We have come far alright. The culture war is entering the surge phase and the rout is almost complete. Listen to the tone and tenor and the anger. Revenge and change is on the way. Determination by the left and the tireless application of whatever it takes for the cause. God bless America.
All that talk of LGBT over and over got me hungering for a BLT sandwich for some reason.
ReplyDeleteThe great uniters: Wright, ACORN, the Weathermen, Black Muslims, Gay Activists.
ReplyDeleteDESPARATE for Change!
Concerned about the bigoted State of Texas (typical Texas person) re gays, but turns a blind eye to the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF BLACKS, and the Holocaust of Black abortion and child abandonment and the destruction of the Black Family by the very welfare state that they love and profit by so much.
What a miserable pair of grievance peddling a-hole opportunists.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI look at female black singers from the 50's and they look so simple and happy.
ReplyDeleteSimple in a healthy way, back when you could enjoy enjoying your life without guilt.
Back before the myth of the great Satan was spread throughout all our institutions, and one could not be hip and enlightened unless one could see the pervasive evil behind every convention and tradition.
Before you had to deconstruct the country brick by brick so we could
"change it for the better."
Michelle always looks like she has a permanent anal corncob implant.
Marxist mofos.
:)
ReplyDelete(from a Fox News Interview, via Limbaugh)
ReplyDeleteDEZENHALL: Oh, I've never seen anything like it. I've been doing this for 25 years and I think what's really happening here is the media are motivated more than anything else right now by the sense that they are making history.
It's more about them than it even is Obama, and everything that Obama does is framed in the context of being visionary, and I think that the desire to personally help make history, to say you were there when it happened, probably is even more of a motivator than political bias, which I do think is part of it.
RUSH: That's an important point. He didn't throw the political bias, the ideological simpatico out the window, but it's an excellent point because these people, it almost is more about them than Obama.
He is the vehicle for them to be able to say they made history.
Not he made history, they did, because they got him elected. He continued with this.
DEZENHALL: It's about narratives. In a Disney movie, the little blonde girl is not going to be the villain.
She is going to save the day.
And Obama really owns the Hollywood narrative right now. He is the one who has the more exciting story. It genuinely is a history-making event, regardless of what your political bias is.
And that really is what I mean by the media's devotion to what the narrative is, what the exciting story is.
India’s nuclear vote is a victory for the U.S.
ReplyDeleteDiana Ross and the Supremes I always liked them.
ReplyDeleteSo that means we'll be helping the Indian nuclear power industry while the democrats keep us sitting on our arse here.
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere that Obama is a smooth operator, but his his wife Michelle and for that matter his witch doctor, Rev. Wright, are not.
ReplyDeleteThis woman seethes with barely repressed anger at white people. There is a mutually parasitic relationship between angry blacks and guilt-ridden whites. In present day America, masochistic guilt-ridden white people are a significant new minority. They stand ready to overlook deficiencies in a black candidate to prove they are not as bad as people like Michelle believe that they are.
She made reference to black anti-gay feelings, which are as powerful as any in the white groups.
ReplyDeleteWhat's Louey Farrakhan and his group think about the gays? I really don't know.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOlson Johnson explains the proper frame of mind in confronting the very real potential for an Obama presidency:
ReplyDelete"What are we made of? Our fathers came across the prairies... fought Indians... fought drought, fought locusts, fought Dix... remember when Richard Dix tried to take over this town? Well we didn't give up then... and by gum, we're not gonna give up now!"
According to Town and Country (Travel edition) the next South American seaside resort destination is Cartagena. Get in on the ground floor (well, damn close to it) dear host.
We'll hook ya up.
Those guilt ridden Jews, let US start there. Voting en bloc for the Democrats, 92%. Greater even than the Blacks have voted for Democrats.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Blacks vote en bloc, it is viewed, by some, as a form of racism, but the Jews voting en bloc, not even mentioned by those same commentators, as being motivated by racial tendencies.
A somewhat skewed perspective, there. To not apply the same standard to identical outcomes.
As to the First Wives Club, both Maverick and Obama have put them off of the playing field. Neither Cindy nor Michelle can stand much scrutiny by the public.
In point of fact they are both a bit abrasive, with storylines not suitable to the White House's east wing.
Typical of Maverick, he goads Obama into taking the World Tour, then complains of the unequal press coverage.
The coverage really does seems fair, to me, as Obama is in the War Zone while Maverick and Bush41 cruise in a golf cart.
Sorry fellas, but Maverick's handicap is not news worthy, except, maybe, on the Iraq-Afghanistan border, or in Czechoslovakia.
Best thing seen by my daughter thus far: A bunch of drunken Colombians happily singing every word of Sweet Home Alabama. (The Master Card ad campaign gurus would would call this "priceless." And be not far off the mark.)
ReplyDeleteWorst experience thus far: Getting in a knife fight with a Spanish copy machine.
Desert Rat: Sorry fellas, but Maverick's handicap is not news worthy, except, maybe, on the Iraq-Afghanistan border, or in Czechoslovakia.
ReplyDeleteYeah, maybe McCain can answer Obamapalooza with a factfinding mission in the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.
Cartagena, back in the day, the pirate capital of the Caribe.
ReplyDeletePretty town, and it has some of the best pick pockets in the hemisphere.
The problem with Colombia, in my mind, you cannt drive, nor hardly walk, to here from there.
If things were to go to far south, there is no easy way out.
Blogger trish said...
ReplyDeleteBest thing seen by my daughter thus far: A bunch of drunken Colombians happily singing every word of Sweet Home Alabama.
That brings back some memories for me:
One day, a number of years ago I met someone who became a good friend. He, a recent refugee from Kenya, came into a recording studio as a drummer (bongo's) to back a singer, a recent immigrant from Poland, who sang in a heavily accented Polish accent "Whoooh Lord Pick a Bail of Cotton" It was just the two of them...weird.
I was in Hong Kong many years ago and a I ended up in a bar with an all Chinese band which specialized in Dixie Land jazz.
Another favorite is Chinglish. Chinese folk in China writing English signs. The funnies stuff was on T-shirts. The Chinese gov. is waging a concerted campaign to get rid of the stuff ahead of the Olympics, or so I read.
Well a couple of this...
ReplyDeleteI am not for change... I am for dollars...
but I am inspired! Mr & Mrs BO want equality under the law.... NO discrimination of any kind
So does that now mean an end to affirmative action?
Does that mean that WHITE childless couples will be able to adopt "black" children that sit in foster care? (no they are full of shit)
Are they seeking a world where if I decide to wear a nice boob tube and thong to work I will be protected under the law?
fuctards....
DR Those guilt ridden Jews, let US start there. Voting en bloc for the Democrats, 92%. Greater even than the Blacks have voted for Democrats.
ReplyDeleteJew did not vote for the dem out of guilt they voted because of Scoop Jackson and other PRO small guy orientation
Now the Democrat Party has gone far left, embracing Jew hating, anti Israel, anti american Jessie jackson al sharpton bull shit, American Jews are moving aja Joe Lieberman into "independent democrats"
A full 1/3 of american jews are not supporting BO by not voting for him...
within the 2/3 that are? MANY big money donors are NOT supporting BO...
Cartagena and Barranquilla, as well as San Andreas, are where the Colombians themselves go to get warm. They fly, mostly. (Hell, it's where we go to get warm.)
ReplyDeleteIn any event, things are headed north rather than south, about which the Colombians are legitimately proud. They have quite literally, over the past 15 years, come back from the brink of oblivion. And then some. And then some more.
Their Independence Day marches were something to behold this year. I'm sure FARC and its various helpmates did. Quite unhappily.
oh, btw the american jewish population is about 1.6% of the population...
ReplyDeleteblacks make up 16%.......
so do the math........
Jews, from a voting numbers pov are less important than....
plumbers.
teachers.
doctors.
gays.
blacks
hispanics
aarp
construction workers
bus drivers
pizza parlor owners
finger nail tech's
booze store owners
Jewish NUMBERS are so tiny as to be a rounding error...
the BIG story is the fact that a full 33% have ALREADY told BO to go to hell is amazing
and the rest of the story (as paul harvey would say) is the MONEY that has evaporated from big jewish donors that are NOT going to BO
http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/
ReplyDeleteIsraelis aren't fooled by Obama
Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama was here in Israel on Wednesday, and it seems that many Israelis are not fooled by him. Despite being inundated for months with op-ed pieces about how we shouldn't be afraid of an Obama presidency, the average Israeli just isn't buying into it.
Over at Gateway Pundit, Midwest Jim has a picture of how Israelis lined up in the streets to 'greet' the Obamessiah. Debbie Schlussel has a long piece on Obama in which she points out that 'Israelis for Obama' has only 57 members, and only six of them are Israelis.
Obama concluded his trip by going to the Western Wall this morning for the sunrise service, and despite the fact that there aren't that many people there at that hour of the morning (sunrise was 5:49 today), the Times of London (not Uzi Mahnaimi this time) reports that Obama was still heckled by those present.
The US presidential nominee was heckled as he visited the Western Wall in the early hours of Thursday morning, bowing his head in prayer and observing traditional custom by placing a folded piece of paper into the crevice of the wall.
Orthodox men interrupted their morning prayers to catch a glimpse of the Illinois senator, reaching out to shake his hand as he passed them by. But not all were taken by the Democrat. One yelled out: “Obama, Jerusalem is not for sale!” before Mr Obama was whisked away to his waiting plane.
Later today, I'll come back to why a lot of Israelis aren't - and should not be - taken in by the Obamaessiah.
Do not really know, about the "big money" Jewish donations, but Obama is raising more money than ever.
ReplyDeleteThat Jewish support for the Dems, may drop to 65%, nothing to cheer about. It is still a major bloc vote, for Obama.
Scoop has been dead for decades, but the Jews still vote Democrat, regardless. That is a lame excuse to trot out, wi"o".
The Jews just hate America, much like the Michelle does. Exemplified by their voting record, over the past twenty years.
It is not something that can be wished away, that reality.
If the Democrats are really anti-American, or even traitors, as many have claimed over the past 8 years, then so are Jews that continually vote for them.
Besides, plumbers, teachers, doctors, gays, blacks, hispanics, aarp, construction workers, bus drivers, pizza parlor owners, finger nail tech's and booze store owners do not share a cultural and genetic heritage. They are occupations, not identities.
ReplyDeleteAs both you, wi"o" and mat have made clear, at least to me, is that being Jewish is a cultural identity, like being "black" is.
You guys both see it that way, being Jewish more than just being part of a religion, but a racial identity.
That historicly votes en bloc.
That many of you, 35% or so, do not want to vote for a black gentile, understandable, especially after the Sharptons and his ilk have burnt your peoples stores, and such.
It is quite evident, by your own statements, wi"o" that for the past twenty years, the Jews and Blacks have stood shoulder to shoulder in support of the Democrats and their vision for the United States.
ReplyDeleteThat pendulum, trish, swings back and forth. Granted it may be twenty years or more before it swings south, again, but swing it will.
ReplyDeleteAs you said some weeks ago, the future in Colombia is some what dependent upon US. Referencing the trade deal. If that is accurate, the foundations of the current northern swing may well be built on sand.
what is,
ReplyDeleteRat's MO is the taunt.
One needn't respond to it, but merrily go one's own way. Posting one's own thoughts.
It's a novel idea, even if not uniformly applied, eminently worthy of consideration and execution.
As anybody in my house will tell you.
ReplyDeletedesert rat said...
ReplyDeleteIt is quite evident, by your own statements, wi"o" that for the past twenty years, the Jews and Blacks have stood shoulder to shoulder in support of the Democrats and their vision for the United States.
actually you misread the history dr...
Jews have been a major part of the democratic party for decades..
From civil liberties to unions...
Jews have lead many fights...
Now for Black america? They NEVER have stood shoulder to shoulder with Jews.. for the Last 30 years Blacks, as part of the DEM party are seeking what is GOOD for them, whereas Jews do not seek "jewish civil rights"
If you wish to understand the COMPLEX reason why so many in the last 40 years were against the GOP just look at the anti-semitic behaviors of Nixon, the ethnic comm's, the "restricted rich white only" atmosphere of the GOP/country club..
Jews saw no home in a GOP, recently the DEM party has been taken over by the Jessie "hymie town" Jackson types, ANSWER Groups, Marxist, Black Liberation, Bowtie Louie's and this is not standing SHOULDER TO SHOULDER
The radical Left/Weatherman/Black Radicals have taken over the party...
thus causing Jews to flee...
If you would LISTEN to "anger blacks" their hate of Whites, America & Jews are the same.
so can the shoulder to should crap, your out of touch......
dr: As both you, wi"o" and mat have made clear, at least to me, is that being Jewish is a cultural identity, like being "black" is.
You guys both see it that way, being Jewish more than just being part of a religion, but a racial identity.
PUUULEEASE....
Being "Black">????? that's a farse.... there is no such thing...
Being Jewish? it's being part of a historic tribe... The MAJOR difference between US and blacks, gays, hispanics, and other assorted occupations is that we do NOT SEEK SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR OUR PEOPLE.
WE support human rights for all... There is no minority status for Jews, there no special loaws FOR us... All we seek is the right to LIVE and not be strung up or exploded.
Blacks as a "group" seek redress, set asides, % of federal and state budgets to spend as they see culturally.
Please don't confuse that with MY group..
Last time I check the world was filled with people of color billions...
Last time I checked there are dozens of nations that have black presidents
Last time I checked "whites" do not suffer either..
Arabs have 21 nations
Moslems? 87
Asians? dozens
Jews? We number less than 11 million in the entire world, (not for the world trying to erase us)
and have one tiny "shitty little country" that we support....
Jews, as a CULTURE have been around for over 3000 years and JUST seek the right to live and not have it legal (as it is) to be murdered in dozens of countries today...
SO dont compare us to america blacks in any way shape or form
dr The Jews just hate America, much like the Michelle does. Exemplified by their voting record, over the past twenty years.
ReplyDeleteIt is not something that can be wished away, that reality.
No but your reality is warped...
Your reading of this issue is quite frankly? quite baiting....
DR : If the Democrats are really anti-American, or even traitors, as many have claimed over the past 8 years, then so are Jews that continually vote for them.
You only read the big bold type or do you ever actually delve into the subject to learn something?
There is quite a big difference between carter and clinton, kennedy and lieberman, jesse jackson and hillary...
please, learn before spouting
While we are on the topic of Jewish culture and faith...
ReplyDeleteI've consistently challenged folk who condemn all Muslims because of what is written in the Koran. I'm also struck by the similarities between Islam, Judaism, and Catholicism. Basically the three take their sacred book as a source of knowledge that is interpreted for regular folk by Imams, Rabbi's, and Priests. Much invective has been flung at Muslims based on interpretations (misinterpretations?) of their book and there are striking similarities to Jewsish persecution using a similar basis. While reading Niall Ferguson' "World at War" I noticed when discussing the Jewish 'Question' he notes a passage on endogamy (marriage within ones 'tribe') from the Torah:
"When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee...thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them' thou shalt make covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son."
Now this is a pretty explicit exhortation to marry only other Jews.
While looking for online references to the above Torah reference to endogamy I came across a site that reminds me so much of many's condemnation of Islam only it is a condemnation of Judaism.
The Source of
Jewish Supremacy
Well, maybe gays and blacks, in wi"o"s litney, are identity groups.
ReplyDeleteWhether genetic or self described.
The others being occupations or discount clubs.
Guess the General is not used to being questioned and shown to be on unstable soil. Not part of his SOP. Typical of the collective mind, best to ignore the ramifications of the questions and their answers, maybe they'll just fade away, like a good soldier should.
Or just ignored until retirement and employment by the Russell Company.
Did I mention, lest anyone think that the good stuff only flows the other way, that though I could not bring back a good burger and the sweet, warm, peaceful western Pennsylvania summer, I did bring back Yukon Jack and Rose's lime juice.
ReplyDeleteSnakebites.
Drink of choice on any canoing/kayaking/camping trip, of which we are sadly deprived this year.
We'll share them as promised with our outstanding Canadian counterparts, on the terrace, on a fine moonlit night.
There is not a nickels worth of difference, between them, 'cepting that Scoop has been dead since 1983
ReplyDeleteTwentyfive years.
Nixon, he's been dead for quite a while, too.
As to the others, Kennedy and Lieberman are in the same Caucus, in the Senate. Vote together most of the time.
I was not discussing Israel, it's existance or any such item. Just voting patterns, as described by you, wi"o", over the past twenty years.
That leaves Scoop, Carter and Nixon out of the mix. Unless the dead have more impact on things Jewish than do the living.
The current Democratic Party, the past twenty years worth, has been dominated by those Democrats you disdain, but your people still stand behind, using figure heads. Like Billary and Senator Schumer that play to both blocs.
Standing shoulder to shoulder with the Blacks, voting en bloc, 90% or more for the Democrats.
Why not just bring back a meat grinder, trish?
ReplyDeleteOr is grinding your own chuck roast not in the realm of possibilities.
The Democrats’ Dilemma
ReplyDeleteA major shift in the composition of the American economy has transformed the Democratic Party and poses deep challenges to its future.
By Joel Kotkin
Americans may dislike the term class, but it has been an essential part of our political history. And for most of our history, Democrats represented the middle and working classes, dating at least back to the days of Andrew Jackson. Under William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic Party cast itself as largely the voice of the small farmer and the working and middle classes. Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and even Bill Clinton maintained this tradition.
Yet over the past two decades, and particularly the last few years, the party’s base has shifted decisively in both demographic and geographic terms. Increasingly, the core Democratic constituency—and, even more so, the base of Senator Barack Obama’s campaign—consists not of working- and middle-class whites but of African-Americans and a rising new class of affluent, well-educated professionals.
This second group, largely white but certainly spread across racial groups, has begun to supplant the old working- and middle-class base of the party. For the most part it differs from the old middle class of shopkeepers, skilled industrial workers, and small farmers, constituencies that have struggled as the economy has globalized and been transformed by the information revolution.
In contrast, the new class has thrived and expanded. Democratic activist Ruy Teixeira has made this case convincingly, pointing out that almost one-third of adults now have college degrees, up from 5 percent during the heart of the New Deal. This group has thrived during the century’s economic transformation, as their wages have risen 22 percent since 1979—28 percent for those with graduate degrees—even as wages have fallen for those with only high school degrees.
They have become the linchpin of a mass affluent class whose influence and geographic spread have been growing as that of the less educated has waned. A half century ago the highly educated component of the population represented a small constituency concentrated in a few places like New York, Cambridge, and Berkeley. Today their influence can be felt not only in major cities, but in wealthy suburbs, college towns, and even in some rural havens.
Even though many of these voters have benefited from Republican economic policies, they have become ever more Democratic.
Academia and the news media constitute the nerve center of the new class. Indeed, academic professionals were one of the largest sources of contributions to John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign.
...
The origins of the new Democratic Party can be traced to at least the 1960s, starting with the nesting of intellectuals such as Arthur Schlesinger in the Kennedy administration. Yet even then, the party’s base remained very much with the white working class, urban ethnics, and a smattering of rural populists. The Republicans remained very much the predominant party of big money and corporate power.
The Democrats who succeeded in the largely conservative epoch after 1968 were those who figured out how to win over middle- and working-class Americans. This group included not only urban voters but people in small towns and the vast, largely nondescript suburbs that grew around the major cities. Jimmy Carter got enough of their support to defeat Gerald Ford in 1976; Bill Clinton did it twice, in 1992 and 1996.
...
The shift among the affluent has also had an impact on the financing of campaigns. Tied to burgeoning information age sectors, notably finance, entertainment, and technology, the post-industrial new class has shown itself to have deeper pockets than the old Republican establishment. Democratic candidates by this spring had raised 70 percent more than their GOP rivals.
Much of this has come in relatively small contributions, but it also reflects a significant shift to the Democrats among such traditionally Republican constituencies as Wall Street. As late as 2004, the financial industry contributed more to Republicans than Democrats; this year Democrats are ahead by a roughly two to one margin. Together Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Obama have raised five times the amount garnered by Senator John McCain.
The problem for the former First Lady lay in the fact that the balance of power in the party had shifted decisively—both economically and electorally—away from these voters and toward the new class. Being the favorite of the small-town coffee shops and steel plants had been enough for Bill Clinton to defeat the likes of Paul Tsongas. Today it no longer guarantees the nomination.
ReplyDeleteOnce Senator Obama gained almost total allegiance from African-Americans, the Clintonian alliance was spent and a new, reformulated Democratic Party was born. This new party has four critical constituencies: the post-industrial new class, African-Americans, young “net-roots” activists, and, finally, the elites of the information age.
Like it or not, that is where blind alligence and en bloc voting has you and your constituency, wi"o".
Nixon is long gone, as is Scoop Jackson. We are in a new day and your folk, en bloc, are behind the learnig curve. Especially if 65% of them support Obama. Perhaps the realities of the outcome of poor past decisions are what is leading 35% or them to, finally, abandon their en bloc voting mentality.
But that is only the top line of the ballot. Where will the Jewish vote fall on the rest of the Democratic field. Will that 35% that dislike Obama split their votes, and go with the Democrat down ballot, still?
65% of the Jewish voters in the US will vote for Obama, because of Richard Nixon, per wi"o"'s explanation.
ReplyDeleteGives one pause, that's fer sur.
This is what 90% Jewish support for Democrats has gained US, today.
ReplyDeleteRaising the prospect that Guantánamo Bay inmates might be unleashed onto the streets of American cities, Attorney General Michael Mukasey said Wednesday there is an "urgent" need for Congress to enact a new law governing how federal courts handle legal challenges from detainees at the U.S. prison camp in Cuba.
But Mukasey's plea for quick passage of a significant new counterterrorism measure essentially fell on deaf ears—at least from the Democrats who control Congress. "Zero," snapped one key lawmaker, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, when asked the likelihood that Congress will rush to pass the kind of law Mukasey and the Bush administration are seeking. "We don't have to pass anything," said Nadler, who chairs the House subcommittee that has primary jurisdiction over the issue, in a brief hallway interview with NEWSWEEK. "Let the courts deal with it."
The derisive comments from the feisty New York liberal—just moments after Mukasey issued his strong appeal in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee—underscores the huge and poisonous gulf that now exists between the White House and Congress on virtually every issue related to the War on Terror. No Democrats on the judiciary panel endorsed Mukasey's call Wednesday for new counterterrorism legislation. None of them even bothered to ask him any questions about it. Instead, they essentially ignored what the attorney general portrayed as the Justice Department's top priority for his final six months in office.
...
Mukasey took another crack at it in Wednesday's testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, ominously suggesting (with prodding from a couple of Republicans) that unless Congress acts, it is at least theoretically possible that federal judges may suddenly start releasing Gitmo detainees onto the streets of America. "Now, the fact is that all of these people, every single one of them, are aliens captured abroad in essentially battlefield conditions who have absolutely no right to be here," said Mukasey, in describing the more than 200 detainees still at Gitmo. "And there's no good reason to have a court bring somebody here for purposes of release, and release into our communities people who could pose a significant danger. We want that particular possibility cut off. We don't want to have to face it. We shouldn't have to face it."
A few years ago, the specter of Gitmo terrorists moving in next door might have invoked fear and panic on Capitol Hill. But no Democrat took Mukasey's dire warnings seriously enough to address them. Instead, they asked the A.G. about everything from the Justice Department's refusal to release internal legal opinions about harsh interrogations to overcrowding in the federal prisons and airline mergers.
Nadler, for one, offered an explanation for the snub: few if any Democrats now accept any of the Bush administration's basic premises on terrorism issues. "Most of them are guilty of nothing," he said about the Gitmo detainees, noting that one group of them, Chinese Uighurs (persecuted Muslim dissidents) would be considered "freedom fighters" by most Americans. "I think it's appalling that the president is still asking for the right to point the finger at anybody anywhere and say, `You're an enemy combatant,' and keep them locked up indefinitely," he said.
Fear of Tricky Dick puts the Jewish bloc in Rep. Jerrold Nadler's hip pocket.
Gotta love it.
Jerrold Lewis Nadler, sometimes called Jerry Nadler (born June 13, 1947) is an American politician from New York City. A progressive Democrat, Nadler represents New York's 8th congressional district, which includes parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn in New York City.
ReplyDeleteNadler's district includes the west side of Manhattan from the Upper West Side down to Battery Park, including the site where the World Trade Center stood. It also includes the Manhattan neighborhoods of Chelsea, Hell's Kitchen, and Greenwich Village, as well as parts of Brooklyn such as Coney Island, Bensonhurst, Borough Park, and Bay Ridge. His district includes many of New York City's most popular tourist attractions, including the Empire State Building, Central Park, Statue of Liberty, Brooklyn Bridge and New York Stock Exchange.[1][2]
Nadler was born in Brooklyn and graduated from Stuyvesant High School in 1965
But it goes even further ...
Born June 13, 1947 (1947-06-13) (age 61)
New York City, New York
Political party: Democratic
Spouse: Joyce Miller
Residence: Manhattan, New York City, New York
Alma mater: Columbia University, Fordham University
Occupation: attorney
Religion: Jewish
I do, amigo, dig a little deeper than the Headlines.
ReplyDeleteThat is where the reality of the situation rests.
As Rep Nadler so easily exemplifies.
ash...
ReplyDelete"When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee...thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them' thou shalt make covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son."
Now this is a pretty explicit exhortation to marry only other Jews.
Shhhh don;t tell that to King David's Grand mother...
"Most of them are guilty of nothing," he said about the Gitmo detainees, noting that one group of them, Chinese Uighurs (persecuted Muslim dissidents) would be considered "freedom fighters" by most Americans.
ReplyDeleteJerrold Nadler has missed 52 votes (4.5%) during the current Congress. Jerrold Nadler has voted with a majority of his Democratic colleagues 97.5% of the time during the current Congress. This percentage does not include votes in which Nadler did not vote
ReplyDelete...
He has been reelected with little serious competition in one of the most Democratic districts in the country; a Republican has not represented this district or its predecessors in over a century
True Blue.
An interesting footnote, to Jerrold politcal career:
ReplyDeleteNadler attended Stuyvesant High School in New York City with Dick Morris, the former pollster/strategist to President Bill Clinton. Morris managed Jerrold Nadler's campaign for high school class president
dr...
ReplyDeleteyou give Jews way to much power...
1.6% of the population as compared to 16% for blacks..
now you love to point out that gays, plumbers, unions etc are self defined or not racial groups, but they in fact are still strong VOTING BLOCKS...
as for VOTING BLOCKS, and that is what we were talking about, Jews HARDLY mean shit even if 100% voted for anyone...
we are a rounding error..
Jewish support for the Party is DEEP rooted and only recently has the party veered left into a cavern...
Why should the Jewish people not support Clinton?
Jews DID vote for Reagan, (reagan dems) and do use their minds to vote on social issues, they, unlike most of the other's in their INCOME bracket DONT VOTE THIER WALLET...
The Historic stench coming from the GOP was and IS hard to over come, and that is why ONLY 30% ALREADY have decided NOT to vote for BO...
As BO's lies become more apparent to the LITERATE Jewish populations and BO's bullshit about being strong about Iran & the Terrorism coming from Iran I am quite sure in the end, BO will be lucky to get 30% of the Jewish vote...
Many Jews supported Billary and would still vote to get her/him back in office (verses a traditional GOP) since McCain is HARDLY a poster boy for the GOP many Jews will vote for him.
Many within the Jewish community who can see do not LIKE the far right GOP/Pat Roberson/ anti-jewish history but in THIS election the FAR right has been sidelined (as they should)
Parties are redefining themselves...
sadly the DEMs at this moment in time are taking a Jimmy the DHimmi path to whatever and I and others have jumped...
to dismiss a 30% drop in support for the Democratic party by jews is reading it wrong...
That is a HISTORIC GROUND BREAKING TURN
rather than not see it for what it is, you seem only to see the negative that 60 % still are there...
it's a half empty /half full argument
BO, wright, carter, kennedy, ayer, sharpton, jackson, AND OTHER PARTY LEADERS are destroying the party.
The last 2 years of DEM control have done NOTHING other than show what bozos they are....
so in the end, Jews are deserting the BO nomination faster than any other democratic nominee in memory...
that's the story i see...
desert rat said...
ReplyDeleteI do, amigo, dig a little deeper than the Headlines.
That is where the reality of the situation rests.
As Rep Nadler so easily exemplifies.
no that just shows you can google like the rest of us...
I frankly think Rat is the brightest human being we've got here.
ReplyDeleteThe Union members do not vote en bloc, at a 90% rate, to claim such is falsehood of epic proportions.
ReplyDeleteThe tranformation of the Democratic Party did not occur over night. As Mr Joel Kotkin describes so well in his piece.
There are very few bloc votes that reach the 90% level, historicly.
Blacks and Jews lead the list. That 90% of the Black vote is vastly larger, in real terms, than 90% of the Jewish vote, does not diminish from the solidarity of the bloc.
What of the down ballot selections, will the Jewish voters of NYC's District 8 abandon Mr Nadler, as they skip that Democratic topline choice?
That is the real question, not whether 35% will not support Obama, but will 90% still vote for Mr Nadler?
Not really.
ReplyDeleteWould I prefer to be with the guys I'm with?
Fuck. Yes.
Why, thank you, trish.
ReplyDeleteYou claimed I did not go past the bold print, wi"o". Which is not very observant, in all truthfulness
"I frankly think Rat is the brightest human being we've got here."
ReplyDeleteBrighter than I, certainly. Anyone that can make these sweeping proclamations regards the voting patterns of a group of people voting by secret ballot and where their collective vote is less than statistical error, is a freaking genius, if you ask me.
It was wi"o" that made the sweeping generalization, mat.
ReplyDeleteI simply took him at his word.
If he was wrong, well there you have it.
What is "Occupation" said...
ReplyDeleteJews historically voted democratic...
I am a democrat...
Jews historically voted 92% democrat...
Red dirt road.
ReplyDeleteA crying sight flying in.
There is your genius, mat.
ReplyDeleteThat's where I first saw Mary
ReplyDeleteOn that roadside pickin' blackberries
That summer I turned a corner in my soul
Down that red dirt road
It's where I drank my first beer
It's where I found Jesus
Where I wrecked my first car
I tore it all to pieces
I learned the path to heaven is full of sinners and believers
Learned that happiness on earth ain't just for high achievers
I've learned I've come to know
There's life at both ends
Of that red dirt road
"There is your genius, mat."
ReplyDeleteWell, did you care to question how he arrived at this silliness? CNN perhaps? Streisand?
If you wish to dispute wi"o" on his statistical and historical data, well have at it.
ReplyDeleteI have no such axe to grind.
Well, dRat, I was curious. So I googled the phrase: "Jews historically voted 92% democratic". And guess what I got? The only relevant hit was that to the our very own Elephant Bar.
ReplyDeleteThat seems reasonable, as there are many sites at "jewish vote patterns" that dispute wi"o''s figure. The first on the list says
ReplyDeleteThe "Jewish vote" has become a coveted prize in the 2004 election. The Republican Party seeks to improve on the dismal 19 percent of the Jewish vote that George W. Bush won in the 2000 election
So, wi"o" was off, by 120%, in that particular election. Only 81% voted en bloc for the Democrat, not 92%. 8% growing into 19%, in the 2000 Presidental election.
Another, more current American Thinker site, said this in 2006
November 15, 2006
The Exit Polls and the Jewish Vote
By Richard Baehr
Almost within hours of the release on Wednesday morning of summaries of the national exit polls, conducted with voters across the county on Election Day, I received several gloating emails from liberal Jewish acquaintances, pointing to one specific result within the exit poll data: namely how Jewish voters within the national sample, had voted in the races for the U.S. House of Representatives. That sub—sample of just over 200 people who self—identified as Jewish voters (about 2% of the total survey sample), reported that they had voted 87% for Democrats, 12% for Republicans.
87% vs 92% wi"o" was pretty dang close, for blogging
I frankly think Rat is the brightest human being we've got here.
ReplyDeleteJust when you think you're winning the rat race, along comes a faster rat
"The Exit Polls and the Jewish Vote
ReplyDeleteBy Richard Baehr"
Those numbers are nonsense.
Go find some others, then, we can compare the sources.
ReplyDeleteAmerican Thinker, disputes the exit polls, but does not offer any substative data to back up the "feeling".
It says:
But the numbers this year, as in 2004, are more on the order of 3 to 1 support for Democrats over Republicans, not the 7 or 8 to 1 ratio suggested by the exit poll survey.
Which would be a 75% to 25% split, but has no poling data to back the claim.
In 2006, Bush would have been more popular than Ronald Reagan. And if Reagan allegedly scored 40%, which I think is on the low side, Bush would have been higher.
ReplyDelete80/20 or 90/10
ReplyDeleteThe difference is in the margins.
Glad you're thinking, but find some polling data to cover those thoughts, or they're just feelings.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, as I said earlier, I don't believe the polling data. But if you want you can easily find that 40% for Reagan number.
ReplyDeleteWe were speaking of the last twenty years, not back to the RR era. Now almost ancient history, his last election being in 1984, almost 24 years ago.
ReplyDeleteI do not really care, but I give wi"o" the benefit of the doubt, being he's being both Jewish and a US citizen.
I'll ride with the 87% number, from the American Thinker, until other data is presented.
ReplyDeleteNo one knows exactly how someone will vote in secret ballot, or if they declined to vote and participate in these fraud elections all together.
ReplyDeleteWell, the exit poll put the number of self-described Jews at 2%, about right, and of those 87% said Democrat.
ReplyDeletePerhaps they lied.
Perhaps your feelings are not indicitive of the US Jewish electorate's recent voting patterns.
Does not make much difference, really.
dRat,
ReplyDeleteIf there's one thing to know about Jews, it is that there is no monolithic Jewish voice. We are the most radically diverse group of opinionated fsckers on the face of this here planet. Always was, always will be.
...The bottles stand as empty, as they were filled before.
ReplyDeleteTime there was and plenty, but from that cup no more.
Though I could not caution all, I still might warn a few:
Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools.
... this is the moment when we must give hope to those left behind in a globalized world. We must remember that the Cold War born in this city was not a battle for land or treasure. Sixty years ago, the planes that flew over Berlin did not drop bombs; instead they delivered food, and coal, and candy to grateful children. And in that show of solidarity, those pilots won more than a military victory. They won hearts and minds; love and loyalty and trust - not just from the people in this city, but from all those who heard the story of what they did here.
ReplyDeleteNow the world will watch and remember what we do here - what we do with this moment. Will we extend our hand to the people in the forgotten corners of this world who yearn for lives marked by dignity and opportunity; by security and justice? Will we lift the child in Bangladesh from poverty, shelter the refugee in Chad, and banish the scourge of AIDS in our time?
Will we stand for the human rights of the dissident in Burma, the blogger in Iran, or the voter in Zimbabwe? Will we give meaning to the words "never again" in Darfur?
Will we acknowledge that there is no more powerful example than the one each of our nations projects to the world? Will we reject torture and stand for the rule of law? Will we welcome immigrants from different lands, and shun discrimination against those who don't look like us or worship like we do, and keep the promise of equality and opportunity for all of our people?
People of Berlin - people of the world - this is our moment. This is our time.
but from all those who heard the story of what they did here.
ReplyDeleteNow the world will watch and remember what we do here -
as opposed to
The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.
The similarities struck me. That Obama, he's got the gift of gab, wonder who wrote the speech?
PARIS (AP) — France's military will slash 54,000 service jobs and close dozens of air, army and other bases in an overhaul meant to slim down the defense sector at home but make it easier and faster to deploy troops abroad, the prime minister announced Thursday.
ReplyDeleteWith some 10,000 troops from Afghanistan to Lebanon, including under NATO and U.N. auspices, France is a major contributor to international peacekeeping and other operations.
Prime Minister Francois Fillon said the restructuring will save billions of euros (dollars) and allow for a smaller, more agile military. Like other European countries, France is grappling with aging military equipment, budget constraints and threats such as terrorism, drug trafficking and Internet-based crime.
"It's our responsibility to make these choices," Fillon told reporters at a Paris news conference. "We have to have a military that's best suited to our needs, to the threats, and at the same time ... our public finances."
The overhaul grew out of a recent top-to-bottom review of defense posture of this nuclear-armed country. In unveiling the white paper last month, President Nicolas Sarkozy laid out his vision for a leaner, smarter and more high-tech 21st-century military. He also made the case for closer French cooperation with NATO.
The total French military force today, including gendarmes, is believed to include about 350,000 service members. Fillon did not say how the 54,000 service members would removed from France's forces or what, if anything, would be done to help them find new jobs.
Fillon said that 83 sites are to be closed starting in 2009, slashing the cost of maintaining the small bases scattered throughout the country.
Most of the French military's budget — 60% — is spent on maintaining troops and sites, while 40% is used for operations, Fillon said.
The French military will concentrate most of its remaining troops at 85-90 beefed-up defense bases by 2014, Fillon said.
Fillon defended the site closures and troop downsizing, saying all the units slated for closure are "ones that are no longer adapted to today's threats."
"Everyone understands that we don't need as many ... tanks when we're not facing the threat of an invasion," he said. "We need more means of intelligence gathering, operative mobility, lighter and more reactive forces."
Under the plan, France aims to be able to deploy as many as 30,000 troops abroad at one time. France currently has more than 10,000 troops in peacekeeping operations in places such as Ivory Coast, Kosovo, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Chad.
The restructuring plan garnered wide criticism even before it was officially announced.
Officials in towns slated to lose their sites have insisted the plan will be disastrous for local economies and have pledged to fight the closures.
Fillon said he understood people's fears and promised $503 million in aid to the most affected regions, many in the depressed northeast of the country. He also said measures would be taken to encourage investment in the hit regions.
A spokesman for the opposition Socialists called the plan "draconian" and said budgetary constraints — and not changing security needs — had motivated the restructuring.
Uncertainty still surrounds the fate of a joint German-French brigade formed in 1989 and made up of 2,500 troops from each country, which some fear could be scrapped in the defense overhaul.
On Wednesday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel appealed for its preservation, calling it "a nucleus of a European security and defense policy."
But Fillon gave her no guarantees, saying Thursday that the French government is "in reflection" about its future. Defense Minister Herve Morin said the brigade dates from an era when France-German reconciliation was paramount.
"We have largely passed this stage," he said.
"The coverage really does seems fair, to me,"
ReplyDelete---
Big Deal:
Up seems like down to me.
Thu Jul 24, 09:22:00 AM EDT
ReplyDelete"We have not journeyed across the centuries, across the oceans, across the mountains, across the prairies, because we are made of sugar candy."
Was going to put that on my office cubicle. Alongside the Gadsden flag and Jolly Roger (the latter captioned "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying").
Amen.
ReplyDelete