pettyfog prattles..

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by pettyfog, Sep 23, 2009.

  1. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
  2. nevzter

    nevzter Well-Known Member

    Mar 5, 2007
    A City by a Bay
    Re: LawProf Loser Doubles Down..

    Another U of M gem...and a big spender to boot! $20? Did he think he was in south-east Asia?
  3. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Typical Palin FU!

    Hard to imagine someone ignorant as this:
    Except it wasnt Palin, it was someone I have extolled as far smarter in foreign policythan either Palin or Biden or Obama.

    If this was the only incident of late, I'd wave it off as a simple misstatement. Trouble is, it's becoming frequent.
  4. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    IL 'Big Tent' reflections

    Something to think about when you bash Tea Party Activists in favor of 'GOP Party Diversity'.
    * Or simply neglect to vote in a given race. Right, George? {Sadly Ken Blackwell was victim}..Right Mike?
  5. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    NY23 aftermant

    Conservative activism in NY23 turned a safe Republican seat into a Democratic seat, at least temporarily. I'm here to say that this is EXACTLY the result that the RNC and FoxNews wanted. Why? Because I've seen it all before.

    I was living in Maryland in 1982 and was surprised to see so many political commercials running on DC stations that dealt with Republican senate primary races in Illinois and New York. I later discovered that NCPAC [the original still is the greatest], the single largest fundraiser for Republicans in 1980, was putting a lot of money into defeating incumbent moderate Republicans and was advertising to senators and representatives in the capital: do it our way, or we'll bankroll your political opponents. It worked BOTH ways.

    This later happened here in Texas and elsewhere in the south where Conservative PACs targeted conservative incumbents who were still calling themselves Democrats.

    Each of these "successes" narrowed the breadth of the Republican party by winnowing out its moderate and liberal members, and also tended to wipe out a lot of the conservative strength in the Democratic Party.

    I suppose this would be fine -- realignment began occuring in the mid-60s when President Johnson pushed through civil rights legislation and created what would later become known as Reagan Democrats -- but what started in '96 is what's continued to trouble me.

    When Clinton was re-elected, Newt Gingrich was excoriated for working with the White House to pass legislation. This was kind of fun to watch, because Clinton had responded to the '94 Republican majority by adopting their Contract With America as his congressional program. Gingrich's critics said that Republicans HAD to vote against Clinton EVEN IF HE WAS PUSHING THEIR AGENDA. Why? Because bi-partisanship when there's a Democrat in the White House only makes that Democrat succeed and makes it harder for Republicans to regain the presidency.

    During this same time, in political journals, what became known as the neo-conservative movement floated the theory that the single-greatest danger to freedom and security in the United States was for a Democrat to be president. Therefore ANYTHING that could be done to weaken a Democratic president would, by itself, make America stronger. That's where the Clinton impeachment, Swiftboating, and "Psst, he's a Muslim" came from, and that's where the current "We Want Obama to Fail" movement came from.

    I'm concerned about this because while I'm seeing a bunch of weak, lame, outmoded, and pretty much dead-on-arrival ideas from congressional Democrats, I'm seeing NO IDEAS AT ALL from congressional Republicans.

    For several years now, the greatest expenditure of American businesses has been employee health care. It is the single greatest motivator to relocate abroad. Meanwhile, it is obvious that health care coverage is diminishing and that -- if for no other reason than to keep our industrial strength -- something has to be done. At the beginning of the first congressional session after Obama's election, insurance companies were BEGGING to work with Congress and were saying that EVERYTHING was on the table. And then ... and then the congressional Republicans made it clear that they were going to do everything they could NOT to fix the problem, and the insurance companies refused to compromise at all.

    So, while I would love to see some fresh ideas from Republicans about our debt, about health care, and about infrastructure strengthening, all I'm hearing is "Socialist, Where's the Certificate, Obama Wants to Kill Granny," and "Our Freedom is Being Threatened." It's working also, since Obama is indeed failing -- as I fully expected him to do -- and as a result we're likely to get someone even less interested in solutions and even more bereft of ideas than GWB to replace him. So I guess that's a victory for the Republicans.

    But ... but it's a crashing defeat for the country. Mounting debt, uncontrollable spending, health care both more costly and less efficient for at least 4 more years, more fraud, waste, and abuse from Wall Street, and more foreign ownership of America's debt can't be a victory for the country. If The Tea Party Movement were actually more than a FoxNews mini-series, you'd have expected them to yell at Congressional Republicans to "STOP PANDERING AND COME UP WITH SOME IDEAS." Yeah, like that's really gonna happen

    So, here's a quote for you from one of those namby-pamby wishy-washy flip-flopping bi-partisan nation weakeners:

    "It's amazing how much you can get done when you don't care who gets the credit." ---- Ronald W. Reagan
  6. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Re: NY23 aftermant

    How freakin! PRECIOUS!

    Never mind Owens was campaigning to the RIGHT of Dede... Everyone of the insiders says.. 'Well, SURE the process didnt work right, but yadda..yadda.. yadda.. BIG TENT!'


    Look at and justify the thing based on issues rather than a rant against populist anarchy.

    I made the arguments.... either address them or not. 'Not' means stay off the dissembling.

    And yeah... what diff does it make who gets the credit when.
  7. HatterDon

    HatterDon Moderator

    Mar 18, 2006
    Peoples Republic of South Texas
    Your "quote" of my post is interesting. Everything in between the first and last paragraph completely disappeared.

    I didn't say anything about NY23 except that conservative activism took a safe Republican seat and gave it to a Democrat. I think everyone with a half a brain would accept that if Fox News and the RNC ignore the race, the Republican wins. Nowhere in there did I quote anything you said and say it was wrong. I just talked about what I see and what I've seen. I was not even making an attempt to respond to anything you posted, because what you posted didn't interest me all that much.

    As a matter of fact, what you have been saying about this since the elections on Tuesday wasn't really all that interesting to anyone judging by the complete lack of responses you got.

    And speaking of "precious"

    Until somebody tells me that you're in charge of the website and can dictate what someone can or cannot say here, I'll say anything that I care to. Or, if that's unpalatable to you, just preface all your political threads with this statement:


    Have a nice day.
  8. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Do you dispute GOP party ID is now 20%?
    When did it drop?
    Who do you think left.. moderates? Some, yeah.. but mostly Conservatives and mainly fiscal conservatives. THOSE figure themselves as moderate.

    I'm gonna point out 2 party politics 101 given: When ONE party moves to edge, the other follows toward center. But that works two ways: the out of power fringe consolidates and organizes to exert power.

    It all depends on the last election, Progressives are now in power and they arent going to give it up easily. Right now MoveOn is getting money together to punish any Blue Dog Dem who votes against the Progressive Party line. It's REALLY the Congressional Dems that are in big disarray, it just isnt being covered. *
    But the point we conservatives/classic liberals are now making is that Dems will say anything to get in, then vote their power.. Owens NY 23 campaigned to right of Dede on stimulus, Health Reform and Card Check... now he's won, he says his vote is FOR!
    Now this is PERFECT.. Dems own him and he owns his vote. Progressives wanted Dede in to muddle things up, same as Reid/Pelosi/Obama are desperate for 'Bi-Partisan' GOP buy in to avoid total ownership of fiscal/rights disasters.

    No matter how you spin it, in 2-party.. you dont win by saying you're in the middle.
    Please quit ignoring the real statistics.. GOP LOST by 'big spending' and remember, Don actually complained about it during Dubya.. is he complaining about worse, now?
    The conservative voter.. and I mean the Palin admiring bunch.. believe if you're gonna act like a Democrat you ought to be a Democrat.

    * USA Today: Vulnerable Democratic freshman abandon the health care bill

    ** Note: When I write 'progressives', I aint talking TR progressives, which were really 'moderates', not Taft Paleoconservatives, I'm talking Socialist, which is who they are.
  9. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Look, Spencer... you STILL turn Palin inside out. The truth is going to come out eventually, and you're gonna feel dum.

    The wholesale attacks from the DNC and their MSM toadies went after every whiff of blood, it was not the Alaska Dems UNTIL the DNC waved their flags. And checkbook.
    Palin's views did NOT change. They still havent but you cannot govern if the elected opposition automatically assume the opposite point.

    And PLEASE stop waving off Card Check as if those who pass it will suddenly come to their senses and reverse the issue. Wont ever happen once the political apparatus is set up.
    what it would mean is: for union workers the secret ballot is gone forever. maybe not ALL unions but certainly key issues/ candidates in key areas.

    And if you wanna talk about corporate political corruption, you want to address, IN DEPTH, what's happening NOW? Like ummm.. say ...GE? I'll debate you on that. How the hell are you gonna be 'Pro-Corporate' on them? Wave the 'Green Banner'?
    How about radio-advertising Mortgage companies and brokers? Wanna talk about them?

    Wanna talk about Duke Energy?
  10. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Smarter than an 8th grader?

    .. from 1954?

    Read it and weep.... for us!

    How many HS seniors of today do you think could pass this? College Seniors?

    Nothing new, though. I found some 1920's era HS general science books at my dad's recently. Blew my mind.
  11. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Fred Phelps converts to Islam

    wouldnt be any stupider than how the MSM is making excuses for the obvious, in the Ft Hood incident.

    Chris 'tingle up my leg' Matthews wondered if Religion was involved.. he's probably STILL not sure.

    Chicago genius mayor Daley put it down to 'American fascination with guns.'

    Some say it's PRE- Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. Sounds like a 'boot camp exit clause' to me.
    - "Drill Sergeant, I got really serious problems with blood and getting shot at"

    Yet.. tell the truth.. how many of you guessed right, in your head on hearing of the shootings, something like this:
    "Oh, god, I hope the guy's name is Smith!"
    - yes that's an actual published quote.
    It's NOT as un-Pc as it seems to think the opposite, either. In fact the writer of that automatically SUSPECTED the obvious. It is ingrained into the human psyche as a protective mechanism. Chalk it up to 'Evolution', LGF!

    The efforts of the PC 'intellectual loving, make a difference' journo corps and politicians, to attempt to paper over the obvious is really disturbing.
    When you refer to Hasan as 'suspected gunman' who 'allegedly' killed those people you are only further undermining peoples confidence in the press.

    And fueling radical views on the far fringes:
    - enabling radical Muslim Clerics, who take this as a sign of dissolute weakness.
    - enabling 'They're taking over our country' White Supremacists.
    Not much is being written on a common topic of a few years ago: White Militia. Does anyone really think current events have them so dispirited they gave up?

    Prima Facie: The guy was a nut job. But how many more of them are out there.

    In fact, Hasan, himself, probably had the obvious answer:
    Allow all Muslims in the Military CO status on request.

    That would be all that need be done. Though some advocate excluding them altogether. Draconian, to be sure, but effective.. except there's no assurance whatsoever it would have stopped Hasan if he HAD been booted out. He still would have felt he had a mission, deranged as he was.
  12. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Prejean AGAIN, sigh..

    On Olbermann {despicable piece of human excrement} calling her a hypocrite..
    Mediate says

    So.. after all those words rebutting her hypocrisy, he ignores the FACTS, easily determined in context of the original foof:
    That it was HER OPINION that marriage was a sanctified ritual between a man and a woman.
    She did nothing to destroy marriages, not did she advocate speciafically destroying relationship or legal observation of them. The writer ignores the elephant in the room that it's not just religious, it's cultural.

    I have my own opinion on her 'hypocrisy'. There's far worse examples of big tent christian hypocrisy -not to mention outright apostacy- today.

    If she'd have been a classic Christian she wouldnt have boob jobs or tattoos {SPECIFICALLY FORBIDDEN} or even be in a meat-market beauty contest. But I aint gonna question her faith.. just her judgement.
  13. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Good News on the Fed Employment Front

    On hiring former political appointments to career positions:

    I think we can all agree on the stated objective
  14. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    J school advocacy?

    Should J-Students Work For The Defense?

    The 'Innocence Project' has typically been a function of Law Schools everywhere. But at Northwestern, the Journalism school is doing the review and investigative reporting.

    The issue of course is journo-advocacy, as opposed to detached reporting.

    Cook County prosecutors raise issues that I believe are quibbles.. such as paying small amounts for interview/testimony to witnesses or suspects.
    And Law Students DIDNT..or SHOULDNT?

    I very much dislike news advocacy but there's a place for investigative reporting, which IS NOT ENTIRELY objective.
    And we recently saluted a PA reporter who made it his end-career job to do the same.
    Not to mention Radley Balko.

    a real conundrum but I think it would be better for NU's Law School to run it and the J school to do the digging.
  15. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Trying Gitmo Jihadists

    It is our duly elected government.
    We are all bound by the law under the Constitution.

    Fact: Law is determined and made not just by application of statute and Constitution but by precedent determined previously in the appellate courts and affirmed, directly or indirectly, by decision of the US Supreme Court.

    While most probably wish for swift and speedy justice, this is unlikely given the circumstances in each case.

    In the long term, the best result for all citizens of the country, in regard to freedom of speech or action, may well be that most or all charges leveled are dismissed under one technicality or other.

    Any other result may well result in draconian measures of restriction.

    - WSJ: Taranto

    I think 'couple of decades' is the optimist view. The 'Law of Unintended Consequences' is not that there 'may be', it's that there always are 'Unintended Consequences'.
    If you dont believe that then consider Dred Scott and why it remains important to this day
    So the 'actual consequence' is that the decision hastened the advent of the Civil War.
    Equally important is that jurisprudence DOES NOT ALLOW for consideration of effect during the process. Nor should it.

    "The Law is an Ass" is a motto with a purpose.

    This is why there always need be Executive latitude of action in extraordinary circumstances, noted by the congress and the press but not challenged in the legal system unless the majority of the populace are affected.

    Here's hoping these are speedily dismissed and disposed of, other than by the law.
  16. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Re: Trying Gitmo Jihadists

    Well, THAT didnt take long....

    base for defense motion #1:
  17. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    'Unpainted Axelrod'

    Apropos of nothing in particular, I think I need to go on record...

    it's as if I fell down a Quantum Rabbit Hole and I'm watching a Coen Bros Movie about the educated and informed political elite.

    Instead of the fringe hayseeds and trailer trash they usually write on.
  18. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    China: 'Wake up call'

    More Accurately.. David Gergen wakes up

    Still some hopenchange there but that gets fewer and further between.

    ....All Americans?!!!!!

    I see.. that's a rhetorical device. I didnt actually fall asleep.
  19. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    Breathe Out, Breathe In..

    Quotes of the Week:

    Obama: 'We've restored America's standing

    I dont think so... unless you're talking maybe the OxBridge Student Unions and Coffee houses in Amsterdam and Paris Left Bank..maybe.


    Leahy: We dont need to interrogate Bin Laden..

    - That's a followup to Obama statement that KSM will be convicted no matter what.

    {Aint no way Leahy's gonna let that upstart Alan Grayson take the lead in 'Dumbest Effing Elected Democrat'}
  20. Clevelandmo

    Clevelandmo Active Member

    Sep 13, 2007
    Re: Trying Gitmo Jihadists

    Unbelieveable. Once again, it's okay to be arrogant and contradict your own actions as long as you're a liberal.

    Oh and lie too
Similar Threads: pettyfog prattles
Forum Title Date
Miscellaneous Pettyfog and HatterDon Feb 3, 2010
Miscellaneous pettyfog's great satan Apr 28, 2008
Miscellaneous Pettyfog defends a pork grant Dec 30, 2007
Miscellaneous Election 2006: Pettyfog the optimist Nov 4, 2006
Miscellaneous Pettyfog's copper and DSL HELL... Jul 4, 2006

Share This Page