“I have to laugh at the comments on here. It is a funny joke between them, and the liberals on here are yelling "slavery" and all other kinds of nonsense. Did any of you stop to think that maybe he does many wonderful things for her? Liberals seem to live for one thing: to find all the ways they are offended. Lighten up, enjoy the joke. She seems happy, she was not offended, so why are all you liberal busybodies so offended?”
Milash on Sep 26, 2013 at 15:21:53
panchang810 on Sep 26, 2013 at 15:04:35
“And what made you think that ONLY THE LIBERALS were offended or found this story annoying? Are you that moronic?”
“That is a very good point, if it came from rape or incest they would make up their minds very quickly. So at 20 weeks the only valid reasons are the life or health of the mother. If she doesn't want the baby after 20 weeks, then I would be in favor of her agreeing to give it up for adoption in exchange for financial help (either private or public). I think this is a fair compromise that a large majority would support. There are many couples that adopt from other countries because there are not enough babies here.”
“I think Gallup's poll was essentially correct, the problem was that fewer Republicans came out to vote. If Romney had gotten the same number of votes McCain did he would have won. The reasons were the media constantly portraying Romney as some evil person (which is far from the truth), and Romney not running a more urgent campaign (he rarely showed up for interviews on major shows while Obama did the full late night tour), and not pinting out the failures of the Obama Administration more fully, including not pounding them on the lies about Benghazi.”
sawsharee on Mar 12, 2013 at 16:36:32
“Actually Romney received more votes than McCain in the final count. Romney is a true gentleman and proven businessman. He is just what our country needed. Even the "mainstream" media is beginning to realize how wrong they were in supporting Obama.”
axt113 on Mar 9, 2013 at 17:11:26
“Romney got more votes than McCain, final tally was 60,931,767 for Romney, McCain only got 59,948,323 votes
You guys need to get real, there are just more Dem voters than Rep voters”
“What does anyone expect? Obama promised to abide by federal matching funds in 2008. Of course, he lied. He outspent McCain by 3 to 1, using campaign funds that were mostly collected via the internet. What many do not know is that Obama is the first candidate to abandon the Address Verification System when collecting donations, which meant that anyone could donate any amount they wanted, from anywhere, anonymously and without fear of surpassing donation limits. I believe Obama will go down in history as the most corrupt President in US history.”
jalanandmruth on Feb 7, 2012 at 18:15:36
“Sadly, the one with the most money wins. CU dealt a knock out blow to any hope of campaign finance reform, not that congress has any real interest in that anyway. Politicians are in it for two reasons, power and personal enrichment. Doing whats good for the country seems to be both accidental and incidental regardless of party. Perhaps we could start a write in campaign for NONE OF THE ABOVE?”
Mariosright on Feb 7, 2012 at 17:50:18
“Yup, he beat your candidate then and he is going to do it again.”
leftcoastindy on Feb 7, 2012 at 17:47:16
“Name a single corrupt thing he has done. He will not even be ON the list of most corrupt POTUS's”
deaconbleu on Feb 7, 2012 at 17:44:49
“Of course you failed to mention McCain broke the promise first. We've already had the most corrupt President in history, several of them, in fact. And they were all Repbublicons.”
mac2jr on Feb 7, 2012 at 17:40:47
“You misunderstood, Obama said he WOULD NOT USE Federal Matching Funds in 2008.”
“I think this incident shows why we need to stay a little while longer. We can't leave until the Iraqi government can prove it can defend itself. This was a test of that. They didn't get a high score by any means, but they didn't completely flunk either. But if we leave too soon, then Sadr, backed by Iran, could attack and try to take over the government. Do we want that? I would say clearly no. And we had to come to the rescue here. Imagine if we had already left? Sadr might have won, and we'd be looking at a radical religious government in one of the richest coutries in the middle east, one that would likely support terorism. That doesn't sound very appealing.
If we stay and give them a chance to become a strong democracy, historians may look back at this as a watershed moment in time. How long did we occupy Japan and Germany? Far longer than in Iraq. And what do we have to show for it? Two friendly, democratic allies. Wouldn't it be nice if we could leave to our grandkids a friendly democratic ally in the middle east (besides Israel)? Iraq can be a great country, we owe to them to stay and help them become one, instead of decending into chaos if we leave before they are ready.”
JacobSinger on Apr 1, 2008 at 11:54:38
“I would beg to differ on that point.
Iran, through Sadr's efforts, is setting the limits for what will be tolerated; they are also letting it be known that some thoughtful planning needs to be done in regards to how best to manipulate the US occupying forces, the US congress, the upcoming election and eventually, the new president. Iran realizes that they have enormous influence over how all of this plays out while US forces are in Iraq, and even more so after they leave. The goal, I think, is to hold out until the next president is in office, and in the meantime, play both ends against the middle to create an effect that will help to elect a US president that has a predisposition for withdrawing from Iraq. So to that end, I think we'll see periodic excursions into heavy fighting through various factions to keep the war in Iraq visible during the election process.
And ultimately I think the seemingly magnanimous influence on current fighting contains a message as well: if we manipulate the situation to get them out, we work this out as we please once they are gone.
Frankly, I don't have a problem with that.
But if you seriously harbor the delusion that it's possible for the US to simply occupy Iraq until they accept the US/western influences on their culture and decide to become a good little client state like Israel--well, I think you're placing hope on a rather futile notion.”
LorettaSingbiel on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:34:02
“"But if WE leave too soon, then Sadr, backed by Iran, could attack and try to take over the government. Do WE want that? I would say clearly no. And WE had to come to the rescue here. Imagine if WE had already left?"
What's all this "WE" stuff?
"WE" had no business GOING in IRAQ!
"WE" have no business BEING in IRAQ!
"WE" have no business STAYING in IRAQ!
What lies beneath THEIR land is NOT OURS to STEAL from the Iraqis...just as what lies beneath OUR feet was not OURS TO STEAL from our Native Americans!!!
When will "WE" ever learn?
And NOW "WE" WANT WANT WANT, WANT WANT ... to BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB IRAN.
"How long did WE occupy Japan and Germany? Far longer than in Iraq."
OH GIVE US A BREAK with your WWII comparisons!
HOPE & CHANGE!
Stay safe, healthy and happy,
balkanization on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:00:07
“Problem is, of course, is that "our" guy Maliki is the one backed by Iran. Al-Sadr is backed by them too, but is a bit more popular among the Shi-ites of Iraq. As has been noted, we ultimately plumped for Maliki and his crew because they spoke English and wore suits. It isn't Kansas, and it isn't Germany, and sending as we did a bunch of young Republicans to try to figure it out was the height of idiocy, or hubris take your pick. It MIGHT make sense to stay a little longer if what we were doing, if who we were supporting, wasn't making it that much more likely that an enlarged Iran would emerge from this conflagration.”
pahpah25 on Apr 1, 2008 at 09:16:35
“it is stupid to compare IRAQ to germany and japan......we are PAYING these two countries for the privelege of having military bases there......oh wow! we are paying IRAQ for the same privilege..only alot of their citizens do not like being occupied.....and the US military is paying iraqis NOT to shoot at us...............are we havig fun yet?”
ejay579 on Apr 1, 2008 at 08:54:32
“Comparing Iraq to the situations in Germany, Japan, and Korea is like comparing apples to oranges. Now if you want to compare Iraq to Vietnam....”
tomcat27834 on Apr 1, 2008 at 08:32:27
“I'll give you this one...unless our strategic plan is to take-on Iran militarily the whole notion of your premise that the region will become democratic "as we westerners define it" is absurd. The invasion and occupation of Iraq was a strategic blunder based on neocons convincing a nieve GWBush that the region would grasp the concept of a "free society" and welcome our "liberation". On the contrary, we are sucked-in (by our own stupidity) a civil war divided amongst factions and IRAN, yes, IRAN is the victor here. If INCOMPETENCE was an impeachable offense, the Bush administration meet the criteria for impeachment.”
“Gore says "decreasing crop yields, more destructive storms, the spreading of tropical diseases to temperate latitudes, rising seas, more climate refugees, failures of governance, increasing floods, deepening droughts, more destructive fires and heat waves" are happening now. Extreme weather events, of all kinds, are down, and down significantly over the past decade or so. Hurricanes last year were near an all-time low, yet they all predicted many more Katrinas (where are they?). Tornadoes are down, droughts are down. More destructive fires? Seriously? How? Where? When?
Science involves developing a hypothesis, which leads to certain results. If the results do not happen (more extreme weather events), then the hypothesis is faulty. But not for global warming. None of their predictions have come true, yet we are attacked if we dare doubt their "science."”
QuiGon on Apr 1, 2014 at 13:44:32
“>> "None of their predictions have come true"
Where DO you guys come up with this? Do you hear it on the radio and then repeat it without fact checking it even briefly?
“You need to actually read the transcript of the trial, because what you describe is not what happened. DZ was walking back to his car because he had lost TM, and then TM jumped out from behind bushes and sucker-punched him, then pounded his head on the concrete.”
“This coming from a man who sold his network to oil producers. Maybe it was written into the sale contract that Al had to keep pushing for the US to halt its energy production, so that we can buy more of it from the people who bought his network.
For those of you who actually believe anything Al Gore says, I ask you to judge him by his actions. He bought a house on the California coast, a coast that he claims will be under water soon due to global warming. This clearly shows he does not believe the alarmist claims he makes, so why should you?”
“It will also be coming here via the trains owned by Warren Buffett. This is why Buffett supported Obama, he gets billions in extra revenues while Obama delays the pipeline, plus he knows Obama's IRS will quietly forgive the $1 billion in back taxes he owes. Crony capitalism at its finest.”
“These plans will drive up the cost of electricity, which will hurt the poor the most. Furthermore, extreme weather, which warmists claim is caused by global warming, has not gone up, instead it has gone down. The number of tornadoes has gone down over the last 40 years. The number of hurricanes have also decreased. The global temperature has not risen in 16 years. What does this mean? It means the models that are being used to create this alarmism and call for action, are wrong. Why would we base policy that will undoubtedly hurt the poor on models that are unequivocally wrong? Here are charts which prove what I am saying: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/06/global-warming-in-a-few-slides.php”
prettyinpink on Jun 26, 2013 at 13:51:37
“With the 5 other scandals going on this is a "wag the dog" effort. Draw attention away from the other issues. The press and the left are so gullible.”
“It was a horrible law. It is still a horrible law. Why would we stop opposing a horrible law which kills jobs and increases health care costs?”
ursulasaulie on Apr 9, 2013 at 07:12:49
“Just a questions, If you, a member of your family gets sick, and you can no longer afford your current insurance and they will dump you because you may have cancer, where will you go for treatment, and who do you think will pay for it.. Please be honest, about this”
“Strange comparison. Scooter Libby did not reveal the identity of a covert CIA agent, the prosecutor knew that from the beginning of the investigation. Instead, he was convicted on the one charge the feds always make whenever they have no real evidence of wrongdoing: lying to federal prosecutors.
On the other hand, Jon Corzine was responsible for, and ultimately "stole" a billion dollars.
It sure seems like Jon Corzine is a much bigger criminal.”
“I live in Ohio. The lesson from Ohio is a sad one. If you flood the state with money, and put ads on the TV day and night filled with lies about how people will die in fires if we don't vote no, then you will get a lot of fools to believe you and vote that way. I talked to many people about it, and they would say they support firemen and teachers so they will vote no. I would then ask them, "do you support fewer firefighters and teachers? Because there will be less of them if the no votes win." They would look at me with a weird look and ask why, and I would tell them that there will have to be layoffs of the "no" votes win. They would then ask me "why would they say what they do in the ads?" I would answer "it's the unions - they have no other interest than to make their leaders rich." Every one would then nod and say that they get it now.
I agree with FDR when he said that public employees should not be allowed to unionize. It is a conflict of interest, and it leads to massive corruption, as we all see. To have my tax dollars go to pay for political ads that lie so that more of my tax dollars can be taken from me is wrong and it is corrupt.”
Joefh on Nov 18, 2011 at 18:30:26
“Luckily, most of us in Ohio think deeper than that and will continue to vote down your kind of blame game politics. Problems in Ohio do not come from public service employees or any other kind of employees. It comes from sweet heart deals, shaddy bets in back rooms, corporate greed, and frankly this kind of blame game you demonstrate you like to play.”
Nov 16, 2011 at 15:45:56
“So you are saying coal is better than oil? That is mostly what is used to power electric cars. And in fact, electric cars are not getting better, they recently compared current electric cars to the ones that were built over 100 years ago, and the performance was almost identical.”
Nov 16, 2011 at 14:52:01
“Yes, those alternatives are at least 20 to 30 years out. Solar and wind require huge subsidies and bailouts just to function. Just ask Robert F. Kennedy. He had to get a bailout from the Energy Department for his solar company recently, even though his company should have never qualified for such assistance. His company lost $71.6 million on $13.5 million of revenue, and was clearly not viable. But he had one of his top guys installed at the DOE in the loan department, and guess what, he got his loan approved. Crony capitalism has never been worse than under this President, we see new examples every day of his rewarding his friends and donors with taxpayer money.”
FearlessFreep on Nov 16, 2011 at 22:40:20
“The quicker we stop promoting fossil fuels, the quicker alternatives will emerge.”
GuyRC on Nov 16, 2011 at 16:22:57
“So Crony capitalism and massive subsidies must only go to Republicans and fossil fuel Corps. Got it.”
Nov 16, 2011 at 14:40:17
“It is much greener to have this pipeline in our country, since pipelines have such a great track record of rarely leaking. The alternative that Canada (once our closest ally, but is now jeopardized by this President's purely political move) is considering instead of the pipeline is to simply pipe it to the coast and let China ship it all back to their country, where environmental standards are much lower than ours. The oil will be drilled regardless of this cowardly decision.”
“This song is so childish. What do we mean when we say we want our country back? It has nothing to do with racial issues, or even social issues really. It has to do with wanting to be in a country that values capitalism, and hard work, and being able to keep most of what we work so hard to earn. It means not having the government constantly waste our money bailing out friends of and donors to the President (Solyndra, Robert F. Kennedy, to name just two out of many).
I just wonder, do liberals not understand that as long as they write such childish and hate-filled songs about people they do not choose to understand, that we can never be one country? Do they not understand they are dividing us more than ever, especially since Obama entered the White House and declared that he was never going to be bipartisan ("I won")?”
solar 2011 on Nov 16, 2011 at 19:29:08
“"It has to do with wanting to be in a country that values capitalism, and hard work, and being able to keep most of what we work so hard to earn."
Last time I checked the USA still has a capitalist economy, in fact much more so now than ever, since the big corporations are allowed to to buy or put the smaller business out of business simply because they can. If a big corporation sends jobs overseas is not because of the USA is becoming less capitalist, it is because of capitalism. They realize is better business to have a workforce in another country since it is cheaper, and then sell their prodcuts in the USA. Business profits are through the roof right now, how is that not capitalism at its greatest? Regarding being able to keep most of what you work, taxes are at an all time low, to what point in history do you want to bring them back so you can keep more?”
JustThisGuy on Nov 16, 2011 at 19:18:09
“Look at tax rates from 1945 till 1995, tell me what you see, and when you would have kept more of what you earned then today.
Government waste and corruption is not new, and the Haliburton no bid contracts were just as bad as the Solyndra investments without backstops.
As for valuing hard work, that is a cultural thing, not something to blame on the government.
So the liberals are saying that from their perspective, they can't see what you are complaining about. I know the liberals I hear from think Obama has been trying to be a very bipartisan moderate, and are upset that he has not been fighting for liberal positions. Where is national heath-care? or at least opt-in medicare for all? Where is action on climate change? Gay marriage?
If you are claiming division, look in a mirror first.”
CaWa on Nov 16, 2011 at 18:50:01
“Where to start. This song is mild compared to the hate filled songs from right wing artists. The right does more to divide people and spread hate than anyone else. And, yes, much of the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the right has been about race. The part about Obama declaring he was never going to be bipartisan is complete BS. He bent over backwards to accommodate the right and they will never be satisfied.
As for valuing capitalism and hard work, the left values that much more than the right. No economic system can exist in its pure form. The most successful corporations will tell you that they benefit immensely from the mild forms of socialism we have in this country (public education, public roads, safety standards, the list goes on). The right is constantly trying to reduce the amount of money hard working people take home through policies like union busting and wage suppression. They constantly put those hard workers in harm’s way with the removal of any worker safety standards. The right simply wants slave labor on the scale of South America where there are hundreds of workers standing outside waiting for someone to get fired for going to the bathroom so they can take their job. It is astounding that anyone who brings up hard work could possibly buy the propaganda of the right.
BTW, where was your concern when Bush and Cheney where handing out pallets of cash to their friends?”
GraphicTV on Nov 16, 2011 at 17:21:37
“Liberals have a LONG way to go before the can be considered as devisive as those crying that they want their country back! Quit projecting your guilt on the rest of us. Furthermore, when did Obama ever declare that he wasn't going to be bipartisan . . . the guy has bent over backwards to placate the right.”
“In this highly partisan Congress, you know full well that any bill they introduced would never be allowed to be voted on. They asked that the bill be paid for out of left-over stimulus funds. What is wrong with that?”
“This was part of a series of continuing resolutions, with the last one asking Clinton to commit to balancing the budget within 5 years. Clinton refused, so the government was shut down for all non-essential govt.employees, who all got a paid vacation from it. No one went hungry, no one missed a check. Because the Republicans stuck to their guns, within a few years of this incident, they were able to balance the budget for the first time in many, many years.
There is only one party that has ever tried to balance the budget. If you like the idea of balanced budgets, vote Republican. If you like deficits as far as the eye can see, vote Democrat. When was the last time a Democrat Congress ever proposed a balanced budget? Not in my lifetime.”
“Wow, this guy is not too bright is he? The tea party protests were about what the government was doing. You know, those things called elected representatives. Wall Street is not government. They protested the government giving so much money to Wall Street. What good would protesting Wall Street do? We don't vote for them! They are not up for re-election. Anybody who would go out and protest Wall Street is simply wasting their time.
I don't like that coyotes sometimes eat cute little furry bunnies. Should I organize a protest against coyotes?”
yweston on Apr 24, 2010 at 09:54:14
“Yes the T Party is working for Wall Street, Corporations and Millionnaires. They get their marching orders from (Fox Network) a corporation, Palin, Beck and Limbaugh all Millionnaires.
The Pres gave the Baggers a tax cut along with other Americans, but Baggers would rather pay and praise Palin for her book of drivel and demonize the President who just put a few more dollars in their pockiets.
Yes the T Party is a Corporate, Millionnaire and Repulbican Tool. And...too st00pid to see beyond all their hate to recognize the "right wing": ruse.”
jfor on Apr 24, 2010 at 07:22:12
“Buddy your post proves your not to bright. Shine on.”
Sam1jere on Apr 24, 2010 at 06:57:46
“How can Wall Street not be government when govt policies helped perpetuate the financial sector's excesses? How about the likes of Tim Geither and their very direct connections to Wall Street giants like Goldman Sachs? There's a direct correlation between the two. Besides, if part of the Tea Party agenda is lower taxes, how will government bailout of the financial sector lower them? All I feel the author's doing is challenging the TP to be more consistent in its pursuit of whatever it stands for. The movement could take it positively and take an actual stand, putting money where its mouth is.”