Tom Cotton is a freshman Senator from Arkansas. He has an awesome pedigree. Cotton was born in Arkansas. His father served in Vietnam. He graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard and went on to Harvard Law School. After law school Cotton joined the Army and served two tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and was awarded the Bronze Star.
Cotton actually wrote something on the record while at Harvard, something Obama, despite being on the Law Review, really never did.
And he ain’t afraid. Not of the press, not of democrats and not afraid of dictators in Iran or the US.
Cotton authored a letter informing Iran that the Congress would have to approve any formal agreements or treaties. The letter can be seen here.
Cotton has taken a lot of fire for that letter, with the New York Daily News calling him a traitor. democrats (democrat being defined as someone with absolutely zero long term memory) conveniently forget a lot, some of which I’ve already covered, but there’s even more. In 1984 demcorats wrote to Daniel Noriega, undermining Ronald Reagan.
Cotton made clear the intention of the letter:
“We’re making sure that Iran’s leaders understand if Congress doesn’t approve a deal, Congress won’t accept a deal,” Cotton, 38, whose letter evoked a sharp rebuke from the White House, said Tuesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program. “Because we’re committing to stopping Iran from getting a weapon.”
Joe Biden laced into Cotton:
“This letter, in the guise of a constitutional lesson, ignores two centuries of precedent and threatens to undermine the ability of any future American president, whether Democrat or Republican, to negotiate with other nations on behalf of the United States.”
You can see already that Biden is wrong, but Biden is seldom anything other than wrong. If you leave out being a pervert, that is.
Cotton doesn’t suffer fools well and shot right back.
“Joe Biden, as [President] Barack Obama’s own secretary of defense has said, has been wrong about nearly every foreign policy and national security decision in the last 40 years,” Cotton said Tuesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” in a reference to former Pentagon chief Robert Gates, who ripped Biden in a tell-all memoir after leaving office.
“Moreover, if Joe Biden respects the dignity of the institution of the Senate he should be insisting that the president submit any deal to approval of the Senate, which is exactly what he did on numerous deals during his time in Senate,” Cotton said.
Barack Obama is a liar. He guaranteed that Iran would not get a nuke and of course, that guarantee was no better than any other Obama assurances.
Cotton is doing us all a big favor questioning Obama. Cotton is a hero. He’s got balls. I could see him as President one day.
I love this guy.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@Greg:Let’s see if I get this right, and Retire05, you might want to help me on this.
Now if I recall correctly, we had many arrangements and agreements in effect with Iran, and then along comes 11 February 1979, when the Islamic Revolution overthrew the government in Iran. Now according to these ‘honorable’ persons presently in Iran “All countries, according to the international norms, remain faithful to their commitments even after their governments change” so I’m gonna guess that Gullible Greg actually thinks that all those honorable Islamists in Iran fully upheld all existing agreements with the USA. If so, the word ‘gullible’ takes on a whole new magnitude of meaning. But then, that is likely not the only thing the Ayatollah and Greg agree on.
@Greg:
I know this is just gonna go right over your head, but an agreement by a president and a foreign country, without the approval of Congress is not worth the toilet paper it is likely written on. these other things Social Security, etc and things passed by congress and can be changed by congress. That’s always been the law. The president making unofficial agreements have never been within the law.
@Greg:
As you parrot the left, and that mental midget we call Vice President Biden blathers on about the open letter to Iran signed by 47 Republicans, let me provide you with a history lesson:
Biden also surely remembers how in 1998, when the Clinton administration was negotiating a U.N. treaty to create an International Criminal Court, [Jesse] Helms did more than send a letter expressing his opposition — he sent his aides to Rome to join the negotiations and make his opposition clear. . . Meeting with the United Nations delegates (with Biden’s aides present), we delivered a clear message from the chairman: Any treaty Clinton negotiated that did not give the U.S. a veto over the ICC in the Security Council was “dead on arrival” in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. However, unlike the Obama administration, the Clinton team smartly tried to use Helms’s opposition as leverage to negotiate more protections for Americans.
Helms did not simply write to foreign leaders explaining the Senate’s constitutional role in foreign policy. Together with Biden, he went to the U.N. headquarters in New York to deliver the message in person. On Jan. 20, 2000, Helms became the first U.S. senator ever to address the U.N. Security Council, where he warned of steep consequences if the U.N. failed to accept the U.N. reforms he and Biden had passed. And he explained to the gathered world leaders what a mistake it was to try to ignore the role of the Senate in foreign policy. Citing the example of Woodrow Wilson’s failure to secure congressional approval for the League of Nations, Helms declared, “Wilson probably could have achieved ratification of the League of Nations if he had worked with Congress.” Helms and Biden then invited the Security Council to Washington, where he gathered all the U.N. ambassadors in the old Senate chamber for a lecture from Senate historian Richard Baker on the Senate’s role in U.S. foreign policy.
By your own standards, Jesse Helms and Joe Biden should have been prosecuted under the Logan Act. Along with John Kerry who personally tried to negotiate with the North Vietnam, and also visited Daniel Ortega for no other reason than to express his opposition to Reagan’s policies on Ortega.
You liberals are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. You scream and stomp your foot over things you have done multiple times.
@Redteam #149:
“But a wedding cake is clearly a ‘prescription’ item?”
Was I talking about wedding cakes?
@George Wells:
yes.
I made my point very well, and I’m glad you noticed it. A doctor can’t be required to write a prescription to a homosexual, but a cake baker can be required to bake a cake for a homosexual. Tho neither may ‘be required’. So next time, just fill in the blank as ‘female’ and it’ll solve a lot of problems. After all, the meaning of words is not important.
@retire05 #120:
“when I called you a sodomist.”
Since you CLAIM not to be obsessed it sodomy, why is it YOU who bring the subject up so often?
What is so important to you about sodomy?
If sodomy isn’t the “Sky-Is-Falling” issue that you insist it isn’t, why keep bringing it up?
Sodomy is a settled right.
Gay marriage will very soon be another settled right.
What is the point of arguing either of these settled issues?
@retire05, #153:
What exactly are you attempting to establish here? That Republican members of Congress have a long history of attempts to undermine or alter the diplomatic efforts of Democratic presidents?
Helms seems to have been one to disregard past international agreements and promises. For example, he wanted to continue U.S. occupation of the Canal Zone, even though the United States had a formal and legally binding treaty obligation to turn the entire area back over to Panama after 1999. That goes well beyond holding presidential executive agreements in contempt.
You’re pretty much providing evidence for what I stated in post #150.
@Redteam #155:
“Was I talking about wedding cakes?
Yes”
Where? (Post, link, etc.?)
@Greg:
Joe Biden is a Republican? Who knew?
I guess your next excuse is that John Kerry, when he was negotiating with the North Vietnamese, was also a Republican. Or that Teddy Kennedy, who personally met with Russian big wigs in order to scuttle the negotiations of Reagan, was also a Republican.
You’re pathetic.
@George Wells:
You’re the one always bragging about being queer. Seems your the one obsessed with sodomy since you are guilty of being a sodomist. Being queer seems to control your entire life. How sad.
@retire05, #159:
Perhaps you have failed to notice that Jesse Helms and Joe Biden were not political clones, and seldom shared political objectives. My guess is that some crack-brained article has recently appeared on the internet, suggesting that the presence of Biden aids at a Helms-arranged meeting constituted Biden’s total endorsement of his positions and actions. You’re probably parroting that, so you really ought to drop the comments about parroting.
You’re also suggesting that any past meeting between an elected democrat and a foreign official was the equivalent of the bullshit Boehner and republican members of the Senate have recently been up to. If that’s so, why do you suppose intelligent observers, both on the right and the left, were so shocked by what all agreed were unprecedented levels of interference?
@George Wells:
too numerous to mention. Oh it might have been called something else, marriage, for example but it was a wedding cake. After all, names no longer mean anything, a marriage is no longer what it was, a female is no longer what it was, so, what does it matter if we call it a wedding cake?
@Greg:
Actually, I’m old enough to remember the traitorous acts of John Kerry and Teddy Kennedy. And when you say “probably” that’s nothing more than you confirming how clueless and painfully uninformed you are.
All? Really? But then, your opinion of who are “intelligent observers” would include Chris Matthew and Rachel Madcow. Or maybe you’re referring to Joe Biden himself who suffers from perpetual foot-in-mouth disease.
How sad that you can’t bring yourself to admit that Democrats have a long history of trying to usurp sitting presidents. You’re beyond help.
@Redteam #162:
You are getting sloppy. Go to bed.
@George Wells:
George, you are the one that insists that the ‘meaning’ of words is not important. I claim marriage is one man one woman, you insist it can be 2 he’s, 2 she’s or 2 it’s. I claim a wedding cake can be married or not. According to your reasoning, it doesn’t matter if you list yourself as a female, just because that’s what it ‘used’ to mean doesn’t matter anymore. Like ‘marriages’, what they ‘used’ to be isn’t important. being gay used to mean you were happy, now it can mean you’re miserable because everyone doesn’t agree that you’re a female, or married.
No, just because I’ve shown you’re not consistent, you don’t get to send me to bed. Did you or your shemale spouse change your last name when you ate your wedding cake?
@retire05, #163:
Try Chris Wallace of FOX News.
The criticism isn’t confined to the United States: European allies join in criticism of Republican letter to Iran
How about this opinion? Tom Cotton picked apart by Army general over ‘mutinous’ Iran letter
Some republicans have apparently become so out of touch with reality that they no longer have a clue they’re out of touch with reality. They crossed a line, beginning with the Boehner invitation to Netanyahu. You might want to view the results of the readers’ poll at the end of that last article.
@George Wells:
Your point about incrementalism is already being trumpeted by Utah’s gay community.
The Mormon Church has given itself an out by getting this ball rolling as far as they could go without being total hypocrites.
Now it will be up to individuals in court suing businesses and landlords until they get their way 100%.
But that will not be enough.
They are already hinting at the rest…..
What homosexuals here in Utah seem to also want is 100% acceptance, not simply 100% compliance with some brand new legal standards.
@Greg:
Not a fan. The acorn didn’t fall from the tree there. He and his dad are both liberals at heart.
Yeah, let’s just have Europe tell us how to operate under our own Constitution. No surprise that you are jacked over Europe being upset. You’d make a great Eurowennie.
Seems your Major General hangs out with some really radical left wing progressives. The entire board he sits on is filled with left wingers from the Center For American Progress and the Century Foundation. Since he himself seems to be a left winger, why would you expect him to support Cotton?
But Pelosi’s invitation to Calderon was OK with you, right?
Bet you loved his speech. He did a lot of America bashing.
You might want to view the results of the readers’ poll at the end of that last article.
Why? I read what you type and leftists are not know for originality so they sound just like you.
Still refusing to admit the truth about John Kerry, Joe Biden and Teddy Kennedy doing even worse things that simply penning a open letter.
You’re still an idiot.
There were 7 republican Senators who refused to sign the letter, along with all 44 democrats and 2 independents. By my count, you’re going to have problems passing any legislation intended to block efforts to reach an agreement with Iran. So, rant away. I’m curious what form the republican tantrum will take next.
@Greg:
So what? All that says is that those 53 Senators are caving to the illegal actions of the Community Organizer in Chief. They might regret that decision their next election day.
That is NOT how it works, dimwit. Obama is to present his deal to the Senate, and they vote to accept it or reject it. Considering how inept Obama is, I take the odds that some Democrats will reject the deal Obama cuts with Iran.
I’m still waiting on you to comment on the fact that John Kerry didn’t write a letter, he actually went to peace talks with the North Veitnam. Or how Joe Biden was involved in thwarting President Clinton. Maybe how Teddy Kennedy tried to usurp President Reagan by having actually conversations, not just writing a letter, to the Russian big wigs.
Your party is the party of subversion, and you are not honest enough to admit it.
Yes, you’re an idiot. And dishonest to boot.
@retire05, #170:
That’s how executive agreements work. They’re not something that the current President invented. You might want to look the topic up.
@Greg:
Peckerwood? Gee, is that the best you’ve got? I guess I’m supposed to now be crushed because Gullible Greggie got upset with me?
OK, peckerwood, tell me what part of the U.S. Constitution allows Obama to negotiate a deal, really a treaty, with any nation without the express consent of Congress?
If I read a two sentence opinion on that particular topic I would know more than you do. You are so damn clueless it makes me wonder how you manage to dress yourself.
Why do I owe a lying POS like you an courtesy? You damn liberals lie with abandon and then get your Hanes all waded up your rear end when you’re called on it. If you can’t take the heat, get the hell out of the kitchen. Frankly, I have no intention of ever being nice to a Marxist commie like you. You have no answer to questions I have ever asked you, always dodging by changing the subject, and now you’re whining because I can you what you are; an idiot. A Marxist Commie idiot. And in all the time you spend here, you have not proven me wrong.
So pound sand, Gullible Greggie. You continue to lie, and dodge actual fact, and I will continue to call you an idiot.
Too bad you didn’t edit your last post before I quote you. Just shows what an idiot you really are.
@Greg:
Sorry Bozo, it doesn’t work that way. The president has to get 67 Senators to ok his deal. What do you think his chances are?
@Greg:
Those are the ones written on toilet paper. As has been established an executive agreement is only a ‘feel good’ act of president that knows damn well the Congress is not going to ok his sell out. It has no force in law and is completely non binding. To be a legal paper, it has to be agreed to by 67 Senators.
@retire05:
He must have edited that out, I couldn’t find it.
@retire05:
He doesn’t even try to prove anything he says is correct, he just runs around pouring gasoline on his ass and trying to get away. He’s a typical Obozo Marxist. He’s rather funny trying to prove that Kerry is a real patriot (that went to North Viet Nam (their side) to cozy up with them against his country. He injured himself deliberately to get out of Viet Nam. He threw away someone else’s medals to protest LBJ’s war. Ole Greg is a real piece of work, about the same class as Lurch.
@Redteam:
Take a look at my response to Gullible Greggie in my post #172. Then check his post #171 from whence those comments came. The little weasel edited everything but the dribble you now see in his post #171. Like all progressive liberals, he’s a coward and not willing to back up what he says. So he changed it, thinking he could fool the stupid conservative. Just one problem, I blockquoted him before he could finish his edit.
Like all progress Marxist commies, Gullible Greggie is not only a useful idiot, he’s dishonest.
Ever read where Gullible Greggie answers any question posed to him? Nope. And ever see where he admits that the very party he supports is guilty of all the things he claims Republicans are even when give concrete evidence? Nope. Instead, he runs around with his tail on fire blaming others for the smoke.
I’m sick of it. I have declared war on every liberal/progressive/Marxist/Leninist/communist DEMOCRAT in America. If they want to lie, and pretend to be anything other than what they are which is liberal/progressive/Marxist/Leninist/communists, then they can just take the flack that comes with their position. Gullible Greggie claims he was in Vietnam. Makes you wonder if he wasn’t just part of Hanoi Jane Fonda’s security detail, doesn’t it?
@retire05, #177:
I deleted a few lines that I decided were both unnecessarily unkind and irrelevant. Rest assured, doing so was entirely for my own benefit.
More often I edit my comments once I’ve read them over simply because I like to say what I mean. I don’t always get my words right the first time. If you find that annoying, perhaps you should simply stop reading my posts.
@Greg:
But Greg….. what about Obama directly interfering in a negotiation by promising the enemy to simply hold out until he gets here and they will then get better terms?!?! Just like Ronald, the champion avoider of evidence of administration failure, you will do whatever it takes to avoid answering admittedly tough to explain questions.
The Republicans did nothing more than inform the Iranians to consider our terms carefully because a deal is not a deal until it is ratified by Congress…. a Constitutional fact. Obama, however, sent a message to the Iranians that Bush’s stern deal could be avoided by waiting for him to come along and then they can negotiate with a cupcake and get everything they want. Why, Greg, would that be his intention? What does he or the US gain by making it easier for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon?
Answer the question, Greg; why are you so upset with what the Republicans did when Obama actually interfered and endangered previous negotiations? His interference has brought us closer to a radical Islamic nuclear armed power; yet you worry about Republicans telling Iranians how our government works.
Of course, all this is academic because Obama has no intention of allowing the representatives of the American people to pass judgement on and plans, instead, to allow the corrupt United Nations decide the fate of Israel. But, if you would try and explain your blatant hypocrisy, that would be really nice.
@Greg:
Bull. You deleted almost your entire post and reduced it to the measly couple of sentences it now shows. And believe me, I have no doubt that what ever you do is for your own benefit.
Well then, perhaps you should proof read before you hit “post comment.” The problem with your habit of editing your posts is that often it totally alters responses to you so that they no longer make sense. This, Gullible Greggie, I also have no doubt that you do for your own benefit.
.
What I find annoying is your dishonesty, your refusal to answer questions put to you, your editing your posts to make others look bad, your refusal to admit that you are nothing more than a troll for Obama, your refusal to own up to the fact that you are a liberal/progressive/Marxist/Leninist/communist DEMOCRAT.
No, Gullible Greggie, I’m not going anywhere. I will stay here and destroy every comment you make. Perhaps if you get tired enough of having your own dirt kicked in your face, it will be you who goes away. Until then…………………………………
@retire05:
Hey, here’s a NEW question for Greggie, which i’m sure he won’t have ‘time’ to answer. Greg, since you find it so offensive for the Senators to write a letter to the Iranian, then it must really burn your butt that Obama gave money to a non profit US company who then transferred that money directly to the Obama campaign team that is running the campaign to defeat Netanyahou in Israel. That, of course, is highly illegal. The Senate is presently putting together all the details. There’s no question it happened, just all the details are not firm yet. I know that since you are such a ‘stickler’ for people in the US obeying the law that you will be insisting that Obama resign before his sentencing.
@Redteam:
It seems that Jeremy Bird, a campaign manager/field advisor for the Obama campaign has been dispatched post haste to Israel. Bird is leading a group, V-15 (Victory 2015) to see that Netanyahu is defeated.
You may have heard of Jeremy Bird before; he headed up the Wendy Davis campaign in Texas, sent here, I’m sure, by Obama to defeat the extremely conservative, Greg Abbott.
Let’s hope that Mr. Bird’s success in Israel equals his success in Texas.
@retire05, #180:
If you were to cease reading them and replying to them, you would no longer have to worry about your replies being nonsensical. Why should I alter my behavior to make things more convenient for someone who only wants to attack me?
Oddly, they tend to remain in spite of your destruction. Here’s a thought: Why don’t you just focus on saying what you want to say, and leave it to other people to say what they want to say, as best they can? What is said either makes sense or it doesn’t. Anyone who bothers to read a comment can decide that for themselves.
@Redteam #165:
“George, you are the one that insists that the ‘meaning’ of words is not important.”
No, I didn’t say that. What I said was that the meanings of words evolve over time. (That isn’t the same as “the meaning of words isn’t important.) If you are in doubt of that, Google “words that change meaning over time” and get educated. At any given point in time, it IS very important that the people who are using “words” understand their CURRENT meaning, so that the people WHO ARE LIVING TODAY can understand the meaning being communicated. If you use an archaic meaning that is no longer in use, you risk confusing your readers and you fail to convey the meaning you intend.
This speaks to your silly proposal to re-name one of each gay couple a “female.” The term in this sense is not in significant usage at this time, and if you use the word “female” in this way, you will confuse anyone who isn’t “in” on your little joke. If the idea you are proposing was worth a red cent, gays would have used it a long time ago to get married, and in fact some tried it, filling in marriage license applications with one male name in the “male name” blank, and one male name in the “female name” blank. It didn’t work. Clerks never accepted such applications for the obvious reason that neither of the two applicants was female. Gay males are not allowed in female restrooms for a similar reason. They are not female.
“I claim a wedding cake can be married or not.”
Well, you’re losing your mind.
“Did you or your shemale spouse change your last name when you ate your wedding cake?’
We did not have a wedding cake, because we are both diabetic.
We did not change either of our names, because neither of us consider the other to have become “property” of the other, and the last-name-change-for-the female” is a throw-back to what we consider to be an archaic property-rights ritual.
@Greg: Though you edited it out, it is still significant that you leftists think it OK to use racist terms while criticizing (or, more often, merely baselessly accusing) conservatives for using them.
@Nanny G #167:
I’m truly sorry for what some gay activists are pressing for. I understand that asking for too much is sometimes a successful negotiating strategy, allowing a “compromise” that gives both sides essentially what they both wanted all along, while giving the impression that each side was both firm and reasonable.
On the other hand, many gays have lived decades without any progress at all, and many died without seeing the wonderful advances in gay rights that are at hand today. I can understand how some of these people might own some residual impatience, and this may be clouding their otherwise more temperate judgment. I counsel them toward “incrementalism,” but they will do what they choose, and we will all have to live with whatever consequences obtain.
(Take note, Redteam: that is an correct-but-archaic usage of the word “obtain.”)
@Redteam, #181:
Here’s the FOX News meme-of-the-day:
Source: Senate panel probing possible Obama administration ties to anti-Netanyahu effort
My response to such statements generally starts with a question you tend to skip: What source?
Why, a source with knowledge! says FOX; A source familiar with the matter!
Please, FOX, give people credit for some measure of intelligence. You have yet to extinguish critical thinking entirely. They go on by making this assertion:
Could be seen as a rebuke by whom? The village idiot? Willingness to investigate an allegation is not a rebuke of anything. Probes are conducted to determine if anything improper really happened to begin with. Rebukes can follow, if it’s determined that something untoward really did occur.
It’s this kind of bullshit manipulation of public opinion that has turned FOX News into a joke. This isn’t how journalism works. It’s how propaganda works.
@Bill, #185:
Since I am of the Caucasian persuasion myself, my use of the insulting term peckerwood could hardly be racist. (Unlike those occasions when the insult was directed toward me by a much beloved black drill instructor.) That said, I deleted the remark after a bit of reflection. Unfortunately Quick Draw McGraw—who has called me an idiot on so many recent occasions that I’ve lost count—was already busily hammering out a reply. I deleted the word, but I’m not going to apologize for having lost my patience.
@George Wells: See if I’ve got this straight: no one changed their last name because it’s archaic, no one can claim they are a female because ‘archaically’ it would be incorrect. you want to use the term marriage, even though ‘archaically’ it’s not correct. gay males aren’t allowed in female restrooms because ‘archaically’ it’s not accepted.
So are you ‘for’ or ‘against’ archaic? I guess only if it suits your purpose (as everyone does, of course)
I’d like to point out that all they have to do is say that they feel like they are female, or are not sure of their gender, or that their gender is ‘other’.
Besides, if you can now ‘claim’ that ‘marriage’ is something it’s not: a man and a man, then you can claim a man is a female. If we are all free to use whatever word we would like to mean something new, then just call yourself a female and it’ll solve everything.
You can even call a ‘wedding cake’ a ‘marriage’, makes as much sense as calling a ceremony between two men a marriage.
@Greg:
But all your Soro’s sources always identify themselves and are always correct. Right, Greg?
Of course the story has been verified, it’s just the details they are sorting out.
@Greg:
Correctly so, I might point out.
@Greg:
It really chaps your ass that Fox is consistently rated as the most accurate, most trusted name in News. But I’m sure they don’t tell you that on PMSNBC. better watch that while you can, it won’t even be on the air much longer. It has a lower audience than LOGO.
@Redteam #189:
“See if I’ve got this straight:”
The only part you got right was “no one changed their last name because it’s archaic”.
All the rest you got wrong.
You get a big “F,” and you’re being set back a grade because you’re wasting everybody’s time in this class, including your own.
This thread isn’t about gay marriage.
I’d continue talking about it if there was any point to it, but you’re not learning anything from our discussion, you are just being silly for the sake of being silly, and I have no reason to waste our time keeping up my half of just being silly.
Keep amusing yourself with that ever it is you think you know about homosexuality, if that’s what you want to do, but I’m out.
@Redteam, #192:
Public Policy Polling explains why FOX comes out on top in an article accompanying the survey results:
Basically, FOX comes out on top because so many republicans believe every word they say. The top slot actually represents approval by only 35% of all respondents. This is kind of like having won more than half of all votes in an election where only 36.4% of all eligible voters showed up.
When they ask people about their least trusted news source, the picture suddenly reverses itself:
It’s best to listen carefully and critically, whatever source you’re most attentive to. The moment a person stops thinking for themselves, someone else begins doing it for them. It’s also a good idea to think carefully about the meaning of poll results. Public Policy Polling is said to have very sound methodology, but they can get entirely different results depending on how a question is asked.
@Greg:
Yeah, I am aware that when you liberals use a racial slur, it is OK because you are simply “allowed”, but a racist term is a racist term, is it not? If racism is to be fought, the use of racist terms and race-based attacks should be eliminated, should they not?
If a black calls another black a “n***er”, is he not calling that person the same thing a white person would be indicating? If I were to call you a “n****r”, would I not be indicating what I believe that word to describe applied to you?
The left is notorious for this and then they lead the charge against anyone else that might do such a thing or simply be accused of it. This proves that, to the left, race and racism is nothing but a political card to play for advantage, not something they (YOU) feel is inherently wrong.
I understand that once the left is found bereft of this weapon they use so often and so effectively they are done, for they have no sound basis upon which to defend their ideology (so they have to vilify everyone else), but I find the hypocrisy of it disgusting.
“It leads the way because of its continuing near total support among Republicans as the place to go for news- 69% of Republicans say it’s their most trusted source with nothing else polling above 7%. Meanwhile Democrats are split between a lot of different outlets when it comes to who they have the most faith in- PBS at 21%, CNN and ABC at 18%, and CBS and MSNBC at 12% all poll in double digits.” This is very simple to explain. Fox is the only outlet that is NOT a far left propaganda outlet, so Republicans and anyone else not a liberal sycophant has very few choices, while liberals have a veritable far left buffet to choose from. However, no one that is interested in what the facts actually are watch the corrupt MSM as they cheer-lead for the liberal ideology.
@Greg: Unlike you, I don’t question that info. The Republicans apparently found out a long time ago that they could go to Fox News if you wanted the truth. The poll clearly shows that the liberals don’t have any source they can trust. They know that whatever lib site they go to, they can’t trust the info they’re getting. As far as least trusted, that’s easy, all libs have found out that Fox is trustworthy, and knowing that the last thing the Dims want to get out is ‘the truth’, then they know they can’t trust Fox because they will put out the truth about Dims. (and anyone else also) So, thanks for putting up that info that clearly demonstrates my point.
@Greg:
Where did I say that I was worried about my replies being nonsensical? I quote you, and that allows any reader to know exactly what I am responding to.
Well there in a nutshell we have the typical liberal attitude; if one doesn’t like what you say, they should just sit down, shut up and let you have your way. Too bad I don’t want to do that so I continue to show you up for the liberal/progressive/Marxist/Leninist/Communist Democrat you are. If you can’t handle that, here’s a suggestion: LEAVE
It is clear that in your idiocy, you are unaware of how blogs really work. You make a comment, others are free to respond to your comments. FA is really great about allowing you your First Amendment rights, along with the rest of us. If you are not happy about that, well, Gullible Greggie, that’s your problem, not mine.
So you had a pang of conscience and that was what caused you to delete almost your entire post? You really expect anyone to believe that, Gullible Greggie? Really? And now you’re whining about the quickness of my response to you? Can you get any more petulant? And who asked for your apology? Certainly not me. I want you to actual start debating people and responding to their questions and comments, not just blather away parroting the liberal/progressive/Marxist/Leninist DEMOCRAT mantra.
But you won’t do that because you’re just not smart enough to actually debate with anyone. You are just a troll who comes here pushing your pre-programed talking points you have gleaned from DailyKos or HuffingtonPost and the DNC. Hell, a five year old girl is braver than you are.
Let’s see, just how many issues have you refused to discuss in this thread alone?
John Kerry – traitor – took actions to thwart negotiations of a sitting president
Joe Biden – took actions to thwart negotiations of a sitting president
Teddy Kennedy – took actions to thwart negotiations of a sitting president
These men did not just write a letter, they physically met with foreign leaders to thwart the negotiations of a sitting president.
I have more names if you want them. Jim McDermott is one.
BTW, Public Policy Polling group is just about as far left as one can get. There is no surprise that you used them.
@George Wells:
Whhaaaaatt?
Aren’t you the one that said that?
Are you saying that’s wrong? You don’t want to use the term ‘marriage’ or it’s not ‘archaically correct’?
Actually everything I said was basically only a ‘restatement’ from things you said. I will admit that it’s likely not something you’re proud of when it’s put into words. But hey, you’re the one claiming two guys are ‘a marriage’ even though you know it’s not true.
George, have you ever heard of an expectant mother being told she’s having an ‘other’? Seems as if there is an effort to imply there are three sexes, boys, girls and others. I haven’t heard of it, but since you travel in different circles thought you might have heard of it. But it will likely be ok since the notion of ‘boys and ‘girls’ is rather ‘archaic’, wouldn’t you say?
Silliness? Who me? You ever read anything Greg writes, or Rich?
Uh huh. So, who exactly is trying to make someone sit down and shut up?
Where do you think the survey results suggesting FOX News is “the most trusted name in news” came from to begin with?
Have you not yet realized that such comments have little effect on me? They’re never going to. Other people don’t tell me who or what I am. It’s wasted effort.
@Greg:
suggesting? They didn’t ‘suggest’ it, they made a clear statement. It’s not open to debate. Libs are envious, well, at least the ones that know the difference. Maybe 3% of libs know enough to care.