29% – Harris Interactive / WSJ poll
Wow, even I didn’t think it’d be this quick. Mr Bush has broken the 30% barrier, on his way DOWN.
I was thinking another week or two, especially as the latest NSA spying scandal broke. Remember folks — this poll will have been conducted BEFORE today’s news came out.
Washington Wire » Bush’s Approval Rating Drops
President Bush’s job-approval rating has fallen to its lowest mark of his presidency, according to a new Harris Interactive poll. Of 1,003 U.S. adults surveyed in a telephone poll, 29% think Mr. Bush is doing an “excellent or pretty good” job as president, down from 35% in April and significantly lower than 43% in January.The Times, in analyzing the results, said “Americans have a bleaker view of the country’s direction than at any time in more than two decades.”
I don’t think he’s hit bottom, either. I mean that in both the political sense, as well as the more conventional ‘hitting the bottle" terms.
(Update: Welcome WSJ visitors! Please feel free to look around. Lots more posts where this one came from.)
May 11th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
Sinking in the polls. Oh! Sinking in the polls is a glorious thing! Just sinking in the polls… How dreary, stale and flat are these times…when our would-be king is laughable `round the globe…
May 11th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
He’s laughable here, too, although also as dangerous as a wounded grizzly bear.
The next six to eight months will literally determine whether America rises or falls, in my opinion.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
Laughable around the globe? The only ones being laughed at around the globe are the left wing kooks who hand the Islamofascists (those doing the laughing) the knives to cut their own throats. Basic truth of life. The Lefts time has come and gone. Your economic philosophy, socialism? Dead. At least in America. Your foreign policy philosophy, appeasement? Dead. At least in America. Your anything goes social philosophy? Dead. President Bush may have a 29% approval rating but how much of that disapproval is Conservatives that don’t think he has been Conservative enough? Plenty I’ll wager. So don’t feel too good about yourselves yet kooks.
In reality if I didn’t love America so much I would love for everyone of you to actually have to suffer the consequences of your weak pansy assed approach to the enemies of this country. To see you actually have to suffer the consequences of the socialism you love so much in theory. You should thank your lucky stars every day that George W Bush is President. And for the record: Polls don’t mean shit. President Bush has accomplished so much that you can never undo (But good luck on getting Saddam back and getting another Justice on the Supreme Court).
May 11th, 2006 at 9:39 pm
Ah, the sweet smell of GOP kool-aid…
Ordinarily I might remove a comment like Roberts, given its uncivil tone — but it makes much more sense to leave it up, so that people can all see what a sad, angry, desperate group the radical loony right-wing has become. They see enemies everywhere and think the solution to every problem involves a gun or a bomb and acting all “manly”.
I actually am glad, in a couple ways, that George W Bush is president.
One is that he and his administration are so gloriously incompetent, they’ve not been able to do nearly as much damage to the Republic than if they’d actually been good at it.
The other is that he and his gang of thugs have awakened us — the LEFT, the Liberals, the Progressives. After the 1960s and early 70s, we got complacent and fell asleep.
No more, bucko. We’re loud, we’re proud. We’re the HIPPIES, and we are back.
Miss us, sweetums? Dab a little patchouli behind your ear and you’ll feel aaaaaalll better.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
Ah the shiny reflection of the kook tin foil hat crowd.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:51 pm
Um, that’s a reflection you’re lookin’ at. Y’know? Tin-foil, reflective?
Ah, not worth the bother. Arguing with these types is like teaching a pig to sing.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:16 pm
Yuk yuk. I know you are but what am I. Yuk yuk. Yeah why bother with debate. All you really need is an innate leftist superiority complex (and 3rd grade level insult skills). You hippies may be back but this time you have a paper trail which documents the failures of your philosophy and the consequences. Thats why you will never be a majority in this country again. So sorry to break it too you “Sweetums” but you and your kind are on your way out. Good riddance. But thanks for keeping my comments. Normally your cowardly side just deletes comments it finds “uncivil”. “Uncivil” meaning anything which disturbs your delicate worldview.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:29 pm
Enjoy your little illusory world, Robert. And for showing us all with your own words exactly the kind of people we’re up against.
I couldn’t have done a better job of portraying a radical right-wing reactionary if I’d tried. I’ll be saving your comments in case I need a character like you in one of my stories or novels.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:33 pm
Yeah everyone that doesn’t think like you is “radical” and “reactionary” Becca. It is much easier to think that way isn’t it? Of course my side knows exactly what type of people we are up against. They’re the kind of people who let Cambodians die by the millions because you are too gutless to fight. You’re the kind of people who don’t care how many Iraqis or Americans die as long as Democrats get elected. You’re the kind of people who want “Peace in our time” with Adolph Hitler. The history books on your kind have already been written. Therefore I won’t save your insightful comments.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:40 pm
I must admit I do feel sorry for your bunch sometimes though. You and your friends are always the first to die when true tyranny shows its face. You think tyranny is George Bush and his administration. You’re convinced of this fact. The sad part is if you lived in Iran, North Korea, Saddams Iraq or Poland in 1939 for one day you would see how badly you are mistaken.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:46 pm
Good night and good luck Becca (and fellow libs). I truly hope you all come around some day. Believe it or not our side actually does care about you.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:47 pm
Problem is, most of us can’t stand either side — whether it be the “God-fearing” Bush/big business supporters or the nutty liberals on the other side who so often trash the USA while bending over for countries like France. You’re all disgusting.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:51 pm
That is the intellectual cowards way out Ted. A plague on both houses to make yourself feel like you are above it all. You are not. Debate the issues and take a principled stand. Then vote and be active in voicing your ideas and why you believe in them. That is what a citizen of a free society does to preserve and promote the best. “All that is required for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing”. That means you Ted.
May 11th, 2006 at 11:18 pm
Interesting, eh Ted? Nothing but insults for us, no respect whatsoever for opposing viewpoints.
Me, I actually respect the conservatives. Small, less intrusive government. Balanced budgets (which actually liberals and centrists also support). Sensible foreign policies that balance diplomacy with a strong military. What’s not to appreciate?
The centrists’ concerns are usually closer to home. They want good schools, affordable and quality healthcare, and decent opportunities to get ahead with hard work. Easy to get behind that, too.
And those of use who wear the progressive/liberal label with pride? We want inalienable civil rights for all, greater cooperation between nations, respect for the environment, and so forth.
None of these desires are mutually contradictory. We’re all for balanced budgets and respect for the Constitution and rule of law.
The reason 7 in 10 people now think the Bush Administration is doing a lousy job is because he *never* supported any of the progressives’ causes, he’s cheesed off the centrists by cheating them, too, and now the true conservatives are waking and realizing that the Bush Administration and the GOP are never going to balance a budget, will keep us entangled in foreign wars for decades, are expanding government at an geometric pace, eroding civil liberties, and generally behaving like a bunch of corrupt thugs whose sole philosphy is “might makes right.” That isn’t conservative either, it’s plain old corrupt authoritarian rule.
Will the progressives, centrists, and conservatives disagree enough again to take separate sides? Sure we will! But it sure would be nice if we could all respect each other’s rights to our opinions, wouldn’t it? And not call each other names?
Unfortunately, with Robert’s type, that’s what they fall back upon. They call us kooks and gutless and pansy-assed. Because that’s all they got.
Schoolyard names and taunts. Goodnight and good luck.
May 12th, 2006 at 12:52 am
Liberty and Justice TrackBack
“It will not be long before Bush will hit the Nixon ‘record’ so to speak. He is nearing 23% more and more. It is a sign, yet again, that conservatives are abandoning Bush. Conservatives were among his most loyal supporters, but they now realize Bush’s policies are not conservative. The new information about the NSA will probably cause more conservatives and libertarians to walk away from Bush.
71% of Americans disapprove of Bush and his policies. 71% of Americans don’t believe Bush is a good President. 69% of Americans think that “things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track”.”
May 12th, 2006 at 1:15 am
Americans slowly wake from their torpor to find their heritage gone. What else should they have expected from the Bush family? Bush I as CIA head engaged in assassinations, as president pardoned Orlando Bosch, pardoned Elliott Abrams and four other Iran-Contra Criminals. Bush II makes Abrams Mid-East envoy on 12/2/02, prior to the illegal and unprovoked war.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:54 am
Becca I am sympathetic to your cause. I have been a Republican all of my life (43 yrs old); I was watching Sunday AM news programs and could actually stomach listening to Howard Dean. The Republicans in power are living the truth of “Absolute powers corrupts absolutly.”
You do your cause no good when you do not use political terms correctly. You have described the republican party as both reactionary and radical. You can only be or the other, the terms are the opposite of each other.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:01 am
This is for Robert. Robert, honestly everyone around the globe is laughing at your idiotic president. Take it from me, I am not American and don’t live in the States.
Sorry to burst your patriotic bubble, but…POP!
Bush should have never been voted in for a second term, and legally he should not have “won” his first term. Well I guess the old addage is correct, “be careful what you wish for, because you might just get it”, and in your case (the American’s), you got what you wanted (via the vote). Enjoy him while you can!
May 12th, 2006 at 5:22 am
Glenn says “everyone around the globe is laughing at your president”. Two points to note: Unless Glenn is not American, Bush is his president also. But apparently Glenn doesn’t respect legal opinions he doesn’t agree with, such as Bush v. Gore (2000) by the highest court in the land. Also, Germany and Canada have elected conservative leaders to replace liberals who “laughed” at Bush’s policies. But then, why pay attention to voting results when we have polls?
I wished for President Bush, and I’m glad we have him. Remember, elections are realistically between the available candidates (the possibility of a write-in winner is laughable), and he was definitely the best available.
To clarify a point on balanced budgets. Becca says that “liberals and centrists” support balanced budgets also. Sure, everyone including Communist goverments want to take in as much as they spend. The policy debate is about whether you take in more or spend less, and from whom it is taken from or given to. Any serious debate about whether liberals believe we should take more or spend less to be in balance?
The most revealing part of this blog is that all of the debate centers on a second-term President who will never run in another election. Where are the proposed solutions, alternative leaders, positive directions? Absent these, the next official poll we take as a country (remember that pesky voting results thing) will disappoint all of you who think the future is about Bush’s poll numbers.
May 12th, 2006 at 6:03 am
We can OOH and AAH at the latest poll numbers for the President and the generic congressional ballot, but in the end, there’s only one thing that matters: state-by-state and district-by-district polls for the US Senate and House.
It’s painfully apparent that the rubberstamp Republicans on Capitol Hill are incapable, unwilling, or afraid to hold this corrupt Administration to any kind of Constitutional standard. But how many of these GOP enablers are actually vulnerable in November? Not many, thanks to unprecendented gerrymandering and, in some cases, blatantly illegal redistricting.
This is especially the case in the House, where the congressional districts are “redder” and “bluer” than they have ever, ever been.
In short, the Democrats are going to have to run the table in November, winning almost every “purple” seat.
May 12th, 2006 at 6:46 am
How can anyone still support Bush. Do you not see your freedoms being taken away, do you not see how he is opening up the border to make this just like the European union. Please stop with the Bush can do no wrong mentality. And if you really think there are any politicians in congress or senate who will grow a spine you are dillusional.
May 12th, 2006 at 10:39 am
Actually, Richard, the debate centers not just on one man who *technically* isn’t allowed to run for another term, but more importantly on the kind of people and governing philosophy he represents.
Republicans are good people! But they’ve let their party leadership be taken over by those who don’t truly represent their most cherished positions. Gingrich and his bunch swept in in ‘94 on a platform of ethical reforms, and now look where we are — Cunningham, Delay, Ney, Jackson, and more indictments to come. They also liked to claim the Dems couldn’t balance a budget — and now we have red ink as far as the eye can see. Bush II himself was elected in part because he pushed a foreign policy that, in response to Kosovo, was supposed to be ‘America first’ — without foreign adventures. Now we’re in a war that by definition can never end, because there will always be more terrorists. And most of all, the Republicans are supposedly the party of small, unintrusive government. Instead, we have massive spying on innocent citizens and a GOP-led federal system that seems to want to control and monitor every aspect of people’s lives — all this in exchange for a little temporary illusory safety.
Anyway, I could go on and on. No, this isn’t just about Bush, but what he represents and whether or not we want more like him and what the GOP is pushing in ‘06 and ‘08 — or is it time for a change. (And yes, time for the Dems to finally grow themselves a spine and start standing for something again.) In addition, this debate is also about denying Bush and the GOP the political capital to institute the rest of their ethically and financially bankrupt agenda — more and bigger wars in the Middle East, more tax cuts for the rich, less rights for the average person, trashing the environment, and letting one religious faction dictate how everybody else will live their lives.
Again, I agree, the Democrats need a better message and real leaders. For now though, and at least until not every single branch is controlled by the GOP, we can begin with “Had Enough?”
I know I have.
For the next 2 1/2 years, the best the Dems can hope for is to win one or both houses of Congress in the ‘06 mid-terms. Could be dicey, given both the gerrymandering and all those electronic voting machines manufactured by closed-source GOP-controlled companies. But with even just the House, the Dems could hold committee hearings (which the current majority GOP will not allow) and issue subpeonas and compell sworn testimony. At least then we could begin finding out what the Bush Administration’s really been up to.
May 12th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Robert,
You sir are a fine example of tolerance.
You asked someone to debate the issues. Right? What exactly are these issues you imagine are not being discussed? The only issue you’ve touched on is your disdane for anything that does not complete you and your tyrannical thinking. Debate the issues? Bring `em on.
Call liberals what you will, call democrats what you will, but the Republican party is not the party I used to know and it sure as hell isn’t the party you imagine it to be and if it is then you need to check yourself in to rehab! The Republicna party is not occupying the oval office!
So take your patriotic drone and your blowhard mentality and do something to save the liberties and constitution instead of defending the indefensible! (I took that right out of Newt Gingrich’s mouth…) See? If you really gave a damn about freedom you’d stop trying to run people down who are practicing one of the most basic principles of this country.
You need to relax a bit and open those peepers before you wake up in another country right where you lounge, my friend.
May 12th, 2006 at 11:52 am
“But with even just the House, the Dems could hold committee hearings (which the current majority GOP will not allow) and issue subpeonas and compell sworn testimony. At least then we could begin finding out what the Bush Administration’s really been up to.”
And there in a nutshell you have todays Liberal strategy. Ideas? Nope. Just investigations. Thats what happens when your party takes positions it knows won’t sell. Open borders. High taxes. Deferal to the UN on US foreign policy. Appeasement of dictators. Right to kill as many babies in the womb as you can. Pardons for Tookie Williams clones. I’m curious Becca. You claim that,
“Republicans are good people! But they’ve let their party leadership be taken over by those who don’t truly represent their most cherished positions.”
What are your positions of the various ideas in leadership? What does your philosphy stand for? Where do you stand say on foreign policy? How do you feel about taxation? If the Republican leadership doesn’t represent the beliefs of Republican voters does that mean that you support Republican voters? Or do you just wish to convey the sense that Republican leadership is out of touch so you can remove it and set you own agenda?
May 12th, 2006 at 12:06 pm
Hi Poetryman,
I suspect you’re flogging a dead horse here. Either Robert is yanking our chain by pretending to be a caricature of a wingnut, or he’s so far gone as to be unreachable.
Speaking from familial experience, it’s nigh impossible to break through to someone whose mind is utterly closed to new ideas, who does not even respect our right to believe differently than he does, and whose sense of vulnerability and victimhood leads him to see enemies in all the wrong places.
May 12th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
And thepoetryman. Normally:
“our would-be king is laughable `round the globe…”
isn’t really a good substitute for that debate you claim to want so much (Bring it on!). As for parties not being what they once were why don’t you take a good long look at the party formerly of J.F.K and Scoop Jackson. That certainly isn’t the Democratic Party I used to know either. They didn’t put politics ahead of country and they certainly didn’t place the foreign policy interests of the United States in the hands of the U.N.
The real problem for you is that you can’t argue your positions effectively. Or so you think. In reality people do understand what you stand for and they reject it. Then when that doesn’t come through for you you make the claim that your opposition is tyrannical or corrupt or uncivil or racist or trying to “run people down”. The only ones who need to calm down and open their eyes are the libs who think that President Bush and Conservatives are the greatest threat to America. So why don’t you wake up my friend?
Before that country you claim to love so much is destroyed by those who actually mean it harm?
May 12th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
I believe that you have every right to your opinion Becca. I also believe that dialogue and the formulation of new ideas is an evolving process. Have you every considered that it may in fact be you and your friends who engage in close minded behavior? Has that thought ever even crossed your collective minds?
May 12th, 2006 at 12:24 pm
It’s really sad, Robert, how all you can do is misrepresent our positions. Because that has been the total essence of every one of your posts.
You use derogatory names for anybody who doesn’t agree with you. You try to force us on the defensive by saying we’re in favor of things that we don’t support at all. You consistently mischaracterize our goals and desires. That’s just plain rude.
Friend, you really aren’t contributing to the solutions at all. And please consider this a warning: This blog happens to be my personal soapbox. I get no advertising revenues from it, and no recompense. It just so happens that a fortuitous Wall Street Journal trackback has jumped my usual site traffic by a factor of 10. I say right up front that I am a liberal/progressive, and if you can’t handle that, I recommend you wander back to the Free Republic or LGF or wherever it is you usually hang out.
I’ve tried to be tolerant, but your entire message is nothing but repetitions of right-wing talking points and baseless claims that liberal-progressives want to destroy America, that we don’t love our country every bit as much as you do. We’re not going there.
Well, I’m sorry you feel that way. As I’ve said in previous posts, an essential requirement for debate is an assumption of respect for another person’s right to hold an opinion other than ours. You have repeatedly expressed utter disdain for anybody who isn’t in that shrinking 29% who still think Bush is doing a fabulous job. And who doesn’t agree 100% with everything Bush and GOP are doing.
If you can’t be tolerant of other views and lay off the extreme rudeness, your commenting privileges will be revoked.
May 12th, 2006 at 12:34 pm
Then let me apoligize Becca if I have said anything that leads you to believe that I don’t think you love America every bit as much as I do. You love America. I’m sure of it. My problem with your side isn’t that you don’t love America (although there are those on your side who don’t). My problem with your side is your continual mischaracterization of your philisophical opponents and your inablility to acknowledge that you are in fact guilty of the same things you charge your opponents with. Disagreement is healthy. Disagreement spurs debate and debate spurs the formulation of new ideas. If you want to see intolerance and extreme rudeness why don’t you watch some video of an International A.N.S.W.E.R or Code Pink rally some time. Can you think of anything on the right that even compares with that particular level of rudeness and intolerance?
May 12th, 2006 at 12:58 pm
Yes, actually, Robert I can come up with examples of rudeness and intolerance that are even worse — and unlike those fringe groups, these radical right-wing folks get national media exposure. Here’s just a few:
****************
JERRY FALWELL: And I agree totally with you that the Lord has protected us so wonderfully these 225 years. And since 1812, this is the first time that we’ve been attacked on our soil and by far the worst results. And I fear, as Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, said yesterday, that this is only the beginning. And with biological warfare available to these monsters – the Husseins, the Bin Ladens, the Arafats–what we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact–if, in fact–God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve.
PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, that’s my feeling. I think we’ve just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven’t even begun to see what they can do to the major population.
JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU’s got to take a lot of blame for this.
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, yes.
JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I’ll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way–all of them who have tried to secularize America–I point the finger in their face and say “you helped this happen.”
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government. And so we’re responsible as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people, of course, is the court system.
JERRY FALWELL: Pat, did you notice yesterday the ACLU, and all the Christ-haters, People For the American Way, NOW, etc. were totally disregarded by the Democrats and the Republicans in both houses of Congress as they went out on the steps and called out on to God in prayer and sang “God Bless America” and said “let the ACLU be hanged”? In other words, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and spiritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time–calling upon God.
PAT ROBERTSON: Amen
******************
Rush Limbaugh:
* Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream.
* Given the National Organization for Women’s membership and proclivities, it’s no wonder that people now view the NOW gang as being obsessed with only two issues: abortion rights and lesbian rights.
* I prefer to call the most obnoxious feminists what they really are: feminazis. The term describes any female who is intolerant of any point of view that challenges militant feminism. I often use it to describe women who are obsessed with perpetuating a modern-day holocaust: abortion.
* A feminazi is a woman to whom the most important thing in life is seeing to it that as many abortions as possible are performed. Their unspoken reasoning is quite simple. Abortion is the single greatest avenue for militant women to exercise their quest for power and advance their belief that men aren’t necessary. Nothing matter but me, says the feminazi; the is an unviable tissue mass. Feminazis have adopted abortion as a kind of sacrament for their religion/politics of alienation and bitterness.”
* Wouldn’t it be great if anybody who speaks out against this country, to kick them out of the country? Anybody that threatens this country, kick ‘em out. We’d get rid of Michael Moore, we’d get rid of half the Democratic Party if we would just import that law. That would be fabulous. The Supreme Court ought to look into this. Absolutely brilliant idea out there.
******************
Neal Horsley’s own words describing the “war” he believes antiabortion people ought to declare against the U.S. government. Neal Horsley is the author of a website known as the Nuremburg Files and an advocate of killing abortion providers. (October 2001)
*****************
…I believe that feminists of the more aggressive persuasion are frustrated women unable to find the proper male leadership. If a woman were receiving that right kind of love and attention and leadership, she would not want to be liberated from that.”
-Tony Evans
***************
Lots from Ann Coulter:
“[Clinton] masturbates in the sinks.”—Rivera Live 8/2/99
“God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’”—Hannity & Colmes, 6/20/01
The “backbone of the Democratic Party” is a “typical fat, implacable welfare recipient”—syndicated column 10/29/99
To a disabled Vietnam vet: “People like you caused us to lose that war.”—MSNBC
“Women like Pamela Harriman and Patricia Duff are basically Anna Nicole Smith from the waist down. Let’s just call it for what it is. They’re whores.”—Salon.com 11/16/00
Juan Gonzales is “Cuba’s answer to Joey Buttafuoco,” a “miscreant,” “sperm-donor,” and a “poor man’s Hugh Hefner.”—Rivera Live 5/1/00
On Princess Diana’s death: “Her children knew she’s sleeping with all these men. That just seems to me, it’s the definition of ‘not a good mother.’ … Is everyone just saying here that it’s okay to ostentatiously have premarital sex in front of your children?”…”[Diana is] an ordinary and pathetic and confessional – I’ve never had bulimia! I’ve never had an affair! I’ve never had a divorce! So I don’t think she’s better than I am.”—MSNBC 9/12/97
“I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote.”—Hannity & Colmes, 8/17/99
“I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote.”—Politically Incorrect, 2/26/01
“If you don’t hate Clinton and the people who labored to keep him in office, you don’t love your country.”—George, 7/99
“We’re now at the point that it’s beyond whether or not this guy is a horny hick. I really think it’s a question of his mental stability. He really could be a lunatic. I think it is a rational question for Americans to ask whether their president is insane.”—Equal Time
“It’s enough [to be impeached] for the president to be a pervert.”—The Case Against Bill Clinton, Coulter’s 1998 book.
“Clinton is in love with the erect penis.”—This Evening with Judith Regan, Fox News Channel 2/6/00
“I think we had enough laws about the turn-of-the-century. We don’t need any more.” Asked how far back would she go to repeal laws, she replied, “Well, before the New Deal…[The Emancipation Proclamation] would be a good start.”—Politically Incorrect 5/7/97
“If they have the one innocent person who has ever to be put to death this century out of over 7,000, you probably will get a good movie deal out of it.”—MSNBC 7/27/97
“If those kids had been carrying guns they would have gunned down this one [child] gunman. … Don’t pray. Learn to use guns.”—Politically Incorrect, 12/18/97
“The presumption of innocence only means you don’t go right to jail.”—Hannity & Colmes 8/24/01
“I have to say I’m all for public flogging. One type of criminal that a public humiliation might work particularly well with are the juvenile delinquents, a lot of whom consider it a badge of honor to be sent to juvenile detention. And it might not be such a cool thing in the ‘hood to be flogged publicly.”—MSNBC 3/22/97
“The thing I like about Bush is I think he hates liberals.”—Washington Post 8/1/00
On Rep. Christopher Shays (d-CT) in deciding whether to run against him as a Libertarian candidate: “I really want to hurt him. I want him to feel pain.”—Hartford Courant 6/25/99
“The swing voters—I like to refer to them as the idiot voters because they don’t have set philosophical principles. You’re either a liberal or you’re a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster. “—Beyond the News, Fox News Channel, 6/4/00
“My libertarian friends are probably getting a little upset now but I think that’s because they never appreciate the benefits of local fascism.”—MSNBC 2/8/97
*******************
Those were available in just 10 minutes of looking around.
Here’s the problem, Robert: The folks on your side aren’t just rude. The most extreme among them want to subjugate women, oppress minorities, launch endless wars (or dare I say, ‘crusades’), and imprison or kill anybody who doesn’t agree with them.
We progressives want your brand of faux “conservatism” out of power. Your folks want us dead.
The groups you mentioned above are barely noticed, outside of the rallies and protests they attend. Your folks are on national television and radio. In the last election, John Kerry disavowed comments from the radical left; just this week, John McCain made nice with Jerry Falwell and is giving a commencement speech at Falwell’s private university.
That’s why it’s so hard to have a reasonable discussion with you.
May 12th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
Falwell was condemned soundly (by Conservatives) for his completely irrational comments. He is in no way in the mainstream of the Conservative movement.
Ann Coulter is engaging in each one of those quotes in tongue and cheek comedy. Its fake, designed to anger liberals by playing on every preconcieved notion they have of Conservatives. It isn’t real and to claim that it is is disingenuous.
Rush is engaging in a combination of tongue and cheek comedy in some of his quotes. In others his he is serious. I agree with some of his quotes and disagree with others. But in no way do any of these quotes project any hate or intolerance. If you ever listened to Rush consistently, you would also find this to be the case.
The wackos who advocate the killing of abortion doctors have been condemned soundly by every mainstream pro-life group in this country. They are not representative of the Conservative movement. Once again to claim that they are is disingenuous.
You made some pretty serious charges.
“The most extreme among them want to subjugate women and imprison or kill anybody who doesn’t agree with them.”
“Your folks want us dead.”
Who exactly in any mainstream Conservative group holds these views? Give me an example of any elected Republican official who has come out with these views.
And given that Republicans are still in control of every elected branch of government, why hasn’t this killing and imprisonment taken place? I mean, if thats what my side wants, what are we waiting for? I wonder that you have the gall to claim that my
“sense of vulnerability and victimhood leads him to see enemies in all the wrong places.”
Do you perhaps think this could be a description of your own worldview?
May 12th, 2006 at 1:41 pm
No, not really.
And those disavowals don’t seem to last very long — as shown by McCain’s making nice with Falwell. Nor do the people who really matter say anything. I don’t recall Bush disavowing Robertson’s and Falwells’s remarks.
Look, it’s been an interesting discussion, Robert — particularly after you dropped the name-calling. But I gotta get on with things in the real-world. Life’s a’calling. If you or others want to continue this debate, feel free, but do be aware that I’m moderating.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
I like the assertions of the conservatives here:
* Bush is failure is due to a lack of ideology, not any failing of the ideology itself.
* The triumph of their ideology is an historical inevitability.
Pretty much what the Communists say to explain their set backs.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:01 pm
Take care.
May 12th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
The remaining 29% would defend his getting caught in the barn with a cow. “Well, with all the liberals bashing him, he naturally would need an outlet.”
May 12th, 2006 at 7:52 pm
We’re well in to the BTKWB limit now.
May 13th, 2006 at 5:08 am
Good debate going there…
I would say Bush is not popular because he failed to deliver on his 2000 and 2004 promises:
‘Compassionate Conservative’ – where is compassion shown for poor and middle class people of USA; how much has he done to prepare US Citizens for the global economy and challenges of the 21st century. (At least Clinton started volunteer programs and National Service)
‘Social Security’ – In 2000, Social security was expected to run out of money something like 2025; what has he done to make it better. (At least Clinton eras had no deficit and were actively working to pay-off all debts)
‘Senior Citizen’ support – What has he done to make their life better? The age eligible to receive social security benefit is raised; Medicare and Prescription Drug is getting more expensive
‘Middle-East, Palestine/Israel’ conflict – whether we want to accept or not but there can be no peace unless this problem is solved; There was a roadmap for permanent solution and there was lot of hope. Is it gone any better or worse?
2004 Promise, Safety and Security – Does average US Citizen feel more secured than 2004?
Economy – you know all governments like to take credit when the economy is going well and blame others when falters. Do we think economy is better than 2000 or even 2004? Only part that government do is to ensure that global trade is fair, open and is growing without exploitation of labor or environment. Can Bush get high marks for that?
US Leadership – I have been living in USA for 21 years.
It used to be that US President and Leaders were seen by third world countries, as a helper/ peacemkaer and genuinely interested in making the poors of the third world live a better life.
Today it seems like foreign policy is run by bullies and ‘u scratch my back and scratch your back’ type of attitudes. Bullies and threat and fear might seem that the job is being done but our country gets alienated from the rest of the world. A good leader has high ethics, moral values and can feel the pain/problems of his citizens.
I will leave with the definition of ‘Compassion’ from dictionary:
1: a deep awareness of and sympathy for another’s suffering
2: the humane quality of understanding the suffering of others and wanting to do something about it
May God give all US Voters strength and wisdom to be strong, compassionate and non-violent.
Racer
Never missed a voting… a registered democrat but open to ideas because ultimately what is good for America is good for me.
May 13th, 2006 at 9:53 am
Actually, I think I’d put it more simply: Bush is as unpopular as he is because he’s proven himself to be untrustworthy, incompetent, and totally lacking in compassion or sympathy for his fellow humans.
What popularity he did have was purely a media creation, playing up qualities the man lacks utterly. However many times Fox News says some happy horsehockey like “He’s the kind of guy you’d like to have a beer with”, eventually people will come to the sad realization, “Maybe, but YOU are not at all the kind of person with whom he’d share that beer. He has his own friends. The powerful and the rich, and if you are neither of those, forget about him giving the least flying frack about you or your needs.”
May 13th, 2006 at 11:26 am
Glenn, Bush stole BOTH elections. Please don’t think that most Americans were foolish enough to vote for that idiot once, let alone TWICE. Didn’t happen.
May 13th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Richard, Bush v. Gore will live in infamy as the most corrupt decision ever rendered by the Supreme Court (unless they pardon Bush after his impeachment). The Court itself placed caveats in the decision that it was not to set precedent – in other words, cancelling out thousands of votes is a favor they inteded to bestow only on Republican candidates, not Democrats. Corrupt and criminal.
May 22nd, 2006 at 8:37 am
Seems to me that we (the people) are missing a basic point. Whether you are a liberal, a conservative, or something other, it is not in the best interests of our elected representatives to do anything but foster ideological arguments which, in the long run, are bullsh*t.\
If you take the fundamental goals of most Americans, to be safe, warm, prosperous, as a given (and you may disagree with that goal set – if so, add your own), the bottom line is that our leaders are failing us across the board.
I have no faith in any party which claims moral high ground. The Japanese thought they had a spiritual high ground when they started dropping airplanes into US ships in 1944-45. The Islamic terrorists of 2001 believed they had a moral high ground. People who shoot doctors over abortion and spike trees all think they hold the moral high ground.
Neither of the major parties has a moral strength, nor do either have any inclination to serve the people, only to stay in power.
When we argue about faith, religion in school, the projection of a strong America abroad, right to life or right to choose, welfare reform, and welfare cheats, we are dropping into emotional and ideological debates that might seem important, but lose all credibility given that they are based on how we feel or are made and encouraged to feel, not on how things really are.
Are people going hungry? Is the environment that we require to support us being husbanded and protected without excessive restriction? Is everyone carrying his or her end of the load? Are children learning? Are useful jobs being created? Are people happy?
Personally, I am tired of all the posturing and lies. If America was really standing for its values, of freedom and truth and fairplay, we wouldn’t hide behind these idiotic and emotional arguments.
Tinman
May 22nd, 2006 at 1:38 pm
Well said Tinman…
At the end of the day what really matters is whether each of the US Citizen has oppotunity to fulfill their dream based on their talent, skills and the value of their service.
The young should have opportunity to learn and grow, the aged should have opportunity to live a decent life after their hard 20-40 years of work life, the only super power should provide guidance and role model for developing nations to grow and minimize illiteracy and poverty.
Does it really matter whether republican or democrat, conservative or liberal are in power? Laws are written to create fair playing ground and like in any game, let the best player win..
Hopefully the 2006 election is based on real issues rather than on fear or personal attacks.
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:52 am
We can all make noise, really bad noise, but that
isn’t going to solve the problem. Everyone knows
that politicians use every thing they can to get hold
of the oval office. This is what’s wrong. They
don’t work together as they should. Iraq is a sore
spot, but its better there than here. Don’t forget,
Lyndon B Johnson’s war, ( Vietnam ) cost out country
56,000 plus some lives. What did that battle
accomplish? And, it was Democratic! How many re-
publicans took advantage of that situation to get
back into office?
What the president needs is our support. Everyone’s!
Mouth’s create his popularity, endangered talk. What
do they need in Irag? More power. Let’s get this
over with. The new president in Irag tells it that
way. The other’s over there that are thinking
of getting into the fight need some to see to help
them think properly. If no right step in the right
direction is taken, it will last forever. What
happen with the russian army in afhganistan? They
were there around seven years and didn’t win their
war.
Theres no to cut heads off. Sitting at a table and
discussing the problem and then finding a resolution
is how to do it. I firmly beleive before its over,
that is what their going to do.
I hope this war doesn’t come to land in our country.
The President isn’t at fault. This is why he has a
congress. The decided, republican and democratic
alike, to go to war. But now, its only George thats
at fault. Congress’s approval is around 18%. How
many are going to loose their seats because of this
this next election. The President has made tremendous
head ways. Check out how many of Irag’s top leaders
are dead or incarcerated. There are two to go
and that is bin laden and his one associate in
afghan.
We are however all empowered by our own minds. Some
understand, some do not! They however talk about
it the way they see it. That hurts eveyone.
Well, God Bless all. Thank you for letting me tell
it in my simple way.
June 4th, 2006 at 10:38 pm
Hello…
You report that 29% are in favor of what “king george”
is doing …Hmmmmmm? Why don’t you just say that 71%
dislike what hes doing? Things that make me go Hmmmm?
take care
June 4th, 2006 at 10:41 pm
I was just relaying the news.
Actually, that 71% number would be inaccurate, because every poll has some folks who respond with either ‘no opinion’ or ‘don’t know’.
Me, I’m just glad the majority of Americans have joined those of us who knew all along that in George W Bush, we have an utter disaster of a Presidency. And did, from the day he was installed by the Supreme Court on a party-line 5-4 vote.
Thanks for stopping by, Green. And also a hello to my other visitors and commenters. Thanks!
June 12th, 2006 at 11:05 am
I have a question to Robert’s remark on how the republicans stand up to tyranny and fight the injustices experienced in other countries (i.e. capturing Sadaam-a leader formerly supported finacially and politically by the U.S. until it was decided his capture would bolster one of the reasons for going to Iraq(oil). I guess its an understandable mistake for a president who bragged about his C average intelligence. Most of America appreciated that since they too have the same level of intelligence (C is at the height of the bell curve)and voted him into office a 2nd time. My question is this: Why is the genocide currently occurring in Sudan (2.5 million killed), Rwanda (1 million killed), Burundi (300,000 killed), etc. not the concern of our administration? Is it because there is no political advantages in helping out?, we cant afford to help out?, their race?, or we only help out those that can bring us political or financial gain (oil, etc)? I know Bush’s approval ratings have hit an all time low and is making Nixon look good but what bothers me is those that continue to approve of him. I guess those are the ones to the left of bell curve. They definitely are like-minded with Bush (i.e. if the man says he is going to do something on Monday he will continue on with his plan on Wednesday regardless of any contradictory facts revealed on Tuesday_. I realize Bush believes he is doing God’s work (he’s openly admitted that and I’m scared) and he doesnt believe in polls and that history will find him a great president (that scares me too). I also know he believes more in his decisions regardless of the facts and has surrounded himself with “yes” people. I doubt he has ever been engaged in a healthy debate about any of his decisions since he either gets rid of those who do or they resign (i.e. Collin Powell). He was asked once what his biggest mistake was and what he would do differently now? This president could not think of any. How can anyone trust someone that doesnt have enough insight into their own behavior to respond in such a way. The only way to describe it is “stupid”. We always underestimate the number and power of stupid people. The stupid are very dangerous especially since they do not know they are such. The actions of stupid people bring no gain to others nor themselves making them the most destructive. Since they have no insight into their behavior there is no chance of them changing. They must surround themselves with people of like minds. They believe they are always right regardless of the facts and quickly rationalize and/or blame others for mistakes blamed on them. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Thanks for letting me vent.
June 12th, 2006 at 11:47 am
Feel free to vent, Lisa.
Bush frightens the hell out of me, too, because he simply refuses to engage in even the least degree of self-examination. Compound that with a deliberately cultivated lack of curiosity for details and stunning intellectual laziness… it’s no wonder America went from near universal sympathy and support after 9/11 to being feared and reviled all over the world.
About all I can figure with respect to Bush’s hardcore supporters is they, too, simply do not want to admit they could be mistaken. And furthermore, there is a certain degree of stubborn intransigence — a cult of victimhood, if you will, where anybody but them — super-conservative, fundamentalist, and red-state American — is seen as an enemy. Why else do we keep seeing complaints about the so-called ‘liberal media’, abrogation of international treaties, and a general attitude that “if America does it, it can’t be wrong” — not to mention this bizarre desire for an Ultra-Daddy King figure in their faux cowboy President?
About all I can figure — and this comes from a discussion with a fellow whom I know and like very much, but who is a diehard Republican (a hard thing to be in the south SF Bay area) — is a lot of them fixate on a few issues near and dear to them. They believe 100% that the Republicans share this value and that the Democratic Party does not. No amount of information or data seems to sway them either. This one believes the Dems will tax him to death.
Another I know believes that only the Republicans will guarantee his 2nd amendment gun rights. Still others are focused on same-sex marriage and/or abortion rights — believing the R’s are somehow more caring of life and morality than the D’s.
What has been happening though is that more and more of the diehards are coming to realize that the R’s don’t really care about them all that much. Or their pet issues. Hence the libertarian R’s have been getting peeled away. As have many of the ones who believe in a non-interventionist foreign policy. Plus there are LOTS of non-hypocrite fundamentalist Republicans who are seeing that while Bush and his friends ‘talk the talk’, they don’t ‘walk the walk’. I mean the genuine ‘compassionate conservatives’ — who think we shouldn’t be bombing civilians in Iraq (and now know we invaded based on lies), but we *should* do something about Dafur. For instance.
Thing is, as Bush’s approval numbers keep dropping to Nixonian levels and more and more honest, decent right-leaning Americans are peeled off, we’re left with the core. Those who never change their minds, whatever the facts. And furthermore, those who, as their numbers dwindle, actually get more stubborn — because the sweet paranoia of being a beleagured group — victims of the nasty world — is darkly attractive.
June 15th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
I agree Becca. This may be an unpatriotic thing to say but part of me is glad Bush was re-elected because if he hadnt been then all we would be hearing now is..”only if Bush was president then things wouldnt be going wrong, etc.” However, Bush and his folks had to do alot of damage before Clinton’s bj finally got put in the background. I primarily vote democratic but I always look at the candidates and do not vote just because of belonging to a party (which I may change). I am dissappointed in the Democratic party and believe they could have handled things differenty than they have but I guess it’s pretty frustrating to work with a congress so laden with the opposite party with no end in site if Bush has his way (which he has thus far). Perhaps the silver lining to the dark cloud we are under could be the emergence and support of a good independent party (i.e. libertarian) but probably not.
I just wish we had a government where both sides get heard and important issues are debated without the blind adherance to a party because the party stands for this or that. We have angered so many other countries at this point in time that I believe it is going to take many years if not decades to win back the respect of the rest of the world and in the mean time I think we are probably due a fall (which I dont like to admit nor ponder). Those still sticking by us probably have to just like we continue to stand by those who sell us oil (like a junkee not wanting to piss off his dealer so he can continue to get his stuff and in other cases like an elderly person forced to put up with an adolescent because they have the strength and driver’s license to get them to the hospital if need be).
I can understand the frustration and anger of other countries whose past goes back many centuries having to put up with our arrogance and new found position as a world power. I believe that’s why many Americans dont like France and their arrogance because we are projecting on to them a quality we dont like in ourselves. It’s as if we went from barbarism to decadence and skipped civilization (not mine–but wish it was) and believe we have the right to tell others how to live. As a country we are very adolescent in our thinking and actions (idealistic and we know everything and then some) and worst of all we tend not to keep our word. We support people who later we dispose them. We always try to act in our best interests even when in the long run it is not. We do not look far enough ahead towards the consequences of our actions today and that is going to bite us in the ass in the end which it has already.
This is the 2nd time ive sat down to type a short response and have went off. Well, at least no one is forced to read it.
June 15th, 2006 at 11:00 pm
I think you make great points, Lisa, and thank you so much for contributing. I actually agree very much with what you’re saying, and read it all quite voluntarily. *grins*
I need to mention though that as of this evening I’m turning off blog comments temporarily. My partner and I are moving to India for a time, leaving this Sunday. The shut-down is temporary, hopefully, until I can get something approaching reliable access again. Might be about a month. If you care to drop me a line, please feel free to write me at admin(at)rebeccamorn.com (replace the ‘at’ with the @ symbol).
Cheers,
Becca
October 30th, 2006 at 10:50 am
George W. Bush and the Republican way of cover-ups, lies, and more!
Bush will get what he wants no matter what.
Bully.
Break the law.
Lie.
Then come up with reasons why he is right.
Well guess what?
Bush is wrong!
You do not spy on Americans without legal permission.
That is KGB like.
The courts are starting to agree.
You do not go to war with another country without proof of the need for war.
Iraq was no threat to the United States.
Yes, Saddam Hussein was evil and had a lot of people killed, but how many Iraqi citizens have been killed since this war started?
How many of our brave service men and women have been killed in Iraq?
How many more will die?
Iraq right now, is in the worst mess it has ever been in.
This was not the case before Bush started this war.
Hey Bush: This war is against terrorists, not with countries.
WMD? Not there!
Did you know that George W. Bush once made fun of the issue of Weapons of Mass Destruction?
He did, and in front of some shocked people during a black-tie event in 2004.
He said…. (While looking under a piece of furniture) “Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be here somewhere.”
Then, while pretending to look out of a window, Bush laughed as he said….. “Nope, no weapons over there.”
While he was laughing, there were men and women fighting and dying in Iraq because of WMD.
George W. Bush should be removed from office because of that alone.
Face it, Bill Clinton lied about having sex, and was impeached because of it.
George W. Bush however, did far worse, as he laughed at the very people who are fighting for the United States of America!
Bush laughs at a lot of things.
While we were under attack, he just sat there.
He has no clue about how to run things.
Speaking of running, that is what many Republicans are doing right now.
Running from their own corruption.
How many are in trouble now?
From Nixon/Agnew to Scooter and Cheney, all we get from Republicans are cover-ups, lies, and more.
Even President Reagan’s defense secretary, Caspar W. Weinberger, who recently passed away, was so bad, that George H. W. Bush had to bail him out with a pardon to help save the Republican name.
Face it…. the Republican Party is a disgrace.
Time for a change.
It is also time for us to take back our country from the Republican mess that YOU are paying for.
I am,
GEORGE VREELAND HILL
* Here are some tidbits of note:
President Clinton left us SO MUCH money.
Bush spent it all.
The United States is now in debt.
In fact, we have borrowed money from China!
Think about that.
We owe money to China.
A country that sides with North Korea.
That is the Bush spending policy.
Spend, and then owe.
Bush is an idiot.
Did you know that some Republicans will not have their pictures taken with Bush?
True!
They fear being seen with him.
The GOP is falling apart.
Mark Foley, a Republican member (now ex-member) of Congress, has sent many e-mails with perverted sexual content to a sixteen year old boy.
This is the same man who while in Congress, backed a bill that was meant to protect children from child predators.
Foley himself, is a man who preyed on a child with lust.
What is also incomprehensible, is the fact that many Republicans knew of Foley’s behavior, and yet, did not take a hard stand against this until it became public news.
If I had a teenage son and/or daughter, I would not want them to go near any Republican leader for fear of either or both becoming a victim of a sick Republican pervert.
Dennis Hastert, is a typical Republican who thirsts for power.
If he knew of Foley’s perverted actions with underage kids before they became public, then he must step down.
However, since he thinks in terms of power more than helping people, he will not step down from his position.
This is the Republican way.
Personal power over the people.
Hunger for money combined with cover-ups, lies, tricks, and more so they can keep their power.
It is sad to see the total mess in Washington and overseas that these Republicans blame on others.
Blame the kids who run errands for them as if to say…..”If if it were not for the page program, then those kids would not have been here for Foley and others to exploit them.”
Blame Clinton for not doing enough with terrorists, while Bush keeps sending troops to Iraq while North Korea and Iran build massive weapon’s programs.
Hey Republicans: If you did not like the job Bill Clinton did, then do something about it.
After all, you have had six years to do it.
Blame, blame, blame.
The real blame is on the Republican Party.
If they do not take responsibility and handle things, then maybe they should all step down.
Ever since Bush has been in office, North Korea has been very busy with their missile and nuke programs.
Because of this, they are now a grave threat to the world.
Iran is also busy doing the same things, only they are more vocal about what they want to do with their weapons.
What has Bush been doing during all of this?
Sending troops to Iraq.
Ha ha, that is real bright.
There were no WMD in Iraq, but we are there anyway instead of going to where the WMD really are.
If Bush just sits there like he did during 9/11, then we will have a catastrophic event somewhere in the world, or a nuke at the doorstep of Los Angeles.
Bush has lost total control of things, and like Iraq, he has no clue how to deal with it.
Our Republican leaders have failed to catch bin Laden, even though Bush said that his capture was a top priority.
When it became evident that bin Laden was not going to be caught any time soon, Bush then said that it did not matter if we capture him.
Say what?
The fact is that Bush changed his mind to save face.
We have left our borders open to let millions of rapists, thieves, loafers, and killers enter our country.
These numbers are since 9/11.
Much of California’s bad economy was blamed on Gray Davis, but the fact is, that illegals broke California.
Why was that not stopped?
In New Hampshire, during the 2002 election for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Robert C. Smith, the New Hampshire GOP hired GOP Marketplace of Virginia, to jam another phone bank being used by the state Democratic Party in an effort to turn out voters on behalf of then-governor Jeanne Shaheen on Election Day.
John E. Sununu, the Republican candidate, won a narrow victory.
Wikipedia, a free on-line encyclopedia, states that three men have been convicted of, or pled guilty to, federal crimes and sentenced to prison for their involvement as of 2006. A fourth is under indictment.
However, investigators and those who have followed the scandal closely believe that there were more people involved at the national level.
It has been suggested that some high-ranking Republican Senate leaders were aware, and more recently records showing phone calls from the political operative convicted of engineering the scheme have raised questions as to whether officials in the Bush Administration were involved as well.
According to The Raw Story, the fourth man indicted in this phone-jamming scheme, will argue at trial that the Bush Administration and the national Republican Party gave their approval to the plan, so says a motion filed by his attorney.
CIA leaks.
Bush giving the finger to people.
Would FDR have done that?
Most of us have heard of Rush Limbaugh, the Republican wacko who can’t keep his foot out of his mouth.
Limbaugh has been busy questioning the severity of the disease that Michael J. Fox is suffering from, known as Parkinson’s.
Limbaugh based his knowledge on the matter by comparing the condition of Fox to a couple of people who also have Parkinson’s disease.
Limbaugh is not a doctor, but thinks that he is an expert on Parkinson’s because of what he has seen.
The fact is that Michael J. Fox supports Democrats and stem cell research, and Limbaugh is trying to make a fool out of him, thus making another voice for the Democrats look small.
Limbaugh even mimicked the actions of Parkinson’s disease in front of a camera.
Think about that!
Limbaugh made fun of Parkinson’s disease.
He did that to make the Democrats look small, and the Republicans look big and brave.
Limbaugh, like other Republicans who have questioned the severity of Fox’s condition, are very sick people.
They laugh at those who are sick if they are Democrats.
Limbaugh has now blamed the media for the story after millions of people thought his actions to be repulsive.
This is the same Rush Limbaugh who once make racial comments about Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, Donovan McNabb, who is African-American.
Limbaugh is obviously an athletic supporter, except he is the kind you wear.
Limbaugh is a typical Republican who will hurt other people to get what he wants.
When Arnold Schwarzenegger ran for office, he said that he would fund his campaign with his own money, and not accept money from outside interests.
Well, as we now know, he took MILLIONS from others while running for office.
These “other” special interest people have more interest in their pockets and their own standing, than in the interests of California.
Arnold’s interests are with wealth and fame.
These “others” and Arnold go hand in hand.
I think we also need an answer from Arnold as to why he took two jobs with muscle magazines so soon after taking office.
This was at a time when California needed him the most.
After all, he said he would be there for the people.
Again, it seems that Arnold put himself ahead of California.
Of course we can’t forget that when it gets close to election time, we always see many road signs that support Democrats start to disappear.
Hum, I wonder what side the sign thieves are on?
Is this the Republican way of gaining the edge?
Republicans can’t stand the truth.
When a topic comes up that exposes them, these cowards will discredit the reporter or change the subject in order to made themselves look good.
Their tactics no longer work.
The people are on to these Republican cowards who can’t fess up.
My thoughts on Iran:
Iran may be a threat in the future, but it is not a threat now.
We have time to think about what to do with Iran.
We need to start thinking about the best ways to solve problems in the Middle East, and not create new ones.
Because Bush and the Republican Party have no clue how to fix the mess we are in with Iraq, it is best that he and they do nothing with Iran.
Wait until the voters pick better leaders, and believe me, that will not be a hard thing to do.
George Vreeland Hill
October 31st, 2006 at 9:51 am
Well said, and exeedingly thorough, Mr. Hill. Thanks so much for your comments!
-Becca