He's been beating the anti-Jim McDermott drum for quite some time. The latest installment is here.
Posted by Eric Earling at December 18, 2007 10:13 PM | Email ThisThere are certain advantages in retaining the ineffective liberal who doesn't actually accomplish very much but is a constant embarrassment to other liberals.
Posted by: Oy Vay on December 18, 2007 11:03 PMDitto...
With enemies like GasBaghdad Jim McDermott, who needs friends?
He's the most entertaining politico around, and there's no cover charge! Besides, the less effective he is, the less looting there is of the federal treasury.
Last thing anyone needs is another suckling earmarker buying boats the navy doesn't want or t-shirts that melt on the bodies of Marines.
First Congressional District ComSymps are getting exactly the government they deserve.
The Piper
Posted by: Piper Scott on December 19, 2007 04:38 AMhttp://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on December 19, 2007 07:43 AMThat's the Seventh Congressional District, thank you. Jim McDermott is our finger in your eye. Long may he serve!
Thanks, you have now proven that people like you had no problem when Stalin or Lenin murdered anyone they wished, just to get their way!
What a way goveren
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on December 19, 2007 10:09 AMIvan thinks McDermott is wonderful because he is "our finger in your eye". I wonder just who "our" are? socialists?,communists?
Maybe Ivan could enlighten us as to just what "our" really believes.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 19, 2007 11:12 AMSo because I support McDermott, I support Lenin and Stalin? For your information, some of those people who Stalin murdered were my family members. So you can kiss my a--, you ignorant, illiterate, right-wing piece of s---.
Get it now?
Posted by: John Galt on December 19, 2007 12:49 PMWish to make a bigger fool of yourself Ivan.
Posted by: Army Medic/vet on December 19, 2007 12:52 PMYes the peace loving and understanding left.
Can't we all get along! LOL
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on December 19, 2007 12:59 PMThank you for the correction...7th District. The early morning fog in my coffee-deprived brain caused me to confuse my own singularly fubar-represented 1st Congressional District with carpetbagging Jay Inslee, the demagogue's demagogue, with the unlucky 7th.
BTW...which finger is it that he sticks in eyes? The one up his nose, the one representing his IQ, or the one up his...
When you find out, please let us all know.
The Piper
A fine demonstration from a member of the peace loving, tolerant left.
Reminds me of those great tapes Dan Sytman used to record at peace protests. Those wonderful peace loving types often threatened to kick his butt.
It's not exactly difficult to see through these people.
And Ivan, here's one in yours.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on December 19, 2007 01:19 PMWhy the hell not a single thread on SP about liberals Patty Murry and Norm Dicks and their bribes uh erm um I mean "earmarks"?
One might think you are trying to get into the good graces of the local MSM outlets to perhaps make a Goldsteinesque launch into a media career.
Is SP just a stepping stone for you to join the MSM? I gotta ask because this powder puff treatment of Democrat malfeasance is quite obvious.
Posted by: pbj on December 19, 2007 01:28 PM
There's a necessary cognitive dissonance that ivan and friends must always maintain in their minds in order to justify their collectivism. They can't understand that rights to the collective, mean rights away from the individual. But we are not collectives. We are all individuals.
But if one builds their whole career on union membership and their whole ideology and self identification around collectivism, it's probably pretty hard to admit such a failure to oneself. It's much easier to keep up the cognitive dissonance, and lash out with profanity when cornered intellectually.
And that's Today's Progressivism. In your face statism and collectivism, and if you don't like it, then they'll force it on you, and swear at you at the same time. Stalin and Lenin would be proud, except they took it the step further and instead of just shouting down the dissenters, they killed them outright.
I guess that's how the left justifies themselves. They don't want to kill those of us conservatives and libertarians who are oriented towards freedom, capitalism, individualism, etc. they just want to shut us up, and do so with the force of law.
Texas Councilman T. Bubba Bechtel, a part-time City Councilman from
Midland , TX , was asked on a local live radio talk show the other day
just what he thought of the allegations of torture of the Iraqi prisoners.
His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause
from the audience.
"If hooking up an Iraqi prisoner's balls to a car's battery cables will save
one Texas GI's life, then I have just two things to say":
"Red is positive"
"Black is negative"
The left LOVES to invoke Robin Hood, but they even get THAT wrong. Robin Hood did NOT "steal from the rich and give to the poor." He actually re-possessed from the Sheriff of Nottingham (read: government) and returned the property to its rightful owners (read: productive INDIVIDUALS.) They've had to lie and distort the story to make Robin Hood their hero. If they knew the truth, they'd hate him, too.
Leftism rests on a sick (and hopefull rotting) pedestal of narcissism and covetousness. It's not a philosophy for the mentally healthy and self-reliant.
Posted by: John Galt on December 19, 2007 03:46 PMSpot on.
I remember when Disney movies actually had good values, not leftist, pc ones. Anyone else?
Posted by: John Galt on December 19, 2007 04:40 PMThe right wing opposed intervention by the USA in Europe affairs up to and including the time when Hitler was engaged in violent aggression.
Democrats Truman & Kennedy fought communism.
Identifying democrats or liberals with Stalin or Lenin is a stupid and ridiculous libel.
If collectivism is wrong, then how does the right wing justify schools? Roads? Collective defense? Colelctive standards for buildings and zoning? COllectivist laws that take away your right to pollute the atmosphere?
Does not the consitution say congress may pass laws based on majority vote plus signature by the president?
Does this not show the founders envisioned having a government?
Any government can be viewed as a deprivation of your individual liberty to exist in a state of nature in which the strong and the conniving and the vicious will take your property, cheat you out of your pension, block you from access to the stream and the forests where everyone harvests deer or nuts.
Where in the actual world is this right wing paradise you right wingers want the USA to emulate?
Russia?
China -- no environmental laws?
Guatemala -- no real taxes, you are free efectively to be rich and hire vicious mercenaries to go kill all the union supporters and peasant advocates.
Please tell us one example of this tiny-government paradise that you can point to.
To equate liberalism or social democracy to Stalin and Lenin is like saying UK, Australia, Sweden, France, Italy, Switzerland and about 25 other countries with high incomes and very high median standards of living -- successful countries -- with a capitalist economic base and a democratic polical system -- are the ame as murderous regimes that mudredered tens of millions of people.
Are you all mentally deficient and insane?
PS: check out the French President's new girlfriend. They are not married, does that disturb your childish "family values"?
PPS: Joyful Noel to all !
Posted by: Marcel on December 20, 2007 07:03 AMBut if one builds their whole career on repeating Rand cult myths and their whole ideology and self identification around greed is good and devil take the hindmost, it's probably pretty hard to admit such a failure to oneself. It's much easier to keep up the cognitive dissonance, and lash out with false moderation when cornered intellectually.
And that's Today's conservatism. In your face rapacity, monopoly, and might makes right, and if you don't like it, then they'll force it on you, and swear at you at the same time. Mussolini and Franco would be proud, except they took it the step further and instead of just shouting down the dissenters, they killed them outright.
I guess that's how the right justifies themselves. They don't want to kill those of us liberals and libertarians who are oriented towards freedom, true competition, individualism, economic justice, etc. they just want to shut us up, and do so with the force of law.
Posted by: ivan on December 20, 2007 07:22 AMAt least I have the backbone to come on here and post under my real name, with my real e-mail address.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, even to cowards.
Posted by: ivan on December 20, 2007 07:39 AMIvan says: " I guess that's how the right justifies themselves. They don't want to kill those of us liberals and libertarians who are oriented towards freedom, true competition, individualism, economic justice, etc. they just want to shut us up and do so with the force of law." Let's see which "right" implimented the CAO in King County? The Trans-fat ban? The Smoking Ban ? Which Party that controls the King County Government uses it's DOE, DNR, DOH and police to enforce those bans? Which State Government fired people who didn't want to join a union? Hard to be an individualist, own property, work or dissent when The State of Washington and King County and the City of Seattle all take actions to keep you in line, shut you up and extract more taxes from you with the force of law. I guess Gregoire, Sims, Pelz, Constantine are all really so far left, they are right.
Posted by: Huh? on December 20, 2007 08:14 AMSo, comrade, when you're one of Goldy's Geldings what's your tag?
Just a quick note...while I'm clearly not a supporter of Ron Paul - his Iraq policy is an invitation to a Middle East killing fields - it's undeniable that the only certified Libertarian in Prexy primary play is running as a...REPUBLICAN!
Libertarians, as a rule, loathe the big government crappola liberals orgasmicly exude, and they're HUGE gun fans. So stick that in your balalaika and pluck it!
The Piper
Posted by: Piper Scott on December 20, 2007 08:46 AMGeorge Washington warned Americans not to "entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition". Maybe the "right wing" who Wilson REFUSED to compromise with about the Treaty of Versailles (and thus left unratified by the US, and completely set in terms by France and the UK) were following Constitutional principles?
Wilson's demand for ideological purity in negotiations yielded the Treaty that set the groundwork for WWII. His leftist idealism is what helped set that most bloody time.
Contrast that to the Right's position best identified by President Reagan:
If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later
Rational compromise. It's called win-win, and is the fundamental principle of free trade and open economies. If you can get a position where you mostly agree, then you accept it. Unlike the unrational Left who demand 100% or nothing. And are willing to destroy a nation to get their 100%...
Polarization in politics comes from the Left. Look at how the two sides view the last Presidents - Clinton is derided as a philandering opportunist, but is acknowledged by the Right for at least not screwing up the economy too bad, even if he did ignore foreign relations.
Bush=Hitler to the Left.
Which is more polarizing? Well, if I called you uneducated, is that worse than calling you pure evil?
Democrats Truman & Kennedy fought communism.
And we're still in Korea with the big problem of North Korea a direct result of the Truman doctrine applied to that country. And that little dust-up Kennedy started was the biggest war we lost.
President Nixon brought about a change in relations with China - avoiding future wars in SE Asia. And laid the framework that led to the defeat of economic collectivism and economic Communism in China (I don't know how often you go to China, but it's economy is more capitalistic than ours).
President Reagan actually DEFEATED Communism.
Identifying democrats or liberals with Stalin or Lenin is a stupid and ridiculous libel.
Complaining about the sting of truth is the defense of the indefensible.
If collectivism is wrong, then how does the right wing justify schools? Roads? Collective defense? Colelctive standards for buildings and zoning? COllectivist laws that take away your right to pollute the atmosphere?
Schools? We don't. The Department of Education should be dissolved. It's a local and state - NOT Federal - issue. Charter schools! No NEA/WEA! Privatizion of the system. And an acknowledgement that an education is a privilege, not a right. If your child does not want to learn, and you don't want to do anything about it, then out of school they go - it's not babysitting.
Roads? "The Congress shall have Power To...To regulate Commerce ...among the several States...To establish...Post Roads". It's called Article 1, section 8 of the US Constitution. Interstate Highways, railways, and flight paths are Constitutionally given to the Federal government. The rest is reserved to the States and localities, as per the Tenth Amendment.
Collective defense? "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense" - Oops, it's Constitutionally required.
Standards for buildings and zoning? Should be a local or State issue, not a Federal issue. Per the 10th Amendment.
Pollute the atmosphere The closest would be the Preamble - promote the General Welfare, as environmental issues can be wide-ranging between and covering multiple States. But usually should be a States or municipality issue.
Does not the consitution say congress may pass laws based on majority vote plus signature by the president?
Yes, provided those laws are Constitutional in their scope. I would argue that most of the laws passed by Congress are not.
Does this not show the founders envisioned having a government?
Yes, and your straw man that pro-capitalists do not want a government is a fallacy. Government is needed - Constitutionally - for many functions. But it is well beyond its Constitutional limitations. If you want to exceed what the Constitution laid down, then use the means of Amendment to change the Constitution.
Any government can be viewed as a deprivation of your individual liberty to exist in a state of nature in which the strong and the conniving and the vicious will take your property, cheat you out of your pension, block you from access to the stream and the forests where everyone harvests deer or nuts.
Government should exist to ENSURE our Creator-given unalienable rights. Powers not explicitly given to the Government are reserved for the States or the People, per the 10th Amendment.
The Founders set up incredibly strong restrictions on the Federal government to PROTECT the rights and freedom of individuals.
Where in the actual world is this right wing paradise you right wingers want the USA to emulate?
Russia?
China -- no environmental laws?
Guatemala -- no real taxes, you are free efectively to be rich and hire vicious mercenaries to go kill all the union supporters and peasant advocates.
Please tell us one example of this tiny-government paradise that you can point to.
My personal experience would be that Chile is close, The Republic of Ireland is pretty good, and contrary to your statement above (China has environmental laws, and is enforcing them) China and HK, from an economic standpoint.
Collectivists like yourself - and those of the Western European governments - need to recognize that it is the INDIVIDUAL, acting alone or through a corporation - that creates the wealth. The Government does not. Restrictions on corporations will only affect the individual (for anything that affects a corporation flows through to the corporate owners), and restrict ultimately the ability to generate wealth.
Ideally, there should be ZERO corporate taxation. None. For all taxes levied on corporations are passed through to the consumer - the individual. Adding taxation to corporations is a stealth sales tax for individuals, and a burden for corporations who now must act as a tax collection arm of the Government. Meaning they become less efficient and less profitable, restricting growth.
To equate liberalism or social democracy to Stalin and Lenin is like saying UK, Australia, Sweden, France, Italy, Switzerland and about 25 other countries with high incomes and very high median standards of living -- successful countries -- with a capitalist economic base and a democratic polical system -- are the ame as murderous regimes that mudredered tens of millions of people.
None have a standard of living as high as ours, nor have an economy anywhere NEAR as vibrant as ours. Look at the recent rankings by the World Bank in terms of purchasing power parity.
Luxembourg leads, simply because it is a historical refuge for tax purposes - its 1929 Holding Company legislation, providing for no taxes on holding companies - makes it a tax haven for Europeans. If Luxembourg bows to EU pressure and eliminates the 1929 law, it's PPP and economy will collapse.
Then there's the US. The first two European countries in that list are neither EU members. The Netherlands is agitating to leave the EU. Denmark? Not in the EU. Ireland? Tax haven. UK? Not in the EU.
Let's look at your list country-by-country:
UK: 80% of the US. And not a member of the EU.
Australia: 77% of the US.
Sweden: 79% of the US.
France: 76% of the US.
Italy: 69% of the US.
Switzerland: 92% of the US. Not a member of the EU.
If anything, we see that the MORE a country respects individual liberty and economic freedom (the UK and Switzerland are considerably more open economically than their EU neighbors) the better the country does. You've exactly PROVEN the pro-economic-freedom side.
Are you all mentally deficient and insane?
No. Just rational, willing to look at hard facts, and draw conclusions consistent with those facts. Economic freedom for individuals and corporations yield the highest standard of living and the best growth - personally, locally, and as a country.
PS: check out the French President's new girlfriend. They are not married, does that disturb your childish "family values"?
Where did "Family values" enter in to the discussion?
Does the French President's strong stance against labor unions disturb your childish Marxism?
PPS: Joyful Noel to all !
And Merry Chistmas to you!
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 20, 2007 08:51 AMMy goodness! Please cite some examples Ivan so we can understand what you are referring to.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 20, 2007 08:55 AMNot exciting enough? I take it you went to public school, and probably work in a union. Can't be bothered with those details and that pesky reading thing...
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 20, 2007 09:00 AMI'm sad to see that the school you attended didn't really live up to standards. Expecting everything to be in pithy little quotes is a sign of a weak mind, and the reduction of everything to the 30 second sound-bite is one of the biggest tragedies of modern discourse.
And yes, this is my third paragraph in this post. Just to annoy you.
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 20, 2007 09:41 AMthat you would compare with a 'frickin blog' just proves my point...BS!
Posted by: Yawn on December 20, 2007 09:54 AMDo you actually have a point that you'd like to make? Or is logic just too much for your left wing brain to comprehend?
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 20, 2007 11:00 AMI think your point-by-point rebuttal of the typical leftist canards thrown out by "Marcel" was remarkably succinct. And well done! But more than likely a waste of your time and talent. Leftists don't have much use for reason and logic. Why, they have EMOTION and GOOD INTENTIONS on their side, and that's what makes them so much better than us. (/sarcasm)
Posted by: John Galt on December 20, 2007 11:45 AMPerhaps it is an indication that you harbor a deep seated insecurity regarding your own beliefs.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 20, 2007 11:53 AMand some of you are indeed 'laughable'.
Naaa, McDermott is just wishing for the days of Stalin again.
That way we could never question his actions.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on December 20, 2007 12:23 PMFriday, December 17, 2004
Monorail chief gets $11,000 raise
Members of the Seattle Monorail Project executive committee voted 3-1 last night to raise Horn's annual salary as monorail project director to at least $184,573 next year, up 5 percent from his current pay level. That increase doesn't include any separate cost-of-living adjustment.
If the adjustment is what the agency thinks it might be, Horn, 49, could end up getting an $11,900 raise, staying among the state's higher-paid public agency directors.
Horn's supporters said he'd earned the raise by guiding the agency through a year of controversies, political opposition and complex legalities, to a point at which it is preparing to build the $1.6 billion, 14-mile system and has tentative approval to use city streets.
"We are rocking and rolling here, and I think we should say (yes to) it," committee member Cleve Stockmeyer said. Committee members Tom Weeks and Kristina Hill agreed.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/204201_horn17.html
Were ya really rockin' & rollin' Cleve???
Posted by: dude on December 20, 2007 02:46 PMThink about it, you head a State Department who's goal is to support a largely illegal alien population and dispense dollars and services with a staff of 1,000. No fat in our State budget right?
Posted by: Huh? on December 20, 2007 03:06 PM