Who does The Left hate THE MOST?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Rush Limbaugh
Sarah Palin
Mitt Romney
George Bush(W)
Dick Cheney
Ronald Reagan
Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Thomas Sowell
Newt Gingrich
Mark Levin
Glen Beck
Ann Coulter
Michelle Malkin
David Horowitz
Sean Hannity
Michelle Bachmann
Other(Name the Target)

[Serge Ibaka]

The right is much better at hate-mongering, imo.

[SoonerStormchaser]

The minorities are much better at hate-mongering, imo.

fixed...on account that just about anything that might go against their agenda has to be racially motivated

[Serge Ibaka]

fixed...on account that just about anything that might go against their agenda has to be racially motivated

Great, an "all minorities are racist!" stance: a very original and well thought out generalization. Well done! :rolleyes:

[KABOOKIE]

Great, an "all minorities are racist!" stance: a very original and well thought out generalization. Well done! :rolleyes:

Speak for yourself General Originality. :rolleyes:

[Curly Bill]

You mean: General Troll

[yermom]

i'm not really that left, but i'm going with Cheney

Rush and Beck are moron entertainers getting ratings and selling books. they are idiots, but i don't hate them per se

Palin is dumber than a sack of hammers and i pity anyone that takes her seriously, but i don't hate her

[XingTheRubicon]

white farmers?

[Curly Bill]

White American citizens?

[yermom]

white farmers?

the ones the government pays not to farm or the ones enabling illegals?

[XingTheRubicon]

after November it won't matter what any liberal thinks

[Crucifax Autumn]

I'm basically centrist, but in that list I have to go with Glen Beck.

[XingTheRubicon]

How could you hate Glen Beck? That's like hating Biker Fox.

[Serge Ibaka]

You mean: General Troll

More like General AWESOME!!!! :pop:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

How could you hate Glen Beck? That's like hating Biker Fox.Which template best applies?: Stupid, or Crazy?

[JohnnyMack]

I'd probably vote for Hannity. Mainly because he tries to act like something other than what he truly is.

[ndpruitt03]

They blame W for pretty much everything they themselves do wrong. So I'll go with W.

[Scott D]

Why would anyone hate Beck? It's more amusing to see which way his opinion blows....usually depends on who is flashing the green at him.

[Serge Ibaka]

I'd vote for Hannity if we're talking the Fox News pundits--Glen Beck can't be taken seriously, and Hannity is a total turd.

Palin, otherwise, because she's a big fat quitter.

But seriously: Karl Rove ftw (loss?).

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

i'm not really that left, but i'm going with Cheney

Rush and Beck are moron entertainers getting ratings and selling books. they are idiots, but i don't hate them per se

Palin is dumber than a sack of hammers and i pity anyone that takes her seriously, but i don't hate herCheney: Crazy
Rush, Beck and Palin: Stupid-box of rocks
(heh)

[Dio]

Great, an "all minorities are racist!" stance: a very original and well thought out generalization. Well done! :rolleyes:

This from the same guy who just said "the right is much better at hate-mongering, imo"? Pot, meet kettle

:rolleyes: right back atcha

[KC//CRIMSON]

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/b/A/limbaugh_oxycontin.jpg
Rush Limbaugh

Charges: We don’t care if this miserable, insecure blowhole wants Obama to fail, but the truth is, for America to survive, Rush Limbaugh must fail. His obvious racism, well-demonstrated over his decades of broadcasting, colors his every mischaracterization of Obama as some commie activist painting the White House black, rather than the regular establishment twinkie he really is. He knows his audience of inadequate boobs well (sound like someone we know? cough..cough..hint..hint..), playing to their unfounded fears of “reparations” and making up facts to shore up their ego integrity.

Exhibit A: “Community service is one of the baby steps toward fascism.”

Sentence: Relegated to Ham radio and CFL team ownership.

[delhalew]

They blame W for pretty much everything they themselves do wrong. So I'll go with W.

They pretend, but how could they hate the best scapegoat they've ever had ? You can't have a discussion on current policy without some granola head invoking his name. I think they'll be beating that horse for decades.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Like that's new or unique. The right does the same thing with Carter.

[Leroy Lizard]

Like that's new or unique. The right does the same thing with Carter.

Disagree. While the Right brings up Carter as an example of a bad president, I don't hear them blaming our problems on him. Certainly they haven't claimed that our presidents are hamstrung by Carter's legacy.

[Crucifax Autumn]

During Reagan's first couple of years his Obama-like poll numbers were frequently blamed on Carter. Not that I'm defending Carter's time in office, but I won't defend most of the Bush years either. It's not like there's a big reset button in the White House or something and all the bad **** goes away for the new guy.

[delhalew]

Like that's new or unique. The right does the same thing with Carter.
Seems like if the "right" mention Carter it's only to say Carter gave us Reagan. There is really no need to say more. Everybody knows Carter was a cluster****. Although I was young, I don't recall the Reagan admin spending more time crying about Carter than solving problems. Reagan initially suffered a bad rep, but that turned around pretty quickly when people got back to work. Then eventually there was the whole ending the cold war thing. Who do you see in office right now capable of such feats. Thus the need for a scapegoat.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Quite honestly, I remember it different. Much of the rhetoric at the time was similar to what we hear now as far as the blame game. Reagan's numbers shifted as much when he got shot as when the economy started doing better.

At the same time the left tried to take credit for the recovery by claiming Carter's policies were finally paying off. Hell, even GHB Bush disagreed with Reagan's economic policies when they were running against each other in the primaries.

Yep...Both sides are stupid when it comes to the blame/credit game and I don't see that ever changing.

[Crucifax Autumn]

And GW Bush spent his time pre-911 saying the same crap about the economy going down and blaming it on Clinton.

It's so typical of both sides to pull this crap. They all need a foot in the *** IMO.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

While I wouldn't necessarily say I hate him the most, I had a feeling of great hateful pleasure when Richard Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre Henchman Robert Bork failed in his nomination to the Supreme Court. Never has there been such an arrogant dick testifying before the Senate.

[Crucifax Autumn]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_AI1_CxkKDPs/S8O5W1tGflI/AAAAAAAADB0/ODPy_GsP3wE/s1600/bork.jpg

[Crucifax Autumn]

http://pierreseguin.ca/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/brokebork.jpg

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

And GW Bush spent his time pre-911 saying the same crap about the economy going down and blaming it on Clinton.

It's so typical of both sides to pull this crap. They all need a foot in the *** IMO.It seems moral equivalency fence-walking is more important to you than facing the truth head-on. If you can't see the cluster-fu*k that is the Democrat Party, and somehow think the Republicans, as an entire party, are anywhere near as corrupt and just flat as consistently wrong and/or misguided as the Democrats, then you've not been paying very close attention.

[Leroy Lizard]

During Reagan's first couple of years his Obama-like poll numbers were frequently blamed on Carter. Not that I'm defending Carter's time in office, but I won't defend most of the Bush years either.

I love how you make it sound as if you're arguing for both sides, when you're really not. ;)

[Crucifax Autumn]

I don't know where you guys get that ****. I have seriously come to the conclusion that they are all full of crap, liars, cheats and scumbags. Playing around with dumb ideas like "yeah, they all suck but these guys suck less" seems rather silly to me.

If you actually think that the whole thing's not misguided and corrupt, filled with people serving only themselves, and completely screwing up the country then I'm not the one who's not been paying attention. You guys have both commented on the dooshiness of RINOs on multiple occasions and the majority of the republican party fits that description when they toss out their true conservative ideals when it benefits them. Just ask John McCain.

[Chuck Bao]

I don't hate on anybody. But, I do hate trying to debate an issue with someone who drops all pretenses of reason and logic in a mad rush to paint the political landscape in terms of black and white.

If you were a salesman trying to sell me a product, I would think the pushiness was a bit off-putting, but I have to admit that I do admire the passion. Now, relax. You've made the sale and earned the commission.

If you are so convinced that you are right, then probably you are right. But, what I don't get is the continual need for the "us versus them". Yeah, I hate that, besides in sports of course.

[Crucifax Autumn]

My big question is who has the bigger dick, Rachel Maddow or Ann Coulter?

And who's ***** is sweeter? Beck's or Chris Matthews'?

What I do know is that all 4 of them are divisive and unreasonable, but I still want to know which person in question one should make a porno with which person from question 2.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I don't hate on anybody. But, I do hate trying to debate an issue with someone who drops all pretenses of reason and logic in a mad rush to paint the political landscape in terms of black and white.

If you were a salesman trying to sell me a product, I would think the pushiness was a bit off-putting, but I have to admit that I do admire the passion. Now, relax. You've made the sale and earned the commission.

If you are so convinced that you are right, then probably you are right. But, what I don't get is the continual need for the "us versus them". Yeah, I hate that, besides in sports of course.The Democrat party STANDS FOR corruption, dishonesty, and authoritarian socialism and fascism. It's that simple. The republican party stands for Americas values, laws and customs. There are individuals in the repubs that are bullshi* RINOS, and part-time conservatives, like McCain, and some people who are as corrupt and lawless as the democrats. I know that, and don't pretend differently. But, the only hope for this country's survival as anything approximating the America we have had is to defeat the Democrats, everywhere and, for the time being anyway, for the foreseeable future.

[Chuck Bao]

My big question is who has the bigger dick, Rachel Maddow or Ann Coulter?

And who's ***** is sweeter? Beck's or Chris Matthews'?

What I do know is that all 4 of them are divisive and unreasonable, but I still want to know which person in question one should make a porno with which person from question 2.

I am a hating on you right now, Cru. Ewwwww! Please stop it.

[Crucifax Autumn]

The Democrat party STANDS FOR corruption, dishonesty, and authoritarian socialism and fascism. It's that simple. The republican party stands for Americas values, laws and customs. There are individuals in the repubs that are bullshi* RINOS, and part-time conservatives, like McCain, and some people who are as corrupt and lawless as the democrats. I know that, and don't pretend differently. But, the only hope for this country's survival as anything approximating the America we have had is to defeat the Democrats, everywhere and, for the time being anyway, for the foreseeable future.

Dude...I actually agree, but I also think the pubs need to be tosed out. Until we have not just one but 2 or 3 more viable parties we're screwed. Many people had hopes for the Tea Party but now they are just bringng in the same career politicians and utter morons we're already bitching about.

They can all suck my a$$.

[MrJimBeam]

White American citizens?

I think the left fear citizens more than they hate them.

[GKeeper316]

i'm not really that left, but i'm going with Cheney

Rush and Beck are moron entertainers getting ratings and selling books. they are idiots, but i don't hate them per se

Palin is dumber than a sack of hammers and i pity anyone that takes her seriously, but i don't hate her

pretty much this, except i'd have cheney as 1a and karl rove as 1b.

[VeeJay]

If Members of Congress would nut up and say to an incoming president, "We're not going to rubber stamp your agenda and pass everything you throw against the wall" we'd probably have a little more respect for them, and that 10% approval may uptick a little.

After the last two disasters we've had as president, you'd think they'd learn. We now have the Speaker of the House in a celebratory speech, claiming "We had to pass the bill...to see what is in it."

I'd say there's a glimmer of hope that we can somehow climb out of the sh*t pile we've found ourselves in, but I'm highly doubtful.

[texaspokieokie]

don't forget Laura Ingraham.

as she gets to be more well known, it might turn out to be Michelle Malkin.

she's great !!

other day she called a prominent dem a "moron".
mighta been obamera, but it coulda been any one of thousands.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

If Members of Congress would nut up and say to an incoming president, "We're not going to rubber stamp your agenda and pass everything you throw against the wall" we'd probably have a little more respect for them, and that 10% approval may uptick a little.

This congress(majority) is FULLY in the camp of the administration, and their conversion to socialist authoritarianism.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

don't forget Laura Ingraham.

as she gets to be more well known, it might turn out to be Michelle Malkin.

she's great !!

other day she called a prominent dem a "moron".
mighta been obamera, but it coulda been any one of thousands.Michelle Malkin is a SUPERSTAR. I'm really surprised I haven't seen the left go after her, yet, like they do Ann Coulter.

[soonerscuba]

Michelle Malkin is a SUPERSTAR. I'm really surprised I haven't seen the left go after her, yet, like they do Ann Coulter.Honest question, I know at one time you professed to have a degree in PS from OU, so at minimum you have at least been in contact with policy analysis at some point in your life. At what point did you forego with actual data and just start parroting whatever the radio or TV tells you, and that you already agree with?

[ndpruitt03]

What numbers are you looking at that say what the democrats have done the last 4 years is good? We've spent so much money to try and fix things. That has never really worked. Right now it's the democrats not looking at actual data because if they did they would have to confess that they are trying to spend the country into oblivion. And it wasn't like the republicans weren't spending money in the 2000s also. And that was bad but the spending the democrats are doing right now makes it look like the repubs in the 2000s were SAVING money. That's ridiculous.

[soonerscuba]

What numbers are you looking at that say what the democrats have done the last 4 years is good? We've spent so much money to try and fix things. That has never really worked. Right now it's the democrats not looking at actual data because if they did they would have to confess that they are trying to spend the country into oblivion. And it wasn't like the republicans weren't spending money in the 2000s also. And that was bad but the spending the democrats are doing right now makes it look like the repubs in the 2000s were SAVING money. That's ridiculous.Was straw on sale at the dollar store? At no point did I make any sort of judgement as to the last decade. I simply think that if one professes to have a formal education in politics, they should be able to point to some model of formulation or theory to butress some of their viewpoint. At least be able to point to a scholarly influence.

[ndpruitt03]

Maybe doing things completely politically isn't always really the right thing to do. The people running the country right now want to give everyone health care, let them stay unemployed and still get money, they want to go after the banks and rich people which will really only end up regulating the less rich cause the rich can avoid punishment by paying people off or finding ways around paying so much.

They want to sound good when they give everyone everything and go after the evil rich people. Problem is that all this sounds good but in practice it just ends up hurting those that aren't rich. It happens over and over and over again in history and the left keeps making the same stupid mistakes.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Your limited real life experience makes me laugh.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Your limited real life experience makes me laugh.translation: If you were more informed, you would know that these socialists are no worse than evil capitalists. All parties are equally wrong/corrupt/evil. haha

[OUMallen]

Beck




''Al Gore's not going to be rounding up Jews and exterminating them. It is the same tactic, however. The goal is different. The goal is globalization...And you must silence all dissenting voices. That's what Hitler did. That's what Al Gore, the U.N., and everybody on the global warming bandwagon [are doing].''

—Glenn Beck on his radio show, May 1, 2007

''Barack Obama ... chose to use his name Barack for a reason -- to identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Is -- really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion.''

—Glenn Beck, ''The Glenn Beck Program,'' Feb. 4, 2010

''I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I'm wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. ... No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out. Is this wrong?''

—Glenn Beck, responding to the question 'What would people do for $50 million?', 'The Glenn Beck Program,' May 17, 2005

(NOTE: I hate Michael Moore too.)

''Roosevelt...Am I wrong by saying there was a good portion of people that thought, 'Holy cow, I'm glad he's dead. He was turning into a dictator.'''

—Glenn Beck, on FDR, who was wildly popular after being elected four times, bringing America back from economic collapse, and leading the Allied powers to victory in World War II (May 21, 2010)

[Crucifax Autumn]

translation: If you were more informed, you would know that these socialists are no worse than evil capitalists. All parties are equally wrong/corrupt/evil. haha

No, it's not that at all. People accuse you of being a parrot, but you have a lifetime of experience to base your opinions on. This kid just repeats anything he hears on the radio and has no clue. The unemployment part is what gets me most due to what I see here in Nevada with 14.5% unemployment. He can't claim that the libs are destroying the economy and also claim that the only reason people are out of work is laziness. It's a STUPID thing to say.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

BeckHe says he might be losing his vision. Maybe Obamacare will "take care" of him with a suitable eye transplant.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Nah. He'll spend a ton of cash at the Mayo clinic or something.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

No, it's not that at all. People accuse you of being a parrot, but you have a lifetime of experience to base your opinions on. This kid just repeats anything he hears on the radio and has no clue. The unemployment part is what gets me most due to what I see here in Nevada with 14.5% unemployment. He can't claim that the libs are destroying the economy and also claim that the only reason people are out of work is laziness. It's a STUPID thing to say.I believe Pruitt said that extending unemployment tends to MAKE people lazy and complacent.

I would say that he is prolly correct about that. It's very similar to extending welfare benefits.

[Crucifax Autumn]

And I think he's repeating what someone else said. The simple math says that if 5-15 people apply for every job 4-14 of them don't get one.

[tommieharris91]

No, it's not that at all. People accuse you of being a parrot, but you have a lifetime of experience to base your opinions on. This kid just repeats anything he hears on the radio and has no clue. The unemployment part is what gets me most due to what I see here in Nevada with 14.5% unemployment. He can't claim that the libs are destroying the economy and also claim that the only reason people are out of work is laziness. It's a STUPID thing to say.

No, we accuse RLIMC of being a parrot because of his handle.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

And I think he's repeating what someone else said. The simple math says that if 5-15 people apply for every job 4-14 of them don't get one.Pruitt continues to make some good points, whether he has heard them before, or not. I believe he's correct about most of the things I've read from him.

[ndpruitt03]

FDR never led us out of an economic collapse. The unemployment rate never really went down till all of his policies were thrown out by the supreme court. Right after most of his new deal was thrown out by the supreme court unemployment went from 24% to 14%. Then FDR passed the Wagner act and unemployment rose back up to the 20s.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

FDR never led us out of an economic collapse. The unemployment rate never really went down till all of his policies were thrown out by the supreme court. Right after most of his new deal was thrown out by the supreme court unemployment went from 24% to 14%. Then FDR passed the Wagner act and unemployment rose back up to the 20s.He was a real beaut, wasn't he? haha

[soonerscuba]

And I think he's repeating what someone else said. The simple math says that if 5-15 people apply for every job 4-14 of them don't get one.THERE IS NO SUPPLY SIDE FOR A LABOR MARKET, THEY'RE JUST LAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[tommieharris91]

And I think he's repeating what someone else said. The simple math says that if 5-15 people apply for every job 4-14 of them don't get one.

Here's more simple math. There are 3.2 million job openings as of May 2010. (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.htm) There are 14.6 million people unemployed as of June 2010. (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm) Now, assuming that every unemployed person was qualified to do every open job, 11.4 million people are still unemployed.

ETA: For those who like to track wayyy back in threads and can't even do that simple math, you shall have this. (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/job%20openings%20vs%20jobless%202010-05-thumb-570x326-29516.png)

[Crucifax Autumn]

Pruitt continues to make some good points, whether he has heard them before, or not. I believe He's correct about most of the things I've read from him.

It doesn't matter though. Without a proper context to place the "facts" within, they are shortsighted and unrealistic. If he was rattling off some shat Maddow says with a total lack of life context you'd agree with me. I'm just tired of an entire country of morons spouting other people's opinions instead of thinking for themselves. Just read some of the posts from juan, scuba, etc. to see what I mean.

Turn off the damned radio or tv and go out in the world and observe people.

[tommieharris91]

And as for who the left hates the most, I'm going with a darkhorse: Michelle Bachmann.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Sharon Angle for me if I get to choose idiots not on the list.

That's not really true either though...I pretty much hate anyone in any party in an elected position right now and only hate the ones currently running slightly less.

[tommieharris91]

Sharon Angle for me if I get to choose idiots not on the list.

That's not really true either though...I pretty much hate anyone in any party in an elected position right now and only hate the ones currently running slightly less.

Nah, Sharron Angle gives Harry Reid a chance to keep his seat.

[ndpruitt03]

It doesn't matter though. Without a proper context to place the "facts" within, they are shortsighted and unrealistic. If he was rattling off some shat Maddow says with a total lack of life context you'd agree with me. I'm just tired of an entire country of morons spouting other people's opinions instead of thinking for themselves. Just read some of the posts from juan, scuba, etc. to see what I mean.

Turn off the damned radio or tv and go out in the world and observe people.

I think watching things on TV and internet are important. But you have to look things up to make sure those things are correct.

For example I used to believe the propaganda that FDR saved us from an even worse depression then I decided to look at what happened after he actually passed his acts, and unemployment didn't really change that much. Then suddenly his New Deal stuff gets thrown out and guess what unemployment didn't rise but fell by about 10%. Then you look at his next big act which gave unions power over business. Suddenly unemployment rose back up 10%.

Maybe what FDR was doing wasn't all that great.

[Crucifax Autumn]

From a left point of view, that may be true, but my point is that I can't stand stupid people and she fits the bill better than anyone I've ever seen on the political stage. She makes typical stupid politicians look like Stephen Hawking.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I think watching things on TV and internet are important. But you have to look things up to make sure those things are correct.

For example I used to believe the propaganda that FDR saved us from an even worse depression then I decided to look at what happened after he actually passed his acts, and unemployment didn't really change that much. Then suddenly his New Deal stuff gets thrown out and guess what unemployment didn't rise but fell by about 10%. Then you look at his next big act which gave unions power over business. Suddenly unemployment rose back up 10%.

Maybe what FDR was doing wasn't all that great.

I don't disagree, but an overall context to all that could be helpful in truly understanding what happened.

Frame your comments with context, experience, and facts and I don't have a problem. If the country wasn't full of sheep on both sides we'd probably get out of our current mess.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

And as for who the left hates the most, I'm going with a darkhorse: Michelle Bachmann.She is a newcomer, and they DO INDEED hate her. I have a friend who is Jewish, and plenty smart about business, but not politics. She almost starts frothing at the mouth when Bachman's name is mentioned. She thinks of her as a she-devil, akin to Sarah Palin.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Dude...I actually agree, but I also think the pubs need to be tosed out. Until we have not just one but 2 or 3 more viable parties we're screwed. Many people had hopes for the Tea Party but now they are just bringng in the same career politicians and utter morons we're already bitching about.

They can all suck my a$$. NICE TRY! You are clever. I tip my hat to your wiliness!

[ndpruitt03]

Ron Paul is probably the most hated 'right wing' politician by the right. And he's pretty similar to Angle politically. He's for privatizing SS, Welfare, and most other government programs. I think that's the way we will have to go eventually because our government won't be able to afford paying for everything.

Look at how the health care system the government wants is working out in Massachusetts. They have the highest premiums in the nation. The government will have find a way to pay for health care on average of about 10k dollars a person if the premiums do what they did in that state.

That's just one entitlement. I will never pick up an unemployment check or welfare check because that is Un-American as can be. That's fine for Europe but this nation should be against such things. It leads a government to controlling more parts of a country and promotes people to do nothing.

Right now I'm unemployed. I've been looking for a job for 10 months. But I'm not taking a penny from the government in my life time. The attitude of all Americans should be to try and pay for your own things in life. The government rights now wants to sound popular and pay everything without really paying for it.

[Pogue Mahone]

Bachmann's amusing, not as amusing as Rep. Eric Cantor, but still entertaining in her own way. Cantor fumbling over his thoughts in exchanges with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is the funniest thing on C-SPAN each week

Sen. Mitch McConnell, who delivered the same uninspired health care speech 150 times on the Senate floor, isn't getting the credit he deserves on this topic.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Bachmann's amusing, not as amusing as Rep. Eric Cantor, but still entertaining in her own way. Cantor fumbling over his thoughts in exchanges with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is the funniest thing on C-SPAN each week

Sen. Mitch McConnell, who delivered the same uninspired health care speech 150 times on the Senate floor, isn't getting the credit he deserves on this topic.Which conservative do YOU hate the most?

[Crucifax Autumn]

Ron Paul is probably the most hated 'right wing' politician by the right. And he's pretty similar to Angle politically. He's for privatizing SS, Welfare, and most other government programs. I think that's the way we will have to go eventually because our government won't be able to afford paying for everything.

Look at how the health care system the government wants is working out in Massachusetts. They have the highest premiums in the nation. The government will have find a way to pay for health care on average of about 10k dollars a person if the premiums do what they did in that state.

That's just one entitlement. I will never pick up an unemployment check or welfare check because that is Un-American as can be. That's fine for Europe but this nation should be against such things. It leads a government to controlling more parts of a country and promotes people to do nothing.

Right now I'm unemployed. I've been looking for a job for 10 months. But I'm not taking a penny from the government in my life time. The attitude of all Americans should be to try and pay for your own things in life. The government rights now wants to sound popular and pay everything without really paying for it.

Just out of curiosity who pays your bills? How do you feed yourself? What if you don't get a job for another 10 months? What happens if there's no job when you or whoever your benefactor is runs out of savings?

Why is no one on either side of the aisle offering real solutions to the job problem?

[Crucifax Autumn]

Which conservative do YOU hate the most?

That's a loaded question thanks to the lack of actual real conservatives out there other than talking heads, none of whom seem inclined to actually run for office.

[ndpruitt03]

Just out of curiosity who pays your bills? How do you feed yourself? What if you don't get a job for another 10 months? What happens if there's no job when you or whoever your benefactor is runs out of savings?

Why is no one on either side of the aisle offering real solutions to the job problem?

Because the real solutions to the problem. Getting out of businesses way so all businesses can do what they do naturally doesn't sound popular. It always works the best, but you can't just try and destroy big business and then not hurt small business.

[Pogue Mahone]

Oh, McConnell's the worst ... and it's not close.

Almost everyone else on this list has some sort of redeeming thought or entertainment value, not McConnell. He makes Jon Kyl and Tom Coburn look positively electric.

[Pogue Mahone]

And another thing, go a little further on the left than I am ... and Joe Lieberman wins going away.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Because the real solutions to the problem. Getting out of businesses way so all businesses can do what they do naturally doesn't sound popular. It always works the best, but you can't just try and destroy big business and then not hurt small business.

And my other questions?

[ndpruitt03]

Right now I pay my bills with the money I have left from working in the past. I'm optimistic I'll get a job before that money runs out. But I don't need the governments help to pay for anything in my life and will never use a government dime at all.

[GrapevineSooner]

The right is much better at hate-mongering, imo.

I think Sarah Spitz of NPR would give your opinion a run for it's money.

Look her up. She's on Journolist.

[ndpruitt03]

Seriously anyone that says the right is better at hate mongering needs to listen to what Obama says about the right at this moment and how the republicans want to go back to how it was under Bush. When unemployment was under 5%, scary. Look I don't like Bush, but the hate mongering from the left right now is worse than any hate mongering the right has ever had. Just look at all the race stuff in recent days and weeks that was started basically by the NAACP.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Right now I pay my bills with the money I have left from working in the past. I'm optimistic I'll get a job before that money runs out. But I don't need the governments help to pay for anything in my life and will never use a government dime at all.

A few more questions...

How old are you?

What jobs did you hold in the past that allowed you to accumulate seemingly unlimited cash?

What jobs are you seeking/applying?


Where do you draw the line on government help? Unemployment? Fire department? Roads? Social Security? Public universities? Public schools? Farm subsidies? Government contracts? The military?

[Crucifax Autumn]

Why is hate mongering by either side considered okay by anyone?

[ndpruitt03]

A few more questions...

How old are you?

What jobs did you hold in the past that allowed you to accumulate seemingly unlimited cash?

What jobs are you seeking/applying?


Where do you draw the line on government help? Unemployment? Fire department? Roads? Social Security? Public universities? Public schools? Farm subsidies? Government contracts? The military?

26 years old.


Never said I had unlimited cash but I have enough and if I run out I'll worry about it by moving in with my parents if I have to, unlike some people I'm not ashamed of having no money because of what the government is doing badly.

I've applied for about 30 jobs in the last 10 months.

I'm against social security, unemployment, and some roads can be better done if they are privately owned. Other roads should be government owned. Social security is going to be at a point where I'm not getting anything from it in 50 years anyway. Both sides of the aisle are already saying they may roll it back to 70 years old and I think it should be at about 85 or 90.

[oudivesherpa]

Themselves. If you’re truly liberal you need to be self loathing and feel guilt about your success and your inability to get those stupid conservatives to agree with you. To paraphrase, those stupid SOB outsmarted me.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Themselves. If you’re truly liberal you need to be self loathing and feel guilt about your success and your inability to get those stupid conservatives to agree with you. To paraphrase, those stupid SOB outsmarted me.It SHOULD be easy to convince anyone that giving up their freedoms, and letting the govt. run your life, is in their best interest, especially since most people are too greedy, stupid, wasteful of natural resources, polluting, etc. to run their own lives.

[Crucifax Autumn]

26 years old.


Never said I had unlimited cash but I have enough and if I run out I'll worry about it by moving in with my parents if I have to, unlike some people I'm not ashamed of having no money because of what the government is doing badly.

I've applied for about 30 jobs in the last 10 months.

I'm against social security, unemployment, and some roads can be better done if they are privately owned. Other roads should be government owned. Social security is going to be at a point where I'm not getting anything from it in 50 years anyway. Both sides of the aisle are already saying they may roll it back to 70 years old and I think it should be at about 85 or 90.

30 in 10 months? So you're not really looking right? Most unemployed people I know are applying for several a day including jobs far below their paygrade like an electrician applying at Wal Mart or computer specialists applying for fast food jobs.

Now on the moving in with parents, what about people who no longer have living parents to sponge off? What about people who's parents are themselves unemployed through no fault of their own?

I'm all for accountability in the system, but forcing people who have worked for 30 years and are actually trying to find work into homelessness is ridiculous.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm all for accountability in the system, but forcing people who have worked for 30 years and are actually trying to find work into homelessness is ridiculous.The govt should just STOP SOCIAL SPENDING, except for people who are truly handicapped, and get to LOWERING TAXES. It's really all that is needed to stimulate the economy, and I believe you know that.

[49r]

Why is no one on either side of the aisle offering real solutions to the job problem?

Why is that their job? If this is a country where one truly has unlimited opportunities to make themselves whatever they want, shouldn't Americans through entrepreneurship be able to find ways to employ themselves and strive?

Why is it the governments responsibility to find anyone a damn job?

[49r]

30 in 10 months? So you're not really looking right? Most unemployed people I know are applying for several a day including jobs far below their paygrade like an electrician applying at Wal Mart or computer specialists applying for fast food jobs.

Last time I was unemployed, I applied for perhaps 30 jobs a week, sometimes more. My unemployment lasted 6 weeks, and I applied for, and got, work in my field even.

Granted, those were a touch bit different economic times, but in any environment 3 job applications a month isn't trying, you've got a good point here.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Because it is largely their actions which led to the job crisis.

If nothing else they need to tweak their economic policies line by line to allow the things you advocate. The average unemployed and broke person doesn't currently have the ability to "employ themselves". There aren't many businesses a person can start with zero capital, and unless the economy is truly healthy there's not much chance of a new business making enough money to survive.

[Crucifax Autumn]

The govt should just STOP SOCIAL SPENDING, except for people who are truly handicapped, and get to LOWERING TAXES. It's really all that is needed to stimulate the economy, and I believe you know that.

It really depends on the taxes. The golden age of the 50s had some of the highest income tax rates in history and jobs were abundant. Generally I agree with you though. Corporations and small businesses are thus far holding back on any major hiring due to a LOT of uncertainty about what's gonna happen next.

[49r]

Because it is largely their actions which led to the job crisis.

If nothing else they need to tweak their economic policies line by line to allow the things you advocate. The average unemployed and broke person doesn't currently have the ability to "employ themselves". There aren't many businesses a person can start with zero capital, and unless the economy is truly healthy there's not much chance of a new business making enough money to survive.

Yes, I blame the orgy of deregulation that's been carried on for the past 30 or so years that's tipped the scales way out of whack too, but it's not an individual party per se that is to blame for this. It's greedy corporations and their fundamental ownership of our government who have gotten out of control and made our economy unhealthy in the name of short term profits.

How long can the ponzi scheme continue? Probably not much if something isn't done to reel in these guys some. Good news is if the entire global economy collapses and corporations and governments go down as a result, the barrier to entry for the average entrepreneur should go way down. :)

[Crucifax Autumn]

but it's not an individual party per se that is to blame for this.

That's what I keep trying to say in part. These political parties are more alike than different and pretty much everyone associated with either is more interested in helping themselves and their friends as well as maintaining power than actually curing any actual problems.

Anyone who swears by either one as the savior of the nation is sadly misguided and fooling themselves.

Wow...this thread sure has veered away from who the lefties hate most! :D

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Yes, I blame the orgy of deregulation that's been carried on for the past 30 or so years that's tipped the scales way out of whack too, but it's not an individual party per se that is to blame for this. It's greedy corporations and their fundamental ownership of our government who have gotten out of control and made our economy unhealthy in the name of short term profits.

How long can the ponzi scheme continue? Probably not much if something isn't done to reel in these guys some. Good news is if the entire global economy collapses and corporations and governments go down as a result, the barrier to entry for the average entrepreneur should go way down. :)WOW!...BUSTED! "ORGY OF DEREGULATION" haha. "GREEDY CORPORATIONS AND THEIR FUNDAMENTAL OWNERSHIP OF OUR GOVERNMENT"...YIKES! Which conservative do you hate the most?

[49r]

That's what I keep trying to say in part. These political parties are more alike than different and pretty much everyone associated with either is more interested in helping themselves and their friends as well as maintaining power than actually curing any actual problems.

Anyone who swears by either one as the savior of the nation is sadly misguided and fooling themselves.

Wow...this thread sure has veered away from who the lefties hate most! :D

Yeah, I certainly believe our problems are endemic to corporate greed - hell everybody loves to be (or wants to be) rich and powerful - that's what makes the world go around, and keeps me getting out of bed every day so I can bust my *** and do what I can to get ahead.

And our current environment isn't really anything new, it's just human nature. We party it up while the times are good living the high life and usually pay for it with a bad hangover. We're about to have one of our worst hangovers ever (or are starting to have it - or are starting to get over it - depending on who you believe). I've stopped worrying about "blame" and "hate" at this point. Now I'm looking at how I need to position myself in order to best take advantage of our current and future economic situation.

I'll leave the blame and hate for the blamers and haters.

[49r]

Corporations and small businesses are thus far holding back on any major hiring due to a LOT of uncertainty about what's gonna happen next.

Funny too, because corporations are reporting record profits for last quarter yet are still not hiring.

I wonder who THEY hate the most? :D

[Scott D]

They apparently hate anyone who disagrees with "Maximize profits with minimal effort" ;)

[Turd_Ferguson]

They apparently hate anyone who disagrees with "Maximize profits with minimal effort" ;)Whats wrong with buy low, sell high:confused:

[Crucifax Autumn]

Nothing as long as it's not buy low, fire everyone, sell high.

[KC//CRIMSON]

The Trifecta Is Now Complete

http://www.salon.com/news/sports/col/kaufman/2003/10/02/thursday2/story.jpg The Deaf

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm253/Art737/SarahPalin1.jpg The Dumb

http://ibwblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/glenn_beck-in-hospital1.jpg The Blind

[GKeeper316]

The Trifecta Is Now Complete

http://www.salon.com/news/sports/col/kaufman/2003/10/02/thursday2/story.jpg The Deaf

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm253/Art737/SarahPalin1.jpg The Dumb

http://ibwblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/glenn_beck-in-hospital1.jpg The Blind

rush looks like hes comfortable with a **** sized cigar in his mouth
sarah looks like rush just snuck up behind her and shoved said **** sized cigar in her vajayjay
glen looks jealous that he doesnt get a **** sized cigar to stick up his own ***

[MR2-Sooner86]

Pipe bomb explodes at oil executives' house (http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=7546937)


If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems?


Deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”


Let’s just throw Ledeen against a wall. Or, pace Dr. Alterman, throw him through a plate glass window. I’ll bet a little spot of violence would shut him right the **** up, as with most bullies.


Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out as Limbaugh writhed in torment from a heart attack. I would gleefully watch this man die in front of my eyes. I never knew I had this much hate in me but he deserves it.


You know, at the risk of violating Godwin’s law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts? Now that it’s getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s.


They want a deficit driven militarist/heterosexist/herrenvolk state. This is core of the Bush/Cheney base transmorgrified into an even more explicitly racialized/anti-cosmopolitan constituency. Why? Um, because the president is a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. But it’s all the same old nuts in the same old bins with some new labels: the gun nuts, the anti tax nuts, the religious nuts, the homophobes, the anti-feminists, the anti-abortion lunatics, the racist/confederate crackpots, the anti-immigration whackos (who feel Bush betrayed them) the pathological government haters (which subsumes some of the othercategories, like the gun nuts and the anti-tax nuts).


Victor Davis Hanson's article about immigration for National Review is the kind of Old White Guy cultural reaction that is at the heart of the Tea Party Movement. It’s very close in spirit to the classic 1970s racist tome, The Camp of the Saints, where White Guys struggle to make up their minds whether to go out and murder brown people or just give up.


I am genuinely scared of Fox. It shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.


Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.


I hate to open this can of worms but is there any reason why the FCC couldn’t simply pull their broadcasting permit once it expires?


****ing Nascar retards…

:pop:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

rush looks like hes comfortable with a **** sized cigar in his mouth
sarah looks like rush just snuck up behind her and shoved said **** sized cigar in her vajayjay
glen looks jealous that he doesnt get a **** sized cigar to stick up his own ***So, Adolph; you've picked your 3 most hated. Who wins it from you?

[GKeeper316]

mine was a toss up between cyborg dick cheney and prince of darkness karl rove.

pay 'tention!

and what's with the adolph bull****?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

mine was a toss up between cyborg dick cheney and prince of darkness karl rove.

pay 'tention!

and what's with the adolph bull****?Would you prefer Hugo?

[Serge Ibaka]

Would you prefer Hugo?

I'M SUPER-DUPER AFRAID OF PEOPLE I DISAGREE WITH, AND THEY = HITLER BECAUSE I'M SUPER AFRAID OH MYyyyYyyy.

[ndpruitt03]

If they actually read history, the progressives would hate almost all of our founding fathers. Just about all the progressive views on how federal government saves everyone is the exact opposite view of those that wrote the constitution.

They would probably like Hamilton though. But he saw himself as a guy that would be dictator of the US when he had his way.

[The Remnant]

The person they hate the most is deceased. Ronald Reagan. He was their worst nightmare.

[GKeeper316]

If they actually read history, the progressives would hate almost all of our founding fathers. Just about all the progressive views on how federal government saves everyone is the exact opposite view of those that wrote the constitution.

They would probably like Hamilton though. But he saw himself as a guy that would be dictator of the US when he had his way.

they didnt live in a world of insurance companies, oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, people using planes as bombs, overpopulation, internet, or instant global communications, and if you had told any of them we'd have a man on the moon in less than 200 years after our country was founded, they'd have burned you at the stake for being a witch or some ****.

when they founded the country, there was plenty of land, natural resources were in abundance, we had yet to cross the mississippi for settlement purposes, and there was still plenty of indians living off the millions of bison roaming free in the wild.

i bow down to what they accomplished and still believe in the priciples we were founded on, but at some point the reality of the situation has to dictate a proper course of action beneficial to most of the people. so far i have yet to see anything that would actually help come from the mouth of 90% of the people that fall on the right side of the isle. let the people fend for themselves isnt all that great an idea when we allow companies to farm out jobs that should pay americans a sustainable wage instead of the pennies on the dollar they can operate in india with.

and hamilton was a grade "A" dooshrocket... he deserved the bitch-like death aaron burr gave him.

[GKeeper316]

The person they hate the most is deceased. Ronald Reagan. He was their worst nightmare.

not really... reagan's compassionate conservatism is what won over a great many middle leaning democrats.

reagan also wanted to completely do away with every single nuclear weapon that existed in the world.

and he didnt have much of a problem with gay people.

whenever i hear glen beck, rush limbaugh or sarah palin invoke reagan's name for the sake of their newfound neo-con movement, i wonder if any of them even bothered to listen to what he ever said.

[ndpruitt03]

they didnt live in a world of insurance companies, oil companies, pharmaceutical companies, people using planes as bombs, overpopulation, internet, or instant global communications, and if you had told any of them we'd have a man on the moon in less than 200 years after our country was founded, they'd have burned you at the stake for being a witch or some ****.

The founders knew witchcraft was BS. You are thinking of the 1600s when they first colonized. Overpopulation is not the problem in the US and insurance companies and other things like that were formed as a result of bureaucratic crap. Do you know why most insurance companies in America didn't really exist till after the Social Security Act was passed?

As far as communication goes. The founding fathers wrote and communicated with each other via mail more efficiently and better than anyone in history at that time because of the advanced mail system they had at that time. I think this is actually one of the more adaptable things for them from the 1700s to now. They wrote more than many people post or tweet or whatever today. I can see how many of the other things of today can blow their minds. Internet would be something they would use a lot more efficiently than most people do today. Thomas Jefferson alone responded to just about every letter he received even if he didn't know who was writing him.


when they founded the country, there was plenty of land, natural resources were in abundance, we had yet to cross the mississippi for settlement purposes, and there was still plenty of indians living off the millions of bison roaming free in the wild.

And there is still plenty of land in this country. Have you driven through most of Oklahoma and Texas or the rest of the middle of the US? The rest of the nation has a lot of open land like that also. On the coast there's population issues in some areas. But population isn't near as big a problem in the US as it is in other places around the world.


i bow down to what they accomplished and still believe in the priciples we were founded on, but at some point the reality of the situation has to dictate a proper course of action beneficial to most of the people. so far i have yet to see anything that would actually help come from the mouth of 90% of the people that fall on the right side of the isle. let the people fend for themselves isnt all that great an idea when we allow companies to farm out jobs that should pay americans a sustainable wage instead of the pennies on the dollar they can operate in india with.

I love it when people act like it's better if government gets in the way now because we've grown too much. With today's technology you would think it would be easier to have self government not harder. It is a myth that the technology has made everything harder. Dumbass bills passed by our government have made it harder to have self government.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

not really... reagan's compassionate conservatism is what won over a great many middle leaning democrats.

reagan also wanted to completely do away with every single nuclear weapon that existed in the world.

and he didnt have much of a problem with gay people.

whenever i hear glen beck, rush limbaugh or sarah palin invoke reagan's name for the sake of their newfound neo-con movement, i wonder if any of them even bothered to listen to what he ever said.You apparently didn't.

[ndpruitt03]

Reagan was not about completely getting rid of Nukes till all of the other ones around the world were gone. Because he didn't completely trust Russia either. Nobody should ever really trust them. His favorite saying to the Russians was "doveryai, no proveryai" or "trust, but verify" in other words he wasn't blindly going to trust Russia every step of the way.

Also ridding everyone of nuclear bombs isn't a reality because everyone that uses or tries to use nuclear technology now, knows how to make one. Even North Korea has one and they are basically in the stone age outside of the military.

[ndpruitt03]

I think there is a bad perception with how republicans think of homosexuality and other things. I think some probably do but a lot of democrats have a problem with such things as homosexuality, legalizing of drugs, and other social issues they don't dare touch also. Hell I bet more democrats have a problem with homosexuality than republicans now. Based off the recent views of racism from the NAACP and other minority races. They may be more racist in the NAACP right now.

To me these issues are about having more freedom. Right now our government wants people to have less freedom. Anytime you say more government that equals less freedom. No matter how much technology changes that will always be the truth.

[Half a Hundred]

If they actually read history, the progressives would hate almost all of our founding fathers. Just about all the progressive views on how federal government saves everyone is the exact opposite view of those that wrote the constitution.

Umm... so? There's a lot of history between 1789 and today that's being left out, that might have some relevance here.


Reagan was not about completely getting rid of Nukes till all of the other ones around the world were gone. Because he didn't completely trust Russia either. Nobody should ever really trust them. His favorite saying to the Russians was "doveryai, no proveryai" or "trust, but verify" in other words he wasn't blindly going to trust Russia every step of the way.

Also ridding everyone of nuclear bombs isn't a reality because everyone that uses or tries to use nuclear technology now, knows how to make one. Even North Korea has one and they are basically in the stone age outside of the military.

Reagan was very pro-nuke until he figured out two things: 1) there was no such thing as a survivable nuclear war (thanks The Day After) and 2) the Soviets were just as afraid of us launching a preemptive first strike as we were of them. It wasn't until the latter that he understood that the Soviets would be amenable to arms reduction talks, and what's more, actually see them through

[HBick]

My theory is that when McCain tapped Palin, he drove away people in the middle. Say what you will about Obama and Biden, but all it took was listening to that wannabe Canadian speak one time and it drove me away. The majority of people driven away didn't even vote.

[Crucifax Autumn]

McCain tapped Palin?

Video?

[Scott D]

I can't link the 3 way between Palin, McCain and his wife...I'm holding out for the 8 figure exclusive rights.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

My theory is that when McCain tapped Palin, he drove away people in the middle. Say what you will about Obama and Biden, but all it took was listening to that wannabe Canadian speak one time and it drove me away. The majority of people driven away didn't even vote.The exact opposite of what you said was the predominant reaction to the addition of Palin. McCain came a lot closer than he would have without her.

The election was won for the socialists when McCain somehow won the republican primary.

[ndpruitt03]

McCain was far to liberal to get the republican vote to be a big turnout. Then you have the hope and change trash that Obama was throwing out that won independents. It still was about a 53-46 win for Obama as far as the popular vote. Which is sizable compared to the last couple of presidential elections. But it's less than most of the other elections since 1980. I think Clinton's first was closer.

[Frozen Sooner]

McCain was far to liberal to get the republican vote to be a big turnout. Then you have the hope and change trash that Obama was throwing out that won independents. It still was about a 53-47 win for Obama. Which is sizable compared to the last couple of presidential elections. But it's less than most of the other elections since 1980.

Gosh, all three of of them since 1980 once you discount the two which were closer? Amazing.

Man, did you know that excepting the games which Texas won, OU is undefeated against Texas this century?

[GKeeper316]

Reagan was not about completely getting rid of Nukes till all of the other ones around the world were gone. Because he didn't completely trust Russia either. Nobody should ever really trust them. His favorite saying to the Russians was "doveryai, no proveryai" or "trust, but verify" in other words he wasn't blindly going to trust Russia every step of the way.

Also ridding everyone of nuclear bombs isn't a reality because everyone that uses or tries to use nuclear technology now, knows how to make one. Even North Korea has one and they are basically in the stone age outside of the military.

it was more of an ideological and philosophical stance he had on nukes. he knew the reality, and still believed they were evil and had no place in a peaceful world.

[GKeeper316]

You apparently didn't.

im liberal democrat and i view reagan as one of the greatest presidents in our nations history. he personally hated homosexuality, but understood that it wasnt one man's place to tell another man what is supposed to make him happy. reagan voraciously opposed a state bill (when he was gov of ca.) that would prohibit gays from teaching in public schools, and the first openly gay couple to spend the night at the white house did so during his presidency.

i soundly submit thats it is you, sir, who dont know anything about reagan.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

im liberal democrat and i view reagan as one of the greatest presidents in our nations history. he personally hated homosexuality, but understood that it wasnt one man's place to tell another man what is supposed to make him happy. reagan voraciously opposed a state bill (when he was gov of ca.) that would prohibit gays from teaching in public schools, and the first openly gay couple to spend the night at the white house did so during his presidency.

i soundly submit thats it is you, sir, who dont know anything about reagan.I don't see how you can possibly even think about saying I don't know anything about Reagan. As a liberal democrat, why do you think he was one of our greatest presidents?

[GKeeper316]

I don't see how you can possibly even think about saying I don't know anything about Reagan. As a liberal democrat, why do you think he was one of our greatest presidents?

because he won the cold war.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

because he won the cold war.Okay, but is that, plus his tolerance for alternate lifestyles, all that impresses you about him?

[GKeeper316]

Okay, but is that, plus his tolerance for alternate lifestyles, all that impresses you about him?

no, but as with any politician, there were things about him i didnt like very much. i thought his escalation of the drug war was a very fiscally irresponsible move, made out of a moral decision instead of what he should have seen it for which was an infringement upon personal liberties.

but imo reagan was the last true statesman we've had as pres.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

no, but as with any politician, there were things about him i didnt like very much. i thought his escalation of the drug war was a very fiscally irresponsible move, made out of a moral decision instead of what he should have seen it for which was an infringement upon personal liberties.

but imo reagan was the last true statesman we've had as pres.His lowering of taxes was VERY fiscally responsible. It helped cause the economy to boom.

[SicEmBaylor]

His lowering of taxes was VERY fiscally responsible. It helped cause the e

Lowering taxes in and of itself is not fiscally responsible. Combining tax-cuts with budget cuts is what's fiscally responsible. I don't begrudge most of Reagan's deficit spending though since the payoff in defense cuts during the 90s and not having to fight the Cold War made it worth it.

[texaspokieokie]

lowering taxes in & of itself IS fiscally responsible.

lowering taxes increases business activity, so more taxes are paid.

[texaspokieokie]

i lived in CA when he was Gov; & i thot he was a very good Gov.

i became repub while he was gov.

[ndpruitt03]

lowering taxes in & of itself IS fiscally responsible.

lowering taxes increases business activity, so more taxes are paid.

Not if you are spending like crazy like our last 2 administrations. Lowering taxes really doesn't matter. Lowering taxes and cutting spending or finding ways where spending will be cut are fiscally responsible. No one ever does both anymore.

[texaspokieokie]

increasing spending can always overcome, just like you said, the last 2 administrations.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

lowering taxes in & of itself IS fiscally responsible.

lowering taxes increases business activity, so more taxes are paid.Lowering taxes ALWAYS stimulates the Private Sector, and, down to a low level of taxation, BRINGS IN MORE MONEY TO THE GOVT.,. A true lib HATES facing that fact. I think the thing that botheres them about it, is it gives the Unwashed more freedom and the politicos lose some control over the People.

[Serge Ibaka]

Lowering taxes ALWAYS stimulates the Private Sector.

This is an over-simplification because it depends on who's taxes are being lowered. Of course the people who are poor or middle-class (or otherwise living hand-to-mouth if even in an essentially wasteful sense of the word) will recycle whatever monies they save from lowered taxes into local businesses.

This is not always true about rich people who sit on their money or invest it in ways that only benefit themselves. Trickle-down theory, imo, seems mostly like a way for rich people to justify their becoming more rich (by saying that their paying less taxes will benefit the masses--silly garbage, i know).

[ndpruitt03]

If we keep spending like we have in the last 8 years or so, increasing taxes will only destroy the economy. You can't try to both spend like crazy and tax also.That's basically why we had the Great depression. If the government left well enough alone the depression probably lasts a couple years at the most. Instead it lasted about 15 years.

[Crucifax Autumn]

How do you explain the tax rates of the 50s and 60s and the boomtimes that accompanied them? I'm all for fair and sensible tax policy, but that time frame seems to run counter to your statements.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

How do you explain the tax rates of the 50s and 60s and the boomtimes that accompanied them? I'm all for fair and sensible tax policy, but that time frame seems to run counter to your statements.First thing that comes to mind was Kennedy's lowering of the tax rates. It worked. Economy got better, and the govt. got more money. What, you don't believe lowering taxes stimulates the economy? I guess I'm not really surprised.

[GKeeper316]

How do you explain the tax rates of the 50s and 60s and the boomtimes that accompanied them? I'm all for fair and sensible tax policy, but that time frame seems to run counter to your statements.

the minimum wage would have to be raised to something like 26 dollars an hour for it to have the same value it had in the 50s.

so while taxes may have been high, people were by and large making more money.

[ndpruitt03]

How do you explain the tax rates of the 50s and 60s and the boomtimes that accompanied them? I'm all for fair and sensible tax policy, but that time frame seems to run counter to your statements.

Taxes were cut in the early 60s by Kennedy. But spending was not that big during this time. I am for cutting taxes because I believe the more money the people have the more they spend, the better the economy. But some people disagree. The spending is the key difference. You have to either cut taxes or cut spending or both and you have a pretty good economy. The Bush tax cuts led to a pretty decent economy for a few years before we started spending like crazy. Before you say we were spending like crazy under Bush it wasn't near as bad was we have been the last 3 or 4 years.

[ndpruitt03]

http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/files/2010/01/spending.JPG

The spending was never really that big till the later Bush years and now. Before that time it only steadily went up.

[Scott D]

I think the answer to this problem is pretty easy...it's time to start relocating the old and infirm to canada.

[Ike]

http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/files/2010/01/spending.JPG

The spending was never really that big till the later Bush years and now. Before that time it only steadily went up.

This graph gets me thinking....What would we see if we overlaid on top of this graph a graph of defense spending per terrorist? Even if it were defense spending minus pre-9/11-defense-spending-adjusted-for-inflation. How much are we spending on a per terrorist basis? I don't know why, but suddenly, I'm curious.

[tommieharris91]

http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/files/2010/01/spending.JPG

The spending was never really that big till the later Bush years and now. Before that time it only steadily went up.
Now, put tax revenues on that same graph and then see what you get.

Also, note the spike in spending during the Reagan years.

Lastly, since defense spending happens to be part of government spending too, this graph is dishonest.

[Shakadoodoo]

im liberal democrat and i view reagan as one of the greatest presidents in our nations history. he personally hated homosexuality, but understood that it wasnt one man's place to tell another man what is supposed to make him happy. reagan voraciously opposed a state bill (when he was gov of ca.) that would prohibit gays from teaching in public schools, and the first openly gay couple to spend the night at the white house did so during his presidency.

i soundly submit thats it is you, sir, who dont know anything about reagan.

I was to young to understand or care about politics in the late 70's and early 80's but I never heard anything good about Ronald Reagan - I did grow up in a poor neighborhood and all I remember people complaining about is "no work, no jobs!" ..... Trickle down Reaganomics was a cleaver way of explaining how the poor got pissed on. The unemployment in the inner-city neighborhood was extremely high during his 2 terms. And I am not here to give you a bunch of stats of what he did or did not do - I am just saying that people that were doing bad in those years did not feel Reagan was helping them in any way, shape or form -

That being said - This is what I remember Reagan and his administration for - Spreading cocaine and Bloods and Crips to every ghetto in America - when he was governor of California from 72-80 - Crips and Bloods was a California problem - By 1984 - every ghetto in America where throwing up Blood and Crip signs and killing each other over crack.

Crack Cocaine and California gang membership exploded in the early 80's -

Here are a couple of videos about the CIA's involvement in the drug trade.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r1KfHaIF_Y
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADTbYLUEUZI&feature=related


now you can agree or disagree - but one fact is clear - the spread of crack cocaine and gangs was unprecedented during Ronald Reagan's Administration.

He is no hero of mine!

[Serge Ibaka]

The "War on Drugs" has failed, and our governments need a complete overhaul when it comes to drug policy.

[ndpruitt03]

The "War on Drugs" has failed, and our governments need a complete overhaul when it comes to drug policy.

Agreed we should legalize drugs. The only drug laws should be against minors getting them. Any other drug laws are useless.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I was to young to understand or care about politics in the late 70's and early 80's but I never heard anything good about Ronald Reagan - I did grow up in a poor neighborhood and all I remember people complaining about is "no work, no jobs!" ..... Trickle down Reaganomics was a cleaver way of explaining how the poor got pissed on. The unemployment in the inner-city neighborhood was extremely high during his 2 terms. And I am not here to give you a bunch of stats of what he did or did not do - I am just saying that people that were doing bad in those years did not feel Reagan was helping them in any way, shape or form -

That being said - This is what I remember Reagan and his administration for - Spreading cocaine and Bloods and Crips to every ghetto in America - when he was governor of California from 72-80 - Crips and Bloods was a California problem - By 1984 - every ghetto in America where throwing up Blood and Crip signs and killing each other over crack.

Crack Cocaine and California gang membership exploded in the early 80's -

Here are a couple of videos about the CIA's involvement in the drug trade.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r1KfHaIF_Y
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADTbYLUEUZI&feature=related


now you can agree or disagree - but one fact is clear - the spread of crack cocaine and gangs was unprecedented during Ronald Reagan's Administration.

He is no hero of mine!YOU GO! A vote for Reagan! He was a BAD ONE, that Reagan guy. He absolutely hated America! I think you're right that he liked gang warfare, with minorities killing each other, like pit bulls.

[Serge Ibaka]

Agreed we should legalize drugs. The only drug laws should be against minors getting them. Any other drug laws are useless.

At any rate, it's completely senseless to consider the amount of tax-payer money that goes into enforcing drug laws and punishing non-violent drug offenders.

It's senseless that there are individuals serving time in jail because they did something that only harmed themselves--it goes against the conventional understanding of prisons and their purpose. If people are trafficking drugs or engaging in violent drug-related activities, that's another story. But use/possession is technically victimless.

[Shakadoodoo]

To answer the post question - I do not "hate" anyone on the right - I just disagree with them and I feel a lot of them are very, very out of touch with poor people in this country - which is the largest socioeconomic group in America.

[SicEmBaylor]

To answer the post question - I do not "hate" anyone on the right - I just disagree with them and I feel a lot of them are very, very out of touch with poor people in this country - which is the largest socioeconomic group in America.

My. God.

[Serge Ibaka]

My. God.

Oh, pish posh applesauce. You know he's right. And to be fair, I think a lot of everybody is out of touch with poor-people. The bourgeoisie, as a general cultural phenomenon, likes to vote like they'll someday be rich.

It's the American dream, bra'.

[ndpruitt03]

Now, put tax revenues on that same graph and then see what you get.

Also, note the spike in spending during the Reagan years.

Lastly, since defense spending happens to be part of government spending too, this graph is dishonest.

Tax revenues have been relatively the same. About 19.5% of GDP since post WW2.

Reagan was a pretty big spender. But the spending really went up right after his term with the Bush years if that graph is right.

I agree, I just couldn't find a graph like that with defense spending.

By the mid 90s there was no cold war. We weren't in Iraq anymore, we had a couple of smaller deals in Africa and one other thing. But our defense spending was really low. Now our spending on both wars overseas, and spending at home is high. Even FDR didn't do much at home in the 1940s when a war was going on.

[JohnnyMack]

My. God.

The Shakadoodoo has spoken.

[Serge Ibaka]

And the truth is that, in suburban school districts, folks are passing bond-issues and building huge and beautiful gyms and theaters and football stadiums. And other kids go to school in dilapidated pieces of sh**.

And then those kids travel across the city to play a basketball game and they wonder why their gym doesn't have an awesome scoreboard and 8 wonderful locker rooms. And they wonder why the world cares about them less.

Tough luck, stupid little punks! You should have been born in a nicer neighborhood.

Things aren't equal, and we know they aren't equal. And somehow we still support some stupid fallacy that "everybody in America has the same shot as success!"

[texaspokieokie]

Shakadoodoo

Reagan ran (& won) for Gov. in 1966 & 1970. your timeline is a little off.

[SicEmBaylor]

Shakadoodoo

Reagan ran (& won) for Gov. in 1966 & 1970. your timeline is a little off.

That and everything else he said.

[tommieharris91]

That and everything else he said.

He didn't even keep his timeline straight in his post.

[SicEmBaylor]

He didn't even keep his timeline straight in his post.

His user name is pretty bitchin' though. I'll give him that.

[Shakadoodoo]

He didn't even keep his timeline straight in his post.

My mistake - point is still the same.

[SicEmBaylor]

My mistake - point is still the same.

Still the same; still wrong.

[texaspokieokie]

SicEm

everythiong else he said was "way off".

Reagan became popular in his 1st term because the welfare roles were
drastically cut. prior to that, it was extremely easy to move to CA & get on welfare.

that's @ least part of why the "poor folks" in CA didn't like him.

i lived there @ that time & that's when i became a repub.

[Shakadoodoo]

Still the same; still wrong.

As long as you want to make America/world a better place for every person living upon it, for generations to come - and we can some how unite and make that happen - I could care less who is wrong or right.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

As long as you want to make America/world a better place for every person living upon it, for generations to come - and we can some how unite and make that happen - I could care less who is wrong or right."C-c-can't we just all get along?"-Rodney King, after fending off multitudes of cops, who were trying to subdue him.

What you want, Shakadoodoo, is Whirled Peas, and, y'know, that just ain't gonna happen!

[GKeeper316]

"C-c-can't we just all get along?"-Rodney King, after fending off multitudes of cops, who were trying to subdue him.

What you want, Shakadoodoo, is Whirled Peas, and, y'know, that just ain't gonna happen!

trying to subdue and beating mercilessly are two totally different things.

[Serge Ibaka]

"C-c-can't we just all get along?"-Rodney King, after fending off multitudes of cops, who were trying to subdue him.

What you want, Shakadoodoo, is Whirled Peas, and, y'know, that just ain't gonna happen!

I knew RLIMC was going to find a way to take issue with Shakadoodoo's post (which was completely sensible and based upon an idealist notion that every humane person would reasonable accept).

The hate is just too well ingrained within his bones: the suffering of unfortunate people is a very special treat!

[Shakadoodoo]

"C-c-can't we just all get along?"-Rodney King, after fending off multitudes of cops, who were trying to subdue him.

What you want, Shakadoodoo, is Whirled Peas, and, y'know, that just ain't gonna happen!

You are right - as long as we don't Believe that it can - it will never happen.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

And the truth is that, in suburban school districts, folks are passing bond-issues and building huge and beautiful gyms and theaters and football stadiums. And other kids go to school in dilapidated pieces of sh**.

And then those kids travel across the city to play a basketball game and they wonder why their gym doesn't have an awesome scoreboard and 8 wonderful locker rooms. And they wonder why the world cares about them less.

Tough luck, stupid little punks! You should have been born in a nicer neighborhood.

Things aren't equal, and we know they aren't equal. And somehow we still support some stupid fallacy that "everybody in America has the same shot as success!"

Uh yeah, because we all know that the difference in education has to do with shiny scoreboards and not corrupt school boards and parents that don't give a sh!t :rolleyes:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You are right - as long as we don't Believe that it can - it will never happen.Give us your recipe for Optimum Whirled Peas.

[Curly Bill]

Optimum Whirled Peas?

They got that singer named Fergie right?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Optimum Whirled Peas?

They got that singer named Fergie right?She don't know squat. We need ANSWERS!

[Curly Bill]

Yeah, but Fergie is hawt.

That's gotta count for something.

[Czar Soonerov]

http://imgur.com/Oskby.jpg


I didn't get mad til sexaT won the MNC.

[Serge Ibaka]

Uh yeah, because we all know that the difference in education has to do with shiny scoreboards and not corrupt school boards and parents that don't give a sh!t :rolleyes:

Parents that don't give a shi* are often under-educated and attended poor schools themselves. They're poor. They don't have a reason to believe in education or its values. They aren't involved in the school as a community--but is it the kids' faults they have crappy parents (and their classmates' parents are crappy as well)?

Suburban kids have better athletic and art programs. They have nicer facilities. They have parents who are well educated, have solid social-connections, and understand how to navigate complex social and political structures in order to get the best for their children and their schools.

Also, the best teachers want to teach in the best schools.

Things aren't equal, and the poor kid in the crumbling school cannot think of a logical reason why they cannot play basketball in a well-lit gym or learn to play the cello if they choose. The world simply cares about kids in Edmond more than it cares about me and my friends.

[Shakadoodoo]

Give us your recipe for Optimum Whirled Peas.

That is something that one person could decipher on his own? - seems to me like that would take all of us to figure out - One person trying to figure out a recipe for world peace for billions of people seems insane.

[ndpruitt03]

http://imgur.com/Oskby.jpg


I didn't get mad til sexaT won the MNC.

And the democrats aren't that pissed at the same dumbass things that democrats are doing right now. They'll only get mad after the republicans take over and flex their newfound power they just got from these democrats.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

http://imgur.com/Oskby.jpg


I didn't get mad til sexaT won the MNC.Who can top this stuff?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

The world simply cares about kids in Edmond more than it cares about me and my friends.

And this culture of victimization is a large part of why conditions in the inner city don't get any better. Throwing money at the problem doesn't work. It was amazing to me when I came down here and saw the level of corruption in the school board and nobody cared. They want to blame their problems on Reagan or Bush or the CIA or anyone else but their own people are down here robbing them blind.

You see immigrant communities like the Vietnamese come here with nothing, go to poor schools and find a way to thrive. But the inner cities get no better.

[Serge Ibaka]

And this culture of victimization is a large part of why conditions in the inner city don't get any better. Throwing money at the problem doesn't work. It was amazing to me when I came down here and saw the level of corruption in the school board and nobody cared. They want to blame their problems on Reagan or Bush or the CIA or anyone else but their own people are down here robbing them blind.

You see immigrant communities like the Vietnamese come here with nothing, go to poor schools and find a way to thrive. But the inner cities get no better.

That's fair in a way: the structures are certainly in tact for people in crappy situations to succeed (look at OHLAP, for instance: an incredibly "socialist" institution within red-state-Oklahoma).

But the issue is more complex because it's difficult to say how I (smart guy with a lot of academic success) would have responded without the support that I was granted by my schools, family, and community.

Things are certainly unequal however, and the culture of "victimization" that you suggested is a learned, cultural phenomenon that exists for a very real reason (even if its misguided logic). And it's on the greater-society to spot the sociological underpinnings of poverty and inequality.

[ndpruitt03]

Many of the guys listed above are actually more like neo-conservatives. Which needs to really be called neo-liberals because that's a better description. There's nothing conservative about those people.

U9TCC14akXk

[GrapevineSooner]

And the democrats aren't that pissed at the same dumbass things that democrats are doing right now. They'll only get mad after the republicans take over and flex their newfound power they just got from these democrats.

Yup.

It's amazing how quickly some people will feign disgust and outrage when it's the President from the other party who is goring their ox.

The same people who are wailing over a government takeover of healthcare were strangely silent back in 2003 when Republicans passed a Medicare Prescription drug plan that Bush was all too happy to sign into law.

And in the last few months, the Obama Administration has awarded at least one no bid contract and renewed certain parts of the Patriot Act while meeting a resounding resistance of...crickets chirping from the left.

Though to correct Czar, the SCOTUS ruled by a 7-2 count that the State of Florida was violating the 14th amendment by essentially ignoring the Florida Legislature in the 2000 election.

[ndpruitt03]

I do hope this Tea Party which is more of a libertarian type movement fixes it. There are a few politicians gaining power because they want less government. But I'm not sure they will act that way after they gain power.

[Frozen Sooner]

Though to correct Czar, the SCOTUS ruled by a 7-2 count that the State of Florida was violating the 14th amendment by essentially ignoring the Florida Legislature in the 2000 election.

That's a bit misleading. 7 agreed there were constitutional problems with the recount. There was major disagreement about the proper remedy-the majority decision only got five votes (which, of course, is all it needed.)

[GrapevineSooner]

That's a bit misleading. 7 agreed there were constitutional problems with the recount. There was major disagreement about the proper remedy-the majority decision only got five votes (which, of course, is all it needed.)

For context and because so many people confuse the 7-2 ruling with the 5-4 ruling, you're right.

[Czar Soonerov]

Though to correct Czar, saxeT didn't win the MNC in 2005. Vince young won it single handedly.

For context and because texas suxx.

;)

[Scott D]

I do hope this Tea Party which is more of a libertarian type movement fixes it. There are a few politicians gaining power because they want less government. But I'm not sure they will act that way after they gain power.

hah....just look at who it's attracting...career politicians who will claim whatever they feel is necessary to consolidate a power base...oh wait, they do that with the current party format, and people fall for it every time.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So, I'll bet there are board libs who haven't seen this list of The Left's most hated Americans, and we need to get their votes and reasonings in.