Sarah Palin said the following at the TeaParty convention:
And now a year later, I got to ask the supporters of all that, how is that hopey-changey stuff working out for you?
Let me get this right, they are against Hope and Change from the President, but they are for change in regards to how our government works? They hate the Obama idea of Hope and Change -- and yet, they want to change Government? To what? What do they want? How are these Tea Partiers different from the GOP? Seriously, let's take a quick look:
Continue reading...
5 comments(Latest Comment: 02/10/2010 03:18:01 by TriSec)
Today is our 2,519th day in Iraq and our 3,047th day in Afghanistan.
We'll start this morning as we always do, with the latest casualty figures from Iraq and Afghanistan, courtesy of Antiwar.com:
American Deaths Since war began (3/19/03): 4375 Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03): 4236 Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 3912 Since Handover (6/29/04): 3516 Since Obama Inauguration (1/20/09): 147
Other Coalition Troops - Iraq: 325 US Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 984 Other Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 640 Contractor Employee Deaths - Iraq: 1,395 Journalists - Iraq: 335 Academics Killed - Iraq: 431
We find this morning's cost of war passing through:
$ 958, 720, 700, 000 . 00
And finally, we pause a moment to remember Vietnam Vet and Congressman John Murtha.
Sarah used a telepalm in Nashville. Obama didn't use anything at the Republican retreat in Baltimore during an unscripted Q&A and people are still talking like she is a serious politician. Scary thing is, no one thought Ronald Reagan could be elected either. Just some food for thought.
I didn't want to talk about Sarah and the tea party today, but I had to. I wanted to ignore this stupidity and not take it seriously. I can't --I'm angry. I don't quite get exactly where this tea party thing is going, but I am incredulously pissed that these people made not a peep before January 20, 2009. I am really resentful that they think they are the chosen ones to save this country-- acting as though millions of hard working activists for the past 8 years didn't exist. Continue reading...
28 comments(Latest Comment: 02/09/2010 02:03:58 by TriSec)
Elitism is the belief or attitude that those individuals who are considered members of the elite — a select group of people with outstanding personal abilities, intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other distinctive attributes — are those whose views on a matter are to be taken the most seriously or carry the most weight or those who view their own views as so; whose views and/or actions are most likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary skills, abilities or wisdom render them especially fit to govern.
Morning dear readers. Hey, here's a question: How's that hope-y, change-y stuff workin' out for ya?
This was a question posed by a folksy, small-town, working-class girl with a perky hairdo, a twinkle in her eyes and a bright and friendly "come-on-up-to-the-porch-for-a-lemonade" smile.
My response was: "How's that bitterness and status quo workin' out for YOU?" Hmmm?
Continue reading...
17 comments(Latest Comment: 02/08/2010 02:47:27 by Scoopster)
On my Honor Author: TriSecDate:02/06/2010 14:15:13
Monday, February 8 marks the 100th birthday of the Boy Scouts of America.
I've been a member of this organization since I joined as a boy myself when I was 8 years old. Like most of our recruiting, it was a friend that convinced me to join, and I've been at it ever since. My friend went on to make Eagle, but I did not...something I regret more and more each year. You all know I never left the organization except for a brief period when I was at college; once I graduated I returned to my 'home unit' and became Unit Commissioner, and ever since then I've filled a variety of roles at both the Boy Scout and Cub Scout level.
Now my own son and his friends are following the scouting trail; I'm his den leader (Bears) and Cubmaster, and we're all going along happily.
But what does it mean to be a scout? Most of you are at least familiar with our guiding principles, as outlined in the Scout Oath and Law. It's pretty straightforward and easy for kids to understand, since this is primarily a youth organization.
Or is it?
For years and years now, it seems that the only time Scouting is in the news is when we kick out an atheist or a gay and they go crying to the media about it. Nevermind the ocassional child predator that's out there. (And I'll note that the incidences in Scouting are statistically no different than any other youth organization or sport...but because it's the Boy Scouts, we get all the headlines.)
Did you know that there's actually a reason behind the vehement, conservative, right-wing direction that Scouting is headed? Many churches have a youth organization. Many scout troops are indeed chartered by churches. But there's one group that has declared scouting to be their "official" youth organization, and they do not run anything else.
Is it fair to tar an entire group with the same broad brush when it's only a few "bad apples" that are causing the problem? This seems to be an apt question as it relates to religious extremism. That label itself is somewhat nebulous in application - how would you apply it? How about someone who is willing to knowingly break the law because their beliefs compel them too?.. No? How about someone who hurts another person because their beliefs compel them too?
Continue reading...
73 comments(Latest Comment: 02/06/2010 05:07:39 by livingonli)
Yesterday it was the Democrat's turn to have question time with the President. In what looked more like a panel of people standing up for political campaign ads, Senate Dems stood forth to ask the president questions. Not surprisingly this debate was far more low key and even somewhat genial. Continue reading...
42 comments(Latest Comment: 02/05/2010 03:22:33 by Raine)
When I was young, it was pretty clear what the two major parties stood for. The Democrats stood for change, and the Republicans stood for the status quo. The Republicans were also supposed to be the party of fiscal discipline. That latter aspect was tossed out the window when Reagan took office and drove up deficits through accelerated military spending. When Bush took office in 2000, he (and congressional Republicans) trashed the rest of their legacy with actions both regressive and radical, trampling on Constitutional rights. What does the party stand for these days? It's impossible to tell - it seems they are only against things.
They are against anything the Democrats support, and against President Obama in particular. Nearly every legislative initiative put forth by the Democrats has been voted against en masse by the Republicans, even those that were originally Republican ideals, and supported strongly by them:
A poll released on Sunday shows that voters who identify themselves as Republicans have some pretty crazy ideas:
Should Barack Obama be impeached, or not? 39% said yes. For what?, I have to ask...
Do you believe Barack Obama was born in the United States, or not? 36% said no, with another 22% unsure.
Do you believe Barack Obama wants the terrorists to win? 24% said yes, with another 33% unsure.
Do you believe Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama? only 14% said no.
But that's just the voters that believe these crazy things, right?... No, even the elected officials - besides condemning legislation that supports their goals just because the Dems are writing it - believe some of the craziness. The Lt. Governor of TN isn't sure if President Obama is a U.S. citizen. He's running to be the governor of one of the 50 states and he's a "birther"??
A House Rep - Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) - has a great idea to help balance the budget: Cut Social Security benefits for those under 55 years old. That should go over well with the electorate.
Finally, we address the issue of the trials for terrorism suspects. When Bush did it, they crowed about what a success it was. Yet now that it's President Obama doing the same thing, suddenly it's the worst idea ever. In fact, they are trying to force the issue via legislation. Would they be doing this if it was a Republican president? Of course not.
I can't believe the voters are happy with this sort of "I'm against it" nay-saying to whatever the Democrats are supporting, to the point where their coming out against their own policies. We'll see later this year whether they are rewarded or punished at the polls for their bizarre behavior.
35 comments(Latest Comment: 02/03/2010 21:44:12 by livingonli)
Today is our 2,512th day in Iraq and our 3,040th day in Afghanistan.
We'll start this morning as we always do, with the latest casualty figures from Iraq and Afghanistan, courtesy of Antiwar.com:
American Deaths Since war began (3/19/03): 4375 Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03): 4236 Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 3912 Since Handover (6/29/04): 3516 Since Obama Inauguration (1/20/09): 147
Other Coalition Troops - Iraq: 325 US Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 973 Other Military Deaths - Afghanistan: 635 Contractor Employee Deaths - Iraq: 1,395 Journalists - Iraq: 335 Academics Killed - Iraq: 431
We find this morning's cost of war passing through:
$ 956, 095, 700, 000 .00
Here at Ask a Vet, we often tend to focus on the political, and the goings-on in Washington. Every now and again, however...we still remember the original intent of this column, focusing on the troops.
Let me ask everyone out there, which state do you think has the highest per-capita casualty rate? Surely it must be red-blooded, superpatriotic, God-fearing Texas? Maybe it's ultraconservative, ultrareligious South Carolina? I've blogged about this before. You're all wrong. It's liberal, peace-loving Vermont.
I think this sums up what happened in Baltimore best: "On Friday President Obama appeared before House Republicans in a historic televised Q & A and performed so well, afterwards GOP Aids said that allowing cameras to roll like that was a mistake. Come on Republicans, are you on such a Scott Brown high you thought you could take down Barack Obama by debating him? You realize debates are why he is President, right? Seriously, all you do is complain how Obama is all talk and then you invite him to a forum that is literally all talk. That's like saying lets see how tough Aquaman is once we get him in the water. I'm not saying you were out classed but the whole thing was like the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark when the guy charged at Indiana Jones with the sword and he just shot him." Continue reading...
47 comments(Latest Comment: 02/02/2010 02:32:01 by livingonli)
