Quote of the day by Dianne Feinstein

LA Times Quote of the Day - PRICELESS



Dianne Feinstein: "All vets are mentally ill in some way and government should prevent them from owning firearms."



Yep, - she really said it on Thursday in a meeting in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee... And the quote below from the LA Times is priceless. Sometimes even the L.A. Times gets it right.



Kurt Nimmo: "Senator Feinstein insults all U.S. Veterans as she flays about in a vain attempt to save her anti-firearms bill."



Quote of the Day from the Los Angeles Times:



"Frankly, I don't know what it is about California , but we seem to have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women to high office. I'm not bragging, you understand, but no other state, including Maine , even comes close. When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington , we're Number One. There's no getting around the fact that the last time anyone saw the likes of Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, and Nancy Pelosi, they were stirring a cauldron when the curtain went up on 'Macbeth'. The four of them are like jackasses who happen to possess the gift of blab. You don't know if you should condemn them for their stupidity or simply marvel at their ability to form words."



Columnist Burt Prelutsky,

Los Angeles Times



Be sure to forward this to all of the "mentally ill" vets you know.

Especially the ones with guns...

Yep, I agree 100%. The residents of California appear to be the ones who are mentally ill by voting for those people.



That would be OK if their effect only was in California, but they are impacting the entire country with their liberal left-wing crap



I am waiting for the big earthquake that dumps California to the bottom of the Pacific ocean, and the rest of the USA will be rid of the like of Pelosi, Waters, and Feinstein as well as the rest of flavor of politics.



...Rich

Not surprised she thinks that. Only slightly surprised she said that.



This topic will be pushed off topic toward a debate about guns and trying to deflect her statement. Ignore the part where she relates her statement to a political topic. Just read and consider the basis of her argument. Incredible.:sad:

Except that it never happened.

Hey Bo don't try and bother those guys with facts...they don't have time for that.

The Conservative Email Forwarding Network is apparently alive and well.

Hey Frank,

If Feinstein, Waters, Boxer and Pelosi had not made similar outlandish statements, then that statement would be less believable.



I don't think that the lies posted by the few Conservative media outlets are any more acceptable than the lies published by the overwhelming majority of the Liberal media.



...Rich

I usually fact check stuff from the internet.:smack:

I usually fact check stuff from the internet.

Click to expand...

Hugh,

I do also, This sounded soo much like the old dog face. I took it for fact.



Sorry guys'. Next time we will vote on it. Then we can read it..:bwahaha:



I will have to split it, to 2 threads. First for the vote. Second one for the issue. Unless the nah's win. Then all we will have is a vote not knowing what or why...well never mind.:banghead:

Mark K. ..Great link period.

Frank,

The Liberals control the mass media so the Conservatives only have emails to spread their lies....and don't act like the Liberals don't lie?? Let me remind you of one of a very big Liberal lie... "If you like your Health Insurance plan, you can keep it" I have a video of Obama repeating that lie 24 different times !!!



It took the few Conservative media outlets to bring that big lie to the surface,...and then Obama tried to wiggle out of that by claiming "That was not what he meant"? Sometimes you can lie without saying anything, and most of the Liberal lies are in what they don't say.



...Rich

How do "liberals" control the mass media? Rich you are sounding a little extremist there

Frank,

Just listen to the news ??? I am far from an extremist and it's not just my opinion, it's common knowledge that the news media is dominated by liberals. There are only a few exceptions like Fox and a few TV and Radio personalities that lean towards the Conservative view...such as Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh, etc..and even their popularity has diminished.



Also, just take a few moments on Sunday mornings to watch shows like Meet the Press and you will see that nearly all the guest commentators are Liberals who often outnumber the few Conservative guests. Most of the CNN, CNBC and MSNBC news commentators are extreme rabid Liberals much like Dan Rather who was fired because he was so intent on discrediting then President George W Bush, that he presented stories on the air that were untrue, and unverified, even after he knew they were probably not true.



...Rich

Liberal/conservative, black/white, rich/poor, ...



All just artificial labels we put on people, we assume for ourselves, we stand behind, wed get drawn to, or we use to rationalize the differences between us rather than actually attempt to deal with or overcome those differences.



We get so caught up in the labels and the ideals that contribute to the labels that we lose sight of the differences and the issues surrounding them... and we allow our elected officials to do the same.



TJR

TJR,

They might be just labels, but they define how people define political beliefs. I agree that we let the politicians and the media define the issues on their terms so that they can play the "Blame Game" rather than focusing on real solutions.



I have said it before, and it was confirmed in a recent poll....21% of the voters are Liberals, 28% are Conservatives, and the remaining 51% majority of voters are middle of the road moderates who lean one way or the other on different issues. We have allowed the political parties to take control of our government to the point that their agenda trumps the majority of the people.



In my opinion, Political Parties are nothing more than another Special Interest Group and they should be banned. We need to take the money out of politics and elect people who can stand on their own two feet and not politicians who have deep pockets to back them.



...Rich

Without up-heaving the system, we could just remove the D or R from the ballots. If you're unsure where the politicians' values are in reference to yours without a label, you're too uniformed to vote.

Hugh,

The D or the R is only the issue because it's not that simple. We voters have let these two extreme political parties control our political system. If you are not a 100% true Liberal or a true Conservative, you have little chance of waging a campaign without the financial backing of one of those political parties. 51% of the voters do not agree with the extreme political views of either party, but we don't have a choice.



Liberals only make up 21% of the voters, and Conservatives only 28%. If a Republican wins, 72% of the eligible voters probably would not have picked him as their choice. If the Liberal candidate wins, then 79% of the voters probably did not want him to win either. 51% of the voters probably do not like either candidate but were required to choose between the lesser of two evils.



It's not a matter of if the candidate is politically Liberal or Conservative. But if the political party is holding the purse strings, that candidate is obligated to push those extreme Liberal or Conservative ideals even if he does not support all of those views.



If you ban the financial support of candidate and all donations went into a fund divided equally between the candidates, then the Candidate stands on his own views and is not a paid puppet of either political party. That's why there is so much grid lock in Washington...The Congress and the Senate are polarized and paralyzed by the two political parties.



....Rich

I agree entirely and would love to see something like what you've been proposing. Just as a simple step (because we only overhaul small things like health care in one swoop), removing the labels makes voters know who they're voting for or just pick a name they like, which is essentially what they're already doing because of the little label.

Hugh,

Precisely. Removing the labels and letting the candidate specify and clearify what they stand for, would let the voter make a better decision. Yes, we will always have voters who just vote for a candidate based on name they like, but now, we really don't have a choice. We only have two candidates to choose from...extreme Liberals, or extreme Conservatives who only follow the dictates of the party line even if they don't entirely agree.



If we can reform campaign financing we stand a good chance of eliminating the political parties that are in control of our elections. Get the big money out of our election processes and the political parties will shrivel up and die on their own and we can elect people who represent a more balanced point of view and willing to negotiate and compromise a win-win solution and not just assume they won the election because they acted like a moderate, and now that they won, they are free to turn into the extreme liberal or conservative simply to repay their political party's agenda.



...Rich

How do "liberals" control the mass media? Rich you are sounding a little extremist there.

Click to expand...

Frank, what you consider "extreme", is reality to the rest of us.