Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
0.238 Powered by Wordpress
Gahh, HOW does it make any sense for us to fund abortion in other countries, especially with our current economic problems?
But I’m glad I didn’t stop reading after the doom and gloom bit- I suppose we can all make it through the next four years, and anyway, it’s kind of fun being underdogs.
Comment by Francesca — 2/2/2009 @ 1:16 am
Economists from around the country just recently took out an ad in the New York Times or Washington Post, I can’t remember which, displaying their chagrin with the “stimulus” and Keynesian “economics,” if you can call it that.
What this basically comes down to is: do you want your grandchildren’s grandchildren paying for the abortions and condoms of non-Americans while the economy sinks further downward?
Comment by Rick Chen — 2/2/2009 @ 10:42 am
So where were you when the Bush stimulus plan was passed?
Comment by Um. — 2/3/2009 @ 7:59 pm
In Berkeley, sadly.
Comment by Spencer Doyle — 2/4/2009 @ 6:15 pm
Who cares if he dissed Rush? After all, he’s “un-American”, where we define an “un-American” as someone who wants the President of the United States of America to fail.
Comment by Alan Colmes — 2/19/2009 @ 12:04 am
You could define “un-American” that way, but to apply it correctly in this case you’d have to think about it a bit more. For instance, Rush would like the president of the United States to fail if “the president of the United States succeeds [in implementing trillion-dollar "stimulus" bills, say]” means America loses. That, which is the point Rush was making, but that got, predictably, misconstrued by his pro-Obama detractors, isn’t un-American. Rather, it is pro-American.
On the other hand, you could define “un-American” as “anti-Obama sycophancy” in which case you’re right, Rush has a problem.
Comment by Spencer Doyle — 2/19/2009 @ 12:52 am