A Bad Time for Liberals

It must be a terrible time for liberals. They thought taking control of the Democratic Party, and the democrats getting control of all three branches of government (oops – I meant the house, senate and presidency), would give them everything they wanted.

Global warming turns out to have fraudulent underpinnings, obviating the justification for their Cap and Trade tax bill. Nobody wants the government to take over health care. Even the democrats can’t get enough support for government funded abortions. Obama is an international wimp, whose notion of diplomacy is bowing down to foreign sovereigns. Spending trillions of dollars hasn’t worked out for them so well, either. (Obama predicts years of trillion-dollar deficits – so he’s got to be spending trillions). Obama’s attempt to suppress Fox News has failed. Obama is being seen as an ineffective president.

It’s just not going the way they thought it would.

In short, the people of the United States have noticed what they are up to. And don’t like it.

Snort.

-Popgun

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to A Bad Time for Liberals

  1. Ben Hoffman says:

    Naaaa, actually Obama’s diplomacy has partially restored our standing in world affairs. Although the global warming emails show conflict among scientists, that doesn’t mean global warming isn’t a problem. Obama hasn’t spent trillions of dollars, so that one is just a lie. The three branches of government are the legislative, the executive, and the judicial, so you’re just ignorant on that one. And the majority wants health insurance reform including a public option, so that’s another lie.

    • popgun says:

      Hi, Ben;

      Well, if Obama has ‘restored our standing in world affairs’, I can’t see it from reading the news. I rather think they don’t respect him, from everything I’ve seen.

      Re global warming – if it was really a problem, the scientists would not have needed to falsify results; the actual data would have supported their thesis. They don’t.

      Re ‘trillions of dollars’ – you are correct, technically – he just PLANS to spend trillions of dollars. The last best estimate for the health care reform’s ultimate cost to the people (not necessarily in the government’s accounting, but rather the actual cost to consumers including increased premiums) is $4.6 trillion dollars over ten years. Even without figuring it that way, just the portion that goes through the government is around $1.2 trillion over ten years starting in 2014. And that is just the health bill. Bush spent too much, but Obama not only continued the trend, he accelerated it. Radically.

      Re ‘branches of government’ – I ‘misspoke’, to quote Hillary. I’m sure you forgave her – presumably you’ll forgive me. As you are surely well aware from the context, I meant the House, Senate and the Executive.

      Re ‘majority wants health … including public option’ – See http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform for solid numbers. 41% faver, 53% oppose the current legislation which includes the public option.

      I make no claim to be perfect, but I can generally back up most of the things I’ve said. You have made no attempt to do so in your comments.

      One more thing. Your own site policy states: “All comments are welcome except for those that contain personal insults with no valid arguments. Also, if you make a comment not supported by facts, you may receive an unpleasant retort.” I find this funny as hell, considering you don’t exercise your own policy when visiting other people’s sites. In your comment on my site, you called me a liar and ignorant. Do it again, and I will block any future comments you may make.

      -Popgun

Comments are closed.