Embarrassment of Riches

Posted Sunday, October 4, 2009, at 10:38 AM
View 30 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • *

    But you cheered nonetheless did you not?

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sun, Oct 4, 2009, at 12:39 PM
  • *

    But the question still remains, did you or did you not cheer that the United States lost out on the Olympics on purely political reasons?

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sun, Oct 4, 2009, at 2:11 PM
  • *

    Guillermo, while I certainly agree with what you are trying to say, please keep it civil. Don't go down the path of attacking using ugly words.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sun, Oct 4, 2009, at 3:23 PM
  • I know of NO ONE that cheered the loss, not in person nor on any discussion boards. The loss was embarrassing, and many of the things said by our leader and his wife were embarrassing.

    However, we do hope that this loss has a good outcome...perhaps President Obama will reduce his ego somewhat and remember that he heads a government sworn to be "of the people, by the people, for the people," not the "liberal people" or the "poor people" or the "minority people" or the "non-white-male people"...but ALL the citizens of this country.

    -- Posted by MrsSmith on Sun, Oct 4, 2009, at 4:36 PM
  • *

    I don't consider the loss embarrassing one bit. Anyone who was following the competition for which city was getting the 2016 Olympics knew that Chicago had a very outside shot at getting the bid. I wanted Chicago to get the Olympics, obviously, but I was happy for Rio de Janeiro winning.

    Bill Kristol said on Fox News that he was delighted that America didn't get the Olympics and that we didn't need it because we have had it a million times. I wonder what world he lives in.

    Just because you haven't personally seen or read it doesn't mean it isn't happening MrsSmith.

    I know the charge, and I've been waiting for it since I posted, that I made all of this up and I am lying once again, and you know what I really wish I made this up and was lying about this, but I'm not.

    To your charge of Obama being sworn to head the government of the people, by the people, for the people, not the liberal people (which any liberal would seriously laugh out loud to hear anyone say Obama represents liberals, as I did) or the poor people ... but ALL the citizens of this country, I think he is doing the best he can do, could he do better? Absolutely. What I do hope is that Republicans would actually represent people instead of whatever business happens to be giving them the most money at that moment.

    What I find most interesting about all of this is that these groups of people (and I am in no way suggesting its most Republicans, because it isn't, I hope) that openly celebrated the loss of an Olympic bid, instead of being shot down by those Republicans or Conservatives that believe fully in this country are either being defended or worse still, it is being ignored since a person didn't see or hear it happen.

    Okay my diatribe is over.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sun, Oct 4, 2009, at 6:16 PM
  • *

    I really love how every time one of your guys makes a fool of himself you guys always come back defending saying that they were using sarcasm. You might want to look up sarcasm, because Bill Kristol was not using sarcasm. He was dead serious. He's happy anytime America fails as long as it makes (in his mind)Barack Obama look bad.

    Bill Kristol is an embarrassment for spending eight years declaring anyone who was against war as un-American or rooting for the other side and now cheering this on.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 6:32 AM
  • Rio de Janeiro deserved these games... they were right when they said that the games are never held in the southern hemisphere! when was the last time that actually happened.

    -- Posted by S&DC on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 10:54 AM
  • Mike, I think you are seeing the double standard now, only because it's republicans doing it. All the liberals in the country and especially the ones in DC have been touting protesters for decades. Nancy Pelosi was as recently as the Bush admin singing the praises of war protesters calling them great Americans. the second a conservative dare to protest big government spending...well, now those people are true scum. Astro-turf! Nazis!

    Gotta love these phoney baloney politicians, every single one of them.

    Politics are so polarizing these days. All these people are at each others throa for the same reasons abd visa versa every day.

    I don't trust nearly all of them no matter what their political affiliation. Just when you start to like a guy for his good moral character and direction for this country he turns out to be lying, cheating, let-down.

    The double standard is goin both ways big time. I will not sit here and act like it's only happening on one side. You however have been. That's what gets people so riled up and I've told you that before.

    You get up here and proclaim that all conservatives are lying, betting against the pres, making too big a deal over DEM flip flops and wrong doings. Well the Dem's do the same thing. When you get up here and defend that it makes you one big phoney baloney that no one will trust.

    It's one thing to be a lying, cheating politician, it's another to be an unpaid spin doctor for them.

    I find it hard to swallow that someone could be so digusted and embarassed by one group of politicains yet jazzed and energized by the other. That makes no sense at all. Anyone who follows politics and is concerned about the bright future of our country and has some sense should be put off by both parties and demanding that the lunatic fringes of each party be dealt with and have their supreme powers be revoked.

    There is something suspect about politicians that crave power and stay a long time in DC. Yes, some may be doing for the good of the country. I however think that if you have any political sense and to survive in DC it becomes not about the people but about the party and survuval of the party. there are a lot of things wrong with that.

    The unpopularity of representatives and the bills they are crafting are indicators that the American people are not in control of government as they should be. I think that the people that voted for Obama are having a hard time sticking up for him now. As far as I'm concerned he hasn't done anything he promised on the campaign trail. It's like once he made the sales pitch on the new Porche he prosmised everyone for a bargain price, he shipped us the worn-out lemon of a used Yugo that we already have had and knew we didn't want.

    But, knowing he had Dem majorities he didn't think it would matter what his real policies were as we couldn't do anyting about his radical ideoligies that grew from the cess pool of Chicago. Well, he certianly underestimated the American people. Liberals are upset to say the least that these soccialist policies are not being streamlined through and think that it's all because the GOP is conspiring against the prez.

    Maybe the majority of the country just doesn''t like what it is seeing. Obama's big plus during the campaign and what he used to defeat McCain was simple...NO MORE BUSH. He made McCain out to be anther George Bush. Well, as far as all the reasons people were mad at Bush, not much has changed, some of it has gotten worse. And on top of that, these policies no one bothered to see coming has come up and the majority of the country does not like it.

    What he has found out is that the American people have spoken up to their Democratic representaives and said enough with this Euopean socialism, and that's what it is Mike. Even the Europeans are sick of their traditionsal socialist parties and are voting them out now more than ever!

    As far as the Olymics go. We now know that the Obamas and they political partners/supporters have millions to gain from hosting the Olympics. What angers people is that is looks to us like the president is spending our time and money to aid people he owes favors. When you look at the politics that surround him it's very easy to make the connection/charge.

    What we would like is for the president to address the evergrowing problem of Iran and N Korea nuke building for our own safety and stop wasting tax payer money to repay his personal favors.

    The other way to look at this is tthe fact that we all know that these commitees have a mind of their own. It seem really arrogant to me that the prez flies in at the last minute uninvited as no president has done before, and tries to use what ever political capital he thinks he has left which is little to none and than it almost seems to make matter worse.

    That is what makes people that do not like the president happy. Sorry if it embarrases you. The things this president has done in his first year have embarrassed a lot of people on both sides of the political fence, and I'm sure he will continue.

    Where were you to defend the president and berate his detractors when Bush was making decisions? Again, the double standard proves again to be working in both parties yet denied by only liberals.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 12:13 PM
  • *


    Did you want President Bush to be successful torturing prisoners? Did you want him to be successful privatizing social security?


    One comment in your blog seemed odd to me, you mentioned that Chicago had only an outside chance of getting the Olympics, where did this information come from? Everything I had heard has Chicago being a favorite to win the bid and that's why it was a shock to be voted out first round.

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 1:17 PM
  • *

    SWNebr Transplant, Chicago had an outside shot at beating Rio de Janeiro because as has been noted, the Olympics have only been held in the southern hemisphere once (Australia).

    Once the members that were voting actually showed up it is said that there were huge attempts to get it pushed to Spain by the former head of the IOC (who was from Spain) which started sapping votes from Chicago. That is why I made the comment that Chicago had an outside shot.

    Chicago (and the other cities) never really stood a chance against Rio de Janeiro.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 5:12 PM
  • Why would the President waste his time trying to sway people to vote for Chicago if he thought it never really stood a chance? That makes no sense. He believed it was close and needed to sway just a few people to tip it in Chicago's favor. Therefore, he showed up to convince them and after his attempts to convince them, Chicago was thrown out after the first round. Maybe it was Spain sucking votes, maybe it was sympathy for Rio, maybe the members were insulted by Obama's interjection, maybe it was Valerie Jarrett's money making scheme. Maybe, maybe, maybe that's all it is... one maybe after another. Maybe next time we'll have a stronger proposal and win the bid. That's the maybe I think I'll focus on.

    -- Posted by McCook1 on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 5:36 PM
  • Anyone who has followed this Olympic Site competition is well aware the final selection is usually cemented years in advance.

    Brazil and its Latin American neighbors, possibly for the only time in history, have voted as a solid block for two decades to swing the selection process where they had already committed to swap votes down the road.

    They swung major deals with African and Asian nations, including the Japanese, Philipines, South Koreans and Tiawnese - to gain support.

    In short, this vote was "wired" at least eight years ago.

    When the Chicago Olympic amateurs realized their serious underdog situation, they recruited Oprah and Michelle Obama and finally early last week, begged President Obama to help.

    Looking for an excuse to meet with a certain Big Mouthed Afghanistan fight general, who went public with his views before reporting to the Pentagon and via that official channel to the Commander-in-Chief, the President flew over, for the chance to meet with a number of foreign leaders -- AND have the general fly in.

    Nothing official came out of that meeting, except for the standard "fruitful, informative and helpful," but unofficial word -- The General got the message, "..flap your jaw in public like this one more time and you are history, even though you were picked for this job because the concensus was that you are the best field commander for Afghanistan. Just remember Truman and the biggest general."

    In short, Air Force One became the Commander-in-Chief's "woodshed" for a brief, direct dressing down -- and then the General and his Commander In Chief and staff went into serious discussions of options.

    Research the global press reaction to the Chicago Olympic sales pitch. Basically the almost universal description was:

    "The offical Chicago delegates' presentation was flat, unimpressive and ineffective. The only sparks for Chicago were the President and Mrs. Obama's impassioned prepared statements and the high point was Pres. Obama's ad-libbed "extra" response to a final question about what hosting the Olympics meant to the Chicago delegation members personally.

    The official delegation response was pathetic.

    The only real fire in the Chicago sales pitch was Pres. Obama's final ad-libbed statement.

    That is not my thinking, but the collective opinions of the global press present.

    Having been involved with the U.S. Olympic committee for two 1960s Olympics, the various political BS theories expressed here are so sad, they can't even be considered amusing.

    The Olympics are BIG TIME -- If you don't understand how BIG and how much planning goes into winning the Olympic Games for any host city, you are just about on par with Mayor Dailey, Chicago Olympic Organizing Committee Chairman Ryan and the entire Chicago organization.

    They received a complete education in Copenhagen.

    Oprah had fans following her around the city and was the media sensation.

    Mrs. Obama performed the official "meet and greet" duties as expected. The President showed up, shortly thereafter made his planned statement, remained for the final question and after the official delegates fumbled that ball totally, stepped in and at least kept Chicago respectable in its pursuit.

    The world press viewpoint: By the time the official presentations came, the Chicago group realized how far out of the game they were and their presentation showed that realization.

    Chicago spent about three years of serious effort to develop their bid -- Rio and the Brazillian government and the entire Latin American community had been working toward this 25 years.

    For those who feel Madrid has a chance. 2012 Olympics are in London. No way will the vote go for two consecutive European Olympics sited less than 1,000 miles apart -- when no South American city/nation has every hosted even one GAMES.

    Plus, the Brazillians have had this thing wired for longer than Chicago has even considered 2016's host city.

    -- Posted by HerndonHank on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 6:59 PM
  • I think if Obama would have not gone Chicago might have won. CNBC gave Chicago a 4-5 shot. Rio was 5/2. That had Chicago as better than even money. Something short circuited somewhere.

    -- Posted by wallismarsh on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 8:36 PM
  • I'd like to point something out that is a common denominator in most all liberal talk I hear and Guillermo said it above.

    Guillermo stated in his own words that he had hoped Bush would have protected our country in "accordance with our laws, and without eroding the little moral high ground that we had left."

    What exactly does it mean "the little moral high ground we have left?"


    This is something that our president is out doing right now, appologizing for being America or American. I ask why this needs to be done and why Guillermo thinks that while Bush was in office he had little moral capital. What did America ever do to the world anyway?

    I think it's funny that you liberals claim to be proud of this country and are very concerned for it's well-being yet you almost always have to be ashamed and embarassed by it's past, present, and future.

    I'm sorry, but I'm not ashamed of our country. Especially it's past. We have always been the leader of the world in almost every aspect. we lead the world in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We have always led the charge in human right and humanitarian aid when other countries stand by and do nothing.

    We have ended wars and saved contenents from corrupt dictators. We have rid the world of murderous dictators. We have pioneered life changing technology. We have also led the charge in saving the planet and pioneering clean air and water. We have the world's most powerful military and the best military technongy ever. We have the best citizens in the world and the most envied country in the world.

    We did this all as a Judeo-Christian based society, not a Muslim. Muslim societies by far remain full of bloodshed and infighting and subsequently third world countries with no human rights, no equallity, and no future.

    I'm sorry if I don't let my heart bleed for the liberal cause, but I'm NOT sorry for being an American and anyone that is had better get their head out of their posterior and take a history lesson. You can pick apart everything this country has done and find times that we have stumbled and fallen, but I challenge you to find a country in the history of the world that has done as much good or produced as much for the world as the USA.

    Now, we all know where Obama went to church for 20 years and how had to stop going there during his campaign. we all know what is preached in that church. It's all anti-American. Anti-white. I don;t have to sit here and prove it, we've all heard the audio and seen this video of what goes on in that church. If it where my church I would have left and found a new one after my first day, Obama didn't. He made that church a part of his life for 20 years.

    Now we have a president that seems to think he needs to appologize for everything American. I wish he's stop because I don't think we have anything to appologize for. We have no reason to hang our heads in shame.

    I think there are signs there that say that this president is not 100% for America the Beautiful as it is now. I think his church is one clue. The fact that he would not put his hand over his heart and recite the Pledge of Allegance during his campaign because he said he didn't want to offend anyone. Well who would tat offend anyway? Radical Muslims and anti-American factions? You tell me!

    And now, the vast right wing conspiracy is back in the news, and that's what's out to get Obama. Well if that's what is after Obama I'd like to find out exaclty what it Obama is ultimately after. I don't think it's the best of what America can be. I think it has something to do with a new era of class warfare and welfare distribution to control the minds of the masses of downtrodden to overthrow and outnumber the minority of achievers and producers.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 9:33 PM
  • I thought we had all agreed to stay on topic and stop discussing politics and religion as you can never change anyone's mind.

    -- Posted by wallismarsh on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 6:36 AM
  • *

    The debate about who hates or loves America more is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with a difference of opinion. In a similar vein, even if someone says they want the president to fail, how can people take themselves seriously when they sensationalize blasting opponents for WANTING AMERICA TO FAIL. The president isn't the country.


    Do you have the legal authority to decide who has and who hasn't acted criminally? As it stands now, your statement could indicate you were happy with President Bush. During his Presidency he had legal advisers who cleared all actions. I'm not positive but I don't recall any final say as to the legality of actions taken during the previous administration. As for the moral issue, didn't I read somewhere about castings stones?

    No nation is free from dubious decisions. It is interesting that American Liberals seem much more inclined to cry about all of America's faults, ignoring the faults of other nations and America's merits. Similarly Conservatives tend towards the opposite, but neither is wholly right or wrong.

    Sure it sucks that the Olympics wont be close, I was hoping to have the chance to go in Chicago, since I actually know my way around there. However, I can also say that in some ways I'm relieved that the corrupt Chicago machine will not have the opportunity to plunder Olympic coffers. I do question the wisdom of the President going all the way to make a failed plea which opened himself up to all of this ridiculousness. I am pleasantly surprised that most of the discussion of the Olympic decision here has been about the efforts of countries not about how it is all Bush's fault like much seems to be these days.

    -- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 10:08 AM
  • Guillermo,

    You did not honestly respond to what was said. You said this country had little moral high ground left. Our president is appoligizing for everything American while he's out making speeches to other countries.

    I think I have a pretty good handle on what's going on. Liberals are ashamed of what this country has done in the past. I think it's a pretty simle thing to get your hands on.

    What I'm saying is that it is pathetic to focus on that bad when the bad is such a small part of who we are and the good we have done is so large and looming. If you people focus on the bad so much and never acknowledge the good...it will be the bad the will eventually define who we are.

    Yes, I understand that this country has done things that are wrong. I know a lot about the history of Latin and South America and I'm sure you could draw a lot of examples from the thing we have done there. What I'm saying is that people like you always seem to focus on the bad. Look at how you worded that statement from your poat, if I didn't know any better I would think we were a terrible country.

    At the same time you are running down this country, you people never seem to have a bad thing to say about countries like Cuba, China, N Korea, Iran, Iraq, etc.

    You say I wear my American patriotism on my sleeve and make it a part of who I am. Well, that's fine with me, you guys wear American imperialism and all the things wrong with America on your sleeve and it has become part of who you are and it comes out in what you say and how you say it.

    We are all obligated as Americans to speak up and define what this country is and where it's going.

    You and I both know that when it comes to global matters, there has never been a country that has paved the way and made it possible for democracy and liberty to shine like the US has. All these other countries that librerals love to speak about, like Norway for example, have done a shred of what the US has done.

    All I'm pointing out it what you said in your entry and what Mike has been echoing in a lot of his blogs. That is, you guys seem to never be abl;e to move past what this country has falutered with, and you never acknowledge what good it has done. As wee all speak up and make our opinions known, the world is watching, there are more liberals now that ever. What do you want the world to know about our country and what opinion do you want them to have of us?

    I think it's important to remind people what we have done for the good of the world and mankind.

    you don;t think I realize that it's the government being critized, well I do. The government being the representing unit of the people of this country was behind most of the good that we have done, as they are the governing body and what represents the people of this country. Of course they take the good with the bad. We are all Americans, good or bad.

    I just think it's rediculous that you only make mention of the bad. You say we have no moral capital left. What grounds do you have to make such and accusation? Maybe you're right, when we have a government that is backing killing babies, maybe we don't have any moral capital left, this is of course a liberal propelled state of our union. Even Muslims don't kill their babies.

    While it's easy to think that this nation is morally bankrupt, if you think that normal likfe is Hollywood. It's not. The vast majority of this coutnry, much to your and Mike's diagreement is still center-right or slightly conservative. It in no way resembles Hollywood or the vast left agenda of some of the people at the wheel.

    Whoopi Goldberg may be able to get on tv and say that drugging and raping a 13 old girl by a 43 year old man is not rape rape, and then she can have 6 abortions, meaning that she has killed 6 babies. She does not speak for several hundred million people that have no way to voice their opinions to her all at once as she does.

    Wallis, I don't think ever agreed not to talk politics, that's the only reason this blog even exists. And the topic of being embarassed for this country was the topic in the first place.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 11:25 AM
  • can we explore what is repulsive, as you say, about conservatism?

    I can't believe someone could say that about conservatism. What do they think real conservatism is?

    Here's my take on liberalism:

    -take money from people who have eraned it and give it to people that have't.

    -reduce human dignity by paying people to do nothing and basically pay for their votes with the handout.

    -allow women to kill their babies because they don't a shred of human dignity or responsiblity, adn allowing them to do this sure won't thrust them into being responsible either.

    -government, which is largely run by thieves and criminals should run everything, thuc taking power away from the people where it was intended to be.

    Liberalism makes me sick. I guess we make each other sick then.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 1:39 PM
  • *

    SWNebr, you do realize that every country that made the final votes was represented by the highest political person they have in their country, right? So, why does our president going over there and representing our country seem so wrong.

    Here is the underlying problem that I am seeing with some of the posters (who are actually staying on topic, hint hing justin and guillermo) in your zeal to blame one person (the president) for the Olympics not coming to America you either purposely or ignorantly ignore the facts.

    Have you really thought and considered why the only organizations claiming that America had the best chance to win were American organizations?

    The simple fact of the matter is the IOC (International Olympic Committee) and the AOC (American Olympic Committee) are at odds with one another. America, whether it be Chicago or another city, had an outside shot at winning the Olympics. If you actually sit an listen to what the people are saying, instead of listening to what people are telling you was said, you would see quite clearly and easily America did not lose the bid because of Obama.

    But reading everything from the posters on this thread, my original theme is not only still correct it has been strengthened. There are people in this country that hate Obama so much that they will openly and loudly root against America just to see him lose. It is an embarrassment. What makes it more embarrassing is these are the same exact people that for eight years called anyone who simply disagreed with Bush as traitors, un-American, (my personal favorite) siding with the terrorists. I won't go there with you now. To me those who openly root for America to loose at anything because of who the president is, is an embarrassment to the country.

    The Republican Party had a great opportunity to turn there woes around and possibly win back the house in 2010. I honestly don't see it happening now. I don't doubt Republicans will make some gains, but as long as they keep allowing the fringe elements of their party to be the microphone for the entire party they will stay a local party.

    I also fully believe that unless the moderate (which is the majority of the party) members take back the party, their will be a third party conservative candidate in 2012 which will effectively hand the White House to the Democratic Party.

    The saddest thing (and yes most embarrassing) about all of this is the supposed "America doesn't need the Olympics" b.s. line because it would have been politicized by Chicago. The only people that politicized the Olympics in America are those same people who want Obama to fail.

    And to the question of how do you link wanting Obama to fail to wanting America to fail, it's fairly simply. If Obama and his policies fail, then America goes into a much deeper hole than it already is therefor America continues to fail. Therefore it is not a leap of logic to say that if you want Obama to fail you want America to fail.

    -- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 3:08 PM
  • Guillermo,

    I never said you did. I said let's explore the reasons why some people do. Notice I used the word "they," not "you."

    I'm not trying to be mean or rude, just explore people's thinking.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 5:48 PM
  • I also feel that if you guys keep using Bush as the poster boy for conservatism, then my assessment of liberalism may be very good. Get what I mean?

    Why do you guys assign Bush with the leading charge for conservatism. We found he is not. we want a better candidate next time. We want a better party.

    I don't even want to be labeled as a republican, I want to be a conservative.

    I've seen what debt can do. Going into fantasy land scale debt is not ever going to do any good. The liberalism we have is doing that and it won't work. it never has!

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 5:52 PM
  • Wow...you must have gotten all this from the Conservative handbook that was given out at the secret convention.

    I won't take the time to twist the beliefs of some left wing socialists...got better things to do. However...you did leave one out:

    *It allows fools the freedoms to complain about the government without cutting out tongues, cutting off fingers, or beheading on the internet.

    (Although to some liberals - a little bit of disagreement on a local blog seems to be worse).

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Wed, Oct 7, 2009, at 9:15 AM
  • Again...not what I said...but wouldn't expect anything less from gi. Interpret how you like cause it would be a waste of time to explain to you. You and your agenda are becoming more tranparent with each comment.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Wed, Oct 7, 2009, at 1:15 PM
  • Wow Guillermo, I didn't expect that to be so rediculous, I knew it would be a doozy though.

    At least you outlined some things, although some of them I can't figure out for the life of me what they have to do with a political party.

    I think you have been so brain washed by a liberal professor at a college, you can't see what's really going one.

    Lets explore this:

    #1 you are absolutely right, nothing says cons like a strong national defense and tax cuts. Reagan cut taxes, tripled the fed tax revenues and created 25 million NEW jobs...what an idiot he was!

    #2? Lat time I check there have been about as many liberal presidents as conservative presidents and these big coperations don't steal peoples money only when there's a republican in office. there is alwasy a securities commission, no matter who's in the office.

    #3. There is absolutely no proof that cons want to destroy the Earth. Nixon created the EPA, he was a republican. Bush set aside monsy for hydrogen research. Just because you don't get as much as you want doesn't mean your not getting it. That is classic liberal trick.

    #4.Global Warming is not a Fact. it is something you choose to believe. I believe in God and it is a fact that Jesus is the Messiah. I also know that abortion is murder because there is living, breathing, heartbeat inside and to kill it the must dismember it, burn it, or strangle it and cut it to pieces and flush it down a grabage disposal. I have heard from several scientis in person, as well as climatologists that think its crap!

    Al Gore used nothign but anecdotal evidence to try to prove something he could profit from. Now that the Eearth is cooling and we've been frezing our ***** off all summer in Nebraska I think your anecdotal evident looks silly as heck.

    #6. that is just sick sick sick. You can do what you want when it's your body, that's fine. But when you are taking on the human responsiblity to create life and creat another human, why would you chop it up into little pieces. Then you libs want to turn around and make us all save trees and whales? You have got to be kidding me?!?!?! Lets kill babies, but save the stupid trees. I don;t think trees are stupid, but I do not value a tree over a human baby, born, or not.

    #7. Well, that's debatable. Should you admit mistakes? Yes. Should you constantly run down your own country to the point where these idiots coming up through the inner city school systems that won't even gratuate don't know anything about this country's past other than what they hear in front of the ACORN office? No! Maybe he could mix in some of all the good stuff we've done with tax payers money over the years so that idiots realize that we are not North Korea.

    Would that be too much to ask?

    Well Guillermo, I think you failed. I think you just assigned a lot of your liberal political war cries to your assesment thinking people are really going to believe that's what conservatism is all about.

    I also failed to mention that when the republicans took control of the government in 1994 they had not had a super majoirty for decades! Under the Dems we saw these money hungry corperations grow. We polluted like no other country in the world and we also witnessed the law change so that women could murder their little ones.

    All this happened with Dems in control. You already had it your way and look what we got, we got the Carter reccession...the only recent thing we have to make us feel better that we're not as bad as we back when Jimmy Carter was the president.

    True conservatism saved Bill Clinton's presidency because they forced him to the center. had they not won, he would not haev balanced the budget or reformed welfare. He would have plunged us inot the abyss we had under Carter.

    I do think it's interesting that you throw these non political aspects of government inot the conservative party when things like the security commission is not a politically motivated entity. They are always there no matter what.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Wed, Oct 7, 2009, at 8:10 PM
  • Ouch gi, that stings.

    Coming from you that really...well...means nothing.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Wed, Oct 7, 2009, at 8:37 PM
  • you believe the sick lies that you want, it doesn't make it a fact just because you are self-righteous.

    Babies can live outside the a lot sooner than what you will EVER admit too. You know it too. You just don't want to admit it.

    On global warming. I want you to prove to me or show me a scientist that can actually prove that the Earth is actually warming up over the last 500 years. I'd like to know how exactly they do this to the nearest 1/10th of a degree.

    How do you eggheads now explain the FACT that the Earth is cooling again? What is your explaination for why scientists all thought it was cooling too rapidly druing the 70's? I have read scientific articles that state if we have a couple more years of low solar spor activity we will have another "minimum" period, not as severe as the Maunder Minimum that was also called the "little ice age" in which the Thames River in London froze over every winter for several years and changed the social-political landscape of history forever.

    I think you liberals need to do more than watch Heide Cullen on the Weather Channel and Al Gores's movie before you start running through the streets proclaiming these "facts."

    Also, I've noticed that the Weather Channel was only running ads about Warming and Heide had her show on when there were a lot of record high temps and drought for a few years there. They also boldly proclaimed for 2 years we would see the worst hurricane seasons ever. The last 3 hurricane seasons have been some of the lowest ever recorded.

    We have also not seen any Warming shows or ads out of the biggest Warming proponents (TWC) since we've had 3300 new record lows recorded this summer in the US.

    Ski resorts are opening sooner than ever in their history and Idaho schools have had their ealriest snow day ever!

    It appears that all the same anecdotal info used to scare people into Warming is now pointing towards cooling. I don;t know what to tell you GI? You're just wrong. Is there more CO2 in the atmosphere than there was 100 years ago. Yes. Does that mean that we're all going to burn a horrible slow death in 6 months as some of the crazy liberals have been claiming, or even in 60 years? NO.

    That does not mean we do not need to take action to reduce pollution. That's what you guys always misunderstand about some conservatives. You think that the lower than your expected level of environmental action means we don't care or won't care.

    For all your pro-environment actions to take hold you need money. to get money you need profitable businesses and working class with disposable income. If you tax businesses to oblivion and pass too many laws that cause buinesses to go overseas, there goin yur money.

    You will diagree with me on that, I've heard your argument before about polluting the Earth to make money, but we all have to have a reason to be here. I don't think we can flip a switch and convert all existance to mimick the Eloi people in H.G. Wells' The Time Machine.

    You can deny reagonomics all you want, but what it ultimatley comes down to is your deep seeded hatred of the rich and wealthy. I'm not wealthy and I don't desire to be. I know that money won't buy me what I ultimatley want or need. I do however need there to be wealthy people in this community and country as you do.

    Liberals have been winning over voters for years by vilifying the evil republican businessman. Like there are no greedy Democratic businessmen in the world! You also imply that only and all conservatives are doing atrocious acts to who knows what. All over the news? Not lately.

    As you said to me before, you think your college education should have been paid for. By whom? A guy that makes $20/hr and worked 20 hours of overtime every week to pay for his family's bills? All this money must come from somewhere. Government does not creat wealth.

    I know that this is never going to soak in for you. You have obvioulsy been raised to attack wealth and think that it is not fair. When I was a kid, everytime someone did something rude to me my parents told me that life is not fair...deal with it.

    I guess that's the difference between people like us. I get over it and make my life what I can with what I have instead of expecting someone else to do it for me with someone else's money....THAT, is not fair.

    Others are rediculously raising hell for someone like Obama to make their lives FAIR and better by no effort of their own simply because it's not fair.

    Tough Tacos.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Thu, Oct 8, 2009, at 7:48 PM
  • Just for the record GI,

    I used to be a Democrat and strongly believed in abortion as I was raised in a democratic household.

    I used to think, like my father, that only these inner city girls that had no business getting prego were the only ones doing it. It was better to not even have that baby in the world as it would just end up on welfare and jail anyway.

    Then I had kids of my own, one almost died as I watched it's little premature body, blue laying on a table struggling to survive.

    I also have seen many pictures of aborted babies and all the body parts cut up laying on a table...bloody and dead. Or the saline burned baby's body all black and disgustingly burned..and dead. all intact by the way.

    My friend who had two very premature babies could put his wedding ring all the way his child's arm it was so tiny.

    So, needless to say, you are promoting murder opf babies plain and simple. When I see those cut up, burned, and strangled babies bodies in those pictures see my son, blue and struggling to survive. He is right now goofing off next to me in his birt bike jammies as I type. He is the joy of my life and the reason for my existance.

    I ask myself, who in their right mind could do such a thing to a defenselss baby? Who would murder something that will bring so much joy into the world?

    The answer. I sick, depraived, selfish, person who only cares about one thing...having it easy, letting someone else pull up the slack and do their work for them...a liberal.

    Abortion is one thing that has turned my off from liberals more than anything. I don't get it. e haven't even gotten into how bad this scars women for life. So many women, latter in life end up miserable because it's only in their grown up, mature years that they realize, onle they actually HAVE the kids, that they have murdered and what could have been.

    Opposing abortion is as much trying to save the soul and the future mental state of the women, not just the baby.

    You think it's about trying to control what people do with their bodies....you may not have the soul to understand it, but it's about being human and saving souls. How inhumane is killing a living breating baby?


    -- Posted by Justin76 on Thu, Oct 8, 2009, at 8:03 PM
  • Sorry for being off topic Mike.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Thu, Oct 8, 2009, at 8:03 PM
  • -- Posted by Husker23 on Fri, Oct 9, 2009, at 8:51 AM
  • sure Guillermo, I'm right, so you attack my typing skills, apparently I left the word "womb" out, but I'm sure you deducted that. I thought you were an intelligent person adn could debate of facts. All you keep telling me is that GW is a fact and everyone knows it.

    I keep telling you about the scientific fact that 1998 was the warmest year on record and it has bee cooling ever since. The GW fanatics haven't been paying attention to their own data for 10 years because they've been riding around on Al Gore's private carbon exhailing jet too long making BS movies.

    I used to believe in abortion and global warming until I looked at the facts. I'm not a bandwagoneer, that's the difference. You'll believe in a cause without caution. I'm cautious of any movement because of the underlying motives. GW is not genuine.

    You will all look like fools in 20 years when none your dire predictions come true.

    You still can't tell me what scientific instruments were used in the discovery of what the global temperature to the nearest tenth of a degree was in the year 1650 can you. Well, just think about that for a minute.

    What was it you said about the 3300 record low temperatures in the US in 2009? I did not catch your brutal rebutal.

    Oh and I agree with you about what the Bible says and it is absolutely right. That still does not mean that anyone should have 70% of their earnings taken away from them to feed fat cat bureaucrats. Anyone has the right to make a living and make money. I should remind you that capitalism is what employs everyone in this country.

    Without it we would be a third world country ruled by greedy and murderous dictators. They would own all the countries natural resources and export industries. We would either work directly for the state owned industries or we would be peasants tied to the land. read a history book sometime.

    The Bible is why I'm not chasing money or the dream of being rich. It's a fools life. Money does not equal happiness and it does not equal success. True riches do not come from this Earth, it comes from within us.

    I didn't always know that. I had to learn that the hard way and that's why I welcomed the Bible into my life. If you learn about Christ and learn from his teachings, you may be able to come to terms with what real happiness is and what it is not.

    -- Posted by Justin76 on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 11:38 AM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: