The latest NBC News poll on healthcare shows that Obama's town halls failed to turn the tide of public opinion:
A plurality believes
Howard Fineman tells us what went wrong, other than the predictable perfidy of Evil Republicans and their big business paymasters:
Murky campaign promises
...The president is
for “reform,” which says… nothing.
Orszag’s fantasy
Every president wants to
reconcile frugality and generosity, and there is always an ambitious
and clever aide willing to tell him it can be done. In Obama’s White
House it is Budget Director Peter Orszag, who confidently told Obama
that carefully administered universal health coverage would save the
government money in the long run.
...Focusing on the have-nots
...the White House all along should have been focusing on the
fears of the 85 percent who have insurance, not on the 15 percent who
do not.
Jonah Goldberg has his view - "if you actually wanted Obama-care to pass, casting a majority of Americans as being stooges of racist goons may not be the best way to go."
He left out greedy and stupid.
Too much extra space on that tea party sign? [click to purchase]
Posted by: Extraneus | August 19, 2009 at 06:19 AM
"In Obama’s White House it is Budget Director Peter Orszag, who confidently told Obama that carefully administered universal health coverage would save the government money in the long run."
Amazing,that is exactly what the founders of Britain's NHS thought. It didn't and it won't.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 19, 2009 at 06:58 AM
On the self-parody watch, Josh Marshall suddenly discovers political violence, and blames it on the usual suspects (H/T Insty):
Coming from the cheerleader for the guy who's bestest buddies with the unrepentant domestic terrorist, I'd call that just a bit rich. Okay, maybe more than a bit.Posted by: Cecil Turner | August 19, 2009 at 07:00 AM
From the WaPo, Debate's Path Caught Obama by Surprise:
Posted by: Extraneus | August 19, 2009 at 07:33 AM
Yeah Josh, when I was "being honest" with myself, I thought of all those members of the right like Lee Harvey Oswald; oh wait, he was a fucking commie. Alright some other assassin like Sirhan Sirhan; d'oh, he was a verminous pali, one of the left's favorite "victims". Let's see, all of Ayers and Dohrn's nutjob Weatherthing scum along with their ilk in the SLA and Black Panthers were all violent lefty nutjobs.
What was the point you were trying to make, Josh?
Posted by: Captain Hate | August 19, 2009 at 07:45 AM
If they pass this thing on a reconciliation or other go-it-alone strategy, they'd better steer clear of geezers with knitting needles or golf clubs.
Posted by: Extraneus | August 19, 2009 at 07:56 AM
What was the point you were trying to make, Josh?
Well, James Earl Ray was a twisted righty, wasn't he? I mean, that's what his diary, conveniently found on some train tracks a few days after his arrest, indicated...
And Oswald's affiliation is forever up in the air for true believers, isn't it? Any day now the pictures of him dining with J. Edgar Hoover, Carlos Marcello, and Judith Exner will surface, I swear it!
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | August 19, 2009 at 08:11 AM
If they pass this thing on a reconciliation or other go-it-alone strategy, they'd better steer clear of geezers with knitting needles or golf clubs.
They could run, but they'd have nowhere to hid come election day. The "go it alone" strategy to cobble together 51 Dem reconciliation votes makes no sense at all. First it assumes that Senators will tolerate being browbeat by Rahm. Then it assumes that any sort of compromise will find the more liberal and conservative Dems willing to stake their reputations and re-election prospects on it. With the GOP shouting "you own it" until Nov '10, by which time no bill (even a good one) would have had time to display it's merits. "Go it alone" is desperation.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | August 19, 2009 at 08:19 AM
Well, James Earl Ray was a twisted righty, wasn't he?
Maybe not; didn't MLK's delusional family declare that he wasn't the murderer despite his previous confession? That they reached that conclusion without Geraldo's help is a mystery though...
Posted by: Captain Hate | August 19, 2009 at 08:27 AM
Just a few months ago Obama was telling us what was bad about government. He mentioned hyper-partisanship, deficit spending, inefficient ineffective government, dealing with lobbyists, divisiveness, etc.
Now that he is in office he is showing us.
Posted by: Original MikeS | August 19, 2009 at 08:42 AM
Seeing Cecil's post, I did a quick search of the TPM site to see if Josh had anything to say about the Black Panthers controversy, and the dismissal of the charges. Because, one does need to worry about the idological cousin with the inappropriate firearms problem.
There's not one word.
'Nuff said.
Posted by: Appalled | August 19, 2009 at 08:45 AM
If they pass this thing on a reconciliation or other go-it-alone strategy, they'd better steer clear of geezers with knitting needles or golf clubs
If they pass it at all someone better be prepared to file a constitutional challenge to get us to the election. It's not slated to begin until 2013 anyway - but a lot of people don't think the COngress or President have the right to do this.
People seem to think Obama wouldn't dare pass something on a party line vote, or he will settle for something small. He just doesn't strike me as that rational.
Posted by: Jane | August 19, 2009 at 08:59 AM
It aint up to Obama or Rahm, and there are plenty of Democrats scared crapless but the strong outpouring of rage at them for even acting like they were going to fiddle with their healthcare just to try another grand social experiment like forced school busing. And its not like there aren't a whole bunch of countries to look at and see that the scheme works in fits and starts or not at all.
I hope they do more than bluff. That will cement the landslide. The effort will fail, and cause a whole bunch more Democrats to lose their seats. I win twice. Pass the popcorn.
Posted by: gmax | August 19, 2009 at 09:08 AM
The 64K question:
Why would a charismatic guy like Obama, with close to 70% approval when he took office, let a Congress led by Pelosi and Reid with a 20 to 25% approval rating, write both his stimulus plan and health care reform. I mean isn't this supposed to be the most intelligent, politically savvy administration ever with an OMB guy who says reform will save lots of money in the long run. Why? Why would they commit political suicide by giving Congress the free rein on this issue. Where is Obama's plan and is this how he saves his skin by coming up with his own plan and telling Congress to throw out the other trash? Why?
Because he reads Matt on the front page of the Daily Telly, that's why! LUN
Posted by: Jack is Back! | August 19, 2009 at 09:13 AM
People seem to think Obama wouldn't dare pass something on a party line vote, or he will settle for something small. He just doesn't strike me as that rational.
I agree Jane, too committed and too far left. The thing that I've noticed about leftists, is that they are just SURE that everyone agrees with them, and really confounded when they find out they don't. I think Obama will be the same way.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 09:14 AM
You know they cooked the books on that poll, 41/29/22 registration split and it was still a disaster, clearly they've moved
from Three Mile Island to Chernobyl in the full meltdown
Posted by: the bishop | August 19, 2009 at 09:20 AM
POFARMER the e-mail I sent you got kicked back
Posted by: jean | August 19, 2009 at 09:21 AM
Its an NBC poll, so of course they cooked the books. Its the liberal way. And then they stand there and scratch their head wondering why Fox is showing enormous viewership growth when they are stagnant and declining. Fox even surpassed CBS in viewers last week for at least a portion of the time.
Posted by: gmax | August 19, 2009 at 09:24 AM
Jim DeMint is having a virtual Town Hall tomorrow nite at 6:00 PM. LUN. He's been on of the rational people in this debate so I thought people might be interested.
Posted by: Jane | August 19, 2009 at 09:27 AM
The thing that I've noticed about leftists, is that they are just SURE that everyone agrees with them, and really confounded when they find out they don't
Gateway Pundit: "Barney Frank wants to know" "What's the matter with you all"
Posted by: pagar | August 19, 2009 at 09:29 AM
Hey jean
Try again
missourichad at agristar dot net
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 09:30 AM
It's funny. You're hearing how the "protesters" are being rowdy, and disrespectfull, and all that. What it looks like, is these Congressmen simply don't want to answer honest questions. The "rowdiness" normally starts after a Congressman has a breakdown. We need better Representatives in Congress.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 09:39 AM
From an Obama posting at the Daily Kos. Also via Gateway Pundit.
According to the storyline that drives many advocacy groups and Democratic activists - a storyline often reflected in comments on this blog - we are up against a sharply partisan, radically conservative, take-no-prisoners Republican party. They have beaten us twice by energizing their base with red meat rhetoric and single-minded devotion and discipline to their agenda. In order to beat them, it is necessary for Democrats to get some backbone, give as good as they get, brook no compromise, drive out Democrats who are interested in “appeasing” the right wing, and enforce a more clearly progressive agenda.
The country, finally knowing what we stand for and seeing a sharp contrast, will rally to our side and thereby usher in a new progressive era.
Our President is a Moron.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 09:43 AM
Sarah Palin moves on to another topic at facebook: the $2B offshore-drilling payoff to Brazil's Petrobras.
Posted by: Extraneus | August 19, 2009 at 09:44 AM
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/19/the-irony-of-reconciliation/>Ed Morrissey makes a good point about what might happen if the Dems try to push Obamacare through with reconciliation. One of the things the Rs could do is stop unanimous for a lot of procedural things that are normally skipped to speed things up. One of them is the reading of the bills before moveing them along.
Now, the Dems could say that was "obstruction." But given that oen of the things that is really getting under peoples skins right now is the fact that these guys never even read the bills before they vote, I don't think the public is going to get angry at Republicans for forcing the bills being read on the floor.
Posted by: Ranger | August 19, 2009 at 09:51 AM
Actually the 52% had no clue what he stood for, because the media wouldn't bother to investigate, how this 'clean and articulate'
Senator, would make common cause with those who would deride the sacrifices of our fighting men and women, and slander our allies
Posted by: the bishop | August 19, 2009 at 09:52 AM
clearly they've moved from Three Mile Island to Chernobyl
TMI was not that big a deal. It required multiple screwups to reach the point of exposing everyone in the area to the equivalent of one chest x-ray's worth of radiation. If "The China Syndrome" hadn't come out the week before, the accident wouldn't have had nearly the same impact.
There were 2 nuclear reactors at TMI, and the other one is still in use. If you ever fly into Harrisburg you go almost directly over it. The decision to have a commercial airline landing path, a nuclear reactor, and the state capitol all in a 7 mile line may be questionable, but it should tell you something about how safe the state thinks the place is.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 09:56 AM
Why in the world would we be giving 2 BILLION to Petrobras? Wasn't the left all in a twitter about "subsidizing"(ie giving tax breaks as an incentive for exploration) the U.S. oil companies?
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 09:59 AM
Well, Po, some circumstantial evidence from Gateway Pundit:
Posted by: Extraneus | August 19, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Ed Morrissey makes a good point about what might happen if the Dems try to push Obamacare through with reconciliation.
I hope Repubs on the Hill have picked up somebody who knows how to describe parliamentary procedure. The last time that came up, our guys proudly proclaimed they were in favor of something called "the nuclear option". Now it sounds like they're gearing up to tell the public they're opposed to "reconciliation". Tone deaf.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Seeing Cecil's post, I did a quick search of the TPM site to see if Josh had anything to say about the Black Panthers controversy, and the dismissal of the charges. Because, one does need to worry about the idological cousin with the inappropriate firearms problem.
There's not one word.
I believe I said it on this site just the other day -- the left has a bizarre blind spot that prevents it from seeing any violence from their own ranks or from those to the left of themselves.
If Marshall wants to talk about political violence, how about the LA riots? Cincinnati in 2001? Since the '60s, the left has rushed to turn every instance of a race riot into a political opportunity and have largely succeeded.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 10:04 AM
The thing that I've noticed about leftists, is that they are just SURE that everyone agrees with them, and really
confoundedenraged when they find out they don't.FTFY
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 10:06 AM
I was being metaphorical, bgates, TMI was more like the "small reactor leak on the detention level", next time I put quotes around the whole thing. Then again with nearly 10% unemployment, who would think they would have trouble passing a new government mandate sight unseen.
Posted by: the bishop | August 19, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Then again with nearly 10% unemployment, who would think they would have trouble passing a new government mandate sight unseen.
Don't forget the nearly TWO TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT.
With a deficit that ginormous, why would anyone even consider govt run healthcare? I man, the govt deficit is going to be larger than tax intake this year, more than likley. That's staggering.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 10:10 AM
What it looks like, is these Congressmen simply don't want to answer honest questions. The "rowdiness" normally starts after a Congressman has a breakdown. We need better Representatives in Congress.
The elected person is a figurehead. Their jobs are to shake hands, raise money, make speeches, and make the votes. The actual decisions are made by their staffs; they write the bills submitted in the Congresscritter's name, they decide how to vote, etc.
When voters ask a Congresscritter about specifics in the bill, they're asking someone who has never had any reason to know any details about any bill for the entire course of their careers. The Congresscritter, caught by their ignorance and unwilling to admit that one of the Great Unwashed might be better informed, gets pissed, lashes out, and that's what we're seeing.
We don't just need better representatives, we need to flush the whole system so that we actually have representative legislators, rather than figurehead representatives fronting for career legislators.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Why in the world would we be giving 2 BILLION to Petrobras?
Isn't their President Lulu a Chavez devotee?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 10:21 AM
"What was the point you were trying to make, Josh?"
It seems to me for decades the left has successfully scared the middle with tales of right wing racism and violence and we shouldn't expect them to easily give up a heretofore winning strategy wven if the media picture has so changed that everyone with a computer knows how wrong and one-sided that storyline is.
Posted by: clarice | August 19, 2009 at 10:24 AM
You're hearing how the "protesters" are being rowdy, and disrespectfull, and all that.
I'm embracing that meme. AS far as I'm concerned the more press the better. Show the pictures of Townhalls populated by people over 50 and try and push the idea that rowdyness is a bad thing.
The opposition is laughable. We are against this bill and we want you to know it.
Posted by: Jane | August 19, 2009 at 10:30 AM
We don't just need better representatives, we need to flush the whole system so that we actually have representative legislators, rather than figurehead representatives fronting for career legislators.
Oh, absolutely, bug bomb the whole thing.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 10:31 AM
"Too much extra space on that tea party sign?"
Just add "It's time to water the tree of Liberty with blood !!!!"
And carry your assault weapon to the next townhall.
Let's threaten violence since nothing else gets attention.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 10:32 AM
We're also giving a bunch of nuclear help to the UAE:
The Obama Administration is trying to make sure everyone in the world has energy, except the US. IMO,It almost seems as if they are determined to make sure we have none.
Posted by: pagar | August 19, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Lula is somewhat in the middle, between the Chavez ALBA bloc, (Morales, Correa,
Kirschner)and more direct foes like Uribe and Garcia. But he was willing to blame
"Blue eyed bankers" for the financial crisis, who keep underwriting their debt, going back to the time that Conrad was writing Nostromo, at the turn of the last century, or even farther back as if you Ferguson's history of the Rothschilds.
Posted by: the bishop | August 19, 2009 at 10:39 AM
From NPR
" Medical fraud takes several forms. Most commonly, criminals get a list of patients’ names, then create fictitious doctors. They send bills to Medicare or Medicaid or health insurers for services supposedly rendered to these patients. By the time the payers figure out that the doctors they’re paying are fictitious and no service was ever rendered, the criminals have closed up shop and moved on.
Another popular form of health care fraud is the “rent-a-patient” scheme. Recruiters find people with health insurance willing to get care they don’t need, in exchange for cash or cosmetic surgery. Several years ago, insurers and the FBI said they had cracked a big case. People from 47 states were paid to come to California to receive unneeded care, including colonoscopies and surgery for sweaty palms. The doctors who performed the work reportedly charged insurers a total of $1 billion."
I suppose the libertarian Republicans would say it’s just a small price to pay for our free market system. And of course, if the government started taking a closer look at the crooks who illegally rip off the system, they might also have to deal with the crooks who rip off the system quite legally--the price-gouging insurance and pharmaceutical companies and their ilk.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 10:42 AM
JWB, Obama at his most disingenuous couldn't convince his most starry-eyed young supporter that his administration would be half as transparent as your pathetic attempt to get real, decent, thoughtful conservatives to act like the boogeymen Josh Marshall uses to scare you.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 10:42 AM
"real, decent, thoughtful conservatives to act like the boogeymen"
Well then it should be a simple matter to repudiate these assholes. But you won't. I wonder why.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Well then it should be a simple matter to repudiate these assholes.
Ok. You're an asshole.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Don't forget, those of us against ObamaCare are also "treasonous". Congressman Eric Massa says so.
Posted by: MTF | August 19, 2009 at 10:47 AM
. "You're an asshole"
That's what I'm talkin' about. You call them boogeymen, when you really think they're right on. But even THAT doesn't make you reflect.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Hey, I thought it was totaly against the rules to question someone's patriotism?
Posted by: Ranger | August 19, 2009 at 10:50 AM
the libertarian Republicans would say it’s just a small price to pay for our free market system.
We might ask what Medicare fraud has to do with a free market. If we were feeling especially difficult, we may even ask what Medicare has to do with a free market.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 10:50 AM
"Morning Ralph" that troll just reminds me of that WArner Brothers cartoon, with the
sheepdog and the wolf. Putting out medicare fraud as an argument for the single payer, that's specially weak. A nearly unlimited
pot of tax payer money, will not prompt
public corruption,
On another note, those folks who were concerned about the P.& O,/Dubai ports deal, well that really showed um, huh.
Posted by: the bishop | August 19, 2009 at 10:51 AM
"You're an asshole"
That's what I'm talkin' about.
Glad we're in agreement on that. You're the only one who's threatened violence - as opposed to the handful of people lawfully carrying weapons who have been in the news lately - which means you're the only asshole in this discussion.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 10:52 AM
JWB--Why do you assume that expanding government programs will reducE the amount of fraud NPR describes occurs in the already existing programs?Don't you suppose a crackdown on medicare and medicaid fraud is the solution?
Posted by: clarice | August 19, 2009 at 10:52 AM
In as little as six months, Washington has gone from Brother Love's Travelin' Salvation Show to Hotel California. Why are they trying to rush through legislation that no one knows what it says or means to individiuals like you and me?
Posted by: jorod | August 19, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Let's threaten violence since nothing else gets attention.
Hi, Moby. When's the next album?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | August 19, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Well then it should be a simple matter to repudiate these assholes. But you won't. I wonder why.
1) None of them have threatened violence. Simply carrying is not a threat.
2) None of them have actually carried INTO a town hall.
3) None of them have broken the law. (I'd bet they have a better understanding of the local gun laws than most of the local police.)
If any of these people threaten violence -- brandish their guns or make verbal threats of using them -- then they deserve whatever punishment the law holds for them. Until then, well, just consider them the equivalent of the CPUSA members that pop up at every left-wing march.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 10:58 AM
The threat of violence is the message. That is clear by the silent approval of the 'decent, law abiding' conservatives.
It's in their genetic code.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Excuses, excuses
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM
While we're repudiatin', how about the Black Panthers carrying weapons in 2000?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | August 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Well then it should be a simple matter to repudiate these assholes
Repudiate who, your strawman?
BTW, I've got one of those evil black rifles needing to be sighted in.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM
The threat of violence is the message. That is clear by the silent approval of the 'decent, law abiding' conservatives.
What threat? I've not heard of any of the open-carry advocates making threats.
Now, I don't think they're doing the brightest thing in the world, but they're not chucking cement on buses full of political delegates or planting pipe bombs.
It's in their genetic code.
Racist.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Hey, I thought it was totaly against the rules to question someone's patriotism?
Hillary said that dissent is the highest form of Patriotism. I remember the screeching distinctly.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 11:04 AM
This was mentioned in the past, but some were proud to do nothing (go to 0:54)
Posted by: Neo | August 19, 2009 at 11:04 AM
What allele is that conservative genetic code located on JWB?
Posted by: clarice | August 19, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Maybe someone should point out to JWB that medicare sets the rates they pay, not the insurance companies? Oh, wait, I just did.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 11:06 AM
It's in their genetic code.
One of the great things about government health care will be the research into identifying genes correlated with undesirable political sentiments.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 11:06 AM
While we're repudiatin', how about the Black Panthers carrying weapons in 2000?
And, if anyone misses the difference -- the NBPP thug pictured in that story is holding his weapon in his hands. At my firing range that would be considered a safety violation during a cease fire. In contrast, the open-carry advocates have had their weapons appropriately stowed -- holstered or slung as appropriate.
That (as I understand it, local laws will vary) is the difference between "carrying" and "brandishing". The NBPP thug was brandishing, and likely -- even in Texas -- breaking the law.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 11:07 AM
"What allele"
You know what an allele is? You must watch CSI.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:07 AM
reconciliation, PAYGO, and the Byrd Rule
can someone splain all this?
Posted by: Chimpy Nuts | August 19, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Republican Congressman Spencer Bachus told the Tuscaloosa News: “Social Security could face default within two years."
The date that Social Security outlays exceed revenues has moved up due to the recession. It was supposed to be 2017.
For years, Progressives have been telling us that this date was meaningless because there is a file full of T-bills in West Virginia which were the IOUs the government has been issuing in lieu of spending the “excess” Social Security revenue as part of the budget.
Well surprise .. surprise .. the date is not meaningless.
This was mentioned in the past, but some were proud to do nothing (go to 0:54)
Posted by: Neo | August 19, 2009 at 11:09 AM
You know what an allele is? You must watch CSI.
You know what an asshole is? You must have a mirror.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 11:10 AM
JWB=Cleo
Posted by: Ignatz | August 19, 2009 at 11:10 AM
"the research into identifying genes correlated with undesirable political sentiments."
No, only the sub-humans who feel it is no threat when someone carries an assault weapon to a public event.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:10 AM
I suppose the libertarian Republicans would say it’s just a small price to pay for our free market system.
Medicare fraud is a "free market" problem? Dude, you've got a serious case of brain blockage that's mixing your Marx and Engels. More to the point, it epitomizes the inefficiencies inherent in a large government program that spends your tax dollars without giving a crap whether any service was provided or not (cuz it ain't their money). So let's expand the system and make it 4x as large, and see how much money it can spend!?
The threat of violence is the message.
Yeah, open carry is all about violence. And SEIU thugs beating up protesters is all about free speech. Self-parody much?
Posted by: Cecil Turner | August 19, 2009 at 11:12 AM
"Yeah, open carry is all about violence"
The 'implied' threat of violence, which you support, poster boy for redemptive self-awareness.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:13 AM
"The threat of violence is the message. That is clear by the silent approval of the 'decent, law abiding' conservatives.
It's in their genetic code."
That is racism!
Posted by: PeterUK | August 19, 2009 at 11:14 AM
But even THAT doesn't make you reflect.
JWB,
What you don't understand is most of us thought just like you when we were eleven or twelve years old.
Posted by: Original MikeS | August 19, 2009 at 11:16 AM
"You know what an asshole is? You must have a mirror."
This troll hasn't a bridge to hide under,nor even a pot to piss in,thus it lives up its own arse.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 19, 2009 at 11:16 AM
"That is racism!"
I can see your point, since almost all of you are WHITE.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Ok. You're an asshole.
BGates,
LOL ! It's great to have you back!
Posted by: Jane | August 19, 2009 at 11:17 AM
No, only the sub-humans
The difference between Nazis and progressives:
The Nazis killed millions of people.
Progressives will only target "the sub-humans". "Untermensch", if you will.
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 11:17 AM
"What you don't understand is most of us thought just like you when we were eleven or twelve years old."
Losing the power of reflection, at an increasingly early age; Conservatism.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:18 AM
JWB,
I am reporting you for hate speech.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 19, 2009 at 11:18 AM
The 'implied' threat of violence . . .
The "inferred" threat of violence from a bunch of hyperventilating pantywaist leftists who think the second amendment only applies to the National Guard.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | August 19, 2009 at 11:25 AM
"No, only the sub-humans who feel it is no threat when someone carries an assault weapon to a public event."
Ah there it blows,Die Untermenschen.Does take a lefty long to get round to it.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 19, 2009 at 11:25 AM
Reminder from reality:
More people attended Obama's inauguration than all August town halls combined.
Health care reform will pass this October as Democrats have super-majorities in both houses thanks to kicking ass the last two elections.
Al Franken is going to vote for it!
Posted by: ensi | August 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM
"The "inferred" threat of violence"
Which you support and applaud, poster boy.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM
I can see your point, since almost all of you are WHITE.
And you know this becausseee?
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 11:27 AM
No, only the sub-humans who feel it is no threat when someone carries an assault weapon to a public event.
So people who assess threats differently than you do are "sub-human"? Or are we "sub-human" for not objecting to law-abiding people exercising their Constitutional rights?
Posted by: Rob Crawford | August 19, 2009 at 11:28 AM
OT: Hey guys we need to have an approximate count for the Meet Clarice luncheon on Thursday Sept 10th in DC. Can you email me at fwdaj@livedot com, if you are planning to attend. Or you can post here, and I'll try to be attentive.
Thanks
Posted by: Jane | August 19, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Matt just got an instapundit link! Excellent article. Congratulations. Lurker Joanne
Posted by: Joanne Calvagna | August 19, 2009 at 11:28 AM
"And you know this becausseee?"
Today, only 2% of all GOP voters are Latino. Only 1% of Republicans are Black. Barely 15% of GOP voters are under 35.
MOSTLY white. 97% that is. What percentage are Rednecks? Harder to figure, but I would guess it's a LARGE number.
Posted by: JWB | August 19, 2009 at 11:31 AM
"I can see your point, since almost all of you are WHITE.
And you know this becausseee?"
Septic has a "Prejudometer" which measures the amount of prejudons emitted by each post.
It's in that little box screwed to the side of his head.
Posted by: PeterUK | August 19, 2009 at 11:31 AM
More people attended Obama's inauguration than all August town halls combined.
That's because Obama was willing to throw an enormous party for himself during the worst economic downturn since the Depression, but most of his Congressional cronies are scared of being in the same room with voters.
Health care reform will pass this October
That's what they said about August.
poster boy
Who you callin' "boy", cracka?
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 11:31 AM
"Yeah, open carry is all about violence"
The 'implied' threat of violence, which you support, poster boy for redemptive self-awareness.
Open carry is about notification that you can and will defend yourself. Nothing more, nothing less.
Posted by: Pofarmer | August 19, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Harder to figure
Wearing your closed-toed, "non-counting" shoes, eh?
Posted by: bgates | August 19, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Which you support and applaud, poster boy.
Jeez, Cleo, even you are usually bright enough to figure out that things in your mind (e.g., your inferences) are beyond anyone else's control. Besides, I don't "support and applaud" your paranoia . . . I actually wish you'd get some help.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | August 19, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Once health care passes-she'll be able to get it-at your expense!
Posted by: ensi | August 19, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Meanwhile-which one of you JOM girls attended Barney Frank's town hall last night?
Posted by: ensi | August 19, 2009 at 11:38 AM
97% of trolls are white, live in basements, and are prone to making up stories like having imaginary sons in Iraq
when we're done swatting Cleo can someone read my link above about reconsiliation etc and splain it to me?
Posted by: Chimpy Nuts | August 19, 2009 at 11:39 AM