PDA

View Full Version : A Balanced Budget, Sarah?



LogansPapa
10-31-2008, 08:23 PM
Complete transcript of Sarah Palin's Cape Girardeau speech
Friday, October 31, 2008
Southeast Missourian


We're gonna make sure that they're secure and our economic plan too. It will help all of us afford good health care and its gonna help our students afford to pay college, thats for our students and our plan includes confronting the $10 trillion debt that the federal government has run up, $10 trillion that we are in debt and we're expected to pass that on to our children and have them pay that off for us. Again that's not right, that's not fair, that won't happen on our watch.


John and I will impose a spending freeze to cover all but the most vital functions of government and we will balance the federal budget by the end of our first term.

WTF:confused:

Ree
10-31-2008, 08:25 PM
What part don't ya understand?

hampshirebrit
10-31-2008, 09:10 PM
All of it that wasn't in English... in other words, all of it.

It would have helped if the economics would have stacked up, but they didn't.

The whole thing is complete babble.

LogansPapa
10-31-2008, 10:55 PM
What part don't ya understand?

I don't know Yoda, perhaps the $74,565.00 per American taxpayer debt magically evaporating 50 months from now. Please feel free to educate me on the math of exactly how that will happen.

Troll
10-31-2008, 11:16 PM
John and I will impose a spending freeze to cover all but the most vital functions of government and we will balance the federal budget by the end of our first term.

Do you have any spaceships for sale? :rolleyes:

A question though: What are 'the most vital functions of government'? That's a weasel statement if I ever saw one.

LogansPapa
10-31-2008, 11:18 PM
About $1,250 a month for every taxpayer going to fly out of her pretty little butt? :p

Constitutionally Speaking
11-01-2008, 04:18 AM
I don't know Yoda, perhaps the $74,565.00 per American taxpayer debt magically evaporating 50 months from now. Please feel free to educate me on the math of exactly how that will happen.


You do know the difference between debt and deficit, right???

She talked about two different issues under the same topic.

She said she will confront the debt by taking on the deficit and balance the budget (deficit) within 4 years. I could balance the budget in a single year, but the special interests and the welfare state supporters would scream bloody murder. That simply requires that we stop spending. That would STILL leave us with the same debt - plus interest. To tackle that, we would need to not just end the deficit, but run an ACTUAL surplus.


This is not that I believe they actually will balance the budget, but that part is not difficult to do - in theory. In practice, it is POLITICALLY very difficult to do. The Dems would bring out the "grandma has to eat dog food" commercials and the like. The Republicans would bemoan the farm subsidies etc.

Sonnabend
11-01-2008, 04:28 AM
John and I will impose a spending freeze to cover all but the most vital functions of government and we will balance the federal budget by the end of our first term.

Her extensive experience handling billion dollar budgets will stand her in good stead then.

Go Sarah :)

AmPat
11-01-2008, 07:26 AM
John and I will impose a spending freeze to cover all but the most vital functions of government and we will balance the federal budget by the end of our first term.
I thought most if not all states had balanced budgets.

My state (TN) has it and if we can do it, the USA can also. Paying off the debt is a different matter. Much easier to pay off debt when you actually have a budget. The US gov't has a blank check. That has to stop.

LogansPapa
11-01-2008, 10:00 AM
You do know the difference between debt and deficit, right???

"and our plan includes confronting the $10 trillion debt that the federal government has run up, $10 trillion that we are in debt and we're expected to pass that on to our children and have them pay that off for us."

Yes, I understand the difference between bullshit and horseshit - but it's still shit.

lacarnut
11-01-2008, 10:13 AM
You do know the difference between debt and deficit, right???

She talked about two different issues under the same topic.

She said she will confront the debt by taking on the deficit and balance the budget (deficit) within 4 years. I could balance the budget in a single year, but the special interests and the welfare state supporters would scream bloody murder. That simply requires that we stop spending. That would STILL leave us with the same debt - plus interest. To tackle that, we would need to not just end the deficit, but run an ACTUAL surplus.


This is not that I believe they actually will balance the budget, but that part is not difficult to do - in theory. In practice, it is POLITICALLY very difficult to do. The Dems would bring out the "grandma has to eat dog food" commercials and the like. The Republicans would bemoan the farm subsidies etc.

No he does not!

Even a freeze would not balance the budget because of increases in items like S.S., which will increase 5% for retirees, increases in Medicare and Medicaid, increases on the interest on the national debt, etc. Around 70 % of the budget is set in stone. The remainder can be cut like defense and the military .

There is no way that a Democratic controlled congress is going to allow the President to cut any social programs or give aways like NPR and the Arts. The President might be able to consolidate agencies but eliminating any program, grant, farm subsidy, etc will be a hard sell.

Politicians have not figured out that revenues from Federal Income Tax will be down this year. Millions will be taking credit on their return for$3k capital losses on their stocks. With unemployment up, the total amount of refunds issued for 2008 will be greater than previous years.

The balanced budget sounds good; I don't blame the Repubs for playing the same game as Obama. Obama promises pie in the sky and money falling from heaven which in reality means I am going to stick it to you middle and upper class suckers if I am elected. .

Sonnabend
11-01-2008, 10:13 AM
Y'know LP..I am half tempted to see if we can find you a campaign manager, so you can run for office :p

Tell ya what...you can have Cynthia McKinney :D:D

FeebMaster
11-01-2008, 01:52 PM
A question though: What are 'the most vital functions of government'? That's a weasel statement if I ever saw one.

Oh you know, just the critical stuff. Like the military, and social security, and medicare, and medicaid, and education, and the highways, and farm subsidies, and foreign aid, and the war on terror, and NASA, and various bits of discretionary spending.

Constitutionally Speaking
11-01-2008, 06:54 PM
"and our plan includes confronting the $10 trillion debt that the federal government has run up, $10 trillion that we are in debt and we're expected to pass that on to our children and have them pay that off for us."

Yes, I understand the difference between bullshit and horseshit - but it's still shit.


But she didn't say they would get rid of the debt. She said they would get rid of the deficit.

Constitutionally Speaking
11-01-2008, 06:56 PM
No he does not!

Even a freeze would not balance the budget because of increases in items like S.S., which will increase 5% for retirees, increases in Medicare and Medicaid, increases on the interest on the national debt, etc. Around 70 % of the budget is set in stone. The remainder can be cut like defense and the military .

There is no way that a Democratic controlled congress is going to allow the President to cut any social programs or give aways like NPR and the Arts. The President might be able to consolidate agencies but eliminating any program, grant, farm subsidy, etc will be a hard sell.

Politicians have not figured out that revenues from Federal Income Tax will be down this year. Millions will be taking credit on their return for$3k capital losses on their stocks. With unemployment up, the total amount of refunds issued for 2008 will be greater than previous years.

The balanced budget sounds good; I don't blame the Repubs for playing the same game as Obama. Obama promises pie in the sky and money falling from heaven which in reality means I am going to stick it to you middle and upper class suckers if I am elected. .


I did not say freeze spending. Freezing at current levels will not balance the budget in a year. CUTTING spending could - if you cut enough.

LogansPapa
11-01-2008, 09:30 PM
But she didn't say they would get rid of the debt. She said they would get rid of the deficit.

One does not feed the other? And she didn't use the larger number to make the smaller seem more powerful? Come the fuck on and wake up!:rolleyes:

AmPat
11-02-2008, 03:09 AM
"and our plan includes confronting the $10 trillion debt that the federal government has run up, $10 trillion that we are in debt and we're expected to pass that on to our children and have them pay that off for us."

Yes, I understand the difference between bullshit and horseshit - but it's still shit.As in; You're full of. The VEEP candidate said she would "confront" the debt. She did not say she would pay the debt to zero. You are misrepresenting what she said.

marinejcksn
11-02-2008, 05:07 AM
She bit off more then she can chew and said something dumb; what you want LP, a cookie? Call me when Senile Joey knows that JOBS is a 4 letter word and not a 3 letter word. :p

marinejcksn
11-02-2008, 05:12 AM
Oh you know, just the critical stuff. Like the military, and the highways, and NASA, and various bits of discretionary spending.

Fixed. Rest of that stuff isn't vital functions of government, just bloated shite we can't afford and shouldn't have. :)

Constitutionally Speaking
11-02-2008, 05:55 AM
One does not feed the other? And she didn't use the larger number to make the smaller seem more powerful? Come the fuck on and wake up!:rolleyes:


I guess we just disagree. I believe she said she would take on the DEBT, and a step in that process is balancing the budget (eliminating the deficit) - and actually achieving a real surplus.


I just don't see how that would raise any questions - except when considering the politics of the situation. The liberal spending tendencies of both parties simply will not allow it.

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 08:24 AM
She bit off more then she can chew and said something dumb; what you want LP, a cookie?

What do I want?

The simple fucking acknowledgement that maybe the sweet thing isn't the brightest bulb on the tree, John McCain is as much a pandering asshole as Obama because he picked her, and, acknowledgement that she's wandering away from he leash and running for the presidency in 2012!

Keep the cookie and have the balls to admit your party is coming apart like a cheap Hong Kong suit in the rain. The 'Down-Ticket" is running for its fucking life and you people have no concept of what could actually happen to your government on Tuesday.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 08:50 AM
What do I want?

The simple fucking acknowledgement that maybe the sweet thing isn't the brightest bulb on the tree
Oh FFS LP....WILL YOU STOP ALREADY??? :mad:

I am SICK and fucking well fed up with this leftie LIE "they're stupid"...she is NOT stupid and will you for fucks sake find a new meme???

The woman is highly intelligent, and she seems to have more damned sense than to be involved with a domestic terrorist, a US hating reverend, a Chicago felon or a Kenyan dictator.

She is a Governor, has been mayor and is the mother of five children


Palin attended four colleges and universities before graduating with a degree in communications/journalism from the University of Idaho in 1987.

In 1982, she enrolled at Hawaii Pacific College but left after her first semester. She transferred to North Idaho community college, where she spent two semesters as a general studies major. From there, she transferred to the University of Idaho for two semestersThis is an incessant and I am starting to say fucking annoying meme "they're stupid"...enough already.

For eight years you have been slamming Pres. Bush's intelligence and the face of the fact he is damned sight smarter than a lot of you..Obama isnt that good a damned candidate and comparing the two, Sarah Palin is by far the more intelligent and better qualified.

Give it a goddamned rest. :mad:

You and your lot owe President Bush a huge apology. In ten years or so you will be wishng that he was back...because trust me Obama is a fucking appeaser and is not fit to command, is not fit to be President and I suspect has a lot more skeletons in his closet.


John McCain is as much a pandering asshole as Obama because he picked her, and, acknowledgement that she's wandering away from he leash and running for the presidency in 2012! Good, becauae I hope to be a US citizen by 2012 and I want to be able to vote for her wehen she does.


Keep the cookie and have the balls to admit your party is coming apart like a cheap Hong Kong suit in the rainSo tell us why Obama is so determined his birth certificate never sees the light of day?


The 'Down-Ticket" is running for its fucking life and you people have no concept of what could actually happen to your government on Tuesday.Even from here, we can very well see what an Obama Presidency will bring...and none of it is good.

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 08:57 AM
Sonnabend, if "W" was and is such a great leader of the free world and respected for his intellect, then why hasn't Mr. McCain employed that respected "pot of gold" in his campaign?:confused:

Goldwater
11-02-2008, 09:22 AM
Palin powered up the GOP base, but also cut into McCain's own "moderate and independant" base.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 10:40 AM
Sonnabend, if "W" was and is such a great leader of the free world and respected for his intellect, then why hasn't Mr. McCain employed that respected "pot of gold" in his campaign?Pres. Bush has been demonised for eight years. Whats left of his reputation has been wrecked by the Press and worse, he has been stalked by a psychotic Cindy Sheehan with the gleeful help of the Left.

Had you lot supported him instead of trying to undermine him, the outcome may have been very very different. And it could have started with you lot not screaming at the top of your voices that he lied, when he did not, and you lot fucking well knew it.

That chalice is deadly because YOU poisoned it.

I'll tell you this, LP...in this country, Sheehan wouild be in prison for being a fucking psychotic stalker. How many death threats? How many vicious lampoons and attacks and assassinations of his character?

How many times have you lot called him a fool and worse and never stopped to realise that YOU were the problem, and not him????

I've said this before and I will say it again. What the Left have done over the last eight years will come back to haunt you, your screeching and psychotic assaults on the man and the office of the Presidency have served to denigrate the good name of the United States abroad, and if the US is hated and reviled, you lot helped it get there.

NONE of you stepped forward and told Chavez where to get off, none of you stepped forward and told Sheehan to lay off, none of you ever to this day have condemned a film that dealt with assassination and used the face of a sitting President.

None of you would ever DARED have allowed that film into the US if they had used Baracks face.

ADMIT IT

I swear to God that you will regret it one day..you have opened a door into something you will wish you had not, and set a precedent that is as sick as it is deadly.

You and the Left and the histrionic, screeching demented moonbats have done more to destroy his name, and to throw the office of the Presidency into the mud than anyone else...the enemies of the US have had a field day with your willing and enthusiastic help.

Over the last eight years, you and your ilk have aided, abetted and with malice aforethought been the willing and useful idiots of the kind of people that glory in the deaths of US soldiers and would exult in the humiliation of the US both at home and abroad.

We have won in Iraq...we have done more than we ever dreamed possible..and only because Pres Bush stood firm and refused to cave in to the shrieks of defeatists who wanted another Vietnam style debacle.

Where are the paens to the troops? To their courage? Where is the press and their thanks to Pres Bush for staying the course and winning a massive victory over the US's enemies??

Where is all that press coverage gone...is it because the long hoped for and dreamed of defeat of the USA, so fervently wished for by such stellar personalities as John "Winter Soldier" Kerry and "Hanoi Jane" Fonda failed to materialise?

The press would never act against the best interests of the US...would they??

Al Qaeda has been smashed. Their soldiers, dead, their commanders dead or captured, their hopes for an Islamic superstate gone forever.

And the sickest part is that none of you, not one, would ever have the guts to say any of it to his face. faced with the man in his presence, none of you would ever dare call him liar, or "Shrubya" or a hundred other vicious epithets.

Eight miserable years of you hating your own country, and a man who never deserved a hundredth of the vile abuse you have heaped upon him.

Eight miserable years.

I'd say you should be ashamed of what you've done to your country...but that'd be a waste of time.

Yoiu have none...and you never will.

Damn you and your ilk to Hell forever.

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 11:19 AM
You and your lot owe President Bush a huge apology.

Sorry - we and I do not.

The American taxpayer has had enough of this person and John McCain is now picking up the tab, despite his having some fine arm candy. The war in Iraq served zero purpose other than war profiteering and employing people therein, both in the private sector and in the military.

He thought we could force a toe-hold in the Middle East and had we simply minded our own business, versus what Bush 41 did with his obviously heroic mission, and that was a lie and a fool's strategy.

His choices in staff have been psychotic - without reason - without any remorse for his utter stupidity.

Remember Sonnabend, this is the man that when asked if he regretted any mistakes he'd made while in office, could not recollect any. Not a single instance. Now there's something to be frightened of, Sir.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 11:35 AM
Sorry - we and I do not. Deny it all you like, the truth is there, plain to see.


The American taxpayer has had enough of this person and John McCain is now picking up the tab, despite his having some fine arm candy. The war in Iraq served zero purpose other than war profiteering and employing people therein, both in the private sector and in the military. Has nothing to do with the taxpayer.Did the taxpayer tell the New York Slimes to publish information on how terrorist funds were traced? Did the taxpayers tell Fitzgerald to try and nail the President for a crime that was never committed in the first place?

Did the taxpayer tell Congressman Murtha to convict the men of Haditha of murder before an enquiry had even been held? Did the taxpayer tell Michael Moore to make Fahrenheit 911 and fuel the already insane ramblings of the 911 Truthers?

These were your sons, your daughters, in harms way. You and your lot undermined the Iraq War and I will gaurantee you this, LP...I know it for a solid gold fact

If tomorrow, the US Army uncovered a massive haul of WMD, bacterial weapons, missiles....guess what the VERY FIRST WORDS out of the mouths of people like you would be??

"It was planted"

The Iraq war is a massive success.. Will anyone ever remember to thank the man who stick it out despite the voracious efforts of the Left to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

Did the taxpayer ask the Left to come up with "General Betrayus?"

DID THEY????

Did the taxpayer ask the entire media to leap into bed with Obama???


He thought we could force a toe-hold in the Middle East and had we simply minded our own business, versus what Bush 41 did with his obviously heroic mission, and that was a lie and a fool's strategy. And he was right. "Mnded your own business"?


His choices in staff have been psychotic - without reason - without any remorse for his utter stupidity.There's that meme again. Remorse? For what?

One of his choices for staff was the first black Secretary of State,..Dr Condi Rice..odd that you forget her yet trumpet Obama as "change" and "breaking barriers"..he already did.

Why did you ignore her?

First black JCS..Colin Powell. Oops..forgot him too. Both Pres Bush appointees.

Odd that you didn't mention them

Psychotic...so you've met the man and can attest to this personally, having examined him and made a thorough medical diagnosis??? Would you please enlighten us as to where you got your medical degree, and your qualifications in psychiatry?

When did you meet him? Where?

You sound like those DU'ers who claim he has committed crimes....yet when I ask what crimes and what proof...silence.


Remember Sonnabend, this is the man that when asked if he regretted any mistakes he'd made while in office, could not recollect any. Not a single instance. Now there's something to be frightened of, Sir.Show me that quote. Now.

Eyelids
11-02-2008, 11:47 AM
Show me that quote. Now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haQzdW7hg4A

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 11:49 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haQzdW7hg4A

Eyelids
11-02-2008, 11:53 AM
I'd like to hear how Iraq has been a "massive success", even the most optimistic person shouldn't be calling it that. There's a still a lot of problems in Iraq and a lot of issues that surround it's future that are unresolved. It would be foolhardy to call that operation a success until we've completely closed the book on that conflict.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 12:13 PM
Remember Sonnabend, this is the man that when asked if he regretted any mistakes he'd made while in office, could not recollect any.LIAR.

From that video you just posted.

First question: what was edited here? there's a gap..a hiccup in the film. What was removed?

0049 - 00:51.

Second "I dont want to sound like I have made no mistakes, I am confident I have..you just put me under the spot here".

So he can and does recollect he made mistakes, he just wasnt prepared for that question at that moment. Congratulations on twisting what he said to suit your own meme.


I'd like to hear how Iraq has been a "massive success", even the most optimistic person shouldn't be calling it that.The Iraqi people themselves are.


There's a still a lot of problems in Iraq and a lot of issues that surround it's future that are unresolved.So was Germany in 1946. Your point is?

http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/iraq/articles/20081027.aspx


October 27, 2008: The war is over. Most of the noise these days is from politicians arguing, not bombs going off. There are still bombs, but now they tend to be assassination attempts, as some political parties play dirty (not unknown in this part of the world). Up north, the Turkish Air Force air raids are taking place farther (the latest was 100 kilometers) from the border. The PKK separatists have been driven out of their bases close to the Turkish border. But the PKK continues to recruit in northern Iraq, despite the hostility of the Kurdish government. Many Iraqi Kurds back the PKK, and its violence inside Turkey.The soldiers think so as well.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 12:17 PM
If that was me and being asked the same question,. Id have to think for twenty minutes to give you a good answer...I can think of a hundred answers...but then again this is the press who arent looking for the truth, just somethng they can use against him.

I have no interest in the presstitutes or their blatant bias and lies.

Constitutionally Speaking
11-02-2008, 12:29 PM
Remember Sonnabend, this is the man that when asked if he regretted any mistakes he'd made while in office, could not recollect any. Not a single instance. Now there's something to be frightened of, Sir.

THe press was looking for something to skewer him with and he was trying to avoid giving them ammo.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 12:29 PM
Please, let me refresh your memory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESm6y9F2oII

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE

Eyelids
11-02-2008, 12:33 PM
The Iraqi people themselves are.
I need some proof of this, scientific polling would be preferential.


So was Germany in 1946. Your point is?
There wasn't an insurgency in Germany in 1946.


http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/iraq/articles/20081027.aspx

The soldiers think so as well.
He's as deeply biased (if not moreso) than the media.

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 12:56 PM
LIAR.

From that video you just posted.

First question: what was edited here? there's a gap..a hiccup in the film. What was removed?

0049 - 00:51.

Be careful who you use the word liar in regard to, Sonnabend. Be very careful.

Are you suggesting that the news media cut out something that refuted the fact that "W" was befuddled and without a clue? Maybe, but I didn't produce it. More-than-likely they just didn't want to waste the tape on mumbling.

You asked for it - you got it. If you think it's some great conspiracy that Bush is a dolt, like your sweetie Sarah - that's fine. Pathetic, but fine.

BTW, If you're referring to Eyelids as a liar - I'm fine with that - but in regard to me, you know I'll simply embarrass you for such assertions.

MrsSmith
11-02-2008, 03:59 PM
I need some proof of this, scientific polling would be preferential.


There wasn't an insurgency in Germany in 1946.


He's as deeply biased (if not moreso) than the media.

That has to be one of your dumbest statements so far, blinky. By the time Germany lost, Hitler had sent every male he could get, from 14 years to 65 years old, out on the front line. Most of the rest of the country was living in starvation conditions. Just who did you think was going to lead an insurgancy?

If we'd done to Iraq what had to be done to shut down Germany, there'd be no insurgency there, either. The only reason there is one is because our soldiers are taught to preserve as many lives as possible. That rule was NOT in effect during WW2. Dumba$$.

Eyelids
11-02-2008, 04:15 PM
That has to be one of your dumbest statements so far, blinky. By the time Germany lost, Hitler had sent every male he could get, from 14 years to 65 years old, out on the front line. Most of the rest of the country was living in starvation conditions. Just who did you think was going to lead an insurgancy?

If we'd done to Iraq what had to be done to shut down Germany, there'd be no insurgency there, either. The only reason there is one is because our soldiers are taught to preserve as many lives as possible. That rule was NOT in effect during WW2. Dumba$$.

I dont even understand what you're trying to get at, you just agreed with me that we didn't have to deal with an insurgency when rebuilding Germany and Japan. Thanks?

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 04:29 PM
Be careful who you use the word liar in regard to, Sonnabend. Be very careful.

This is what you said.


Remember Sonnabend, this is the man that when asked if he regretted any mistakes he'd made while in office, could not recollect any.

and this is what Pres. Bush said. From the video YOU posted. Incidentally, that was not the quiersiton he was asked, either.


"I dont want to sound like I have made no mistakes, I am confident I have..you just put me under the spot here".

So I am being careful, and you did lie, and he did not say what you said he did. So either it was a lie, or you misrepresented it...either way, what you said in that quote was dead wrong.

Waiting for you to admit it.


Are you suggesting that the news media cut out something that refuted the fact that "W" was befuddled and without a clue?

YES. If you think for one moment that the media in the US or elsewhere is fair or balanced...you're the one that needs help. He was not befuddled, he was not without a clue, and I am again getting sick of your continued use of this meme.

The MSM is a sick joke.


Maybe, but I didn't produce it. More-than-likely they just didn't want to waste the tape on mumbling.

Or maybe they went to the Michael Moore school of editing. Remember him?The guy that used cut and paste on a slew of Heston speeches to create a fabrication for his film Bowling for Colombine?

Care to coment on the conduct of the newspapers over the last twelve months...the massive bias for Obama and continuted hit pieces on McCain and Sarah?

Are you trying to tell me that the last twelve months, the media, in your opinion, have been fair and impartial???

BWHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!


You asked for it - you got it. If you think it's some great conspiracy that Bush is a dolt, like your sweetie Sarah - that's fine. Pathetic, but fine.

Yes, there is.


BTW, If you're referring to Eyelids as a liar - I'm fine with that - but in regard to me, you know I'll simply embarrass you for such assertions.

Go right ahead.

MrsSmith
11-02-2008, 04:29 PM
I dont even understand what you're trying to get at, you just agreed with me that we didn't have to deal with an insurgency when rebuilding Germany and Japan. Thanks?

How old are you again? Did you learn to read at some point in your past, or do you have your Mommy come read the posts with the long words to you? :rolleyes:

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 04:30 PM
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010438

Propaganda Redux
Take it from this old KGB hand: The left is abetting America's enemies with its intemperate attacks on President Bush.

by ION MIHAI PACEPA
Tuesday, August 7, 2007 12:01 A.M. EDT

During last week's two-day summit, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown thanked President Bush for leading the global war on terror. Mr. Brown acknowledged "the debt the world owes to the U.S. for its leadership in this fight against international terrorism" and vowed to follow Winston Churchill's lead and make Britain's ties with America even stronger.

Mr. Brown's statements elicited anger from many of Mr. Bush's domestic detractors, who claim the president concocted the war on terror for personal gain. But as someone who escaped from communist Romania--with two death sentences on his head--in order to become a citizen of this great country, I have a hard time understanding why some of our top political leaders can dare in a time of war to call our commander in chief a "liar," a "deceiver" and a "fraud."

I spent decades scrutinizing the U.S. from Europe, and I learned that international respect for America is directly proportional to America's own respect for its president.

My father spent most of his life working for General Motors in Romania and had a picture of President Truman in our house in Bucharest. While "America" was a vague place somewhere thousands of miles away, he was her tangible symbol. For us, it was he who had helped save civilization from the Nazi barbarians, and it was he who helped restore our freedom after the war--if only for a brief while. We learned that America loved Truman, and we loved America. It was as simple as that.

Later, when I headed Romania's intelligence station in West Germany, everyone there admired America too. People would often tell me that the "Amis" meant the difference between night and day in their lives. By "night" they meant East Germany, where their former compatriots were scraping along under economic privation and Stasi brutality. That was then.

But in September 2002, a German cabinet minister, Herta Dauebler-Gmelin, had the nerve to compare Mr. Bush to Hitler. In one post-Iraq-war poll 40% of Canada's teenagers called the U.S. "evil," and even before the fall of Saddam 57% of Greeks answered "neither" when asked which country was more democratic, the U.S. or Iraq.

Sowing the seeds of anti-Americanism by discrediting the American president was one of the main tasks of the Soviet-bloc intelligence community during the years I worked at its top levels. This same strategy is at work today, but it is regarded as bad manners to point out the Soviet parallels. For communists, only the leader counted, no matter the country, friend or foe. At home, they deified their own ruler--as to a certain extent still holds true in Russia. Abroad, they asserted that a fish starts smelling from the head, and they did everything in their power to make the head of the Free World stink.

The communist effort to generate hatred for the American president began soon after President Truman set up NATO and propelled the three Western occupation forces to unite their zones to form a new West German nation. We were tasked to take advantage of the reawakened patriotic feelings stirring in the European countries that had been subjugated by the Nazis, in order to shift their hatred for Hitler over into hatred for Truman--the leader of the new "occupation power." Western Europe was still grateful to the U.S. for having restored its freedom, but it had strong leftist movements that we secretly financed. They were like putty in our hands.

The European leftists, like any totalitarians, needed a tangible enemy, and we gave them one. In no time they began beating their drums decrying President Truman as the "butcher of Hiroshima." We went on to spend many years and many billions of dollars disparaging subsequent presidents: Eisenhower as a war-mongering "shark" run by the military-industrial complex, Johnson as a mafia boss who had bumped off his predecessor, Nixon as a petty tyrant, Ford as a dimwitted football player and Jimmy Carter as a bumbling peanut farmer. In 1978, when I left Romania for good, the bloc intelligence community had already collected 700 million signatures on a "Yankees-Go-Home" petition, at the same time launching the slogan "Europe for the Europeans."

During the Vietnam War we spread vitriolic stories around the world, pretending that America's presidents sent Genghis Khan-style barbarian soldiers to Vietnam who raped at random, taped electrical wires to human genitals, cut off limbs, blew up bodies and razed entire villages. Those weren't facts. They were our tales, but some seven million Americans ended up being convinced their own president, not communism, was the enemy. As Yuri Andropov, who conceived this dezinformatsiya war against the U.S., used to tell me, people are more willing to believe smut than holiness.

The final goal of our anti-American offensive was to discourage the U.S. from protecting the world against communist terrorism and expansion. Sadly, we succeeded. After U.S. forces precipitously pulled out of Vietnam, the victorious communists massacred some two million people in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Another million tried to escape, but many died in the attempt. This tragedy also created a credibility gap between America and the rest of the world, damaged the cohesion of American foreign policy, and poisoned domestic debate in the U.S.

Unfortunately, partisans today have taken a page from the old Soviet playbook. At the 2004 Democratic National Convention, for example, Bush critics continued our mud-slinging at America's commander in chief. One speaker, Martin O'Malley, now governor of Maryland, had earlier in the summer stated he was more worried about the actions of the Bush administration than about al Qaeda. On another occasion, retired four-star general Wesley Clark gave Michael Moore a platform to denounce the American commander in chief as a "deserter." And visitors to the national chairman of the Democratic Party had to step across a doormat depicting the American president surrounded by the words, "Give Bush the Boot."

Competition is indeed the engine that has driven the American dream forward, but unity in time of war has made America the leader of the world. During World War II, 405,399 Americans died to defeat Nazism, but their country of immigrants remained sturdily united. The U.S. held national elections during the war, but those running for office entertained no thought of damaging America's international prestige in their quest for personal victory. Republican challenger Thomas Dewey declined to criticize President Roosevelt's war policy. At the end of that war, a united America rebuilt its vanquished enemies. It took seven years to turn Nazi Germany and imperial Japan into democracies, but that effort generated an unprecedented technological explosion and 50 years of unmatched prosperity for us all.

Now we are again at war. It is not the president's war. It is America's war, authorized by 296 House members and 76 senators. I do not intend to join the armchair experts on the Iraq war. I do not know how we should handle this war, and they don't know either. But I do know that if America's political leaders, Democrat and Republican, join together as they did during World War II, America will win. Otherwise, terrorism will win. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi predicted just before being killed: "We fight today in Iraq, tomorrow in the land of the Holy Places, and after there in the West."

On July 28, I celebrated 29 years since President Carter signed off on my request for political asylum, and I am still tremendously proud that the leader of the Free World granted me my freedom. During these years I have lived here under five presidents--some better than others--but I have always felt that I was living in paradise. My American citizenship has given me a feeling of pride, hope and security that is surpassed only by the joy of simply being alive. There are millions of other immigrants who are equally proud that they restarted their lives from scratch in order to be in this magnanimous country. I appeal to them to help keep our beloved America united and honorable. We may not be able to change the habits of our current political representatives, but we may be able to introduce healthy new blood into the U.S. Congress.

For once, the communists got it right. It is America's leader that counts. Let's return to the traditions of presidents who accepted nothing short of unconditional surrender from our deadly enemies. Let's vote next year for people who believe in America's future, not for the ones who live in the Cold War past.

Lt. Gen. Pacepa is the highest-ranking intelligence official ever to have defected from the Soviet bloc. His new book, "Programmed to Kill: Lee Harvey Oswald, the Soviet KGB, and the Kennedy Assassination" (Ivan R. Dee) will be published in November.

MrsSmith
11-02-2008, 04:35 PM
This is what you said.



and this is what Pres. Bush said. From the video YOU posted. Incidentally, that was not the quiersiton he was asked, either.



So I am being careful, and you did lie, and he did not say what you said he did. So either it was a lie, or you misrepresented it...either way, what you said in that quote was dead wrong.

Waiting for you to admit it.



YES. If you think for one moment that the media in the US or elsewhere is fair or balanced...you're the one that needs help. He was not befuddled, he was not without a clue, and I am again getting sick of your continued use of this meme.

The MSM is a sick joke.



Or maybe they went to the Michael Moore school of editing. Remember him?The guy that used cut and paste on a slew of Heston speeches to create a fabrication for his film Bowling for Colombine?

Care to coment on the conduct of the newspapers over the last twelve months...the massive bias for Obama and continuted hit pieces on McCain and Sarah?

Are you trying to tell me that the last twelve months, the media, in your opinion, have been fair and impartial???

BWHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!



Yes, there is.



Go right ahead.


We've posted the studies showing that the media is unashamedly in Obama's corner, haven't we? LP is:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/121/313603122_5852818bd7.jpg?v=0


He is getting too old to actually think things through, you know.

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 07:10 PM
To show you what a dead weight George W. Bush is on the Republican Party, today, at this moment - look who's going out on the campaign trail in the waning hours of this most historical event.

Let me introduce you to Laura Lane Welch Bush.

http://www.dbtechno.com/images/Laura_Bush_AIDS_Haiti.jpg

This beautiful and intelligent creature is going out to give one last charge for the party.

Not her husband, the current president of the United States - because he's dead weight. When has this ever happened before? What former president has not been asked to stump for his party's nominee? It might have occurred previously, but the former CofC would have to be a real piece of work.

And that's what we have here.

It's not the MSM - it is the reality that the current leader of our government is a stark political liability. He's at the back of the boat and dragging the stern under water. That's why they've asked Laura.

Unprecedented.

JB
11-02-2008, 07:18 PM
To show you <snipped> What's this have to do with a balanced budget thread? That you started no less. :rolleyes:

GWB...top 5 of all time.

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 07:26 PM
What's this have to do with a balanced budget thread? That you started no less. :rolleyes:

GWB...top 5 of all time.

Reality's a mother-fucker sometimes, huh?:cool:

JB
11-02-2008, 07:29 PM
Reality's a mother-fucker sometimes, huh?:cool:Where's Sharpton and Jesse been?

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 07:40 PM
His title is PRESIDENT BUSH. He is the President of the United States, and dont you fucking well forget it.


This beautiful and intelligent creature is going out to give one last charge for the party.Wow..don't say that too loud...your liberal friends will call you a freeper. Dont you remember...one of your fsvourite memes is that she killed a boyfriend in a car accident that she deliberatly caused. (http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/laura.asp)

That meme and that lie have been posted here in B/W of DU and I have not seen you..not once did you EVER stand up for her and declare it to be a vicious and debased lie.

Where were you when Pres Bush was being labeled a deserter or worse...where were YOU when CBS ran a story based on fake documents?

Sitting there, rubbing your hands with glee?? Do you have any idea of just what it is that you and your ilk have done???I know where I was..on LGF watchng as Rather was torn to pieces. Yet where is your outrage over what he did?? You blithely call Pres Bush unintelligent and call him a liar yet you ignore the very real lies of Dan Rather and the hit piece he ran on the President using documents he knew to be forgeries


Not her husband, the current president of the United States - because he's dead weight.You really haven't read or understood one single word I've written, have you? You just don't get it....and you probably never will.


When has this ever happened before? What former president has not been asked to stump for his party's nominee? It might have occurred previously, but the former CofC would have to be a real piece of work.You and your ilk are why. The words character assassination do not do it justice.

Here, I'll introduce you to some friends who have helped turn this man's life and career and Presidency into a nightmare.

www.huffingtonpost.com (http://www.huffingtonpost.com)
www.democraticunderground.com (http://www.democraticunderground.com)
www.dailykos.com (http://www.dailykos.com)
www.michaelmoore.com (http://www.michaelmoore.com)


It's not the MSMThat one sentence proves that you have no intention of listening to me, and that I am wasting my time. Your ilk have helped destroy the good name of the United States, your ilk have leapt into bed with America's enemies..all in the name of smearing Pres. Bush.

Eight years of hate of one man.

Eight years of screeching derision and lampoons and abuse and threats and epithets.

Eight years of helping to wreck your own home.

Eight years of political bile and venom that have tarred the office of the Presidency forever.

And the sad part is, that you have no idea of the damage you have done.

Would you like to know why he is hated? Why he is "dead weight" as you so callously put it?? Why the name and the Presidency of the United States has been hauled through the mud and slime???

Here.

http://baysideproducts.com/store/images/windsor_cheval_mirror.jpg

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 07:59 PM
With that much of a retort there must have been a grounded nerve there somewhere, Sonnabend.

If it wasn't true about GWB being 'dead weight', why wouldn't they ask him to join the campaign trail - back when McCain made his stunning comeback? Why would they wait until this last desperate few hours to ask The First Lady to come spread the message? This is a tragedy in the making and John's is using the soon-to-be ex-president as a target.

He's wise enough and has had the medical history to know when to cut a cancer from the body.

This is as simple as that, Sonnabend.

Sonnabend
11-02-2008, 08:03 PM
He's wise enough and has had the medical history to know when to cut a cancer from the body.

Referring to the President as a cancer is yet another example, LP. Read what you just wrote.


This is as simple as that, Sonnabend.

Yes, it is.

AmPat
11-02-2008, 09:50 PM
To show you what a dead weight George W. Bush is on the Republican Party, today, at this moment - look who's going out on the campaign trail in the waning hours of this most historical event.

Not her husband, the current president of the United States - because he's dead weight. When has this ever happened before? What former president has not been asked to stump for his party's nominee? It might have occurred previously, but the former CofC would have to be a real piece of work.

And that's what we have here.

It's not the MSM - it is the reality that the current leader of our government is a stark political liability. He's at the back of the boat and dragging the stern under water. That's why they've asked Laura.

Unprecedented.

I don't see why this is such a surprise. The MSM has been instrumental in giving the sheeple their opinion of our President. He and the RNC are simply doing what any intelligent people would do; play to your strength and hide your weakness.

All outgoing Presidents are "dead weight." What again is so new about that?

LogansPapa
11-02-2008, 10:13 PM
All outgoing Presidents are "dead weight." What again is so new about that?

So outgoing presidents are not called upon to campaign for their party? And when they are not - their wives are? Are you fucking kidding me?

marinejcksn
11-02-2008, 10:17 PM
What do I want?

The simple fucking acknowledgement that maybe the sweet thing isn't the brightest bulb on the tree, John McCain is as much a pandering asshole as Obama because he picked her, and, acknowledgement that she's wandering away from he leash and running for the presidency in 2012!

Keep the cookie and have the balls to admit your party is coming apart like a cheap Hong Kong suit in the rain. The 'Down-Ticket" is running for its fucking life and you people have no concept of what could actually happen to your government on Tuesday.

1st. The Republican Party isn't my party, I'm a registered Independent. ;)

2nd. Calling her "sweet thing" is degrading to women. Sexist! :p

3rd. I know exactly what could happen to my government on Tuesday. Either people will begrudgingly vote in a moderate Republican who wont be very great, or they'll fall for the slick talk and elect the first Marxist the white house has ever seen. I'm betting on the latter, because to be quite honest I think a lot of Americans are dumb sheep. :(

marinejcksn
11-02-2008, 10:27 PM
I'd like to hear how Iraq has been a "massive success", even the most optimistic person shouldn't be calling it that. There's a still a lot of problems in Iraq and a lot of issues that surround it's future that are unresolved. It would be foolhardy to call that operation a success until we've completely closed the book on that conflict.

See, it just hurts ya'll on the Left so bad to admit we did any good over here because if you admit we have your whole arguement is thrown to shite. It's been a huge success, seeing the transformation we've made from when I was last here in '06 to right now when I'm here again. I always love how people who've never set foot in this land are suddenly experts on how bad we fu*ked up this country, it's priceless. :p

marinejcksn
11-02-2008, 10:30 PM
I dont even understand what you're trying to get at, you just agreed with me that we didn't have to deal with an insurgency when rebuilding Germany and Japan. Thanks?

**Cough** **Werwolf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werwolf)** **Cough**

Must hurt to be taught something by a dumb jarhead, 'eh college boy? :p

Lager
11-02-2008, 11:17 PM
I have to admit how amusing this is to me. Amusing as anything can possibly be in this unique time. With all the negative factors that are lined up against the Republicans. With two wars, an unpopular president whose party has held the white house for 8 years already, an economy that's going south and teeters on uncertainty. A vice-presidential candidate that's been a lightning rod for negativity, and still, still our country hovers around 50 -50. In other words, with the stars lined up against the republicans in a once in a millenium configuration, the dems still cannot convince a significant majority of people to go all in with them. It's amazing to me that with all these factors in place, the people still don't seem comfortable throwing in their lot with the current crop of dems. Yet that doesn't seem to stop eyelids and LP from doing their little victory dance.

MrsSmith
11-02-2008, 11:24 PM
I have to admit how amusing this is to me. Amusing as anything can possibly be in this unique time. With all the negative factors that are lined up against the Republicans. With two wars, an unpopular president whose party has held the white house for 8 years already, an economy that's going south and teeters on uncertainty. A vice-presidential candidate that's been a lightning rod for negativity, and still, still our country hovers around 50 -50. In other words, with the stars lined up against the republicans in a once in a millenium configuration, the dems still cannot convince a significant majority of people to go all in with them. It's amazing to me that with all these factors in place, the people still don't seem comfortable throwing in their lot with the current crop of dems. Yet that doesn't seem to stop eyelids and LP from doing their little victory dance.

Greyt post! I applaud you!

MrsSmith
11-02-2008, 11:25 PM
I don't see why this is such a surprise. The MSM has been instrumental in giving the sheeple their opinion of our President. He and the RNC are simply doing what any intelligent people would do; play to your strength and hide your weakness.

All outgoing Presidents are "dead weight." What again is so new about that?

Obviously, the MSM has greatly affected LP's thoughts, because he buys the whole load of manure. :rolleyes:

AmPat
11-03-2008, 12:43 AM
So outgoing presidents are not called upon to campaign for their party? And when they are not - their wives are? Are you fucking kidding me?

Wipe that false surprise off your post and re-read the ENTIRE response. If the President OR ANYBODY is considered a liability, the candidate will avoid them. What is so surprising about that? Are you as fascinated by colored baloons and shiny objects?:rolleyes:

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 10:19 AM
If the President OR ANYBODY is considered a liability, the candidate will avoid them. What is so surprising about that?

But the candidate will ask his wife (the disrespected president’s) to come out on the campaign trail in the last 48 hours of the race? This has happened before? Please feel free to educate me on that history.

lacarnut
11-03-2008, 10:40 AM
But the candidate will ask his wife (the disrespected president’s) to come out on the campaign trail in the last 48 hours of the race? This has happened before? Please feel free to educate me on that history.

If shit was brains, you would not even get a smell. Most President's wives have been more popular than their husband's at the end of their term starting with M. E.. Pat Nixon, R. Carter, Betty Ford, Nancy Regan, the Bush wives. The only lemon was Hillary Clinton who is a tax evader and stole furniture and paintings when she left the W.H. and overstepped her authority and use of federal funds at her attempt to impose socialized health care.

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 10:48 AM
If shit was brains, you would not even get a smell.

We'll try this again: This has happened before? Please feel free to educate me on that history.

lacarnut
11-03-2008, 02:49 PM
We'll try this again: This has happened before? Please feel free to educate me on that history.

I am trying but you just don't listen.:)

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 02:53 PM
I am trying but you just don't listen.:)

Come on old fart - show me where’s this has happened before - where a lame duck’s wife has gone out and campaigned for a presidential candidate, but not the lame duck himself. Doesn’t your party have any shame?

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 03:01 PM
November 3, 2008

Laura Bush campaigns in Shepherdsville

By Marcus Green
magreen@courier-journal.com

SHEPHERDSVILLE, Ky. - First Lady Laura Bush campaigned in Bullitt County today, using her only election-related appearance of the day to urge voters to support 2nd Congressional District candidate Brett Guthrie.

"One thing is clear," Bush told several hundred people at the Paroquet Springs Conference Centre. "Brett Guthrie is the only candidate in this race who's ever created a job or provided health insurance, and that means something to working families across Kentucky."

Guthrie, a vice president at his family's Bowling Green Trace Die Cast manufacturing company, is running against fellow state Senator David Boswell, an Owensboro Democrat. Boswell was campaigning in the Owensboro area on Monday.

In an 11-minute speech, Bush also rallied a friendly crowd behind Republican Presidential hopeful John McCain and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who is seeking re-election to the Senate.

"Kentucky couldn't have a better advocate in Washington than Mitch McConnell, and my advice for tomorrow is to stick with Mitch for … six more years in the Senate," she said.

Bush also joked that she was looking forward to tomorrow's election "because it seems like George has been on the ticket this entire time" – a clear reference to Democrats' attempts to link McCain with President Bush.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20081103/NEWS01/81103023/1008

Sonnabend
11-03-2008, 03:50 PM
Doesn’t your party have any shame?

Pot, kettle, over.

JB
11-03-2008, 03:53 PM
So outgoing presidents are not called upon to campaign for their party?Are you serious?

Gore ran from Clinton in 2000 like he had bubon.

Shannon
11-03-2008, 03:54 PM
Are you serious?

Gore ran from Clinton in 2000 like he had bubon.

I was just going to mention that.

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 03:58 PM
I was just going to mention that.

http://www.v7n.com/forums/attachments/graphic-design-forum/2751d1152575132-cropping-animated-gif-weird.gif

OH PLEASE!

Shannon
11-03-2008, 04:02 PM
Really, LP? That's your response?:rolleyes:

JB
11-03-2008, 04:04 PM
I was just going to mention that.It's not even that much of an issue. It's not like it happens every election.

2008 - Bush didn't campaign
2004 - Not applicable
2000 - Clinton didn't campaign
1996 - N/A
1992 - Kind of N/A
1988 - Ron probably campaigned for Bush
1984 - N/A
1980 - N/A
1976 - N/A
1972 - N/A
1968 - N/A
1964 - N/A
1960 - Maybe Ike campaigned for Nixon, I don't know.

In the last 50 years a sitting president campaigned on behalf of his party maybe twice. :rolleyes:

Sonnabend
11-03-2008, 04:08 PM
Y'know LP....do we need to remind you that this is Conservative Underground? I, for one, am getting tired of your constant denigration of Sarah Palin, the President, other Republicans, you ignore the valid points we make, and treat us as fools as well.

You, like Eyelids, are a banned poster who came back here and you are here under sufferance.

I have been patient.I have been tolerant. That patience has limits, you do not read or respond to anything I say and quite frankly I have about had enough. Go back in this thread, read what I have piosted and then I want a proper and honest reply.


Doesn’t your party have any shame? John Murtha.

Haditha.

Care to comment?

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 04:22 PM
Y'know LP....do we need to remind you that this is Conservative Underground? I, for one, am getting tired of your constant denigration of Sarah Palin, the President, other Republicans, you ignore the valid points we make, and treat us as fools as well.

You, like Eyelids, are a banned poster who came back here and you are here under sufferance.

I have been patient.I have been tolerant. That patience has limits, you do not read or respond to anything I say and quite frankly I have about had enough. Go back in this thread, read what I have piosted and then I want a proper and honest reply.

John Murtha.

Haditha.

Care to comment?

Feel free to remind me of anything you like, Sonnabend.

"The forum where liberal and conservatives and come together."

This is the header that’s listed with www.conservativeunderground.com and you’ll need to press to get that changed if you’re really serious about your position.

Regarding Murtha - he’s an Independent? Didn’t know that - now I do. ;)

Sonnabend
11-03-2008, 04:42 PM
"The forum where liberal and conservatives and come together."

This is the header that’s listed with www.conservativeunderground.com (http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/../) and you’ll need to press to get that changed if you’re really serious about your position.

Screencap.

LogansPapa
11-03-2008, 04:46 PM
"you say tomato, I say tomahto"

Point is - don't like it? Change it. :cool:

Sonnabend
11-03-2008, 04:46 PM
Screencap it...I don't see it.

Goldwater
11-03-2008, 04:51 PM
Screencap it...I don't see it.

How can you not know?

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/2468/cubb2.png (http://imageshack.us)
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/cubb2.png/1/w766.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img515/cubb2.png/1/)

Might be a joke though...

Sonnabend
11-03-2008, 05:02 PM
Ah...a Google header.It would help if LP over there was more specific.

Thank you.

How do I not know? I dont need to Google it, I know where it is.

Goldwater
11-03-2008, 05:45 PM
How do I not know? I dont need to Google it, I know where it is.

Touché sir.

MrsSmith
11-03-2008, 08:20 PM
The forum where liberal and conservatives

Ok, people, we are WAY over our quota. We've got to cut it down to ONE lib. So, who all gets banned? :mad::mad:








:D

Odysseus
11-04-2008, 10:51 AM
Ok, people, we are WAY over our quota. We've got to cut it down to ONE lib. So, who all gets banned? :mad::mad:
:D

Slate has a ratio of 55 Obama supporters to 1 McCain supporter, and DU maintains zero tolerance for conservative postings. Sauce for the goose...