Disqus - Latest Comments for terrye

Re: Power Line - Devoutly To Be Wished

terrye — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 21:21:23 -0000

He might end up being a one term president, but what makes him think that these policies will live on beyond him? I would not be surprised to see these bills voted right back out again.

Re: Power Line - They Won't Have Sarah Palin to Kick Around Any Longer

terrye — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 08:41:31 -0000

I like Sarah Palin and think she has every right to do what she likes, but a third party would be good news to Democrats not conservatives. It will be Ross Perot all over again. It would split the conservative vote and Obama would win a second term with a plurality. Clinton won with less than 45% of the vote thanks to Ross Perot. I really do not think that Sarah Palin wants to guarantee Obama a second term and render conservatives impotent in the process.

Re: Power Line - Cognitive Dissonance

terrye — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:42:36 -0000

I think a lot of these people are clinging to old ideas about what the parties stand for. They think Democrats=working people and Republicans=rich. It is a simplistic and and inaccurate mindset, but I do think that is what is going on.

Re: Thousands Attend Indianapolis Tea Party

terrye — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 19:16:07 -0000

I would like to know more about all this. Are they going to do another event? How do I contact people in Indiana who are involved in all this?

Re: Fear And Loathing In The Hillary Clinton Campaign

terrye — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:41:21 -0000

Desperate act or not, it is a reminder that this is not Miss Congeniality we are voting for here. it is the President of the United States.

Re: Obama Getting Bad Military Advice

terrye — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:38:32 -0000

That is soooo stupid. *IF* AlQaida start to form a base in Iraq.... In other words, if a building falls in Manhattan then we will do this whole thing all over again.

No thanks. The costs of pulling out that army will be enormous not to mention time consuming and dangerous. To "just go back in", as if an invasion were a small thing of no consequence is so ridiculous I can not believe the man said it. Nor can I believe that the same people who have been calling Bush stupid and incompetent could keep a straight face and defend Obama's idiotic assertion.

Re: Obama Getting Bad Military Advice

terrye — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:29:34 -0000

I am not in my Momma's basement. I am in fact in my study. Two of my cousins are in iIraq and they happen to think Obama is an idiot. But what do they know. They are not a partisan Democrat in love with the Messiah and hoping for recession and high casualties.

Re: Obama Getting Bad Military Advice

terrye — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:33:43 -0000

If people like you had put half the time and energy into coming up with an acceptable alternative to McCain as you have into the incessant and redundant and non ending bitching and moaning and whining about him being chosen by your fellow Republicans for the nomination....well things might be different. But they are not.

Re: Geldof: The Unexpected Bush

terrye — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:26:22 -0000

I remember reading once that Herbert Hoover put together a huge humanitarian aid effort to feed Europeans during WW1. He was not a politician at the time and for many people in Europe it was their first dealings with the US. On one Polish man was said to say years later that the US had saved him three times. The first time was then when he was a very small child and was starving. He said he was given food, among the foodstuff was a can of meat with the inscription, A gift from the American people. He said he knew then and there that was something exceptional about America.

Re: Geldof: The Unexpected Bush

terrye — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:22:02 -0000

I think it was a good thing to do, and I am every bit as much an American as you are. So, your attitude is that if it does not do you good, then screw it. Well, what good have you done? To yourself or anyone else?

Re: Obama's Sotto Voce To Canadians: I'm Demagoguing On NAFTA

terrye — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:12:11 -0000

I saw this at Investors Business Daily:

This not only insults our allies and trading partners, it signals to everyone else that America's capricious, chest-thumping protectionist ally, Mexico, a third-world nation that is trying hard to transform itself into a first, bears the brunt of this coded jingoism.

That's because trade pacts these days are about more than just trade — they represent long-term strategic partnerships. But after this talk, who'll want to sign a permanent trade deal knowing they'll be threatened by ambitious politicians every election season?

Far from being an enemy, Mexico is a partner with whom we did $350 billion in two-way trade last year. In the process, we've gained millions of high-paid jobs in the U.S. The relationship has boosted U.S. incomes an average $2,000 per family since 1994. Besides buying 35% of our global exports, Mexico and Canada are also two of our biggest oil suppliers, selling us energy we'd be in huge trouble without.

Casting NAFTA nations as villains sends a chilling message to the dozen other nations that have since signed NAFTA-like agreements — countries as friendly and diverse as Singapore, Jordan, El Salvador, Australia, Morocco and Chile.

They must be wondering when their moment will come to be blamed for poisoned toys, sick pets, bad dumplings, factory shutdowns, outsourcing and all the broader problems of globalization that have nothing to do with their pacts.

Worse still, the irresponsible talk could have a chilling effect on strategic allies waiting for free trade pacts they've already signed to be approved — Colombia, Panama and South Korea. We've left them hanging. What a fine way to win and keep allies.

The demagoguery is particularly objectionable because it's dishonest. First, the NAFTA pact wasn't shoved through by fiat. It was negotiated over years by the Clinton administration, with major input from both Republican and Democratic Congresses.

Everyone got his or her say at the time, and after many debates, the agreement passed both houses in late 1993.

Unlike our trade with China, which is subject to tariffs but contains no major labor or environmental demands, NAFTA did include labor and environmental standards, with the trade-off for Mexico and Canada being the permanence of the treaty.

Subsequent ones, such as 2007's Peru free trade agreement, and the nearly identical pending Colombia pact, required even tougher labor and environmental standards to ensure passage.

Nations give up a lot to sign free trade pacts with the U.S. And some, such as Mexico, endure considerable internal opposition.

But they do it not because selling cheap toys here is such a big deal, but because embracing the trade pact's legal infrastructure comforts investors and helps lure foreign investment.

For these countries, those investments are their future.

Threatening to renege on a permanent treaty — as Clinton and Obama are doing through their identical vows to "opt out" of the deal — signals loudly that America's word is no longer its bond. A permanent pact with the U.S., it turns out, isn't so permanent.

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:56:23 -0000

Oh pleaze, the Democrats have accused Republicans of setting up gulags, of using lies to kill people, of being war mongers, racists, fascists and all manner of nefarious and horrid things. The Republicans are pure amateurs when it comes to paranoid fear mongering.

I think a better tact with Obama would be to simply point out that inspite of his self serving rhetoric about being a uniter and all, he is in fact a partisan liberal Democratic party hack.

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:52:54 -0000

My guess is one of his conservative buddies told him he needed to suck up to the base so he should call in a crowd pleaser, but the guy was not pleasant nor was he dancing. Look, McCain felt the need to apologize and that need was based on feedback he was getting from other people who could see the reaction. He was not standing there when this guy was flapping his gums.

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:30:35 -0000

What is this, a contest?

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:29:08 -0000

Hillary tried this kind of campaigning with Obama and where did it get her? Maybe this is not about fire in the belly, maybe McCain just thinks it is stupid and counterproductive. Believe it or not, there are lots of folks out there who do not respond to ugga ugga grunt grunt.

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:25:01 -0000

Oh for heaven's sake, the man is not a Muslim and his mother is from Kansas and I am not voting for him either. But I would like to see a Republican win in November and right now people are looking for someone who can unite the country. And like it or not, Obama is leading in that regard. I hope McCain can put a dent in that, but stuff like this will not help him make that happen, in fact it will hurt him in a general election.

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:22:03 -0000

Cunningham was even make fun of Madeline Albright's looks. That kind of thing might work if you are a second rate comic doing stand up, but when you are part of a national campaign like this, a little decorum is not a bad thing.

Re: McCain's Sista Souljah Moment?

terrye — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:20:03 -0000

I am sorry, but McCain did the right thing here. I saw part of Cunningham's warm up on the evening news and he was acting like a real jerk. And it was not just Obama that he was dissing either. People are tired of this kind of thing and they want less nastiness in campaigns. I was watching this and from what I could see the crowd was not all that thrilled themselves. The guy went too far. If conservatives are going to cry about McCain not being their friend or whatever, it would be helpful if they did not make it political suicide to have them on his side.

Re: The Road Goes Ever On

terrye — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:22:35 -0000

I guess this is good news for Ed, but I am sorry to hear it. I think Michelle is toxic, I am sorry but I can not stand the woman and probably will not follow Ed to Hot Air.

Re: Now Louis Farrakhan Gets Messiah Fever

terrye — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 07:16:45 -0000

How far from the End Time can we be? This will only fuel the other side of the nuttiness, the Obama is the antiChrist rumbles one hears from certain quarters.

I am serious, this is getting more bizarre all the time. Farrakhan says people are being transfromed, into what exactly? It is like the invasion of the body snatchers.

Obama's foreign policy rhetoric, his trade polices are positively naive and infantile.

On one hand we are not to do business with anyone, including the people next door, on the other hand we are to be friends with everyone, including the people who publicly wish us ill. Strange indeed.

Re: Can Obama Carry The Red?

terrye — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:07:18 -0000

You are right, he was the only successful Democratic president. And watch them throw him under the bus.

Re: Can Obama Carry The Red?

terrye — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:03:18 -0000

McCAin may have made a mistake in Keating 5, but he was cleared and I doubt that there are many people who have been in government service for that many years with a cleaner record.

HNAV can not get past the fact that the Republicans did not support his guy. He is a sore loser.

Re: Can Obama Carry The Red?

terrye — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:00:14 -0000

I think a lot of the talk about global warming is hype, but you know what? Most people do not. Most people support measures to deal with it. You can be sure Democrats do.

Now I do not care what your study says, I have seen so many studies on both sides of this issue that my eyes glaze over at the mere mention of another link.

But the truth is we can look at the markets right now and watch futures on oil over $100 a barrel. Not so long ago, I would have said that was not even possible.

So if we can find a way to free ourselves and our economy from the stranglehold of oil dependency then I am all for it. I think that in time a great deal of the fear surrounding the global warming issue will subside and more cooler heads will prevail...but until then this issue is not going to go away.

And neither is the high costs of energy.

Re: Can Obama Carry The Red?

terrye — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:53:43 -0000

And there is no way we can support Obama's social spending just by surrendering in Iraq. It will take more than that to pay for the kind of spending he is talking about.

Re: Can Obama Carry The Red?

terrye — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 16:51:53 -0000

That is not true. McCain relented when he saw how much revenue was generated by the tax cuts, but he never changed his mind on spending.