My housewarming gift for President Obama
After news of Barack Obama’s cranked-up thermostat eco-hypocrisy came to light this week, I got to thinking. What could we do to help our president? What could we do to show our patriotism, reach across the aisle, and help the White House save energy during these frigid 100 first days?
I thought of crocheting him a sweater, but I just don’t have the time (or stomach) to convert this pattern:
Fortunately, there’s a less time-consuming alternative out there to cope with sub-tropical temperatures. You’ve seen the ad on TV a million times:
SNUGGIE!
It’s the blanket…with sleeves. One size fits all. Perfect for keeping the president’s bulging pectorals warm while allowing him to free up his hands for important household tasks — like signing new tax hikes on the poor into law.
The next time President Obama is photographed in his shirt sleeves in the overheated Oval Office this winter, I’m hitting send on my order form…
Maybe they can make personalized Snuggies adorned with a mini-patch of everyone’s favorite presidential seal:
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Reminder: Global Warming Still Going to Cause Chocolate Shortage
February 11, 2012 02:31 PM by Doug Powers
33 Comments
Concrete Evidence Man is Causing Glacier Retreat
February 2, 2012 03:07 PM by Doug Powers
68 Comments
E-mail of the day: Media Matters coordinates with Capitol Hill “allies” on Keystone XL; Plus: 20,000 jobs “is not that many”
January 25, 2012 11:23 PM by Michelle Malkin
86 CommentsObama’s Green Robber Barons
January 25, 2012 09:13 AM by Michelle Malkin
89 Comments
Obama Admin. Rejects Keystone Pipeline; TransCanada Can Reapply After Finding Alternate Route; Updated
January 18, 2012 12:13 PM by Doug Powers
159 Comments
GM to Call Back Chevy Volts
January 5, 2012 08:59 PM by Doug Powers
71 Comments
Categories: Double standards,Enviro-nitwits
Pundit & Pundette
» Obama's war on conscience, cont'dRedstate
» Media MattersHot Air
» National Review to Newt: Get outAmSpecBlog
» Explosion Near Israeli Embassy in IndiaNRO
» Santorum’s Turn
My feelings include actual experience of living through Clinton’s thrashing of our military while being on active duty and depending on those little things we need in the military… like having enough Soldiers in your unit professor!
That would have been a super argument to make 10 or 12 years ago, you know…when Clinton was in office.
But as it stands…think I’m sticking with “math.” No offense.
Nice spin, Chappy.
You didn’t bother to even read what I posted, did you?
Spoken like a true troll.
Next…
No spin. You are doing exactly what the WaPo did you your bestest gal Palin.
I read every one. And on every one you continue to lean on this false notion Obama is cutting the DoD by 11 or 10%. That is why I ask my question, because you seem to have zero grasp on what is really going on.
Spoken like someon avoiding answering an uncomfortable question.
Lets take this reallllll slow for ya.
Last year, budget for DoD was 515 billion.
I have one source that says the DoD budget request this year is 581 billion. I am more than happy to see other numbers, but that is what I have.
Obama has apparently asked for about a 10% reduction in the BUDGET REQUEST. NOT THE SPENDING LEVEL FROM LAST YEAR.
Following me so far? Lets plug in some numbers then.
581 minus 58 (you know…10% of 581) equals……I’ll wait while you grab your abacus….THAT’S RIGHT!!! 523 Good boy!
And is 523 more or less than 515? THAT’S RIGHT AGAIN!!! ITS MORE!!! You are a sharp one!
So tell me again how he is gutting the DoD when spending looks to be more than last year?
No offense taken Chap. You know not what you boast about.
You will defend the indefensible when it concerns a democrap. Most conservatives actually try to hold to something that has been lost to liberals for far too long, integrity and principles.
I’m still looking for the indefensible spending cuts Obama is purported to have made in the DoD. Please show me those first, and then we’ll talk about what I will or will not defend.
and the percentage levels of budget request reductions for his “stimulus bill?……. were any others programs requested to be scaled back?……. it’s his intent…… you can use the numbers anyway you want, it’s his intent to socialize the country and reduce the effectiveness of the military.
Hmmmm…I guess I missed the subtle “intent” aspect of this when people were going on saying how they were literally sick that Obama was cutting the military by 10% and wanted all our troops to die and our pilots fall from the air.
I love it!! Chappy doesn’t even bother to read what I post – then he attacks me for it!!
Twist and spin all you want, Chappy, it doesn’t change anything.
Maybe you should bother reading what I first posted – and then we can start again from there. Then again, if you did that, then you wouldn’t be a troll who blames everyone else for your inadequacies. At least you’re good for a laugh!!
‘Kay, sport. Why don’t you just spell out real nice for me what argument you think I am missing here. Save us both a lot of trouble.
Let’s see. Sacrifice for you, but not for me.
We’re supposed to turn out temperatures down (I already do and have for years to cut back on expenses.) Yet “Obama’s from Hawaii” so it’s ok. (I thought he lived in Chicago for decades.)
We’re supposed to eat pork and beans, but Obama has that special $100 per serving steak. (How many servings per pound? Two? Three? Does that make $200-3300 per pound? I can afford prime rib only when it’s on sale.)
By the way, since this special steak comes from Japan, will Obama give up this luxury and “buy” American beef?
Is there a parallel between Obama and Louis XIV… the Sun King? Will Michelle soon tell us to just eat cake?
Is this guy a walking, talking oxymoron?
Are these people for real? or are they a walking, talking SNL skit waiting to happen?
chap,
You are a step above lgm with your intellect and your quick prose, but my friend you ultimately suffer from the disease of liberalism.
Sadly, there is no quick cure for this pox on civilization.
I’ll repost it because Chappy admits he can’t read:
Let’s see if Chappy can figure it out the second time I posted it.
Speaking of cold… The folks in the ice storm are still without power. The One is sure doing a poor job of handling this disaster isn’t he?
Where’s Je$$e Jack$son and Al $harpton to cry RAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST??
Oh wait, it’s the midwest… neh-ver mind…
No that was just another subtle tactic MM uses to distort things. She starts out by assuming the absolute upper price range for that beef (many wagyu cuts are much cheaper) saying its $100/lb but them that magically gets transformed to $100 a serving later on.
Is this what you want me to respond to? How is this relevant to whether or not Obama is cutting spending, except to say that yes, people do play games with numbers like this. I am glad you found some moral justification for doing the same. Didn’t change the reality when Palin was accused of it and it doesn’t change the reality now.
JHSII:
A decrease in the amount of a proposed/requested budget increase is still an increase in the number of dollars.
It may not be an increase in actual purchasing power.
It may not be an increase in supplies, equipment, personnel, etc.
Hell, it may not be anywhere near enough for what the military needs right now, let alone what it may need in the near and far future.
But, it is an increase in the number of dollar units.
I would suggest that time and life should not be wasted arguing this point
with an individual who likely knows what your concern is – that the socialists, as usual, as is indeed their very nature, are going to suck funds from the military in order to buy votes with increased entitlement spending, but instead pounces upon an inaccuracy in a statement, and makes that the focus of discussion.
Just say – concede, even – that a decrease in a proposed increase is still an increase in dollar units over the previous year.
That, hopefully, will end the nitpicking that, while mathematically accurate; is nonetheless meaningless for the discussion I believe you wish to engage in, and the point I believe you wish to make: that the socialists not only will screw us, but will also place us in mortal danger.
Once you have said that, perhaps you can then see how that individual responds to that statement.
Of course, Chappy snips out the part that makes the comparison, thus removing the relevance. I’m glad Chappy has to take something out of context just to get in another cheap shot at me.
JSHII, sadly this seems to have been a wasted effort. Apprently Chap doesn’t understand irony. He probably thinks irony is something he gets in his Flinstone Chewables.
Chap – If it were Bush the Dems would have it at $100 per bite by now and all the children would be dying.
While I agree with what your observation concerning the military cuts, can you at least conceed JHSII’s point that the Dems used that tactic over and over against Republicans? So if they’ve used it and think it’s a fair argument, why is it suddenly not now? (I didn’t agree with the tactic then or now, btw)
Chapoutier Apologist for Obama whether he likes it or not.
She starts out by assuming the absolute upper price range for that beef (many wagyu cuts are much cheaper) saying its $100/lb but them that magically gets transformed to $100 a serving later on.
Because Chap’s messiah can’t eat just anything. Remind us again about the Sarah Palin wardrobe. I think some of your fellow propagandist have been slacking off.
No I addressed the relevance. You are trying to justify your calling this a spending “cut” by saying that the liberals have done the same in the past. Man. You sound just like lgm.
And there aren’t any “same liberals.” There is me, now, telling you you are wrong.
In fact on that Palin thread I refer to, I am almost positive I called the WaPo disingenuous, so don’t try to pin any hypocrisy labels on me.
Granite – Of course, if you calculate the actual increase of numbers of dollars spent against the loss of value in the dollar due to inflation…
I don’t think Chappy wants to end the nitpicking though, because that would ruin his self-esteem.
Not apologetics. Pointing out distortions and half truths. There is a difference.
But now that you ask, I don’t really care about the Wagyu beef.
Dave:
Yeah, I know. It was fun though
Well said, Joy.
We cannot use that dishonest tactic that socialists use.
If it is recommended to us, an honest response would be similar to that of Robert Shaw’s character in The Sting (might be a paraphrase), “What am I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better than I did?”
I do enjoy how you scramble for ways to justify your initial erroneous opinion once it has been thoroughly debunked. Tell me, why was no one making the inflation argument BEFORE I showed you how wrong you were?
Chap,
Why is it that he can spend a trillion dollars on freaking pork, yet he has to cut the one thing our government is CONSTITUTIONALLY supposed to do?
Tennessee, if he was just making a statement about irony, why did he then lead with the same “Obama’s 11% cut” comment?
But your Chewables line was funny. I give you credit.
Chaps:
How much should the military sacrifice for you and your beloved Obummer? A 10% decrease is such wonderful news for those in the military alredy making sacrifices or some of the enlisted folks living on food stamps. Yeah, I’m feeling the love.
As to the original topic: Obummer doesn’t just need a Snuggie he needs one of those Amish built fake fireplaces/stoves as well.
Maybe you missed the part where he isn’t cutting it.
Later all. I’m off to the inlaws.
Chappy:
As you’ve never shown me how I was wrong about anything, how can I tell you anything at all?
chap,
Exactly, you are like a bad in-law. Thanks for ending on a point we all can agree on….have fun at the “in-laws”.
You are welcome, but the honor is ours.
With Chappie there is good and bad. The good is that he isn’t as snippy today as he was a few days ago. Perhaps his idol is doing all the things Chappie thinks he ought to be doing. The bad part is that Chappie seems to take pride in plying his “trade” on us poor unintelligent conservative working stiffs. He is always spinning the truth in an attempt to cover for his messiah. i.e. “Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’. It must make him feel like more of a man.
The fact remains that, as a Democrat, Hopey Changey will decimate the military. It’s in his DNA.
And Chappie, since obviously you have never served in the military, snubbing the MOA ball was a big deal. These heroes gave and risked all unselfishly for our country. Even the boot-licking Pentagon pukes you so confidently use as an example of how military friendly your One is would have gladly given up a handshake in order for the POTUS to give honor to those who, for some devine reason, lived to wear the Medal of Honor. And before you make the ignorant mistake of referring to them as MOA “winners”, they recieve it and therefore are “recipients”. The only thing these people want to win is victory.
Folks:
Two separate issues:
1) A smaller increase than requested is still, technically and actually, an increase in dollar units.
2) The socialists will spend as little as they possibly can on the military, in order to buy votes by instead spending as much as they possibly can on entitlements.
Please drop the argument on #1.
It is meaningless.
Do not get drawn into the tunnel vision game of lawyers.
If spending goes up by only a Goddamn cent, it still increases in dollar units (albeit only by $0.01) even if those units are of inflated, decreased-purchasing-power dollars.
Even though the spirit of the socialists’ argument is dead wrong, the letter of their argument is correct: less of an increase is still an increase (in dollar units, not in purchasing power, tanks, bullets, military pensions, aircraft, new/upgraded weapons systems, etc).
Again, don’t get sucked into the lawyers’ game.
Our society has suffered enough over the past 40-50 years from the lawyers’ games.
That’s why good, solid, accurate evidence can be “thrown out” and not used in court if it had not been obtained according to the arcane rules that lawyers have created.
It is not false evidence, mind you; it just was not obtained 100% according to the rules that lawyers have written.
Same thing applies here:
A markedly decreased increase in funding is still an increase in dollar units;
and, the military will be inadequately funded by the socialists.
That is the “tunnel-vision” argument that the socialists should be hit with.
Chap – But he IS requesting a 10% cut in the proposed budget… I’ll be looking forward to seeing him request cuts in the proposed budgets for Education and other failed Dem pet projects.
I think in making your point you’re missing the point.
Gawd, I hope chap is not my boss. (Sure sounds like it.)
You have our sympathy if he is.
Right on granite. For some reason Americans keep sending these slimeballs to D.C. to write our laws (and keep their lawyer friends benefitting from perpetual litigation most of which based on idiotic ideology). I would love to see a future where economists are our representatives and law makers. Government run by people who are good in business and not wasteful morons with their hands in the coffers every chance they get.
I think it was Scott Van Pelt on ESPN Radio that said if he could find a Snuggie that had one sleeve made out of ShamWow! he’d be all set.
Meh.
The Trial Lawyers are the largest lobby aliened with the Democrats and their biggest donor.
The fox is in the hen house.
You know those Snuggie robes would turn Barack and Michelle into Monk and Monkette…if only they would live like Monks.
I admit I’m having a fantastic monastic day today…(ouch that line hurts!)
This does bear reposting, Chap, because it has been the truth..even one of my very socially liberal Econ professors chuckled about how federal budget cuts really were not cuts at all during the modern era sice the ’60s.
I agree. I told my process server the other day, “If you are an attorney or millionaire you should not be allowed to run for office.” (I think he is a closet FDR dem.)
There hasn’t been a “working stiff” in DC for much too long. They all feel they are entitled.
I am sick and tired of it. They tell us over and over again, through thier actions, “none for thee only for me.”
love2rumba,
They were as misguided as JSH. I doubt that is much comfort to either side.
Michelle, BHO says thanks, but I won so I get to turn up the thermostat as high as I want to. If you want to use up excessive amounts of heat, then you need to win. Nanny Nanny Boo Boo!!
It’s only a cut from the proposed budget. It’s that simple
Joy said:
Yeah.. why isn’t the newsmedia going bonkersnit over the One’s lack of attention here? He is supposed to rescue us from everything…
granite,
Fine. There are obviously a slew of things that can affect how effective each dollar is. Inflation certainly. The cost of goods, like fuel, is another. And that is a legitimate debate. But that debate is totally useless unless we start from a level of honesty with respect to each sides positions. And the screed about Obama cutting spending when that is simply not true or about hating troops or other crap like that certainly does little to advance anything. And then you get what we had here.
OffTopic yet on at the same time…
Go Steelers, Go Card’s !
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=59830
Nice to see our troops getting a couple of beers and some pizza, even in Ieaq !
Ieaq= Iraq…Who wants to take the points on a Steelers win ?
Today, Representative Barney Frank (D-Mass.) indicated how Obama’s plans to gut the military would be translated into budgetary allocations. Frank told the editorial board of The Standard-Times that the Democrats would slash military spending by 25%, forcing American to withdraw from Iraq sooner. Rep. Frank said.
I’m just happy our brave ladies and men, have a little time to enjoy and relax.
When’s the last time Barney withdrew sooner ?
I suppose he’s going through withdrawal now ?
Easy, big fella, easy….
On January 31st, 2009 at 2:22 pm, chapoutier said:
Whatever the figure it is not even close to 20% of the budget. You also ducked my comment of Obama’s promise to raise the prioce of fuel. The low prices are going BYE BYE.
The short answer is the COLA for 2008 was in excess of 5%. Last time I checked that means DOD’s spending power just went down a minimum of 2% in the middle of a war.
And you can imagine what little Meals on Wheels missions he will dream up like Clinton did to siphon off even more resources.
The results that I mentioned under Carter happended. You never disputed the impact and you never disputed the price in human life. Your silence confirms my points.
Chap,
Of course THE ONE got the cheapest cut of the Japanese steak, didn’t he? What was it? Wag you What?
Tennessee, Irony is what you have to do if don’t get your clothes out of the dryer while they’re still warm.
Democrats would NEVER cut military funding! Unless they do something like gut the training budget of an active duty Army division like Clinton did in the 90s. He reduced state-side divisional training budgets from 60+ million to less than 20 million. Basically, you can even roll your tracks off the motorpool pad with that level of funding.
Of course, if you kill training then everything else falls apart. If you don’t train you can’t deploy. If you can’t deploy you can’t deter and resist threats to national security.
Do you think Delta Force crashed and burned in the Iranian Desert for no reason? It was Carter cutting budgets for training and maintenance.
What the heck. I am sure that if Obama doesn’t care about murdering little babies that somehow survive the abortionists best efforts he won’t care about a few thousand more casualties in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Flyover,
I don’t know exactly how much is spent on fuel (in Iraq it is apparently one third of all costs) but I for the life of me have no idea why you are hung up on 20 % as some magic threshold for significance. And I also have no idea why you would assume 2008 cola numbers are relevant to a budget where only a small percent would be affected by COLA in any case, let alone 2008 numbers when energy prices were going so high, this inflating that number a great deal.
Come on folks…Lighten up, support the troops. Superbowl weekend !
BTW…Is it against the US military code to bet on the Superbowl?
Hey, Chapoutier: Do you have a favorite team ?
Charley,
I have no idea what cut was used. Neither does MM. But that doesn’t stop her speculation does it?
Also, did you know Obama froze the wages of white house employees? Probably not because those stories somehow get glossed over here. I believe that will save somewhere around 200K. That is a lot of wagyu of any cut.
I have a vat of chili going now, I like to let it simmer for a few hours…
jeff:
Bills
Mets
Celtics
Syracuse Orange
chapoutier said:
I must have missed Obama’s outrage when MoveOn branded the General responsible for turning the Iraq war around a traitor.
I must have missed the part where Obama finally was able to bring himself to saying the obvious, that the strategy worked.
The truth is, Obama, along with every other major Democrat politician out there, would have preferred our troops failed, because it would have been politically advantageous for them.
Does that sound like a friend to our troops to you?
Wagyu…sounds like chicken…I love some good beef but, $100 a pound ? What was the cow smoking ?
Go Syracuse, Co Orangemen…Not PC of course…I like that school. They beat Michigan State several times.
Chappy forgot his real favorite teams:
Al-Qaeda
Hamas
Hezbollah
Planned Parenthood
and whoever is playing against America!
Mets eh? Your as much a masochist as a Detroit Lions fan.
Let’s support our troops this weekend. Chapoutier has the guts to say who he favors. How’s about you ? Got a buck to spare on the big game?
As a friend explained: “Typically, pay freezes in such government position do NOT freeze automatic COLA ‘increases’ which are called ‘increases’ not ‘raises’ which is how they are typically automatically exempted. So while the rest of us will have decreasing real income due to expected inflation from obscene gov’t spending, Obama’s aides will keep pace with their ‘increases’ despite not getting raises.”
Uh, how does betting on the superbowl demonstrate support for our troops? And what did Chappy say that “took guts?”
I listened to many superbowls on AFN on the radio because AFN didn’t broadcast television signals after 22:00 hours in Europe. I heard the immaculate reception on the radio but never saw it until years later.
I am all for the troops. But I couldn’t care less who wins this game. I don’t have a dog in this fight.
I expect the Steelers will have a better shot but the Cards aren’t called the Cardiac Cardinals for nothing and they did manage to get this far. But, I couldn’t care less who wins and I am not going to bet on a game I don’t care about.
But, I hope you enjoy the game.
I guess, we eed a new category…SBDS
Anyone heard anything about BO getting FEMA to
Kentucky? Instapundit has a headline…Obama Dozed
As Kentucky Froze. MSM doesn’t seem to have noticed
that people are dying in a red state. Hmmmm
eed=need
Hey, Kentucky just has to wait on Global warming. Then, you will be ok.
When tobacco futures skyrocket, He will be there.
TXRose said:
Is it too early to cry racism? You know, like how Bush didn’t care about New Orleans because many of the people were black (it’s a “chocolate city” after all). Where are the accusations that Obama doesn’t care about Kentucky because many of them are white and he is black?
Of course, Obama probably doesn’t think it is a big deal. “Freezing? It is 77 degrees in here! How could you freeze? Want to try some of my wagyu?”
3% of the DOD’s budget is for fuel. Here is your reference.
http://74.6.239.67/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=dod+fuel+budget&fr=yfp-t-501&u=www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34062.pdf&w=dod+fuel+fuels+budget&d=IZucwg-YSGgz&icp=1&.intl=us
COLA not relevant? Interesting. Ever look at DOD’s budget? They are not staffed with robots. Budget items include, salary, insurance, food, fuel, housing, health care, etc. You know the same things a household budget consumes. It was a factor in every budget I had to develop in thecommands I served in.
Again, I lived the Carter and Clinton budgets cuts. WarEagle82′s comments were accurate. So were mine.
People died at Desert One in 1980 from the same cause Obama wants to repeat. Obama doesn’t give a rat’s rear, as long as he can have the money to spend on keeping his party in power permanently.
Every penny will be redirected to you darn well know what kinds of things.
It’s an ego thing with ‘O’. He, and the Democrats know there is no support in the military. He’s sponging off his ( limited ) constituency.
In the Carter years, tank commanders were restricted by the reduced budget. They drove jeeps around on maneuvers to save on fuel.
GEEES!
Don’t you trolls remember that?
I want a ROBUST military and, hope the slicks can shoot some live ammo.
Live rounds are more accurate anyway.
The tank rounds were restricted too.
Figures, How can you practice with inaccurate rounds? Just asking…
If you were to practice with, let us say, live rounds; The accuracy of the projectiles would be improved. Real ammo is the only way to get real results.
Intellectual exercise: If you had an M1 Abrams at 800 yards…Could you place a shot inside a 3 by 5 foot window ? Just wondering…
flyover,
Thanks for the cite. I note that it says every $10 increase per barrel costs the military 1.3 billion. Considering we went from $130 to $40 or so, I’d say that is significant savings.
I hope the Cardinals win, because it gives bad teams hope. Haha. Hope.
And, Change ? ROFLMAO
This is what we’ll need with Obama’s military.
http://www.psywarrior.com/InflatableTank.jpg
I’m tired of hearing that BO needs to keep the
thermostat at 77 because he’s from Hawaii. I was
raised in AZ and S TX but did not turn up heat when it
was so cold in N Central TX last week!!
You mean Obama hasn’t parted the skies and shown his countinence upon the land and warmed it with his glorified gaze?
In fact, why didn’t he stop the ice storm all together with his omniscient power.
Surely if GWB could make a storm come out of the ocean and destroy New Orleans that Obama could have saved the Mid South and Mid West from the ice storm.
(wow, I think I just used up all of my sarcasm for the month of February)
Superbowl. 5 plays followed by a commercial repeatedly for over 4 hours. Oh and Bruce at half time for who knows how long. Boring!!!!
Good day for a good book.
These postings sound like “family”.
Sheese get over it.
BO will, like our former one-term president and Israel’s hero, Jimmie Carter , fail. Chappy, whoever, we should leave the trolls alone to drowned in their misery and pork.
Let me invoke the spirit of Carnac the Magnificent.
Clinton
Carter
Budget Cuts
Ed…the envelope please…
“What are three things that have nothing to do with Obama considering the fact he is not cutting the DoD’s budget.”
It might indeed be that that could be a legitimate debate.
However, I’m not aware that anyone was debating that.
The mathematical accuracy aspect of honesty should be a given.
Agreed.
That refers to the “letter” of the discussion; which is essentially a distraction from the essence of the discussion.
And, you know that.
You may deny it.
But, you know that.
Again, as far as the literal, mathematically accurate aspect goes, that is not incorrect.
Whether it was a “screed” is, from what I read, the opinion of one individual.
I think I’m a bit older than you.
I was in high school and college during the Vietnam War protests.
I remember how the protests stopped, virtually overnight, as if a switch had been flicked, as soon as the draft was stopped, and the military became all-volunteer. Hell, it was even a high-school debate team topic for us one year (paraphrased): “Resolved, that the military should become all-volunteer”.
I also clearly remember how the military, the U.S. government, and military personnel in general were viciously, nastily condemned.
Returning servicemen were spat upon and called babykillers.
That actually happened.
The socialists made political hay with that, because it was Republican administrations from Jan. 1969-Jan. 1977.
And the media made hay with it because the media (entertainment, news, broadcast) were, as they are now, overwhelmingly socialist.
And ROTC was kicked out of colleges and universities because academians were, as they are now, overwhelmingly socialist.
Then the disaster that was Carter came.
And Carter was/is a socialist.
And then the embarassment that was Clinton came.
And Clinton was/is a socialist.
So, when it is said that the socialists hate troops, that is most definitely not crap.
It is merely a statement of fact.
The hypocritical, faux-outrage response by socialists to that statement is nothing more than an act of fear and a diversionary tactic, precisely because it is accurate, and merely a statement of fact.
The socialists’ response is not unlike the hysterical, threatening responses from Muslims when accurate statements about Islam are made by Robert Spencer (his books) and Geert Wilders (his film “Fitna”).
The “spirit” of the discussion a number of posts ago had nothing to do with mathematical accuracy of dollar units of spending.
Rather, it most likely had everything to do with the socialists’ ultimate plans for the military; which will be (because they are socialists, after all) to significantly cut military spending; and to add those funds to the other funds they will generate with tax increases; and thus significantly increase spending on entitlements, in order to buy more votes, and to further consolidate their power.
Diversionary tactic, socialists, lawyers…hmmmm.
Diversion, and spinning, and twisting of the truth made a lasting impression on me during the time of the embarrassment that was Clinton (Jan. 1993-Jan. 2001), when weaseling was made into an art form.
I remember at the time thinking that Clinton was no different from the wise-ass guy who, in school, say, would swipe your pen, or book, or whatever;
then, when you confronted him, if he did not have the (whatever) on his person, if you asked him, “Do you have my (whatever)?”, would answer “no”.
Your problem was that you had asked the wrong question…you should have asked, “Did you take my (whatever)?”
If you were to accuse him of lying, he could claim that he had not…since he did not have the (whatever) on his person.
Therefore, technically, he did not lie to you.
He might even glibly tell you, “I didn’t lie to you. You didn’t ask me if I took it. You only asked me if I had it.”
A typical lawyerly gambit.
What the wise-ass would be trying to pull…now, that is crap.
And of course, it would not be wrong to say that a wise-ass like that deserved a good smack in the mouth for such deception.
Sorry for the length.
Gotta get up early and go the hopsital for a few hours in the A.M.
‘nite, all.
sounds like you have some unresolved issues to work out granite. Still fighting the same tired war 35 years later. Hope you have a good shrink.
In the meantime, I guess I will have to console myself being “technically” or as I like to put it “actually” correct, and confess to ignorance about this purported spirit of the discussion in which you claim Obama is going to cut all military spending. You have your feelings about what Obama will do on one hand, and I have what he has actually done on the other. You purport to me a doctor but seem to have little regard for empirical evidence.