Top Repub in Congress Lazy&Hits Bar at 5

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Top Repub in Congress Lazy&Hits Bar at 5
34
Thu, 07-01-2010 - 12:16am

Yikes. Watch it yourself. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/joe-scarborough-on-john-boehner-not-the-hardest-worker-and-in-bars-by-five-pm/

This is from a Republican TV personality who used to be a prominent Republican in the House and criticizes the Dems all the time.

This is what the Republicans are about at the core today. I wish it were not so. We wouldn't be in such bad shape if it were not so.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Fri, 07-02-2010 - 10:32pm
He is coasting, for sure. Maybe that's also why he wanted to privatize Social Security and invest it in the stock market right before the crash. An energetic rocket scientist he is not.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 12:15am

By the way, did you see the historians' latest verdict on another prominent Republican? President George W. Bush is the worst President in the modern era according to them.


LOL! Must have been the 50 million people he liberated, or getting rid of Saddam. Maybe it was all that economic expansion, even after 9/11.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 10:36am

"LOL! Must have been the 50 million people he liberated"

You sound like a liberal stereotype. You do know that don't you?? Are you aware how much this totally unfunded misguided war cost us in lives and our pocketbooks? The whole reason we stuck our nose in that hornets nest turned out to be a mistake based on half baked, trumped up evidence at best.

Your comment is really amazing to me. I have no doubt that if W. were a liberal you would have gone for the jugular because of that dumb war. Republicans today have no standards, just Fox talking points.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 4:42pm

Of course my comment is amazing to you. Common sense, logical thinking, and facts tend to amaze liberals. That happens when you manufacture a reality and believe that if you repeat it enough, people will believe it.


You are just going to hold on to the fact that they didn't find WMD in Iraq and claim that that was the absolute only reason to go to war. You will ignore the changes caused by 9/11, the UN resolutions, Iraq's breaking of the cease fire, and the general threat caused by Saddam. But go ahead, it is not unexpected.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2010
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 5:48pm
Really? The Obamessiah only ranked 15? Why he got a Nobel Prize for just being the Obamessiah...surely he has to be a little higher on the scale...maybe just a hair under Carter?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2010
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 6:04pm

And how quickly the bobbleheads ignore the FACT that it was the Democrats who claimed Hussein had WMDs two years before Bush was even elected.

And it was the Democrats who declared Hussein a threat to our national security.

And it was the Democrats who made "regime change in Iraq" the new US policy.

And it was their demi-clod himself, Bill Clinton, who said "The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world. The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people."

And it was their demi-clod himself, Bill Clinton, who said "it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."

I don't know if it's actually a dishonest attempt to re-write history, or if it's just that most libs so grossly ignorant...but the history will be written by the winners...and the record will not speak kindly of the corrupt Dems...and Barry will quickly join Carter as one of the worst Presidents in history.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 8:30pm

"You are just going to hold on to the fact that they didn't find WMD in Iraq and claim that that was the absolute only reason to go to war."

You clearly don't understand that you sound like a stereotypical liberal. And this comment is even more stereotypical liberal!

Let me spell out what you just said because you are not seeing it. You are arguing that we didn't go in because of a threat to our national security, namely WMD, that might have justified going to war. Instead, we went to war because we wanted to liberate an oppressed people.

Hmmmmmmmm. Don't you think we could make the same argument for running around liberating dozens of similar dictatorships in the world. Do you think there is a reason that the oppressive dictatorship that we decided to liberate people from just happened to be the one that Bush told us had WMD??

You do realize that your justification for war - the stereotypical liberal justification (actually, I am not sure liberals feel that way, it's just how Fox types try to stereotype them - would mean we would be bankrupt by now fighting a whole number of Iraq style wars.

And you claim to care about fiscal conservatism. LOL! This is why America should never ever ever elect these Republican jokers today back into power. They will bankrupt us next time they get the chance.

You do realize that the debt to GDP ratio for every Republican President since Nixon went way way up and actually went down under both Democratic Presidents.

Then again, I doubt you realize that.

Have a nice evening and good ongoing sleep.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-07-2010
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 8:45pm

>>> You clearly don't understand that you sound like a stereotypical liberal. And this comment is even more stereotypical liberal! Let me spell out what you just said because you are not seeing it. You are arguing that we didn't go in because of a threat to our national security, namely WMD, that might have justified going to war. Instead, we went to war because we wanted to liberate an oppressed people.

Knock! Knock! Anyone home?...

Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human rights found that Iraq continues to commit "extremely grave violations" of human rights and that the regime's repression is "all pervasive." Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by beating, burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands; children in the presence of their parents — all of these horrors concealed from the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state.

The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people, who have suffered for too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it and the security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate through cruelty and conquest and open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty in a unified Iraq.

If we meet our responsibilities, if we overcome this danger, we can arrive at a very different future. The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine, inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world. These nations can show by their example that honest government, and respect for women, and the great Islamic tradition of learning can triumph in the Middle East and beyond. And we will show that the promise of the United Nations can be fulfilled in our time.

Bush Iraq Speech To U.N. - NEW YORK, Sept. 12, 2002

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/12/national/main521781.shtml

and...

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the nonnegotiable demands of human dignity.

People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery, prosperity to squalor, self-government to the rule of terror and torture.

America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomen, Shia, Sunnis and others will be lifted, the long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin.

Iraq is a land rich in culture and resources and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time.

If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq, at peace with its neighbors.

George Bush's speech on Iraq - Cincinnati, Monday 7 October 2002

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/oct/07/usa.iraq

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sat, 07-03-2010 - 10:29pm

You are arguing that we didn't go in because of a threat to our national security, namely WMD, that might have justified going to war. Instead, we went to war because we wanted to liberate an oppressed people.


Thanks for your response, it is a good example of a disingenuous argument often used by the left.


Of course, I

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-24-2010
Sun, 07-04-2010 - 6:40pm

"Knock! Knock! Anyone home?...
Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human rights found that Iraq continues to commit "extremely grave violations" of human rights and that the regime's repression is "all pervasive." "

LOL! You sound more like a die hard stereotype of a liberal with every post!!

UN? Human rights?? This is why we should go to war? Then why didn't we preemptively attack, oops I mean liberate to use your lofty pie in the sky rhetoric, North Korea? Why not Sudan? I don't remember the Republicans saying Clinton should have finished the job in Sudan. Why not all the other dictatorships?

Seriously, the point that we should preemptively attack a nation simply to liberate it from a dictator is idiotic. There has to be a lot more to justify all out war, as opposed to sanctions and diplomacy. And when it came to our war in Iraq, it was obvious that that "something" was Bush's charge that Iraq was developing WMD. And he threw in baseless trumped up allegations that Iraq at the time had ties to bin Ladin - another whopper.

I am not writing this for you by the way. I am sure you will come up with some other retort of equal value. I am writing this for those who just might read your post and think it is factual or logical.