Audacity of Truth
Rahmbo:
"Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil's spawn. He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive."
-Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) on Obama's COS, 3/7/10
Velvet Lair- Legends March 18, 2010
- Some things are just not cute March 18, 2010
- The adventures of the lady spider killer continue March 11, 2010
- Intermission February 19, 2010
- People who allow their dogs to poop in other people’s yards February 16, 2010
Bam: Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) smacks down House leadership’s attempt at power grab
The transcript:
“Yesterday these leaders attempted to change a 185 year old House rule to dramatically increase taxes and government spending against the will of the minority party and the American people.
“Is this really the way to run the self proclaimed most honest and open Congress in our nation’s history?
“While House leadership may suffer from amnesia, the American people most certainly do not, and bending the rules to pass egregious tax-and-spend policies will not stand in the people’s house.”
Watch the video of Walberg’s comments below. It’s just a little over a minute.
Hat tip to Don Surber, who asks an interesting question:
Where is the press? When Republicans took over in 1995 (following the 1994 election) every move of Newt Gingrich was scrutinized and tested for that High Crime Of Hypocrisy, the only sin the Secular Left recognizes. Pelosi has yet to fulfill a single one of her promises — indeed, her promise not to withhold funding of the war was shattered and she is given a pass on it.
Maybe we need the Fairness Doctrine for straight news reporting.
Heh.
As to where the media is? Probably out lovingly covering Senator Obama’s latest fundraiser …
Prior/Related:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
85 Responses to “Bam: Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) smacks down House leadership’s attempt at power grab”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Sure, Vegas, it looks like Iran is the real deal. As I’ve mentioned on this site previously, I’m wary because of confusions surrounding the Iraq evidence, but I’m willing to listen to the facts. I hope we have enough resources freed up for us to deal effectively with Iran, if it comes to that.
Oh, and Severian? I’ll never lie to you, sweetheart–you have my solemn oath as a Lefty.
It’s not so much that the left lies to us Doc, it’s that you display a stunning ability to lie to yourselves. You show a real talent for convincing yourselves that reality is something other than it is, and at ignoring the end results of your own actions. You’ve done it here yourself on numerous occasions, with statements lie the Dominoes never fell in SE Asia, in contrast to all facts. You have never dealt with the horrendous loss of life that occurred after liberals forced withdrawal from SE Asia, and the parallels for what will happen to the Middle East if you manage to force the same kind of abandonment and surrender. You move blithely onto the next approved party talking point, completely unfazed by the death and destruction your policies leave in their wake. And that’s one of the main reasons we will never trust you to manage the nations affairs, you are not serious enough.
Doc,
You’re the first person on the left that has admitted that Iran is a threat that I’ve seen. You also have to remember even France and Russia thought Iraq had WMD’s they were against the war because of £¥$. And don’t forget that there were about 2 dozen reasons why we went into Iraq in the first place and the vast majority of them are still valid. Hell trying to kill Bush Sr. should have been reason enough to take Saddam out. And I’d feel the same if he had tried to take Clinton out. There are lines that you don’t cross. Trying to kill the POTUS should be one of them. And yet people on the left just laugh it off. Why? My guess is that Bush 41 had an R next to his name and not a D, but that’s just me.
Thanks, buddy, but I think you misunderstood what I was saying (Big shock). As I referred to in a previous post, it was the 2006 election in which Al Qaeda, Syria, and Iran were thrilled with the result.
Here you go champ:
Al Qaeda hails election results
I even linked it to the BBC, who seems to despise Bush almost as much as you. I linked it to BBC so I could be spared the whining that was sure to follow if I linked it to Fox News, or the Drudge report.
Once again, why do you think our enemies are so happy about the dems winning in 2006?
Perhaps you could try linking to some sites to back up your “claims”. It might do something to your dwindling credibility.
NC Cop:
If our goal is to do the opposite of what al Qaeda wants, I wonder what one is to make of this quote, from the BBC article you linked to:
He told US President George W Bush to “stay on the battleground”. “I tell the lame duck (US administration) do not rush to escape as did your defence minister.”
It looks like al Qaeda wants us to keep fighting. By continuing to fight, are we not playing into their hands? Why do you think our enemies are so happy about our continued presence in Iraq?
I’d say, offhand, that this guy wants to get inside our heads and screw with our minds. It sounds like it might be working.
So from now on, if our enemy, wherever they may be, says they are glad we are fighting them, we should retreat? That’s a fabulous plan. What if the Taliban in Afghanistan says the same thing? Do we retreat from there, too? You seem to be of the opinion that if our enemy doesn’t immediately surrender or puts up a fight, we should leave.
Only on people like you, my friend.
I noticed you didn’t answer my question though.
I expect nothing less from you.
Only Doc could make Neville Chamberlain look like a war monger NC.
I did answer your question, NC Cop. I said that it looks like they’re trying to get in your head. They’re spouting propaganda for their own purposes–what the heck else do you expect of them? I’m sorry that you got sucked into the al Qaeda vortex of lies, but don’t get angry at me because I didn’t.
You’re obviously really confused here. When al Qaeda says something that bolsters a point you want to make–like the Democrat/election thing–you want me to take it seriously. When al Qaeda says something else in that same article that might bolster a Lefty’s point–like the fact that they really like the idea that the President is staying the course–you say it’s supposed to be disregarded.
Which is it? Are they liars, or are they truth-tellers?
OH, I see now. Al Qaeda, Iran, and Syria all released statement saying that they were happy with the election results to get in my head!!! It makes perfect sense. The answer was right there the whole time.
LOL!! Doc, you have been a source of great amusement to me throughout this post. I haven’t come close to getting angry with you!!
Ah, once again, the lefty creative thinking. Please find in any of my previous posts where I said to disregard any statement from them. What I said was that they are quite happy the dems won the election. I have no doubt that they are happy that we’re staying in Iraq. They are extremists. All they want to do is kill Americans, here or Iraq, it makes no difference to them.
Gosh, Doc, isn’t everyone capable of lying AND telling the truth. Much like the dem leaders. I can’t think of a single reason why they would lie about their joy in the dems winning in 2006. Yet, I’m sure they have a propaganda machine, which apparently is working well with you, that will make up lies to advance their cause. Again, how does lying about the dems winning in 2006 advance their cause?
It is quite evident that no matter what evidence that is presented to you, you will not change your mind. I certainly can’t think any evidence better than the statement from out enemies (please don’t overlook the fact that it was also Iran, not just Al Qaeda) about who they would rather deal with, yet you continue to stick your head in the sand.
Buh-bye
LOL!! Doc, you have been a source of great amusement to me throughout this post. I haven’t come close to getting angry with you!!
I don’t think it’s dawned on Doc yet that we all view him as our current “virtual” village idiot. Hey, since steve went away he’s the best we’ve got!
Maximum utilization of all available resources, SEV?
Hey Doc, your lack of knowledge is truly astonishing. How is Iraq a defeat?? We are fighting 4 enemies allied against us. Al-Qaeda, former Bathists, Iran and Syria. Now you all want to run. Also as if that alone isn’t a completely ignorant thought, Pelosi is saying that there will be no outside influence on what happens to Iraq once we leave. Like there is no outside influence now. Talk about idiotic. Our troops need to come home victorious. The left needs to support the mission and the troops.
Also if Iraq is such a lost cause, then why are so many Iraqis attempting to create a better Iraq?? Why are so many lining up to join the police or military?? The left have been trying to say Iraq is a “quagmire” or a “civil war” since 2004, and you have been wrong and continue to be wrong with astonishing amazement. The Iraqis themselves are working for a better Iraq, but you on the left want to just give up.
Lastly, What kind of stupidity makes you believe that if Bush signs this funding bill, and doesn’t pull the troops out by the “arbitary” timeline, that those on the left won’t scream and stomp their feet that he is ignoring the will of the people. Yeah, I have no reason to be suspicious of the motives of the leadership of the left, nope, none at all. – Lorica
Now to answer your questions:
According to our best estimates and what Al-Qaeda has said, between 6000 to 8000. Which makes Iraq the central front in the war against AQ.
It is abit late for this to have much of an effect outside of turning bin Laden into a martyr. The snake has turned into a hydra, and bin Laden is pretty minor these days. If we were going to take him out we needed to do it along time before now. After all bin Laden did declare war against the US in what 1992?? Do I get my bonus points?? What we need to do now is ensure that the Iraq experiment does actually work. If we bring democracy to Iraq, we bring with it all the same blessings that the rest of the western world has. If people in, name the country, can work thru it, so can the Iraqis. Are the Iraqis odds so much worse that that of our Founding Fathers?? I have to imagine that those on the left telling Lafyette the exact same thing 230 years ago. – Lorica
Doc wrote, “I’ve lost count of the times I’ve been called a liar just in this thread alone.”
Then stop doing it.
Doc wrote, “Lying and having a different opinion than you–or even having a different take on the facts than you–are not the same thing.”
You are entitled to having an invalid opinion I’ll agree. But when you reference a bill and the BILL says things that are contradictory to the CLAIM you make and words mean things then you can only address the substance or go on having an invalid opinion.
Actually, we’re up against at least six, Lorica. I guess you forgot about the DBM and the dhimmiRats. I do not joke!
Baklava:
Please show me how and where I’ve lied. I’ve cited and quoted the passage in the bill that I think makes my point. You say that you “skimmed until pages 37 and 38″ before deciding that I was lying. Are you saying that the evidence comes on page 37? Page 38? I’d need you to be more explicit, like giving me a section number or something, because I don’t have a hard copy of 1591 like you do–I was reading it off the Congressional web site, and it’s not paginated.
If I’m wrong about the bill, I’m wrong, but you haven’t really made any attempt to show me specifically what I got wrong.
Hey Doc, your lack of knowledge is truly astonishing.
Well, Lorica, I guess you’ve hit one of those “reading comprehension” problems you guys are always writing about.
If you were to go back and reread both Crabby’s post and my response, you’d probably notice your error.
Read Doc. Stop lying.
There are limitations and therefore contradicting your CLAIM.
It’s ok to admit being wrong. I’ve done it before in posts.
It’s not up to me to do your due diligence. It’s not up to me to make claims negligently.
Any grade schooler out there want to look at page numbers and find limitations???
Dear Baklava:
Go ahead and type in capitals all you want–the fact remains that the limitations in 1591 are not, as I pointed out in my original post that got your panties in a bunch, actual limitations. They are, as any dumbass can tell who actually bothers to read the document, non-binding.
(By the way, I got that “non-binding” rifff when I climbed into the WABAC machine and remembered that that was the phrase people were using when the thing was passed.)
I’ve repeatedly drawn your attention to the specific passage that shows that you have your head firmly lodged up your hind end, and I’ve repeatedly invited you to show me the specific passage that says I’m wrong. Instead, you froth at the mouth, spewing Cheeto flecks all over your screen, screaming, “LIAR! LIAR! LIAR!”
This stuff may work with your high school buddies as you’re sitting around the table playing Dungeons and Dragons, but you’re out of your league here, my friend. This is the real world. Bring the freakin’ documentation or get out of my face. Cite the section that trumps my citation or move on to another topic.
Doc?? You do have a reading comprehension problem. I quote out of that exact reply to crabby in the post you reply to when you tell me to go read your reply to crabby. Hello??? You ever think about going back and doing a little reading, since it is obvious you didn’t read it the 1st time. Your reply to crabby is exactly what I am talking about.
Also, in your reply to crabby, you say 5 TIMES that the left feels. Well Yippee Skippy!!! How about you try a little “Thinking” it might help us all get thru this. Knowledge requires Thinking Doc, not feeling. I don’t have an error to re-address, unlike yourself.
Astonishingly, I must repeat myself, Your lack of knowledge is truly astonishing. – Lorica
Wow. I can feel the flecks of your spittle from here.
Either “your lack of knowledge is truly astonishing” is addressing how you feel about the issues I mentioned–in which case, nobody cares, because your view of reality was not the issue of the post–or you’re telling me that you know better how the Left feels than a Lefty does–in which case, all I can say is, “It is to laugh.”
One way or the other, you’re displaying the typical blinkered thinking of the chronically conservative.
Sometimes what people post doesn’t revolve around you and your crack-addled internal universe.
Cheerily,
Doc
Lorica:
I almost forgot to address the actual issue at hand, as your inherent idiocy provides so many targets of opportunity. Up above, I wrote:
If you were to go back and reread both Crabby’s post and my response
See, among thinking humans, the “re-” word part in “reread” assumes that I knew that you had already read the post in question. “Re-” is a prefix which means “to do again.” This suggests that I figured–rightly, as it turns out–that you weren’t “reading” in the sense that reading teachers think of the term–that is, in the sense of “bringing meaning to text.” Instead, you were doing something that I might term “bringing foolishness to text.” Maybe I can write a scholarly paper on it.
And you have the unmitigated gall to lay into me for reading comprehension issues?
Ah, the irony, she is delicious….
Doc, you really should actually read the damned document before going on one of your little self righteous, narcissistic rants. If looking like an idiot is your goal, you succeeded magnificently.
Doc, I “re”-read the reply you gave crabby. What I want to know, and I am STILL waiting for, is your proof that the Iraq war is a “trainwreck”. If my reply to you is idiocy, then your non-reply is worse. You have all this blah blah blah about “feelings” but you don’t at all provide any hard evidence that a truly thinking person can actually work with. I don’t give a squat about how the left “feels”, that doesn’t matter to me. Apparently the left has more feelings than evidence, and then you call me an idiot. Good Lord Doc. I want the HARD EVIDENCE that you alone have that the war in Iraq is a “trainwreck”!!! If you can’t give it to me, then do us all a favor, and stop posting the feeling trash.
Ohhh and I am not angry with you, so your spittle remark is really uncalled for. But I do like the little adolescent passive agressive nature of your replies. Good One – Lorica
Ohhh Peaches, they are delicious too!!
Oh, and the bill is just chock full of other attempts to interfere and micromanage the war, like requiring constant reporting to arbitrary congressional committees, interfering with troop deployments by setting arbitrary limits on unit deployment timelines and such, restricting how money is spent, etc. And that’s not even mentioning the ton o’pork attached to the end, what minimum wage or Katrina bailouts have to do with the military effort in Iraq is beyond me. And the statement about “not requiring troop levels to be limited to below that in Jan of 07″ means short circuiting the surge. Only a Democrat could convince themselves that a reduction to Jan levels from the surge is not a troop withdrawal, same way you manage to convince yourselves that eliminating a tax cut is not a tax increase. Orwell would be proud, well, shocked and disgusted more likely, as you libs have taken Newspeak to even greater heights than he envisioned.
My fingers are getting tired from cutting and pasting this passage from 1591, but I’ll try it again.
In the Orwellian NewSpeak we Lefties use, “shall not be costrued to require” is actually secret code for “shall not be costrued to require.”
We’re tricky that way.
Oh, and Severian: whip out the old thesaurus and find a synonym for “narcissistic.” I mean, I’m glad you know a four-syllable word and all, but you’ve worn it smooth from overuse.
“Shor-Circuiting the Surge.” I think I’ll use that for the name of my next band.
“Short.” Darn my index finger for missing that T. I’ll bet it’s some kind of Mexislamofacist conspiracy. Let’s boycott France again!
That’s what’s in 1591. There have been about 200 amendments proposed, including ones to strip the timeline out, but they have not been approved. Only about 5 have been and they do not relate to the war limitations, they mainly add more pork.
Well Doc, since force levels are currently above Jan 07, what part of the fact that this represents a decrease in force are you having problems with? Try reading very very slowly, move your lips if you need to. Your distortions of fact and reality are really pretty pathetic. And yes, you are still a narcissistic liberal, that explains your behavior and why you keep posting the same drivel over and over perfectly, you like to see your own words in “print.”
Again, what part of “not be construed to require” and “below Jan 07″ troop levels is so hard for you to understand? Since troop levels are higher, the Dims are promising not to require troop levels to be lower than before the surge? And you don’t think that requiring the surge troop levels to be done away with, that “to Jan 07 levels” doesn’t mean getting rid of the surge by removing the additional troops?
Liberalism is obviously a form of mental illness, you can’t even understand simple written English, but then that’s no surprise, your type likes to continually argue what the meaning of “is” is and such.
The goal is clear, if it appears the surge might work, the Dems will come up with a reason to take troop levels back to Jan 07 levels, back to the levels that represented the “failure” they harp on, because success is something too terrible for them to contemplate. And they have idiots like you Doc to carry their water for them, arguing that a reduction is not a reduction.
Hey Doc, narcissist! Bwahahahahaha
You know Doc, there’s no way even you can be that dense, hence you are being dishonest. You’re deliberately misrepresenting the facts of the bill in questions. And you promised not to lie, I’m so disappointed and my trust in human nature has been shattered! Oh the humanity!
/tap /tap /tap Is this thing on?? Hello Doc, still waiting on that “hard evidence” that Iraq is a trainwreck. – Lorica