U
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If that were true, slavery would have died out long before the Civil War. It survived because it was very profitable.
You're crazier than a loon.
I gave examples with sources of Gov. Scott Walker's "accomplishments". Feel free to refute any of them, if you can.
No refutations Vetteman?
Color me surprised.![]()
No one gives a shit about the poor baby union state employees.
Oh look...another thread of brilliant political commentary from liberals about who conservatives should vote for...
Walker also alluded to the expectation back in the United States that he would run for president, noting the media had described him as "bland" as a prospective candidate. "I'd rather be bland than stupid, or ignorant, or moronic," he said.
Who would you vote for in 2016?
Go ahead Eyer the Liar, enlighten us. Who do you, being a "real conservative™", think that conservatives should vote for?
Because the GOP is the one floating the names listed in this thread.. Not "liberals".
There’s something quaint about the way Jeb Bush is trying to get around critiquing or endorsing his big brother’s disastrous presidency, especially when it comes to the unpopular wars President George W. Bush began and mishandled. It’s almost as if the commoners are trying to get him to gossip about family matters, and voters will understand if he’s too much of a gentleman to do so.
Asked by the Washington Post’s Philip Rucker whether his foreign policy speech next week would deal with his brother’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush wouldn’t answer:
“I won’t talk about the past. I’ll talk about the future. If I’m in the process of considering the possibility of running, it’s not about re-litigating anything in the past. It’s about trying to create a set of ideas and principles that will help us move forward.”
Does Bush really think he’s going to get away with not talking about his brother’s wars – or his tax policies or the surplus he spent into a deficit or the economy that cratered on his watch? And how will the Florida governor square the fact that he rips President Obama regularly – in 2013 he called him a “complete and utter failure” – with his unwillingness to weigh in on the presidency that preceded Obama’s?
While Bush is talking about creating “a set of ideas and principles” for his foreign policy, I hope journalists remember that he was one of just 25 signatories to the original “statement of principles” issued by the hawkish Project for a New American Century — alongside Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby, Elliott Abrams, Norman Podhoretz, Frank Gaffney and other card-carrying neocons. He didn’t sign subsequent PNAC declarations, but as a first-term Florida governor and son of the last president, Bush’s name stood out on that founding document.
Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, is said to be a rising contender for the Republican presidential nomination. So, on Wednesday, he did what, these days, any ambitious Republican must, and pledged allegiance to charlatans and cranks.
For those unfamiliar with the phrase, “charlatans and cranks” is associated with N. Gregory Mankiw, a professor at Harvard who served for a time as George W. Bush’s chief economic adviser. In the first edition of his best-selling economics textbook, Mr. Mankiw used those words to ridicule “supply-siders” who promised that tax cuts would have such magic effects on the economy that deficits would go down, not up.
But, on Wednesday, Mr. Walker, in what was clearly a rite of passage into serious candidacy, spoke at a dinner at Manhattan’s “21” Club hosted by the three most prominent supply-siders: Art Laffer (he of the curve); Larry Kudlow of CNBC; and Stephen Moore, chief economist of the Heritage Foundation. Politico pointed out that Rick Perry, the former governor of Texas, attended a similar event last month. Clearly, to be a Republican contender you have to court the powerful charlatan caucus.
So a doctrine that even Republican economists consider dangerous nonsense has become party orthodoxy. And what makes this political triumph especially remarkable is that it comes just as the doctrine’s high priests have been setting new standards for utter, epic predictive failure.

I would like to start off by talking about the subject and the subject of course, is secession and nullification, the breaking up of government, and the good news is it’s gonna happen! It’s happening!
And it’s not gonna be because there will be enough people in the U.S. Congress to legislate it. It won’t happen. It will be de facto. Ya know, you’ll have a gold standard when the paper standard fails and we’re getting awfully close to that. And people will have to resort to taking care of themselves. So when conditions break down, ya know, there’s gonna be an alternative. And I think that’s what we’re witnessing.