Community Blogs
Laughing at the Left: How liberalism has become a joke.
At the recommendation of local conservative radio talk show host Mark Belling, I read an article Belling had discovered, entitled "Laughing at the Left." Being a firm believer that many liberals, especially liberal politicians, are devoid of "common sense" and instead tend to approach life and it's challenges based on "feelings," I just had to check out "Laughing at the Left." Wow!
"Laughing at the Left" was written by Quin Hillyer. Mr. Hillyer is a senior editorial writer at the Washington Times and a senior editor of The American Spectator. Hillyer's well-written column was chock-full of observations and facts clearly demonstrating how illogical liberalism really is. I found so many examples that were true and undeniable, that I just had to share them with my readers. Hillyer's column is powerful stuff. Rather than just provide a link to "Laughing at the Left," I contacted the author directly for permission to re-print the column in it's entirety. Mr. Hillyer graciously agreed to allow me to do so. (In addition to re-printing the entire column, Mr. Hillyer requested that I provide a link to his article at American Spectator. Please click on the title below to access the column and learn more about Mr. Hillyer.)
Laughing at the Left: by Quin Hillyer
If the consequences for this great nation of ours weren't so serious and the policies preferred by the left weren't so dangerous, one would really laugh, almost uncontrollably, at the beliefs and (il)logic of American liberals. Based on things they have actually said or done, here are some of the things they really, truly seem to believe.
They believe we can spend our way out of debt. They believe taking money from one part of the economy to give to another part somehow makes the economy bigger. They believe people who have never run a business can run a business better than people who have spent their whole lives running businesses. They believe that what appears to be a 20-year spike in global temperatures (a spike itself that hundreds of scientists dispute) can mean doom for a planet whose temperatures have swung much more widely for 6 billion years -- but that an eight- or ten-year flattening or even drop in temperatures can be ignored because it doesn't comport with the "models" based largely on the previous 20 years. They believe that punishing "developed" nations for carbon consumption is a good idea even if it means that developing countries without the same environmental controls will take over the production/manufacturing forced away from the developed countries. So, somehow, in the name of saving the environment from carbon emissions, they would create even more carbon emissions (and other, real pollution) elsewhere -- and call it progress.
They believe that teenage girls who aren't allowed to get even minor cosmetic surgery without a parent's permission should nevertheless be able to procure an abortion without a parent's permission. They believe that would-be parents should have the "choice" to kill their babies, but not the choice of where to send their children to school. They believe that when it comes to advising about abortions, nobody should interfere with the doctor (abortionist)-patient relationship -- but when it comes to caring for the elderly, anonymous bureaucrats should dictate to doctors what sorts of treatment are cost-effective enough to be "approved."
They believe it is unconstitutional for a legislature to mention Jesus but perfectly okay to mention Allah. They think it is offensive for mass-market movies to exhibit Christian sensibilities, but that it is perfectly okay for primetime TV shows on the public airwaves to have eighth graders decide which is the sexiest from among of contestants on MILF (Mothers I'd Like to ****) Island. They believe it disqualifies an appellate judicial nominee to joke one time about praying "please God, no more Souters" on the Supreme Court, but that it doesn't disqualify a Supreme Court nominee to repeat in multiple prepared speeches that "inherent physiological or cultural differences… may and will make a difference in our judging." They believe it is disqualifying for a judicial nominee to have quoted Thomas Aquinas about a Catholic duty to be good and active citizens while speaking to a Catholic high school. They believe explicit words in the Constitution protecting contracts, and gun ownership rights, and property rights against government seizure, are to be ignored; but that wholly invented "rights" that cannot be found in any words of the Constitution, but that merely "extend" from "emanations" from "penumbras" of other judicially created "rights," are somehow sacrosanct and essential parts of the Constitution.
They believe that when a white skinhead threatens a black man, it is a sign of a vast racist conspiracy; but that when paramilitary-garbed New Black Panthers with a weapon, spouting racial epithets, stand right in front of a polling place, it is no violation of civil rights at all -- even after a judge has already moved to issue a default judgment against the Panthers. They believe that blacks are suffering racial discrimination when black voters themselves choose to hold non-partisan elections. They believe white firefighters can be denied promotions specifically because they are white, and that Asian students can be denied admission to college because they aren't black, but that black students who want to attend racially integrated private schools should be sent back to de facto segregated public schools in the name of "fairness."
The Left thinks it is good diplomacy to insult our allies while kowtowing to our enemies and bowing to problematic rivals. They tried everything in their power to stop Ronald Reagan's Cold War policies and yet now claim to have been part of a decades-long, bipartisan consensus on Cold War efforts. They think Afghanistan is a "war of necessity" until they are in charge of it, after which it becomes a war that must be stopped, one that was inherited from bad Republicans. They oppose missile defense because they say it will never work, and then when it works they oppose it anyway. They think that American imperialists are worse than foreign Communists. They think American servicemen should be prosecuted for (allegedly) punching a jihadist-terrorist in the stomach while capturing him -- and in a military court, without civilian due process rights -- but that foreign terrorist suspects are too good for military justice and instead deserve Miranda rights and other domestic American civil rights.
They support jail sentences for mere paperwork violations of environmental laws, even of foreign environmental laws or regulations, but they think even violent criminals should be let free if police make unintentional mistakes in paperwork or procedure.
They also think it is dangerous to the point of being an existential threat for ordinary citizens to challenge office-holders at town hall meetings, but perfectly okay for those same powerful office-holders to call their critics "un-American." They believe in the secret ballot for Mexicans, but not for American workers who are considering unionization. They say, against all evidence, that far more ballots are kept from being cast due to utterly unspecified "intimidation" than are cast fraudulently in the names of people who actually go nowhere near the polls, of dead people, and even of pet dogs …and of dead pet fish!!!
And, finally for now (this could go on for page after page), get this: They actually think most Americans agree with them. Now that isn't just laugh-inducing; it's worthy of a roll-on-the-floor, guffaw-til-you're-blue-in-the-face, uncontrollable laughing fit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT ON, Mr. Hillyer! And the proof will be in the upcoming elections in 2010, 2012 and beyond. Why, even right now, in Massachusetts of all places - a Democratic stronghold for years - a Republican candidate has an excellent chance of winning that seat in a special election on January 19th! Whodathunkit? After 40-plus years of being dominated by Democratic Senator Teddy Kennedy (who should have spent a few of those years in prison, if there was any justice), Republican Scott Brown is neck-and-neck with Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley. Dems in Washington D.C. are even scared that Brown will win. They are threatening to stall certifying Brown, if Coakley loses, in order to still have the votes to pass the health care bill! Unbelievable.
And don't forget that Senator Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota) recently announced he wouldn't run again for re-election (hmmm...could the fact that he was 22 points behind Republican Governor John Hoeven in the polls have played into his decision?), as well as Senator Chris Dodd (whose own poll numbers are dismal.) Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid looks like he won't have a job after November of this year, either....
The writing is on the wall. Let Obama and the Democrats continue to "lead" as they are doing. Let them pass that boondoggle mess called "health care reform." Go ahead and pass another spend-crazy "stimulus bill" that will go over like a lead balloon, as did the first $787 billion dollar stimulus bill that just HAD to be passed quickly - so unemployment wouldn't rise above 8%!!! Let Harry Reid continue to "lead" the Senate - even after making racist remarks about Obama. (The same remarks, if uttered by a Republican, would have spelled the end of their political career.) Let Nancy Pelosi and other Dems call Americans who are against socialism and the government take-over of health care "Astroturfers," "Nazi's, " and un-patriotic. Let Obama and the Dems continue to aim America on a path towards bigger government and out-of-control spending. We Americans know better. And many who were initially fooled by Obama have wised up. The majority of Americans don't like what is going on. Not one bit. We are angry. We are motivated. We are afraid for America. Obama and the Democrats have awakened a sleeping giant - conservatives and others throughout the country who will not tolerate what our government is trying to do. People who have never been interested in politics are paying attention. People who have never attended a political rally or protest are turning up at such events in droves. And we will speak loud and clear at the voting polls! (Heck, even voter fraud won't be able to help salvage many Democratic politicians careers at this point... )
i laught at the left evililunists all the time. the demoncraps are evil and obama is a noncitizen muslim! your almost as smart as jim hayett for a lady.
laugh at the demoncnraps!
The right seems to think they have all the answers.
And don't forget that Senator Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota) recently announced he wouldn't run again for re-election (hmmm...could the fact that he was 22 points behind Republican Governor John Hoeven in the polls have played into his decision?) - Hemmer
Actually from his own statement he is stepping down because he wants to peruse other interests like teaching and writing books.
http://dorgan.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=321298
In the words of Chris Dodd
You have honored me beyond words with your confidence. Let me quickly add that there have been times when my positions and actions have caused some of you to question that confidence. I regret that, but it is equally important that you know I never wavered in my determination to do the best job for our state and nation. I love my job as your Senator, I always have, and still do. However, this past year has raised some challenges that insisted I take stock of my life. Over the past 12 months, I have managed four major pieces of legislation through Congress; served as Chair and acting Chair of two major Senate Committees, placing me at the center of the two most importance issues of our time – health care and reform of financial services; lost a beloved sister in July and in August – Ted Kennedy; battled cancer over the summer; and in the midst of all this, found myself in the toughest political shape of my career. Now let me be clear, I am very aware of my present political standing here at home; but it is equally clear that any certain prediction about an election victory or defeat nearly a year from now, would be absurd.
Maybe these “retirees” are simply retiring because they have other things they want to do in their life.
But of course to a conservative everything has a political reason.
In the words of Chris Dodd Himself
You have honored me beyond words with your confidence. Let me quickly add that there have been times when my positions and actions have caused some of you to question that confidence. I regret that, but it is equally important that you know I never wavered in my determination to do the best job for our state and nation. I love my job as your Senator, I always have, and still do. However, this past year has raised some challenges that insisted I take stock of my life. Over the past 12 months, I have managed four major pieces of legislation through Congress; served as Chair and acting Chair of two major Senate Committees, placing me at the center of the two most importance issues of our time – health care and reform of financial services; lost a beloved sister in July and in August – Ted Kennedy; battled cancer over the summer; and in the midst of all this, found myself in the toughest political shape of my career. Now let me be clear, I am very aware of my present political standing here at home; but it is equally clear that any certain prediction about an election victory or defeat nearly a year from now, would be absurd.
Maybe these “retirees” are simply retiring because they have other things they want to do in their life.
But of course to a conservative everything has a political reason.
Why no mention of the republican exodus?
"In the House, 14 GOP incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while 10 Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Does this mean Republicans are "dropping like flies"?
In the Senate, six Republican incumbents have decided not to seek re-election, while two Democratic incumbents have made the same announcement. Is this evidence of a mass Democratic exodus?
Among governors, several incumbents in both parties are term-limited and prevented from running again, but only three Democrats who can seek re-election -- Parkinson in Kansas, Doyle in Wisconsin, and Ritter in Colorado -- have chosen not to. For Republicans, the number is four -- Douglas in Vermont, Rell in Connecticut, Crist in Florida, and Pawlenty in Minnesota. (Update: the GOP number is five if we include Palin in Alaska.)"
I wouldn't break open the champagne just yet if I were you.
Yea, just what jmark said. you guys make a huge deal about the two democratic senators retiring and 10 house members, yet there are wayyyy more republican senators and house members retiring. your explanation please?
Amy...unreal. Each and every liberal here has ignored the real point of this blog post. This fact from Hillyer's article is the second best:
"They think American servicemen should be prosecuted for (allegedly) punching a jihadist-terrorist in the stomach while capturing him -- and in a military court, without civilian due process rights -- but that foreign terrorist suspects are too good for military justice and instead deserve Miranda rights and other domestic American civil rights."
However, this one is by far the most accurate.
"And, finally for now (this could go on for page after page), get this: They actually think most Americans agree with them. Now that isn't just laugh-inducing; it's worthy of a roll-on-the-floor, guffaw-til-you're-blue-in-the-face, uncontrollable laughing fit."
Doesn't surprise me all these libs are running again!
What the liberal comments on this post fail to mention is the fact that most Dems are dropping out of running again for their seats because they know they would lose. The polls are reflecting as much.
For the Republicans, it is a different story. For example, Senator Jim Bunning (KY) admitted that he couldn't raise enough money for re-election. And many Republicans don't want him to seek re-electin anyhow, based on his record. He wasn't getting the backing from his own party that he needed. Republicans would like to see Kentucky Sec. of State Trey Grayson run. Sam Brownback (KS) made a promise when he first came to the Senate that he would serve no more than two terms. He stated that he is keeping that pledge (hey, didn't Herb Kohl say the same thing years ago????). He served two terms and he is leaving to fulfill his promise. He plans on returning to Kansas to run for Governor. Kit Bond of Missouri is dropping out due to family pressure and health issues. He has had several major surgeries.
Were these men concerned that Democratic challengers were double-digit points ahead of them in re-election polls? No. Cuz that wasn't the case.
As Brian Walsh (communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee has stated: ""The good news is that in each of the states where we've seen a retirement, and even in the states where there is talk of a retirement, Republicans have a strong bench of experienced and battle-tested candidates waiting in the wings. It's also helpful that these announcements are being made early enough in the cycle so that our candidates will have time to raise money and assemble a strong campaign."
So, rather than drop out due to the fact that they KNEW they didn't stand a chance of getting re-elected, some Republicans are chosing not to run again for a wide variety of honest reasons. Not because the polls are telling them they are finished, like their Democrat counterparts.
Amy...Had Hillyer had gone on with page after page, I think Quin would have mentioned this liberal hypocrisy that is a real laugher!
In 2003, Over 87,000 Jobs Were Created. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/6/10)
* But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Criticized 2003 Job Creation As “Far From Enough.” “The slight increase in jobs last month is wonderful news for 57,000 Americans. But the 2.1 million Americans who have been actively looking for work for more than two years … know that it is far from enough …” (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, “Pelosi: ‘Slight Jobs Increase Far From Enough -- We Must Do More to Create Jobs and Growth,’” Press Release, 10/3/03). http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/the_democrats_job_standard/
Pure speculation, there is absolutely no proof of this.
You are just grasping at straws hopping that 2010 will be good to the republican party. Even your own leader doubts if republicans are ready to lead
http://www.kansascity.com/444/story/1664408.html
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/65133-are-republicans-ready-to-lead
http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=73473
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/28/williams-is-republicans-ready-to-lead/
The previous post was in response to this comment by Amy.
"What the liberal comments on this post fail to mention is the fact that most Dems are dropping out of running again for their seats because they know they would lose." - Hemmer
Yea, Bunning can't get any money because no one likes him. And what is up with you two stereotyping all liberals into one box? there are some of us out there, me included, that thinks it would be ridiculous to arrest a soldier for punching a known-terrorist in the stomach. If he did it to an unarmed civilian for no reason, then yes.
Thanks for the articles Onlyoneme.
Are the folks on the right setting themselves up for big disappointment come November? " Asked Monday by talk-show host Sean Hannity if Republicans can regain the House in November, Steele said, "Not this year."
How's that for confidence.
Onlyoneme: Three of the four websites/articles you cite regarding "Republican electibility" are from last year - October - before the health care bill was passed. The lone article that is current was regarding Michael Steele's book - in which Steele lamented that Republicans need to get back to their conservative roots in order to win elections. I agree! Read what Steele says about the elections in November in it's entirety. I don't think he dismisses the possibility that Republicans can sweep the Dems. Especially after Americans know that every Dem voted for that monstrous mess of a government power-grab - health care - that the majority of us do not want!
To finish jmarks incomplete quote from Michael Steele: Asked Monday by talk show host Sean Hannity if Republicans can regain the House in November, Steele said "Not this year."
Jmark ends there - no surprise. Here's the rest of what Steele said: "He added: "I don't know yet, because I don't know all the candidates yet. We still have some vacancies that need to get filled, but then the question we need to ask ourselves is, if we do that, are we ready?"
In answer to his own question, Steele said: "I don't know. And that's what I'm assessing and evaluating right now. Those candidates who are looking to run have to be anchored in these principles ... because if they don't, then they'll get to Washington, and they'll start drinking that Potomac River water, and they'll get drunk with power and throw the steps out the window."
Exactly! Good for Mr. Steele. We don't want RINO's like Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins. And good riddance to Arlen Specter - he's the Dems problem now. We want conservatives - that represent the real values of the Republican party. Less government, strong national defense, less taxes! And we are on the right path!
less taxes?
"More surprising, the GOP chairman directly or indirectly criticizes:
-President George H.W. Bush for raising taxes two years after President Ronald Reagan left office, though Steele ignores the fact that Reagan raised taxes too.
-President George W. Bush for not vetoing spending bills during his first five years in office. He calls Bush and other Republicans "enablers for big government" and derides the Bush administration's Troubled Asset Relief Program as "a massive government slush fund."
Looks like he's throwing dubya under the bus. Good for him!
WOW! How's that crow jmark? And nice try on the redirect--Amy smoked you and your erroneous references and you print a come back about Bush? Priceless.
You are an idiot!!!
Way to go, Amy. Your title and post has just been proven accurate!!! I'm laughing and I love it!
Amy smoked me?
In her dreams!
Exactly, ajohnson911. Isn't it funny how few liberals have actually even commented on "Laughing at the Left" - the main point of my blog? Rather, they go off on tangents, cuz they have no rebuttal to Mr. Hillyer. They cannot dispute Mr. Hillyer's numerous examples of just how bizarre liberalism really is. What's down is up, what' up is down. What's right is wrong, what's wrong is right. Liberalism is indeed a joke. And Mr. Hillyer is right - it would be funny if the consequences of liberalism weren't so dangerous to our country.
Conservatives are just as funny. They are opposed to big government but gave us the 3rd biggest government bureaucracy, the Homeland Security Department. Against government spending but one conservative hero, Ronald Reagan, tripled the deficit. Another conservative hero, Barry Goldwater, was opposed to the introduction of any type of religion into government, but we have seen religion making it's presence felt more and more, witness the Terri Schiavo episode and the abortion debate. Conservatives were opposed the institution of Miranda rights, they would rather live in a place where there are no restrictions on what the police are allowed to do, a police state. Conservatives look to the past and want to return there, liberals look to the future and try to improve it.
Two of the five paragraphs you authored are directly related to the upcoming congressional elections. Explain to me how quoting the opinions of the Chairman of the GOP regarding said elections is going "off on tangents".
And if you're going to mention "less taxes" as a Republican value, it seems appropriate to mention Steele's opinion of how Republicans have strayed from that value.
Every post I've made has been relevant to your steaming pile of crap.
Careful Ref, commenting on Amy's latest post is likely to get you labeled a redirectionist.
"but not for American workers who are considering unionization." this guy can't be seriously saying the right is more supportive of unions than the left....."They believe we can spend our way out of debt" ..Didn't Dick say "deficits don't matter?"......"but not the choice of where to send their children to school." Any parent that wants to send their child to a different school can either move to that district or pay for private schooling...."They oppose missile defense because they say it will never work, and then when it works they oppose it anyway." If this is in reference to the Polish missle site, I still say let Europe build their own....." "rights," are somehow sacrosanct and essential parts of the Constitution... Why is the right so suddenly worried about that G@& D*%mned (to quote GW) piece of paper.
Ref , Goldwaters conservatism has been dead and gone for decades. He was a true conservative unlike the radicals that call themselves conservatives now.
jmark: The main point of my blog was the column "Laughing at the Left." It is even the title of my blog. Since few comments on this site even reference that, and instead talk about my side blurb regarding how Republicans are poised to sweep elections in the coming years, I do think that the main topic IS being avoided. Why? Cuz libs don't have an answer for Mr. Hillyer's observations. And I agree that Republicans have strayed from the conservative value of "less taxes." That is why they are no longer the majority. People didn't want them in office because they were not upholding Republican values and they suffered at the polls. Bush was as guilty of this as Democrats. His "compassionate conservatism" was double-speak for trying to placate Democrats. Bush and other Republicans discovered that doesn't work. Hopefully more Republicans are taking note that they need to get back to the true values of the Republican party - and I feel that is starting to happen.
Carl Hicks: The entire sentence you quote in your comment at 12:04 today should actually read: "They (liberals) believe in the secret ballot for Mexicans, but not for American workers who are considering unionization." That to me is not an "endorsement" of unions, but rather an example of how union liberal thugs want to keep track of how their union members vote - and persuade them to vote how THEY - the union leaders - want them to. Strong arm tactics. Just like having union thugs present at town halls - to intimidate those who were speaking out against Obama's policies and health care plans.
And Dick Cheney's entire quote was "Reagan proved deficits don't matter." You only use a part of the quote to give it a different meaning.
And we all know that most libs are against "school choice" cuz the public schools (teachers unions - full of liberals) then lose out. With more students being allowed to make a "choice" and going to private or parochial schools, public schools lose tax dollars - via federal funds, if their student populations decline.
And: ...."They oppose missile defense because they say it will never work, and then when it works they oppose it anyway." That is true.
As for the Constitution: a few questions: Does the Constitution give the government the right to fine or jail any American who refuses to buy health insurance? NO. Actually, wording is in the Constitution that spells out the exact opposite! And who considers the Constitution an obstacle in to what he is trying to accomplish? Barack Obama. "Bigger government, less rights.": the current mantra of Barry & Co.
Mr. Hillyer's observations are actually opinions he has formulated that he says are "Based on things they have actually said or done, here are some of the things they really, truly seem to believe."
Interesting opinion piece I am sure that a "liberal" author could come up with a simular opinion peice on conservatives. Just Mr Hillyer's comments made print first.
So you want us to express our opinions of Mr Hillyer's rant of his opinions. I will say it is the typical conservative standing on their soapbox ranting on about their superiority complex.
Sorry but leaving out the words "Reagan proved" really dosen't change it's meaning, nice try tho..
Any reference to prove this point?
"when it works they oppose it anyway." That is true."
"His "compassionate conservatism" was double-speak for trying to placate Democrats" Makes one wonder how much "double speak" was said.
He did seem rather "orwellian" to me
Extreme liberalism is a joke just as extreme conservatism is.
Actually, Mr. Hicks, when you stated that Dick Cheney said "deficits don't matter" it made it sound like Cheney could care less about deficits. When his real quote is cited, as I did, Cheney said, " Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Contrary to your belief that that doesn't change the meaning, it clearly does. Click on: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer
to learn more.
As for the missile defense, witness what Obama recently did to Poland and the Czech Republic. Click on: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204518504574418563346840666.html
for more info.
"The U.S. decision also undermines the credibility of the U.S. nuclear defense umbrella. The Bush Administration sought to develop a global defense posture in part to reassure allies that they don't need their own nuclear deterrent, even as rogue regimes seek nuclear arms and the missiles to deliver them. America's Europe reversal tells other countries that they can't rely on the U.S. so it's best to follow the Israeli path and develop their own weapon and defenses."
What a blessing that would be for the American taxpayer!!!!!!
"deficits don't matter" Cheney can spin it anyway he wants but he was defending deficit spending, whether he cared about what he was defending isn't pertinent.
Mr. Hicks: Dick Cheney wasn't spinning anything. And Cheney wasn't being flippant about deficits like you imply. Read the washington post link I cite in an earlier comment. Here's a portion:
"In late 2002, Cheney had summoned the Bush administration's economic team to his office to discuss another round of tax cuts to stimulate the economy. Then-Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill pleaded that the government -- already running a $158 billion deficit -- was careering toward a fiscal crisis. But by O'Neill's account of the meeting, Cheney silenced him by invoking his take on Reagan's legacy.
It wasn't that Reagan's policies proved that government borrowing had no impact on the economy. But his administration's record -- particularly with some years of hindsight -- did give reason to question traditional thinking and provided a new context for future arguments about deficit spending.
"The lesson we should have learned [from those years] is that deficits have little or no short-term economic impacts," said William A. Niskanen, a member of Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers.
As important, they appeared to have no impact politically, said Stephen Moore, a conservative economist at the Club for Growth who worked in Reagan's budget office.
"Voters and politicians became anesthetized to big deficits," Moore recalled. "Reagan was running these big deficits, and liberals argued it was going to be Armageddon. We were going to ruin the economy. Interest rates were going to go through the roof. And none of these things happened."
In summary, Cheney was pointing out that tax cuts are good for the economy - as Reagan believed. And as many Americans - including myself - believe. Let more hard-working people keep more of their own hard-earned money. Stop the goverment from taking more and more and more - to do whatever they please. Wasteful spending seems to be a prominent cause in Washington D.C. these days. With taxpayers funding the bills.
Oh ok so then since he was not defending deficit spending he was condemning it by saying "reagan proved" ?
Because if a person is not defending something they are either condemning it or do not care and are not voicing any opinion. No comment can not apply since he commented and you say he did not approve of it...it was a condemnation.
Mr. Hicks: Whatever....
advertisement
- The Age of Entitlements (16)
- Olympic gold medal taken away from Lindsey Vonn! (24)
- Montana Bear Tragedy (37)
- Dan Rather - uncensored! (26)
- Stop Obamacare - here's what you can do! (60)
- Impeach Obama! (55)
- High Speed Rail - High Cost (15)
- Why the Electoral College is necessary. (26)
- Proud to be the party of "NO" (36)
- The eloquent Robert Gibbs (9)
- More It's Hemmer Time posts
Permalink | Email This Blog