Washington Post: "Rejecting of Keystone Pipeline; Act of National Insanity"

[Guest]

A column by Robert J. Samuelson in the liberal minded Washington Post blasts the Obama Administration's rejection of the Keystone Pipeline as an act of "national insanity" with no benefit for the American people, coupled with achieving no redeeming virtues, and only partisan symbolism as it's result.

posted FYI

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rejecting-the-keystone-pipeline-is-an-act-of-insanity/2012/01/19/gIQAowG6AQ_story.html

[Guest]

A column by Robert J. Samuelson in the liberal minded Washington Post blasts the Obama Administration's rejection of the Keystone Pipeline as an act of "national insanity" with no benefit for the American people, coupled with achieving no redeeming virtues, and only partisan symbolism as it's result.

posted FYI

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rejecting-the-keystone-pipeline-is-an-act-of-insanity/2012/01/19/gIQAowG6AQ_story.html

Ain't that the truth. :ohdear:

[Guest]

we the people are getting what we deserve!!

btk

[Guest]

we the people are getting what we deserve!!

btk

Damn if I deserve it.

[Guest]

For the life of me, I cannot understand this one. Why, what for ?????????????

[Guest]

I'm sure you read the article in today's newspaper that said "Exxon Mobile agreed Thursday to pay Montana $1.6 million in penalties over water pollution caused by a pipeline break last summer that fouled dozens of miles of shoreline along the scenic Yellowstone River".

[Guest]

I'm sure you read the article in today's newspaper that said "Exxon Mobile agreed Thursday to pay Montana $1.6 million in penalties over water pollution caused by a pipeline break last summer that fouled dozens of miles of shoreline along the scenic Yellowstone River".

The benefits far outweigh the risks involved.

[Guest]

the impacts are never presented is perspective. Only with sensationalized focus.
Where was the leak? Size of area impacted out of the total sensitive area? Did Exxon do the right things when it happened?

No different than the drilling for oil smoke job issues in the Alaskan outback. The size of the area to be drilled in comparison to the overall was akin to a grain of sand on the beach. The notion of affecting the caribou was touted by the opposition. Yes they were correct it did affect the animals, but in a positive way. They prefer to migrate around the facilities as they generate small amounts of heat....which they like!!!

Out of context case making is so easy to present...unfortunately too many Americans only source of information is the media and they believe only what they hear and see.

As a media executive once told me in a discussion regarding truth/accuracy; he said their priority was to be first. The truth and accuracy would sort itself as a story unfolds.

btk

[Guest]

First the Boeing plant in South Carolina, and now the pipeline. Does this current president ever learn by any of his mistakes?

[Guest]

Have you forgotten about that BP oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010?

[Guest]

Have you forgotten about that BP oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010?

Have you forgot our huge dependence on foreign oil?

The BP oil spill is now just a memory, like the Exxon Valdez.

Still well worth the risks involved.


Do you know the oil will go to China instead, pumping into and shipping off in tankers off our coastline? Any chance for a spill there?

Only in that scenario we only get the spill and not the energy. Great plan liberals...............great plan.

[Guest]

Think of what the Obama decision really says...
The United States, with all it technological skill and business expertise, is incapable of building and operating a long steel tube that won't leak. That notwithstanding the desirability of tapping new sources of oil and the jobs the project might produce.

This is the same country that put a man on the moon? And we're going to make wind or solar power a major industry? Yeah, right.

Unbelievable!

[Guest]

Yep, it's not like the Pickens Plan grew any legs.

[Guest]

Last November, the State Department ordered TransCanada to find a new route so the pipeline would not cross the Sand Hills, following vocal protest from Nebraska landowners, environmentalists and state legislators.

TransCanada had agreed to work with officials in Nebraska and at the State Department on the new pipeline path — a decision that eliminated opposition from Nebraska legislators — but the company had not yet proposed the route.


vancouversun.com

[Guest]

Please someone enlighten me. What does the State Department have to do with oil pipelines? Origin Canada?

[Guest]

Congress has recourse. Let's see The House take action !!!!!


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/21/us-usa-pipeline-legislation-idUSTRE80K04320120121?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F +US+%2F+Top+News%29

[Guest]

Please someone enlighten me. What does the State Department have to do with oil pipelines? Origin Canada?

Exactly right. It's the border crossing that is the reason Obama can stick his nose in.

There are reports that the company is looking at going ahead with building most of the pipeline from Montana to the Gulf Oil Region refiners bypassing the need for federal approval. This would enable the transport of the immense oil deposits of the Bakken shale rock formation.

Later the company could apply to build the short distance the rest of the way into Canada. I'm guessing they know Obama can't be there forever.

Independent entrepreneurs finding a way. Ever the American way of doing things.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-20/transcanada-may-shorten-keystone-xl-bypass-federal-review.html

[Guest]

Obama is kowtowing to the affluent environmentalist many who are big contributors and provide a great campaign network for his re-election. Environmentalist are liberals but in their environmental quest, not liberal, and in fact deter growth. These are people who like the environmental status quo As the Forest Service use to say "the person who built his mountain cabin last year is an environmentalist. The person who wants to build one this year is a developer." Environmentalist have spent 30 years trying to hide this simple truth william Tucker, American Spectator Jan 20th

[Guest]

Exactly right. It's the border crossing that is the reason Obama can stick his nose in.

There are reports that the company is looking at going ahead with building most of the pipeline from Montana to the Gulf Oil Region refiners bypassing the need for federal approval. This would enable the transport of the immense oil deposits of the Bakken shale rock formation.

Later the company could apply to build the short distance the rest of the way into Canada. I'm guessing they know Obama can't be there forever.

Independent entrepreneurs finding a way. Ever the American way of doing things.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-20/transcanada-may-shorten-keystone-xl-bypass-federal-review.html

Build baby, build.

[Guest]

Gee - I wonder who Owns "Alberta based" TransCanada?

[Guest]

First the Boeing plant in South Carolina, and now the pipeline. Does this current president ever learn by any of his mistakes?

They are not mistakes in his opinion.

[Guest]

Gee - I wonder who Owns "Alberta based" TransCanada?

Who?

[Guest]

The benefits far outweigh the risks involved.

That might depend on where you are.....

[Guest]

Who?

Here is who......

http://stockzoa.com/cusip/89353d107/

[Guest]

Have you forgotten about that BP oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010?

You know if the oil companies where not forced to go off shore and drill 5 miles down in the ocean where it is all but impossible to work on and stop the leak if something happens, and allowed to drill on shore in the many many places that have huge reserves and much less chance of disaster..........your question would not be posed!
It is the uber left that thinks we can run the country on foreign oil, sun rays, cannibus leaves and incence that caused that spill ( and some stupid people running it)
but they would not have been there if we would just wake up and drill in shallow water and on land until REAL alternative energy is viable!!!

[Guest]

You know if the oil companies where not forced to go off shore and drill 5 miles down in the ocean where it is all but impossible to work on and stop the leak if something happens, and allowed to drill on shore in the many many places that have huge reserves and much less chance of disaster..........your question would not be posed!
It is the uber left that thinks we can run the country on foreign oil, sun rays, cannibus leaves and incence that caused that spill (and some stupid people running it),
but they would not have been there if we would just wake up and drill in shallow water and on land until REAL alternative energy is viable!!!

So true.

[Guest]

You know if the oil companies where not forced to go off shore and drill 5 miles down in the ocean where it is all but impossible to work on and stop the leak if something happens, and allowed to drill on shore in the many many places that have huge reserves and much less chance of disaster..........your question would not be posed!
It is the uber left that thinks we can run the country on foreign oil, sun rays, cannibus leaves and incence that caused that spill ( and some stupid people running it)
but they would not have been there if we would just wake up and drill in shallow water and on land until REAL alternative energy is viable!!!

I'm not sure whether to applaud you or LMAO at this ridiculous truths in your post...:bigbow: :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: :bigbow:

[Guest]

I will accept both!

[Guest]

You know if the oil companies where not forced to go off shore and drill 5 miles down in the ocean where it is all but impossible to work on and stop the leak if something happens, and allowed to drill on shore in the many many places that have huge reserves and much less chance of disaster..........your question would not be posed!
It is the uber left that thinks we can run the country on foreign oil, sun rays, cannibus leaves and incence that caused that spill ( and some stupid people running it)
but they would not have been there if we would just wake up and drill in shallow water and on land until REAL alternative energy is viable!!!

Where in the US are HUGE reserves of drillable oil?

[Guest]

Where in the US are HUGE reserves of drillable oil?

I'll take it any way I can get it, especially the oil is on this continent. You won't be able to stop the people from claiming this energy forever. They (we) won't stand for it much longer.

[Guest]

Where in the US are HUGE reserves of drillable oil?

ALASKA! TEXAS COAST shallow water. Oklahoma, Colorado, California shallow water just off the coast (this will never happen) You know those people out there don't want to look at rigs from their beach house!, New Mexico and many others but who is going to search when you can't even get a permit unless you want to put up wind generators or mfg. solar panel (take the money, make a few panels go bankrupt).

I know why don't we give Brazil a billion or two, maybe three to help them drill so we can watch them sell it to our enemies.

No wait, I think someone has already done that!

Don't you hate it when all the good ideas are taken.

[Guest]

ALASKA! TEXAS COAST shallow water. Oklahoma, Colorado, California shallow water just off the coast (this will never happen) You know those people out there don't want to look at rigs from their beach house!, New Mexico and many others but who is going to search when you can't even get a permit unless you want to put up wind generators or mfg. solar panel (take the money, make a few panels go bankrupt).

I know why don't we give Brazil a billion or two, maybe three to help them drill so we can watch them sell it to our enemies.

No wait, I think someone has already done that!

Don't you hate it when all the good ideas are taken.

The question was asked as "Drillable oil" .... I have lived in Colorado for 45 years, since I was a teenager. The supposed oil in Colorado in NOT drillable nor it is oil. For some reason Republican canidates have been speading a rumor that the US has more oil resources than the Middle East. There has been several oil shale boom/bust cycles have come and gone in Colorado. Now there is a new process which requires FRACKING, I don't drink bottled water but some people do now after the Natural Gas people came in and used FRACKING to release the gas. Now in some counties they can light the water with a match. Not a fun thing.

You might want to read up on FRACKING and the deal VP Cheney made, in serect, with his buddies so they didn't have to disclose the FRACKING fluids contents which means when it gets into the ground water no one can prove it was a fracking fluid.

I live, in the summer, in El Paso county....look it up. Thats part of the new oil zone in Colorado. Check out the link...

http://www.mineralweb.com/2011/08/news/el-paso-county-co-niobrara-shale-oil-gas-leasing-booms/

I'm sure you want clean ground water and so do I.

[Guest]

I'll take it any way I can get it, especially the oil is on this continent. You won't be able to stop the people from claiming this energy forever. They (we) won't stand for it much longer.

I noticed that you didn't answer the question....maybe its because you know the answer.

[Guest]

OK, some places produce some don't. Sorry your county has not panned out YET! But I still don't hear you even sounding like we should try. You only ask where?
So is you answer to just pay other countries, buy from our enemies and throw good money after bad to companies that get the money only because they backed the president.
Is that your energy plan??

Why not drill in the other places? Why not natural gas,
WHY NOT A PIPE LINE. We only have thousands of them in the US now and for years past.
Have YOU heard of "big pipe line breaks" all over the place in the US, no! I have been to Alaska and walked several places where the pipe line is there and I don't see where this is going to hurt the environment. Hell, the animals love it. It gives them shelter and warmth.

If these things are so bad maybe we should just start the process of removing the thousands of pipe lines we have.

This is political and BS. If you or anybody else thinks it is about the environment they/you are not being honest about the situation or so blinded about keeping your king on the throne they can't see it.

This is political to the bone and makes the Pres. part of the problem and not part of the solution.

[Guest]

OK, some places produce some don't. Sorry your county has not panned out YET! But I still don't hear you even sounding like we should try. You only ask where?
So is you answer to just pay other countries, buy from our enemies and throw good money after bad to companies that get the money only because they backed the president.
Is that your energy plan??

Why not drill in the other places? Why not natural gas,
WHY NOT A PIPE LINE. We only have thousands of them in the US now and for years past.
Have YOU heard of "big pipe line breaks" all over the place in the US, no! I have been to Alaska and walked several places where the pipe line is there and I don't see where this is going to hurt the environment. Hell, the animals love it. It gives them shelter and warmth.

If these things are so bad maybe we should just start the process of removing the thousands of pipe lines we have.

This is political and BS. If you or anybody else thinks it is about the environment they/you are not being honest about the situation or so blinded about keeping your king on the throne they can't see it.

This is political to the bone and makes the Pres. part of the problem and not part of the solution.

I made NO comment on the pipeline...I merely asked a question about drillable oil in the US. If the Oil and Gas companies were threatening your home maybe you would change your tune.

And now for the links regarding oil pipeline leaks.....

http://jackhbarnes.com/2011/01/09/alaska-pipeline-offline-indefinitely/
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/07/18/117743/oil-pipeline-breaks-spills-during.html
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0E15FF3E59157493CAA9178CD85F43 8785F9

Check out whats going on in Denver right now:

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_19787661
http://www.examiner.com/green-science-in-denver/colorado-s-recent-suncor-spill-indicates-the-future-of-fossil-fuel-mismanagement
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2011/11/29/oily-muck-spills-into-creek-near-south-platte-river/

We are very careful about water out in the West....mainly because we don't have enough.

Your question.....

OK, some places produce some don't. Sorry your county has not panned out YET! But I still don't hear you even sounding like we should try. You only ask where?

I am NOT sorry my county hasn't panned out...my water is still safe. But this unproven risky source of "oil", and I use that term loosely, is used as part of the statement you referenced in the original post. Cause you believe anything the Republican Talking Points tell you......

[Guest]

I liked the comparison in this mornings paper stating there are some 50,000 miles of pipeline current criss crossing the USA.

While all are operating safely and effectively....NONE...are as safe and environmentally regulated as the 1700 miles that has just been REJECTED.

The environmental issue and the need for more time to study are words for the dummies in the crowd.

btk

[Guest]

It's amazing that liberals who are so "compassionate" for the poor and down trodden don't care at all if struggling families pay 4 or 5 dollars a gallon for gas. Maybe Obama can come up with a gas stamps program for them. After all, food stamps seem to be doing well in the Obama economy.

Yes, given there are already 50 thousand miles of crude oil pipelines criscrossing the U.S, I think we have it pretty well figured out by now.

But lets not get more oil from Canada or drill for it ourselves, we need to keep sending billions of our tax dollars to our enemies for their oil.

Maybe by the time gas is 7 or 8 dollars a gallon, someone will have figured out how to build a solar powered car that goes more than 20 miles and costs less than 45 thousand dollars. I'm sure poor people will celebrate.

[Guest]

Where in the US are HUGE reserves of drillable oil?

I noticed that you didn't answer the question....maybe its because you know the answer.

I did indeed answer the question. I don't give a whit about the oil gathering process. I said I would take it any way I can get it. Any method, any process, any way at all. We have the technology to extract it?; let's go get it.

[Guest]

I liked the comparison in this mornings paper stating there are some 50,000 miles of pipeline current criss crossing the USA.

While all are operating safely and effectively....NONE...are as safe and environmentally regulated as the 1700 miles that has just been REJECTED.

The environmental issue and the need for more time to study are words for the dummies in the crowd.

btk

Yes; succinct and to the point with all the truth that is needed.

Good post.

[Guest]

It's amazing that liberals who are so "compassionate" for the poor and down trodden don't care at all if struggling families pay 4 or 5 dollars a gallon for gas. Maybe Obama can come up with a gas stamps program for them. After all, food stamps seem to be doing well in the Obama economy.

Yes, given there are already 50 thousand miles of crude oil pipelines criscrossing the U.S, I think we have it pretty well figured out by now.

But lets not get more oil from Canada or drill for it ourselves, we need to keep sending billions of our tax dollars to our enemies for their oil.

Maybe by the time gas is 7 or 8 dollars a gallon, someone will have figured out how to build a solar powered car that goes more than 20 miles and costs less than 45 thousand dollars. I'm sure poor people will celebrate.

Guess I am the liberal you all trying to bash.....

I have never smoked pot in my life.....that started this thread all liberal smoke weed. What a joke.

But this attack I don't get...

It's amazing that liberals who are so "compassionate" for the poor and down trodden don't care at all if struggling families pay 4 or 5 dollars a gallon for gas.


Taking Richie Lion's comment together with this one I quess I expected to care about much you all are paying while you all don't give a damn my about drinking water.

Amazing....

And I thought the Bush's told us the Saudi's were are friends....didn't one hold hands with the King. How did they become the enemy?

Bring on the Bush bashing comments......:boxing2:

[Guest]

It just saddens me that liberals what to put poor people out in the cold thats all.

[Guest]

It just saddens me that liberals what to put poor people out in the cold thats all.

It's not that far fetched. You want to know the the crackpot environmentalist leftists want for our society, all you've got to do is watch that show "Living with Ed", that was on for a while, where he tried to make his own power and rode bikes everywhere, etc., etc.

It's about devolution of our society.

[Guest]

It just saddens me that liberals what to put poor people out in the cold thats all.

So you think its the liberals that killed this pipeline? Now a dose of reality.

Nebraska is a RED STATE

Here is the truth:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/31/us-pipeline-keystone-idUSTRE77U3A620110831

The Republican Governor asked Sec Clinton to deny the permit because it put at risk a major WATER source. (WATER is king in the West)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/16/us-oil-pipeline-nebraska-idUSTRE7AF1QK20111116

Not even the legislature wanted the pipeline along that route...why? WATER

Don't think are many liberals in that government body. Have you even been to Nebraska? I have.

Please do some research and look before you leap......:boxing2:

This time its NOT the pot smoking liberals but do you know how much pot grows in Nebraska? I was playing golf in Curtis, NE it was growing all over the course. To bad I don't smoke free grass!!!!

[Guest]

If my memory servers correctly it was Obama that said no to the pipeline.

There's no doubt liberals don't care about us poor folk. We can't afford skyrocketing gas, home heating oil and electricity prices. Not all of us are rich liberal fat cats that can afford 6 dollar a gallon gas while the rest of us suffer. Some of us have to drive 30 or 40 miles each way to work... if we can still find it.

Tell me, what's Obama's plan for energy independance? Half billion dollar loans to solar panel companies that go bankrupt?

Just another case of the left not caring about anyone but themselves, leaving the little man out in the cold as usual.

[Guest]

If my memory servers correctly it was Obama that said no to the pipeline.

There's no doubt liberals don't care about us poor folk. We can't afford skyrocketing gas, home heating oil and electricity prices. Not all of us are rich liberal fat cats that can afford 6 dollar a gallon gas while the rest of us suffer. Some of us have to drive 30 or 40 miles each way to work... if we can still find it.

Tell me, what's Obama's plan for energy independance? Half billion dollar loans to solar panel companies that go bankrupt?

Just another case of the left not caring about anyone but themselves, leaving the little man out in the cold as usual.

You didn't read the links did you? The Nebraska Governor and Legislature asked the administration, actually sent a letter to Sec. Clinton, to have TransCanada reroute the pipeline away from the sensitive areas. TransCanada has NOT yet proposed another route. There is nothing to approve.

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/keystone-xl-delayed-but-it-wont-be-stopped-2116504.html

Obama's plan for energy independance is green energy, he has clearly stated that.....what was Bush's plan? Clinton's plan, Bush 1's plan?

The US government has NOT had any plan in my lifetime for energy independance.

I don't like the loan anymore than you do but I could most likely find something just as stupid in a previous administration.

I have downsized my car to 4 banger....didn't do much for the gas mileage but I tried. I can't afford $6.00 gas anymore than you can.

[Guest]

WOW Green Energy!!

How's that working for everyone these days especially the poor among us? Anyone out there dumping Obama's green juice in their cars or home furnaces? Total BS.

It an't the Conservative movement that trys to scrap drilling and coal where ever they possibly can. The left does nothing and has done nothing but demonize and attack every single energy sector this country depends on. FACT

More evadance that liberals don't care about those suffering in this country. They only care about keeping their own power and keeping people beholding to them.

Very cruel people in my book.

[Guest]

wow,to blame one group(liberals)for our energy problems is just wrong. How anyone with any sense can believe that garbage is beyond my scope. Our energy problems have been going on since the 1970's through conservative and liberal eras.

[Guest]

Tell me, what group is largely responsible for not allowing drilling? conservative groups or liberal groups? I don't think many of the radicle environmental groups that like to sue to stop most any oil or gas exploration are staffed by many conservatives.

Was it a Conservative group in northern CA that stopped water to the farmers because a little guppy they found in the canals?

"Yesterday, at a meeting of the Legislature's Energy and Telecommunications Interim Committee, Democrats voted against an energy policy that would support Montana's oil, gas, and coal industries."

"Wed Sep 24, 2008 Gore urges civil disobedience to stop coal plants"

"Jay Leno takes the Democrats to task for blocking oil drilling in the Arctic Nat."

"Democrats are scrambling to appear pro-drilling — hence the “Drill Act” title for Thursday’s bill — even as leaders such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., are dead set against reversing the drilling bans."

"Democrats cited last year's BP oil spill in defeating a Republican plan to allow more coastal oil and gas exploration and speed drilling permits."

I can go ON and ON and ON.

Our energy problems have been going on since the 1970's through conservative and liberal eras.

That's exactly right. And what group conservative or liberal is largely responsible for opposing oil, gas and coal exploration?

How about filing lawsuits to stop oil, gas and coal exploration... or even farming for that matter?

Get a clue...

[Guest]

If my memory servers correctly it was Obama that said no to the pipeline. There's no doubt liberals don't care about us poor folk. We can't afford skyrocketing gas, home heating oil and electricity prices. Not all of us are rich liberal fat cats that can afford 6 dollar a gallon gas while the rest of us suffer. Some of us have to drive 30 or 40 miles each way to work... if we can still find it.

Tell me, what's Obama's plan for energy independance? Half billion dollar loans to solar panel companies that go bankrupt?

Just another case of the left not caring about anyone but themselves, leaving the little man out in the cold as usual.

Gotta agree with you dklassen! Obama claims to have said NO and he wants credit for saying NO =He said NO.

[Guest]

What people like waynet fail to understand is the American people are wise to the liberal lie and subversion. Liberalism fails every time it's tried... that's rather obvious after three years of Obama. That's why Obama and the democrats are going down in flames this Nov just like they did the last Nov elections.

[Guest]

What people like waynet fail to understand is the American people are wise to the liberal lie and subversion. Liberalism fails every time it's tried... that's rather obvious after three years of Obama. That's why Obama and the democrats are going down in flames this Nov just like they did the last Nov elections.

Dear God! I hope you are right!!!! :bigbow:

[Guest]

If you read today's newspaper, you would have seen the article titled "Keystone pipeline gets second chance". The article starts out "Reports of the death of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline to supply Alberta crude oil to Texas refineries appear to be greatly exaggerated".

It goes on to say "In a phone call to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, President Obama said TransCanada can submit an amended plan to reroute the pipeline around an envionmentally sensitive aquifer in Nebraska".

"This outcome is one of the scenarios we anticipated," CEO Russ Girling said, adding that TransCanada would reapply for a presidential permit.

Why don't you get the facts straight?

[Guest]

Purely political at the cost of American jobs we need now. He wants to wait until after the election. Again Omaba puts himself before the American people.

Speaking of facts...

http://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2011/11/democrat-socialism-energy-and-pipeline.html

[Guest]

If you read today's newspaper, you would have seen the article titled "Keystone pipeline gets second chance". The article starts out "Reports of the death of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline to supply Alberta crude oil to Texas refineries appear to be greatly exaggerated".

It goes on to say "In a phone call to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, President Obama said TransCanada can submit an amended plan to reroute the pipeline around an envionmentally sensitive aquifer in Nebraska".

"This outcome is one of the scenarios we anticipated," CEO Russ Girling said, adding that TransCanada would reapply for a presidential permit.

Why don't you get the facts straight?

Facts are very straight. All the facts presented were posted with the appropriate links, even to the company saying selling the oil to China is an option they won't ignore.

Maybe things will change, maybe they won't, but that doesn't alter the truth of the facts of yesterday.

[Guest]

WOW Green Energy!!

How's that working for everyone these days especially the poor among us? Anyone out there dumping Obama's green juice in their cars or home furnaces? Total BS.

It an't the Conservative movement that trys to scrap drilling and coal where ever they possibly can. The left does nothing and has done nothing but demonize and attack every single energy sector this country depends on. FACT

More evadance that liberals don't care about those suffering in this country. They only care about keeping their own power and keeping people beholding to them.

Very cruel people in my book.

Did you forget that Bush cut the funding for LIHEAP 5 years in a row? He sure cared about the poor. Perhaps you did.

What has the conservative movement done for the poor of the country...Provide some links.......

[Guest]

Here's one-
http://www.urbancure.org

[Guest]

Nice dodge but it's the liberal left wing ideology that's driving up energy costs and it's that exact ideology that's recking America. The only compassion liberals have is for their government, not the people they seek to control and enslave.

[Guest]

Nice dodge but it's the liberal left wing ideology that's driving up energy costs and it's that exact ideology that's recking America. The only compassion liberals have is for their government, not the people they seek to control and enslave.

I noticed you didn't respond....what type of energy policy did Bush have?

A secret meeting with the big oil boys? That's a matter of public record.

[Guest]

Here's one-
http://www.urbancure.org

Katz... I asked for links about the conseratives helping the poor.

That is just another Repub hate site as far as I could see.

Attacks on the NAACP, Planned Parenthood...the payroll tax cut is a welfare scam. I work, I'm not on welfare, I paid a higher tax rate than Rommey. What makes the payroll tax cut a welfare scam. Do people on welfare pay payroll taxes? I don't think so.

Enlighten me...why is cutting the payroll taxes a welfare scam?

[Guest]

The best way to help the poor is to get them off the dole and onto jobs where they can find some personal pride.

OH wait a minute; the pipeline besides generating union jobs will open the opportunity for thousands and thousands of ancillary jobs to support the project and it's maintenance in the years ahead.

OK, that's a way to help the poor. Get them off the dole and into employment. That can also be helped by get government out of business's way through business tax cuts, capital gains tax cuts and eliminating taxes on any money brought back into the U.S.

That's another way to create jobs and help the poor.

[Guest]

Any energy policy means absolutely nothing when you have leftwing environmental groups (and others) suing at every turn and liberal judges upholding the suits. Thats exactly what I mean. You don't see conservative groups demonizing and suing every energy sector that's most important to us as a nation do you?

Perfect example. You call them big oil boys. We all know liberals hate "big oil" You gonna fill your gas tank with water this week?

[Guest]

There in lies the exact problem. Liberals want people on the dole. They want their constituents dependent on them and not themselves.

[Guest]

Any energy policy means absolutely nothing when you have leftwing environmental groups (and others) suing at every turn and liberal judges upholding the suits. Thats exactly what I mean. You don't see conservative groups demonizing and suing every energy sector that's most important to us as a nation do you?

Perfect example. You call them big oil boys. We all know liberals hate "big oil" You gonna fill your gas tank with water this week?

Lets get one thing straight if you think I am a left wing liberal you are sadly mistaken. So what would you call the oil companies...why did Cheney meet with them in secret? You all hate secret meetings don't you.

Nah....I hardly ever have to fill up my tank...I am most often in a rental car. This week I do have to drive to Atlanta on business so no water for me.

But your need for cheap oil doesn't mean you can polute my drinking water to get it. No left evironmentalist here....I just want safe drinking water in El Paso County.

[Guest]

There in lies the exact problem. Liberals want people on the dole. They want their constituents dependent on them and not themselves.

You are against any type of a social safety net? So that would mean no welfare, no medicaid, unemployment, food stamps....how far are you willing to go?

[Guest]

Nah....I hardly ever have to fill up my tank...I am most often in a rental car

So........Rental cars don't use gas?

[Guest]

You are against any type of a social safety net? So that would mean no welfare, no medicaid, unemployment, food stamps....how far are you willing to go?

The net has become a little to comfortable. There's less and less incentive to get out of it.

Especially with liberals fighting for their right to get more and more.

[Guest]

So........Rental cars don't use gas?

Yes but I don't pay.....

[Guest]

The net has become a little to comfortable. There's less and less incentive to get out of it.

Especially with liberals fighting for their right to get more and more.

I believe that a social safety net is needed for those who find themselves in trouble. I don't believe that anyone is entitled to skate through life on welfare.

In these exordinary times the extended unemployment benefits have been necessary. Given the levels of unemployment benefits I really don't understand how the Repubs can make a point that those are a good as a job. Not from what I have seen.

BTW just what things are the liberals trying to get more and more?

[Guest]

Yes but I don't pay.....

Well, somebody pays for the gas. I guess then as long as someone pays for the gas you don't care where it comes from or what it cost.

[Guest]

Well, somebody pays for the gas. I guess then as long as someone pays for the gas you don't care where it comes from or what it cost.

He asked me if I was going to put water in my tank this week... I said no I would be in a rental. Just answered the question.

[Guest]

I am most often in a rental car

I guess I misunderstood your statement then?

If so then I retract the question, if not?

[Guest]

Katz... I asked for links about the conseratives helping the poor.

That is just another Repub hate site as far as I could see.

Attacks on the NAACP, Planned Parenthood...the payroll tax cut is a welfare scam. I work, I'm not on welfare, I paid a higher tax rate than Rommey. What makes the payroll tax cut a welfare scam. Do people on welfare pay payroll taxes? I don't think so.

Enlighten me...why is cutting the payroll taxes a welfare scam?

It's not a hate site. It is an organization set up by an African American woman, formerly pro-abortion, fomerly living on welfare and formerly consumed by drugs. In her own words, she has woken up, she has changed her world and gotten herself free from Uncle Sam's Plantation. She works day and night to help others be free from the teat of government, so they too can live lives of dignity, self worth, confidence and their own success. Where is the hate in that?!?!?

[Guest]

I guess I misunderstood your statement then?

If so then I retract the question, if not?

I still work full time in Hospitals on computers....this week Grady in Atlanta. First 2 weeks in Jan Elmurst in NY that's why the statement I am generally in a rental car.

[Guest]

It's not a hate site. It is an organization set up by an African American woman, formerly pro-abortion, fomerly living on welfare and formerly consumed by drugs. In her own words, she has woken up, she has changed her world and gotten herself free from Uncle Sam's Plantation. She works day and night to help others be free from the teat of government, so they too can live lives of dignity, self worth, confidence and their own success. Where is the hate in that?!?!?

I looked at the speech in the headlines....

"NAACP Plantation Masters play the Race Card"
"Payroll Tax Cut is a Welfare Scam"

I even asked how the Payroll Tax Cut could be a Welfare Scam but no one answered. So how it is a Welfare Scam?

[Guest]

I looked at the speech in the headlines....

"NAACP Plantation Masters play the Race Card"
"Payroll Tax Cut is a Welfare Scam"

I even asked how the Payroll Tax Cut could be a Welfare Scam but no one answered. So how it is a Welfare Scam?

Did you read the articles or just the headlines? Can't always judge the book by it's cover. To whom did you direct your question? Here's the article in it's entirety...maybe it can answer your question?

~"Last year, a one-year cut in the payroll taxes that working Americans pay to finance Social Security was enacted in the name of so-called economic "stimulus."

But, like the rest of the economic stimuli that have come from Washington over the last three years, the only thing that has been stimulated is the growing hole of national debt into which we sink deeper and deeper.

Now, unsurprisingly, our president and his Democratic colleagues want to continue, and possibly expand, this payroll tax holiday despite its obvious failure.

Wait a second: Failure is a matter of definition.

If the point was to help get our economy back on the road to growth and prosperity, the payroll tax holiday has been a failure. But if the point of the payroll tax holiday was not to reduce government interference in our lives but to keep it, grow it, and strengthen the decided movement of the last three years to turn our nation into a welfare-state plantation, it's a great idea.

That is really what is going on here and why President Barack Obama and his Democratic colleagues on Capitol Hill love the idea.

Unlike our income taxes that government takes for general revenue and unspecified spending, the payroll tax is earmarked and specified. It pays for Social Security.

A cut in income taxes, even if not accompanied with an equivalent cut in government spending, puts the pressure for such cuts in place and carries with it the prospect of reduction of government interference in our lives.

But there is no such possibility with the payroll tax. When the tax was reduced "temporarily" last year from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, were working Americans asked to agree to an equivalent cut in their Social Security benefits that that payroll tax pays for?

Of course not.

What politician in his or her right mind would suggest to working Americans that they intend to cut Social Security benefits?

But cutting the payroll tax is a dream idea for anyone whose project is turning our nation into a welfare state.

This is because, unlike the income tax, which almost half Americans don't pay, practically every working man and woman pays the payroll tax.

And, what the payroll tax pays for, Social Security, is impossible to cut.

So, if the payroll tax is cut, you have to find another way to pay for those Social Security retirement benefits.

So how about rich people?

Democrats would like for super high-income earners, the top 1 percent, who already pay 40 percent of America's income taxes, to also start paying for everyone's Social Security benefits.

Why not also force high-income earners to put their addresses up on the internet and we can all send them our grocery bills, our car payments, and our kid's tuition bills? Let's get the rich to pay for all our bills, including our retirement.

Unfortunately, some Republicans are allowing themselves to be suckered into this political blackmail.

Cutting payroll taxes earmarked for a Social Security system that is already bankrupt is no way to run a country and no way for people that are allegedly free and responsible citizens to live.

And using a payroll tax holiday as a back door plan to turn Social Security into a middle class welfare program does not bode well for our nation's future.

If the point is to fix Social Security, let working Americans keep their payroll tax and use it to fund their own private retirement account -- an idea that 3 of 4 Americans under 50 favor.

If the point is to restore our economy, let's cut the trillion dollars in new spending we've larded into the government over the last three years and start focusing on rewarding rather than punishing individual freedom and success.

[Guest]

cologal~ Maybe this really is hateful after all...I'd have to conclude that the NAACP is hateful in preventing African Americans their constitution freedoms to life, liberty and the pursute of happiness.

NAACP plantation masters play race card again
NAACP fights efforts to address the core problems that perpetuate the cycle of poverty in black America.

"Rick Santorum must be racist because he thinks all people, regardless of ethnicity, should have the dignity of self-sufficiency.

At least that's how the NAACP sees it.

Talking about pushing back against those in government endlessly trying to expand welfare programs because they make money off them, Santorum said, "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money." " by Star Parker/Urban Cure

[Guest]

cologal~ Maybe this really is hateful after all...I'd have to conclude that the NAACP is hateful in preventing African Americans their constitution freedoms to life, liberty and the pursute of happiness.

NAACP plantation masters play race card again
NAACP fights efforts to address the core problems that perpetuate the cycle of poverty in black America.

"Rick Santorum must be racist because he thinks all people, regardless of ethnicity, should have the dignity of self-sufficiency.

At least that's how the NAACP sees it.

Talking about pushing back against those in government endlessly trying to expand welfare programs because they make money off them, Santorum said, "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money." " by Star Parker/Urban Cure
Reply With Quote

And the post before this one.


I have been reading your post closely lately and...........

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

Go get'em

[Guest]

And the post before this one.


I have been reading your post closely lately and...........

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

Go get'em

Wish I could take credit for the content. I have been having trouble posting links lately, so copied and pasted Star Parker's articles from cure.org. I have been reading her works very closely lately, incredible stuff!!!

[Guest]

Did you read the articles or just the headlines? Can't always judge the book by it's cover. To whom did you direct your question? Here's the article in it's entirety...maybe it can answer your question?

~"Last year, a one-year cut in the payroll taxes that working Americans pay to finance Social Security was enacted in the name of so-called economic "stimulus."

But, like the rest of the economic stimuli that have come from Washington over the last three years, the only thing that has been stimulated is the growing hole of national debt into which we sink deeper and deeper.

Now, unsurprisingly, our president and his Democratic colleagues want to continue, and possibly expand, this payroll tax holiday despite its obvious failure.

Wait a second: Failure is a matter of definition.

If the point was to help get our economy back on the road to growth and prosperity, the payroll tax holiday has been a failure. But if the point of the payroll tax holiday was not to reduce government interference in our lives but to keep it, grow it, and strengthen the decided movement of the last three years to turn our nation into a welfare-state plantation, it's a great idea.

That is really what is going on here and why President Barack Obama and his Democratic colleagues on Capitol Hill love the idea.

Unlike our income taxes that government takes for general revenue and unspecified spending, the payroll tax is earmarked and specified. It pays for Social Security.

A cut in income taxes, even if not accompanied with an equivalent cut in government spending, puts the pressure for such cuts in place and carries with it the prospect of reduction of government interference in our lives.

But there is no such possibility with the payroll tax. When the tax was reduced "temporarily" last year from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, were working Americans asked to agree to an equivalent cut in their Social Security benefits that that payroll tax pays for?

Of course not.

What politician in his or her right mind would suggest to working Americans that they intend to cut Social Security benefits?

But cutting the payroll tax is a dream idea for anyone whose project is turning our nation into a welfare state.

This is because, unlike the income tax, which almost half Americans don't pay, practically every working man and woman pays the payroll tax.

And, what the payroll tax pays for, Social Security, is impossible to cut.

So, if the payroll tax is cut, you have to find another way to pay for those Social Security retirement benefits.

So how about rich people?

Democrats would like for super high-income earners, the top 1 percent, who already pay 40 percent of America's income taxes, to also start paying for everyone's Social Security benefits.

Why not also force high-income earners to put their addresses up on the internet and we can all send them our grocery bills, our car payments, and our kid's tuition bills? Let's get the rich to pay for all our bills, including our retirement.

Unfortunately, some Republicans are allowing themselves to be suckered into this political blackmail.

Cutting payroll taxes earmarked for a Social Security system that is already bankrupt is no way to run a country and no way for people that are allegedly free and responsible citizens to live.

And using a payroll tax holiday as a back door plan to turn Social Security into a middle class welfare program does not bode well for our nation's future.

If the point is to fix Social Security, let working Americans keep their payroll tax and use it to fund their own private retirement account -- an idea that 3 of 4 Americans under 50 favor.

If the point is to restore our economy, let's cut the trillion dollars in new spending we've larded into the government over the last three years and start focusing on rewarding rather than punishing individual freedom and success.

Katz...this explanation has nothing to do with its being a Welfare Scam...this has nothing to do with welfare.

I am over 50 and I have experience with taking a lump sum and putting into a retirement account. That was 23 years ago and if I had to retire on that I would be working tell I died.

We seem to be on opposite sides of this issue but thanks for responding.

[Guest]

And the post before this one.


I have been reading your post closely lately and...........

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

Go get'em

All I know is as a computer person we used to discribe things in terms of Master and Slave...we had to stop that.

The payroll tax cut has nothing to do with welfare.

[Guest]

Master and Slave? Are you going to tell me that an African American woman who freed herself of drug addiction, welfare dependence, and being a frequent flier at the abortion clinic THEN put herself through college while singlehandedly raising her children, has NO RIGHT to use the terms Master and Slave?!?!? HA! She and her writings have gained my deepest and utmost RESPECT! Rant all you like, but you are missing out on a beautiful woman's story of SURVIVAL and VICTORY! AND totally missed her POWERFUL message of DIGNITY and FREEDOM!

[Guest]

Master and Slave? Are you going to tell me that an African American woman who freed herself of drug addiction, welfare dependence, and being a frequent flier at the abortion clinic THEN put herself through college while singlehandedly raising her children, has NO RIGHT to use the terms Master and Slave?!?!? HA! She and her writings have gained my deepest and utmost RESPECT! Rant all you like, but you are missing out on a beautiful woman's story of SURVIVAL and VICTORY! AND totally missed her POWERFUL message of DIGNITY and FREEDOM!

Katz....

I don't use hate speech and I don't accept hate speech from anyone.

I have told you in a earlier post I respect you beliefs.... I would expect the same from you.

[Guest]

I don't use hate speech and I don't accept hate speech from anyone

Just so I don't step on your toes in future posts, would you point out where KatzPajamas used "Hate Speech" in the post.

I have read it over several times and I don't see it???

[Guest]

Just so I don't step on your toes in future posts, would you point out where KatzPajamas used "Hate Speech" in the post.

I have read it over several times and I don't see it???

Katz directed me to Cure with a link a few posts back...I looked at the site I saw the hate speech and referenced it in a post. She asked me if I read the articles which I did not because of the hate speech. I had asked how the payroll tax cut was a welfare scam so she responded with a long message ... you commented on the post. I made a comment about the what we call client/server now.

That prompted Katz long post which included this:

Master and Slave? Are you going to tell me that an African American woman who freed herself of drug addiction, welfare dependence, and being a frequent flier at the abortion clinic THEN put herself through college while singlehandedly raising her children, has NO RIGHT to use the terms Master and Slave?!?!?

We no longer use that phrase because it was deemed hate speech by the industry.

There you have it.

[Guest]

I think you might be a little sensitive on this. I don't think she was using the phrase as hate speech. I think it was the women in the article and she was pointing that out trying to get her point accross to you.

It is amazing how so many people are sitting on the "RED BUTTON" just ready for someone to hurt there sensibilities! Everything offends them as if it is some kind of right to not hear something that hurts their feelings.
I think you have called this one wrong. It appears that the "Race Card" always seems to be on the top of the deck.

The problem is that changing the words to say the same thing seems disingenuous, at best. Somehow by saying the same thing with different words makes it "sound" better, but it means the same thing!
Typical liberal fix to something.

[Guest]

How does any of this have anything to do with "Rejecting of Keystone Pipeline; Act of National Insanity"?

[Guest]

It does't, I am sorry. I will try to do better. You know how a conversation just sorta takes on it's own life and just grows.

[Guest]

Did you forget that Bush cut the funding for LIHEAP 5 years in a row? He sure cared about the poor. Perhaps you did.
What has the conservative movement done for the poor of the country...Provide some links.......
My post with link to CURE (http://www.cure.org) was in response to this request...a conservative movement doing somethings for the poor of the country.

Cologal asked another question-
Katz... I asked for links about the conseratives helping the poor.

That is just another Repub hate site as far as I could see.

Attacks on the NAACP, Planned Parenthood...the payroll tax cut is a welfare scam. I work, I'm not on welfare, I paid a higher tax rate than Rommey. What makes the payroll tax cut a welfare scam. Do people on welfare pay payroll taxes? I don't think so.

Enlighten me...why is cutting the payroll taxes a welfare scam?
__________________________________________________ ___________
I then responded by posting the actual articles, but apparently cologal either did not read the link she had asked for and chose to make a snap judgement by a few interesting titles OR she did read them and since she didn’t agree or understand, she chose to label them HATE…Sorry notlongnow, just more liberal manipulations to twist reality to a palce where they can point fingers at anyone but themselves...

[Guest]

I think you might be a little sensitive on this. I don't think she was using the phrase as hate speech. I think it was the women in the article and she was pointing that out trying to get her point accross to you.

It is amazing how so many people are sitting on the "RED BUTTON" just ready for someone to hurt there sensibilities! Everything offends them as if it is some kind of right to not hear something that hurts their feelings.
I think you have called this one wrong. It appears that the "Race Card" always seems to be on the top of the deck.

The problem is that changing the words to say the same thing seems disingenuous, at best. Somehow by saying the same thing with different words makes it "sound" better, but it means the same thing!
Typical liberal fix to something.

I avoid hate speech because it is hateful. It makes no matter to me if the speaker is red, white , yellow or black. I won't listen to music that include any words that disrespect women with the B word.

If that is liberal I will accept that as a good thing.... but I have lived for 25 years with Buddhist meditation teacher....Right speech is part of the Eight Fold Noble Path.

[Guest]

It wasn't hate speech.

[Guest]

It wasn't hate speech.

That depends on your perspective...to me it was so I avoided it!

[Guest]

I guess I have to agree with you...I mean, I'm not watching Obama tonight for the same reason. I avoid hate speech and BS like the plague.

[Guest]

I have been trying to get this out of the political context.....

So we both know, in the literal sense, there are no slaves under a Plantation Master in this country.

Your point was that an African American women had the right to say those things....if you proceed with that logic in a straight line then it is ok for an African American rapper records a song that calls women B**ch and W**re.

It is not political with me.

[Guest]

if you proceed with that logic in a straight line then it is ok for an African American rapper records a song that calls women B**ch and W**re.


Apparently it IS OK because it is on the radio, tv, internet and sold in stores every day!

[Guest]

Contrare...I believe that there are slaves on the government plantation. Maybe you shouldn't critique the article that you are unwilling to read. That in itself is the height of hatred, when you judge something and label it without knowing it or trying to understand it.
As far as slaves and masters, that is a human rights issue.

[Guest]

Contrare...I believe that there are slaves on the government plantation. Maybe you shouldn't critique the article that you are unwilling to read. That in itself is the height of hatred, when you judge something and label it without knowing it or trying to understand it.
As far as slaves and masters, that is a human rights issue.

Katz but this is just rude...you seem to be the one with hatred. I have shown you none.

[Guest]

Contrare...I believe that there are slaves on the government plantation. Maybe you shouldn't critique the article that you are unwilling to read. That in itself is the height of hatred, when you judge something and label it without knowing it or trying to understand it.
As far as slaves and masters, that is a human rights issue.

Katz this is just rude...you seem to be the one with hatred. I have shown you none.

I didn't expect this of you....

[Guest]

You tried to make out that I was posting hate speeches...not true.
Posters on this forum ask for links and supporting evidence, and when it is provided the mud starts flying. Unfounded accusations about posting hate speeches is rude and something I would never/ nor have I ever done.

I still doubt that you ever read the articles. Too bad, you may have learned about Star Parker and her generous heart of gold for the unfortunates in our society. Your ability to judge her article only by the meaningful title, could also be considered hateful.

Whatever....

[Guest]

You tried to make out that I was posting hate speeches...not true.
Posters on this forum ask for links and supporting evidence, and when it is provided the mud starts flying. Unfounded accusations about posting hate speeches is rude and something I would never/ nor have I ever done.

I still doubt that you ever read the articles. Too bad, you may have learned about Star Parker and her generous heart of gold for the unfortunates in our society. Your ability to judge her article only by the meaningful title, could also be considered hateful.

Whatever....

Katz... I in no way attacked you....I said the site was a hate site because it contained hate speech, in my opinion. At every turn I tried to explain why I felt that way.

I did go back and scanned the NCAAP article but it in no way changed my opinion. I have come to believe in Dukkha....When we want things to be other than they are we suffer. The only way to stop the suffering is to drop the wanting. In the remaining years of my life I don't want to hate, I don't need conflict.

[Guest]

What does that have to do with conservative people helping the unfortunate people in this country?

[Guest]

What does any of this have to do with "Rejecting of Keystone Pipeline; Act of National Insanity"?

[Guest]

What does any of this have to do with "Rejecting of Keystone Pipeline; Act of National Insanity"?

The tangent has swung wide, but that what happens when you try to defend the indefensible. You must divert, and this thread is a good illustration.

[Guest]

Richie says, "The tangent has swung wide, but that what happens when you try to defend the indefensible. You must divert, and this thread is a good illustration."

Since he opened the door, I have to add that this is the same tactic Newt used in the South Carolina debate when he refused to answer the question about his ex-wife's statements - and turned indignant toward the questioner that this gossip was no way to start a debate about national issues.

Newt could not defend the indefensible and therefore had to divert.

You have to admit that Newt does have good political consultants who prepped him with the proper answers and appropriate act for him to take. Still, he is a slimeball, Washington insider, career politician, and actor.

[Guest]

Richie says, "The tangent has swung wide, but that what happens when you try to defend the indefensible. You must divert, and this thread is a good illustration."

Since he opened the door, I have to add that this is the same tactic Newt used in the South Carolina debate when he refused to answer the question about his ex-wife's statements - and turned indignant toward the questioner that this gossip was no way to start a debate about national issues.

Newt could not defend the indefensible and therefore had to divert.

You have to admit that Newt does have good political consultants who prepped him with the proper answers and appropriate act for him to take. Still, he is a slimeball, Washington insider, career politician, and actor.

Well, not precisely a "career" polititian as his career was interrupted by a little ethics matter and censure by his peers. Of course, if the people choose they may resume his career next year. I think he should retire to the villages and play golf.

[Guest]

Eweissenbach, It would be nice of Newt to retire and play golf - BUT NOT HERE!!

[Guest]

Richie says, "The tangent has swung wide, but that what happens when you try to defend the indefensible. You must divert, and this thread is a good illustration."

Since he opened the door, I have to add that this is the same tactic Newt used in the South Carolina debate when he refused to answer the question about his ex-wife's statements - and turned indignant toward the questioner that this gossip was no way to start a debate about national issues.

Newt could not defend the indefensible and therefore had to divert.

You have to admit that Newt does have good political consultants who prepped him with the proper answers and appropriate act for him to take. Still, he is a slimeball, Washington insider, career politician, and actor.

Newt says his ex-wife and you are lying. He got indignant, but he answered the question. Your example is "a fail" as the kids would say, but nice try. You're on your toes today.

[Guest]

Newt and Calista are both lying cheats. Amazing how the family values people are so easily fooled by these sleazes.

[Guest]

I'm still wondering what the difference is between Herman Cain's alleged 13 year affair and the famously poplular president Bill Clinton and His numerous affairs and one night stands and kneels...I guess it is all in one's perspective

[Guest]

Newt and Calista are both lying cheats. Amazing how the family values people are so easily fooled by these sleazes.

I get you, I really do. If you don't like someone, every allegation that is thrown at them is fervently believed by you as fact, and you'll stick with your view come hell or high water.

If you like someone, it's completely opposite. You wouldn't believe something against Obama or Clinton if you saw them doing it with your own eyes. You would defend them and pluck out your own eyes for lying to you.

I really do get it, old buddy.

[Guest]

Quote I saw last night..

"So let me see if I have this straight. Newt is depending on the children from his first wife to tell the world that his second wife is lying about his third wife."

[Guest]

Quote I saw last night..

"So let me see if I have this straight. Newt is depending on the children from his first wife to tell the world that his second wife is lying about his third wife."

You (the collective "you") have no real idea of the Gingrich family dynamic; you have to admit that much.

Making assumptions on the doings of another family is presumptuous.

We all love gossip though, don't we. Much more fun to just assume things.

[Guest]

What does any of this have to do with "Rejecting of Keystone Pipeline; Act of National Insanity"?

???

[Guest]

I make no assumptions. I just thought the line was funny.

There are time when Newt seems like a genius to me. And others when I look at him and the response is "WHAT is he SMOKING?".

It's hard to take someone preaching "family values" when you have as checkered a history as Newt does. I mean, he was screaming about Bill cheating on Hillary while doing the exact same thing.

Now, to your point, of course circumstances matter. Just like Newt, I'm on my third marriage. In my case, I married too young the first time (Lisa and I have a very friendly relationship these days though she's moved to Canada). The second time I was married for 19 years - my two daughters are from this marriage. Unfortunately my wife decided the grass was greener elsewhere and did everything she could to try and make me leave (you wouldn't believe the stories I could tell) - but I wouldn't. She finally left nearly 6 years ago. Now I'm married (for 1 1/2 years and counting) to a woman I can't imagine leaving.

So, yeah, circumstances matter.

I've always said that I thought Newt torpedoed himself when it comes to being President but that he still had a lot to offer as a consultant or advisor. In some areas, he certainly does have the lights on. But, President? Definitely not for me.

[Guest]

I make no assumptions. I just thought the line was funny.

There are time when Newt seems like a genius to me. And others when I look at him and the response is "WHAT is he SMOKING?".

It's hard to take someone preaching "family values" when you have as checkered a history as Newt does. I mean, he was screaming about Bill cheating on Hillary while doing the exact same thing.

Now, to your point, of course circumstances matter. Just like Newt, I'm on my third marriage. In my case, I married too young the first time (Lisa and I have a very friendly relationship these days though she's moved to Canada). The second time I was married for 19 years - my two daughters are from this marriage. Unfortunately my wife decided the grass was greener elsewhere and did everything she could to try and make me leave (you wouldn't believe the stories I could tell) - but I wouldn't. She finally left nearly 6 years ago. Now I'm married (for 1 1/2 years and counting) to a woman I can't imagine leaving.

So, yeah, circumstances matter.

I've always said that I thought Newt torpedoed himself when it comes to being President but that he still had a lot to offer as a consultant or advisor. In some areas, he certainly does have the lights on. But, President? Definitely not for me.


Well......I guess if it's Newt or Barry you're going to have to decide what to do. Vote for anyone else but Newt in that scenario and you've voted for Barry.

[Guest]

Well......I guess if it's Newt or Barry you're going to have to decide what to do. Vote for anyone else but Newt in that scenario and you've voted for Barry.

Unfortunately, there's more truth in that statement than I'd like.

To me, the decision is as follows...

Obama - definitely not my first choice. Could have done a LOT better with the economy but he seems to have stopped most of the bleeding. He's made more progress on most economic fronts than Reagan did with the mess he inherited from Carter. Remember that Reagan said it would take more than 4 years to recover from the mess - and he was right. Note that I said "stopped the bleeding" - this is a VERY anemic recovery and I can't help but to feel that the lack of string on TARP has something to do with it. Admittedly, I'm not sure what the President can do about one fundamental flaw in our system right now - the fact that companies are ONLY looking out for their shareholders - and then only for the next quarter with ver few exceptions (like Apple - sitting on $90B and refusing to do dividends or stock buybacks because that doesn't meet their long-term strategic goals).

Republicans - With the exception of Ron Paul, they all seem to want to return to the policies that got us into this mess un the first place. They want to de-regulate without any specifics - just demagoguery about jobs being strangled. So far, a vote for almost any of them seems like a vote for George W. Bush.

I'm normally an optimist but it's hard to keep that going under these circumstances.