Conservative Blog - Latest Comments in Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Percy Jones — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:14:57 -0000

ameriken,

some people dont want to work and think that those who do should give it to them. they are the deserving ones and want it handed to them. all those that work will soon be on the same shelf as those who dont. what's the point of busting your a** anymore? it will all be taken away.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Percy Jones — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:04:13 -0000

Those that wish for change are going to get it. Look in your pocket, that's all you will have. Change. Be careful what you wish for. Find a safe place to hide.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

ameriken — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:03:49 -0000

@ toe who said: "hoboblah's words above demonstrate what is seen as the difference between the "conservative" ideology of "I got mine- go get your own!" - and the "progressive" ideology that seeks fairness and resolution for the "greater good"

What I personally find difficult to understand is how conservatives can say with a straight face that they are "Christian" and hold the "moral high ground" yet boldly demonstrate- over and over again, that they are not this.
I see here a constant babble about socialism and "the redistribution of wealth"...
Perhaps you can explain to me how you justify your selfish behavior with regards to taxes- for example... with this in mind:
LUKE 21: AS JESUS WATCHED RICH MEN PUT THEIR OFFERINGS IN THE TREASURY, A POOR WIDOW PUT IN TWO COPPER COINS. AT THAT JESUS SAID: I ASSURE YOU THIS POOR WIDOW HAS PUT IN MORE THAN ALL THE REST. THEY MADE CONTRIBUTIONS OUT OF THEIR SURPLUS, BUT SHE GAVE WHAT SHE COULD NOT AFFORD."

As for the bible quote, Jesus speaks to individuals personally as how each should live their lives, he was not establishing a government agenda or political system. Nowhere in the bible does Jesus say to establish a government to take from one and give to the other, rather it is all done voluntarily. Give and help the poor by our own pockets and our willingness to give to others of our own pocket, no matter we are rich or poor.

Ever see the lines for food at a Catholic Charity? Or the "Jesus Saves" missions in cities with a line out the door for food and beds?

Why aren't our taxes feeding those people? Why aren't they lined up at 'Liberals Save" or some government office? The conservatives I know give of their own free will to those in need, as well as volunteer in those soup kitchens.

The bible is not a mandate for a political system.

If you are going to point out that conservatives are "not this", then fine. But tell us, what are you doing out of your own pocket thats far better than the conservatives? How are you living up to that standard?

Based on the example of the woman giving everything she had, I suppose that since you are criticizing conservatives for not giving everything of their own, that you are doing just that? Are you giving everything you own in order to benefit someone else who has less than you?

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Free Radical — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:54:53 -0000

No intention of answering the question, then? Content to rest on your laurels?

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:42:41 -0000

Face it free, you can't go any further.

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Free Radical — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:24:56 -0000

Before we go any further, Hoboboh, I have a point-blank question for you to answer: What do you mean when you say you are willing to use the Bible in its entirety to govern this land? Can you please describe what a Biblically-governed America would be like?

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:42:26 -0000

Ok Free,

Sorry about not addressing it to toe, but you are all the same to me. For all I know, you are all the same person.

The Bible analogy on my part is the CORRECT one. the topic was TAXES, and she gave. What don't u understand? The 30% have income and yet, they don't pay. Why gosh by golly, now they get a "TAX CREDIT"!! This is LUNACY!!

I'll repeat myself (grr), if you have an income, then you need to be taxed!! Not what you "think" you can give or not. If that was the way we did it, no one would send in any money ever!

Having wealth and believing in redistribution is not a correlation. Having an economic IQ and NOT believing in "redistribution" is a correlation.

See how that works?

I won't do your research for you. It is a fact that Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. You can bring up all the ANECDOTAL evidence you want. It still won't change the facts. I'm not talking about "Certain" people. I'm talking about everybody. Conservatives are far more generous with their money than Liberals.

We just know that giving it to the Govt. to dole out is the WORST way to run an economy. You do not.

Better to give it to Charity, which is what we do. Far more than you do. Get over it and change yourself.

You are economically lazy Free. You want others to work for you. Do it yourself, if you can. if you can't I can give you a list of some charities to help you along.

And that's how it is done in a free society.

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Free Radical — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:22:52 -0000

Hoboboh - you may want to work on trying to keep your opponents straight. The poster you were addressing was Toe. I'm Free Radical. Nice to meet you.

Indeed, I noticed that you clarified the "equality of opportunity" point. It's not that I didn't read it - it's that I didn't agree. There's a subtle difference.

I also noticed that you called the Bible post incorrect. It's not that I didn't read it - it's that you're wrong. The woman gave to the treasury according to her ability to give. Some people in this country have no ability to give; therefore, they will give nothing. I shouldn't have to make this point again.

You claim you're willing to use the Bible to run this country, but you haven't responded to the section I just pointed out. Fact: Jesus was a communist. He preached that you should give all your wealth to the poor and walk around barefoot preaching the Word. The early apostolic communities described in the Bible are communes. No country on earth has had a system as socialist as the one the Bible advocates. Are you willing to do that?

Prediction: your response to this point will include no actual evidence. You will simply assert that you have already told me I was wrong; why haven't I listened?

Even though, as I said above, you were speaking to Toe and not me, I feel I should clear something up: I'm healthy, whole, and reasonably successful. The vast majority of other liberals are as well. Go ahead and check the data if you want to - the majority of people who believe in some degree of wealth redistribution have adequate wealth themselves.

Speaking of data, I'd like to see some hard facts on your statement that Conservatives give more to charity than Liberals. Warren Buffet is preparing to filter $60 billion through charities. He's a self-made billionaire with an immense work ethic, and guess what? He's a liberal who favors the inheritance tax. He endorsed the bailout. He endorses Obama.

Richer and more economically intelligent people than you have seen it our way, Hoboboh. Not every liberal is poor and lazy - in fact, most of us aren't.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:59:45 -0000

LOL Free Radical, I'll translate your opening for you. """I cannot refute your last posts, so i won't try""".
=====================================================================
It's not, "I GOT mine".

It's I've EARNED mine.

Now you go EARN yours. if you need help or assistance in achieving the DREAM of your CHOICE .. I will help you. That does not imply that my EARNINGS can be COPPED because YOU didn't APPLY yourself to the best of your ability.

If you did apply to your best, that is your consolation. Better to be poor with principles than a liberal wthout any, no matter your bank account.

You are just lazy "Free". You want others to lift for you. If you are reasonably healthy and whole and you cannot succeed in this country, you are not trying.

Don't take my humanity for gullibility. I can spot a canard where I see one. The REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH is a BIG ONE!

The fact that you think it is even viable shows your utter lack of economic and human nature.

I knew you wouldn't touch the Million dollar idea Free, for it exposes the LUNACY of what you preach.

Don't just go read a book. Read an economic book, FFS!!

Psst .... Conservatives outspend Liberals in regard to CHARITY by a HUGE amount. So please, don't preach as if you have some and I don't. I'll match my contributions on a % basis any day of the week with you. measuring any other way would make it unfair for you.

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

toe — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:41:06 -0000

Hoboblah, I have no interest in "refuting" your previous post- I merely pointed out that you supposed "Christians"- are only this when it suits you.
I maintain that the conservative ideology is just selfish. Your rant above shines the spotlight on exactly that. ... "I've got mine- go get your own!"

Nice.

I know most of you here beat dead horses...do you also kick stray dogs? Do you have an ounce of humanity?
Just wondering.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:34:52 -0000

@ free radical,

If you can't go to your neighbor's school, don't blame the republicans, blame yourself and your dopey party.

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:33:01 -0000

I reposted and clarified my "equality of opportunity", nothing more. Nothing has changed either. You seem to interpret that saying as, "everyone gets the same chance at each opportunity". That is LUNACY. It is still up to the individual. You wish to make it up to the Govt. This is where you look like a LUNATIC!

The Bible post was incorrect as I have already pointed out. Work on ur reading comprehension. The old Lady was giving to the TREASURY .. i.e. .. TAXES!! She gave!! THE 30% DO NOT GIVE! You missed the meaning, I am not surprised.

Either way, I am more than willing to use the Bible in its entirety to govern this land. Are you?

If the answer is no, then stop using anecdotal evidence to shore up a ridiculous argument with a source you don't believe in. It is the height of hypocrisy!

Toe and his ilk think the "redistribution of wealth" will solve anything. It will not, except for make everyone a lot poorer. It's been tried be4 and it fails every time.

Why not just give everyone 1 million dollars each?

Seriously, if we extrapolate out tour "logic", we could TAX all the rich and collect their wealth. Divide up all the "earnings" and distribute an exact amount to each citizen. Everybody will start at the same level. How's that? Will that work?

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Free Radical — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 12:48:29 -0000

Hoboboh - do you suffer from short-term memory loss, or simply an inability to read? When I spoke of "equality of opportunity", I was using your words. If you don't believe in equality of opportunity, why did you use that phrase when describing the system that has ostensibly made America into an economic juggernaut? Surely a phrase you believe in was available?

I'm certainly glad to see you've fallen back on the tried-and-true conservative rhetoric of "you are what you make yourself; if you don't like your situation, go out and find another one." That's very cute, and I'd love to see liberals turn America into a country where that's actually possible. Right now, however, the fact is that I can't attend my neighbor's school. Most public school districts only accept students from their immediate vicinity; if you live in a neighborhood with a bad school and cannot afford either to move or to attend a private school, you're going to a bad school. No freedom of choice; no possibility of competition. That school, one might say, has the monopoly on your market. Unfettered capitalism at work.

Toe was absolutely right to quote the Bible, and your unwillingness to take his point does not change that. The quote he used illustrates a fundamental principle of wealth redistribution: that no one would be penalized for their inability to give. The old woman was laudable because she gave according to her ability; if your ability to give is greater, you give more. If your ability to give is zero, you give none. Very Christian.

While we're on the subject, let's switch from Luke to Acts of the Apostles: "All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved."

Looks like the Bible advocates a system more communist than any Democrat has ever espoused. Anyone who calls themselves a free-market capitalist Christian should find either a new religion or a new economic philosophy; I've read the Bible, and it doesn't quote The Wealth of Nations anywhere.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 11:06:15 -0000

One man's "greater good" is another mans 'ripoff" It's called Communism, just say it.

Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself forever. Give him a fish, and he;ll be at your door tomorrow.

Please don't quote the Bible Toe, it doesn't suit you even when it suits you.

I'm glad to see that the old Lady GAVE. the 30% do not GIVE. NO COPPER FROM THEM!

So your point has no point. Think again.

Frankly, I would like to see TAX rates hinged to CHARITY offerings. Taxing according to income is false and misleading. Yearly income is not a true sign of wealth. It is however a easy way to add things, even though the data is faulty at the outset.

By the way, since you could not actually refute my ideas, I'll put that one in the win column.... again.

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

toe — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:23:05 -0000

hoboblah's words above demonstrate what is seen as the difference between the "conservative" ideology of "I got mine- go get your own!" - and the "progressive" ideology that seeks fairness and resolution for the "greater good"

What I personally find difficult to understand is how conservatives can say with a straight face that they are "Christian" and hold the "moral high ground" yet boldly demonstrate- over and over again, that they are not this.
I see here a constant babble about socialism and "the redistribution of wealth"...
Perhaps you can explain to me how you justify your selfish behavior with regards to taxes- for example... with this in mind:
LUKE 21: AS JESUS WATCHED RICH MEN PUT THEIR OFFERINGS IN THE TREASURY, A POOR WIDOW PUT IN TWO COPPER COINS. AT THAT JESUS SAID: I ASSURE YOU THIS POOR WIDOW HAS PUT IN MORE THAN ALL THE REST. THEY MADE CONTRIBUTIONS OUT OF THEIR SURPLUS, BUT SHE GAVE WHAT SHE COULD NOT AFFORD.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:36:48 -0000

Free radical said:
"In what possible world does the Republican system, which privileges the rich, constitute equality of opportunity? If my father is wealthy and another man's father is not, in what way have he and I been provided equal opportunities? If my school is excellent and another man's school is not, in what way have he and I been provided equal opportunities? If I have health care and another man does not, in what way have he and I been provided equal opportunities?"

The equality of opportunity is not based on everyone having the exact same opportunities. That would be impossible. this is where you are OFF the rail my friend. Let me reduce your misguided angst!
The citizens of the United States are NOT guaranteed EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES! They are guaranteed EQUALITY under THE LAW.

NO, you are not guaranteed a house to live in. We have just witnessed what happens when the Govt. tries to implement that hair brained idea.

No, you are not guaranteed to be wealthy! there is an old and tried and true statement. Sh*t happens! It's called life.

No, you are not born with the same intellect as others! One need only read the posts of "Amber" to see that this is correct.

If your school is worse than your neighbors school, go to that one instead. That's the way to improve the other, through competition, not socialism. of course that is NOT the way it is done, and thus "Free Radicals" lament. By the way, using your logic, shouldn't all the kids in the SAME class get the same GRADE? No? Gosh, maybe we are not all equal.

Republicans don't "privilege " the rich (whoever that is), they merely ENCOURAGE it through letting you invest where YOU want. Letting you KEEP more of what YOU make.

The NEW SOCIALIST DEMOCRATIC PARTY wants to be the GOOD guys and redistribute monies which do not BELONG to them. You want to call it being FAIR. I call it SOCIALISM.

I know, lately people have been actually saying in public that Socialism isn't so bad! Uh huh, well let me tell you a secret. Perhaps you can find a country that is doing okay with Socialism. We won't compare their growth or economic health to the U.S. because lets face it, there are no comparisons that measure up to this capitalist dynamo. Let's say Austria, or Australia....? Just random I assure you. The ONLY REASON any country is doing well with Socialism is because of the HUGE ECONOMIC ENGINE which is the CAPITALIST U.S.! Turn the U.S. into a Socialist nation and watch everyones standard of living FALL GLOBALLY. We are the engine which ALLOWS Europe to be Europe. We even tolerate their bitching and moaning even though we basically FLOAT them all.

It seems tempting I know, but we are the locomotive which pulls everyone else along even though THEIR Govt. systems are not nearly as efficient or fair as ours.

In the end, life is what YOU make it, not what Obama makes for you. Only the first way will last and be self regenerating. The other just leads to apathy and enslavement.

As for the TAXES!! The founding fathers had no conception at all that a full 30% of the nation would not kick into the till. Not in their wildest dreams could they believe that would be the case.

If you produce an income, you should pay taxes! End of story. If you cannot make an income, then there should be charities to help you along, no argument there.
Again, if you set up a LARGE portion of the population to RECEIVE MONIES (tax credits, its a joke) for NOT producing, this is the perfect way to hamstring the very engine needed to pull the train of citizens to prosperity. This also sets up a permanent underclass of people who in the end will become slaves to the Govt.

This is what the DEM'S are doing right now and it is criminal.

There is a common myth that people who are poor stay that way. That is only true in Socialist nations, not Capitalist. This nation has the ability to make ANYONE wealthy. Everyone can take a shot. it's up to them. Even so, not everyone can be wealthy. If everyone was given a MILLION dollars by the Govt. tomorrow, it would instantly be worth about a thousand dollars. There is no "trick" to redistribution. It won't work in the end.

I'll finish with another axiom which is a fitting closer to this post.

Life isn't FAIR. You can't make it FAIR by taking from Peter to pay Paul. Better to teach Paul how to keep the monies he makes and invest in BIG OIL where he can retire in 30 years or so.

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Free Radical — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:53:43 -0000

Where to begin.

First of all, Hoboboh, I'm not sure anyone is actually fooled by your caricaturing of both parties' positions on "equality." In what possible world does the Republican system, which privileges the rich, constitute equality of opportunity? If my father is wealthy and another man's father is not, in what way have he and I been provided equal opportunities? If my school is excellent and another man's school is not, in what way have he and I been provided equal opportunities? If I have health care and another man does not, in what way have he and I been provided equal opportunities?

To say nothing of the fact that never, in the entire history of the modern Democrat Party, has a candidate proposed that "regardless of your efforts, your results will be averaged out." I would hardly say an individual making $4 million annually who pays $1.7 million of that in taxes has been made average alongside his fellow citizen making $22,000 annually. Maybe that's because I like to apply arithmetic to these situations, and not empty free-market rhetoric.

No Democrat is seriously suggesting that everyone's lifestyle is going to be equal. The rich will live richly, the poor will live poorly. Democrats merely suggest that anyone rich has been given opportunities (health, education, business prosperity) that others do not have; in order for there to be equality of opportunity, those on the bottom must be given those same opportunities. We don't suggest eliminating the lower class; we suggest their standard of living should be raised by those with an excess.

Moving on to Ameriken, I think you'll find that only by the most grim and depressing definition of liberal does John McCain constitute "half a liberal." Sure, he occasionally "took on his party leadership" - which any sensible person would see as evidence that his party was wrong, and the opposition was right. The entirety of this election, however, has seen McCain cleave to the conservative teat in such a shameless and disgusting manner that all my previous respect for him has eroded. Notice his sudden transformation from Episcopal (among the mellowest and most level-headed of faiths) to "Baptist" (a church whose titular ceremony he has never undertaken, and whose most famous national leader he once decried as an "agent of intolerance"). Notice his sudden willingness to swallow his well-justified criticism of said agent and appear at Liberty University; notice his sudden revelation that Christianity "means I'm saved and forgiven." Who do you think he's trying to please? Liberals?

John McCain was once respectable for his honesty, his seemingly genuine convictions, his willingness to admit that in dodging the question of the Confederate Flag he had committed a "sacrifice of principle for personal gain." Liberals still disagreed with him on 95% of issues, but we granted him the courage of his convictions. Now that he's shown his willingness to say whatever needs to be said, to mock the office of the Vice President, to lie whenever lies might help, he lacks even that courage - and without it, why would you possibly vote for him?

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

ameriken — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:35:41 -0000

@daddysteve #69,

Amen!

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

ameriken — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:32:25 -0000

I dont care if Obama is black or white, yellow, brown or whatever.

Actually, he is as much a white man as he is a black man. Remember early during the primaries when many democrats were saying he 'wasnt black enough'?

But race isnt the issue, as much as I would love to see a black president, a female president, a chinese president, a mexican president, I would never vote for Obama or anyone based on race alone. It is based on ideals, world view, political beliefs, character, competency and experience.

I'd vote for Condoleeza Rice or Colin Powell long before I'd vote for Obama......why? Their political and world views are closer to mine.

As for McCain, well, he is half liberal, which is why so many democrats loved him and why he can reach across the aisle. He has demonstrated that in how he votes, as well as his political views. It is also why so many conservatives couldnt stand the man.

And also why I didnt vote for him in the primaries.

As far as I am concenred, in this election, no matter who wins, republicans lose. We either get a half liberal, or a whole liberal.
Despite that, very early on, I actually considered voting for Obama based on one reason: unity. His 'change' message was one of unifying both parties and healing racial division.
However once he made up racial issues in the primaries against the Clintons, and later against McCain, as well as Democrats always throwing out the race card to further the divide, I decided the change message was all bullshit (even Obama changed his change message from one of unity, to one of 'no more Bush'). Liberals dont want unity......they want to keep that racial divide going.
So, what choice do I have? McCain? Half liberal?
Either one to me stinks, but given these two lousy choices, McCain has more experience, and has a track record of crossing the aisle, as democrats have attested to time and time again. So, I guess since I have no other real choice, I have to go with the lesser of two evils.

To answer Roxanne, they're both weasels and Obama is just as guilty of the hypocrisy, distortion, and cyncism as McCain is. I hope you can open your eyes and see that politicians are politicians, and none of them really give a flying f--- about you or me.

If you think your candidate is actually 'better' than another candidate, you are really not looking at them objectively and have blindly bought into their well planned marketing strategies, cliches, buzz words and big promises.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Roxanne — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:31:56 -0000

I'm curious about your thoughts on these so-called "weasel words" McCain used last night at the RNC.

Is he genuine or just following Obama's lead (literally)? In either case, looks like you might have some of your own angry words to eat.

We're all a little tired of the hypocrisy, distortion, and cynicism, including the other candidate, John McCain.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

daddysteve — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:09:29 -0000

You youngsters are showing your age if you think either party is about anything but business as usual.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

daddysteve — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:06:23 -0000

Socialism is bad. Fascism is bad. What's the lesser of two evils here?

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

HOBOBOH — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:08:36 -0000

McCain is no Bush and that won't fly in the campaign. Barack's people already know that.
In the beginning of the campaigns, Obama was in command, but that star has faded. So, the question is how can a person (McCain) who no one supposedly cares about, even it up in the polls? Well for one thing, Barack has been back peddling ever since the dem nomination to get to a center point that's winnable.
I don't think he's gonna make it tho. One thing he cannot control is current events.
As just one example which will probably help sink Obama is the Russia/Georgia war (yep, it's war). The majority of Americans do NOT believe Barack is any match for Putin. Rightfully so ..

Obama has already made enough gaffs and blurbs and outright nonsensical statements to cripple any Republican in his stead. The media has been falling all over themselves trying to cover his flanks. As usual, they think we aren't paying attention. But we are.

In the end, it comes down to two diametrically opposed philosophies.

1.) Equality of opportunity - (McCain) - Everyone has the right to pull up to the trough and feed through your own wits and hard work, but results cannot be guaranteed (it's called capitalism).

2.) Equality of results - (Obama) - Everyone has the right to pull up to the trough and feed, but regardless of your effort, you're results will be averaged out (it's called socialism).

The first way is the foundation that America was built upon and has delivered the greatest economic powerhouse the world has ever seen. This is no small thing.

The second way is the road to mediocrity and finally tyranny.
This is no small thing.

So when do the riots start?

out.

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

chris — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 09:28:11 -0000

You have to see this petition that is going around. Tell Pelosi to get off her butt and do something about energy prices!

http://www.houseconservatives.com/petition/

Re: Obama’s Hope, Change and Other Weasel Words: The Politics of Usual

Alphonso Carponzo — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:53:23 -0000

A little more humor would help the debate.
"Bop early and bop often." -Alphonso Carponzo
http://www.bop-o-rama.com

Your Bops really count!