Quotes of the day
posted at 10:05 pm on September 7, 2009 by Allahpundit
“The obvious rejoinder to these points is that Jones supposedly brought this on himself by long ago making a mistake and signing a misguided petition about 9/11. Obviously, he made a mistake – and he admitted that. But even if you don’t accept that apology or admission of fault, the idea that him signing that petition means he’s worthy of removal is just a pathetic argument that highlights the most damning hypocrisies of all. For instance, are we really expected to believe that Jones signing one random petition is a bigger problem than, say, Geithner accepting free room and board for the industry he is supposed to be regulating?…
Hence, we can be assured the original targeting of Jones was a calculated move with race in mind – a move designed to fit the criticism into a larger racial backlash framework first perfected in the 1980s. That framework has created a simple reality: In America, governmental advancement is wide open for right-wing movement players, and you can even vaguely hope for a seat at the political table if you are a white progressive former hippe-turned-yuppie liberal. But if you are a black person with any enduring loyalty to progressive movement or social justice activism, the loud and clear message from politicians and the media is that you are not welcome anywhere near the halls of power, because you will be billed as some nefarious combination of Al Sharpton, Huey Newton, Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael and Willie Horton.”
***
“Now, thanks to Glenn Beck, we’ve got that voice back. No longer tied to his desk with a sock in his mouth, Van is now freed to do what he does best: inspire and energize groups around the country…
I despise 9/11 ‘truther’ conspiracies. Indeed, one of the guidelines for bloggers on HuffPost is a ban on posts putting forth those kinds of theories. And it was stupid of Van to put his name on a very stupid ’9/11 Truth Statement.’ I’ve spoken to Van. He doesn’t believe that the Bush administration orchestrated the 9/11 attacks or allowed the attacks to happen in a cold-hearted attempt to gin up support. The 9/11 ‘Truthers’ are fringe-dwellers and Van was completely wrong to allow himself to be associated with them…
Isn’t it time we acknowledge that no human being with any passion and deeply held beliefs ever emerged flawless into the world? And that if every mistake, misstep, boneheaded decision, or error in judgment becomes an automatic disqualifier for public service, then we’re going to be left with a political landscape filled with nothing but wrinkle-free, foible-free, passionless automatons who have never made a mistake because they never took the risk of having an original thought.”
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7
.
They couldn’t “codify it into the Constitution”, because they (and myself) opposed a ‘Theocracy’.
But they definitively legalized the PUBLIC (that’s the key word) recognition of God, without demanding it.
If any non-Christian were offended by seeing or hearing the PUBLIC practice of Christianity, then it “sucked to be them”.
They couldn’t demand that Christian believers take their Christian practices behind closed doors, so that they could walk anywhere outside without being offended.
But then comes the “Counter-Culture Movement”, which really began when the Supreme Court ruled against PUBLIC practices and displays of Christianity.
Those SCOTUS rulings need to be over-thrown and reversed.
listens2glenn on March 5, 2013 at 12:59 AM
The fact that the establishment was aware of her accomplishments was indeed a reason they didn’t want her to continue to succeed. This is one of those cases where I will be more than happy to be wrong, she has surprised me before.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:00 AM
There’s a vast difference between Christianity being practiced/praised in public and the government being the shepherd of Christian morality.
I agree with overturning things like the Lemon test.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:00 AM
Single mothers are FAR more costly.
Drug war $15 billion/year
Single Mothers $112 billion/year
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:00 AM
Yeah, he’s a real uniter alright.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:01 AM
Yeah, and what exactly is the small government way to get rid of single mothers?
I think we’re well past the event horizon on no-fault divorces and such.
Besides, that 112 billion also covers costs that would be incurred even if a father was present.
Meanwhile, it’d be easy to stop fighting the war on drugs and cut 15 billion in a flash.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:03 AM
I know but you at least have to give it to the Bush family that they managed not to self destruct. They are at least very admirable people.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:04 AM
Being a uniter is overrated. Dubya was “a uniter, not a divider,” and he ended up being hated by most of this country.
I’m glad being sane and consistent, even if that makes me a “divider.” It’s not my job to be your or sharrukin’s apologist, Cindy.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:05 AM
You can’t really separate the Christian society the founders grew up in, and Christian beliefs they ascribed to from what they brought to the table when they wrote the constitution and the bill of rights.
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:05 AM
Well at least Jeb is a Republican. I’m interested in why you don’t like him as a nominee.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:06 AM
Yes, it is a baseball game. I want us to be the Yankees, and for some reason you think it’s better for us to be the Cubs.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:07 AM
I’m not anyone’s apologist, no one needs one. Including you.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:07 AM
I don’t see her acting as anyone’s apologist, myself included, nor do I see myself needing one.
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:08 AM
No, they’re not. TARP isn’t the same as Stimulus and Stimulus 2. Medicare Part D isn’t the same as Obamacare. Wanting to extend the AWB but not being able to isn’t the same as presiding over Fast and Furious.
It’s all a zero sum game, sharrukin. There’s two options: winning or losing. You want to keep losing, go haead.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:09 AM
A divot is cut from the same cloth as the Grand Canyon. That doesn’t make them equivalent.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:11 AM
I think history will be kinder to W, four years of Obama has done a lot for him already.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:12 AM
Who cares? I thought you said it didn’t matter.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:12 AM
This is why it’s hard to take you seriously on fiscal issues. Your social agenda always trumps the money issue. Free drugs (what could go wrong with that?), but lets just ignore the $112 billion dollar elephant in the room.
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:12 AM
I have wanted to read Mark Levin’s book “Men in Black”, but haven’t done so yet. He spoke some of the S.C. in Liberty or Tyranny, which I have read.
bluefox on March 5, 2013 at 1:12 AM
They may not be the same but they still shouldn’t have happened. You don’t take a failing program and add to it. You don’t ignore current laws on finance and bankruptcy because there is no too big to fail. All these things are building blocks for more abuses.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:14 AM
Sorry..No harm was meant..:)
PS..Good evening..:)
Dire Straits on March 5, 2013 at 1:14 AM
Sure. Republican massive overspending is completely different than those evil Democrat’s massive overspending. Completely different!!11!!
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:15 AM
Perhaps, but most of the history writers are still fairly liberal.
I don’t think another Bush can win at the national level until Dubya’s name is cleaned of all the dirt heaped on it for the past 13 years.
Of course, you’d think Democrats would have the same problem with Hillary, but for some reason they don’t seem to care.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:16 AM
I didn’t like the amnesty that Pres. Reagan gave and I didn’t agree with turning over the Panama Canal. I can disagree with people (like you) without thinking they are horrible or had ill intent. You take all this far to personally.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:16 AM
I think there may be truth in both of our opinions actually. Hopefully, someday we will know more.
bluefox on March 5, 2013 at 1:18 AM
Yep, I agree with all of that. Add to it the way the media would handle it while completely ignoring how they loved it when every new Kennedy ran for public office, it’s enough to make my head explode.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:18 AM
Here, let me try this as a syllogism:
A. A Hershey bar is made of atoms.
B. Jupiter is made of atoms.
C. Jupiter is a Hershey bar.
Now let’s insert your argument in place of that:
A. Republicans raised our debt with bad policies
B. Democrats raised our debt a ton more with worse policies
C. Republican policies are the same as Democrat policies
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:18 AM
Sorry but it doesn’t work. Bush overspent more money than any president in history…until Obama took the title. That doesn’t make Bill Clinton a budget warrior. They are all spending money the nation doesn’t have. As a conservative I want to go in the other direction.
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:23 AM
Because it’s not the elephant in the room.
First of all, it’s not a blanket issue. Not all single mothers are equal.
Secondly, like I said, it encompasses costs that would be also be incurred in two parent homes. It’s not an apples to apples comparison with something like the War on Drugs.
Thirdly, there’s no easy small government answer to the problem of single mothers. There are two pretty easy small government answers to the War on Drugs:
A. Stop fighting it, period.
B. Leave it to the states and let federalism do its job.
And on the drug issue, you’re starting to sound like a Democrat. OMG, something could go wrong with allowing more freedom? Well, we can’t let that happen. Think of the children! We should probably go ahead and ban guns and liquor, too; wouldn’t want anything to go wrong, now would we?
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:23 AM
.
From the founding of the country, until post-WWII, there were laws on the books making sodomy, adultery, fornication, and pornography against the law.
.
If you’re stating that you disagree with those kind of laws, then that’s where we disagree.
listens2glenn on March 5, 2013 at 1:26 AM
A lot of people with a lot of terrible ideas grew up in Christian societies. It’s not the government’s job to enforce adherence to Christianity.
Like I said to listens2glenn, things like Lemon v. Kurzberg are another issue altogether. I have no problem with the 10C on a courthouse wall, and if the QB wants to lead his team in Christian prayer before the homecoming game, he should be allowed to.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:27 AM
Using meth or heroin isn’t freedom.
Ann Coulter was right. Pot and gay marriage 24/7, and the fiscal issue is used as a cheap dodge.
$4.9 trillion dollar Bush…that’s fine.
$112 billion for single mothers…oh well.
$15 billion drug war…http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCEUpIg8rE
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:28 AM
Almost missed your reply. Please don’t apologize, B-Plus and Dire Straits have just as much right to their opinion as anyone else here.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 1:28 AM
If you want to make a case for those laws, I’ll need a better reason than “we used to have them.” We also used to have segregation and a lot of other really bad policies.
But yeah, for the most part we disagree. Pornography is a 1st Amendment Issue to me, so yeah, I disagree with blanket anti-pornography laws.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:30 AM
I’m straight and I don’t smoke pot, but keep ****ing that chicken.
Being able to do something without intrusion from the government is actually the definition of freedom.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:34 AM
The number you keep using is based on an awful lot of assumptions:
Again, you’ve failed to address the fact that many of these costs would still be incurred if the parties in question were married.
And I’ve yet to hear the small government solution. Outlaw all divorces? Force people to stay married by government fiat? Outlaw sex outside of marriage?
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:37 AM
The only way to go in the other direction is to elect more Republicans. Even if there’s only a 1% chance of a GOP-run Senate, House and WH actually cutting spending, that’s better than the 0.00% chance we’ve got under the auspices of a Democrat-run Senate and WH.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:39 AM
.
I believe you have brought us “full circle”. Re-posting:
.
listens2glenn on March 5, 2013 at 1:40 AM
Sorry, I just don’t agree. If I want to give recognition to God, that’s my business, but it’s not the government’s business.
Good Solid B-Plus on March 5, 2013 at 1:43 AM
No actually a 1% chance isn’t better than no chance at all.
No chance at all would require facing up to the truth. A ghost of a chance leaves the empty illusion that something might be done when it really won’t be.
sharrukin on March 5, 2013 at 1:48 AM
+ 100..:)
Dire Straits on March 5, 2013 at 1:57 AM
.
I understand, and I don’t hold that against you.
I don’t believe those fore mentioned laws constitute an imposition on your (or anyone else’s) right to reject “recognition of God.”
It is my contention that the negative impact on society by practicing what those laws forbid, is “self evident”, and doesn’t require the Christian Bible to prove it.
listens2glenn on March 5, 2013 at 1:57 AM
.
Everyone should have a right to my opinion, as well.
.
. . . . . . . . . . What ? !
listens2glenn on March 5, 2013 at 2:07 AM
They do have the right to your opinion, they just don’t have to agree with it.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 2:09 AM
I am glad to see you have a Model 12 Winchester in your family..I am equally blessed..:)
Dire Straits on March 5, 2013 at 2:12 AM
Here ya go…
“When the Continental Congress convened in 1776, the delegates recognized the importance of a fort to protect their growing seaport from the British. Soon afterwards, a low bluff on the Medway River at Sunbury was fortified and garrisoned by 200 patriots. When the British demanded the fort’s surrender on November 25, 1778, the defiant Col. John McIntosh replied, “Come and take it!” The British refused and withdrew back to Florida. Forty-five days later, they returned with a superior force, and on January 9, 1779, Fort Morris fell after a short but heavy bombardment…”
http://www.gastateparks.org/info/ftmorris/
“Come and Take It!” is as American a response to Tyranny as “Give me Liberty or Give me Death..” – Patrick Henry
workingclass artist on March 5, 2013 at 8:05 AM
Our platform is concerned with fundamental issues like smaller government and adherence to the constitution. Republicans have not made government smaller, and have done NO better in adhering to the constitution than the Dems have in the last 20 years.
Only if you think spending less money than the Dems would have, given the opportunity, is somehow “better.” If you’re a rah-rah-sis-boom-bah cheerleader for the Republicans because they expand government somewhat more slowly than the Dems do, I’m sorry, but you’re part of the problem.
gryphon202 on March 5, 2013 at 8:43 AM
Molon labe. It’s a lot older than the American Revolution, but it’s timeless IMHO.
gryphon202 on March 5, 2013 at 8:44 AM
This is about as dumb as Akin’s and Murdock’s abortion comments. Why are our guys so uninformed when it comes to basic constitutional principles? And why are they so stupid in interviews? This one was with Beck. Imagine how he’d do with a liberal interviewer. Ouch.
Carson had my interest up until his dumb gun comments. He’s toast now. Move on please. Nothing to see here.
conservativemusician on March 5, 2013 at 9:09 AM
And in five years be spending an extra $115 billion a year on drug addled idiots. Financial SUCCESS!
astonerii on March 5, 2013 at 9:18 AM
.
It was my paternal Grandfather’s, handed down to my Dad who still has it.
It was well used until the last few years.
Everytime I go to Cabelas (Hamburg, PA), I head STRAIGHT for the “used gun” racks, and look for M12s. I can’t afford one, but I can still handle the ones that are there, however briefly.
I also look for Sav M99s, but the last two times I was there I might have seen ONE. Apparently they’re getting popular as well.
listens2glenn on March 5, 2013 at 11:24 AM
This!!! Needs to be repeated ad nauseum.
Up until GW started winning, CW was tilted towards giving up and letting the King have his way – See Benedict Arnold et al. For the record, treason would be harsh as betrayal to the cause is more accurate. Just like all the CINOs up in DC claiming to support conservative principles, yet when they sense the tide turning, they scurry to take opposing positions. Except in this case they betray the conservative voters (who won’t be there to reelect them next time around) and acting “treasonously” to the oath to uphold the constitution and the rule of law.
It takes only a 1/3 to turn the tide again. My contention is that we have at least 1/3 of Americans that canand will support a die hard conservative. But the operative is ‘conservative’ in word, deed and frame of mind. Put up candidates in that mold and we will start winning by making a bold contrast agaisnt big spending statist
Exactly!!!
Two ways I see in getting the best representation is 1) more states ditch winneer-takes-all in the primaries AND in the ECV. 2) Going to multiple votes to isolate the true winner of elections. There’s no reason that ballots can’t be created to for voters to rank their choices. However many are on the ticket, instead of checkboxes, voters can assign a number to each (no # = no support). That way the candidate with the most wins, even if he/she was second choice for a majority of voters. This also saves money on run-off elections. This would prevent situations where Akins won against two better candidates that had their votes split.
Ultimately, the 17th needs to be repealed and control of the senate returned to the respective States.
AH_C on March 5, 2013 at 11:36 AM
That totally misses the point. Bad guys don’t give a damn what the law is and will carry whatever they want, wherever they want. Further restrictions only put law abiding citizens at a further disadvantage.
Bah, it’s all pointless anyway, this is a point of religion with the Left, there’s no logic or statistics or facts that will convince them. Molon labe.
John_G on March 5, 2013 at 11:43 AM
Whatever you like.
Bmore on March 5, 2013 at 11:51 AM
So, I guess the Carson lovefest is now officially over. Good, I didn’t like him from the get go.
hatecraft on March 5, 2013 at 12:22 PM
Sloppy thinking on Dr. Carson’s part. May I suggest that everyone read the Federalist Papers before commenting further on law and liberty? Our founders actually thought through a lot of implications.
disa on March 5, 2013 at 12:34 PM
Y’all are funny.
Bmore on March 5, 2013 at 1:20 PM
The urban/rural distinction was actually a key part of Breyer’s dissent in the Heller case five years ago that recognized
establishedan individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment that’s as plain as the nose on your face.Akzed on March 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM
He is only defined as a “Conservative Savior” because he is black. The Repubs are pushing any African that is one of the 4% who voted for Romney as the next conservative Messiah. Herman Cain is a perfect example. He had his wings fitted and his halo on order when his past opened up for everyone to see.
Stop being ashamed of being White! You have been fed “White is Weak” and “Whites don’t have racial interests” all your life via news and Movies. If they don’t throw a black in there to be the voice of “wisdom” for the hero, they just switch the races and to hell with the facts. Example: A Dolphin’s Tale. A lighthearted tale about a dolphin who receives an artificial tale from a Numinous negro(TM), when in reality it was two White scientists who developed the tail.
Bulletchaser on March 5, 2013 at 2:56 PM
This is the entire problem in two sentences. Brilliant.
We need a inter-State Kinetic Military Action, because the system is broken. Liberals want Amnesty NOW! Repubs want Amnesty soon. The people want less illegals, less immigration and a secure border.
The choice is the Liberals (fast) or Repubs (slow).
Bulletchaser on March 5, 2013 at 3:11 PM
So very true, extra melanin can get you a pass on a lot of things. We, of the white persuasion, fail to understand what this has to do with character or intelligence. I will still give the good doctor some leeway but it has more to do with his being a political public rookie. I will continue to hide and watch.
Cindy Munford on March 5, 2013 at 6:00 PM
.
Excuse me, mam ….. we don’t use the term “white” in that context, anymore.
Today we say “melanin deficient”.
listens2glenn on March 6, 2013 at 12:10 AM
SO the rights granted under the Constitution are only valid sometimes in some places for certain people? uh… no.
johnnyU on March 6, 2013 at 12:09 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7