Cliff LyonSarah Palin Naked
Subtitle: My Deepest Personal Feelings - I Hate You.
I stumbled upon this article and re-print it here. It is essentially one that I have been writing in my head for years. This one was published 2 weeks ago after Charlie Gibson, Palin interview.
She said “nucular.” Twice.
I realized three things tonight. For one, if you are a McCain/Palin/Bush voter, you and I do not have a difference of opinion. We have a difference in brain power. Two, she really is as ignorant as I feared. And, three, she really is kinda hot. Basically, I want to have sex with her on my Barack Obama sheets while my wife reads aloud from the Constitution. (My wife is cool with this if I promise to “first wipe off Palin’s tranny makeup.” I married well.)
Now, I want to be clear and speak directly to those of you who LOVED that Palin interview. You’re an idiot. I mean that. This is not one of those cases where we’re going to agree to disagree. This isn’t one of those situations where we debate it passionately and then walk away thinking that the other guy is wrong but argued well. I’m not going to think of you as a thoughtful but misguided person with different ideas who still really cares about the country and the world. No, sorry, not this time. This time, if you watched that interview and weren’t scared out of your freakin’ mind, then you’re mentally ill, mentally disabled, or mentally disturbed. What you are NOT is responsible, informed, curious, thoughtful, mature, educated, empathetic, or remotely serious. I mean it.
But I like to think that anyone can change.
Stop voting for people you want to have a beer with. Stop voting for folksy. Stop voting for people who remind you of your neighbor. Stop voting for the ideologically intransigent, the staggeringly ignorant, and the blazingly incompetent.
Vote for someone smarter than you. Vote for someone who inspires you. Vote for someone who has not only traveled the world but who has also shown a deep understanding and compassion for it. The stakes are real and they’re terrifyingly high. This election matters. It matters. It really matters. Let me say that one more time. This. Really. Matters.
September 30th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
That’s the thing that just boggles my mind. How could the Republicans do this in all seriousness? This really does matter. And how do people continue to kid themselves that Palin really is qualified? I realize some, like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, are just lying because it’s what they do, but some like Sean Hannity and our own Ken really really don’t have a clue, they do think she’s qualified. Seitzman expresses it so well.
September 30th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
From C&L, the latest on the Palin interview:
At some point, the depression following realization that folks actually like Palin turns to bewilderment and then sheer disgust toward my fellow Americans - punching Judies who just haven’t had enough of the Bush mentality.
Bob S., you have some serious soul searching to do and little time left in which to do it.
September 30th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
George Will’s opinion is summed rather nicely, as reported by HuffPo, in the following:
Partisanship has its place, but one would think/hope that it has its limits, too, particularly where one’s own well-being and country are at stake.
September 30th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Is there a way we can take the Sarah Palin supporter list and make a new law and punish them? Criminal Stupidity should be a felony.
September 30th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Jim your curiosity reminds me of a planaria.
God by now Cliff, you would well be on death row. Should such a legal determination become reality.
Afford clemency to the least, that have the most effect against you. It will serve your cause well.
That you are still alive is proof enough of how benign America really is.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:18 am
There you go again, Cliffy.
Protecting those civil rights, again…
Wheeee!
October 1st, 2008 at 3:24 am
Isn’t nice that the party of “Inclusion” makes such statements like Cliff’s
and
and
I would like to here from all the other liberals, democrats, lefties; whatever you call yourself.
What do you think when you hear or read of your fellow democrats making such statements?
October 1st, 2008 at 4:23 am
Bob S.,
Admitted, unabashed liberal here. When I hear or read of my fellow Democrats making such statements, I laugh (and cry). It was intended as humor, albeit sardonic. This supports my theory that you always have to explain the punchlines to conservatives.
But Bob, how do you feel about being forced to either pretend the Sarah Palin nomination is a good one, or vote for another ticket? If the Dems had nominated Palin, you conservatives/republicans/wingnuts, whatever you call yourselves, would be relentlessly brutal. Don’t you hate being put in the position of having to defend her qualifications?
October 1st, 2008 at 5:38 am
Bekkieann,
Sorry, but I don’t buy that it was intended as humor. Check out the many comments from AUTHORS on this site bashing Christians, bashing Republicans, bashing anyone they disagree with. It’s not humor. It’s an attack.
Even you do it:
Simple question, is it the type of discourse that should be used?
As far as defending Palin: I would rather vote for an inarticulate person who shares most of my values than vote for an inarticulate person who is diametrically opposed to most of my values.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:16 am
Aw Bob, that was just a little gentle teasing on my part. I apologize if you were honestly offended.
As for defending Palin, if only her inability to express herself were the only problem. I fear she has revealed far more about the underlying lack of knowledge and understanding needed for the job.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:26 am
Bekkieann,
I wasn’t offended, I was just pointing out the pattern that I see.
I understand and I’m concerned about the underlying lack of knowledge also, but is it enough to say “Because the Vice-Presidential candidate can’t answer all the questions, some of the questions we want; that we shouldn’t vote for McCain for President?”
Another thought, after all the complaining, whining and moaning that everyone(myself included) have done about how the “professionals” have done these last couple of decades; maybe an amateur should be the answer?
October 1st, 2008 at 7:06 am
Bob S,
Stop whining. It was an attack. We. I AM attacking you. You are responsible for this disaster. You Bob ARE RESPONSIBLE!
October 1st, 2008 at 7:16 am
Cliff,
Thanks!
So, I’m responsible, because I voted for Bush?
Or am I responsible because I bought only as much house as I could safely afford? That I put money down on my house, got a fixed interest rate with a payment that I can afford?
Am I responsible for the Republicans repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and Clinton’s failure to veto it?
Am I responsible for Clinton’s Changes to the regulations about the CRA?
Tell me how I’m responsible and YOUR AREN’T?
October 1st, 2008 at 7:26 am
Yes, Bob YOU are responsible.
October 1st, 2008 at 7:28 am
And Cliff, You didn’t answer my Question.
How am I responsible and you aren’t?
You also didn’t answer the question of HOW I’m responsible?
Need another cup of coffee this morning or a reading comprehension remedial class?
October 1st, 2008 at 7:49 am
Bob, It is your responsibility to be an educated informed American. It is your responsibility to speak out against injustice, lying, corruption and treason. It is your responsibility to do everything in your power to see that Bush hangs not in spite of the fact that you voted for him, but BECAUSE you voted for him.
It is your responsibility to grow up and accept the fact that the NRA is evil and guns are bad.
It is your responsibility to reject the kind of person who says “I bought only as much house as I could safely afford? That I put money down on my house, got a fixed interest rate with a payment that I can afford?” so fuck everybody else.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:08 am
Cliff,
I suggest the reading comprehension course. Maybe even more coffee.
Thanks again.
Here is real simple. I have never said F** everybody else. Not in word, thought or implication. That is only your reading into what I write.
Who is responsible for the mortgage crisis? Those who did the responsible thing or those who didn’t act responsibly?
Here is a clue for you; Those who acted irresponsibly are the ones whose mortgages are in arrears or they have walked away from paying the mortgage.
It it not my responsibility (nor should I ever have the authority) to tell other people how to manage their money, right?
If I don’t have the responsibility or authority to tell others how to manage their money, why should I accept the consequences of their actions?
That is completely different from saying F* everyone else, it is simply stating the fact of Personal RESPONSIBILITY. Something you’ve denied even exists but claim that we shouldn’t bail out the companies that are responsible for the fiasco along with the individuals.
So, we should bail out people when they make bad decisions but not companies? Tell me how that makes any sense. Doesn’t it create a moral hazard for the companies but none for the individuals?
On another note: Maybe the issue isn’t my maturity here,
That is a pretty simplistic and childish viewpoint, don’t you think?
Guns in the hands of the police; Good or Bad?
Guns in the hands of criminals; Good or Bad?
Maybe it’s not the guns at all, but the people using them. Most adults grow out of the personifying inanimate objects, shouldn’t you?
October 1st, 2008 at 8:14 am
Bob S.– It makes sense for people who are “upside down” on their mortgages, owing more than the house is worth, to walk away. Thanks to the Republicans in Congress and on the Supreme Court, bankruptcy no longer enables them to stay in their homes. They’re screwed.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:25 am
Richard,
The point that I was making is that the people shouldn’t get into a situation requiring them to walk away from a mortgage.
My wife and I calculated how much we could afford on a mortgage using several scenarios; including one we called “flipping burgers”. Basically, we decided that we could afford X amount of mortgage per month if I (highest paid) was laid off and could only get a minimum wage job.
We also considered where to buy a house and when. It is not the responsibility of the government or any other person to take over someone’s mortgage because they bought into a market where the housing prices were inflated. Most people could afford to wait or purchase less home.
Would you say folks who failed to research the issue properly, failed to calculate how much house they could afford, failed to plan for possible down turns (in the economy or housing market) acted responsibly or irresponsibly?
If we are unwilling to bail out companies that acted irresponsibly, why should we bail out individuals who acted irresponsibly?
October 1st, 2008 at 8:32 am
The point I am trying to make is that if you support Bush and/or any republicans, you are responsible for the destruction of everything that was good about America.
Whats left? Just Bob and his house. Great!
October 1st, 2008 at 8:46 am
Bob S.– The only justification I can think of to ease up on people who are behind on their mortgages, whose only option may be to walk away, is to avoid another Great Depression. Other than that, no reason.
More than nine percent of all mortgages are currently in default or foreclosure.
Conservatives try to dodge responsibility for financial crisis by blaming poor people, minorities.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:03 am
Only if you think short term, Richard. Unfortunately, you’ve been had. Tricked. Hoodwinked. Bamboozled.
Of course the home you recently bought costs more than it’s worth. Ever look at your mortgage statement? Ever notice how much of the payment actually goes toward the Principal?
The Fact is, Richard - unless you live in Dubai or Holland, they aren’t making anymore real estate. The house you bought will increase in value.
But it isn’t - and never was intended to be - a commodity.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:07 am
Richard,
Can you help me out here with a definition of predatory lending?
Are evil bankers and mortgage brokers stalking people in the streets, forcing them to sign Adjustable Rate Mortgages?
Perhaps the evil doers are putting up camouflage in houses; tricking people into believing that a 1,100 square foot 2 bedroom 1 bath cottage is worth multiple hundred thousands of dollars?
Maybe we should stop those predatory practices by having the government tell everyone how much they should pay for a house? Think of all the jobs we could create….hundreds of people going from being file clerks and production line operators to being federal housing appraisers.
Also, I enjoy this type of reporting:
Let me try “A record 100% of the people either made their mortgage payments or they didn’t.”
Trying to make the issue sound worse then it is or at least spread it out but they soon give away the game.
I didn’t include the “riskiest lending practices” in bold for a reason; If no one was deciding to take a “risky” mortgage, then there wouldn’t be any risky lending practices. I know this will be hard to believe on this blog; but I have not seen a single case of banks forcing people to take a loan. Not One. Every single mortgage has been voluntary.
I’ll ask again: If we are unwilling to bail out companies that acted irresponsibly, why should we bail out individuals who acted irresponsibly?
October 1st, 2008 at 10:28 am
Bob S.– All made possible by GOP deregulation of the mortgage industry. Yet you want to blame the victims. Did you read all the fine print when you signed your mortgage? I think the honest answer is no.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:41 am
Richard?
Can you please point to this “GOP deregulation of the mortgage industry” you keep referencing?
Something concrete, please. Links to your own posts don’t count.
October 1st, 2008 at 10:50 am
Richard,
The answer is that I didn’t read all the fine print word for word. But I did cover each and every bit of it with the mortgage company. I had a mortgage broker I trusted (college classmate) in the signing, confirming anything I didn’t fully understand. But here is the important part….99% of all the loan documentation I fully and completely understood PRIOR to it being signed. Because that is what responsible people do!
I don’t want to blame the victims….there are NO VICTIMS in this!
A victim is someone who can’t help what happened to them. Can you honestly tell me that the people who signed each and every one of the mortgages didn’t understand what they were doing?
And if they didn’t understand, why didn’t they? It is not blaming the victim to say people should be responsible for their financial decisions.
Or do you advocate everyone just turn their money over to the government and let the government decide where they should live, how much they should pay a month, etc?
Fine, blame it all on the GOP. Never mind that some democrats voted for it and a democrat president didn’t veto it.
Nevermind the fact that it really didn’t de-regulated anything
Blame it all on the GOP, it’s okay. It doesn’t change the fact that individual people took risky steps. It also doesn’t change the fact that those people, just like the businesses that took risky steps, should have to face the consequences of their actions.
Facing the consequences of their actions doesn’t make them victims, just adults.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:05 am
Gramm, Leach and Bliley are all Republicans, as I have previously pointed out. Clinton, as I have previously said, didn’t veto their bill because it passed by a veto-proof majority.
Your strenuous efforts to deny what is common knowledge are really impressive.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:09 am
Bob S.:
That line of attack is so freaking weak you should be ashamed at yourself for resorting to it; while we libs, on the other hand, should find comfort in the fact that that’s the best you can do!
The poor, poor banks, being required by law to throw their collective wisdom re loan portfolios away for the good of the unreliable poor of America.
That is hardly the case, Bob, and you know it! Cry me a freaking river!
October 1st, 2008 at 11:09 am
jd– All you have to do is Google “GOP deregulation of the mortgage industry” and see what comes up. For example:
McCain and the Mortgage Meltdown
October 1st, 2008 at 11:34 am
James,
I would like to respond to your comment, but it’s not making much sense but I’ll try anyways.
Am I or am I not responsible for Bill Clinton changing the regulations? I didn’t ask for them, I didn’t try to use the government to promote a social plan.
In some cases, that is exactly what it was and in some cases it was greed. Primarily it was IN RESPONSE to governmental pressure. I don’t care if it was democrat pressure or republican pressure. The fact is that the financial institutions were required, by law, by regulation and by pressure to increase home ownership. The primary method available was the sub prime market, so that is what they did. Did the institutions go overboard, yes.
But it isn’t my responsibility to insure that each and every person gets the mortgage that is right for them and NOT get one when they can’t afford it. That is the message I’m trying to get across James.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Richard, the Nation is hardly a reliable source. It’s a partisan magazine. Please try again.
Further, Leach may be a Republican, but he’s on in name only. Why he even heads Republicans for Obama. I’ll tell you what, I won’t claim that Leiberman is a Dem if you don’t claim that Leach is a Republican.
Finally, Gramm Leach Bliley passed the Senate 90-8. I could be wrong, but there were more than 8 Democrats in the Senate in 1999, weren’t there? It also had nothing to do with mortgages. I challenge you to dispute this with FACTS, Richard.
For a more detailed read on GLBA, try “The Real Effects of U.S. Banking
Deregulation“. This would be a paper by one of those “credentialled professionals” that Dear Leader Cliffy puts so much stock in.
Instead, why don’t you look at the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (signed by President Clinton).
October 1st, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Bob S:
You are buying John McCain and Sara Palin hook, line and sinker and we’re supposed to believe you make good decisions. Are you sure your house isn’t on top of a sinkhole? Why should we have to bail you out if your house is on top of a sinkhole and your insurance company abandons you? Maybe you’re not as lucky or as smart as you think.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:31 pm
jd– As a subscriber to The Nation, I can assure you it’s nonpartisan and critical of both major political parties. I have never known them to get their facts wrong, either.
Phil Gramm and his army of lobbyists got Democrats to vote for deregulation of the financial markets. That does not make deregulation the fault of the Democrats. The Commodity Futures Modernization Act is specifically cited in the section of the article I quoted.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Larry,
Surprise, I don’t expect you or anyone else to bail me out.
If my house is; on a sinkhole, toxic dump, has black mold,has a higher mortgage then I can afford, rearranged by carpenter ants, hit by a meteorite, swarmed under by zombies, consumed by a solar flare that leaves my neighbors completely untouched sucked into a black hole created by the Large Hadron Collider in Europe, etc and etc, I don’t expect you to bail me out.
You have no idea, except the arguments I make here, if I’m buying McCain/Palin hook line and sinker….but I’ll give you a clue….Read what I’ve written repeatedly.
What is it with some of the liberals on this board that can’t comprehend or remember what has been written, especially to them repeatedly.
I’ll say this again really slowly for you Larry
I (that is me)
am (verb -showing action)
voting (going to the polling place, pulling the lever-actually electronic button)
against ( in opposition)
Obama (Barry “Whose Middle Name is Hussien but it is Racist to say that” Obama )
more ( a larger percentage)
then (as a necessary consequence )
I ( that is me again)
voting (see above, this is getting old already but some people need the help)
McCain ( John, only slightly less socialistic then Obama but enough for me).
Does that make it clear? I am voting against Obama more then I am voting for McCain.!!
October 1st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Help, I’m being moderated again…..starting to feel picked on here.
Serious note, I do appreciate those admins that help. I fully understand that it is not something the admins control and I even believe that Cliff runs an open board, despite the occasionally threat or two.
I just don’t understand what in the comment caused it. If someone can explain it, I’ll avoid doing it in the future.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Bob S.– I approved your comment. Have no idea why it got stuck!
I appreciate that you don’t want anyone else to bail you out in the event Earth gets swallowed by a black hole! That’s an eminently reasonable position.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Richard,
Thanks for the help.
I wouldn’t expect help if the Earth was sucked into a black hole but I limited that line to just my house. You and I, unlike some, don’t wish ill on others.
October 1st, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Bob,
So you will vote FOR any unqualified candidate rather than Obama. I don’t understand why you would do that, but for argument’s sake, I’ll accept it. But I’d like to know what his middle name has to do with your decision.
October 1st, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Bob:
I hate to burst your bubble re the CRA, but, as explained here, your theory just doesn’t hold water.
October 1st, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Hey Bob, If you lost your house and everything and you were homeless and penniless with 5 kids and wife, would you make them suffer and refuse help?
Which society would you prefer to live in? One that helped its needy, or one that said tough shit?
For me, I am very sure, I’d prefer to live in a society without people like you. in it.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Cliff,
Really, this isn’t what I expected of someone with college degrees.
I don’t expect someone to bail me out doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t accept help. I first would seek help from my family, my church, my local charities, etc. That is not contradictory to my statements.
If no help was available, then my family would suffer. But at no time do I expect to be saved from the folly of my own actions and decisions. What is hard to understand about this?
If I was about to loose my house, I wouldn’t expect the government to step in and make my payments or even re-negotiate my mortgage which is one of the provisions of the bail out. How incredibly socialistic is it to have a judge be able to arbitrarily re-write the terms of a mortgage.
Cliff, it seems you keep getting caught up on the idea that only the government can help people. I disagree with that completely. The government has a defined role and this bail out and much of the social network exceeds it. That is the point I keep trying to make.
Charity and assistance has nothing to do with government assistance.
If you feel strongly about people loosing their houses, have you paid anyone’s house payment?
Have you paid off anyone’s mortgage? Taken it over for yourself and allowed them to live in the house?
You have no idea of the work or assistance that I do. Nor can you show anywhere that I’ve said that I wouldn’t help people.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Bob,
Did you use your own “bold” tags or did you use the Quicktags? I’ve had stuff hit the filter before when I’ve typed them in myself.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Bob S:
I think the reason you’re voting against Obama is because you think he’s going to take a dime from you. I’m voting for Obama because I really think he cares about America and the rest of the world too.
If you were being honest, you’d have to admit that if your house fell in a sinkhole and everybody in your family was injured AND your son came back from the service missing three limbs and required constant professional care, ect…
There has to be a point at which you shouldn’t feel ashamed in the least to have your government bail you out. I would support and pay taxes to treat you in a dignified manner at the worst moments in your life.
But you’re going to vote against Obama and everyone else in the country because you mistakenly believe you’ve worked harder then most Americans. You haven’t!
October 1st, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Well, I guess that’s a matter of perspective, isn’t it?
Here we go again with the canard that those Polly Pureheart Dems were tricked (I say TRICKED) by those dastardly Republicans. Of course, that leads to the question, if the dems are so stupid (Dems like Schumer and Biden) to be so easily tricked - why do schlubs like you continually vote for them? Why not vote for someone smarter?
Larry, I KNOW that Obama cares about America. But so does McCain. I don’t think for a minute that Obama wants to destroy this country, but his ideas and policies were so thoroughly repudiated by 1979 - I don’t want to see a repeat.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:53 pm
BekkieAnn,
No, I’ve never said that. Personally, I don’t think that Palin — for Vice President or McCain for President is unqualified.
I also personally think the Republican candidate for Vice President is at least as qualified as the Democrat Presidential candidate. That is my opinion.
Is she as articulate, informative and comfortable as I would like, No. But I don’t necessarily consider that a disqualifying criteria.
I don’t like the direction that Obama wants to take the country. That is why I’m not voting for him.
As far as the middle name, it comes from the gun blogs. A while back there was a big fuss in the media about how if anyone used Obama’s middle name, that person was racist. So, lots of folks started making up middle names or doing as I did.
It has nothing to do with my decision to vote for him or not.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
James,
I’ve been over this multiple times. Read the previous posts between Richard and I.
Don, I’m not sure used the quick tags but corrected one with typing it myself.
I wonder if using the parentheses was the issue? Thanks for the info and idea, I’ll watch how I do it.
October 1st, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Bekiann? Are you suggesting that McCain doesn’t have the qualifications to be President?
October 1st, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Larry,
Okay, again for those that might have trouble remembering. I don’t mind paying taxes. I don’t mind paying more taxes. I do mind when people talk about using the government to take more of my money to give to others. That is communism, socialism, fascism; whatever -ism you want to use. If I want to give people money, I should be able to decide who, when, where, how and especially WHY.
JD said it well, I think both care about the country, I’ve never denied that. I just don’t want to see his policies and goals implemented because I view them as leading to greater socialism.
Gee Larry, let’s set up some straw arguments and impossible situations:
I think you forgot if my daughter was pregnant and my dog only had three legs, but I think you got everything else. See my comments about the difference between accepting help and expecting help.
I think you might have hit on something that explains it. We should have a sense of shame that the government has to bail us out. Regardless of the situation, if a person has made such decisions, failed to prepare etc; that the government is required to do those things a responsible person should do, yes it should be shameful.
We, as a society, have gone far from removing the shame. We’ve made it acceptable to not only accept government assistance but to stay on it.
That is your choice, I’ll ask you the same as I have others. If you feel strongly about it, have you sent in extra money so the government can carry out your wishes?
I simply disagree that the government is the best or even appropriate agency to provide the types of assistance. That given, I wouldn’t stop anyone from donating any percentage of their income….so do you live your values?
I agree with you, I haven’t worked harder then any or most Americans. I’ve never consider that I have.
I will state that I have worked hard for my money. Shouldn’t I be allowed to keep as much as possible?
Shouldn’t I be allowed to decide what I want to do with my money?
Or should we all just make as much as we can, turn it over to the government and trust them to return what we deserve?
I also am not voting against everyone else in the country….a little hyperbole on your part there just because I disagree with your choice of candidate.
October 1st, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Anyone, I’ve another comment trapped in moderation.
Any help is appreciated.
October 1st, 2008 at 4:22 pm
JDB,
I’m just responding to Bob’s assertion he plans to vote against Obama. It seems to me that when a person says they are voting “against” a candidate, it at least implies that qualifications of the fallback choice are not important. Otherwise, why not say you are FOR the candidate who will receive your vote?
October 1st, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Bob:
Four more years of the same; that is what you are voting for when you vote for McCain, and there is nothing you can do or say to deny that!
October 1st, 2008 at 6:22 pm
BTW, Bob:
Here is a brand new article that debunks your theory that the CRA is to blame. Janet Yellen crystallizes succinctly the fallacy of your argument in the following snippet:
Come on, Bob, wake up from your deep sleep and start smelling something other than pig shit.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:23 pm
BekkieAnn,
I’m not sure how much you’ve followed this blog, but I’ve repeatedly have stated my reasons for voting for McCain.
Heck, Richard hosted a Point/Counterpoint debate where we talked about policies, issues, and plans.
Thanks again for doing that Richard, anytime you want I would participate again. I enjoyed talking about the issues.
James,
Think what you want, it doesn’t change how I’m voting. It is simply your opinion that McCain will be 4 more years of the same…and I do believe that I have the freedom of expression & and even thoughts to deny it if I want to.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I will bet anyone 25,000 dollars and give 5 to 1 odds (you put up $5k win $25k), if you search political blogs for the combination of right-wing idiots defending their opinion by invoking the 1st Amendment and/or freedom of expression…that the count would heavily favor republicans.
Thats a contract. I’ll ask Counsel, James Farmer to set up an escrow account to hold funds.
The idea that one CAN support John McCain because of a Constitutional Right is so asinine as to embarrass the entire species.
As if you haven’t embarrassed us enough?
October 1st, 2008 at 6:54 pm
DMC,
Can we expect anything more from you than testies-driven yucks - now that your entire stinking ideology has been flushed down the toilet?
October 1st, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Bob S.,
I follow only casually. Should I make more of an effort to inform myself of your opinions? I’m sure it would be more convenient for you if you didn’t have to repeat yourself for the benefit of any newbies. You seem to have little patience for that.
I’m jumping out of this thread now. Evening all.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Bob S:
You go ahead and vote for the guy who will surely give your tax dollars to mercenary armies, people who have so much money, they truly don’t know what to do with it, and war profiteers of all stripes. I wish I could say Obama is going to pledge not to give any of those categories any money, but I do know he will try to give more money to people are are desperate for a little help thanks to the socially destructive policies of the present corrupt administration.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:34 am
Cliff - I’d take your bet - if I could figure out what you are saying. Is there a dropdown on Babelfish that will translate your comments into common English?
Oh - and wasn’t there an earlier bet that you promised to set up? Or are you just talking out your ass again?
For the rest of you folks, FactCheck.org has an interesting analysis on the Credit Crisis.
Some highlights:
Read the whole thing. It’s pretty interesting.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:43 am
Richard? I’m still waiting for you to answer the previous post….
October 2nd, 2008 at 2:22 am
jd:
No, I will not read the whole thing; but, on the other hand, I note that the first para. of your citation negates Bob S’s principle argument re responsibility for the current financial issue we all face.
October 2nd, 2008 at 4:37 am
JD,
I you don’t understand my bet, you probably should not take it.
October 2nd, 2008 at 6:16 am
Cliff,
Maybe there are a couple of reasons conservatives mention the Freedom of Speech/Expression more often?
1. Liberals, like you, have threatened to take away our freedoms. You do remember doing that, don’t you?
2. Conservatives support all of our freedoms, not just the ones that are convenient to our beliefs; e.g. if conservatives disagree with what you have to say, they don’t call it “hate speech” and try to get it made illegal.
3. Maybe conservatives aren’t sure if some of the liberals remember what we are supposed to have? (remember that right of INDIVIDUALS to keep and bear arms?
By the way, would you care to address this point that you’ve either overlooked or ignored?
That is a pretty simplistic and childish viewpoint, don’t you think?
Guns in the hands of the police; Good or Bad?
Guns in the hands of criminals; Good or Bad?
Maybe it’s not the guns at all, but the people using them. Most adults grow out of the personifying inanimate objects, shouldn’t you?
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:49 am
I (and my bet) refer specifically to the purpose and context in which you used it (1st Amendment), i.e to defend your opinion…that you love Bush and McCain and Palin.
I don’t expect you to understand or explain why or how disconnected the two are. I meant only to point out to more intellectually sophisticated people, the anthropological correlation to small-minded, selfish, right-wing Americans.
October 2nd, 2008 at 8:25 am
Hey Cliff,
Is this defense tactic number 8 or 9,obfuscation?
October 2nd, 2008 at 8:46 am
jd– Asked and answered. Phil Gramm and an army of lobbyists deregulated the financial sector, which led to the mortgage meltdown. As I told you, all you have to do is Google “GOP deregulation of the mortgage industry.”
Did you ever answer my question? Are you going to deny that McCain pledged to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term as President?
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:26 am
Richard. I did answer your question. 2013 was the date.
Richard, did you read the Fact Check article?
As Albert pointed out, it does run against some of what Bob has been saying re the CRA - in part.
It also completely negates your assertion that Phil Gramm and deregulated the financial sector which led to the mortgage meltdown.
Of course, if you have hard evidence - I’m more than willing to look at it.
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:35 am
Bob - Cliff thinks that if he strings together a bunch of $3 words, people will think that his opinions are worth consideration.
He is unable to understand that his complete lack of gravitas comes from not only his ludicrous ideas, but his inablity to form coherent sentences conforming to established grammar rules.
[wait for it - Cliffy's gonna proclaim that before he was an IR major, a VEWWWY challenging field, he was an English major]
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:47 am
JD,
Notice how Cliff is completely avoiding the gun questions?
I’ll re-post it again for him….I think until he answers I’ll keep doing this. Don’t you think he should answer it since he proclaimed the NRA evil and Guns Bad?
Cliff,
That is a pretty simplistic and childish viewpoint, don’t you think?
Guns in the hands of the police; Good or Bad?
Guns in the hands of criminals; Good or Bad?
Maybe it’s not the guns at all, but the people using them. Most adults grow out of the personifying inanimate objects, shouldn’t you?
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:56 am
He’s busy. He’s currently removing an inch of dust and the plastic wrap from his Chicago Manual of Style.
Did you read the FactCheck article, Bob? It’s a pretty good one.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:06 am
jd– FactCheck correctly concludes that a lot of factors came together to cause the mortgage meltdown. Deregulation is the biggest cause, but not the only one. Most of the other causes were consequences of deregulation. They also point to the Bush administration, which failed to provide government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
My conclusion still stands– Republican right-wing ideology is to blame. If Democrats bought into the deregulation meme, then shame on them.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:19 am
JD,
Obviously, Factcheck is a republican apparatchik
Good article but as Richard proves it is still the Republican’s fault. Let’s not throw out all the scoundrels….just those evil mind controlling republicans.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:37 am
Bob S.– How about this explanation? Republicans enacted deregulation when the controlled Congress. Many other factors added to the mortgage meltdown, most of which were consequences of deregulation and a laissez-faire mentality.
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 am
Uhhh - No - Richard. No matter how much you’d like to make it so.
I’m still waiting for you to show me, specifically, where the Republicans deregulated the financial sector which directly led to the mortgage meltdown.
What particular piece of legislation? Can you point to it? Quote it?
Btw - thank you for taking the time to read the article. Apparently that many words are much to daunting for Albert to tackle.
October 2nd, 2008 at 11:59 am
jd– No matter how much you’d like to believe the opposite of the truth, most Americans are well informed and not buying the latest GOP talking points. A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll suggests that by a 2-to-1 margin, Americans blame Republicans over Democrats for the financial crisis.
The poll also indicates more Americans think Obama would do a better job handling the economic crisis than McCain.
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Sorry, Richard. FactCheck doesn’t do GOP talking points.
And regardless of the CNN poll - the truth is out there.
Wasn’t it you that was bemoaning the “stupidity” of the American voter? Weren’t you complaining that they should be more educated?
Clearly, a brief perusal of the FactCheck entry would disabuse them of the notion that the GOP is solely responsible for the current financial situation.
I’m still waiting for you to show me, specifically, where the Republicans deregulated the financial sector which directly led to the mortgage meltdown.
What particular piece of legislation? Can you point to it? Quote it?
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:34 pm
jd– I challenge you to find an accurate quote of me where I accusing voters in general of “stupidity.” I might have said that regarding the 20-percenters who support Bush.
You are making a reductio ad absurdum argument by saying that if any Democrats backed the Republican deregulation of the financial markets, then Republicans can’t be blamed.
I already gave you the information you keep asking for. If you want more proof, use The Google!
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:00 pm
In all honesty, Richard - It may have been Cliff or Larry who called American voters, “stupid”.
But you are still dodging the question, “I’m still waiting for you to show me, specifically, where the Republicans deregulated the financial sector which directly led to the mortgage meltdown.
What particular piece of legislation? Can you point to it? Quote it?”
I’ve made no such “ad absurdum” argument. That’s because Gramm Leach wasn’t responsible for the current mess - it did, however, mitigate some of the damage.
I thought you read the FactCheck article.
Now, please answer the question.
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
JD, Richard,
I’ll jump in here. I think the problem is that while some legislation has changed the rules, it is still a heavily regulated area.
The “deregulation” didn’t remove the rules, it just changed them and freed up the companies from previous restrictions. If I have something with 1,000 regulations on it and I remove 300, isn’t it still regulated?
Nothing that the Republicans did removed the regulations, Nothing the Democrats did removed the regulations. Anything Congress did loosened those regulations and then BOTH parties’ administrations either didn’t enforce the regulations or pushed them to achieve goals that didn’t make financial sense.
/reasonableness mode off
However, I think that most of the changes regarding the mortgage industry itself was a part of the Democrat party plan to increase home ownership. Those changes and the shifting enforcement of the regulations is what caused the mortgage crisis.
….and the firestorm begins in 3…….2……..1
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Here’s my answer, again, for the fourth time: Google “GOP deregulation of the mortgage industry.”
For everyone’s convenience, I suggest we continue this at the new post I’ve put up:
Republicans: Don’t Blame Us, We Just Run the Government
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Your answer isn’t sufficient, Richard. It’s not an answer at all. It’s akin to “go look it up yourself”.
Unless you can show me something better than a response a lazy parent would give, I’m calling “Bullshit” and asserting that you haven’t the foggiest idea as to what you are talking about. You’re simply parroting the party line. Aren’t you a little ashamed of yourself?
Let’s try again –
I’m still waiting for you to show me, specifically, where the Republicans deregulated the financial sector which directly led to the mortgage meltdown.
What particular piece of legislation? Can you point to it? Quote it?”
November 5th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
You know one small thing that really pisses me off? All you friggen idiots using the word “then” where you should be using the word “than.” Fucking tittie balls, you’re all a bunch of stupid ignorant fucks.