UPDATE 6/24–Bill Maher made exactly this joke on Friday. Great minds…
48 comments on “Eric Holder declared to be in contempt of Congress”
“Everything old is new again…”
Forty years just seems to pass like lightning, doesn’t it?
Are you sure that isn’t Congress is Contemptible????
Ba-DUM-bum.
Typical PAD non-response.
oh hello darin. where have you been?
Typical Darin nonsense.
I’ve held Eric Holder in contempt ever since he helped Marc Rich buy a presidential pardon from Bill Clinton.
So this is how the Republicans will solve the jobs and economic problems, I guess. They have no other ideas other than what has never worked before.
“I have nothing but contempt for this court!” is still my favorite line from the original Transformers movie.
Second favorite: “Me Grimlock kick butt!”
“Oh šhìŧ! Now what are we going to do?” is perhaps not my favorite line from that movie, but it’s the one that makes me grin the widest.
I think that was Groucho’s line originally – if it wasn’t Lord Julius, it was someone else of about the same vintage.
Gee. Liberals go with the flow of the joke and conservatives spin around on the stick they have up their collective ášš. Who’d’ve seen that coming? Oh wait: Everybody.
PAD
I agree with you, PAD. Right-wingers are such a humorless lot. Those racists should learn to see the humor in the deaths of at least 200 Mexicans, and one border patrol agent.
Malcolm, it’s just too bad that the right-wingers led by that crook Issa weren’t as concerned about the program when their party-boy Pres was in charge. (I also seem to recall that Issa was pretty much supportive when DUBYA claimed executive privilege when Congressional Dems were trying to get documents from that administration for a Dem-led investigation.)
And, Malcolm, I *REALLY* don’t think the GOPers or their right-wing associates are the least bit concerned about the deaths of ANY Mexicans. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to hear that the right-wingers openly laugh at the thought of Mexicans dying. (They certainly don’t seem to care about those Mexicans who die while making an illegal crossing, so why would they care about Mexicans dying as the result of drug cartel violence in their own country? Violence which was exacerbated by the DUBYA Administration’s original policy.)
Are you kidding? The Right has a wonderful sense of humor.
.
How else can you explain the fantastic practical jokes they’ve been playing on the American people (Bush43, Palin, etc.)?
Proving the rule there, are we, Malcolm?
PAD
It’s the political game, played with all the hypocrisy by both sides.
PAD is right, it’s better just to laugh at it all.
“Proving the rule there, are we, Malcolm?
PAD”
Naw, I’m just pointing out Democrat projection is all.
Malcolm, With all due respect you really need to relax a bit. This is the second time in a little over over a month – the other being the Hugh Laurie bit – PAD had sought to lighten things and tell a joke and you automatically go to battle stations. Neil C. did too, but you seem unable to let it go. PAD wasn’t even making a point about “Fast and Furious”. he was making a joke. Kind of like this one:
.
“A friend of mine told me that in the morning he had to deal with a liar, at noon he had to deal with a thief and in the late afternoon I had to deal with a crook”. “I responded, ‘Oh, my God! What a horrible day! At least it’s not likely you’ll have to go through that again.” “To which my friend responded,’I go through it every day. I work for a Congressman.”
.
Get it? It’s a joke. And it’s okay not to automatically make everything a right-left battle. It really is. It’s okay for people just to be people. It’s okay to forget about right-left when 5-year-olds are being told they’re going to hëll for singing “God Bless The USA”, no matter which politician had them there in the first place.
.
Just as it’s okay to feel anger at those who protest a gay soldier’s funeral, whether you believe in gays in the military or not.
.
It’s okay to forget about left-right for at least a bit when you see the now viral video of an elderly woman being bullied to the point of tears.
.
And it’s okay to enjoy a bipartisan chuckle every once in a while. If we get to the point where we’re all so angry we can never laugh, what’s the point?
To be fair, it’s someone on the liberal side that Congress has gone after, so going with the flow of the joke and making fun of Congress “supports” the liberal side.
I imagine things might go differently if Congress were holding a Republican in contempt.
Impressive sneering disdain, Malcolm. You should be a pundit.
I’ve been visiting this sight for about six years now. By coming here, I’ve learned from the left posting here that Republicans are racist, sexist, homophobic, and any other type of bigoted white males that want to poison drinking water, exploit the poor, boil the earth, invade bedrooms, and establish a fascist theocracy so they can make a dollar. If you disagree with any of those characterizations of the GOP, feel free to speak up.
And when I show the same general attitude back at you, “you libs”* comment on my sneering disdain? When people try to carry on an intellectual conversation with me, I try to respond in kind. When I’m met with sneering disdain, I can speak that language too.
*Thank you for pointing out that phrase. I’d been using phrases like “Those who call themselves liberal” or “Northeastern Liberals” to distinguish the fact that the left isn’t liberal. The phrase “you libs” is less cumbersome, and yet gives me the personal satisfaction of not calling you something you aren’t.
Malcolm, to quote Josiah Bartlett, I’d be a bit more impressed with your moral indignation if it weren’t quite so covered in crap.
I know plenty of Republicans who don’t fit any of those categories. I simply speak out when I see Republican pundits being áššhølëš and Republican politicians being áššhølëš. And hey, guess what: I do the same thing when I see Democratic pundits and politicians doing the same thing. But right wing commenters here always blissfully ignore that, because it runs counter to their myopic view of not only this site (not sight) but the world in general.
PAD
Jerome, you’re right. In both cases, pet peeves of mine were hit, and I didn’t walk away when I should have. I apologize to all who endured it.
“right wing commenters here always blissfully ignore that, because it runs counter to their myopic view of … the world in general.”
And we now have a scientific explanation for this as the following (from an article from last year’s GLOBE AND MAIL) suggests:
“Liberals and conservatives don’t think alike. And it turns out the structures of their brains are often different too.
A new study from researchers at the University College London have found that people who consider themselves liberal tend to have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain believed to be have an “executive function,” which controls how we process information. Those who consider themselves conservative tend to have a larger amygdala, which is linked to emotional detection.
The scientists say their findings match previous evidence that liberals are better at dealing with conflicting information and that conservatives are better at recognizing threats.
“Previously, some psychological traits were known to be predictive of an individual’s political orientation,” researcher Ryota Kanai said in a press release. “Our study now links such personality traits with specific brain structure.””
It does explain a lot, doesn’t it?
Starwolf, the only things those studies explain is how to spot gullible types who will grasp onto anything to try to win an argument without all that hard thinking and stuff. Let’s ignore the obvious point that it’s a little hard to make these correlations when “liberal” and “conservative” are such subjective terms. In this very forum some have claimed that what we call “liberal” in this country would be considered “conservative” or “moderate” somewhere else–so who knows what the ones tested in London were like. “Conservative” can mean anything from hardline communist in China, Ayn Randian douchebag in college, Ray Bradbury…you get the point.
And one can play the silly game right back at those who would use this to paint conservatives as frightened people ruled by the lizard part of the brain (as some liberals tried to do when this came out). See, a small amygdala is linked to sociopathy. Far from just being some danger-recognizing leftover from the mesozoic, the amygdala helps with long term memory, emotional intelligence, recognizing the emotions of others, and how many friends one has. So gee, I suppose one could use that to try to paint the president as a friendless sociopath unable to learn from the lessons of the past to appreciate the dangerous situation his policies are derpy derpa derp…really, why aren’t people more embarrassed by this sort of thing?
When I see someone using this kind of argument, I just assume they have nothing better. Admittedly, it will help you get published at Salon or Glenn Beck’s website but that seems a small recompense for showcasing one’s ignorance.
I agree with Bill.
Of course, people with more regimented, order-loving personalities will naturally gravitate to social/religious/political movements that are more organizing.
But in countries where communism is strong, you will have leftists with thinking patterns that are very similar to hardline American Christians. Since in those countries, communism is the main organizing force.
Starwolf: And we now have a scientific explanation for this as the following (from an article from last year’s GLOBE AND MAIL) suggests:
…[quote from article] …
It does explain a lot, doesn’t it?
Only that the nature vs nurture argument continues.
“You’re a liberal/conservative because of the structure of your brain” would be far overstating the conclusions the scientists arrived at.
They are very contemptible about joking!
Oh, and Peter, remember the correct term is “You liberals” or just “Libs” with a disdainful shrug.
No, “of” not “for”.
The opposite of progress is Congress.
Yes, I know, old. But still entirely applicable.
Wish I could point and claim we Canadians had the high moral ground on this one but, no. Our GOVERNMENT was found in contempt of Parliament. Twice, yet! And the voters’ reaction in the subsequent election? “Yawn, wake me when something important happens.” Yeah, it’s got a lot of us really depressed.
Canadians can get depressed. Now I’M depressed.
If you see an unhappy Australian, we’re all in trouble.
PAD: Gee. Liberals go with the flow of the joke and conservatives spin around on the stick they have up their collective ášš.
To be fair, it’s someone on the liberal side that Congress has gone after, so going with the flow of the joke and making fun of Congress “supports” the liberal side.
I imagine things might go differently if Congress were holding a Republican in contempt.
Riiiggghhhttt … meanwhile, nothing is really being done about actually trying to solve any of the various problems facing the country as a whole.
Oh, yeah ~ forgot for a moment ~ that’s not what Congress is supposed to do.
Of course not. Congress is supposed to do everything it can to make sure that Obama accomplishes as little as possible so they can get the White House back.
PAD
That does seem to be their game plan doesn’t it? Tread water or the equivalent thereof until such time as they feel their fondest wishes have been granted.
“Work? Pssh! Forget that ~ that’s for the folks who elected us. Just sit back, grumble loudly, raise money, and get re-elected.”
Sounds so simple. Too bad it doesn’t really accomplish much of anything short of showing one’s own self-imposed limitations.
Considering the fact that the Democrats had a lock on both houses of Congress for Obama’s first 2 years and still have control of the Senate, that statement can charitably be said to make no sense whatsoever. Unless the “they” that you mention are the Democrats, which kind of makes sense in a sort of logical kind of way. I could see why Dems who haven’t lost all touch with reality wouldn’t consider the socialist in the Oval Office one of their party and would want to recapture the White House for themselves.
Obama is no more a socialist than Bush was a fascist.
But it seems like contemporary right-wingers have defined “socialist” as anyone who doesn’t think Ayn Rand is God.
And on the other end of the spectrum, Joseph W, your assertions that GOPers are not the least bit concerned about dead Mexicans is vile, repugnant, repulsive and disgusting and not even worth responding to, especially on a thread that started with humor.
A simple question, Jerome: Do you really think that a party whose leaders advocated creating electrified fences, to the cheers of their followers–fences that would presumably be fatal if touched by men, women, children, trying to come here seeking a better existence–you think they ARE concerned about Mexican lives? Or at least making it a priority?
I mean, sheer humanity says that the average GOPer is concerned about human life. But can you at least acknowledge, at least understand, that sometimes the GOP actively seems to position itself as the party of not giving a dámņ?
PAD
*Sigh* I promised myself to stay out of this thread after apologizing, but I’ve just got to know – Is the electric fence proposed actually lethal? I’ve always assumed it would be similar to the ones we had on the farm that, while unpleasant to touch, were not lethal. I know Cain said it would be lethal and then walked the lethal part back as a joke. Even if you believed he was sincere, you have to admit that if he walked it back, he must have believed it didn’t play well with the GOP primary voters.
Seriously, Malcolm? With a straight face, that’s the angle you’re taking? We meant an electric fence, but not necessarily a lethal one! Now of course it could still instantly kill someone with a heart condition, or a child, or the elderly, but as long as the intention is not to kill, then our hearts are pure.
And sure, sometimes our presidential aspirants talk about it being lethal, but hey, they’re just kidding. Because we right wingers are renowned for our sense of humor when it comes to joking about killing Mexicans.
Why did he walk it back? Presumably because his handlers told him to. Why would they tell him to? You choose to decide that it’s because the joke appalled GOP primary voters…the same ones who cheered the whole idea of electric fences in the first place. I choose to think it was because his handlers were concerned that cavalierly joking about killing Mexicans wouldn’t play in a general election, should Cain have made it that far.
PAD
George Orwell once observed that we live in a time when reasonable men must restate the obvious. I don’t have to just restate the obvious, I have have to restate what I’ve stated before. I don’t blame you on this account, because you have a lot of people posting here, and I’d never expect you to remember everyone who posts a personal detail. So I’ll post a couple items from my heritage I’ve posted before and add on to it.
If there is any gringo who takes a dim view of killing Mexicans, it’s me. My grandfather Robertson (and yes, my particular breed of Robertson is Polish) was born in an American colony in Mexico. Since his parents were absentee, he was raised by Mexicans and Indians. As a result, my very Republican grandfather, the same man who quit the John Birch Society for being too soft on communism,* raised his sons to view Mexicans in a good light. My father passed it down to me. When we moved to Chicago from Oregon, I actually got the šhìŧ kicked out of me more than once for telling the white kids the Mexicans weren’t bad, or necessarily illegal. And it is this same heritage my family has with Mexico that takes me from being just angry over the Fast and Furious scandal, to being enraged by it. I have followed it since right-wing CBS first broke the story, and every new revelation has had me spitting nails. The only thing this administration can do to infuriate me more in foreign relations is undermine Poland, especially in its diplomatic struggles with Russia. Oh wait…
Sure, I have no problem with a non-lethal electric fence. I’ve lived on or around farms for a good part of my life. I’ve been zapped by them on occasion from the time I was five, until only a few years ago. Sure it’s a jolt, but it’s not lethal. The only person I can see as ~maybe~ being at risk is someone with a pacemaker, and I’ve known people with pacemakers who’ve continued to work around them, so I’m guessing the risk isn’t that great.
But for argument, let’s just say the plan was to put up a lethal electric fence that would instantly vaporize anything that touched it. I would vehemently fight it, but I have little say in border policy, so the lethal fence goes up. Do you really think Mexicans are so stupid as to try to climb a twenty foot tall fence topped with razor-wire marked “electric” in both words and pictures? Do you think mothers will pick up the children they’re trying to smuggle into America for a better life, and toss them against these fences to check the voltage? The assumption I make is that most Mexicans, like any other racial group, would do things to ensure their continued survival like not touching fences clearly marked high voltage.
Sure, a few people at a rally may cheered or laughed when Cain said what he did. Is it fair if I judge all Dems by every inappropriate thing that a people at left-leaning rallies have laughed or cheered at? And no one actually got killed when Cain made his lame suggestion/joke. It only remained in theory. Fast and Furious has taken 200-300 lives at least. Conservatives are accused of having a double standard on this issue. What makes the libs any better if they don’t demand an accounting?
*I only bring up the John Birch thing to burnish his credentials as a conservative Republican.
See, right there is where you make the same type of broad generalizations based on a single event or person that you accuse the GOP of doing. It WAS a joke. Do you really think Cain, as he said in part of it, expected immigrants to fight alligators? Or to really build a moat the side of a football field? You talk about conservatives having a stick up their ášš, but this was yet another incident that demonstrated the “humorless liberal”.
.
You want to paint Cain as a GOP leader when he led polls for a few weeks. How about these leaders who actually worked to get a comprehensive immigration plan that had a “path to citizenship” in it AND a wall through to help find a permanent solution to our immigration problem in a humane way: George W. Bush, John McCain and Trent Lott. One was President at the time and there was a reason so many Hispanics voted for him. He offered a deal that was a true compromise – and extremists on both the left AND killed it.
.
Yet I don’t remember too many members of the media or the opposition party giving Dubya a break when he was pushing a bill that would have accomplished something for everyone. I don’t remember the unsusual suspects on the Left praising him for being bipartisan and reasonable. Hispanics might give Bush credit then and more of them might vote Republican! Couldn’t have that. So he got no cover or wind at his back and the status quo remained. It almost killed McCain’s chances in 2008 also, yet I don’t remember too many stories about how reasonable and brave he was for issue either
Who isn’t?
—
Nice. O…and for all the humorless whiners above…Bite me !
• 
“Everything old is new again…”
Forty years just seems to pass like lightning, doesn’t it?
Are you sure that isn’t Congress is Contemptible????
Ba-DUM-bum.
Typical PAD non-response.
oh hello darin. where have you been?
Typical Darin nonsense.
I’ve held Eric Holder in contempt ever since he helped Marc Rich buy a presidential pardon from Bill Clinton.
So this is how the Republicans will solve the jobs and economic problems, I guess. They have no other ideas other than what has never worked before.
“I have nothing but contempt for this court!” is still my favorite line from the original Transformers movie.
Second favorite: “Me Grimlock kick butt!”
“Oh šhìŧ! Now what are we going to do?” is perhaps not my favorite line from that movie, but it’s the one that makes me grin the widest.
I think that was Groucho’s line originally – if it wasn’t Lord Julius, it was someone else of about the same vintage.
Gee. Liberals go with the flow of the joke and conservatives spin around on the stick they have up their collective ášš. Who’d’ve seen that coming? Oh wait: Everybody.
PAD
I agree with you, PAD. Right-wingers are such a humorless lot. Those racists should learn to see the humor in the deaths of at least 200 Mexicans, and one border patrol agent.
Malcolm, it’s just too bad that the right-wingers led by that crook Issa weren’t as concerned about the program when their party-boy Pres was in charge. (I also seem to recall that Issa was pretty much supportive when DUBYA claimed executive privilege when Congressional Dems were trying to get documents from that administration for a Dem-led investigation.)
And, Malcolm, I *REALLY* don’t think the GOPers or their right-wing associates are the least bit concerned about the deaths of ANY Mexicans. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to hear that the right-wingers openly laugh at the thought of Mexicans dying. (They certainly don’t seem to care about those Mexicans who die while making an illegal crossing, so why would they care about Mexicans dying as the result of drug cartel violence in their own country? Violence which was exacerbated by the DUBYA Administration’s original policy.)
Are you kidding? The Right has a wonderful sense of humor.
.
How else can you explain the fantastic practical jokes they’ve been playing on the American people (Bush43, Palin, etc.)?
Proving the rule there, are we, Malcolm?
PAD
It’s the political game, played with all the hypocrisy by both sides.
PAD is right, it’s better just to laugh at it all.
“Proving the rule there, are we, Malcolm?
PAD”
Naw, I’m just pointing out Democrat projection is all.
Malcolm, With all due respect you really need to relax a bit. This is the second time in a little over over a month – the other being the Hugh Laurie bit – PAD had sought to lighten things and tell a joke and you automatically go to battle stations. Neil C. did too, but you seem unable to let it go. PAD wasn’t even making a point about “Fast and Furious”. he was making a joke. Kind of like this one:
.
“A friend of mine told me that in the morning he had to deal with a liar, at noon he had to deal with a thief and in the late afternoon I had to deal with a crook”. “I responded, ‘Oh, my God! What a horrible day! At least it’s not likely you’ll have to go through that again.” “To which my friend responded,’I go through it every day. I work for a Congressman.”
.
Get it? It’s a joke. And it’s okay not to automatically make everything a right-left battle. It really is. It’s okay for people just to be people. It’s okay to forget about right-left when 5-year-olds are being told they’re going to hëll for singing “God Bless The USA”, no matter which politician had them there in the first place.
.
Just as it’s okay to feel anger at those who protest a gay soldier’s funeral, whether you believe in gays in the military or not.
.
It’s okay to forget about left-right for at least a bit when you see the now viral video of an elderly woman being bullied to the point of tears.
.
And it’s okay to enjoy a bipartisan chuckle every once in a while. If we get to the point where we’re all so angry we can never laugh, what’s the point?
To be fair, it’s someone on the liberal side that Congress has gone after, so going with the flow of the joke and making fun of Congress “supports” the liberal side.
I imagine things might go differently if Congress were holding a Republican in contempt.
Impressive sneering disdain, Malcolm. You should be a pundit.
I’ve been visiting this sight for about six years now. By coming here, I’ve learned from the left posting here that Republicans are racist, sexist, homophobic, and any other type of bigoted white males that want to poison drinking water, exploit the poor, boil the earth, invade bedrooms, and establish a fascist theocracy so they can make a dollar. If you disagree with any of those characterizations of the GOP, feel free to speak up.
And when I show the same general attitude back at you, “you libs”* comment on my sneering disdain? When people try to carry on an intellectual conversation with me, I try to respond in kind. When I’m met with sneering disdain, I can speak that language too.
*Thank you for pointing out that phrase. I’d been using phrases like “Those who call themselves liberal” or “Northeastern Liberals” to distinguish the fact that the left isn’t liberal. The phrase “you libs” is less cumbersome, and yet gives me the personal satisfaction of not calling you something you aren’t.
Malcolm, to quote Josiah Bartlett, I’d be a bit more impressed with your moral indignation if it weren’t quite so covered in crap.
I know plenty of Republicans who don’t fit any of those categories. I simply speak out when I see Republican pundits being áššhølëš and Republican politicians being áššhølëš. And hey, guess what: I do the same thing when I see Democratic pundits and politicians doing the same thing. But right wing commenters here always blissfully ignore that, because it runs counter to their myopic view of not only this site (not sight) but the world in general.
PAD
Jerome, you’re right. In both cases, pet peeves of mine were hit, and I didn’t walk away when I should have. I apologize to all who endured it.
“right wing commenters here always blissfully ignore that, because it runs counter to their myopic view of … the world in general.”
And we now have a scientific explanation for this as the following (from an article from last year’s GLOBE AND MAIL) suggests:
“Liberals and conservatives don’t think alike. And it turns out the structures of their brains are often different too.
A new study from researchers at the University College London have found that people who consider themselves liberal tend to have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain believed to be have an “executive function,” which controls how we process information. Those who consider themselves conservative tend to have a larger amygdala, which is linked to emotional detection.
The scientists say their findings match previous evidence that liberals are better at dealing with conflicting information and that conservatives are better at recognizing threats.
“Previously, some psychological traits were known to be predictive of an individual’s political orientation,” researcher Ryota Kanai said in a press release. “Our study now links such personality traits with specific brain structure.””
It does explain a lot, doesn’t it?
Starwolf, the only things those studies explain is how to spot gullible types who will grasp onto anything to try to win an argument without all that hard thinking and stuff. Let’s ignore the obvious point that it’s a little hard to make these correlations when “liberal” and “conservative” are such subjective terms. In this very forum some have claimed that what we call “liberal” in this country would be considered “conservative” or “moderate” somewhere else–so who knows what the ones tested in London were like. “Conservative” can mean anything from hardline communist in China, Ayn Randian douchebag in college, Ray Bradbury…you get the point.
And one can play the silly game right back at those who would use this to paint conservatives as frightened people ruled by the lizard part of the brain (as some liberals tried to do when this came out). See, a small amygdala is linked to sociopathy. Far from just being some danger-recognizing leftover from the mesozoic, the amygdala helps with long term memory, emotional intelligence, recognizing the emotions of others, and how many friends one has. So gee, I suppose one could use that to try to paint the president as a friendless sociopath unable to learn from the lessons of the past to appreciate the dangerous situation his policies are derpy derpa derp…really, why aren’t people more embarrassed by this sort of thing?
When I see someone using this kind of argument, I just assume they have nothing better. Admittedly, it will help you get published at Salon or Glenn Beck’s website but that seems a small recompense for showcasing one’s ignorance.
I agree with Bill.
Of course, people with more regimented, order-loving personalities will naturally gravitate to social/religious/political movements that are more organizing.
But in countries where communism is strong, you will have leftists with thinking patterns that are very similar to hardline American Christians. Since in those countries, communism is the main organizing force.
Starwolf: And we now have a scientific explanation for this as the following (from an article from last year’s GLOBE AND MAIL) suggests:
…[quote from article] …
It does explain a lot, doesn’t it?
Only that the nature vs nurture argument continues.
“You’re a liberal/conservative because of the structure of your brain” would be far overstating the conclusions the scientists arrived at.
They are very contemptible about joking!
Oh, and Peter, remember the correct term is “You liberals” or just “Libs” with a disdainful shrug.
No, “of” not “for”.
The opposite of progress is Congress.
Yes, I know, old. But still entirely applicable.
Wish I could point and claim we Canadians had the high moral ground on this one but, no. Our GOVERNMENT was found in contempt of Parliament. Twice, yet! And the voters’ reaction in the subsequent election? “Yawn, wake me when something important happens.” Yeah, it’s got a lot of us really depressed.
Canadians can get depressed. Now I’M depressed.
If you see an unhappy Australian, we’re all in trouble.
PAD: Gee. Liberals go with the flow of the joke and conservatives spin around on the stick they have up their collective ášš.
To be fair, it’s someone on the liberal side that Congress has gone after, so going with the flow of the joke and making fun of Congress “supports” the liberal side.
I imagine things might go differently if Congress were holding a Republican in contempt.
Riiiggghhhttt … meanwhile, nothing is really being done about actually trying to solve any of the various problems facing the country as a whole.
Oh, yeah ~ forgot for a moment ~ that’s not what Congress is supposed to do.
Of course not. Congress is supposed to do everything it can to make sure that Obama accomplishes as little as possible so they can get the White House back.
PAD
That does seem to be their game plan doesn’t it? Tread water or the equivalent thereof until such time as they feel their fondest wishes have been granted.
“Work? Pssh! Forget that ~ that’s for the folks who elected us. Just sit back, grumble loudly, raise money, and get re-elected.”
Sounds so simple. Too bad it doesn’t really accomplish much of anything short of showing one’s own self-imposed limitations.
Considering the fact that the Democrats had a lock on both houses of Congress for Obama’s first 2 years and still have control of the Senate, that statement can charitably be said to make no sense whatsoever. Unless the “they” that you mention are the Democrats, which kind of makes sense in a sort of logical kind of way. I could see why Dems who haven’t lost all touch with reality wouldn’t consider the socialist in the Oval Office one of their party and would want to recapture the White House for themselves.
Obama is no more a socialist than Bush was a fascist.
But it seems like contemporary right-wingers have defined “socialist” as anyone who doesn’t think Ayn Rand is God.
And on the other end of the spectrum, Joseph W, your assertions that GOPers are not the least bit concerned about dead Mexicans is vile, repugnant, repulsive and disgusting and not even worth responding to, especially on a thread that started with humor.
A simple question, Jerome: Do you really think that a party whose leaders advocated creating electrified fences, to the cheers of their followers–fences that would presumably be fatal if touched by men, women, children, trying to come here seeking a better existence–you think they ARE concerned about Mexican lives? Or at least making it a priority?
I mean, sheer humanity says that the average GOPer is concerned about human life. But can you at least acknowledge, at least understand, that sometimes the GOP actively seems to position itself as the party of not giving a dámņ?
PAD
*Sigh* I promised myself to stay out of this thread after apologizing, but I’ve just got to know – Is the electric fence proposed actually lethal? I’ve always assumed it would be similar to the ones we had on the farm that, while unpleasant to touch, were not lethal. I know Cain said it would be lethal and then walked the lethal part back as a joke. Even if you believed he was sincere, you have to admit that if he walked it back, he must have believed it didn’t play well with the GOP primary voters.
Seriously, Malcolm? With a straight face, that’s the angle you’re taking? We meant an electric fence, but not necessarily a lethal one! Now of course it could still instantly kill someone with a heart condition, or a child, or the elderly, but as long as the intention is not to kill, then our hearts are pure.
And sure, sometimes our presidential aspirants talk about it being lethal, but hey, they’re just kidding. Because we right wingers are renowned for our sense of humor when it comes to joking about killing Mexicans.
Why did he walk it back? Presumably because his handlers told him to. Why would they tell him to? You choose to decide that it’s because the joke appalled GOP primary voters…the same ones who cheered the whole idea of electric fences in the first place. I choose to think it was because his handlers were concerned that cavalierly joking about killing Mexicans wouldn’t play in a general election, should Cain have made it that far.
PAD
George Orwell once observed that we live in a time when reasonable men must restate the obvious. I don’t have to just restate the obvious, I have have to restate what I’ve stated before. I don’t blame you on this account, because you have a lot of people posting here, and I’d never expect you to remember everyone who posts a personal detail. So I’ll post a couple items from my heritage I’ve posted before and add on to it.
If there is any gringo who takes a dim view of killing Mexicans, it’s me. My grandfather Robertson (and yes, my particular breed of Robertson is Polish) was born in an American colony in Mexico. Since his parents were absentee, he was raised by Mexicans and Indians. As a result, my very Republican grandfather, the same man who quit the John Birch Society for being too soft on communism,* raised his sons to view Mexicans in a good light. My father passed it down to me. When we moved to Chicago from Oregon, I actually got the šhìŧ kicked out of me more than once for telling the white kids the Mexicans weren’t bad, or necessarily illegal. And it is this same heritage my family has with Mexico that takes me from being just angry over the Fast and Furious scandal, to being enraged by it. I have followed it since right-wing CBS first broke the story, and every new revelation has had me spitting nails. The only thing this administration can do to infuriate me more in foreign relations is undermine Poland, especially in its diplomatic struggles with Russia. Oh wait…
Sure, I have no problem with a non-lethal electric fence. I’ve lived on or around farms for a good part of my life. I’ve been zapped by them on occasion from the time I was five, until only a few years ago. Sure it’s a jolt, but it’s not lethal. The only person I can see as ~maybe~ being at risk is someone with a pacemaker, and I’ve known people with pacemakers who’ve continued to work around them, so I’m guessing the risk isn’t that great.
But for argument, let’s just say the plan was to put up a lethal electric fence that would instantly vaporize anything that touched it. I would vehemently fight it, but I have little say in border policy, so the lethal fence goes up. Do you really think Mexicans are so stupid as to try to climb a twenty foot tall fence topped with razor-wire marked “electric” in both words and pictures? Do you think mothers will pick up the children they’re trying to smuggle into America for a better life, and toss them against these fences to check the voltage? The assumption I make is that most Mexicans, like any other racial group, would do things to ensure their continued survival like not touching fences clearly marked high voltage.
Sure, a few people at a rally may cheered or laughed when Cain said what he did. Is it fair if I judge all Dems by every inappropriate thing that a people at left-leaning rallies have laughed or cheered at? And no one actually got killed when Cain made his lame suggestion/joke. It only remained in theory. Fast and Furious has taken 200-300 lives at least. Conservatives are accused of having a double standard on this issue. What makes the libs any better if they don’t demand an accounting?
*I only bring up the John Birch thing to burnish his credentials as a conservative Republican.
See, right there is where you make the same type of broad generalizations based on a single event or person that you accuse the GOP of doing. It WAS a joke. Do you really think Cain, as he said in part of it, expected immigrants to fight alligators? Or to really build a moat the side of a football field? You talk about conservatives having a stick up their ášš, but this was yet another incident that demonstrated the “humorless liberal”.
.
You want to paint Cain as a GOP leader when he led polls for a few weeks. How about these leaders who actually worked to get a comprehensive immigration plan that had a “path to citizenship” in it AND a wall through to help find a permanent solution to our immigration problem in a humane way: George W. Bush, John McCain and Trent Lott. One was President at the time and there was a reason so many Hispanics voted for him. He offered a deal that was a true compromise – and extremists on both the left AND killed it.
.
Yet I don’t remember too many members of the media or the opposition party giving Dubya a break when he was pushing a bill that would have accomplished something for everyone. I don’t remember the unsusual suspects on the Left praising him for being bipartisan and reasonable. Hispanics might give Bush credit then and more of them might vote Republican! Couldn’t have that. So he got no cover or wind at his back and the status quo remained. It almost killed McCain’s chances in 2008 also, yet I don’t remember too many stories about how reasonable and brave he was for issue either
Who isn’t?
—
Nice. O…and for all the humorless whiners above…Bite me !