In fact, forget the thread!
I would say the obvious partisan political nature of the seven Benghazi "investigation"Committees and, what is it now, three(?) Planned Parenthood “investigation” committees being run on the taxpayers’ dime, easily qualify as malicious GOP behavior.
And yet reality has a liberal bias. What does that say about your worldview?
Oh, you had a point other than “Both sides are just as bad!”?
Hmm. Apparently you didn’t.
Again, there’s nothing preventing you from making your own thread. Please, open one and tell us exactly why Democrats are to be pitted. You know, as opposed to doing your best to derail a thread that makes your side look bad (not that they need any help, of course).
And if you could include anything from this century, perhaps…?
Ballot boxes were stuffed by the GOP in Ohio in 2004; voters were disenfranchised in JEB’s Florida to help get his brother elected (the one that would later lie to Congress to wage Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol’s war).
So, the Democrats are to be judged both by the actions of boll weevils and by the actions of the civil rights faction? Really? I guess your point is that LBJ, being Texan, was really just another boll weevil, manipulating those poor dumb Negroes into voting for Democrats while giving them nothing.
I don’t know about LBJ, but there are Democrats who think that way across this country, I agree. But what LBJ did was give them a block of black voters who hold them to account. Governor Jay Nixon (D) in my home state was well-liked by white people, but I think his handling of the Ferguson matter lost him black support in a big way. Blacks in this country do have to stand up for themselves and fight against white Democrats, whatever white Dems think.
Where are the GOP in this? Still taking credit for US Grant? How about you take some blame for letting the Redemption happen, yeah?
Yeah, containment and anti-Communism was bipartisan in those days. Don’t blame the Democrats because you weren’t winning elections.
If I were of a sufficiently anti-Communist bent, I could also say that while Johnson’s administration bungled the war, Nixon abandoned our allies in South Vietnam, and allied to the backers of groups like the Khmer Rouge and Shining Path. But hey, German-accented Realpolitik, patriotism & anti-Communism, same difference, right? (But that would be cruel. We probably did have to let Vietnam be unified by the Soviet-backed side in the end. I’m not as clear why Pol Pot was our ally in the 1980’s, though.)
Who needs an American President for the Americans, when you can snuggle up to Asian dictators? You probably want a Bush in office, to get cozily back in bed with the emirs of Arabia.
W’s administration lied to Congress to start a war.
Best deal either side was going to get, probably.
I live in a GOP district. You think Pubbie kids don’t vandalize Democrat yard signs? Really? Come on.
On this, we agree.
But politicians of whatever party should be held to account for their sins.
More gerrymandering, as it were.
31 state licensing offices to be closed:
*The Alabama Law Enforcement Agency’s website says their office at the Clarke County Courthouse is still open, but soon a lot of others nearby won’t be. On Wednesday, the agency announced that it would close 31 offices throughout the state, leaving 29 counties without a place where 16-year-olds can take a driver’s test …
and, of course,
*In 2011, Alabama lawmakers approved the state’s voter ID law, making it illegal to vote in Alabama without a government-issued photo ID. For most folks, that’s a driver’s license. In those 29 counties you might be able to register at the courthouse, but you won’t be able to cast a ballot there unlessunless you have that ID…
Look at the list of counties now where you can’t get a driver’s license. There’s Choctaw, Sumter, Hale, Greene, Perry, Wilcox, Lowndes, Butler, Crenshaw, Macon, Bullock … Depending on which counties you count as being in Alabama’s Black Belt, either twelve or fifteen Black Belt counties soon won’t have a place to get a driver’s license.
Counties where some of the state’s poorest live… majority African-American. *
Shitheads.
(reposted from SRIotD, with less invective)
Indeed, in the very early '60s there were lots of racist Democrats in the South. By 1968, you know what we called these assholes? Republicans. Guess they felt unwelcome in the Democratic party, while Goldwater and Nixon greeted them with open arms.
You should look up the fight at the 1964 Democratic convention some time.
While he also said it would lose the South for the Democrats - which he was right about. I must say that Republicans today are working as hard as they can to make sure his prediction remains true.
Wrong, yest? Malicious? You seem to forget the secret bombing your favorite Republican started. You think Tricky Dick got us out faster than Humphrey would have? Or RFK if he had lived?
And we didn’t get out because of Nixon being courageous - we got out because of lack of support of the country (on the left) and his lack of power due to Watergate.
Hey idiot, the planner of that right wing conspiracy admits that Hillary was right about it being a right wing conspiracy.
I have an idea. If you like getting into wars so much, we should restart the draft but make only conservatives eligible. No age limit. You guys can go get your asses shot off if you love it so much.
Yeah, that’s Democratic policy. I admit to vandalizing a sign when I was working on a political campaign. But I was working for the NY Conservative party back then.
What did they do, add the name “Bush” to it?
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, you are free to start a “Malicious Democrat behavior” Pit thread and to post in it whatever you might think qualifies. Why don’t you stop shitting in this one and go do that?
It’s malicious Republican behavior, where else would he post it? It’s just like adaher posting in the Stupid Republican Idea thread.
The last thread he started complaining about Democrats (sorry…“liberals”) didn’t go so well, really.
LBJ took the IRT
Down to 4th Street, USA
When he got there
What did he see?
The youth of America
On LSD!
LBJ, IRT
LSD, LBJ
FBI, CIA
LSD, Eeeelll Beeeee Jaaaayyy! 
We talked about this. Tequila and bongwater is not for amateurs.
adaher isn’t that selective, though. He posts his stupidity everywhere.
:mad: “Amateurs,” indeed!
- Marco Rubio
http://theslot.jezebel.com/marco-rubio-backs-off-suggestion-that-women-look-forwar-1732124335
Comment is superfluous.
…wul, if you’re going to talk about Rubio, Trump, and a variety of others I could think of, the poison never stops. Whatever happened to respectable Republicans who didn’t seem like they were trying to outscream each other on Jerry Springer?
Well, now, to be ruthlessly fair, there was no actual screaming involved, he simply lied his ass of in a perfectly calm manner. I’ve told you a million times, don’t exaggerate!
While hunting for a medical record(*), I came across an old Harper’s magazine with an article by Thomas Frank titled “GET RICH OR GET OUT: Attempted robbery with a loaded federal budget.” (Harper’s is not on-line, but you may get 2 or 3 hits if you copy-paste an excerpt into Google search. That’s how got the excerpts; I didn’t type them all in. :eek:)
-
- After I spent half an hour searching for the radiogram, my wife found it in less than a minute … in exactly the place I expected it to be. :smack:
Words “appearing between quotation marks” in the following are excerpts from George W. Bush’s 2004 Budget.
[QUOTE=Thomas Frank]
A preliminary chapter called “Governing with Accountability,” for example, simply heaps blame on federal shoulders. When corporate scoundrels are accused of wrongdoing, of course, they try to defend themselves, or at least take the Fifth; here the White House can be seen confessing, on behalf of previous administrations and, indeed, the entire federal workforce, to just about anything you care to think of. “Federal agencies,” for example, are said to be so out of touch that they have “not managed themselves well enough to know whether they had the right people with the right skills to do their work.” Among federal workers “pay and performance are generally unrelated,” which is apparently not a problem in the private sector. Another chapter spreads the blame to federal efforts generally, lamenting that “in most cases, we do not know what we are getting for our money.” This in turn is said to be a failing of “the Washington mentality,” which “has wasted untold billions of dollars…” The books tell of gaping loopholes in the Social Security system, credit-card abuse by federal employees, and preposterous agricultural price supports, all of these problems flowing together to give the overall impression that government is simply a gigantic boondoggle.
…
Much of the press commentary on this budget has focused on the deficits into which it proposes to plunge us. The budget’s authors have, of course, anticipated this reaction. That surplus for which everyone pines was, we are helpfully informed, nothing more than a “revenue bubble” propelled by a bull market that was “already in the process of popping” when the businessman president took office. Although it is obviously true that the booming stock market pumped up tax receipts, and although it was foolish for anyone to count on those inflated tax receipts continuing into the future, to call the surplus a “bubble” is to confuse the issue. In ordinary usage, a “bubble” is a pitfall of the private sector, a situation in which prices are driven to unsustainable heights by collective fantasies of stupendous future profits. A bubble is a swindle – you know, like the NASDAQ. Here the term is simply used to imply that the surplus was doomed all along and that the current administration, unlike its predecessor, is in no way to blame for its disappearance. Those tax cuts enacted two years ago? They did not cause the deficit. The budget would have been in deficit anyway because of falling revenues after the stock-market crash. Tax cuts, therefore, aren’t important. Slam door, walk away.
… Fully 32 percent of the total tax cuts this year will go to society’s richest 1 percent. While the average person will get a tax cut of $289 in 2003, people who take in more than a million dollars a year will get tax cuts of more than $30,000 each. Ironically, these are the same people who benefited from the great bull market of the 1990s, as well as from the great bull market of the 1980s. The bull may have exhausted himself now, but with George W. Bush taking up the slack these same folks are going to get their third up-decade in a row.
Just imagine how the president’s writers might have illustrated this aspect of the budget. Rather than photos of impoverished children getting school lunches and handicapped people working in a garden, the documents might have included pictures of high-income Americans posing proudly on their new sailboat, or pointing to the gleaming copper gutters they’ve had installed on their suburban manse, or sharing a laugh with the eager young staff of the rule-breaking libertarian magazine they’ve endowed. We could gawk at their titanium tree house designed by Frank Gehry, their Turnbull & Asser ties, their friend the congressman, their trip through Indochina on a sedan chair.
…
The groups that claim to represent workers need to be taught a lesson, too. Just as Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao recently took the opportunity of addressing the AFL-CIO’s annual meeting to read aloud from a list of union-related crimes, the budget for the Department of Labor proposes, under the heading “Standing Up for the Rights of Union Members,” to increase the budget for investigating and prosecuting unions. “Cracking Down on Labor Racketeering,” as the budget puts it, might be of some benefit, but it is by no means a burning requirement of the moment. (Did unions destroy the NASDAQ?) The notion’s prominent place in the budget is yet another blame-dispersal device, this one lifted from the playbook of the auto industry: whatever goes wrong, blame the unions. In the meantime, the initiative will impose costs on innocent unions as well as villainous ones, and is thus a clear signal of where the administration’s sympathies lie. The Labor Department budget is getting smaller, remember, not bigger, and while the dollars flow for down-cracking, other programs from the days when unions had a say in how the country was run are simply being defunded.
[/QUOTE]
Feel free to Google and read the whole thing! (I didn’t want to impose on the excessive-excerpt rule.)
I find it ironic that the GOP talks so much about supporting our troops, applauding their service, and honoring their deaths. Then they’ll tell you that we daren’t raise taxes, lest the job creators take their wealth and move to some other country. They ask those with little to sacrifice, and those with a lot to be rewarded.