Seriously, does Tano ever tell the truth about anything?

Hillary’s aides point to Obama’s extremely progressive record as a community organizer, state senator and candidate for Congress, his alliances with “left-wing” intellectuals in Chicago’s Hyde Park community, and his liberal voting record on criminal defendants’ rights as subjects for examination.

Along the same lines, ABC reported that Clinton aides gave the network various examples, of Obama’s controversial stands. The aides cited Obama’s past assertion that he would support ending mandatory minimum sentences for federal crimes, pointing to a 2004 statement at an NAACP-sponsored debate: “Mandatory minimums take too much discretion away from judges.”

Tano tried this lie a few weeks ago, and of course ran away when the facts came out. But then again, as aptly put earlier this week, what else would we expect?

It is a liberal lickspittle for re-spewing the talking points generated from the elitist copy machines at MoveOn.org and the DNC. The Powers-That-Be, one might say. It is just a goose-stepping foot soldier. One can only feel sympathy for such a creature. I’m sure there are many others like itin Michigan and across the USA.

http://hillbuzz.org/2010/02/09/jacksonian-democrats-are-reagan-democrats-are-hillary-democrats-are-palin-democrats/

I don’t see a single shred of evidence that Hillary is a liberal. All of her policies are mainstream. Her healthcare plan was not an overthrow of our economy, but a plan which helped our current system reach out to more people, which would have profited everyone. The fact that many of you hate her for what are probably “internalized sexism” reasons doesn’t make what you believe true, any more than it makes what Palin haters believe true.

I admire both Hillary and Palin.

Good catch on the link. Thanks.

10: Too funny. as if a majority conservative court isn’t doing exactly that now? Essentially extending the political rights of corporations to give money isn’t exactly in the best interest of the people.

Again, constitutional freedoms for terrorists and not American companies. Not funny at all, but pretty damn sad and pathetic.

The Republicans have not been hijacked by the far-right. That is code for religious zealots and knuckle-draggers.

Yes it has, every bit as much as the Democrat Party was taken over by leftist nutjobs. Does this mean every single Republican and Democrat fits this description? No. I don’t even believe this means a majority of the rank-and-file of either. Yet special interest groups on both sides hold tightly onto the reigns of power and though their grip is knocked loose sometimes that doesn’t last very long. Perhaps things like the TEA party movement will help change that, I cannot say. Yet since I have libertarian-minded family members as part of the movement it gives me hope.

Remember the movie “The Truman Show”? It was based on what people thought, at the time, was a ludicrous premise: that a corporation could adopt a baby. I wonder how far we are from that now. While reasonable members of both parties have worked to limit the reach non-human entities, less than reasonable entities continue to work to strengthen their power.

Hey, there is no accounting for Ash!
It is hilarious though, given that Hillary herself and her campaign pitched themselves as the true liberals in the primary races, viewing Obama as the centrist sell-out…

And helio please check out this site:
http://www.wnd.com/
Gawd!

The “conservative” Democrats you have cited would be well to the left of Olympia Snow. I can respect Evan Bayh. Jim Webb is pure opportunist and about as predictable as your average sidewinder. Ben Nelson is a whore. Hillary Clinton has yet to decide if there is any principle worth holding up to the winds of change if there may be something more useful in wavering or doing a full 180.

There was a day when the Democrat party had honest brokers for alternative views. That day passed when Pat Moynihan died.

The Republicans have not been hijacked by the far-right. That is code for religious zealots and knuckle-draggers. You are welcome to join the Republican party, but I suspect your agenda may depend on circumventing the popular will by order of the stacked court.

does GayPatriot stand for independent gays, or is it an appendage of the Republican Party?

Fair enough. It is clear that liberal gays are an appendage of the Democrats. However, the TEA party supporters are mainly Republicans, independents and more than a few Democrats who have decided that politics as usual needs to be taken to the woodshed.

So, I would suggest that a GayPatriot is most likely not a Democrat. However, I do not see why that means the GayPatriot is then forced to take a seat among the independents or Republicans. However, there is a possible misunderstanding on my part when one speaks of an “independent gay.” Is that a gay who is not on the liberal gay reservation? Someone who does not lead with the “gay agenda?” A gay who is outside the “gay community” or isn’t “gay enough?”

Perhaps, just perhaps, a GayPatriot is an American who is gay rather than a Gay who happens to be american.

Ass.

guess there are not too many people around here that you admire, eh?

All that said, I admire anyone who stands for their principles without engaging in name-calling and misrepresentation

Hear, hear!