Two From the Asylum and Another Obama Misstep

The past week produced some doozies from the GOP asylum.

An Idea No One Could Possibly Bawk, Bawk, Bawk At

First we get Nevada Senatorial hopeful Sue Lowden who suggests that bartering for your medical services is a good alternative to the current health care legislation. Heck, according to her it used to work fine. You went to your doctor and if you couldn’t afford to pay him, you offered him a chicken. When this brain-dead fool was offered the chance to explain her way out of such insanity, she stuck to her guns. In a world where Sarah Palin is viewed by some as a domestic and foreign policy expert, we can expect just about anything. So I strongly recommend, before Sue gets elected and the chicken plan becomes law that you visit the Medical Chicken Calculator just so you know how much chicken to buy before you get sick. An appendectomy for example will cost you 1,019 chickens.

I actually have an idea that Harry Reid can counter with. If I’m not mistaken, Reid grew up in a house of prostitution. Now can any of you think of an interesting barter system that ties into the world’s oldest profession? I sure can!

May I See Your Papers?

Lunacy must be contagious since Nevada’s southeast neighbor, Arizona had a touch of whacked out legislation this past week. Everyone knew that the Arizona legislature had passed a bill allowing police to demand evidence of legal immigrant status from folks they pulled over. Few thought Governor Jan Brewer would be crazy enough to sign it but sign it she did. The new law is ripe for abuse as few blond light-skinned folks are going to be asked to prove they are here legally. From my travels on other blogs, I’ve seen the case made that we already have laws requiring immigrants to carry with them at all times proof of their legal right to be here (I guess, green card, etc.). It has also been stated that cops can already arrest you if you refuse to provide identification when asked. These points are made in defense of the law. Here is where I am lost.

If it is already the law that legal immigrants should carry a form of proof of “legality” and it is already the law that everyone must produce id when asked by a policeman, then why on Earth do we need the Arizona legislation? Other than create a public relations nightmare for Arizona, what value does this new law add? By signing this easily misunderstood redundant legislation into law, Jan Brewer has bought her state a world of hurt. Since the law suits have already started and the Justice Department is already on alert, Jan better hurry up and jump to the chase. Get those un-American folks lined up and tattoo numbers on their arms while you’ve got the legislative momentum going for you!

Obama Did Not Read My Last Post

Well okay, I didn’t really expect the POTUS to be reading the Rutherford Lawson Blog but I sure wish he did. This time he tripped so badly that Rush Limbaugh actually had a good point. Yes, you will hear this from me only once so listen carefully … Rush Limbaugh was right (sort of).

Obama still does not understand that remarks addressed at a niche audience get heard by everyone. In a video aimed at DNC donors and OFA members, Obama urged that we get out the vote for “young people, African-Americans, Latinos and women”. Watch for yourself at the 1:58 mark.

My immediate reaction was “oh no he didn’t!” Whether intentionally or not, Obama implied that the older white male vote was either unimportant to him or a lost cause. The simple truth is without a decent portion of elder white males, Obama would not be President today (this is true of EVERY President). So after I caught my breath, I hoped against all hope that no one else would notice this. Alas, the blowhard loved by Conservatives everywhere, Rush Limbaugh, heard Obama loud and clear and worked it for all it was worth.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

I think Rush Limbaugh is one of the worst things to happen to broadcast media. However, in this case, Rush raises a reasonable question. (Sorry Ed Schultz.) I’ve got a news flash for our President. Barack, white people matter. They have valid concerns just like minorities do. If you continue to make them feel ignored or marginalized, you will not only ruin any chance for a positive Democratic outcome in 2010, you will end up a one term President.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

64 thoughts on “Two From the Asylum and Another Obama Misstep

  1. You got this rotten Obama race baiting speech idea from my comments in your last thread, didn’t you? The man is numbingly tone deaf and clumsy – desperate, I think. Admit it Rutherford – you need my creativity to add spice. 😉

    But you’ve finally after two years asking a question I can’t answer or defend. You’ve got a point. Since it is required for legal immigrants to carry identification, I’m not sure what the new law provides that Arizona doesn’t have now.

    However, I do disagree with one Rutherford assessment. Since it has such high approval of the general populace, I actually think the only people that are offended would never cast a vote for an Republican anyway.

    Besides, I saw a poll tonight that said most Latinos with American citizenship and vote also agree with the new law.

    HOT AIR and Rasmussen! tee hee… your favorites. 😈

  2. I have to disagree with you again. While you’re correct (just as with the Miami DNC speech) that Obama’s remarks are heard beyond his immediate audience, I have to side with Fox News (via Shep Smith) and question those being weirded out by Obama appealing to his base.

    Honestly, sometimes I think you spend so much time w/ your nutty conservative commenters that you buy into their Limbaugh-Beck approved shtick! It is not as though Obama specifically excluded white Americans. Rather, that’s a deliberate reading by those that would like to hear exactly that.

    Then, you see, they can scream that Obama is a racist, while simultaneously accusing him of “playing the race card.” (All of which is entirely devoid of meaning these days – but perhaps that is part of their brilliant plan?) Since when was addressing the concerns of a particular part of your constituency racist or exclusive to the needs and concerns of any other constituency?

    Do you remember when it used to be controversial to say a president was racist? (OMG! Kanye was SO out of line!) It wasn’t that long ago. (The right is just FAR more bold in their distraction and flagrant attacks.) Try not to fall for it next time, my friend (although I guess we can discuss this on Sat 😉

  3. “If it is already the law that legal immigrants should carry a form of proof of “legality” and it is already the law that everyone must produce id when asked by a policeman, then why on Earth do we need the Arizona legislation?”

    Because the people who were supposed to be enforcing those laws weren’t (federal) or weren’t allowed to (local).

    The first law is a federal law that clearly wasn’t being enforced well enough.

    The second law deals with local cops. While they were allowed to ask for ID w/ cause. They were not being permitted to ask about citizenship ID, because that is supposed to be enforced by the fed—who isn’t doing its job.

    So yes…it is redundant. That’s because the state had to write a bill that allowed it to do the fed’s job.

  4. So yes…it is redundant. That’s because the state had to write a bill that allowed it to do the fed’s job.

    But don’t mind the porous border…the Feds are right on top of the pressing matter of the amount of salt in processed foods, and the urgent need to demonize opposition voices as hate-filled, and violence inciting.

    It could be, just maybe, that by Arizona drawing attention to jobs that no Congressmen is interested in doing, they are focusing attention on a problem that a certain party in DC is all too happy to ignore, and that would be the driving force behind the coordinated outrage we are being treated to. But I’m sure the Wrong Reverend Sharptongue will rally the oppressed until they overcome this manifest injustice, even if he has trump up a few examples to do it.

  5. I have to disagree with you again. While you’re correct (just as with the Miami DNC speech) that Obama’s remarks are heard beyond his immediate audience, I have to side with Fox News (via Shep Smith) and question those being weirded out by Obama appealing to his base.

    Hypocracy doesn’t weird me out. I find it hard to even work up to outrage over this charlatan and his antics anymore. But I do find it ironic that the man who said this:

    “Even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us–the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of ‘anything goes.’ Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America–there is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America–there’s the United States of America.”
    –- state senator Barack Obama, Democratic National Convention, July 27, 2004

    then decided to open this video the way that he did. But then it never occurred to me that appealing to people based on their racial identity or gender was a sterling way to unite a country, especially at a time of such great polarization. I guess that is more of that whole “Smart like Spock” thing our intellectual betters keep telling us about. Too bad I’m not smart enough to see the genius in it. I guess I’ll keep thinking of us as “Americans”, and leave the real racism to the experts. The Democratic Party, its supporters, associates, hangers-on, and followers. I don’t know many conservatives who could ever hope to even parallel Democratic expertise in racism and identity politics.

  6. I’m just wondering if Sandi would have had the same opinion had George Bush said the same thing Obama said, only substituted white men, white women and Cubans?

    Of course, Sandi would have been apoplectic over the comment and rightly so. But because it’s Barack and he’s black, and because Sandi is so hopelessly blind to her own bias and double standards, the thought she’s a hypocrite never occurs to her.

    Add to the fact that Obama was marketed as the post racial President, it will be people like Sandi stoking the fires with baseless charges that actually set racial unrest in motion again.

    It is inevitable because Obama can’t win without it, and if he should lose, guaranteed the race card will be played with riots to follow.

  7. And speaking of more criticism of our current federal gov’t, about the nine militia members recently busted? Well, it seems the task force head that busted the “McVeigh wannabees” is so inept, she can’t remember any of the details.

    From PJM:

    DETROIT – An FBI agent who led the investigation of nine Michigan militia members charged with trying to launch war against the federal government couldn’t recall many details of the two-year probe yesterday during questioning by defense lawyers.

    Even the judge who must decide whether to release the nine until trial was puzzled.

    “I share the frustrations of the defense team … that she doesn’t know anything,” U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts said after agent Leslie Larsen confessed she hadn’t reviewed her notes recently and couldn’t remember specific details of the case.

    http://www.toledoblade.com/article/20100428/NEWS02/4280343/-1/rss

    It’s impossible to carry on dialogue with the author of the Cassandra files. She’s neither smart enough nor reasonable enough to do much but carry the water for the left’s media – a puppet on strings.

    But you Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Hippie and Mr. Curator – you guys might at least see why I do not have much faith that our government could hand out free cheese efficiently, much less facilitate something as complicated as health care?

    P.S. – Yes I saw the nine, inbred looking militia members. They were a pathetic lot and this post is not defending their ideas or actions, but simply reminding you that while it may be Obama’s “experts” who constructed the new health care proposal, Obama nor his cabinet are the ones you will be working with to obtain permissions or deliver payment. And as you three are aware, the plan is only as good as the people who administrate it. 😉

  8. A post style I’ve complimented you on before R but this time it doesn’t work for me. I’ll give you 5 out of ten though cause I know your time hasn’t been all yous of late and you’ve got a lot on the plate.
    On chickens,I don’t get it so I got nothing,other than to say I’d vote for a chicken before I voted for Reid.

    Rutherford I’ll hold out hope that you are better than many on your side on the Arizona issue. Read the law,try to grapple with the frustration of the Arizona people and be open to accepting that the majority of Arizonans (all colors & backgrounds) have a strong desire to be fair and safe.This law is sound and in my opinion is actually a positive for citizens and legal immigrants.

    The alleged red meat. I won’t say I agree with cassandra because I think she misses the reality but what O has uttered is not anti-white/anti-male. He is looking and trying to reconnect with the energetic base that exclusively elected him and by most reports are not likely to vote in a non presidential election.
    I think his message was pretty clear,honest but equally non-motivational. It is also filled with partisan rhetoric which borders on and stretches beyond lying.

  9. Why was it not racist for Michael Steele to bring a “hip hop” makeover to the Republican Party or an “urban” feel to the GOP? Was he not targeting his message to those the GOP are desperately trying to reach?

    And lets all remember that when the GOP talk about courting Christians, gun owners, etc. they actually do mean to exclude non-Christians and non-gun-owners. So naturally, if they hear someone they really hate suggest targeting a message to particular groups that they themselves have all but written off, they see it as an opportunity to scare up the old white guy vote.

  10. The alleged red meat. I won’t say I agree with cassandra because I think she misses the reality but what O has uttered is not anti-white/anti-male. He is looking and trying to reconnect with the energetic base that exclusively elected him and by most reports are not likely to vote in a non presidential election.
    I think his message was pretty clear,honest but equally non-motivational. It is also filled with partisan rhetoric which borders on and stretches beyond lying.

    Alfie, I simply cannot agree. If Dim Won was truly a post-racial President, and not the divisive SOB that he really is, that whole approach could have been done in a way that could have:
    a) remained consistent with his agenda of the promotion of self and the dissemination of lies, lies, more lies, and damn lies;
    b) actually asaid something inspiring, rather than selfish; and
    c) still appealed to “his base”.

    “My freinds, I thank you for the trust you have placed in myself and our party. Since our election in 2008, we have made significant progress in making the promise of America available to all Americans. But now we find ourselves with a rapidly approaching mid-term election, with much of our fundamental transformation of our country into a 21st Century nation still to be done. We could not have begun this great work without the assistance of many citizens who had never before paid close attention to politics, or participated in the electoral process. If we are to continue this historic and unprecedented task, we need these same Americans to participate again. People like Susie Smith, who never voted before because she didn’t believe that one vote-her vote, could make a difference. Or a person like Tyrone Jones, who had been disenfranchised because of his multiple felony convictions…a wrong that has been corrected because of a recent 9th Circuit ruling that requires the automatic restatement of the voting rights for all felons…even if they are still repaying their debt to society. Or people like Louisa Patron, who loves this country so much that she came here illegally to enjoy the benefits and priviledges of citizens, and she would not have been able to vote without the courage of enlightened cities like San Fransisco, which have witnessed the the power possible from ignoring immigration law and all that it requires and treating undocumented immigrants as citizens. These Americans all proved to thenselves, and the country that one vote—their vote, can make a difference. We needed you help in 2008, and we need it again in 2010. Vote. Vote early, and vote often. I’m Barack Hussein Obama, and I approve this message.”

  11. Why was it not racist for Michael Steele to bring a “hip hop” makeover to the Republican Party or an “urban” feel to the GOP? Was he not targeting his message to those the GOP are desperately trying to reach?

    Because minorities can’t be racist. That’s what geniuses like “Skp” Gates keep telling us. Duh!

    And lets all remember that when the GOP talk about courting Christians, gun owners, etc. they actually do mean to exclude non-Christians and non-gun-owners. So naturally, if they hear someone they really hate suggest targeting a message to particular groups that they themselves have all but written off, they see it as an opportunity to scare up the old white guy vote.

    Religion and gun ownership are not race or gender specific factors, and no one has made claims that the election of a member of the GOP is somehow “post-racial” or that any specific candidate is a “Great Uniter”.

  12. Because minorities can’t be racist. That’s what geniuses like “Skp” Gates Rutherford Lawson keep telling us. Duh!

    What happened to our first post racial and transparent President? Seems to me that race has reared its head from the administration more than any of recent memory. Am I wrong?

  13. Because minorities can’t be racist. That’s what geniuses like “Skp” Gates keep telling us. Duh!

    I’d like to read that. Got a quote?

    So its OK if the GOP targets black voters to bring a “hip hop” makeover to the Republican Party? Its also OK to only target Christians and gun owners at the expense of leaving out everybody else?

    So once again, complaining about phony “white victimization” card really must exist in the GOP handbook. IOKIYAR

  14. Yes, blacks can be prejudiced or bigoted, but not ”racist” because racism involves systemic oppression — the wielding of power. As blacks neither wield power nor control the system, the reasoning goes, it’s beyond their ability to be racist. ~ repeated ad nauseum…

    Including one Mr. Rutherford Lawson, Curator. I believe I paraphrased that closely. Correct me if I am wrong Mr. Lawson. 😉

  15. So its OK if the GOP targets black voters to bring a “hip hop” makeover to the Republican Party? Its also OK to only target Christians and gun owners at the expense of leaving out everybody else?

    You mean it isn’t divisive for a post-racial great uniter of a president to focus on certain races, but if it were, it would be no different than the other party tailoring its message to people who have chosen to engage in Constitutionally protected activity that anyone, regardless of race or gender may engage in?

    Its bad enough to engage in moral equivalence arguments, but when you equate two things that have nothing in common with each other? More proof of the utter failure of post modern philosophy.

  16. Back to the AZ bill….

    Maybe some of you opponents to this bill can clarify something for me.

    Why is it against civil liberties to force people to prove their immigration status but it’s not against civil liberties to force people to prove they have health insurance?

  17. And where was the President focusing on certain races when he said “young people” and “women”, or do you just want to cherry pick and mean “African-Americans” and “Latinos” the very demographic that in all likelihood will not show up at the voting booth in November.

    It is too bad the GOP is not tailoring their message to “Constitutionally protected activity” like you said, but instead would rather tailor their message as “fear of outsiders”. The modern GOP cannot win over different groups of voters when its agenda appeals to neither their values nor their interests. It is much easier for the GOP to point the finger at the ACLU, abortionists, pagans, feminists, gays, lesbians, blacks, hispanics, and muslims.

  18. @LOL
    Why don’t you ask Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush?

    ‘I think it creates unintended consequences,’ he said in a telephone interview with POLITICO Tuesday. ‘It’s difficult for me to imagine how you’re going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well.’

  19. @Curator: “Why don’t you ask Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush?”

    Because I am asking you and Rutherford.

    Why is it against civil liberties to force people to prove their immigration status but it’s not against civil liberties to force people to prove they have health insurance?

  20. I for one have just about had it with Curators left wing talking points. Dude give it a fucking break will ya!
    You live and breath identity politics but have the gall to accuse the GOP of it.?!
    Gays can’t vote for tax breaks? Latinos can’t vote for enterprise zones? Blacks for better schools? And none of them can do any of that just because they’re Americans?
    No no no not in Curators world. Labels must be issued and if anybody squabbles about a label then falsely accuse the nearest right of center entity and be done with it.

  21. LOL #20 the PPAC actually denies healthcare coverage to illegals. So you can stay anywhere you like you just can’t have insurance…for now.

  22. I don’t know? On one hand I go to jail, on the other I pay a fine. I bet you have health insurance and I bet you carry mandatory car insurance. Do you carry those for the public good? Would we force Hispanic people to carry “papers” on them for the public good, or just to appease our fear of brown people?

    Speaking of civil liberties…please list the lost freedom/liberty you have experienced over the last 15 months.

  23. Alfie, I understand that illegal immigrants aren’t covered under ObamaCare. That isn’t really what I am asking.

    I am asking how a mandate to show proof of citizenship infringes on civil liberties more than a mandate for me to purchase a service, and a mandate for me to show proof that I have purchased that service.

    Hell, the AZ mandates reasonable suspicion before asking for proof of citizenship. All I have to do to be asked to prove I have health insurance is to file a tax return.

  24. I’m not going anywhere Curator.I’m gonna make Tex look like your first love. You are one of the most dishonest pieces of shit I’ve met on the net. You float shit out that is easily refuted. You toss up Soros/Kos points like its gospel. You sicken me.

  25. @Alfie

    The Right could not wait to make the claim of racism towards Obama’s remarks, yet are hypocrites when they themselves target minorities and black people to bring the “hip hop” makeover to the GOP, gun owners to please their NRA base, and Christians to appease the Religious Right.

    And I’m playing identity politics?

  26. “I don’t know? On one hand I go to jail, on the other I pay a fine.”

    So civil liberties are only violated if the penalty for non-compliance with mandates is severe enough?

    “I bet you have health insurance…”

    Actually, I don’t currently have health insurance. I am in violation of the law, and if I maintain that status, as should be my civil liberty to do so, I will be punished. The method of that punishment doesn’t change the fact that my civil liberty to not purchase a service is being violated.

    “I bet you carry mandatory car insurance.”

    I do have auto insurance. But the auto insurance mandate is not a mandate on all Americans. If I don’t own a car, I don’t have to have auto insurance. Also, driving is not a right, it is a priveledge. In order to take part in that priveledge, I must comply with certain mandates that accompany it.

    “Do you carry those for the public good?”

    As a matter of fact, I do. That is why the auto insurance I am required to have as a driver covers everyone but me if I get into an accident.

    Thanks for playing.

  27. Something to ponder while I’m away doing schoolwork.

    With the third NO vote in the Senate to block reform, where are the Tea Party yahoos, because I really can’t think of a better time to put pressure on Wall Street and Washington to make sure there is adequate regulation to ensure that we never have another taxpayer funded bailout?

  28. I don’t currently have health insurance.

    Were you denied due to a pre-existing condition?

    You, nor your wife, or son’s have coverage? Do you just depend on emergency room coverage and push the costs on everyone else? Are you a closet socialist?

  29. The 3 filibusters forced Dems to negotiate with the GOP. In doing so, compromises have been reached and the GOP has signalled it won’t filibuster it again.

    This is the way government is supposed to operate. The opposition party makes its best attempt to stop legislation until it is allowed to be part of the process of drafting it. Once negotiations become inclusive, compromises can be reached, and a problem resolved in less than 14 months.

    When you go it alone, you waste time and political capital.

    Ponder that.

  30. Something to ponder while I’m away doing schoolwork.

    You found another 3rd grade with really loose admissions standards? Good for you, sparky.

    With the third NO vote in the Senate to block reform, where are the Tea Party yahoos, because I really can’t think of a better time to put pressure on Wall Street and Washington to make sure there is adequate regulation to ensure that we never have another taxpayer funded bailout?

    If your concern is about another bailout, you could always try allowing enforcement of the laws on the books instead of having key Democratic Congressmen (Bwarney Fwanks, call your office) block enforcement of existing laws and resist additional regulations that would have prevented a great deal of the public injury in the sub prime mess.

    Then there is also actually saying “NO.” to companies that made really poor business decisions, got burned, and came calling with their hats in their hands. I know, it does significantly reduce the opportunites for graft and corruption funded by the taxpayer, but its what responsible legislators would do. Too bad we didn’t have any.

  31. Curator, it’s not the reform that’s opposed. It’s a flawed bill. I sure hope you’re not studying logic. You’d get an “F.”

  32. “You, nor your wife, or son’s have coverage? Do you just depend on emergency room coverage and push the costs on everyone else? Are you a closet socialist?”

    I pay cash for my medical services. And my lack of insurance pushes costs on to nobody, because I don’t go to the ER.

    Is it a mandate that I use the ER?

  33. See Steele is a perfect example. You are thinking in one dimension Curator. One layer. That’s what kills the credibility of the Lefts position here.
    Steele was frowned upon by a number of republicans others considered it a good idea to give him a shot.
    Many on the Left went the Uncle om route.
    Then Steele policies and comments drive republicans nuts and people on the left start to label the right racist for calling for his head.
    You play the hip hop card. theres some evidence that that was his idea. So is it wrong? Insensitive? Blacks get to use the n word don’t they?
    The flip side is answered by asking if you saw the Jon Stewart show with the puppet lampooning Steele?

  34. El Tigre,

    Curator, it’s not the reform that’s opposed. It’s a flawed bill. I sure hope you’re not studying logic. You’d get an “F.”

    I think that is unduly harsh. Curator should receive an “I” for incomplete, because Curator has never attempted rational thought of his own that we have observed. We can’t flunk him until he has an original thought. Right now the best we can give him is a “D” for dumb ass. And it’s a solid “D.”

    Curator is to busy plagiarizing quotes off the net and attributing them to himself.

    Therefore, I award him an “A++” for cut & paste methodology. 😉

  35. Hey, the perfect Dimocratic candidate is running for Senator and has Baracky’s endorsement – the ultimate kiss of death!!!

    Alexi Giannoulias’ family bank is taken over by the FDIC about the same week Giannoulias gives a rousing speech on finance reform! ** GUFFAW ** This is another in a long list of high quality individuals from the party of Curator.

    You really can not make this shit up! 😆

  36. I’m curious if the members from the other side of the aisle have something to say the whole Admin v Press thing.
    At first I thought there was more sour grapes amongst the press corps than I could ever care about but there seems to be some legs growing on this and O himself seems to be ratcheting up some arrogance.
    Like them or hate them Clinton and Reagan were in tune with the media.How smart is Obama?

  37. I meant to add an example.
    So I want to deliver this message today: We’re not playing that game. I’m not going to say what’s in. I’m not going to say what’s out. I want this commission to be free to do its work
    The game being answering probing questions that don’t need 17 minute long babbling non answers.

  38. The 3 filibusters forced Dems to negotiate with the GOP. In doing so, compromises have been reached and the GOP has signalled it won’t filibuster it again.

    What compromise? Dodd said he would not weaken consumer protections and the GOPhers finally caved. GOPhers can read polls and it wasn’t looking good for them.

  39. @Curator: “What compromise? Dodd said he would not weaken consumer protections and the GOPhers finally caved. GOPhers can read polls and it wasn’t looking good for them.”

    I don’t know what specific compromises. As usual, we will have to pass the bill before we can see what is in it. So until then, I will take the word of Senate Republicans who were there. This what they had to say…

    Earlier, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, released a statement saying closed-door negotiations with Democrats on the financial regulations reform bill had ended with agreement on some issues but others left unresolved.

    “Now that those bipartisan negotiations have ended, it is my hope that the majority’s avowed interest in improving this legislation on the Senate floor is genuine and the partisan gamesmanship is over,” McConnell’s statement said.

    In a separate statement, the lead Republican negotiator on the issue, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, said that agreement had been reached on some issues but that the talks were at an impasse on others.
    ….
    Shelby said he had negotiated a deal on provisions that would prevent companies from growing too big to fail, as well as a process for unwinding collapsing Wall Street banks.

    But, he said, he and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Connecticut, were unable to reach a deal about the powers and scope of a consumer protection regulator or the best way to regulate complex financial products currently traded in the dark.

    That is a compromise, wouldn’t you say?

    So sorry I am not taking your, or CNN’s word for why the GOP ended the filibuster.

    With signs that support for the filibuster was crumbling, Republican leaders signaled Wednesday they would allow the debate to begin. Shortly after that, moderate GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine became the first Republican to announce that she would vote to launch debate on the bill to overhaul the financial regulatory system.

    But since neither you, nor CNN, was actually in those negotiations. I think the word of senators who were trumps you both just a wee bit.

    @Tex: “I think that is unduly harsh. Curator should receive an “I” for incomplete”

    Tex, you are forgetting the new grading scale. Incompletes are worth a solid B+ these days.

  40. the energetic base that exclusively elected him

    Alfie, this is exactly where I disagree with both you and my esteemed colleague Sandi.

    No one gets elected President in this country without lots of white men voting tor them. Plain and simple. Did Obama carry the youth vote, the black vote and the female vote? Yes. Did they “exclusively elect” him? Absolutely not.

    The other problem I have here, which I had in my prior article on the subject, is that Obama is not a candidate. He is POTUS. That calls for different behavior and different rhetoric. Obama would be well advised to NOT single out any minority for any reason when he is speaking publicly. Interestingly, despite what Tex etal might say, during the campaign, Obama for the most part avoided race like the plague. Now for some ungodly reason, he wants to go there now and then. Not smart.

    For once I have to agree with those who cite a double standard here. If George W, Bush was caught on tape saying “I want all you rich, middle aged white men to go to the polls”, he would be drawn and quartered by the media. This is no different.

  41. By the way, I say Rush was right (sort of). The “sort of” involves Obama NOT being a racist as Rush claims. I would be more specific that he’s being “racial”, not racist. He is reaching out to minority groups unnecessarily. Think about this statement:

    I need all of you who came out for me in 2008 to go to the polls this November.

    WOW! That makes a damn big difference. No one gets excluded. No one gets taken for granted. No us against them. It was so easy for him to do …. and he blew it.

  42. To LOL, the immigration status/health insurance comparison falls flat immediately. Doesn’t even get out of the station. The AZ law is fraught with trouble because it has the potential to target brown skinned people. Plain and simple.

    I’m not for illegal immigrants. But I don’t think the way to deal with them is to make citizens and legal immigrants uncomfortable.

    By the way, doesn’t it just make you proud that Mexico issued a travel advisory for Arizona? I’m used to seeing travel advisories for Iraq. But the United States of America? Not our finest hour!

  43. Speaking of civil liberties…please list the lost freedom/liberty you have experienced over the last 15 months.
    — Curator

    Clearly a rhetorical question since not one single freedom or liberty has been lost by anyone in the past 15 months.

    That’s what makes so much of this whining from the right so laughable. It also makes it highly suspect … like there’s more to it than meets the eye …. too much demographic change in America perhaps? Mmmmmm.

  44. BUT getting back to Arizona for a minute:

    On MSNBC, Chris Matthews said something that bothered the crap out of me. To paraphrase, he said “harassing illegals will have an ill effect on the businesses who need to hire them.” Again, I’m only paraphrasing but that was the gist of it.

    Excuuuuuuse me? Last I looked we had near 10% unemployment and businesses NEED to hire illegals? Bull sheeeeut. Now I know it’s cheap labor that can’t complain cos if they do they get deported but let’s get real. Companies need to stop hiring illegals and give those jobs to legals who desperately need them.

  45. “LOL” from what I understand the GOP caved not because of negotiation but because their bluff was finally called and folks were willing to go late into the night if necessary.

  46. El Tigre, this flawed bill excuse is getting damn old. All bills are flawed. If the GOP wrote the thing themselves it will still be flawed.

    You make the best effort and you run with it. The GOP’s preoccupation with perfection is a nice smoke screen for obstructionism.

  47. ““LOL” from what I understand the GOP caved not because of negotiation but because their bluff was finally called and folks were willing to go late into the night if necessary.”

    May I ask from where did you acquire that understanding?

    “By the way, doesn’t it just make you proud that Mexico issued a travel advisory for Arizona?”

    Rutherford, can you not see that it is in the interest of Mexico to make AZ and this bill look bad? This makes it more difficult for Mexico to export millions of its unskilled, unemployed labor. That’s millions less that rely on Mexican social services and less potential for civil unrest to develop in an already failing state.

  48. “LOL” I haven’t quite “admitted” that Obama isn’t fit for office.”

    Nor did I admit anything about Hot Air.

  49. “To LOL, the immigration status/health insurance comparison falls flat immediately. Doesn’t even get out of the station. The AZ law is fraught with trouble because it has the potential to target brown skinned people. Plain and simple. ”

    Their civil liberties are more important than mine?

  50. As for the claim of “targetting” people…

    “Supporters have dismissed concerns about profiling, saying the law prohibits the use of race or nationality as the sole basis for an immigration check. Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the measure Friday, has ordered state officials to develop a training course for officers to learn what constitutes reasonable suspicion someone is in the U.S. illegally.”

    Is it a perfect solution? No.

    But remember, “All bills are flawed.”

  51. Rutherford, what’s damn old is pushing ill-conceived bullshit legislation and demonizing anyone that disagrees with it. And still admitting it’s flawed but claiming it MUST pass or [insert parade of horribles here].

    Boy oh boy. The thought of it! Putting the brakes on poorly drafted partisan bills. Opposition in the democratic process is such a hindrance.

    I guess the only way to handle it is to call out the obstreperous, racist, amoral sons-of bitches and ram it thorugh.

    Enjoy your healthcare bill. There’s plenty more where that came from.

  52. Rutherford ,seriously that me of all people can see the harmlessness in Obama’s comment is a real shock to me.
    As far as targeting “brown people”. You’re taking the cheap & easy way out. Arizona by geography plus the overwhelming demography of illegal immigration will absolutely net more people of “brown skin” tones than blonde or red heads.
    It isn’t racism its reality and that doesn’t make it wrong.

  53. Oh yeah… More on the AZ law and targeting people.
    There is a lot of language in the bill that is likely more applicable to native born caucasians.Such as drivers of vehicles that park and or drive in the attempt to pick up illegals for labor.

  54. @Alfie

    Is it reality for a GOP Congressman to now declare that any U.S. born baby of an illegal immigrant should be deported? Funny how Republicans can swear to uphold the Constitution out of one side of their mouth, and say things like this out of the other.

    I don’t see where the 14th Amendment of our Constitution says it applies to some citizens, but not to others. Can someone point that out? I’d really like your opinion, is this targeting “brown people” or is it just a reality?

    Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), said this over the weekend, and it made the LA Times by Wednesday, yet I still haven’t heard a peep from the GOP leadership.

    Does this guy Hunter have a problem with the US Constitution that he’s sworn an oath to uphold? Regardless the Republican plan to alienate every minority voting bloc is going just swimmingly.

  55. I don’t think you need to have the qualifier of “GOP Congressman” but I understand why you do.
    FWIW I think one can and that as a nation we must look at whether a child born IN the USA of ILLEGAL parents is a LEGAL US CITIZEN. Caps for emphasis not for e shouting.

    Only a liar would state that a possible scenario in Arizona could not play out as follows: Police pull over a vehicle. Pasty faced white guy behind wheel. Heavy brogue and blazing red hair. Police ask for proof of immigration status and catch an Irish citizen who has overstayed his student visa…by two years.

    NYC picks up Chinese and Eastern Europeans all the time. I don’t see why you insist on playing the brown card. The illegal population of the USA is predominantly from south of the border but I don’t see why people have the need to get the whole brown thing going.

  56. ,em>Regardless the Republican plan to alienate every minority voting bloc is going just swimmingly.
    As a registered Republican (honest,currently more due to it keeping the robo calls down) I’d rather lose every election for standing for the law and sovereignty of the USA than to be a label tossing Dem flush with victory. I’d remind you that it was Obama who had identity politics and racist bumper stickers. things like “Polynesians for Obama” etc.
    Tell you what. You guys take over the country. Ruin it. I’ll leave. Of course as a rule I’ll probably have to find a country that will allow me to enter it illegally,work there illegally and possibly even get myself and the fam on the local dole or I’ll go back to school as an illegal but get free tuition. Can you help me pick the country that will allow that other than the USA?

  57. Let the babies born in the US stay. But their illegal parents can leave. If it breaks up families, oh well. This anchor baby BS has to stop.

    People that are in favor of illegal immigration, such as Rutherford and Curator, can adopt them all.

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s