If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Sparks Tribune)   Richard Burr (R-eally doesn't care about national security, NC) derails a Senate Armed Services hearing to protest the health care bill. It's cool, the commander of the US Strategic Command needed to use his airline miles anyway   (charlotteobserver.com) divider line 173
    More: Dumbass, Richard Burr, Armed Services Committee, U.S. Sen, Claire McCaskill, armed forces, unanimous consent, state attorney general, Senate Armed Services  
•       •       •

2541 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Mar 2010 at 1:16 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



173 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-03-25 02:40:52 AM  
Sabyen91: What is with the baby boomer hate? Do people really despise their parents so much?

I don't hate anyone because of their age. But I hate the group as a whole. They turned this country around and got us going backwards. They woke us up while we were having the American dream.*

/corn dog award!
 
2010-03-25 02:43:14 AM  
Sabyen91: What is with the baby boomer hate? Do people really despise their parents so much?

They've been at the sociopolitical helm of the nation for at least the last 30 years. Our great failures lay at their feet. They've repeatedly sold their ideals when they became inconvenient. If we're lucky, we'll only spend the next 50 years unf*ckerating their legacy.

Individual Boomers can be wonderful people. As a group, they're what's wrong with America.
 
2010-03-25 02:43:28 AM  
Bigedmond: This guy does not look like a baby boomer. Yet this seems to be what this country is coming too.

Can somebody explain to me a purpose for having a holster carry a gun that low? It seems foolish to serve any purpose besides saying "LOOK AT MY GUN!"

/assuming it's made for a longer weapon?
 
2010-03-25 02:47:13 AM  
Its a drop holster. It is mostly used to when you are moving around with a rifle, IE an m4, you have more mobility. The military uses then because a belt holster can easy catch on the soldiers body armor, making the soldier less maneuverable.

For his purposes, yea it was strictly for show.
 
2010-03-25 02:47:24 AM  
RevMercutio: Can somebody explain to me a purpose for having a holster carry a gun that low? It seems foolish to serve any purpose besides saying "LOOK AT MY GUN!"

you answered your own question. The only people who wear those are people who were never in the military who want to play army.
 
2010-03-25 02:49:27 AM  
log_jammin: Sabyen91: What is with the baby boomer hate? Do people really despise their parents so much?

I don't hate anyone because of their age. But I hate the group as a whole. They turned this country around and got us going backwards. They woke us up while we were having the American dream.*

/corn dog award!


Occam's Chainsaw: Sabyen91: What is with the baby boomer hate? Do people really despise their parents so much?

They've been at the sociopolitical helm of the nation for at least the last 30 years. Our great failures lay at their feet. They've repeatedly sold their ideals when they became inconvenient. If we're lucky, we'll only spend the next 50 years unf*ckerating their legacy.

Individual Boomers can be wonderful people. As a group, they're what's wrong with America.


Well, maybe...they did elect farking Reagan.
 
2010-03-25 02:50:42 AM  
Pincy: mister13: Is it just me or does it seem like the US is headed for civil war?

Don't let Fox News fool you. The angry violent teabaggers are a small minority. They just have a huge cable news and radio network giving them free advertising, so it makes them appear to be much larger in number than they actually are. But that's the role of Fox News, to distort reality.


To be fair though it's not just Fox giving the Tea Party movement more than it's fair share of virtual column inches. The blogosphere - which is where true political junkies live and die - and the rest of cable news have turned breathless TP analysis into a cottage industry.

Yes, FNC gives the tea partiers their most avid positive spin, but the rest of the main MSM stream MSM media gives them the attention (albeit frequently negative) that makes them seem more popular than they are.

Either way. They'll tire soon. Plus the lack of a coherent strategy and central leadership will doom them to obscurity sooner than later.

Prove me wrong, kids. Prove me wrong.
 
2010-03-25 02:51:49 AM  
Bigedmond: Its a drop holster. It is mostly used to when you are moving around with a rifle, IE an m4, you have more mobility. The military uses then because a belt holster can easy catch on the soldiers body armor, making the soldier less maneuverable.

For his purposes, yea it was strictly for show.


Well that, and it's a difficult straight pull, so if Officer Friendly did stop him, it would be easier to keep his hands well and away from actions that would put his hands near the weapon, while still showing that he's armed in such a way that it's obvious that he's not trying for a terribly concealed carry.

It was very much for show, and to not confuse officers with where his hands were going.
 
2010-03-25 02:53:58 AM  
Sabyen91: Well, maybe...they did elect farking Reagan.

Link (new window)
 
2010-03-25 02:56:19 AM  
Bigedmond: Its a drop holster. It is mostly used to when you are moving around with a rifle, IE an m4, you have more mobility. The military uses then because a belt holster can easy catch on the soldiers body armor, making the soldier less maneuverable.

For his purposes, yea it was strictly for show.


Ah, okay. Thanks. Having it be for a secondary weapon makes sense.
 
2010-03-25 03:02:11 AM  
log_jammin: Sabyen91: Well, maybe...they did elect farking Reagan.

Link (new window)


I really think that is crap. Maybe it is because the baby boomers I know didn't vote for Reagan or Bush I.
 
2010-03-25 03:08:15 AM  
What's with all the biatching about how the bill was 'rammed down our throat' and 'unprecedented legislative trickery'? As far as I can tell, all that's happened so far is the House passed a bill using a normal vote, then the Senate passed a modified version of that bill (with 60 votes), and then the House agreed to pass the Senate bill, which was just signed by the president. You know, exactly how the process of making laws is described to grade schoolers.

The various bills were discussed at length for over a year. There was no vote in the middle of the night after only a few days of debate. No one held the vote open for several hours so they could buy off persuade other congressmen to change their votes. And while no Republicans supported it in the end, they actually did offer quite a few amendments that were included in the final bill, so despite what they say, they were not shut out.

Now the reconciliation bit is mostly a workaround against the filibuster in the Senate, but that's a separate matter, and mostly just strips the blatant pork out of the original Senate bill. But most of the big changes to the system are in the original bill, so even if that doesn't go through, we still have health care reform.

I know the mandate rubs some people the wrong way, but it's really only there because single payer or the public option were off the table. If everyone was covered by default, it wouldn't be necessary.

And why are people so shocked that the bill reduces the deficit? I know it's a crazy idea, but the government can actually do things without getting more debt, they just have to actually fund the bill - through either spending cuts elsewhere or additional taxes - of which this bill does both. I know people love to biatch about taxes too, but the increases in this bill are fairly modest, I think it's just really over the top health plans, tanning beds, and a small bump to the payroll tax on people making more than $200k, I think we'll all survive...
 
2010-03-25 03:17:19 AM  
Sabyen91: Well, maybe...they did elect farking Reagan.

They're also responsible for the Bush II redux. And the War on Certain Drugs Sometimes. And the dot-com bubble. And the real estate bubble. Etc, etc.
 
2010-03-25 03:19:42 AM  
Sabyen91: Maybe it is because the baby boomers I know didn't vote for Reagan or Bush I.

Even many of the democrat baby boomers I know are selfish pricks.

They truly earned the title "the me generation".
 
2010-03-25 03:21:15 AM  
Occam's Chainsaw: Sabyen91: Well, maybe...they did elect farking Reagan.

They're also responsible for the Bush II redux. And the War on Certain Drugs Sometimes. And the dot-com bubble. And the real estate bubble. Etc, etc.


log_jammin: Sabyen91: Maybe it is because the baby boomers I know didn't vote for Reagan or Bush I.

Even many of the democrat baby boomers I know are selfish pricks.

They truly earned the title "the me generation".


I suppose I can only disagree from personal experience and it is anecdotal. Maybe most of them really are selfish pricks.
 
2010-03-25 03:23:28 AM  
Burr, joining his GOP colleagues' outrage at the new health reform law, used an obscure Senate rule to prevent the Armed Services committee from meeting this afternoon

Ok this is just stupid as hell. Can anyone look at that sentence and say it's not stupid as hell?
 
2010-03-25 03:26:28 AM  
fnottr: What's with all the biatching about how the bill was 'rammed down our throat' and 'unprecedented legislative trickery'? As far as I can tell, all that's happened so far is the House passed a bill using a normal vote, then the Senate passed a modified version of that bill (with 60 votes), and then the House agreed to pass the Senate bill, which was just signed by the president. You know, exactly how the process of making laws is described to grade schoolers.

Yeah, but the democratics circumvented the GOP's 41 vote supermajority. Reconciliation isn't used often. Basically the Dems were afraid of a joint session of congress because they're cowards. No, it's not a big deal, yes this issue has been on the table and in the news forever.
 
2010-03-25 03:27:09 AM  
Sabyen91: I suppose I can only disagree from personal experience and it is anecdotal. Maybe most of them really are selfish pricks.

Like I said, any given Boomer can be awesome, a wonderful, giving, rational person who genuinely cares about his fellow man. As a group, they suck hard.
 
2010-03-25 03:27:49 AM  
moothemagiccow: fnottr: What's with all the biatching about how the bill was 'rammed down our throat' and 'unprecedented legislative trickery'? As far as I can tell, all that's happened so far is the House passed a bill using a normal vote, then the Senate passed a modified version of that bill (with 60 votes), and then the House agreed to pass the Senate bill, which was just signed by the president. You know, exactly how the process of making laws is described to grade schoolers.

Yeah, but the democratics circumvented the GOP's 41 vote supermajority. Reconciliation isn't used often. Basically the Dems were afraid of a joint session of congress because they're cowards. No, it's not a big deal, yes this issue has been on the table and in the news forever.


They just like the "rammed down our throat" part.
 
2010-03-25 03:30:40 AM  
The GOP: The party that takes national security so seriously, only a chance to be petty about something can distract them from their eternal vigilance.
 
2010-03-25 03:32:01 AM  
Occam's Chainsaw: Sabyen91: I suppose I can only disagree from personal experience and it is anecdotal. Maybe most of them really are selfish pricks.

Like I said, any given Boomer can be awesome, a wonderful, giving, rational person who genuinely cares about his fellow man. As a group, they suck hard.


You are probably right. They have had a lot of selfish politicos.
 
2010-03-25 04:02:26 AM  
fnottr: What's with all the biatching about how the bill was 'rammed down our throat'

Penis.

/find out more at your airport's restroom
 
2010-03-25 04:05:47 AM  
Occam's Chainsaw: They've been at the sociopolitical helm of the nation for at least the last 30 years. Our great failures lay at their feet. They've repeatedly sold their ideals when they became inconvenient. If we're lucky, we'll only spend the next 50 years unf*ckerating their legacy.

Individual Boomers can be wonderful people. As a group, they're what's wrong with America.


What I wonder is how that happened. Was the "Greatest Generation" just so utterly exhausted from fighting WWII that they couldn't be bothered to raise decent kids? Where did the boomer selfishness come from? It's not readily apparent in either their parents or their children?
 
2010-03-25 04:09:47 AM  
if they actually think that they can win elections by acting like farking 2 year olds, they will be sorely mistaken. they are giving democratic candidates so much fuel for campaigning, its regodamnediculous.
 
2010-03-25 04:31:39 AM  
What I wonder is how that happened. Was the "Greatest Generation" just so utterly exhausted from fighting WWII that they couldn't be bothered to raise decent kids? Where did the boomer selfishness come from? It's not readily apparent in either their parents or their children?

Boomers didn't have it nearly as tough as their parents. Many of them never really knew hardship, just a consumerist 'he-who-dies-with-the-most-toys-wins' mentality. It gave them a sense of entitlement that many of them never really shook. And Vietnam and Watergate jaded them, taught them to distrust pretty much everything and everybody, and look out for Number One.
 
2010-03-25 05:01:41 AM  
Don't fool yourselves, kids. The dickweeds are thick with many, many different sizes, shapes and ages. Generalizations singling out boomers are little more than that: generalizations.

Back on topic, does this clown give any justification for this action whatsoever? Being entirely unrelated to health care, is there even a hint that this action (or more appropriately, I suppose, "inaction") serves any purpose other than to paint himself and his cohorts as being a bunch of petulant little shiats?
 
2010-03-25 05:11:43 AM  
UNC_Samurai: Fellow North Carolinians; we could have had Erskine Bowles instead of this louse in 2004, but noooooo. We had to have two of the laziest senators in a century with him and that harpy Dole.

It occurred to me recently that this guy was lucky enough to get voted in on a good year for Republicans, that his timing was lucky enough to miss 2006 and 2008, and that 2010 may be good for Republicans again.

/Dammitsomuch
 
2010-03-25 05:19:31 AM  
i786.photobucket.com
 
2010-03-25 05:37:36 AM  
Sabyen91: I suppose I can only disagree from personal experience and it is anecdotal. Maybe most of them really are selfish pricks.

Both of my parents are Bommers (born '47) and both voted for twice for Reagan, Bush and Bush.

/anecdotal evidence is... anecdotal
 
2010-03-25 06:19:08 AM  
Republicans: Don't use the nuclear option
Democrats: Technically, it isn't the "nuclear option" ... it's reconciliation.
Republicans: We are refering to how we will slow the senate down and nothing will get done.
Democrats: LMAO, how much slower can the Senate move!

Oops.
 
2010-03-25 06:19:54 AM  
The Republican party, aslo known as the do nothing party. The whole Contract with America seems to of done nothing.
So what is up with that?
 
2010-03-25 06:20:36 AM  
GAT_00: justbob2000: When is the GOP going to figure out that stomping your feet and throwing a tantrum because you did not get your way makes them look like spoiled 3rd graders?

Well, there remains absolutely nothing in the main media outlets calling them on it, so I'm thinking they're going to keep it up for a while.


MSNBC's been riding them all day over the holdups in the senate. I'm sure BBC America would have too but I don't get that channel anymore so I'm not able to watch.

Of course you're not going to be seeing any of this on the news channels owned by the companies that bought his way into his senate seat though. Just gonna have to watch somewhere there's still journalistic integrity.
 
2010-03-25 06:26:45 AM  
Vindibudd: I love it how stalling and being obstructionist is such an admirable trait when Democrats do it (new window), but holy god, how dare the Republicans ever do anything similar.

I committee voting down a judge because they don't want him for no other reason that they don't want him, they'd already voted him down once before, is completely different from what the republicans are doing in the senate. They lost on healthcare and now they're taking it out on homeless vets and the troops. Classy.
 
2010-03-25 06:31:23 AM  
We won't have him to kick around after November. Even his party doesn't like him
 
2010-03-25 06:33:11 AM  
etv_2k: The whole Contract with America seems to of done nothing.

It did give us a 500 dollar a child tax credit the Right loves to complain about.


They're quit literally a self sustaining outrage machine.
 
2010-03-25 06:35:42 AM  
Weaver95: so basically this incident is so bad that even the token shill for all things Republican couldn't defend it and ran screaming from the thread.

yeah. this bodes well for Republican chances of a sweep in the midterm congressional elections.


Applause are in order for you showing that he was full of shiat and the perfect example of the liars that use the 'Both sides are bad!' defense only to justify republicans doing it. Good job.

Of course, he'll probably return to the thread right before it dies, post anything and then claim that he won.
 
2010-03-25 06:45:29 AM  
Vindibudd: I love it how stalling and being obstructionist is such an admirable trait when Democrats do it (new window), but holy god, how dare the Republicans ever do anything similar.

The GOP runs on how much they love the troop but fark every time they can
 
2010-03-25 06:50:32 AM  
immrlizard: We won't have him to kick around after November. Even his party doesn't like him

As a NC voter: your lips to God's ear, friend.
 
2010-03-25 06:57:08 AM  
NeverDrunk23: Of course, he'll probably return to the thread right before it dies, post anything and then claim that he won.

Won't happen.

/I'll be checking the thread when I wake up.
 
2010-03-25 06:58:49 AM  
the new face of the republican party: pro rape, anti troops, hates veterans.
this will bode well.
 
2010-03-25 07:01:58 AM  
Vindibudd: I love it how stalling and being obstructionist is such an admirable trait when Democrats do it (new window), but holy god, how dare the Republicans ever do anything similar.

Curious on two factors... was the delay tactic implemented? (you just cite an article that cites an "internal memo")
Second, that is one... care to cite more before acting as if the Democrats were as obstructionist as the Republicans have been.

Additionally, up until now all the moves have been directly related to the HCR... this act (and the 2 oclock vanishing act) are pure petulance and don't impact the HCR in any fashion.
 
2010-03-25 07:11:35 AM  
Markoff_Cheney
the new face of the republican party: pro rape, anti troops, hates veterans.
this will bode well.


No surprise, they curse ACORN and one of their founding platforms was to help Vietnam Vets. Though ACORN did seem to lose their way, they did do a lot of good.
 
2010-03-25 07:16:22 AM  
GOP: more like spoiled, petulant children every day.

hphotos-snc1.fbcdn.net
 
2010-03-25 07:16:41 AM  
This is one classy individual.

"On Friday night, I called my wife and I said, 'Brooke, I am not coming home this weekend. I will call you on Monday. Tonight, I want you to go to the ATM machine, and I want you to draw out everything it will let you take. And I want you to tomorrow, and I want you to go Sunday.' I was convinced on Friday night that if you put a plastic card in an ATM machine the last thing you were going to get was cash." Burr added, "I think it is safe to say the economy has not rebounded. If anything, we have gone deeper into what economists call 'recession.' I would tell you it's not a recession. I would define this as a depression."

I'll do what I can, Sen. Burr, to get you back to the private sector.
 
2010-03-25 07:19:23 AM  
Man, I wish I had a dollar for every time someone thought Weaver and Hubie were liberals because they criticized the GOP's antics
 
2010-03-25 07:23:11 AM  
Pincy: mister13: Is it just me or does it seem like the US is headed for civil war?

Don't let Fox News fool you. The angry violent teabaggers are a small minority. They just have a huge cable news and radio network giving them free advertising, so it makes them appear to be much larger in number than they actually are. But that's the role of Fox News, to distort reality.


I suspect a nixonian "silent majority" will show their disgust with the foxbaggers in November.
 
2010-03-25 07:30:03 AM  
cabbyman: Keep this up! The best thing for America is a few decades of do nothing Congresses!

That's like saying the best way to drive a cab is to not turn the steering wheel.
 
2010-03-25 07:40:32 AM  
Sabyen91: log_jammin: Sabyen91: Well, maybe...they did elect farking Reagan.

Link (new window)

I really think that is crap. Maybe it is because the baby boomers I know didn't vote for Reagan or Bush I.


It is crap and shows all the metal aptitude of blaming Germany's problems in the 1930s on the JOOOOOOOOS.

Hey, log_jammin and Occam's Chainsaw,

Try using some paint remover. I hear it does wonders for getting that drool from that wide brush off. After all, you wouldn't want to walk around marked with idiocy, would you?


DrBenway: Don't fool yourselves, kids. The dickweeds are thick with many, many different sizes, shapes and ages. Generalizations singling out boomers are little more than that: generalizations.

Thank you.

Jesus, you'd like to think that the very least we could do is make an attempt to not act like the people we are having a great time ridiculing.
 
2010-03-25 07:46:15 AM  
Random Reality Check: After all, you wouldn't want to walk around marked with idiocy, would you?

That hurt man...that really hurt....
 
2010-03-25 07:46:40 AM  
Republicanism is in its last throes.
 
Displayed 50 of 173 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report