Hypocrisy Alert: Dem Rep. Pete Stark Called Bush Liar On House Floor

[red states rule]

Here is a Dem not only calling Pres Bush a liar, but also smears the troops in Iraq

Where was the outrage in the liberal media on this one?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DsGaNR9dVPM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DsGaNR9dVPM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[CSM]

Isn't it odd that the Dems were so concerned over the cost of the war(s) when Bush was CiC and now that we have Obama, there is absolutely NO discussion of the cost of troop surges in Afghanistan, the rising death toll of US troops there, etc.?

Such disingenuous tactics validate my belief that the politicians really do not give a rats ass about the troops or anything else. They have and will say just about anything to stay in power ... and the country be damned!

[red states rule]

Isn't it odd that the Dems were so concerned over the cost of the war(s) when Bush was CiC and now that we have Obama, there is absolutely NO discussion of the cost of troop surges in Afghanistan, the rising death toll of US troops there, etc.?

Such disingenuous tactics validate my belief that the politicians really do not give a rats ass about the troops or anything else. They have and will say just about anything to stay in power ... and the country be damned!

After Pres Bush was booed by Dems during his State of the Union speech after warning us SS would go broke, Harry Reid responed to Bush's SS reform plan

It is a classic


Domestic ambition

Throughout the 53-minute speech, many of the president's points were met with loud applause and standing ovations.

But the first half of Mr Bush's speech focused on domestic policy - and this is where he received loud heckles from some members of Congress.

He spoke in detail about his plans for younger workers to divert some of their taxes into personal investment accounts to ensure they receive a pension when they retire.

Responding to Mr Bush's speech, Senate minority leader Harry Reid said the plan for social security was "dangerous" because it would add to national debt.

"That's an immoral burden to place on the backs of the next generation," he added.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4228927.stm

[CSM]

Yeah, those "immoral burdens" can get pretty... well....burdensome! I guess overall the point is that all politicians see the citizenry of this country as pack mules. The only difference between them is in which "immoral burden" those mules will be forced to bear.

[red states rule]

Yeah, those "immoral burdens" can get pretty... well....burdensome! I guess overall the point is that all politicians see the citizenry of this country as pack mules. The only difference between them is in which "immoral burden" those mules will be forced to bear.

Based on what I have seen from Dems recently CSM, I understand why they do mind spending mroe and increasing taxes

They hand money over to groups that will help keep them elected, and they do not plan to pay the increased taxes

These Dems wil be dead and gone when the bill comes due - so why should they care?

[CSM]

Based on what I have seen from Dems recently CSM, I understand why they do mind spending mroe and increasing taxes

They hand money over to groups that will help keep them elected, and they do not plan to pay the increased taxes

These Dems wil be dead and gone when the bill comes due - so why should they care?

Why shoud they care?

Well, I believe they care because it propagates the dynasty. Anyone who doesn't believe we have royal dynasties should take a good hard look at the family from Massacheussetts that is so enmeshed in politics, the Rockefellers and a few others that have been in power since before WWII.

[red states rule]

Why shoud they care?

Well, I believe they care because it propagates the dynasty. Anyone who doesn't believe we have royal dynasties should take a good hard look at the family from Massacheussetts that is so enmeshed in politics, the Rockefellers and a few others that have been in power since before WWII.

As I said posted before, liberals care about one thing and one thing only - POWER. They really do not care how their poliices harm the nation, workers, families, and our national defense

Pres Bush pointed out how Social security will go broke and here is how Dems responded

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RBxmEGG71PM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RBxmEGG71PM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[CSM]

as one famous/infamous poster once wrote: hypocricy is ok as long as it's your side doiing it (or words to that effect).

It is my opinion that rehashiing who did what to whom is not going to help ... the issues this nation faces today are far too important to be marginalized by prepubescent name calling. The effects of what our government does in the next few months and years will have long lasting repurcussions that this country may or may not withstand. I find it incredibily frustrating that our elected officials spend more time worrying about breaches of protocol than they do about resolving real issues.

[red states rule]

as one famous/infamous poster once wrote: hypocricy is ok as long as it's your side doiing it (or words to that effect).

It is my opinion that rehashiing who did what to whom is not going to help ... the issues this nation faces today are far too important to be marginalized by prepubescent name calling. The effects of what our government does in the next few months and years will have long lasting repurcussions that this country may or may not withstand. I find it incredibily frustrating that our elected officials spend more time worrying about breaches of protocol than they do about resolving real issues.

As I pointed out to my liberal buddy - who i car pool with - IF Obama really wanted to get health ins for those who do not have it, he would be trying to grow the economy with tax cuts

With jobs comes health ins.

If Obama would have went to Wall St and told investers he would cut the corporate tax cut to 15% - he would see the Dow soar, businees expand, and hire new workers

Those workers - in a month or so - would then have health ins, and damn, they would be paying taxes to the government

But Obama does not care about these people. He care about government, and increasing the power of the government