I don’t see anything in the constitution that says YOU MUST BE A CONSERVATIVE TO BE AN AMERICAN

Well, actually, yes there is:

The Guarantee Clause

U.S. Constitution – Article 4 Section 4

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Now I could use this answer on two levels. The first being a tongue-in-cheek play on words Republican for Conservative.

But clearly Republican back then, when the Constitution was drafted, did not mean the Republican party of RINO Steele of today.

It meant a Republic, a representative form of government, superior to that of democracies, which were subject to mob rule and descent into chaos.

More importantly, it meant NOT what the Democratic Party has become now, basically a camouflaged vehicle for communist incrementalism, as there is very little light between the planks of Socialism and the current democratic party line, particularly when dealing with the Soros – Ayers – Obama – Pelosi – Reid et al Berkeleyite Leftist cadre.

More importantly, it meant that those elected to government held their positions in the form of a trust, not ownership.

They were not authorized to give away the farm, but to hold it in good faith stewardship, and to preserve and protect the Constitution, the Constitutional freedoms and rights of every citizen, the Constitutional sovereignty of each State, and to protect the nation, and to guard and increase the nations’ wealth, not plunder it.

Not turn it over to millions of undeserving foreign nationals. Not to voluntarily retreat against every foreign tyrant and aggressor. Not to seek every American soldier’s death and defeat on foreign battlefields.

You cannot ally yourself with Americas’ enemies, you cannot kick aside and forsake our allies, you cannot spew contempt on everything that America holds dear and still…

call yourself an American.

Well there Condum,

It seems that the only way you can make a point is to fudge reality.

If you just allied yourselves with folks who served the National interest, you would be doing what countries, at least smart countries have done if they wanted to prosper or even simply to survive.

But no, Leftards have been consistent, and this is where you go into full disingenuous fudging mode. The US allied itself with WWII Soviet Russia since it served the US national interest to have the Soviet Army tie up a huge portion of Nazi men, weapons and material — men, weapons and material which might otherwise have been shooting at and killing Americans.

But no, Leftards, such as yourself and such as Pinch Sulzberger, editor of the NYT (and his Pentagon Papers dad before him) would rather see AMERICAN soldiers get killed.

Your pal, the Winter Soldier, Kerry was out there testifying before Congress (e.g. LYING) how American soldiers commit war crimes and comport themselves as Jeenjiss Kaaaahn, handing Communists a massive propaganda weapon during wartime.

Your sweetheart Jane Fonda was giggling like a little schoolgirl, manning a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun, transmitting over an NVA freq, playing Tokyo Rose against US troops during wartime, and giving information to the NVA that made the lives of the American PW’s even worse than the inhuman misery they were already undergoing.

The same crap played out, again and again throughout the Cold War, with your pals Teddy Kennedy and Jesse Jackson, siding with the Communists in Southern Africa, leading to the turnover of Southwest Africa, Mozambique, Angola, Rhodesia and South Africa to Communists, plunging those countries into chaos, disease, starvation and mass murder.

Each time you commies get what you want, which is to cut free nations loose and allow your Soviet or Chi-Com friends to attack them without US support, and the slaughter begins, you go on your merry way, the news coverage ceases and you find some other free nation under attack to fuck with.

In Central America, Iran, and any other number of places, the US-based Left CONSISTENTLY sided with America’s enemies and the enemies of freedom.

A huge majority of Communist victories won in the nightmare years that the Soviet Union existed, were with the direct aid and assistance of the Democratic party and the US-based Left (see, for example, COVERT CADRE, about the IPS)

Domestically, you and your pals attack the Constitution — free speech, the free exercise of religion, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, property, Due Process and substitute in its’ place a game plan that looks suspiciously close to the tenets of socialism.

You and your pals attack centrally-held Middle American values and champion the deviants, the slackers and the criminals.

Nice try, but you and your buddies on the Left are filth.

You are toxic to freedom.

You are pollution to morals.

And you folks are thieves when it comes to the work, the wealth and property of others.

Nice try at obfuscation.

Go sell your propaganda to the mouth-breathing masses — your lies don’t work here.

Condom,

I agree with you that we are a Republic for of gov’t, but I don’t see where that makes us a conservative Republic. Alot of ranting about how unamerican liberals are but thats opinion

Yes, you’d like it to be just opinion. Check your history. I just hit some of the highlights, but the trend is made clear my the consistent treason of so-called American, so-called Liberals.

If they are Americans, it is through sheer accident of birth. They have no loyalty to their native country, but contempt. They share much in common with Lee Harvey Oswald and the Rosenbergs — they hate and betray this country.

It’s far past opinion and well into proven fact.

My statement: According to Robert108 the only time we have had a truly conservative gov’t is the Reagan years.

I would agree with R108 when it came to the presidency. The Congress, on the other hand, did their best to ensure that the Marxists worldwide, like Central America and Southern Africa, won and free countries lost.

It was Reagan and his allies in the executive branch that dragged and unwilling and caterwauling Democratic Congress into fighting Communism. They spent their time fighting him to prevent him from helping freedom fighters in Central America, the Middle East and Southern Africa. It was Reagan that pushed forward on Star Wars, while Congress sought to hobble the military and curtail our intelligence community.

It was Reagan that started the doctrine of ROLLBACK and started a raft of covert operations that broke the back of the Soviet Union without having to resort to open warfare.

It was the Democratic Congress that hounded him with endless investigations into special operations that funded and carried out anti-Communist operations.

Again, you are wrong about how Leftists/ Liberals have anything but a barren legalistic claim to be American. Even if considered American by birth, their words and actions reveal them to be traitors.

All the rest have been Rinos or Liberals. I am pretty sure they were all Americans. If conservatism is the best form of government why hasn’t it lasted? Where does it come up short? By all the polls that Fox puts up this is a conservative country. Why haven’t the voters followed the Conservatives lead? Whats missing?

Liberals are not really Americans anymore..

Mudcat is absolutely correct.

Leftists, by their actions, and by their every word, are traitors to America and have set themselves up as enemies to freedom everywhere.

They consistently ally themselves with dictators and tyrants the world over.

Almost every Communist and other tyrant’s victory since WWII has not been because of a Communist battlefield victory, but due to the fact that the US-based Left has consistently banged the defeat and withdrawal drum — from South Africa to Angola, to Rhodesia, to Vietnam to Cambodia, to Nicaragua, to Panama, to Iraq to Afghanistan.

They are truly enemies of truth and freedom.

They are the domestic enemy.

You and your hater buttbuddies can try, but you will only destroy yourselves. She’s good, and you lefties are evil.

That bitch deserves everything she gets for her behavior during the election. I hope the press shreds her.

Dino you moron pull you head out of your ass and start using brain for something besides a battering ram.

This is a pretty interesting story, but Rob, don’t you think that y’all are doing exactly what you claimed the left did with Obama?

That is; imagining who you think she is, instead of just looking at exactly who she is, and what she is doing?

Seems to me you guy are all fantasizing about what you think she is up to. Because there certainly is no information that gives any of you cause to conclude the things you do.

We shall see.

Liberals are not really Americans anymore..
mudcat on July 4, 2009 at 06:24 pm

Fuck you,fuck your wife, sister, mother, daughter and everything you hold dear you fucking bastard.
Who the fuck you think you are?
And who the fuck appointed you arbiter of who is American, and who is not?

What could be more unamerican than a rant about how those immigrants are taking over and any one that doesn’t agree with me is unamerican. I guess a dictionary description of
An American is a citizen of the United States of America isn’t enough. I don’t see anything in the constitution that says YOU MUST BE A CONSERVATIVE TO BE AN AMERICAN> nope just looked through it again. Lets expand the def. and add on …and obeys and lives by the laws of the United States. Nope nothing there that says you have to be conservative.
Nothing in the Constitution that describes an American as a particular, race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, sex, short, tall, fat, thin educated or not, productive or not liberal or conservative or in between ideology. Plenty of felons of both conservative and liberal persuasion that are Americans. Nothing in the Constitution that says you have to
serve or not serve in the military to be an American.
At one time the white male property owner had more rights then other citizens of the United States but that didn’t mean the have nots weren’t American. My guess is if some of the bloggers lived back then as the privileged class they would be saying how UnAmerican it is to allow women the vote or blacks, mexicans, or Indians to own property.
This is conservatives challenge: They have to prove they aren’t racists, sexists, bigots.
They have been portrayed as such by the liberal media and its been going on so long, it is a stereotype. Unfortunately within all stereotypes there is a grain of truth; One that has been perverted, distorted so it becomes true. Conservatives half to prove that
they weren’t the ones to persecute blacks, and keep women in there place. That they aren’t represented by the Bernie Madoffs of the world.
When you get yahoos on this blog and other conservative blogs ranting and cussing it does nothing to the correct the stereotypical behavior of a conservative.
The general publics def of a conservative is “someone opposed to change and are hypocritical preachers.” Thats what has to be fought against.
As far as Sarah Palin goes she sounded as if there was a quiver in here voice, and she is fed up with the politics as they are. She will not run for President, She will make millions on the talk show circuit and conservative fund raising rallies preaching to the choir. I would not be surprised to see her on Fox with here own show. She has shown her self a quitter as far as a national political office. If she can’t stand the criticisms and false stories without cracking she doesn’t belong in a higher office.

conundrum: You misrepresent when you describe the invaders as “immigrants”. They aren’t, and shame on you for telling that lie. Real Americans welcome legal immigrants, who have learned our language and history, and who are ready to live as Americans in the fullest meaning of the word.

If she can’t stand the criticisms…

Ten months of lying smear and false ethics charges, as well as death and rape threats against her children are not “criticism”. She is now in a position to strike back at those who have slandered her, and I hope she smacks them very hard.

That is; imagining who you think she is, instead of just looking at exactly who she is, and what she is doing?

Seems to me you guy are all fantasizing about what you think she is up to. Because there certainly is no information that gives any of you cause to conclude the things you do.

I think you’re right on this one. When Palin (not Sarah; I don’t know why everyone acts like they’re on a first-name basis with her) first accepted the VP nomination, I was pretty interested and excited. However, she continually proves herself to be as naive and amateur as Obama. Much of the criticism she gets from the media is unfair, but some of it is valid. This latest stunt says to me that she’s unreliable and very unpredictable. Not the type of person I want as POTUS.

As time goes on the GOP prospective nominee herd just keeps getting thinner, especially among fiscal conservatives. At this point it seems we’d be lucky to get a RINO into office. But I’ll try to remain optimistic, considering 2012 is still a few years from now.

You cannot ally yourself with Americas’ enemies, you cannot kick aside and forsake our allies, you cannot spew contempt on everything that America holds dear and still…
Allies come and go as we see fit to use them. A good example is the French, we pretty much don’t care for them but from the beginning they were our ally. Remember we didn’t particularly care for the British in the 1770′s through 1812 at least. WE allied ourselves with one of the biggest murderers in the world Stalin because it was in our best interest.

More importantly, it meant that those elected to government held their positions in the form of a trust, not ownership….. No one owns their elected position. Some hold onto it and consolidate power better then others but it comes down to the voters to kick them out or keep them in. Witness Bush who strengthened the Executive Branch, abused it and people kicked him out. Same thing will happen to Obama. In four years he is out of here if the electorate are willing. He may be out sooner through impeachment if the Conservatives could have their way. Thats the beauty of our system. It can’t be changed enough that it can’t be corrected. It will coming down to selfishness vs. self sacrifice. The selfishness of all entities on the Federal Tit, individuals as well as corporations. vs the short term sacrifice needed to get off of it.

They were not authorized to give away the farm, but to hold it in good faith stewardship, and to preserve and protect the Constitution, the Constitutional freedoms and rights of every citizen, the Constitutional sovereignty of each State, and to protect the nation, and to guard and increase the nations’ wealth, not plunder it….. and thus there is the Supreme court that will rule on Constitutionality of laws passed.
If change is needed to the constitution then we have the amendment process. The biggest threat I see is the over use of the executive order that seems to have the same weight as law. This was abused by Bush and Obama. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion. …… And we still have a republic form of gov’t. A representative gov’t with checks and balances. This still doesn’t make it a conservative gov’t. According to Robert108 the only time we have had a truly conservative gov’t is the Reagan years. All the rest have been Rinos or Liberals. I am pretty sure they were all Americans. If conservatism is the best form of government why hasn’t it lasted? Where does it come up short? By all the polls that Fox puts up this is a conservative country. Why haven’t the voters followed the Conservatives lead? Whats missing?

How could you possibly have Palin’s name , and the word “plan” in the same sentence? This ignorant cunt thinks if she steps down the charges will go away, that if she is no longer governor that the feds can’t prosecute her.

Can you say cavity check.

That bitch deserves everything she gets for her behavior during the election. I hope the press shreds her.

They’ve already been doing that. Ass wipe!

It seems now clear that Palin is NOT facing any federal indictments! The FBI said they are not aware of any indictments.

It seems clear that while making $125k per year as governor, Palin’s legal bills exceed one half million dollars and that she could make more money to cover this mounting debt, a debt cause by nuisance law suits and false charges by liberals, outside elective office.

It seems clear by her statements about her taking a role in advancing limited government, fiscally conservative policies and her social-moral views that, Sarah is far from out of politics and has future plans.

It seems clear the Left still fears Sarah, her looks, ability to speak and personal charisma, so she is their number one target.

If she wants to run, she has to compete with Romney, Gingrich, and the Huckster- and none of them have day jobs.

Palin’s move puts yet more pressure on Obama to finally get some results, as the soaring rhetoric isn’t hypnotizing the plebes like it used to. This week Helen Thomas, Colin Powell, and Warren Buffet all turned on him. Polls are looking droopy for The One lately.

Obama’s porkulus program is a train wreck, all it’s done is bump interest rates and tank the dollar. We are being laughed at by bad guys like Tehran, Pyongyang, and Al Qaida who amazingly turned-down Barack’s friend-requests.

Palin could trounce him in 2012, when Americans would vote for the Gipper-in-Heels in droves- while begging for lower taxes, free enterpise, a defense posture with some backbone… an end to the radical, anti-American nightmare we’ve got now.

Go get ‘em Sarah-

They dislike her because she is more popular and more effective without playing their political crony game. Fear born from jealousy is an unfortunate state of being.

Spartacus: It is the belief of the Leftists that Obama and the last two election cycle victories in Congress for the Democrats have produced a long term strangle hold on power for liberalism and conservatism is dead.

Well, these things run in cycles, one party gets in power, they always overreach and the people punch them in the nose and the other party regains power. So, I believe conservatives, if they run as conservatives, will return to power and that means both Congress and the White House.

The problem is, the huge debt we are mounting and increased dependency by the people on government largesse will take decades, maybe several generations to reverse, as people don’t give up government money very easily. In the meantime, the Republican Party will get in power, lust after that power and govern just like liberal Democrats and we’ll get our butts kicked again and then more liberal programs and spending.

Romney, Gingrich, and the Huckster are big spending, liberal Republicans and the GOP is run by these professional, more big government, power hungry liberal to moderate Republicans. So, we are so screwed!

It seems now clear that Palin is NOT facing any federal indictments! The FBI said they are not aware of any indictments.

That is the lies the left keeps drumming up.

you can’t just take a break and grow a brain.

Buzz’s lament!

I dunno. If her reason for quitting her job is to focus on a Presidential run 3 years from now, then she is as much a despicable career politician as anyone we currently have. Obama will get my vote just for the lack of moral difference.

Oh, and conservatism is an ideology!

Wrong again. American conservatism is founded on the human principles of personal, economic, religious and political freedom, along with individual independence and our Constitution. It is the exact opposite of an ideology like Marxism. Conservatism puts people above ideology. Free people making free choices is not an ideology, it’s a principle.

Hillary didn’t get a tenth of what Sarah has received; her daughter was never objectified by a statement that a baseball player “knocked her up” during a baseball game; there were no websites calling for the death of her infant son, either. Besides, many of the accusations against Hillary were true; the ones against Sarah were all false.
Big difference, but I don’t expect a partisan hack like you will acknowledge that fact.

Liberls beware! Sara is unleashed to say and do as she pleases now!

Payback is hell, and in her case well deserved!

Mark wrote:

Liberls beware! Sara is unleashed to say and do as she pleases now!

Payback is hell, and in her case well deserved!

You mean she wasn’t the “pitbull with lipstick” during the campaign? Really, Mark, we liberals are just shaking in our boots. I’m sure President Obama is huddled in the situation room with his knees rattling wringing his hands.

ooeeewww, we are scared,run for the hills all you liberals!

So the basic premise of the conservatives is that the liberal voting public are prostitutes going to the highest bidder ie whichever gov’t program benefits them, or at the very least dupes in a nefarious scheme of a liberal administration in a power grab?
The problem being of course is that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely so that even well meaning conservatives get sucked into it and start pandering to the public in the form of earmarks thus keeping themselves in power but losing there integrity.

So the basic premise of the conservatives is that the liberal voting public are prostitutes going to the highest bidder ie whichever gov’t program benefits them, or at the very least dupes in a nefarious scheme of a liberal administration in a power grab?

Wrong again, but it does reveal the content of your character that you warp “free people making free choices” into that.
Again: Personal, economic, religious and political freedom, following the limited govt as described in our Constitution and founding principles.
When you lefties seize control, you ignore the Constitutional limitations placed on govt, and start rigging markets and redistributing earnings for political advantage, all the while lying about your real motives.
I say again, the train wreck the Obama administration has already caused, and is continuing to cause, will expose corrupt leftie ideology for what it is: totalitarianism.
Since 1968, you commies have been infiltrating the Dem Party and the govt schools, with the result that many people don’t know basic economics and haven’t been educated in the false premises of Marxism.

…power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely…

The present Dem cabal in the Executive and Legislative Branches is a very good illustration of exactly that. It is poised to ruin the country to satisfy Obama/Pelosi’s lust for power. Sacrificing people for power is the mark of the ideologue.

conundrum: Just to make it simple for you; when a formerly honest man abandons his principles and starts bending the truth, is he still an honest man?

108: Good point, I should have made it! Once conservatives stop behaving like conservatives, by defeinition, they are no longer conservatives.

Why in the hell is Bambi off on an overseas trip again tonight?

The country is going to hell, and he’s having fun.

Asshole!

Mark: He has to build relationships with his Marxist and Muslim allies abroad, plus the idea of having his sorry buttocks out of the country makes me feel safer at home.

from Nieman 108: Good point, I should have made it! Once conservatives stop behaving like conservatives, by definition, they are no longer conservatives.

This is also an easy excuse, that way conservatives could do nothing wrong ever. 108 has used this before. That is why I wrote that according to 108 there hasn’t been a conservative president in the last 60+ years except for Reagan.

That goes back to My statement: According to Robert108 the only time we have had a truly conservative gov’t is the Reagan years. All the rest have been Rinos or Liberals. I am pretty sure they were all Americans. If conservatism is the best form of government why hasn’t it lasted? Where does it come up short? By all the polls that Fox puts up this is a conservative country. Why haven’t the voters followed the Conservatives lead? Whats missing?

If conservatism is the best form of government why hasn’t it lasted? Where does it come up short?

Because of the weakness of the human animal, when the liberals offer something for doing nothing; when they offer people a fail safe, personal responsibility free life, there are always people in any society less well off financially and that want to blame others for their own laziness; and they willingly accept money and advantages in life they have not earned. Since they vote for the people (politicians/party) offering them a free ride in life, the next liberal knows he/she must offer a little better deal to get their votes, until the liberals get the majority of votes and they spend us into oblivion.

It is called greed and sloth, it is a disease that infects a people and it always ends in tyranny!

This is also an easy excuse, that way conservatives could do nothing wrong ever. 108 has used this before.

If a person says they are a capitalist and vote communist, are they capitalists or communists? It is not what someone may say they are, it is what they actually do that tells us what they are in life. We have had several NE Senators that are registered and run as Republicans and vote liberal, what are they? It is a not an excuse for failure, conservatism has a few core values that are inviolable: Among them are limited government and fiscal responsibility, one may vote conservative on 99% of the issues, but if they vote to expand government (THree may be exceptions) in our lives or to spend beyond our means, then to that degree they are NOT conservatives.

The guy who emailed you was expressing his free speech rights, not playing politics. You leftie totalitarians want to silence real Americans when we say things you don’t want to hear.
Shame on you!
There you go being dishonest. The guy was dishonest because he was perpetuating a lie. When you purposely distort the facts that makes you dishonest. Isn’t it a sad comment on you when a conservative is caught distorting the facts he is only using freedom of speech. I like to have these discussions but lets not in your words “bend the truth”

Conservatism is a set of principles of those of us who believe that the best human condition is maximized individual liberty and minimized government regulation and interference in human affairs.

OK, then tell us how it failed to produce this Utopia we were promised 30 years ago.

There you go being dishonest. The guy was dishonest because he was perpetuating a lie. When you purposely distort the facts that makes you dishonest. Isn’t it a sad comment on you when a conservative is caught distorting the facts he is only using freedom of speech. I like to have these discussions but lets not in your words “bend the truth”

None of your nonsense changes the fact that we have free speech in this country, even for politicians, and the guy who emailed you(you claim) wasn’t a politician, so your entire screed falls apart.

Little dino: Only your failed Marxism promises utopia; conservatism just promises you will receive in accordance with your effort and dedication. We’re not for equal outcomes, which are inhuman and impractical.
There has never been a thirty period of fiscal conservatism in our history, moron. You keep telling that lie, though, which raises serious questions about your mental health.

So it is clear that electing righties won’t do us any good at all and the facts bear that out.

So the solution is to elect Marxists?

We need to elect conservatives and demand they behave like conservatives, then you and I will be free to succeed or fail and not be beholden to the government.

So Neiman, how do you propose to do that. You didn’t do it over the last 8 years. You were too busy going after the Democrats than to watch your own house.

You are like every other rightie out there. You constantly bitch and moan about Obama and wail about what has happened to this country and want to elect more conservatives. Then when you elect conservatives, you defend the conservatives to the hilt,and when they don’t act conservatively then you wail about the need to elect more conservatives.

It just seems to me that you have elected conservatives and they turned on you and you just keep saying elect more conservatives.

So what’s different about Sarah. She abandoned the office that the conservatives in Alaska elected her to. She took an oath of office. She has now abandoned that office to go the route of the very celebrity status that you have decried Obama for, she will write a book for $11M and do the book tour, give $20,000 speeches around the country and so on and so on .

Now there’s nothing wrong with that, but please don’t come here and say she is the next conservative Messiah, because that is exactly what you are doing. I don’t expect you to admit it but it is astonishing that you all come here and claim that she is so different from all the other politicians.

She is just like all the other politicians, she won’t even be a one term governor but will be the new conservative Messiah. Bow down, Neiman, bow down!

…(until the investment houses of Wall Street took half of the gains last year)…

Actually, that was Bungler Obama and the Dem social engineers in Congress. Dem market rigging and wasteful Dem social spending is always the cause of recession; always.

So it is clear that electing righties won’t do us any good at all and the facts bear that out.

Not one thing you said had any bearing on the truth whatsoever!

djer: While there is much to criticize about the many Republicans in Congress that betrayed their principles: (1) As I said, voting Marxist and for a Cult Personality is hardly the answer. (2) A bad Republican and a Conservative that forgets their principles still stand heads and shoulders over liberal socialists. (3) Until 2008 unemployment was so low it was virtual full employment, we fought two wars (three really), the treasury was increasing its income yearly because of low taxes and then a liberal time bomb in bad home loans and wall street greed knocked us down, which can happen to any President. Yet, despite all of that we were stil not facing multi-trillions in debt and the nationalization of major business, industries and utilities in America.

We conservatives are ready, willing and able to criticize wayward elective conservatives; while you liberals stand by your burnining house without uttering a negative word.

Bush did not veto a singly unbalanced budget that was submitted by the Republican rightie/conservative Congress. He did not budget for the two wars he started. He spent, spent, spent. He spent the surplus that Clinton handed him after balancing the budget during his presidency.

Conservatism/rightieism is a pipe dream only in someone’s mind since we have never seen a conservative/rightie Congress act conservative.

And try as you might, this all started on Bush’s watch. He did nothing to balance the budget, he did nothing to stop the growing deficit. He and the conservative/rightie congress drove this economy into a new depression
under their watch.

Now all of a sudden, the conservative/righties in Congress find their principles. Where were they the last 8 years. Lining their pockets while you were sitting silent, we were robbed blind and now the Democrats have to make some unpleasant choices.

Why in the world would be go down the same road the conservatives/righties took to get up into this debacle? Conservatives/righties are just flimflam artists and you wear it well.

Oh and Neiman, the treasury was not increasing its income when you consider that the wars were off budget. I suppose when you’re cooking the books like Bush. Wall Street greed was not of democratic making. It seem like the SEC chair appointed by Bush turned his head to what was going on.

And as you well know, Bush and Paulsen knew the car makers were in trouble and chose to leave that little mess for Obama to clean up. If you remember, the first bailout was under Bush’s watch, he knew how in dire straits the economy was.

For you now to try and minimize the responsibility of the Bush administration is just laughable.

He spent the surplus that Clinton handed him after balancing the budget during his presidency.

There was no surplus; that was a Clinton lie. In truth, Clinton handed President Bush a quarter of negative growth, along with facilitating 9/11. President Bush rescued us from both Clinton debacles.

…we were robbed blind and now the Democrats have to make some unpleasant choices.

We have been robbed blind since FDR, along with JFK, LBJ, Carter and Clinton, with wasteful social spending and market rigging for social engineering purposes.
FDR’s “Social Security” and LBJ’s “War on Poverty” and “Medicare” continue to rob the private sector of needed capital. Only fiscal conservatism can save us. We have to live within our means, and Dems will never do that.

Oh and Neiman, the treasury was not increasing its income when you consider that the wars were off budget.

Another ignorant lie; receipts to the Treasure increased as a result of the modest tax rate cuts, but spending increased. For the economically ignorant, they are two different things.
Clinton’s stupidity enabled 9/11, which led directly to terrorism advancing in Afghanistan and Iraq. Even Bungler Obama has to admit that. He’s continuing to fight the terrorists in Afghanistan, and is now claiming credit for what President Bush did for Iraq.
Why aren’t you whining about that?

But bush could have vetoed a spending bill, even ONE while the republicans were spending us $5 TRILLION into debt, doubling it, from 2001-2007. Bush was too busy shoveling the money to his friends to veto anything.

You will never be able to revise history and make the bush years anything but synonymous with failure and economic disaster.

If income grew as you say then they were even more negligent with the Treasury. The truth is, tax cuts have a limit in their ability to increase revenue, something simple-minded conservatives don’t get.

Bush was too busy shoveling the money to his friends to veto anything.

Even if what you say is true… and patently it is not… that’s a pretty lame excuse for Barack Obama doing exactly the same thing, only twice the cost to taxpayers in less than half the time.

Look, you can castigate Mr. Bush’s profligacy all you want, but you are more than a little late to that party. Conservatives have been howling about that very fact for years. Besides, your criticism of Bush’s spending is meaningless partisan drivel, which anyone with a 6th grade education can understand. For your criticism to have any meaning at all, you would also have to be critical of Obama and his obscene spending, which of course you aren’t.

I know this is really difficult for you to comprehend, but if you are going to criticize Mr. Bush for doing something of which you disapprove, you can’t then turn around and use Bush’s actions as justification for Obama doing the very same thing. That’s a level of hypocrisy even an ignorant leftist should be able to understand.

Batone wrote:

Conservatives have been howling about that very fact for years.

Yep, you’re right, they were howling but no action. The conservatives/righties in Congress just kept on spending and spending and spending. Conservatives/righties like to talk about limited government but in reality they never practice.They like to talk about family values and legislate family values, but rarely practice.

And then when the going gets rough, one of them aborts their job as governor on Alaska, while one runs off to Argentina and another messes around with this friends wife. All talk those conservatives/righties.

The hyprocrisy, Batone, is that Bush drove this economy to near depression levels that decry the conservative mantra touted by those in the White House and in the Congress during the Bush years.

Then when we hit rock bottom, he starts with a bailout that wasn’t near enough for the seriousness of the near depression. Bush even stated that he left the carmakers situation for Obama to deal with.

Well, Obama is making the tough decisions. It is clear you don’t like them and in two years what is left of the conservative/rightie movement will have its chance to win back the House and the Senate. Good Luck with that.

I may not be the expert you and R108 seem to be and I am definitely not able to parrot the same language that R108 uses on a regular basis,(I see that you are though).

But I will say this: taking the country into two wars that were not budgeted, signing budgets for 7 straight years that were not balanced and grew the cost of government; and expanding the deficit doesn’t take economics experts such as you and R108 to know that there is sufficient cause and effect that there is a problem.

djer,

First things first, okay? No one expects expertise. Certainly not me. But some basic economic and fiscal knowledge is necessary to have your commentary taken seriously. Agreed?

I think that if you check you’ll see that precedent was on Mr. Bush’s side regarding the war expenditures. I don’t know of a single US war, including the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, that was carried “on budget.” Of course, that doesn’t mean, as implied by those on the Left, that the costs weren’t put before Congress and voted on in regular, supplementary appropriation bills… as is done with alll manner of other federal expenditures. In fact, if you actually THINK about it, war efforts are probably the single most difficult expenditure to budget for. After all, to think that in January we will know with any marginal degree of certainty what our military expenditures in Afghanistan will be next October is simply gratuitous nonsense. Of course the entire argument is moot in any case. When was the last time a Congress passed the requisite budget and specific appropriations bill on time anyway? Hmm?

…signing budgets for 7 straight years that were not balanced and grew the cost of government; and expanding the deficit doesn’t take economics experts such as you and R108 to know that there is sufficient cause and effect that there is a problem.

I agree. As does Robert108, I’m sure. And had you been paying attention over the past few years, you’d know just how much we have disagreed with the Bush administration’s willingness to accede to Congress’ spending habits, Democrat and Republican.

But let me caution you here. If you are going to castigate Mr. Bush for his profligate spending, you can’t very well turn around and give Obama a pass, considering that his spending projections make Mr. Bush look positively miserly by comparison. If you’re going to berate Bush for a $400 billion deficit, you can hardly applaud Obama’s $2 trillion deficit. Not without being ridiculed by those of us who think.

djer: You are the parrot here, since you repeat what you’ve been told, with no personal knowledge of the subject about which you speak; that is apparent by your ignorant statements. Bat and I are experienced in business and economics, and we both speak from our own knowledge and experience on those subjects.
Deficit spending beyond what is needed for the next investment cycle is bad, but when the economy is booming, like it was for almost the entire Bush administration, it’s tolerable. I’ll wager that you can’t name any Bush economic policy that was recessionary, using cause and effect reasoning, so you’re just parroting the leftie propaganda.
What Obama is doing, which is much more massive deficit spending in a time of economic downturn, is stupid and counterproductive, as can be seen by the record destruction of American wealth, doubled oil prices, choked off domestic energy development and skyrocketing unemployment.
BTW, your handlers have told you that unemployment is a lagging indicator, which is false; employment is a lagging indicator, because increased investment takes some time, typically a quarter, before businesses start increasing their hiring after a downturn. Unemployment, on the other hand, is a leading indicator, as businesses start shedding jobs on anticipating a downturn that looks to be long term, like what happened when Obama started his attacks on private sector economic activity.
Again, if you want to demonize President Bush’s deficits, you must really hate Obama’s much larger ones, unless you have a politically-based double standard.
Again, the best policy is to cut both tax rates and wasteful social spending, while removing govt influence from the markets; this encourages economic growth that is self-sustaining.
The next best is to cut tax rates while increasing wasteful spending, which tends to balance out with slow growth.
The worst is to increase tax rates, attack private sector prosperity while draining private capital with massive deficit spending.
Or, you could take some basic econ courses and learn something.

R108 has blamed everthing that happened during a republican administration on the previous democractic administration or on some future democratic administration. The republicans have been blameless in R108′s mind. And if he did disagree he would claim they weren’t conservatives in the first place or RINOs or some other excuse that it wasn’t the problem with the conservatives in power.

I absolutely don’t like the fact that we are having to spend to keep the economy up and running. But I don’t believe that the economists, including Mark Zandi, who was McCain’s financial policy guy, felt there was any other alternative when the credit markets froze up. The banks were clamoring for action. The carmakes were on the verge of major collapse.

Now I understand full well, that there are many who believe that the government should have let the free market take its course and basically let the chips fall where they may. But I don’t believe that this would have been responsible government to just see what happens.

Now we’ll just have to wait and see what happens and you will have your shot at taking back the House and Senate in 2010 if the economy hasn’t improved.

Even Bush knew and understood just how precarious the economy was.

My point with all this BatOne is that the attacks are all on Obama, ok, fine, but to say that this is all Obama’s doing is just not correct.

djer,

First, your criticism of R108 is simply wrong. I’ve been posting here at SAB for quite a few years, though not nearly as long as he has, and I know that he has been consistently critical of the Bush administration for any number of things, not least of which was uncontrolled federal spending, and Mr. Bush’s apparent unwillingness to veto some of the more outrageous spending initiatives that crossed his desk. But again, a word of caution. If you are going to criticize the Bush deficits, you can’t very well condone the Obama deficits that are 4 or 5 times as bad.

I absolutely don’t like the fact that we are having to spend to keep the economy up and running.

We aren’t “having to spend to keep the economy up and running.” That’s nonsense.

First of all, let’s acknowledge that there have two separate but related financial crisis to deal with. The lesser was/is the recession. The more urgent and critical was the so-called “credit crisis”. They are not the same thing at all. Confusing the two, or worse, lumping them all together diminishes your credibility in addressing either.

Mr. Bush chose to address the credit crisis. And he did so quickly and decisively. Obama has chosen to lump the two together (“Never let a good crisis go to waste!”), disingenuously blurring the distinction while using “the” crisis as an excuse to reward his supporters with taxpayer funded handouts and expand the reach and scope of the federal government over the private sector economy, all the while spending us into generations of unmanageable debt.

Now we’ll just have to wait and see what happens and you will have your shot at taking back the House and Senate in 2010 if the economy hasn’t improved.

Don’t be quite so simplistic! If you want to take credit for any serious economic recovery that occurs, you’re going to have to demonstrate that it was the Obama policies that have actually caused the economy to turn around. I don’t think that’s very likely, and I’m betting that there will be no discernible recovery, and that none of you on the Left will want to take much credit for the economy in any case.

R108 has blamed everthing that happened during a republican administration on the previous democractic administration or on some future democratic administration. The republicans have been blameless in R108′s mind.

Two false statements from you. I have said nothing of the kind, but if that is your premise, then your conclusions will also be false. GIGO(that means “Garbage In, Garbage Out”, which is a computer programming term). You can’t arrive at truth by starting with false premises.
Even so, attacking me with false statements is beside the point. Govt spending is wasteful by nature, but there are some legitimate expenses of govt, like national defense, which are worth what we spend, and there are wasteful expenses, like the vast majority of social programs. Two of those, SS and Medicare, are the largest part of our ongoing debt, and have been institutionalized.
It is a fact that Dem administrations always expand wasteful social spending, while some Republican administrations do not. FDR, JFK, LBJ, Carter and Clinton expanded federal spending massively. SS came from FDR, Medicare came from LBJ, who also looted the SS trust fund. That doesn’t excuse Republican wasteful spending, it just puts it into perspective.
BTW, no amount of govt spending can possibly create economic growth. The mistaken belief that it can is an obsolete idea from a guy named Keynes, who cooked up a nonsensical concept called “aggregate demand”, which was the false premise that made his conclusions false. To keep it simple, the demand for hula hoops, for instance, is not the same as the demand for investment capital, in terms of how it contributes to self-sustaining economic growth, but Keynes lumped them all together to create his meaningless “aggregate demand”.
The problem with govt spending is that it takes the money from those who are best at creating prosperity, and gives it to those who are less able to do it, or even unable to do it.
Logically, that can’t be good for the economy, but it is great for buying votes.

conundrum: If you care about your own honesty and integrity, when you quote someone other than yourself, either use the “quote” button or quotation marks. It’s just common courtesy.

r108 writes:

The next best is to cut tax rates while increasing wasteful spending, which tends to balance out with slow growth.

Well, we saw how well that worked for the last Bush years, leading us into near depression. His total neglect of the “free market” which doesn’t regulate itself as greed rules, lead us into near depression.

But only you and Bat One are qualified to write on and all knowing on the things economic from your own business experience. You only write on your type of economic ideology as if it is the one and only economic ideology.

All the self-appointed experts want to say that Palin is stupid and “has so much to learn” and on and on. But maybe, just maybe, she doesn’t do things like other politicians do things.

She has always seemed to me to much more a real person than a groomed politician,hence her appeal to me. There are a hell of a lot of us that are just sick of all the inside the beltway freaks from both political party’s. Talk about lifetime jobs. Politics does strange things to people, hopefully it hasn’t happened to her. Hell she may have something up her sleeve that might drop a shoe on one of her enemy’s, hopefully a stiletto.