Thursday, February 24, 2011

Flee Collared



There's an old saying that "When the going gets tough, the tough get going." Unfortunately, when the going gets tough, the spineless and cowardly also get going...packed into buses and headed to other states to keep Democracy from working.

At least, that's the case in Wisconsin and Indiana, with Democrats in other states feverishly examining Greyhound bus schedules looking for sanctuary states.

Frankly, we think this new Democrat "Flee Party" movement deserves a newer and more accurate mascot than the old Ass they've used previously, and Hope n' Change is happy to suggest the design seen in today's cartoon.

We think the Democrat Donkey has outlived any semblance of accuracy. After all, a donkey is actually capable of performing work, stands on its own feet, and is at least marginally lovable... none of which is true of a liberal Democrat.

But a flea? It's a blood-sucking parasite that lives off of others, it breeds promiscuously, and it's nearly impossible to get rid of. In other words, it's a perfect match!

So let us celebrate this new era in which Conservatives are finally making clear that while this has been "the land of the flea"...it's once again becoming "the home of the brave."
-

31 comments:

drjim said...

Excellent!
Now when they call us "Tea Baggers", we can call the "Flee Baggers"!
Or maybe that should be "Flea Baggers"?

Ricko -Tyler, Texas said...

I must admit, this is right on target...I think that the AWOL politicos should be replaced as they have abandoned their sacred duty and oath of office. I also feel that the "union" members should be fired if they fail to return to work. Worked for Ronnie, why not now? There are millions of us unemployed who need the work...and we don't need a stinking union.

Earl said...

Perfect mascot for the reasons you cited. I'd only add that they're very annoying pests that jump from one gravy train to another.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Spot on today, Stilt!
Perhaps they need to be fitted w/ radio tagged 'flee collars' so they can be tracked?

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Pete: Flee collars...funny.
Stilton: I like the new mascot but I'm not in love with the use of red, white and blue on the image. It still speaks to allegiance to our flag, which we know the Democrat politicians don't have. Perhaps solid red with one white star...or a hammer and scicle...or a crescent (no, that would be Obama's personal symbol).

robert said...

They are certainly the party of the parasites. I've been saying that for years. I wish I had the ability Stilt does. To focus in on an issue with laser presision and offer up impeccable humor.
I yield to the master.

robert said...

Oh and drjim, they call me and my children "teabaggers" I like to call them "salad tossers"

Chuck said...

Democrat/Flea: “a blood-sucking parasite that lives off of others, it breeds promiscuously, and it's nearly impossible to get rid of. In other words, it's a perfect match!”. I’ll be quoting that a lot!

I also like the more generic: Politics – from the roots “poly” meaning many and “ticks” as in blood-sucking parasites. I don’t know who to attribute this too, but I’ve been quoting it (probably incompletely and incorrectly) for years.

Suzy said...

The fleas in Chicago have been genetically changing so as to be immune to any sort of methods to get rid of them. Hopefully the general flea population will not change so quickly that we cannot get rid of them in 2012.

StupidLiberal said...

Wait...who are the blood suckers?

It's humorous that the democrats are the fleas in the backwards worldview that exists on this blow. Especially when red states are the largest receivers of tax dollars. That money comes from more affluent, coastal, urban, and most certainly Democrat states and regions.

In general most red states receive more in tax dollars then they actually pay in tax dollars. It's we horrible, money-making liberals that receive less then what we actually pay for.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1397.html

I understand that this is due to higher populations in coastal areas, the fact that we pay HIGHER taxes, and the fact that we tend to be the wealth generators of this country. Democratic areas, suprise suprise, make most of the wealth in this country! It's not our fault we think that spending the limited tax dollars we get on science education, promoting engineering, and the kind of smart public work projects that sustains long term economic infrastructure (public transportation).

I really wish all of these money sucking, red state flea bags would get to work and pay their fair share. The Indian owned gas station down my street is hiring...

In all honesty though, I have no problem that at the end of the year, I actually owe the government more than I've already paid. That money goes to important things that help support my fellow citizens because the Repubtards over the past few years killed any sort of economic motive force in this country. I have no problem that my tax dollars go to welfare, heck I was on foodstamps when I was working on my masters.

Anonymous said...

StupidLiberal - imagine - a liberal Democrat on food stamps - isn't that the norm? I personally worked a full-time job while I was getting on my Masters and I never had to go on food stamps. I also had a son in college at the same time, and he was never on food stamps, either. BTW, I'm a conservative and am not ashamed of it. I don't want a government handout - I just don't want to support the parasites.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

StupidLiberal- You still don't get it. It's not a matter of which states receive the most money; it's all about the fact that the federal government shouldn't be in the business of handing out money at all...especially money that's borrowed from China.

The wealth statistics you cite are all about population density and not political ideology. And if you want to argue that liberalism and density are two sides of the same coin, I won't argue. I've yet to meet a liberal who wasn't dense.

But the really telling remark in your post is that "I was on foodstamps when I was working on my masters." Hey, great! I guess that kept you from having to get a job while attending classes, huh?

And so we get a lovely snapshot of what makes a StupidLiberal: someone who leeched off of a food program intended for the poor while taking college courses...and who now supports others' abuse of the system to assuage his residual guilt.

By the way, were you on your way to a medical degree to save lives, or did you just want a couple more years of PolySci or Humanities to delay entering the real world where working people actually pay for their own meals?

Pete(Detroit) said...

SmackDown! Cheeseheads 1, Libs NOTHING!

As far as 'red state / blue state' government fundage, been to Detroit lately? Democrat bastion for 40 years, and nearly a total welfare hell hole. Yes, there are success stories, and yes, things appear to have bottomed out, but 50% of the adult population is functionally illiterate, and 70% is on some kind of assistance. Once again, the results of rewarding bad behavior. Just sayin'

Pete(Detroit) said...

And what you have against Indians, anyway?

Stupidliberal said...

*Editor's Note: It's really cool when you delete a post. Especially when it's correct. I thought this blog was about genuine communication? Or is it only about points of view that substantiate one another?*

I obviously don't get it Stil. I should have dropped out of the engineering program I was in, simply because the scholarship I received only paid for school, and the job that I work barely managed to cover my rent and utilities. That would have been the right thing to do.

Especially considering the fact that because of what I did, when my father had a heart attack last year and I am now able to support him on my income. That's one less person on the dole, right?

Anon, what you did was laudable, but Stil raises a good question. What sort of master's where you working on, since that's how we judge education. Was it an applicable wealth generating degree, like science, engineering, or medicine. Or was it one of those horrid, liberal disciplines of journalism, political science, or *gasp* philosophy.

Unfortunately, Stil, the wealth statistics I cited are COMPLETELY about politics. Liberals pay more in taxes in get less, while conservatives pay less, but get more. The deficit that we have is completely the fault of conservatives. Had they been paying an equal portion of the bills all along, we wouldn't have to be paying interest to our dreaded future Chinese overlords.

Individuals with liberal political ideologies are the wealth generators in this country. In general, they're more educated, the tend to live in areas where average median income is higher, cost of living is higher, and pay scales are higher. There is a portion of the liberal demographic that is defined by life in poverty. They do live on foodstamps and section 8 housing. If these individuals do so with no initiative to move beyond these handouts, their position is indefensible. The same applies to the flyover country trailer trash that scream about less taxes, when they receive more than they pay out. Roads cost money. Hospitals cost money. Police officers cost money.

If you conservatives are really about balanced economics and less taxes, give back all of the unbalanced tax dollars you've been receiving for YEARS, and you might seem a bit more believable.

But it's nice how you dodged the point that the numbers show this to be true. Urban areas and coastal areas are the wealthy and liberal regions of this country, and the poorer, less industrialized are the conservative areas of this country where people who should have been getting job skills where to busy trying to flip houses when the Bush, blunder-in-chief, was busy deregulating the housing market for his family friends on Wall Street.

StupidLiberal said...

But, you know, keep deleting my posts. I'm on my lunch break, I'll be here for a while. .

Doc -Northern Nevada said...

StupidLiberal ... If the "coastal and urban areas are the liberal and wealthy regions" of the country, then please simply explain why are so high a percentage of THE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS in these very same areas (Los Angeles, NYC, Detroit and surrounding areas etc., etc.) on Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc etc etc. Also if they are so wealthy and rich while the hell can't they bother to change the neighborhoods they live in from something other than 'Urban Blight'? The only 'change' I have seen in my 61 years of life is when the places they live become so run down from abject NEGLECT and ABUSE, they protest, riot, scream about real estate 'red-lining' - then they 'Hope' they can get the Dems to vote in MORE social programs so they can once again abandon the places they live, move into a much nicer area, THEN DESTROY IT TOO!

Once that happens the Dems jump right on the bandwagon, get 'Urban Redevelopment Agency money' passed into more government budgets that cannot afford it, so the union workers can be paid out of the public funds to clean up the mess that all these wonderfully fine Democratic Liberal Voters leave behind when they have destroyed the cities and neighborhoods, and then moved on. While still on the public dole!

Obviously you have been drinking far too much of the Obummers kool-aid, and bought into the whole charade. Want me to justify what I say? Fine, it is easy to do. Pick ANY major Democratic metroplitan area, (which includes most major cities and areas) and drive through it with your eyes open! Hint: Take lots of guns and a few friends with you - you will need them if you happen to do it at night, and in many places even during the day!

You seem to LOVE quoting numbers - once again, do your 'due dilligence' and look up the studies about exactly WHERE (geographically) the highest percentage of the 'social entitlements' are being paid out by every governmental entity in the US - plot it on a map of the US. Then overlay that same plot map with one that shows where the Democratic Liberal 'voting strong holds' are ... THEN tell me how you are being abused as a rich liberal.
You can do it - after all you received a college education! I PAID CASH for all of my education by the way.

I can't help but wonder where your 'scholarship' came from. I recently went back to school again for another degree and a VERY HIGH percentile of the students enrolled claimed they had "health insurance and full ride scholarships" so they could go to school. What they REALLY had were Pell Grants and Welfare, Food Stamps and Medicaid - ALL entitlement programs. While they came to school in brand new cars, trucks, motorcycles and were dressed in far better clothes than I could afford. Go figure, during breaks when we might get to chatting - they were VERY STAUNCH Liberals! That MY tax Dollars were paying for their education!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

StupidLiberal - For starters, I haven't deleted any of your posts here today. So you can quit bitching about it already. Whiner.

And I didn't sidestep anything; you keep wanting to define bloodsucking parasites as the people who are receiving money versus those who are stealing it and giving it away to buy votes. One is a nuisance, one is an active pest. Hint: the liberals are the active pests.

Regarding the job you took which "barely covered rent and utilities" (while you were on a scholarship), color me skeptical. You were in college by choice, and you should have taken responsibility for that choice (granted, not a strong point of liberals). Poor you just couldn't stand to live on ramen noodles, so you had taxpayers like me buy your groceries. I'll say "you're welcome" right after I hear a big "thank you."

For what it's worth, I'm genuinely sorry about your father's heart attack, and am glad to hear that you have the income to support him. And I hope if he needs a pacemaker, he won't just get painkillers (per Obama's plans).

And if you want an argument about whether Republicans (not Conservatives) have been fiscally responsible in the past, you've come to the wrong place. The GOP have been complete whores on the budget (albeit still a step up from the Dems, who have been syphilitic whores on the budget).

Doc-Northern Nevada - well said!

Pete(Detroit) said...

Doc - "From each according to their means, to each according to their needs" is nearly irresistible when you have nothing, and need everything. Agreed, tho, I'd be a LOT more sympathetic to the 'deserving poor' if they didn't live so darned well.

SLib - "with no initiative to move beyond these handouts, their position is indefensible"
Full agree. The problem is, the sweet government teat is so large there is also no INCENTIVE to move beyond. Other than, you know, wanting something actually better. But that requires, you know, effort. With a system that's set up to penalize success, it's tough to make that argument.

TheOldMan said...

SL: "...Bush, blunder-in-chief, was busy deregulating the housing market for his family friends on Wall Street." Please provide citations and specific details. In Sept 2003, Barney Frank famously stated that he was willing to roll the dice on housing (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122290574391296381.html). In June 2005, BF pushed against cutting back Fed efforts to encourage home purchases (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIhxzNX738s , the last 15 seconds are marvelous). In 2003 GWB pushed for more Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac oversight and regulation (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print) however BF resisted: ''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

These are but a few references. Where are yours? Let's stick to provable facts and leave the name-calling to others.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

TheOldMan- Thanks for doing the research on this - great stuff!

robert said...

Stupid Liberal said "The deficit that we have is completely the fault of conservatives."
Really? COMPLETELY our fault? Wow! Well, I'm convinced.
On behalf of myself and all conservatives I would like to offer an apology to you and all your fellowes who have suffered so much because conservatives have mucked everything up. Is there anything I, personally, can do to help ease your pain? You have suffered so horrible a fate to have been born in this country where one political party has COMPLETELY destroyed what could have been an otherwise PERFECT Communist Utopia. I am so sorry. Also extend my sincerest apologies to your off-spring in the future so that they truely know how sorry we all are that they could not live in a perfect world were it not for conservatives. I have to go weep now....

Sarcasm aside, I'm also sorry to hear about your padre. I never had a heqartattack but I am a heart patient. Triple cardiac bypass in May 2000. Also, you realize since your father had a heart attack, that means you have heart disease too. Take care of yourself.

robert said...

Boy I really mangled "heart attack" in my last post huh?

Pete(Detroit) said...

Robert - yeah you did!
Also failed to point out that the debt increase in the two years of Obama (total Dem control of house and senate) exceeds the first 225 years total. Add to that the two prev years when Dems had house control (all spending originates in the house) and it gets truly amazing. Granted, W hardly met a spending bill he didn't like (vetoed maybe one?) but trying to argue that W is conservative is like trying to say that Kennedy's are good drivers.

Chumgrinder said...

You forgot one other difference. My donkey is cute, loving, and always grateful when I feed him.

On the other hand, he IS always eager to practice extracting my wallet from my back pocket (though he hasn't yet been successful).

Chumgrinder said...

"Stupid Liberal said 'The deficit that we have is completely the fault of conservatives.'
Really? COMPLETELY our fault?"

Well, yes and no.

First off, the question is loaded.

Democrats spend like drunkards and then tax us like slaves to cover the resulting deficit. Republicans cut our taxes, but continue spending like drunkards, which creates a deficit.

The only real difference between them is whether you want to live as a plantation slave, or you want your grandchildren to live as plantation slaves.

Second, the question conflates "conservatives" with "Republicans," which (as the above analysis proves) is a fallacy. Real "conservatives" don't spend beyond their means.

Colby_Muenster said...

Wow.... A very spirited exchange today!

Would anyone wager that the vast majority of Wisconsin residents are appalled by what is going on? I can really sympathize. Here they are with their chicken assed pieces of dog shit Senators hiding out in a bar in another state, and there is probably absolutely nothing they can do about it. I don't know if Wisconsin has recall laws, but the fine citizens need to find some way to send these dickweeds packing. And the teachers?! Fire all of 'em I say. If the whiners can't make it on $89 grand a year, lets see how they fair being greeters at Wal-Mart. The Libs predicted the end of the world when Reagan had the guts to fire the air traffic controllers, but look what happened. If the Gov. fires every last teacher, I predict you will hear the cheers from the citizens of Wisconsin all the way here in NC! And BO would probably wet himself.

Anonymous said...

I sure wish StpuidLiberal would proof read his posts since there are a lot of grammatical errors. And this from a master's degree? BTW, whatever happened to student loans? I guess the dole is easier to get.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Anon - student loans are another form of 'the dole' - worst default rate of anything outside the 3rd world. But apparently not worth chasing down the defaulters, even tho they file for tax refunds (ok, I assume there is SOME penalty for default, or EVERYONE would do it - but it's pretty bad)

Boeing Driver said...

FWIW, as a longtime veteran of the airline biz, I'll offer a correction to Reagan's 1981 firing of the striking Air Traffic Controllers, which opened the ball on an ongoing government-assault-on-working-standards that has gutted the middle class.
The ATC strikers had exhausted all alternatives and had the legal right to strike. More importantly, they were striking not so much about money (they were already well paid) but working conditions which impact passenger safety in the air and whic the MSM couldn't be bothered to report intelligently--obsolete cathode-tube equipment, dangerously understaffed towers, ATC workers assigned long back to back shifts that exceeded human endurance--and believe me, you and I want those ATC people alert and adequately rested. I saw this firsthand. Reagan's summary firings were both illegal and unconstitutional--no President has such authority to meddle in contract negotiations in peacetime.
So Reagan, anxious to make a statement but badly advised, fired almost every competent and experienced ATC in the USA. They were replaced by inexperienced new hires and it took the system years to stabilize. A very different situation from striking teachers, who we all agree are in the wrong. Point is, don't invoke Reagan's name to cast a halo over Presidents firing lawfully striking workers. Reagan was in the wrong, did the wrong thing, did a lot of damage and set a terrible precedent that both parties have exploited since to pander to corporate greed at the expense of the US worker. Clinton signing NAFTA would have been impossible had not Reagan unwisely created the precedent of POTUS dictating to workers the terms of their employment.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Pete(Detroit)- I don't consider student loans to be "on the dole" (I paid mine off, and so will my daughter) though you're right - far too many students borrow the money, casually default, and the lenders (backed by the government) don't seem to care. Moreover, Obama has suggested that he might like to "forgive" college loans for students he deems worthy. Maybe those who donate time to MoveOn.org or Organizing for Amerika or something...?

Boeing Driver- Thanks for the interesting insider's perspective!