Friday, June 13, 2008


My choice for VP.


Another Lally said...

I agree with Webb on many issues concerning military recruiting policies.

This educational bill should be a 'no brainer', as should be all of the benefits of the GI Bill from years back.

The greater irony is that years ago there was a draft so service was compulsory. Thus the benefits for the two year compulsory service was a great boost to our economy.

The argument that a person who does not wish to be a career soldier might become one in order to receive greater benefit should be an issue in the retirement policy of the armed forces, not the benefit for minimum service.

Though I disagree with Webb on some issues, this is not one of them.

He would be such a fine choice for vice-president that I'm sure the DNC will reject him for his military background and concerns for our men and women in uniform, past and present.

Lally said...

Oh please, how self-righteously hypocritical to make any remarks of any kind against the Democratic Party's commitment to the military when a vast majority of Democratic politicians not only served their country with honor but often with valor that got them decorated (Kerrey, Webb, Gore, etc.) as opposed to recent Republicans who either avoided service (Cheney's famous Viet Nam avoidance of service quote about having "better things to do" etc.) or served with nothing close to valor (Junior's Reserve service that kept him away from Viet Nam and his not showing up for duty for close to a year—for which he received no punishment though I got court martialed for missing two weeks in peacetime!). Give me a break, especially since it's been the Republicans that have kept our service men and women without the proper armour and armored vehicles for a war they misplanned and are trying to prevent an update of the G.I. Bill from being enacted for those who have served and are serving in it still.

Another Lally said...

Funny, I agree with Webb and you still get bent out of shape.

I seem to recall massive cuts in defense spending and outsourcing many logistic functions formerly performed by the military (Peace Dividend).

Seems we are paying double and triple for those cuts.

JIm said...

Webb would be an interesting choice and be a more worthy debate opponent than Obama. Obama showed his ignorance about economics, when he did not realize that tax receipts rose when rates were cut. Obama also showed his ignorance of history, when trying to defend direct and presidential negotiations with dictators without preconditions, he referred to JFK and Kruzchev in Vienna during a nuclear crisis. He was unaware that the meeting took place approx.two years before the crisis and that the meeting was a disaster for Kennedy, and the US. Kruzchev was convinced that Kennedy was a lite weight who could be rolled, which led to the Cuban Missal Crisis.

Webb's Southern comments have not seemed to gain any traction. I don't have a problem with it, but the liberal media would have gone nuts if a Republican said it.

Michael, your reaction to Another Lally above, seem to indicate an anger management problem.

Lally said...

Nice try guys. "Anger management problem"? Nope, just a natural disgust with the hypocrisy of the right. I admire the right's ability to use the old Nazi and Soviet "big lie" propaganda technique to repeat the same tired untrue message over and over again until most of the public gives in and accepts it as truth. But I don't accept it as truth, nor, thank God, do more and more of the general public. To disparage the Democrats as anit-military is a lie. Period. No anger, just the facts ma'am. To disparage the Democrats as the "tax and spend" party is a lie, period. If you are a working person earning either an hourly wage or a regular salary, or a small business person, or anyone else making under 200,000 a year, you are better off under the Democrats. Proven by all economic measures. Period. You can pull out your rightwing "experts" to refute the facts, by blaming the Republican recessions and depressions and decline of real wages etc. etc. on events that occurred earlier under Democrats, and then turn around and try to take credit for any good that occurs under the same Republican administrations, but the reality is that under Democratic administrations working people, or what is incorrectly called "the middle class" (there is nothing "middle" about it, since the distance between the "middle" class and the "upper" class is far greater than between the "middle" class and the "lower" one, etc.) are better off. End of story, and end of my responding to your ceaseless rightwing attacks that would be silly if they weren't part of the same kinds of attacks that have caused this country so much harm, especially in the past seven years.

Another Lally said...

I always find humor in your short-sighted approach to economics.

Under the tax and spend crowd, business has been exporting job after job to nations with lower corporate tax rates.

The middle class exists at the behest of the employer who pays them their wages. We have employees who want to dictate terms to the employer and then wonder why they are unemployed.

When the poor and middle class start creating jobs to promote the growth and stability of the middle class then they should be given incentives.

Lower taxes across the board and demand that state and local governments be responsible for their governance. We elect these people who raise our taxes, so the more local the level of inefficiency, the greater our ability to promote the changes sought.

Join your local political club so your voice can be heard.

JIm said...

The Pelosi led congress has very few victories. One that she touts is, an increase in minimum wage. The most recent unemployment percent went up to 5.5% (still low by historic standards, but up none the less) at a time when there has not been much in the way of corporate layoffs. This ocurred in the spring when students and recent graduates are looking for work. Most minimum wage earners are not the main family wage earners. Could it be, that we have another example of unintended consequences of liberals attempting to help a group, but end up hurting that very same group by making entry level jobs too expensive to be economically viable.

Mike, your liberal advocacy, might be more more convincing, if you could site historically successful liberal progressive governments and or programs. I don't know if you want to include Clinton in examples, since he did some non liberal things like work for free trade with NAFTA and he was dragged kicking and screaming to sign the welfare reform bill.

I look forward to your liberal/progressive success stories. I suspect you will not include Air America as a successful enterprise. In the free market of ideas they do not seem to be fairing well. No wonder the Democrat party wishes to kill talk radio with the Fairness Doctrine.

Lally said...

Okay, last word with you two for quite a while because it is just too tedious. You obviously can't read very well, either of you, or you would have noticed the tons of examples i have cited on previous posts and are obviously available all over the internet, the history books, memoires (many written by your own tribe, rightwingers, only in repentance for the lies they told and mud they slung that they knew was in the service of lies and those few who would benefit from them to the detriment of the rest of us) and the etc. etc. etc. It would be easier for any Democrat to name five hundred successful Democratic programs that worked in the last one hundred years than it would be for any Republican to name five Republican programs that worked, that is worked to the benefit of the country and all its citizens rather than the coporate elite few who have grown even richer and more powerful in these past seven years when the Republicans have been in total charge. God bless you both, and your cohorts, but not your distortions, avoidance of addressing the points in your adversaries arguments nor your negative commentary and energy on all things good and kind to paraphrase another book I'm sure you also never read.

JIm said...

One would due. You obviously don't feel up to the task or maybe you recognise that history has shown that most ot the liberal agenda has been a failure.

JIm said...

By the way, there use to be more liberal voices that would respond to some of the conservative thoughts on this blog. It seems they have also fallen silent along with Mike. It is a shame, that the American Liberal/Progressive movement, even if in microism(sp?), is not up to rational debate. Tim Russert, and Daniel Patrick Moighnihan, Hubert Humprey, Tip O'Neal must be looking down in sadness from their special place in Heaven. It is amazing how many Irishmen are on that distingished list. It would be a shame to think that liberals and particuarly Irish liberals have lost their courage.

JIm said...

FYI - Words from Tim Russert delivered in a talk at Notre Dame

" It is not enough to confirm your political views by only accessing and reading outfits that reinforce your view but do not challenge them"