February 13, 2009

Collins, Snowe, Specter, and Steele

With Judd Gregg back in the Senate and Ted Kennedy back in Florida, the only way the Multi-Generational Financial Rape Act can pass is on the vote of the three turncoat Republicans in the Senate: Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter.

Michael Steele has just taken the reins of the Republican National Committee and must play a simple, direct role in attempting to stop this economy-crippling spending bill. Steele must tell Collins, Snowe, and Specter that if they vote for the stimulus bill, then they will not be supported by the Republican Party in their Senate reelection bids.

Let them provide their own stimulus.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at February 13, 2009 12:34 AM

It requires 60 votes to invoke cloture (end debate). I don't believe that there is any debate allowed on a conference report. In other words, only a majority of those present and voting (51 votes or fewer) is required now.

It's over.

Posted by: Yes We Did at February 13, 2009 02:13 AM

I suppose the only possible good news out of this is that most of the spending doesn't occur for a few years. Perhaps there will be a miracle in 2010 putting massive Republican majorities in both houses, and allowing them to push through repeals of the crap in this 'stimulus' bill.

I can dream, can't I?

Posted by: douglas at February 13, 2009 06:12 AM

I'm having no trouble at all recalling "a President showing the level of unbridled arrogance and incompetence" to which you refer. Thankfully, he's now back to being a cowboy in the wild, wild west.

As for one of the most "incompetent administrations in history", Obama doesn't have a chance of earning that distinction. That last administration has won that, hands down.

Posted by: Dude at February 13, 2009 06:49 AM

Dude, for 8 years your side dumped on Bush in order to regain power. With the help of the elite media and the badly informed you won. It was a disgraceful mode of operation and beneath the dignity of normal relations. It reveals the Left's vapid points of subject matter.

Posted by: Rick at February 13, 2009 07:28 AM

I agree. We need to find three highly qualified, conservatives and support them in the primaries.

Snow is up in 2010, Spectre in 2012 and Collins in 2014. Snow is very popular in Maine and may be hard to displace in a general election. If she loses in a Republican primary and can raise the funds, she might run an an independent as Leiberman did.

Arlen Specter is the worst of the lot. His position on the Judiciary Committee is an embarrassment.

Posted by: arch at February 13, 2009 07:52 AM

Snowe isn't up for election until 2012. I also have to remind those hoping for a strong conservative, that Maine is a blue state. Maine went for Obama by about 16%. On top of all this the Maine GOP party isn't all that strong.

Posted by: Will at February 13, 2009 02:35 PM

These three are great start.

Senators like Voinovich in Ohio, who is retiring, needs go too. Jell-O Republicans along with RHINOs need to be booted. The only way Conservatives will be able to wrestle away any the power Emperor Obama will amass in the next two years is with a majority dedicated to Conservative values and principles.

Posted by: Franklin's Locke at February 13, 2009 03:40 PM

How do we get Chairman Steele to take action against the 3 traitors? They should be stripped of their committee assignments, and kicked out of the Party. This would leave the Republican nominations for their seats open. I have written & written the RNC, and all I get back is the same form letter.

We have to start educating the people about our founding principles. I am a philosopher and lawyer and find that people are completely ignorant of these founding principles. Anybody can be beaten in an election. But our side doesn't know how to fight. When dealing with lying Democrats, one has to be ruthless and go for the jugular. But Republicans think that if they just "play nice", people will like them. I am telling you that it is possible to be ethical and moral, and, at the same time, fight so hard and smart that you grind the faces of the opposition into the dust.

Posted by: Huldah at February 13, 2009 04:57 PM

Mr. Steele,

Tell the fine Senators - we don't support losers!

We helped Specter and it was one BIG mistake. Let them run as Democrats and spend some money for some good opposition.

How dumb can you be to vote on a trillion dollar bill that you have not read nor understand?

Posted by: Typical White Person at February 13, 2009 06:32 PM

This revenge taking talk reminds me of Kos when Lieberman went for Bush. The Senate was created to be a gathering of "little kings", who would vote without fear of anybody. So this is what you get from our constitution. New York has 10 million people in it and gets two senators and so does Montana with 400 thousand people. Sure, dump the three "traitors" then what do you get? A 100% bullet proof monarchy. The American people, morons that they mostly are, voted in these idiots because they wanted free cash coupons and could not understand Iraq.They now no longer care about Iraq and want the to cash in the coupons. If you want Republican conservatives running things you either have to come up with spectacular talent ( not) or hope Obama really screws up like Carter. In the one case you have a near impossiblity and in the other something hard to wish for.But, although the economy will be slow to recover, the pork bill has many embarassing things in it which can be exploited in sort of a reverse envy of the "more stimulated than me" groups. If the timing is just right, the house democratic majority could become weaker in 2010 and the monarchy could be derailed in the senate.

Posted by: mytralman at February 13, 2009 09:22 PM

I know that Specter ihas voted for this because the pork dangled in front of him was funding for the type of cancer he has, but what bribe did the use on Collins and Snowe?

Posted by: Gary at February 14, 2009 11:31 AM

Hi, mytraulman and all others: The conservative talents are out there - but they have to connect. For example, Sarah Palin has enormous crowd appeal, but she would be better if, as Ann Coulter suggested, she spends some time studying The U.S. Constitution and The Federalist Papers. Without an ideological foundation, people flounder!

I have the requisite knowledge of The Constitution, The Federalist Papers, our founding principles, and political philosophy; BUT I could never WOW! a crowd, nor do I wish to try. So, the candidates with the WOW! factor need to team up with the studious behind-the-scenes people like me; and then, they can go out there and KICK ASS and restore the Republic for our posterity. I am in contact already with a Republican who is planning to challenge my liberal democrat congressman. That's how we take the House back - district by district.

We also need to set up a network so we can THANK Republicans who do a great job and give them moral support. I see them on Fox, and want to tell them they did a great job, etc.. so I go to their web sites, and because I am not in their district, I can't get through via email!

Posted by: Huldah at February 14, 2009 12:59 PM

first things first: publicly boot these dirt bags from the Republican party. deny them any support at either the local, state or national level. every time one of them is mentioned as being a Republican, point out that they have been thrown out of the party, and therefore have no claim to the title.

if you don't defend your brand and your trademark, you have no recourse against counterfeiters when they sell knock offs.

Posted by: redc1c4 at February 14, 2009 02:20 PM

I think that what many of you who call yourselves "conservatives" fail to understand is that there are many shades of being a conservative, or a liberal, for that matter. What we're seeing throughout America today are many Republicans, everyday citizens, who are no longer going to allow the rabid right wing windbags to "define" what it means to be a conservative. Sure, folks such as Coulter and Rush will continue to have their hard core following. But, when you look at the numbers Obama is still enjoying a very high approval rating with the American public, including many republicans.

As for the three republican senators mentioned in this thread, I doubt that they have much to worry about should they decide to run again when their terms are up.

You can call me a liberal conservative or a conservative liberal. I don't care. For me and millions of other Americans the days are gone when we allow someone else to define OUR politics.

Posted by: Dude at February 14, 2009 03:05 PM

Did Steele get the reins, or the ruins.

And for thos "conservatives" that think left is on to a good thing, why not "come out" and register as a Dhimocrat, or P&F or whatever is an honest representative of what you really are, and leave the Republican Party to the Republicans?

Posted by: Larry Sheldon at February 14, 2009 03:38 PM

Larry makes my point for me. Not everyone who is a republican is going to agree on all of the issues. Not everyone who calls their self a conservative is going to allow someone else to dictate to them what it means to be a conservative. Those days are history.

It's the same with democrats, too. I'm a registered democrat. I voted for Obama. I also voted for a republican as my senator. I'm against the very idea of same sex marriage. It's ludicrous. I use that as an example to make my point. Furthermore, I refuse to allow the far left wing of my party to tell me how I MUST feel and believe about every issue in order to call myself a democrat.

Personally, I hope to see and have good reason to believe, that the extremes of both political parties are going to become more and more marginalized and irrelevant. The far left and the far right are in the minority. The real America is somewhere in the middle. We see that in both parties.

Posted by: Dude at February 14, 2009 04:08 PM

I'm a Republican. The party leadership in Congress talked a good game on the stimulus, and did an admirable job of maintaining party discipline in the House. But where was the "traditional" Republican concern about balanced budgets, deficit spending, and the national debt during the period when the party finally controlled both houses of Congress after a forty-year hiatus (especially after 2001 with a Republican in the White House at the same time), and could have really done something about converting all that ideology and rhetoric to action? Just one record deficit after another. (When I asked my Republican congressman about it, he said that the absolute size of the deficit, or of the accumulated national debt, was not the issue. What indicated that progress was being made was that the deficit under the Republicans was a much lower percentage of the gross national product than it used to be under the Democrats!) (Oh, I guess that means we don't have to pay those dollars back, then!) It appears that politicians of either existing party are just in it for the pork, and that they all lack the will for the tough decisions and shared sacrifice that substantive progress in this area would require. It also seems as if there's nowhere that a voter who still cares about these issues can be heard anymore.

Posted by: Overlay at February 14, 2009 05:26 PM


You've nailed it, man! Neither party is being honest when they discuss the national debt nor the annual deficits. That's why I've said before that for the most part the republican versus democrat, us versus them, my team versus your team, however you wish to put it, is a dog and pony show.

What a crock to define the annual deficit as a percentage of either the GNP or the GDP! It's all a big lie. The ONLY honest way to define the annual deficit is to compare how much we spend to how much we take in during a fiscal year. Period. It's a no brainer.

Posted by: Dude at February 14, 2009 05:54 PM

Dude said: "But, when you look at the numbers Obama is still enjoying a very high approval rating with the American public, including many republicans"

Approval ratings this early are meaningless.

Dude said: "You can call me a liberal conservative or a conservative liberal"


Posted by: Rick at February 14, 2009 08:14 PM

First of all, to even dream that you're gonna replace RINO Republicans in Maine with hard right candidates is absolutely ludicrous. The Republican brand is lucky to have ANY representation in New England as it is. In fact, expect the Democrats to target Judd Gregg like a hunter going after a buck...they're going to throw multimillions at his competitor. Word is, he's quite vulnerable as it is. Collins and Snowe have NOTHING to fear from a hard right competitor in a primary challenge.

As for Spector, he's vulnerable, but not from a hard right primary challenger, but from a well funded Democratic one. Remember, Pennsylvanians tossed Santorum, who is pretty conservative, out of office in 2006.

In any case, i think Republicans can just about forget New England. They're done up there. They can be somewhat competitive in a state like Pennsylvania, but it's going to be a while before they'll elect another Santorum.

Posted by: Mr. Barkley at February 14, 2009 11:17 PM


Agreed, approval ratings this early are meaningless. Time will tell.

It's not illogical that I and millions of other Americans are no longer going to allow the extremists of the two parties to force us to buy into their ideology. For example:

I oppose same sex marriage and I support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. On those issues I'm a conservative.

I support nationalized health care for all citizens. Furthermore, I'm a free market capitalist who supports a strong Federal Government with meaningful regulatory oversight the excesses of unbridled free market capitalism. On those issues I'm a liberal.

It's not illogical for a person to be conservative on some issues and liberal on others. You just don't like it that a lot of folks are finished with letting other people tell them what they MUST support if they're going to be a Republican or a Democrat. You and people who think as you think are just going to have to get over it.

You can be sure that the leadership of the RNC understands this now. Windbags such as Rush and Coulter may be feeding their fans what they want to hear when they insist that to be a conservative you must believe as they do on every issue. However, they're certainly not going to improve the lot of the Republican Party on the national level.

Posted by: Dude at February 14, 2009 11:34 PM

The GoP isn't going to replace any leftleaners with rightthinking people.
They're more likely to do the opposite, float MORE lefties during any upcoming election.

It may not make much sense for logical thinkers, but for campaign managers it seems to be a good idea.
After all, if lefties win elections (and they are, just look at congress and the white house), putting lefties up for election increases your chances of winning.

Welcome to the United Soviet of Amerika.

All that of course assuming there will still be a GoP at the next election cycle (or indeed an election cycle) and that they won't have been banned by then for some trumped up "crimes committed by Bush" like the Obama regime are trying to affect.

Posted by: J.T. Wenting at February 15, 2009 03:09 AM

Dude, When describing a conservative it's illogical to use the terms conservative liberal and liberal conservative. The correct terms are, right of center and left of center.

You are attempting to shift the conservative line more to the left. For example; Rush is conservative and there are some to his right and some to his left. Now for liberals, Lieberman is liberal with some to his left and right. Where is Obama's position? Well he is rated the most liberal Senator in Washington, therefore he is to the left of Lieberman. Previously you described Rush as " rabid right wing". Using your depiction the correct description for Obama then is "radical leftist" or "radical liberal".

You stated: "You just don't like it that a lot of folks are finished with letting other people tell them what they MUST support if they're going to be a Republican or a Democrat". Dude, no one ever has.

You said, "You can be sure that the leadership of the RNC understands this now". Who knows what they think.

Posted by: Rick at February 15, 2009 08:27 AM


Using your system of political taxonomy, after reading my positions on several issues in the above posts, how would you classify my politics? Am I a left of center conservative or a right of center liberal? I'm both. It's all semantics.

I read commentaries all the time where writers are saying that in order to be a REAL conservative you have to believe this or that. I hear it on this and other forums, as well as from pundits who do it for a living.

As for the thoughts of the RNC leadership, we can speculate and make judgments on their ability to grasp that the far right wing of the republican party no longer has the influence that it once enjoyed in American politics. Neither does the far left wing of the democrat party. Most Americans are somewhere in the "center".

Perhaps we need a new phrase to add to the stew pot. How 'bout we have conservatives, liberals and centrists?

The democrats didn't win this election by appealing only to the far left of their party. That would have been impossible. My hope is that the republicans will never again control the legislative and executive branches of the federal government by appealing primarily to the far right wing of their party. And that's not to say that I won't vote for a Republican presidential or senate candidate in the future.

Posted by: Dude at February 15, 2009 10:27 AM

Dude, the far right wing of the Republican Party would be the likes of General Walker and the John Birch Society. Gingrich, Reagan etc were the conservative center of the Party. The far right wing of the Republican Party has not controlled any branch of government in my lifetime, which by the way is rather long.

The conservative center and/or right, did not lose this past election as the head of the losing ticket was a left of center conservative, or moderate, similiar to the Rockefeller wing.

Posted by: Rick at February 15, 2009 11:57 AM

Well the sad news is that Obama is really neglecting the production of domestic energy. Windmills and solar panels are wonderful, but just a small drop in the bucket of what this country needs.

As gas prices inch up again, I'm afraid that a lot of Obama's stimulus bucks will flow straight into OPEC as oil goes back up over $4-5 in the years ahead.

Posted by: Right on Demand at February 15, 2009 02:51 PM

Right wingers should give up on New England. Others above have stressed this point up above but it needs emphasizing again. I lived in Portland, Maine for years and it's as liberal as Boston and becoming more so with each year.

With Lindsay and DeMint and other southerners at the head of the declining Republican party, there's little sympathy among average people in New England for the Republican line.

Posted by: Reggie at February 15, 2009 07:48 PM


Thanks for your explanation of what you consider to be the center of the republican party. I suppose from many republicans' point of view that you are correct.

I also agree that McCain isn't a far right winger. For a while I considered voting for him. However, when he chose Palin as his running mate that was the clincher for me. That was a very bad decision on his part and may very well have cost him the election. I think that she's a great campaigner but she doesn't have the "right stuff" to win a national election. She certainly energized the "base" but she hurt the ticket in the long run.

I hear a lot of republicans saying that the party needs to go back to the basics of their "conservative" principles in order to win more congressional and senate seats. Do you believe that to be true? I don't. I think if the republican party goes for that approach they'll see results in 2012 similar to the results of 1936 when, after 4 years of FDR, the ranks of the republican party fell from 36 to 16 in the Senate and from 117 to 88 in the House.

For the republicans to ever regain power on the national level they are going to have to be appealing to far more people than the base that they've depended on in the past. The train wreck that we now have as a result of 8 years of Bush/Cheney politics has changed that model for years to come.

Posted by: Dude at February 15, 2009 11:02 PM

Dude, yes I feel they must go back to conservativism to win. Over 50% of the population is right of center by all surveys I have seen. Conservatism is what wins for Republicans not Democrat lite. What Republicans have lacked since Reagan are communication skills.

The prime movers of this credit crises mess we are in now was caused by Liberalism's pet projects, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Franklin Raines, Democrat and Obama advisor when CEO of Fannie Mae began a program in 1999 to issue bank loans to individuals with low to moderate income and to ease credit requirements on loans that Fannie purchased from banks. The MSM is not reporting this as it should, but like former President Reagan said "facts are stubborn things".

Posted by: Rick at February 16, 2009 07:53 AM

Dude, yes I feel the Republicans must return to conservatism to win not remain Democrat lite. Most all national surveys seen have the population over 50% conservative. Republicans need to explain conservatism in a cogent manner. Proof of that is talk radio, as that is why liberal talk radio fails and conservative talk wins. Now liberals want to force you to listen to there side by implementing the so called "fairness doctrine". WOW, you should be opposed to that!

Regarding the credit crises mess we are in. The prime movers were two pet projects of the Democrats. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Franklin Raines, Democrat and Obama advisor, when CEO of Fannie Mae began a program in 1999 to issue bank loans to individuals with low to moderate income, and to ease credit requirements on loans that Fannie purchased from banks. This is not being reported by MSM, but as a former President said "facts are stubborn things"

Posted by: Rick at February 16, 2009 08:08 AM

Rick, the problem with Republicans returning to their core conservative principles is this: they keep moving the goalposts! Frankly speaking, i don't even know what being conservative is anymore.

Supposedly, this is a center-right country, although i'm not sure what that means either. Fact is, Americans are strongly addicted to big government without even knowing it. Big government in most peoples mind seems to constitute the programs that "everyone ELSE gets," and not the ones that YOU happen to benefit from.

I've seen it time and time again here in so called "conservative" Arizona. People raising hell about government interference in this or that, but God forbid they don't get federal funding for their favorite pork projects.

In any case, after 8 years of Bush, and what..12 years of Republican majorities(?), the GOP has almost no standing when it comes to the claim of preferring less government IMO.

Posted by: Mr Barkley at February 16, 2009 01:15 PM


You seem to be an intelligent and articulate man who can engage in respectful and civil political discussions. I appreciate that.

I disagree with your assessment that the republican party should return to its prior brand of conservatism in order to regain power. I hope they do go that route because I believe they'll have little chance of success with that agenda.

While it may be true that 50% or more of the voting public considers themselves to be somewhat conservative, the old brand just doesn't fit anymore. The RNC understands this. They don't like it but they understand it.

Fannie and Freddie certainly have their share of blame to bear in this current financial mess. However, there's plenty of blame to go around. The Right Wing Media doesn't want to acknowledge this because it conflicts with their ideology.

Many of these "toxic assets" (what a deceptive term!) are the results of subprime loans made to middle and upper middle income people who simply bought more house than they could afford. We're talking couples with incomes of 80-120 grand a year, not exactly poor minorities and poor white trash. The bankers and mortgage brokers loved it! It seemed as if it would never end. Of course, the bubble eventually burst, as it always does when you're dealing in fantasy. There are thousands of million dollar homes and condos that have been foreclosed in south Florida alone. We can't blame that on Fannie and Freddie.

So, what's the right thing to do for the American economy and people, now? Honestly, I don't know. I don't think anyone else knows either. It's all speculation, computer models, etc.

I do know this. If we're going to socialize the debt of the private sector we should also socialize some of their profit.

The problem is under-regulated free market capitalism. I'm a capitalist. But I understand the need for common sense regulations and oversight. Without it, we'd all be living in a rat's nest with the exception of a very few super wealthy people. In fact, we're on the verge of being there right now.

I wonder what would happen if the government did absolutely nothing about our current economic crisis: no TARP, no stimulus package, not anything. What do you think would be the consequences of that?

I am opposed to the fairness doctrine. Most liberals aren't going to spend 3-6 hours per day listening to left wing propaganda. The right wing talk shows enjoy the success that they do because there's an entertainment market for the product that they deliver. Granted, many of the listeners often confuse the entertainment factor with "news and facts". In reality, most of those conservative talk shows are to American Political Discourse what Championship Wrestling is to Professional Sports. Personally, I believe that pundits like Rush and Coulter don't even believe themselves half of the venom that the spew on the airwaves and in print. They have recognized a market and capitalized on it. Fine with me. That's the American way!

Some of my more liberal friends don't understand why I'm opposed the to FD. When I ask them if they would spend 3 hours of their days listening to a liberal talk show they all say, "No, I don't have time because I'm too busy with my work."

From one old timer to another............



Posted by: Dude at February 16, 2009 01:26 PM

From what I am understanding is that it's OK to go way into debt if we want to kill foreigners but it's not OK to go into debt to help fellow Americans? Confusing. Very confusing.

Posted by: Ed at February 16, 2009 01:34 PM

"White trash", huh? Nice. Fifty bucks says the 0bama-drone who posted this filth is the type that screams RAY-CISM whenever you criticize the Messiah. No wonder the Neo-Nazi types were so eager to get The One elected - he and his worshippers are doing a wonderful job of setting race relations half a century back.

Posted by: Nine-of-Diamonds at February 16, 2009 02:07 PM

Dude, I think a political party should run on its ideology and not attempt to fool people by running candidates that fit the views of a given area. If they cannot sell their ideology then fold the tent. If feel the RNC should not emulate the DNC in this way.

Yes you can blame Fannie & Freddie. Many people with high incomes have poor credit scores. Franklin Raines CEO of Fannie eased the credit requirments resulting in a housing boom and bubble that has now been pierced. The Fed also had a part due to keeping interest rates low too long.

Posted by: Rick at February 16, 2009 02:27 PM

Dude, I forgot to ask you what "Right Wing News Media" you're referring to? I thought it was generally acknowledged by now that most all the major news outlets are liberal.

Posted by: Rick at February 16, 2009 03:09 PM

As for one of the most "incompetent administrations in history", Obama seems to have an early lead in garnering the title, espeacially when their follow on is ...

The United States has abandoned its policy of sanctioning companies that aid Iran’s nuclear and missile program, they said.
The officials said the new Obama administration of has decided to end sanctions against Iranian government agencies or companies that aid Teheran’s missile and nuclear program. The officials said Israel has been informed of the new U.S. policy.
“We were told that sanctions do not help the new U.S. policy of dialogue with Iran,” an official said.

Posted by: Neo at February 16, 2009 03:28 PM


Your brilliant and well thought out comments always remind me of a line in an old Eddie Vinson song: "Her mind is on vacation and her mouth is working overtime". And just so you'll know, white trash is a moniker that many of us Southerners proudly wear. There are, of course, several kinds of white trash. But, that's a whole separate topic for another time. In the meantime, you should crawl back under your rock.


It is generally acknowledged by conservatives that the MSM is liberal. But, it ain't so. Do the research to see who owns the MSM. I wish that we truly had a liberal MSM, meaning a media that would truthfully inform the American people about our system of government.

Granted, there are a few liberals who report for the MSM as there are also some conservatives.

I've never read nor heard even one MSM report, not even Fox which is openly Conservative and slanted toward the republican party, that explains to the American public how our government uses phony accounting methods to calculate our deficits. This was mentioned by another person previously in this thread.

Not once have I ever heard a MSM report to the public the truth about the Federal Reserve Banking System. Most people, in their blissful ignorance, actually think that it's a part of the Federal Government. In fact, the Fed is the piggy bank, a private corporation devised by the financial elite in this country in the early 1900s and established by Congress, that prints the phony money out of thin air that it then loans to the government and of course, charges interest on this phony money. Both parties and the financial sector love this system.

If we truly had a liberal media in this country it would be informing the people of the REAL corruption that lies at the root of our present system of government and the problems. That ain't likely to happen. Unfortunately, they are too busy pitting us against each other as a diversionary technique to maintain the status quo. My hope is that Obama will prove to be a notable exception to this rule. Time will tell.

Neo, I'm a bit skeptical of the source of your quote in regards to:

"The officials said the new Obama administration of has decided to end sanctions against Iranian government agencies or companies that aid Teheran’s missile and nuclear program."

Posted by: Dude at February 16, 2009 04:45 PM

Liberal talk shows don't do very well for one major reason: Liberals don't care much for the "preaching to the choir" programming for 3 to 4 hours. I'm fairly liberal, but i know why i'm a liberal and after spending nearly 7 years in the military, and 13 years of running a business, i know how i became one. I don't need any confirmation from Bill Press, or anybody else. I'd much rather test my beliefs by listening to people producing meaningful counterpoints.

Not to say that all liberal programming is bad because it isn't. Actually, Press, Schultz, Rhodes, Hartmann (the best talk show host PERIOD, liberal or otherwise), and Colmes have very good shows. All are successful too.

I hate the Fairness Doctrine because i don't want government controlling content. However, i've heard claims that the playing field isn't fair since so many media companies have been allowed to merge by the FCC. Don't know how true that is, but in any case, i'd rather not get government involved. I say let the conservatives have radio...after all, it hasn't helped them in the last two elections, has it?

Posted by: Mr. Barkley at February 16, 2009 04:53 PM

Dude, This MSM issue you and I are commenting about isn't even close. There is no sense discussing it further. What your most recent post illustrates to me is a lack of following the news, in depth, and with an open mind. This issue has been put to bed, even by the media, PERIOD. I'm suprised anyone would have your point of view. Suggest you start studing this issue by first reading the book "Bias" by Bernard Goldberg, a liberal, and former employee of CBS and friend of Dan Rather.

Posted by: Rick at February 16, 2009 05:12 PM

Mr Barkley, Well said. Most of us who are even moderately liberal aren't going to spend enough time listening to the "preaching to the choir" to support the advertising dollars required to fund the various "conservative" talk shows. We've got better things to do.

On the few occasions when I have tuned into some of those right wing talk shows I've noticed that it's interesting to note the type of products that are being advertised on these shows, when they aren't pushing yet another book! The advertisers certainly have identified their market!

I, too, am opposed to the fairness doctrine for the very same reasons that you stated. Let folks listen to what they wish and keep the government out of it.

Rick, You're right, no sense discussing the MSM media issue any further. I can assure you that I do follow the news, in depth, and read from many different types of media. We simply have a different perspective. In fact, it goes back to our earlier discussion of the meaning of liberal and conservative. You have your worldview and I have mine. They're different.

Posted by: Dude at February 16, 2009 06:16 PM

Rick, don't you watch TV? From the sunday talk show lineup alone, I would swear republicans recently won a landslide election! Why would a supposedly liberal media give so much airtime to the opposition party after a crushing defeat? Dick Cheney is on record saying he loved going on Meet the Press b/c he was never challenged. David Gregory seems to have the same habit as Russsert of stating RNC talking points as fact. "liberal media" is your security blanket that helps you and other far right wingers avoid confronting the fact that your policies failed. You want an idea of what liberal media is, check out olbermann/maddow, but try convincing anyone that they held all the magic media power and dooooommed McCain.

Posted by: somegayname at February 16, 2009 07:59 PM

Snowe and Collins, the RINO's from Maine sold out for 400 million to the state's exhausted Medicare fund. Our state, being a liberal stronghold, has mismanaged Medicare for years and is near bankrupt. Barrack, Pelosi, & Reid got a two-fer for their "stimulus" bill from our RINO's. Our solution is to vote for Democrats next time around so that we can get rid of the RINO's and spend the time to find real conservatives to run on the next election cycle.

Posted by: Arturus Canus at February 16, 2009 08:33 PM

In response to your question

"I wonder what would happen if the government did absolutely nothing about our current economic crisis: no TARP, no stimulus package, not anything. What do you think would be the consequences of that?"

Simple, A few banks would have declared bankruptcy and gone to BR court. The shareholders would have had their assets reduced (or eliminated), the depositors would have been reimbursed up to the FDIC/FSLIC limits and, maybe, a few CEOs would have gone to jail.
Problem solved.
As it is now, The Democrats have twisted the system to reward failure (gov't hand outs and grants) and punish success (higher taxes on those who do well).

With the new Democrat system, what do you think we'll get more of? Rewarded Failures or Punished success?

Your a moron, Go buy a clue.

Posted by: Angry Conservative at February 17, 2009 04:58 AM

Angry Conservative,

When you call someone else a moron, you should at least spell correctly.'re-and-Your

Posted by: Will at February 17, 2009 09:23 AM

Next time I'll be more diligent at FIVE O'CLOCK in the f&%#@ing morning.

Posted by: Angry conservative at February 17, 2009 10:07 AM

Angry Conservative,

Thank you for your enlightening and informative post. With your grasp of complex financial matters I'm surprised that the Bush administration didn't call on you as an adviser. Had he done so and followed your advice this whole TARP thing would be a moot point. Even though I'm a moron I do seem to remember that TARP passed under his leadership.

I'm not sure what we'll get now that the Democrats are in charge. I do know what we got after 8 years of the past administration. Granted, Clinton deserves some of the blame for this mess with his relaxing of banking regulations. Really, it's way too complicated for me to go into all of it right now. Besides, you aren't going to care what a moron has to say, anyway.

My hope is that Obama, with the help of Congress, will now take the necessary steps to put our nation back on track. I don't know what those steps should be. Really, I don't think anyone knows. It's all a craps shoot.

What you should keep in mind is that this isn't a Pubs versus Dems issue. As I've said before, that's just a smokescreen to divert our attention from the root causes of this mess.

The ONE thing that gives me hope is that Obama wasn't a part of the Beltway Establishment before coming to the presidency. He and his team are brilliant stratigists, as evidenced by their 50 state campaign plan. I hope that he will take bold and decisive steps, as did FDR.

One more thing, have you ever looked into the amount of money that's actually in the FDIC to cover the insured deposits? Check that out. You'll be in for quite the surprise, I'm sure. You might also wish to look into the number of folks who did not get fully reimbursed for their federally insured deposits when the S&L industry went belly up.

Thanks again for your thoughtful and informative response. You're a really sharp person!


Posted by: Dude at February 18, 2009 09:29 AM

Dude, Here is what you said, with my comments included as a rebuttal.

Granted, Clinton deserves some of the blame for this mess with his relaxing of banking regulations. (Yes, Pres. Carter, Senator Frank, Senator Dodd and people who borrowed more than they can afford get the remainder. You overlook the fact the the Republicans tried to stop the wrecking freight train.)

Really, it's way too complicated for me to go into all of it right now. (Maybe for you. It's pretty damn simple for anyone with an ounce of common sense. Business go bankrupt everyday. Savings and Loans went under in the 1980's? Why didn't the world stop turning then? I gather you are not old enough to remember that or have lived though it. I did.)

My hope is that Obama, with the help of Congress, will now take the necessary steps to put our nation back on track.
(Wrong, Obama is going to reward campaign contributors. That is why the bail out bill was NEVER posted on the internet for all the taxpayers to read - as Nancy Pelosi Promised. Obama, Pelosi and Reid do not want anyone to see where all this cash is being spent.)

The ONE thing that gives me hope is that Obama wasn't a part of the Beltway Establishment before coming to the presidency. (the word your looking for here is CLUELESS. He had never, ever worked for a living. He has been in school, a community organizer and a senator. He has no idea how to run a government.)
He and his team are brilliant stratigists, as evidenced by their 50 state campaign plan.

(Really? Brilliant? Then why can't they figure out their own taxes? If I paid my taxes the way his administration has, I'd be in jail for 100yrs.)

One more thing, have you ever looked into the amount of money that's actually in the FDIC to cover the insured deposits? Check that out.

(So, We can't afford to bail out depositors who have cash in failing banks but we can payout 700 Billion on Obama's word?. Hmmmm sounds fishy to me. Bear in mind, FDIC and FSLIC only cover CASH on deposit up to the 250K limit. Security that you hold in a 401k and IRA are still yours even if the institution that you purchased then through is gone. Perhaps you should do some research. As an investor, I know where my money is, and what would happen if the bank I have it in goes under.)

I stand by my original argument because I saw it work in the 1980s. There was pain but not the runaway inflation that we are about to see. By the way, have you checked the price of gold lately? Look at the rice in price since Nov-2007. that is when the TARP was passed and gov't flood gates opened up. I won't defend Bush for signing the bill authorizing TARP. However, Congress (As the Legislative Branch) writes the laws, the President (as Executive Branch) enforces the laws. Bush is complicit but not the ONLY person that deserves Blame for TARP.

Since you seem to be an Obama supporter, answer one question.

Since Obama spent 9 months on the campaign trail attacking Bush for overspending, how do you justify his 90 degree turn and support for this 700 Billion Pork bill?

Once you get out of school and start working for a living, you'll get an education.

Posted by: Angry Conservative at February 18, 2009 04:55 PM

Angry Conservative,

I'll respond to your post in more detail later today or this evening. Believe it or not, I'm already a working person...........and have been for decades. Even so, my education is continuing. I hope that I keep learning as I continue on this journey of life, which by the way has been a nearly 60 year trip, thus far.

One more thing for right now: Why do you always seem to find it necessary to insult someone with whom you disagree on a topic? Why don't we just stick to the issues and topics and be civil as we debate our disagreements?



Posted by: Dude at February 19, 2009 09:20 AM

I'll await your answers but don't piss down my leg and then tell me it's raining. My BS meter is pretty sensitive.

Your posts read like most of the arguments made by college students and left wing nut-jobs. I'm giving you credit by assuming your a college student and not a left winger. You'll get my respect when you earn it. You have no right to it until then. I expect no less from anyone here.

Posted by: Angry Conservative at February 19, 2009 03:44 PM

Angry Conservative,

Earning your respect is the least of my concerns. You don't even respect yourself enough to refrain from posting vulgar and profane comments on a public forum. I don't care what you think about me.

Furthermore, you are wrong in your assumptions. I graduated from college in the early 70s. In your way of thinking, I guess you could call me a left wing nut-job. In my way of thinking I consider myself to be an independent thinker. I don't buy into the party line of either of the major parties. I realize and understand that corruption exists in both parties.

In your world it seems to be all about Republicans versus Democrats. In my world it's more about trying to understand and base my votes on who's going to try to do the best job for ALL Americans. Yes, I voted for Obama and was proud to do so. I also voted for the incumbent Republican US Senator who represents my state.

When I said that he and his team are brilliant strategists I was, of course, referring to the campaign team. You know, the team and the strategy that convinced enough voters to give him 52.9% of the popular vote and an electoral college landslide victory, garnering more than double the electoral votes of Senator McCain.

I was not referring to the foolish choices of nominating people to cabinet positions who had outstanding tax issues. That was a big mistake. You'll get no argument from me on that point.

I'm not suggesting that we can afford the TARP bailout. In reality, we can't afford to bail out either the banks or the FDIC insured deposits, should that become necessary. Most of that FDIC money to cover insured deposits is a myth.

The Deposit Insurance Fund currently has appx. 45 billion dollars to cover insured deposits of roughly 4.5 TRILLION dollars. That's 1% (ONE%) of the insured deposits. In the unlikely scenario of ALL of the US banks failing at the same time, well, what can I tell you? Do the math. If even 25% of the banks holding 25% of the insured deposits were to fail, not an unlikely event, there's still only a fraction of the funds available to cover those supposedly insured deposits. THAT is a big problem. Both of our political parties share equal blame in this mess.

NYU Economics Professor Nouriel Roubini, who has accurately predicted much of what has come to pass in the last several months, predicts that Congress will have to bail out the DIF. In July 2008 FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair acknowledged that the FUND is seriously under funded.

So, don't count on your FDIC insured deposits actually being insured nor can you assume that you'll get all of your money should your bank or banks fail. Furthermore, there's nothing in the law that says WHEN your insured deposits would be paid to you in the event of a bank failure. In fact, the FDIC website states that "FDIC deposit insurance is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government." That's rather ambiguous in my opinion, and more importantly, in the opinion of legal experts and economists!

By the way, the S&L bailout of the 1980s cost the taxpayers more than 150 billion dollars. The former FSLIC was underfunded, too.

In other words, it's all a dog and pony show of gigantic proportions. I suggest that you or anyone else interested in learning about the REAL problem that we face, and the root cause of our problem, go to youtube and search The Creature from Jekyll Island. Listen to the recording that shows a time of 1 hour 11 minutes 12 seconds. I'd post the link here but I'm not sure if that's allowed under the terms of service of this forum. This is NOT a partisan issue. It is enlightening and informative and you can certainly be assured that neither of our major political parties nor ANY of the MSM (right leaning or left left leaning) will discuss this or even want the public to know the history of the Federal Reserve Banking System. If you do take time to listen to this recording keep in mind that it was recorded in 1994. It's as if it were recorded today.

I cannot defend and do not defend the 700 billion pork bill. It's far from perfect. I have a lot of mixed feelings and concerns about it.

Pork Bill or no Pork Bill, we ain't seen anything yet. My main point is that our government has for decades been run and manipulated by a hand full of the Super Wealthy people of the world. Our free market capitalist system is all based on a myth and we the people are pitted one against the other by these people under the guise of Republican versus Democrats, liberals versus conservatives, left wing versus right wing.

My HOPE, and I'll freely admit that it's only a HOPE, is that our current President will finally stand up to the corruption that we have endured for nearly a century now.

I'm still getting my education. Are you?


Posted by: Dude at February 19, 2009 09:27 PM

My BullShit meter went off concerning your comments about the FDIC. Bankruptcy means a firms assets do not cover the existing liabilities. It does not mean the bank has zero Assets. During bankruptcy, creditors get paid a PORTION of their liabilities. Depositors are first in line and the FDIC/FSLIC make up the difference. Stockholders and Bond holders are further down the line and usually lose out. But, since they are investors, they SHOULD understand the risk when investing in a financial institution.

Your HOPE in Obama is a misplaced. He is a child of the most corrupt political machine in the country. Blagojevich is a prime example of the Chicago political machine.

If you graduated college in the early 70s then you should be about 10yrs from retirement. Are you comfortable that you will get back your Social Security payments? Keep in mind that we are going to have 10% - 20% (at least) inflation for the coming presidential term. If you think I'm full of shit, look at the price of Gold. Check the spot price since November of 2008. About the time the TARP was signed.

Your going to get an "Obama" education alright. He is going to turn you around, pull down your pants, bend you over and give your a SERIOUS education.

Why do you think the IRS is pressuring the Swiss banks to give up clients names? Simple, anyone with half a brain is hiding what few assets they have left. You left wingers think Utopia is coming. I KNOW that Cuba style government is coming. We'll get Hyper inflation, gov't control of industry and Big brother control of the media, just like Cuba, Venezuela and a host of other banana republics.

Your Quote -> "Our free market capitalist system is all based on a myth and we the people are pitted one against the other by these people under the guise of Republican versus Democrats, liberals versus conservatives, left wing versus right wing."

I'm done wasting my time on you. I thought you might be reasonably intelligent but I was mistaken. Go back to your little "Hope" plaque and "Change" sticker. Lay down your prayer rug and kneel before the Messiah if that makes you feel worthy.

Posted by: AC at February 20, 2009 06:19 AM

Angry Conservative,

As I thought, reasoning with you is a waste of time. You take everything I've said out of context, ignore reality, and are so full of yourself that you can't think in a logical manner. It's no wonder that you call yourself Angry Conservative. Your fantasy is collapsing around you, indeed it has already collapsed, and you don't even know it, or whom to blame.

I have absolutely no delusions that Utopia is coming. In fact, I believe just the opposite is in our near future. Thankfully, I and my neighbors here in the boonies have survival skills. We still know how to grow and preserve food and still understand the concept of "helping our neighbor".

I believe in the Messiah, that's for sure. But it ain't the human being to whom you refer. My Messiah is Jesus Christ.

Let's call it a draw. You live in your bubble and I'll live in mine. That's the good old American Way! Time will tell which one of us is right in our analysis.

Have a nice day,


Posted by: Dude at February 21, 2009 11:19 AM

I forgot to tell you; The FSLIC, which you have mentioned several times in your posts, was disbanded in 1989. If you're going to discuss current political and economic issues you'll be better prepared if you'll actually use some up to date information as you do your "research". 1989 was 20 years ago!

Believe it or not, I do know the difference between a depositor and an investor. My post concerning the FDIC, which you dismiss out of hand without offering any evidence to the contrary, was addressing insured deposits only.

I'll give you credit for one thing. You're the King of the Straw Man Argument!

Gold prices? Within the past 12 months gold peaked at $1011.25 on March 17, 2008. Yesterday, February 20, 2009 the spot price was $989.00. Yes, gold prices have enjoyed a steady increase over the past few months. Considering the current mess that we're in, with or without TARP, seems logical to me that it would be increasing and will continue to do so for quite some time. However, I ain't an expert on gold prices.

As you look deeply into your crystal ball that enables you to see into the future and KNOW what's going to happen, it's past time for you to break out the glass cleaner and give that thing a good cleaning.

Enough of dealing with this garbage of yours for now. I hope that you do realize that I'm in no way trying to convince you of anything nor have any hope of you becoming less "angry". I wish you well, though. More importantly, perhaps there are people who visit this forum but don't participate in the discussions who will read both of our posts and at least use their brains to THINK about your position and my position on issues and then come to their own conclusions based on rational thought rather than knee jerk reactions, towing the party line and making assumptions for which there are no facts to support. I support everyone's right to have their own opinion even if I don't respect their opinion. I don't respect the way that you express yours.

Now I'm done.


Posted by: Dude at February 21, 2009 03:34 PM