The Hill-Man's Blog

Please Enter Your Comments Below

You forgot a few prospective titles: -Pork: The Other Trite Stimulus Package -From Immigrant to President in 180 Days -Around the Bush: How to Place Blame and last but not least -How to Tax Friends and Impoverish People

Violating the Constitution is getting to be habit forming with these Liberal ass clowns. First they con America with a phony President who was not born here. Now they pass a blatantly unconstitutional law to retroactively tax the income of politically unpopular people. I guess since Congress votes on bills they never read, they might as well not read the Constitution too. CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW TAKING EFFECT RETROACTIVELY. It does not get much clearer than that, but apparently it needs to be a freight train or a ton of bricks before it makes a dent in the skull of a Liberal Congressman. These are the people who supposedly make and uphold the laws, not blatantly violate them. Oh wait, I forgot. Laws are for everyone else. Liberals are ABOVE THE LAW. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

This isn't his first book he's written, so you could argue among other things he's a writer. Obviously the first black president was going to get a book deal! So what’s you point? If the book comes out before he fixes things or things start to get noticeably better then you have an argument but for now I think your being petty. He has the TOUGHEST job right now with our country and the world eager to see how he’ll do and you want him to forgo his salary?! What would that do? Spark some kind of forward thinking where leaders of companies do the same for the greater good? I don’t see you forgoing your salary and your job is not nearly as tough. As far as Leno that's yet to be seen, I kind of like the fact he'll be in the hot seat and have to answer live. It’s not like he can solve the economic disaster we’re in at 11:30pm. I don’t remember hearing you complain LAST YEAR when your golden boy Bush was on Deal or No Deal. Pretty sure “the country [was] deeply involved in two wars-and mired in a “catastrophic” economic meltdown” last year as well. Just saying.

As for the faux-President going on the Tonight Show, the man is a low-class fraud who already proved he does not believe the Office holds any sacred dignity whatsoever. He showed that with his shabby dress, casual working hours and disregard for basic protocol. He showed it with his embarrassingly shoddy reception of British Prime Minister Brown. The Browns gave the Obamas thoughtful, historically significant, personalized gifts chosen to accent good will between the two new leaders. Obama gave the Browns a bag of DVDs. Obama couldn't bring himself to give up his precious Blackberry "just" to be President. He swore he "couldn't live without it," obviously unaware of how shockingly embarrassing we all found that too-candid admission to be. Liberal pundits and columnists have declared that Obama is so "great" that he's actually stepping DOWN to the Presidency. The implication of course is that (among the Left at least), Obama is the Messiah, and sitting in the Oval Office is necessarily a step down from god-hood. That's how disdainfully and disrespectfully the Left views the office. There's no surprise in that, since for the last 8 years they've been downright shocking in their denigration of the Presidency. Disrespect doesn't even begin to describe it. So by going on the Tonight Show Obama is not undermining the dignity of the Presidency because to him, the office does not enjoy any such lofty elevation. It's just a job. A powerful job, but nothing special in terms of dignity, respect, temperance or gravitas. Just a means to stroke an ego -- a particularly large and hungry ego. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

HILLMAN: SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT: YOU ARE "OUTRAGED" ABOUT OBAMA'S BOOK DEAL, YET YOU HAVE NOT PROBLEM WITH A.I.G. GETTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF BONUSES THAT THEY ALLEGEDLY "EARNED"? WHILE ON THE SUBJECT ,ALLOW ME TO PROVE FURTHER THAT YOUR HEROES AT A.I.G. ARE REALLY FRAUDULENT CRIMINALS. #1: ACCORDING TO NY ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW CUOMO, A.IG. STATED THAT "THE RETENTION OF INDIVIDUALS AT FINANCIAL PRODUCTS (WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR RUNNING THE FIRM INTO THE GROUND) WAS VITAL TO UNWINDING THE SUBSIDIARY'S BUSINESS" , YET THE CRIMINALS AT A.I.G HAVE BEEN UNWILLING TO PROVIDE THEIR NAMES, DESPITE A SUBPOENA FOR THE LIST, WHICH MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE THEIR CLAIM. #2: DESPITE THEIR CONTRACTS, THESE FINANCIAL PRODUCTS CRIMINALS AGREED TO TAKE 2009 SALARIES OF $1 IN EXCHANGE FOR RECEIVING THEIR RETENTION BONUS PACKAGES. THE FACT THAT A.I.G. COULD NEGOTIATE THE TERMS OF THE PAYMENTS, RENDERS BULLCRAP A.I.G'S ASSERTION THAT IT WAS "OBLIGATED TO PAY THE BONUSES BECAUSE OF EMPLOYEE CONTRACTS." YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU ARE OUT OF TOUCH AND HIDE BEHIND YOUR MICROPHONE AND RUN YOUR MOUTH ABOUT THINGS THAT YOU JUST AS MUCH ABOUT OR EVEN LESS THAN YOU CLAIM OTHERS KNOW. IS THERE NOW ANY WONDER WHY RADIO IS THE DYING MEDIUM THAT IT IS?

Gone with Wind. Its the perfect title. If the government can just go ahead and pass a law for these people to pay a 90% tax rate on their bonus who is to say that they won't turn around and do the same for the "regular" people i.e. tips and commissions. The government was aware of the bonus in the contracts before giving the bail out. AIG has multiple divisions, If John Smith worked his tail off to make his division successful then he should be compensated. Let's keep it simple. I work in retail, my shoe department could have a heck of day and exceed their sales goal but the rest of the store could have under preformed. Should my sales associates in the shoe depart who rely on commission not receive it because the rest of the store had a bad day? I think not. They earned their commission. It does not matter whether their base is minimum wage or $200,000. If their division made their goal they deserve to be compensated. The government never should have given money for these companies that mismanaged their business to begin with. And plese don't get me started on the indecency that Obama is showing our vets by suggesting their private health insurance cover injuries/illness they received while on ACTIVE duty! They would not have gotten their leg blown off if they had not been acting on the orders of their commander and chief, that would be you Mr. President!!! How dare he make such a suggestion! How dare anyone support it!!!

Hey Hillman, I used to look at other countries on the news, people protesting in the streets, throwing bottles, lighting flags on fire. I used to look at these countries as barbaric and out of control.Guess what!!!!! We take it in the ass every day...and always will until we get so fed up we are....that crazy country. What a joke our gov. is to bail thes idiots out and not set the rules. It's like me not being able to pay my mortagage ..you bailing me out...an then I go on vacation to Maine!!! But like I said BEND OVER AND GET READY....stop wasting airtime with what we think is right...It doesn't matter. I have to log off now because I have to go to bed so I can be functional in the morning and take care of America's most unwanted. Adios

Cocaine and Me; or How I Stole The Presidency With Ebonics and a Few Good Speeches

book title- "SI SE PUEDE!!" The new america

No he should not forgo his salary.I have often seen very left wing people begin accumulating wealth and as a result of this begin to swing toward center.It is amazing what proof of capitalism can do to reform the leftist mind. Look at Bill Clinton,he is far less liberal than he once was.I will admit that this view does not explain some of the moon bat wealthy in holly wood.Thanks from NH

SOME MORE ITEMS FOR HILLMAN AND HIS CULT BLIND CULT FOLLOWERS: HOW MANY PEOPLE KNOW THAT GEORGE W. BUSH (THE ONE WHO WAS PRESIDENT WHEN THE FIRST INSTALLMENT OF CORPORATE WELFARE THAT WENT TO CITIBANK, A.I.G AND THE OTHER CRIMINALS) IS GETTING 7 MILLION DOLLARS FROM CUSTOM HOUSE FOR HIS BOOK DEAL? SPEAKING OF CITBANK (THE COMPANY THAT AMERICAN TAXPAYERS OWN 80% OF), HOW MANY KNOW THAT THEIR CEO VIKRAM PANDIT (HE OF THE FAMOUS QUOTE: "I GET THE NEW REALITY AND I WILL MAKE SURE CITIBANK GETS IT TOO") GOT AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COSTED $10 MILLION DOLLARS? THIS ITEM SHOULD END THE CRYING ABOUT THE COST OF DEVAL PATRICK'S OFFICE REMODELING, ETC. TO MICHAEL (THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): "LIBERALS ARE ABOVE THE LAW"? YOUR CRIMINAL HEROES AT THE FIRMS LISTED ABOVE THAT RECEIVED ALL OF THAT CORPORATE WELFARE MUST BE ULTRA LIBERAL, SEEING AS THEY HAVE LIED TO THE S.E.C, CONGRESS, AS WELL AS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, WHOSE BACKS THEY GOT RICH OFF OF.

HOW MANY PEOPLE KNOW THAT GEORGE W. BUSH (THE ONE WHO WAS PRESIDENT WHEN THE FIRST INSTALLMENT OF CORPORATE WELFARE THAT WENT TO CITIBANK, A.I.G AND THE OTHER CRIMINALS) IS GETTING 7 MILLION DOLLARS FROM CUSTOM HOUSE FOR HIS BOOK DEAL? Right. He took that money as an advance on a book he hadn't written yet WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT? No. So the two things are not even comparable. You do understand the difference between an ex-President getting a book deal and a SITTING President getting a book deal. Right, Matty? SPEAKING OF CITBANK (THE COMPANY THAT AMERICAN TAXPAYERS OWN 80% OF), HOW MANY KNOW THAT THEIR CEO VIKRAM PANDIT (HE OF THE FAMOUS QUOTE: “I GET THE NEW REALITY AND I WILL MAKE SURE CITIBANK GETS IT TOO”) GOT AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COSTED $10 MILLION DOLLARS? THIS ITEM SHOULD END THE CRYING ABOUT THE COST OF DEVAL PATRICK’S OFFICE REMODELING, ETC. Why do special olympians like Bratty Matty always think that because one guy does something wrong, that must make every wrong perfectly all right? So two guys screwed the taxpayers? That does not excuse Cadillac Deval, Matty old queen. It makes them BOTH WRONG. What a glorious concept, huh? “LIBERALS ARE ABOVE THE LAW”? YOUR CRIMINAL HEROES AT THE FIRMS LISTED ABOVE THAT RECEIVED ALL OF THAT CORPORATE WELFARE MUST BE ULTRA LIBERAL, SEEING AS THEY HAVE LIED TO THE S.E.C, CONGRESS, AS WELL AS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, WHOSE BACKS THEY GOT RICH OFF OF. If Bratty Matty the cyber queen were capable of rational thought, he would know that these AIG execs are nobody's heroes. Conservatives uniformly rejected the very concept of bailouts, or "corporate welfare." It was the Liberals who rammed that golden gem down the taxpayers' throats. Funny how Scatty Matty never does comprehend that particular fact. But then if he could deal with reality, he wouldn't BE a Liberal. How's my ass taste, Matty? Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican. PS btw, Catty Matty if anyone's gutless around here it's you Liberals. You're the ones who always want to steal other peoples' money in the name of financial security so you don't have to face the realities of life. Don't you think it's time to grow up, cut your mommy's apron strings and be a real man?

Just wanted to say that I'm a fairly new listener - moved to MA from TX and I listen to your show fairly regularly at work. While I may not agree with everything you say, I do enjoy listening to different perspectives. If there is anything I can say about the people of New England, it's that they are very "passionate" indeed... ;) I always feel bad for Spaz, though. He takes an incredible amount of abuse! @ Matt: I'm sure this is not the first time you have been asked this but what's with the caps? I am all for e-debate and such but you can totally do it without coming off as completely obnoxious. Cool points, though, for being able to spell and form sentences!

Hey Matt, Who contributed the largest sums of money to the Democratic National Convention? AIG, Citibank, Lehman Brothers, hey look at that the majority of the list are banks that are getting massive payouts. Who contributed millions of dollars to Obama? That's right, Acorn, the company he wants to sell the federal census to. Hmm, who else? Oh look, Barney Frank took a few million in gifts to his campaigns from Citi and AIG. Lynch, same thing. Let's talk about Lynch. Lynch is the one who added the amendment to allow the bonusing in the first place. Wow. Who passed the majority of the Real Estate deregulation writs. Had to be a republican, who was it? Right, Clinton. Good ole Bill. If you want to place blame, be unilateral about it. And for God's sake turn off the caps lock.

MATT- I CANT ARGUE THAT CORRUPTION IS EVERYWHERE. I AGREE THAT EVERY AMERICAN INCLUDING YOURSELF CARES ABOUT THE SIZE OF HIS WALLET. I'M NOT HEAR TO BASH ANY PRESIDENT. BUSH HAD IT PRETTY SHITTY, AND HE DID WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS RIGHT WHETHER YOU AGREE OR NOT HE IS A FATHER TOO. LIKEWISE OBAMA HAS DONE THE IMPOSSIBLE BECOMING PRESIDENT AND BEATING THE ODDS. BUT IS IT NOT TRUE THAT MORE PEOPLE VOTE ON AMERICAN IDOL THAN ON POLITICAL ELECTIONS? HILLMAN HAS A POINT. HE DOES HAVE A NERO LAIDBACK ATTITUDE. WE JUST SPENT MORE MONEY THAN EVER BEFORE BETWEEN BAILOUTS AND STIMULUS PACKAGES. OUR CHILDREN AND OUR CHILDRENS CHILDERN ARE IN FOR A WORLD OF HURT. THIS IS WEALTH WE DONT HAVE. WE STILL ARE THE BEST INVESTMENT COUNTRY EVER BECASUE EVERY MAJOR COUNTRY IS OUR CUSTOMER. CHINA WILL ALWAYS LET US BORROW MONEY. BUT IS THAT WHAT AMERCIA WAS FOUNDED ON? WHO TAUGHT THE JAPANESE HOW TO MAKE CARS? HOW MANY WORLD WARS HAVE WE BAILED EARTH OUT OF? STILL PEOPLE HAT US. OBAMA IS A KNOWN SOCIALIST. YOU CANT ARGUE THAT. THE THINGS THAT MAKE THIS COUNTRY GREAT AND THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE IT GREAT MEANING THE 50% OF THE POPULATION THAT PAY TAXES ARE GOING TO BE FORCED TO WORK HARDER FOR THOSE THAT EITHER CHOOSE OR HAVE NO CHOICE TO DO NOTHING. I DON'T MIND WATCHING MY TAXES GO TO WELFARE. BUT TO WATCH A BILL GET PASSED WITH 9000 EARMARKS ON IT AFTER HE SWORE HE WOULD NEVER DO IT MAKES ME WONDER HOW HONEST HE IS. MY POINT IS THE 30% OF THE COUNTRY THAT TRULY UNDERSTANDS WHAT USA MEANS WILL ALWAYS KEEP IT ON ITS TOES NO MATTER WHAT THE MASSES THINK IS RIGHT OR WRONG. ALL I KNOW IS THAT IF THIS COMES BACK TO DRINK MY BLOOD MANY YEARS FROM NOW. I WILL SIMMPLY PICK UP MY COUNTRY AND PUT IT BACK ON ITS FEET ALONG WITH EVERYONE ELSE THAT UNDERSTANDS MY PASSION.

HOW ABOUT WAR CRIMES, LIES, AND THE MANIPULATION OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT - FORWARD BY ALBERTO GONZALEZ?

Hate to say "I told you so" but we did. We tried to warn you Liberal jackasses, but would you listen? Hell no. So now here we are, with Obama and his Socialist goons trying to take over the entire economy. Don't take my word for it, read all about here in his official newspaper: New York Times -- Administration Seeks Increase in Oversight of Economy "The Obama administration will call for increased oversight of executive pay at all banks, Wall Street firms and possibly other companies as part of a sweeping plan to overhaul financial regulation, government officials said. The government does such a magnificent job of running the Postal Service, Amtrak, Medicaid and Medicare, Social Security, the IRS and itself that it wants to take over the entire frigging ECONOMY??? Are these people smoking crack??? This is the stupidest idea in the history of Man. The only thing that could possibly be worse than this is if we put Spaz in charge of it all. Enough is too much already. Time to rein in these Socialist dragoons before we wake up to find it's too late. These people are on some kind of ego-fueled power trip and they are out to grab everything they can. Wake up! Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

Divorce Decree writen by a student!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL PUT AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE IT'S BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM. Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al: We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way. Here is a model separation agreement: Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them). We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .. You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N.. but we will no longer be paying the bill. We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find. You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World. We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in 15 years. Sincerely, John J. Wall Law Student and an American P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you. __________________

Congratulations to Spaz for so clearly and accurately stating the Liberal theory of economics. This is the mindset we currently have running the country, the Spaz Fairness Doctrine. Under this plan, everyone gets paid $10k a month, from the top CEO to the imbecile who mops the floors. That's "fair." But it's only "fair" to those who do not comprehend what money IS. Fools like Spaz and Matty believe that money is just numbers, imaginary stuff that doesn't really mean anything. They believe that if we have greater numbers of this imaginary stuff -- more money -- then we have greater wealth. That is not so. Let's have a world of Spaz's utopia, wherein everybody makes $10k a month. Ah, but that money has to come from somewhere. It does not just appear out of thin air. You can't just print more money and expect that you are richer. The VALUE of the money has to come from somewhere. Money does come from somewhere. It comes from trade. Every monetary transaction, whether it's a $100 billion bank merger or a McDouble with fries, is a transaction that creates wealth. In the burger example, you've taken some materials -- a bit of meat, some bread, lettuce, etc -- and put them together to make a product that people are willing to pay money for. You take 50 cents worth of materials and put them together, sell them for a dollar. You just created wealth. But if we allow the government to come in an arbitrarily declare that from now on, no matter how much wealth you create, you will earn only $10k month, then money is instantly meaningless. They've declared that no matter how many burgers you sell, you cannot get ahead, earn more, make more money than you did before. It's always $10k a month. Spaz would say, "That's great because anyone can live on that much money, that's enough money." That's false. What fools like Spaz fail to realize is that when you arbitrarily pay the mop guy $10k a month, that money has to come from somewhere. In order for the company to HAVE $10k a month to suddenly pay the mop guy (who was making $10/hour before) they have to raise their prices up to whatever levels are needed to pay the mop guy this new arbitrary salary. So instead of a McDouble costing $1, now it costs $4,000. Get it? That's called Inflation. That's what happens whenever the government arbitrarily declares the minimum wage must be raised. The people making minimum wage THINK they're richer because they're making higher numbers of money than before, but in reality because the costs of every business just went way up due to the wage increase, prices all go up as well, and the people earning minimum wage aren't really making out any better. But other people are actually POORER after the minimum wage goes up, because the money they were making is suddenly worth less than it was before minimum wage was increased. If you were making $20/hr before the minimum wage went up, you were making four times the minimum, but now the minimum is $10/hour so you're only making double that. You just LOST ground, yet you cling to the foolish Liberal belief that this is "fair." BTW, Matty and Spaz both believe in the Marxist doctrine that the worker is being exploited by the corporations. Whether Spaz knows it or not, that belief is STRAIGHT out of the Communist Manifesto. It's built on a lie. The lie is that the owners of these companies just sit back and get fat off the backs of the workers. The reality is the owners are the only ones taking risks with their money. Workers show up, do their jobs, collect their paychecks, and go home to whine about how "exploited" they are. The owners are the ones who invest the money in these companies, risking their hard-earned money on the future of the company. If the company does well, the workers keep their jobs and maybe get a raise. If the company fails, the workers get jobs elsewhere. If the company does well, the owners get a reward for risking their money in investments with the company. If it fails, the owners lose their money along with their companies. It's completely dishonest to say that the workers bust their asses to make the "fat cat" owners rich. The fact is, if the owners were not taking the huge risks of investing in these companies, the workers would not have jobs to complain about. THAT is the truth. The entire Liberal worldview is like trying to sit a bunch of 3-year olds at the kitchen table. The minute you try to give them cookies, you've got a drama scene on your hands because 3-year olds are utterly selfish and cannot reason. They scream and bang their feet because "he got more milk than I got, it's not fair!" and "You gave her a bigger cookie than I got, that's not fair!" It's never "thank you for the milk and cookies." Liberals are all 3 years old and filled with envy, but they never stop to think about where the milk and cookies are coming from. When I was a kid my dad owned a Chevy. The guy next door, who owned property, drove a Buick, which meant he had a lot more money. The guy my dad worked for drove a Cadillac. Spaz would look at that and whine that it's not fair for the owner to drive a Cadillac, because my dad works as hard as that guy. They should both drive Chevys -- or when Spaz is in a greedy mood, he says they should both drive Caddies. But I was not raised that way. I was raised to believe that if I worked hard, maybe I would own a Cadillac someday too. That's the American way, and that's the American Dream: if you work hard, you have a chance to move up in life. Dinesh Desouza is a writer who was born in India. His parents came to America when he was a boy. He remembers what it was like in India, and he's grateful that his family moved here. Not because they were starving in India. His mother was a teacher and his father was a doctor or something. They lived well in India. But Mr. Desouza has traveled the world and he has seen for himself that people in every other country on Earth all want to come to America. Why? The pat answer, he says, is that "people want to live in a country where the poor people are fat." But there's a lot more to it than that. It's not simply greed that makes people want to live here. It's opportunity. He says, "If I had stayed in India, I would have gone to a university near my home, married a girl from own town and church, gotten a job not unlike my father's, and acquired a whole set of values and beliefs that could be pretty accurately predicted in advanced simply by looking at my family's station in life. In America, I have FAR greater opportunity. I write books and go on lecture tours and I make far more money than my parents do. I hold very different opinions on politics and other things because I have traveled the world. None of this would have been possible in India." Introducing the arbitrary concept of "fairness" to American industry renders the whole notion of opportunity utterly vacant. In seeking to impose an artificial and frankly unattainable Socialist doctrine on Americans, we strip them of their opportunities to excel. When the rewards are predetermined, what reason is there to strive harder, work longer hours, invest your money? No reason at all, and that's why Socialism is a false doctrine. It has never worked. It CANNOT work, because at its very core it denies reality. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

TO MICHAEL (THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): THE MANIFESTO THAT YOU JUST WROTE SEEMS FAMILIAR, MUCH LIKE THE REASONS THE BELIEFS THAT ADOLPH HITLER EXPRESSED IN HIS BOOK MEIN KAMPF. THE DIFFERENCE IS YOU STATED YOUR BELIEFS IN A LONG, MEANDERING, RAMBLING, BORING SOLILOQUY. SOME OF THE EXACT COMPLAINTS YOU HAVE ARE THE SAME THAT THE NAZIS STATED AND JUST LIKE YOU THEY USED LIES AND PROPOGANDA TO SPREAD THEIR MESSAGE. FIRST OF ALL, WE ARE NOWHERE NEAR BEING ANYTHING RESEMBLING A "SOCIALIST STATE", BUT YOU BIGOTED CONSERVATIVES CAN'T PLAY THE "COMMUNISM"CARD ANYMORE, SO YOU PUT THE NEXT BEST LABEL ON ANY PERON OR POLICY THAT YOU DON'T AGREE WITH. IF OBAMA'S POLICIES ARE "SOCIALISM", THEN WHAT DO YOU CALL BAILIN GOUT A COMPANY LIKE CITIGROUP, WHOSE CEO GOT AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COST $10 MILLION??? HOW ABOUT THE $400 MILLION THEY PAID TO PUT THEIR NAME ON SHEA STADIUM, AFTER THEY RECEIVED THE FIRST INSTALLMENT OF CORPORATE WELFARE? BUT OF COURSE YOU ANSWER TO THIS IS THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS "CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT" BECAUSE THESE CORRUPT INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE DESTROYED OUR CREDIT MARKETS ALLEGEDLY "WORKED HARD" TO ATTAIN THEIR POSITION, WHICH UNDER YOUR DOCTRINE GIVES THEM CATE BLANCHE TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, NO MATTER HOW ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL. REGARDING YOUT STUPID CONCEPT OF THE "MOP GUY MAKING 10K A MONTH": IT IS NOT ONLY SALARIES THAT "HAVE TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE" IT IS ALSO THE TRIPS AND PERKS THAT THE CEOS AND EXECUTIVES USE THAT HAVE TO "COME FROM SOMEWHERE" AS WELL, AND IN THE CASE OF A.I.G, CITIBANK, ETC. IT HAS COME ON THE BACK OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER, AS WELL AS THROUGH CORRUPT ACCOUNTING PRACTICES, WHICH HOPEFULLY THESE CRIMINALS WILL BE TOSSED IN JAIL FOR. FURTHER, IF THE OWNER OF YOUR MYTHICAL BUSINESS IN WHICH "MOP GUYS" MAKE 10K DOES NOT LIKE PAYING THAT WAGE, HE SHOULD LET THESE "MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR MOP PEOPLE" GO, AND DO THE MOPPING HIMSELF. WHILE HE IS AT IT, HE CAN DO ALL OF THE OTHER MAINTENANCE AND CUSTODIAL WORK THAT IS BENEATH HIM AND IS DONE BY PEOPLE THAT HE HAS BEEN MAKING UNINFORMED HATEFUL JUDGMENTS ABOUT HIS WHOLE LIFE. LET'S SEE HOW MUCH OF A "GENIUS" THIS EXECUTIVE IS WHEN THE TRASH PILES UP AND THERE ARE RATS INFESTING THE OFFICES. WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IS THAT THE TAXPAYERS OF THE UNITED STATES SHOULD WAKE UP TO THE CORRUPTION THAT THESE ALLEGED "HARD WORKING BUSINESS EXECUTIVES" HAVE FORCED UPON US, AND PHYSICALLY REMOVE THEM ALL FROM POWER IF THE GOVERNMENT WILL NOT DO SO BY LEGISLATION. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY THESE CRIMINAL EXECUTIVES WILL BE PREVENTED FROM EXPLOITING, AND GETTING RICH OF THE BACK OF THOSE THAT ARE BENEATH THEM.

TO JUSTIN BUSA AND HIS WATER CARRYING LAW STUDENT: IS THAT A PROMISE? ARE YOU CONSERVATIVES REALLY GOING TO LEAVE AND DO US ALL A FAVOR? THAT WOULD BE THE ANSWER WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR ALL THIS TIME. ONE NOTE OF CAUTION GENIUS BOY: SEEING AS DIVIDING EVERYTHING UP WILL BE PERCEIVED AS "SOCIALISM" BY YOU, MICHAEL (THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE), HILLMAN AND OTHERS, YOU GET NOTHING!!! OR , YOU RUN THE RISK OF LOOKING LIKE EVEN BIGGER HYPOCRITES THEN YOU ALREADY ARE.

Matty, here's a little advice, off the topic of politics, personally from me to you. In the future don't pretend to know things you don't really know. People can tell when you're doing that, and you just look like a liar. For instance, when you try to sound like you've read Mein Kampf or that you've ever actually heard one of Hitler's speeches. Because when you do stuff like that you put your ignorance on display for all to see. It's dishonest. And the only thing you've got going for you here is your sincerity. As for whether Mein Kampf contained any capitalist arguments, you can't possibly be serious. See, if you had ACTUALLY read the book instead of merely pretending that you read it, you'd know the whole thing was a populist tome intended to appeal to labor with bastardized Marxist platitudes. Hitler's speeches were loaded with Marxist twaddle and ultra-nationalist pandering. The man was a die-hard Socialist, first and foremost. He implemented Socialist labor reforms, many of which still exist in Germany. He put through myriad programs that any self-respecting Liberal in America today would drool over -- environmental programs, health programs (the Nazis were the original anti-smoking crusaders), temperance, "fair" wage laws, safety programs, and so forth. So please stop with the made-up crap trying to link Capitalism with Nazism. The two could not be farther apart. If you want to make a sane and realistic comparison, let's discuss the differences (few) between Fascism and Communism. Let's discuss how they are both offshoots of Socialism. Let's discuss how the American Left has a long and deeply dishonorable history of embracing all three of those dystopian nightmares. I noticed your 3-year old whining "rebuttal" did not address even one key point thing I made. You wasted three tedious paragraphs bitching about perks and sounding like Spaz with his penis envy arguments. "If the CEOs don't want to pay the mop guy ten grand they can let the top brass go and then mop the floors themselves." That's a fine example of a typical Liberal argument based on an astonishing lack of comprehension of how business works, what money is, and why you can earn a larger number of dollars and still be significantly poorer than a guy who earns half as much money as you. But that's a complicated concept for a 3-year old to grasp, so it's not surprising that Liberals just can't do it. As for who's gutless, Matty, you're still hiding behind an anonymous first name. And you're still advocating Mommy government. Why don't you put it out there for everyone to see, and cut the apron strings like a man? Don't worry, we all know why. It's because Liberals are really girls, deep down in the ballsack where it counts. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

Hillman>>I am a moron for thinking that maybe the President shouldn’t go on a late night talk show to kibbutz with Jay Leno while the country is deeply involved in two wars-and mired in a “catastrophic” economic meltdown. I actually agree with you here (particularly the moron part). He should not have gone on Leno. The problem is that you've been such a "drama queen" on this the past few days. The guy was on Leno trying to be "witty," and spontaneous and failed miserably. He would not be the first, and certainly not the last. He apologized, almost immediately. If I had to choose betwen the "special olympics" comment, and "mission accomplished," I think I'd chose the former. Get a grip. Ted

TO MICHAEL (THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): FIRST OF ALL, MY NAME IS MATT SMIALEK AND THAT IS MY REAL NAME, MORON. ALSO, I HAVE A DEGREE IN HISTORY WITH A CONCENTRATION ON 20TH CENTURY HISTORY (SPECIFICALLY THE HOLOCAUST), SO ANYTIME YOU WANT TO COMPARE KNOWLEDGE OF THAT TIME PERIOD, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO MAKE YOU LOOK MORE CLUELESS THAN YOU ALREADY ARE. I HAVE READ MEIN KAMPF AND I DO FIND MANY SIMILARITIES IN YOU VIEWS OF PEOPLE IN LOWER INCOME CATEGORIES AND THE DARWINISTIC VIEW THAT HITLER AND THE NAZIS HAD OF THOSE THAT WERE POOR, DISABLED,ETC. THE NAZIS WOULD SHOW PROPAGANDA FILMS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IN NATURE TO THOSE THAT HAVE DIFFICULTY SURVIVING FOR WHATEVER REASON (FINANCIALLY OR OTHERWISE), AND HOW SAID INDIVIDUALS "ARE A DANGER TO THE PROSPERITY OF ANY STRONG SOCIETY", ETC. AS FOR "ULTRA NATIONALIST PANDERING" THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU CONSERVATIVES DO WHEN YOU STATE THAT BARACK OBAMA'S POLICIES AS WELL AS THE BELIEFS OF LIBERALS, ARE GOING TO CHANGE OUR SOCIETY FROM A DEMOCRACY TO THAT OF A SOCIALIST STATE. "ULTRA NATIONALIST PANDERING" IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU CONSERVATIVES ENGAGED IN OVER THE LAST 8 YEARS, WHEN ANYONE THAT DARED SPEAK OUT AGAINST THINGS SUCH AS THE WAR IN IRAQ, WARANTLESS WIRETAPPING, PLACING PEOPLE IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THEIR POLITICAL VIEWS, OR OTHER POLICIES OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS LABELED "UNAMERICAN", OR A "TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER". "ULTRA NATIONALIST PANDERING" IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU CONSERVATIVES ENGAGED IN WHEN YOU CALLED BARACK OBAMA A MUSLUM AND AN "AL QUEADA PLANT" I DON'T NEED TO READ YOUR RAMBLING DISSERTATION TO KNOW THAT IT CONTAINS THE SAME PROPAGANDA, JUST WORDED DIFFERENTLY. YOU SIMPLY USE MANY PARAGRAPHS TO SAY THAT INDIVIDUALS THAT MAKE LESS THAN $200,000 A YEAR, WHO ARE NOT THE LEADERS OF COMPANIES SUCH AS A.I.G (AND WHO HAVE PROCEEDED TO RUN SAID COMPANIES INTO THE GROUND YET STILL WANT BONUSES FOR SUCH INEPTITUDE) ARE SOMEHOW RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC CRISIS. YOU CALL ME STUPID? WHILE YOU SAY SOMETHING LIKE: " you can earn a larger number of dollars and still be significantly poorer than a guy who earns half as much money as you." I KNOW I REALLY HAVE YOU BACKED INTO A CORNER WHEN YOU WHEEL OUT SUCH A PATHETIC, DELUSIONAL ARGUMENT. ACTUALLY I WILL DO YOU ONE BETTER: THAT IS A SCARY ARGUMENT, AND PROVES THE LENGTHS THAT YOU WILL GO TO BLAME THOSE THAT YOU, HILLMAN, AND OTHER CONSIDER DEADBEATS. OF COURSE, WHEN IN DOUBT YOU CAN ALWAYS ENGAGE IN THIS SHOPWORN, TIRED ARGUMENT, THE ONE MADE FAMOUS ON THE PLAYGROUND WHEN WE WERE IN THIRD GRADE: "It’s because Liberals are really girls, deep down in the ballsack where it counts." THAT IS WHAT IT ALWAYS COMES DOWN TO WITH YOU CONSERVATIVES. IT WAS THE COMMUNISM LABEL FROM THE 50'S THROUGH THE 80'S. COMMUUNISM IS DEAD, SO NOW ANYONE THAT SPEAKS OUT AGAINST BANKRUPT CONSERVATIVE BELIEFS IS A "SOCIALIST"(DESPITE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE NO CLUE AS TO HOW SOCIALISM WORKS). WHEN THAT FAILS, THE "LIBERALS HAVE NO BALLS" WARHORSE CAN ALWAYS BE WHEELED OUT. IT ALWAYS COMES BACK TO THE SAME PROPAGANDA WITH YOU RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS, AND THE HATRED IS THINLY VEILED. JUST LIKE OTHER LIARS AND PROPAGANDISTS THAT DESTROYED A CONTINENT AND NEARLY THE WORLD MANY YEARS AGO.

Again, dont confuse matty caps with the facts. they make his head hurt. you can tell by reading his rants that he has no idea how the real world works. Logic is lost on him.

Matty, it's painfully obvious to everyone here that you do NOT read. You skim. That's probably how you could "read" a book that is bursting with Marxist platitudes and come away with the completely baffling notion that it's a Capitalist love-fest. As for "ultra-nationalist pandering" I'm sorry that you don't want to put any effort into these exchanges, but if you had you would know that in Hitler's Germany, nationalism was the extreme protectionism exerted by the government for Germans against the rest of the world. Nationalism is the near-religious belief that one's own country is inherently superior to every other. This belief typically extends to economic policies, as protectionism is usually justified by an "us before them" mentality not unlike "me against the world." That's why the Nazi Party was originally called the National Socialist Party. But of course, you already knew all that, since you have a degree in History with a focus on the 20th century. Right? As for name-calling, I wouldn't get too self-righteous on that front, Matty ol' Queen. Remember, it was you who ran around here calling everyone else "gay" when you couldn't address their arguments. The irony of that apparently was not lost on you since you stopped doing it (after someone pointed the irony out to you, of course, and made you aware of the hypocrisy, but then Liberals never see their own hypocrisy -- they're too blinded by their self-righteousness). As for "JUST LIKE OTHER LIARS AND PROPAGANDISTS THAT DESTROYED A CONTINENT AND NEARLY THE WORLD MANY YEARS AGO" would that be Communism you're referring to? I know it's popular among the ignorant Left today to pretend that Communism is dead, but there are roughly a billion and a half Chinese who would disagree. And then there's that pesky Vlad Putin. You might have heard of him, hard-line Communist, currently tyrant-in-chief over there in Russia? He's trying mighty hard to bring back Communism. What did you suppose that whole dust-up over there in Georgia was all about last year? You had heard about that, hadn't you? As for Conservatives doing "evil" in the world, let's see which has done more good. Let's see how many people murdered in the name of Socialism? 150 million, conservatively speaking. Number of people murdered in the name of Capitalism? Zero. Number of people Liberated by peace activists chanting "make love not war"? Zero. Number of people Liberated by the American military? Hundreds of millions. Number of people who starve to death annually due to the squalor caused by Capitalism? Zero. Number who starve due to Socialism? More than 50 million EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Number of people risking their lives to sneak into countries like Russia, China, France, Venezuela, Iran, North Korea and all these other countries you Leftist morons love so much? Zero. Number of people who will risk their lives to sneak into America? 6 billion and climbing every day. I guess you're right, it's a pretty close call. Michael. Michael.

YOU CALL ME STUPID? WHILE YOU SAY SOMETHING LIKE: ” you can earn a larger number of dollars and still be significantly poorer than a guy who earns half as much money as you.” I KNOW I REALLY HAVE YOU BACKED INTO A CORNER WHEN YOU WHEEL OUT SUCH A PATHETIC, DELUSIONAL ARGUMENT. ACTUALLY I WILL DO YOU ONE BETTER: THAT IS A SCARY ARGUMENT, AND PROVES THE LENGTHS THAT YOU WILL GO TO BLAME THOSE THAT YOU, HILLMAN, AND OTHER CONSIDER DEADBEATS. Seriously? I had expected you would just gloss right over that one, rather than admit your ignorance on the subject of monetary theory, but you're really going to challenge that one? Okay. Fine with me! Here's how it works. You live in Massachusetts and you earn $10/hr. You can buy a loaf of bread for $2, which means you have to work 1/5th of an hour to buy a loaf of bread. 12 minutes. Spaz lives in New York City doing the exact same job you do. He makes $25/hr. So he's richer than you, right? But wait. The cost of living is much higher in NYC, so he has to pay $8 for a loaf of bread. That's 1/3rd of an hour. 20 minutes. You make $20k a year and Spaz makes almost $50k but he's actually poorer than you are because the cost of living is so much higher. GET IT NOW?? It has nothing to do with how much you make. The ONLY thing that matters is how much you can buy with it. Michael.

RICH: LOGIC MUST BE LOST ON YOU TOO, BECAUSE NONE OF YOU HAVE COME UP WITH A COHERENT, LOGICAL ARGUMENT AS TO WHY IT IS OKAY THAT COMPANIES LIKE A.I.G,ETC. GET BILLIONS IN CORPORATE WELFARE(THE FIRST INSTALLMENTS OF WHICH WERE PROVIDED UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH), WHILE THE CEO AT CITIBANK UPGRADES HIS OFFICE TO THE TUNE OF $10 MILLION. YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED AN ARGUMENT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T.

LAST 8 YEARS, WHEN ANYONE THAT DARED SPEAK OUT AGAINST THINGS SUCH AS THE WAR IN IRAQ, Dared speak out? You mean the highly dangerous and surreptitious NINETY PERCENT OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA that constantly ripped the Bush administration, everything the President did or said, the entire war effort, and our own troops? That daring? You really do live in a fantasy world, Matty. WARANTLESS WIRETAPPING, Let's get that straight, since you are insanely ignorant on this stuff. Nobody in America had their phones tapped without cause. What's the big deal, really? The government can come listen to my phone calls if it makes the country safer from terrorists. They can sit through all the boring crap about my sister's family in FLA, the goofy shit with my kids, the corny stuff with my wife and the dull details of my work. I have nothing to hide. They can listen to it all, if that's what it takes to keep terrorists from blowing up any more innocent civilians. But that's not even what's happening. The mainstream media made it sound like Dick Cheney was maniacally eavesdropping on every American's phone conversations. That's not even remotely what happened. They tapped the phones of suspected terrorists and then went back and got warrants for the wiretaps. What's the big deal? Why are you Liberals ALWAYS opposed to every counter-terrorism measure? PLACING PEOPLE IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THEIR POLITICAL VIEWS, So now that Obama is doing far worse, you'll be sure and bitch about that, right? You Liberals are pathetic. OR OTHER POLICIES OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS LABELED “UNAMERICAN”, OR A “TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER”. Liberals opposed wiretapping, interrogation, detaining terrorists, investigating suspected terrorists and even heightened security at likely targets. Liberals opposed even CALLING terrorists by that word. Even when we broke up clear and well financed terrorist cells in America, you Liberals insisted on ridiculing the operations. You called the Fort Dix plot "immature, long on talk but short on action," as though nothing that was not actually firing bullets was not a real plot. The Muslims were caught buying tens of thousands of dollars worth of automatic weapons from undercover operatives, and the New York Times reported the story as though they were innocent school boys framed by savage Right-wing extremists. Liberals are literally insane when it comes to terrorists. “ULTRA NATIONALIST PANDERING” IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU CONSERVATIVES ENGAGED IN WHEN YOU CALLED BARACK OBAMA A MUSLUM AND AN “AL QUEADA PLANT” You probably shouldn't try to use words whose meanings you don't understand. I mean, you can do whatever you want, but it really makes you look like a moron. Just saying.... Michael.

NONE OF YOU HAVE COME UP WITH A COHERENT, LOGICAL ARGUMENT AS TO WHY IT IS OKAY THAT COMPANIES LIKE A.I.G,ETC. GET BILLIONS IN CORPORATE WELFARE(THE FIRST INSTALLMENTS OF WHICH WERE PROVIDED UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH), WHILE THE CEO AT CITIBANK UPGRADES HIS OFFICE TO THE TUNE OF $10 MILLION. YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED AN ARGUMENT BECAUSE YOU CAN’T. That's called a Straw Man, Matty. That's a good nickname for you. Straw Man Matty. I like that. Look, dude, nobody is saying the bailouts were okay. In fact, Conservatives were practically violent in opposing the bailouts. All of them. We had blood shooting out of our frigging eyes. So the Liberal-controlled Congress passed the first bailout and George W. Bush (not a Conservative by any stretch of the imagination) signed it. That doesn't make it right, and every Conservative I know lost his frigging mind over it. Yet you have consistently come here to complain that we "can't defend" these bailouts. You're really embarrassing yourself, Matty. Is there some medication you should be taking? Michael.

TO MICHAEL (THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): THE ONLY NICNAME I WILL USE FOR YOU IS THE ONE ABOVE, BECAUSE IT IS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH. I WILL ANSWER ALL OF YOUR RAMBLING, MEANDERING DIATRIBES IN ORDER. "Dared speak out? You mean the highly dangerous and surreptitious NINETY PERCENT OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA that constantly ripped the Bush administration, everything the President did or said, the entire war effort, and our own troops? That daring? You really do live in a fantasy world, Matty." ONCE AGAIN, FOR ABOUT THE 99889998889998899999TH TIME YOU HAVE EVADED AND DODGED THE TRUE ISSUE. YOU MUST BE A LAWYER, BECAUSE YOU ARE GREAT AT DISTORTING THINGS, WHICH ALSO MEANS YOU ARE SCHOOLED IN THE ART OF RIGHT WING EXTREMIST PROPAGANDA. I AM TALKING ABOUT THE BUSH/ROVE PROPAGANDA MACHINE THAT A HERO LIKE MAX CLEELAND (WHO LOST LIMBS FIGHTING IN THE LAST WAR THAT WAS BASED ON LIES)"UNAMERICAN" FOR SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THE IRAQ WAR. I AM ALSO TALKING ABOUT THE SAME FEAR MONGERING APPARATUS THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR VALERY PLAME'S INDENTITY AS A C.I.A. OPERATIVE BEING REVEALED AFTER HER HUSBAND EXPOSED THE LIES THAT THE WAR WAS BASED ON IN HIS NOW FAMOUS OP-ED PIECE. "WARANTLESS WIRETAPPING" HISTORY LESSON TIME MORON: DO YOU KNOW WHAT FISA LAWS ARE AND WHY THEY WERE ENACTED? SINCE YOU LOVE DISTORTING ISSUES, I WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY WERE ENACTED TO PLACE LIMITS ON WIRETAPPING AND SURVEILLANCE TACTICS THAT ANOTHER OF YOUR HERO'S ADMINISTRATIONS (THAT OF RICHARD NIXON) WAS CAUGHT RED HANDED ENGAGING IN. IN SHORT THESE REGULATIONS STATE THAT NONE OF THESE ACTIVITIES CAN BE ENGAGED IN WITHOUT THE AUTHORIZATION OF CONGRESS. NOW SHOW ME DOCUMENTED PROOF THAT BUSH OBTAINED SUCH AUTHORIZATION. YOU CAN'T BECAUSE HE DIDN'T. YET WHEN ANYONE IN CONGRESS SPOKE OUT THEY WERE LABELED "UNAMERICAN", OR "SIDING WITH THE TERRORISTS". ANOTHER PART OF THIS ISSUE THAT YOU CHOOSE OT IGNORE IS THE FACT THAT THE BUSH ADMINSTRATION GOT THE WIRELESS PHONE COMPANIES TO GO ALONG WITH THIS BRUTAL TACTIC AS WELL. THESE ARE THE VERY COMPANIES THAT AMERICANS PAY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FOR CELL PHONE SERVICE, FOR THE PRIVILEDGE OF HAVING OUR CONVERSATIONS SPIED ON. BUT THEN AGAIN, THAT IS THE CONSERVATIVE WAY. LARGE COMPANIES CAN DO ANYTHING THEY WANT( LIE, CHEAT, ENGAGE IN FINANCIAL SHELL GAMES), AND THEY WILL ALWAYS HAVE A BLANK CHECK FORM REPUBLICANS TO KEEP DOING SO. “ULTRA NATIONALIST PANDERING” IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU CONSERVATIVES ENGAGED IN WHEN YOU CALLED BARACK OBAMA A MUSLUM AND AN “AL QUEADA PLANT”. AND YOUR BANKRUPT RESPONSE WAS: "You probably shouldn’t try to use words whose meanings you don’t understand. I mean, you can do whatever you want, but it really makes you look like a moron. Just sayin" ANOTHER CLEVER BIT OF EVADING THE TRUE ISSUE. IN FACT YOUR BANKRUPT RESPONSE HAS NOTHIING AT ALL TO DO WITH THE ISSUE. THAT IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO ANSWER FOR THE FACT THAT RUSH LIBAUGH AND YOUR OTHER CONSERVATIVE HEROES, TRIED DURING THE CAMPAIGN (AND ARE STILL TRYING) TO PAINT OBAMA AS A TERRORIST. ONCE AGAIN, YOU DID NOT RESOND TO THAT POINT, BECAUSE YOU AHVE NO RESPONSE. "That’s called a Straw Man, Matty." WHAT??? THAT IS SERIOUSLY THE BEST YOU CAN COME UP WITH? STRAW MAN? THAT REMINDS ME OF WHEN ONE OF YOUR FELLOW WATER CARRIERS (RICH I BELIEVE ONCE REFERRED TO ME AS A "CRIPPY BOY HEAD" I SEE THAT WHITE FLAG WAVING SINCE YOU ONCE AGAIN EVADED THE ISSUE. SOI WILL ASK THE QUESTION ONCE AGAIN: IN YOUR OWN WORDS!!! ( NOT HILLMAN'S, RUSH LIMBAUGH'S,BILL O'REILLY'S OR ANY OTHER RIGHT WING EXTREMIST MANIFESTO). ALSO,WITHOUT QUOTING FROM YOUR COLLEGE ECONOMICS COURSE, EXPLAIN (ONCE GAIN IN YOUR OWN WORDS!!!) HOW YOU CAN JUSTIFY THE CEO OF CITIBANK (THE SAME INDIVIDUAL THAT STATED:"I GET THE NEW REALITY AND I WILL MAKE SURE CITGROUP GETS IT TOO") GETTING AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COSTED $10 MILLION DOLLARS, WHIL THE COMPANY GOT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN CORPORATE WELFARE. ANSWER THE QUESTION THIS TIME INSTEAD OF RESORTING TO THIRD GRADE NAMES LIKE "STRAW MAN". ALSO, TO ANSWER ONE OF YOUR INSANE ECONOMICS RAMBLINGS FROM ONE OF YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS: ONCE AGAIN, SHOW ME DOCUMENTED PROOF OF A LOAF OF BREAD COSTING $8 IN NYC!!! SERIOUSLY, WHAT ON GOD'S EARTH ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? AGAIN, YOU CALL ME NAMES AND YOU PUT FORTH A STUPID ARGUMENT LIKE THAT??? OF COURSE, ONCE AGAIN YOU EVADE THE TRUE ISSUE AS TO WHY THE COST OF THINGS LIKE FOOD GO UP IN THE FIRST PLACE. USING 2008 AS AN EXAMPLE, THE PRICE OF FOOD IS TIED TO FUEL COSTS, AND OTHER EXPENSES TIED INTO BRINGING ITEMS LIKE BRAD, ETC. TO MARKET. OF COURSE THE PRICE OF FUEL GOES UP BECAUSE OF THE GLOBAL SHELL GAME THAT THE OIL COMPANIES PLAY, WHILE HIDING BEHIND THE BULLCRAP ABOUT "THE PRICE HIKE BEING BASED ON CONSUMPTION", OR SOME OTHER LIE. NINE TIMES OUT OF 10 THE COST OF LIVING IS TIED TO THE INCOMPETENCE OF THE EXECUTIVES AT A BIG CORPORATION (SUCH AS A.I.G)THAT MAKE THE CONSUMERS(OR IN THE CASE OF A.I.G THE TAXPAYERS0 PAY OF THEIR INEPTITUDE. MY GOD, PLEASE TELL ME YOU DON'T RUN A COMPANY OR WORSE TEACH ANY COURSE ON BUSINESS. IF YOU DO EITHER ONE, IT IS NO WONDER THAT BUSINESS IN AMERIC IS IN THE SORRY STATE THAT IT IS. "W. Bush (not a Conservative by any stretch of the imagination)" NOW I KNOW YOU ARE DELUSIONAL. ALSO, THERE WAS NOT A CONSERVATIVE THAT WAS AGAINST HANDING THOSE CORPORATIONS BILLIONSIN CORPORATE WELFARE. YOUR HERO BUSH STATED THAT COMPANIES LIKE A.I.G ARE "TOO BIG TO FAIL". ALSO, LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT: YOU "AND THE OTHER CONSERVATIVES" THAT YOU DON'T NAME ARE "AGAINST" A.I.G. AND OTHERS GETTING BAILOUT MONEY, BUT YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE EXECUTIVES GETTING THEIR BONUSES AFTER THEY HELPED RUN THESE SAME COMPANIES INTO THE GROUND. THAT MAKES ALOT OF SENSE!!!

TO MICHAEL (THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): CLARIFICATION: IN MY HASTE TO COMPLETE MY PREVIOUS POST I DID NOT STATE SOMETHING PROPERLY. IN THE SECTION REGARDING MAX CLEELAND I WANTED TO SAY THAT THE BUSH/ROVE PROPAGANDA MACHINE LABELED A HERO LIKE MAX CLEELAND "UNAMERICAN" BECAUSE OF HIS VOCAL OPPOSITION TO THE WAR IN IRAQ, WHICH ABOVE ALL ELSE IS PROBABLY THE MOST DISGUSTING AND GUTLESS HATCHET ATTACK THAT THE PREVIOUS REGIME ENGAGED IN.

I wish I could say it was fun to able to say "I told you so." The minute they started talking about having the government take over failing businesses, I said "watch, the Liberals will not let their pet newspaper chain die. The New York Times will be the Official Newspaper of B. Hussein Obama in FACT rather than just in spirit." Here it is, straight out of Reuters: Dem Congressman seeks to rescue failing newspapers Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies. Ummm...folks when the government owns the newspapers, that's a Fascist regime. It's bad enough the Left already controls over 90% of the mainstream media. Now they're going to flat-out OWN half the newspapers in the country too? For Liberals like Matty and Spaz who go through life blissfully ignorant of basic facts, this will give the Democrats actual ownership of the New York Times. The New York Times owns the Boston Globe, the Worcester Telegram and a CRAP LOAD of other papers in the US. The power grab by this administration is now zooooming past "stunning" and racing headlong into terrifying. Michael.

“W. Bush (not a Conservative by any stretch of the imagination)” NOW I KNOW YOU ARE DELUSIONAL. Well, your opinion is not worth much. Bush was a Conservative like Bill Clinton was a Moderate. Bush supported the amnesty bill for illegals, and we had to fight for three months to get Republicans to vote against the damned thing because they kept saying, "Well, he's our President, we should support him." That's your idea of Conservative? Again, you are clearly using words whose meanings elude you. Bush turned in budgets that shocked Conservatives with their generous spending, but you insist on labeling him a Conservative? Bush caved in to Leftist demands versus the war on terror again and again, and you still want to pretend he was a Conservative? And he refused to veto the bailout legislation, which Conservatives were almost violently opposed to, but you still persist in the fantasy that he was Conservative? The only things I can think of that might make him remotely Right-leaning were his support for tax cuts, and his strong opposition to terrorism (as opposed to Liberals who always want to perform exotic fetishes on terrorists). Even his so-called "pro-life" agenda was tepid at best. He blocked several funding elements for federally funded abortions and he supported bans on late-term and partial-birth abortions, but then he refused to support legislation limiting abortions in other ways, so it's pretty hard to argue he's a staunch Conservative there, Matty. You really should read something besides Huffington Post because you are embarrassing yourself pretty badly here. ALSO, THERE WAS NOT A CONSERVATIVE THAT WAS AGAINST HANDING THOSE CORPORATIONS BILLIONSIN CORPORATE WELFARE. Really? What planet are you ON??? Here on Earth, EVERY Conservative was vehemently, passionately, decisively opposed to every single bailout. Or are you going to pretend that RINOs like John McCain are Conservatives? Don't make us laugh, Matty, because we aren't laughing WITH you, we're laughing AT you. Why do you keep coming back here and embarrassing yourself this way? You state things that are demonstrably untrue, and then when you're shown why they're not true you change the subject. You make assertions that don't even make any sense, and when you're shown the blunders in your "reasoning" you respond with Spaz-like fumbling and you declare that you aren't interested in the facts. You use words to mean things they do not mean and cannot mean, and when that's pointed out to you, your response is to mimic Keith Olbergirl and whip out your college degree. Then you follow that up by proving once and for all that you don't the foggiest idea what you're talking about. You demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of basic concepts of what money is and how it works, how an economy works, how a business is run, or even what the word "fair" means, yet you expect everyone to take you seriously just because you're breathing. In short, you are the perfect example of the reason I say Liberalism is a mental disorder. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

HOW YOU CAN JUSTIFY THE CEO OF CITIBANK...GETTING AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COSTED $10 MILLION DOLLARS, WHIL THE COMPANY GOT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN CORPORATE WELFARE. ANSWER THE QUESTION THIS TIME INSTEAD OF RESORTING TO THIRD GRADE NAMES LIKE “STRAW MAN”. Actually, Matty, if you'd paid even a tiny bit of attention you'd know that NOBODY here has tried even once to justify anything these CEOs have gotten. We've been opposed to the entire bailout -- ALL OF IT -- right from the beginning, while you Liberal douchebags went around pretending there was an emergency. Try to follow along this time, Chatty Matty. YOU CAN'T JUSTIFY IT, THAT'S WHY WE SHOULD NEVER DO BAILOUTS! Get it that time? It's only about 27th time you've been told that. ALSO, TO ANSWER ONE OF YOUR INSANE ECONOMICS RAMBLINGS FROM ONE OF YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS: ONCE AGAIN, SHOW ME DOCUMENTED PROOF OF A LOAF OF BREAD COSTING $8 IN NYC!!! SERIOUSLY, WHAT ON GOD’S EARTH ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? AGAIN, YOU CALL ME NAMES AND YOU PUT FORTH A STUPID ARGUMENT LIKE THAT??? Wow. Even for you, that's rather stunning. I'm sorry that you were not capable of following simple logic, but it does explain why you believe the utterly absurd crap that you do. You're just not bright enough to handle anything more. If you feel left out, that's because everyone else reading this was able to follow it just fine. I bet even Spaz understood that example, Matty. Sorry you weren't up to it. THE PRICE OF FUEL GOES UP BECAUSE OF THE GLOBAL SHELL GAME THAT THE OIL COMPANIES PLAY, WHILE HIDING BEHIND THE BULLCRAP ABOUT “THE PRICE HIKE BEING BASED ON CONSUMPTION”, OR SOME OTHER LIE. Actually, you're partly correct there. But you're blaming the price increase on the oil companies when in fact it was your own Liberal stooges in Congress who caused the price of oil to skyrocket. See, when you pass retarded laws that prohibit American oil companies from drilling any oil in America, or even exploring for new oil, then they are forced to buy all their supply from places like OPEC. And OPEC is not stupid. They quickly realized they had us over a barrel (literally) and they raised their prices. You can thank Nancy-boy Pelosi for that Matty because she did it ON PURPOSE. Why do you think she refused to even allow discussion of a bill to restore drilling in the USA? She wanted the price of oil to be high because she owns stock in alternative energy companies, moron. Look it up. NINE TIMES OUT OF 10 THE COST OF LIVING IS TIED TO THE INCOMPETENCE OF THE EXECUTIVES AT A BIG CORPORATION Are you feeling all right? You're just having some sort of breakdown, right? You're just pulling everyone's chain here, right? Nobody -- NOBODY -- seriously believes that. The cost of living is the result of corporate incompetence? So when someone gets a raise, where do you suppose that money comes from, Einstein? When the cost of a raw material goes up, do you suppose companies and their stockholders just eat that additional expense? You are possibly the most fundamentally ignorant person I have ever met. No wonder you can't figure out how to work your damned caps lock. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

TO MICHAEL ( THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): OKAY, FIRST OF ALL, SHOE ME ONE COMPANY THAT IS GETTING OFFERING RAISES IN THIS ECONOMY. JUST ABOUT EVERY MAJOR CORPORATION IS CUTTING BACK, LETTING EMPLOYEES GO, OR ON THE VERGE OF COLLAPSE. THE CAUSE OF THIS TO VARYING DEGREES IS BECAUSE OF YOUR CRIMINAL HEROES AT A.I.G, CITIBANK, AND OTHER FIRMS, THAT PLAYED THE CREDIT DEFAULT SHELL GAME, AMONG OTHER FORMS OF CORRUPTION THAT THEY ENGAGED IN. MY COMPANY JUST ANNOUNCED THAT EVERYONE IS GETTING THEIR PAY SLASHED, STARTING AT 5% ON UP. WHY? BECAUSE OF POOR BUSINESS DEALINGS, AND THE FACT OUR COMPANY'S TOCK PRICE HAS BEEN SINKING LIKE A MANHOLE COVER FOR ABOUT 5 YEARS NOW!! WHO'S FAULT IS THAT YOU STUPID MORON??? THE GUY "PUSHING THE MOP" I'M SURE, RIGHT? READ AND READ CAREFULLY: WHEN I BRING UP SUCH THINGS AS THE CEO OF CIITBANK GETTING AN OFFICE UPGRADE THAT COST $10 MILLION I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT BAILOUT MONEY!!!!! THESE ARE TWO SPERATE ISSUES YOU STUPID RETARD BECUSE #1: THE OFFICE UPGRADE WAS HIDDEN FROM THE BOOKS, AND WAS FOUND OUT ABOUT WELL AFTER THE BAILOUT MONEY WAS DISTRIBUTED!!! SO I WILL ASK AGAIN, FOR THE998889999889999999999999TH TIME, WITHOUT EVADING THE QUESTION: CAN YOU JUSTIFY THE CEO OF CITIBANK GETTING AN OFFICE UPGRADE (AGAIN NOT BAILOUT MONEY) THAT COST $10 MILLION DOLLARS????????) OF COURSE THE OFFICE UPGRADE IS JUST ONE OF MANY OTHER THINGS I COULD BRING UP, THAT THESE CRIMINALS KEPT HIDDEN FROM FEW, AND DECISIONS THEY MADE WITHOUT INFORMING THE SHAREHOLDERS, OR THE SEC, WHICH IS ILLEGAL BY THE WAY. ALSO, I KNOW HOW TO WORK THE CAPS LOCK, BUT I AM GOING TO KEEP TYPING IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE I KNOW HOW MUCH IT PISSES YOU OFF. FURTHER, I AM GOING TO LAUGH EVERY TIME I SEE YOU AND YOUR FELLOW RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS GET MAD ABOUT IT.

MY COMPANY JUST ANNOUNCED THAT EVERYONE IS GETTING THEIR PAY SLASHED, STARTING AT 5% ON UP. WHY? BECAUSE OF POOR BUSINESS DEALINGS Matty, it's clear that logic is not your strong suit, but please try and make a special effort to follow along here. YOU made an assertion about corporate ineptitude being the cause of inflation. I rebuked you by showing that your claim was false, that inflation is caused by rising costs. So you counter that by arguing that costs aren't rising, and instead wages are going down? Are you sure you want to argue that?? I mean, it doesn't help your original assertion at all, which was that inflation is caused "90%" of the time by corporate ineptitude. I'll tell you what. Pick one, and stick with that. Either 90% of inflation is caused by corporation incompetence or it's not. After all, you do understand that when the economy slows down or even contracts, a company that hopes to remain viable has a duty to its shareholders -- and to its employees who probably want to keep their jobs -- to reduce costs. So I'd say a company that engages in downsizing during economic downturns is behaving responsibly. But you assert that this is "incompetence." You can't have it both ways, Matty. READ AND READ CAREFULLY: WHEN I BRING UP SUCH THINGS AS THE CEO OF CIITBANK GETTING AN OFFICE UPGRADE THAT COST $10 MILLION I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT BAILOUT MONEY!!!!! THESE ARE TWO SPERATE ISSUES YOU STUPID RETARD BECUSE #1: THE OFFICE UPGRADE WAS HIDDEN FROM THE BOOKS, AND WAS FOUND OUT ABOUT WELL AFTER THE BAILOUT MONEY WAS DISTRIBUTED!!! And your point is? It still used bailout money. In any case, you keep claiming that we can't justify these bailouts and I keep reminding you that we are not attempting to justify them. We were the ones opposed to them from the beginning. It was LIBERALS who demanded all these bailouts, Liberals who wrote the legislation, Liberals who voted on them without even reading the damned bills, and Liberals who now act all shocked that the money was misspent. Seriously, Matty if you can't even follow your own arguments you can't really expect me to do all the work on both sides. Step it up, dudette. Michael.

matty I never said its ok to bail out these companies at all. see if you actually read these things insted of glazing over the facts you dont wanna acknoledge you would know that. I didnt want the government to bail out any private companies. Its just a terrible idea, now that is has become acceptable to do so, where will it end? A bankrupt government. Now i understand your bitterness towards people who earn alot of money. you paid to go to college and major in history. That must really pay the bills huh matty

RICH: OKAY, READ VERY CAREFULLY ONCE AGAIN (WHICH WILL REQUIRE THAT YOU REMOVE YOUR HEAD FROM YOUR ASS): FOR THE 99988899988899999999999TH TIME: THE ISSUE IS PERKS SUCH AS AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COST $10 MILLION, AND WHICH TOOK PLACE AFTER THE CORPORATE WELFARE WAS HANDED OUT!!!!!!!!! IN CASE YOU DIDN'T GET IT THAT TIME I WILL SAY IT AGAIN: THE ISSUE IS AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COST $10 MILLION AND TOOK PLACE AFTER THE FIRST INSTALLMENT OF CORPORATE WELFARE WAS HANDED OUT!!!!!! YOU PROBABLY DON'T BUT I WILL ASK ANYWAY: DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW???? GO AHEAD AND DISTORT THIS ISSUE NOW LIKE ALL THE OTHER ONES.

TO MICHEAL(THE OTHER GUTLESS CONSERVATIVE): FOR THE 99988899988899998889999999999TH TIME: PERKS SUCH AS THE $10 MILLION DOLLAR OFFICE SUITE AND THE BAILOUT MONEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!!!! ONCE AGAIN I WILL ASK: CAN YOU JUSTIFY THE CEO OF CITIBANK GETTING AN OFFICE UPGRADE THAT COST THAT MUCH, WHILE THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER OWNS 80% OF THE COMPANY?? AGAIN: THE OFFICE UPGRADE IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AND WAS HIDDEN FROM THE BOOKS!!!! "So I’d say a company that engages in downsizing during economic downturns is behaving responsibly" OF COURSE YOU DO, AS LONG AS IT IS NOT YOUR JOB THAT IS BEING LOST. I HAPPEN TO WORK FOR A COMPANY THAT HAS LOST MILLIONS OVER THE LAST 3-PLUS YEARS ALONE, HAS SEEN ITS STOCK PRICE SINK LIKE A MANHOLE, TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS TRADING AT 18 CENTS, AND IT HAS FELL SO MUCH THAT THE STOCK IS NOT EVEN TRADING ON THE NYSE ANYMORE. DESPITE THIS, OUR COMPANY IS STILL PROMOTING AT THE COPORATE LEVEL. FOR WHAT?

“So I’d say a company that engages in downsizing during economic downturns is behaving responsibly” OF COURSE YOU DO, AS LONG AS IT IS NOT YOUR JOB THAT IS BEING LOST. First, I am genuinely sorry that your job is in jeopardy. I may dislike you, but I don't wish ill upon you. Hopefully, your company will be able to turn itself around and you will keep your job. Second, why do you assume that my understanding of economic realities is dependent upon whether it affects me personally? Whether the truth affects my job or not doesn't make it less true. I've faced job loss in the past and will face it again. If what I've been reading in the news is correct, then major downsizing is about to hit my industry as a whole, and since I'm relatively low on the totem pole... Nevertheless, when a company is faced with rising costs, declining revenues, or both, it can respond in a number of ways. All those ways basically break down into three sectors and companies can avail themselves of any combination of these: 1) the company can take steps to reduce material costs or increase revenue, wherever possible. This by itself might be enough to save a company from ruin. But not always. Sometimes, the economic circumstances are so bad that these measures are not enough. 2) the company can take steps to reduce the size or cost of its workforce. The more wisely-run companies generally take this as a last resort because they recognize that loyal, well-trained and experienced employees are vital to a company's long-term success. Sadly, not all companies are wisely-run. 3) the company can acquire or merge with other companies to create a new company that is more competitive and more profitable. Your argument that it's wrong for a company to reduce costs (for instance by letting some employees go or by asking for pay cuts) is a classic Marxist refrain. Marx denied the fact that companies exist to create profit. Rather, the Socialist mantra is that companies exist for the sake of the workers, and whether profit is made or not is irrelevant. This begs the obvious question: what do you suppose a company SHOULD do when it's not profitable? According to you and others who "think" the way you do, companies should just continue to operate as though nothing were wrong. They should just continue to pay their employees, dole out raises and benefits (but not to executives, of course), and sell products at arbitrarily "fair" prices in perpetuity. This is like a man standing in a bucket trying to lift himself up by the handle. Where do you expect all this money to come from?? You Liberals never get around to addressing that fundamental flaw in Socialism. You just gloss right over it as though it didn't exist. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

THE ISSUE IS AN OFFICE SUITE UPGRADE THAT COST $10 MILLION AND TOOK PLACE AFTER THE FIRST INSTALLMENT OF CORPORATE WELFARE WAS HANDED OUT!!!!!! And yet you strenuously insist that the remodeling used no bailout money. You admit the work was done AFTER the bailout money was received, but you insist it had nothing to do with the bailout. You'll just have to forgive everyone else for not following your reasoning here. After all, most people can follow a line of reasoning if the writer provides at least a faint trail of itty bitty bread crumbs, but in this case the trail dead-ends at a vertical cliff wall and the bread crumbs exist only in your imagination. You're just going to have to explain this one to us, Matty. We're all waiting breathlessly, I assure you. Michael, the Other Massachusetts Republican.

So, if your morning show starts to get poor ratings, will YOU forgo YOUR salary? I doubt it. As usual, you use your morning show, and your blog, as a political stage

So, if your morning show starts to get poor ratings, will YOU forgo YOUR salary? I doubt it. Obviously I can't speak for the Hillman, but what generally happens when a show like his starts to decline in the ratings is the people don't draw lower salaries -- they draw pink slips. You can believe that if the Hillman Morning Show was a low-rated program, it would be gone. Radio is terribly competitive, and there are dozens of morning shows out there gunning for a rather limited audience. I think the figures I saw earlier this year estimated the Greater Boston / Central New England area at roughly 4 million listeners. If the show didn't pull in high ratings compared to other morning shows, it would quickly be replaced with one that (hopefully) did. The fact that Hillman has been here doing this show for so many years proves he's successful. Successful being defined "consistently delivering morning show content that attracts listeners day after day." You could call it maddening, even infuriating, if you are piqued by the views expressed on the air. You could call it compelling (Spaz is compelling in a train wreck sort of way). You could call it entertaining (LB, Danielle and Barbare definitely fill that role). One thing you can't call it, at least not today, is a failure. Michael.

How bout "I Owe my Career to White Guilt"? Why is he going around to Jay Leno and different States as if he is still on the campaign trail? If you think about it, it makes total sense that a person who isn't talking about certain issues (Taxes, Redistribution, Radical Left Change, bailouts) would parade around with a big smile on his face, crack jokes and talk about vague topics like Hope and Change for America. He is doing it to just continue to try and get people to like him instead of selling his real plans for this Country. He cant sell his real plans because they are so far out there. He cant go around and tell us that he wants to weaken our Defense, redistribute wealth, nationalize banks, take over companies and fire CEO'S. He will then have to answer tough questions. Cant do that because it will expose the fraud that he is. See what happens to Barney Frank when he tries to take tough questions. Frauds cant do it. So doesn't it make sense that he go around and crack jokes in order to bump up his popularity with the people of America who are still ill informed because all they watch, read or listen to is main stream media. These people will go along with any of his plans as long as they like him. Boy have we been dumbed down! Keep it up Greg! You are a true Patriot who understands that sometimes the hardest thing to do is either nothing or get back to basics instead of reinventing the wheel. We can solve our Problems in this country by going back to basic Conservatism as well as simply enforcing our excisting laws. Barack and friends are totally seizing a crisis as an excuse to totally reinvent our Nation from top to bottom. We need to stand up to this before its too late. Say no to Populist Fascist Govt. Thank You!!

The best website…... [...]here are some links to sites that we link to because we think they are worth visiting[...]…...

Extra Reading... [...]we like to honor other sites on the web, even if they aren't related to us, by linking to them. Below are some sites worth checking out[...]...