Harry Reid fired! Republicans Take Senate. . .

by Jack Lee

The first light of day exposed a battleground littered with democrat politicians, like the long serving Senator Tom Harken-D of Iowa, a 30 year incumbent. He was shot down just like Senator Kay Hagan who was ousted by Thom Tillis-R, in part by linking her to the president and his low popularity ratings. In Colorado Cory Gardner-R crushed incumbent Sen. Mark Udall because of his support for ObamaCare.  And so it went…until the Republicans captured seven seats in the Senate and that gave them a strong majority.

mitchmcThere’s so much to be learned from the election last night I almost don’t know where to begin. On the surface it was a landslide victory for the Republican Party, but dig a little deeper and what it really was. . .  was a huge negative vote against democrats!  It was also a repudiation against a politician who wasn’t even in the race, Barrack Hussein Obama.

Given this huge victory you might think my faith in the voters has been restored, but not yet.   It was the low information voters that elected these bums in the first place.   Now they elected other bums to replace them, we just went from the party of evil to the party of stupid.  No cause to celebrate, not until the Party of Stupid makes a serious effort to repair its image.

The Tea party revolt set a good example for voters to follow if we are ever going to hold politicians accountable and actually get better results!  Changing seats from R to D and vice versa won’t do it, we have plenty of history to back that up.   We must make whoever is in that office perform!  If it takes the threat of an immediate voter backlash and termination come next election, so be it.

This is why I say what happens next is largely on us. If we are to move forward we better remember it was the uniformed, and reckless voter that cast a pall over democracy and gave us Obama. It turned us into a nation of disillusioned and cynical voters saying a pox on both your houses!  The people have never been more dissatisfied with politicians, from either party.

Republicans better understand this:  They were not swept into office because citizens are in love with them.  They were put in office on a negative vote aimed at the last group of losers.  They were put in with an expectation of change or else!  They’re tasked with repairing the damage left by the Obama Administration or they will suffer the same wrath that derailed the democrats.  People are fed up with the broken promises and all those inept and corrupt politicians from both party’s.

The gridlock of the last 8 years must end now and important, productive legislation must follow if republicans are going to be around to elect the next president. They must demonstrate they can deliver and they are on a very short leash! If they don’t deliver and they rest on their laurels like they did in 2006, their gains in 2014 will disappear faster than Grant took Richmond.

What the GOP needs to do next is pass some legislation that will improve the economy!!!!   The first thing that comes to mind major tax reform, but there is no way do that quickly and come out with a good product. However, there are plenty of short term projects that could endear them to the public. Republicans could focus on legislation to lower the highest corporate tax rate in the Western World. This would stimulate jobs and we need jobs! It would likely have some bi-partisan support too. The GOP must attack our huge deficit too. Repeal of ObamaCare should be a priority and so should blocking amnesty for millions of illegal aliens as Obama has proposed.

PS  The next time somebody says. “I vote for the person not the party” what they’re  really saying is, I didn’t take the time to know the issues.   These voters better learn what they stand for and support the party that most reflects them and then vote in a ticket that can get something done.   Casting a vote for the pretty face, a smooth talker or someone of the right race or religion doesn’t cut it!  Nor does single issue voting…that’s just as stupid.   Please let them know it’s this sort of stupidity that brought about gridlock in Congress and gave us Barrack Obama.  If people don’t fully understand the issues and the party planks they shouldn’t vote.  Voting ignorant and reckless is a crime against democracy because it risks obligating others to bad government.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

97 Responses to Harry Reid fired! Republicans Take Senate. . .

  1. Harold says:

    “Republicans better understand, they were not swept into office because citizens are in love with them, they were put in office on a negative vote with an expectation of change! They’re tasked with repairing the damage left by the Obama Administration or they will suffer”

    Wise words Jack, The voters of America have given themselves a ray of hope, Now it is the GOP task to turn that ray into a beam of light in the right direction.

    Should the GOP not see that light, well it just means to me that neither party is willing to do the work of the people and just use political office inappropriately on the backs of our labor.

    Champaign promises, should not become just a fading and distant memory, they need to be the business plan for the real work which needs to be done, so far we have seen the talk, now it time to see them walk the walk.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Absolutely Harold. They have the reputation as the party of stupid – it’s going to take some hard work and smart leadership to move beyond that label.

      If they don’t come up with some meaningful legislation they are toast. There’s no end of things to fix, surely they can come up with a few things fast that would help us. There’s the economy, streamlining taxes, repairing immigration, cuts in the deficit, strengthening national defense and so many other compelling issues in need. They’ve got to have a plan and fast, time is not on their side, 2016 will be here before you know it.

  2. Peggy says:

    It will be interesting to see how many Democrats in Congress join in voting with Republicans to get these bills passed and on Obama’s desk to sign. Knowing now just how voters feel about Obama and his agenda, they’d be wise to vote with the Republicans if they want to retain their seat next election.

    And if enough do support the bills they could override Obama’s veto. Just takes 60%. The Keystone pipeline is one I would think would pass if vetoed by Obama.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Well, yeah… we know Obama will veto whatever he can get away with, but we just have to stay persistent. He will look pretty bad vetoing good stuff…that will tick off the voters.

  3. Tina says:

    Imagine! Republicans have already passed a truckload of bills that the Senate can now take up. If they haven’t already worked together between the two houses to create plan of attack then I’d be surprised. They know they have to perform no matter what the president plans to do. Imagine that too…the President of “no” won’t look too good to a nation that is demanding a different direction.

  4. Pie Guevara says:

    In 2008 when Democrats controlled both houses and had won the executive branch I honestly thought it would take only four years for them to completely self-destruct.

    It took six.

    Unfortunately they destroyed the country in the process. I hope and pray this wonderful new Republican controlled congress can repair the damage and puts this country on the right path, but if they do a repeat of the 108th and 109th congresses, we are going nowhere.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Pie, that’s right, the GOP has been given another chance to earn the trust of the voters. I think they ought to take a hard look at the ACA and see what they can trim and replace with something better. If they work hard enough they could reinvent Obamacare into something workable, that wouldn’t break the bank and that would be a great way to start the 2016 election.

  5. Peggy says:

    Mitch McConnell even said this morning he’d received phone calls from three prominent Democrat leader who were excited to work with him to get bills through the senate they had supported/authored.

    Obama, on the other hand said he’s willing to work with the Republicans, but he’ll veto bills he doesn’t like and will use his executive powers when he needs to. In other words it’s his way or the highway still with him.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Peggy, the democrats know they did wrong and that Obama was the root cause of a lot of their misery. Sure a lot of payback going around now.

  6. Tina says:

    Peggy I listened to the President stammer and twitch to say whether he would work with Republicans and it was very revealing. He finally said he would work with them on bills they knew he could sign. My way or the highway? Definitely! Then he reminded everyone again that he would continue to use executive action to get work done for the American people, a clear sign that his narcissism trumps everything.

    I will keep an open mind and I will give him credit if he goes the way of Bill Clinton rather than Saul Alinsky, as someone on Fox Business pointed out this morning. Given his disposition and record, however, I expect the full Alinsky.

    I don’t know what Republicans will do but I sense they will come to Congress well prepared. As I wrote before they already have written hundreds of bills in the House that can now be taken up in the Senate, many of them would affect the jobs situation. I think they will push the Keystone Pipeline. i think they will address corporate tax law, extremely stupid regulation in banking, Fannie and Freddie, student loan debt, if not Obamacare then some of the most onerous parts of it, the border and immigration law, a balanced budget, funding for the military.

    Geez when you start to look at the list it sure highlights dysfunctional government under the poor leadership of Obama/Reid.

    Someone else said its not morning in America yet but at least there’s a sunrise!

  7. Tina says:

    Harry Reid should be afraid, very, very afraid. Nevada turned bright red over night.

    Hillary and Bill didn’t fair any better. Every candidate they campaigned for lost!

    Hollywood big shots also lost.

  8. Peggy says:

    Heard someone on Fox today recommend that McConnell should take each and every House bill that has been sitting on Harry Reid’s desk and make a big deal over it before bringing it to the floor. Like announcing the date it was passed in the House and making a real public media display so voter will know why Congress is in the mess it is and why the senate has been the cause of the, “Do nothing Congress” title.

    When a very liberal state like Oregon’s voters rejected Prop. 88 denying immigrants drivers license I think Mr. Obama should rethink giving amnesty to 5-16 million illegals.

    McConnell had better keep the nuclear option in place until just before the they lose control. What was good for the goose is good for the gander. Hopefully, there will never be another leader like Reid and the normal order can be maintained.

  9. Pie Guevara says:

    The liberal excuses abound for this GOP political rout. While they are amusing in one sense, most are boorish boilerplate lib comfort-zone rationalizations. PBS NewsHour left-wing political “analysts” (read anal-ysts) Wednesday night were blaming the results on rich engaged, white, aged voters dominating the polls while poor, stupid, young, Obama voters did not show up. Nothing new there in the systemic, institutional racism of the left. They are beside themselves.

    Perhaps the funniest anal-ysis YET came from Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.),head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who declared, “We spent six years dancing in the middle and not providing an assertive contrast to the Republicans, and we’re paying the price for it.”

    DANCING IN THE MIDDLE? JAJAJAJAJA!

    • Post Scripts says:

      Yeah, that’s the ticket. The democrats need to move further to the left past Marx, past Stalin and right into Mao’s camp. That ought to work out really nice. PS And while they are at it they should do a Red Purge on the membership and get rid of the moderates that are holding them back! ha!

  10. Pie Guevara says:

    This truly is The Year Of Women. Real women. Strong women. Intelligent women. Informed women. Caring women. Engaged women. Astute women. Outstanding women. Republican women.

    http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/11/05/18-year-old-freshman-elected-to-w-va-house-of-delegates-becomes-youngest-state-lawmaker-in-us/

  11. Peggy says:

    Here’s another “real” Republican woman.

    Mia Love on what it means to win historic election:

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/transcript/2014/11/06/mia-love-what-it-means-win-historic-election

    Grab another pill Libby.

  12. Libby says:

    Pie, we don’t blame, we report facts. If you know who’s registered, in what party, and in what precinct … and we do … then you can match that against precinct turnout, and see who voted and who didn’t.

    Now, we know how facts do bother you … but you’ll just have to suck it up. And why should you be displeased? Your election was not (as Peggy feared) “stolen” by actual brown people who actually turned out to vote.

    You turned out, and you took it. That’s how it’s supposed to work. Be proud … not paranoid.

    As I said elsewhere, I am too disgusted to be grieved. The poor people, black and white, are gonna do some serious languishing in economic distress over the next two years, and they’ll deserve it.

    Me, I’m going to sit back and enjoy watching Mitch NOT enjoy his tenure as Senate Majority Leader.

  13. Harold says:

    REF Post #5, Where Tina talks about the bills sitting in Harry’s office.

    I got to thinking, it might be a easier move and faster for all of America if Harry vacates his current space, and Mitch just moves in, what with all those bills sitting in the corner of Harrys office,(if not in the dumpster out side of Harry’s office window)it could take staff a long time to move them.

  14. Tina says:

    Libby: “The poor people, black and white, are gonna do some serious languishing in economic distress over the next two years, and they’ll deserve it.”

    You are once again showing what a phony you are!

    The poor people, black and white, have been languishing for over six years in economic distress because of the lack of opportunity and jobs…young blacks and single women have been hurt more than anybody!

    The middle class has been decimated. people working for government and people with a lot of money (1%-ers) have done well in the Obama economy.

    The only jobs created for the rest of America have been part time and real wages have gone down. Not only that but for most of this time of languishing misery energy prices and food prices have been going up.

    Who is attempting to create panic now…ginning up fear in the poor/black community?

    It’s the same old crap you on the left have been spewing for fifty to seventy years and the poor have not seen much real improvement in their lives due to leftist policies in all of that time.

    You and your party OWN the poor and lousy economy policy. It’s time for you and your party to back off and get the he77 out of the way to give the poor a real “shot” at the American Dream. It’s time for you and your party to support the ideas of the right for a change and act in cooperation, you know that bipartisan thing you always demand when you really mean do it our way? The tables have turned. You have an opportunity to put the people before your failed ideology. Have you the guts?

  15. Libby says:

    “You and your party OWN the poor and lousy economy policy.”

    I know you need to think so, but the rest of us do remember what precipitated the current distress. I’m not going to rehash this with the willfully obtuse. In fact, it’s this sort of idiocy that makes this site such a bloody bore.

    You can say the Obama “recovery” is nothing to brag on, chiefly because of his unwillingness to take on “The Street”, but if you think Mitch has any plans to do so, you’re out of your tree.

    Mitch’s only plan seems to be to pitch the 10 million recently insured back into the uninsured pile, and they’ll deserve it.

  16. Pie Guevara says:

    Both Senator Tim Scott (R-South Carolina), THE FIRST BLACK SENATOR TO BE ELECTED IN THE SOUTH SINCE RECONSTRUCTION and Condolezza Rice are none to happy with the appalling race baiting coming from Democrats and assorted Libbaiters.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-scott-blasts-democratic-race-baiting-2014-11

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/223161-dems-midterm-racial-attacks-appalling-rice-says

    Our very own racist Libbaiter sure is a sore loser. Go suck an egg, dear.

  17. Pie Guevara says:

    By the way, the Libbaiter shore enuf is playing true to classic dysfunctional liberal psychology. Nothing is ever their fault. Not their policies, not their complete lack of public decorum, not what they say, not what they do, not who they are. It is those damn rich white older voters! Any other interpretation is outside of their comfort zone.

  18. Tina says:

    The rest of us? Phffftttt!

    The rest of us not only know what caused all of this but can show you (And have) the exact string of policies that set it in motion, the activism and abuse of the legal system, the money grubbing leadership at Fannie that encouraged it to ensure fat bonuses for herself/himself, the creation of bundled loans (to “hide” the toxic ones) created at Fannie, the arrogant dismissal (And blocking tactics) by Barney Frank of the Ways and Means Committee even after repeated warnings, and the criminal wheeling and dealing at places like Countrywide.

    You can’t point to s single policy or decision made by conservatives that set the whole crazy ball in motion.

    “…chiefly because of his unwillingness to take on “The Street”

    I suppose you mean K Street? If so Obama did very well with K Street and got exactly what he wanted. He pandered to and twisted arms in the green energy, energy and health care sectors, he waged war and twisted arms in the banking sector, he wooed Hollywood and leftist Silicon Valley types for support and collected a whole lot of hard cash for himself and the Democrats in the process. His QE stimulus kept Wall Street humming while it devalued the dollar (And the wages of the middle and poor who were fortunate enough to still be working) In shirt, his economic policies have created unprecedented numbers of people languishing out of the workforce, massive underemployment, and chronic unemployment. All of it in the name of taking over control of healthcare, pushing the green agenda and, he hoped, enough dependency in America to create a permanent, single party, socialist government…the fundamental transformation of America. We were on the path to third world status economically.

    As for “Mitch” you don’t have a clue about what he would do because you are unwilling to consider another point of view even when it has worked in the past and even when it has been adopted by Democrats. Also because it fills some twisted need to hold Republicans as cruel and thoughtless.

    As for the uninsured, the harm and damage done to the middle class and to the economy to create this new entitlement and subsidy is too high a price to pay. The price will explode if its allowed to continue. The damage done to future generations is unconscionable.

    We need to replace it with policies that work without all the attendant damage…and we will, probably with some Democrat support.

  19. Libby says:

    Pie, don’t change the subject … you thereby concede me the point.

    You have to answer the point, if you hope to win it.

  20. Libby says:

    Good God, Tina … Wall Street. What kind of paranoid ignoramus thinks that “K” Street does anything but Wall Street’s bidding.

    Geez, you are appalling.

  21. Peggy says:

    Boy Libby, you sure got your knickers all twisted cutting off the blood flow to your brain.

    It’s actually funny seeing your reaction to the Republicans taking control of Congress. You, true to progressive form, just can’t deal with people who believe differently having a say in the process. Just like Obama’s demand to Congress to give him what HE wants or he’ll veto it.

    No where did I say, brown people had stolen votes. I did post a link to Oregon’s voted down law that would have given driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.

    I want our laws enforced. Period! And if it takes presenting a photo ID, like Mexico requires, or sticking our finger in a jar of purple ink, like countries in the ME requires to ensure only citizens vote and they only vote once, I’m all for it.

    Question is Libby why aren’t you? If poor people in third-world countries don’t have a problem following their voting laws, why do you and so many Democrats have a problem following your own country’s voting laws? What happened to the one person, one vote rule? Or does it only apply to members of the other party?

    Here is just one of many examples of possible and real problems with our voting process.

    Ineligible DACA Beneficiaries Discovered on NC Voting Rolls: Oct. 22, 2014

    ““We want to know how such a large number of non-U.S. citizens were ever registered to vote in the first place,” Jay DeLancy, executive director of the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina, told Watchdog.org. “There is clearly a system failure here and we need the Board of Elections and the DMV to help the Legislature and the public understand where the problem lies.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/22/Ineligible-DACA-Beneficiaries-Discovered-On-NC-Voting-Rolls

    You say you like facts, well, here they are. Now quit complaining.

  22. Peggy says:

    Here’s some more facts to chew on. The bench of upcoming national legislators just got bigger.

    The Historic GOP Landslide of 2014 That Nobody’s Talking About:

    “We all now know that Tuesday’s results for the GOP were a gain of 7 in the Senate, 14 in the House, and 3 in governor’s mansions across the country. But what about the state legislatures? Did a similar tide of red sweep their statehouses as well?

    The short answer: yes, they did.”

    Video and beautiful map
    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/11/198404-ok-enough-house-senate-governors-races-happened-state-legislatures/

  23. Peggy says:

    Now we know where Libby got her talking points.

    5 Hilariously Stupid Reactions By Liberals In The Media After Last Night’s GOP Tidal Wave:

    http://www.mrctv.org/blog/5-hilariously-stupid-reactions-liberals-media-after-last-nights-gop-tidal-wave?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=marketing&utm_term=facebook&utm_campaign=msnbc-election

    “There you have it folks.. pure liberal media lunacy.”

  24. Tina says:

    Libby: “What kind of paranoid ignoramus thinks that “K” Street does anything but Wall Street’s bidding.”

    What kind of narcissistic ignoramus brings up “The Street,” as if she’s an insider, without explanation or even a clue as to what she’s talking about and then blasts someone for attempting to make sense of it? I’ll tell you, a covert “B” does that.

    Further, what kind of ignoramus attempts to shift blame by pretending that Obama isn’t neck deep in K Street/Wall Street shenanigans and corporatism?

    Your assertion was that the economy was “nothing to brag on” because Obama was “unwilling to take on The Street.” He didn’t just not take them on he colluded and pandered to them for self and party interest and at the same time put huge barriers in place that put the middle and poor classes out in the cold!

  25. Tina says:

    Peggy, apparently only Libby and a few others were paying attention to all that leftist drivel.

    Fox News, once again, was tops in the ratings by huge margins:

    According to Nielsen Media Research, Fox News Channel beat CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC and ABC’s coverage in both total viewers and in the 25-to-54-year-old demographic.

    Co-anchored by Bret Baier and Megyn Kelly, the channel’s election coverage averaged 6.3 million viewers during prime time.

    CNN was the second most watched news network, with 2.1 million viewers during prime time. MSNBC came in third with about 1.7 million viewers.

  26. Aaron says:

    Who is Libby? Is she real? Most of you are sensible but I cant stand what this broad writes. Glad the election wnet the way it did.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Yep, Libby is real. She has a very liberal opinion when you can get it. unfortunately, the rest of the time she spends saying quick little one liners that focus on unkind things and name calling. I think she’s intelligent, but she’s so busy blaming republicans, conservatives and Christians, she doesn’t really get into the details of what she believes. Pretty much a Code Pink sort of woman.

  27. Peggy says:

    No surprise Fox news was first in viewers. More people, thanks to the internet, are realizing the lies, biased coverage, and lack of coverage all of the other news channels and programs have been producing for years.

    I like both Bret Baier’s and Megyn Kelly’s show each day. Baier usually has Charles Krauthammer on and Kelly’s past attorney experience can really ask some tough questions.

    Getting to the truth isn’t easy, but with all of the Liberals they have on at least both sides of issues are presented. I really admire Kirstin Powers. She’s a Democrat, very intelligent and not afraid to say she doesn’t agree with a liberal strategy or what a member of her party said, including Obama. She has her liberal principles and sticks to them and isn’t afraid to call them out when she thinks they are wrong.

    Fox isn’t perfect, but at least I feel I’ve been given the views on both sides of an issue where if I got my news from the other media outlets it would be largely slanted to the far left.

    The huge ratings Fox got says I’m not alone in my views. Hope they keep it up and don’t go the way of CNN. Remember when they really did a great job of covering world news? To bad they fell under the liberal bias spell.

  28. Peggy says:

    Aaron, Libby is a far left progressive troll who likes to tell people on this conservative blog that they are idiots for not believe as she does.

    The concept that people believe life is better when their liberties and freedoms should be founded on individual accomplishments and a limited government instead of collective restrictions and a large nanny state are beyond her ability to comprehend.

    Welcome to the blog. I hope you enjoy the discussions and participate on the large variety of topics Jack and Tina present.

  29. Libby says:

    Peggy: “No where did I say, brown people had stolen votes.”

    You must have the shortest memory on his planet:

    Leak Shows NAACP Is Planning Mass Fraud on Election Day:
    http://patriotsbillboard.org/leak-shows-naacp-is-planning-mass-fraud-on-election-day/

    Is this drivel not of your posting?

    Geez.

    … and Aaron …

    bite me … and proof your posts if you expect me to take you seriously.

  30. Peggy says:

    Oh Liiibbbyyyyy, Note the “:” after the word “Day.” It indicates it’s a title to the article for the link below it.

    I didn’t WRITE the article, nor did I write the title. I simply copied and pasted it.

    I post articles all of the time. Some I agree with and some are just to share.

    When I have something to say, I’ll say it. But, don’t try to tell me I wrote something when I didn’t and made it clear that I didn’t.

    Get new glasses, change your attitude and stop being such a sore looser.

  31. Peggy says:

    This one’s for you Libby. Note the colon (:) indicating I didn’t write this.

    Jon Stewart Calls Out ‘Chickensh*t’ Democrats:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/07/jon-stewart-democrats_n_6119480.html

  32. Libby says:

    Good Lord …

    RE: Peggy #31

    I went to check her source, and Norton went ape-shit over a phishing attack.

    What is wrong with you people? … that you trust to such “news sources”?

    Something seriously, that’s for sure.

  33. Harold says:

    Lighten up Lib, it is “pokey piece” toward the resulting failure of Liberals understanding that Americans have concerns, those same concerns and failures brought about by your own Liberal party of choice.

    As to the “trust such news sources”, seriously those links portray more of a realistic understanding of the progressive mindset. In fact I have a tendency to put more belief in the spin of those spots than anything Obama reads off his teleprompter.

    If those spots are the source of your serious problem!, then the problem is with your own parties policies(which America now believes are seriously wrong)that caused them to be spoken.

    And I will add by your own Liberal media talking heads.

  34. Peggy says:

    Dear Libby, The link worked fine for me. Note it’s from Huffington Post. If you got a Norton warning, you might need to update your protection.

    Here try this YouTube video. It should work. Promise you’ll love it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWHmYjJPstE

  35. Peggy says:

    Try again.

    In case you hadn’t heard, enjoy the below article.

    Title – Republican Romp Extended to State-Level Elections(:)

    “Republicans swept into control of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, but that only begins to tell the story of a midterm election that turned into an electoral rout.

    From Nevada to New Hampshire, Republicans won resounding victories in state-level elections.

    Combined with unexpected victories in gubernatorial races in Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts, the Republicans are poised to control a higher percentage of state governments than at any point in the past 25 years.

    With a few dozen state legislative races still undecided, Republicans have scored a net gain of more than 250 seats across the nation’s 99 legislative chambers, according to an analysis by Ballotpedia, which tracks state-level elections.

    Republicans took the majority in nine chambers–winning the Colorado Senate, the Maine Senate, the Minnesota House, the Nevada House and Senate, the New Hampshire House, the New Mexico House, the New York Senate and the West Virginia House. The GOP is set to control at least 64 of the 99 chambers–with two still up for grabs.”

    http://dailysignal.com/2014/11/07/republican-romp-extended-legislative-races-coast-coast/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

  36. Libby says:

    Niggle all you like, Peggy.

    I’d respect you more if you’d just admit that the patriotsbillboard pushed your “bigot” button, and you hadn’t the wherewithal to resist.

    But now, having had it pointed out to you, you are just a little bit contrite.

  37. Steve says:

    Hello
    I am new to Chico and fond this blog. Is this a friendly place to share views or do you prefer to keep to your group? I am interested in the local politics of the area and all views as I am new.

    To be honest I have no faith in any of the politicians as it seems to me they all cater to who ever finances their campaigns. That said I need to learn local politics

  38. Tina says:

    Re: Libby #41

    I have Norton also and Norton did not go “ape-sh*t” when I clicked on the link.

    Libby I believe you fabricated your assertion. It would be typical of the radical progressive “ends justify means” mindset. I think patriotsbillboard pushed YOUR bigot button, the one where you fabricate a lie in order to play the racist card.

    You are such a phony.

  39. Tina says:

    Steve welcome to Post Scripts and welcome to Chico!

    Post Scripts is a free speech environment where we discuss politics and current events. We try to keep the blog open and friendly and succeed for the most part. Since it is a free speech environment things can get contentious so bring that thick skin and let the negative roll off your back. Whichever side you most favor you will have defenders in the mix. Most of those who comment have been with us for some time. I think that says a lot about the people who contribute to PS.

    I’m glad to hear you don’t put faith in politicians, they are people after all and subject to the same failings as anyone else. Although I’m clear we don’t elect perfect human beings I do have expectations that our elected officials will do their best to make decisions that support the nation as a whole rather than special interest groups. Politicians are under pressure from many such groups. They should listen, they are all Americans, but I don’t want them to pander or make special deals.

    As for the money in campaigns I can only say it takes money, especially at the national and state levels to compete for the job. Money doesn’t always deliver a favorite, however. If I can, let me compare it to baseball teams. The New York Yankees have a lot of money due to their huge, monied localized fan base (compare to Arizona or Colorado). The Yankees have been trying to buy the championship for some time now by purchasing talent and it has not paid off for them. In similar in politics. The record, the message, the ability to connect, and a vision for the future wins in politics. Honesty and accountability are also important to voters. The will of the people should rest on these things but every once in awhile slick marketing, rather than substance, manages to capture the prize. It’s up to the electorate to learn to spot a pretender with an agenda and reject him. Your interest will serve you well if you pay attention over time using buyer beware as your armor.

    One again welcome to Chico, Steve. I hope you will find that hometown feeling here…hope you also become a regular at Post Scripts. New voices make the blog much more interesting.

  40. Peggy says:

    Libs, I don’t need nor want your respect. I seek the respect of people I admire not from those who don’t earn it.

    So, go back to sucking on your sour lemons. I expect nothing from you but more vile attacks filled with your bigoted remarks.

  41. More Common Sense says:

    Libby: I went to check her source, and Norton went ape-shit over a phishing attack.”

    Well, Libby is caught in a lie!

    Libby, as a computer software development professional with 34 years experience I can tell you that no security software (especially Norton) will notify you of a phishing attack while you are using a browser. The term “phishing” is a term that applies to activities related to electronic communications (most commonly email) where the perpertrator represents themselves as some trusted entity to attempt to acquire personal information. Websites may not be trustworthly and may misrepresent but using the term “phishing” would be incorrect in describing websites activities.

    What the matter Libby? The truth didn’t support your agenda so you decide to create some of you own “truth” that did? I believe that kind of truth is called a lie!

  42. More Common Sense says:

    I just love this. Over and over Libby has said the conservatives have to bow down to Obama because he won the election. She has even said that if we wanted to change things we had to win an election all the while implying that was an impossibility. Well, last Tuesday the conservative won in huge way. Are you going to follow you own advice and bow down? Libby, the problem with mouthing off like you do is sometimes it comes back to haunt you!

  43. Peggy says:

    Hey Libby,

    “We won, you lost, get over it.”

    Who said that?

    That’s right!

    Obama said it to the GOP.

    How does that shoe taste?

  44. Peggy says:

    Oh, this was just tooooo good not to share. Don’t miss the From Townhall article toward the bottom.

    If this isn’t liberal logic in a nutshell, I don’t know what is!:

    Read more at http://www.youngcons.com/if-this-isnt-liberal-logic-in-a-nutshell-i-dont-know-what-is-2/#IibK4jS8dgJmyLU7.99

  45. More Common Sense says:

    Wow, isn’t it interesting there is silence from Libby.

  46. Libby says:

    “Post Scripts is a free speech environment ….”

    I haven’t heard from Dewey lately.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Libby, Dewey repeatedly violated the terms and conditions of the paper and good taste. As a result we asked him not to post anymore. Free speech has it’s limits, everything has its limits, why do I have to explain this to you?

  47. Libby says:

    “Over and over Libby has said the conservatives have to bow down to Obama because he won the election.”

    Oh, I’ll want to see examples of this. I don’t recall ever doing any such thing.

  48. Libby says:

    MCS … don’t blather. And don’t call me a liar. Peggy’s “news source” is nothing more than an internet marketing shark … to which my software alerted me … thank goodness.

    It should be obvious … the reason your machines don’t object is that your machines are hooked … good and proper.

    Messing around on this site got the Washington Post thinking I espoused their editorial position. Took me some little while to persuade them I did not.

  49. Libby says:

    Peggy … then you DID post all that “patriotsbillboard – the blacks are going to steal the election” stuff because you believed it.

    What are we arguing about?

    You were wrong.

  50. Peggy says:

    What are we arguing about, Libby? We’re arguing about the fact you have a very twisted mind.

    You accused me of writing the article, which I didn’t. Now, you’re arguing the validity of the article’s content, which stated Judicial Watch has evidence the NAACP has plans for large scale voter fraud in North Carolina.

    You have every right to not like certain evidence, but you have no right to say it doesn’t exist, if it does. Like it or not Libby the facts will always be the facts, deal with it.

    From the article.

    “The government watchdog group Judicial Watch is announcing that they have come across evidence of plans for massive voter fraud set to take place in
    the lead up to the 2014 midterm elections.”

    Grow up Libby and stop being such a progressive child.

    I’m done playing this stupid game with you.

  51. Peggy says:

    Proof of more lying by this administration to American voter.

    Obamacare Architect: We Passed the Law Thanks to the ‘Stupidity of the American Voter’:

    “One of the architects of Obamacare said the law was written in a deliberately “tortured” way and relied on the “stupidity of the American voter” to ensure its passage.

    In a newly unearthed 2013 clip, Jonathan Gruber, the MIT health economist who helped craft parts of the Affordable Care Act, got fairly candid about the tactics used to get the Affordable Care Act passed during a panel at the Annual Health Economists’ Conference last year.

    “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes,” Gruber said in one 52-second clip. “If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

    Gruber then trumpeted the value of a “lack of transparency” — and called American voters stupid.

    “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” Gruber said. “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass.”

    Better for the American people to be saddled with a law they don’t understand, Gruber claimed, than for them to understand the law and rally against it.

    “Look, I wish … we could make it all transparent,” Gruber said, “but I’d rather have this law than not.”

    Audio:
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/10/obamacare-architect-stupidity-of-the-american-voter-was-critical-to-passing-the-law/

  52. RHT447 says:

    I was stationed in (the former) West Germany during the mid-’70’s. This author nails it. This is what the left’s agenda is based on.

    A memorable anniversary, and those who would forget it

    Perry Metzger (New York, USA) · Historical views · Opinions on liberty · Philosophical

    “Twenty five years ago today, the crossings between East and West Germany, most notably at the Berlin Wall, were opened, and shortly thereafter, the last of the Marxist regimes in Europe ended.

    The Berlin Wall was a symbol of the depravity and viciousness of the Marxist idea. Karl Marx was a pure hate monger masquerading as a social philosopher. His ideas may, in the end, be summarized thus: wealth can be gained only by stealing from others, and thus successful people are evil, and thus it is okay to threaten or kill rich people (or even people who are just a bit better off than you are), to steal their belongings, and to threaten anyone who might in the future have more stuff than you do. If you somehow get more things than other people, it is okay for other people to take your stuff, and if you resist, it is okay to beat you up or kill you.

    Even more succinctly, Marxism is the idea that jealousy is laudable, and should be turned into social policy with the use of pervasive violence.

    I am putting this more bluntly and baldly than the average Marxist would. They prefer concealing their central idea beneath a heavy blanket of words. They dress up their “philosophy” in avant garde costumes, adding layers of verbiage, complicated and counterfactual claims about language and logic, bizarre ideas about the nature of history, etc., all in the service of keeping people from seeing what they’re actually suggesting. What lies underneath is nothing much more than hate of people who have more stuff than you do, justified by little or nothing more than wanting to take what they have for yourself.

    When you base your beliefs on this sort of foundation, the violence that proceeds is not an accident or the result of an improper understanding or implementation of an otherwise fine program. The violence is the direct and intentional result of the underlying program. The violence is the entire purpose of the underlying program.

    In spite of the claims of apologists, the Marxism that fell twenty five years ago was the true Marxism. You cannot force people to work whether they get any benefit of it or not if they can flee from you, so you have to build walls. The Berlin Wall was not an aberration, it was the the only way to keep the quite literal slaves from fleeing their bondage. You cannot take stuff from people who have it without goons with guns, since they will not want to hand their material possessions over, so you bring in goons with guns to scour your population. In a free market, you get ahead by making things people want like bread or telephones, but in a Marxist society, the only way to get ahead is through gaining political power, and so people who are exceptionally talented at deploying violence and thuggery and are ambitious rise to the top of your society. Stalin or someone like him was not an accident, he was an inevitability.

    What is shocking but sadly unsurprising to me is this: after a seventy year experiment that lead to a hundred million deaths, we still have people in our universities and even on our streets who profess to be Marxists.

    There are, everywhere, professors who teach a Marxist interpretation of history, of literature, of economics and sociology, and not merely for some sort of historical perspective, but as an actual active ideology they would like their students to adopt. It is, indeed, an entirely ordinary sort of thing, so common it is not even worthy of note. There are people who wear Che Guevara T-shirts in the streets, never mind the people Guevara ruthlessly executed, including children, in the name of Marxism.

    Would it be considered equally ordinary for a professor to be out teaching the Nazi interpretation of literature or social interactions, and encouraging their students towards adopting the Nazi point of view? Would people feel equally unmoved by people walking around wearing a Joseph Goebbels shirt?

    Note that I do not suggest censorship. That is not the point. What I am instead suggesting is that, to this very day, our culture has not yet absorbed the lessons of Marxism, has not come to terms with the fact that it was not a noble experiment that failed, but rather a monstrous calamity that needs to be understood for what it was, lest it happen again.”

    November 9th, 2014 |

    Link:

    http://www.samizdata.net/2014/11/a-memorable-anniversary-and-those-who-would-forget-it/

  53. Libby says:

    “Dewey repeatedly violated the terms and conditions of the paper and good taste.”

    Hmmmm. In all honesty, I rarely read Dewey’s comments, as they tended to be somewhat canned and incoherent.

    But Pie has always taken the prize around here for bad taste (though he’s better lately). So if that’s your criteria, I’d have to say that you don’t apply it judiciously.

  54. Libby says:

    “You accused me of writing the article….”

    Talk about twisting.

    I said, “is this not of your posting” … not writing.

    Peggy, anybody who reads the thread will see that you are STILL trying to worm your way out of promoting unfounded and bigoted idiocies.

    All you have to do to get me to stop harassing you for it … it to stop doing it.

  55. Chris says:

    Peggy, I think it is pretty clear that Libby did NOT accuse you of writing the article. She was accusing you of endorsing what she believed to be a racist dogwhistle attack.

    I don’t know if I agree with that wholeheartedly, but I do know that Judicial Watch has a record of claiming their evidence is a lot stronger than it actually is, of making mountains out of molehills, and in some cases simply forwarding inaccurate information. I have no reason not to believe their latest claims about the NAACP are anything but yet more crying wolves.

  56. Chris says:

    “The conservative group Judicial Watch obtained 2,000 pages of receipts and expense reports for speaker travel under the Freedom of Information Act. The group says these demonstrate Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s “boorish demands for military travel” are “more about partying than anything else.” Based on that, the conservative WorldNetDaily ran an eye-popping but inaccurate headline that said, “Taxpayers pay $101,000 for Pelosi’s in-flight ‘food, booze.’ ” Claims of Pelosi’s extravagant liquor bills spread from there through any number of blogs and chain e-mails, which sometimes attribute the in-flight costs of entire delegations to Pelosi alone on her flights between Washington and her district in California.

    But Judicial Watch is wrong in several respects. Our examination of the documents reveals that Judicial Watch overstated the amount of money spent on “in-flight expenses” for Pelosi’s congressional delegations, or CODELs. Furthermore, Judicial Watch, a watchdog group that describes itself as “conservative,” failed to compare Pelosi’s costs with those of the previous speaker, Republican Dennis Hastert, even though the Air Force handed over documents covering CODELs that he led, as well as those led by Pelosi. And the fact is that Hastert’s travel, as represented in Judicial Watch’s own documents, was comparable to Pelosi’s.”

    http://www.factcheck.org/2010/03/pelosis-party-plane/

  57. Libby says:

    Chris … facts, reason, logic … you waste your time. We don’t do that here.

    And MCS said: “Over and over Libby has said the conservatives have to bow down to Obama because he won the election.”

    It took me awhile (you hyperbolize), but I think I know what you mean here. I did, and do, very much enjoy pointing out that your minority status is what it is, and you just have to stick it … which is NOT the same as requiring you to kowtow to the O-man personally.

    (In fact, that bit of prose goes that much further to point up your unhealthy and impolitic obsession with the O-man, personally. And I think that, as a matter of your personal growth, emotionally speaking, you should be working on this.)

    But you know what, your minority status has, in fact, not changed. Thirty-seven percent of the electorate may have gained you control of the Congress, but it is NOT a political mandate. Like I said, you just try and boot those college kids off their parents’ coverage, and see what happens to you.

  58. Chris says:

    Libby: “Hmmmm. In all honesty, I rarely read Dewey’s comments, as they tended to be somewhat canned and incoherent.

    But Pie has always taken the prize around here for bad taste (though he’s better lately). So if that’s your criteria, I’d have to say that you don’t apply it judiciously.”

    Agreed on both counts. I don’t think a liberal poster calling a conservative poster “shit-for-brains” would be tolerated here, nor should it be. But this is mild by Pie’s standards, and he is tolerated because his targets are liberals. (Usually–I do remember a few times he irrationally snapped at Jack and Tina, due to his own failures at reading comprehension.)

  59. Libby says:

    More heinous liberal political commentary from Salon, which gave me a good giggle. Be interested to know what it does for Peggy & MCS.

    ***

    … Those historical tidbits, from “The Political Beliefs of Americans; a Study of Public Opinion” by Lloyd Free and Hadley Cantril, immediately came to mind last week when Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, locked in a tight reelection fight — as always — made a lot of headlines with her comments noting that race had something to do with President Obama’s unpopularity in the state.

    “I’ll be very, very honest with you. The South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans,” she told NBC News in an interview. “It’s been a difficult time for the president to present himself in a very positive light as a leader.”

    This is hardly earth-shattering news from the state that brought us Plessy v. Ferguson in the 1890s, and the deeply racialized devastation of Katrina less a decade ago, after which even President Bush admitted that “deep, persistent poverty” in the area “has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America.” Speaking of Katrina, according to a PPP poll last year, the good people of Louisiana “were evenly split on who was most responsible for the poor Hurricane Katrina response: George W. Bush or Obama, 28/29.” Given that Obama was a first-year senator at the time of Katrina, it’s not hard to see what Landrieu was driving at. …

    ***

    Heh-heh-heh-hee-hee.

  60. Tina says:

    Libby: “Messing around on this site got the Washington Post thinking I espoused their editorial position. Took me some little while to persuade them I did not.”

    More Libologna.

    I go to the Wapo site often and they’ve never even noticed. Libby I’m thinking its some of that red red wine going to your head.

  61. Tina says:

    Libby: “if that’s your criteria, I’d have to say that you don’t apply it judiciously.”

    Only one other poster, besides Dewey, was blocked on PS and he’s literally gone now, RIP. The reason wasn’t his politics, his contentious or x-rated language or even his repetitive canned blather. Figure it out.

  62. Tina says:

    American Renaissance:

    Judicial Watch, October 21, 2014

    According to a letter from a lawyer for the State of North Carolina to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a speaker at a recent NAACP conference in North Carolina urged audience members to mislead the NAACP’s own members into believing they do not need to register to vote in advance, or that they do not need to vote at their assigned polling place. Why? The letter alleges: To create confusion and animosity during the upcoming mid-term elections in North Carolina, and to use the evidence of that confusion in the ongoing litigation between Eric Holder’s Justice Department and North Carolina and to show that North Carolina’s election integrity laws are discriminatory. From the letter:

    It is also our understanding that during the [NAACP conference], Rev. Barber urged those in attendance to take unregistered voters to vote during the Early Voting period and to engage in get-out-the vote activities that included transporting registered voters to vote in precincts in which they are not assigned to vote on Election Day, or words to that effect. The stated purpose for these activities, as I understand it, was to gather evidence for and thereby enhance plaintiffs prospects of success in the litigation involving [North Carolina’s Election Integrity Laws].

    I saw video of people being interviewed that admitted they had been told they could vote without being registered which lends some weight to the validity of claims made by JW.

    Also the tactic of using the evidence created in the chaos is reminiscent of the purpose behind the gun walking plot. In Fast and Furious the evidence of guns being sold to Cartels was going to be used to gin up support for stricter gun laws.

    Radical progressives are covert and unethical; the end justifies the means.

    America is not a racist nation. The Republican Party is not a racist party. The American people are finding out what a phony load of crap the race baiters and pimps in the Democrat Party have been up to since the sixties, perpetuating racism, pitting people against each other, creating animosity and feelings of unwelcome where NONE exists! The American people are finding out that Democrats do this to keep blacks on the plantation…voting Democrat.

    Meanwhile, good for NPR, “As GOP Swept Congress, Black Republicans Took Home Historic Wins.”

    Libby, you and Mary Landrieu are both pathetic. You should be reminded that in that history it was Democrats working against black people including through the evil KKK.

    Obama’s unpopularity has to do with the lousy economy, the high number of Americans not working cause they can’t find a job, the divisive politics, the lies and tricks re Obamacare, the loss of American standing with our allies and in the world, the rise of dangerous terrorist, and despicable covert undermining schemes like Fast and Furious and IRS targeting.

    There’s plenty to not like about Obama, so much so that many Democrats voted by staying home. (And that included many black citizens who are just as discouraged by this president as any white voter.)

  63. Chris says:

    Libby, quoting Salon:

    “Speaking of Katrina, according to a PPP poll last year, the good people of Louisiana “were evenly split on who was most responsible for the poor Hurricane Katrina response: George W. Bush or Obama, 28/29.””

    I had to Google this to confirm, it was so unbelievable. But yes, that was the actual result.

    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/08/in-louisiana-clinton-keeps-up-governor-falls.html

    Holy mother of God, people can be stupid.

  64. Libby says:

    We get our giggles where we can, but for the republic I have not much hope … not with such a quantity of dimwits abroad in the land.

  65. Chris says:

    Libby, right now I am getting my fair share of giggles reading Tina’s comment #72. A comment in which she goes on and one about how non-racist she is, and how Democrats are the REAL racists…right after citing a racist, white supremacist website as her source.Again.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Renaissance_(magazine)

    Absolutely hilarious.

  66. Chris says:

    I mean, Jesus, Tina. If your goal is to convince people that there is no racism in the Republican party, wouldn’t it behoove you to at least check and see if you are linking to racist hate sites to support your argument? Especially since you have already been told at least once that American Renaissance is a racist hate site?

    I mean, how freaking hard is that?

  67. Libby says:

    Good God, Tina … the New Century Foundation and their works are freakin’ notorious.

    What is wrong with you!?

    Or … if you’re going to be a racist … just say: “I’m a racist.” Then we can quit bugging you about your flaming hypocrisy, which is sooooo irritating.

  68. Tina says:

    Chris it would have behooved me to go to the JW cite instead, you’re right about that. It also doesn’t freak me out the way it does you. Probably because I’m not motivated by the dire need to nail anybody as you are.

    Your willingness to believe that this makes me a racist, or an idiot, is pretty damaging to your own character. The site simply copied and pasted original content from Judicial Watch, which was noted at the top of the blockquote, and which you chose to ignore simply because that gave you another opportunity to feel smug while denigrating me.

    And by the way, It wouldn’t be necessary to “try to convince people” that racism is not a big problem in America if the party you favor hadn’t spent the last fifty or sixty years convincing people, especially young students, that America is still, forever, and always a racist nation and the republican Party the equivalent of the KKK, a Democrat legacy.

    Congratulations Chris! You’ve swallowed the extremist position, hook, line, and sinker. You participate willingly in their game. You assist in the grand scheme to convince the electorate that people who are not racist are racist. That makes you a lying tool for the supreme liars who keep the racism charge alive for their own selfish and political power. Guess what, you also enjoy it:

    ” I am getting my fair share of giggles…

    Isn’t that just a bit hypocritical since you constantly pass yourself off as a fair minded, understanding, kind, and generous of spirit (The equally phony label liberals give themselves)?

    “Libby, quoting Salon:

    “Speaking of Katrina, according to a PPP poll last year, the good people of Louisiana “were evenly split on who was most responsible for the poor Hurricane Katrina response: George W. Bush or Obama, 28/29.””

    I had to Google this to confirm, it was so unbelievable. But yes, that was the actual result.”

    The liberal spin at Salon requires a bit of reality. The following is from the PPP link cited:

    PPP surveyed 721 Louisiana voters, including an oversample of 274 usual Republican primary voters, between August 16-19, 2013. The margin of error for the overall survey was +/- 3.7% and +/- 5.9% for the GOP portion.

    The oversampling were Independent voters who often fall on the Democrat side, as they have for Obama in his two runs for the Presidency…hardly an indictment on Republicans that Salon wished to imply.

    Q2 Who do you think was more responsible for the poor response to Hurricane Katrina: George W.
    Bush or Barack Obama?

    George W. Bush…………………… 28%
    Barack Obama…………………….. 29%
    Not sure………………………… 44%

    Q24 If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican,
    press 2. If you are an independent or identify
    with another party, press 3.

    Democrat………………………….. 45%
    Republican………………………… 36%
    Independent/Other………………….. 18%

    Implying (Or stating, as some left sites have) that it was Republicans who think Katrina was Obama’s fault is a stretch.

    Obama was a Senator during Katrina. The governor and mayor, first line of defense Democrats, at the time were Democrats. What many people don’t know is that the President cannot act until the governor asks him to, states rights. The governor failed to ask immediately, the mayor was a hapless crook, and GWB was targeted for destruction a la Saul Alinsky #12.

    Heartland Institute:

    The primary responsibility for dealing with emergencies does not belong to the federal government. It belongs to local and state officials, who are charged by law with the management of the crucial first response to disasters. First response should be carried out by local and state emergency personnel under the supervision of the governor and her emergency operations center.

    The actions and inactions of Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin are a national disgrace due to their failure to implement the previously established evacuation plans of the state and city.

    Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin cannot claim they were surprised by the extent of the damage and the need to evacuate so many people. Detailed written plans were already in place to evacuate more than a million people. The plans projected that 300,000 people would need transportation in the event of a hurricane like Katrina. If the plans had been implemented, numerous lives would likely have been saved.

    In addition to the evacuation plans, local, state, and federal officials held a simulated hurricane drill 13 months ago, in which widespread flooding supposedly trapped 300,000 people inside New Orleans. The exercise simulated the evacuation of more than a million residents. The problems identified in the simulation apparently were not solved.

    Close Call Gave Warning

    A year ago, as Hurricane Ivan approached, New Orleans ordered an evacuation but did not use city or school buses to help people evacuate. As a result, many of the poorest citizens were unable to evacuate. Fortunately, the hurricane changed course and did not hit New Orleans, but both Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin acknowledged the need for a better evacuation plan.

    Again, however, they failed to take corrective actions. In 1998, during a threat by Hurricane George, 14,000 people were sent to the Superdome, and theft and vandalism were rampant because of inadequate security. These problems were not corrected.

    The New Orleans contingency plan is still, as of this writing, on the city’s Web site. It states, “The safe evacuation of threatened populations is one of the principle [sic] reasons for developing a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.” But the plan was apparently ignored as Katrina headed toward the city.

    Mayor’s Office Responsible

    Mayor Nagin was responsible for giving the order for mandatory evacuation and supervising the actual evacuation. According to state law, his Office of Emergency Preparedness (not the federal government) must coordinate with the state on elements of evacuation and assist in directing the transportation of evacuees to staging areas.

    Mayor Nagin had to be encouraged by the governor to contact the National Hurricane Center before he finally, belatedly, issued the order for mandatory evacuation. And sadly, it apparently took a personal call from President George W. Bush to urge the governor to order the mandatory evacuation.

    The city’s evacuation plan states, “The city of New Orleans will utilize all available resources to quickly and safely evacuate threatened areas.” But even though the city has enough school and transit buses to evacuate 12,000 citizens per fleet run, the mayor did not use them. To compound the problem, the buses were not moved to high ground; as a result, they were flooded.

    The plan also states, “special arrangements will be made to evacuate persons unable to transport themselves or who require specific lifesaving assistance. Additional personnel will be recruited to assist in evacuation procedures as needed.” This was not done.

    There’s more at the website.

    Is there an ounce of shame in all of that giggling?

    Could it be that Salon is not all that reliable?

    Could it be that many leftists have bought the lies and spin?

  69. Peggy says:

    The New Orleans’ mayor Nagin was also found guilty of 20 out of 21 corruption charges. He was just sentenced the other day.

    Ex-New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin found guilty of corruption:

    “A jury convicted former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin Wednesday on 20 of 21 federal corruption counts, including bribery, marking a stunning fall for the feisty official who gained a national profile following Hurricane Katrina.

    The 57-year-old Democrat, who led his city through the aftermath of the 2005 storm, was found guilty of charges that he accepted bribes, free trips and other gratuities from contractors in exchange for helping them secure millions of dollars in city work while he was in office.

    He will remain free on bond while he awaits sentencing. Each of the charges carries a sentence from three to 20 years, but how long he would serve was unclear and will depend on a pre-sentence investigation and various sentencing guidelines. No sentencing date was set.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/12/jury-reaches-verdict-in-ex-new-orleans-mayor-nagin-bribery-case/

    Nagin convicted of trading contracts during mayoral term:

    “Former New Orleans mayor C. Ray Nagin, was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison on Wednesday on charges of corruption during his term in office. Nagin, a cult hero in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, but whose popularity later eroded, served from 2002 to 2010. He was arrested, then indicted, on January 2013.”

    http://www.examiner.com/article/nagin-convicted-of-trading-contracts-during-mayoral-term

    I wonder if he would have received such a light sentence if he were a Republican? Note the prosecutors have the right to appeal the sentence. Doubt they will.

  70. Chris says:

    Tina: “Your willingness to believe that this makes me a racist, or an idiot, is pretty damaging to your own character.”

    I never said it makes you “a racist.” As I’ve said before, I think everyone has some unconscious racist beliefs, and occasionally acts on racist ways, so dividing people into the labels “racists” and non-racists is generally unhelpful. Members of groups like American Renaissance certainly deserve the label, but I wouldn’t label you as “a racist,” since that would imply racism is a fundamental part of your character.

    I do think you implicitly accept a subtle form of white supremacism when you say things such as “Americans were more free prior to the 1950s,” or “the founders had moral clarity,” as these statements completely erase the experiences of people of color (not mention women and gays) and rely on the unstated, possibly unconscious premise that the freedom of white men is all that really matters. I know you don’t think these arguments rely on those premises. But they clearly do, and denying that only shows that you have not thought those arguments through at all.

    I think this subtle form of racism is rampant in your party, which is uncomfortably close to white supremacists, as demonstrated by your frequent accidental citations of white supremacist organizations. If you find is so difficult to tell the difference between a white supremacist hate site and a mainstream conservative site, and this happens so often, then that should tell you that there is an uncomfortable amount of overlap between the right wing and the bigotsphere.

    I think it was idiotic of you to spout off about how racism is not at all a problem in the right wing in the same comment that you unintentionally cited a white supremacist web site to make your argument. You attempted to prove that the claims about the NAACP were not racially motivated by citing a racist web site.

    I think it was idiotic of you to resort to the tired “the KKK were Democrats!” argument, which, while technically true, completely ignores the Southern Realignment and the fact that during the 60s Democrats began rejecting segregation while Republicans embraced the Southern Strategy, a deliberate attempt to court white racists and alienate blacks. It is ridiculous of you to blame Democrats for convincing people that Republicans are the party of racism, when it’s a historical fact that Republicans starting under Nixon deliberately spread this perception about themselves for political gain.

    It is both idiotic and racist of you to continue to compare blacks who vote Democrat and/or receive welfare to slaves on a “plantation.” If you cannot see why this offensive and insulting, then that’s even more idiotic. This phrasing is not winning you any more minority voters. In addition, it’s morally wrong. Black Democrats are not “slaves,” and claiming they are in any way similar is repugnant.

  71. Tina says:

    Chris: “I do think you implicitly accept a subtle form of white supremacism when you say things such as “Americans were more free prior to the 1950s,” or “the founders had moral clarity,” as these statements completely erase the experiences of people of color.”

    There were much much fewer laws and regulations in America prior to the 1950’s so in that general sense Americans were a lot freer, including blacks. The remark about moral clarity was not explicitly stated about the period of the founders but in relation to current attitudes. People of all colors today share an attitude of blame shifting. Black, even as slaves, would never have blamed a gun or the tea party for a murder…they blamed the person who committed the crime, and rightly so. Therefore, I disagree completely that my comment implies a “subtle form of white supremacism.”

    I can see how someone that has been trained to think in terms of race would automatically revert to race thinking.

    My later, explicit comment that the Founders had moral clarity was about the meaning and purpose of the Second Amendment. Once again the mores are irrelevant to the point.

    “hese statements completely erase the experiences of people of color (not mention women and gays) and rely on the unstated, possibly unconscious premise that the freedom of white men is all that really matters.”

    Man, the thing that hits me square in the face is that as long as our colleges keep pushing white guilt our country will never heal.

    I disagree profoundly that these comments, as stated and as intended, “erase the experiences of people of color (not mention women and gays) and rely on the unstated, possibly unconscious premise that the freedom of white men is all that really matters.”

    The next thing that hits me in the face is that black people will never be allowed to move ahead as equals as long as they have to drag the past with them or wear it for the guilty white to use as a political bludgeon.

    “But they clearly do, and denying that only shows that you have not thought those arguments through at all.”

    How dare you! You clearly don’t have the slightest idea about what I have “thought through”. What you have is an opinion based mostly on your own conditioning. I appreciate that you apparently now think I’m only a little racist or a fraction white supremacist but you’ve made this evaluation based on what you think, on your conditioning and not on what I think or experience.

    My prejudices are simple. I don’t like criminals, thugs, or low-lifes of any color. These are defined by attitudes and actions alone. They are not defined by appearance, gender, race or religion.

    “I think it was idiotic of you to spout off about how racism is not at all a problem in the right wing…”

    I think its idiotic of you to spout off that it is a right wing problem.

    Wherever racism exist it isn’t a party problem. The Democrat Party has deceptively attempted to make it a Republican problem in a strategy to cover the racist KKK past of many Southern Democrats and lay claim to the black vote. They succeeded too with the help, for decades, from the 3 major networks, the NYT, and others who promoted and favored Democrats. (When other sources were practically non-existant)

    “If you find is so difficult to tell the difference between a white supremacist hate site…”

    I don’t find it difficult! Its arrogant and idiotic for you to think that much less say it. It’s not like you haven’t made your share of goofs, particularly when in a hurry, and you don’t have the added responsibility of writing and/or posting material for comment, posting comments, ridding the blog of spam, and replying to the good people who take the time to comment. Oh, and its fun fighting internet and computer problems in the midst of all of this which happens more regularly than you know. it has been going on in my life for at least four weeks now which means I sometimes spend an hour or so only to have my internet suddenly blocked and my time wasted because I cannot get a comment or article posted.

    We do this as a hobby, Chris, in between the other responsibilities we have. Given the circumstances your criticism is petty.

    “completely ignores the Southern Realignment and the fact that during the 60s Democrats began rejecting segregation while Republicans embraced the Southern Strategy, a deliberate attempt to court white racists and alienate blacks.”

    More evidence of your progressive deceptive conditioning.

    Redstate features historian Sean Trende, who exposes the myths and spin about the Southern Strategy. Read the article at the link for background history and context:

    The basic “Southern Strategy” myth, popularized by Kevin Phillips in the early 1970s, goes like this: under LBJ’s leadership, Democrats nobly and self-sacrificingly supported civil rights during Stage Four of the movement, giving an opening to opportunistic Republicans to crack the Democratic Solid South; following the support given by voters in some Deep South states to Goldwater in 1964, Nixon (formerly a supporter of civil rights) developed a “Southern Strategy” to use coded appeals to southern whites, enabling him to win the 1968 election; and everything the GOP has accomplished since 1968 is tainted by a continuous reliance on that same strategy to keep white southerners in the fold.

    Like most myths, the Southern Strategy myth has some kernels of truth to it. It’s true that LBJ changed his tune on civil rights in the Oval Office, and did so knowing that this would have costs to the party. This, as Trende notes, is the nature of political coalitions and why they are inherently unstable. It’s true that Nixon, like Republicans as far back as TR, had the dream of adding white Southern support to his coalition, and dedicated a campaign strategy to doing so. And it’s true that the South has, broadly speaking, been far more Republican since the late 60s than it was before.

    But the reality is quite different from the myth.

    The Real Story of the Un-Solid South

    At the center of the Southern Strategy myth is the idea that Republicans used the race card to seduce Democratic voters in the South into leaving their natural partisan home. The truth, as Trende convincingly demonstrates, is the opposite: the growth of GOP support among white Southerners was steady and mostly gradual from 1928 to 2010, and was a natural outgrowth of the fact that white Southerners were ideologically much more compatible with the national Republican agenda and coalition than with the national Democratic agenda and coalition. What retarded the Southern switch from the Democrats to the GOP was a combination of party loyalties dating back to Reconstruction and the Democrats’ use of racial issues. In other words, if you take race out of the picture, it’s likely that white Southerners would have switched parties earlier and in greater numbers. The real “Southern Strategy” was the one pursued by the Democrats, especially under FDR, to keep conservative white Southerners in a liberal party.

    You can read shorter versions of Trende’s argument in columns by Trende, Jay Cost (who looks especially at the South’s divergence from the party of organized labor), and Gerard Alexander, as well as more background on the two parties’ civil rights records from Williamson. I will summarize. (continues)

    As I have said, you have been conditioned to think as progressives wish you to think. I would wager you were never exposed to this line of thinking or facts in your studies in high school or college. I wrote about this before in conversation with you but apparently it didn’t penetrate or you simply prefer to believe Republicans are racist.

    “It is both idiotic and racist of you to continue to compare blacks who vote Democrat and/or receive welfare to slaves on a “plantation.”

    A. I got the line from a black woman, once a self described welfare queen who grew up and realized the trap she was in by accepting welfare and benefits when she was perfectly capable of caring for herself.

    B. I do not criticize the black people. I criticize the attitudes and policies that over time trap too many black (and poor white) people and I believe that radical leaders intended it to be exactly as it has turned out…dependent and voting for Democrats that promise them more and more and more.

    C. I think its idiotic that you can’t see it is the policy I deplore.

    “This phrasing is not winning you any more minority voters.”

    Especially when my position is mischaracterized and (purposely?) misunderstood just to slam me.

  72. Chris says:

    Tina: “There were much much fewer laws and regulations in America prior to the 1950′s so in that general sense Americans were a lot freer, including blacks.”

    Ridiculous. Absolutely effing ridiculous.

    Prior to the 1950s, there were laws regulating what schools blacks could go to, what drinking fountains they could drink from, where they could eat, where they could sit…to shrug this all off as if it doesn’t matter is downright monstrous.

    “The remark about moral clarity was not explicitly stated about the period of the founders but in relation to current attitudes.”

    This sentence makes no sense.

    “Black, even as slaves, would never have blamed a gun or the tea party for a murder…”

    If those are your only qualifications for moral clarity or freedom then your definitions of those terms must be absolutely ridiculous. (Not that you would define either term in a debate anyway; refusing to define your terms is a time-honored tradition among the intellectually dishonest.)

    “I can see how someone that has been trained to think in terms of race would automatically revert to race thinking.”

    And I can see how someone who has never learned to think would believe a statement like “Americans were freer prior to the 1950s” is somehow racially neutral.

    “My later, explicit comment that the Founders had moral clarity was about the meaning and purpose of the Second Amendment. Once again the mores are irrelevant to the point.”

    And as I pointed out then, that argument STILL didn’t make any sense, because the Founders infringed on gun rights to a greater degree than any politician in our country has managed to do today. You even admitted that the Founders required universal registration and routine inspections, not to mention excluded many segments of society (such as blacks) from owning firearms outright…and yet you still have the audacity to claim they were more respectful of the right to bear arms than our country today? Based on WHAT? What they said, instead of what they actually did?

    “Man, the thing that hits me square in the face is that as long as our colleges keep pushing white guilt our country will never heal.”

    You have no idea what you’re talking about. “Guilt” has nothing to do with it. Guilt is a useless emotion. I bear no guilt for any racial or societal wrong. What I do believe I have is the responsibility to try and make the world a better place…and that means not standing idly by when I see real, meaningful bigotry.

    The idea that Americans were more free prior to the 1950s is a fantasy that only those blinded by privilege could believe. The Republican party today is actively engaged in perpetuating this fantasy. This is dangerous, not just for minorities and women, but for all who care about an accurate understanding of history.

    “I disagree profoundly that these comments, as stated and as intended, “erase the experiences of people of color (not mention women and gays) and rely on the unstated, possibly unconscious premise that the freedom of white men is all that really matters.””

    Disagree with these comments all you want–you’re completely unable to refute them, so your disagreement is worthless.

    “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” –Isaac Asimov

    “The next thing that hits me in the face is that black people will never be allowed to move ahead as equals as long as they have to drag the past with them or wear it for the guilty white to use as a political bludgeon.”

    Do you understand that there is a difference between “dragging the past with them” and “countering anti-historical bullshit?”

    “I think its idiotic of you to spout off that it is a right wing problem.”

    So the fact that you, Peggy and Jack have more than a few times cited white supremacist sources to back up your arguments, and Libby and I never have, doesn’t tell you anything?

    “The Democrat Party has deceptively attempted to make it a Republican problem in a strategy to cover the racist KKK past of many Southern Democrats and lay claim to the black vote.”

    It’s like you literally cannot read. I already explained why the KKK argument is meritless.

    “They succeeded too with the help, for decades, from the 3 major networks, the NYT, and others who promoted and favored Democrats. (When other sources were practically non-existant)”

    Once again: they succeeded due to Republicans’ own statements, actions and policies, which were designed explicitly to alienate blacks and court racist white southerners. You know this. Everyone knows this. It is a historical fact. Please stop denying it.

    “I don’t find it difficult [to tell a white supremacist site from a mainstream conservative site]!”

    …But you did. If you didn’t, you wouldn’t have linked to it. Right?

    “I wrote about this before in conversation with you but apparently it didn’t penetrate or you simply prefer to believe Republicans are racist.”

    It penetrates just fine. The problem is that your link (at least, the quoted portion) doesn’t contradict anything I have written about the Southern Strategy.

    My claim was that Republicans intentionally tried to court the racist white vote and lose the black vote. Nothing in the quoted portion of your link addresses that claim. It may be true that the South would have become Republican even without racial issues, but that doesn’t address my point. There is documented evidence that Republicans intentionally tried to win the South through coded racism–whether or not that strategy actually worked is immaterial.

    Lee Atwater was caught on tape infamously saying the following when working for the Reagan White House:

    “You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, it backfires. So you say stuff like, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and the byproduct of them is blacks get hurt worse than whites. And, subconsciously, maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract and that coded then we’re doing away with the racial problem one way or the other, you follow me? “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.””

    Unless your argument is that Atwater was a stealth liberal, then you must admit that Republicans bear at least some of the responsibility for spreading the perception that they have a racism problem.

    Martin Luther King, Jr. himself disparaged the racism of the Republican party. But when I pointed this out to you, you said that he had been “boondoggled” by liberal Democrats, as if he could not think for himself! Note that this was only a few comments after you falsely claimed MLK Jr. was a “registered Republican,” a claim you did not even acknowledge was false.

    http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2014/02/20/government-cereal-hitting-stores/

    In fact, reading over that thread, you made numerous false and ridiculous claims, like:

    –MLK didn’t favor a welfare state
    –MLK might have come back to the Republican party under Reagan, a man he openly mocked
    –Blacks couldn’t vote in MLK’s time (seriously, what? Blacks have had suffrage since 1870. Do you know anything?)

    You then cited MLK’s crazy niece, notorious bigot Alveda King, who believes that allowing gays to marry is equivalent to “genocide” and will “result in the extinction of the human race,” in order to back up your false claim that MLK Jr. was a Republican.

    When I pointed out her bigotry and explained to you that she has been disowned by the rest of the King family, you wrote this:

    “BFD. They embrace the Democrat lies about black history. They carry water for the Democrats because they promise them freebies…some of them have sold their souls and sold out the black community in the process…enriching their own lives without real concern for the quality of life blacks have under Democrat policies.”

    So not only did you say that the only reason MLK believed the Republican party had embraced racism was because he was stupid enough to be manipulated by Democrats, you then made the same exact claim about his family. When I asked you to tell me who, specifically, in King’s family you were referring to, you disappeared.

    Good god, woman. And you don’t see how any of this might be offensive to black Americans? You really do believe that the majority of blacks are gullible idiots who are simply being manipulated by white Democrats. You think this stupidity even extends to the man who did more to fight for black civil rights than almost anyone else.

    You actually told me that you are more qualified to determine what racism looks like than Martin Luther King, Jr!

    And you’re going to tell me your worldview isn’t influenced by your white privilege? Hilarious.

    “A. I got the line from a black woman, once a self described welfare queen who grew up and realized the trap she was in by accepting welfare and benefits when she was perfectly capable of caring for herself.”

    Tina, “a black woman said it one time” is not a valid argument for defending yourself against charges of racism. Internalized racism is a thing that exists. So is internalized sexism, which you have also demonstrated plenty of. (Remember that time you told me there were fewer good roles for women in Hollywood because women weren’t as interested in acting? Golden.)

    If she viewed herself as living a slave-like existence and that she was capable of living without welfare that is one thing. That does not entitle you to appropriate her experience and generalize it to apply to a large number of African-Americans currently on welfare because they really need it.

    “B. I do not criticize the black people. I criticize the attitudes and policies that over time trap too many black (and poor white) people and I believe that radical leaders intended it to be exactly as it has turned out…dependent and voting for Democrats that promise them more and more and more.”

    The fact that this relies on the unspoken premise that black people dumb and easily manipulated doesn’t even occur to you, does it? Again: you are incapable of thinking through your arguments in a logical manner.

    “Especially when my position is mischaracterized and (purposely?) misunderstood just to slam me.”

    It’s neither mischaracterized more misunderstood. I understand your argument better than you do. That’s the crippling disadvantage of people with no critical thinking ability or capacity for self-reflection: they will never understand why they believe the things they do, or what their beliefs even imply.

    The advantage is that you’ll never realize this no matter how many times it’s explained to you in the simplest terms possible, so at least you’ll be happy and never have to worry about changing your mind (unless someone in a position of authority you respect makes you). Ignorance is bliss.

  73. Tina says:

    Chris your arrogance knows no bounds. Your single mindedness makes you a complete bore and your inclination toward projection make your assertions ridiculous. There is no point in engaging you further.

  74. Chris says:

    Tina, do you still believe that MLK Jr. was “boondoggled” into believing that the Republican Party had embraced racism? Would you like to now explain which of his family members you denigrated when you claimed, with no evidence, that they “carry water for Democrats” in exchange for “freebies?”

  75. Tina says:

    Chris have you finally given up your drug addiction?

  76. Libby says:

    Tina: “There is no point in engaging you further.”

    And then you did. But I understand your position, that’s one overwhelming post. You don’t have to answer all of it. Pick something. This, for instance:

    Tina: There were much much fewer laws and regulations in America prior to the 1950′s so in that general sense Americans were a lot freer, including blacks.”

    Chris: Prior to the 1950s, there were laws regulating what schools blacks could go to, what drinking fountains they could drink from, where they could eat, where they could sit … to shrug this all off as if it doesn’t matter is downright monstrous.

    You got a rebuttal for this?

  77. Peggy says:

    Learned something new today about MLK.

    The FBI Wrote MLK After His ‘I Have A Dream Speech’ Urging Violent End To His Civil Rights Push:

    “In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his revered ‘I Have A Dream Speech’ to an overflowing audience in the nation’s capital.

    While King’s immortalized words have driven civil rights movements the world over, his massive influence at the time did not sit well with the FBI. The FBI Domestic Intelligence Chief at the time was William Sullivan, and he was absolutely convinced that King was a “filthy fraud.”

    Sullivan put major surveillance on King, and even wrote a chilling letter urging him to put a permanent end to his civil rights push.

    The New York Times published a copy of Sullivan’s letter.

    And just to clear things up, if anyone thinks Sullivan was a conservative, his obituary details how he was the only liberal democrat to be in the FBI hierarchy at that time.”

    (Be sure to check out the link indicated “liberal democrat” to see how Sullivan died because of a “hunting accident. The line is several pages long.)

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/11/201800-new-fbi-wrote-mlk-dream-speech-urging-permanent-end-civil-rights-push/

  78. Chris says:

    Tina: “Chris have you finally given up your drug addiction?”

    This makes no sense as a retort. Everything in my comment is based on things you actually said. You actually said that MLK Jr. was “boondoggled” into believing that the Republican party had embraced racism. You actually said that his family members “carried water” for Democrats because they were just as easily manipulated. You actually lied about MLK being a registered Republican, then linked to MLK’s crazy homophobic niece to justify that lie, then insulted the non-crazy members of the King family when I pointed out her crazy statements about how gays are causing the “extinction of the human race.”

    I provided a link to you saying those awful things. You never explained them or took them back.

    I, on the other hand, have never said anything about having a drug addiction, because I never have had a drug addiction.

    You seem to be having trouble telling the difference between reality and delusions.

    Even more than usual, I mean.

  79. Libby says:

    VTina: There were much much fewer laws and regulations in America prior to the 1950′s so in that general sense Americans were a lot freer, including blacks.”

    Chris: Prior to the 1950s, there were laws regulating what schools blacks could go to, what drinking fountains they could drink from, where they could eat, where they could sit … to shrug this all off as if it doesn’t matter is downright monstrous.

    You got a rebuttal for this?

    ***

    Well, have you?

  80. Tina says:

    Yes Libby I do. It seems you two cannot discuss anything without inserting race.

    I wasn’t “shrugging off” racial prejudice and injustice. I wasn’t addressing it at all.

    I was talking about the number of regulations in the 1950’s as opposed to the number today and the lack of freedom we now all have as a result. Just since 1970 we’ve added pages and pages of regulations.

    US Gov info:

    According to the Office of the Federal Register, in 1998, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the official listing of all regulations in effect, contained a total of 134,723 pages in 201 volumes that claimed 19 feet of shelf space. In 1970, the CFR totaled only 54,834 pages.

    The General Accountability Office (GAO) reports that in the four fiscal years from 1996 to 1999, a total of 15,286 new federal regulations went into effect. Of these, 222 were classified as “major” rules, each one having an annual effect on the economy of at least $100 million.

    While they call the process “rulemaking,” the regulatory agencies create and enforce “rules” that are truly laws, many with the potential to profoundly effect the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans (emphasis mine)

    This may come as a surprise to you two but slavery ended quite awhile back as have the conditions you threw in my face out of the blue. Believe it or not plenty of blacks now work in good jobs and own businesses. Of course the ones that are not finding work in the Obama economy sure would benefit from less regulation, and lower taxes on business, so they could find decent work!

    But you haven’t been conditioned to think about them or the affect the onerous regulations have on all Americans. YOU are too busy focusing on race and trying to find any excuse to accuse. You really are pathetic.

    Investment Watch Blog, see the video.

    Reason:

    The growth of federal regulations over the past six decades has cut U.S. economic growth by an average of 2 percentage points per year, according to a new study in the Journal of Economic Growth. As a result, the average American household receives about $277,000 less annually than it would have gotten in the absence of six decades of accumulated regulations—a median household income of $330,000 instead of the $53,000 we get now. (emphasis mine)

    There’s your shrinking middle class, and I dare say a whole lot of opportunity has been lost for the poorer classes as well. Add Obamcare to the mix and the attack on energy production from the EPA and your lefty agenda gets to be fairly damaging to Americans of all races.

    Obamacare added 11,588,500 words of regulation or 10,535 pages in the Federal Register.

    The EPA is having field day also.

    US News:

    A study in the June issue of the “Journal of Economic Growth” – authored by John Dawson of Appalachian State University and John Seater of North Carolina State University – estimates that federal regulations have reduced economic growth by about 2 percent per year between 1949 and 2005. They find that if federal regulations were still at levels seen in the year 1949, current GDP would be $38.8 trillion higher. While that number seems extraordinarily high, a number of other studies have similarly concluded that regulatory accumulation slows down economic growth.

    You guys need to break out of that box and learn a few things. A good place to start would be to stop inserting your thoughts into what others say.

    It should bother you that the black unemployment rate has been so high under Obama’s leadership and that the number of Americans now in poverty nearly matches the Great Depression! You seem to be shrugging off this very damaging bit of current reality!

    There is an insincerity in your accusations, a grasping at straws.

  81. Chris says:

    Tina: “Yes Libby I do. It seems you two cannot discuss anything without inserting race.

    I wasn’t “shrugging off” racial prejudice and injustice. I wasn’t addressing it at all.”

    Like I said before: the statement that “Americans were more free prior to the 1950s” is NOT racially neutral. There is no way, given the actual lack of freedom for non-white Americans prior to the 1950s, that it ever could be. You may have thought you weren’t addressing race when you said this; but that just shows that you have no grasp of historical context.

    Libby and I did not “insert race” into your statement. It’s already there. Just because you want to pretend away the implications of what you say does not mean anyone else has to humor you.

    If you would like to make it a rule on your blog that all participants have to join in on your pretenses in order to comment, you of course have that right. Until that point, please don’t get angry when others refuse to entertain your attempts to pretend away the clear meanings of your statements.

    The idea that taxes on businesses (which are lower than they were prior to the 1950s) and things like environmental regulations restrict freedom to a greater degree than Jim Crow laws is so ridiculous that it barely merits a response. Only someone whose perspective has been irreparably warped by privilege could argue that Americans are less free now than blacks were prior to the 1950s.

    “Of course the ones that are not finding work in the Obama economy sure would benefit from less regulation, and lower taxes on business, so they could find decent work!”

    There is no evidence that lower taxes and less regulation on businesses correlates with higher employment. None. Zero. Zip.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/billharris/2012/11/05/tax-cuts-dont-create-jobs/

    http://www.businessinsider.com/study-tax-cuts-dont-lead-to-growth-2012-9

    http://www.epi.org/publication/quick-guide-evidence-regulations-jobs/

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/tax-cuts-for-job-creators/?_r=0

    “It should bother you that the black unemployment rate has been so high under Obama’s leadership”

    Do you have any idea how high the black unemployment rate was prior to the 1950s? Do you at least know that it was higher than it is now?

    Do you ever bother to take five seconds to check if what you are saying is true or if it even makes sense?

  82. Libby says:

    Tina … don’t change the subject … from Jim Crow America … to any general whatsoever of government regulation.

    You really are a very, very, very sad person. You wanna be a bigot … be a bigot!

    But all this niggling is a bloody bore.

  83. Tina says:

    Libby and Chris you are both projection artists interested only in your own thoughts.

    Both of you are uninterested in the loss of freedom for anyone that is caused by added regulation, most of which has happened since 1950. That is the subject, if it’s been changed it was by both of you.

    Perhaps you’d like to exchange emails so you can commiserate together privately and we could avoid all the labeling and total crap you two spew. I could make that happen.

  84. Chris says:

    Tina: “Both of you are uninterested in the loss of freedom for anyone that is caused by added regulation, most of which has happened since 1950. That is the subject, if it’s been changed it was by both of you.”

    But I addressed this subject. I simply think it’s ridiculous. There is no evidence that added regulations on businesses constrains Americans’ freedom in any tangible way.

    You were the one who decided to make the more general statement that “Americans were more free prior to the 1950s.” You then doubled down by suggesting that this applied even to blacks under Jim Crow. When I pointed out the many, many laws and regulations that constrained the freedom of blacks prior to the 1950s, you refused to acknowledge them.

    I do not believe laws like environmental regulations or the historically low taxes your business pays come even close to the oppressive laws governing the behavior of blacks prior to the 1950s. I don’t even believe they come close to your own freedom-restricting policies, such as your attempts to deprive gays of the right to civil marriage.

    “Perhaps you’d like to exchange emails so you can commiserate together privately and we could avoid all the labeling and total crap you two spew. I could make that happen.”

    I would post my e-mail, but recently one of your friends said he would like to shoot me in the head because I disagreed with him, and repeatedly called me a n****r burner for reasons only a psychopath like him could fathom.

    For the record, he remains a welcome guest of Post Scripts and has not received any condemnation or warning from you.

  85. Tina says:

    Chris: “But I addressed this subject… There is no evidence that added regulations on businesses constrains Americans’ freedom in any tangible way.”

    Therein lies the end of the conversation for Chris who arrogantly believes he’s the final word, who resists thinking outside his comfort zone, and who chooses to ignore the assessment I posted made by the GAO way back in 1999. Imagine the figures increase fifteen years later:

    The General Accountability Office (GAO) reports that in the four fiscal years from 1996 to 1999, a total of 15,286 new federal regulations went into effect. Of these, 222 were classified as “major” rules, each one having an annual effect on the economy of at least $100 million.

    While they call the process “rulemaking,” the regulatory agencies create and enforce “rules” that are truly laws, many with the potential to profoundly effect the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans (emphasis mine)

    Today the number of people without work that have given up looking, the number working part time who would prefer full time, the number currently on the unemployment rolls, the number who have never entered the workforce at all due to the lack of opportunity is in the millions! many have been stuck there for six years or more. You can’t say their lack of opportunity to find work (the freedom to pursue happiness) hasn’t been severely blunted and dimminished by regulations and the constricting policies of government.

    Zero Hedge:

    The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) is a small “think tank” in Washington DC which puts out an annual report called: “Ten Thousand Commandments”. The report deals with the regulatory agencies of the US federal government and the cost of the regulations…In their Ten Thousand Commandments 2012 report which was released in June, the CEI estimates the cost of US government regulation at $US 1.75 TRILLION. That is just under half (48 percent) of the budget of the federal government. It is almost ten times the total of all corporate taxes collected and almost double the total collected from individual income taxes. It is also one-third higher than the total of all pre-tax corporate profits. It is the hidden cost of doing business in an interventionist economy. The fact that the cost of complying with these regulations is substantially higher than the total of corporate profits is a stark illustration of the end result of economic intervention. That end result is capital consumption.

    There is your shrinking middle class! There is the loss of wage equity! There is one he77 of a lot of lost freedom and opportunity! And in case it han;t been shoved down your throat often enough to make it clear women and blacks are currently being harmed the most!!!!!

    You are crippled because you have been conditioned.

    You cannot engage in conversation that exists outside of that conditioning.

    It’s obvious you choose to remain ignorant.

    It’s obvious that bullying and deriding people is more important to you than is economic freedom for everyone or learning something that might have a real positive effect in the black community.

    Your attitude stinks. You are stuck in 1960’s thinking.

    You are militant, arrogant and adolescent. First you bully and attack and then you become a crybaby when someone returns the favor and treats you with the same contempt and disrespect.

    Incredible! We’re done.

  86. Chris says:

    Tina: “Therein lies the end of the conversation for Chris who arrogantly believes he’s the final word, who resists thinking outside his comfort zone, and who chooses to ignore the assessment I posted made by the GAO way back in 1999.”

    You did not cite anything by the GAO. You cited one man’s interpretation of the GAO.

    Given that

    1) Just a few days ago, you cited a misrepresentation of the GAO’s analysis of Obamacare

    and given that

    2) Instead of admitting you did so, you went on to cite a misrepresentation of the CBO

    and given that

    3) Yesterday, you cited a misrepresentation of a Russian science laboratory

    and given that

    4) Instead of admitting it, you moved on to more misrepresentations

    I see no reason to take the information in your link at face value. If you can cite the primary source, the GAO, actually saying the same thing, then I will consider it. But your pattern of misrepresenting non-partisan sources in order to fit your agenda is very clear, and you’ve shown no signs of even recognizing that problem.

    “You can’t say their lack of opportunity to find work (the freedom to pursue happiness) hasn’t been severely blunted and dimminished by regulations and the constricting policies of government.”

    Not only can I say that, I provided plenty of evidence to back it up in comment #91.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/billharris/2012/11/05/tax-cuts-dont-create-jobs/

    http://www.businessinsider.com/study-tax-cuts-dont-lead-to-growth-2012-9

    http://www.epi.org/publication/quick-guide-evidence-regulations-jobs/

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/tax-cuts-for-job-creators/?_r=0

    – See more at: http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2014/11/05/harry-reid-fired-republicans-senate/#sthash.vnrZd0N0.dpuf

  87. Chris says:

    Also, do you understand the the “100 million dollar impact” of the major rules noted by the GAO can be positive or negative?

Comments are closed.