Friday, January 30, 2009



"In his Inaugural Address, President Obama promised to put an end to the petty politics that have come to dominate Washington.

Yet, today that message is threatened as the White House and their allies are making political threats rather than crafting a bipartisan economic stimulus plan," Cantor said. "Yesterday's vote was only the beginning of the process and House Republicans are committed to working with President Obama to find real economic solutions. We should not allow politics to destroy this process. Threats from unnamed White House sources undermine our national spirit of bipartisanship."
"In addition, President Obama should immediately disavow plans by some political groups who announced they will run attack ads against Republicans.

"Committed to working with President Obama to find real economic solutions"? You mean the way the Republicans demanded concessions, the Democrats gave them, and every single one of you voted against the bill anyway? This is like saying Lucy is "committed to working with Charlie Brown to kick the football". And a Republican, of all people, is now whining about "attack ads"? Awwwwwww, you're about to make me bust out crying.

Fuck you, Rep Cantor, and the swaybacked refugee from a glue factory you rode in on. This bill contains exactly the sort of things Barack Obama ran on: tax cuts for the middle class. Investment in infrastructure and schools. Investment in alternative energy. You know, the sort of things your party spent the whole election making fun of, because you had no plan of your own to offer other than more Bushonomics. And guess what? The people liked what they heard. Obama and Congressional Democrats won, and won big.

Even after all that, Barack Obama held out his hand to pull you onto the train, and you slapped it away. So stand on the station platform as the train pulls out without you. Stand there and cry.


Anonymous said...

The GOP suffers from what the Democrats suffered from for the longest time: A very shallow talent pool.

I despise the idea of single-party rule, since it didn't work under the Bush Administration, but let's face it. I have more fingers than the GOP has people in Congress who are worth a damn.

Your hope, Republicans, is not Sarah Palin. You can't put lipstick on Dan Quayle and get Ronald Reagan. Doesn't work. Your hope is to kick the current crop into retirement, spend a little time in the wilderness, and come back in eight to twelve years with fresh talent and, yanno, ideas?

The guys in there right now are basically against everything and have been for too long.

No wonder Mitch McConnell looks nervous. He's thinking, "I have to work with this idiots?"

GOP, you are the Democratic Party in 1988. Accept it and act accordingly.

Unless you'd like to see the Libs or the Greens or the Taxpayers Union usurp your position. (Hmm... The Greens as the counterweight to the Democrats. That might be fun! President Kucinich? I may have to go back into standup comedy for that!)

Todd Mason said...

Actually, rouge and Just for Men hair color on Dan Quayle is a pretty close approximation of Ronald Reagan.

Todd Mason said...

Yes, we Greens will boldly blow our chance to move into serious minority status, I'm sure.

We Libertarians, too. Nominating remarkably inappropriate ex-Georgia Housemenbers from the big parties was an excellent start toward new levels of irrelevance. Didn't even register well for either party in Georgia.

John McFetridge said...

This is like saying Lucy is "committed to working with Charlie Brown to kick the football".

Ha ha ha ha.

That's such a great line.

Gerard said...

That last paragraph was good.

Charlie Stella said...

JD wrote: “You know, the sort of things your party spent the whole election making fun of, because you had no plan of your own to offer other than more Bushonomics.”

The saddest part of this statement (and it is an accurate statement) is that the Dems followed it (Bushonomics) lockstep (much the way they gave el Busho pretty much whatever he wanted from 2006), including a rush to support the Bush-proposed bailout (plus $150 billion in pork) a couple months ago.

I’m not so sure I’d want to call the legislation passed yesterday Obama’s stimulus … or take pride in the partisan victory … because come judgment day (defined as the point at which Obama and the DEMS can no longer blame Bush or the REPS for whatever basement floor of the abyss the economy is at – say, for arguments sake, 5 years from now, after Obama is re-elected), with all that majority and no one else to blame if things get worse … that WAAAA just might turn into a YEA!!!!!!!

Not that the Reps might be wishing bad on the economy for the sake of their political hides …

Or that that would make them bad people if they did.

I’m just here to stir the shit before it gets stale.

FerfeLaBat said...

Here. A peace offering.

I fear what this bill will do to our economy when inflation kicks in. I sincerely wish they would pass a smaller, more targeted bill designed to hit the economy hard and immediately and portion off the rest for further discussion and analysis.

Charlie Stella said...

“That is the height of irresponsibility,” Mr. Obama said. “It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

The "height of irresponsibility," in my book, was giving those clowns all that gelt without stipulations on how they could spend it.

For the record ... expecting such responsibility for the "Greed is good" crowd, is pretty god damn naive.

Maybe they (including President Obama) should've considered such potential irresponsibility BEFORE they turned over all that coin.

JD Rhoades said...

Seems like the Republicans are going to use the same "Otter defense" with the bailout that they used with the Iraq war. Remember Otter's line from Animal House?

"Flounder, you can't spend your whole life worrying about your mistakes! Hey, you fucked up - you trusted us!"

JD Rhoades said...

Thanks for the peace offering, it supposed to be a link? It's highlighted but I can't seem to get it to open.

nathan s said...

"Fuck you, Rep Cantor, and the swaybacked refugee from a glue factory you rode in on."

Dusty, it's shit like this ^ that makes me proud to call you my friend. Excelsior!

Charlie Stella said...

JD, please don't take this the wrong way, but ...

Otter this … the Democratic Majority that had so much fun Bush bashing, pushed for Bush’s bailout proposal full throttle … and gave in when12 Republicans held out on the original $700 billion. They (the DEMS) then gave up a $150 billion perk on top of the original $700 billion and the 12 “holdouts” capitulated like France against Hitler (only quicker).

Obama supported the BUSH BAILOUT from its inception. They (Dems and Reps) turned over $850 billion without stipulations precluding “Wall Street” from doing whatever the hell they wanted. Hearing Obama call Wall Street irresponsible now … or McCaskill calling Wall Street “idiots” is the height of hypocrisy. It shows that at the very least, the Democratic Party is EQUALLY as incompetent as were the Republicans.

“Idiots?” Yeah, we sure are … for keeping both parties in power when there are and have been alternatives.

If everybody who says Ralph Nader, et al, are just “in the way” voted their conscience instead of what they believe is the lesser of two evils, irresponsible idiotic Wall Street wouldn’t have had $.02 (two cents) to give out for bonuses.

Honestly, if you’re going to blame just the Republicans (or exclude Obama) for the bailout, you have serious problems dealing with the facts.

Sorry, fellas (and gals), Obama was stripped of his teflon on the bailout when he voted for it twice.

JD Rhoades said...

Charlie, here's what I said about the bailout at the time:

It is true that Obama did refer to the plan as an "outrage"; however, he went on to say: "But we have no choice. We must act now. Because now that we're in this situation, your jobs, your life savings and the stability of our entire economy are at risk."

Frankly, I think that kind of grudging acceptance is about as close as any Americans are right now to supporting the bailout, and most of us aren't even that close.

Both Republicans and Democrats have failed to convince the public (including me) that using $700 billion to buy the bad debts of Wall Street millionaires who made stupid financial moves is going to benefit anyone but said millionaires.

What I said about Treasury Secretary Paulson: Don't believe a word this guy says. Get the oversight provisions in writing. Then get rid of this lying, power hungry hack Paulson.

See also this column.

So when you tell me the Wall Street bailout was a bad idea, you're preaching to the choir, brother.

Yes, both sides still supported it, largely because Bush and his Treasury Secretary were frantically telling all of us that if Congress doesn't vote for this money to be spent NOW NOW NOW, there'd be an IMMEDIATE FINANCIAL DISASTER, a collapse of Road Warrior proportions.

Yes, Obama was wrong in falling for the con. After eight years of Bush, anyone who believed a word those lying sacks of shit said ought to have their damn head examined.

But the con artists and their supporters don't have any standing to point that finger.

At least Obama pushed for changes in the plan, such as "a payback plan for taxpayers if the bailout succeeds; a bipartisan board to oversee the bailout; limits on any federal money going to compensate Wall Street executives; and aid to homeowners who are struggling to pay their mortgages." NONE of which were thought of by the Bushistas.

FerfeLaBat said...

it was a link to a new York Times article on the "Bacon Explosion" I found video:

FerfeLaBat said...

Charlie - "McCaskill calling Wall Street “idiots” is the height of hypocrisy."

It's populism - isn't it? As in guillotines and Auto da fe style governance. Should be entertaining if nothing else - we voted for this - well - not me - but a majority did.