A Pope and a Hope! Huckleberry Hound and Obamarama met Andy Warhol!
A Pope and a Hope, a Pope and a Hope, celebrate everybody, a Pope and a Hope!
On the republican side, Huckleberry Hound defeated Deputy Dawg, Dick Tracy, Rupaul, Grumpy and Rudy.
On the democratic side, the man who preached hope defeated the woman married to the man from Hope.
THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS 
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 10:36 am
When Huckabee says things like “Club for Greed,” his euphemism for the Club for Growth, or whe he says, “People like me because I look like someone they work with as opposed to someone that laid them off,” he exposes and ugly rift in the GOP base that scares the heck of of the establishment conservatives – the Religious Right may not be so “Right” anymore. This isn’t like when Roberston placed second in Iowa in ’88 as a stauch rightwing conservative by playing the God Card. Huckabee is running as a populist – by playing the God Card. Big difference. Of course, Huckabee has a money problem and so you may be right that he has peaked. He has to get on TV in places like Michigan and Florida and South Carolina, and his resources would be hard-pressed to cover that. If he does well in NH, third place would be the very best he could hope for, then he gets some steam. If I were him, I’d head straight over to SC and MI. NH and FL are too establishment for Huckabee. But don’t make the mistake of thinking this was about abortion. This was about the disillusionment with the mainstream GOP of late – that’s why so few GOPers came out to vote, and if that trend continues, they’re in big trouble with an establishment candidate.
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 10:50 am
JMJ said;
“Huckabee has a money problem and so you may be right that he has peaked.”
Maybe he can scrape some of that ” change ” off of Obama that he says he’s got so much of.
Empty suit is right Eric. Any fool can claim to make “change”.
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 11:51 am
I think Romney and Clinton are the empty suits in this race.
JMJ
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 11:55 am
“Any fool can claim to make “change”.”
LOL! That’s exactly what Reagan ran on in ’80! LOL!
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 12:30 pm
What candidate hasnt promised change jersey ?
My problem is that its the center piece of his campaign right now and he says it every five minutes, he has so little experience he couldnt change a diaper.
Dems fell victim to their own media by giving all the glory to Hillary and Obama.
I’m disappointed that the dems didnt give Biden his due attention. He’s actually the one dem that wouldnt scare the crap out of me. Just a little pee. He has more experience on the hill and overseas than the top 3 dems put together.
But the silver lining is this.
Ron Paul and Kucinich are finally being taken out of the game. Its time for the relevant players to come to the field.
America needs to be told one way or another that the Ron Paul idea of just packing it all up and coming home is really not what America wants. Maybe now these antiwar moonbats will see that there are very few people in this country who actually agree with them and they’ll shut up and go away.
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 12:33 pm
By the way Jersey, Reagan got elected twice. And proved he could make changes that matterd. Not wheter homosexual illegal alien terrorists got there rights.
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 12:44 pm
What changes did Reagan make, exactly? Let’s see… well, he got rid of the 70% marginal rate, and wealth disparity has grown ever since, while wages have been stagnant ever since. He established a “War on Drugs” police state and now we have the largest incarceration rate in the entire world and millions of disenfranchised and ruined lives. He did nothing for the national infrastructure. He made any deal he could get from the Dems for his imperial military and we wound up with the worst deficits and debt in our history to that point – and in peacetime no less!
Really, Micky. What the hell did Reagan do for regular people like us? I’ll tell you what he did – NOTHING. He was a useless sack of ordure.
JMJ
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Oh, and as for what Americans want – most think the war was a mistake and want out asap – most want universal healthcare – most want help with higher education – most believe the economy is heading in the wrong direction – etc. The powers that be can’t avoid these desires forever, even if there are enough sycophants out there who refuse to accept reality.
JMJ
mary said,
January 4, 2008 at 1:48 pm
thought you all might get a kick out of this double dipping story, I did. If Hillary wins in 2008 and Bill is ‘appointed’ to fill her Senate seat and either live to retire ‘they’ (together or alone) would get two US Presidential retirement checks, two US Senate retirement checks, and a retirement check from the State of Arkansas .
About the only thing they MIGHT NOT get is a Social Security check….but I wouldn’t bet on it….I understand ole Bill has earned $40,000,000 in the past six years.
What a guy!
AND THE REST OF THE STORY… Hilarious Rotten Clinton, as a New York State Senator, now comes under the ‘Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan,’ which means that even if she never gets reelected, she STILL receipt Yves her Congressional salary until she dies. (Would it not be nice if all Americans were pension eligible after only 4 years?)
If Bill outlives her, he then inherits HER salary until HE dies. He is already getting his Presidential salary until he dies. If Hillary outlives Bill, she also gets HIS salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that?
It’s common knowledge that in order for her to establish NY residency, they purchased a million dollar-plus house in upscale Chapeau, New York .
Makes sense!
They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life.
Still makes sense.
Here is where it becomes interesting. Their mortgage payments hover at around $10,000 per month. BUT, an extra residence ‘had’ to be built within the acreage to house the Secret Service agents
The Clinton’s charge the Federal government $10,000 monthly rent for the use of that extra residence, which is about equal to their mortgage payment. This means that we, the taxpayers, are paying the Clinton’s salary, mortgage, transportation, safety and security, as well as the salaries for their 12 man staff — and, this is all perfectly legal!
Who in their right mind would vote for this?
chris naron said,
January 4, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Eric,
I largely agree with the prevailing assessment that Huckabee’s success in Iowa is due to the evengelical vote. I also agree with your charicature of Huckabee. I don’t like the guy as a potential president.
However, Iowa helped him greatly. What Huckabee has needed all along is face time, and he’s going to get it in spades now. His personality and charm are his biggest assets, and now he gets to use them.
You and I may live in Southern California, but there’s a whole country between here and New York. I’ve lived there. Casual voters, as opposed to political nerds like us, are going to respond positively to his personality, His grasp of the issues people care about is strong enough not to distract from his likeability.
Our only hope against Hopeboy 2.0 is the fact that Fred might actually be finished with his morning cup of coffee and ready to head out to the fields. I wish I could say our best hope was your favorite baby doctor from Texas, but it looks like his campaign has no idea how to turn 22,000 committed voters into actual voters. I won’t let them make the same mistake in California.
I have a minivan.
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Who’s reality ? The one you concocted ?
I like the way you speak for everyone else’s reality.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
The poll, conducted in conjunction with Le Moyne College’s Center for Peace and Global Studies, showed that 29% of the respondents, serving in various branches of the armed forces, said the U.S. should leave Iraq “immediately,” while another 22% said they should leave in the next six months. Another 21% said troops should be out between six and 12 months, while 23% said they should stay “as long as they are needed.”
22+ 21+23 = 66% do not say ASAP !
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 2:53 pm
This poll shows a majority that doesn’t want out ASAP either.
Different branches had quite different sentiments on the question, the poll shows. While 89% of reserves and 82% of those in the National Guard said the U.S. should leave Iraq within a year, 58% of Marines think so. Seven in ten of those in the regular Army thought the U.S. should leave Iraq in the next year. Moreover, about three-quarters of those in National Guard and Reserve units favor withdrawal within six months, just 15% of Marines felt that way. About half of those in the regular Army favored withdrawal from Iraq in the next six months.
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 2:54 pm
And then there’s this from the Iraqi people (they count)
Click to access iraq.poll.4.28.pdf
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
If the Coalition left Iraq today, would you feel more safe or less safe?
More safe 28%-Less safe 53-No difference 12-Don’t Know 8
Do you think that Saddam Hussein would have been removed from power by Iraqis themselves if U.S. and British forces had not taken direct military action?
Yes 4%- No 89 -Don’t Know 6 -Refused 2
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 2:58 pm
And also.
CBS/NEW YORK/ New York Times poll
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
“When it comes to the war in Iraq, which of the following statements comes closer to your point of view? The most responsible thing we can do is find a way to withdraw most of our troops from Iraq by the beginning of 2009. The most responsible thing we can do is to remain in Iraq until the situation in the country is stable.
57% say withdraw by 2009
40% say remain in country til stable
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Which comes closest to your view about what the U.S. should now do about the number of U.S. troops in Iraq? The U.S. should send more troops to Iraq. The U.S. should keep the number of troops as it is now. The U.S. should withdraw some troops from Iraq. OR, The U.S. should withdraw all of its troops from Iraq.”
Send more Keep same Withdraw Withdraw
number 10 number 19 some 30 all 39
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 3:01 pm
The above came out all wrong. It states only 39 % want all troops out.
==================================================================
Looks like the numbers and the facts are just against you once again jersey.
WE ALL WANT OUT OF IRAQ ! But no one in their right mind things it should e ASAP.
because when you use the term “as soon as possible” the key word is “possible”.
Yes it is possible to leave in just days. But it would be highly irresponsible.
But that doesn’t matter does it ?
( sorry eric, had to break up the post a little )
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 3:50 pm
“Oh, and as for what Americans want – most think the war was a mistake and want out asap – most want universal healthcare – most want help with higher education – most believe the economy is heading in the wrong direction – etc.”
What exactly did I say here that you are controverting, Micky?
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 5:50 pm
You have to define “possible”
It possible for us to pack up all our guys in days and our equipment in weeks or a couple months.
The problem is that its not going to happen overnight as you suggest everyone wants.
And my research shows that the majority of Iraqis, Americans, amd servicemen dont want us to bail immediatley either.
As far as Socialized medicine goes, thats another description that should be used in its proper context. Not disquised as Universal health care, or CHIPS.
Theres a diffence between being concerned about the cost as opposed to the quality.
America wants to keep the quality, but not foot the bill.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/US/healthcare031020_poll.html
As noted, support for this universal system is conditional. If it limited Americans’ choice of doctors, support drops sharply, from 62 percent to 35 percent. Likewise, if it meant waiting lists for some non-emergency treatments, support falls to 39 percent.
As noted, personal experience with the current system is positive, which serves to temper all these concerns. Among all Americans — even those who lack coverage — large majorities express satisfaction with their quality of health care (85 percent), ability to see a doctor (83 percent), ability to see good specialists (78 percent) and ability to get the most sophisticated treatments (77 percent).
Among uninsured Americans these ratings are lower — but, perhaps surprisingly, still mostly positive: Sixty-nine percent rate the quality of their health care positively; 73 percent, their ability to see a doctor; 55 percent, their ability to see top-quality specialists; 58 percent, their ability to get the latest treatments.
You know what Jersey ? MOST people want everything like the little list you supplied.
We all want Whirled peas too.
The difference is that I know the public is not as dumb as you think they or I am.
This all comes with a price tag.
You need to be little more forthcoming when you say everybody wants something.
What people want and what they know is “possible” are two different things.
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 6:07 pm
I repeat my query, Micky.
I didn’t try to define “possible.”
I didn’t say the American people are dumb enough to expect or want “overnight” withdrawl from Iraq.
I didn’t say the American people wanted “socialized” medicine.
Please tell me what exactly you disagreed with.
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Give me your phone # I dont want anyone to hear what I’ve got to say to you. 😦
You imply that everyone wants out of Iraq, but you put no context to that statement as well as health care and education.
MOST ? Most of what americans ? the moonbats ?
Most of all of us ?
Most people want alot of things . But not unless certain conditions can be guaranteed.
You present it all as encompassing opinion. And that is just not true.
I can easily say most people want a million bucks.
So what ?
JMJ said;
“Really, Micky. What the hell did Reagan do for regular people like us? I’ll tell you what he did – NOTHING. He was a useless sack of ordure.”
Hmmm… Defeating the Soviet Union might be good for a start.
That was a war.
Uniting the west and east ?
Ridding us of the biggest threat our country faced since the 40s.
Hell of alot more than Carter ever did.
Jersey McJones said,
January 4, 2008 at 7:17 pm
“Hmmm… Defeating the Soviet Union might be good for a start.”
Yeah for Reagan. Neither did he defeat them nor did it matter to you and I. Got anything better than that?
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 4, 2008 at 7:42 pm
You asked one question, I gave you one answer.
Now let me ask you something.
How the hell do you know if what Reagan did for me mattered or not ?
Are we going back to your telekentic abilities again Jersey ?
How young are you ? Did you have to hide under your desk once a week performing drills ? I remember it all too well’
Your biggest fear in childhood was probably Kurt Cobains death. Or that Clinton actually wore underwear at all.
So please (explitive redacted) dont tell me what matters to me and what doesnt.
Just because you dont think so does not make it true its still a well documented fact in the anals of history that Reagans teqniques in strategy and spending crippled and collapsed the Soviet union.
I will quote former KGB General Oleg Kalugin
In 1980, the Soviet Union threatened the survival of the United States, her allies, and the very principle of self-government. In 1990, the Berlin Wall was gone, the Warsaw Pact had disintegrated in all but name, and the Soviet Union was only months away from ceasing to exist as a nation. The United States won what was, for all practical purposes, the “third world war.” Far from being accidental or, conversely, inevitable, this foreign policy triumph arguably resulted from a coherent strategic vision forged and implemented by American policy makers against much opposition and great odds; a triumph of the West, and a triumph for the foreign policy of Ronald Reagan.
==================================================================
At the famous Summit Meeting in Reykjavik Iceland in October 1986, Gorbachev practically begged Reagan to drop the SDI project. He offered to give in to all of the US demands on arms control in exchange for a promise to end “Star Wars”. But Reagan refused. And I think that is when Gorbachev knew the “Cold War” was over and that the USSR had lost.
==================================================================
Ronald Reagan’s 1984 visit to Normandy came just six months after the deployment of intermediate-range nuclear forces (INF) in five European countries. That action consummated a decision taken years before by a NATO alliance determined to counter the coercive threat posed by powerful Soviet SS-20 ballistic missiles. And it was achieved despite what was, arguably, the most sophisticated, well-financed, and determined political-warfare campaign ever waged against democratic nations, mounted by the Soviet Union and its sympathizers in Western Europe.
==================================================================
There ! Is that better ? probably not.
greg said,
January 5, 2008 at 1:50 am
Ah, Mary, if only your story about Hillary and Bill were true. It’s an urban legend floating around and totally false. Check it out at:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp.
Jersey McJones said,
January 5, 2008 at 7:43 am
The USSR was bound to collapse eventually, Micky. So whatever. It’s just another part of the mythology of Reagan.
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 5, 2008 at 9:52 am
JMJ said;
The USSR was bound to collapse eventually, Micky. So whatever. It’s just another part of the mythology of Reagan.”
The Soviets knew they had problems and their solutions to those problems were renderd useless by Reagan. Had Reagan not done what he had done the USSR could very well still be with us today.
And it didnt happen quite by accident or fate as you would like to try and sell that myth.
Reagan made it the center piece of his campaign by addressing them the “evil empire”. The USSR was in his sights since your favorite farce facad conspiracy theory the Hollywood blacklistings.
Your quite a character to even suggest that Reagans accomplishments are myths.
When you are…
#1 constantly shut down by hard fact always coming from me.
2# always claiming to know things about me and others that only God or myself could know.
#3 The biggest purveyer of myths I have ever known.
(A) Climate change (happens everyday since creation)
(B) Iraq is a “complete and utter failure” ( it was easy to prove that a myth)
(C) Bush has lied about Iraq and WMDs ( it was easy to prove that a myth)
(D) Our troops are not that educated ( it was easy to prove that a myth)
(E) Bush caused 911 (insane)
(F) terrorist are unruly children
(G) Americans are intensly stupid
(H) that I never read Carters book
( I) you know what matters to me.
This one is especially scary. It strongly spells out that you think you know what matters to people you dont really know. Sounds like big government nanny state thinking (if you call that thinking)
(J)( For Jersey ) Jersey knows for a fact that he has had more tail than me.
As far as Reagan goes… Everything you say is just a hateful opinion, and that is a fact. Because I have facts that prove your opinion to be just that.
You have nothing but suggestion, opoinion and hateful bias.
I have history, documents and mass concencous and agreement on my side.
Half your arguements are moot because they are always unprovable because as you say ” I cant prove a negative” Which really is a childish and unproductive approach to life.
I pick fights I can win because there is proof
You pick fights where there is no way to prove your point. Its like always having to prove something didnt happen.
This is why I am forever always shoving concrete facts and reliable sources in your face and you harldy ever have anything but opinion and heresay.
sdc said,
January 5, 2008 at 11:34 am
YOU HAVE MANY COMMENTS AND A VERY INTERSTING BLOG. MINE IS LESS VISITED AND I AM SOMETHING OF A NOVICE.
http://relentlesschurch-worldwide.blogspot.com/
chris naron said,
January 5, 2008 at 1:39 pm
The USSR was bound to collapse eventually, Micky. So whatever. It’s just another part of the mythology of Reagan.
JMJ
Yeah, like the USSR was in worse shape in the 1980s than in the 20s, 30s or 40s. What kept them alive when things were much worse would have kept them alive perpetually had it not been for Reagan, the Pope and Maggie Thatcher. When the Soviets found themselves screwed beyond recognition in decades past, they clamped down and used fear to keep things in order, And the West let them do it. Sometimes we even helped them out. That stopped with Reagan.
Also, who besides Ronald Reagan was saying back then that the USSR was anything but a superpower with whom we had to learn to get along?
Jersey McJones said,
January 5, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Chris,
The Soviets were under international pressures far greater than Reagan and Maggie and the Pope prior to the 80’s. The USSR was a large poor nation dominating a bunch of small poor nations and eventually it died. Continuous pressure from the USA certainly helped that along, but Reagan was no more a part of that than Churchill, or Carter, or Kennedy, or Eisenhower, or whoever. Communism has been non grata in America since the Second World War. Reagan just happened to be there for the end of the movie, that’s all.
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 5, 2008 at 5:04 pm
I like the way Jersey starts concieding in little ways.
First he says;
Micky. What the hell did Reagan do for regular people like us? I’ll tell you what he did – NOTHING. He was a useless sack of ordure. ”
And now its this;
Continuous pressure from the USA certainly helped that along,
Now he is certain that the USA being lead by Ronald Reagan helped it along.
Thats a far cry from when he earlier said “NOTHING”
And this;
“Reagan just happened to be there for the end of the movie, that’s all.”
And wouldnt it be just like hollywood and HUAC? he got rid if all the commies in the movies.
Plenty tried to put the nail in the coffin. But only Reagan could do it.
Thats like when you cant open a jar of pickles and then someone else does it for you and you say; “yea,so what? I loosened it up for you !
Reagan opened it and thats all that counts.
Jersey McJones said,
January 6, 2008 at 6:21 am
“he got rid if all the commies in the movies.”
You really do have a comic-book view of the world, don’t you?
JMJ
micky2 said,
January 6, 2008 at 8:40 am
JMJ said;
“You really do have a comic-book view of the world, don’t you?
Look whos talking !
I guess the view of our enemy as unruly children is a pretty realistic one huh ?
And Arnold always got the bad guy so what ?
I dont need comic books we have moonbats and socialist squirrels gone wild running around looking Circ D Solei on acid.
As a matter of fact the UN along with a bunch of socialist visionarys are going to start using comic books to do their dirty work.
“The comic, initially to be distributed free to 1m US schoolchildren, will be set in a war-torn fictional country and feature superheroes such as Spider-Man working with UN agencies such as Unicef and the “blue hats”, the UN peacekeepers.”
“The UN’s goals are somewhat different: according to its website, it hopes the comics will teach children the value of international co- operation and sensitise them to the problems faced in other parts of the world. “
For further reading on this > http://arclightzero.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/end-of-the-year-special-the-un-goes-after-your-kids/#comments
chris naron said,
January 6, 2008 at 8:44 pm
JMJ,
That’s total hindsight analysis. No one on the left was saying that then. And it’s not even correct in hindsight. I state again: The USSR had been through much harder times than the 1980s and they survived, They would have survived had it not been for Reagan.
a rose by any other name « Words By, and Of, Hillary Clinton said,
January 8, 2008 at 5:19 pm
[…] rose by any other name I had to post this because of the title, A Pope and a Hope! Huckleberry Hound and Obamarama met Andy Warhol!, but it would be worth reading regardless of the title. Here’s a sample… John Edwards […]