Can’t pay for the government you’ve already got? Make it bigger!

This would be hilarious if it wasn’t so damnably sad.  The New Mexico state legislature had a devil of a time balancing its budget this year, so what did those geniuses do?  Why, they passed a bill creating a new cabinet department!  In this case, the Department of Hispanic Affairs, which, as I explain in my New Mexico Independent column today, we most emphatically do not need.

Thankfully, Governor Bill Richardson had the good sense to veto this unfunded mandate, but could he just veto it and leave it at that?  God forbid.  He’s a Democrat, after all, so he had to waffle and backpedal and create a Hispanic Affairs advisory council and promise to work with next year’s legislature to create an Office of Hispanic Affairs.  Oh, okay.  We can’t afford the Department, so let’s just not call it a department.

Those of you who don’t live in New Mexico may not realize just how different “Hispanic” in New Mexico is from Hispanic in any other state in the U.S.  My column will enlighten you.

Comments 28

  1. potwor wrote:

    I don’t understand what you have against Hispanics. What’s wrong with creating a Department or a cabinet that addresses issues specific to the Hispanic community? Will it really bankrupt New Mexico to do this? I doubt it. Moreover, a Hispanic friendly department will be more likely to help New Mexico’s numerous Hispanic constituents. The Federal Govt has a department of Veterans Affairs. Should they abolish that department to save money or does it provide vital services to veterans? I don’t know. Maybe you’re just a cheapskate.

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 5:28 pm
  2. Brigette Russell wrote:

    What do I have against Hispanics? Did you even read my column??????

    And yes, I am a cheapskate when it comes to government spending. It’s called fiscal responsibility. It’s my tax money and yours, after all.

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 5:59 pm
  3. Pot War wrote:

    Yes, I read your column. And, no, I didn’t need anyone to translate it for me, thank you very much.

    Do you think the federal govt should eliminate the Dept of Veterans Affairs?

    And why do you read the obituaries so much? Pretty morbid if you ask me. Also kind of weird that you pay attention to how much intermarriage goes on when reading people’s death sheets.

    One last thing. How do you feel about legalizing pot?

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 6:42 pm
  4. Bowden Russell wrote:

    Oh God, a pot-head.

    Don’t bother with him B.

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 8:01 pm
  5. Pot War wrote:

    Mr. Bowden,

    I don’t do drugs or pot, but I think they should be legalized so the govt can focus on real problems like the disastrous state of the U.S. economy. Besides, legalizing the weed could bring in a lot of revenues, which in turn could be used to offset any minor costs from a Department of Hispanic Affairs. In fact, I think it should be part of a joint bill called the Cheech and Chong Relief Act.

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 8:35 pm
  6. Pot War wrote:

    Senor Bowden,

    It might surprise you, but I actually vote for both democrats and republicans (can you say the same?). Like the greatest of our founding fathers, namely El Presidente Jorge Washington, I eschew political parties and am interested solely in the issues.

    That said, I believe that Brigette’s concern about the cost of a Department of Hispanic Affairs is both overstated and misguided. The govt wastes crazy sums of money on all sorts of fools errands — such as the govt’s war against pot — but she chooses to focus her outrage on a relatively modest proposal to create a department of Hispanic affairs in a heavily Hispanic state. That department, if properly run, could do a lot of good for the people it is intended to serve. And while it may not be intended to serve people like you, do you really have a problem with helping Hispanics?

    Moreover, I have yet to hear either one of you say whether you think the Dept of Veterans Affairs should be eliminated. Do we really need a special department for veterans when their issues can be handled by other federal agencies? The failure to answer this simple question reveals the hypocrisy behind your xenophobic position.

    Instead of naming calling, why not address the arguments I raise. No, you’d prefer only like-minded people posting here so that you can feel superior among your back-patting friends. The problem with such a mindset is that it leads to bad public policy as well as cognitive dissonance (ask Senorita Brigette what “cognitive dissonance” means).

    Lastly, I don’t smoke pot but it might help you resolve some of your anger issues. Seriously, I promise you that the Apocalypse is NOT coming — even if New Mexico creates a Dept of Hispanic Affairs.

    Viva la raza!

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 3:16 am
  7. JTripodous wrote:

    Let me get this straight. You have lived here for three years of your life and have read the obituaries with an eye out for Anglo-names descendent from Hispanic progenitors. You know that many Hispanic and Anglo people live in the same neighborhoods and attend the same churches. You can identify doctors, lawyers, accountants, CEOs, dentists and other successful people of Hispanic descent, therefore Hispanics, as a group, are succeeding and the term no longer has any political meaning anyway. So, because some – let’s say many – Hispanics live amongst non-Hispanic white people their ethnicity no longer has political meaning and Hispanics are not in need of help or protection? I hope that is not really how you think because if it is, you need to get out more.

    How many poor people do you know personally? How many are Hispanic? How many are Native American? How many are not white? How many people in NM live below the poverty line and what is the breakdown by ethnicity? Those are the kind of facts you need to know to argue against, or, indeed, for such an idea. I think it is a well known fact that the number of children living below the poverty line in NM is disproportionately Hispanic. Are you disputing that? That would be the way to go about it.

    There is now a black President and a black woman billionaire who appointed him, so I guess, using your logic, black people are on an equal footing with whites now too and their ethnicities are meaningless. Yes, I am making a joke but that is not far from what you are saying.

    Your position against the department as an unfunded mandate does make sense; however, your article makes it clear to me that the unfunded mandate isn’t really your issue. You just don’t think Hispanics need or deserve it and you should just come out and say so.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 5:46 am
  8. Dan wrote:

    The Bowdens (and most Republicans in general) have a very selective approach to fiscal conservatism: Unfunded mandates are awesome if they involve invading foreign countries for no particular reason but they totally suck if they involve helping the lower classes. They are awesome if they’re disguised as “tax cuts” but they suck if they’re disguised as “tax credits”. You get the idea.

    Personally I agree that there’s no need for a department of Hispanic affairs in New Mexico not least because the a super-majority of the state government is Hispanic. The real need is for more help for the Native population.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 6:51 pm
  9. Brigette Russell wrote:

    Moreover, I have yet to hear either one of you say whether you think the Dept of Veterans Affairs should be eliminated. Do we really need a special department for veterans when their issues can be handled by other federal agencies? The failure to answer this simple question reveals the hypocrisy behind your xenophobic position.

    First, the failure to answer this simple question is because I’ve had a small child running a high fever and vomiting all over creation.

    Second, I do not appreciate being called a hypocrite or a xenophobe on my own blog. I’ll put up with a lot on the NMI site because I merely work there, but this is MY site, and I’ll thank you to have a little courtesy. My husband called you names, so your beef is with him, not me. I treat people with respect, and expect the favor to be returned.

    Third, xenophobe is the wrong term, since the vast majority of NM Hispanics are Americans, and xenophobia means fear of foreigners.

    Fourth, I haven’t looked into the costs and functions of the Veterans’ Affairs Dept in sufficient depth to be able to answer the question. I think a LOT of govt depts could be gotten rid of, and I suspect that the VAD is one whose functions could be handled by the DOD, but this is just an off the cuff response. Generally, I like to get more background before I take positions.

    Fifth, no, I do not support legalization of marijuana or any other drugs. And no, I don’t want to reinstate the prohibition of alcohol (HUGE sigh). And yes, I realize you probably think this makes me a big fat hypocrite. You’re entitled to your opinion.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 7:07 pm
  10. Brigette Russell wrote:

    They are awesome if they’re disguised as “tax cuts” but they suck if they’re disguised as “tax credits”.

    A tax cut means you’re still paying taxes, just less than you would be without the cut. A tax credit means that even if you’re not paying any taxes at all, the govt sends you a check. What, may I ask, is wrong with being opposed to the govt simply handing out money? By calling it a “tax credit” instead of “free money from the govt” (or, more accurately, “money we took away from some of your fellow citizens”) it makes it sound just like a tax cut. It isn’t.

    When 10% of the population pays 72% of the federal income taxes, and a Republican suggests reducing some of the taxes paid by that 10%, people howl at the injustice and call it welfare for the rich. Welfare would be flat out giving them money, not reducing the amount of money the govt takes away from them. It’s still taking their money, just a slightly lower — but still significant — amount.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 7:18 pm
  11. Rob wrote:

    Mr. Pothead,
    Before you ask, I do not think the Department of Veteran’s Affairs should be abolished. It IS wrong to establish a department that is based on race. There are such things as the EEOC already established. Then there are non-government agencies such as the NAACP. They are not government funded. Look around Santa Fe, Hispanics are not the minority. I won’t waste my time quoting statistics to prove the obvious.
    You cannot possible make the connection between the VA and the DHS (?). The VA is open to all veterans regardless of race, color, creed, religion, political affiliation, gender, sexual persuasion, etc… The State of New Mexico (and the USA) is in financial trouble already. If the state had a SURPLUS, then a DHA might be realistic financially, even if it is not unethical to found a government agency based solely on race. Next would come the Department of African American Affairs, Department of Asian Affairs, … where would it stop??
    If you would look at the article from and UNBIASED standpoint, Brigette is saying it is financially IRRESPONSIBLE and IMPRACTICAL when people are already taxed enough! Do you not pay taxes, Mr. Pothead? Do you want to pay MORE taxes? *NEWS FLASH* More taxes is how a new department would be funded!
    Is it not already expensive enough to live in Santa Fe? If people think living there is unaffordable now, let the state start new departments and see how expensive it will become.
    Furthermore, how is Brigette degrading Hispanics? A lot of people read the obituaries out of curiosity. Does it make her a racist because she stated the obvious difference between Gonzalez and Johnson? That is utterly ridiculous.
    Lastly, Dan. Your statement about fiscal conservatism and helping “lower classes” as you succintly stated, is accurate if you define “lower classes” as those UNWILLING to work for a living. Of course if you had your way, we would all be peasants. But hey, at least we would all be equal. Great, really great. Grow up.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 7:21 pm
  12. Brigette Russell wrote:

    Let me get this straight. You have lived here for three years of your life and have read the obituaries with an eye out for Anglo-names descendent from Hispanic progenitors.

    Good Lord. I don’t read them “with an eye out” for anything. It’s just something I’ve noticed. I notice a lot of things. I’m a historian by education, and historians are trained to notice things — lots of things, random things, anything. You make it sound like I’ve got some sort of obsessive fixation. How many hundreds of posts on this blog have I written? How many of them have one damned thing to do with race or ethnicity?

    You want to know what started me thinking about it? I can go into a lot of boring detail in an attempt to reassure you that I’m not some horrible bigot, but it wouldn’t do any good, because it’s pretty obvious you’ve already got your mind made up. I’m not wasting one more minute of the time I could better spend with my kids arguing with a lot of closed-minded people who have read 800 words out of the millions I’ve written and decided I’m some sort of monster.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 7:25 pm
  13. Rob wrote:

    Sorry for all the typos in my earlier comment. It’s clearly the government’s fault I don’t proofread.
    I just had a money-saving idea! How about a Department for People Who are not White Affairs?

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 7:54 pm
  14. Dan wrote:

    A tax cut means you’re still paying taxes, just less than you would be without the cut. A tax credit means that even if you’re not paying any taxes at all, the govt sends you a check. What, may I ask, is wrong with being opposed to the govt simply handing out money? By calling it a “tax credit” instead of “free money from the govt” (or, more accurately, “money we took away from some of your fellow citizens”) it makes it sound just like a tax cut. It isn’t.

    This is just semantics from a budgetary standpoint. Either way they’re almost always unfunded mandates with some handwaving about how they’ll improve the economy and thus revenues. The point is that Republicans for the most part only care about fiscal conservatism when they’re not in charge of the executive branch. Eight years of Bush II’s giant deficits – not a single tea party. Four years of Bush I’s giant deficits – no tea parties. Eight years of Reagan’s giant deficits – no tea parties.

    The GOP is just a self-absorbed as the Dems are. There’s no real ideology in play. The GOP is the party of the rich and as a result they favor policies that favor the rich, full stop. This whole tea party effort is a result of agitation on the part of the GOP’s opinion makers. Its not grass roots, its pure astroturf – with Fox News, Limbaugh, and the rest of the usual suspects hyping it nonstop, just like they achieved with the tiny “pro-war” rallies that they managed to get the media to cover in 2002.

    Posted 15 Apr 2009 at 10:31 pm
  15. Pot War wrote:

    Senorita Brigette,

    As evidenced by your response, you are one classy lady. Sorry to hear that your child was sick. I always drove my mama crazy when I was sick little nino.

    I agree that name calling is unnecessary but I disagree with where you draw the line. Calling someone a hypocrite is not an insult if you are merely saying that the person is taking inconsistent positions. I’m sure I’ve done it myself for that matter — hobgoblins, little minds like Bowden’s, and all that.

    As for the term xenophobia, I still believe that my usage was correct. The Greek word xenos means both stranger and foreigner. Check the almighty and powerful Wikipedia god if you doubt me. So I stand by point, which is that although I do not believe you are racist I believe that you have some discomfort with my Hispanic brethren. That’s OK though because I believe everyone is a little bit xenophobic.

    As for the department of Veteran Affairs, I am in favor that too, especially if they are Hispanic veterans. But I respect your position that you need more information. More people should be like that, especially those who watch Fox News.

    I am not surprised by your position on pot. Is it based on a moral concern for people’s health or something else? Again, I do not use pot nor do I use tobacco, but I’d rather tobacco be illegal and marijuana be legalized because I think the evils of the tobacco weed are far worse than the supposed evils of the whacky weed. Do you think tobacco should be made illegal?

    Anyway, I enjoy your columns. They’re entertaining, even if sometimes annoying. Alas it is time for me to go get some margaritas! (Thank God you don’t want to bring back prohibition.) I’ll deal with Rob later. Even drunk, I can handle that racist jerk.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 1:38 am
  16. Rob Kerns wrote:

    Pot War,
    Classic liberal statement. I knew that was coming. What did I say that could possibly imply that I am a racist? Sounds like you are the racist. I guess it doesn’t really matter. Play the racist card. It’s the easy way out. Liberals are good at finding that.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 3:11 am
  17. JT wrote:

    I don’t think that you are a “terrible bigot” at all. Nor do I believe you are anything like a monster but your position didn’t seem truly based in the logic you began with, regarding unfunded mandates. Had you left it there, I don’t think you would have heard comment from me at all. Perhaps I went too far in my response and didn’t mean to treat you unkindly.

    I don’t like Native Americans myself but that is because my parents owned a liquor (“Fire Water”) store near a reservation and they were always begging for more whiskey and cigarettes on credit and bitching about my father’s wooden Indian in the window. It made me so sick my cousin and I once watered down some booze with our urine and sold it to a drunk, but that was years ago. No offense meant to any decent, hardworking, teetotaler native Americans, should one actually exist and find this blog.

    The point I was trying to make, poorly perhaps, was that your race and upbringing do play a part, like it or not. Even if, by some miracle, it didn’t people will assume it does because we are all like that. I am part Spanish myself, though the better part is Greek Cypriot. Hispanics in NM do better than the rabble that peoples the eastern sections of Los Angeles, I will admit, but there are many poor Hispanics in NM too and they may need help. They are not necessarily mainstreamed by the standards one would use in CA. Does that mean I support the creation of such a department? No, it doesn’t, any more than I think we should waste a nickel saving some low-life native Americans based on some ludicrous claim that we stole land from them. Too many people are unaware that they had no sense of property in their culture, if one can call it a “culture” at all.

    Again, if I came across as mean, pardon me.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 3:20 am
  18. Dan wrote:

    Lastly, Dan. Your statement about fiscal conservatism and helping “lower classes” as you succintly stated, is accurate if you define “lower classes” as those UNWILLING to work for a living. Of course if you had your way, we would all be peasants. But hey, at least we would all be equal. Great, really great. Grow up.

    Spoken like a true Ayn Rand disciple manchild. Believe it or not I actually do have to pay some of my taxes at the top marginal rate. This nonsense about the lower classes being “unwilling to work” is the kind of thing only a smug child of privilege could believe. The lower classes by and large work much, much harder than the upper classes.

    I guess the difference between us Rob is that I can understand that I was born with cultural advantages that gave me a leg up. That’s not to say that I was, as the famous and very true saying about George Bush goes, “born on third base and thinks he hit a triple”.

    This entitled mindset that Republicans have about how they deserve their success through their supposed hard work and the pretense that it has nothing to do with the advantages that the vast majority of them were born with is what makes the GOP look so infantile to the rest of the country (and the rest of the world). Republicans all think they’re John Galt but in reality they’re mostly George W Bush, successful because of who they were born to and the networking that they were able to do as a result. You need look no further than the majority of the Bush administration to see the real Republican model of success: a bunch of incompetent clowns who met the right people in prep school.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 3:38 am
  19. Dan wrote:

    In other right wing lunacy news, conservative superhero Rush Limbaugh was so desperate to attack the President Obama today that he chose to side with the Somalian pirates for authorizing the naval commanders in the field to use their own judgment as to whether force is necessary.

    When is the GOP going to get some adults to lead again instead of these infantile children that have a death-grip on the party?

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 3:49 am
  20. Pot War wrote:

    Senorita Rob,

    Forgive any misspellings. As the Partridge family used to sing, I went out and got happy — by having a few margaritas!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EOZska_OLI

    I must say that gringa Susan Dey was hot both then and on LA Law. Now, well not so much.

    What makes you a racist? Well for starters have you ever made sweet love to a beautiful mamacita? I thought not. You probably only find white women attractive. Admit it! As we all know, admitting it is the first step to curing your disease.

    More to the point, you called me a Pothead even though I made it very clear that I do not use pot. That is just a slur against my Hispanic heritage, which makes you, mi amigo, a racist.

    Further, you accused me of being biased merely because I did not agree with Brigette’s position. I respectfully disagree with her, but you resort to name calling, which makes you an obvious racist. Is your opposition to the Dept based solely on cost or do you find the very notion of a Dept of Hispanic Affairs offensive? Which is it? I bet it’s the latter, but you wish you use the cost issue as a pretext to hide your racism. I, however, am not fooled.

    I hope that Jesus Christ cures you of your illness. If not, may the almighty and powerful Wikipedia god have mercy on your soul.

    Buenas noches!

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 4:04 am
  21. benito_a wrote:

    Should of shown up here earlier. Brigette’s teabagging brethren were encircling me at the Independent.

    I started all the ruckus at the Independent in the comments section and I’ll present the comment that I believe sums up the situation, which was in response to being called drunk and just wanting a handout:

    In my writing throughout this thread, my overall point is that Brigette is coming from a very limited perspective and some very cursory facts surrounding the bill were not even presented, like… there is a Hispanics Affairs Dept. in 34 other states, the bill passed overwhelmingly in the Legislature, there is currently already a Native American Affairs Dept. as well as an African American Affairs Dept in the state (from your comment above, you are apparently unaware of this)… apparently the people associated with these departments are lazy and not willing to pull themselves up by their bootstraps in your estimation.

    Amigo, mi amigo if you will, I can assure you that I’m not lazy, nor diabolically scheming for a government handout, nor drinking a bottle of tequila under a cactus. I’m not ranting for a Hispanic Affairs Dept., I’m arguing for a reasonable perspective. I’m actually completely ok with people not wanting this, but someone who’s been here three years and cites the number of hispanics she encounters in decent jobs as her justification for there being no need for one, is flimsy at best, arrogant and hurtful at worst.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 6:31 am
  22. Rob wrote:

    Pot War,
    Still playing that racist card? You’re just making assumptions and pinning them to me. Very weak.

    I said you were biased because instead of focusing on the topic, you simply thow out the racist card whenever someone disagrees with you.

    What I said was that a DHA is not feasible financially. I would like to hear what you and other hispanics would hope to gain from a DHA.

    Dan, I would say I started my life on first base. Halfway through I went back to home plate. Yes, I still believe that old fashioned hard work will get you around the bases.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 1:21 pm
  23. JT wrote:

    Dan, you don’t really believe that native Americans need more help do you? Do you know how much help they already get and what they do with that help? They get a lot of help and they drink it or squander it. Some have gotten smart, probably with the aid of non-natives, and gone commercial in the casino business but most just sit and whine about how they were taken by the government, which means the White Man. They are being kept down by the government and its aid. Do you think my Grand parents (who came from Cyprus) would have gotten jobs and become successful merchants if the government had handed THEM a welfare check and gave them housing? NO WAY! Admittedly, the native Americans may soon go the way of the dodo but can we stop that with government money? No, nor should we try. You should also keep in mind that many people we call Hispanics are actually native Americans from Central or South America after all. You can easily tell them apart because they have the weird, flat, square faces whereas the true Spaniards have a softer, Latin (European), more intelligent appearance to them. That is not to say they are actually more intelligent but they simply look that way.

    Also, the term “unfunded mandate” has a meaning and, respectfully, I don’t think you know what it is. The war was not an unfunded mandate. No war we ever had was that I can recall. And a tax cut vs a tax credit is NOT a matter of semantics. How can you say that IF YOU pay taxes? Be honest, are you an adult and part of the workforce? It is ok if you are not, but for people like me it sounds silly to say what you said.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 4:28 pm
  24. JT wrote:

    Benito,

    So are you FOR or against the idea of a Department of Hispanic Affairs and do you support the departments for the two other ethnic groups you mentioned?

    I understand why we have a Native American Affairs Department, though I think I made it clear that I am against it. The state has a significant amount of reservation land which the federal government has no immediate plans to seize and the feds also pump significant amounts of welfare to these people, so the state has a specific and identifiable interest there. Also, they, frankly, need a government babysitter and maybe an historian to record the final phases of their self-extinction.

    I am part Hispanic and I do not think we need any such department for several reasons, only one of which Ms. Russell touched upon in her piece. We do not have the money and there is no specific purpose that should require a special department dedicated to a specific ethnic group as if they deserve to be treated differently. Why not have a Non-Hispanic White Affairs Department? Or a Department of Jewish Affairs? I know this Samoan guy near Algodones who is barely making a living and will let you sleep with his Mexican wife for money, maybe we should have a Somoan Affairs Department to help him get back on track too. Funny, but like the Native Americans he is desperately poor but can somehow always find the money for booze. I almost ran him down when he was stumbling around drunk on 85. His wife is worth the $20 if you are out this way.

    Back to my point – the CORRECT and least controversial way to go about this would be for the state to have no such departments but to have a single department dedicated to the poor or the struggling of all ethnic backgrounds as a single group. Like a Department of Loser Affairs or some euphemism for loser or failure.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 4:31 pm
  25. Dan wrote:

    Also, the term “unfunded mandate” has a meaning and, respectfully, I don’t think you know what it is. The war was not an unfunded mandate. No war we ever had was that I can recall.

    How are Bush’s various wars not unfunded mandates? He had to get emergency funding every six months for them ever since they started (because he thought people were stupid enough to not notice if he didn’t include them in the actual budget, which apparently worked on conservatives.) Tax cuts and credits that are not offset by spending cuts are unfunded mandates, period.

    And a tax cut vs a tax credit is NOT a matter of semantics. How can you say that IF YOU pay taxes? Be honest, are you an adult and part of the workforce? It is ok if you are not, but for people like me it sounds silly to say what you said.

    I can say that because I’m not a selfish infant and I understand that civilized society requires taxation and that civilized society is what’s responsible for my success just as much as the education I earned and the work I do.

    That some conservatives are fundamentally incapable of understanding their debt to society is continually baffling to me.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 7:00 pm
  26. JT wrote:

    Dan,

    Just looked in and I agree that you are not an infant. You are a teenager or a college kid who doesn’t work for a living and probably lives off his Mom and Dad and probably still under their roof. You don’t fool me.

    No one disputes that taxes have a purpose but my comment stands and perhaps you need to learn your terms before you start typing. I restate that the term has a specific meaning called a “definition” which you can look up. It doesn’t mean what Dan wants it to mean.

    I am glad that you don’t think you pay too much in taxes, but how much do they take out of your McDonald’s paycheck anyway? Is it Circle K? I can see that you are one day going to make it into management in one or the other.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 7:20 pm
  27. Dan wrote:

    I see we’re at the second stage of conservative argument now. First stage: state your opinions as facts and disregard all the contrary evidence. Second stage: accuse your opponent of being too young and/or not wealthy enough to argue with you. You and Bowden should hang out.

    I’m in my mid thirties and barely break the six figure category income-wise. Is that sufficient penis measuring or do we have to get more specific?

    Your little racist screed about Native Americans above is a pretty good indicator of your character. I imagine Brigette will be not be pleased to see you arguing on her side while simultaneously going off on tangential racist rants.

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 8:37 pm
  28. JT wrote:

    Dan,

    Funny how you have a problem with me having a problem with Native Americans – something I freely admit and I well explained why. I am sure you never say anything bad about any race or ethnic group because you are not a racist. You can call me one all you like, considering the source of the insult, it makes me laugh.

    You are not at all prejudiced, Dan, though you know conservatives better than we know ourselves apparently and I guess you are the hero in this imaginary play of yours where we all adored Bush and listened unthinkingly while you knew better because you stay on top of things! I am sure you read anti-Bush blogs daily. I wonder if you would even lie about it. I bet you even called Bush and his supporters fascists, didn’t you? As terms and their actual definitions have no meaning for you beyond what you imagine that meaning to be, I would not be surprised. I, myself, don’t go to anti-anything blogs or websites and I am educated enough to know that you are not well educated and, in all likelihood if you are telling the truth about your age, uneducable. But, fortunately for me that is your family’s problem and not mine. No one is pure anything, Dan, and that includes me. I am fiscally conservative and regarding social-support programs (largely due to being fiscally conservative and having seen a welfare state in action) but I am rather liberal when it comes to other matters like civil unions, etc.

    You are worse than a fool, Dan. You are a patsy. I know many intelligent people who are left leaning, including many of my friends and I myself have no problem with helping people who need help TEMPORARILY but in the end the government should not be in the business of supporting failed people or businesses. High taxes have never been known to help an economy and you can feel free to point out any instance where that statement is wrong. You won’t find one. That is where I am coming from and you can take from that and figure out my actual positions in the world of politics, regardless of administration or party. The math is simple. As regards militarism, I support the idea that with enemies one needs to show strength and the willingness to use it. I did support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, though not the follow-up in the former. I also supported the idea of direct, overwhelming military force to save people in Africa and from genocide. Not that you would care a damn about that, save maybe to buy a t-shirt with Clooney’s face on it.

    I can’t imagine why you refer to penis size as that was old when I was in high school. Yeah, I am sure you are in your thirties and I am sure you pull down what you say you pull down but at least you didn’t tell a bigger lie by saying you’re a millionaire. I am new to this blog and don’t know Ms. Russell or Mr. Bowden but what they think about what I write is immaterial to me. Just worry about your own pathetic, ignorance-riddled rants that prove you are either a child or an idiot. I gave the benefit to you when I guessed the former. I am, of course, assuming you don’t suffer from a diagnosed mental illness, but maybe I shouldn’t make such assumptions.

    Good luck in life. You are really going to need it and your kids are going to need it more.

    One more thing, Dan. For shits and giggles why don’t you lay out how we conservatives think and the stages. I would love to read it. LMAO!!!!!!!!

    Posted 16 Apr 2009 at 10:04 pm

Trackbacks & Pingbacks 2

  1. From Moralia - And you thought tea and chile didn’t go together on 16 Apr 2009 at 2:13 pm

    […] I’m not sure, but then again, it’s become standard operating procedure on the left to call anyone you disagree with a racist, and consider the argument […]

  2. From Moralia - Tea and antipathy on 18 Apr 2009 at 6:58 am

    […] me! Oh, thank God, Dr. Garofalo has diagnosed my disorder. I don’t really hate blacks and Hispanics and gays and everyone else who doesn’t look and think and mate exactly like me — […]

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *