The left, which necessarily includes the MSM, is doing to Palin what they did to Bush. Make stuff up and repeat, repeat, repeat. Truly disgusting.

Galoob-

"Great, I look forward to the article. Even though it will probably be an even longer string of epithets and ad hominem attacks without any facts refuting (or "refudiating") what I said."

Wrong again Galooob. The only truth to your spew is that you admit saying it. Do you drive?

That's a pretty through debunking J. Good work.

Me? I'm still working on the idea that there can be a militant, or a radical moderate. Maybe galoob will be by in a bit to explain it to us. All I can think of is that a militant/radical moderate is someone who sits on his ass in the middle of a fight and demands answers to nonsensical questions. That can't be right, and I sure wouldn't allow it in the meeting room.

It's great, watching this lady live rent free in the heads of the left.

It must gall them that she can live her life as the epitome of an American woman, never deviating from her principles. In contrast to the present occupant of the White House, she brings to these eyes a welcome sight.

If agreeing with her and espousing the positions she takes makes me a country hick extremist God fearing flyover scorned rube, I'll wear that description with pride.

Still pisses me that such a collection of scum is infesting the WH-but that looks to change in the next 2 election cycles. Then perhaps we can have the adults administer the country--unlike now. Time to draw a distinction between citizens who truly love their country, and those who just live here.

And I hope THAT gives the left major heartburn.

"You moderate your own due diligence and just cheerfully swallow and regurgitate their talking points...."

Nailed it. Just like that other echo chamber who hasn't been missed.

re: 5 and post

No I think you give galoob too much recognition there. Monkeys using touchpads have no diligence to moderate. Just note how unpredictable feces throwing versus eating is in the posts.

Wow, Jay Tea,

You keep reminding me why I began reading Wizbang. I admire the way your mind works as you shred the "moderate" comments and thoughts of galoob.

I am mocked because I read blogs but the cogent thinking that appears from so many writers helps me to keep my own mind sharp and my arguments clearer.

I also believe it is good to have people like galoob who give us just a taste of the other end of the argument as I can't abide actually visiting the left leaning sites very often.

galoob marginalized itself a long time ago, consequently I ignore it.

"Never argue with an idiot. They will draw you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Be a crude, dishonest commenter; get articles written about you. It's the Wizbang way.

Good fisking, but why give them the attention they crave?

Les, I used the tool as a tool. I used him as a cudgel to bludgeon down the BS he was spouting. My goal wasn't to make him look like an idiot, but to make him and everyone else who talks and thinks like him look like an idiot.

Which, basically, involved holding up a mirror.

J.

When my lib friends begin denigrating Palin, I always ask them about the whoppers Biden spewed at their debate. There were many, but if Palin had said the following [or something like it, leaving our the reference to Obummer] the press would have run her off the ticket. Yet, how many MSM stories talked about this? This never happened. And remember, Joe was added to the ticket for his foreign policy expertise
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/

BIDEN: When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, "Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don't know -- if you don't, Hezbollah will control it." Now what's happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel.

You're probably right JT, but it somehow seems distasteful to elevate the childish poo-flingers to the status of something comment-worthy.

Meh, whatever. Let the world see their BS in the sunlight, and laugh.

This is the problem with the big lie, especially when you have an msm megaphone. Someone spouts the lie that Palin wants to ban books, the MSM runs with it and before you know it galoob and Dane etal repeat it like it's true. JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY IT DOES NOT MAKE IT SO.

My, my.

Well, I'll give you credit for substantively replying, JT.

Who's the credulous one? When you cite Palin's book for the rationalization of the book banning effort, aren't you swallowing a lot?

Did Palin mention that she tried to fire the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, after she resisted the book banning request?

"Sarah said to Mary Ellen, 'What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?" Kilkenny said.

"I was shocked. Mary Ellen sat up straight and said something along the line of, 'The books in the Wasilla Library collection were selected on the basis of national selection criteria for libraries of this size, and I would absolutely resist all efforts to ban books.'"

This was reported in the Alaska media back in 2006, so it's not something cooked up recently. The American Library Association got involved to save Emmons's job as librarian.

Read more: http://www.adn.com/2008/09/04/515512/palin-pressured-wasilla-librarian.html#ixzz11sRqqt2b

The other bit of your credulousness is the "pro-life" bit. I'll take on faith that, as you say, she doesn't really want to do anything about abortion. Even though I would oppose it, I would have more respect for her if she did propose criminal penalties. Instead she wants to have it both ways - hard core rhetoric for the pro-lifers and the assurance it's all just a political posture for others such as yourself. Weaseling the issue. If you think abortion is homicide, aren't you compelled to do something about it?

On the mosque, she's just whipping up her Know-Nothing base. Again her position is vague and allows her to bash a religious minority without any outrageously unconstitutional substantive proposals. What she does say runs counter to the principle of religious liberty, for sure.

I had a laugh at your defense of wars.

How is the money spent? Well, military hardware, which tends to get blown up. The hardware comes from, mostly, American companies, which employ American workers to take parts and material bought from other American companies and turn them into the tools of war. War tends to be good for the economy -- it drives up domestic spending.

First, I am amused that you are a War Keynesian - that "stimulus" is fine as long as its building MRAPs rather than American roads. It's apparent that you are ignorant of military operations and maintenance vs. procurement budgeting. The cost of the wars is much more in consumables than manufactured hardware. The cost of the huge amount of fuel consumed, contracted food services and transportation (with Gulf Arab foreign contractors), land rental, etc. Do you know we are paying Iraqi sheikhs to rent land in Iraq? Through Commanders' Emergency Relief Fund, we have spent billions on roads and bridges in Afghanistan and Iraq. Through "Business Stability Operations" we spent billions on inefficient and corrupt state-owned Iraqi enterprises. The money is mostly being pissed away in the sand over there, not providing jobs here. We will have thousands of jobs for health care workers to take care of the wounded and permanently maimed and disabled, though, I suppose you would regard that as a stimulus.

I don't know if I have to give her credit for having a son in the Army, that was the kid's decision, but by the way, Palin's visit was only to Kuwait, hardly a dangerous place.

The idea that Iran is a threat to the USA is something I'll believe then they have troops in Cuba, rather than us having troops on their borders in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't think we need any more wars at the behest of Israel, it's time for them to negotiate a little rather than rely on us to spend blood and billions knocking out their enemies. America first.

In sum, Palin is just a fake-populist, ignorant opportunist, who could not serve out her term as governor and who dances to the tune of her neocon masters.

"She wants to outlaw abortion, which would create a huge class of criminals."

Jeebus...we wouldn't want to make people criminals that take another person's life.

roflmao

"JT, first Dane, and now galoob has been allowed to take up residence in your head. You're losin' it, man."

Jay needs people to hate. He creates these montsters in his mind and then lets that hate drive his work forward as a motivator.

Hate fuels the right wing agenda, and motivates them. Karl Rove knew that and used that to best advantage to get a puppet alcoholic elected to the White House for 2 terms.

But there's a difference. Jay, you're no Karl Rove! Jay and Drummond and the other hate monkeys on this site are the people folks like Karl Rove, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin manipulate. They're just puppets also.

Calling those who seek abortion "murderers" is a prime example of how the hate monkeys try to turn American against American.

Palin's political chances were setback considerably when she quit her term as Alaska Governor mid-term so she could cash in on her recent fame coming out of the 2008 elections. She has admirers... among the sick and twisted hate monkeys, but she'll never get elected to national office.

And Karma is a bitch, isn't it? Hate monkeys losing their jobs, failing from illness and falling over from heart attacks, allowing themselves to be consumed by their hate and letting it influence their lives and the lives of their family and children.

Jesus taught us to let love rule our lives, and yet the people who are the loudest in their claims of following Jesus are the ones who just hate liberals, and hate Obama, and hate Nancy Pelosi, and hate ObamaCare, and hate Harry Reid, and hate unions, and hate educators, and hate the media, and hate intellectuals, and hate the Black Panthers, and hate hate hate....

They'll hate the suggestion that their bad luck is a product of Karma. And they'll hate anyone who suggests it.

Dane- "Hate monkeys losing their jobs...(snip)"

Raaaaacist! Still proving my thesis day after day. TUVM.

Mr Tea, do you have a comeback for Galoob's comeback?

Because I think we both know who made who "look like an idiot" on this particular thread.

If we go to Galoob's reference, we find is much to do about nothing. Shakespeare would be proud. But, Galoob is hoping we won't actually read the reference. He clearly did not.No one can point to any books that were suggested to be banned. No one can point to any treatment Emmons received that was different from what other received. In other words, the story is making up smoke hoping to find fire. Galoob, though, see fire that does not exist. Do not call 9/11.

No one can do anything about abortion unless they are on the Supreme Court. I put this in the same category as Cuomo running ads that if he is not elected, abortion will be banned in the State. Right, this is the New State Attorney General running these ads. Besides Gallob, abortion on demand is a minority position in this country. Get back to me when your position is the majority position. Until then, many, many of us use Artistotelean metaphysics to conclude that a human being is instantiated at conception and given the normal course of events will almost always produce a human being.

Her position and other's position on the mosque is quite clear. If Islam is truly the religion of peace, they would refrain from pocking a stick in the eye of "Ground Zero". I am truly surprised you cannot seem to understand that position. Do you not understand it or do you choose to ignore it?

There is no such thing as a "war Keynesian" (except to Krugman and he is still wrong). In fact, Keynesian economics does not work. It has never worked and it never will work. Our political class has never even given it a try in that they will not run surpluses in good times. They spend, spend, spend.

Will you believe that Iran is a threat to America when they detonate an atomic bomb and/or put it on one of their missiles and aim it at Europe or Israel. Is your warped little definition of threat to America restricted to the physical land mass of the United States. Good luck with that. We fought WWI and WWII for reasons other than a direct threat to our land mass.

You are a very weak debater. Most of your debate consists of glossing over the inconvenient facts.

That galoob is in fact a lying leftist piece of human detritus is hardly "stop the presses!" material.

Likewise for the rest of Comrade Obama's little troll corps, despite Jay's occasional fondness for one or another of them.

I keep telling him to get a kitteh instead. They're much cuter, and they cover up their own poop.

No one can do anything about abortion unless they are on the Supreme Court.

Uh-uh. You could propose and enact a constitutional amendment which bans it, or leaves it to the states, through the normal amendment process through Congress and state legislatures. Same as booze was banned and un-banned. Why isn't Palin leading that effort? Because JT was right, she's just posing.

There is no such thing as a "war Keynesian" (except to Krugman and he is still wrong).

JT proved there is such a thing. Keynesianism is the economic doctrine which says that government spending on manufacture and construction that provides jobs and a multiplier effect through demand is "good for the economy" War Keynesianism is when you believe spending only on military procurement and construction is "good for the economy." Now, JT did say this:

Yup, wars have to be paid for. Wars are expensive. Wars cost a lot of money, that isn't being spent in other areas.

But think about that for a moment. How is the money spent? Well, military hardware, which tends to get blown up. The hardware comes from, mostly, American companies, which employ American workers to take parts and material bought from other American companies and turn them into the tools of war. War tends to be good for the economy -- it drives up domestic spending.

Now that is about a Keynesian or Krugmanite statement as you will find - government spending (with money borrowed from China) "is good for the economy -- it drives up domestic spending." So JT is a "War Keynesian." The only problem is it's wrong substantively - the war money is mostly being spent on Gulf Arab and Pakistani contractors providing fuel, transportation and food, procurement has actually suffered because of the cost of operations and personnel -- and wrong morally, because troops have to die.

Moderate.

That's what liberals who don't want to lose their conservative friends call themselves.

Hell, I'd just be glad for JT to explain why spending government money for "War tends to be good for the economy -- it drives up domestic spending" and why spending government money for roads, bridges, medical research or schools in the USA is bad socialist stimulus that hurts the economy. 'Cause I never got that principle taught in my economics classes.

Wow, Jay Tea - you really know how to bring out the raging lunatics. Let's see, from galoob's post at 2:25, we learn that Palin could ban abortion, but she isn't leading the charge for a Constitutional Amendment to do so, ergo she's really only a "poser." From this, I guess galoob's earlier statement that "[s]he wants to outlaw abortion, which would create a huge new class of criminals" is false, because she's really just a "poser." Nice debating technique.

Mr Caird:

One, it's "much ado about nothing," not "much to do."

One who claims to use "Aristotelean metaphysics" to arrive at their position on abortion should learn to spell "Aristotelian."

And one who calls another a "weak debater" should probably avoid strawman arguments such as "abortion on demand is a minority position in this country... Get back to me when your position is the majority position." See, because Mr Galoob never called for abortion on demand, or indeed took any position on abortion at all. He simply accused Palin of wanting to ban abortion, later seeming to concede that she doesn't really seem to want to ban it badly enough to actually DO anything about it, beyond using the issue to whip up the rabble.

Your argument that Keynesian economics does not work should be addressed to Mr Tea, as he is the one claiming that a bloated military budget is "good for the economy." Not Galoob. Who, again, is the weak debater?

Maybe you consider Mr Gravitas Emeritus Addison a "strong debater." After all, calling people names and referring to the President as "Comrade Obama" seems like the debating style most Wizbang commenters prefer.

So, laws create criminals. What brilliance! All we need to do to eliminate crime is revoke all laws. Why didn't I think of that? Sheer genius! Progressives are such deep thinkers. I am truly humbled.

So let's see - is Snopes.com a rightwing shill organization?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

"Given that, as yet, there is no documentation of any books having been banished from the Wasilla library by Mayor Palin, or even of which books she may have had in mind when she broached the subject, whence comes the considerable register of tomes now being circulated as "the list of books Palin tried to have banned"? The purging of the selections enumerated here from a public library would surely outrage any educator or book lover, with the listing including classics of literature by authors from William Shakespeare to William Faulkner, works by popular contemporary writers such as Stephen King and J.K. Rowling, and even such seemingly bland reference works as Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary.

"Palin herself, qquestioned at the time, called her inquiries rhetorical and simply part of a policy discussion with a department head about "understanding and following administration agendas"."

Seeing she didn't ban any books - it's hard to see just how that's supposed to be indicative of anything.

Re abortion - I'm against abortion - but I want it legal. Simply because I'm against it doesn't mean that I want it stopped - because I can't determine for others what the best course of action in that case is, and I've seen nothing indicating Palin wants to ban abortion.

She's pro-life - but if anyone (of either party) were to bring up an amendment looking to ban abortion, I'd vote against it.

So why was the department head threatened with termination? And why did Mayor Palin relent after the librarian was defended by the Library ASssociation?

Where's your source for that, Bruce? Apart from Kos, of course -- I've documented that site's history of just plain making up shit about Palin and spreading it far and wide.

In her book, she gave a perfectly logical and plausible explanation for the whole story that is consistent with known facts. Yours, on the other hand... not so much.

J.

Here's galoob's original quote: ""...her record from Wasilla was one of trying to ban books from the town library." That is patently false. The only thing that can be said with certainty is that Palin inquired as to the process of removing books. To conflate that to "...trying to ban books" is wrong.
Suppose I was elected to city council. And suppose that I, and some of my supporters, do not believe that public funds should be spent so that people can sit in front of a computer screen at the library and look at porn. Suppose I make a couple of inquiries as to how the library could limit access to sites on the library's computers. Suppose, after some reflection, I decide not to push the issue - for whatever reason. Do I now have a record of "...trying to ban computer access at the town library?" I don't think so.

Yeah....that's some "moderate"

I'm getting tired of these people's lives...

"But think about that for a moment. How is the money spent? Well, military hardware, which tends to get blown up. The hardware comes from, mostly, American companies, which employ American workers to take parts and material bought from other American companies and turn them into the tools of war. War tends to be good for the economy -- it drives up domestic spending."

Sorry to take this out of context of your post, (which was otherwise on the mark) but this is a variation of the broken window fallacy. Economic activity on its own does not create wealth unless an item of wealth remains in the end.

Yes, for another time I agree with you Bruce, I DO think we all know who made whom look like an idiot.

My big problem with Palin (apart from her alleged meanness and prejudice) is that she doesn't understand or wish to understand the modern world or even prehistoric world except through the prism of the bible belt of Wasilla. She is willfully ignorant. She allegedly (but would have to) think that human beings coexisted with dinosaurs. Palin said "she had seen pictures of human footprints inside (the dinosaur) tracks," She wants 'intelligent design/creationism' to be taught in public schools on a par with evolution. She has a clear misunderstanding of the constitution and the abiding political theory/principles of our founding fathers.

Palin only a month ago, during the National Prayer day,

Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant- they're quite clear- that we would create law based on the God of the Bible and the Ten Commandments, it's quite simple.

I doubt she has read the full Ten Commandments (what they have to do with the Constitution?) but as a rightwing Pentecostal evangelist she must believe "the end times are coming".

As someone who is to the right of Ariel Sharron, on the Middle East, with her finger on the nuclear button, Palin could make those words prophetic. And her proud credentials to conduct US foreign policy is laughable. Remember all the GOP and Palin talk about the inexperience of Obama. As her chief cred, just being on a Russian flight path doesn't cut it. Let'a face it, she isn't taking any courses to further her knowledge of the world. She is spending her time cashing in on her VP exposure.

Everyone on the left considers themselves to be a moderate.

Oh, Steve. Huffington Post? I went to the original article. The dinosaurs thing is single-sourced, and countered by several others saying Palin preferred to not discuss such matters publicly. So I don't buy it.

I also don't get the sheer hysteria on both sides of this particular fight. I consider anyone -- on either side -- who gets excited about this in a political sense and uses it as a litmus test on candidates as a useless idiot.

Further, Palin never ONCE tried to impose her religious beliefs through her office. The original article talked about how a judge ordered Alaska to offer same-sex partners of state employees benefits, and Palin deliberately chose to not fight the case.

Alaska is a unique state, and its governor has unique challenges. It has no borders with any other states, but does have two foreign nations as neighbors. She had extensive dealings with Canada, and always had to remember Russia was a hell of a lot closer than any of the other 49 states.

Also, note that she said "based on," not "based exclusively on." The 10 Commandments have had influence on secular laws for millennia. You wanna argue that the Constitution doesn't draw from them?

Thin gruel, Steve. Very thin gruel. Tell us some more about how Obama was so much better qualified than Palin was -- I found that especially entertaining when I remembered that Palin wasn't running against Obama. It was Obama vs. McCain, Palin vs. Biden.

J.

"Everyone on the left considers themselves to be a moderate."

35. Posted by Ken Hahn

Bravo, Ken!

And, these fools think they are smarter than Sarah. They get their news (and talking points) from saturdaynightlive. Heh.

Hey, JT, I guess we've established that you're a War Keynesian/Krugmanite, no?

So if Palin is wrong about the 10 commandments why are they in court rooms all over the country?

Yes Palin was careful about imposing her, to me, narrow-minded religious views, when governor or mayor. The lifestyle of her daughter must have helped. Obama vs Palin or another Tea Party candiate would be delightful clear choice.

Some of the tea party ideas are acceptable, deficit reductions, healthcare anomalies for businesses, less pork barrel, more transparency but they keep throwing up engaging but very foolish candidates, In 'gotche campaigns they are in big trouble, when they get into veer into social or science issues when they feel they must appeal to their base. Have you ever heard of a scientist, such as' paleonologist', being a member of the Tea Party,?

Troll night at the Wizbang. JT must be hitting a home run.

So, Steve, she was "careful." Does that mean that she understands and respects the separation of church and state, or it was all part of her grand plan (including a failed run for veep) to become president and impose her idea of theology?

As for your intellectual snobbery vis-a-vis the Tea Party, how about a genuine rocket scientist?

Ruth McClung. Born-again Christian. Tea Party attendee. Congressional candidate. Physicist. Rocket scientist.

Remember that name, Steve. In a few weeks, there very well be an (R-AZ 7) after it.

Oh, and her opponent's a certain Raul Grijalva, whose name has been getting a very unhealthy amount of attention lately... it just gets better and better.

J.

I believe it was the friezes, that Palin and O`Reilly were talking about. I recall it was the enlightenment thinkers such as Thomas Locke, the 'social contract', who really influenced the founding fathers. The enlightenment was about the rule and role of reason, rather than unquestioning subordination to authority and the church. I can't say what they would have made of Sarah Palin, and this was before the discovery of modern medicine, evolution, genetics, astrophysics. Doctors even killed George Washington by withdrawing far too many litres of blood-the treatment of the day- when he caught a cold riding.

I didn't know you could be a rocket scientist with just a Bachelor of Science but good for her.

As for Sarah Palin, her theology will certainly inform her Middle East policy. It already has.
Palin Getting Middle East Policy Advice from Billy and Franklin Graham'

Sarah Palin recently explained (in 2009) that Israel's illegal settlements should be expanded "because that population of Israel is, is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead."

There is Palin's reality, and way of thinking? And you would like to see her president?

Think Progress now? Well, Steve, I guess that's a step up from Puffington Host...

Steve, try to follow the dots. The current line of BS the Palestinians are pushing is that the expanding Israeli settlements in the West Bank are an obstacle to peace. Building new homes and whatnot.

Why would Israel be building all these new settlements? Because they're experiencing a population boom. Partly from sabras (native-born Israelis), partly from a lot of immigrants.

Yes, the US is the country with the biggest population of Jews, but Europe is suffering a very unpleasant resurgence of anti-Semitism. Partly from Eastern Europe, partly from the growing Islamic segment in Western Europe. You probably haven't heard much about it, but it's real.

So, in other words, Palin was accurately describing the situation in Israel.

Does that mess up your prejudices and intellectual snobbery, Steve? Sorry. Perhaps you should move from the "reality-based community" and into reality.

J.

Bruce-

"So why was the department head threatened with termination? And why did Mayor Palin relent after the librarian was defended by the Library ASssociation?"

More importantly. Why does Bruce never end up with a positive vote talley?

By the logic of Palin, the Palestian demographic presures are obviously greater. and they are fenced in the Gaza strip, can't leave or get out.

But Sarah Palin is at least better than the ranking Republican representative on the FCC, John Shimkus R of Illinois see clip of video that's "the infallible, unchanging, perfect word of God," in refuting anthropic climate change -"only God will decide when it is over for the earth, with loud trumpet calls "etc

No Sarah doesn't go that far, even though her 'dominionist'/christian supremacy Wasilla church commands it, -there is nothing human beings can do to alter the earth`s fate, the coming end time- but the Tea Party may have a new standard bearer in Shimkus. He already is attending their rallies.

Looks like galoob got as many friends as he could to stop by to play with the comment scores. Those scores mean so much to some people. So much so that I even have my own fans that single out my comments. Love you!

Steve, at 9:16 says: "Some of the tea party ideas are acceptable, ... but they keep throwing up engaging but very foolish candidates." Come on Steve, give the Tea Party some slack. It's only been in existence for about 18 months. You can't expect it to come up with candidates like the D party, which has been in existence for about 200 years.
I mean, how can you compete against stellar candidates like South Carolinian Alvin Greene, currently under indictment, or 18 time US Rep. Stark, who responded, when questioned as to what, if any, limits the Constitution placed on the Federal Government's power: "The Federal Government Can Do Most Anything In This Country." Or, Representative Pelosi, who famously said of the Obamacare Bill: "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."
Come on Steve - it'll take a little time to come up with candidates who can compete with these guys.

Steve, the Palestinians in Gaza have a remarkably high standard of living for "ghettoized, apartheid, trapped, oppressed people." And despite the terrible, horrible, brutal, racist blockade, they still manage to get in plenty of rockets, mortars, and other weapons to attack Israel.

Do NOT get me started on how the Palestinians are the victims of their own horrible choices, time after time after time after time again. Their national motto ought to be "we never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity."

So right now they're breeding up a storm, to create more and more and more shaheed to wage war against Israel? Shrug.

J.

Tea Party Candidates are "foolish" ha that's just plain funny. Good list started but here's a few to add, Joe the brain Biden (you remember him he say FDR go on TV to calm the nation in 1932), Alan Greyson (#1 foolish politican), John Conyers (let's have a pretend impeachment in the basemnt) and the big one BHO (let this be the day that the oceans.... blah blah blha.) The Republicans have their share too so it's just silly to pick on the tea party.

Yes Jay, you have made this argument up before; the Palestinians, they are their own worst enemies and have kicked the ball way because of their weak leaders, particularly Arafat who walked away from Camp David, but why should a entire generation suffer? And since when has there been a courageous, smart but humane leader. I can hardly think of one, not even Churchill.

The Jews are arguably the most sophisticated, national group in the world. Why in 1933, even when doomed after Kristallnacht or the Night of Broken Glass,"
did no country, apart from the UK, want to accept more than their measly quota of Jewish immigrants/refugees? Our leaders in the West were timid and afraid of the reaction of their own anti-semitic citizens, if they werren't anti-semitic themselves.

Since 1900, Jews have won 178 Nobel Prizes versus like one, Arafat for a dubious Nobel Peace Prize. Not an equal playing field, one side is mainly operating on the cutting edge of the contemporary world, the other stuck in the eighth century, that is until the fundamentalist orthodox right-wing Jews continue to threaten any peace plans as do their extremist counterparts on the Palestinians, Hamas.

Galoob,

Both your points are wrong. One cannot get a Constitutional Amendment on abortion through both Houses with a 2/3rd's majority. Hence, working on a constitutional amendment is a waste of time. You might better spend your time looking for a Constitutional Convention. One can, however, work to take the federal government back out the abortion funding
business.

Second, that is not a Keynesian statement. First there is nothing about a multiplier, nor is there any attempt to look at alternative uses. Not many people agree with Keynes that spending money to dig a whole and then fill it up again is a Keynesian stimulus. Think opportunity cost.

@Bruce Henry,

Not much of a counter argument. On the one hand, you complain about a typo in "Aristotelian" and the other is a complaint that Galoob does not have a determinable opinion on abortion. Tell you what. I will bet my house against your house that his opinion is abortion on demand ought to be available, on demand. Ya' wanna bet?

The funny part is you then do something very similar, but worse, by claiming "Mr Tea, as he is the one claiming that a bloated military budget is 'good for the economy.'". No, he didn't. First, "bloated" is your word. He said the money is spent on domestic hardware and stays in the economy. But, lots of that money is spent in the theater and in logistics to get to the theater. He said nothing about a multiplier and without a multiplier Keynesian economics is worthless.

Walter Cronanty says that .... the Fascist Party Left and its Goebbelsesque propagandist/pamphleteer Pravda "press" is doing to President-Elect Palin what they earlier did to the president Bush.

.... Tell the BIG LIE and repeat, repeat, repeat ....

Sure.

Essentially, that is, nothing has changed since the beginning of the 20th century by which time in the form of the first "progressives" the manifestation of evil that -- assisted by the attentions of the war-profiteering traitors, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Johnson, Billy Bubbah Blythe and second-generation traitors Gore and Kerry et al -- has morphed into the vast RICO-racketeering organized criminal empire that prefers we call it by its street name, the modern "Democratic" potty.

Was she other than a feet-on-the-floor humble person, President-Elect Palin might be flattered. For the more that mob envies you, the more it fears you -- and the more they'll hate you. It's what lizard-brain-driven do.