Gay Patriot Header Image

I thought this post was about gay rights’ activists

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 3:30 pm - December 14, 2009.
Filed under: Blogging,Gay Politics,Random Thoughts

“Waaah” is Not a Constitutional Right.

Share

5 Comments

  1. Following the link, we see liberal blogger Matthew Iglesias complaining:

    We’re suffering from an incoherent institutional set-up… in which a defeated minority rejects the majority’s governing agenda out of hand, seeks opening for attack, and hopes that failure on the part of the majority will bring them to power… It’s a system in which the minority benefits if the government fails, and the minority has the power to ensure failure. It’s insane, and it needs to be changed.

    Clearly, Iglesias is talking about the irresponsible and destructive behavior of the nation’s Democrat minority during the Bush administration.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 14, 2009 @ 4:32 pm - December 14, 2009

  2. (E.g., when Democrats blocked regulation of Freddie and Fannie, thus ensuring the failure of the nation’s financial system. Or when Democrats systematically tried to undermine America’s war efforts and ensure defeat in Iraq.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 14, 2009 @ 4:33 pm - December 14, 2009

  3. ILC they are very good points. The libtards are still doing their screaming, putting their hands over their ears and going “la la la… I cannot hear you”, as they continue to make up their narratives that are just so very fanciful. One commenter on the other site even had the hide to ask about what happened “under the old regime”, totally oblivious to the fact that in the last two years of the Bush Administration the Dummycrats were in charge of the playground.

    However, taking your example of Freddie and Fannie, what you forgot is that it was a certain person named Obot who was the one who lobbied Congress to allow the packaging of mortgages of derivatives. Now he has the absolute hide to blame “greedy banks”, yet he bears a whole lot of responsibility for what took place. Also, as you rightly point out, when McCain and Bush tried to introduce legislation to stop the massive blowout in the housing and financial sectors it was the majority Dummycrats that refused to pass the legislation. Who then is culpable?….. Who in fact voted against that necessary legislation? Can there be any other reason than that the Dimbulbcrats were in fact attempting to manufacture a crisis?

    The Dumbocrats in the Congress have a lot to answer for when it comes to their actions…. yes a whole lot… because they have been more corrupt than the previous Republican majority.

    Comment by StraightAussie — December 14, 2009 @ 6:55 pm - December 14, 2009

  4. SA, it just goes to show how our left-liberal friends stick to no principles, changing their tune whenever the shoe is on the other foot. Now that they have one-party rule – very temporarily – they want to bypass the very system that they manipulated to gain power. They would have shrieked if a Republican said such a thing, in the 5-6 years when Republicans held a similar dominance of the government.

    As for regulating Fannie and Freddie: The Republicans had majorities in Congress at the time. But I do not believe they had the 60 votes in the Senate needed to overcome Democratic opposition. The Dems were the hard-core opponents of regulation – joined, shamefully but I believe only after it was clear that the Democrats would win the issue, by a much smaller number of GOP Senators.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 14, 2009 @ 8:03 pm - December 14, 2009

  5. You can have a system in which a defeated minority still gets a share of governing authority and participates constructively in the victorious majority’s governing agenda, shaping policy around the margins in ways more to their liking

    The ability of a lefty like Iglesias to repress memories of his own people’s tactics is amazing.

    My question is just how much tinkering around the margins we need to do when the whole agenda is toxic?

    How does the minority participate when the majority leadership locks its own members out of policy making and demonizes people in their caucus who in lock-step (goose-step?)?

    Comment by SoCalRobert — December 14, 2009 @ 9:13 pm - December 14, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.