Community Blogs
Common Sense: Not so Common!
Common sense has been lost over the years. In fact, the loss of our commons sense may be attributed to the tremendous, and very dangerous, division we have in our country. I believe that in order to end the divide we created in this country, it must begin by embracing an old rule: common sense. Here are some current examples of our lack of common sense.
Common Sense #1: A few years back, Senator Trent Lott attend a birthday party for Senator Strom Thurmond. Mr. Lott said some words at that event that were taken to believe Lott may have agreed with Thurmond’s racists years of past. Even though Mr. Lott made numerous statements that he didn’t agree with Thurmond, and that’s not what he said but also apologized, both Republicans and Democrats agreed he should relinquish his position. Common Sense? Both parties said their decision came together and was bipartisan. Fast forward.
How about Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood's hasty "stop driving" your Toyota retraction on Wednesday? A day earlier, Education Secretary Arne Duncan expressed regret for saying that Hurricane Katrina "was the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans." White House chief of staff, Raum Emanuel has said he was sorry for telling liberal activists it was “retarded” for them to run ads attacking fellow democrats. And we all know the extreme racist comments said about president Obama by senator (D) Harry Reid who happens to be the house leader just like Lott was when Lot attended Thurmond’s birthday party. After Reid made comments about Obama’s “light skin” and his “Negro dialogue,” nothing was done to Reid. In fact, none of the above received their comeuppance. If you carry over the same common sense rule with Lott, all should have been removed like Lott and by both parties. Common sense to remove these politicians? Absolutely! Were they removed? Nope! Not from our liberal democrats. An apology sufficed for everyone except the one given by Republican, Trent Lott. Oh, I didn’t even mention the KKK democrat senator Byrd yet. Maybe later perhaps.
Common Sense #2: On September 9, 2009, Senator Joe Wilson shouted out “you lie” during one of Obama’s many health care speeches. Regardless if Wilson was correct or not, was it common sense to apologize for that remark since political etiquette says all senators and congressman attending Presidential speeches are not to shout out anything at our sitting president? Yes. Fast forward to Obama’s State of the Union Address and we get a very different picture with common sense. "With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections," said Obama, a constitutional lawyer. “I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests or, worse, by foreign entities.” Obama then went on to urge Congress to pass a new law to help correct the problem. Common sense to bash the Supreme’s on national TV and especially with a lie (I guess Joe was right after all)? Nope!! Commons sense to apologize? Yes. Did Obama apologize? Nope!
Common Sense #3: Bush became the first President to push spending to 3% of GDP. The liberal democrats went ballistic as soon as the MSM started their daily headline news stories attacking Bush for his spending. Common sense to go after a president for his spending even though, as the chart proves, much of the spending (01 and 02) was to build up our military after 9/11 and after Clinton cut our military nearly in half? Yes. Now Obama increases spending to 20% GDP while also quadrupling our deficit and increasing our national debt. This spending by Obama and the democrats makes Bush’s spending look like a kid’s paper route. But yet our liberals say nothing and still blame Bush. Common sense to continue to blast President Bush’s spending while Obama and his regime get a free pass for their spending that will take our nation from one of the lowest debt to GDP, to number one or two in a few short years? Nope. Common sense would be for our liberal democrats, and the MSM, to go after Obama and the democrats for their trying to bankrupt America. Have they? Nope!
Common sense is lacking from our democrats in Washington. Especially when it doesn’t fit their agenda.
We encourage your comments but will strive to remove discussion that contains personal attacks, racial slurs, profanity or other inappropriate material as outlined in our guidelines. We post-moderate comments on most content, but may choose to pre-moderate some comments so please be patient if you don't see yours appear right way. We also ask for your help by reporting comments you think are inappropriate.
- More common sense why Obama must go. (2)
- A great American President vs a bad un-American President (15)
- And some want four more years of this dishonesty and hypocrisy? (143)
- The Great Divider. (0)
- Recall Your Mom (0)
- Tax Truth (0)
- Anyone recall the last standing ovation at a Presidential primary? (0)
- Need your help to stop this liberal corruption (0)
- Why Walker should not be recalled. (0)
- Walker wins Governor of the Year! (0)
- More Fighting Liberal Lies! posts
11 Comments
Proud Progressive - Feb 07, 2010 8:13 PM
jhayett - Feb 07, 2010 8:33 PM
Bush did NOT have a debt surplus. This is where the MSM is so dishonest. They even have you believing in that. Budget deficit is totally different than our national debt. Which will be nearly 90% of our GDP in a few years under Obama and his spending. Bush spent 3% to GDP, Obama is at 20%. That deficit goes towards our national debt and Obama has taken it to a level that can destroy America unless we vote him and his cronies out of Washington.
Your analogy to Obama accepting Reid’s apology (we can only assume that’s your analogy?) only makes my point clearer. Reid did apologize as did Lott. That’s a fact. Both apologies were accepted even though Reid’s were point blank and racist. However, the big difference is the democrats still insisted Lott be removed and Reid not to be removed from his position. That’s a fact and is called hypocrisy.
Proud Progressive - Feb 07, 2010 9:07 PM
Proud Progressive - Feb 07, 2010 9:13 PM
my behalf an I find Thurmans policies repulsive as do I any one who defends them.
jhayett - Feb 08, 2010 9:51 AM
Your comment about who accepted Strom Thurmond’s apology? Lott was the one who apologized and was then kicked out, not Thurmond. And Lott apologized and accepted by both parties. If not, then that makes your liberal democrats even worse and more hypocritical (and I haven’t even brought up democrat, KKK member Sen Byrd who still gets a free pass by the liberals). Lott’s apology was accepted as was Reid’s but Reid gets a pass and is allowed to stay on as house majority but Lot is not. Hmmm, something stinks and most Americans can see right through all this. Too bad you can’t
Carl Hicks - Feb 08, 2010 5:04 PM
jhayett - Feb 08, 2010 5:41 PM
Read more at GALLUP.com.
jhayett - Feb 08, 2010 5:42 PM
Andy_Kristensen - Feb 08, 2010 9:45 PM
jhayett - Feb 09, 2010 3:40 PM
Here's the scoop on what Obama inherited: I'm Sick of "Inherited"
The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush, blah blah blah. Amazingly enough, a lot of people swallow this nonsense. So once more, I'll try a short civics lesson. Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since November 2006 is the Democratic Party. They controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009, as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases. For FY 2009, though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets.
jhayett - Feb 09, 2010 3:43 PM
Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period:
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
WAKE UP, AMERICA , BEFORE ITS TOO LATE