BJean

Leigha, I loved your post.

When all this financial mess began to emerge as the disaster it was, everybody agreed that it was due to little or no regulation. The Republicans are primarily responsible for that and it dates back to even before either Bush was elected. They embraced the Ayn Rand theory that Greenspan and others adopted and the phrase for it, the "trickle down theory of economics" was seen as a reasonable way to handle economics in a capitalist society. It has now been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that not only does it not work, it can lead to corruption and greed and all the things we have been having to deal with that is making our financial lives miserable. At least those of us who are middle class or poor. The rich, including Greenspan, just kept getting richer. To hear someone seriously discuss deregulation as any kind of remedy to our financial woes in the U.S. is actually kind of frightening. Stupidity like that is scary.

I'm chagrined that at least one ultra conservative posting here has seen fit to adopt the word "hyprocrite" when referring to Democrats.

And you're funny. LOL With one sweep of your keyboard you declare that that type of cutting and pasting massive amounts of liberal and right wing material was getting us nowhere and you were going to stop. Then you keep right at it. LOL You're as funny as a rubber crutch.

patty: "liberal doctors are now stating that the death penalty via a hypodermic needle is cruel and unusual punishment. The doctors say assisting in these legal actions is against their Hippocratic Oath. So, a Doctor can suck the brain out of a baby whose head is sticking out of the birth canal, but they have a problem inserting a needle into a murderer’s vein? LOL You post something that represents a visual of a baby's head sticking out of a birth canal gettin its' brains sucked out and a murderer on a gurney getting a lethal dose of drugs and watching him die by the punishment you've described as being cruel and unusual and you finish up this little scenario with "LOL"? Do you know what LOL stands for? Good grief woman.

Regarding spending during the economic crisis, George Bush constantly told people to get out and buy stuff when he was in office and the economy was faltering. People staying home after 9/11 was a big problem for our economy. Do you just have selective memory?

patty: "So, you're saying that without that cities order of buses, this particular bus making company would have gone out of business?" We were taking about jobs. Without orders, people lose their jobs. Without orders, companies can't hire new employees or keep old ones. If you have particular statistics on this particular bus company that indicates that they have more than enough orders to keep all their employees and hire new ones, I'd be very surprised. And you go on to say that our umployment rates are going up. But that is not what the latest studies say. patty: "You liberals will not even admit when the government wastes a dime, cause your precious Obama might be criticized for it, and we can't have that, now can we?" Now that's just plain silly. We criticize anybody who deserves it. You appear to have lost it a little in this post of yours.

If someone doesn't understand the difference between the government looking out for its people and big business looking out for its bottom line, it makes you wonder what else they don't understand. Or maybe it's what else they've swallowed, hook, line and sinker?

Aw you had to go and make a liar out of me...

If someone doesn't have a problem like this family, they usually are skeptical that this kind of story really happens. They happen all too frequently. And people lose everything sometimes, when they're trying to take care of a critically ill loved one. When you hear criticism of countries that have universal health care, it boggles the mind. By comparison, we seem absolutely barbaric.

This never gets old.

I know he had been giving you personally a hard time in other posts, but it looked to me like he was trying to direct his comments at all right wing extremists in a couple of his last posts (although not the very last one.) You say he has a self-esteem problem. I sincerely doubt that. I think he is very frustrated with politics and the things that the Republicans say that have no basis in truth. He took it out on you because you defend the way the Republicans do business. Can you just consider the source and not feel so attacked? I've found that if someone directs mean comments directly at me, I believe I need to respond in kind. But I'm a happier person if I just chalk it up and respond in a more general way and reiterate my own my point. Talk is cheap though, right?

You da man! Excellent job. I am grateful! Please keep up the good work.

Thank you for bring some sanity to a discussion about Republicans v. Democrats. Instead of suggesting tea bagging parties and birther partiesa and instead of posting rants and raves from extremists, you've chosen to post the truth. It's refreshing.

They're in a whole different league intellectually with Maddow too. And methinks their audience won't have a clue that there's any difference between climate and weather, they'll only be celebrating that the global warming theory is debunked at last. Pat Robertson will say that this is God's way of giving Al Gore his come-uppance!

Write it backwards on your cheek and you can read it whilst looking in a mirror. That'll drive 'em crazy!

OMG Cleo's!! That last one is awesome!!!

phil you continue to crack me up. Don't count on me saving you with my prayers though. Afraid it wouldn't do you a bit of good. Besides, I enjoy your humor and irreverance. Do you want me to also find you a sticker that says "Senator Brown put on your pants!"

Bush also misrepresented the facts of our intelligence to the legislators and that's how he won such overwhelming support for giving him the power to take us into war. The Democrats haven't had any power in such a long time that they've obviously still living in fear of the big bad Republicans. And to tell the truth, they know that the Republicans are capable of just about anything. But that's no excuse. It's hard to believe that the public isn't just being fed a line by the Democratis with their manuverings with the health care reform bill. Because if they really really thought it was the answer to our major problems with our health care system, then they're nuts for not taking the bull by the horns and getting it done. I'm afraid they're all bought an paid for by the insurance industry. When you learn a little about how much cash the lobbyists for insurance companies are passing out, it isn't a stretch to believe that the Dems are being controlled by it too. But they've promised and were elected on reforming the health care system so they needed to at least look like they were trying. That sounds a bit like "it's a communist plot" I guess, but the longer I live the more I become jaded. I do think that Rachael Maddow does a good job of giving both sides a venue to vent their spleens. She doesn't hold back if she disagrees, but she does allow the opposition plenty of time and space to air their opposing thoughts. And she doesn't make stuff up, which is what the right wing does. On Fox, with most of their commentators, they talk over anyone who disagrees or they maniuplate the sound system. It's appalling.

and btw patty, phil was not talking about one person here at LBT, he was speaking in more general terms which is, I believe, allowed at Rants and Raves.

patty, let's not go there. Afterall you're the one who kept repeating the hate word, ad nauseum. phil it would be great if we were able to get the rules changed and have a viable 3 party or more system. The problem with some of the other parties that are trying to get rheir candidates on ballots is that they're mostly run by crackpots.

Well thanks Cleo's! That's not it, but it'll do in a pinch. The one I was referring to actually addresses the time when you speak to others about God, meaning that you should speak softly, not in a loud and brash way.

Yep kartman, that's what I've been saying. Reagan was a puppet of the wealthy powerful men behind the Republican party but he was coached to work one-on-one with legislators in order to get the Republican agenda done. He staged breakfasts and senators were thrilled to get to have breakfast with the president in the White House. They nearly always came away from it supporting whatever the president was wanting. Being the cynic that I am, I have no doubt that promises were made in trade for their votes, but is actually how things have been done in Washington since the beginning of our country. When a guy is elected president, he thinks he can go in and do the "right thing" for the country and since he had a voter's mandate, the legislators will have to go along. Yeah right. It doesn't happen that way. Jimmy Carter is an example as is Bill Clinton. George W didn't have to play the getting along - you cross my palm - I'll cross yours game, because he had all the votes he needed to get his war and everything else. When I worked as a legislative aide in Virginia, I learned real quick how stuff got done. It was a real eye opener and quite depressing. But it is what it is and I don't know how it's ever going to change.

Cleo's, that's why it is so frustrating for members of congress and the president to try to "reach across the aisle." The Republicans are having none of it, no matter what. And the press has really been harsh and critical of the president. They say he hasn't been able to get his policies through congress and then they say he's trying too hard to work with the opposition. If he tried to ram his proposals through, they'd give him hell and the fact that he doesn't try to do that also causes them to give him hell. I'm finally convinced (and it took me a while) that the opposition party is being racist in their refusal to work with the president on any front. And the press loves being able to criticize the president and congress and everyone else because they think it makes them look smart. What a country.

kartman I totally agree with you. I decided that she didn't mean that men have no right to give input when they are directly involved. Even then, as you say, the choice is ultimately the woman's. But I have a feeling that she meant that men in the government shouldn't be making the decision for all women. At least, I hope that's what she meant.