(2007-11-19) — A Republican move to make English the official, and exclusive, language for Congressional debate failed in a party-line vote today following an apparent filibuster threat by the House Hispanic Caucus, whose members made impassioned pleas from the House floor in Spanish.
While the specifics of the Hispanic legislators’ objections won’t be clear until government translators finish work on the debate transcripts, members of the House Anglo Caucus said they could “feel the pain” of their Latino colleagues, and expressed “solidarity with whatever it is that they said.”
The vote comes during a week which saw House Speaker Nancy Pelosi move to kill an amendment that would protect employers, including the Salvation Army, from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English.
Rep. Pelosi said that in addition to allowing Hispanic Salvation Army store workers to chat with each other in Spanish while serving monolingual American customers, she intends to push for legislation requiring Salvation Army bell-ringers to demonstrate “a greater diversity of cultural rhythmic patterns in their ringing.”
“The monotonous back-and-forth motion employed by most Salvation Army bell-ringers,” said Rep. Pelosi, “reminds many of our minority friends of their historic oppression by Anglo Saxon persecutors whose idea of music is listening to a metronome ticking in 4/4 time.”
54 responses so far ↓
1 Hawkeye // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:24 am
Isn’t it interesting how Congress can vote to support English-only bills until a Christian charity group gets involved? Then, if Christians are in favor… Well, it MUST be wrong!
More Christian-bashing from the Left. Why am I not surprised… (sigh).
2 boberinyetagain // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:50 am
They shoud require all Christians to speak English. That would throw them off the scent for a while
3 mig // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:52 am
I sat next to an older fellow from Cuba that swore Mexico was a beautiful garden of Eden before we stole the property and took the water.
It is my understanding that the vast wasteland of Arizona and New Mexico were a hardship on the Mexican Gov’t to patrol against marauding Indians and banditos and were happy to hand over the land and for a profit for the ruling class.
The Mexicans saw this wasteland as useless and not worth the time, effort and money spent having it.
And it was a barren wasteland until the last say 50 years when people started moving into the area and wanted lawns and golf courses. Now it is a thriving area and the Mexicans think its thier birth right.
Aztlan rings loud among the ‘latinos’.
4 Maggie // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:08 am
The Salvation Army Bellringers could use casstinets in stead.
5 Maggie // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:10 am
that would be instead ,instead of in stead.
:>)
6 gafisher // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:15 am
Re#3: Εικόνες της Îίκαιας, mig, αλλά δεν θα μποÏοÏσα να καταλάβω τη γλώσσα. Θα ήσαστε Ï€Ïόθυμοι να μεταφÏάσετε?
7 gafisher // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:17 am
Er, I mean, nice pictures, mig, but could you translate the language?
8 Maggie // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:27 am
Mig,
I will translate #6.
Happy Thanksgiving Mig, and remember…never turn you back on a turkey.
9 debass // Nov 19, 2007 at 10:01 am
#3
We should have kept the entire country.
I think Swiss is the official language of the bells. With all the ding dongs in congress, maybe that should be their official language, for they obviously don’t understand the language of their constituents.
10 conserve-a-tips // Nov 19, 2007 at 10:54 am
Good morning everybody. I type with a clear head, finally! Thanks for the prayers – they were all around me.
Personally, I think that Ms. Pulloutsy is discriminating against us southerners. If she really wanted diversity, she’d fight for “redneck slang”. Now which do you find more endearing? – “mi casa es su casa” or “Y’all jest come rat on in now an’ make ya’selves rat at home now, y’heah?”
11 Fred Sinclair // Nov 19, 2007 at 11:29 am
“solidarity with whatever it is that they said.†Scott how do you do it? that is a classic line.
The English speaking people in the US encourage by being enablers to the non English speaking persons with our acceptance of their agenda. I believe a lot do understand English (like the Frenchies) but refuse to use it, primarily to make a point.
Several times I’ve run across them – I just smile and say in English, “Gee, I’m so sorry that you have confused me with someone who cares, too bad you don’t understand so you could learn how I feel about “wetbacks”, then I wave good-bye and walk away.
Heirborn Ranger
From last thread – my # 10
THE GIPPER
“The gun has been called the great equalizer, meaning that a small person with a gun is equal to a large person, but it is a great equalizer in another way, too. It insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed. When the British forgot that they got a revolution. And, as a result, we Americans got a Constitution; a Constitution that, as those who wrote it were determined, would keep men free. If we give up part of that Constitution we give up part of our freedom and increase the chance that we will lose it all. I am not ready to take that risk. I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive.†—Ronald Reagan
12 boberinyetagain // Nov 19, 2007 at 11:58 am
Tracking devices in our pockets (cell phones)
Tracking devices in our cars (e-z pass)
Cameras on telephone poles
Government listening to our phone calls, monitoring our e-mails/web surfing.
Yep, them guns will keep us “free”, keep kidding yourself. We run like frightened children to “big daddy” and allow him (beg him) to do as he pleases to keep us “safe”
How come we aren’t?
13 gafisher // Nov 19, 2007 at 12:23 pm
Bober Re: Tracking Devices –
We know where you are, and we know what you’re doing. For the life of us, though, we can’t figure out why.
14 gafisher // Nov 19, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Debass Re#9: Swiss is the language Pelosi &co. use to deal with their bankers, but it’ll never be approved for common use unless the Swiss change their flag.
15 random // Nov 19, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Just imagine for a moment Bill as First Husband. While Hil and Putin are shaking down the world, First Husband and Mrs. Putin are shaken-it-down.
16 random // Nov 19, 2007 at 1:31 pm
Isn’t Swiss holey?
17 always right // Nov 19, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Just wait till congress “pass a law” to get its paws on the donation $$$ Salvation Army gets.
18 boberinyetagain // Nov 19, 2007 at 2:48 pm
Why not?
I’m feeling insecure, where did I leave my gun? Anyone?
19 Fred Sinclair // Nov 19, 2007 at 4:54 pm
b-y-a ALWAYS KEEP TRACK OF YOUR GUN (if you don’t, someone else will; I speak from experience)
Heirborn Ranger
20 EXT // Nov 19, 2007 at 6:09 pm
#12
How come we’re not safe?
There are still Democrats in Congress when they should all be home in their caves in Pakistan.
That’s what loose borders get us….
21 conserve-a-tips // Nov 19, 2007 at 6:35 pm
EXT: Did you hear the video clip of Clinton confronting her Code Pinko heckler? She kept trying to say, “What we need, is more Democrats in Congress….what we need is more Democrats in Congress….what we..” Very monotonous and robotic and all I could think was that I won’t vote for anybody who looks at our country through the jaded prism of a party, rather than through the standards of right and wrong. I won’t vote for anyone who says that we need more Republicans in Congress, either.
22 mindknumbed kid // Nov 19, 2007 at 7:43 pm
What we need, is the founding fathers in congress.What we need is an educated citizenry. What we need is a nation on its knees begging a Holy God for forgiveness.
If we had those three things we could even handle Hillary in the White House…but I doubt she would enjoy it.
23 mindknumbed kid // Nov 19, 2007 at 7:47 pm
Amen c-a-t, especially if they’re just a bunch of RINOs ! How’s the knee ?
24 Darthmeister // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:00 pm
No man is safe when there’s a liberal Democrat trying to “help” them.
I bet bober will feel really safe in that progressive cradle-to-grave cocoon the DemDonks keep trying to sell as if it were some kind snakeoil medicine show.
It’s the Democrats who keep trying to sell a little security in exchange for essential liberties (and a person’s dignity). There is little question that at least one thing the federal government is constitutionally authorized to do is provide for national security.
Instead the Donks have chosen to focus on the consitutional mandate “to promote the general welfare” by twisting it to mean “to provide welfare.” There’s a good reason the constitutional framers used the word “promote” and not “provide” since they pretty much believed limited government should not be in the charity business but rather be promoting the public good (e.g. national security, law enforcement, just law, etc.) and not be taxing the American people using coercive redistributive taxation in order to inefficiently achieve some kind of “public benefit” (welfare, corporate and farm subsidies, etc.) that private industry and institutions are better equipped to address at the local and state level.
25 mindknumbed kid // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Can anyone tell me of one government run program that is a model of efficiency?How about inovative?
I wish someone could convince me of a government that is truly helpful to me.
Look at the IRS, the longer it exists the more complex things become and the less efficient it becomes. Where is the motivation to cut operational costs? They don’t look for them, they don’t really need to, if they are over budget they wil lobby to increase funding.
26 mindknumbed kid // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:28 pm
English only has always worked well for me.
27 Darthmeister // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:40 pm
James Taranto at OpinionJournal speaking in English:
And the (fear entertained by the) left is much worse. They are so scared of terrorism that they have constructed an elaborate system of denial. They lash out at anyone who takes the terror threat seriously but their complacency is obviously phony, as evidenced by their lurid and obsessive fantasies about torture, tyranny, global warming and all other manner of unreal horrors.
bober:
Tracking devices in our pockets (cell phones)
Tracking devices in our cars (e-z pass)
Cameras on telephone poles
Government listening to our phone calls, monitoring our e-mails/web surfing.
Taranto nailed ya’ bober. The only reason you aren’t wetting your panties now over terrorism (other than your pathological denial) is your implicit acknowledgement that you know our military has done a bang-up job killing or at least keeping the Islamofascist nutbags occupied in Afghanistan and Iraq. That’s why you engage in your phony bravery by declaring that, unlike us, you suffer little insecurity with respect to what had been and still may be a very real random terrorist threat to innocent Americans.
I admit it’s comforting to me to know the Bush Administration takes seriously its constitutional national security/defense obligations even though the Donks in Congress put party before country. But my trump card is I know God is sovereign but He gave me a brain to see that I need to first trust my FAL and .45 auto before I trust some panty-waisted, lying, we-lost-in-Iraq Democrat with the security of my family and community. That is if the Donk gungrabbers don’t first try to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights. And may God have mercy on this nation if the Donks end up running the show after 2008. The Dhimmiecritters will turn the Constitution into a suicide pact before it dare offend its radical leftist voting bloc.
28 debass // Nov 19, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Garfisher,
Are you saying that the only flag that Nasty Leprosi and Co. will accept as representing them is the double cross?
29 gafisher // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:09 pm
I wish I had said that, debass; well put!
30 Darthmeister // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:36 pm
Resistance to Nazis did not come from universities or science or art or literature or radio or newspapers but only from religiously serious people” … i.e. Christians.
Some of the more serious anti-Semitics/anti-Jews today are liberals who couch their bigotry with codewords like “Zionists” and “neo-cons.” The National Socialist Worker’s Party (NAZI) believed the concept of capitalism and Jews were intricably bound, hence it gave the Nazis’ one more reason to virulently hate all capitalists. Nazism/fascism (national socialists) and Communism were merely two facets of socialist collectivism. And some of the two biggest Jew-hating governments in history were the Nazi and Soviet governments.
31 everthink // Nov 19, 2007 at 9:54 pm
What a Whackjob! So, now you’ve got a cross on your brown shirt?
32 conserve-a-tips // Nov 19, 2007 at 10:09 pm
Mindnumbedkid: It’s night and so it kneeds a pain pill! Something about the dark makes it hurt!! Thanks for askin’.
Boberin, I don’t know about you, but I don’t have my guns because of the government, but because of the bad, bad, bad people out there who would like nothing better then to walk into my home and cause me some trouble. ..you know…robbers. But then, I suppose I could just hand my things over and say, “Please don’t shoot me,” and they would listen.
33 conserve-a-tips // Nov 19, 2007 at 10:24 pm
I think that I am going to call my congresswoman and ask her to present her next bill, on the floor of the house, in French. I think that I will ask her to make sure that she addresses Madam Pulloutsy totally en Francais and that she asks her questions, demanding answers. I believe that I will also ask her to include the rest of the Oklahoma delegation in the reparte and that they throw in a few “sacre bleu’s!” and “mon dieu’s” and “quelque choses mal’s” just for effect. When Madam Speaker loses her temper and demands English, I would hope that the response would be a picture of Sarkozy and a round of, “Viva La France! Liberté, égalité, fraternité !”
34 Fred Sinclair // Nov 19, 2007 at 10:55 pm
mindknumbed kid # 25 The U.S. Patent Office is the only one that comes to mind. I don’t recall hearing anything negative about them.
Heirborn Ranger
35 Fred Sinclair // Nov 19, 2007 at 11:02 pm
c – a – t: Je Vous Adore, Que Voluze es encore?
(French class was a looooooong time ago (1952?)
Heirborn Ranger
36 Effeminem // Nov 20, 2007 at 5:09 am
An honest man has nothing to fear.
I’m not real big on government spying on us because they’ll just use the information to take away other rights, but in a better world, we wouldn’t really have privacy and we wouldn’t need it. Sort of a trade-off. How long would Ted Bundy have lasted if there were cameras everywhere?
37 Darthmeister // Nov 20, 2007 at 8:53 am
Last time I checked, the National Socialist German Worker Party brownshirts were collectivist left-wingers. Nazism and Soviet communism were merely two sides of the same socialist face. They hated capitalists, believed in centralized control of privately-owned businesses, promoted abortion particularly among minorities, extolled the virtues of euthanasia among the handicapped and the elderly for the good of German society, believed in gun control, and were thoroughly pagan in their worldview. The Nazis were more than happy to use Christian symbols and language to fool nominal Christians in order to advance their political causes just like the liberal Democrats have been doing the last couple of years.
Actually, neverthink, ideologically speaking, you have more in common with the Nazi brownshirts than any true Christian conservative does.
38 Darthmeister // Nov 20, 2007 at 9:21 am
Effeminem, though it’s far too easy to say one wants both unfettered privacy rights AND national security, in the real world it sometimes doesn’t work that way.
A question was recently asked of Chris Dodd that I think you might want to answer: What’s more important, the unfettered “right to privacy” or national security?
After much bloviating Chris Dodd eventually stated national security was most important because “civil rights” mean nothing to someone who is dead.
BTW, though our government has the technical ability to warehouse all email correspondence and telephone conversations it certainly does not have the ability to “monitor” those communications. The sheer number make it impossible. As it stands, warrantless FISA “wiretaps” have NOT been ruled illegal by the Supreme Court and in fact back in August a Democratically-controlled Congress passed a FISA bill which validated what the Bush Administration has been doing all along, when necessary monitor phone conversations using known terrorist telephone numbers which originate or terminate offshore without a warrant.
And once again I go back to the reality which no American should be naive about. It’s not about “spying” on Americans which is the real issue but rather for informed Americans to understand that ANY conversation on public airwaves or through the public ether on the Internet is by its nature NOT PRIVATE. It’s no more private than you sticking your head out the privacy of the front door of your house and yelling something to your neighbor across the street – it’s public airwaves! Doh!
Do I like the idea that some leftist Democrat regime might further subvert the FISA and ECHELON data gathering systems in order to turn America into a police state (don’t forget the thousands of FBI files that the Clinton Administration were in illegal possession of during the 1990s)? No. But then if I wanted to do something truly subversive and find myself on the wrong side of whatever Stalinist-type regime is in power, I sure wouldn’t be using landlines and emails. Prepaid cellphones that have been “scrubbed” would be the best way to communicate. Otherwise, what do you really have to fear if your simply ordering a Dominoes pizza, setting up an appointment to get your car fixed, or talking to the grandparents to set up a family reunion? You can’t put the genie back in the bottle and the terrible truth in this technological age is that ever since the 1950s the American government as well as other governments of the world have been in possession of the technological capability of “data mining.”
Don’t kid yourself, by your definition Americans have been “spied upon” since shortly after World War II and I can tell you for a fact that there was far more intrusions into privacy rights by FDR (opening and censoring private mail even within American borders, monitoring all overseas telegraphy, monitoring the phone calls of suspected “subversives” and Nazi sympathizers within the continental USA, etc. – all without the niceties of warrants) than what is happening today. Yet the American republic withstood such temporary intrusive measures during that time of war. Yes, as a general policy, “spying” on Americans is not a good thing and frankly our government doesn’t have the resources or facility to do much of that kind of “spying” you fear most.
BTW, no American founder believed in unfettered privacy rights, otherwise it would have been explicitly protected without amendment in the U.S. Constitution. The safety and the security of the republic typically takes priority over some altruistic or utopian definition of “privacy”. And don’t think for a moment that replacing the Bush Administration with a Clinton or Obama Administration is going to change this equation as long as they see the “vast right-wing conspiracy” as a real enemy. I believe history will record the Bush Administration was quite benign in its “spying” as compared to other past and possibly future Democratic administrations.
39 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 9:31 am
“Last time I checked, the National Socialist German Worker Party brownshirts were collectivist left-wingers.”
Where did you go to check that, … last time … Dipstick? Would they let me go there, too? I would like to read that by somebody other than you, … just once!
ET
40 Darthmeister // Nov 20, 2007 at 9:36 am
How Lee Harvey Oswald’s murder of JFK subverted American liberalism
Pretty compelling stuff. I’ve always put old school liberalism’s turn to anti-Americans and hard-left politics as occuring in the mid to late 1960s. Islamofascism declared war on the West somewhere between 1972 and 1979 (1972 Munich Olympic hostage assassinations and the Carter-Iranian hostage debacle). And it was only since 911 that slumbering Americans (at least some of us) woke up to this reality of a literal war against rapacious Islamic jihadism.
41 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 9:37 am
Have you read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William L. Shirer. Why don’t you do that?
42 Darthmeister // Nov 20, 2007 at 10:19 am
From a Yale website: National Socialist German Worker’s Party
Also, the The dirty little secret of Nazism
Of course the leftwing intellectual elites have long claimed the NAZIs were “right-wing” when in fact the NAZIs were left-wing just like their commie brethren in the Soviet Union. The war between the Nazis and Soviet Communists was an example of fratricide, which demonstrates there is no love lost between commies and national socialists just like there was no love lost between Sov-coms and the Chi-coms. The idea that socialism will create universal brotherhood among the various nations is a sick joke. Socialist regimes by definition support the heavy hand of centralized governments in hopes of creating a social collectivism which would assure its survival against free market capitalism.
And please note how the NAZIs padded its political rhetoric with all the socialist gobbley-goop that many liberal socialists in America do. All the nice sounding stuff about “self-determination”, “equal rights”, “the nationalization of all trusts”, “all personal profit arising from war must be treated as treason”. The “demands” of the NAZI party is quite revealing because it differs very little from the militant demands of the American left the last twenty or so years.
There is a certain racism which runs through Nazism, but then racism is no stranger to patronizing liberal Democrats and leftists in general. They’ve merely learned to hide it better than the NAZIs or their racism has expressed itself in other more subtle ways. What can be more bigotted or racist than to act like black Americans can’t make it in this world unless there’s a patronizing liberal or “affirmative action” helping them along?
And the crowning glory of the demands of the NAZI Party is this: “In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations. ”
Sounds just like the liberal/progressive/collectivist/Democrats to me. Use the power of “a strong central authority” to force their political and social prescriptions on a free people.
Nazism was socialism and socialism always leads to totalitarianism.
The American left confuses itself by pointing to Hitler’s Germanic nationalism without understanding that the Nazis were indeed strongly nationalistic but they were also socialistic – hence NATIONAL SOCIALIST German Worker’s Party. What’s so hard to understand about that?
43 Darthmeister // Nov 20, 2007 at 10:33 am
neverthink, if you’ve read the “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”, then you probably need to reread it keeping in mind the points I’ve made about the true nature of Nazi ideology. Shirer certainly isn’t the last word on this complex issue of left-wing Nazism if he was claiming Nazism was actually “right-wing”.
BTW, Shirer’s textbook, along with “Mein Kampf”, was required reading in a World War II history class I took at the UofH in 1974. Admittedly I don’t remember much about Shirer’s ideological perspective but his book has had it’s share of detractors for a variety of reasons.
For example, Elizabeth Wiskemann stated in her 1961 review that the book was “not sufficiently scholarly nor sufficiently well written to satisfy more academic demands”. But that’s neither here nor there since many so-called “scholars” are misinformed about the true nature of Nazism. I frankly don’t have the time or desire to rehash Shirer’s view of the Nazi party since the books runs nearly 1250 pages.
44 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 10:54 am
Wascal Wabbit finds another Wacko!
I went to that Yale site, there was no statement supporting you conclusions there; but, Goober over at “The dirty little secret of Nazism” let the cat out of the bag. That’s the secret ONLY you and he (and the very dumb here) know! Did he get this idea from you?
Thanks, now there are two of you!
ET
45 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 11:05 am
“Shirer certainly isn’t the last word … ” Oh’ but, mein kampf, he is!
This is THE authoritative, and exhaustive record of the Third Reich.
ET
46 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 11:24 am
“BTW, Shirer’s textbook, along with “Mein Kampfâ€, was required reading in a World War II history class I took at the UofH in 1974.” BS!!!!
Recommended maybe; but, as you point out it is bigger than most textbooks. In any case you’ve never read it.
You went to the University of Hawaii, on that Native American set aside? I guess we all appreciate things better when they are not given to us.
ET
47 gafisher // Nov 20, 2007 at 11:59 am
ET, what part of Nationalsozialist (National Socialist German Workers Party) makes you think it’s not a Socialist (a.k.a. left-wing) idealogy?
48 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 12:24 pm
gafisher,
We used to have church socials, the people who attended must have been “Church Socialists”; but, they weren’t NAZI’s. Tolerance, or the lack of it, is key here.
ET
49 Terry Cowgill » Tuesday’s Musings // Nov 20, 2007 at 2:04 pm
[...] Perhaps Congress should allow its own debates to proceed in Spanish, or require “Salvation Army bell-ringers to demonstrate a greater diversity of cultural rhythmic patterns [...]
50 Darthmeister // Nov 20, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Despite your almost pathological denials, the Nazis were indeed NATIONAL SOCIALISTS. Being a centralized, collectivist government makes them left-wing … period. Those on the left can be even more murderous, nationalistic and patriotic to their ideology of hate than the most radical right-winger. Remember, true right-wingers are anarchists (little to no government). Left-wingers are hive mentality collectivists … i.e. socialists. Limited government conservatives (and a few old school liberals) are actually the centrists on the political Mobius strip. The far left collectivists and the extreme far-right anarchists are strange bedfellows indeed.
BTW, your obfuscating sophistry doesn’t change the reality that Nazism was fundamentally left-wing … you know, all praise to the State which will nuture us from cradle to grave! Get used to it, Nazism was merely another facet of socialism.
Changing the subject:
Those matters, however, aren’t paramount on the minds of residents in urban communities, who want crime-free streets, neighborhoods free of vandalism, pothole-free streets, family-friendly parks and low taxes. Rudolph Giuliani’s success in attending to those desires while serving as mayor of New York is one reason why he is now the leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination. Democratic Mayor Bart Peterson’s failure to do so recently cost him his job. It has also kept Indianapolis, once a shining Rust Belt metropolis, mired in the same blight, mayhem and malaise that have long made Detroit (run by a Democratic mayor) an unlivable slum.
A near-record 153 reported homicides last year — including such headline-grabbing incidents as the savage mass murder of Emma Valdez and six of her relatives — shows that Indianapolis is in some ways less safe than either New York or Detroit. It was the only one of eight mid-sized cities (along with the Big Apple) to experience increases in incidents and crime rates per 100,000 people in every category — including a 44-percent increase in the burglary rate — between 2000 and 2005.
Rampant, flagrant vandalism has become an increasingly common feature of the city’s landscape, as even downtown office buildings are “tagged” in graffiti. So has abandoned housing, with both poor and otherwise middle-class neighborhoods such as Fountain Square blighted by ramshackles that attract drug dealing, vagrancy and arson. City government, once-known for embracing privatization and merging local government operations under such legendary mayors as Stephen Goldsmith and Richard Lugar, has become addicted to tax increases. Peterson burnished this reputation — and likely sealed his fate — this past July when he convinced the Democrat-controlled city-county council to approve a 65-percent increase in the county-option income tax, just as homeowners were livid over a new round of double-digit property tax increases.
Some Democrats never learn, there is a limit to which American taxpayers will be the beast of burden for tax-and-spend liberalism.
51 expressqz » Bill to Make Debate in Congress English-Only Defeated // Nov 20, 2007 at 3:00 pm
[...] all the details here [...]
52 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Is not! Is not! Is not!
Which party is more tolerant of their right of others to hold views that differer from their own? Why I even think your voice should be heard (and immediately discounted for what it is).
Were you not recently suggesting Democrats should be rounded up and jailed like illegals.
That sounds sorta NAZI to me!
I hope you’ll remember what I said: Maybe you could get Blackwater to try that for you.
Now, go wash that silly little mustache off!
ET
PS Crime which was was down under Clinton has gone up under Bush, as has teen pregnancy.
In fact, every measure previously used to measure the success of an administration has declined dramatically under Dumbyah.
ET
53 everthink // Nov 20, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Will Scott McClelland’s new book “What Happened” bring “Frog Walking” back to the White House? I never know for sure, what think you, patriots?
426 days.
ET
54 Fred Sinclair // Nov 20, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Darthmeister – I think this may include trolls. (It wouldn’t “cut & paste” so I had to type it out with my one hand )- hope it’s worth it It makes at least as much sense a some of what I’ve been reading here from our homegrown “windbag” trolls. – Heirborn Ranger
“If Hoekstra is correct in asserting that Hobbes is only responding to an explicit fool, then we have one less reason to take Hobbes seriously rather than one more. The only fool worth arguing against is the silent one. It is not the explicit fool but the silent fool who “is deadly to the Commonwealth” (p.628) Hoekstra reminds us that the Latin origin of the word fool is “windbag” (p 624, n. 10). An explicit fool may indeed be a windbag: all talk and no action “enclined onely to ostentation; but not to attempt.” While the explicit talks, those who remain silent have the chance to “strike first” (p 623). This only confirms that if Hobbes really intends to limit his refutation to the explicit fool then the problem that is posed to his social contract theory by the silent fool remains unanswered.
You must log in to post a comment.