The Heartbreak of Liberalism

It’s easy, not to mention great fun, to ridicule liberals. But so long as you’re not totally devoid of the compassion gene, it’s hard not to feel sorry for them.

For instance, imagine you voted for Barack Obama in 2008 because you believed all the high-sounding hooey he spewed, ignoring his background and his associates. Because you gave him the key to your heart, you found yourself unable to complain about an additional five or six years of mounting casualties in Afghanistan, drone strikes, Guantanamo or even the Patriot Act.

You also felt you couldn’t complain about Operation Fast and Furious; tapping the phones and computers at the AP; the Benghazi massacre and subsequent cover-up; or the scandalous goings-on over at the IRS.

You can’t even condemn the President for subverting the Constitution by grabbing power from the legislative branch of government.

The fact is, liberals can’t even take Obama to task at a time when unemployment and under-employment are destroying the lower and middle class; ObamaCare is wrecking the world’s best health care system; and soaring energy costs are killing Americans trying to cope with winter storms of biblical proportions. And all the while, Barack and Michelle are carrying on like French kings and dukes just prior to Robespierre’s introducing the royal scum to Joseph Guillotin’s novel contribution to the world of pest control.

But before we waste too much sympathy on liberals, we should recognize that even Obama couldn’t totally destroy America without the assistance of like-minded mopes like Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin and Alan Grayson, all duly elected by voters who take obvious pride in being both arrogant and stupid.

Unlike the typical low-information liberal, even a child knows that when the Declaration of Independence states that all people are created equal, it’s not to be taken literally. The child, even one cursed with progressive parents, realizes that some people are bigger, stronger and faster. He or she may even realize that some people are smarter, born richer or are simply more ambitious, than others.

But what everyone should understand is that, ideally, every American is entitled to equal liberty and the opportunity to succeed, with the freedom to define success on his own terms.

What equality never means – except in the echo chambers liberals have where their brains were meant to be – is equality of outcome, as determined by politicians and federal bureaucrats. Such systems are inevitably totalitarian, with equality — except for the privileged few in authority — being one defined as equality of deprivation, fear and misery.

A reader of mine, Buz Chertok, reminded me that the Fifth Amendment calls for equal protection under the law, but Attorney General Eric Holder only prosecutes whites for hate crimes, even those involving intimidation of white voters. In addition, taking his marching orders from Obama, he refuses to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act or those laws dealing with illegal immigrants. That is why my ears perked up when I heard that Holder was looking to step down before the end of the year. My glee was short-lived when I realized how easy it will be for Obama to find a new hand puppet to head up the Justice Department.

Finally, I really liked Ronald Reagan. He had an amiable personality and he had terrific writers and, after four decades in front of the cameras, knew how to deliver a line. But, unlike some, I never regarded him as the conservative ideal.

As a two-term governor here in California, he raised our taxes twice. He signed the most liberal abortion bill in America. And along with Jerry Brown, he helped close down the state’s mental asylums, unleashing thousands of psychotics on our streets. As President, he let himself get snookered by the Democrats and signed the amnesty bill that opened the floodgates to millions of illegal aliens. What’s more, he did nothing to diminish the size and scope of the federal government. He didn’t do away with a single cabinet position or shut down a single federal agency. He couldn’t even be trusted to appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court. His two picks, Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O’Connor, might as well have been appointed by Jimmy Carter.

When you remove the rose-colored glasses and look at Reagan realistically, ignoring the famous grin and marvelous rhetoric, he was about as conservative as John McCain.

To find an inspiring model of conservatism, you have to go back to the 1920s and Calvin Coolidge. In 1920, when Warren G. Harding became the first of three consecutive Republican presidents, our national debt was $26 billion. By 1930, it had been lowered to $16 billion, thanks mainly to Coolidge, who was in the White House from 1923-1929. By comparison, when Reagan took office in 1981, the national debt was $907 billion. By the time he left in 1989, it was over $3 trillion.

Much of Coolidge’s fiscal success rested with his Bureau of the Budget, which went so far as to check the desks of federal employees to make certain they weren’t wasting stationery and paper clips, and to insist that bureaucrats receive only one pencil at a time, and not be given a replacement until they turned in the stub; a far cry from these days, when a single department, the IRS, was found to have wasted over $100 million last year alone.

Also, unlike the uberliberal Woodrow Wilson, who believed the black race was inherently inferior and deserved to be segregated, going so far as to have “Birth of a Nation,” D.W. Griffith’s celebration of the Ku Klux Klan, screened for him at the White House, Coolidge was dedicated to the notion of racial equality. He actually tried to get anti-lynching laws passed by Congress. Predictably, he failed because the Democrats dominated both the House and Senate.

Some people may be unaware of the fact that blacks used to vote overwhelmingly for Republicans, the party of Lincoln. That was until FDR wooed them over to the dark side by putting millions of them on the dole in the 1930s. It’s been 80 years and, proving that bribes always work better than shackles, they haven’t set foot off the plantation since.

Finally, it is to his credit that Coolidge, a taciturn New Englander by nature, was nicknamed “Silent Cal.” After five years of Obama’s endless speeches and lectures, don’t we all long for a president who’s not infatuated with the sound of his own voice?

©2013 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.

Author Bio:

Burt Prelutsky, a very nice person once you get to know him, has been a humor columnist for the L.A. Times and a movie critic for Los Angeles magazine. As a freelancer, he has written for the New York Times, Washington Times, TV Guide, Modern Maturity, Emmy, Holiday, American Film, and Sports Illustrated. For television, he has written for Dragnet, McMillan & Wife, MASH, Mary Tyler Moore, Rhoda, Bob Newhart, Family Ties, Dr. Quinn and Diagnosis Murder. In addition, he has written a batch of terrific TV movies. View Burt’s IMDB profile. Talk about being well-rounded, he plays tennis and poker... and rarely cheats at either. He lives in the San Fernando Valley, where he takes his marching orders from a wife named Yvonne and a dog named Angel.
Author website: http://www.burtprelutsky.com/
  • buckrodgers

    Liberals have done more damage to America then most people can imagane and it’s not untill reality hits them right between the eyes, do they start to worry, for example most Americans agree that nobody should be without healthcare, as long as their health care remains the same, liberals want women to serve in forward posistions in the milatary, but their not in a hurry to force every women to register for the draft, like men who are still required to do when they turn eighteen, liberals demand the right to compete in the PGA, at the same time the LPGA is fighting to keep them off their tour, liberals like Bill Mahr and Warren Buffet run around the country complaning that they don’t pay enough in taxes, the hire the best tax accountants money can buy, we all know about Al Gore selling out the polar bears for a billion dollars and we also know their are a lot of liberals in the media and Hollywood who think their something special when they run around the country labeling evertbody but themselves a racist, then return to their predomintaly white neighborhoods, where the get together with their oredomintaly white neighbors and complain about all the racist,it seems to me that the me me generation, anyone who was born during the Vietnam War who wasted their lives are trying to make their mark on society and it’s all an illusion. they want to live for today and not have to worry what happens tommorow.

  • Realist

    Libcult operatives faithful adherence to libcult dogma is, at best, specious and “fluffy”. The amount of fluff and disinformation the libcult acolytes need to spout in order to be able to assure themselves that the libcult dogma put into government policy IS working is simply hysterical.

    Obamesiahcare IS working!
    The sea levels ARE going down!
    Glo-bull warming IS causing this coldest winter in a hundred years!
    The IRS DID target the Tea Party but we’ll never admit it because we are libcult operatives!
    No you can’t keep YOUR insurance but your congress critters CAN!

    Libcult operatives are wading deeper and deeper into the inescapable quicksand of reality and there is no escape for the fanatical cultists!!!

  • info warrior

    It’s funny how right wingers characterize liberals. It’s obvious they need media personalities to tell them what to think and what to believe.

  • Rose

    If the liberals are so heartbroken, why am I happy and you so morose? Many liberals are quite pleased with Obama, whom We the People elected twice. And we liberals did not do it by ourselves. Independents helped. Women, some of them Republicans, helped. And nobody helped as much as the rabid right. You guys turned a lot of folks our way by extremist remarks and by putting forth some really lousy candidates. Next time it might help to have candidates who can do things like name one newspaper, think on his feet, and watch what he says about voters while at elite fund raisers.

    • Concernedmimi

      Rose, Rose, Rose; you poor little liberal progressive, are just another zombie who fell for Obama’s propaganda. Just keep watching for the moral of the story. Keep tuned in, dearie and you will soon learn a history lesson you can one day, tell to your ; whatever about how you helped elect the most inefficient, domestic & foreign policy no-nothing, community organizer and wonder just how you got duped.

      • Rose

        I am proud of my vote. Bin Laden is dead. We are out of Iraq. We are getting out of Afghanistan. He has not dragged us Into wars with Syria or any other country. We have health care for all. We are not being ruled by a Mormon Mafia or McCain and his tiresome cronies. It’s all good.

        • KC50

          Bin Laden is dead but not the men who murdered our ambassador and 3 other Americans in Benghazi. Obama didn’t drag us into a war with Syria but how embarrassing was his “red line” spiel? We have always had health care for all because no emergency room has turned anyone away. And, all liberals are not happy as many of them have lost their health care policy and can’t afford the unaffordable health care act unless they qualify for a subsidy. And in case you haven’t noticed, many middle class families are losing ground financially each and every day and Obama’s crushing policies have put a stranglehold on our whole economy. And it appears that since he has a phone and a pen (like most 12 year olds), he can make or change all the laws by himself and congress can go home. So you can be proud of your vote, but I am proud I didn’t vote for him either time.

          • Rose

            How do you know the ones who murdered the ambassador etc. are still alive? I had rather have a red face over a red line than rivers of American soldiers’ red blood flowing in Syria. I care as much for their lives as you do an ambassadors. Your naïveté about the availability of health care is startling. If that were true, you would not be bellyaching about ObamaCare, since taxpayers would be paying for everyone anyway. Millions have signed up for health care. It must offer them something. I do not believe Fox News propaganda. I admire the president for using all the powers given to him by the constitution to deal with GOP gridlock. The president does not control the global economy and spare me your fiscal responsibility speeches since you supported the big-spending Bush. Yep. I am proud as a peacock!

          • Tabitha Bliss

            You do realize more people have lost their insurance due to Obamacare than people that gained it from the program, right?
            — And by the way, I am one of those who now has no insurance coverage for the first time in my life, thanks to your Messiah. According to his exchanges, my family could qualify for about 14K in subsidies IF I made about 4K less per year!
            As it stands now, I cannot afford the replacement plan since O has jacked up the rates & I am far from the only one in this situation.. Hardest hit is the middle class, of course. So the way I see it now, is that my health insurance was redistributed to welfare moochers who now get covered for free.. And the wonderful thing is that I will have to pay a penalty for NOT buying O’s substandard, over-priced policy! And it IS substandard! O replacement policies wouldn’t cover the 3 hospitals in my area that I’ve been admitted to in the past!
            O’care = NO care.
            And why don’t you try selling your, “Healthcare for all” spiel to the cancer patients who’s insurance was cancelled thanks to O’care, only to be replaced with O’care policies that won’t pay for their specialists or prescriptions? I’m sure they’d love to hear it.

            We are now over 17 trillion in debt, have a hollowed out military that warns our basic, homeland defense is in danger, a program that’s destroying our nation’s healthcare system from the inside out & a lot more idiots on the dole in this country than before ’08 who will stay there & never be productive members of society again.
            Thank you progressives!
            You liberals are such idiots that are so far removed from reality, you really are exactly like Stalin’s useful idiots or the Chavez cult. You will go to your graves in complete denial of the facts that are right in front of you.
            You are absolute PROOF that liberalism IS a mental disorder!.

          • Rose

            Tabitha, I am not buying that bunk. Tell it to some of the others, but I don’t believe you for one minute. Nice try, though. What do you do for a second act? Praise Vladimir Putin’s potency?

          • sjangers

            That response is completely inappropriate, Rose. Telling another poster that a personal story they chose to share is a lie is never going to be acceptable behavior in a civil discussion. Doubt if you want. But if you can’t find a civil way to express your disagreement with another poster, you should really keep your thoughts to yourself.

            I’ve supported the occasional left-wing troll who visits this site- even one or two whose activity was, I suspect, subsidized by the DNC- because I think it’s healthy to have an exchange of different viewpoints. But there’s absolutely no room for the sort of rudeness and disrespect you displayed in this post when people are trying to have a productive exchange of views. That sort of intolerance only breeds more intolerance. So clean up your act. It might be a good idea to start with an apology to Tabitha.

          • legal eagle

            No room for rudeness by the right wing nut jobs who comment on this site or by Prelutsky the hater?

          • Rose

            I have been called a liar, a flake, a nut and lots of other things on these boards.

          • sjangers

            You shouldn’t be called a liar here or in any civil discussion unless there’s clear evidence that you are, Rose. Flake and nut job may be more appropriate expressions.

          • legal eagle

            I am called the same things on a regular basis…In the legal world calling someone a liar is frowned upon…saying that someone made a misrepresentation or an exaggeration is appropriate. What’s the difference?

          • sjangers

            The difference is a lie is a direct and knowing misrepresentation of the truth. A misrepresentation may not be deliberate. And exaggeration is a distortion of the truth and may be the result of misunderstanding or unintentional bias. But lies are intentional attempts to conceal or contradict the truth, a pretty important concept in our social, political and scientific tradition. A lie goes directly to the integrity of the person who tells the lie. Calling a person a liar is a direct attack on integrity and character and really should be avoided without conclusive evidence that the charge is accurate, else observers are left to ponder which liar may be closer to telling the truth.

          • legal eagle

            As there are different versions of “the truth” I would say your definitions are accurate but their applications are highly subjective….

          • sjangers

            In some instances truth is simply not open to dispute. When it could be, different standards apply. Application may be mildly subjective. But when in doubt, I’d recommend that anyone engaged in a civil discussion ought to err on the side of caution. There are many better ways to dispute an argument than to call the other person a liar, although few may be more satisfying. You just need to avoid giving in to your inner child, Eagle.

          • legal eagle

            It’s too easy to call people liars so if you object to the term I won’t disagree…However, the term is loosely used on this site daily so while I may agree with you those who, submit comments on this site, use the term daily as a political pejorative…

          • sjangers

            And in my self-appointed role as Miss Manners, whenever I notice a poster calling another poster a liar without sufficient evidence that they are, I will call them on their boorish behavior.

          • legal eagle

            Best of luck on your new job…..LOL

          • sjangers

            Thanks. Just make sure you don’t add to my workload.

          • legal eagle

            Aye Aye Captain..

          • sjangers

            We’re counting on you to set a good example, Eagle.

          • legal eagle

            BTW….How is someone supposed to get evidence? The exaggerations on healthcare premiums are well documented…Monthly premiums v copays v deductibles v max out of pocket…it’s complicated and many on the right either don’t understand or are purposely ignorant to make a point….

          • sjangers

            That’s a silly argument, Eagle. If I don’t think I can get evidence to support the charge, but I think you’re wrong, I should be free to call you a liar!? If I can’t get the evidence then I have to find another way to dispute your claim. If I can’t manage that, then perhaps I should just say nothing, because directly challenging the integrity of another person without sufficient evidence simply isn’t acceptable behavior in a civil disagreement. If you prefer a less civil form of disputation, lace on some gloves and make sure your health insurance premiums are up to date.

            The debate over whether the ACA is beneficial or harmful to individuals is complicated. And it isn’t helped by the standard that the President set when selling the American people on the idea. It’s pretty evident that the reality of ACA isn’t the same as what was promised, but the actual outcome is still rather murky.

            Whether or not all of the criticism of the law is justified is also complicated. I’ve no doubt that there are inaccuracies and misrepresentations among those criticisms, but I’ve also seen a fair amount of inaccuracy and misrepresentation in Democratic response to those claims.

            Some private citizens have been upset that the law is harming them economically and have described that impact. Supporters of the law have countered with economic arguments that demonstrate the overall cost to that person or family isn’t going to be harmful because reduced rates, increased coverage, subsidies that will kick in, etc. balance out the upfront cost to the person (and maybe the poor critics just aren’t bright enough to understand that).

            But understanding- or hoping- they have an equivalent amount of money coming in the future doesn’t offset the immediate and higher costs some people are incurring for their health care today. When they’re struggling to make ends meet and have to shell out more money for their health, it really doesn’t matter to them if the law promises that they will be paying less in the future. The promise that they’ll have to pay less doesn’t prevent creditors from hounding them today. It doesn’t prevent them from worrying about how they’ll buy food, or heat, or pay the rent when some of their health needs cost more today, and they can’t meet those needs without cash.

            The promise that it will balance out financially in the future may not be sufficient reassurance for people who have already seen a number of promises made by ACA supporters fall a bit short of original projections. They feel their uncertainty, fear and pain today, and being told that their complaints about the law are dishonest because it will all work out financially in the end does nothing to make them feel better today.

            Just because you claim that it’s a complicated issue, but the premium/co-pay/deductible/max out-of-pocket equation will balance out in the end, so they’re liars if the say the law is hurting them, doesn’t do anything to help them feel any better about it. You have a partisan agenda. They’re just trying to make it through another month on the limited resources that remain to them in the Obama economy. For many of them, it’s pretty frightening. All your partisan arguments to the contrary don’t change that fundamental reality.

          • legal eagle

            The fact is that people like to complain and that change is difficult particularly in policies affecting healthcare. The U.S. healthcare system is a mess and the ACA has not cleaned up the mess…At least Obama has had the balls to try to bring about some change, Whether the cure is worse than the disease is yet to be determined. I haven’t heard too many complaints from my family or friends and plenty of them are Republicans….

          • sjangers

            My situation also hasn’t changed much under ACA, Eagle. But I can see pretty easily where this law could- and almost certainly has- make things a lot more complicated for many Americans. That much was evident even as the law was being proposed. But there was a political desire to make it happen, and now the party that pushed it has to accept the consequences for their action. It doesn’t matter how much of the reaction to the law is driven by perception and how much by reality. President Obama and his supporters pushed for a political solution to a social problem, there’s no evidence that this law was going to net more winners than losers, they oversold the law to attract enough political support to pass it, and now they’re paying the price for a poor gamble. The problem I have with that is that many innocent Americans will also be paying a price for that gamble.

          • Integrity

            Distorting the truth to make a point is wrong, regardless of which side engages in it. Have there been some exaggerations? Of course, and that is wrong. How about acknowledging that many people have actually been adversely impacted by ACA? How about acknowledging that opposition to ACA may very well be based upon principle and not racism? How about acknowledging that many on the left voted for ACA without ever reading it? ACA is not complicated. In fact, it is quite simple. It is, and always has been, about more Government intrusion into our lives.

          • Integrity

            Your point is well taken. By her own actions, Rose has long waived any right to a civil discussion. Rose is a liar, easily proven by the overwhelming evidence that she unwittingly supplied while trolling on these forums. QED

          • sjangers

            Perhaps I should spend more time here, Integrity. When I visited during the past few weeks, I observed that Rose is a highly partisan, combative poster whose arguments and facts aren’t always consistent, but I haven’t seen evidence that any of her positions are deliberate misrepresentations of the truth.

            If you’re going to call Rose- or anyone else- a liar, you need to produce evidence that she has deliberately uttered falsehoods. A phrase like “easily proven by the overwhelming evidence that she unwittingly supplied while trolling on these forums” isn’t sufficient justification for such a harsh challenge to her integrity. You need to show specific examples where she deliberately made statements that weren’t accurate, and that she did so knowing they weren’t accurate. If you can’t do that, or if you won’t, then you need to withdraw the allegation and you should apologize to Rose.

            I understand the frustration of having this forum invaded by people who seem more intent on offending than they do on adding anything to the discussion. I understand they can sometimes be insulting and offensive, often harshly so. But we’re certainly not improving the quality of discourse, and we’re not doing any credit to ourselves, if we lower our standards of behavior and use similar tactics in return.

          • sjangers

            Direct personal attacks on another poster’s integrity, absent any evidence to back them up beyond wishful thinking, are beyond the pale, in my opinion. Burt saves his attacks for public figures and broad categories of individuals, which is appropriate to his role as a humorist and pundit. Check in with Stewart, Colbert and some of their ilk if you have any doubt about this. Most private posters avoid the sort of fundamental, personal attack that Rose directed at Tabitha, but I do call them out when I notice them.

            It’s been a while since I heard from you, Eagle. For a guy with your training, two false equivalencies in such a short message seems a bit careless.

          • Integrity

            Come on LE, is it not your intention to entice those type of comments when you post? QED

          • legal eagle

            I was responding to Rose’s claim that people were rude. I wasn’t solicitingg your comments…
            Art Leider

          • Integrity

            If you are scared, then say you are scared. QED

          • KC50

            Thank you.

          • KC50

            Are you by any chance related to Harry Reid?

          • Rose

            Tabitha, I will give you the typical GOP reply. Just grab your bootstraps, girl, and start pulling yourself up. You can do it! And I am sure you would never sink so low as to take a subsidy. Looks like you are in a jam, but when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Work your fingers to the bone to get what you need. It’s the GOP way!

          • legal eagle

            Care to tell us the specifics of your family plan? Deductibles v. Co pays v. monthly premiums v. Max out of pocket….Are you sure you’re actually paying more or are you exaggerating to make a point?

          • Integrity

            What happened to the Ambassador is a good teaching lesson for liberals. Obama had his back until it was no longer convenient to do so. Similar to how Hillary allowed politics to trump women’s rights. You are correct about the big-spending Bush though; I am still angry about TARP. You take naivete to a whole new level. QED

          • curmudgeon

            And dumb as a stump!

        • DanB_Tiffin

          http://www.usdebtclock.org
          Sure, it’s all good.

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      >>If the liberals are so heartbroken, why am I happy

      Ignorance is bliss.

      • Integrity

        And it was the chest thumping Republicans that caused her to become a liberal. She is even ignorant of her own posts! QED

  • gold7406

    BO represented the the perfect political astronomical syzygy for the left. The dems made a choice, what would be most emblematic of liberal ideals? The speeches, the the idealism, the promises, the man, the background, the history,
    the unknown. The dems went “all in” and continue to make excuses weekly for their own bad judgement.

    • legal eagle

      Like you made excuses for the disaster known as W. Bush?

      • gold7406

        not at all. he played the hand dealt.

        • Rose

          W. Left such a mess for Obama. It may take three Dem administration to clean up the Bush wreckage of the country. We need Hillary!

          • gold7406

            rose…or should I say julia. you must be living in an alternative universe or are living where you believe historical fiction or revisionist history.
            I wonder how this administration would have handled 9/11? Hand wringing, nail biting, speeches, kicking dirt, peeing in pants.
            This administration is cleaning up things? This administration took a bad situation and has made it worse. When Biden says, expanding food stamps is a success, you’re totally wrong.

          • legal eagle

            Here is the difference between Republicans and Democrats…Had Gore been President on 9/11 the Republicans/Fox News/Limbaugh/McCain etc. would have been attacking Gore on 9/12….Republicans don’t even acknowledge that 9/11 happened under Bush’s watch…Never heard a word from Fox News/Limbaugh critical of Bush or his NSA advisor Condi Rice….Did you?

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            lol. Oh, the fantasy that is your perspective on life…

          • legal eagle

            Great non-responsive response…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            What’s the point of responding to DNC propaganda?

          • legal eagle

            DNC propaganda? Care to be specific?

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Yes. Your above post. Specific enough for you?

          • legal eagle

            I still have no idea what you are talking about…DNC propaganda?? WTF

          • Integrity

            Of which you are a subject matter expert. Your tactic seems to be to attack Bush in lieu of defending Obama. Are you having difficulty defending the indefensible? QED

          • Integrity

            Then why did you vote for W twice? I thought it was the chest thumping of McCain that caused you to jump to the other side. You are too easy. LOL & QED

          • curmudgeon

            Why? Sounds like you have already destroyed enough of what made this nation good. Need Hil to put the final touches on America’s tombstone? You are living proof of the mistake made in passing the 19th amendment.

        • legal eagle

          So Bush was dealt 9/11? I guess LBJ and Nixon should be excused for being “dealt” Vietnam?
          Bush was not dealt Iraq…He chose to go all in…It was a war of choice….

          • gold7406

            will the full backing of congress.
            and your choice would have been?

          • legal eagle

            I and millions of others believed the war was a scam to get Iraq’s oil fields into the hands of U.S, interests….WMD’s were political cover…Trillions spent thousands dead and wounded for what? Regime change?

          • gold7406

            revisionist history is a wonderful thing.
            much of the wmd’s went to iran,just like the mig’s.
            you must be one of the people carter granted amnesty to, for running to canada during viet nam.

          • legal eagle

            Got any other GOP fairy tails? Maybe the WMD’s were stuck up Saddam’s butt?

          • curmudgeon

            Fairy tails or tales? Poor rebuttal at any rate. Liberals have such a wonderful set of blinders when it comes to defending the childlike ‘warrior’ they placed in the White House by trying to divert attention with the finger pointing at the evil Bush. Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.

          • legal eagle

            I hate to tell you this but, unlike Bush in 2000, the majority of American voters put Obama in office…If that’s a problem, for an ideologue like yourself, I’d suggest you see a mental; health professional before Hillary is elected…

          • curmudgeon

            Was it tail or tale?

            You are of course including all the votes Obozo received through democRAT voting fraud? Hard to beat the redistributive Santa Claus you retards find so awesome.

            You so Anti-American that you would elect a harpy like Mrs. Clinton?

            You obviously are deranged and delusional.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            And since Obama was elected, how dare the citizens of the United States actually take exception with anything he does! How dare they!

          • legal eagle

            You and your cultists take exception to EVERYTHING he does…..ie..When unemployment goes down you bitch about participation rates, when GDP goes up you bitch about deficits, when the stock market goes up you bitch about interest rates being low etc. etc. etc…It’s a culture of ideological whining…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            >>You and your cultists take exception to EVERYTHING he does

            Actually, I don’t… but you wouldn’t know that because you don’t actually read my columns. All you do is scroll to the bottom of every column on this website and spew whatever propaganda arrived in your Inbox that morning.

            >>When unemployment goes down you bitch about participation rates,

            BECAUSE it’s a big reason WHY the unemployment number is going down.

            >>when GDP goes up you bitch about deficits,

            First of all, I don’t time any column to go with GDP changes. Secondly, our deficits and debt are HUGE, and much of the recent deficit reduction has come from the sequester which Obama was adamantly against.

            I ‘bitch’ about stuff like this because I believe in this crazy notion called economic solvency. I’m a fiscal conservative who isn’t living in your fantasy world where there are no consequences that come with spending ourselves into oblivion. I also have a moral conscience about passing on this problem to my kids’ generation. I’m sorry you don’t.

            >>when the stock market goes up you bitch about interest rates being low

            I’ve never written about interest rates. Again, try actually reading my columns once in a while.

            You see, people like me confuse you because my natural inclination isn’t to gloss over reality in order to protect a man who makes liberals’ hearts tremble with his pretty words. I’m not ignorantly blissful over America’s decline because I care about America. As you’ve indicated many times, you only care about yourself and the bubble in which you live in. I’m glad your happy. Most of the country isn’t.

      • curmudgeon

        With able assistance from Dingy Harry Reid and Nana Pelousi?