So Obama won't be able to achieve peace between these two species? That's too bad.

The partisans of the welfare state demand peace, in order to pay for its insatiable need to keep handing out more and more benefits.

Hard to argue with this. Almost all of the people who are railing against the Iraq war and want to pull our troops out inevitably do so and say "we could do XYZ social programs (education, housing, health care, etc) if we took the money we are using in Iraq and applied it at home".

Actually, if we are going to stop the war, we should put down the giant dollar sign pen and STOP SPENDING THAT MONEY ALTOGETHER

"President Obama"

It's got an awesome magnificent-ness to it.

Is this true?

It's true, Your Honor, this man has no dick.

"The partisans of the welfare state demand peace, in order to pay for its insatiable need to keep handing out more and more benefits."

Money that goes to poor people goes immediately to retail sales, the retailers buy more wholesale goods and hire more help raising the GDP and lowering the jobless rate. Money spent on education helps break the circle of poverty.

Money spent on war is blown up, lost or goes into offshore tax shelters.

Is everyone with the last name Novak an asshat journalist?

Diogenes: Tell me this guy isn't Bob Novak's son.

They were born two years apart according to Wikipedia.

I'm going with husband.

Diogenes: Tell me this guy isn't Bob Novak's son.

The thought of Robert Novak having sex almost ruins it for me.

Almost.

Was that article written by skookum?

I read this article earlier today off of RCP, and couldn't help but notice that his assertions that we would be deep in debt, that Iran and other extremist countries would be stronger, that terrorists would be emboldened, and there would be a total lack of responsibility on the part of the government, are all real and tangible and obvious outcomes of the last 7 years of Bush. If you're so scared of these realities in 2012, why aren't you scared of them now, as they stare you in the face?

As well, like seemingly every single Republican wingnut this election cycle, he complains and complains and complains about Obama's ideas, but offers none of his own nor offers any praise whatsoever for McCain's policies nor any defense of the last 7 years of rampant buggery of everything that America means to more half the country.

Keep it up boys. I want you to find out the hard way what more negative campaigning will get you. Keep labeling the Democrats as socialists, and radicals, and whatever else you come up with. You still haven't learned the law of unintended consequences, but you'll know it by November.

GaryPDX: That's funny..the Dems are doing loyalty oaths in Oregon from Salem. We've have 40 or 50 city council members in small towns resign rather than do loyalty oaths.

Oaths (new window)

These folks are mostly republicans and now they want to make their own State in Eastern Oregon.

Did you even read that article? It's about people resigning over an invasion of their privacy, and the words "oath" and "loyalty" appear a grand total of ZERO times. Is that the wrong article? I don't disbelieve that the Dems would try that, but that article doesn't even come close to saying what you're pretending it does.

Tastes Like Chicken: GaryPDX: That's funny..the Dems are doing loyalty oaths in Oregon from Salem. We've have 40 or 50 city council members in small towns resign rather than do loyalty oaths.

Oaths (new window)

These folks are mostly republicans and now they want to make their own State in Eastern Oregon.

Did you even read that article? It's about people resigning over an invasion of their privacy, and the words "oath" and "loyalty" appear a grand total of ZERO times. Is that the wrong article? I don't disbelieve that the Dems would try that, but that article doesn't even come close to saying what you're pretending it does.

Being a socialist, you wouldn't understand.

GaryPDX: Just wait until they hand you the Official Citizen Rulebook, then you'll understand. After all, everyone has to pay so everyone gets taken care of.

I just love your "sky is falling!" act whenever socialist ideas get discussed.

Oh the horror! We could be like.. like.. Icelanders!! Those poor miserable bastards?!

GaryPDX: You didn't get it..at the point of "relatives over 18", Salem's published reasoning was to determine where peoples loyalties lie. Those disclosures are easily defined as "loyalty oaths".

How so? I'm really not trying to be obtuse here - but I don't see how this has anything to do with loyalty, and I don't see how it has any similarity at all to requiring people to pledge allegiance to the party. It's obviously an invasion of privacy... but I'm not seeing the loyalty part. Can you elaborate?

Unright: I just love your "sky is falling!" act whenever socialist ideas get discussed.

Oh the horror! We could be like.. like.. Icelanders!! Those poor miserable bastards?!

Three words: state. run. liquor. stores. Well, in Sweden, but close enough.

GaryPDX: Quite a few of them didn't take it that way. They just said "screw this" and resigned.

Well they're dumb.

Who my relatives are isn't any of Salem's stupid business.

If you're a public official, then yes it is.

GaryPDX: Car_Ramrod: GaryPDX: Quite a few of them didn't take it that way. They just said "screw this" and resigned.

Well they're dumb.

Who my relatives are isn't any of Salem's stupid business.

If you're a public official, then yes it is.

Uh,.no it isn't. People think it is.

Why do you hate transparency in government?

GaryPDX: That's funny..the Dems are doing loyalty oaths in Oregon from Salem. We've have 40 or 50 city council members in small towns resign rather than do loyalty oaths.

Oaths (new window)

These folks are mostly republicans and now they want to make their own State in Eastern Oregon.

Did you actually read the article you linked? It's a "conflict of interest" statement, not a "loyalty oath."

FTFA: "It brings government into this open, transparent, accountable manner," he said. "A public official is not allowed to benefit from their public position."

The Onanist: Did you actually read the article you linked? It's a "conflict of interest" statement, not a "loyalty oath."

FTFA: "It brings government into this open, transparent, accountable manner," he said. "A public official is not allowed to benefit from their public position."

Came, clicked GaryPDX's link, beaten to the punch by TO, but still "This!"

/of course this has nothing to do with the stupidity of the original article.

GaryPDX: Car_Ramrod: Why do you hate transparency in government?

I don't. But when the government is rummaging around in cousins, or whoever, lives, that's too far. I have no control or influence over what my relatives do and if my word isn't good enough, I don't want the stupid situation to begin with.

You see, you think it's a prudent practice, comrade. Free people are offended by it.

They are using it as a check against conflict of interest, you know, like what happens in Chicago. This is why executives at companies have to declare stock transactions, why relatives of an employee cannot win prizes in that company's giveaways, etc...

/woah, Wilford Brimley "diabetus" reference on Fast Money on CNBC, even with the goofy pronunciation
//oh yeah, I watch it to learn how to be socialist

GaryPDX: The Onanist: Did you actually read the article you linked? It's a "conflict of interest" statement, not a "loyalty oath."

FTFA: "It brings government into this open, transparent, accountable manner," he said. "A public official is not allowed to benefit from their public position."

Okay..I'm explaining to you what happened and how these people reacted to it.

fair enough. Doesn't make them right, I think they turned a totally reasonable (at least as i understand: Name, Job, etc...) form into a stupid protest.

/Maybe they would have been caught funneling cash into their brother's construction company so they bolted?

GaryPDX: Car_Ramrod: Why do you hate transparency in government?

I don't. But when the government is rummaging around in cousins, or whoever, lives, that's too far. I have no control or influence over what my relatives do and if my word isn't good enough, I don't want the stupid situation to begin with.

You see, you think it's a prudent practice, comrade. Free people are offended by it.

They want to know who you're related to so it's not easy to do them favors with the public funds. One would think you would be supportive of protecting the taxpayers' money. Unless you give us a better article, it says no family information is required other than the names of your relatives. What a huge invasion of privacy. Hell, they could probably find out themselves using governmental records.

It's a sure sign you don't have a solid argument if you need to just throw out "comrade" at random to deflect criticism.

GaryPDX: Blues_X: GaryPDX: Okay..I'm explaining to you what happened and how these people reacted to it.

Well... maybe they're just assholes?

Or toothless hick republicans.

Aren't they the same thing?

cousin-merle: GaryPDX: Blues_X: GaryPDX: Okay..I'm explaining to you what happened and how these people reacted to it.

Well... maybe they're just assholes?

Or toothless hick republicans.

Aren't they the same thing?

He clearly said "tootless". Maybe they're all sad that their jobs didn't give them trumpets, so they took their ball and went home.

GaryPDX: "see where your loyalties lies"

Cite please.

Ugh
[fta]


The number one issue, orders of magnitude greater than others, is what will happen in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other sources of worldwide terrorism - suicide bombers, haters of Israel, and would-be destroyers of the United States and her allies. What will happen in Iraq? What will happen in Iran? What will happen in Pakistan?

This is the first place he goes? Where does this asshole work, the AEI?

*Checks AEI*

Figures
Michael Novak
George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion, Philosophy, and Public Policy

GaryPDX: superbeerchan: I think the lunatic right-wing fringe is simply worried that instead of having a sympathetic ear in the current administration, they are instead going to be marginalized again.

Just wait until they hand you the Official Citizen Rulebook, then you'll understand. After all, everyone has to pay so everyone gets taken care of.

Bring out the fear politics....pathetic

GaryPDX: Car_Ramrod: GaryPDX: "see where your loyalties lies"

Cite please.

This happened a few months back, you can google it yourself. It was a Kulongski quote and were up over 125 resignations so far all over the state. Tell me something, if this isn't going to far, why are so many good people calling it quits?

Are they all corrupt republicans to you?

You're the one bringing it up, you have to prove your case. Don't use a quote and make me find it. I have no basis as to the quality of these people that are resigning, but in my opinion, they are highly overreacting for something so simple and non-invasive. Furthermore, I haven't mentioned party allegiance at all. I don't care if they're Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Green, whatever; transparency in the government is a good thing. If they don't like it, well...bye.

/btw: "Your search - Kulongski "see where your loyalties lies" - did not match any documents

GaryPDX: This happened a few months back, you can google it yourself. It was a Kulongski quote and were up over 125 resignations so far all over the state. Tell me something, if this isn't going to far, why are so many good people calling it quits?

Are they all corrupt republicans to you?


You see "google it yourself" is usually the last refuge of someone trapped in a lie. Because googling for things can be difficult if there aren't many specifics (which in reality you haven't really given) and it can be especially difficult when there aint shiat to find.

So, whereas we were giving you the benefit of the doubt before, now you just look like a liar. I'm still not willing to call you one yet but you've headed down that path we've seen taken thousands of times before by those asked to provide facts.

GaryPDX: coma: So, whereas we were giving you the benefit of the doubt before, now you just look like a liar. I'm still not willing to call you one yet but you've headed down that path we've seen taken thousands of times before by those asked to provide facts.

I tried to find it but there are a few hundred articles on the topic now, I just didn't feel like rummaging through it all.

Share your search results. I'm sure the Fark political community is interested in the topic and would like all the facts possible so we can have a full and honest debate with you.

It's not Fark, it's

Michael Novak

What? There are more of these things? NRO have a clone shop now? Sweet Jesus, they are cloning aren't they?

I'll bet this one is Robert's lover.

KaponoFor3:
Actually, if we are going to stop the war, we should put down the giant dollar sign pen and STOP SPENDING THAT MONEY ALTOGETHER


I'd be all for that, personally.

However, right now my choices are between "Give my tax dollars to Halliburton with no-bid contracts" and "Invest it in the American infrastructure", you're damn right I'm going with the latter.