Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Progress 2016 | Customer Service | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Democrats out of touch

August 4, 2013

Marlene Axtman, Jamestown Recently, Democrats have really out done themselves in the outlandish name-calling category....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Aug-23-13 6:57 PM

No, YOU'RE not getting it. The entire state has a drinking problem.




0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 9:31 AM

namexxx, you're not getting it yet.

Individuals = small brush

States = broad brush

Using a person's name = small brush

Using "you people" = broad brush

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 9:30 AM

Uh, ask locomotive what?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 9:30 PM

I'm not painting you people with a broad brush. I'm stating the truth:

N.D. drinks more beer per capita than any other state in the nation.

That's not an opinion. That's not a painted description of a state with an alcoholism and addiction problem. That's REALITY.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 6:37 PM

I forgot to mention which talking point.

Watch out, willgrr, your Fox news talking point is showing.

(Boy, they never get tired of that one, do they?)

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 6:17 PM

Yeah, right.

Watch out, willgrr, your talking point is showing.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 9:14 AM

That's another talking point (Pres. Bush is responsible) but I digress.

No, namexxx, you never said my phrase "Republicans are evil incarnate," but the sentiment is awfully close. Racist morons? Neanderthals? "Have another beer and go clean your gun?"

You keep saying these things. If you don't believe them, why do you say them? There's no other conclusion any reader could make.

FYI - I myself haven't drunk any alcoholic beverage in 26 years. There are others who are of my political bent who are also non-drinkers, of beer or any other alcoholic beverage.

Yet you continue to make broad assumptions about Republicans (and ND) for this readership, namexxx. That's what I'm challenging with my phrasing.

It wouldn't be right if I painted ALL Democrats, liberals or progressives with a broad brush, would it?

What about individuals? Is it too much trouble to deal with them?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 8:48 AM

Have another beer and go clean your gun.

I never said "Republicans are evil incarnate." I don't give you that much credit. I said you people are a bunch of racist morons.

You're pathetic. And now, to try and feel better about your pathetic lives, you blame everything on "Obama."

The proof of this, of course, is that you blame "Obama" for things that happened when George Bush was president!

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 8:05 AM

"Racist morons"

How could anyone disagree with this oh-so-enlightened statement?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-22-13 8:04 AM

This is just the favorite talking point of the Democrat party activists: Republicans are evil incarnate, or some other such hyperbolic statement.

Interesting how only one political party is horrible and it's the other party stating it over and over. Yeah, yeah.

Now if we go along to assume what the Democrats are assuming, that the Republican party is at an end, wouldn't that make the Democrat party a monolith in our political landscape? So are they scared of competition?

Most totalitarian regimes of the world prefer no competition. In fact, they do what they can to suppress and crush the opposition.

This seems no different. The Democrats use words of defamation rather than weapons of destruction to take out their political enemies, while declaring their own right standing at the same time. Sure, everyone's right in their own eyes.

C'mon, Democrats. Can't you "allow" others who disagree with your point of view to exist? You could be the "compassionate"

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-21-13 11:50 AM

Not all working hours are from 8 to 5. Was this an out-of-touch comment?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-21-13 9:14 AM

If you try to help the bottom 98% of the population it's Class Warfare, if you try to help the top 2%, it's "pro-growth"...John Fugelsang on the twitter

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-20-13 4:34 PM

"What happened to "pride" in people? Its no longer any problem to let some other person pay your way."?...billdoesntgetit Listen here bozo, Just who do you think pays for the business tax credit when a business buys healthcare coverage for their employees? Or the tax expenditure that effectively give a tax break to an employee who has his insurance paid for by his employer. That tax expenditure cost the Gov't more than 200 billion dollars per year in lost revenue. Both of these circumstances are effectively tax credits.

OHHHHH!!!! But these people are producers not takers, they pay taxes you say. WELL I DO TOO!!

Why don't you demonstrate some personal pride and produce some posts that contain facts?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-20-13 1:03 PM

Whistler---I agree we need less divisiveness, so I'm gonna tune into the Limpman's radio show...there isn't a hint of divisiveness there.

Is that where you got your idea that the President is divisive? The President hadn't lifted a finger when the Limpman wishes that he fails. Plus the Limpman cheered the stock markets decline in '09, don't say he didn't, I heard him. No divisiveness there, no.

Oh, just ran the numbers for a fictional family of four who purchase Health ins. with the ACA. With $49000 income they'll pay a $268 monthly premium..."Gosh Becky, maybe this year we can build that new deck" Gosh darn socialized medicine!!! Job killing Obamacare? Not for that deck builder! Painter, car salesman, retailer, vacation insurance company.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-20-13 11:19 AM

Hey, Everybody I just got may mail. A letter from BCBS. They're getting ready for the ACA and they're ready to help me negotiate the law. And they even have a nice calculator to run some numbers. Gee, I wonder what's in it for them? You can look it up too if you buy your own individual insurance as I do. I'll put it in the form of a sentence 'cause as everyone has learned here you can's send a link... "It starts with blue ND" dot etc. Takeoutthespaces.

You'd be jealous...Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha. Suckers.

Check your mail...Unless somebody else already buys your insurance, in that case you're just a "I got mine" sort of creep.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-20-13 11:03 AM

It is traditionally called an "administration" in the USA. Regime is reserved for dictatorship or tyrannical leaderships. Oops, I stepped in THAT one, you two bozos actually believe the President who was elected TWICE by majorities is a dictator and a tyrant. I have a difficult time imagining how anyone could be so delusional. Why are you so Un-American?

You two don't know much about living in a civil society where the wishes of the majority and minorities are respected.

I'll tell you where the regime's between your ears and you can never leave. A couple of sad, pathetic souls.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-20-13 10:32 AM

HEY!! billdoesntgetit--- How about this from Newt Gingrich...“We should insist that everyone above a certain level buy coverage (or, if they are opposed to insurance, post a bond),” he wrote in his 2008 book, ‘Real Change.’ “Meanwhile, we should provide tax credits or subsidize private insurance for the poor."

Hey dumbo!!! How is that different from the ACA? Huh? How? Obama gets a bill passed that would fly threw a Republican "regime", but for the fact that he is sitting in the "oval orifice", and it is met with nothing but resistance. Why don't you people sit back and see if any of your dire, unfounded, predictions come true? I predict some problems implementing the law but mostly because it is a complex enterprise, however obstructionism like calling for young people to refuse to purchase insurance is foolhardy and endangers those people who are foolish enough to take that tack.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-20-13 10:11 AM

Whistler---"regime"? Straight out of the Limpman's playbook...Got any original content?

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 11:00 AM

Perhaps the word "trillions" can be used when talking about policies, not just vacations.

"Slow growth and increasing inequality are ripping the social fabric of America — vanquishing the dreams of working families, saddling the young with onerous student debt and frustrating retirement plans.

"President Barack Obama is stirring passions by proposing government initiatives he hopes will stifle House Republican efforts to curb federal spending, but those can only end in tears.

"Early in his first term, he pushed through more than $4 trillion in deficit spending on stimulus, broader Medicaid benefits, alternative energy projects and other industrial policies.

"Through last fall, growth was an anemic 2.1 percent and has since slowed by half.

"He blames sequestration, which subtracted about $45 billion from government spending."

quotes from 7-30-13 newsmax article

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 10:04 AM

And I'll cite my source...

mediamatters . org/mobile/research/2009/06/01/drudge-ny-post-report-obamas-nyc-trip-cost-igno/150723

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 10:03 AM

CONASON: -- program by the president. Twenty-four thousand in the scope of the expenses of the presidency isn't really very much. I'm glad he paid for the dinner and the tickets himself, though, because it wouldn't be much of a date if he had, you know, had the taxpayers pay to take out his wife.

So, this is what the presidency is. When the president travels -- as George Bush did, as Bill Clinton did, as presidents have, you know, throughout history -- the government pays to keep them safe, to keep their communication secure. This is just -- this is part of the job.

O'DONNELL: All right, Joe Conason. Great to see you, Joe. Thanks so much for joining us.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 10:03 AM

O'DONNELL: -- those tickets. What would be the counter-argument here? Do the Republicans want the Obamas just to stay at home inside the White House --

CONASON: You know --

O'DONNELL: -- and not go out and socialize and, like --

CONASON: As somebody who lives in New York City, I mean, we here would see this as an economic development --


1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 10:03 AM

CONASON: Everybody knows what the right thing to do is --

O'DONNELL: Yeah, everybody knows that.

CONASON: -- in those circumstances.

O'DONNELL: Joe, let me put up on the screen some of the instances of what it cost. The travel expense estimate -- $24,000. There were three planes: one for the Obamas, two for staff and reporters -- and, of course, reporters do have to reimburse the government for that expense -- two helicopters, the motorcade into New York City, and dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets were $96 apiece. But Obamas paid for their own dinner and for --

CONASON: Right. Right.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 10:02 AM

CONASON: Well, you know, Norah, you have to wonder whether any of these people got exercised, for example, when President Bush spent something like 40 percent of his time at Camp David, Kennebunkport, and his ranch in Crawford. I don't know how much all of that travel cost the taxpayers, but nobody on the Democratic side said, "Oh, the president shouldn't be doing this" -- even though he was doing this before 9-11, during the war in Iraq.

I mean, this is -- I don't think anybody is really angry about this. I think this is, as you suggested, a cheap shot. And I -- you have to wonder whether the president would rather break a promise to his wife or suffer a cheap shot from the RNC. And I think that's a pretty easy choice, right?

O'DONNELL: Yeah, exactly. I think this man knows when he makes a promise to Michelle Obama, he should not break that promise. It's a good point.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-19-13 10:02 AM

From the 10 a.m. ET hour of MSNBC Live on June 1 (2009):

NORAH O'DONNELL (host): Yeah, exactly. You know, the president and Mrs. Obama took some time this weekend to enjoy dinner and a show in New York City. The first couple stopped traffic and turned heads in the Big Apple. And even though they made the trip on a smaller version of Air Force One, Republicans are pouncing -- criticizing, slamming the Obamas for putting on a show and winging it into the city for an evening out while another iconic American company prepares for bankruptcy. Those are the words at the RNC.

With me now live, Joe Conason, national correspondent for The New York Observer. All right, Joe -- cheap shot on the part of the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 111 comments Show More Comments


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web