2009.10.29
Thursday open thread
"I personally don't think it's possible to come up with a crazier plan."
"We attack the mayor with hummus."
"I stand corrected."
"Just keeping things in perspective."
What crazy things are you planning today?
.....Advertisement.....
.....Advertisement.....
CHECK THIS OUT!
BREAKING NEWS
Upcoming Events
RSS feed 
The Commerce Department, in its estimate of Q3 GDP, says the economy grew 3.5% annual rate, the fastest pace since Q3 of 2007, after contracting 0.7% in the April-June period.
This is good news. The US economy is rebounding, as always, inspite of the fact that most of the government stimulus has not kicked in. Maybe the rest should be returned to the tax payers.
The question remains, how good can the economy get with high taxes, record deficits, a falling dollar, and most important, 10% unemployment.
The administration is warning that high unemployment will become the norm. It makes the population more dependant on government and the move toward socialism easier, I suppose.
Comment by John R — October 29, 2009 @ 10:28 am
John R,
If 0bama gets even half of what he wants, look for malaise for another decade like we had from 1933-42.
Things are setting up almost eerily, for a repeat of 1994. I would like to think people will come to their senses, and throw out this extreme liberal party. Liberals should be praying for this, too, because following the '94 GOP takeover, they set the country for the longest sustained period of prosperity on record. We all benefit, rich and poor, when the economy is roaring due to private sector enterprise!
Comment by Suzie — October 29, 2009 @ 10:59 am
"New" healthcare plan proposed by Dems isn't really different from the old reform plan. It still costs too much resulting in increased taxes, and it still aims to ration existing care of seniors and the poor. It still uses the government to provide healthcare, something it has done poorly in the past. Liberal Dems are still trying to ram what is bad for our country down our throats.
In other news, Obama is still undecided on what to do in Afghanistan. In the meantime, the Taliban continues to grow stronger and kill people.
Comment by Jim — October 29, 2009 @ 11:51 am
Obama using dead American troops as a photo op absolutely disgusts me.
Unable to decide what to do about Afghanistan, he looks weak. Someone in his staff decided it would show he cares by having a picture of him saluting a passing flag-draped transfer case.
My disgust for this man is at an all-time high.
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 12:20 pm
The guy's been on the job for a whole nine months and it's all his fault.
Balderdash!! As far as a repeat of '94, keep right on dreaming, nah gah happ ann.
Comment by Art Hill — October 29, 2009 @ 12:24 pm
@4
Shows a whole lot more respect than Rumsfeld's form letters.
Comment by Art Hill — October 29, 2009 @ 12:49 pm
Respect, Art? Not even close. It was a photo op, nothing more. And as a veteran, it turns my stomach.
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 12:56 pm
@7...Patrick...
People would bitch and moan if he didn't do something and people are gonna bitch and moan if he does.
At least he is showing us what the real cost of war on any level is and that's a cost of human treasure and life. The previous administration tried to hide that cost believing (foolishly) that the American public cool be fooled by such subterfuge.
Comment by Will — October 29, 2009 @ 1:12 pm
@5 - "The guy's been on the job for a whole nine months and it's all his fault."
You should remember that argument the next time your tempted roll out that tired ol' liberal "9/11 happened on Bush's watch" argument.
Comment by Another Chris — October 29, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
I'm not sure which is worse right now...Obama using dead American troops for a photo op, or those of you who defend him for doing so.
Disgusting.
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 1:40 pm
@9...
I believe there's a pretty substantial difference between Obama's watch and Bush's watch. Bush ignored the obvious and Obama is having to try to clean up that which Bush ignored.
Comment by Will — October 29, 2009 @ 1:48 pm
@11..Obama is having to try to clean up that which Bush ignored.
too bad he is doing a lousy job of it
Comment by pammala — October 29, 2009 @ 2:24 pm
@10....Patrick...
If Bush had done the same thing, would you consider it a photo op for him?
Perhaps Obama wanted to know exactly how it feels to see a casket of a soldier come off a plane...to experience what it feels like to try to comfort a family...to fully experience the gravity of the decision to send more troops into harms way.
Personally, if I were President...I'd drop the big one on both Iraq and Afghanistan and turn them both into giant crystals. Don't call me a dove for very long.
Comment by Will — October 29, 2009 @ 2:45 pm
@13
"Perhaps Obama wanted to know exactly how it feels to see a casket of a soldier come off a plane...to experience what it feels like to try to comfort a family...to fully experience the gravity of the decision to send more troops into harms way."
Are you kidding me? If this is Obama's first experience in this situation or with those types of feelings... He should NOT BE OUR PRESIDENT. The U.S. Presidency is not a job where you should receive on-the-job training. Obamas whole six months in the Senate before he went into campaign mode don't count as experience to me. Sorry. We told you this guy was in no way ready to lead this country. This is worse than the Bush "Missions Accomplished" gaffe. BY MILES! He is exploiting DEAD SOLDIERS!
Comment by Walker — October 29, 2009 @ 3:10 pm
#11: Colin Powell, an Obama supporter, said just this week that Bush has made America safer. What has Obama done?
Comment by Jim — October 29, 2009 @ 3:13 pm
0bama done nothin' Jim...he done nothin'. He ain't gonna do nothin' either.
Comment by T Witten — October 29, 2009 @ 4:09 pm
@Walker #14,
George W. Bush never saw the casket of a soldier come off a plane, though his decision to needlessly invade Iraq resulted in more than 4,000 of those caskets coming home.
He made it through eight years of wartime presidency without ever experiencing that situation. Do you believe he SHOULD NOT BE OUR PRESIDENT because of that failing?
Did those of you who are complaining about Obama exploiting dead soldiers know that the family signed a consent form? They wanted the picture taken. Did it ever occur to you that the families of some soldiers might view the the president getting up in the middle of the night to witness this somber ceremony as an act of honor for their fallen family member - an act of honor that George W. Bush never once undertook himself, with or without cameras.
@Patrick #10: The only thing disgusting here is that some people will go so far to criticize a sitting president who, by all appearances, is taking his duties and responsibilities to the men and women in uniform with the gravity and seriousness they warrant.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 29, 2009 @ 4:24 pm
#4 As to the person at the top showing respect to our war dead is in no way disrespectful.Where do you guys get this stuff from.He is the President and that is his job. And yes Bush never did do that, stand by and watch what our dead come home.
He did say he would quite golfing. Who is kidding who?
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 29, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
#17 - Dan, Bush never watched out dead come home? Gee, maybe because he was actually visiting with their families!
Who gave the family the consent form to sign? Was it the families idea for Obama to fly to Dover? I'll bet BIG money it wasn't, Dan...it was someone in the White House who saw it as a chance to spin Obama's inability to make a decision about Afghanistan and deflect some of the heat.
Sorry if you find criticizing a sitting president disgusting, Dan. Was it disgusting when you and your Lib friends did it for 8 years?
Obama "taking his duties and responsibilities to the men and women in uniform with the gravity and seriousness they warrant"? Don't make me laugh, Dan. My gut hurts too much right now thinking of all the friends I've lost so this fraud can have his picture taken seeming sincere.
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 5:45 pm
Q-What's the difference between a traitor and a patriot?
A-Nine months.
Comment by Art Hill — October 29, 2009 @ 5:49 pm
The big difference between Bush and 0bama is Bush articulated his vision of victory. 0bama not only hasn't done that, at one point he said he wasn't even interested in victory. The left should hound 0bama with the questions: "What is your objective in Afghanistan?" "What will victory look like, assuming you want us to win there"?
Another major difference is Bush didn't waste time implementing the plans his knowledgeable generals game him. 0bama has dithered for political reasons, and because he's not sure he wants us to win, given his proven disdain for the military.
The idea that the failing planless 0bama would trash the fully engaged and successful George W. Bush -- in front of our military -- is just beyond reprehensible.
Character matters, people. We warned you of that in 1992, and reminded you last year. When we elect a man of questionable background and questionable character, you get results like we're getting.
Comment by Suzie — October 29, 2009 @ 6:16 pm
Hey Obama went to meet fallen heroes at Dover...That's fine. But it was NOT necessary for him and his admin to make a photo op/news story out of it. The Bush's met with hundreds of families of the killed and wounded and chose to keep those meetings private. It was NOT about the Bushes, it WAS about Obama and that's the difference on how these events were handled.
Comment by BUD — October 29, 2009 @ 7:18 pm
C'mon, Suzie, the Left hound Obama? Not in your wildest dreams. Doing so would make them look foolish for electing him (despite it being true).
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 7:49 pm
@21
You could dump a load of that manure on the garden and grow some dynamite tomatoes. How hard were you laughing when you wrote it? "Fully engaged and successful George W. Bush?" BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Please, stop it, I can't breathe!!
Comment by Art Hill — October 29, 2009 @ 8:01 pm
#20 - Art, I thought the answer was "It depends. Are they a Democrat or a Republican?"
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 8:03 pm
So, the Chairman of the National Endowment of the Arts declared in a speech that Obama is most powerful writer since Caesar.
I wonder if he counted the book that Obama's terrorist friend wrote for him?
Comment by Patrick — October 29, 2009 @ 8:05 pm
@13 Personally, if I were President...I'd drop the big one on both Iraq and Afghanistan and turn them both into giant crystals. Don't call me a dove for very long.
I AGREE !!
Comment by pammala — October 29, 2009 @ 8:15 pm
Good golly, anybody who favors a nuke is insane. Would you get all of our troops out first or just sacrifice them? Do you care that the Iraq nuke would poison Israel?
Comment by gdad — October 29, 2009 @ 8:49 pm
gdad...
Of course I would remove our military. If the Iraqi and Iranians are such a threat to our way of life (and presumably the Israeli as well) then why do we continue to sacrifice treasure from both sides? Should it go on indefinitely? NO...if indeed the threat is what we've all been led to believe it is. At some point, we need to stop pro-creating just so that we can feed a military complex.
Suzie...
Bush never articulated what victory would look like...none of his cronies ever did because they didn't think that far off the end of their noses. Bush piddled away time in Crawford TX while our troops were suffering under inept leadership.
You expect Obama to figure out in 9 months how to clean up a mess that Bush created over the span of 8 years. Give me a friggin break.
Comment by Will — October 29, 2009 @ 10:01 pm
As we enter the final weekend of the gubernatorial election, some analysis has been missing. LAst year, Barack Obama won the state of Virginia by 6 pts. The CURRENT governor is chair of the DNC. The last 2 governors elected in Va. were democrats. With all this political goodwill and tailwind it appears the GOP candidate is going to stomp the democrat candidate by approximately 10 pts.
One has to wonder how can this be? IS it Barack Obama and the liberal democrat agenda aren't embraced as the MSM would have you believe? The Wednesday morning spin ( NJ gov race/ NY district 23) will no doubt fill us in.
Comment by BUD — October 30, 2009 @ 8:05 am
#29 - Will, Obama will NEVER figure out how to clean up anyones mess. His voting record of "Present" clearly shows he is unable to make up his mind.
Someone else in the shadows will tell the fraud what to do.
In the meantime, more American soldiers will die.
Comment by Patrick — October 30, 2009 @ 8:27 am
Patrick...
Did you share the same outrage at the death of American soldiers prior to Obama's election as President? I can't fathom why you wouldn't have been just as angry then as now.
Comment by Will — October 30, 2009 @ 9:01 am
Dan - "an act of honor that George W. Bush never once undertook himself, with or without cameras."
Again you are so off base. Wrong, Wrong Wrong and Wrong. Look at hundreds of articles online written about his visits with the families! If Obama wants to honor our dead soldiers - SEND HELP TO AFGHANISTAN WHEN THE GENERAL YOU SELECTED TELLS YOU THEY NEED MORE TROOPS. Maybe that will save lives. Obama is looking more unfit for president as each day passes. Me, me, me and I, I, I. Self indulgent and arrogant are now way to go through life, son!
Comment by Walker — October 30, 2009 @ 10:15 am
I am not wrong. Bush never witnessed the caskets' arrival at Dover. Never. Yes, he met with families. That's different.
By the way, Obama also met with families, including that night when he had a private meeting.
Obama is doing his job - making a deliberate decision before sending more troops into harm's way, the same way that Bush made a deliberate decision before deciding on the surge strategy.
Why is it you refuse to give Obama the same amount of time to decide this strategy that Bush took? Can you explain that, please?
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 30, 2009 @ 10:18 am
Why is it you refuse to give Obama the same amount of time to decide this strategy that Bush took? Can you explain that, please?
That would require a certain amount of familiarity with the situation in Afghanistan and the history of the conflict.
Fox "News" is not known for it's in-depth coverage.
Comment by Art Hill — October 30, 2009 @ 11:40 am
#33 You can say we are wrong (Bush did not to Dover to face our dead) till the cows come home but that does not make fiction into non-fiction.
I really think some, not all, in the neo-right wing world of the so far right the coast guard cannot find them, that you guys cannot stand that a black guy won, he really did, look it up.
Hope you enjoyed your morning paper after the election.
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 30, 2009 @ 11:41 am
#32 - Will, yes I have always been outraged over soldiers deaths. Not having been in the military yourself, I garauntee there are a lot of things you can't fathom.
#36- Bill, I hope you enjoy your newspaper on Wednesday. Oh, and BTW, calling us racists? Weak.
Comment by Patrick — October 30, 2009 @ 11:52 am
Dan ... in repsonse to your question in #34... it appears BUSH was looking for a new IRAq strategy after the 2006 elections...panels were convened in early Dec 2006.... a report was generated by the American Enterprise Institute on Dec 14th termed "Iraq: a Turning Point." This report called for 20,000 additonal troops...the BUSH admin. waited for the new Defense Sec Robert Gates to assess the situation and to discuss with others the AEI report. The new incoming speaker,Nancy Pelosi announced one of her top priorities would be to STOP any additional deployments to Iraq.... On Jan. 10, 2007 Bush announced he would proceed with a surge of some 20,000 troops..roughly 4,000 to ANBAR and the rest in and around Baghdad....The first of these additional brigades ( 2ND Brigade 82nd Airbone shipped out in late January 2007.
Gen McCrystal(sp?) called for 40k additional troops last August........
Comment by BUD — October 30, 2009 @ 12:04 pm
#37 Not calling anyone a racists unless I hear with my own ears and then I tell'em to their face. But here's the thing,when one looks at the posters that were made this summer and things that have been on the net, you cannot tell me that a lot of your side of the face just don't like the black dude in the White House, you must run across this at some time?
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 30, 2009 @ 12:05 pm
Bill - Stop the race baiting. It shows your lack of an argument. You can keep repeating "Faux News" and "Obama's Black" all you want. It's actually rather pathetic.
Dan - Bush took 5 weeks after the Nov 2006 elections to push forward with the surge. This was against the advice of some. It turned out to help in the Iraq theatre. Obama is going on 2 months since McChrystal has asked for support troops. October has been the worst month so far in Afghanistan. Either pull out or send support. You cannot sit on your hands with this one.
Comment by Walker — October 30, 2009 @ 12:13 pm
Dan - Why you also fail to mention that of the 15 families of the soldiers ONLY 1 signed the waiver and granted permission. Odd don't you think? Here is a link that explains what some of the families think about this photo op. Pretty enlightening!
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/10/firedoglake-buttheads-clueless-about-bush-and-our-war-dead.html
Comment by Walker — October 30, 2009 @ 12:21 pm
I apologize for some of the language on the blog above. But it helps explain why I think Obama's decision on this was wrong!
Comment by Walker — October 30, 2009 @ 12:27 pm
@37...Patrick...
Don't even begin to patronize me with your sarcasm about understanding military life.
My father was in the military for 30+ years so you can't tell me a thing about what I can or can not fathom. I've sat with the families of soldiers who have died in the line of duty and I've held them while their bodies shook with anquish and despair knowing that a sole supporter won't be back to share births of children, grandchildren or to see graduations, marriages and the list goes on and on.
Comment by Will — October 30, 2009 @ 12:39 pm
@41
11 of the 15 families requested no cameras BEFORE it was known the president would attend. Do the math.
BTW, this blog is extremely slow to load the last couple of days.
Comment by Art Hill — October 30, 2009 @ 12:48 pm
"Bush never witnessed the caskets' arrival at Dover. Never."
Proof please. Are you saying that because he never took a photographer with him?
Comment by Henry — October 30, 2009 @ 1:05 pm
#39 - Bill, "you guys cannot stand that a black guy won" sure sounds like someone calling us racists to me. And no, I've yet to actually meet someone on my "side of the face" who came right out and said they didn't like Obama because he's black. Inexperienced? Yes. Unqualified? Yes. Dishonest? Yes. Socialist? Yes.
But not because he's black. Which, by the way, he wasn't before getting elected, remember?
Comment by Patrick — October 30, 2009 @ 1:05 pm
#46 Take a look of some of the signs this summer or some things on the net and tell me you have never come across this. Another thing, I do not know where you go but I would say maybe 2 to 3 times a week (I am a white dude so maybe they think I agree with them) I hear what they call our President and cannot repeat it here. I also cannot repeat what a next door folks spread on the back of their house.
By the way he did not run on the Socialist ticket. Have you ever met one?
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 30, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
#43- Will, not being patronizing or sarcastic at all. Unless YOU...not someone you know...have actually been in the military, then it's impossible for you to fully understand it. sure, you may see parts of it, but that's it.
Comment by Patrick — October 30, 2009 @ 1:35 pm
#47- Wow, Bill, you must hang out with some real gems.
And yes, having spent a lot of time in Sweden I have met several Socialists. Did Obama run on the Socailist ticket? Of course not, don't be silly. But honestly? He had you and others so awed he could have and still won.
Comment by Patrick — October 30, 2009 @ 1:42 pm
@48...Patrick..
Then exactly what's your point? The ravages of war are horrible to say the least. The cost in terms of lives both lost and affected by the loss of life is incalcuable. I understand how people feel that have been in the military and I can see it in their eyes when they talk to each other. I took my father to reunions of his World War 2 Navy shipmates. They didn't like to talk much about the war but you could tell it deeply affected each one of them in a very poignant way.
No...I haven't stared at a shell coming my way nor have I been the target of enemy fire...and I'm indeed lucky. But don't dismiss my ability to understand.
Comment by Will — October 30, 2009 @ 2:18 pm
#49 Maybe in a fictional world and I am sure it would make a great book but in the real world he did not run on that ticket. But you guys keep using it for the fear that some have. The party of NO is what it is becoming.
And just think for a moment...there is a reason why he won because of your party and the damage they did.
As former Republican senator Rick Santorum said, "we have an obligation to support our generals in the field, to give them the resources they need to accomplish the mission.That was not done by the prior administration. Let’s be very clear about that."
As to hanging out with gems, well If you live in a gated community or just decide not to go out to other parts of our community well then you choose that.
But I am hoping you are not saying its not out there.
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 30, 2009 @ 2:22 pm