Sunday, April 26, 2015

This is One Picture Worth 
Many Thousands of Words




THE REPUBLICAN ROGUES GALLERY

TOP: Sen. Lindsey Graham, Sen Rob Portman, 
Sen. Kelly Ayotte, Sen Orrin Hatch, Sen. Mitch McConnell
BOTTOM: Sen. Ron Johnson, Sen. Thad Cochran, 
Sen. Susan Collins, Sen. Mark Kirk, Sen. Jeff Flake

What Might YOU Have to Say 
About the Problem it Reveals?

36 comments:

  1. I had to look up information about objections to the confirmation of Loretta Lynch.

    Dick Durbin's position:

    A top Democrat said Tuesday that Republicans should be "more sensitive" about their objections to Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch in light of the approaching 50th anniversary of the civil rights march in Selma.

    Huh?

    Everything is racist now. **sigh**

    Jeb Bush, of course, favored the confirmation.

    FT,
    You asked: What Might YOU Have to Say About the Problem it Reveals?

    1. Both political parties basically support the same agenda.

    2. Members of both parties fall in line when "The Big Boys" tell them to do so. Oligarchs? Maybe.

    THERE IS NO INTEGRITY IN POLITICS TODAY! The very idea of public servants is passé.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I couldn't agree more, AOW. This as happened, of course because a preponderance of White, Christian members of the various and sundry Western Societies have been carried away by the specious quasi-noblity of destructive, irrational, victim-oriented sentiments insidiously foisted in us by ENVIOUS, SPITEFUL, MALICIOUS INTELLECTUAL AGGRESSORS.

      In other words we must ABANDON Law, ABANDON Reason, ABANDON our Values, ABANDON Tradition, ABANDON our Mores. Actively SCORN our Achievements, REVILE the Accomplishments, DISCREDIT and DISOWN the Sacrifices and Courageous Acts of our Ancestors –– i.e. toss away EVERYTHING that made us what we once were –– CEDE all our Advantages to The Wretched of the Earth in order to MAKE UP to them for the POVERTY, MISERY and DEGRADATION their markedly INFERIOR cultures produced –– LONG before any of "US" ever knew of their existence.

      The utter wretchedness, degradation and wanton savagery of most pagan, non-white peoples is the fault of US damnable CHRISTIAN WHITES for having a achieved a higher degree of Civilization, a higher standard of living for the average person, greater material comfort, more refined, exquisitely accomplishments in Architecture, Art, Music, Literature, Poetry, Drama, Mathematics, Science, Medicine, Engineering and ultra-sophisticated Technology than all previous cultures combined.

      "WE" had NO RIGHT to BE SUPERIOR, because our manifest superiority makes others more clumsy, lowly, less ambitious and more inept FEEL BAD. Ergo "WE" have a "moral obligation" to GIVE it ALL UP, and embrace the brutish, sadly deprived primitivism we had the colossal effrontery and unmitigated gall to ESCAPE, ABANDON and attempt to RISE ABOVE.

      BOY, do "we" SUCK, eh?

      Delete
  2. Information You DeserveApril 26, 2015 at 9:39 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry,IYD! Except in rare instances we only permit remarks directly relevant to the subject matter of the post to stand.

      Do check our by laws before attempting to post again, please.

      Delete
  3. We now have an Attorney General who has vowed to ignore immigration law.

    Thanks GOP!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Long Arm of Truth say... problem with communication is belief it has been acheived. Sometime same can be said of truth.

    Loretta Lynch may or may not make a fine AGAINST. Only time will tell. Qualifications are undeniable. 10 republicans knew this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Republicans were also aware of the following FACTS:

      FACT 1: Attorney general nominee Loretta Lynch defended the Obama’s administration’s immigration policies, aligning herself with the White House on a controversial issue even as she sought to establish her independence.
      Under intense but polite questioning from Republican senators on the first day of her confirmation hearing, Lynch pledged to be an independent prosecutor and sought to mend relations with a Republican-controlled Congress by promising to work closely with lawmakers on topics from cybercrime to terrorism.
      On the most contentious issue brought up at Wednesday’s Judiciary Committee session, Lynch stood firmly behind President Barack Obama’s decision to allow as many as 5 million people who had entered the country illegally to stay temporarily.

      Lynch said the legal underpinnings of the policy, as laid out in a Justice Department memo, were sound. She said that focusing immigration enforcement and deportation dangerous and violent criminals was “a reasonable way to marshal limited resources to deal with the problem.”


      So, LEGALLY, LIMITTED Resources justify the position. But what if the resources were NOT limitted? What if the president was simply choosing not to spend the resources available to hiM?

      FACT 2 (Sept 2014): Administration officials have told Congress repeatedly that their budget gives them the resources to deport about 400,000 illegal immigrants a year, but numbers reported by The Associated Press last week suggested they were on pace to deport about 320,000 this year. Those figures track with what The Washington Times projected in April.

      FACT 3 (April 2015):Deportations have plummeted by another 25 percent so far this year, with the government even struggling to find enough criminals to kick out of the country, according to the latest statistics that suggest President Obama’s amnesty has hampered removal efforts.

      That could undercut Mr. Obama’s legal justification for the deportation amnesty, where the pace of deportations has been raised as a key way of judging whether the president is complying with the law by trying to grant “deferred action” to millions of illegal immigrants.

      The numbers for the first six months of fiscal year 2015, which began Oct. 1, are striking: The government has deported just 117,181 immigrants, which is just three-quarters of the 157,365 immigrations kicked out during that same period a year earlier, according to figures provided to Congress....

      Homeland Security and ICE officials have said they are budgeted to deport about 400,000 people a year, but they are on pace to deport less than 250,000 in fiscal year 2015.


      The AG knows that there is NO legal basis for the President's position. And so do the Senators who voted to confirm her.

      Delete
    2. Hello again, Nursie Po-Poo, darling! Once more your imbecilic, puerile observations have been permitted to stand only because they have been eloquently neutralized by Thersites.

      I, myself, cannot be bothered dealing with your smarmy, insincere, always unwelcome assertions and false, deliberately disruptive attempts to challenge the veracity and integrity of simple statements of truth.

      You are not worth any amount of my precious time, Nursie Poo-Poo, so yet again I order you to GET OUT and STAY OUT of this blog.

      Delete
    3. What wrong with Nurse?

      He talk worse than me. Clear as mud on my shoe

      Delete
  5. The GOOP needs to ditch the elephant as its symbol.

    The new symbol of the Gutless Old Party is the capon: A ball-less, plucked chicken.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks to Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and now Loretta Lynch, Justice, has a new Face, and it's no longer a blindfolded lady with a scale.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Black lives MATTER!! Yours... not so much!

      Delete
    2. Joe,

      In a faux-egalitarian society created ad maintained by the ruthless application of force and threat of death, some people must always be considered "more equal" than others.

      Delete
  7. Long Arm of TruthApril 26, 2015 at 3:50 PM

    If only it were possible to roll back time to that idyllic age when black folks know their place eh Joe Conservative?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When black men were actually men, and not the demagogue's mob.

      Delete
    2. ...and apologists for racist hooliganism, like yourself, were a shameful embarrassment the world over.

      Delete
    3. Hello, Nursie Poo-Poo! I'd know you anywhere. I'm letting this septic, idiotarian observation remain only because Joe answered it so intelligently.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  8. Long Arm of TruthApril 26, 2015 at 6:25 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ...as do your "divined" intentions and subsequent racial apologetics.

      Delete
  10. The problem it reveals?

    The lunatic right fringe is off their rocker.

    The one issue with Lynch that was sticking in the right's craw was Obama's rearrangement of ICE and CBP priorities and her support for it. Well duh. Was Obama going to pick an attorney who thought it was inappropriate? It's a major policy initiative, and a huge political move. No matter what, he was going to pick an attorney who thinks it is constitutional, and there are plenty out there. Otherwise, she was as conservative a pick as they were going to get out of him, and they had to allow him to have one at some point. It's their job.

    These sorts of right wing outrage reveal a deep disregard for responsibility and reality, and a deeper, like tendrils through their souls, hatred of that black guy named "Obama" in the White House.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JMJ,
      It's a major policy initiative, and a huge political move. No matter what, he was going to pick an attorney who thinks it is constitutional, and there are plenty out there.

      Of course.

      And when another POTUS is in the Oval Office, that POTUS will appoint those in line with that administration's views -- the Constitution be damned.

      Should the next POTUS not be one to advance the same agenda as Obama's, will the Left say, "That's okay" and not oppose the policies and appointees of that POTUS?

      Delete
    2. Hey, JERSEY, please try to tell that piffle to those who sponsored the nominations of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas –– to name just two who were viciously attacked and abused in a most unprincipled, unethical fashion.

      You are too intelligent to be serious in advocating the pronounced Double Standard you appear to favor. You are better than that, so please CUT IT OUT.

      And PLEASE stop calling MY guests stupid names. It not only insults and maligns them unjustly, it discredits YOU and makes you look like an ill-tempered fool, which I know positively you are NOT.

      I have any number of friends in "real life" who disagree most vehemently with my opinions. We DO get irritated with one another, but work always to keep the lines of communication open so we can enjoy other aspects of our friendships that relate to the many things we DO have in common.

      AOW is a friend. I can vouch for her intelligence, her basic honesty, and her dedication to doing constant research to back up her statements, so when you call her inappropriate names and spread lies about her I have to tell you it's UNACCEPTABLE at MY blog.

      That doesn't mean I don't like you or don't want you to share your opinions, __ I do __ but PLEASE stop being so goddam RUDE about it.

      OKAY? Is it a DEAL?

      Delete
    3. What the hell are you on about?

      It's not like Lynch is some fringe left character. That was the point I was making - other than this one issue, the right didn't have much of a problem with her. Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas are both on the fringe right.

      I didn't call anyone anything, other than the "lunatic right fringe," a blanket description of the far right.

      What's the problem?

      JMJ

      Delete
    4. But Loretta Lynch IS a hardcore leftist, Jersey, and she HAS said on the record that she believes illegal, unconstitutional gestures on the part of the president regarding immigration and unsanctioned changes in the health care law are just fine with her.

      If is the DUTY of Conservatives to OPPOSE such a person as a matter of PRINCIPLE. This post is about the FAILURE of REPUBLICAN senators to do what they were elected to do.

      Now, IF you were fair-minded, you KNOW you would not stand for that for one split second, if the president were a REPUBLICAN.

      I'm not saying you don't have a right to your opinion, even if I think it's wrong, but please don't confuse opinion with FACT.

      The rudeness I mentioned was not directed at me. You and I get along pretty well, because I take you with a grain or two of salt and we're both from New Jersey, but I am dead serious about not being rude to AOW or anyone else.

      We never know how someone else is going to "take" our remarks, so it's always a good idea to err on the side of courtesy, and giving the benefit of the doubt, UNLESS you are dealing with a troll or a persistent stalker.

      Be of good cheer!

      Delete
    5. RE: FreeThinke to Jersey: "You are too intelligent..."

      ----------

      Got any proof of this so-called intelligence you think McJones possesses?

      I sure as hell haven't seen anything from that clown other than slobbering idiocy.

      Delete
    6. "Hold fast to that which is good. Return not evil for evil."

      Delete
    7. "But Loretta Lynch IS a hardcore leftist"

      You don't know what you're talking about. You shouldn't go on about things you obviously know nothing about.

      JMJ

      Delete
  11. JMJ might well be the one that is off his rocker by inferring that a nominated court justice ALWAYS supports that social and political causes that the political party nominating him\her is at least publicly committed to supporting.

    John Roberts who was nominated by Dubya cast the deciding vote for socialized medicine, Obamacare.

    Anthony Kennedy nominated by Reagan isn't preaching fire and brimstone about the about the depravity of the sodomites as might be the result of JMJ's twisted caricatures but rather casting deciding votes for the "progressive" agenda of same sex marriage.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You inferred, Waylon, but I did not confer. I do not think that way.

      JMJ

      Delete
  12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE, SO KINDLY GET OUT AND STAY OUT.

We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––
We WILL use COMMENT ERADICATION.


IN ADDITION

Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.