Forums » Off-Topic
"If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov"
-- White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips
Apparently, your duty as an American Citizen is to report anything that does not toe the party line regarding healthcare reform to the White House.
In the spirit of cooperation with this Orwellian White House initiative, I encourage those of you who are U.S. citizens to report my blog post to The Powers That Be in Washington.
Thank You for your Required Cooperation.
-- White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips
Apparently, your duty as an American Citizen is to report anything that does not toe the party line regarding healthcare reform to the White House.
In the spirit of cooperation with this Orwellian White House initiative, I encourage those of you who are U.S. citizens to report my blog post to The Powers That Be in Washington.
Thank You for your Required Cooperation.
Why are you such a racist Leebs?
Apparently because I fear change and hate babies and puppies. It's all part of the trifecta of evil.
i already emailed them the entire healthcare bill
lol look, I did the same thing. It sure sounded fishy to me.
Well, when your entire administration was created on hype and propaganda (as *all* modern administrations are), you really have to keep a tight leash on your (mis)information.
If you are not part of the machine, you must be eliminated! That's how it's done in Illinois and that's how Mayor Daley will run the White House, too! err. I mean Pres. Obama.
If you are not part of the machine, you must be eliminated! That's how it's done in Illinois and that's how Mayor Daley will run the White House, too! err. I mean Pres. Obama.
I hate Illinois Nazis.
Hehe, shlimazel.
I just sent lebermac's post.
Haha! Send them the health care bill... brilliant!
DivisionByZero: I don't think it's fair to say *all* modern administrations. Certainly this one was, and many others (though it's never been this bad before). I know this will start a debate (that hopefully I can stay out of... yeah right!), but in my opinion, while I certainly disagreed with him on several issues and thought he seriously dropped the ball the last couple years, George W. Bush was always what he appeared to be, and both his blunders and his successes were all genuine.
DivisionByZero: I don't think it's fair to say *all* modern administrations. Certainly this one was, and many others (though it's never been this bad before). I know this will start a debate (that hopefully I can stay out of... yeah right!), but in my opinion, while I certainly disagreed with him on several issues and thought he seriously dropped the ball the last couple years, George W. Bush was always what he appeared to be, and both his blunders and his successes were all genuine.
George W. Bush was always what he appeared to be
An idiot?
An idiot?
George Walker Bush: A genuine fuckup!
Haha. Lecter: no. Genka: no.
Bush was harmless. It was his administration that was the problem, seeing as he bent to his cabinet member's whims like a wet noodle. (then again, some of them, like C.Powell, were OK).
Hahahaha! vIsitor, I had a genuine laugh at your post. It amuses me to no end to hear liberals in and out of the media criticize bush in one breath for being a puppet of his cabinet, and in the next breath criticize members of his cabinet for not thinking for themselves, being completely under Bush's thumb. Then you mention Powell as one of the few that is okay... the one who waits until the timing is perfect for undermining his own party to endorse the most purely socialist presidential candidate this country has ever seen, pulling a complete 180 on all his previous statements just so he can seem to agree with Obama rather than be seen to endorse him simply because of his race. No, it was people like Rumsfeld and Rice that I liked. Powell belongs in the McCain camp with the rest of the self-promoting morons.
Prof. Chaos,
While I added a good dose of hyperbole to my comment, I think it applies as well to Bush 2 as to the rest. It just happens that the image which was sold to us played up on his sincerity and straightforwardness. There was still a significant propaganda machine behind his campaigns as well. One only really needs to recall, for instance, his campaign against Gore where the Washington insider vs. Reform-minded outside was really played up.
While I added a good dose of hyperbole to my comment, I think it applies as well to Bush 2 as to the rest. It just happens that the image which was sold to us played up on his sincerity and straightforwardness. There was still a significant propaganda machine behind his campaigns as well. One only really needs to recall, for instance, his campaign against Gore where the Washington insider vs. Reform-minded outside was really played up.
There was still a significant propaganda machine behind his campaigns as well.
Right. Because Obama would never engage in such Chicago style politics. Hope & Change were well articulated, defined, and analyzed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
Oops.
Well, at least paying for all the stuff we want to make sure all citizens get access to as of right isn't really a big deal. http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html See also, this handy chart: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.html And how big it is in the physical sense: http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/usdebt.html
2010 elections, meet 1994 elections. You'll have a lot in common.
Right. Because Obama would never engage in such Chicago style politics. Hope & Change were well articulated, defined, and analyzed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
Oops.
Well, at least paying for all the stuff we want to make sure all citizens get access to as of right isn't really a big deal. http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html See also, this handy chart: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/03/21/GR2009032100104.html And how big it is in the physical sense: http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/usdebt.html
2010 elections, meet 1994 elections. You'll have a lot in common.
2010 elections, meet 1994 elections. You have a lot in common.
Oh, let's hope so! The thing that scares me here is not the Democrats but my own party (I can barely say that anymore, they have compromised away any semblance of conservatism). Will my party nominate conservatives with backbone, or more McCains? We had a great opportunity in 2008 that we blew by nominating a Democrat to run against a Socialist. No more compromising, no more getting along, it's time to highlight our differences and win by not giving up our core beliefs. Republicans are responsible for 1992, and they are responsible for 2008, and I am sick of it.
DivisionByZero: The image we were pummeled with from the media was a far-right extreme Bush who couldn't tie his shoes. Every slight stutter and misspeak on his part was given quite a lot of analysis in prime-time news. Imagine if Bush had received so many "boo"s when throwing an opening pitch, and that pitch was short-hopped like Obama's was. It wouldn't have been completely ignored by the press (who even in some cases claimed it didn't bounce!), it would have been analyzed to death as a possible sign of incompetence on Bush's part. And if he butchered the English language as thoroughly as Sotomayor? Forget it! You won't likely hear her mocked as Bush was. I have a hard time believing that any sort of positive image was sold to the public.
The thing that most impressed me about Bush was that even when I disagreed with him, I always knew he was doing what he believed in, more concerned with how his policy would affect the U.S. than about his personal image. In fact, it was frustrating at times that he honestly thought his "new tone" was the right thing. While I would yell at the TV, hoping Bush would hear me and stand up for himself, I could never really kindle my anger because he really wanted to be above the fray, and kept his calm much better than I ever could with my short fuse.
Oh, let's hope so! The thing that scares me here is not the Democrats but my own party (I can barely say that anymore, they have compromised away any semblance of conservatism). Will my party nominate conservatives with backbone, or more McCains? We had a great opportunity in 2008 that we blew by nominating a Democrat to run against a Socialist. No more compromising, no more getting along, it's time to highlight our differences and win by not giving up our core beliefs. Republicans are responsible for 1992, and they are responsible for 2008, and I am sick of it.
DivisionByZero: The image we were pummeled with from the media was a far-right extreme Bush who couldn't tie his shoes. Every slight stutter and misspeak on his part was given quite a lot of analysis in prime-time news. Imagine if Bush had received so many "boo"s when throwing an opening pitch, and that pitch was short-hopped like Obama's was. It wouldn't have been completely ignored by the press (who even in some cases claimed it didn't bounce!), it would have been analyzed to death as a possible sign of incompetence on Bush's part. And if he butchered the English language as thoroughly as Sotomayor? Forget it! You won't likely hear her mocked as Bush was. I have a hard time believing that any sort of positive image was sold to the public.
The thing that most impressed me about Bush was that even when I disagreed with him, I always knew he was doing what he believed in, more concerned with how his policy would affect the U.S. than about his personal image. In fact, it was frustrating at times that he honestly thought his "new tone" was the right thing. While I would yell at the TV, hoping Bush would hear me and stand up for himself, I could never really kindle my anger because he really wanted to be above the fray, and kept his calm much better than I ever could with my short fuse.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: the Right cannot help this country until it snuffs out any political legitimacy of the Palin crowd and similar ilk. They're like a backwoods version of Blago, Burris, Pelosi, etc. Pure kryptonite.
Once the Right kicks the religious wing of the party to the curb, says "you'll vote for us no matter what and you'll like it--now go pray," and embraces truly conservative/libertarian positions on domestic issues, while remaining in the Cheney world on all things scary and foreign, we'll see a two term Republican president.
But not before.
Once the Right kicks the religious wing of the party to the curb, says "you'll vote for us no matter what and you'll like it--now go pray," and embraces truly conservative/libertarian positions on domestic issues, while remaining in the Cheney world on all things scary and foreign, we'll see a two term Republican president.
But not before.
Um, we just saw a two term Republican president. And in my opinion, the reason Palin was scary to the left is that she was the embodiment of the ideal conservative. I hear no one on the conservative side (except maybe Huckabee, who I detest) saying "vote for me and pray or else". What we fight against as conservatives is the mentality of "vote for me and don't you dare pray because someone else will be offended". Except that she'll never go for the nomination, I would have loved to see her on the ticket. Jindahl/Palin 2012! Too bad it won't happen. In fact, that was the last straw for me with McCain. It was bad enough that he sought to undermine his own party after he lost the nomination to Bush in 2000, but what he and others in my party (I can hardly bear to say that anymore) did to Palin is inexcusable and evil.