Republican Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina said Saturday that former Vice President Dick Cheney would likely end up in hell because of his role in the Iraq war.
Dick Cheney
At a Young Americans for Liberty conference, Jones said it was impossible under current law to prosecute a president for intentionally manipulating intelligence reports to make the case for war. He explained he co-authored a bill to change the law, but the legislation was killed in committee by his Republican colleague Lamar Smith of Texas.
“I have no malice towards Lamar, I have respect for him,” Jones remarked. “But that again is the problem. Congress will not hold anyone to blame. Lyndon Johnson’s probably rotting in hell right now because of the Vietnam War, and he probably needs to move over for Dick Cheney.”
Jones initially voted in favor of the Iraq war in 2002. He infamous called for “French fries” to be renamed “freedom fries” after France refused to support the U.S. invasion of the country.
The conservative Christian turned against the war after witnessing American casualties and once it became clear Iraq was not building any weapons of mass destruction.
It’s quite apparent that Republicans and Democrats see things differently. That observation explains why an obvious mathematical fact is still being debated and questioned by Republicans. Picture a Democrat looking at the equation 1+1 and coming up with the correct answer of 2, and a Republican looking at the same equation and coming up with 11 as their answer.
Consider Mitt Romney for example. He was famous for repeating an obvious and proven lie. He often said, “since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history.”
Bob Cesca from the Huffington Post called this Romney claim a super-colossal lie.
With the end of fiscal year 2012, the Congressional Budget Office announced the 2012 federal budget deficit: $1.1 trillion. Taken purely at face value, this number is enormous. Yet every Democrat, and especially the Obama campaign, ought to be telling anyone who will listen: Not only has the president cut the deficit by $312 billion during his first term (so far), but he’s cut the deficit by $200 billion in the past year alone. And the CBO projected that the 2013 Obama budget, if enacted as is, would shrink the deficit to $977 billion — a four year total of nearly $500 billion in deficit reduction.
Okay, yeah, I get it. It’s risky to mention the deficit, but not when you couch it in math and the facts.
As I’ve documented before, the CBO reported in January, 2009 that the federal budget deficit for that fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2008, was already $1.2 trillion. President Obama’s additional ’09 spending added another $200 billion to the deficit, bringing the total to $1.412 trillion. Unprecedented and huge, but given the enormity of the financial crisis and the depth of the recession, there weren’t many other options on the table. Add two wars into the mix and there you go.
But since then, deficit spending has dropped precipitously. Why? Chiefly because President Obama signed the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act in February, 2010, which mandates that new spending be offset with spending cuts or new revenue. Yes, a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress passed this legislation. Guess how many congressional Republicans voted for the law. Zero. Not one. Perhaps during this week’s debate, Vice President Biden could ask Rep. Paul Ryan who voted against the bill.
But we shouldn’t be alarmed that Republicans apparently have their own Math standards. To them, 1+1=11, Obama is the biggest spender in the history of American presidents and their Mitt Romney actually won the November election. Of course he won, that’s what all their math experts claimed.
(NEW YORK) — Fox’s Chris Wallace has landed the first post-election interview with defeated Republican nominee Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann.
Wallace said on “Fox News Sunday” that the interview will air on his show next week. Additional portions will be on Fox News Channel the next day. Wallace says he’ll ask Romney how he has dealt with the defeat, what he plans to do and his thoughts about President Barack Obama’s second-term agenda.
Fox News spokeswoman Ashley Nerz says the interview will be taped this week in southern California, where Romney has spent much of his time since the election.
Romney has also said he will speak March 15 to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, an annual event that draws leading Republican voices.
Have you ever wondered how to curb, or even merge violent crime prisoners here in the U.S. prison system back into a form of societal life? Have you ever heard of the movie, The Dirty Dozen? In 1967, an awesome war movie enlisted or drafted violent, life-sentence type prisoners into the Army during World War II to fight against the German war machine. It featured some of the greatest actors of that time such as Lee Marvin, Charles Bronson, Ernest Borgnine and living legend Hall of Fame Football running back, Jim Brown.
The premise of the movie was to take these violent criminals from prison, train them to become soldiers and send them into battle, supervised of course by a US Army Major. The goal was to get the best out of these hardened criminals.
At any rate, that’s what the U.S. could do with these prisoners here in our jails. They seem not to mind violence so why not establish a real-life “Dirty Dozen” squadron of soldiers. Put them right in the middle of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and all of the hot spots around the world. Send the violent offenders that are condemned, those on a life sentence, the rapist and extreme violent gang members that have been reeking havoc here in the States. With that, prisons would be freed up of violent offenders and would be filled with more of your “white collar” criminals instead.
Just last week, a member of Congress was thinking about re-introducing the notion of a Draft again. Really? With the dangers all over the world right now, terrorists are ready and violence are on our borders due to the drug war. Why would we even want to consider a Draft? There is another alternative, a deterrent that may work in our favor instead of the dreaded Draft.
Think about it. With violent criminals who are currently imprisoned fighting these wars on behalf of the United States, our sons and daughters would not be on the front lines. Those that seem to enjoy “killing” and violence without remorse would be risking their lives instead.
And they’re already on ‘death row’ or serving ‘life sentences’ anyway. It’s a win-win situation. Problem solved. Prison over crowding, solved. Those that commit violent crimes now would know their punishment – terminal life sentence in the Army or in the Marines. Believe me, I think these guys would have a totally different perspective when someone else is shooting back at them.
You can change here for Dysfunction Junction, or take the local, making all stops to Interminable Terminal. Have your tickets ready. If you can afford them.
This latest skirmish over the economy and the role of government is highlighting more than just the usual differences between the parties. It’s uncovering the stripped-bare disdain the Republicans have for negotiating with the president and their utter lack of gravity when it comes to exchanging ideas. Yes, the left does not want Obama to back down on anything related to Medicare or Social Security or balancing budget cuts with revenue, but when the other party simply refuses to meet you halfway, they cease to be a responsible partner.
Well, here comes the reality. Governors of both parties are getting plenty nervous about the effects the cuts will have on their still-fragile budgets. They won’t bring the government to a standstill, nor will they shut down Washington, which I believe to be the secret Republican fantasy, but they will do something worse. They will be a nuisance and a slow trickle of bad news. They will deny people who need certain services what they need. They might result in layoffs at the state and local levels. In short, they will drain away confidence at a time when we need it to increase. But if that’s what the GOP wants, then they’ll get it.
I suppose that President Obama’s, and the Democrats’, worst nightmare would be that the sequester takes effect and the effect is minimal and possibly positive. That would embolden Republicans to continue to push for even more cuts, though not to the military I’m sure, and would discredit and undercut the left’s economic arguments. I’m not gambling on that outcome. The economy needs more money to circulate and get spent, not less. Exactly the opposite will begin happening on Friday.
Something big is getting ready to happen on March 1st. The Sequester is coming and Republicans are once again, sitting on their hands instead of doing whatever they can to protect the economy and the middle class. It’s the same old story – By doing nothing, the effects of the coming Sequester protects the rich, while the middle class suffers.
So in preparation for the big event, Democrats are coming together through the efforts of The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee – The DCCC – by creating an ad targeting 27 Teaparty Republicans who would love nothing more than seeing a suffering middle class after the Sequester kicks in.
The head of the DCCC, Steve Israel put it this way:
“There are real-world consequences for middle class families because of House Republicans’ dysfunction and chronic chaos. For the defense workers who may get pink slips, the federal law enforcement officers who may be furloughed, and the FBI agents and the food inspectors who are looking at layoffs, they will be reminded that those pink slips have been brought to hardworking Americans by this Tea Party Republican Congress.
It is time for House Republicans to come back to work to avert this crisis, stop protecting tax breaks for special interests and corporations — and stand up for the middle class.”
The Republican leaders in the House of Representative and their members have been on vacation for the past couple weeks. There is absolutely no urgency on their part to get back to work.
They claim that they cannot support Chuck Hagel because he is financially supported by the dreaded group called “Friends of Hamas!” But there is something you need to know about Friends of Hamas…
This week, President Obama used his weekly address to urge Congress to work together to stop the next manufactured crisis slated to take effect on March 1st. The President said;
Our top priority as a country right now should be doing everything we can to grow our economy and create good, middle class jobs.
And yet, less than one week from now, Congress is poised to allow a series of arbitrary, automatic budget cuts that will do the exact opposite. They will slow our economy. They will eliminate good jobs. They will leave many families who are already stretched to the limit scrambling to figure out what to do.
But here’s the thing: these cuts don’t have to happen. Congress can turn them off anytime with just a little compromise. They can pass a balanced plan for deficit reduction. They can cut spending in a smart way, and close wasteful tax loopholes for the well-off and well-connected.
Simply asking that question will not resolve anything but facing and making adequate and lasting changes can lead to actually saving lives.
Most recently, the focus from the media, political leaders, gun rights activists and many others have not been focused on long-term needs or solutions but rather on short-term story lines, misleading voters and pushing policies as well as allowing misunderstandings which have led to surges in firearm sales.
The story of the century would be a day without a death from gun violence or even more so, violent crime.
Sound impossible? We are driven to think that way.
The sales increase of armed weapons proves this. There are many statistics on the amount of weapons in the U.S and the surge in sales but the fact is many guns aren’t registered. However, the increase in background checks shows the surge in sales and a lot is due to the speculation of what may change with new laws or regulations.
Although a majority of gun owners agree with the idea of stronger background checks, many loopholes in laws already in affect allow around 40% of sales to go through without background checks.
If these issues were dealt with, would that resolve the problems at hand? No.
The majority of gun owners were well intentioned weapon purchasers. It was never their plan to allow the weapon to get into the wrong hands, use the weapon in any way other than the way it was first intended and certainly to abide by all laws when purchasing their weapon, ammunition or laws pertaining to either.
This part is simple. At least it should be.
The 2nd Amendment is brought up in a great deal of discussions, arguments and as much as it is a part of this topic, it is also a big part of misguided discussions and a detour from what should be brought to the table in this matter.
There is very little brought up about our responsibilities for our rights and freedoms and the effects of change over time.
You see, it is clear today the person next door, at the office, in the church or at school may be planning something nobody could have imagined or possibly be the victim of the next violent crime. How are we to know? How can society better prepare or better prevent more deaths from these types of crimes?
Does it help when our congress continuously makes every effort to show their unwillingness to work together, compromise or communicate to efficiently get things done for those who elect them?
Does it help when people are looking for an end to gun violence in some way and a leading organization like the NRA comes out and takes no responsibility but instead points their finger at others? Why not accept some responsibility and work together? It is clear many NRA members do not agree with the NRA’s standing.
Does it help when our society is flooded with violence in its gaming and entertainment industry?
Do attacks on Facebook, Twitter and many of the Social Media websites help at all?
It has been made very clear bullying leads to aggressive behavior, violent crime and yes, massive shootings and often ends in suicide. So why add to that? Why attack those speaking out against violent crime and gun violence?
Does any of this help? Obviously not!
A crime very rarely starts at the moment of the attack, shooting, kidnapping, “random” event, or murder/suicide.
Our society has become self-centered and comfortable with shrugging of responsibility, passing the buck and expecting someone else to fix the issue. That is the issue. Our rights and freedoms should never cause others to live in fear. That is not freedom.
The reason gun violence is more an issue of violent crime is because that is what most often leads to it.
Life is very fast paced, more so now as many people must multi-task, never taking time to slow down.
As our economic tensions are high in the U.S., many people are financially over burdened.
Personal lives, finances, work conditions, health conditions and the constant feed of information can leave many people at a constant breaking point.
Emotionally, there are many struggling from childhood through adulthood, just to fit in or keep their private life out of the public eye in fear of rejection.
There is a major ongoing need to unwind in a society that is less willing and sometimes unable to allow that to happen.
As much as someone may be a responsible gun PURCHASER, there are many changing and unknown factors which come into lives leaving many gun owners unaware of how dangerous having a readily available weapon may have become. So many think nothing will ever happen to them to take them to the breaking point but the news tells the other side of that story. Nobody can be foolish enough to say something could never happen to them. That is someone that shouldn’t own a gun.
The only way to actually make our society safer is for everyone to take responsibility for our part. We ALL have a part. The idea of more guns and less regulation is not the answer. That breeds fear and fear breeds crime. This is not one side or the other, a political rival or even a statement for or against gun control.
It will take more than gun control, gun laws or regulations to see this through but isn’t this worth it? Violent crime death does not see race, economic status, neighborhood, political party, age or anything. That has been very evident as we have watched recent deaths in just this year alone.
Understand, this is more than gun violence. It starts before someone picks up a gun so everyone is part of this solution.
NRA, that includes gun control and regulations. Just because it starts before someone picks up a gun doesn’t mean a weapon should be laying there for the wrong person nor should any weapon be there that can commit mass murder because it was available.
We all need to step up.
In the state of North Carolina, the voters chose to go in a different direction. For the past 20-years, a Democrat had been the sitting Governor of North Carolina, but all that changed on one election night in November, 2012. The new Governor, Pat McCrory, a former Mayor of Charlotte NC., was elected as the first Republican governor since Gov. Jim Martin who served from 1985 -1993.
Since Gov. McCrory’s inauguration in January this year and his State of the State Address this month, he has already made sweeping legislative moves and overturns that directly affect thousands of North Carolinians right where it hurts most – their finances. According to Gary Anderson of the Associated Press, McCrory signed the bill making these changes in his state’s Capitol building office. The media wasn’t invited to the signing, but several of the legislators (All Republicans) who quickly shepherded the bill through the General Assembly in the first two weeks of this year’s work session, were there. (Why so Secretive?)
The bill includes an unemployment plan that repays $2.5 billion owed the federal government for jobless benefits paid since the Great Recession, by cutting maximum weekly jobless payments from $535 to $350 on new claims beginning July 1. And the maximum number of weeks for state benefits goes from 26 weeks to 12 to 20 weeks, depending on the state unemployment rate. But what’s not mentioned is that Gov. McCrory gave a $13,000 raise to his Cabinet secretaries while making these cuts.
The bill also raises state unemployment taxes, partially through the elimination of a zero-percent rate that about 30,000 businesses have received. Federal taxes will continue to rise by $21 per employee per year until the debt is repaid and a 20-percent state surcharge will continue a little while longer.
“As one of the first laws under his tenure, these cruel cuts will forever mar any legacy that Gov. McCrory hopes to leave behind,” said MaryBe McMillan with the state AFL-CIO. “Only bullies kick people while they are down. Shame on our governor and our legislature for turning their backs on unemployed workers.”
Shameful indeed.
When President Obama even mentions a minimum wage increase or the super rich paying a little more in taxes or healthcare for every American, the Republicans cringe, squirm and call it bad economics. But a Republican Governor and Republican led House comes into power, kicks the little man while he’s down and this is considered Good Policy?
One leader, led by the North Carolina Chamber, who backed the overhaul – Chamber CEO Lew Ebert – acknowledged in an interview that it was “tough medicine” for both businesses and workers, but that it would insure the system wouldn’t be in such bad shape again. (Hey Ebert, what about those who aren’t working?)
“We’re sending a strong signal. We’re getting our house in order,” he said.
Riiiigghhtttt. By destroying the little man who’s struggling to make ends meet, keep a roof over his and his family’s head, put food on the table, pay for college tuitions, buy groceries, pay a mortgage, make a car payment, etc. All of this on $350 a week? Yep, that’s a Strong Signal alright. A signal signifying what Democrats have always thought about Republicans and was confirmed by the great Mitt Romney. Does 47% ring a bell?
By now, you have all heard of the most recent reason why some Republicans are against Chuck Hagel‘s confirmation. For the few who haven’t heard, the latest scoop on Hagel – according to Republicans – is that he received money from a group called, “Friends of Hamas.”
Shocked? Well you should be. A little digging online found that Friends of Hamas does not exist. The idea of the fake organization came from a reporter in New York. But this little fact has not stop some Republicans in congress from naming the fictitious organization and its non-existent connection to Mr. Hagel, as one of their reasons for opposing Hagel’s confirmation. Take Republican/Teaparty Senator Rand Paul for example. Responding to a question about the so called, Friends of Hamas, the Senator said that he saw the information and that it is “more and more concerning.”
The information of course, is being pushed by a conservative website, Breitbart.com. Breitbart is the same site that fabricated a video of Shirley Sherrod, giving the impression that Sherrod had racist tendencies. The doctored video implied that Sherrod denied a white farmer the funds and information he needed. Due to the backlash on the video from Fox News and other conservative media, Sherrod was forced to resign as Director of Rural Development for the United States Department of Agriculture. She later sued Breitbart.
Friends of Hamas does not exist, but Breitbart stands by their story and continues pushing this lie to Congressional Republicans and these Republicans have bought into it.
Stephen Colbert breaks it down in the video below.
We all knew this was going to happen, that Republicans would eventually endorse and vote for Chuck Hagel’s confirmation. So what exactly was the point of them filibustering ‘their Republican friend’ last week? I mean, at what point will they put politics aside and just do what they all knew they would do from the start?
Hagel cleared the threshold when five-term Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama said he would vote for the former GOP senator from Nebraska after joining other Republicans last week in an unprecedented filibuster of the Pentagon nominee.
“He’s probably as good as we’re going to get,” Shelby told the Decatur (Ala.) Daily.
Although a Republican, Hagel has faced strong GOP opposition, with many of his former colleagues voting last week to stall the nomination. Republicans have questioned Hagel’s support for Israel, tolerance of Iran and willingness to cut the nuclear arsenal. His opposition to the Iraq war after his initial vote for the conflict angered his onetime friend, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
GOP lawmakers demanded more time to review the nomination that a divided Armed Services Committee had approved on a party-line vote.
Shelby’s support was a clear sign of weakening Republican opposition, and it prompted two letters within hours from Hagel’s fiercest GOP foes. One letter went to the president calling on him to withdraw the nomination, the other to GOP senators pleading with them to stand together against Hagel.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By agreeing to this, we can analyze browsing behavior and unique IDs on this site. Declining or revoking consent may affect certain features.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
