Sean Hannity calls Obama “Worst President” Ever

Rightrdia suspected conservatives would have a fit when Obama announced changes to the arachaic US strategic nuclear policy.

Sean Hannity declared Barack Obama the “worst president ever” for his commitment to nuclear disarmament, only to sputter out a series of introspective questions mercifully interrupted by Newt Gingrich. “Our enemies must be rejoicing,” Hannity boldly declared as he discussed the details of Obama’s new nuclear disarmament policies that would stop the building of nuclear weapons and prohibit their use against non-nuclear powers.

Many years ago the US developed a policy called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). The Major, our international affairs writer liked the acronymn 'MAD' because any nation considering the use of nuclear weapons would have to be unbalanced. Nobody wins in a nuclear exchange.
 
Nuclear weapons were only been used twice at the end of Wordl War 2. After the war ended, the US spent 47 per cent of its defense budget on nuclear weapons until out policy makers realized the utility of these weapons is limited. Once a adversary has a nuclear capability, the use of nuclear weapons becomes unthinkable.

Of course, this is the reason Israel, which may have up to 200 tactical nukes, doesn't want Iran to develop a similar capability. Once the Iranians have nukes, it will blunt the Israeli nuclear arsenal.

Media Matters for America: Fox News gets the 'nuclear option' wrong

Fox Nation falsely refers to reconciliation as the "nuclear option"


Fox Nation: "WH: If GOP Filibusters Health Care, We'll Use Nuclear Option." On February 22, Fox Nation's home page displayed the following graphic:

FACT: "Nuclear option" refers to changing Senate filibuster rules, not to reconciliation.

Trent Lott coined "nuclear option" to refer to proposal to change filibuster rules. Lott coined the term "nuclear option" to refer to proposed changes to the Senate rule requiring a three-fifths supermajority to end a filibuster.

Lott was one of the leading advocates of this proposal. However, as Media Matters for America noted, after strategists deemed the term a political liability, both Republican senators and media figures misattributed the term to Senate Democrats.

FACT: Reconciliation is already part of the Senate procedure, and Republicans previously used it to pass Bush's agenda

Reconciliation is already part of the congressional process. The budget reconciliation process is defined by the U.S. House Committee on Rules as "part of the congressional budget process ... utilized when Congress issues directives to legislate policy changes in mandatory spending (entitlements) or revenue programs (tax laws) to achieve the goals in spending and revenue contemplated by the budget resolution."

Republicans previously used reconciliation to pass President Bush's agenda. In a March 28, 2009, article, The New York Times reported that "the long record of Republican support for fast-tracking budget-related bills definitely dilutes their ability to challenge Democrats on the issue."

During the previous adminstration, Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to pass President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts as well as the 2005 "Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act."

FACT: Fox routinely misuses "nuclear option"

Fox Nation, Fox News personalities routinely invoke the "nuclear option" while discussing reconciliation. Fox News personalities including Sean Hannity, Dick Morris, Bret Baier, and Greta Van Susteren have all falsely compared reconciliation to the "nuclear option."

source: http://mediamatters.org/research/201002220017

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 5222 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Powered by ScribeFire.

When the going gets tough, the tough get going

Rightardia comment: Obama has activated his political organization, Organizing for America. A lot can change in the next year and the Democrats have resiliency. A recent Gallup Poll also indicates that Republicans in Congress have a 13 per cent approval rating. Democrats in Congress have a 55 per cent approval rating. Independents represented by Blue Dog Democrats aren't much better than the GOP at 22 per cent.

If a dimwit like George Bush could gain congressional seats in the 2002 elections, the Democrats should be able to as well. If there is a will, there is a way. A lot will depend on how the Democrats handle health care.

The Democrats do have a nuclear keep it simple stupid option. Extend Medicare to other Americans. We have CHIPS, S-CHIPS, and Medicaid. All could be rolled into a single unified program and additional age groups could be phased in over time.

JOSH KRAUSHAAR | 8/31/09 4:50 AM EDT

Some of the most prominent and respected handicappers predict an election in which Democrats suffer double-digit losses in the House. this will not be enough to provide the 40 seats necessary to return the GOP to power.

Top political analyst Charlie Cook wrote that “the situation this summer has slipped completely out of control for President Obama and congressional Democrats.”

"Many veteran congressional election watchers, including Democratic ones, report an eerie sense of déjà vu. The chances of Democratic losses going higher than 20 seats is just as good as the chances of Democratic losses going lower than 20 seats.

At the mid-August Netroots Nation convention, Nate Silver, a Democratic analyst whose uncannily accurate, stat-driven predictions have made his website 538.com predicted that Republicans will win between 20 and 50 seats next year. He further alarmed an audience of progressive activists by arguing that the GOP has between a 25 and 33 percent chance of winning back control of the House.

“A lot of Democratic freshmen and sophomores will be running in a much tougher environment than in 2006 and 2008 and some will adapt to it, but a lot of others will inevitably freak out and end up losing,” Silver told POLITICO. “Complacency is another factor: We have volunteers who worked really hard in 2006 and in 2008 for Obama but it’s less compelling [for them] to preserve the majority.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26393.html#ixzz0Pkz8pCx8Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1

Netcraft rank: 12834 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites?s=6C2826218226DBAE131D0E5D3916#12834