Home > Liberal, Obama > Obama fires Reid!

Obama fires Reid!

Okay well not really, Obama can’t do that. Only the voters can, but Obama just nailed the final nail in Reid’s coffin. I wonder if Reid will be “stepping down  due to family issues” soon?

When times are tough, you — you tighten your belts.  You don’t go buying a boat when you can barely pay your mortgage.  You don’t blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you’re trying to save for college.

That cause the Democratic Mayor of Las Vegas, and ex mob lawyer, Oscar Goodman to come out swinging.

“He didn’t learn his lesson the first time, but when he hurt our economy by his ill conceived rhetoric, we didn’t think it would happen again, but now that it has I want to assure you, when he comes I’ll do everything I can to give him the boot back to Washington and to visit his failures back there.

“I gotta tell you this, everybody says I shouldn’t say it, but I gotta tell you the way it is. This president is a real slow learner.”

Ouch! A slow learner. Was that dig at Obama anyway related to Rahm’s “retard” comment that got him in hot water?

Reid of course had to jump in on this Dem vs Dem cat fight.

“The President needs to lay off Las Vegas and stop making it the poster child for where people shouldn’t be spending their money,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat.

Harry Reid of course, has no right to say anything about profligate spending, even to Obama. It’s the pot calling the kettle. Especially when the Senate voted to raise the debt limit by $1,900,000,000,000.00 dollars recently.

Of course this is very very bad news for Harry Reid. The whole country isn’t very happy with him, much less Vegas. Reid has a 52% unapproval rating in Nevada alone. That was in January, before he raised the spending limit and before the latest Obama flap.

Nevada politics is strange. Nevada is actually very much independent, although the influx of Californians, running from their own mistakes has shifted it more and more Left. There is a huge Mormon population in Las Vegas. Harry Reid is Mormon. That’s not a knock against Reid, I know a lot of Mormons, and the are very good people. Of all the various religions, I hold LDS in a high esteem, they actually try to practice what they preach, for the most part.

Simply put, Mormons stick together. That is entirely rational considering the amount of persecution they have gone through over the years. In Missouri until June 25, 1976, it was perfectly legal to kill a Mormon if they were on your property. Harry Reid has only maintained his Senate seat because he is Mormon.

It seems kind of odd, considering how conservative most Mormons are. But that only underscores the fact that they stick together. This next election, I don’t think Reid can count on the Mormon support he used to have. Prop 8 in California, did a lot of damage. By now, everyone should know that the Mormon community were big proponents of Prop 8. The largely liberal attacks against the Church didn’t help Reid, nor did his criticism of the Mormon community over it.

Now we have Obama coming in, not once but twice, slamming Las Vegas for populist points. Goodman, being the good politician he is, channeled a lot of anger from the shitty Vegas economy at Obama and Reid took a lot of collateral damage. Trust me when I say Las Vegas is in the shitter. Everyone thinks Vegas is a gambling town. That is true, but over the last decade a significant portion of the local economy came from the Housing Boom.

Now Reid might have been able to pull of a win, if he had the Mormon support. Ha, he can thank his fellow “tolerant” liberals for screwing that pooch for him. So simply put, Obama just fired Reid.

So now I can honestly say something positive about Obama!

Categories: Liberal, Obama
  1. geoff
    February 3, 2010 at 23:52

    Hi Zombie, another LR expat coming over. What happens in Vegas comes back to haunt you, if you over play your hand (or mouth). What a dimwit.

    • February 4, 2010 at 21:35

      Welcome, I haven’t been over there in a bit, is it that bad?

  2. geoff
    February 3, 2010 at 23:54

    Hey zombie take off my last name or delete my post geoff

    • PJ
      February 4, 2010 at 23:22

      Hey geoff! Good to see you “over here.”

  3. kenoshamarge
    February 4, 2010 at 05:38

    Excellent post ZH! I love the line: “Nevada politics is strange. Nevada is actually very much independent, although the influx of Californians, running from their own mistakes has shifted it more and more Left.”

    I didn’t understand the “Mormons stick together” thing either. Thanks for the information.

    • February 4, 2010 at 21:42

      Mormons get a bad rap a lot of the times. I think they are one of the most misunderstood groups in America today. What I know I know from personal experience. My HS had a lot of Mormons and I have a lot of Mormon friends. I don’t believe a lot of the religious stuff but like I said in my post, I respect them for their convictions.
      One problem with politics today is that we (lol not me, but the royal we) can’t agree to disagree anymore. I humbly submit what happened to LR as evidence.

      • kenoshamarge
        February 5, 2010 at 07:05

        I agree with you completely about the fact that we can no longer “agree to disagree” anymore.

        I fled LR rather than take some damn “purity test” to prove my “liberal” creds.

        Perhaps that was because I am not a “pure” anything. I know that I am definately a “fiscal conservative” and that I am more liberal socially than conservative depending on the issue.

        I don’t like labels. I don’t like labels because none of them are a perfect fit.

        Mostly I’m a moderate Independent. Mostly.

      • February 7, 2010 at 22:55

        No one is 100% pure anything. Well I’m 100% pure zombiehero, but that’s about it.
        How many times have liberals told us that everyone is unique and we should celebrate diversity? But that only applies if we all think, act and vote all the same? Diametrically opposing ideas like that can’t co-exist. So which one do they really believe and which one is just for show?

  4. yttik
    February 4, 2010 at 08:01

    Obama can be so short sighted, especially when it comes to business. He’s not only damaged tourism in Las Vegas, twice now, but he’s harming boat builders. Locally we just layed of 42 boat builders in a very pro-Obama town. His words couldn’t have come at a worse time, because now people feel like it’s personal, as if the President of the US is directly costing us jobs. All those people got pink slips right when Obama was lecturing people about the immorality of buying boats and it was like pouring salt in a wound. Now we’ve got anti-Obama signs up in people’s yards all over town.

    • February 4, 2010 at 21:44

      One things that politicians don’t want to acknowledge are the uncertainties that come with any pronouncements they make. Regime uncertainty is a big problem facing our economy right now. Obama’s words only underscore that point.

  5. Woodhull
    February 4, 2010 at 08:05

    On the “Californians, running from their own mistakes..” Tell me! They despoiled our little piece of paradise about 15 years ago looking for “a better lifestyle” here in the NW. However, I will say that my unscientific estimate of those who call themselves “Californians” were really grifters who came from some of the mid west states like Ohio and Illinois (to get away from the harsh climate) and CA was just a stop-over. Maybe it’s different in NV in that they are “true” Californians, i.e. natives, migrating.

    ZH: Where do these quotes come from? I don’t watch the news.

    • February 4, 2010 at 21:47

      Problems seem to be the only export from Cali that any of the other states.
      Which quotes? I put numerous links in my post…probably more than I needed?

  6. Kara
    February 4, 2010 at 22:09

    I thought you’d like this article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/02/hacked-climate-emails-flaws-peer-review

    On a side note–I missed chunks of time at LR, but man, something is WAY different. John is still awesome, but the posters and are almost reminiscent of the Obots. Is that way you saw, too? I know I was reluctant to criticize Palin because of the boring ol’ “You must be sexist!” or “But what about Obama?” nonsense from those who cannot see other people’s perspectives (or think everything is about Obama and how evil he is). The sexist theme gets tired. Everything gets tired.

    I do not admire the LDS people for their convictions anymore than I admire the Muslims or Catholics. Live in an area that is LDS dominant and it changes your view. I know Nevada has plenty of Mormons….I am just saying this: I tire of any religion or dogma or political group shoving their ideals down my (and society’s throat under the banner of “belief” and “conviction.”

    • February 4, 2010 at 22:41

      See most of the LDS I know and talk to are really nice people. I don’t have to agree with them on politics or religion, but I respect them non the less. The only problem I have is that your argument about shoving ideals, applies to “liberal” groups just as much as religious ones. Pro choice is just as much of a “belief” and “conviction” as pro life. They are just opposite sides of the same coin. Same thing with Gay Marriage, there are strong beliefs on both sides.

      Yeah LR has changed. Why else do you think there are so many LR expats at my blog?

      • Kara
        February 4, 2010 at 22:52

        Never said it didn’t apply to libs. Actually, I think I wrote “political groups” too. It is not either or…but you are in that mode, still eh?


        • February 5, 2010 at 04:28

          Lol my whole point was that it was prevalent on both sides. Sorry if it came off wrong. Take AGW for example, there are plenty of non-religious groups out there trying to push their belief system on everyone else. Many of them, Atheists. Religions don’t own the monopoly on trying to convert people. That’s all I’m saying.

  7. PJ
    February 4, 2010 at 23:44

    What is kind of strange is that there are pro-choice repubs and pro-life dems. And pro-gay marriage repubs and anti-gay marriage dems. There are also pro-choice and pro-gay marriage Catholics.

    I guess I’m still stuck on the idea of how absurd it is to have any kind of “purity” test for any one group.

    • February 5, 2010 at 04:33

      Ha ha like I said, “Dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!”

  8. PJ
    February 4, 2010 at 23:58

    ZH, I agree that there are strong beliefs on both sides. But I’ve never had a “pro-choice” person come to my door and try to convert me. I have a major problem with religions that do that.

    • Woodhull
      February 5, 2010 at 01:39

      I’m so glad you wrote that, P.J. I think you’ve said that before and the response finally came to me just yesterday. Here it is: That’s because the pro-choice people don’t have to actually “come to (our) door”, because they sneak in through our T.V. and radio and we bring them in with our daily paper and magazines. And they don’t come right at us with their pro-choice message; preferring instead to influence us (and our kids) with messages about Viagra, Yaz, the morning after pill (“Plan B”), Trojans (hey, that’s kinda funny), KY “Intense”, etc. In other words, popular culture about “doing it” early and often overwhelms anything remotely religious in the lives of most Americans. If we could but clearly identify in the same manner how often (and insidiously) pro-choicers “come to (our) door”, it might be rather surprising just how unrelentingly that is.

      • Woodhull
        February 5, 2010 at 01:47

        ..and I meant to add: If popular culture (in all its forms) isn’t a religion, with all its religious zeal and ad dollars to spread its message, then I don’t know what is.

      • PJ
        February 5, 2010 at 01:57

        Hey Woodhull,
        We must be up at the same time. 🙂

        I just wrote a rant on door to door “salesmen.” Must be an issue with me. 🙂

        I could write (if I had the writing skills) a book about my personal journey regarding how I feel about abortion. After relentless personal soul searching, I am pro-choice. I take it for granted that others have taken a similar journey and may have come out of it being pro-life. I was never more offended when my brother-in-law announced that he could convince anyone to change from pro-choice to pro-life if they gave him 10 minutes. It is that lack of respect for the “other side” that I despise. Both sides are guilty of it.

        • February 5, 2010 at 04:35

          If you want to post anything, let me know. I’m more than happy to open this up.

    • February 5, 2010 at 04:34

      Did you read any of Mouses comments over the Tebow affair against Yttik? lol If that isn’t someone trying to convert, I don’t know what is.

      • Woodhull
        February 5, 2010 at 09:00

        Yes. It was awful. I was taken by surprise by mouse’s comments.

      • February 6, 2010 at 07:52

        I’m not really that surprised. It just seems strange that everything happened all at once. Like a set up.

  9. PJ
    February 5, 2010 at 01:46

    I just realized how insulting it is – to Jesus – to have people going door to door in an effort to “save” people. Just think about what Jesus went through to save everyone – we’re talking about CRUCIFICTION! And now there are these assholes going door to door acting like he didn’t get the job done and “they” could do it better?

    WOW. Talk about hubris.

  10. Woodhull
    February 7, 2010 at 00:13

    zombiehero213 :I’m not really that surprised. It just seems strange that everything happened all at once. Like a set up.

    Geoff thinks it was a set up. And I think you guys may be right about that. Thing is, I can’t figure John out — maybe he’s just been taken in by all the traffic it’s stirred up.

    • PJ
      February 7, 2010 at 00:30

      I could be way off base (wouldn’t be the first time), but it seemed like TL was acting as John’s “Rahm Emanuel.” John says he doesn’t want an echo chamber, but maybe he didn’t like being on the losing side of some of his favorite issues (global warming, public education, etc.).

      That’s totally a wild guess…

      • PJ
        February 7, 2010 at 09:52

        Or, maybe TL is more like “honest Iago”. Just a thought…

      • Woodhull
        February 7, 2010 at 11:34

        Maybe. My next sentence is not because of recent developments at LR, but I’ve noticed for some long while that even as fabulous as John’s writing is (and it is, consistently), when it comes to his predictions he straddles the line until a few commenters have weighed-in with their very biased opinions. Then, in follow-on posts, he takes a position. Political humor is one thing, political analysis is another. And such “analysis” at LR is almost always based on the loudest, angriest, most intimidating voices — almost never on (especially in the past month) anything remotely based on facts.

        Does this remind us of any other sites? Huffpo, kos — maybe?

      • February 7, 2010 at 15:41

        PJ – Maybe, but I’ll give John the benefit of the doubt on this one. Although I don’t know if you’ve noticed how at one point John would have guest posts by a variety of different people and view points; like yttik’s post on Global Warming, ROberta’s posts on education etc, now guess who’s the only guest poster? It’s interesting but I don’t want to dwell on it.

      • February 7, 2010 at 15:44

        Woodhull – I agree with John pronouncements but for entirely different reasons than John a lot of the time. For example, I think we are going to hit a financial storm again soon, because the underlying economics (keynesian) isn’t sound. John likes to talk about Peak Oil, but I think that is more of a symptom rather than the cause.
        I don’t think you necessarily have to have a position, I kind of liked his fence straddling. To me it showed an openness to listen to options. It’s just unfortunate that the loudest and the most brutish were the ones that got the mic longer.

  11. PJ
    February 7, 2010 at 12:39

    What you said makes sense to me Woodhull. Other blog owners have admitted to being “bullied” by their readers and indeed, going with the loudest and most aggressive voices. I don’t know for sure if that’s what happened to John, but I know it happens.

    I really liked LR because John allowed any and all voices to be heard (including obots as you pointed out before). The obots left of their own accord because it was obvious they had a shoddy argument (which only worked on sites like kos and Huffpo – and didn’t work at all when put under the slightest bit of scrutiny).

    I know TL has talked about republican “moles” (opportunists) who go on to “puma” sites and try to recruit – this is a big issue with him. Maybe John started to buy into that idea???

    Still trying to make sense of it all…

    • February 7, 2010 at 15:47

      TL uses it to try and discredit those he doesn’t agree with. He is a thought socialist that I was talking about in my Sowell post. I’m happy that you think my argument is better in some instances but I’m not here to win converts, just want to give a different perspective. Then leave it up to you to decide which is the better argument. Others want to deny you the choice or if they can’t try to paint such a horrible picture of the other side that you will not listen what they have to say.

      • PJ
        February 7, 2010 at 16:16

        “TL uses it to try and discredit those he doesn’t agree with.”

        Yes, and he has had some success with that –

        I have learned a lot from you (and Woodhull) and will continue to come here to hear what you have to say. I still need to read those books by Dr. Sowell –

  12. PJ
    February 7, 2010 at 16:10

    zombiehero213 :PJ – Maybe, but I’ll give John the benefit of the doubt on this one. Although I don’t know if you’ve noticed how at one point John would have guest posts by a variety of different people and view points; like yttik’s post on Global Warming, ROberta’s posts on education etc, now guess who’s the only guest poster? It’s interesting but I don’t want to dwell on it.

    I don’t remember yttik’s post – it would be nice to go back and read it. But I see your point. And, it’s possible people stopped sending John posts -except for the one guy? I will continue to read John’s blog because I really like his writing – and I find the comments interesting too. A guilty pleasure perhaps?

    • Woodhull
      February 7, 2010 at 17:35

      What made LR especially special was captured in more than a few comments over the past couple years — that the, for the most part, the folks commenting made fabulous comments more in with a view towards exploring issues, trading viewpoints and defending their position. In the main, it was smart and engaging. Now there’s not even a pretense of that. Oh well…I guess I could start my own blog but my writing is uneven and I’m flaky. As soon as I’d create it, I’d neglect it just because I can’t stand the tyranny of a schedule.

      • Woodhull
        February 7, 2010 at 17:37

        Just watching the opening plays on the Superbowl — so sorry for mangled comment.

      • February 7, 2010 at 22:53

        Hey I work 50 plus hours a week, taking 3 online classes, and get Call of Duty MW2 time in. If I can manage so can you! You’d have at least one loyal reader!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: