Barack Obama’s most devilish political move since the 2008 campaign was to appoint a Republican congressman from upstate New York as secretary of the Army. This week’s election to fill that vacant seat has set off nothing less than a riotous and bloody national G.O.P. civil war. No matter what the results in that race on Tuesday, the Republicans are the sure losers. This could be a gift that keeps on giving to the Democrats through 2010, and perhaps beyond.
[...]
That this pastoral setting could become a G.O.P. killing field, attracting an all-star cast of combatants led by Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, William Kristol and Newt Gingrich, is a premise out of a Depression-era screwball comedy. But such farces have become the norm for the conservative movement — whether the participants are dressing up in full “tea party” drag or not.The battle for upstate New York confirms just how swiftly the right has devolved into a wacky, paranoid cult that is as eager to eat its own as it is to destroy Obama. The movement’s undisputed leaders, Palin and Beck, neither of whom have what Palin once called the “actual responsibilities” of public office, would gladly see the Republican Party die on the cross of right-wing ideological purity. Over the short term, at least, their wish could come true.
New slogan for the Republicans:
We’re also corrupt, incompetent and total suck. But we’re not… oh shit, we are.
#53 – Brain of an Alfalfa Sprout,
When you’ve only got one neuron, it’s hard for you to understand, but I was making two points. Deregulation caused the financial collapse by allowing banks and brokerages to merge and do whatever they wanted once merged. FDIC still insures the banks. So, we had to bail out these unregulated too-big-to-fail institutions that should never have been allowed to get so big or take on so much risk. That adds to debt.
Therefore, deregulation did lead to more debt.
I know, logic is hard for you with that empty head. Don’t worry about it. Ignorance is bliss. Lie back and relax and let the intelligent people of the world discuss adequate solutions.
#60,61 – chuck,
Yup. But, we have to shorten them to bumper sticker length.
Democraps: At least we’re not Repugnicans.
Repugnicans: Um … shit.
At least Republicans have the decency to NOT run Kenyan-born muslim usurpers that hate America as presidential candidates. A little respect goes a long way; something the democrats would do well to learn.
#62 – I can follow your logic.
But I don’t see why we were required to bail-out the too-big-to-fail institutions. FDIC insures the depositors (customers) of the banks. Not the banks. And only up to $100,000 (or is it more now?). And that’s just regular accounts. Stocks, derivatives, etc aren’t covered. And neither are huge pension plans.
Deregulation led to the “moral hazard” where large financial institutions realized they could simply keep lending far beyond their means. But the other side of the “moral hazard” is when politicians realized they had to bail-out the investors, because the unions behind those pension plans support Democrats. (and when I say “support, I don’t mean they vote for them, I mean they contribute to their campaigns.)
At least Republicans have the decency to NOT run Kenyan-born muslim usurpers that hate America as presidential candidates.
No, they just run Panama-born senior citizens who don’t know how many houses they own and are willing to betray everything they said and did the last time they ran for the republican presidential nomination.
@25
StoopidFlanders said:
“Bush was killing terrorists in the Iraq war…”
Oh, I suppose he was. Along with tens of thousands of innocent civilians.
“…They don’t qualify as people…”
Yeah, I know…those brown people don’t count as “real people” like white protestant christian people do. Especially when they have our oil under their sand.
“…You managed to make it through those 8 years without getting blown up by a suitcase nuke…”
Well, seven years at least. September 11, 2001 was the worst terrorist attack in American history and warning was given in more than a few ways beforehand.
Remind me, WHO was president on September 11th?
Oh that’s right…I remember now: it was that guy who now claims we were “kept safe” for eight years. Safe…Except when he was crapping his pants in abject fear on 9-11, that is.
“…so consider yourself lucky and show a little respect for your betters…”
Oh, we do have some respect for them.
Especially the better who now sits in the Oval Office.
#62 Democrats took over both in the 06 elections…and all the deficits since then, are their fault…they control Congress which has the power of the budget…
Against reality you say:
So, both democraps and repugnicans alike are increasing debt. But, it’s the repugs, and sometimes their aftermath, that are increasing it at alarming rates.
There are going to be a lot of empty seats at your testimonial dinner.
For gosh sakes, Photoshopper: Get the %$#@&! shadow angle right on the clown noses!
Geez.
[Why does everyone think I did the photo? I found it on the interwebitubes. -- UD]
#65 – chuck,
But I don’t see why we were required to bail-out the too-big-to-fail institutions. FDIC insures the depositors (customers) of the banks. Not the banks. And only up to $100,000 (or is it more now?). And that’s just regular accounts. Stocks, derivatives, etc aren’t covered. And neither are huge pension plans.
It’s now $250K per account, which amounts to $1M/couple if done properly ($250K each in accounts for spouse 1 & 2, then $500K in a joint account).
But, you’re correct. We didn’t really have to bail them out. However, with both parties bought by Wall St., everyone who had any real say in the matter was all for bailing out banks instead of homeowners.
I say, reinstate Glass-Steagal first. Reduce the limit of the amount of leverage back to 12x instead of 44x second. (Ever try to get even 12 times your net worth in debt? It’s unheard of. Banks/brokerages get 44x. YIKES!!!) Then, any bank too large to fail should be broken up into smaller banks under the Sherman Antitrust Act.
That’d be a start.
#67 – Joe Hill,
@25
StoopidFlanders said:
“Bush was killing terrorists in the Iraq war…”
Oh, I suppose he was. Along with tens of thousands of innocent civilians.
Joe, Why the hell did you give in to that point??!!? How many Iraqis were involved in the terrorist attacks of 9/11? 0. 13 Saudis and 3 Afghans, if I remember correctly. Though I could be mistaken on the exact number.
However, the Saudis are our friends. So, instead of attacking Saudi Arabia, or even questioning the members of bin Laden’s immediate family who were here in the U.S. at the time, we flew them back to safety (quietly) on 9/13 when no Americans were allowed to fly anywhere.
And, what about the 12 different reports from 12 different U.S. intelligence agencies stating that we are less safe since the start of the Iraq war and less safe from terrorism as a direct cause of the Iraq war?
(google break)
Oops. I apologize. I remembered incorrectly. It was 16 different U.S. intelligence agencies who concluded that the Iraq war was directly responsible for a reduction in safety from terrorism.
http://tinyurl.com/y86nffw
Daily Show 10/29/09 episode, funny as hell
Dare you to put you top 6 liberal leaders up there. Who would they be? For sure they wouldn’t need clown noses to highlight their incompetence.
Check this out!
The enemy of my enemy is my friend?
http://tinyurl.com/yzdjwb6
#71
“The report is a collection of the view of all 16 US intelligence agencies.”
That’s an ambiguous sentence to me. I don’t read it as saying every agency stated “…the Iraq war was directly responsible for a reduction in safety from terrorism”. That’s a real stretch.
#73 ” For sure they wouldn’t need clown noses to highlight their incompetence.”
You kid yourself. They would have to hang their heads in shame.
#75 – Loupe,
Perhaps I should have cited the original NY Times article referenced in the BBC article. The Times was clearer.
The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.
A consensus view means that they were all in agreement.
http://tinyurl.com/gkxlu
Sorry for the ambiguous BBC article.
Rush on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace (the smirker!)
http://rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.member.html
haha this is the biggest load of bs!!! this a-hole has no idea what he’s talking about! democrats are the ones on the edge of civil unrest. Obama’s ruining the dems and throwing every bluedog that doesn’t agree with his policies under the bus. bitter sweet and can’t wait to pick up seats in the upcoming elections by true conservatives.
Democrat leaders say ‘we tax everything that moves,’ and we want to expand government everywhere. Then California, run by a Democrat legislature and heading towards the Democrats Arnold, decides they are going to take more taxes in withholding from people’s paychecks, basically a forced loan, and somehow it’s the Republicans that are imploding?