I am not a fan of John McCain.  I will not vote for him in November.  He is wrong on too many issues.
Last summer I left the Republican Party.  As I stated then,
the Republican president along with a Republican Congress spent my tax dollars silly an…

If the Republican weren’t being such utter hypocrites about fiscal responsibility, the moonbat defenses would collapse a little and the Democratic politicians would have to follow a little more fiscal restraint also. The implication of this has been noted from other angles before: Republican lack of fiscal responsibility enables greater Democratic lack of fiscal responsibility.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 1:54 PM

I take it you weren’t posting here on this site when Republican commenters were screaming at the top of their lungs, protesting Bush’s Democrat-like spending habits. As a matter of fact, all true conservatives, on this site and elsewhere in the political universe were outraged at Bush. Enough so, that Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House.

But you know I’m having a hard time coming up with any example of liberal Democrats ever complaining about wasting money. It’s always been their modus operandi, and they dance in the streets when they see the redistribution of the wealth, from the producers in our economy to the lackeys who always have their heads in the government feeding trough looking for a handout.

I get your drift though, anything and everything that ever went haywire was Bush’s fault, even the Democrat’s lack of fiscal responsibility. So in your hypothesis, once the Republicans become fiscally responsible, then the Democrats will follow suit. Funny, I saw no evidence of this during the 40 some odd years the Dems controlled both the House and the Senate. But that was probably, uh, Eisenhower’s fault.

Are there monkeys flying around your house?

And my moonbat friends have no end of fun pointing out the deficiencies of the Republicans with respect to fiscal responsibility. It’s one of the most effective arguments that the mooonbats have. It helps the moonbats to view themselves as heroes when they are able to see the Republicans as total hypocrites.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 10:46 AM

On every major spending issue we have ever seen, your moonbat friends are supporting liberals who wanted to spend more. End of discussion.

Jaibones on March 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Well no, it’s the end of the discussion. This isn’t about the logic of the moonbat position. I’m talking about how the moonbats make their case to themselves. They refuse to look at the facts about Democratic spending and use Republican pork to defend their refusal to look–just the typical caviling of any religion. If the Republican weren’t being such utter hypocrites about fiscal responsibility, the moonbat defenses would collapse a little and the Democratic politicians would have to follow a little more fiscal restraint also. The implication of this has been noted from other angles before: Republican lack of fiscal responsibility enables greater Democratic lack of fiscal responsibility.

Being a senator. It’s not just a job, it’s a (whore’s) career.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Thanks for that list of moochers, fogw.

Add, they don’t fall under the Social Security system they imposed on us. That’s why they’re all multi-millionnaires when they retire, regardless of tenure. And we don’t even know about all the bennies, official, and otherwise. I despise them, left and right.

Preaching drinking water, while drinking wine:

…murmurings of the little harp-girl’s song in Heinrich Heine’s 1844 poem “A Winter’s Tale”

I know the authors, I know the tune,
I know it line for line
In public, water is all they preach;
While in secret they guzzle wine.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Second look at term limits.

And my moonbat friends have no end of fun pointing out the deficiencies of the Republicans with respect to fiscal responsibility. It’s one of the most effective arguments that the mooonbats have. It helps the moonbats to view themselves as heroes when they are able to see the Republicans as total hypocrites.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 10:46 AM

On every major spending issue we have ever seen, your moonbat friends are supporting liberals who wanted to spend more. End of discussion.

fogw, could you explain your list of the “top 21 moochers” better? I don’t even know if “mooching” measures something I could argue without embarrassment or not.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM

Try leeches, bloodsuckers or parasites.

Does that work for ya?

1 Robert Byrd (D-WV) January 3, 1959 ….. coming up on 50 years

Approaching 3.9 million dollars in income from salary alone.

Multiply that by at least ten to calculate supplemental income from kickbacks on earmarked projects.

Are you comfortable? Why yes, I make a good living.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

fogw, could you explain your list of the “top 21 moochers” better? I don’t even know if “mooching” measures something I could argue without embarrassment or not.

Here’s the top 21 moochers in the Senate. All in office at least 23 years.

Rank-Name-Date Elected

1 Robert Byrd (D-WV) January 3, 1959 ….. coming up on 50 years
2 Ted Kennedy (D-MA)November 7, 1962 ….. 40 year club
3 Daniel Inouye (D-HI) January 3, 1963 ….. 40 year club

4 Ted Stevens (R-AK) December 24, 1968 ….. 40 year club

5 Pete Domenici (R-NM)January 3, 1973 ….. 30 year club

6 Joe Biden (D-DE) January 3, 1973 ….. 30 year club

7 Patrick Leahy (D-VT) January 3, 1975 ….. 30 year club

8 Richard Lugar (R-IN) January 4, 1977 ….. 30 year club
9 Orrin Hatch (R-UT) January 4, 1977 ….. 30 year club
10 Max Baucus (D-MT) December 15, 1978
11 Thad Cochran (R-MS)December 27, 1978
12 John Warner (R-VA)January 2, 1979
13 Carl Levin (D-MI)January 3, 1979
14 Chris Dodd (D-CT)January 3, 1981
15 Chuck Grassley (R-IA) January 3, 1981
16 Arlen Specter (R-PA) January 3, 1981
17 Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)January 3, 1983
18 John Kerry (D-MA)January 2, 1985
19 Tom Harkin (D-IA)January 3, 1985
20 Mitch McConnell (R-KY) January 3, 1985
21 Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) January 3, 1985

Being a senator. It’s not just a job, it’s a career.

But earmarks is a no-brainer, this issue appeals to voters of all political stripes. The Republicans in Congress could help their brand immensely by getting behind this in a public way that forces the Dems to block it. Can we start another Harriet Miers/Amnesty uprising to keep these tools from screwing us over again?

I forgot DeMint, of course. He’s endorsed McCain and is an anti-amnesty hero along with Sessions and Coburn.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Actually, he first endorsed, and actively worked for, Mitt Romney.

Buy Danish on March 5, 2008 at 10:53 AM

Yes, but right at or after CPAC he did endorse McCain. So I’m curious who these GOP “heros” are who use immigration against McCain now (to help kill earmark reform, IMHO) and exactly how outspoken they were against amnesty a year ago?

What’s the point of working so hard and spending so much money to get these guys in office if they are just going to act like power-hungry Socialist Democrats?

Don’t be too discouraged thuja. Your moonbat friends have short term memory loss. They forgot about the New Deal, The Great Society and all the other fantastic social programs to come down the pike in the past 8o years.

Of course they can grouse all they want because either Dem candidate will continue to fleece them just as much, if not more, as the rest of us.

It bothers me too, but I remember who brought us to this point in time.

You people make me sick.

Instead of finding ways to pick fights with John McCain, perhaps the Senate and House GOP caucuses ought to try listening — not just to McCain, but also to the message voters have been trying to deliver for two years.

Only problem is Sen. McCain has also failed to listen to the message of voters, so it is an across the board problem with both parties now.

I too see 535 lumps of ass lard that needs to be thrown out with the trash by Anti-incumbant voting or term limits. Either way would suit me.

But I ain’t holding my breath.

[Edited by Ed M]

I forgot DeMint, of course. He’s endorsed McCain and is an anti-amnesty hero along with Sessions and Coburn.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Actually, he first endorsed, and actively worked for, Mitt Romney.

Simple. They’re willing to see everyone’s ox gored except their own.

Idiots.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Do you mean Michael Chrichton’s State of Fear? Affirmative!