Gracious Democrats Won’t Sanction Wilson

Let me start off by saying that I agree with what Joe Wilson said but I think it was the wrong place to say it. When he blurted out “you lie” during Obama’s joint session speech he removed the focus from the health care debate and put it on him and gave credence to the notion that mean spirited Republicans want to derail health care and deny people in need.

Having said that I find it amusing that the House leadership considered some sort of disciplinary action against Wilson because he broke a rule about not being able to call presidents liars. What I find amusing is that they were pretty quick to consider it (they have decided not to pursue it) but drag their feet when any of their people are involved in problems that really do need to be investigated. Charlie Rangel did not pay his taxes and failed to report income for years and the investigation is dragging on while Rangel pays hush money to those investigating him. He will probably get away without sanction.

Joe Biden and several other Democrats were very upset at the Wilson outburst (as were some Republicans) and they let it be known that this kind of behavior is not acceptable. That is unless it is they who are behaving that way. During one of Bush’s State of the Union Addresses the Democrats booed and heckled him. I think it was Rahm Emanuel who said that no president was ever treated the way Obama was by Wilson. He evidently did not see the video of his party disrespecting Bush.

I don’t think that one should justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior and I certainly don’t think what Wilson did can be justified. I merely point out that Democrats are acting as if they have been the most civil people in the world and the only reason mean old Republicans are acting this way is because Obama is the guy in charge.

The behavior is not acceptable no matter who does it. Wilson would have served the cause better if he had held his tongue and then went on the talk shows to demonstrate why Obama is lying. Obama told several lies last night and that is certainly something to look at but there is a time and a place for everything.

I think things will get a lot uglier before this is all over.

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

51 Responses to “Gracious Democrats Won’t Sanction Wilson”

  1. Darrel says:

    BigD: “He evidently did not see the video of his party disrespecting Bush.

    I don’t think that one should justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior…”

    DAR
    But that’s what you just did.

    I love it when people contradict themselves in the very next sentence.

    You are going to pretend you can’t see the difference between a group collectively moaning, groaning, laughing or cheering (acceptable), and an individual yelling out and interrupting the president by calling him a liar?

    I think this is a stupid and inconsequential distraction but… spare me. There is a difference.

    D.

    • Big Dog says:

      I did not contradict myself. Look at what you did, you took only a snippet of what I wrote and used it to show something I did not say. I love it when you do this to make a point because it shows how dishonest you are. For those who are just checking in, here is what I wrote:

      I don’t think that one should justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior and I certainly don’t think what Wilson did can be justified. I merely point out that Democrats are acting as if they have been the most civil people in the world and the only reason mean old Republicans are acting this way is because Obama is the guy in charge.

      Notice how I said that what he did cannot be justified and that I am pointing it out to demonstrate that the “outrage” of the Democrats is phony and that Emanuel is a liar.

      If we are talking about civility then it does not matter what the behavior. I don’t see a difference because they are both bad behavior. I think the ginned up anger by Democrats is the distraction.

      Next time try using my words in context and don’t cherry pick. Use the entire quote. Otherwise you make yourself out to be a fool.

      • Darrel says:

        Bigd: “I did not contradict myself.”>>

        DAR
        Of course you did. That’s EXACTLY what you did. You tried to “justify bad behavior by pointing to bad behavior,” when you said:

        “Democrats booed and heckled him.”

        And:

        “He evidently did not see the video of his party disrespecting Bush.”

        And in the very next sentence you said you don’t do this:

        “I don’t think that one should justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior…”

        The fact that you went on to qualify your claim later, as anyone can see, doesn’t change the fact that you did X, and then in the very next sentence you said you “don’t think one should” do X.

        D.

        • Blake says:

          What about when Harry Reid called Bush a liar, Darrel? Was that acceptable? I am not like Dog, I think Joe Wilson had every right to call it as he saw it- and Hussein has lied repeatedly and intentionally.
          For eight years it was ok for the spineless left to boo Bush, call him a liar, and everything else, but now they get sanctimonious?
          Can YOU say “Hypocrite”?

        • Blake says:

          If it was ok, and apparently by your silence it was, for Harry Reid to call Bush a liar, then Joe Wilson can do so when Hussein is lying- either both are right, or both are wrong- which is it?

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: “What about when Harry Reid called Bush a liar, Darrel?”>>

          DAR
          Let’s see it. Make your case. Did he yell it at him during a speech before Congress? Of course not. Hang on, I’ll check for you.

          “During the 2000 campaign, Bush — at the urging of Nevada-based consultants — issued a statement in which he said he would not move forward on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump unless there was “sound science” to back it up. After Bush assumed the presidency…, he went forward with the dump, even though there were myriad scientific questions left to answer.”

          So in Reid’s opinion Bush lied about this. That’s his opinion. He also called Bush a loser. He apologized for that but would not about the liar observation. Of course Reid is entitled to his opinion. Since he didn’t yell it at Bush and interrupt a speech before a joint session of Congress, your example/comparison fails. No one is complaining that Wilson thinks Obama lied. The complaint is the venue and manner he chose to deliver his opinion.

          BLK: Was that acceptable?>>

          DAR
          Of course.

          BLK: Hussein has lied repeatedly and intentionally.>>

          DAR
          Still waiting for a *single* example, little grasshopper.

          BLK: Can YOU say “Hypocrite”?>>

          DAR
          Yep. Sure can. Speaking of that… your Wilson buddy apparently voted to support funding for illegal immigrant health care.

          Is that hypocrisy or irony? Maybe both. A twofer as they say.

          D.

  2. Big Dog says:

    And let us not forget that Obama is the contradiction. He scoffed at Hillary when she said she would force people to get insurance and said that if they made it affordable people would just buy it. Now he is for enforcing. There are plenty of things in health care he said he would do and now is doing something different.

    That is a contradiction. So if you love people who actually contradict themselves I can see why you love Obama.

  3. Darrel says:

    Speaking of contradictions and hypocrisy, here is a doosey from Limbaugh today:

    From my Media Matters summary of Limbaugh’s show today.

    “Rush’s adjectives for Obama’s speech: Disgusting, reprehensible, predictable, grossly inappropriate, filled with lies and distortions, fraudulent, awful, petulant, childish, divisive, crude, disgusting”

    And then later:

    Rush says “vitriol” in health care discussion coming from others, not himself:

    LIMBAUGH: “Mr. President, if you’re gonna stop the name-calling, look inward, look inside the White House and the Old Executive Office Building and you tell your people to shut up. You tell your people to stop it. You get a hold of Paul Begala, you get a hold of James Carville, and you tell them to shut up. You get hold of your buddies over at MSNBC and you tell them to shut up. That’s where the name-calling and the vitriol is coming from.”

    Breathtaking.

    But you won’t be able to see it of course.

    D.

    • Blake says:

      As you yourself said, those are adjectives describing Hussein the Liar’s speech- all valid descriptives- and he is right to ask that Hussein look inward to his staff.
      The guy’s speech was as indicated by Limbaugh, but he left out a few things.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: As you yourself said…>>

        DAR
        You are confused. I didn’t say this. Notice the quotation marks.

        Of course the point, which you (I hope) are pretending to miss, is the hypocrisy of using vitriol like this and then saying the vitriol is actually coming from somewhere else.

        D.

  4. Big Dog says:

    I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of the left. See it as you wish but you took the sentence out of context. I did not try to justify anything. If I did then I would have said that it was OK Wilson did it because the Dems did it. I was quite up front in my assertion that Wilson should not have vented in that forum.

  5. victoria says:

    http://www.newsmax.com/farber/obama_communist_czar/2009/09/08/257557.html

    I read this quy quite often and he has a good perspective on things a lot. I hope he is right this time too. Well it cheered me a little anyway.

  6. Blake says:

    And now Botox Nanny has decided to censure Rep. Wilson if he does not apologize on the floor of the house- she should at least TRY to make up her mind- why o why couldn’t she get a fatal shot of botox? Or at least have the toxicity build to a terminal conclusion? Our nation would be more secure.

  7. Big Dog says:

    Darrel is waiting for a single example of Obama lying. Many have been shown but Darrel explains them away. How many times does it take for Darrel or Adam to say well he was campaigning then so it does not count or some such excuse to realize they cannot see that Obambi lies?

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: Darrel is waiting for a single example of Obama lying.>>

      DAR
      It’s really not too much to ask.

      Bigd: Many have been shown but Darrel explains them away.>>

      DAR
      You need one that can hold up to scrutiny. You don’t have one of those.

      Bigd: “[Dar says] well he was campaigning then so it does not count”>>

      DAR
      I have never said your example does not count. I show that your examples are bogus, based upon false information, or just a childish misreading of plain English. And I do this easily.

      Bigd: some such excuse to realize they cannot see that Obambi lies?>>

      DAR
      Still waiting for a *single* example.

      Hit me with your best shot.

      D.
      —————
      “You know the difficulty with a president when he makes a statement is that everybody checks to see whether it is true.”
      –Richard Nixon, National Prayer Breakfast, 1974

      • Big Dog says:

        You have been given plenty of examples. You refuse to admit they are lies. You claim to dismantle them but you just make excuses.

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “You have been given plenty of examples.”>>

          DAR
          Which one do you think has the best chance of maybe coming close? Try it again. I’ll roast it.

          Bigd: “You refuse to admit they are lies.>>

          DAR
          This shouldn’t be difficult. Let’s review. To show a lie you need to show:

          a) The claim is false
          b) the person made the claim knowing it was false.

          That’s a lie.

          Let’s see one of those.

          When you show one of those, I will agree with you.

          D.

      • Blake says:

        You could take any of his speeches and show that he lied, but you would not, and have not accepted the examples because you are a lap dog for Hussein, and nothing he says is a lie to you- you just lick up his spittle as if it was ambrosia. that’s really too bad.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: You could take any of his speeches and show that he lied,>>

        DAR
        But I am not the one asserting that he lied. You are. So you are the one with the burden of taking “any of his speeches” and showing “that he lied.”

        When are you going to do this?

        D.

        • Blake says:

          Both Dog and I have done this- it is not our fault that you are intellectually challenged, and either can’t or won’t see the validity of our arguments, but then Nobuma is your idol, your god, the one you kneel in front of.

  8. victoria says:

    How many times does it take for Darrel or Adam…….? If the number went into infinity and we were blue in the face they wouldn’t see it because they refuse to see it. They are mentally ill and there is even a book out about how mentally ill liberals are. Everytime they come on here they prove it too. You can parse and divide words and go Dar: Vic: Dar: Vic: all day but you cannot change the truth about what is happening in this country and who is responsible for it. Even right now the Democrat strategists are trying to explain away the Tea party protests in DC. “When Bush was in power it was Code Pink and so now that Obama is in power it is the Tea Party Protesters,” according to one Democratic strategist. God help us from such stupidity.

    • Darrel says:

      VIC: “you cannot change the truth about what is happening in this country and who is responsible for it.”>>

      DAR
      I completely agree Victoria. Obama campaigned on positive change and now he is following through on his promises. And for sensible people who want to see America succeed, in the US and around the world, we are very thankful.

      D.
      ——
      “Median percentage of people in 21 nations surveyed who trust President Obama to “do the right thing” in world affairs: 71

      Median percentage of respondents who said the same thing about George W. Bush in March 2008: 17
      –Harpers Magazine, Oct. 2009, pg. 13

      • Blake says:

        Hussein has NO positive change, just a socialist collective for all you little commissars- and the reason more Yourapeein’ countries like Hussein, is that he is weak, has no spine, and can be pushed around- something they have always wanted to do with the US.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “[Obama] has NO positive change,”>>

        DAR
        Abbreviated list of positive change in just his first month:

        Announced strict new rules for lobbyists

        Paycaps for WH staff

        Hillary Clinton confirmed Secretary of State

        Signed an Executive Order closing Gitmo and secret CIA prisons overseas

        Named George Mitchell and Richard Holbrooke Special Envoys to Middle East

        Signed Lily Ledbetter Act,

        Eric Holder confirmed;

        Signed S-ChIP legislation;

        Canceled 77 land leases around Arches National Park;

        Signed the Stimulus Bill;

        Announced his home foreclosure prevention plan;

        Banned budget gimmicks, like emergency funding for Iraq;

        Signed Executive Order for Office of Gulf Coast Recovery.

  9. victoria says:

    And Obama is in my state right now still pushing his agenda.

  10. Big Dog says:

    Well Darrel, wait until the END of his term and see what that number is. Bush had great numbers at this time in his first year. He was through the roof after 9/11.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “He was through the roof after 9/11.”>>

      DAR
      You are absolutely right. It’s more than a little sickening that a politician would gain politically because of an evil act he so utterly and disastrously failed to stop.

      But there it is.

      And then he went on to set new record lows.

      D.
      ——————-
      “Mr. Bush’s final approval rating [22%] is the lowest final rating for an outgoing president since Gallup began asking about presidential approval more than 70 years ago.”

      CBS

      • Blake says:

        As far as “failed to stop”, that was due to Clinton’s little Gorelik “Wall” that he had put into place so the CIA, FBI, NSA, and all the rest of the alphabet soup cold not talk with each other.
        9/11 was Clinton’s fault- sorry to be the bearer of the truth.

  11. Big Dog says:

    OK Darrel, then let’s reverse this. Show me where George Bush made a statement that was false and that he knew it was false and you can say he lied.

    Since you cannot know if a person knew something was false you can not ever say they lied

    Except, when we have them making two contradictory statements. You have been shown by many folks here where Obama said one thing one time and the opposite another time. That would be a lie.

    I don’t have to show he knew it was false because he would have demonstrated that himself.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: Show me where George Bush made a statement that was false>>

      DAR
      Why would I do that? Why are you changing the subject and running from your burden of backing up YOUR claims?

      Bigd: Since you cannot know if a person knew something was false you can not ever say they lied>>

      DAR
      Really? You believe that? Would you like a thousand counter examples?

      If your wife calls and asks if you’ve fixed the sink yet, and you say yes, and she gets home and it hasn’t been fixed, you lied and you both know you lied. Understand?

      Bigd: “Obama said one thing one time and the opposite another time. That would be a lie.>>

      DAR
      What are you talking about? Make your case. You’ve got nothing.

      Bigd: “I don’t have to show he knew it was false because he would have demonstrated that himself.”>>

      DAR
      Right. Now all you need is to provide your example and support it with citation and evidence. You’ve never done that. Let’s see what you’ve got.

      You won’t do it because you can’t.

      D.
      ———————
      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=21119

      • Blake says:

        He said he would be transparent, and has not been- that is one LIE- he said the bills wold be on his website for 5 days, for public review- that hasn’t happened- LIE- I could go on ad nauseum, but you would not believe it because you are Nobama’s Monica.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “He said he would be transparent,>>

        DAR
        He said he would be see through? Even superman can’t do that.

        Citation please. If you would like examples of how he has made government more transparent, just let me know.

        BLK: “…he said the bills wold be on his website for 5 days,…>>

        DAR
        Yes he did. Here is the official excuse for dropping that ball.

        “During the campaign, the president committed to introducing more sunlight into the lawmaking process by posting nonemergency legislation online for five days before signing it. The president remains committed to bringing more transparency to government, and in this spirit the White House has posted legislation expected to come to the president’s desk online for comment. We will be implementing this policy in full soon; currently we are working through implementation procedures and some initial issues with the congressional calendar. In the meantime, we will continue to post legislation on our Web site for comment as it moves through congress over the next few weeks.”

        DAR
        This would be broken commitment, not a lie. If you have trouble grasping that, think of all of the instances in which Bush said he would do something, and didn’t (I can provide a long list if you like). You wouldn’t consider those lies, and neither would I.

        This is because to show a lie you would need to show that they *knew* the statement/promise/commitment was false when they made it.

        D.

  12. Big Dog says:

    Darrel, prove that Bush failed to stop 9/11. Show me any evidence that demonstrates this. Show me the intelligence information he received and then show me where it says that we will be attacked by airplane on 9/11 in New York and DC.

    Show this. I want you to show me how he failed to stop something.

    And then I want you to explain why Clinton failed to stop the first bombing of the WTC. If Bush could have stopped the second one then Clinton could have stopped the first.

    So will you dig up the intelligence info (you know, back up your claim) or will you run?

    I don’t want any stuff from your tin hat friends, I want the actual intelligence reports and the briefing where he was told about the attacks on that particular day.

    Then I want you to show me how he instructed the airport screeners to miss all the razor knives carried on by the hijackers.

    Will you back it up or will you run?

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: Darrel, prove that Bush failed to stop 9/11.>>

      DAR
      Bush was president and in charge of the nations defenses. 9/11 happened. Therefore, Bush failed to stop 9/11.

      Bigd: explain why Clinton failed to stop the first bombing of the WTC.>>

      DAR
      I don’t know why he failed to stop it, but he certainly did. Then he caught the bad guys, and put them away. Just like Bush did with Bin Laden. Oh, wait, that’s not right….

      Bigd: If Bush could have stopped the second one then Clinton could have stopped the first.>>

      DAR
      Non sequiter. Careful with those “if, then” statements.

      Bigd: show me how he instructed the airport screeners to miss all the razor knives carried on by the hijackers.>>

      DAR
      Box cutters were allowed on flights at that time.

      Bottomline, as I said before:

      “The greatest security breech and attack on American soil happened under Bush’s completely negligent and incompetent governance. Bush (who wouldn’t even take the time to have a meeting with his counter-terrorism coordinator), and Cheney (who never even bothered to chair a single meeting of the anti-terrorism taskforce he was suppose to lead) COMPLETELY dropped the ball and failed to do their jobs.”

      D.

      • Blake says:

        Let’s take that fallacious argument in another direction- Clinton was President- during his term, babies were born out of wedlock- Clinton failed to stop unwed births and teen pregnancy.
        See? I can do that argument too. OOOhhhh, lets try another one- Obama is president, North Korea has exploded a nuke, so Obama failed with the North Koreans.
        See? Its easy.

        • Darrel says:

          BLK: that fallacious argument>>

          DAR
          I am sorry that you don’t know what a fallacious argument is. What is the name of this supposed “fallacy” I used? You can’t provide this because my claim is a rather mundane statement of fact.

          Bush failed to stop the 9/11 attacks.

          This is not even a controversial statement of fact. Likewise, Clinton failed to stop the first attack on the twin towers. Please learn to understand basic English.

          BLK: Clinton was President- during his term, babies were born out of wedlock->>

          DAR
          Absolutely correct. This usually falls under the category of “teen pregnancy” and it is something all presidents work toward diminishing. The US performs very poorly in this category compared to peer countries. Sorry to “bash the US” but I am interested in truth, not flag waving based on feel good BS.

          This problem is intricately connected with abortion so it should be important to you that the US doesn’t do better.

          Oh, and note: “According to 2006 data from the Guttmacher Institute, those red states accounted for eight of the 10 states with the highest teenage birthrates.”

          NYT’s

          The problem is aggravated by the fact that Abstinence Only Education does not work and in fact causes more teen pregnancy. Ask Sarah Palin about that.

          You will accuse me of bragging but… I actually did an hour long TV show on this topic for our local cable access channel and it won best “documentary” category of the year.

          Much of the information covered can be read here if you are interested.

          BLK: Clinton failed to stop unwed births and teen pregnancy.>>

          DAR
          Actually, his record on this was very good. The US hit a 60 year low under his tenure. Consider:

          “I am very encouraged by new data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing that teen birth rates in the United States have reached their lowest level since record keeping began 60 years ago. These preliminary data for 1999 show that birth rates among 15 to 19 year-olds dropped 3 percent from the previous year and 20 percent from the most recent peak in 1991.”

          LINK

          D.

  13. Big Dog says:

    You call that a list of positive achievements? Hell, half of them are lies. He might have signed the lobbyist thing but he hired a bunch of them and they WROTE the health care bill.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “half of them are lies.”

      DAR
      Show this. There are 13 claims in that list. Show “half of them are lies.” Show one of them is a lie. Make an attempt and I will, once again, expose who the liar is.

      D.

  14. Big Dog says:

    I have shown you a number of times where he lied. He has taken two different positions on the same issue, one is a lie.

    You give an example of me and my wife. Of course if you have personal contact with a person you can determine if they knew what they were saying is wrong. Since none of have personal knowledge of any of these people we cannot do what you say.

    You have called Bush a liar in the past. I am merely holding you to the same standard. Prove it or say that you were wrong based on your criteria.

    As for Obama, it has been shown here and elsewhere that he has said different things about the same subject. Those are lies.

    Obama in debate with Hillary:

    “I don’t think that the problem with the American people is that they are not being forced to get health care.”

    But in his speech last week he said:

    And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek, especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, just can’t be achieved.

    That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.

    So the problem was not that people are not being forced but now he believes they need to be forced so we can all do our part. He lied then or he lied now.

    Forcing was bad when he was debating Hillary (and he knew more people would resist that idea) but now that he is there he will force you.

    I say screw him, don’t buy it and don’t pay the fine. They can’t put everyone in jail and if they do who will pay for this?

    I will go on a government plan the day this low life SOB has the same plan.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: You have called Bush a liar in the past.>>

      DAR
      Show this.

      Bigd: Obama in debate with Hillary:
      “I don’t think that the problem with the American people is that they are not being forced to get health care.”>>

      DAR
      Good attempt! I think. Let’s unpack it and see if it’s a lie.

      At this time, Hillary had a tentative healthcare plan she was peddling for her campaign and it had requirements for people to buy insurance (as Romney’s plan in Wisconsin does).

      Obama’s plan, at the time, did not. It had another method of getting everyone covered. So of course he would argue for his plan, and against her’s. They were after all, debating the merits of each others plans.

      Continue….

      Bigd: But in his speech last week he said:

      “And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek, especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, just can’t be achieved.
      That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.”>>

      DAR
      So we see, over a year later, Obama has co-opted a feature of a plan by a fellow Democrat. OMG. Hillary must have smirked a little when she learned this.

      Plans change. Policies change, adapt, improve, get worse, etc.,. Also, people learn knew things and change their minds (I know you don’t, am speaking of normal people). That’s what we have here.

      Bigd: “now he believes they need to be forced so we can all do our part.”>>

      DAR
      That’s right. He changed his policy. That’s not a lie, that’s changing your policy. Do your favorite politicians ever do that?

      That you would choose this as your example of a supposed lie just shows how weak and pathetic your position is.

      But thanks for trying!

      Bigd: now that he is there he will force you.>>

      DAR
      Right now 40-50% of our medical system is socialized. It was this way under your Bush (WPE). It’s the only part of our system that is working effectively, fairly and efficiently. The private sector delivery system is a mess, unfair, wasteful, full of perverse incentives and an utter disaster. At some point, the whole pile of junk is going to come crashing down. These band-aids may keep the franken-monster creeping along for a little while longer but at some point, the private greed based system is going to go. America, cannot, afford it.

      Oh, and we’ll finally be the last country in the world to go on the metric system too. It’s better.

      D.
      ——————–
      Why does this country have so many crazy nutbars holding us back?

  15. Big Dog says:

    You are completely wrong about 9/11 but you are entitled to your foreign opinion. Maybe you should take your Canadian ass back where you belong.

    That is the one major problem here, we let scum from other nations come here and then they feel free to criticize the way we do things. Obviously it is better here then up north or you would be there.

    Bush was not responsible for 9/11, he had daily briefs, and there was no way anyone could have seen it coming especially on that day and at those times.

    Clinton was not responsible for the first attack.

    Clinton was able to capture people because they did not die in the attack. The ones who were responsible and were caught were sent to Gitmo. Because of liberal cry babies like you they are being released or brought to the US.

    If they are ever released here and cause any harm I would hope the patriots line you traitors up and shoot you along with those in government that let it happen.

    So I am tired of you coming here with your attacks on America and our way of life. Go home where you belong, or won’t they let you be a slum lord in Canada?

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “Clinton was not responsible for the first attack.”>>

      DAR
      I didn’t say he was “responsible.” You said “he failed to stop it” and I agreed with you.

      You need to learn what basic words mean. I think that is the real root of your problem.

      Bigd: “Go… back where you belong.”>>

      DAR
      I am an American citizen. My American mother will soon be elderly and I will be helping her. Her American father, my grandfather, was 100% disabled in WWII and died year before last, age 86. I have as much right to be here as you.

      Bigd; “won’t they let you be a slum lord in Canada?”>>

      DAR
      Canada has surprisingly few “slums.” I don’t know how they manage to do that considering the US is, as they say, “number one” and has a great many of them (my properties are quite nice btw).

      If you had good arguments for your beliefs, I think you wouldn’t find the need to substitute insults for evidence.

      D.

  16. Big Dog says:

    I did not say you lied with the list, the “positive” achievements are based on lies.

    Announced strict new rules for lobbyists
    Then broke the rules. He lied

    Paycaps for WH staff
    They could not have gotten pay raises anyway because their salaries are based on the federal schedule. They will not be denied pay raises (when they are due) if everyone else gets them. They can’t do it. Another lie.

    Hillary Clinton confirmed Secretary of State
    We have had Secretary’s of State forever. Her confirmation being positive is a matter of opinion.

    Signed an Executive Order closing Gitmo and secret CIA prisons overseas
    The ones overseas were just moved to other locations. We will see in January if he closes Gitmo.

    Named George Mitchell and Richard Holbrooke Special Envoys to Middle East
    This was a counter to Hillary being SOS. Must not have been too positive if they needed to watch her.
    Signed Lily Ledbetter Act,

    Eric Holder confirmed;
    This being positive is a matter of opinion.

    Signed S-ChIP legislation;
    This being positive is a matter of opinion

    Canceled 77 land leases around Arches National Park;
    This being positive is a matter of opinion

    Signed the Stimulus Bill;
    This being positive is a matter of opinion

    Announced his home foreclosure prevention plan;
    How is this a positive or negative thing? It is like saying he announced that it was daytime.

    Banned budget gimmicks, like emergency funding for Iraq;
    Then allowed them in passing stimulus and other bills. Wants a budget gimmick to be used in Senate to pass Health Care takeover.

    Signed Executive Order for Office of Gulf Coast Recovery.
    This being positive is a matter of opinion.

    • Darrel says:

      Bigd: “Announced strict new rules for lobbyists — Then broke the rules. He lied”>>

      DAR
      Almost all rules, have waivers, exceptions. That there have been waivers, does not change the fact that Obama successfully strengthened lobbyist rules, as he promised. This is very much a positive thing, as many even on the far right have noted and I have referred to.

      Bigd: “Paycaps for WH staff”
      …They can’t do it. Another lie.>>

      DAR
      You don’t know what you are talking about. Observe:

      ***
      “Last week, the White House made public the salaries of all 487 of its employees. The data showed that Barack Obama followed through on one of his first official acts as president — to freeze the salaries of his immediate staff making $100,000 or more. The data show that most of his senior employees earn about $172,200 annually, the same amount their counterparts earned in the final year of the Bush administration.

      This isn’t the first time the federal government has frozen pay in executive or leadership positions.

      Congress held the Senior Executive Service pay cap in place from 1994 to 1997, as well as in 1999. That followed cutbacks in the SES by President Clinton.”

      http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0709/070909pb.htm

      That’s all you’ve got it seems, and none of it backed up.

      And let’s not forget, the claim I was responding to was this little whopper from Blake:

      “[Obama] has NO positive change.”

      And I only looked at the first 30 days.

      Maybe some day you guys will learn to not make statements that are so easy to knock down. Or not.

      D.

      • Blake says:

        That Nobuma ha no positive change is my opinion, but then you have a different mindset. I might assert that concentration camps are bad, but you might feel that they were a good thing- you are entitled to your misguided opinion, I am entitled to my correct one.

      • Blake says:

        That Nobuma has no positive change is my opinion, but then you have a different mindset. I might assert that concentration camps are bad, but you might feel that they were a good thing- you are entitled to your misguided opinion, I am entitled to my correct one.

  17. Big Dog says:

    The WH made the list of salaries available in February sometime.

    The freeze was a gimmick. There is already a cap on SES pay as there is on GS pay. And boo hoo, I feel bad for someone making that much money having to have a pay cap.

    But, they could not get an increase anyway because the pay rate for them was already established. The next one due is in January. Let’s see then if it is capped. He hired them at the going rate.

    Like I wrote, a lot of what you stated is based on someone’s opinion of a positive change. You gave your opinion of it. I could say it was negative change and we would both be correct based on our definitions of what is positive or negative.

  18. Big Dog says:

    No one is advocating abstinence only education.

    8 of 10 from red states? I would be willing to bet that if you looked at where they occur in red states you will find them coming from the very blue inner cities in those states.