CNN == Democratic Campagin ad!!!

[dr. freeze]

What a joke this channel has become!!!

Bunch of whiners crying "Help me government, HELP ME!!!!"

With shows like "Broken Government", "War on the Middle Class" etc. etc. how can anyone take this bunch of leftist clowns seriously???

Watch these guys long enough, one may want to check themselves into the morgue ASAP!!!

Save me government, help me!!!

I need you to control my life, savings account, job, family, retirement, EVERYTHING!!!!

I can't live without you, government!!!

Don't fail me now!!!

:142smilie :142smilie :142smilie

What a sad state our country has become listening to these clowns trying to dumb down the citizenry and hook us all up to government feeding tubes.

From the cradle to the grave, womb to the tomb, the government will be there for us forever!!!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

While Cheney uses word slapdown--I prefer bitchslap

CHENEY PRAISES WIFE'S 'SLAPDOWN' OF CNN'S WOLF BLITZER
Mon Oct 30 2006 13:07:04 ET

In a sit-down interview with Neil Cavuto set to air on FOX NEWS at 4pm EST, Vice President Cheney praises his wife's performance on CNN last Friday when she challenged the cable news network's editorial bias:

CAVUTO: Your wife, Mr. Vice President, created a little bit of a stir in an appearance on a rival news network last week, taking exception to the way that network portrayed the economy, the government, that things are going to hell in a hand basket. I'm sort of paraphrasing here. Actually, she was much more to the point that I'm being. What did you think of that?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I thought it was great. We refer to it around the house as the 'slapdown.' And she was very tough, but she was very accurate and very aggressive. And of course, she was in the business for a while. There was a time on that network when she used to host the show they had on for a long time called "Crossfire," on Sundays for a couple of years. So she spoke her mind, and I thought it was perfectly appropriate.

CAVUTO: Did she go into that kind of ticked off because she saw this week-long series on--one day a time -- everything that's bad with America, and she just said, you know what, I'm going to let it rip?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I'm sure she'd seen part of it, but, no, I think she just responded to the moment. But she's pretty tough and pretty aggressive, and that's exactly the way it ought to be. She presented, I though, a very strong case.

CAVUTO: Did you talk to her prior to her going on?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No.

CAVUTO: Did you talk to her afterwards?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I did.

CAVUTO: What did you tell her?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I told her I thought it was a sterling performance.
+++++++++++++++

but then again you have consider CNN small viewing audience and who they're playing to--

--and while on of media --lets look at the ultra liberal papers--NYT-LAT--Boston GlobeHow long these publications continue to have their circulation pummelted --and my goodness look who is gaining in circulation--in fact has almost caught NYT--is there a lesson here

POST BEATS NEWS
NOW 5TH LARGEST NEWSPAPER IN U.S.
By ANDY SOLTIS
October 30, 2006 -- The New York Post today surpassed the Daily News and The Washington Post to become the 5th largest newspaper in America after bucking the national trend and chalking up a whopping 5.1 percent jump in circulation.

The Post's average paid circulation was 704,011 for Monday to Friday in the six-month period ending Sept. 30, the Audit Bureau of Circulations reported.

That's an increase of 34,348 copies over the same period in 2005.

"This is a joyous occasion for the paper and its readers," said Post editor-in-chief Col Allan. "The first question we ask every morning is what do our readers - our bosses - want to see in tomorrow's paper. And then we get it for them - the best sports in town, great gossip and features, hard-hitting news, and opinion that shapes the debate."

The Daily News, which had been in 5th place, fell to 6th place with Monday-to-Friday circulation of 693,382. The Washington Post fell to 7th place with a circulation of 656,297, down 3.3 percent, from 678,780 the previous year.

"This is a great and historic day for The Post," said Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of News Corporation, which owns The Post.

"We have created a newspaper with a unique voice that reflects the heart and soul of New York, and today's publisher's statement, which for the first time places us ahead of the Daily News and in the top five newspapers in the country, is a testament to the vitality of the paper and the cherished role it plays in the life of this city."

The New York Post, founded by Alexander Hamilton on November 16, 1801, is the oldest continuously published daily newspaper in the United States.

Here are the top 25 daily newspapers in the U.S. by circulation (with percent change) for the six-month period ending September 2006.

1. USA Today: 2,269509, (-1.3%)
2. The Wall Street Journal: 2,043235, (-1.9%)
3. The New York Times: 1,086,798, (-3.5%)
4. Los Angeles Times: 775,766, (-8.0%)
5. The New York Post: 704,011, 5.1%
6. Daily News: 693,382, 1.0%
7. The Washington Post: 656,297, (-3.3%)
8. Chicago Tribune: 576,132, (-1.7%)
9. Houston Chronicle: 508,097, (-3.6%)
10. Newsday: 413,579, (-4.9%)
11. The Arizona Republic, Phoenix: 397,294, (-2.5%)
12. The Boston Globe: 386,415, (-6.7%)
13. The Star-Ledger, Newark, N.J.: 378,100, (-5.5%)
14. San Francisco Chronicle: 373,805, (-5.3%)
15. The Star Tribune, Minneapolis: 358,887, (-4.1%)
16. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 350,157, (-3.4%)
17. The Plain Dealer, Cleveland: 336,939, (-0.6%)
18. The Philadelphia Inquirer: 330,622, (-7.5%)
19. Detroit Free Press: 328,628, (-3.6%)
20. The Oregonian, Portland: 310,803, (-6.8%)
21. The San Diego Union-Tribune: 304,334, (-3.1%)
22. St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times: 288,676, (-3.2%)
23. The Orange County (Calif.) Register: 287,204, (-3.7%)
24. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch: 276,588, 0.6%
25. The Sacramento (Calif.) Bee: 273,609, (-5.4%)

 

[Chadman]

Are you two actually hugging right now?

:com:

By the way, I for one hope that our government (at least the one that pre-dates this administration) is around for my lifetime. Some people think it's the best government in the world. Others, like Freeze, well...you saw the Canadian hope from him previously. Not sure why you're still here, Doc.

 

[djv]

No doubt much of the middle class in the 25 to 75 range getting chit kicked out of it. And our Government has gotten good at spending money or giving it away for stupid reasons. They still wan't to call them self conservatives. Right! That's first joke on us.

 

[kosar]

Are you two actually hugging right now?

:mj07:

 

[kosar]

While we're on the subject of 'bitchslapping.'


RANGEL & VEEP IN ALL-OUT WAR
REP. RIPS 'S.O.B.' AFTER TAX ASSAULT

By GEOFF EARLE

October 31, 2006 -- WASHINGTON - Rep. Charles Rangel yesterday blasted Dick Cheney as a "son of a bitch" after the vice president said the Harlem lawmaker would raise taxes and destroy the economy if Democrats take control of the House.

The bitter war of words escalated to the point where the bombastic Rangel even questioned whether the tightly wound Cheney needed professional treatment - and mocked him for accidentally shooting his hunting buddy ealier this year.

Cheney fired the first shot when he predicted that Rangel - who is poised to chair the powerful House Ways and Means Committee if the Democrats seize the House next week - wouldn't continue "a single one" of President Bush's tax cuts.

"I think that would be bad for the economy," Cheney said on CNBC News. "I don't know if the stock market would like it."

He then got in a major hit, saying on the Fox News Channel, "Charlie doesn't understand how the economy works."

Many of Bush's 2001 tax cuts are set to expire in 2011 - meaning rates would jump back up again, boosting taxes by well over $1 trillion, unless Congress acts to continue the cuts.

"So if a man like Charlie Rangel were to be chairman of the committee, and sitting there with the gavel, all he has to do is not act, just don't call up the legislation, and there'll be a big tax increase," Cheney said.

The vice president's stinging comments were the latest in a series of White House statements intended to raise fears about Rangel, as well as other prominent Democrats, as a way to convince voters to stop them from taking over the House.

Contacted by The Post for a response, Rangel unloaded.

"He's such a real son of a bitch, he just enjoys a confrontation," Rangel fumed, describing himself as "warm and personable." Rangel said Cheney may need to go to "rehab" for "whatever personality deficit he may have suffered."

"When you have those sorts of problems, you're supposed to seek help," Rangel advised. "He ac- knowledged that he has problems with communication."

Asked whether he was resurrecting over-the-top charges he made last year that he believes Cheney is mentally ill, Rangel cracked, "I don't think he's shot anyone in the face lately, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt."

The vice president accidentally shot his hunting companion, then-78-year-old Harry Whittington, with a shotgun early this year.

Rangel's digs on Cheney recalled his statements last year that the vice president, who has had four heart attacks, was too sick to work.

"I would like to believe he's sick rather just mean and evil," Rangel, 76, told cable channel NY1.

"Sometimes I don't even think Cheney is awake enough to know what's going on. [Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld is the guy in Washington . . . running the country."

Cheney, 65, responded then, "I'm frankly surprised at his comments . . . They were so out of line it almost struck me that . . . Charlie was having some problem. Charlie is losing it, I guess."

Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride wouldn't respond directly to Rangel's latest broadsides.

"The vice president has been discussing tax policy, the fundamental difference in Republican and Democrat views on how to keep taxes low and the American economy growing," she said.

Cheney once famously told Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on the Senate floor to "go f- - - yourself" while Rangel once had a confrontation with Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) where the Capitol Police were called in.

Rangel said he is focused on Social Security, tax simplification and the Alternative Minimum Tax that is squeezing even some middle-income families - not what to do in 2011, when the Bush tax cuts expire.

"The president's not going to be around in 2010. I may not be on the committee," said Rangel, who recently said he'd quit Congress if the Democrats don't win control of the House.

"It's quite possible that I might want to extend the tax cuts," he said, without naming any specific tax cut that might continue.


geoff.earle@nypost.com

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20061004-090355-7594r.htm

Rangel and tax increases
TODAY'S EDITORIAL
October 5, 2006


If Democrats gain 15 seats in the House in the midterm congressional elections, New York Rep. Charlie Rangel will become chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, making him the principal gatekeeper for tax legislation in Congress.
In various interviews recently, Mr. Rangel has sent different messages. On Sept. 20, he told Bloomberg News that he "cannot think of one" of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush that merits renewal. Nearly all of those cuts expire at the end of 2010. When asked whether as chairman he would consider tax increases across the table, Mr. Rangel replied, "No question about it," according to the Sept. 26 edition of CongressDaily PM. But on the same day, Mr. Rangel told Fox News Channel's Neil Cavuto that "a retroactive increase in taxes" was "definitely not on the table," adding that he "would not roll back" any tax cuts that have been legislated to remain in effect through 2010. To clarify things, the Democratic staff of the Ways and Means Committee pointed to Mr. Rangel's interview with MarketWatch. Citing Mr. Rangel, MarketWatch reported on Tuesday that "a Democratic-controlled Ways and Means Committee wouldn't attempt to pull the plug on any of the first-term Bush tax cuts before they expire in 2010."
Mr. Rangel, of course, voted against the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts; he voted against the 2006 measure that extended the 2003 cuts from the end of 2008 to the end of 2010; and he has vociferously opposed making the 2001 and 2003 cuts permanent. Nevertheless, his repeated pledge not to pursue any "roll back" through 2010 is noteworthy.
To be sure, even if a "rollback" effort were undertaken during the next Congress (2007-2008), it is safe to say that it would never achieve the two-thirds majority in both chambers that would be necessary to override the inevitable veto from Mr. Bush. In the absence of Mr. Rangel's commitment not to pursue rollbacks, it is easy to imagine a scenario in which Democrats could muster majorities in both chambers in 2009 to ram through a reconciliation bill replete with rollbacks (reconciliation measures are not subject to filibuster in the Senate) that would be gladly signed by, say, President Hillary Clinton, who joined Mr. Rangel in voting against the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
Thus, Mr. Rangel's promise of "no rollbacks" means the top individual income-tax rate would remain 35 percent through 2010. President Clinton and a Democratic Congress raised the top rate from 31 percent to 39.6 percent in 1993 after President George H.W. Bush had increased it from 28 percent to 31 percent in 1990. Enacted in 1997, the $500 child tax credit was increased to $1,000 in the 2001 and 2003 tax bills, and will remain in effect. As high as 70 percent as recently as 1980, the top tax rate for dividend income was lowered in 2003 from 38.6 percent to 15 percent, where it would remain through the end of this decade. The top tax rate on capital gains, which had been reduced from 28 percent to 20 percent in 1997 and then to 15 percent in 2003, will remain at that level through 2010. Marriage-penalty relief, the 10 percent income-tax bracket and reduced marginal rates for middle-income workers will also stay in effect for the next four years if Mr. Rangel chairs Ways and Means, regardless of who is elected president in 2008.

 

[kosar]

Hey, i'm no fan of Rangel's (and definitely not Pelosi for that matter), I was just going along with the 'bitch-slapping' theme.

 

[Nosigar]

Hey, i'm no fan of Rangel's (and definitely not Pelosi for that matter), I was just going along with the 'bitch-slapping' theme.

:mj07: Sure, Bernie.
Coincidentally you always counter a pseudo-conservative's remark with some socilaist's remark. Never vice-versa

You, ole centrist, you!

:scared Happy Halloween :scared

 

[kosar]

:mj07: Sure, Bernie.
Coincidentally you always counter a pseudo-conservative's remark with some socilaist's remark. Never vice-versa

You, ole centrist, you!

:scared Happy Halloween :scared

Good to see ya around, Nosigar. Where ya been hiding?

Actually, just kind of a coincidence, I guess. I was reading the hard copy of the very right wing NY Post this morning as I do almost every day(I love their opinion area and their writers who are better than the NYT or just about anybody else) and saw that stuff with Rangel and Cheney which was on the front page. Then I went to the NY Post website and found it.

Probably wouldn't have posted anything, but I saw Waynes post about Dick's wife 'bitch slapping' somebody. Just thought it was kind of ironic.

I definitely don't have much love for Cheney, maybe even less than I have for Dean, Gore or Kerry. Or maybe 'vice versa.' Tough call.

Meanwhile, wake me up when you, or any of the other lock-step folks here say anything strong against this admin or Iraq. Or for that matter, against any leading member of the republican party.

I express strong negative opinions on members of both parties, depending on the situation. You can mock the 'centrist' thing, but you know better.

At least my post got you out of the woodwork as I always read and appreciate your posts.

What's your opinion on how Iraq has gone, BTW? I don't think i've ever seen one post from you about this. From the beginning of the occupation until now. What say you?

You make very intelligent posts about a myriad of issues, but you avoid the abortion in Iraq. Can't say I blame you. :sadwave:

 

[kosar]

Coincidentally you always counter a pseudo-conservative's remark with some socilaist's remark. Never vice-versa

Funny how Cheney/Wayne(not sure who you're talking about) is a 'psuedo' conservative, yet Rangel is a (not 'psuedo') socialist.


:142smilie :mj07:

 

[dr. freeze]

dont wnat to put words in Nosigar's mouth, but....

not sure any true Conservative would spend like the Bush/Cheney administration

that is why the description of "pseudo-conservative" is appropriate

as far as Rangel, i cannot seem to find anything that would make me think that he is not a socialist

 

[kosar]

as far as Rangel, i cannot seem to find anything that would make me think that he is not a socialist

I really don't know if he's a 'socialist' or not, Freeze. I do know I have flinched whenever I have seen him on TV over the last 4 years or whatever. He reminds me of Jackson, Sharpton, etc.

At least that's how he comes off.

I've never seen so much (potential) power being attributed to the (potential) chairman of the W & M committee as I have in the last 2 months. Good strategy by Rove and Dr. Evil.

You know, as if Rangel would have total control of tax rates if the dems take the house.

Only the most ignorant would fall for that, but then again, here we are in year 6.

 

[djv]

It surprised me someone woke Cheney up. I thought they had him hid in the capitol basement.
And for him to start talking about something he has no knowledge of. Oh Well.