Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
  • ObozoMustGo

    And now…. The REAL Cartoon of the Day!

    [click image to enlarge]

    The object of the game is to destroy American capitalism by having the government take over everything!

    Want to play? No???

    Too bad, you’re already playing and just don’t know it! By the way …

    You’re not winning!

    Have a nice day!

    “A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.” – Thomas Jefferson

    • Replying to ObozoMustGo –

      I find it interesting that you take a quote from Thomas Jefferson, that pretty much shows the contrast between the policies that were implemented during the Bush fiasco and those that have been implemented during the years President Obama has been in office.

      Spending is slowing down, employment is increasing, (despite the best efforts of the “JUST SAY NO!” House of Representatives.)

      The stock market just reached a record high, Iraq and Afghanistan are slowly but surely winding down, etc.

      And yet, there you go, criticizing President Obama. Did you EVER criticize Bush while he was BANKRUPTING the United States, SUCKING US INTO TWO UNFUNDED WARS, CREATING THE LARGEST WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY TAX REDUCTION EVER, and Pumping HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS into the Industrial – Military Complex?

      GROW A PAIR!!! The Bush and Cheney clones LOST!

      GET OVER IT!

      • ObozoMustGo

        Jim, you are a fool. There really isn’t any way around that. I like you, Jim, I do. But you are a fool. I’m sorry.

        First off, how the hell do you have any clue as to what I said during Bush’s term? If you’ve read my posts over the past year, you know that I am no defender of his or his spending. To be fair, Bush wasn’t the only one who got us into the wars. ALL of the DemonRATS, including Clinton, supported war with Saddam BEFORE Bush even became president. The attacks of 9/11 cemented the nation behind the wars. I supported the wars, but not the endless occupations and nation building. That’s gone on for 5 to 7 years too long. By the way, there has been more death and casualties in Afghanistan under Obozo than under Bush. I know I’ve told you this before AND proved it with DoD data. You just like repeating lies, Jim. You perpetuate deceipt and you are aware of the fact that you are doing it.

        Second, tax reductions ARE NOT WELFARE, you idiot. How can you say that you keeping your own earnings is welfare? You cannot. However, this is just another lie that morons like you like to perpetuate. Only an idiot thinks like that.

        I have also addressed the facts behind spending with you directly in prior discussions. However, you’re apparently too stupid to actually learn.

        Question: How do you rationlize slamming Bush for his spending, which over EIGHT YEARS was growth in National debt of about $5T, and give Obozo a pass for increasing the debt by $6 TRILLION after only FOUR YEARS? The fact of the matter is that BOTH should be slammed for spending us into oblivion. The reason you don’t is because you’re a liar and a hypocrite. It’s as simple as that.

        Have a nice day!

        “The man of system . . . is apt to be very wise in his own conceit; and is often so enamoured with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan of government, that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it. He goes on to establish it completely and in all its parts, without any regard either to the great interests or to the strong prejudices which may oppose it. He seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon
        a chess-board. . . .” —Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, 1759

        • CPAinNewYork


          You’re still talking like an asshole. It’s true that the Democrats voted for the invasion of Iraq. Based on the information that was given out by the Republican administration and that same administration’s suppression of the CIA’s findings, I probably would have voted for war if I were in Congress.

          The problem is that the information was intentionally deceptive by Bush, Cheney and the neocons. If I knew then what I know now, I would have opposed the invasion. I clearly remember being shocked by the failure of our troops to find the weapons of mass destruction when they entered Iraq and then being angered by the realization that the Republican administration had intentionally lied the nation into war. Make no mistake about it: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and that neocon piece of crap Wolfowitz have the blood of about 4,000 American troops and 100,000 Iraqui citizens on their hands.

          I don’t know your reading habits, but I suggest that you read George Tenet’s book about his stint as CIA head. It’s an eye-opener. He confirms what other authors contended regarding the Bush Administration’s intention to invade Iraq immediately upon taking office. The destruction of the World Trade Center provided the excuse for that, even though the CIA told Bush and his cronies long before the invasion of Iraq that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with it.

          Before leaving this topic, let’s not forget the Mossad’s role in providing false information about Iraq’s having weapons of mass destruction. It seems that Israel’s highly vaunted intelligence arm was either double dealing or was incredibly inept in its evaluation of Iraq’s capabilities and intentions. I’ll go with double dealing, because it seems to me that protecting Israel was one of the primary reasons for invading Iraq.

          • ObozoMustGo

            CPA… you are clearly very forgetful, stupid, or a downright liar. The history of Iraq did NOT start with Bush. In fact, here are quotes from your favorite DemonRATS about Iraq, WMDs, and the war. Take note of the dates. So who was lying about WMD before Bush took office? You could take the Obozo strategy and say it was Bush 1’s fault, I suppose. Read it and weep.

            Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

            “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

            “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

            “Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.” –Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

            “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” –Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

            “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
            — Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

            “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

            “Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

            “There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
            Letter to President Bush, Signed by: — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and
            others, Dec 5, 2001

            “We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.” — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

            “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

            “Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

            “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

            “The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
            — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

            “I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

            “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

            “He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do” — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

            “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
            — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

            “We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

            “Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
            So you see, the truth is that you just did not like Bush. That’s fine. But don’t perpetuate the lie that Bush and the WMD’s issue was falsely created for the purpose of starting a war unless you are going to say truthfully, as I have proven with their own words, that the lie began with Clinton, and Bush and other DemonRATS were behind it also.

            Have a nice day!

            “Politicians are like diapers; they need to be changed often and for the same reason.” ― Mark Twain

          • tobyspeeks

            Ding-a-ling OMG!!! Have you forgotten that Bush Senior started all that rhetoric you so kindly copied and pasted? I know your memory is convenient, but jeesh.

          • CPAinNewYork

            If I’m stupid, then in comparison you’re an idiot.I don’t see where you get lying, unless you’re so pushed to the wall that you can’t say anything else.

            Let me explain the problem to you, again: What I addressed was the Republican lies that led them to request Congress’s permission to invade Iraq. Those same lies were presented to the United Nations in our request for its agreement to do the same thing. Russia and France refused, so Bush decided to order the invasion anyway. Maybe Russia and France smelled a rat..a Republican lying rat.

            In contrast to the outright lies presented to the United States Congress and to the United Nations General Assembly as justifications for war, you offer statements by officials and legislators accusing Saddam Hussein of having WMD. Those accusatory statements do not constitute requests to start immediate hostilities against Iraq.

            Don’t you see the difference here? Are you so dense that the difference really evades you? Are you so blind to the morality involved here that you cannot see the difference between going to war over false claims and stating one’s opinion about alleged transgressions? If the answer is “yes,” then you’re on the same low moral level as Bush, Cheney and the neocons like Wolfowitz. In short, you’re a warmonger.

          • ObozoMustGo

            CPA… you should read my other posts and responses in this thread, especially the ones to Metrognome. You see, I don’t agree with the leftist, Bush despising group that invented the rumor that Bush lied so he could go to war. It’s absurd at face value, and anyone half objective knows that. The reality is that the whole Saddam has WMD issue started under Clinton. The quotes I gave you prove that. It continued under Bush, and in the context of having just been attacked on 9/11/01, it’s understandable that there was a measure of revenge to be exacted. Whether or not you agree with it doesn’t really matter. Understanding the context of the times and the history leading up to it makes it fully rational that Bush made the decision he did. Every single DemonRAT, save a couple of America hating leftst freaks, agreed. There may have been intelligence saying Saddam did not have WMD, and there was intelligence that said he did. A president can’t stand in the middle. He must decide. Bush made the decision to go to Iraq. In my post to Metro, I’ve discussed what I thought the motivations and strategy were. Do I agree with or like Bush? NO! He’s a progressive in Republican clothes. Look at his horrendous spending record and new programs he started. But being fair and objective, it’s an outright lie to say that Bush lied about WMD just so he could go to war.

            I think my stance on this is fair and balanced.

            By the way, I’ve been called a lot of things on this site, but never a warmonger. You’re the first. Congratulations!

            Have a nice day!

            “Demagogue: one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.” – H.L. Mencken

          • metrognome3830

            Good evening, OMG. You went to a lot of work to prove nothing new. Yes, a lot of people, Republican and Democrat, apparently believed the reports that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction. Believing something is much different that knowing something is wrong but saying it’s not. That IS lying. And Bush/Cheney, even though they were informed that the information they were acting on was not true, chose to act anyway and they told lies to all of us to justify their actions. Now don’t call me stupid. I never believed their BS from day one. I was always against the invasion of Iraq. If anyone knew anything about the relationship between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban, they should have known that it was highly unlikely they would be in collusion on the attack of the WTC. Yet, that is part of the Bush Administration’s justification for attacking Iraq. All your quotations are from people who fell for the misinformation. That doesn’t make them liars. Gullible, perhaps, but not liars. I will concede that GW could absolutely be included in the gullible group. But Cheney — no. That evil little creep knew exactly what he was doing. And one of the things he accomplished very well was to make a huge amount of money for Halliburton and KBR. And I’m quite sure he profited quite handsomely personally.
            BTW, how have you been? Haven’t seen your posts lately.
            Have a great evening!

          • ObozoMustGo

            Hey Metro! Long time, no chat. I’ve been traveling for business and have taken on some new responsibilities that limit my debate time a lot.

            What you are missing Metro is the plain fact that Slick Willie Clinton and the cronies in his regime ALL said Saddam had WMD. Now, were they lying? Why weren’t they getting the same council that there were no WMD, but for some reason Bush did? It doesn’t make any sense to blame Bush and ignore those who were in charge before him. Especially considering the fact that Bush was in office only 9 months before 9/11. Clinton had 8 years of an intelligence apparatus studying these things. The fact of the matter is that while some insiders may have said that there were no WMD, many others did say so. So the President must listen to both sides and weigh the decision. I don’t fault him for that. I also do not discount the probability that what WMD Saddam may have had could easily have been moved to Syria in the long lead up to the invasion. Funny how we are hearing Obozo claim Syria has WMD now, and warned them against using them on their own citizens. Isn’t that odd? Do you believe Obozo now, Metro? Or is he lying to get us into another war?

            One last point. The whole Haliburton thing is silly nonsense. There is no chance that Cheney supported the war so he could enrich himself. He was already rich and had been detatched from them for a long time. But it’s a wonderful conspiracy theory and narrative for stirring up the leftist freak hornet’s nest. But it’s not true!

            Have a great day, Metro!

            “It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctively American criminal class except congress.” — Mark Twain

          • metrognome3830

            Slick Willie et. al. had information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction but no confirmed data. There were also reports that Iraq did not have WMDs. So no war was declared. Bush, however, took the same information — both pro and con — and chose to go with the pro WMD reports even though, at that time there was pretty convincing evidence there was no WMDs in Iraq, and made the decision to go to war, using the WMD argument and the attack on the WTC to justify his actions. I do discount the probability that Saddam transferred his alleged weapons to Syria. That argument holds no more water than the alternative argument that Syria is incapable of developing their own chemical weapons. No, I do not always believe Obama, but I certainly don’t believe that he or any rational person wants to get us into another war. I think it’s a good idea to be vigilant. If Bush was after the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, why did he go to Iraq? The largest number of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Saddam Hussein wanted nothing to do with Al Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden. If he knew of any Al Qaeda in Iraq they would most likely have been dispatched quickly. So, why Iraq? Why did we not attack where the terrorists came from?
            No, the Halliburton thing is not silly. Men like Cheney never have enough. The belief that he wouldn’t try to enrich himself and his partners even further is silly. That’s the kind of man he is.
            Do you actually believe he pushed for a war because he was worried about Saddam Hussein’s WMDs? Not a chance. Dick Cheney is a thoroughly evil person. I believe he is a sociopath.
            Have a great day, OMG!

          • ObozoMustGo

            Metro, you’ve just slammed Slick Willie by saying he didn’t really know what he was saying when he proclaimed Saddam to have WMD. He did not make it up, did he? Maybe he did as a way to deflect attention away from Monica-gate. What do you think? And then Bush perpetuated the lie not cover his ass, but to go to war because he likes war and he likes killing people and eating cats and starving the poor and poisoning water and making his buddies like Cheney richer than they are. That’s the way you see it, isn’t it? You know, Metro, your absence of conversation with me has allowed your imaginative mind to wander into dangerous areas again. You need me to keep guiding you around to the right way of viewing the world around you. Dick Cheney is a great patriot that advised Bush on what he thought was best for America. Whether you agree with him or not, you’re dead wrong on calling him evil. You and leftists out there hate him because he was very effective at destroying leftist arguments and politicians. You just believe the propaganda that’s feed you by the chattering class of useful idiots in the leftist media who act as political attack dogs for the DemonRAT party.

            Why Iraq? I think they chose Iraq because they, and the UN, and most of the rest of the world, believed he had WMD. Not everyone, but certainly most. They also felt that Iraq, having not too long ago prior to Saddam taking over, had been a reasonably free country with an educated people accustomed to capitalism and individual freedom. I think they believed the Iraqis would be supportive of his overthrow. From there, they would have a chance to begin changing the culture of the middle east and simultaneously attract the terrrorists to fight our military like attracting roaches to a poison bate box. I don’t necessarily agree with those thoughts, but I understand them. And I understand that in the context of the worst foreign attack on Americans on American soil still burning in our national conscience during that time, that naturally there was a sense that we needed to respond. I did not disagree with that theme at the time. What I do disagree with is the concept of nation building in cultures that cannot accomodate or want freedom. Many of the people do, but the muzzy culture is a culture of failure and a culture of slavery and war. We should have accepted that and just left them to rot after bombing the snot out of them and killing Saddam. By the way, Obozo is still doing exactly what Bush did, and worse, in Afghanistan. The nation building crap has got to stop. We cannot afford it any more.

            Have a nice day, Metro!

            “Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination.” ― Mark Twain

          • metrognome3830

            Sure I slammed Slick Willie. I have probably never agreed with everything any president or political party did. I also kind of liked some things about presidents of both parties. I even thought it might be fun to hang out with ‘ol GW. I bet he was a lot of fun before he decided to become a politician. But, I do believe Bush was either a liar or gave too much credence to Cheney, Rumsfeld et. al. Gosh! I didn’t even know about his fondness for killing people, eating cats and poisoning our water. Did he beat his dog, too? Enriching his buddies? No, I don’t think he cared much one way or the other about that. As for Dick Cheney being a great patriot? NFW. I’ll stick with my original prognosis. He’s a deeply committed sociopath. He advised Bush on what he thought was good for Dick Cheney. Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator and I’m sure the Iraqis thought they would be better off without him. What they found, however, is that while Hussein was a cruel dictator, the radical Muslims that moved in after he was taken out, were far worse. Hussein had kept them out. Not for any altruistic reasons, I’m sure. He just didn’t like them and he wanted all the power for himself. The Iraqis actually had more freedom under Hussein. I agree that they should be allowed to rot, as you say. I do not agree that we should have bombed the snot out of them. Taking out Hussein and his minions would have been sufficient. But, no, despite all protestations to the contrary, we seem incapable of avoiding nation building. In Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria etc., etc. Why do we insist on going into countries that have democratically-elected leaders and deposing them, i.e. Iran (1953), and turning them back to the oppressors they thought they had rid themselves of? I am all for pulling out of the Middle East altogether and letting them kill each other until they are all gone. But we won’t because we still need the oil. You are absolutely right, we can’t afford it anymore.
            Have a nice day, OMG!
            “Insanity and happiness is a more compatible combination.” – Metrognome3830

          • ObozoMustGo

            Congratulations Metro! You are the first poster from The Memo, or anywhere else, other than me, of course, to make it into my book of quotes. Look for your quote in other posts of mine!

            You crack me up Metro. That’s why I love you, buddy!

            Have a great night!

            “Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction in stolen goods.” – H.L. Mencken

          • metrognome3830

            Thank you, I’m honored.

          • ObozoMustGo

            By the way, Bush does eat cats. He prefers kittens. I have proof. Here is the picture.

            Have a great day, Metro!

            “Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under.” – H.L. Mencken

          • metrognome3830

            Good one, OMG! Good quote as well.
            Have a great day, OMG!

          • metrognome3830

            OMG, knowing your interest in quotations, I thought you might enjoy these.
            Paraprosdakians are figures of speech in which the latter part of a sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected; frequently humorous. Winston Churchill loved them.

            1. Where there’s a will, I want to be in it.

            2. The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it’s still on my list.

            3. Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

            4. If I agreed with you, we’d both be wrong.

            5. We never really grow up, we only learn how to act in public.

            6. War does not determine who is right – only who is left.

            7. Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit.. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.

            8. To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism. To steal from many is research.

            9. I didn’t say it was your fault, I said I was blaming you.

            10. In filling out an application, where it says, ‘In case of emergency, Notify:’ I put ‘DOCTOR’.

            11. Women will never be equal to men until they can walk down the street with a bald head and a beer gut, and still think they are sexy.

            12. You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.

            13. I used to be indecisive. Now I’m not so sure..

            14. To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target.

            15. Going to church doesn’t make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.

            16. You’re never too old to learn something stupid.

            17. I’m supposed to respect my elders, but its getting harder and harder for me to find one now

          • ObozoMustGo

            Yes. I love paraprosdakians. I have seen that email a couple of years ago. Here’s one of my favorites from Churchill.

            Have great evening Metro!

            “You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing…after they have tried everything else.” —Winston Churchill

          • patuxant

            All of your BS lines up with only one thing; Desert Storm. I said then when the old Bushie was there, why didn’t we go all the way? Well, guess what? These politicians were stroking their own sticks. Oil=Money=Greed=Power. All your BS lines get no where, as I see you are trying to put the blame anywhere you can find it as long as it is not on a GOP doormat. Please! Have the balls to admit it!

          • patuxant

            Am sorry you went along with the crowd of idiots regarding this invasion and a breach from our country’s previous behavior. That should have told you something then. So So broke with our ethics and even moreso, fucked our country in the ass. Guess you should have looked toward thinking for yourself.

          • CPAinNewYork


            I’m sorry, too. Usually, I’m distrustful of government types, but the “evidence” seemed so overwhelming and was corroborated by the British, so I was convinced.

            I’m glad that you weren’t fooled. For that you’re my hero. America needs high principled geniuses like you to keep us on the straight and narrow.

            By the way, isn’t “Patuxent” spelled with an “e”?

          • patuxant

            Yes, CPA, that is the correct spelling for the river, Patuxent, in MD. Just fooling around. BTW, I get your tongue-in-cheek remarks as I like to read through the lines and fine print! Don’t claim to be a “know-it-all” (in fact, I sometimes wonder just what do I really know!) but something just didn’t add up to me at the time, and the fact that we never in our history as a nation, took to being the first to attack, and I lost a good and dear friend over it. Unfortunately, he died a few months later and we didn’t have the chance to mend fences. But, I wish you well…and hope all is good in NY! I was there in 04 on New Year’s Eve and by far, it was the most glorious night I ever had. Just so overwhelmed by it all….

        • HEY, BOZO! JIMMY HERE.

          I’m not going to spend a lot of time on this, because actually have other things that I would rather do.

          However, it appears you haven’t developed the cognitive skills to read and actually understand what was written.

          I am referring to the statement you made that questions what you said about the Bush years. If you have someone in forth or fifth grade read the question I posed for you, they will likely tell you that I asked IF you ever criticized Bush.

          And, I admit, you are partially correct. A lot of Democrats, as well as Republicans, were sucked into the quagmire of Iraq, based on the false information that was pushed by the Bush administration.

          I was not one of them. Even before the facts became evident, I made myself clear that I thought it was a mistake to preemptively invade Iraq. None of the “facts” made sense to me.

          Things such as wether Saddam Hussein had Nuclear capabilities, (doubtful, since no mushroom clouds appeared over Israel), and if he did possess Nuclear capabilities, did he have long range missiles capable of reaching American soil? Also doubtful.

          I was uncertain about Chemical and Biological weaponry, but even if he did have them, only an idiot would let that genie out of the bottle. (Of course, no one ever claimed Saddam Hussein had a very high intellect.)

          By the way, do you “like” all the “fools” who don’t share your views? If so, you like a lot more people than I would have thought, based on your superiority complex.

          (Which I find laughable.)

          • ObozoMustGo

            Hey Jimmy! How are you today? My point about the matter was that the whole Iraq WMD thing pre-dated Bush by a long margin. Clinton was in office 8 years and had the benefit of his intelligence aparatus for that long. Bush was in office only 9 months when we were attacked on 9/11/01. Further, while there may have been those advising him there were no WMD, there were others that said Saddam DID have WMD. That included the UN weapons inspectors that were barred and fooled with for 10 years. Clearly, Bush had to make a decision one way or the other. So, while you may not have supported the idea, mostly because you hated the man making it, it was a decision that was supported by prior President’s and their intelligence advisors.

            You and I may disagree on the wars. Fine. I think we had a right and responsibility to respond to the attacks and to defend ourselves. I just wish we went in and bombed the hell out of them in Iraq and Afghanistan AND then left! I disagree with the nation building garbage. That’s not our responsibility. Especially in a part of the world that does not want nor respect democratic rule. Kill them all, then leave them with the mess. That’s the best deterrent to someone attacking us behind having strong trade relationships, which for some countries is simply not possible.

            Good discussion, Jim. Thanks, and have a nice day!

            “Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other.” ― Mark Twain

        • patuxant

          I find it odd that you start out complimenting this guy and then slam him into the ground calling him an idiot. Is this supposed to be an intellectual exchange or just a gang-banging?

    • The real issue is the attempt to let the most powerful corporations complete their PURCHASE of the government that belongs to ALL OF US. When there is no public sector left, all institutions are in private hands, and there are only a few of those owners, the result is FEUDALISM. Then you will be calling your boss “my Lord” and all but a few of us will rent our living space from a land LORD for real. Democracy is not destroying capitalism, the abuse of capitalism is destroying democracy. What they cannot (yet) buy outright, they buy propaganda to dupe well meaning people like you into voting to give it to them.

      Regulation is as necessary to truly competitive capitalism as referees are to football. Has anyone said referees are “socialist” because they “redistribute earned yardage?” Interesting quote from TJ, did it ever occur to you that the economy rigged by the most powerful IS taking bread from the mouth of labor? Compare your taxes with Warren Buffett’s or Donald Trump’s. And compare what has happened to YOUR wages in the last 40 years vs what has happened to theirs. Less than ten percent of the population earns 80 percent of the income, and more people are in poverty (by government reports) than ever before.

      Before you throw words like “socialist” and “leftist freak” around, do some study as to what these words really mean. And read the 1956 REPUBLICAN platform. It might strike you as being written by “leftist freaks” compared to the 2012 one, which has many clauses more appropriate to 1912 or even 1812.

      The middle class lifestyle that most of us enjoy was brought to you by the New Deal with some help from World War Two. Without them … study what Carnegie’s steel workers, Rockefeller’s oil riggers, and other workers of the late 1800’s had to deal with. When workers tried to strike, the companies hired goons to SHOOT them, even though they were unarmed. Then the surviving leaders were HANGED for starting the strike! That is the America that the Tea Party leaders, bought out by corporate bosses, want to bring back.

      • ObozoMustGo

        Alan, you are a stone-cold moron and you have no clue how the real world actually works. I’ll bet you’re a government worker, academic, or lifelong union thug. You support socialist concepts of government just like Obozo does. You can deny it in one sentance but it comes out in all others. You do this only because you actually have this false belief that freedom and capitalism and profit are evil and that they result in an upward spiral of ultimate control of all resources by a few. Nothing could be more false. You are an idiot if you think that freedom and free market capitalism result in FEUDALISM. You type your foolishness and communicate with the outside world on the very technologies that would never be possible without capitalism and freedom. Capitalism, individual freedom, liberty, and a Constitution that protects those rights are what have given us the greatest prosperity of all. NOT the government, you fool.

        No one I know says there should not be some regulatory oversight. Those are what we call LAWS, not bureaucrats sticking their noses in every aspect of life. Yes, they SHOULD be the referees. But today, they are not, They are PARTICIPANTS in the game AND simultaneously referees. This is what happens when you have ever growing and expanding government with greater control over every single aspect of life and business. When businessmen discover that they gain advantage over other businesses when they cozy up to regulators and politicians, what the hell else do you expect. If you dont like business being cozy to government, then get government out of the business of business. When the business guys know that there is not any reason to bribe politicians and bureaucrats, they’ll stop wasting their money. Note that there will never be eradication of corruption. That’s human nature. But what I say is true. What you think is false. More government involvement results in more close relationships between government and business.

        I find it odd how idiots like you complain about this so-called “income gap” (which does not exist in reality) and desire bigger government and punitive taxation to “level the playing field”, to redistribute the wealth, and never does it occur to you that the biggest income gaps are those found in the most socialist countries where everyone is so-called equal and “in this together” or whatever other Marxist phraseology you can come up with. Where is the income gap bigger? At one extreme lets look at N. Korea or Cuba or Venezuela or any leftist freak socialist utopia. Well, as it turns out, the only people in those countries that have pot to piss in are the political class. The leaders somehow become multi billionaires while the people are starving. Odd how that happens, isn’t it? NOT!

        And FDR was a disaster and a tyrant. He believed that government could actually control the economy like a man controls pieces upon a chess board. He prolonged the Great Depression by a decade, at least. Price controls, gold confiscation, forced destruction of crops and livestock when people were starving, forced monopolies in certain industries, confiscation of private property, confiscation and jailing of Japanese Americans, dreation of the greatest Ponzi Scheme ever known to mankind (SS)…. these are NOT what created the middle class. You are a brainwashed idiot if you believe that crap.

        Finally, America’s problems are 100% related to PROGRESSIVES and they exist in BOTH the Repubican and DemonRAT parties and have since Wilson. The only exceptions were Coolidge, Goldwater (too bad he didn’t win), and Reagan. Every single other president was a progressive.

        Have a nice day!

        “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C. S. Lewis

        • tobyspeeks

          For every manager at walmart there are 1000 regular walmart employees on food stamps. Your tiny mind will one day get wrapped around the corporate greed concept.

          • ObozoMustGo

            When will you get your mind around the concept of government greed?

        • Reagam was the 2nd worse President in this Country’s history, the worse is Bush 2. Under the economic policies of both thousands were laid off and were out of work for many months when Reagan was President and under Bush 2’s economic policies, 2 tax cuts, paying corporations moving expenses when the took jobs out of the country and 2 unfinanced wars ,tens of thousands lost their jobs and the ones lucky enough to find jobs are only being paid mimium wage for jobs that they are over educated for , that is if they can get hired a lot of mimium wage a lot work place won’t hire you if you have a college degree. There is an income gap when 2% of the people have 90% or more of the money in the Country, that is a hugh money gap. The brain washed idiot and do not know your own country’s history is you.

          • patuxant

            Yes, tell him more as well…


          • ObozoMustGo

            I agree with you, except my preference is that they either live in another country, or in hell!

            Have a nice day, Jimmy!

            “In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made [progressives].” ― Mark Twain, Following the Equator: A Journey
            Around the World – edited by ObozoMustGo for current day reality

        • patuxant

          Am not reading most of your diatribe because it is utter bull shit and obviously copied and pasted from wherever you are searching. Bottom line is that you don’t have a frigging clue what true Capitalism is and sadly, you think you do….

    • WhutHeSaid

      Pssst — Bozo: Obama is still your leader. He’ll be your leader for 4 more years.

      Oh yes, he’s also still black.


      Have a nice day!

      • ObozoMustGo

        what’s up whut, you racist pig?

        • patuxant

          No, don’t thin he is OB1. But if the truth hurts….

    • patuxant

      Well, we now see you once again! Nice! And also nice to note that you still don’t get it. Take a long ass view at history even as far back as 10 or so years ago. See what your “ideologues” got us into. A preemptive war, a loss of hundreds of thousands and a debt that still haunts us today. Yet you defend this line of thinking? Don’t you see what trap you have fallen into? I am certain you are no millionaire/billionaire, but you speak on their behalf. Why, I ask myself? Why does someone who sees the bull shit and has the intelligence, not figure out what is happening here? Very simple, my friend. It is Greed and Gluttony and manufactured and clothed in the garment of “free enterprise and capitalism”. Wake up and get a brew at Starbucks!

      • ObozoMustGo

        You’ve been a busy beaver Puxy, haven’t you? My inbox is filled with you, and it’s happy. Even with your hate, I still love you Puxy! 😉 And I did get my Starbucks this morning. Thanks!

        I love how you lefties always whine about “greed and glutony” as if those traits are only found in business people and not politicians and bureaucrats. HA! I’d say that politicans and bureacrats that demand, at the point of a gun or threat of jail, to confiscate the fruits of another person’s labor. What’s more greedy, wanting to keep your own earnings or demanding that another person give you theirs? Hmmmmmm…. You should go to YouTube and and search on “Milton Friedman Phil Donahue interview”. It’s one of the best discussions on this topic.

        Since you have asked, I will tell you that I am not a millionaire/billionaire. What you, and others, do not understand is that I do not defend them as you think. I defend one’s freedom to BECOME a millionaire/billionaire. What you fail to realize is that your feelings about successful people are nothing but jealousy and envy materialized into a political philosophy. When you punish the wealthy, you create barriers to others who are working their asses off to become wealthy. What ever you punish, you tend to get less of. And confiscatory taxation combined with a public rhetoric and outcry against successful people will result in fewer successful people. Don’t you get this? And IT IS wealthy people that create and build businesses that employ people like me and MOST Americans that still have a job. (and there are 6 million fewer of those than when Obozo took office). In fact Puxy, many of those wealthy people BECAME wealthy by taking risks and working their asses off for decades to achieve financial success. And a great many of them started out life poor and so-called disadvantaged, and even lack formal education. What they don’t lack is desire and fortitude and common sense to work and fight through tough times. Why do you want government to stand in the way of that?

        Here is something I wrote last summer that you should read. It’s a cut and paste.

        Leftist nutjobs use the term “trickle-down economics” as if it is some form of derogatory term. That’s a hell of a lot better than the DemonRATS ideas of “trickle up poverty”. The truth is, supply-side economics is the only true way to build a company and an economy. I know I’ve told this to you before, but I’ll do it again: Supply-side economics works.

        Where did Microsoft come from? Where did Cisco come from? Where did 100 thousand other companies, most of whom you’ve never heard of, come from? Are the tens, maybe hundreds, of millions of people worldwide employed by, and because of them, just a mirage? Are the over 10,000 millionaires created by Microsoft just a fantasy? Tell me, how did those companies come to be? Magic? A government program? ahhhhhhhh………..NO!

        Microsoft, Google, Apple, Cisco, and countless other examples of companies, were started by engineers or scientists with an idea and then were funded by rich guys with money, many of them venture capitalists who
        aggregate rich guys’ money for investment in new companies. That money from rich guys trickled down to employees and other companies that serviced them. And it trickled down to their private lives and paid painters and doctors and people that sell or make clothes. What is so damned hard to understand about this? This is the way free market economics works.

        I personally know this is how it works and my earnings are some rich guy’s investment funds. I do consulting to small, venture backed and pre-IPO companies. My checks every two weeks come to me because some group of rich guys decide to take a chance and invest in a business plan that a couple of engineers throw together for some new kind of technology like, for example, a transformer that will make the electric grid more efficient. They take the money and they hire people who can make a go of bringing their idea to reality. Along the way, every so often, the company must go back for another round of funding from those same rich guys and more rich guys. They keep hiring more people, using my services and paying me. When I
        take my truck for service, those rich guys’ money has “trickled down” through
        me to my mechanic. When I take my kids to mini golf, those rich guy’s money “trickles down” to the guy that owns it and the teenagers that staff the place and then to the company that makes the ice cream cones we buy.

        This is the way the world works. To think otherwise is a colossal bout of ignorance. But I get it. Wide-eyed leftist freaks really doesn’t have much of a clue about the real world. Only the world that you wish could exist if only we could stamp out racism, genderism, xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia,
        whateverotherphobia, and differences between classes of people. If only we
        could do that, the world would be a perfect place where no one was poor and no one was discriminated against and there would be no wars, right? WRONG! No one but the most hardcore dedicated socialist actually believes that bullsheet. And if they really do, they are not just ignorant of the past 100 years of history, but they are just simply a fool.

        I think I understand capitalism very well, Puxy. I live it daily. I’ll let this response stand for all of your comments to me, except the one about whut being a racist pig, which he is. The guy can only see skin color, and judges based upon it. That is racist.

        Have a great day, Puxy!

        “There is all the difference in the world, however, between two kinds of assistance through government that seem superficially similar: first, 90 percent of us agreeing to impose taxes on ourselves in order to help the bottom 10 percent, and second, 80 percent voting to impose taxes on
        the top 10 percent to help the bottom 10 percent — William Graham Sumner’s
        famous example of B and C decided what D shall do for A. The first may be wise or unwise, an effective or ineffective way to help the disadvantaged — but it is consistent with belief in both equality of opportunity and liberty. The
        second seeks equality of outcome and is entirely antithetical to liberty.” -– Milton Friedman

  • adriancrutch

    Too Bad BOZO wasn’t in the WTC! But then he can run faster than a jumbo jet!

  • english_teacher

    OMG is a bully who does not really want a discussion. He is only interested in pushing his viewpoint and insulting those who do not agree with him. He should be ignored in that same way that Lana should be ignored. I’m sure he will not disappoint me with his pithy comments to insult me now.

    “You speak an infinite deal of nothing.” ― William Shakespeare
    “The bottom line is, insults only hurt when they come from someone I respect.” ― Kresley Cole
    “Wretched are those preoccupied with insulting, belittling and discrediting others.” ― Wayne Gerard Trotman