18 Oct

Say What? 10-17-2010 Edition [Reader Post]

                                       

Liberals:

President-elect Obama said, in December 2008, after meeting with governors: “I think we can get a lot of work done fast.  All of them have projects that are shovel ready, that are going to require us to get the money out the door.”  Shovel-ready was a term which tested well, and the President repeated it many times.

President Obama, October 2010: “The problem is, is that spending it [stimulus money] out takes a long time, because there’s really nothing – there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.”

President Obama: “Just this week, we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations.”

President Obama, at a Boston rally, to cheering crowds: “And if they [Republicans] win in Congress, they will cut AIDS funding right here in the United States of America and all across the world.”  Apparently the President has not heard of George W. Bush.

Token liberal on Forbes on Fox, with regards to FNMA and GHLMC: “No, we’re not moving toward a socialized housing market.”  Those 2 government entities control or guarantee 90% of the mortgages in the United States (it used to be, 50%).

Vice President Biden, explaining why Democrats aren’t running on the administration’s accomplishments like health-care and financial-regulatory overhaul and the stimulus: “It’s just too hard to explain.  It sort of a branding, I mean you know they kind of want the branding more at the front end.”  Don’t worry; it’s not supposed to make sense.

Biden: “These rich guys always underestimate us, that’s one thing that I kind of like about it, that’s one of the parts of my job I’ve enjoyed over the years, a little straight left and a right hook, it works”

President Obama, on making Joe Biden Vice President “[This was] the single best decision I have made.”  This was said to a Delaware crowd.

Biden:  “I am truly angry as I go around the country watching. people absolutely, fundamentally blown away by the greed and the policies of the last eight years, of the last administration.”

President Obama: “Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared, and the country’s scared.”

U.S. Department of Agriculture release: “Across the nation, many schools are already taking steps to provide students with healthier meals and the nutrition knowledge to make healthier choices. However, it is well recognized that understanding the value of a healthy diet does not always translate into healthy choices. Research has shown that good intentions may not be enough”

Bill Clinton: “And honest to God, half of [Republicans] need psychiatric help—not because they are crazy but because no one can be that angry for that long.”

Asked if the prospect of Republican control of one or both houses of Congress concerned him, billionaire George Soros answered: “It does, because I think they are pushing the wrong policies, but I’m not in a position to stop it.  I don’t believe in standing in the way of an avalanche.”

Bill Clinton at his 80th event: “I planned to do about one stop for everybody that helped Hillary run for president because she’s one of only two members of the president’s cabinet who cannot participate in politics.”

Maureen Dowd:, “We are in the era of Republican Mean Girls, grown-up versions of those teenage tormentors who would steal your boyfriend, spray-paint your locker and, just for good measure, spread rumors that you were pregnant.”

Ann Curry, when narrating a short video item about Russia unveiling a new set of inflatable weapons designed to fool spy satellites: “Wish all weapons were like that.”

Liberals Making Sense:

Governor Paterson of New York: “We projected we would get $4 billion [from raising taxes] and we actually got far short of that.”  Paterson is not running for anything, by the way.

Rep. Nick Rahall, Democratic incumbent for the U.S. House in the 3rd District in West Virginia: “Climate change – to deny it exists, to just put your head in the sand and, `oh no, it doesn’t exist, what are you talking about,’ is about like standing on the floor of Macy’s during the month of December and claiming Santa Claus doesn’t exist. Come on, get real. There are responsible coal operators who work with us and continue to work with us, not only on climate change, but safety is another example.”  It is possible that Rahall essentially made a point that was exactly opposite of his real point.

President Obama: “By November 3rd, I will have saved or created 50 to 70 jobs for Republicans.” (Okay, okay, this was a cartoon).

ABC’s Charles Gibson confided to Larry King shortly after the 2003 invasion of Iraq how he and his wife had “a little framed sign hanging in our bedroom, my wife and I, that said, `War is not good for children and other living things,’ and I believe that. So I don’t like covering war and I hate to see them occur.”

MSNBC host Keith Olbermann calls Fox News radio host Brian Kilmeade an “un-American bastard”

Chris Matthews: “The message from the TEA Party is. every man for himself. if these people were every man for himself they would have. been killing each other after two days.”

Crosstalk:

Chris Matthews: Some of these people like Sarah Palin seem to brag about their lack of knowledge. They don’t read the paper.

David Ignatius, Washington Post: Yeah, we had a political party briefly in America called the Know-Nothings who kind of bragged about their separateness, and that spirit is alive now. I mean, I think that Sarah Palin is a likeable person. The fact that she’s obviously an outsider has worked to her advantage up to a point.

This is, of course, based upon Palin getting huffy with Katie Couric 2 years ago, when Couric implied that Palin did not read anything in backwards Alaska.

Sarah Palin spoke to this in the movie Media Malpractice: “To me, the question was more along the lines of, “Do you read? What do you guys do up there? What is it that you read?” And, and perhaps I was just too flippant in my answer back to her, but of course I read newspapers. I read publications. I spend a lot of time of course reading our local papers and the highly-circulated publications here in Alaska because that’s my job to know the business of Alaska and our communities. But also USA Today, yes, and New York Times.”

_______________________________________

Bob Schaeffer (not known for asking tough questions of liberals): “Let’s switch to politics. Last week, of course, the President’s on the campaign trail. He’s on the campaign trail just virtually all the time now. While he was out there, the Democrats put out a– an ad that’s released this morning that blames the Republicans and specifically the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for injecting foreign money into campaigns. The President’s words on the trail last week were, ‘groups that received foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections.’  Now I want to ask you about that because the New York Times looked into the Chamber specifically and said the Chamber really isn’t putting foreign money into the campaign. That it does charge its foreign affiliates dues that bring in less than a hundred and thousand dollars a year. A lot of organizations including Labor Unions doing– do that. But the Chamber has an annual budget of two hundred million dollars and it says, along with that, it keeps these foreign dues separate. They do spend heavily in politics, twenty-five million so far. They expect to spend fifty million. But this part about foreign money, that appears to be peanuts, Mister Axelrod, I mean, do you have any evidence that it’s anything other than peanuts?”

David Axelrod: “Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob? The fact is that the Chamber has asserted that but they won’t release any information about where their campaign money is coming from. And that’s at the core of the problem here.”

Bob Schieffer: “If the only charge, three weeks into the election that the Democrats can make is that there’s somehow this may or may not be foreign money coming into the campaign, is that the best you can do?”

The unedited interview and video at:

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/10/schieffer-mocks-axelrod-complaining-about-gop-ad-dollars-%E2%80%98-best-you-can-do%E2%80%99

______________________________________________

Wolf Blitzer: “Your opponent, who I interviewed earlier, Carly Fiorina, she says basically this charge about you that you’re simply a career politician who has no experience in the real world creating jobs.”

Barbara Boxer: Well, she’s just wrong on that. I voted for over $2 trillion of tax cuts, the largest one was in the stimulus bill. She’s just wrong.

Wolf Blitzer: When you say you — you supported $2 trillion in tax cuts during the stimulus?

Barbara Boxer: Tax cuts. Yes.

Wolf Blitzer: Tax cuts?

Barbara Boxer: I had the –

Wolf Blitzer: Where –

Barbara Boxer: During my career.

Wolf Blitzer: Oh, during your career. I thought you just said during the stimulus.

Barbara Boxer: Yes.

Wolf Blitzer: Well, you said you –

Barbara Boxer: No, no.

Wolf Blitzer: — supported two trillion –

Barbara Boxer: No, $1.2 trillion with the stimulus.

Wolf Blitzer: Yeah, but –

Barbara Boxer: — that I can tell you.

Wolf Blitzer: — that would be maybe two or 300 million dollars.  We’re not talking about a trillion.

Barbara Boxer: So let’s — so — so let me say this.  A third of the stim and over my time — let me correct it, you’re right, thank you — $2.2 trillion I voted in tax cuts, $1.2 trillion of which became law.  A third of the stim was tax cuts, and it was considered the biggest tax cut in history over a couple-year period.

Conservatives:

Professor Mark Perry: “If you’re not familiar with the state of California, it’s a public employee pension management organization that runs a state on the side with a large $19 billion deficit.”

Calvin Beisner (Cornwall Alliance Founder on he Glenn Beck show) concerning the upside down values of the green movement: “This is why you destroy an eagle’s egg and you go to jail, but if you destroy a baby in the womb, you are protected.” (Quoted from memory)

Bernard McGuire
(former Imus sidekick): “Taxes are going up and grandma is going down; that’s Obama-care.”

Betsy McCaughey: “The powers of the federal government are limited and enumerated.” (From memory)

Rush Limbaugh: “Senate majority leader Harry Reid, arguably the second or third most powerful man in our government describing colonoscopies.  ‘If you do colonoscopies, colon cancer does not come because you snip off the things they find when they go up, and no more.’  It makes me wonder if at some point they snipped off something and more of Dingy Harry’s when they went up there.  The more I listen to him talk, it’s just… and we’re supposed to believe that this represents enlightenment, compassion, brilliance.  I mean here’s a guy actually advocating colonoscopies, go in there and snip it off when they get in there.  This is a guy that wants to be up our butts.  He’s admitting it.  He got more energized during that sound bite talking about colonoscopies than at any other time in the debate when he envisioned being up our butts.  Talk about intrusive.  This guy is personifying intrusive government, Big Government, up our butts — up our business is what I mean.”

Taken from

Conservative Review #148   (PDF version)   (HTML version)

About Gary Kukis

A retired math teacher who spends most of his time exegeting the Old Testament and, once a week, puts out an ezeen.
This entry was posted in Liberal Idiots, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Monday, October 18th, 2010 at 11:02 am
| 432 views

14 Responses to Say What? 10-17-2010 Edition [Reader Post]

  1. But this administration is filled with brilliant people. We must be too dumb to understand the language they are speaking. Liberal must be using English 2.0 and conservatives are just too dumb to get it. How else could you explain the blatant stupidity?

    ReplyReply
  2. Tobias Sherman; you’r the dumb one here, and you have to learn more;
    DO not forget , you are with smart CONSERVATIVES, not with your dumb racist gang.
    your in the contrary of brilliant

    ReplyReply
  3. Old Trooper 2 says: 3

    Obama’s Education, and Ours

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/greenwald/374546

    Obama’s Education, and Ours
    Abe Greenwald – 10.18.2010 – 2:37 PM

    The Obama administration has come to learn that its two most significant achievements — the stimulus and ObamaCare — are fundamentally flawed. President Obama’s admission that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” is to the stimulus what Ronald Reagan’s praising the freedoms of the Soviet Union would have been to the Cold War: a vitiation of the president’s political ideology. The same can be said for the administration’s granting waivers to big companies and unions, freeing almost 1 million employees from the ill effects of his health-care plan.

    So the president is getting an education. Kind of like a school where the $862 billion tuition is picked up by the public and word problems describe real people in real circumstances. If unemployment is at 7.7 percent and you invest $7 billion of taxpayer money in the study of ant behavior, sage grouse mortality, and corporate travel and the refurbishment of abandoned forts, how many speeches attacking George W. Bush will you have to make before November?

    Those opposed to the stimulus were not the reactive “party of no”; they were the party of knowing. They knew that warped incentives and listless bureaucracies make governments inefficient producers and employers. There is no such thing as a shovel-ready government project, because government cannot swing into therapeutic action the way liberals like to think. Conservatives know something else Barack Obama has yet to cover: there are shovel-ready jobs — in the private sector. At any given time, this country is bursting with entrepreneurs, Americans with blueprints and business plans on which they’re willing to stake everything. Perhaps next semester, Obama will learn about creating a friendly financial environment that allows small businesses to break ground, succeed, and hire. For now, it’s hampering regulations and looming taxes all the way.

    The health-care-law exemptions granted to McDonald’s, the United Federation of Teachers, and 28 other employers expose the unfeasibility of ObamaCare at its core. The lucky parties didn’t want to incur the costs of phasing out annual caps on employee medical coverage. There is no reason to think doing so will be easier for employers who have not yet sought waivers. What did not work for McDonald’s and others will not work, period. The flood of objections has yet to begin. The waivers also threaten America’s claim to being a country of laws, not men. If every one of the president’s learned lessons results in a corresponding hall pass administered by the federal government, we will soon have compromised the legal framework vital to the conservation of an advanced and civilized society.

    Even as Obama learns, he unlearns. He has not backed away from either the folly of stimulus or the debacle of ObamaCare. Similar to most educations today, his is as expensive as it is worthless. Like insuring more patients or cutting costs and surging forces or drawing down troops, the poles of ignorance and knowledge merely represent another false choice requiring no presidential decision. He’s seen the light but prefers the dark. “Obama 2.0,” as the administration conceives it, will involve more detailed explanations of the same bad policies. The rest of the country doesn’t enjoy this executive luxury. In a couple of weeks, concerned Americans will face a political choice that’s as real as it gets. It is unlikely that their education, hard earned these past 20 months, will go to waste.

    ReplyReply
  4. jlfintx says: 4

    These truly have to be the two dumbest men on earth; perhaps in the history of the earth!

    ReplyReply
  5. neil says: 5

    @ Bees: I think poor Sherman was just being sarcastic!

    ReplyReply
  6. neil: YOU know, I also felt guilty, after I answer, but I figure, he would come back and strike me
    so, instead of saying WOOPS, as I almost did after,
    I let it go in case I was dealing with a oponant of our group,
    AT this time they are charging us with a vengeance, as you can see.
    so I thank you for giving me the right reason to apologise to him,
    and I will right on the next one following,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  7. TOBIAS SHERMAN: I apologise for jumping on your comment,
    I was only reading an attack on it instead of reading an intelligent turn on words,
    now I will deduct that I’ll have to be smarter than I think I am, the next time such happen,
    and I even felt it right after thinking, ” WHAT IF HE MEANT”,
    WEll I’m willing to take the lesson, to not repeat my error of judgement,
    please allowe me to, and dont be so sofisticated on your wording that have to be analysed,
    AS you would be a good LAWER for this way of trowing words.
    bye

    ReplyReply
  8. Pingback: Tweets that mention Say What? 10-17-2010 Edition [Reader Post] -- Topsy.com

  9. Old Trooper 2 says: 8

    Harry Reid Takes Credit For Saving The World

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SOoBOsZBU8&feature=player_embedded

    Wow! What a guy!

    ReplyReply
  10. Missy says: 9

    The unions have outspent both the Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove’s organization.

    AFSCME 87.5

    SEIU 44

    NEA 40

    Totaling $171.5 million

    US Chamber of Commerce 75

    American Crossroads 65

    Totaling $140 million

    The 1.6 million-member AFSCME is spending a total of $87.5 million on the elections after tapping into a $16 million emergency account to help fortify the Democrats’ hold on Congress. Last week, AFSCME dug deeper, taking out a $2 million loan to fund its push. The group is spending money on television advertisements, phone calls, campaign mailings and other political efforts, helped by a Supreme Court decision that loosened restrictions on campaign spending.

    “We’re the big dog,” said Larry Scanlon, the head of AFSCME’s political operations. “But we don’t like to brag.” :roll:

    The 2010 election could be pivotal for public-sector unions, whose clout helped shield members from the worst of the economic downturn. In the 2009 stimulus and other legislation, Democratic lawmakers sent more than $160 billion in federal cash to states, aimed in large part at preventing public-sector layoffs. If Republicans running under the banner of limited government win in November, they aren’t likely to support extending such aid to states.

    Newly elected conservatives will also likely push to clip the political power of public-sector unions. For years, conservatives have argued such unions have an outsize influence in picking the elected officials who are, in effect, their bosses, putting them in a strong position to push for more jobs, and thus more political clout.

    Some critics say public-sector unions are funded by what is essentially taxpayer cash, since member salaries, and therefore union dues, come directly from state budgets.

    “Public-sector unions have a guaranteed source of revenue—you and me as taxpayers,
    ” said Glenn Spencer, executive director of the Workforce Freedom Initiative at the Chamber of Commerce.

    It used to be said that 40% of union membership aren’t democrats, hmmm, forking over $390 for candidates they wouldn’t vote for.

    “Previously, most labor-sponsored campaign ads had to be funded by volunteer donations. Now, however, AFSCME can pay for ads using annual dues from members, which amount to about $390 per person. AFSCME said it will tap membership dues to pay for $17 million of ads backing Democrats this election.”

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303339504575566481761790288.html

    ReplyReply
  11. Missy says: 10

    What idiots!

    U.S. Subsidiaries: You Think Our Money’s Dirty? Give it Back!

    Fifteen Democratic Senators recently sent a letter to the Federal Election Commission urging them to “repair and strengthen protections against foreign influence of American elections” by not allowing foreign-controlled subsidiaries (or U.S. subsidiaries) to donate to political campaigns and “influence” the election. Those Senators were Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Al Franken (D-MN), Kirten Gillibrand (D-NY), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Pat Leahy (D-VT), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jack Reed (D-RI),Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).

    The kick of this is, with the exception of Sen. Franken, the fourteen other senators have accepted PAC donations from U.S. subsidiaries of foreign corporations. According to opensecrets.org, Menendez tops the donations list with $247,204. Combined, the fourteen Senators have received a total of $1,216,122.00 from U.S. subsidiaries of foreign corporations. Outside of this group, a total of 86 Senators on both side of the aisle have accepted funds.

    The Organization for International Investment (OFII), whose members are U.S. subsidiaries of foreign corporations, has fired back. They have sent a letter to the fifteen senators asking them to clarify the position against foreign donations. I interviewed Nancy McLernon, CEO of OFII, about the controversy.

    NM: It baffles me how a Senator could sign on to a letter like this without checking their own donations. Wouldn’t they check what companies have donated to them? I hope when they realize they have received donations from American employees directly working at U.S. subsidiaries, they will clairfy their position. If not, maybe they should refund the money.

    LL: This is not the first time U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies have been a Congressional target. What kind of message does this send to them?

    NM: It’s the constitutional right of Americans who work for U.S. subsidiaries to pool their money in support of someone. So, if you work for Nestle does that mean your rights are less important than if you work for, say, Hershey? U.S. subsidiaries have been a punching bag for too long when it comes to political rhetoric.

    In our recent CFO survey, 72 percent said the U.S. business environment for them is deteriorating. They are questioning if the U.S. is a place for investment and the jobs that come with it. The dots need to be connected.

    U.S. subsidiaries should not be tagged with the scarlet letter “F” — it is counterproductive in encouraging them to invest and create jobs here.

    LL: Where have most of the monies gone to?

    NM: In the last election cycle, U.S. subsidiaries have given more to Democrats than Republicans. So who are they really bashing? This is not a GOP issue. Senators on both sides of the aisle have accepted PAC money.

    Graphs showing how much these senators have accepted and another with a list of all members who have accepted donations from the subsidiaries at the site.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/39798587

    ReplyReply
  12. MISSY: hi, yes they really are desperate, they’ll go as low as they can, to deprive the
    AMERICANS working in FOREIGN COUNTRY to donate on the party they choose,
    Which is not their own,as they are finding out.

    ReplyReply
  13. Missy says: 12

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    I hope they never give them another dime!

    ReplyReply
  14. MISSY, your right, they deserve it, but they play with the money of the AMERICANS,
    that’s why they don’t care, BUT the people will cut out their MAJORITY and they will feel it,
    THEIR fun is over now.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>