GOP Plot to screw the economy and middle class

Here are a few of the ongoing economic conditions facing a vast majority of Americans, many of whom are all revved up to vote Republican in November. According to Michael Snyder of the Business Insider:

• 61 percent of Americans "always or usually" live paycheck to paycheck, which was up from 49 percent in 2008 and 43 percent in 2007.
• 66 percent of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1 percent of all Americans.
• Over 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009, which represented a 32 percent increase over 2008.
• The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation's wealth.
• In America today, the average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks.
• More than 40 percent of Americans who actually are employed are now working in service jobs, which are often very low paying.
• Despite the financial crisis, the number of millionaires in the United States rose a whopping 16 percent to 7.8 million in 2009.

Oh, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reported that wages for the highest 20 percent of earners rose by nearly 300 percent since 1979, while wages for the bottom and middle 20 percent increased only by 41 percent -- combined. Plotted on a graph, middle and working class wages have flatlined for 30 years. Roll all of these tragic figures into a slow growth recovery and here we are. Most of us in the middle class are screwed.

The GOP Plot to Screw the Economy and the Middle Class

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/the-gop-plot-to-screw-the_b_662953.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=072910&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry

Socialism rants:

http://www.slate.com/id/2251669

http://www.aolnews.com/surge-desk/article/new-tea-party-billboard-of-obama-hitler-and-lenin-receives-complaints-from-other-tea-partiers/19553093?sms_ss=facebook

me:  

SO you have access to the internet and can Google references to communism and socialism, find blogs run by a-holes [and I bet they're really pretty too] then use this information to connect the dots [via 62 degrees of separation] and make a connection that you consider definitive proof [Master's Degree program at Glenn Beck U.]
So let's see.... Tea Party rally-racist with signs-Tea party is racist...BINGO
and then there's Christ-says the rich won't get into heaven-give to the needy-socialist...BINGO
but I'm sure the capitalist bible will have an argument to trump the Gospels.

SO you have access to the internet and can Google references to communism and socialism, find blogs run by a-holes [and I bet they're really pretty too] then use this information to connect the dots [via 62 degrees of separation] and make a... connection that you consider definitive proof [Master's Degree program at Glenn Beck U.]
So let's see.... Tea Party rally-racist with signs-Tea party is racist...BINGO
and then there's Christ-says the rich won't get into heaven-give to the needy-socialist...BINGO
but I'm sure the capitalist bible will have an argument to trump the Gospels.

Obama: 2009 report card

http://www.brookings.edu/about/status-report.aspx

 

The Status Report: Assessing the Obama Administration’s First Year

During the presidential transition, Brookings scholars wrote a series of policy recommendations in 12 memos to incoming President Barack Obama. In January 2010, one year into the new presidency, our experts rated the progress of the new administration on those same issues in The Status Report, a series of daily commentary and video.

Each of the items below provides an assessment of President Obama's performance in light of recommendations made during the Presidential Transition.

• The Status Report: Assessing Obama’s Leadership

  Darrell West, January 4, 2010

  Darrell M. West gives President Obama a B+ on his ability to reposition government as a solution rather than a problem and for making good progress in a situation of extreme political polarization and unusually large policy challenges.

• The Status Report: Obama and Energy Security

  William J. Antholis and Charles K. Ebinger , January 5, 2010

  William Antholis and Charles Ebinger give President Obama a B+ on taking mostly positive steps internationally, but some missteps domestically, on building a secure energy future for the United States.

• The Status Report: Obama's Commitment to Creating Opportunity

  Ron Haskins and Isabel V. Sawhill , January 6, 2010

  Isabel V. Sawhill and Ron Haskins give President Obama a composite score of B-, applauding his fast action to create more opportunity in the recession but questioning the fiscal sustainability of the safety net.

• The Status Report: Obama and the Tax System

  William Gale and Benjamin Harris , January 7, 2010

  William Gale and Benjamin Harris give the administration a B, for their handling of tax and fiscal policy in meeting the challenges of the global economic crisis. However, they remain concerned in the lack of progress on efforts to reform the tax and fiscal system.

• The Status Report: Obama’s Commitment to Global Development

  Noam Unger, January 8, 2010

  Noam Unger gives the administration a B- for its record of leadership in global development. Unger says that improved effectiveness in this area would help reduce global poverty, support the emergence of more capable partners and mitigate transnational threats.

• The Status Report: Obama's Effort to Restore Economic Confidence

  Karen Dynan and Martin Neil Baily, January 11, 2010

  Karen Dynan and Martin Baily give the Obama administration an A- in its effort to restore U.S. economic confidence, offering credit for deft handling of the economic crisis but raising questions about whether the president has laid the foundation for sustained growth.

• The Status Report: Obama’s Challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan

  Vanda Felbab-Brown, January 12, 2010

  Vanda Felbab-Brown gives President Obama a B for laying out the right strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan but doing it too late in 2009 to stem the insurgency, corruption and apathy.

• The Status Report: Obama's Challenges in the Middle East

  Martin Indyk and Kenneth Pollack, January 13, 2010

  Martin Indyk and Kenneth M. Pollack give the president an overall grade of B for confronting big challenges in a region that includes Iraq, Iran, terrorism in Yemen, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. That reflects an A for effort, they say, and a C for results that have so far not matched the promise of the administration’s ambitious agenda.

• The Status Report: Obama and Global Financial Stability

  Kemal Dervis and Eswar Prasad, January 14, 2010

  Kemal Dervis and Eswar Prasad give President Obama a B+ for what the new administration accomplished on global economic policy during the crisis, but temper the high grade with an incomplete for the big tasks that lie ahead, partly the result of problems created by the very policies that got us out of the crisis.

• The Status Report: Obama's Plans to Rebuild American Prosperity

  Bruce Katz and Robert Puentes, January 15, 2010

  Bruce Katz and Robert Puentes give the president and his administration an A- for boosting infrastructure spending and for initiating policy reforms and innovations in the first year. On the bigger effort to rebuild American prosperity, however, they feel that the work is, thus far, incomplete.

• The Status Report: Obama's Leadership Abroad

  Steven Pifer and Strobe Talbott, January 19, 2010

  Steven Pifer and Strobe Talbott give President Obama an A- in tackling the transnational threats posed by nuclear proliferation, the arms race with Russia, and climate change. They are taking into account the difficulties that Obama faces in four respects: the sheer magnitude and complexity of the agenda, a difficult Russian negotiating partner, the burden of the Bush legacy of unilateralism, and the intensity of political opposition.

• The Status Report: Obama and Health Care Reform

  Henry J. Aaron, January 20, 2010

  Because Congress has not yet enacted legislation to reform health care, Henry Aaron assigns a grade of ‘incomplete’ on this issue, noting that history will judge the president depending on whether the effort succeeds or fails in the long run.

Tax Links:

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/subjects/taxes/ 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm 

http://www.moneybluebook.com/2009-federal-income-tax-brackets-official-irs-tax-rates/ 

http://www.moneybluebook.com/2010-federal-income-tax-brackets-irs-tax-rates/ 

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/412113_top_federal_income.pdf 

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=901335

Bush Tax Cuts for the rich don’t hold up:

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/07/20/kyl-edits 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/13/AR2010071305391.html  

5 myths about taxes:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/01/AR2010040102287.html?sid=ST2010072802968

The Whole Hand Over His Heart Debacle:

The Comment:

The video from the 2008 campaign and titled “Barack Hussein Obama refuses to salute US flag” was posted on FaceBook. My daughter and I commented on the post that the video’s title was basically misleading, untrue and inflammatory.

This is my ‘basic argument in regards to the video: 

In the video B. Obama does not place his hand over his heart but in no context does he '”REFUSE” to. In fact he rises in reverence, he stands in reverence facing the flag and when it is over he applauds the anthem. No refusal, no apparent disrespect other than he neglects to place his hand over his heart. Under the circumstance to suggest that he intentionally disrespected the flag or refused to place his hand over his heart is a contradiction to his actions, the context of the video and would have to rank as one of the dumbest gestures that a candidate for president could employ. Now, probably the second dumbest gesture would be for a candidate to ‘forget’ to place his hand over his heart, but in the context of the video and the mans objective the more logical conclusion would be that. I could rationalize why that may have happened but I agree he should have placed his hand over his heart, it was either dumb or neglectful not to but in no way does the video reflect a refusal. It would be like if someone to a video of me walking up to a church door, stopping and then choosing not to go in. Did I refuse to go in? or did I choose not to go in? Did I remember something in my car? Or did I just decide not to go in? To depict my actions as a refusal would not be an objective characterization.

Mu daughter posted the following links to debunk the video title’s suggestion and another picture that is commonly used to make this inflammatory point are misrepresented and outright untrue:

Kelly July 10 at 6:32pm

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-arlington-salute.htm
video: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/286572-1
I think the anthem is about the 1 minute mark and the part where the photo comes from is at the 11:30 mark

A cousin [known here as Happy Camper] commented in disagreement with mine and my daughters response:

"There are videos in which Obama does have his hand over his heart during the National Anthem, I believe those probably occurred after he saw how public opinion was totally appalled at his lack of respect for our country. I just don't think you would ever see any other president NOT put his hand over his heart at ANY time during the playing of the anthem.* If this were an isolated incident, it would not be such a big deal but this follows a pattern of incidents such as the many times he has went around the world and apologized for us to other countries when he should be proud of our country and not be apologizing. He says we are often arrogant as a country, etc, he never mentions the fact that the massive amount of taxes we pay has allowed us to build a military which has freed millions upon millions of people.  Nor does he mention the fact that we are the only nation who has went into lands, overthrown the treacherous dictators, freed the people and then spent millions of dollars rebuilding their land and then left it without taking anything in return, no other nation does this, yet all he seems to dwell on is that we are a country who should hang our head low and apologize and bow to other leaders. It is a real shame, other countries have had bad things to say about America for years and it has been said that is because they are jealous of all we have, why Obama feels he must join them and ridicule America** is unknown to me but it is truly sad.  Every time there is an earthquake or some other natural disaster around the world, we are the first ones there with aid and comfort.  When Haiti had their earthquake the amount of money and aid sent there was unbelievable, we are such a giving, kind, compassionate nation yet he feels we should apologize for who we are, I don’t get it. Not only do we give militarily and with our tax money, we also give more as private citizens through charitable contributions than all the other nations combined. Moments after the Haiti earthquake, I personally used my cell phone to donate money, yet to hear Obama tell it and to watch his actions, we are all heathens who need forgiveness for being so evil. I don’t understand where this mentality comes from and it is shared by the liberal crowd in America and I suppose that is why they find him so appealing. I sure wish these same people would have been so quick to make excuses for Bush when he was president and Bush didn’t do anything that this president does yet he was called an imbecile and a racist and a monkey and the list goes on and on.  Bush gave more money to Africa for treatment of AIDS ($15,000,000) than all other presidents combined yet he is called a racist. Where are the supporters to come to his defense when all this was going on? Those same people are now saying we should support this man in office now to insure he is a success, just as when Chris Matthews got the chill running up his leg. They also say we should not mention the fact that this current president does not place his hand over his heart during the anthem and we should ignore that he is constantly apologizing for this heathen nation. This is just the tip of the iceberg,** he said he would not take on any lobbyist yet violated this promise 17 times in the first few months.  He said all bills would be posted on the internet for review by the public in the name of transparency yet this has not happened and he is the most secretive administration since Nixon. He said he would not raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 and this was a lie. He rails about how we should save energy and turn our thermostat down yet he flies his wife to New York for lunch at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars for the use of Air Force One. The list could go on and on, it is never ending. Any time an issue comes up with the military, he seems to be more concerned about the terrorist’s rights and even changed the name of a terrorist attack to a manmade disaster. When the police and criminals have a confrontation, he always takes the side of the criminal. "

*********************************************************
Before going to my response to this comment let me explain the nature of my response:

1. At this point the person who had originally posted the video had started deleting everyone's comments so after receiving the above comment directly from Happy Camper I contacted him and told him that I would post my response and then would let him have an opportunity to have the last ‘public’ word in the debate. Which is what follows.
2. I just don't think you would ever see any other president NOT put his hand over his heart at ANY time during the playing of the anthem.* remember this statement, because it is always used in some form when criticizing Obama.
3. Most often when debating points with someone from the right you always encounter the ‘Talking Points’ which are spewed as fact on FOX and conservative radio. In this situation these talking points lead to the presentation of opinion or personal conclusion as fact. The problem with the automatic presentation of the ‘Talking Points’ is that they are presented on FOX and conservative radio in a vacuum. They are never contested. On Monday someone suggest something, or wonders about something and by the end of the day someone else is pondering the same thing. By the end of the week it is now being treated as fact and the suggestion/fact becomes part of the Talking Points. The problem is when the talking points are presented and a counter argument is made the talking point was created without critical vetting and the presenter is left with no counter argument. SO the natural reaction when the high ground is lost on a point is to flood the opponent with endless talking points no matter how irrelevant. This way when the basic opening argument is lost you change subject. The preponderance of talking points lends weight to the original argument even though it was debunked as was some of the talking points, but there are just so many. You see this tendency when Happy Camper goes of the path with his This is just the tip of the iceberg,** list of 8 topics totally unrelated to the original, basic argument. Not too mention the ridicules statement connected to Nixon, please. This is why I don’t address his tip of the iceberg list. I can’t prove my point if we get sidetracked. The debate is about the video and his patriotism.

**************************************************************

MY response to the Happy Campers comment above:

In regards to President Obama putting his hand over his heart ‘all the time’, I too wish he would. Everyone should do so for a variety of reasons, but to not do so on occasion is neither criminal or proof of a lack of respect for this country. If it is then there is a lot of disrespect going around all over this country at sporting events, public meetings and assemblies. Out of the majority of people who do put their hand over their heart how many of them are doing it, as you put it, in reference to ‘public opinion’ around them? As members of military families you and I probably look at this from a more intense perspective than many, but what bothers me is the increasing level of Americans who make patriotism into a series of chest beating and loud-shouting clichés and rituals. How many chain emails and talking head pundits do I have to hear criticize people for exercising the rights that others have sacrificed and fought for. Those who fought for those rights were fighting for everyone's rights, not just yours and not just mine. Along with rights comes a responsibility to exercise them. To suppress someone's rights is more injurious to those who sacrificed than to exercise those rights in opposition to something some of us may approve of.

Personally when I consider what might constitute or define patriotism the anthem, the flag and the pledge are not at the top of the list as these are just symbols and rituals that are used to demonstrate ones outward claims. What comes to the top of my list are things such as sacrifice, commitment, service, support of justice and equality, the willingness to defend your neighbors rights as much as your own, especially when they are in conflict, etc. The presidents reaction to the first few notes of the National Anthem may not be to automatically raise his hand to his heart, but is the automatic response anymore reverent?

You say if this wasn’t an isolated incident it would be no big deal. Come on now! This is probably one of the most circulated political videos around and it is always accompanied by statements that it is unequivocal proof of his disrespect! Its usually titled “Barack Hussein Obama refuses to salute US flag” which is obviously a biased conclusion. You then state that further proof is that

“…he has went around the world and apologized for us to other countries when he should be proud of our country and not be apologizing. He says we are often arrogant as a country, etc,”.

What is the correlation between an apology and patriotism? I can understand that you may not agree with the apology. I can understand that you don’t think he should be apologizing, but what you see as unpatriotic others see as humility, and if your saying our country should not show humility when it has done wrong, or that this country has never done wrong, then aren’t you proving his statement that we are often arrogant?  You correctly point out many of the fine attributes and accomplishments of this great country but you ignore the darker and often hidden side of our history. I would point to slavery, genocide of native Americans, Jim Crow, segregation, etc. When you say we have “…overthrown the treacherous dictators, freed the people…” you overlook the fact that we have also supported dictators and corrupt regimes, as well as undercut or removed governments [some elected] that we have had the ‘arrogance’ to deem ‘not in our best interest’. The attitude that other peoples hate us only out of jealousy is also arrogant as it isolates all of those people we have differences with as not having valid grievances or the ability to reason and formulate actions. There are some whose dislike for us is rooted in unrealistic or unfounded perceptions but many have real or imagined grievances that could be addressed. I too am proud of this country. In spite of our transgressions I recognize the many great accomplishments, but pride without humility IS arrogance.

Is it that an apology is seen as a criticism of our country? I can see the logic of that, but is criticism of our country unpatriotic? I remember when criticism of our President was portrayed as unpatriotic and unsupportive of our troops [Bush and Iraq]. I remember when criticism of invading Iraq was portrayed as unpatriotic. But if criticism of our government and/or President is unpatriotic then where is the indignation over the criticism of this President? Where is the indignation of the Tea Parties portrayal of this country and government? I’m being sarcastic here because criticism is not unpatriotic, its as American as apple pie. That is, unless you are located on the wrong side of the political map.

As far as your statement that Obama ridicules America, I don’t see it, you have to show me what you mean.

In regards to:

“…yet to hear Obama tell it and to watch his actions, we are all heathens who need forgiveness for being so evil…”

this is your assessment and opinion. I disagree with it but your welcome to it. Also:

“…I don’t understand where this mentality comes from and it is shared by the liberal crowd…”,

again that is your assessment. I’m perceived as a liberal and I don’t believe that, but then as a liberal I am always subjected to right-wing explanations of what I’m supposed to believe.

The statement:

“I sure wish these same people would have been so quick to make excuses for Bush when he was president and Bush didn’t do anything that this president does yet he was called an imbecile and a racist and a monkey and the list goes on and on.”

First of all, to be sure. I didn’t call Bush a racist, never heard him called a monkey, and never questioned his intelligence. I just didn’t always see evidence of it. To say that Bush didn’t do anything this President does implies either this President didn’t do anything right or Bush didn’t do anything wrong. During Bush’s pre-911 months he was also making world stops like Obama, the difference was where Obama was apologizing Bush was offending. Not the same thing, but not really different either. Both could be seen as embarrassing. As far as wishing ‘these people’ would make excuses for Bush why is that necessary? He had and still has FOX news and conservative radio constantly doing that. If you want followers of Obama to make excuses for Bush then how about the reverse? If what you are saying is you wish we were more tolerant and less partisan then I can agree with that, but the video that started this conversation does not fit with that wish. It is meant to be divisive and inflammatory.

I tell you what… I’ll make a deal with you along these lines. I’ll defend Bush on something he was criticized for and you defend something that Obama was criticized for. You can choose what I defend and I’ll give you a heads up on what I would like you to defend, Obama’s Memorial Day agenda this year [2010]. It should be easy since the original portrayal of the FOX coverage of that agenda was totally rebuked before Memorial Day arrived. Once the facts as laid out by FOX concerning the agenda’s of past presidents was found to be false and misleading there shouldn’t be to much work in defending his agenda. People may find your defense unbelievable though if all they watch is FOX  since they never, as usual, retracted their misrepresentations.

In terms of people saying we should support the current President, shouldn’t we? Weren’t we supposed to support the previous one and the ones before that? I remember on numerous times when criticism of Bush was categorized as unpatriotic, against the troops, or traitorous there were some less inflammatory defenders of Bush saying support the office, if not the man. Support doesn’t mean we have to agree or vote for his ideals, but it should at least mean we don’t hope he fails or pray for his assassination.

In reference to the items expressed in your “This is just the tip of the iceberg” statement I won’t try to defend them for two reasons:

1. I’m not familiar with all of them and if true I would probably have problems with some of them myself.
2. To address them all I would have to research them all and that would mean before I could address them I would have to wade through the endless layers of right-wing accusations that would result in the discovery that most of them are falsifications or misleading in nature. In other words they strike me as all too similar with the right-wing tactic of throwing out arguments or accusations in the vacuum of FOX News or talk radio where they are never contested leading them to being accepted as unequivocal facts. Similar to the whole Memorial Day agenda lie. I have no problem addressing a specific issue [time permitting] but do have a problem chasing false issues.

I will address one of them however. I looked at the tax rate tables for 08,09 and 2010 and my tax rate for 2010 actually was lower. I did pay more in taxes but that was because I made more not because my taxes went up.

******************************************************************

The point behind the Memorial Day challenge. It was intended as a trap. The Memorial Day agenda was presented as a slap at the troops and fallen. Obama was characterized as being the first president to not go to Arlington on Memorial Day. Fox blasted the other networks for not covering the fact that Obama was the first President ever to not go to Arlington. As usual it turned out to not be true and as usual Fox never made a retraction, but they and conservative radio [mike savage for sure] had succeeded in planting the idea which will keep popping up for years in internet chain emails. When the other networks carried the story they pointed out among other things that Reagan had missed 4 [out of 8], Bush Senior 4 [out of four years], Bush Jr had missed some [?] and Clinton was the only one to go 8 for 8.

Happy Camper didn’t take the bait though. Unlike most on the right I feel he probably knew the story was false at this point and debunking that myth would have weakened his argument on this myth.

******************************************************************

my notes/responses in red

HappyCamper said...

I must say, you make a very articulate and compelling argument for your point of view on this entire “The Whole Hand Over His Heart Debacle.” It is very reasoned and well thought out and you provide very convincing and specific examples for your side. I would like to cordially respond to several things you have said.
You admit, “I too wish he would [put his hand over his heart all the time]”. You go on to say that “everyone should do so for a variety of reasons”. This admission indicates that it is preferable to place the hand over the heart during the National Anthem. I feel the main reason for doing this is to SHOW RESPECT for the National Anthem and I think you would agree with that premise. Conversely, not placing ones hand over the heart COULD BE construed as a show of disrespect. I agree it is not necessarily a show of disrespect and you are right, it is not criminal to not do so but no one has ever accused the president of breaking the law in the video. There are various reasons it would not be construed as a show of disrespect, for example; someone could be paralyzed in their right arm, they might be uneducated in proper etiquette and decorum towards showing respect for our anthem, they could feel peer pressure to not do so to avoid the possibility of ridicule from friends, especially kids in school.
Regardless of all of these reasons, this does not explain why the president would feel compelled not to do so since none of these examples apply to him. If anything, you would think he would feel out of place since all others on stage were placing their hand over their heart. Furthermore, he is not just some citizen or high school kid at a pep rally. He is the president of the United States and I am almost certain you would not see any military officer not display such honor and yet he is the Commander in Chief…

 Keep in mind here that I am not, or have not through this process defended the President for not placing his hand over his heart, also remember the reference made early that is about to be repeated here:

I would challenge anyone to show just one example of where any other president refused to display such respect for our flag or anthem. I think what Obama did in the video is unprecedented.*
I understand you also question what the correlation is between Obama apologizing and his lack of patriotism. I think it is a reasonable conclusion to draw that if someone feels his country is arrogant and guilty of wrong doing to the point where they must apologize, it is reasonable to see that as a motive as to why he would not be proud of his country and honor his country’s anthem. maybe This is the pattern I was speaking of when I mentioned that Obama has a history and reputation never seen in any previous president in which he is not proud of his country. your opinion and suggestion is the pattern??? His wife even feels the same way and we have it in her own words that, "only now, for the first time" she is "proud of her country." in regards to this statement let me suggest the words ‘in context’ I guess her husband had to be elected president to finally make her proud of our country, sad. What more do you need when you have it coming from her, in her own words.

Now here we go again with the ‘Talking Points’ bombardment

Obama also attended the church of a pastor who ridiculed America and called it the US of KKK and said, “God Damn America”. The examples go on and on and it has actually gotten to the point in which it is so blatant and so obvious that it is hard to believe people actually try to defend him and paint a picture that he is not really the guy he is. At some point you think his defenders would throw in the towel on this one and have to concede, OK, he is not very patriotic and is obviously not proud of his country and does come across as actually being ashamed of his country from time to time. As usual, conclusions and opinions stated as fact, facts unproven

Finally, I would like to address one last point in your posting. I would actually like to address many more but it is getting very late and in the interest of saving time I will only respond to your statement that you didn’t call Bush a racist and never heard him called a monkey. I wasn’t referring to you specifically when I said people call him a racist and a monkey. I was speaking of the liberal crowd in general but to be more specific and to illustrate this accusation is accurate, I would like to remind you that Kanye West said Bush didn’t like black people because he, Bush, didn’t do more to prevent what happened to black people during hurricane Katrina. West was basically saying Bush was racist. This even after Bush pleaded with the people of New Orleans to evacuate and they didn’t. He tried to get Nagin to use buses to evacuate the city but Nagin would not and then he blamed the results of his failure to evacuate on Bush. Bush was trying to respect the sovereignty of the state of Louisiana and the city of New Orleans when he was told by both Mayor Ray Nagin and U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu that they had it under control. Then, just to point out another of the endless double standards, Nashville, TN endured the worst flooding in 100 years and President Obama has not even visited the devastated city even once, this is unheard of and such a double standard. No one is saying Obama is racist, you hear nothing about his failure to visit Nashville yet Bush was a racist even though he repeatedly visited New Orleans and gave more to Africa for AIDS treatment than all other presidents combined. This is such a glaring double standard and it goes on and on. It is so obvious it is laughable to try to deny the double standard or explain it away. As for being called and compared to a monkey, I am not insinuating that you called him a monkey but I would like to refer you to the following YouTube site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=getcyXautSs  This is only one of many YouTube videos in which the left compares President Bush to a monkey. It is common knowledge that the liberal crowd used to constantly ridicule Bush’s intellect in spite of the fact that he was a graduate of both Yale and Harvard and his grades were better than John Kerry’s when they both went to the same school and who they claimed was so much smarter than Bush. For goodness sake, have you not seen all the bumper stickers which read, "somewhere in Crawford, TX there is a village who has lost their idiot."
I’m sure you agree with probably nothing I have said here and I’m sure I would never be able to convince you that Obama is not a patriotic president and I’m sure you take issue with all of the examples I have given you even though the facts speak for themselves. I just thought I would try to explain why I feel the way I do and even though it seems so glaringly obvious to me, I feel certain you will not see things from my point of few.

July 12, 2010 11:38 PM

My response [not posted] at the ending of this response is a link and picture. Remember I continually noted his reference to ‘no other President…unprecedented…”

I said I will let you have the last word in the debate. I will leave the post and your comments as they are on my site. Any other comments posted by others may require a response from me [or yourself as you like] but I will leave my arguments and your arguments as they are, to stand on their own merits. This reply will not be posted there, nor will the link I'm sending you.

It surely appears that I might be implying that you directed the Bush was called this and that specifically at me. What I was referencing, and this was a large part of my 'dismay', that as a liberal the remarks were directed towards me. Honestly I feel that the right would be a lot better off if they spent less time trying to define the positions of others and concentrated on explaining their positions.

My apologies, I never saw the monkey video, but in my defense the gist of my argument was in reference to the main stream medias, not every crackpot or idiot celebrity who has access to a blog or YouTube. And my defense of liberals is not absolute, but I do contend that most are good people, patriotic and moral.

In reference to your comment: "I would challenge anyone to show just one example of where any other president refused to display such respect for our flag or anthem." I am sending you a link, not to prove anything, or to disprove your statement, but to prove nothing. I would never consider George H.W. Bush unpatriotic but a picture can say a thousand words, but most of those words come from the imagination of the beholder.
In closing, your right, I think we will disagree on a lot, but I enjoyed the debate. Your welcome to comment/contest me on my site or FaceBook but hey, I'll fight back.

Does This Make George H.W. Bush Unpatriotic?

www.huffingtonpost.com  “The Conservative blogosphere says that Barack Obama isn't patriotic enough to be President because he was photographed without his hand over his heart during the National Anthem. Here's a photograph of George H.W. Bush at a ceremony commemorating the 10th anniversary of the liberation of Kuwait.”

HappyCamper said...

It was good getting your response and feedback. In paragraph two you say, "I feel that the right would be a lot better off if they spent less time trying to define the positions of others and concentrated on explaining their [sic] positions." I would like to assure you, the practice of defining the positions of others is not exclusive to the right. The left does plenty of this also. In fact, I believe the left is far more guilty of this than the right but I have no proof to offer other than the routine talking heads I see on TV. Also, they are often doing what you just did in the above quote. They offer advice on how to make the GOP or the right "better off" but I really don't think you or they want to help the right be better off, thanks for the advice though. It is just difficult not to respond in kind when pot shots are taken towards us. I feel the left is far more vicious and non cordial than the right ever is. When Ann Coulter had pies thrown at her comes to mind, as she spoke at the podium at the University of Arizona. There are many other examples in which the liberals try to prevent free speech and an exchange of ideas. It seems to me the liberals are very good at preaching tolerance to everyone, as long as you AGREE with THEM, the minute you differ from their beliefs, all bets are off and you are attacked with pies or blood is thrown on you or paint, whatever the case may be.
As far as the above picture, you have me on that one, I have never seen nor heard of that but as you said, this really proves nothing and the reason I say that is not because he doesn't have his hand over his heart, I say it because it is out of context. THE WHOLE POINT OF THE INAPPROPRITNESS OF THE VIDEO, ITS TITLE, THE RELATED FALSEFIED PICTURES, AND WHAT HIS NOT PUTTING HIS HAND OVER HIS HEART IS ALL ABOUT IS CONTEXT. YET IT IS ONLY APPLIED HERE! i COULD JUST AS EASILY MAKE THE SAME ARGUMENT ABOUT THE CONTEXT OF M.OBAMA’S STATEMENT ABOUT PRIDE. I would have to see the context this photograph was taken in, but if the national anthem was in fact being played and he didn't automatically feel compelled to place his hand over his heart, I think it would speak volumes about his attitude toward our country. I don't have a double standard, one for Obama and one for Bush. If not placing his hand over his heart illustrates Obama's lack of patriotism, I would have to say the same thing about Bush. The reason I don't think this photo is a slam dunk is because of lack of context. dUHHHH
Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that they were playing the Kuwaiti National Anthem, which I'm sure they would do at this ceremony. It is cordial and appropriate for any American to show honor to Kuwait by placing the hand over the heart during the playing of the anthem [never heard of this one but the rest of this explanation is moot, the double standard is exposed] but not totally necessary and Bush not doing so as they played the Kuwaiti National Anthem would not be illustrative of his lack patriotism for the Unites States. If, however, it were the US National Anthem being played, it could be at the very beginning of the anthem and Powell and Schwarzkopf could have done it a second earlier and Bush waited until the first note of the anthem began to play, which is totally appropriate, and this picture was snapped seconds before Bush rendered his honor. I don't know if either one of these two scenarios are correct, I am just offering them as speculation as to why he might not have his hand over his heart, but, as you so correctly pointed out in your comments, to offer this as proof of anything would be wrong.
In any event Glenn, I have enjoyed debating this topic with you and find you to be very informed and an excellent debater. The perspective you provide on topics as well as the anecdotal evidence you bring forth on a couple of items actually made me begin to rethink my position because I do always try to be fair on any topic, even if it is not in line with my particular ideology. Thanks for the exchange and I will check out your blog from time to time and I would expect nothing less than for you to "fight back" and vigorously defend your position.

These are personal notes and notations. Not for publication.

copy of comment

Some people should remember "there for the grace of God go I..."
I've worked for a paycheck since I was 15 years old (43 years) and the only time I was out of work and drew unemployment was between my leaving the Military and when my GI Bill kicked in. The GI Bill was so small then that I couldn't go to class without getting a job to support my family, but school was hard for me and I had to drop out for my family to survive. So I guise that makes me stupid and a slacker. SO for that guy who has worked a measly 26 years I would point out that pride without humility is just vanity. Unless things have changed I'm pretty sure that Unemployment benefits are for people who have worked. ARE WORKERS The ideal that 26 years of hard work is unaffected by events that are out of our control and is never influenced by some form of good fortune is really self-indulgent. Last but not least as you blame liberals for everything you don't have control of remember that it was conservatives and their anti-protectionist rants that repeatedly said the key to dealing with the outsourcing of American jobs WAS TRAINING!!! Hang in there Charlie and Jennica, going to school is a good thing, as is trying to better your family.