I love the whore-iness of it all
Bookworm on Dec 20 2009 at 6:37 pm | Filed under: Democrats
Now that Nelson has made the 60th Democratic vote, having sold out his principles on abortion for a probably unconstitutional permanent medicare benefit for Nebraska, Olympia Snowe has suddenly developed scruples and announced that she won’t vote on the bill — and why not? Now that the Dems don’t need her vote, there’s nothing in it for her to vote for it, and everything in pretending to her constituents that she’s a “conservative.” I hope that her constituents are smarter than that, and that they destroy her when she next runs for office.
How immoral are these people and how stupid do they think we are? I’d say the answer to both questions is “very.” Of course, judging by the 2008 election results, Americans, collectively, are just as dumb as the D.C. prostitutes think we are.
Related posts:
- Liberal fascism
- I agree with his point, but I love his writing even more
- How much do brains matter in a President?
Email This Post To A Friend
9 Responses to “I love the whore-iness of it all”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Dems controlled spending in both houses as of 2006, but got the deficit blamed on Bush and the Republicans. People fall for these things because they don’t pay attention.
Neo has been writing about just exactly how deep the rabbit hole goes for the tyranny loving Left. http://neoneocon.com/2009/12/19/the-goals-of-obama-and-the-left-tyranny-coup-or-business-as-usual/
You’re right, of course, Y, but on the other hand, Bush didn’t veto much either. Both with his own party in power and definitely with the Dems in power, he had the power of the pen and he didn’t use it. The problem, also of course, was that he needed congressional cooperation to make sure the funding of the Iraq war continued, but I sort of think he also wasn’t what I would call a real conservative. It took me a while to figure out that a “compassionate conservative” was actually an old style Democrat with a strong national defense mindset. Even if I had known that going into the election, I’d have voted for him because of the only other option – Gore – but at least I would have been prepared for the reality. Just goes to show … something. Not sure what – unless it’s that political campaigns tend to disguise the candidates rather than hold them up for examination.
So BW is calling some politicians money whores?
This is really business as usual– what’s unusual is just the number of zeros.
Listening to politicians confuse millions with billions was always maddening. Now they can’t keep the difference between billions and trillions straight.
“judging by the 2008 election results, Americans, collectively, are just as dumb as the D.C. prostitutes think we are.”
Michael Moore was right.
Michael Moore is part of the problem and is on the target list.
<B>Both with his own party in power and definitely with the Dems in power, he had the power of the pen and he didn’t use it.</b>
For 2 reasons.
Bush doesn’t like to veto what he considers the legitimate business of Congress.
And Congress exploits that fact by attaching riders to bills, such as Defense Spending which Bush is loath to veto. And they do it with such things as the Kennedy No Child Left Behind, promising Bush all kinds of things, and Bush believes them because Bush is not a deceptive minded person. So he’s taken for a ride by something old Byzantine hands would have advised him to avoid. He and Rumsfeld both, for example, trusted in “Diveristy” Casey purely because he was the General on the ground at the time, rather than trusting to political and military necessities as the barometer of action.
Whether bush’s performance could be increased or not isn’t for me to say. I wasn’t there standing by his side advising him to do or not to do. Nor did I see first hand or even second hand the quality of his advisers or the exact premises upon which he made his decisions. But I can tell you why he didn’t make them. The reasons that he either discarded or never considered.
And that’s no surprise. Most of America, including John McCain, was on the old template of trusting in Dems to go along to play along, because that was how it was ALWAYS done.
<B>unless it’s that political campaigns tend to disguise the candidates rather than hold them up for examination.</b>
It’s the fault of Dems, really. But then, again, isn’t almost everything the fault of Dems. The Dems create the thesis about Republicans and Republicans react with the anti-thesis. Then they collaborate together to form the synergy of compromise.
Because the Dems take such a hard and unreasonable stance, the Republican party tends to react accordingly. Thus when Dems talk about not enough troops, Republicans talk about troops not being the answer. When Dems talk about too many troops too late, Republicans start talking about more troops. To the public, this makes the Republicans look self-serving, since the media favors Dems and subtly distorts public perception similar to the Russian NKVD, even if Dems take contradictory positions.
Bush campaigns on restoring dignity back to the White House and lowering taxes. Those he did. Had the Democrat opposition been a loyal opposition, something devoted to the best interests of America, they would have forced Bush to make other promises, to adapt his strategy, and to better Bush’s political instincts. But they did none of this. It was left to Bush and Cheney to figure out how to change the Iraqi strategy for the better. The Dems did nothing but offer failure as an option.
Well, Ronald Reagan LEARNED from his experience with Democrats in California – he did not go to Washington and keep right on making the same mistakes. President Bush had had reasonable experiences with Democrats in Texas, I’ve heard, but once in D.C. he had PLENTY of negative experience early on, and he never appeared to learn…so I think it’s pretty plain that he wasn’t a committed conservative. More like JFK and Scoop Jackson, it appears. Not what I wanted, but definitely better than Gore, or what we have now.
BrianE really nailed it with this: “This is really business as usual– what’s unusual is just the number of zeros.”
Why are you demeaning hard working whores?
Try to come up with another term to describe politicians. Hmm! It is tough.
Cockroaches