Archives: September 2007
Dutch politician Rita Verdonk raps about ... something. I don't know. Does anyone here speak Dutch?
I thought this was funny, even though I have no idea what this woman is talking about. Yes, sometimes I laugh at the things I don't understand, but I like that more than fearing the things I don't understand. Here's Rita Verdonk's Wikipedia page ... and her official campaign page. Mmm! Orange!
SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE: Iran so far
Andy Samberg and Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad together at last, in this SNL Digital Short with Adam Levine of the group Maroon 5.
John Edwards showed great courage, insight at MTV/Myspace Forum

WTF?! You've heard about what John Edwards said about young African-American men the other day, right?
Asked about what he could do about "inner-city kids partaking in violence" at the MTV/MySpace Forum on Thursday, Democratic candidate John Edwards offered an apocalyptic prediction for young black males:
“We cannot build enough prisons to solve this problem. And the idea that we can keep incarcerating and keep incarcerating — pretty soon we’re not going to have a young African-American male population in America. They’re all going to be in prison or dead. One of the two.”
First of all, the right wing has latched onto this story because they smell blood in the water. They think, wrongfully, that this is a clear case of ... of what? What do they think this is? What do they think it says about John Edwards?
I'll tell you where this story will go -- nowhere. Nowhere. Why won't it go anywhere? Because most black people themselves know exactly what John Edwards meant, and MOST of them agree. Did I say all? No, I said most. There is no issue or question in this world in which everyone will agree, and that goes for this too. But it's no secret to anyone, especially African Americans, that the black community, and young black males in particular, are in a crisis in this country. A flat-out crisis. Edwards wasn't cold, disrespectful, disingenuous, irrational or inconsiderate. He was concerned, and f*ckin' aye we should be too.
Jim Geraghty of The Campaign Spot on National Review Online said one of the dumbest things I've read in a long time when he wrote on Friday that "there are more African-American men in college than in prison," with his point being that African-American men really aren't being incarcerated at an unusually high rate. What he's trying to say is that there's no problem here at all. He's trying to say John Edwards was wrong.
I'd like to ask Jim Geraghty if he knows the ratio of white men in college versus the number in prison. He left that number out, nor does he mention the number of Asian American men in college or in prison. What do you think that ratio is?
The United States is the world's leader in incarceration with nearly 2.2 million people currently in our prisons or jails. About 800,000 of them are black. That's more than 1/3 of the entire prison population. African-Americans make up 13.4% of the U.S. population yet more than 30% of the prison population. Now tell me again how John Edwards was wrong.
Frankly, I'm shocked by the courage Edwards showed to say what he said. It's harsh, it's sad, but are we going to hide from the truth, or are we going to say, "Look, we will fix this. We will change this. We will help make this right." People know what Edwards said is true, but name another national politician courageous enough to say it. Look around. The African-American community is in crisis. What are we as a society going to do about it? If you're like me, you trust that John Edwards and those like him really want to help, and by help I don't mean build more prisons.
For more on this discussion over at the Daily Kos website, click here.
TAGS: John Edwards, conservative, Republican, FoxNEWS, media, race, African Americans
Rush prepares for his third tour of duty in Iraq
» There's more to this entry. Click here for the rest of it.
Gettin' High With Obama & Letterman
OK, now, before you go flyin' off the handle about me teasing Barack, I'm a huge Barack-aholic. I want him to be president more than anyone else running. This is just a funny video, so please don't write anything else into it. -Blue
The official presidential announcement music video from Senator Kimberly McFriendly (R) Heartland, USA! Yeeha!
Read about Kim's platform: http://kimmcfriendly.com/
When Bill O'Reilly dined at Sylvia's in Harlem, he expected amateur night at the Apollo
» There's more to this entry. Click here for the rest of it.
Make Mine Freedom!
With all their fist shaking about freedom being on the march, this cartoon could just as easily have been produced today as it was 60 years ago. The only thing that gives away its true age is the quality. It's too good for this White House.
TAGS: cartoons, animation, propaganda, freedom
Eli's Dirty Jokes - The Farmer's Daughter
More Dirty Jokes
Eli's Dirty Jokes - BBQ BootyEli's Dirty Jokes - Moose Hunting
Eli's Dirty Jokes - Rawr
Eli's Dirty Jokes - Five Birds
Eli's Dirty Jokes - Nice to Meet You
Eli's Dirty Jokes - Piano Man
TAGS: Jokes, Humor, Comedy, Cartoons
Scorsese does Bert & Ernie
This has nothing to do with politics, but it's so funny I couldn't resist. I don't know what it is about puppets.... I'm a sucker for puppets, and if you make 'em swear ... OH, THE HUMANITY THAT'S FUNNY!
Video allegedly shows Blackwater Security personnel randomly shooting at civilians in Iraq
Blackwater Shoot People For Sport - Funny bloopers R us
I have no idea if this clip is authentic ... but whomever it shows shooting is clearly a maniac. Just like I don't know if the shooter is a Blackwater employee, the shooter doesn't know if the people he's shooting at are insurgents or school teachers.
User comments over at MetaCafe, where I found this video, seem split on this one.
GOGETER 1 doesn't see anything wrong and had this to say about the video:
"Non of this shootings where uncall for"
HIGHLYUNSTABLE thinks the shooter is only firing paintballs:
"It looks more like paintballs to me, seeing as how everyone still keeps following them while they are being shot at. And then the guy at the end nonchalontly gets out of his car and just stands there. Even mercenaries are legally responsible for their actions. And how exactly do you know this was Blackwater Marines? I don't see anything that shows who they are."
TAGS: Blackwater Security, Iraq, shooting, video
If Gore Were President
Good old Gore.... I laugh when I hear conservatives say how they, too, can't stand George W. Bush but that they're sure he's been a better president than Gore would have been. Yeah, whatever. ; )
Now, watch a conservative post a comment calling liberals idiots for believing what Gore says in this skit. LOOK OUT! The glaciers are attacking!
Comedian Bill Hicks on fundamentalist Christianity, and dinosaurs
If the world is 12,000 years old, why weren't dinosaurs mentioned in the Bible? "What a big f*cking lizard, Lord!"
Presidential double standard in denouncing Moveon.org Petraeus ad. Bush refused to denounce Kerry Swift Boat ad.

But back in 2004, after much-maligned ads funded by the conservative Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacked Sen. John Kerry's Vietnam war record (Kerry: Bush lets attack ads do 'dirty work'), Bush declined requests to denounce those ads against his political opponent. The Swift Boat ads were condemned, however, by Sen. John McCain, among many others in Congress.
TAGS: Bush, Swift Boat, ads, Kerry, Petraeus, Moveon.org
UF Student "Don't Tase Me Bro!" Remix
I think I might surprise and probably disappoint some of my readers here, but I really don't sympathize with the young man who found himself at the center of a police dogpile at the University of Florida's recent Kerry speech. For starters, he's fine. The young man is unharmed, and he's become a martyr of sorts because of this, even drawing the support of the ACLU to his defense, and so he's doing fine.
I'm a strong believer in free speech, obviously, and I think free speech rights have eroded under President Bush, but I also believe Andrew Meyer, 21, went much too far to prove his point, so far that his underlying point about free speech was lost, and that the reaction by security to his eratic, potentially dangerous behavior was understandable.
This is NOT a free speech issue, although that's what many choose to believe. The young man -- who, BTW, has a history of taping his own practical jokes -- could have said his piece without going as far as he did. He put other people at risk with his behavior and endangered not only the safety of the officers but the safety of the other students in the room as well.
Just my take on it. I'm sure many will disagree.
TAGS: Kerry, taser, Andrew Meyer, free speech, Florida
Yargh, Mateys! It Be International Talk Like a Pirate Day
Do ye best to be talkin' like a pirate taday, ye foul landlubbers, or I'll be feedin' yer hearts to me hungry crew! YaAAAAaar!LENO: Al Gore's modern interpretive dance
Hilarious! No wonder he didn't win the presidency. Al's just too cool to be president. You know he wanted to bust a move on Jay. You could see it in his beady eyes. Seriously, Gore got a personality transplant after the 2000 election. I think he's become one of the funniest former political figures out there.
Many conservatives unwilling to accept a link between the Iraq war and U.S. oil interests
Neil, as one would expect from an ultra-conservative person, is understandably bothered by Alan Greenspan's new book, The Age of Turbulence. In so many words, the former Federal Reserve chairman calls George W. Bush a dolt and says he respected President Clinton -- that right there is enough to drive most conservatives bonkers -- but Greenspan also says that he believes the Iraq war is mainly about securing oil supplies.
I think Greenspan is a very smart man, to put it mildly, and I think he meant what he said. Neil needs to get over it. I'm going to make some assumptions here.... I don't think Greenspan is implying that George W. Bush went into Iraq singlehandedly to conquer the country and steal Iraq's oil. It's more complicated than that. Neil knows it too.
This is the real world here, and we all know that the war in Iraq isn't just one man's battle. There are hundreds of personalities behind the scenes in this war -- people within our government, heads of corporations with billions at stake, leaders of other nations -- all with different agendas. Without a doubt, some of them are primarily concerned with money; others, perhaps like President Bush, we could say, might have had noble intentions sending troops into Iraq, but the reality is that this war exists first and foremost because of oil in the Middle East.
I don't think anyone really doubts that anymore, not even Neil, although people like Neil just can't bring themselves to admit it. Had Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia all been countries without a drop of oil, this war would not have taken place. No one can prove that statement, obviously, but I think everyone still knows that it's true. Today, America's economy needs Mideast oil -- lots of it. Without it, our economy grinds to a halt.
Neil also knows that many people on the right, American soldiers and people with family members serving in Iraq, don't accept that oil was a big reason for this war because it's just too painful to accept. People need to believe they're fighting for principles, and to some extent they are, but this war exists because of oil and what it means to America. Sorry, Neil. And I think you know it too.
---
In other FOXNews news ... take a gander at this reader poll they had up on their site on Monday. Does Universal Healthcare mean higher taxes? Uh, yeah, probably. That or higher deficits. Am I worried? Uh, no, not really. I mean, heck, taxes would rise a heck of a lot more on rich folks than they would on Middle Class people like me. We all know that much is true, and look what I'd get in return if my taxes went up! -- tens of millions of my less fortunate countrymen would have improved access to health care. Eight million (8,000,000) American children have no coverage at all. Doesn't that bother you? Isn't that on your conscience? I'll tell you, it bothers me. This one's a no brainer. Raise taxes and git 'er done!

TAGS: Fox News, Cavuto, Business, Economy, Finance, Money, Oil, Iraq, Greenspan, Taxes, Healthcare, Hillary, Clinton
South Park PC Vs Mac
Alright, now, this is funny.... Best Apple v. PC commercial yet. I use both Apple Macs and Windows PCs and like them both for different reasons.
Digg.com reader comments reveal perceptual differences over conservatism

Skip742: Well, yeah. But what is not really recognized on the left is that most conservatives pretty much hate George Bush as much as you do. We just know that Kerry or Gore would have been at least as bad. Still, in my opinion, at least if we'd elected them, we might have maintained some kind of loyal opposition in Congress. Instead, we were treated to "go along to get along". Greenspan is right. So is Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Peggy Noonan, Bob Novak, Tucker Carlson, Bruce Fein, David Keene, Paul Weyrich, Richard Viguerie, Dick Armey, Alan Keyes, Newt Gingrich, Paul Craig Roberts, nearly half of the old Reagan administration, and anyone who ever supported Barry Goldwater. Basically, we're trying to get our party back from the losers who are running it now. Don't think we're ever going to fully agree on economic policy or things like that, but there are many of us who know that the present administration is going way off course. That's why there's such upheaval likely to emit from the Republican Convention this year. Keep an eye open.
Chestnutridge: Your post would be more accurate if you would admit that the "anti-Bush" rhetoric emulating from Republican conservatives was much less when he popular. Few Republicans had the guts to speak out when he had high approval ratings. While Buchanan and a few others expressed opposition, most were happy to go along with his plans. They backed his ill planned and ill executed invasion. They backed his expansion of government and assault on Constitutional rights. They even backed his insane spending because they were bought off with tax cuts that rewarded their base. Now that he has brought failure and lost elections -- now they have they guts to oppose him. But where were they when the country needed them?
My reply: Skip742, I think most liberals are aware that most conservatives hate George Bush, but where your party attributes everything wrong with conservatism to George Bush, I think most liberals attribute to more than George Bush. I think your party went off the tracks with Ronald Reagan and is now trying to say, "It's not the platform that's the problem; it's George Bush."
GW Bush didn't invent out-of-control spending and the unintentional yet undeniable dismantling of the Middle Class. That was Ronald Reagan. One of Cheney's favorite sayings is that Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. I really believe that that's a commonly held belief among Republicans, that deficits don't matter.
You said that "Greenspan is right." Is he also right in saying that Clinton was the most fiscally conservative, because that's really what Greenspan is saying, of the 6 presidents he worked with? I think he was. On the economy, I think Clinton was the true conservative.
I haven't seen true fiscal conservatism from either a Republican Congress or a Republican president, not just one named Bush, in decades.
Why should we expect to see it now?
TAGS: Economy, Business, Finance, Greenspan, Interest, Conservative, Republican
New memoir by former Federal Reserve chairman should open eyes on the right
When one of your own, a widely respected Republican former chairman of the Federal Reserve, writes a book in which he not only indicts the current White House but the very party he belongs to, it raises eyebrows -- or, it ought to. Alan Greenspan, 81, has written that book, and it goes on sale tomorrow. Greenspan has arguably been the most successful American public official of the past three decades. "In terms of supporting economic growth and preventing inflation, Greenspan is the best, bar none," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com
In "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World," published by Penguin Press, Greenspan criticizes both congressional Republicans and President George W. Bush for abandoning fiscal discipline. He received a massive $8 million advance for the book. Because of Greenspan's stature, it's sure to be an international bestseller, but even before the book's official release advance copies have already reached critics.
Speaking of critics, this book is sure to create many new ones for Alan Greenspan. Any time either Republicans or Democrats are perceived to have turned against their own, it brings out the attack dogs. However respected he may have been by conservatives before this, Greenspan's star is sure to fall now. He will be criticized not for his opinions about Bush, Reagan, Clinton, and the war in Iraq, but in delayed hindsight for his policies and the job he did as Federal Reserve Chairman. What he had been praised for until now, he will be vilified for from this day forward. That's the nature of the political beast. Loyalty always above reason.
Greenspan, who worked with 6 presidents, makes some shocking revelations. I caught wind of the story on Drudge Report yesterday and was so blown away by the fact that it took more than 12 hours for FOXNews to mention what Drudge had reported on earlier in the day. Twelve hours may not sound like much time, but normally, when Drudge highlights (in red, as he sometimes will) breaking news on his site, which receives more traffic (14 million visitors yesterday alone) than FOXNews.com itself, the rest of the mainstream Internet media almost always follows suit within an hour. Now, almost 24 hours after Drudge first reported on the book, FOXNews.com posts just a small mention, and the story they link to reveals next to nothing about the book. It says nothing about Greenspan's remarks about President Bush, President Clinton, or Presidents Reagan or Nixon (with whom he also worked).
Drudge Report...

And FOXNews.com...

I was surprised and overjoyed that President Clinton and Greenspan shared what Greenspan seems to describe as a respectful, effective working relationship. That's the way it should be. That's what I want to see. I want to see intelligent people overcoming their differences to work toward common goals, in this case the long-term health of the economy. Greenspan, who refers to Clinton and Nixon as the two most intelligent presidents he worked with, seems to have admired the former president's "political courage" for tackling the deficit so early in his administration. And Greenspan, like the rest of us, was deeply disappointed in the former president over the Monica Lewinsky affair.
Highlights
Calls himself a "lifelong libertarian Republican."Calls President Bush's failure to veto spending early in his administration "a major mistake."
Writes, "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."
Republicans in Congress "swapped principle for power. They ended up with neither. They deserved to lose."
Ronald Reagan's ability to instantly tap one-liners and anecdotes in support of a particular policy represented an "odd form of intelligence."
Describes Bill Clinton as "a fellow information hound" with "a consistent, disciplined focus on long-term economic growth" whose relationship with Monica Lewinsky "made me feel disappointed and sad."
Rising income inequality could undo "the cultural ties that bind our society" and even lead to "large-scale violence."
Sources: Wall Street Journal, The Age
TAGS: Economy, Business, Finance, Greenspan, Conservative, Republican
Bush: "Don't Pick on Petraeus!" and... the president thanks 36 countries for their sacrifice in Iraq
And in the following clip, the president thanks 36 countries for their help in Iraq, obviously doing his very best to show that America isn't the only country that feels Iraq is vital in the "War on Terror." Problem is, Canada never sent troops to Iraq, even though the administration asked repeatedly. OOPS! They sent troops to Afghanistan. You and I know that Afghanistan and Iraq are different countries, but geography never was the president's strongest subject.
He also neglects to thank China.... They fund much of our national debt. I think they deserve a small thank you, don't you?
Preview of Bush's Thursday night speech: Let's bring 'em home!
Tonight the President will come before us all to give one of those historic presidential speeches presidents give from time to time -- you know, the ones that feel all presidential and serious. He'll try to make just a few points, and those points will be...
- 1. The surge has been working, and we're beginning to make progress in Iraq.
- 2. And that Congress [meaning the Democrats] are playing politics and slandering the good name of Gen. David Petreaus, an honorable soldier.
- 3. We need to deal with [code for bomb] Iran.
The president will tell a few stories about how soldiers who once had to watch out for snipers in downtown Baghdad now routinely share tea and cookies with their former enemies at one of the many delightful cafes that have opened for business. He'll talk about how Iraqi children, previously unable to go to school because of bombings in their neighborhoods, can now walk to school safely. He'll try to illustrate how America has turned the corner in Iraq. Nevermind that research by the BBC, which has been tracking casualties in Iraq since the surge began, shows a different side of the story. Tonight will be all about progress, and Iran.
Then -- and here'll be the president's coup de gras -- he'll announce that he's decided things are going so well in Iraq, matter of fact, that we can start bringing some troops home. Yea! Yea! That's a sign of victory, isn't it? We must be winning if we're beginning to bring the troops home. Yea!
Of course, he probably won't mention that it's just 30,000 of 160,000 soldiers (that's less than 20%), that the military had said months ago that those troops would have to return due to troop shortages, and that they won't actually return until around this time in 2008, but let's not focus on the negative. No, Thursday will be a day for good news. It's about VICTORY! We've turned the tides, he'll say. Next up: Iran.
But there's still hard work ahead, he'll add. Check back in two years. Yup, hard work.... God bless America.

If anyone was surprised by what the president said tonight, they haven't been paying attention at all.
Cavuto: Know Who's Giving You Money

Without a doubt, Hsu is a crook, just like Jack Abramoff and Tom Noe were crooks, and Hillary obviously has to return the money her campaign received from him. As far as I've seen she has. Is that all there is to it? I don't know. And neither does Neil. This story is developing.
But Neil is doing a lot more here than going after Hillary Clinton; he's playing defense by going on offense, using the Hsu story to defend George Bush. That's what he's ultimately trying to do here. Neil thinks this is about a lot more than Hillary Clinton. He thinks it's vindication for President Bush. Calling the Clinton response to the Hsu scandal phony, he says...
That people who question what this president knew and when he knew it, about matters on the other side of the globe, can get away claiming ignorance about what they should have known about matters right under their nose.Isn't that funny? -- "...about matters on the other side of the globe"? Right, on the other side of the globe, because that's really all the Bush critics are upset about, Neil. Nevermind the decisions Bush and his administration made out here on American soil, all Bush's critics are really concerned about are those things out there in Eye-rack, and they're hypocrites, all of them. Every last one of 'em!
I'd have less of a problem with Neil's rant if he'd only stuck with his veiled criticism of Hillary, but by trying to tie this to George Bush, as if to imply that Bush has been unfairly criticized by Clinton and others who've questioned what "the president knew and when he knew it," that's where Cavuto crossed the line between reasonable and partisan hack.
Nice try, Neil, but try again.
Five lies the Neo-cons think they can turn into truths if they repeat them often enough
- 1. Things are getting better in Iraq.
- 2. Bush plans to cut troops in Iraq (Nevermind the fact that those cuts were set to happen regardless due to expiring tours of duty.).
- 3. The Democrats are the party of wasteful government spending!
- 4. America will hunt down the people [Iraqi insurgents] who attacked us on Sept. 11.
- 5. The war in Iraq is making America safer. The fact that we haven't been attacked again is proof that fighting in Iraq is a good idea.
Sick and tired of O'Reilly mischaracterizing Democratic calls for withdrawal from Iraq

"Also, Iran has been held in check. Should the USA withdraw from the theater, that country is likely to have its own surge, not only on Iraq, but also in the entire Gulf region.
Whenever I point that out to the cut and runners, I get no cogent response. Perhaps our upcoming guest Congressman Ron Paul will break that cycle this evening." - Bill O'Reilly
Although he can't make it without adding an insult, O'Reilly makes a valid point about Iran's likely plans for the region, but unless I'm wrong, Democratic leadership in the Congress has called for redeployment of U.S. forces out of Iraq into neighboring countries where they continue aiding Iraqi security forces against al Qaeda, but CEASE BEING the front-line soldiers in Iraq's ongoing religious civil war, and where they provide a deterrent to Iran and others. Murtha, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, Biden -- none of them have called for retreat as the right wing goes around describing it.
Would it kill the right wing to be honest about the Democrats for 10 minutes? The majority on the left in Congress are calling for strategic redeployment, not a full-scale retreat and surrender. That's the God's honest truth, but it obviously behooves the war supporters to mischaracterize the position held by most of the Dems in Congress as something other than what it is.
No, when you're the party behind this huge f*ck up of a war, it's way easier to frame your ideological opponents as cut and runners, aka cowards, than it is to accurately describe their position.
I just wish I knew where guys like Bill O'Reilly get off being so smug about this war, as if they've been right about one damn thing so far. They act as though they knew this whole insurgency would happen from the start, as if they're so effing smart and logical, and the Democrats are the clueless ones. Right, and we're all supposed to continue to trust their judgment???
The Petraeus non-Report

Gen. Petraeus lost his right to claim that he's above politics when we spent the weeks leading up to his testimony before Congress touting so-called progress with the surge in the press. I cannot recall the last time a top general went on as aggressive a media tour before Congressional hearings. He was clearly playing politics, and so I find it difficult to believe that this man is working independent of the White House.
9-11-07 UPDATE: For the record, I don't claim to be an expert in military affairs. I don't claim to know more about military strategy or counterinsurgency tactics or the chain of command than Gen. Petraeus knows. My problem isn't with the general's credentials; it's with what he and the White House are defining as "the mission" in Iraq. Petraeus is reporting on just one tactical element of the larger war, but Iraq is more than just a series of neighborhoods in Baghdad. How is the war going? The surge was proposed by the president back in January as a means to achieve victory in Iraq, not merely as a means to partially stabilize Baghdad while under massive US occupation.
The question I am trying to answer is this: Is the surge working to stabilize Iraq, or is it merely serving to temporarily stem violence in the areas in which the surge troops were sent?
I do take issue with Gen. Petraeus' description of the surge's effects in the larger context of the overall war. He is acting as though the military effort in Baghdad and Anbar presents the total picture, as if the mission he was given by President Bush was not to stabilize Iraq, but rather to stabilize Baghdad, and even in that respect, progress has been limited and open to interpretation.
Five things I'll never forget about Sept. 11
- 1. The feeling that came over me, watching CNN that morning at home, when the second plane struck the Twin Towers. That was the instant the world realized the first plane hadn't been an accident.
- 2. The sense of camaraderie and shared understanding in the country following the attacks.
- 3. Heading out of my apartment on the way to work that morning and seeing people crying in their cars.
- 4. Calling my parents in Hawaii early that morning to tell them the news and to make sure they were alright. With the time difference, they were still asleep and had no idea what had happened back East.
- 5. That after six years of war, we're still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, Usama bin Laden is still at large, and Americans are in the middle of a civil war in Iraq.
Surge: The Movie
I'm not a big fan of MoveOn.org because I think they take too many liberties with the facts, but unfortunately that's not unusual nowadays. When the White House does it, we can't expect a group like MoveOn.org not to.
At any rate, this here made me laugh. I remember back in January when the White House said the surge would last through the fall. Now, we're told it'll last through the spring ... of next year. Come next year, I expect we'll hear how some new plan, call it The Dragon's Tail, will last only until the fall of 2008, and then it'll be the next mission, and the next one, and the one after that.... Neverending war, people. No end in sight, no plan to get us out of there, only making things worse.
Five tired Republican arguments
- 1. By fighting in Iraq we are making America safer.
- 2. Democrats want to grow the size of the federal government, even though this is the biggest it has ever been in American history.
- 3. That we have to reduce environmental regulations on corporations because it's the best thing for consumers.
- 4. That lobbying by big drug and energy companies represents the "free market economy" we hear so much about.
- 5. That Republicans are the party of military might, even though the number of Republican war vets working in the White House and the Capitol is dwarfed by the number of former oil executives.
Cavuto: If You Want More From Government, Be Prepared to Pay More to Government

Today, Neil unloaded in his "Common Sense" column about government, and folks being prepared to pay more for government if they expect to get more from government. Bullsh*t. Bullsh*t, bullsh*t, bullsh*t. Again, Neil and I don't see eye to eye.
For me to believe Neil is correct, I'd have to believe that future federal governments would all be just as wasteful, corrupt and incompetent as the current one is. I'd have to believe that the Bush administration hasn't been any more wasteful or incompetent than any other administration has been -- that every presidential administration and every Congress have all been equally incompetent. No.
And I don't think most Americans believe that either. I think most Americans -- if you randomly polled 1,000 of 'em -- would say that this current government has wasted massive amounts of money.
I strongly believe that we can get more from our government for every dollar we send to Washington D.C. than we're getting from our government today.
Neil is trying to make an ideological point about taxes, to scare you away from believing in Democrats who, in all likelihood, may raise taxes, because as a fiscal conservative Neil believes that taxes are bad, they're always too high, and that government is inherently wasteful. That's the conservative ideology on government: businesses are better.
Would a Democratic president raise taxes? Maybe, maybe not. Certainly they would go up for the wealthy. As a member of the Middle Class, would I necessarily care if my taxes went up? No, not necessarily, because I believe there is such a thing as a good government. We could use new highways, better bridges, better schools, cheaper health care, an infrastructure overhaul -- we could use a lot -- and I believe a good government could help us get there.
I believe Republicans, for many years, have been irresponsible about debt and spending. My ideology is that there is such a thing as a good return on an investment in American government. I do not agree with Neil's implied assumption that governments are equally wasteful. All governments waste, obviously, but all are not equally wasteful.
I am willing to pay for quality government, but I am sick and tired of paying for incompetence, corruption and crap.
Neil Cavuto labors to deny the truth

Neil, using statistics to deny a reality that most Americans see with their own two eyes....
Five things I hate about the corporatization of America under Republican leadership
- 1. That disasters like Iraq and Hurricane Katrina wind up turning into huge profit windfalls for ruthless companies and individuals, and that corruption just seems to be par for the course nowadays.
- 2. That we can spend $2 billion/week in Iraq, week after week after week, but can't spend $2 billion/week rebuilding our public school system.
- 3. That Republicans preach the virtues of a free market but then give huge tax breaks to oil companies that don't need help turning a profit.
- 4. That 'government spending' has become a euphamism for 'fat paycheck.'
- 5. That Republicans can talk about free markets but then vote to halt people from buying prescription drugs from Canada.




