And once again, Hillary did NOT win Texas.

Great compilation, teh funay!1

+1 aragons pissed but what about gimli?

So who are these people and why haven't I heard about them?

Mmmm, more of that "Hillary won Texas and Nevada" gar-bage.

The video actually specifies that Obama won the caucus in Texas and Hillary won the primary, which is factually accurate.

That was awesome.

When the fark is August going to get here? This was high entertainment during the strike, but now, it's just annoying again.

What the frack.

Neonkopite: The video actually specifies that Obama won the caucus in Texas and Hillary won the primary, which is factually accurate.

Doesn't say dick about Obama winning more delegates in Nevada...plus, in mentioning Obama winning the Texas caucuses, it wasn't mentioned that Obama won more delegates from the state as a whole. It was tacked on as a "and Obama won this, moving on...", with no weight being attached to it.

One correction: Identity Politics are the black of political fashions.

Mike Gravel talks about himself.

I'm surprised I knew most of that.
I need to get out of the house more.
DAMN YOU INTERNET!!!!

all you need to know about this election is how the media is destroying Obama just like they did Howard Dean and John Kerry
by running the same attacks day after day,week after week for free.
hell Hillary doesn't need any money. The networks do this for free. and after they have killed Obama's candidacy they'll go after Hillary and once again the corporate media will prove who really decides the elections and who their favorite is. The party that lets Murdoch,GE,Disney and Time Warner grow ever more influential.
5 or 6 corporations decide our president. They just pretend to let us participate to keep up the illusion.

Hobodeluxe: all you need to know about this election is how the media is destroying Obama just like they did Howard Dean and John Kerry
by running the same attacks day after day,week after week for free.
hell Hillary doesn't need any money. The networks do this for free. and after they have killed Obama's candidacy they'll go after Hillary and once again the corporate media will prove who really decides the elections and who their favorite is. The party that lets Murdoch,GE,Disney and Time Warner grow ever more influential.
5 or 6 corporations decide our president. They just pretend to let us participate to keep up the illusion.

You've come down with the crazies

Seven minutes?!?
Who has THAT kind of time?

Ha, that rawked!

Hobodeluxe: all you need to know about this election is how the media is destroying Obama just like they did Howard Dean and John Kerry
by running the same attacks day after day,week after week for free.
hell Hillary doesn't need any money. The networks do this for free. and after they have killed Obama's candidacy they'll go after Hillary and once again the corporate media will prove who really decides the elections and who their favorite is. The party that lets Murdoch,GE,Disney and Time Warner grow ever more influential.
5 or 6 corporations decide our president. They just pretend to let us participate to keep up the illusion.

MugzyBrown
You've come down with the crazies

/ummmm, let's think about it. With deregulation of the communication industry what scared the crap out of our Grandparents in the 50's, the lack of diversity amongst the radio & TV across the country, HAS HAPPENED. Disney owns ABC, Clear *farking* channel for crying out loud! (Owned by Mit Romney - helllooo people) These big giant corporations determine everything from the music we have the ability to listen to and what a "hit" and are now doing the same thing with TV.

//Granted, back in the '50's what they were afraid of is the Communists taking over and brainwashing us into electing a Communist to be President.

///Instead, we have something more evil - a Corporate President.

They forgot Poland.

That was one of the best things I have ever seen on the politics tag.

Yay submitter.

You know, if I didn't think it mattered, politics would be great entertainment.

Not enough "Hussein" and "Closet Muslim". If I remember one thing about this election cycle, it's going to be that people with funny names shouldn't run for president because Americans are like little children.

gbiewer: hese big giant corporations determine everything from the music we have the ability to listen to and what a "hit" and are now doing the same thing with TV.


Wow it's amazing you found some medium to get this information and your opinion out to the world.

I wish other people would figure this out. These should be some information sharing network created. Something where vasts amount of information could be sent and discussed.. a highway of sorts.

MugzyBrown: I wish other people would figure this out. These should be some information sharing network created. Something where vasts amount of information could be sent and discussed.. a highway of sorts.

This idea of yours is full of holes. I think a series of tubes would be more efficient.

I doubt we've seen the end of Rev. Wright. After the way he went out last week and all but declared to be the great Oooga Booga, it would seem he is trying to purposefully sink the Obama campaign.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/28852/1/TDS-Festival-Wrights.wmv (pops)

Shaggy_C: Not enough "Hussein" and "Closet Muslim". If I remember one thing about this election cycle, it's going to be that people with funny names shouldn't run for president because Americans are like little children.

How about people shouldn't run for president if they want to increase dependancy on the government?
How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?
Or am I racist for asking those questions.

MugzyBrown

Wow it's amazing you found some medium to get this information and your opinion out to the world.

I wish other people would figure this out. These should be some information sharing network created. Something where vasts amount of information could be sent and discussed.. a highway of sorts.

Maybe Al Gore could invent something? You know, like a network or something?

MugzyBrown: I wish other people would figure this out. These should be some information sharing network created. Something where vasts amount of information could be sent and discussed.. a highway of sorts.

That would never work. Unless information flows downward from the appropriate sources, you can't trust it. It would essentially consist of ravings by pajama-clad nutcases and funny animal pictures. Thank god for the media. Only their non-biased judgement can protect us morans from ourselves.

Threadjack:

Why won't Fark let this link be approved:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1736831-1,00.html

The article was 3 hours ago, but all submissions were rejected.

I guess Generals throwing the SECDEF under the bus is taboo here now.

globalwarmingpraiser: How about people shouldn't run for president if they want to increase dependancy on the government?
How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?
Or am I racist for asking those questions.

That would depend upon why you hate George Bush.

Lost_in_Korea: I guess Generals throwing the SECDEF under the bus is taboo here now.

No.

NYT does funny things with their urls.

Fark don't like.

But not because of the content.

globalwarmingpraiser: How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?

PAYGO? what are you some kind of libtard or something?

Lost_in_Korea: Why won't Fark let this link be approved:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1736831-1,00.html


Skleenar: NYT does funny things with their urls.

Maybe I'll just go ahead and read what you wrote, instead of just imagining things in my head from now on.

globalwarmingpraiser

How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?

You mean like borrowing half a trillion American dollars from the Chinese to invest in a hole in Iraq, and then backing it up with tax cuts for the wealthy? Is that what you mean??

globalwarmingpraiser: How about people shouldn't run for president if they want to increase dependancy on the government?

Wait, I thought things like "socialized health care" were doomed for failure because of how terrible the service was. Why would people be dependent upon a shiatty system? Wouldn't they want to get off of it ASAP?

So what's the deal? Are you afraid it would actually work, therefore denying your preconceived notions about the world? Or is it that the 'socialist' projects would fail miserably and not create any dependence, meaning that your argument is idiotic. Which is it?

Oh and all the candidates suck besides Ron Paul.


/Did I Ron Paul the thread properly.

The entire Democratic race in seven minutes

I'm waiting for the 30 second version, done with bunnies.

Skleenar That would never work. Unless information flows downward from the appropriate sources, you can't trust it. It would essentially consist of ravings by pajama-clad nutcases and funny animal pictures. Thank god for the media. Only their non-biased judgement can protect us morans from ourselves.

Pajama's who's wearing pj's???

/Currently wearing my Cubs shirt.

//Now who is the nutcase?

///slashies and sarcasm intended

Rovian: You mean like borrowing half a trillion American dollars from the Chinese to invest in a hole in Iraq, and then backing it up with tax cuts for the wealthy? Is that what you mean??

Nice red herring thar'...he's talking about Obama's answer to the capital gains tax question, where when confronted with the fact that a 15% rate brings in higher revenues than a 25% rate, he said he didn't care and would make it higher just to be 'fair'.

dittybopper

THIS! Maybe in an unbleeped Resevoir Dogs version!

Shaggy
15% rate brings in higher revenues than a 25% rate,

I wouldn't expect to find that as a hard rule for all instances, there are too many variables some of them controllable, some of them not so much.

Thats not a red herring, thats exactly what he said,.

How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?

Skleenar: globalwarmingpraiser: How about people shouldn't run for president if they want to increase dependancy on the government?
How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?
Or am I racist for asking those questions.

That would depend upon why you hate George Bush.

Because he ran as a conservative then proceeded to govern with the worst ideas of both the Republicans and Democrats.
Headso: globalwarmingpraiser: How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?

PAYGO? what are you some kind of libtard or something?

Nope, fiscally conservative, less taxes, less spending. You know honest.

Rovian: globalwarmingpraiser

How about they don't propose policies that increase spending if they plan on promoting policies that decrease revenue, in the name of fairness?

You mean like borrowing half a trillion American dollars from the Chinese to invest in a hole in Iraq, and then backing it up with tax cuts for the wealthy? Is that what you mean??

No, like borrowing half a trillion dollars from the chinese when tax revenues have been steadily increasing over the coarse of your presidency.

Shaggy_C: globalwarmingpraiser: How about people shouldn't run for president if they want to increase dependancy on the government?

Wait, I thought things like "socialized health care" were doomed for failure because of how terrible the service was. Why would people be dependent upon a shiatty system? Wouldn't they want to get off of it ASAP?

So what's the deal? Are you afraid it would actually work, therefore denying your preconceived notions about the world? Or is it that the 'socialist' projects would fail miserably and not create any dependence, meaning that your argument is idiotic. Which is it?

No, I am afraid it is a money pit that we will never get out from under much like Iraq. These irresponsible government policies have to stop.

/God, I am starting to sound like a Paulista.
//If I start saying gold standard like it is a holy thing please shoot me.

Skleener,

I don't comment often, mainly because I am almost like day/night opposite timewise of the majority of Fark commenters. But I do read the comments (A LOT). You have no idea how many times I would have commented in a thread, except that by the time I see it, it's pretty much dead.

Anyway, I just want to say that I generally enjoy your posts and am glad that at least you acknowledged mine. And I hope that you read that link.

Regardless,
I remain,
Lost_in_Korea

globalwarmingpraiser: Because he ran as a conservative then proceeded to govern with the worst ideas of both the Republicans and Democrats.

Then you are not a racist.

Feel better?

/or at least have not provided any evidence that you are in this instance.

Globalwarmingpraiser

No, like borrowing half a trillion dollars from the chinese when tax revenues deficits have been steadily increasing outpacing tax revenues over the coarse of your presidency.

FTFY

Welcome to the 28%, we hope you enjoy your stay.

Rovian: I wouldn't expect to find that as a hard rule for all instances, there are too many variables some of them controllable, some of them not so much.

I'm not sure I trust the data either; it was a WSJ 'study' that they brought up at one of the debates.

gbiewer: dittybopper

THIS! Maybe in an unbleeped Resevoir Dogs version!

Or maybe the "Snakes on a Plane" version:

I'm sick of these muthafarkin' super-delegates in my muthafarkin' primary!

Lost_in_Korea: Anyway, I just want to say that I generally enjoy your posts and am glad that at least you acknowledged mine. And I hope that you read that link.

Aw, shucks.

It's nothing. I'm just wasting my employer's investment in me.

/too bad my employer technically is me.