« Liar, pants afire. | Main | Because it's Friday. »

August 28, 2009


A city council member, no less....

This suggests that Texas isn't the only place where the constituents are as crazy or crazier than their representing politician....

A tux and a top hat?

Are we sure this ain't political theatre? Someone saying something that stupid in such a get up ... I'm hoping that some smart liberal convinced him to do this just to make a point.

Doesn't he realize it has the word "social" right there in the name?!??! It doesn't get much dumber than that.

DAS has to be right. He had to be going overboard to make a point.

you can see for yourself here.

When a person sitting on a city council doesn't understand who runs a 75-yr-old program that they pay into, is it any surprise that only 37 percent of an AARP poll's respondents correctly identified the public option from a list of three choices?

This kind of rank ignorance is directly attributable to the quality of news information provided by our Glorious Media.

The really sad and sick thing is, there are many on the never-right who think that this guy is exactly the kind of person who should be the rule rather than the exception in politics. I spent most of the day yesterday going through Palin's Facebook Wall. A more frightening group of dittoheads is hard to imagine. Many of them advocate strict term limits (one term) and no "professional" politicians, only "regular" people need apply.

a propos of nothing:

what did the nay-saying, worn half-hitch say to the unstable sheepshank?

"I'm a frayed knot."

I just read (on Atrios or Think Progress) that the man was actually defending Social Security and Medicare, saying he "wouldn't give them up" for anything. So I'm not sure if he is really as ignorant as the shorter quote makes him sound.

The "birthers", "deathers", "teabaggers" and "plug pullers" have been having all the fun, next up at one of these townhalls... "The Afterbirthers"

big surprise: Glenn Beck can't spell

“I’ll be danged if I am going to give up my Social Security because of socialism,”


I think even Michelle (Brainiac) Bachmann thought that was stupid!


I don't think so. She probably wrote the line herself.

I believe that it might be a good idea to go back and actually listen to everything that Mr. Schaffer was saying in context.* I think that some here (and elsewhere) have missed the boat. I believe that what Mr. Schaffer was trying to say was that he wasn't going to let claims of "socialism" get between him and his Social Security/Medicare. It just didn't quite come out that way.

Keep listening to the speech he gave at the YouTube link that was posted. He's clearly saying that the Fortune 500 and big money lobbyists are running our government and is telling people that if they look up who is giving large sums of money to these politicians, they will know how these politicians are going to vote.

Short version: Schaffer is actually IN FAVOR of reform. He was criticizing people that make claims of socialism to attack programs like Social Security and Medicare.

*ThinkProgress has posted a link to the Star-Tribune (http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/house/55421247.html?page=2&c=y) where Schaffer is quoted as saying "I'm on Social Security and I've got Medicare. I have socialized medicine. I wouldn't give it up for anything in the world."

yes, roman berry is right. think progress has misrepresented what happened. you should watch the video. the man does not say he won't give up his social security because of socialism - he says he won't give it up [just] because it IS socialism. he goes on to argue against bachmann.

wha is we called it national?

The comments to this entry are closed.

blog advertising is good for you

June 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30