'I, for one, welcome our new Democratic overlords.'
UPDATE: I also welcome visitors from Instapundit, The Corner, and other points 'round the Internet tubes. Remember, collaborators will have their taxes raised last!
(explanation of reference may be found here)
Trackbacks
-
11/8/2006 8:14 AM
Bungaloe Bill wrote:
First off: This says it all for me.Lessons from Election Day 2006:1. There were any number of chances over the last two years to declare victory in Iraq, draw our forces down and move remaining troops to permanent bases out of the line of fire (but -
11/8/2006 2:52 PM
Comment is free wrote:
Democrats dance in the street, Republicans nurse their hangovers, and Donny Rumsfeld departs. -
11/8/2006 3:45 PM
Wizbang Politics wrote:
Really. I do welcome them. Resistance is futile, anyway.... -
11/8/2006 5:03 PM
UNCoRRELATED wrote:
heh... -
11/9/2006 9:09 PM
Geezerville USA wrote:
Heh! A little humor is in order. Hat Tip: Infinite Monkeys ... -
11/21/2006 10:03 AM
Three Sources wrote:
Rep. Barney Frank's proposed "Grand Bargain" with business sounded like a positive step to me. Taranto likens it to a protection racket today, but -- ever the optimist -- I see it as a chance for the most onerous business...
Yes, and war=peace, famine=plenty, poverty=wealth, too.
Reply to this
You'll be hearing that kind of sycophancy not so much from the media, they are already fellow travelers, but from large corporations and high ranking members of the military who know what side their bread is buttered on.
Reply to this
I for one want part the billions that will now be saved on the Iraq war to be used to improve health care and housing for our immigrants that are deprived.
Reply to this
I suggest you prepare to use the billions saved after stopping offensive military actiosn in Iraq and elsewhere to rebuild the first city nuked on US soil.
Reply to this
Great idea! Maybe we can improve the healthcare and infrastructure in the soon-to-be radioactive 'just downwind of Long Beach' area for our quasi-permanent Mexican guests! Muy bueno!
Reply to this
Wow, you're original! And not at all paranoid! And did I mention how original you are!
Reply to this
Withdrawl from Iraq is never going to happen. It would result in Israel getting flattened and the Democrats would never let that happen. Remember all the kvetching about "Who lost China" after World War II? Too many votes tied to "Who lost Israel."
Reply to this
Could "Cinque" be the legendary "Field Marshall Cinque" from the Symbionese Liberation Army wayyy back in the day? If so, perhaps he IS one of the overlords. Comrades, let the food distribution begin!
Reply to this
Richard - "Israel getting flattened" ?? By whom? The vast armies of the Islamo-fascist Caliphate Empire?
Reply to this
Renzy, your ideas intrigue me, and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Reply to this
By rebuilding the first city nuked on US soil, you mean New Orleans, right?
I agree, now that some responsible people are governing maybe we can actually start rebuilding.
Reply to this
Actually, I have a mix of dread and curiousity. It's like calling the bluff of a back-seat driver and saying, OK, YOU drive. The Democrats have gotten by on criticism alone for so long- can they actually generate an idea?
Take the snarky Katrina reply. There was plenty of criticism for New Orleans. After all, it was only the largest disaster recovery operation in US history, and the fastest ever major military mobilization for disaster recovery in the US. Plenty to complain about! But ideas? How WOULD the Democrats rebuild? Throw money at it? Use federal authority to take away municipal level perogatives? Put the Corps of Engineers in charge? Bigger, higher levees? More pumps? Landfill to create higher ground? Changes to laws to allow private reconsrtuction greater flexibility to encourage growth, or less, to help maintain the unique character of the region? Rebuild to the original size and design, or change it? Let some land return to wilderness? Who will be in charge? Which agency? How much authority will they have?
Remember all the "Plans" John Kerry claimed to have? Even though they're two years old, aren't you as eager as I am to finally see them? You don't doubt their existence, do you? I mean, Kerry counted no less than 17 plans ready for action, and I'm expecting detailed, structured, well thought out and considered plans. Let's be reasonable, though, give them a week or two to cough them up.
My nightmare is this: they've forgotten how to actually drive, and Congress will be quiet as churchmice, waiting for Bush to do something so they can knock it down- but this time as the majority!
What will they do? What is this "New Direction" they have promised to take us? What are their plans?
chirp...chirp...chirp...
hmmm. "Down" is also a direction, isn't it?
Ben
Reply to this
My nightmare is this: they've forgotten how to actually drive
Apparently. Howard Dean is already backing away from forcing a "responsible redeployment" saying that such decisions are "up to the President".
Reply to this
Thanks, Ben, for the insight. Haven't you realized that snarky rhetorical questions don't actually qualify as argument? Guess not.
In fact, the Dems do have plans, for domestic and foreign policy. Expect to see a hike in the minimum wage, revamping of the Medicare bill to allow bargaining with drug companies (allowing bargaining is part of liberating market forces, something statist Republicans seem to have forgotten), and some environmental initiatives. Foreign policy, I expect the Congress will wait for Baker to finish his job, and, having heard his recommendations, make their own. It is also likely that Baker will adopt the Dems' plan for loose benchmarks. Also look for the Dems to implement all the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, something that should have been done long ago. Look for oversight of government contractors, who have been ripping off the American taxpayer for years now.
See what happens when you actually answer real questions, instead of posing sarcastic rhetorical ones? In fact it's the Right that has no answers, and that is left with problems for which they have no solutions. Your post could not show that point better.
Reply to this
...revamping of the Medicare bill to allow bargaining with drug companies (allowing bargaining is part of liberating market forces, something statist Republicans seem to have forgotten...
Interesting, I seemed to have missed where use the might of the Federal government to force a private citizen to set artificially low prices for their product became "bargaining"!
Why don't they try something useful, like reducing frivolous lawsuits, the single largest component of drug prices?
Oh, sorry, didn't mean to offend our new Overlords with logic and reason.
"The Republicans suck, but the Democrats suck more!"
Reply to this
I just hope they ALL shutup and work together to defend the Country and work to keep the economy improving.
I am sick of the name calling and crap.
I just hope they all shutup and go to work.
Reply to this
I'd settle for "shutup and go home."
Reply to this
Amen and Amen!!!!
Reply to this
Jim,
"Thanks, Ben, for the insight."
You're welcome!
"Haven't you realized that snarky rhetorical questions don't actually qualify as argument? Guess not."
You guessed wrong.
"In fact, the Dems do have plans, for domestic and foreign policy."
Not really. Check the website of the Democratic Party. Look under "Agenda". That's where they would put plans, right? But, the Dems have only wish lists, and complaints. For example, under "economy" they start with telling they will make more jobs (in what sectors? how? where?) and balance the budget (raise taxes? cut things? what things? or default on loans) and these two vague wishes - NOT plans, there is a difference between a plan and a goal- are followed by page upon page of criticism of Bush policies. If they are going to raise the minimum wage as you say (bad idea!) I'd expect it to be here. If YOU have any particular line on actual Dem plans, you must be one of the Anointed, because they sure as hell don't see fit to share with ordinary shmoes like me.
Don't take it from me, heck, you know as well as I, don't trust any stranger on the internet, look at their website. Agenda for Energy. "Cleaner". "Reduce Energy Dependence". Fine. As goals, I like. But, how? No clue. Can we start by getting the Kennedey to drop their obstruction of the development of the finest wind farm site in the northeast? Instead of policy, same thing, we start with the Bush Bad rants: first one reads "Bush failed energy policies lead to record profits for oil companies". That's not Agenda, Jim, that's a bitch, nothing more.
So, maybe you have some inside scoop, maybe you have just your own spin, hopes, interpretation, or whatever, but I am waiting to see some real concrete ideas presented as a party platform. No, "here's what we want", more "here's what we will do to get it." It's easy to say "Educate our children". Now, how are you going to do that?
Ben
Reply to this
And while we are on the subject of policy vs whine: You see the page under Agenda where they are supposed to tell us their energy policy, and it consists of hopes, dreams and complaints? And complaint #1 is Bush driving up oil company profits?
Hello? Did they notice that the SECOND company they sneer at for high profits, Royal Dutch Shell, is Royal DUTCH Shell (OK, technically UK-Dutch) and NOT a US corporation?
So might this be a clue? That it's a global phenomenon and NOT a Bush policy that drove their profits up?
Might perhaps they devote a single line to that thesis, if only to refute it?
Naah. Who needs analysis, when we can whine and blame?
And now they have the wheel. Hang on.
Ben
Reply to this
Dang it, Ben, stop it with all the facts!
Our new overlords don't do facts! It makes them think! And decide! Ouch!
Much better to say, "Bush is bad". C'mon. Be fair!
Reply to this
"Foreign policy, I expect the Congress will wait for Baker to finish his job, and, having heard his recommendations, make their own. It is also likely that Baker will adopt the Dems' plan for loose benchmarks. Also look for the Dems to implement all the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, something that should have been done long ago. Look for oversight of government contractors, who have been ripping off the American taxpayer for years now."
"I expect." How is "I expect" equal to a plan? I read this as - I voted for them, even though I don't know for sure what they'll do. Very smart.
Reply to this
Raising minimum wage: part of the platform. (This has been all over the MSM and the web, so I have no idea why you haven't heard of it). Negotiating drug prices: part of the platform, also well-publicized. Creating a plan for phased withdrawals from Iraq: part of the platform. Implementing all the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission: part of the platform (and again well-publicized.) Increased funding for stem cell research: part of the platform. That's what I, and millions of others, voted for. "Expectation" is the anticipation that something will happen as it has been proposed. I didn't realize wingers don't even understand English anymore. So I expect (or predict or assume) that the Dems will enact the platform they ran on, to the extent the President doesn't veto their legislation.
The Dem caucus has a plan for the first 100 days that has been well publicized. So, Ben and "Zippy", just because you don't like the plan, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And although many people don't like Bush (in fact, the large majority of the population), that's not why I voted the way I did and, although probably some people did vote anti-Repub as opposed to pro-Dem, most people I know didn't. This election was an endorsement of Dem policies as much as it was a rejection of Repub ones.
Reply to this
Jim Perrin,
Thanks for the Laughs. It is so enlightening to see how dumb some people can be. The Democrats? Plans? Ideas? Ha! Ha! Ha! Hee! Hee! You should apply to Letterman. He needs joke writers!
Reply to this
Just love how you respond to the facts -- oh wait. Typical right-wing comment, mindlessly repeating RNC talking points. Way to think for yourself, idiot.
Reply to this
And, Zippy, would it have been smarter to vote for people who I KNEW were going to continue screwing things up, even if I didn't know what the other team was going to do?
Reply to this
Ah my dear Martis, have you not noticed that the Israeli armed forces had their butts handed to them by a bunch of rag tag Arabs in Lebanon? The legendary Israeli military is a demoralized bunch operating with mediocre leaders -- they are no longer what they were. They are the equivalent of the Russian military in Afghansistan. In other words, without the United States presence in Iraq, they are ripe for the plucking. So, Nancy Shmancy, we ain't going anywhere,and that's just fine with her. She needs the Jewish voters in 2008. If you believe otherwise, keep on toking!
Reply to this
The post\cartoon reminds me of what the French aristocracy said 'round the time of the Reign of Terror. And... didn't I just hear Rush Limbaugh saying, "Let them eat cake (but not mine!)".
Sorry, Split Enz, History Does Repeat Itself.
Reply to this
Any Split Enz reference deserves serious props. One of the most underrated bands of the '80s.
Reply to this
Silly, can't you figure it out? The democrapic plan is to, well, just have a plan. That's all they need. If it doesn't work, they and the lmsm will just blame the repubs and bush - right up until the eections in '08.
Reply to this
jim perrin:
Do you really believe in raising the minimum wage? To what end? Why don't we just make it $40 an hour. That sounds like a more legitimate living wage than $8 or whatever it currently is. Of course, we would have double-digit unemployment and there certianly would no longer exist a foothold in the job market for the uneducated and the young. Why would you hire someone under-qualified when you can pay someone more qualified at the same rate?
Negotiating drug prices? OK. So rather than running around w/ bush derangement syndrome, why haven't the Demos been pushing this? First I've heard. Regardless, true market forces versus government half measures and regulations are the only solution to this issue. What happens when the government begins rationing healthcare and drug use as they do under every other socialist healthcare system? Regarding phased withdrawals, I believe even discussing this at this point is dangerous but then I'm a neo-neo-con. The 911 Commission, why? Why should we just accept their recommendations wholeclothe? That is just silly. If the demos have felt so strongly about it, why haven't they been standing up pushing for it everyday in every session? And stem cells. OK. Personally I'm more than a little concerned about the idea of creating human embryos for the purpose of their ultimate destruction. There is currently 72 patented treatments utilizing adult stem cells and 0 for embryonic. They are currently most useful for creating tumors. But that aside, is it at least not a legitimate argument to not rush in to such a policy? Regarding Katrina, Ben made some good points. This was one of the largest natural disasters in world history. The federal response was actually quicker than that for Andrew under Clinton. I wonder how many more would have died had Negan and Bianco not listened to the President when he called to kindly ask that they get people the hell out of there. Sure there was/is plenty of malfeseance and wasted dollars but that is what government does and the bigger the program and the bigger the government presence the greater the presence of waste. Government is not efficient under either party.
I get it, you don't like repubs I don't like demos. Hillary today takes a swipe at Cheney today and in the same sentence says that we need to tone down the vitriol and personal attacks. I just want the snarking to end. I haven't heard of a consistent, articulated plain from the demos beyond sound bites but OK, let's see it. I'll listen. I am philosophically opposed to most of their rhetoric but I welcome the debate. But we have to stop the snideness.
Reply to this
A note to the all the commenters:
First off, welcome. We're flattered you came here. Now, we don't have a comments policy here, because quite frankly, we haven't needed one before.
But.
In internet discussions, as in life, all of us here think the "Thumper Rule" is the one to go by.
You know, Thumper. The rabbit. From Disney's "Bambi".
His words of wisdom (no, no, not "Look! The water's stiff!") to all of us were: "If You Can't Say Something Nice, Don't Say Nuthin' At All."
Chew on that as you continue your discussion, and thanks again for visiting.
Reply to this
So let me get this straight. The right wing is pissed off (at themselves?) for governing so badly, and enriching such a tiny percentage of the population, that people in a great number of states elected enough Democrats to take control of the Senate *and* the House.
This, despite well-funded Republican ad campaigns, public debates, and even a few dirty tricks (call me, Harold).
But the problem isn't with the Republican platform, or bad Republican decisions (Iraq) or Republican corruption (Abramoff). The real problem isn't with the voters either, who I guess in this view are somehow misled, despite Republicans controlling both Congress and the Presidency (and arguable the courts as well) and having all the powers of incumbency and bully pulpit.
The problem is with the Democrats, who with neither control of Congress nor the Presidency for 6 years, have somehow won considerable power with "no ideas"?
This is laughable. But worse, it shows that Republicans haven't learned anything from this election at all.
In case you need it spelled out in capital letters, folks, here you go.
We, the People, are PISSED OFF. We are feeling BETRAYED by a government that is supposed to protect us and govern for our good. We are APPALLED by the endless stream of ethical lapses. We are HORRIFIED at the international community's revulsion with America. We feel MORE VULNERABLE to terrorism, not more safe, thanks to our expensive adventures in Iraq that have NOTHING to do with Osama bin Laden.
So try to hear this, really: We don't much care about the gays getting married, and we're sick of hearing about gays, god, and guns--we have our own lives to live and bills to pay; why don't you try to mind your own business, too.
What we want is a government that represents us, governs for our good, doesn't bow to lobbyist money, doesn't intimidate us with horror stories and threats, and just allows us to lead our lives, better.
Do you hear us now?
Reply to this
6 years of cronyism, no tax and spend spend spend, nation building, non existant WMD, war profiteering, raping the constitution, perverts, wife beaters, adulterers and holier than thou christianists running the country into the largest financial hole in history. Disregarding their comittment to defend the constitution by using cheap and non binding tricks (signing statements) 400% increase in secret earmarks for contributors,
If that is what it means to be a conservative, I'll take liberal any day.
It's a bitter pill to swallow eh chickenhawks? You were sold a bill of goods and told to pay no attention to the men behind the curtain....
Well Dorothy, I don't think you're in Kansas anymore.
Reply to this
Am I a "chickenhawk" even though I'm ex-military? And I advise against "raping the Constitution." The paper cuts are brutal.
Reply to this
I don't think I have seen so many leftist talking points lumped into one post before! WOO!
I'd suggest you do a we bit of research before posting fallacies but suspect my advice would be a waste of breath.
Please continue though.
Reply to this