Posted on 08/14/2011 5:14:32 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
I wouldn’t call Laura Ingraham trampy but she is definitely snarky and abrasive. I find it difficult to listen to her anymore.
I would refine that and say there is little we do know about him. There can be little if any question that super powerful govt. agencies have been blackening web pages on his behalf for some time and we are owed an explanation.
Please see my post 294 for my assessment of her MTP appearance.
kabar, her judge picks comments were great as you say, and she also said to Gregory’s asking if she would appoint an atheist judge, the same exact answer she gave on appointing a gay one.
Their views on the Constitution, their fitness to serve, “and whether they agree with my views”.
Those would be her questions and she would never ask, are you gay, are you an atheist, etc.
I’m interested in hearing about what happened at Harvard. Something stinks there.
There is a huge ratings war going on in the 9AM-12PM Eastern time slot. Laura, Boortz and Glen Beck are all duking it out with audiences in the millions at stake. Any of the three are capable of having kick ass shows any day of the week or being unairable. If you want stability listen to Rush and many time Hannity, especially his first hour. Bill Bennett is improving rapidly as well.
The BBA was part of cut, cap, and balance. Yes, it is a long process, but a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.
I like her stress on a growing economy. Our revenues are in part lacking because we aren’t growing, many are unemployed and on public assistance - the latter, further draining the treasury.
Growing the economy does grow revenue, but that is not going to be done overnight either. Moreover, if we don't fix our structural problems associated with the entitlement programs, we will be no better off. 10,000 baby boomers are retiring every day and will continue to do for the next 20 years. By 2030 one in five residents of this country will be 65 and older, about twice what is now. And there will be two workers for every retiree compared to 3.3 today and 16 in 1950. This has major ramifications in terms of the entitlement program costs and our ability to support them.
Medicare already spends more than it receives in dedicated taxes and premium payments. As baby boomer retirees begin to flood the system, the impact will be felt by every other federal program:
• Currently, Medicare claims about 15 percent of federal nonentitlement tax dollars.
• By 2020, Medicare deficits will claim one in every five federal tax dollars that are not already dedicated to Medicare and Social Security.
• This means that in just 9 years the federal government will have to stop doing one in every five things it does today if taxes are to remain at their current level and projected Medicare benefits are paid on behalf of the disabled and the elderly.
• By 2030, the deficits in Medicare will claim one in every three general revenue dollars; by 2050, they will claim one in every two.
Exactly, Occidental and other schooling as well. It’s all a mystery from his real name on.Is he still Barry Soetoro and if not when was it changed?Questions never end.
She certainly did.
I won’t list them for you, however, because of who you are on these threads.
They were all spot on.
Oh grow up.
My critique was based upon the way she handled him. It was weak, unfocused, unsure, and well..it didn't look Presdiential. She had ample opportunity to solidly refute him, put him down, defend her viewpoints..which as you corectly say, are held by the majority of Americans..instead, she weakly repeated that "her position is that marriage is between a man and a woman."
She needs to recognize IMMEDIATELY what it took Palin a year to learn..that the MSM is NOT her friend..it is her avowed ENEMY...and she needs to go right at them..in their face...
That is his nickname in TX. IF he is the candidate against o, I will vote for him, but I am tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Great post and not just because I couldn’t agree with you more.
Bachman said over and over in response to Gregory’s continually ridiculous question over whether she would hire a gay for a cabinet post that she had three critera...1-is he or she qualified 2-are they competitant individuals 3-do they generally align with her on the major issues.
What the hell’s wrong with this? She didn’t say she WOULD NOT appoint a homosexual, she said what she said. Gregory, having received the Democrat irrelevant questions that American does not sit around worrying about all night, kept nagging at her like a poisoned Fishwife.
Please don’t forget we have a homosexual as head of the Dept. of Education, a gay fellow who wants to reach way beyond the sort of stuff on sexuality that should not be taught in schools. Bachman’s answer covered the bases in that she wouldn’t disqualify an individual because of their sexual orientation except where a certain sexual identity might not be appropriate.
We get this out here in la la land although most of us still aren’t losing sleep over a matter that took up 1/3 of a Meet the Press hour. This is NOT, go with me here, a news organization trying to open up public debate on an important American issue. It’s a Meet the Press carrying the water for one political party and nothing less.
Nagging and getting in one’s face over anything is just bad manners and meant to shake that person. Let’s not condemn that innocent individual that had this done to them as being somehow incapable.
It was awful how that man behaved, I don’t know how he can sleep nights.
I’m not sure Ann C changed. We liked her caustic criticisms of lefties but she once lived with a Muslim, and a lot of her quirks are coming to the front. I don’t see the “rules” request (for photos of her when mentioned) much either. Too skinny. Whoops. Can I say that? Oh, and I disagree with your one by one analysis that this and that candidate can’t beat the Kenyan. At this rate a warm body will win (ask Rush). But... but we want the best we can muster for us and U.S. (not just to beat the Kenyan).
Would anyone expect a Presidential candidate to say that he/she would practice sexual orientation discrimination in his/her hiring practices? Do they want Bachmann to commit political suicide?
In concept she is obviously for balancing the budget. Even a law, if it were properly drafted. (Many versions are bad ones, and that is what Dems would go for.)
She was opposed to that bill because she opposed raising the debt ceiling. (She has the American people on her side on that one. The ignoramuses. /s)
Yes, it is extreme what would result. At the same time, she used that fact to point out how extreme our spending and borrowing are. After we pay a few “musts pay”, we are then having to borrow to pay for everything else. And it gets worse every day, not better.
Revenues and expenditures for people on government programs are a big part of it, too.
She is actually on to something...it wouldn’t take too long to begin to free up businesses to hire people and invest because everywhere she goes people in business tell her what is wrong and why they are frozen in place. The worst is Obamacare, then Dodd Frank, then taxes.
She said it will take a House, a 60 vote Senate, and a President to really go to town on the problems, quickly.
She’s right about that.
Which is a very odd take since the consensus on the thread was completely different then yours. Could it be your are letting your Pro Palin biases color your analysis?
Friend, she stated the position of the American people. Marriage is between a man and woman per the American people.
She would be admired for her composure and the points she did indeed get to make despite Gregory’s wild antics.
I just disagree. I don’t think she looked weak. I think she looked about as strong as she could given what he did to her. But he did not make her look bad, he made her look verbally assaulted, she was not trying to look like Winston Churchill or Maggie Thatcher in her prime, she was representing herself and her values and views and economic concerns as well as the “people’s candidate” that she is.
She did not overreach and try to be some powerful gut fighter. She elevated the level of discourse.
She did well.
There’s a fine line.
She was on the right, not wrong, side of that line...my opinion.
Would like to see Luntz show this to a focus group.
She was more “Presidential” later with Chris Wallace. But on the other hand, he did not verbally assault her. Just asked asinine questions...
Just finished Dr Jerome Corsi’s book “Where’s the Birth Certificate” and it provide a lot of fertile aid to expose this giy. Too bad the book took a tumble when Bambi released the fake BC, but Jerome gives us much good research and documentation (many exhibits). One thing we need is for at least one battleground state to pass a state law requiring a long form BC for every presidential or VP candidate since “natural born” citizenship is specific requirment for office, unlike Senator or dog catcher). That would really heat it up. Bambi has spent over $2 Million in lawyer fees to hide all this stuff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.