And Now for Something Completely Different

Hypocrites, Part 2

Posted Tuesday, February 16, 2010, at 4:53 PM

*** A little explaner in what has happened on this blog. Things got way to personal for all involved about something that had absolutely nothing to do with this blog. For my part I do humbly apologize on my part for how personal it got. So for the better of this particular blog I took the original down and reposted it with no comments to give everyone a chance to concentrate on the actually contents within the posted blog. If you want to say that I silenced my critics, I silenced myself as well. So let's regain our focus and talk about the blog itself ***

I left a lot of this off the original blog because I just wanted to see how much farther today's Republican Party would sink themselves, and I'll be dipped that they did not keep me waiting.

So for over a year Republicans, conservatives, and the Tea Party crowd have been complaining that there has not been enough transparency in the health care debate. That's at least part of the reason the Republican Party has given for voting in unison against both versions of the health care reform. It more than likely is not true as they like their secret meetings as much as anyone else, it is just more politically convenient right now to want transparency. As late as January, Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona) had a tither when it was announced that President Obama and Congressional Democrats were going to have a closed door meeting about health care and when C-SPAN announced that it would like to televise health care reform meetings House Minority leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said that it was a very important step in the process.

Fast forward to February and now that President Obama has proposed a televised summit between himself and Congress Republicans have done a complete 180 degree somersault into a tuck now declaring that because Obama actually agrees with them and wants to televise the summit that it is more than likely a political stunt (acting as if nothing they have done over the past year has been just that). I believe what is actually at the base of all this is that they wanted a political stunt where they could outshine Obama, and then he actually attended one of their televised meetings and answered questions from them and not only did well, but scored a political point for the way he responded. Now their opinions have changed on televising anything. In my opinion those of us that actually follow politics closely know that the Republicans have no better ideas than what's presently out there. This has been bore out over the last year. They continued claiming that they were being held out of the process and that they had different ideas about how to do health care reform, but when they were pressed on what those ideas were they rarely would state anything. When they finally came out with a program, that Michael Steele spearheaded, it was nothing more than old ideas that never worked before dressed up for the internet age. Now that they have gotten what they want and cameras will be present for the exchanging of ideas between all parties they really are not sure they want to be a part of it.

Here are a couple of my predictions. They will sit down for the summit, some good ideas will comes out of it, but Republicans will say that the process was unfair and claim that Obama and the Democrats set it up to make the Republicans look bad.

2nd Prediction: The Republicans will back out of the summit and claim the reason as, in the first prediction, that the whole process was set up by Obama and the Democrats to make the Republicans look bad.

In either case the "liberal" media will be the Republicans lap dogs (as usual) and announce to the nation that the process was unfair and it was set-up by Obama and the Democrats to make the Republicans look bad. On the Sunday shows the panels will be made up of Republicans and conservatives all loyally shaking their heads yes to that claim and what Democrats that are asked to appear will sit by and say nothing.

There is a third option that everyone will get together come up with some good ideas and everyone will be happy, but you, I, and everyone knows that is just not going to happen. The Republicans have made a habit out of obstructing just to obstruct and there is no reason to believe that anything will change with this.

Now to the blatant hypocrisy concerning the stimulus or National Recovery Act or whatever you feel most comfortable calling it. When it passed last year every single Republican in Congress voted against it. They railed against it, even some Congressmen going as far as calling it arsenic and that it would only make things worse. As early as the first of this year they were claiming that it had not worked and was a colossal waste of money.

Here's the problem for the Republicans. For some reason they continue forgetting that cameras record what they say and it stays out there for everyone to see forever. The reason I say this is because what they are saying in Washington D.C. in the chambers or in front of the cameras is not really meshing with what they are saying in their home districts. A large group of Republicans even have pictures on their websites showing them with a group of people and one of those over sized checks touting the programs that were created by the very stimulus package they trashed on the national scene.

I am not sure if Republicans just believe that when they go back home that no one is paying attention or even more likely they just do not care. They play to the far right base when they are in the national spotlight but actually play to their real moderate right base when they go back home. Eric Cantor (R-Virginia) who masterminded the obstruction game of voting no across the board held a job fair in Virginia. Nothing too big there except that many of the businesses that were there for the job fair were only there because of money, grants, projects that were received through the stimulus.

Even, Joe "You lie" Wilson (R-South Carolina) despite voting against the stimulus has lauded the program while back in South Carolina.

Funny thing about this blatant act of hypocrisy, you will not hear a single Republican congressmen deny this because it is all right there in print (or more aptly on the computer screen) for everyone to see. Instead what they will do is simply ignore it and continue on the national scene decrying that the stimulus has not worked while at home declaring that the National Recovery Act has been instrumental in bringing jobs and money to their home districts.

Gotta love those Republicans they try so hard to talk out of both sides of their mouths and they just are not very good at it.

But it does bring up an old quote that Republicans and President Bush used ad nauseum during the 2004 election about John Kerry, "He was for the war before he was against it".

I guess in the case of televised meetings we can now say that Republicans were for transparency before they were against it and in the case of the stimulus Republicans were against the stimulus before they were for the National Recovery Act (yes just in case you missed it the stimulus and NRA are the exact same thing).

I have another item to discuss because I know that it will undeniably be brought up by a poster and that's the claim now that President Obama is saying that he supported the troop surge even though in 2007 as a Senator he is on tape saying that he did not support the surge, bringing back the saying that he was against the surge before he was for it.

Now that is a huge case of hypocrisy, is it not? Unfortunately, Obama has never said that he supported the surge. Vice-President Biden went on television and said that Iraq "could be one of the great achievements of this administration". Somehow out of that statement people have come to the conclusion that Obama was supportive of the surge. It is one heck of a stretch but hey that is politics.

Most do not agree with Biden's statement and I certainly do not. I just want our troops out of Iraq. If the Obama Administration wants a true achievement they need to finish the job in Afghanistan and get our troops out of that country. With the situation in Iraq and taking it from the much it was in to the situation we see today I do not think anyone but the actual troops that have been in Iraq since 2003 should get the credit. The politicians just need to stay away from any credit there because they screwed it up enough already.

This is a bit of an old story but I am sure that everyone remembers that when Obama vacationed in Hawai'i (which is original home state) Republicans chastized him heavily calling him an elitist that was out of touch with Americans, Michael Steele led this charge. The odd thing about the whole situation is that just a few months later the RNC held some meetings in the same state. No one on the Republican side seemed all that upset that the RNC would go to Hawai'i to do work that could easily have been done right in the RNC's home offices. It is blatantly hypocritical but I am as sure as the sun shines that a couple of my devoted posters will spin explain the difference but the truth is Republicans will opposes everything Obama does to the very end. If he came out today and proclaimed that sun rises in the east and sets in the west, Republicans would hold a press conference minutes later declaring the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.

Good times, good times.

How I completely forgot the other newsworthy hypocritical issues for Republicans that came out over the past couple of weeks I'll never know. But anyways let's get to them.

Everyone knows how Republicans have been up in arms about Paygo and Cap and Trade but what no one talks about is that both plans were originally Republican ideas that they trumpeted for years up until Obama said that they were good ideas. Now, all of a sudden, the same plans that Republicans thought up and heralded for years will now cost billions of dollars and cause too many people to lose their jobs.

Then there's Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security. Republicans haven been trying (for 50 years when it comes to Social Security) for years to get rid of these programs. The only time they show support for the programs is in election cycles until last year when all of a sudden the programs that they had been trying to kill became a political football for them and all of a sudden they pronounced that it was the Democrats that wanted to kill Medicare/Medicaid during the health care debate with cuts that would hurt senior citizens. Of course, it was nothing more than a lie as the only cuts that the programs would see would have been cutting the fat out of the programs which fiscal conservatives are always advocating. Last year, though they threw away their fiscal conservative ideologies to join the lie.

Now that we are in an election year you would think they would be fighting to save those programs again. Not so, in the past two weeks bills have been brought forward in committees to end both Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security. Unfortunately Democrats did not put a focus on the fact that last year Republicans were trying to "save" the very programs they are now trying to kill.

So once again just a few examples of Republicans either being for something before they were against it or against it before being for it.

Stay classy GOP.

Comments

View 27 comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

I bet I could have heard the exact same thing by watching CNN last night for about 8 minutes. No wonder only 6 people tune into that station every night.

-- Posted by Justin76 on Tue, Feb 16, 2010, at 8:56 PM
Here's the real problem you face posting well thought out opinions on blogs. You face the old challenge of arguing there are no witches to Cotton Mathers followers. You can talk and argue, and back up your thoughts with truckloads of hard evidence, you may do that right up until the moment the flames extinguish you.

The ignorant are nothing if not the greatest hazard to intelligent life on the planet.

-- Posted by didereaux on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 5:37 AM
justin,

Hate to discourage your fantasy.

The industry ratings show very clearly, CNN is the most watched and most trusted broadcast news source in the U.S and the world.

Ammanpour is easily the most respected field reporter of this generation.

It is a rare network newscast that does not include at least one CNN developed segment.

They all have begun copying CNN innovations.

Don't let your political theology pull on the blindfolds.

-- Posted by HerndonHank on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 2:49 PM
Hate to discourage your fantasy.

The industry ratings show very clearly, FOX is the most watched and most trusted broadcast news source in the U.S and the world.

Ammanpour is not the most respected field reporter of this generation.

It is a rare network newscast that includes a CNN developed segment.

They all have begun copying FOX innovations.

Don't let your political theology pull on the blindfolds.

-- Posted by boojum666 on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 5:49 PM
Wow a discussion on which network is more watched CNN or Fox News. How enthralling. Unfortunately organizations have been copying Fox News innovations and it makes watching the actual news extremely difficult. Breaking News for every little thing whether it's important or not, scrolls running across the bottom that have nothing to do with news. Yes we can thank Fox News for dumbing down the newscast.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 6:02 AM
Boo

Everyone copies everyone with technical innovations.

Every NFL color analyst attempted to copy John Madden, but no other "X-Spurt" had the coordination, knowledge, teaching ability and pizz-zazz of Madden.

He remained Numero Uno until he retired -- what was it -- just before his 100th birthday -- Joking of course.

But FOX does not even rank among the top news organizations, simply because most of its "News" budget is wasted on opinion personalities.

Until you get some serious credentials within the international news community backing your pathetic line of bull, don't try to blow smoke.

There really is no competition for Ammanpour today.

Several have serious credentials, but cannot stack up against Ammanpour's decades of field experience, her record for going after the most dangerous interviews, relentless impartiality and integrity, encyclopedic knowledge and unequalled language skills.

More than a few of U.S. Field Commanders in the Middle East have considered Ammanpour their most reliable and trusted intelligence source to actually learn what the situation is on both sides of any conflict.

Just watch her Sunday afternoon broadcasts. At the end, you have no idea where she stands.

But you **** well know exactly how much her guests know and you know when one or more of them is a phony.

Couric props up all her "guests." Ammanpour exposes them if they are not for real and know what they are talking about.

She has exposed some people I had believed to be competent for decades within 15 minutes and opened them up like a can of sardines without them realizing what they were revealing.

When she repeatedly rode horseback into Pashtun country in Afghanistan and Pakistan, asked the toughest questions of Taliban leaders and any others she located -- And did it so deftly they did not take offense at a woman confronting them directly on the most serious matters.

Boo -- If you had attempted to follow in her footsteps, 20 years ago, or one year ago -- You would have been dead 20 years ago, or one year ago.

I know men who fought at Tora Bora, who are absolutely in awe of Ammanpour. The 10th Mountain "pathfinders" don't give their respect easily -- but they insisted the brass provide videotapes of all her broadcasts from the mountains.

Working news professionals do not have opinions in news time or print news space.

Once a "News" staffer expresses a personal opinion on any serious subject, they have lost all credibility for impartial news reporting.

I have not seen a Fox "News" broadcast in years which did not air at least one STRONG opinion expressed by each NEWS person.

-- Posted by HerndonHank on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 7:26 AM
Your critiques of Hank's often far fetched posts would carry much more weight if you didn't feel it necessary to engage in idiotic and childish mockery.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 8:51 AM
Mike,

Your crticism of the Republican districts publicizing stimulus fund use is interesting to me. I can understand how you might see hypocrisy here, since you think everything a Republican does is hypocritical while Democrats apparently are free from that fault; but are there not Democrats in those districts who were in favor of the stimulus. Are representatives not elected to serve and represent all of thier constituents? Is it your position that only if a person is fully behind, 100%, any position that they should be able to use a service? As Obama famously said that he won, so did the Democrats in Congress win on that vote, your argument is that the money should be spent only in Democratic districts? What stimulative effect would that have?

Where you in favor of the Bush Tax waste of money that gave us all a couple hundred dollars a few years back? I wasn't but I spent it anyway. I guess that just proves that in your view I am a hypocrite as well. Although, since I'm not a Democrat that may have been a foregone conclusion.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 9:00 AM
I don't have the power to censor hank, but thanks for thinking that I do but I love that you say that it annoys you to hell but you get a laugh out of it. Now THAT'S funny.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 10:29 AM
Actually SWNebr where the hypocrisy comes in and when these Republicans are in Washington and in front of cameras they trash the stimulus but when they are home and in front of smaller crowds that laud the stimulus. That is hypocritical. But your point is very interesting that because there are Democrats in the districts where these Republicans who voted against the stimulus, said it wouldn't, say it hasn't worked are going back home and saying completely different things about the stimulus that makes it okay. Don't really buy that line but if that's what you want to believe that's fine.

Truth be told I was supportive of the one Bush tax cut that actually benefited everyone and not just the rich, so you attempt at a "gotcha" really did not work. Was it good for the economy? No it had no real effect but I supported it.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 10:34 AM
hank you nicknames for everyone is very similar to another poster who used to come on here parading as everything from a former student of mine to a high school drop out Taco Bell worker, not to mention as a female. The only reason I am convinced you are not that person is because you called me lil mike (which is a pretty sweet nickname so thanks for that) and not twiggy.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 10:36 AM
Oh and SWNebr one final point, I wasn't criticizing the districts. How they used the stimulus money was completely up to them. I was criticizing their representatives who spoke against the stimulus, voted against the stimulus, proclaim that it hasn't worked, and then go back to their districts and throw their arms up in jubilation at how the stimulus worked as if it was their creation and they should get the credit for their districts getting the money.

The Senators and Representatives that actually voted against the bill and yet celebrate the stimulus at home are the hypocritical ones, not the districts themselves.

I do not consider you hypocritical for not supporting the Bush tax cuts yet using the tax money you got because you did not physically vote against the cuts.

So your unfounded attack on me that I consider all Republicans hypocritical falls a little flat when it's actually analyzed on what I have actually said and what you have taken from it.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 10:42 AM
So I'm starting the censorship machine? Can you show me where it is because I'm not sure I've ever seen such a machine. Hmmm ... I wonder if it's too late to shut it off. hank, you seem to know all about, have any idea where it is?

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 1:11 PM
Mike - Read your BOLD remarks that start this heading. You censured the comments. You removed them because you didn't like them. If that is not censurship then please explain what it is????

-- Posted by wallismarsh on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 1:51 PM
I took down the remarks because the majority of the comments had nothing at all to do with the blog and was, instead, a battle to see who could thow the most insults at each other. I welcome criticism and I don't take blogs down because I don't like what is being said I take blogs down when the posters have gotten completely off task.

But hey you say it's censorship so it must be.

What's with all the question marks anyways.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 2:00 PM
hank are you sure you aren't Steffanie, steff, G5, or any of the numerous monikers that user used each time he got kicked off the site? Your rhetoric is just so very similar.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 5:57 PM
Joe Buck.

-- Posted by Jaded American on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 9:43 AM
This is news to me. When exactly did President Obama attempt to suppress Fox "News"? Nevermind, don't answer that because he didn't but that's just one of those boogeymen that the Republican Party and Conservatives keep making up to scare people.

What he did do was call Fox "News" out on their bogus claim to be fair and balanced

Just today I notice he is holding a town hall meeting in Nevada, so you would think all the cable news networks would be showing that (because it is news). Well Fox "News" is more concerned with Tiger Woods statement to break away from coverage of his statement which was 2 hours ago to actually cover some news.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:22 PM
Interesting that after the Ft. Hood attack conservatives and Fox "News" were just appalled that it was not considered an act of terrorism and yet a man flying a plane into an IRS building in Austin, TX is definitely not an act of terrorism because the Homeland Security say it isn't.

I guess the difference and the blatant hypocrisy is that the reason conservative and Fox "News" considered the Ft. Hood shooting terrorism is because the shooter was of Middle Eastern decent and the the guy that flew his plane into a federal building was a white guy. Maybe it's just me.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:37 PM
Wait a second hank are you saying with your quote "The IRS is not an international operation" that the IRS planned it's own bombing? You blamed one on the guy being a terrorist for an international muslim jihad against the United States, where you came up with that only one can assume.

It almost sounds like you are excusing the coward that flew his plane into a government building.

It also sounds like you don't believe in domestic terrorism. You keep telling everyone that they need to have a sliver of knowledge of current events which you clearly don't have but you might want to keep history in mind. In the US we have had far more domestic terrorism than foreign terrorism could even approach.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 4:56 PM
Works for me reformedrightwinger

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Feb 20, 2010, at 2:30 PM
It appears that my first prediction for the health care summit was right on the money. Not only are the Republicans claiming it was a trap (a theme they have been running with for weeks in the build up) they are even going as far as complaining about the way the room was set up. Ah, gotta love them, they are so sadly predictable.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 6:17 AM
Ahh the false argument already being played on the airwaves that poor little Republicans didn't get enough time.

But it's not surprising, they went in declaring that it was a trap and they weren't going to be treated fairly so the shocking thing would have been them coming out of the meeting singing a different tune. Fortunately Republicans are the most predictable creature in D.C. and continued on their meme of "poor us, no one listens to us".

It's interesting that whenever Bush talked down to Congressional Democrats you all loved it and thought that it showed that he meant business. Now all of a sudden you say Obama does the same to the Republicans and he's arrogant.

By the way which party is this "Democrat Party" you keep mentioning. I've never heard of them. I know there's the Republican Party and the Democratic Party and many different 3rd Parties, but I've never heard of the Democrat Party.

But you are right this was a desperate attempt to drive up poll numbers. That's why the President announced it more than a month in advance and gave Republicans ample opportunity to plan for this event because it was just plain old desperation. Boy howdy you called the President out on that one alright.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Feb 26, 2010, at 6:00 PM
I do need to correct you on one point senior, "Democrat Party" is an invention by Newt Gingrich.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Sat, Feb 27, 2010, at 7:14 AM
Oh this old meme again. The funniest thing that has come out of this supposed cult surrounding Obama and regarding him as a god is that only people who actually believe in any of it are the people that invented it. The only people that apparently believe that Obama is any kind of deity are all on the right side of the spectrum. And the whole thing of calling Obama B. Hussein Obama as if it's derogatory towards him is also laughable. People got over that 2 years ago, but at least I know that on this website you are still trying to slam him because of his middle name.

Thank you hankherndon for keeping the oldies going here.

But I'm being derogatory towards you hank (according to your definition) so I apologize. I don't want to upset you.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Tue, Mar 2, 2010, at 9:56 AM
Backassward Henri,

The remarkable thing that is coming out of personal experience, dealing with people in more than 20 states on a daily basis and reviewing a wide range of news and comment are two clear realities.

The average men and women who provided most of Candidate Obama's financing and precinct campaign support have been totally confused by all the lies being repeated ad nauseum.

The real "movers and shakers," especially those who are involved in any of the dozens of volunteer task forces, in military planning and the 50 or so major issues needing attention -- Are almost 100% favorable toward President Obama.

An uber-conservative business friend flew out of Dulles in January. His seatmate was military "star grade" in casual civvies and "shades."

The man exchanged the shades for bi-focals after settling into his window seat and was instantly recognizable from TV and front pages.

My friend jokingly declared the attire and shades were indeed "deep cover." Got one sharp glance in return.

When the steward came by with the cart, both ordered drinks, with a double scotch on the window.

Sometime later the "Star Man" laughed aloud.

Finally he said without preview, "I outlined the best plan my staff and I could put together and presented a brilliant supporting statement.

"That big-eared S.O.B. asked one question and exposed a fatal flaw. Never criticized, just asked his question."

My friend asked what "big-eared S.O.B." was referred to.

"That guy in the White House. My Commander-in-Chief and thank God he is there. Thirty military professionals in that room and all of us realized instantly he had spotted a real flaw we hadn't recognized in the hour of my presentation."

[I may be off a word or two, but this is an almost exact quote.]

My friend and I had quit discussing anything political because he had become a raver against Obama before early 2008.

The other thing the "Star Man" told him, "Prior to that one question, the President sat for nearly three hours without a word, listening to everyone else.

Then he asked the one question and saved American lives."

Henri,

Mike has pointed out the GOP/Conservative hypocrisy.

Our staunchly conservative GOP senator, who verbally assaults President Obama at least twice weekly, came home last week for a ribbon-cutting.

Completion of a "Stimulus Bill" funded project.

Guess who took full credit for that project, the improvement it has already made in lives and the jobs it provided.

That's right, Henri, that Senator who has publicly charged the President with "being an instrument of Satan."

That's hypocrisy.

-- Posted by HerndonHank on Fri, Mar 5, 2010, at 9:34 AM
By the way,

I can remember Wendell Wilkie and Thomas E. Dewey sneeringly refer to the "Democrat Party."

You can bet Warren Harding used the term deliberately, probably even Teddy Roosevelt.

I find it interesting that I get ripped for using the "Tea Baggers" own name for themselves.

While people who know it is incorrect, constantly abuse the term "Democrat Party" and insist it is all right.

[By the way, how many realize former NYC D.A. Thomas E. Dewey has been officially exposed for being in the pocket of one of the major N.Y. Mafia families. Bonnano (Joe Bananas) as I recall.

Dewey's crime fighting reputation came about because his financial benefactor fed him evidence about the other N.Y. Mafia Families and he was able to successfully prosecute.

Files have revealed J. Edgar Hoover knew, but kept quiet -- knowing he would have complete control over Dewey.

Hoover was seriously irritated that he had no control over Truman after being able to "hint" and get his way with FDR. [He knew about Lucy Mercer and FDR -- and that was a major hammer.]

-- Posted by HerndonHank on Fri, Mar 5, 2010, at 9:47 AM

Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration:

If you already have an account, follow this link to login
Otherwise, follow this link to register