Washington Post>
Palin’s Pregnancy Problem
My first reaction was shock. Then anger. John McCain chose a running mate simply because she is a woman and one who appealed to the Republican’s conservative evangelical base. Now, with news that Palin’s 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant, McCain’s pick may not even find support among “family values” voters.
It has happened before, of course. Geraldine Ferraro was chosen as the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 1984 because she was a woman, but that was 24 years ago. I thought we were past this. Apparently not. McCain’s choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate is a cynical and calculated move. It is a choice made to try to win an election. It is a political gimmick. And it’s very high risk. I find it insulting to women, to the Republican party, and to the country.
This is nothing against Palin. From what little we know about her, she seems to be a bright, attractive, impressive person. She certainly has been successful in her 44 years. But is she ready to be president?
And now we learn the 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is pregnant. She and the father of the child plan to marry. This may be a hard one for the Republican conservative family-values crowd to swallow. Of course, this can happen in any family. But it must certainly raise the question among the evangelical base about whether Sarah Palin has been enough of a hands-on mother.
McCain claims he knew about the pregnancy, and was not at all concerned. Why not? Not only do we have a woman with five children, including an infant with special needs, but a woman whose 17-year-old child will need her even more in the coming months. Not to mention the grandchild. This would inevitably be an enormous distraction for a new vice president (or president) in a time of global turmoil. Not only in terms of her job, but from a media standpoint as well.
McCain’s cynical choice has created a dilemma for many women. For still-angry Hillary Clinton voters, they will have to decide if they want to vote against their concscience and political interests by voting to elect a Republican woman who’s even more conservative than McCain.
Evangelical women also will have to decide if they will vote against their conscience by voting to put the mother of young children in a job outside the home that will demand so much of her time and energy.
Southern Baptist leaders like Richard Land and Al Mohler have praised McCain’s choice. But these are the same men who support this statement from the 2000 Baptist Faith & Message:
“A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.”
Palin’s lack of experience and her family situation are both valid and vital considerations here, especially when she will be running with a 72-year-old presidential candidate who has suffered four bouts of a deadly cancer.
And by the way, how can McCain call Barack Obama unqualified, inexperienced, not ready from Day One, not able to be commander in chief, and then put someone like Palin in a position that is a heartbeat away from the pesidency?
I don’t blame Palin for accepting the position. How could she or anyone turn down such an opportunity? I was once in a similar position. After four years of reporting at the Washington Post, I was chosen by CBS to be the first network anchorwoman in America, to co-anchor their Morning News. I had never been on TV a day in my life. I was 32. There were women at CBS who were much more qualified than I was and certainly other men. They chose me because they wanted a woman. I didn’t even want the job, but I didn’t feel I could turn it down. Of course it was a disaster. I lasted four months. I wasn’t ready for Network TV. Palin isn’t ready to be leader of the free world.
The calculation on the part of the McCain people is clear. Palin’s candidacy could draw some of the 18-million Hillary Clinton voters who are not happy she lost and who want to vote for a woman on a national ticket. Palin is not of Washington and that will be appealing to some. Most importantly for McCain, Palin is decidedly anti-abortion and that will keep the Republican base under control and appeal to some evangelicals who might be considering Obama. She has a son who is headed to Iraq.
Those are positives for a McCain-Palin ticket, but what about the negatives?
She has no national political experience, especially in the area of foreign policy. That fact that she is not of Washington also will be difficult for her. Barbara Bush once told me that her husband had been a congressman, UN ambassador, ambassador to China, and head of the CIA and they thought they were prepared for the vice presidency (under President Reagan). But she said nothing can prepare you for the criticism and scrutiny of being in the White House. Sarah Palin is not prepared for that.
Is she prepared for the all-consuming nature of the job? She is the mother of five children, one of them a four-month-old with Down Syndrome. Her first priority has to be her children. When the phone rings at three in the morning and one of her children is really sick what choice will she make? I’m the mother of only one child, a special needs child who is grown now. I know how much of my time and energy I devoted to his care. He always had to be my first priority. Of course women can be good mothers and have careers at the same time. I’ve done both. Yes, other women in public office have children. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has five children, but she didn’t get heavily involved in politics until they were older. A mother’s role is different from a father’s.
These are dangerous and trying times for the entire world. This is no time to to play gender politics. The stakes are too high. And given McCain’s age and history of health issues, the stakes for choosing a qualified vice presidential candidate have never been higher.
Maybe this will work. Maybe McCain will win with Sarah Palin as his running mate. But if he does, it will be for all the wrong reasons.
Source:http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/08/sarah_polin.html

No time for plan A again, time for a wedding now…lol

By Elisabeth Bumillerupdated 11:10 p.m. ET, Mon., Sept. 1, 2008
Palin disclosures raise questions about vetting
Alaskans say no one from McCain camp asked them about eventual VP pick

video report of over-shadowing questions at convention>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/26498199#26498199

may have to c/p into address bar… sorry.

[ well just a thought here folks…lol-- I guess since Palin appears to of had no time to think before saying yes to McInsane… her first plane to adopt this child too had to make a different turn…lol lol,…]

ST. PAUL – A series of disclosures about Gov. Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain’s choice as running mate, called into question on Monday how thoroughly Mr. McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.
On Monday morning, Ms. Palin and her husband, Todd, issued a statement saying that their 17-year-old unmarried daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant and that she intended to marry the father.
Among other less attention-grabbing news of the day: it was learned that Ms. Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state’s public safety commissioner; that she was a member for two years in the 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.
Aides to Mr. McCain said they had a team on the ground in Alaska now to look more thoroughly into Ms. Palin’s background. A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice.
Although the McCain campaign said that Mr. McCain had known about Bristol Palin’s pregnancy before he asked her mother to join him on the ticket and that he did not consider it disqualifying, top aides were vague on Monday about how and when he had learned of the pregnancy, and from whom.
While there was no sign that her formal nomination this week was in jeopardy, the questions swirling around Ms. Palin on the first day of the Republican National Convention, already disrupted by Hurricane Gustav, brought anxiety to Republicans who worried that Democrats would use the selection of Ms. Palin to question Mr. McCain’s judgment and his ability to make crucial decisions.
At the least, Republicans close to the campaign said it was increasingly apparent that Ms. Palin had been selected as Mr. McCain’s running mate with more haste than McCain advisers initially described.
A rushed pick?
Up until midweek last week, some 48 to 72 hours before Mr. McCain introduced Ms. Palin at a Friday rally in Dayton, Ohio, Mr. McCain was still holding out the hope that he could name as his running mate a good friend, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, a Republican close to the campaign said. Mr. McCain had also been interested in another favorite, former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania.
But both men favor abortion rights, anathema to the Christian conservatives who make up a crucial base of the Republican Party. As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering the men, the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates.
erhaps more important, several Republicans said, Mr. McCain was getting advice that if he did not do something to shake up the race, his campaign would be stuck on a potentially losing trajectory.
With time running out — and as Mr. McCain discarded two safer choices, Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, as too predictable — he turned to Ms. Palin. He had his first face-to-face interview with her on Thursday and offered her the job moments later.
“They didn’t seriously consider her until four or five days from the time she was picked, before she was asked, maybe the Thursday or Friday before,” said a Republican close to the campaign. “This was really kind of rushed at the end, because John didn’t get what he wanted. He wanted to do Joe or Ridge.”
Mr. McCain’s advisers said repeatedly on Monday that Ms. Palin was “thoroughly vetted,” a process that would have included a review of all financial and legal records as well as a criminal background check. A McCain aide said that the campaign was well aware of the ethics investigation and that it had looked into it.
People familiar with the process said Ms. Palin had responded to a standard form with more than 70 questions.
“It was obviously something that anybody Googling Sarah Palin knew was in the news and there was a very thorough vetting done on that and also on the daughter,” the aide said.
Locals say no one talked to them
Mark Salter, Mr. McCain’s closest adviser, said in an e-mail message that Ms. Palin had been interviewed by Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., a veteran Washington lawyer in charge of the vice-presidential vetting process for Mr. McCain, as well as by other lawyers who worked for Mr. Culvahouse. Mr. Salter did not respond to an e-mail message asking if Ms. Palin had told Mr. Culvahouse and his lawyers that her daughter was pregnant.
In Alaska, several state leaders and local officials said they knew of no efforts by the McCain campaign to find out more information about Ms. Palin before the announcement of her selection, Although campaigns are typically discreet when they make inquiries into potential running mates, officials in Alaska said Monday they thought it was peculiar that no one in the state had the slightest hint that Ms. Palin might be under consideration.
“They didn’t speak to anyone in the Legislature, they didn’t speak to anyone in the business community,” said Lyda Green, the State Senate president, who lives in Wasilla, where Ms. Palin served as mayor.
Representative Gail Phillips, a Republican and former speaker of the State House, said the widespread surprise in Alaska when Ms. Palin was named to the ticket made her wonder how intensively the McCain campaign had vetted her.
“I started calling around and asking, and I have not been able to find one person that was called,” Ms. Phillips said. “I called 30 to 40 people, political leaders, business leaders, community leaders. Not one of them had heard. Alaska is a very small community, we know people all over, but I haven’t found anybody who was asked anything.”
Trying to keep a secret
The current mayor of Wasilla, Dianne M. Keller, said she had not heard of any efforts to look into Ms. Palin’s background. And Randy Ruedrich, the state Republican Party chairman, said he knew nothing of any vetting that had been conducted.
State Senator Hollis French, a Democrat who is directing the ethics investigation, said that no one asked him about the allegations. “I heard not a word, not a single contact,” he said.
Mr. French, a former prosecutor, said that he was knowledgeable about background checks and that, he, too, was surprised that the campaign had not reached out to state legislative leaders.
A number of Republicans said the McCain campaign had to some degree tied its hands in its effort to keep the selection process so secret.
“If you really want it to be a surprise, the circle of people that you’re going to allow to know about it is going to be small, and that’s just the nature of it,” said Dan Bartlett, a former counselor to President Bush and an adviser in both of his presidential campaigns.
Former McCain strategists disagreed on whether it would have been useful for Ms. Palin’s name to have been more publicly floated before her selection so that issues like the trooper investigation and her daughter’s pregnancy might have already been aired and not seemed so new at the time of her announcement.
Catch-22
“Had the story been written about the state trooper three months ago, nobody would care about it anymore,” said Dan Schnur, a former McCain aide who now directs the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California. “It’s a risk. No matter how great the candidate, it’s a significant risk to put someone on the ticket” who hasn’t been publicly scrutinized.
“They obviously felt it was worth the risk to rev up the base and potentially reach out to Clinton supporters,” Mr. Schnur said.
But Howard Opinsky, another McCain veteran, said calling attention to Ms. Palin’s possible candidacy during the search process would have undermined the impact of her eventual selection.
“Had her name been played out in the press for months and months, she wouldn’t have been seen as so bold,” Mr. Opinsky said. “You either get freshness and you have to live with what you get in your vetting or you lose the freshness.”

The Party Hack That Is Michael Moore

The man has made some good movies that address some of the most important issues of our time. He was brave enough to question and present things that many don’t have the mind or resources to do. It ‘seemed’ to be noble as he called for universal healthcare and for working man’s rights, but it nows is “crazy” ? Has he changed like his candidate of choice changed? Does he care more about the Dem party than he does America? Or money? Apparently.

He has determined that Obama (who is opposed to his idea of Single payer, Universal healthcare) is the candidate to elect and if you choose Nader (who agrees 100% with his idea for healthcare), it is a waste and those who do it are crazy.

So, who is craziest? The person who votes for the issue that means the most to them (enough so to write, direct and produce a hit movie) or to vote for the person who says he is against your favorite issue?

Michael, You dumbass. Just how smart do you want me to think of you when you say such stupid shit?

Nevermind. I’ll just assume that you have been bought off like the rest.