On Politics, We Can Always See the Whites of Their Eyes.
Fred Thompson at His Snarkiest Best
by: Bill Dupray posted: 2008-12-02 16:11:00
Viewed 44869 times. 54 Comments.
Fred leaves no stone unturned in this brilliant, funny, sarcastic hit piece on the liberals and the economy.
We may not have gotten him as president, but then again, we'd be missing out on stuff like this.
Tags: economy, Fred Thompson,
Related Articles
- Katie Packer, Exec Dir, Workplace Fairness Institute: ?High Road?
- CBO's latest: TARP to cost us $109 Billion
- GOP Talkers on EPA?s Backdoor National Energy Tax
- Hoyer on tax increases: 'But if you're going to buy, you need to pay'
Links to this post
Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/fred-thompson-at-his-snarkiest-best/trackback
Comments 54
Don't miss the point here, Sir.
With the stimulus plan, the congress will spend huge amounts of money, making sure that certain people (read campaign contributers) get a good chunk of it. That way the contributions are repayed, and votes paid for in important districts. Prostiticians are almost certain go get even more contributions in the future and remain comfortably in the House and Senate. It's a beautiful thing. Nobody but taxpayers have to spend any money. What a country!
Nice one Fred!
A government trying to tax and spend its way to prosperity is equivalent to a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
Winston Churchill
this is absolutely correct, justin. the infrastructire comment above is woefully out of touch. obama is pulling a fdr. the infrastructure is not in bad shape - it is just a source of jobs the government can create, and in this instance all union jobs. it is also similar to lbj's spending - which doubled inflation in just a few years.
oh, btw, the consensus is that fdr's meddling with the economy prolonged the great depression by 7 years - and we got out of largely because of the war. nice job.
If the government was not spending billions on war and nothing on infrastructure we might not be in the sh*t hole we are in now
Come on now Michael, infrastructure has nothing to do with the "sh*t hole" we are in now. Nor does the war. It has to do with the lack of oversight on Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae (democrats fault) and the SEC's lack of enforcing their own rules (Chris Cox's fault).
Get with the program and find out some facts instead of drinking the Kool Aid!
Who benefited from lack of oversight of Freddie and Fannie funds? it wan not me the liberal.
Ah, but it was those that liberals put in office and support. Frank, Dodd, Reid and Obama.
But who made lots of money before the banks collapsed? Who is still rich?
But who got rich when the banks were giving out bad mortgages? Who is rich now?
SO WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW
Fred Thompson is being sarcastic not hopeful, good thing he is just an actor now
who benefited? the dems in office through direct campaign contributions and jobs for friends. you and me rarely benefit from graft and system manipulation.
Actually, Fannie Mae is one of Carter's bragging points... Fast forward to the Clinton era, and you have Clinton removing regulations to help promote people obtaining homes that are beyond their means ushering the beginning of our current mess with Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. Bush tried to raise the warning bell to no avail - the dems didn't want to hear it... and here we are today with the mess started by Carter, furthered by Clinton, with the current dems putting the final nail in the economic coffin of this current mess. Go Dems!
Look Michael, what happened to the economy now has been set in motion LONG before the "war." We haven't had an actual free market economy since at least 1913 and every mistake that Hoover made in the Great Depression, our government is replaying -- except they are trying to perfect their mistakes by making them larger.
Pumping money into the system, federal "public works," unions and minimum wage and the artificial wage rate, all are going to prolong this recession into a depression that probably will rival if not surpass the Great Depression. Prosperity comes from economic freedom, not government regulation and manipulation. Get government to butt out, prosecute those businesses who engage in fraud, larceny, etc., get rid of special interest groups in Washington, and let bad debt liquidate so that we can get past this recession quickly. But we all know none of that will happen... so hold onto your gold folks - we're in for a rough ride.
The only thing that saved FDR from being one of histories biggest losers was WWII. Had that that not happened, his socialist programs would have bankrupted the economy, which was already, as you say, in the depression.
The problem for Obama is that he is more of a Marxist/Socialist than FDR was and, unless he finds himself a big ol' war to fight, his policies will exacerbate the problem and not only will this generation of Americans learn how bad Socialism really is, the myth of FDR's greatness will be cast to the wind.
This stuff objectively does not work. Nobody like Michael needs to believe us. Time will prove us to be correct.
Has it occured to you how much we're spending on illegal immigration? It's always, "the war" with liberals. You never look at the whole picture.
If it weren't for "illegal" immigration the US would come to a stand still.
Michael, care to cite a fact or two to back that up, or are you just that good?
Really? World oil production peaked three years ago. Why pump trillions of dollars into road infrastructure as Obama plans? Once, if, the economy recovers prices will run up beyond the last price peak, $147/barrel. No drill, no economy.
I find it interesting that Bush the compassionate conservative supported the financial stimulus package and encouraged everybody to spend the money. Liberals? I don't think so. Maybe if the government had simply exercised the regulatory responsibilities it had for the past nearly 8 years, we would not be where we are today. As I have suggested to several friends give Obama a chance to take control before bad mouthing what he may do, not what he has not done.
how do you think has the power of the purse in american government? POTUS? you do recognize that regulations, even though falling under the executive, are at the mercy of the legislation.
to point at W and his last 8 years is kinda silly. i look to clinton and his 8 before them. i look to the gridlock between the parties - national priorities are undermined by both parties in congress depending on who is in the WH. the system does not work well.
give Bambi a chance? sure. until he signs the Freedom of Choice Act - then he is done. look at his stimulus package - show me a single job he mentions anywhere that is not a union job. what about the Employee Free Choice Act he promises?
neither of these issues are "free." they draw heavy black lines on one side of the electorate.
Bambi will get a chance - until his social agenda kicks in. then no more. not another day more.
Ron, most conservatives very much don't like the bailouts going on and I'm one of them. However you say "government" and "8 years" together implying that it has been all Bush's fault.
You forget, or don't know, that it was Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and company that rejected the Bush's attempts 4 times to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and the over regulation forcing banks and other mortgage companies to make loans they normally wouldn't have made to people that couldn't pay for them.
As for Obama, short of calling for a raise in taxes, it generally isn't him that conservatives are afraid of, it is Pelosi, Dodd, Reid, etc. that will pass along their agenda and have no opposition from the President.
BTW Michael, you only have to submit your comment once...
Sorry abut my excessive comments. I am a Liberal, I love to give. Not just that, I got an error message the first few times I commented.
you're obviously liberal, michael, and that's not a bad thing. diversity of opinion is good.
my observations, however, have led me to see that most liberals love the concept but not the reality. if a liberal waiter does a good job and i take his or her tip to the homeless guy outside, the lib gets pissed. if a liberal student gets a "B" in class instead of the "A" deserved so that the "C" student won't feel badly, they cry foul.
Ted Kennedy is all for clean energy, unless it is off his beachfront property.
we are all ego-centric. we are all in it for both ourselves and others. i just don't wear my charity on my sleeve. i don't protest about people making more than me. i recognize the system for what it is.
what does bother me is graft - and that is dodd's middle name. i detest stealing from the system, using it to enrich himself - and all the while acting as if he is pure and white - and then watching the MSM do nothing.
what this country needs is an active 3d party. we had one in every POTUS election until FDR ran the table, and then the socialists joined the dem party and changed it's core values forever. what remnants of the dem party worth anything died with jfk and bobby.
you like jfk? think he was a good lib? read this post to understand him a little better - http://patriotroom.com/article/jfk-on-governments-role-in-the-economy
i am not suggesting that you don't understand him, but the mantra of W giving tax breaks to the wealthy is deplorably thin.
class warfare, michael? let's see, banks were making loans for mortgages to subprime individuals. some of those folks used that opportunity well. banks also had higher earnings per share for a while - so the investing class made money. bank executives that worked an entire career to get to their position made money.
we are a capitalist society with socialist overtones. you want a demand-controlled society? look at russia, cuba, england ... so one with our GDP per capita, our incidence of home ownership, our standard of living.
in america, you are free to make a million or free to starve to death. your call. if you just let yourself loose, it is amazing how far you can go. if you stand in one place and bitch about the system and everyone else "getting something" then you'll never move.
go for it, michael. make something happen for yourself.
It's too bad our Congress and Executive Level don't have the "guts" to face the truth and tell the American people our real financial status even though most Americans aren't stupid and know the true facts. Just maybe we could ask those countries, that own America's debt, to forgive our debt just like America did for many foreign countries over the years. Instead of America borrowing money and paying interest on that money to fund foreign-aide, let's tell those countries receiving our foreign-aide funding, to receive foreign-aide from countries that can afford to give it.
Going along with Bill's comments on time being the proof... we actually have the proof, here in America, that Socialism/Marxist views Do NOT work. There are plenty of places in America in which people have chosen welfare as their main source of income - and have chosen it for several generations within each family. Welfare is certainly vital for those whom need it (and there are certainly those who honestly NEED it and it should be provided to those people) however, when people choose welfare over finding a job, we have a problem. Just a small amount of research will show that the welfare in this country is massively abused. When you give people the option of not working and yet still having their basic financial needs met - they will, many times, take the easy way out. The competitive nature of many prevent this - but the idiological views of "sharing the wealth" and that those who work hard and make a lot of money are the bad guys give into this whole welfare philosophy. We are shifting towards an entitled philosophy in this country and it will be to our detriment.
I would suggest that Michael spend just an hour researching the history of welfare in this country, and review some of the states that have the most abusive statistics - it is truly an eye-opener. And the data is there for anyone to see if they don't choose to avoid seeing it.
Along with welfare abuse, let us not forget the abuses of the medicare and medicaid systems. Doctors and hospitals abuse these programs regularly to get more money out of the government.
My former nanny, the guys that deliver my food, the crew that rebuilt my office.
What is the difference between illegal immigrant workers and out sourced labor?
Outsourced labor gets paid market rates and pays taxes into the economy.
Bill, Do you know what outsourced labor is? Let me tell you. When you call customer service for AT@T and "Cindy" answers the phone, she is in INDIA. AT@T laid off a US worker and hired "Cindy" at about one tenth the salary. She is getting paid market rates in rupees and pays no US taxes. Illegal immigrants might not pay taxes but they do spend $ in the US and support the economy. I know many of them personally and they mostly wish they could pay taxes. Their children (citizens are honor students!)
That is beside the point Michael. They are ILLEGAL. What part of that do you not understand? They have no legal right to be in this country working. The fact that they are is a slap to those who do come here legally via work visas, H1-Bs and other means to work. They have the right. Some border jumper does not.
Also, outsourced does NOT always mean offshore. It just means the company hires another company to do a specific job. You will be hard pressed to find any company of decent size that does everything in-house, it just isn't economical to do so. Sometimes it is offshore and that is the company's right to do so.
Well, Cindy in India doesn't show up at the emergency room in Phoenix and expect the American taxpayers to pay for the delivery of her baby, and Cindy in India isn't on the welfare rolls in San Diego, and Cindy in India's kids aren't enrolled in an American public school paid for by Americans.
So while neither Cindy in India nor the illegals pays pays taxes, we pay for all of the illegals' freebies and none of Cindy in India's.
I understand illegal, i just don't care. I am the descendant of a "border jumper". But we a talking about the economy not the hoops a person has to jump through to become legal.
When Dell has its code written in Pakistan they screwing the US economy the same way they contractor is when he hires a guy standing in frond of Home Depot and pays him $50 a day cash.
I see, so you don't care about the law when it is inconvenient for you and you have no concept of how to run a business, nor any concept of the economy. Got it.
Dell isn't in the business of writing code, but regardless your point still is wrong. If Dell (or any other company) were to always pay American wages they would go out of business. Why do you think so many items are made in Taiwan or China? Cheaper for the company to produce, thus cheaper for them to sell and people will buy them.
"Buy American" is a great slogan, but people don't practice it. People buy what they can afford or what is less expensive. The same reason people go to WalMart instead of the local mom-and-pop grocery. Convenience and price.
Although you can look at like this: Company "A" sources it's products from overseas. It then sells them here in the US. That company does hire some American workers. It also leases and/or builds buildings. All of which goes into the economy. Add to that, if they are a big company (like Dell), then mutual fund companies invest in them by buying stock. These mutual fund companies are funded by pension plans, IRAs, 401ks, SEPs, etc.
They make money for their share holders, and those shareholders eventually spend that money. In our economy. Your view is too short sited and based on a few workers who are not American producing some product or service. So what? There are more benefactors in the long run in some cases. Not all, but most.
Now if that same company had to buy everything in the U.S. they would have to charge more for it because U.S. workers cost more. Add on union costs, in the appropriate sectors, and the American public won't buy the product because it is too expensive. That company goes out of business. No workers, no products, no investment.
Sure Michael Dell makes a lot of money. So what? He built that company from nothing. He ran the company for many years. He should get paid millions. I would. If the guy putting screws on the back of Mr. Dell's computers wants to be rich too, he shouldn't be putting screws on computers... He has the same opportunity that Micheal Dell did, Michael Dell just had the drive, motivation and took advantage of it. Stop crying for the worker who is contempt to hang tires, drive screws, pick crops or whatever else it is they do. That is their choice, they should live with it or move on and up.
The good thing about living in NYC is that we do not allow Walmarts here. I shop in Mom and Pop stores. I might spend a few more cents on my stuff but the $ does ot go to stockholders it goes to my neighbors.
and it it not that I do not care about the law when it inconvenient for me. I just don't care about the law.
Ever think that your neighbors might be stock holders? Not all stockholders are "rich and powerful" you know. If you choose not to shop at WalMart, more power to you. Not allowing WalMarts in NYC is a good thing? So not allowing people the freedom of choice is a good thing. Must be a liberal.
You don't care about the law. How nice. I bet you would care if people discriminated against you and didn't allow you to work. Or shop in that nice little grocery store.
If Walmart were to move in, I would not be able to shop in my grocery store.
And that is WalMart's fault? I think not. If your grocery store could not compete, then that, in this country, is what we call competition and the free market system. If you can't compete, you lose.
WalMart used to be a single store too you know. They competed. They won. They expanded. Now they provide jobs to 10's of thousands world wide. They source products from 100's of companies world wide which provide more jobs. That is a good thing. Customers choose to shop there.
Robert
I just figured it out. I am not just a liberal, I am a New Yorker. We thrive on diversity. If Walmart would move in and put our Mom and Pops out of business because they can out price them by selling the same shit that they sell in ever other store I would be upset. Just because they have a profitable business plan does not mean I should be happy.
There are still be thousands of jobs and thousands of products available in NYC and Sam Walton's family would have a little less money.
And you people deserve that little slice of hell you have carved off for yourselves. A place where diversity is celebrated, as long as it's not the freedom-based kind of diversity, like the freedom to choose to buy a diet soft drink.
Please stop trying to export your ruinous ideas to fine places like Phoenix. Feel free to put them here, where they can do little damage.
And you define diversity by excluding someone. How interesting. You may not be happy, but all the other people that may choose to shop at WM over the mom and pop would be happy with the lower prices. Or better selection. Or customer service, whatever.
If that mom and pop can compete on any level (not just price) and stay in business, then more power to them. I would cheer them on myself.
I am outta here.
This video was sent to me by a family member who forgot that I asked not to forward me any more political emails. We only got into arguments. It only brought out the worst in both of us.
But we did agree, and I think we would all agree that we live in a great country.... A country that allows everybody to have an opinion.
Michael,
It would be ashame to loose your opinions... though most of the other writers on this site don't seem to agree with you - and you don't seem to agree with them, you explain your reasons for disagreement in an articulate and passionate manner. I've gone to alot of the liberal sites, and it seems like someone with a different opinion can't voice such opinions without being attacked quite viciously - it seems with the goal of silencing any views of opposition. It's good to have your views in this site. Hope you stick around.
Fred Thompson absolutely nails my thoughts on how and where this country's economy will go. Without a doubt, the toilet!
Mike, what did you expect from a site where being a moderate is bad and being a liberal is worse? They're saying yeah you can have an opinion, but you're wrong because you're not conservative. You wouldn't be able to change any opinions even if you give them evidence to support your arguments.
OK, we all get it: conservatives are perfect, liberal congress members are at fault for everything that is wrong, blah blah blah; these guys aren't going to accept responsibility for anything (except for when things go well).
What is 2 + 3 ? (seriously... for moderates the answer is 4 and for liberals the answer is cat) - duh huh huh, that was a good one huh huh. lame.
thanks for playing along! yes, we are conservatives. and i guess that when libs call conservatives evil and mock Christ believers, it's just having fun!
we are as entitled to our opinions and jocular humor as you are. the difference between us is that we put it out there for comment. do you?
this is called the arena of ideas. you broad-brush over "give them evidence to support your arguments" without giving any. please do. we'd love to have an open and fair debate on any issue you wish. the only comments we censor are the truly obnoxious. let's discuss any issue you wish. present your evidence - we'll comment and present ours - then you comment.
open and free debate, rather than drive-by condemnation. game?
clyde, talking to a staunch conservative (or staunch liberal) is like talking to a wall. it's next to impossible to change fundamental beliefs of people regardless of how many facts you state or how rational your arguments are. have you ever seen someone try convincing an atheist that there's a god or vice-versa? how well does that work out?
mike could've brought up facts and figures and it wouldn't mean a thing because at the end of the day (judging by the average response on this site) none of you are going to change your opinions even if he does and no one will admit that conservatives are just as at fault as liberals for the mess we're in. there's no room for accountability here, only finger pointing at the "idiotic" liberals (see simple math problem on comment submission).
the site is so incredibly biased, that healthy debate has no place here. if this were an extremely liberal site, do you think conservatives would be treated any differently? probably not. in the end conservatives are just like liberals in that they argue in circles and will ultimately agree to disagree. they'll tell each other thanks for your valuable input, but no thanks.
btw clyde, there are liberals who are christians and don't believe all conservatives are evil. just like there are conservatives who don't think that all liberals are godless, anti-conservative morons. most liberals want a secular governement, as do some conservatives; please don't mistake that for liberals hating christ or religion.
anyhow, this is my last post here, as i have no real desire to have an argument with people who can't see through their conservative shroud. which is ironic because i'm posting this. well, shame on me for that....
Conservatives are far from perfect. Even those who run this site disagree on some things. That is ok.
As for healthy debate, I'm all for it. Now if someone makes a stupid statement like "I don't care about that law", that is just ridiculous and I (and possibly others) are going to jump on it. The problem I have with most democrats (not all), is that they trumpet a line of thought without facts, dismissing history or other presidence then I have personally have a problem with that. I have seen a couple democrats debate an issue and presented it in a very well thought out manner; almost convincing. Those people I respect even though I disagree with them completely.
To put it bluntly, obvious dumb and outrageous statements do not make a debate. It just shows lack of thought.
Like Clyde, I do not necessarily call myself a republican, I just tend to agree more with their party's principals than the democrats.
tis ironic.
and although you may never read this, i'll say it anyway. liberals and conservatives are not at fault for any of the current situation - democrats and republicans are.
people who believe in certain things and stick to this beliefs rarely cause long-term problems. it is when politics enters - and the strange bedfellows join - that things get into trouble.
planned parenthood - and the politicians to whom they bestow their money - can spend all they want on abortion. i personally disagree. but when they spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawsuits to defeat a fetal murder statute, i think they are acting beyond their beliefs. i think they are then acting as politicians - they are working to defeat any recognition of a fetus as a person so as to preserve their position under abortion.
i'm a strict constructionist, and come to that position as an attorney and law professor. i have conservative beliefs. but when i lecture, my students see both a conservative and a liberal. i argue opposite them in order to assist them to develop a critical view.
this site gives me an opportunity to express my personal beliefs. i am not a republican, but i think the republican party is closer to my views than the democrat party is.
btw, on the liberal christians remark ... i read the Bible as not supporting same-gender unions. i have no issue with same-gender unions or marriage - all sin is equal. but when the liberal christians place a practicing homosexual as their pastor, i do believe that a line has been crossed. so i guess it resides in the definition of liberal - and i agree that there are many definitions.
thanks for stopping by. take care of yourself.
Have an opinion?
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
Publius' Newsstand
-
Rep. Altmire confirms: NO
Nancy has about run out of "yes" votes: Congressman Jason Altmire will vote against the latest version of health care reform when the U.S. House of Representatives votes on the bill this weekend. Altmire confirmed that he has decided to vote no in a telephone conversation with KDKA Political Editor Jon Delano. The McCandless Democrat is expected to post a statement on his website later today.Views: 93 Comments: 0
-
JIP: Obama Approval Under Disapproval on RCP
Tough to be Barry: Real Clear Politics, or RCP for short, is a news site that averages approval/disapproval polls together, forming a very non-partisan system. For the last year and change, I have closely watched the approval of the President. Slowly but surely, it kept going lower and lower and lower. The President was at his peak on January 29, 2009 with an approval of 63.5 and a disapproval of only 19.3, a 44.2% difference. From the beginning of March to the end of June, Obama's approval/disapproval held moderately steady. But then it happened. The President began calling for radical reforms to the American Health Care System. While reform is needed, this "change" that the President was peddling did not sit well with the American people.Views: 180 Comments: 0
-
Will House recon bill surive intact in Senate? ...
Very clear. Toast: FTA: Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said Thursday that it is unlikely the Senate will be able to pass a health care reconciliation bill unchanged from what the House passes. Conrad said the Senate Parliamentarian has declined to make rulings on several issues in the bill that Republicans are likely to challenge under the ?Byrd rule.? That rule states that, among other things, every provision of a budget reconciliation bill must have a budget impact and cannot be ?extraneous.? ?Although we?ve spent many, many hours with the Parliamentarian, some things he has not yet rendered a conclusion? on, Conrad said. ?He wants to hear from both sides before he does.? Conrad continued: ?Do I expect there will be some additional Byrd rule challenges that will be upheld? Yeah. I do.?Views: 97 Comments: 1
-
Another flip from Yes to No: Rep. Michael Arcur...
Rep. Mike Arcuri (D., N.Y.), a sophomore who had a tough go of it in 2008, will vote nay on Obamacare, both on the House floor and in the Rules Committee. The Rules vote is symbolic, since Democrats outnumber Republicans there two-to-one. But the floor vote could go either way. It is obviously a blow to Pelosi's chances of hitting 216.Views: 155 Comments: 0
-
Update on CBO: Corrupt Dem leaders touting unof...
Thanks to Avery for the heads-up on today's atrocity rolling off Capitol Hill.Ranking Republican Paul Ryan responds to an NRO query about the news this morning: ?The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that there is currently no official cost estimate. Yet House Democrats are touting to the press ? and spinning for partisan gain ? numbers that have not been released and are impossible to confirm.
Boy, a final official number that came in over a trillion bucks would really bite them in the a**.Views: 125 Comments: 0
-
McCain's lead over Hayworth shrinks to 7
Johnny Mac is also under the all-important 50% support level.The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely Arizona GOP Primary voters shows McCain ahead 48% to 41%. Three percent (3%) favor another candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided. Following the announcement that Sarah Palin would campaign for his reelection, McCain opened up a 53% to 31% lead over Hayworth in January. The two men were in a near tie in November.
By my math, McCain's lead shrunk from 21 to 7 in two months. Hmmm.Views: 71 Comments: 0
-
CBO: Obamacare costs $940 billion
And in the world of Washington speak, somehow spending that much cash actually lowers the deficit by $130 billion. I have a better idea. How about we just not spend $940 billion in the first place? After all, if you are trying to trim your budget, you don't go buying a Lamborghini on a credit card. One more thing. Isn't it funny how CBO can score a bill without an actual bill. Hmmm . . .Views: 85 Comments: 0
-
USA Today editors: The Slaughter Rule is a 'gim...
Keep in mind USA Today wholeheartedly supports this health care takeover, but even they are disturbed by "deeming" a bill passed without a vote in the House.[House] leaders are mulling a rule that would allow the chamber to "deem" the Senate's version of health legislation as passed, without actually having to vote on it. Imagine how useful this trick would be in daily life. You could make unpopular decisions without actually appearing to make them. That excruciating Thanksgiving dinner at your brother-in-law's? You "deemed" that you attended. . . . It's understandable that some House Democrats wouldn't want to cast a direct vote on the Senate bill . . . before moving to change it. But a procedure this transparently gimmicky just adds to the cynicism surrounding the bill and opens it up to unnecessary court challenges.
Views: 88 Comments: 2
-
Biden bombs at Correspondents' Dinner
Biden is funnier when he isn't trying to be funny. This stuff is so lame, he should have gotten the hook. More, if you can stand them, at the link. - "I just got back from five days in the Middle East. It's great to be back to a place where a boom in housing construction is a good thing." - "Liz Cheney is here tonight. Liz has been on a tear. Now she's questioning if Tom Brady is a Patriot." Meh, said the crowd. "What the hell, it was worth a try." - On moving to Washington: "I voted for public housing all my career -- never realized how good it actually is!"Views: 99 Comments: 1
-
Shocker: Boxer now trails Campbell in CA Senate...
Sure, it's within the margin of error, but Campbell is leading. The pollster moves the race to "toss-up."In hypothetical match ups with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) in the general election, Campbell leads Boxer, 44% to 43%, while Boxer leads Fiorina, 45% to 44%, and tops DeVore, 45% to 41%. Both findings are within the survey's margin of error.
Views: 90 Comments: 0
Get Your PR Button!
More Articles By Bill Dupray
- Another flip from Yes to No: Rep. Michael Arcuri (D-NY)
on 2010-03-18 with 155 views - CBO: Actually, those defict reduction figures are pretty much guesses
on 2010-03-18 with 136 views - Update on CBO: Corrupt Dem leaders touting unofficial numbers
on 2010-03-18 with 125 views - Homeowner introduces two robbers to 2nd Amendment: One dead, one fled
on 2010-03-18 with 284 views - McCain's lead over Hayworth shrinks to 7
on 2010-03-18 with 71 views - CBO: Obamacare costs $940 billion
on 2010-03-18 with 85 views - USA Today editors: The Slaughter Rule is a 'gimmicky, cynical trick'
on 2010-03-18 with 88 views - Biden bombs at Correspondents' Dinner
on 2010-03-18 with 99 views - Shocker: Boxer now trails Campbell in CA Senate race
on 2010-03-18 with 90 views - GOP gears up for health bill lawsuits
on 2010-03-18 with 59 views
Double-down economics ($5 blackjack table wannabees) vs. trickle down economics ($5000 blackjack table alreadybees) ....Gambling either way. Our government needs rehab.