Point taken Dave. You are correct with your assessment.
I still find his gaping ignorance unbelievable. He is just one of several examples as to how the GOP is working itself into irrelevancy. Santorum is another. Anyone thinking Perry as well?...
Lets stop and think for a moment; lets think about the message rather than always focusing on the messenger.
Prior to 9/11 was there any "credible evidence" that Al Qaeda was planning on using commercial jetliners to plow into buildings and kill thousands of people?
Of course not, we all would have laughed at the thought.
So, what is so absurd and stupid about the idea of people having babies in the US and then training them to martyr themselves?
That idea is not any stranger than the idea of not wanting to know how to take off and land a commercial jetliner...just want to learn how to fly one that is already in the air...
Besides, Michelle Malkin got her citizenship by being born in the USA while her parents were students here....
Sure would be nice if we could send her back to the Philippines.
The fact is WE were not aware what Bush had and didn't have at that time...
Just like we are not aware of what Obama has in regards to "terrorist babies"
Considering the recent Boston Marathon bombing, the flipping of the muslim military psychiatrist who is responsible for the Ft. Hood shootings and the fact that Hamas in Palestine and Al Qaeda in Pakistan have strapped bomb vests on kids before the idea of terrorist babies is not and should not fall outside the whelm of possibilities.
Now, having said that even the most logical of messages in the hands of Louie Gohmert can sound crazy....
Now, don't go run off and make this some big conspiracy. The reality is that AL Qaeda is weaker than they have ever been. When you got to break out your old followers from prison to get the expertise you need then that is a sign of weakness...no new followers with the desire and or moxy to fight like the old guard.
That's a positive and a sign that AL Qaeda doesn't have the support that it once had within the Muslim community.
The protests in Eqypt are also a good sign...because one side represents the Muslim Brotherhood and the other represents a more secular desire.
Democracy is messy....
So, all in all, Obama is doing a fine job in regards to foreign policy, its hard to walk a fine line in such tumultuous times but you gotta "stay the course" and let things play out.
First, I don't do conspiracy, I leave that to wd/DS and EricDondero of the Libertarian Republican.
Second, I'm not convinced yet he is doing a "fine" job at foreign policy. He certainly is at this point is doing no worse than his predecessor.
Third, I agree democracy in the pure form is a messy business being only a step away from anarchy. Which is why a republic is far superior.
Obama has just over three to stay his course. If at the end of his day things are going well, America remains secure, and the global situation has improved he will have insured a positive FP legacy.
Don't wait for the MIC neo con militarist type in the republican party to agree with much of this discussion.
Too bad the fiscal picture and the economy still isn't so rosy. But, he has three years and three months. All we can do is wait it out.
And the fact that the unemployment rate is at its lowest since the Bush administration's financial disaster--7.4%
And we've had 41 straight months of job growth.
Now we all know there are still huge problems, but to ignore the good news is to show stubborn partisanship, we know you try to avoid that.
Think of this: President Obama is chipping away slowly and surely at the problems. Imagine how much better we'd be doing if the two political parties cooperated.
That's the real tragedy.
We have an opposition party right now whose only goal is to defund a law that was judged constitutional by the SCOTUS last year and has helped insure over 30 million Americans. And the GOP wants to do that without a plan to replace it.
That's the definition of insanity.
40 times they've voted for a repeal of the law; and 40 times it's gone nowhere.
How exactly does one take the comment of RN about the economy and the response of Shaw's and respond to both and at the same time address neither?
The economy is a disaster. But this economic disaster has been a long time in coming; like all the way back to 1980.
The supply side, get rid of regulation, government as an empowerer of big business, special interests, and the wealthy, financial train wreck of 2008...
Basically 28 years of voodoo economics derailed our economic train....and the world's for the most part (except for Germany and the Scandinavian countries who never bought into the voodoo economics) now, Obama has gotten the train back on the tracks and its moving once again.
But we are on the same tracks heading in the same direction.
Reagan while a advocate of supply side economics (ignoring the concept of true supply and demand) did oversee several tax increases.
He simply failed to connect the dots properly methinks. Today's republicans might have Reagan scratching his head. He would not be nominated by the party today, IMNHO.
RN: First, I don't do conspiracy, I leave that to wd/DS and EricDondero of the Libertarian Republican.
Regarding people who "do" conspiracy, I'm the very first person RN thinks of? Surely there are many more famous persons that would spring to mind when the topic of conspiracy theories comes up. Off the top of my head I can think of Richard Belzer and Jesse Ventura. Just recently I watched (half of) a new SyFy program called "Joe Rogan Questions Everything" (I turned it off because it was too crazy).
I'm sure there are many others that would spring to the minds of the other commenters here well before me. Yet RN decides this is a good opportunity to get in a dig at "wd/DS"... and this "EricDondero" person I've never heard of. My response? Boo hoo RN... obviously disappointed that his post bashing my blog didn't generate more negative comments.
As for the terror babies conspiracy... when is this Anderson Cooper interview from? I did a post on my blog on this subject more than two years ago. Is Gohmert STILL talking about terror babies?
17 comments:
There are no words to describe Gohmerts GAPING ignorance. Simply unbelievable!
Actually RN, there are.
Unless and until GOP leadership publicly denounce and distance themselves from his views, and others like him, we can call describe him as such...
The heart, soul and voice of the new Republican Party.
Oops! posted this in the wrong thread below...meant to post it here.
"Ye gods! So many stupid GOPers! It's difficult to decide who gets the top prize.
Who the hell are the people attracted to this political party? And why?"
Point taken Dave. You are correct with your assessment.
I still find his gaping ignorance unbelievable. He is just one of several examples as to how the GOP is working itself into irrelevancy. Santorum is another. Anyone thinking Perry as well?...
Lets stop and think for a moment; lets think about the message rather than always focusing on the messenger.
Prior to 9/11 was there any "credible evidence" that Al Qaeda was planning on using commercial jetliners to plow into buildings and kill thousands of people?
Of course not, we all would have laughed at the thought.
So, what is so absurd and stupid about the idea of people having babies in the US and then training them to martyr themselves?
That idea is not any stranger than the idea of not wanting to know how to take off and land a commercial jetliner...just want to learn how to fly one that is already in the air...
Besides, Michelle Malkin got her citizenship by being born in the USA while her parents were students here....
Sure would be nice if we could send her back to the Philippines.
Think about it....
The fact is, tao, that there's no credible evidence "terrorist babies" are being seeded here in the US.
And according to his report, Bush had more than an "inkling" about what al Qaeda planned to do.
Shaw,
The fact is WE were not aware what Bush had and didn't have at that time...
Just like we are not aware of what Obama has in regards to "terrorist babies"
Considering the recent Boston Marathon bombing, the flipping of the muslim military psychiatrist who is responsible for the Ft. Hood shootings and the fact that Hamas in Palestine and Al Qaeda in Pakistan have strapped bomb vests on kids before the idea of terrorist babies is not and should not fall outside the whelm of possibilities.
Now, having said that even the most logical of messages in the hands of Louie Gohmert can sound crazy....
Interesting observations Tao. Something to think about as you say. I'm impressed.
Gohmert is still a wacky and creepy dude.
Ah, RN...my day is complete, I've impressed you!
Now, don't go run off and make this some big conspiracy. The reality is that AL Qaeda is weaker than they have ever been. When you got to break out your old followers from prison to get the expertise you need then that is a sign of weakness...no new followers with the desire and or moxy to fight like the old guard.
That's a positive and a sign that AL Qaeda doesn't have the support that it once had within the Muslim community.
The protests in Eqypt are also a good sign...because one side represents the Muslim Brotherhood and the other represents a more secular desire.
Democracy is messy....
So, all in all, Obama is doing a fine job in regards to foreign policy, its hard to walk a fine line in such tumultuous times but you gotta "stay the course" and let things play out.
Obama is doing that.
First, I don't do conspiracy, I leave that to wd/DS and EricDondero of the Libertarian Republican.
Second, I'm not convinced yet he is doing a "fine" job at foreign policy. He certainly is at this point is doing no worse than his predecessor.
Third, I agree democracy in the pure form is a messy business being only a step away from anarchy. Which is why a republic is far superior.
Obama has just over three to stay his course. If at the end of his day things are going well, America remains secure, and the global situation has improved he will have insured a positive FP legacy.
Don't wait for the MIC neo con militarist type in the republican party to agree with much of this discussion.
Too bad the fiscal picture and the economy still isn't so rosy. But, he has three years and three months. All we can do is wait it out.
"Too bad the fiscal picture and the economy still isn't so rosy."
Apparently you choose to ignore this:
The Best Kept Secret In American Politics-Federal Budget Deficits Are Actually Shrinking!
And the fact that the unemployment rate is at its lowest since the Bush administration's financial disaster--7.4%
And we've had 41 straight months of job growth.
Now we all know there are still huge problems, but to ignore the good news is to show stubborn partisanship, we know you try to avoid that.
Think of this: President Obama is chipping away slowly and surely at the problems. Imagine how much better we'd be doing if the two political parties cooperated.
That's the real tragedy.
We have an opposition party right now whose only goal is to defund a law that was judged constitutional by the SCOTUS last year and has helped insure over 30 million Americans. And the GOP wants to do that without a plan to replace it.
That's the definition of insanity.
40 times they've voted for a repeal of the law; and 40 times it's gone nowhere.
The GOP is a Nowhere Party.
How exactly does one take the comment of RN about the economy and the response of Shaw's and respond to both and at the same time address neither?
The economy is a disaster. But this economic disaster has been a long time in coming; like all the way back to 1980.
The supply side, get rid of regulation, government as an empowerer of big business, special interests, and the wealthy, financial train wreck of 2008...
Basically 28 years of voodoo economics derailed our economic train....and the world's for the most part (except for Germany and the Scandinavian countries who never bought into the voodoo economics) now, Obama has gotten the train back on the tracks and its moving once again.
But we are on the same tracks heading in the same direction.
Reagan while a advocate of supply side economics (ignoring the concept of true supply and demand) did oversee several tax increases.
He simply failed to connect the dots properly methinks. Today's republicans might have Reagan scratching his head. He would not be nominated by the party today, IMNHO.
RN,
Lets see, Reagan would not be "nominated by the party today..." means what?
Nothing because he is dead and the Republican party is nothing more than a party of hate whores slobbering at the trough of stupidity.
Hell, in 1980 Barack Obama would have been a Republican.
Thank you for confirming my with an exclamation point.
Yeah, you might be right, in "80" Obama might have been a republican. But I doubt it.
RN: First, I don't do conspiracy, I leave that to wd/DS and EricDondero of the Libertarian Republican.
Regarding people who "do" conspiracy, I'm the very first person RN thinks of? Surely there are many more famous persons that would spring to mind when the topic of conspiracy theories comes up. Off the top of my head I can think of Richard Belzer and Jesse Ventura. Just recently I watched (half of) a new SyFy program called "Joe Rogan Questions Everything" (I turned it off because it was too crazy).
I'm sure there are many others that would spring to the minds of the other commenters here well before me. Yet RN decides this is a good opportunity to get in a dig at "wd/DS"... and this "EricDondero" person I've never heard of. My response? Boo hoo RN... obviously disappointed that his post bashing my blog didn't generate more negative comments.
As for the terror babies conspiracy... when is this Anderson Cooper interview from? I did a post on my blog on this subject more than two years ago. Is Gohmert STILL talking about terror babies?
Keep following me and do keep on keepin on dude.
Post a Comment