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.

(Yahoo)   In order to take the White House back from the dangerous, liberal, radical socialist who has nearly destroyed America, it looks like the GOP has settled on running the guy with nearly identical policies and ideas   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 239
    More: Amusing, Mitt Romney, GOP, White House, Presidency of Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich, St. Augustine, 49th state  
•       •       •

2660 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Jan 2012 at 9:04 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



239 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-09 11:30:24 AM

karnal: jso2897

vygramul: Philip Francis Queeg: karnal: ReaverZ

karnal: Cletus C.

Obama vs. Romney should be an interesting election. Economy is improving, it seems, which will certainly favor Obama if it continues. But will he be able to generate the excitement he did last time now that people have seen he really isn't that much different than the rest of them?

A lot of the Obama vote depends on getting people to vote who generally don't. A lot of the Republican vote depends on getting people to vote who are far right of Romney.

Yep, should be interesting


I am sure ACORN has that covered already......bring in the buses and gift cards.

Wow, they are soo powerful they can change elections even though they don't exist anymore? Please, let us in on this secret information you have? Are you one of the guys that went to Mars with Obama??!!


gul·li·ble (gl-bl) adj.
Easily deceived or duped.

ACORN is everywhere! Even under your bed.

Clearly, we need a Simon Wiesenthal-like institute to chase down former ACORN electoral criminals who perpetrated massive voter fraud and packed 6 million votes for McCain/Palin into boxcars and incinerated them - even separating chads from their vote cards and packing them into voter-suppression chambers all in a continent-wide campaign of destroying an entire culture of derp.

In one horrible example of voter intimidation, they stationed an old, drunk black man with a stick in from of a polling place, as an act of terrorism.
A drunk black man with a STICK!!
It's the Nazis all over again!


Is that how you remember it?

[plimages.blob.core.windows.net image 300x300]


One of those guys was a registered poll observer, who had every right and reason to be there. the other is a random drunk . Those are the facts - check 'em.
But anyway - are you telling me that you actually find those two sad sacks FRIGHTENING?
Damn, son. Don't take much to scare you.
 
2012-01-09 11:31:02 AM

ReaverZ: I_C_Weener: ReaverZ: Please post my denial. I am offend at your inference that he is stupid. Obama being conservative is pretty obvious.

Since I never said stupid, I don't think I'll engage you anymore.

[i586.photobucket.com image 500x375]

Really, this is Fark numbnuts.


Dude, don't even bother with him. He's the Politics tab's equivalent to The English Major. Except that he's a damn "moderator" who greenlights all these awful trolling headlines. He's just here to stir things up and drive pageclicks.
 
2012-01-09 11:31:02 AM
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-01-09 11:31:24 AM
Obama isn't perfect, far from it, but i'd gladly take a thousand of him over anyone the GOP nominated. The debates showed us just how completely insane, unethical, or just plan indecisive their candidates are.

If this is the best they could come up with, they are in serious trouble.
 
2012-01-09 11:32:36 AM

BillCo: Rain Man would be preferable to the moron we have in office now.


Your plan is to count cards in Vegas? Isn't that a euphamism for what got us in this mess in the first place.

//almost forgot. 0/10.
 
2012-01-09 11:33:52 AM

karnal: Acorn Housing changed its name to Affordable Housing Centers of America yet has retained the same tax and employee identification numbers that it held under its former name.


Perhaps you should check IRS regulations as to why this occurred. Also you do realize that ACORN did dissolve, hence these name changes of it's local affiliates, just because their parent organization folds does not mean the locals fold also. This is very similar to when a National Chain that has Franchisees folds, the Franchisees still own their business and may continue their services albeit under a different name, also they do not change Tax and Employer Id's either.

Final thought: You do realize that the Attorney Generals of several states -after granting Mr. O'Keefe full immunity in exchange for viewing his unaudtied videos- found that ACORN committed no illegal acts. Which leads one to ask why Mr. O'Keefe demand immunity before he would turn this "evidence" over to the proper authorities? Now why would he do that?
 
2012-01-09 11:34:18 AM

Old enough to know better: He may be moderate, but unfortunately hes still a Republican, and those guys are heavily into Groupthink. Even if Mitt were to win the election, we'd find him quickly falling into line with the party.
I'm sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, a vote for any Republican, no matter how reasonable they sound is a vote for the likes of Boehner and Bachmann.


Yup.

It's important to remember that GWB the candidate was far more moderate than GWB the president, and when Nader went around telling everyone that Bush and Gore were the same, it actually got traction.
 
2012-01-09 11:34:43 AM

Riothamus: Dude, don't even bother with him. He's the Politics tab's equivalent to The English Major. Except that he's a damn "moderator" who greenlights all these awful trolling headlines. He's just here to stir things up and drive pageclicks.


First, Mods don't green light. Second...nope. Just a Romney voter. Third...that guy has issues.
 
2012-01-09 11:35:02 AM

TomD9938: Philip Francis Queeg: Yeah, you are right. Letting the State have a monitor in your bedroom to make sure that any sexual activity with your wife is done in such a way as to allow the possibility of pregnancy is just a reasonable regulation of commerce like any other.

That's a bit of a leap.

I would hope though that there's a govt. body, somewhere along the way, making sure her birth control pills are safe, or that the x-x-large condoms Im using have been tested and proved effective.


Yes, it's called the FDA and the Republicans want to dismantle it.
 
2012-01-09 11:35:22 AM
>jso2897

karnal: jso2897

vygramul: Philip Francis Queeg: karnal: ReaverZ

karnal: Cletus C.

Obama vs. Romney should be an interesting election. Economy is improving, it seems, which will certainly favor Obama if it continues. But will he be able to generate the excitement he did last time now that people have seen he really isn't that much different than the rest of them?

A lot of the Obama vote depends on getting people to vote who generally don't. A lot of the Republican vote depends on getting people to vote who are far right of Romney.

Yep, should be interesting


I am sure ACORN has that covered already......bring in the buses and gift cards.

Wow, they are soo powerful they can change elections even though they don't exist anymore? Please, let us in on this secret information you have? Are you one of the guys that went to Mars with Obama??!!


gul·li·ble (gl-bl) adj.
Easily deceived or duped.

ACORN is everywhere! Even under your bed.

Clearly, we need a Simon Wiesenthal-like institute to chase down former ACORN electoral criminals who perpetrated massive voter fraud and packed 6 million votes for McCain/Palin into boxcars and incinerated them - even separating chads from their vote cards and packing them into voter-suppression chambers all in a continent-wide campaign of destroying an entire culture of derp.

In one horrible example of voter intimidation, they stationed an old, drunk black man with a stick in from of a polling place, as an act of terrorism.
A drunk black man with a STICK!!
It's the Nazis all over again!


Is that how you remember it?

[plimages.blob.core.windows.net image 300x300]

One of those guys was a registered poll observer, who had every right and reason to be there. the other is a random drunk . Those are the facts - check 'em.
But anyway - are you telling me that you actually find those two sad sacks FRIGHTENING?
Damn, son. Don't take much to scare you.

didn't scare me at all.....the subject was voter intimidation.
 
2012-01-09 11:37:03 AM

karnal: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 400x300]


Well,. that's a clever picture. But it doesn't change anything. The fact is that, failing having committed a felony in some places, every adult American has a right to vote. Some even believe it to be a duty. The assertion that there is something wrong with encouraging and helping Americans to vote says volumes about your world view - and nothing about ACORN.
Tough titty, m'lord - they're letting the peasantry vote now, and there's nothing you can do about it.
 
2012-01-09 11:37:39 AM

Tarkus: TomD9938: Philip Francis Queeg: Yeah, you are right. Letting the State have a monitor in your bedroom to make sure that any sexual activity with your wife is done in such a way as to allow the possibility of pregnancy is just a reasonable regulation of commerce like any other.

That's a bit of a leap.

I would hope though that there's a govt. body, somewhere along the way, making sure her birth control pills are safe, or that the x-x-large condoms Im using have been tested and proved effective.

Yes, it's called the FDAevery agency and the Republicans want to dismantle it.


I know you were being specific, but I thought I'd broaden the scope a bit.
 
2012-01-09 11:38:05 AM

Antimatter: Obama isn't perfect, far from it, but i'd gladly take a thousand of him over anyone the GOP nominated. The debates showed us just how completely insane, unethical, or just plan indecisive their candidates are.

If this is the best they could come up with, they are in serious trouble.


Given the Republican candidates have pretty much guaranteed if they are elected, we are going to war with Iran (a country 4 times the size of Iraq, into which we put 1.5 million military personnel over 9 years), pretty much A GREAT BIG THIS!

If you love what our country used to be, it would be prudent for Republicans like me to continue voting for Democratic presidential candidates.
 
2012-01-09 11:38:50 AM
i.qkme.me
 
2012-01-09 11:39:08 AM

karnal: >jso2897

karnal: jso2897

vygramul: Philip Francis Queeg: karnal: ReaverZ

karnal: Cletus C.

Obama vs. Romney should be an interesting election. Economy is improving, it seems, which will certainly favor Obama if it continues. But will he be able to generate the excitement he did last time now that people have seen he really isn't that much different than the rest of them?

A lot of the Obama vote depends on getting people to vote who generally don't. A lot of the Republican vote depends on getting people to vote who are far right of Romney.

Yep, should be interesting


I am sure ACORN has that covered already......bring in the buses and gift cards.

Wow, they are soo powerful they can change elections even though they don't exist anymore? Please, let us in on this secret information you have? Are you one of the guys that went to Mars with Obama??!!


gul·li·ble (gl-bl) adj.
Easily deceived or duped.

ACORN is everywhere! Even under your bed.

Clearly, we need a Simon Wiesenthal-like institute to chase down former ACORN electoral criminals who perpetrated massive voter fraud and packed 6 million votes for McCain/Palin into boxcars and incinerated them - even separating chads from their vote cards and packing them into voter-suppression chambers all in a continent-wide campaign of destroying an entire culture of derp.

In one horrible example of voter intimidation, they stationed an old, drunk black man with a stick in from of a polling place, as an act of terrorism.
A drunk black man with a STICK!!
It's the Nazis all over again!


Is that how you remember it?

[plimages.blob.core.windows.net image 300x300]

One of those guys was a registered poll observer, who had every right and reason to be there. the other is a random drunk . Those are the facts - check 'em.
But anyway - are you telling me that you actually find those two sad sacks FRIGHTENING?
Damn, son. Don't take much to scare you.

didn't scare me at all.....the subject was voter intimidation.


Lolwut? I'm really starting to think you're just having me on, here.
 
2012-01-09 11:39:48 AM

karnal: TFerWannaBe


karnal: Where ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise

California ACORN changed its name to Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment.
New York ACORN renamed itself New York Communities for Change.
Acorn Housing changed its name to Affordable Housing Centers of America yet has retained the same tax and employee identification numbers that it held under its former name.

The fact that you still believe ACORN stole the election shows you're one of the greatest fools on Fark. Conspiracy theorists are the most gullible people on the planet.


I never said they stole the election - I said they brought busses and paid voters to cast votes....but since it was for the Obama cause, it is totally legal.


Don't stop believing!
 
2012-01-09 11:40:41 AM

coeyagi: our plan is to count cards in Vegas? Isn't that a euphamism for what got us in this mess in the first place.


jesus - there are still people who don't have that asshole on ignore?
 
2012-01-09 11:42:05 AM

FlashHarry: coeyagi: our plan is to count cards in Vegas? Isn't that a euphamism for what got us in this mess in the first place.

jesus - there are still people who don't have that asshole on ignore?


I only ignore people who persist with their nonsense. BillCo is kind of a hit and run troller, i.e., he doesn't clog up a thread with utter dogcrap.
 
2012-01-09 11:49:40 AM

Magorn: Philip Francis Queeg: shivashakti: Philip Francis Queeg: You could go with Newt.

Newt's an utter scumbag with no morality whatsoever. He makes Bill Clinton look like a good husband.
.

Yeah, but he's not a religious zealot. And let's be honest Cain isn't far behind in the "utter scumbag with no morality whatsoever who makes Bill Clinton look like a good husband" category.

What's sad is that there is a guy running for the GOP nomination that, liberal though I am, I would give serious thought to voting for. He's a charismatic speaker, and a lot of what he says about how to fix the corrupting influence of money in politics really resonates with me. Also as a former Governor and Congressman, he's better qualified than most of the GOP field. Sadly however he's polling in the nearly negative numbers.

An no his name isn't Huntsman, or even Johnson. Let's leave it as an exercise to the reader to see if anyone even knows he's running or whether the media blackout on him is almost total.


Roemer? I like his assertive stance on campaign finance. Walking the walk is to be commended.
 
2012-01-09 12:29:22 PM
In order to take the White House back from the dangerous, liberal, radical socialist who has nearly destroyed America, it looks like the GOP has settled on running the guy with nearly identical policies and ideas

But he's not black, so vote for him.
 
2012-01-09 12:43:42 PM
Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...
 
2012-01-09 12:52:20 PM

CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...


Obama: This bill has other good stuff and the bad stuff I won't enforce.

CeroX: I am gonna vote for the guy who supports the gold standard, thinks consumers can go fark themselves and die of food poisoning, and doesn't care a lick if blacks / atheists / gays' rights are sodomized by state legislatures.

Seems reasonable, bro.
 
2012-01-09 12:52:48 PM

CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...


Are you somehow of the opinion that the NDAA would not be law if Ron Paul was president? Because that's not how a veto override works.
 
2012-01-09 12:54:49 PM
As a progressive, I don't mind the prospect of a Romney presidency. He's the kind of guy who would work with Democrats in Congress to achieve some progressive goals in order to build bipartisan consensus. Given his pro-choice past, I don't even think he would appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices. He'd be more likely to appoint an old school New England conservative like, say, Mr. Justice Souter. Liberal on some issues, libertarian on others.
 
2012-01-09 12:57:43 PM

CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...


I was angry at Obama about the NDAA - until I acquainted myself with the actual facts of the situation. Without regard to what he says (and he lies a lot) Ron Paul would have signed the exact same bill.
Now if you want to vote for him, that's your right, of course. Indeed, if you wish, you could just wipe your ass with your ballot and flush it down the toilet.
Same thing, so suit yourself.
 
2012-01-09 12:59:24 PM

bugontherug: As a progressive, I don't mind the prospect of a Romney presidency. He's the kind of guy who would work with Democrats in Congress to achieve some progressive goals in order to build bipartisan consensus. Given his pro-choice past, I don't even think he would appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices. He'd be more likely to appoint an old school New England conservative like, say, Mr. Justice Souter. Liberal on some issues, libertarian on others.


To follow that up, nominating someone like Santorum would be the best way for conservatives to say "f*ck you" to liberals. Santorum would definitely promote a kooky conservative agenda. Since he would be elected by conservatives more than independents, he just wouldn't have the wiggle room to appoint the kinds of judges Romney would. Doing so would alienate his core support. Romney, by contrast, would anger the moderates and independents who voted for him if he appointed some far right activist judge.
 
2012-01-09 01:02:15 PM
images.cheezburger.com
 
2012-01-09 01:02:17 PM
jso2897 [TotalFark] Edit/Remove Favorite UserAdd Favorite User

*
* Smartest
*
* Funniest
*

Quote 2012-01-09 11:39:08 AM Edit/unIgnore User Ignore User

karnal: >jso2897

karnal: jso2897

vygramul: Philip Francis Queeg: karnal: ReaverZ

karnal: Cletus C.

Obama vs. Romney should be an interesting election. Economy is improving, it seems, which will certainly favor Obama if it continues. But will he be able to generate the excitement he did last time now that people have seen he really isn't that much different than the rest of them?

A lot of the Obama vote depends on getting people to vote who generally don't. A lot of the Republican vote depends on getting people to vote who are far right of Romney.

Yep, should be interesting


I am sure ACORN has that covered already......bring in the buses and gift cards.

Wow, they are soo powerful they can change elections even though they don't exist anymore? Please, let us in on this secret information you have? Are you one of the guys that went to Mars with Obama??!!


gul·li·ble (gl-bl) adj.
Easily deceived or duped.

ACORN is everywhere! Even under your bed.

Clearly, we need a Simon Wiesenthal-like institute to chase down former ACORN electoral criminals who perpetrated massive voter fraud and packed 6 million votes for McCain/Palin into boxcars and incinerated them - even separating chads from their vote cards and packing them into voter-suppression chambers all in a continent-wide campaign of destroying an entire culture of derp.

In one horrible example of voter intimidation, they stationed an old, drunk black man with a stick in from of a polling place, as an act of terrorism.
A drunk black man with a STICK!!
It's the Nazis all over again!


Is that how you remember it?

[plimages.blob.core.windows.net image 300x300]

One of those guys was a registered poll observer, who had every right and reason to be there. the other is a random drunk . Those are the facts - check 'em.
But anyway - are you telling me that you actually find those two sad sacks FRIGHTENING?
Damn, son. Don't take much to scare you.


Actually the one with Dreadlocks is King Malik Shabazz of the New Black Panther party and the tall one is his lackey who's name I forget. They are both on record as hating white people, they are followers of Khallid Muhammud, famous for the "Kill White babies" speech. Neither are registered poll observers, both were dressed to intimidate and were carrying trunchions.
 
2012-01-09 01:03:27 PM

bugontherug: As a progressive, I don't mind the prospect of a Romney presidency. He's the kind of guy who would work with Democrats in Congress to achieve some progressive goals in order to build bipartisan consensus. Given his pro-choice past, I don't even think he would appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices. He'd be more likely to appoint an old school New England conservative like, say, Mr. Justice Souter. Liberal on some issues, libertarian on others.


You sure about that?

Mitt Romney would govern in the way he determines is best for Mitt Romney. If he thinks that "fark the Democrats" is what will help him get reelected, then that's what he would do. Since most of his base is half-convinced he's a closet liberal, he will need to do things like this.

I also seriously doubt that Romney would send the nomination of a justice like Souter to a GOP-led Senate. GOP President + GOP Senate = Roberts and Alito.
 
2012-01-09 01:05:00 PM
Oh and Im not taking side, just clarifying the identity of those two clowns. I hate all the politicians involved and cant see myself voting for any of them from the GOP, and I dont know with NDAA if I can vote for Obama again.
 
2012-01-09 01:09:15 PM

qorkfiend: CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...

Are you somehow of the opinion that the NDAA would not be law if Ron Paul was president? Because that's not how a veto override works.


Oh i know how it works, but what were the numbers passed the first time? 2/3rd? I honestly don't think that both the house and senate would feel so passionately about being able to imprison american citizens that they would override a veto for it
 
2012-01-09 01:10:28 PM
Isn't karnal forgetting something?

img.photobucket.com
 
2012-01-09 01:11:36 PM

qorkfiend: You sure about that?

Mitt Romney would govern in the way he determines is best for Mitt Romney. If he thinks that "fark the Democrats" is what will help him get reelected, then that's what he would do. Since most of his base is half-convinced he's a closet liberal, he will need to do things like this.


I think this is almost the complete opposite of reality. There's a saying in Washington: "you dance with who brung ya." If Romney gets elected, it will be because of support from moderates and independents, not the conservatives who are suspicious of him. Romney won't want to risk alienating the people who put him in office by appointing far right judges.

I also seriously doubt that Romney would send the nomination of a justice like Souter to a GOP-led Senate. GOP President + GOP Senate = Roberts and Alito.

Justice Souter was appointed by Bush Sr. For basically the same reason I think Romney would appoint a Souter. He wanted to appeal to the political center, and not the far right. Romney is no Bush Jr. He draws his support from a very different crowd. New Hampshire moderates like Romney much more than do red blooded conservatives.
 
2012-01-09 01:11:43 PM

CeroX: Oh i know how it works, but what were the numbers passed the first time? 2/3rd? I honestly don't think that both the house and senate would feel so passionately about being able to imprison american citizens that they would override a veto for it


The vote was something along the lines of 90-7 in the Senate, and two-thirds majority in the House. If the Senate and House didn't feel so passionately about the detention provisions, why did they include them in the farking bill?
 
2012-01-09 01:16:25 PM

jso2897: CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...

I was angry at Obama about the NDAA - until I acquainted myself with the actual facts of the situation. Without regard to what he says (and he lies a lot) Ron Paul would have signed the exact same bill.
Now if you want to vote for him, that's your right, of course. Indeed, if you wish, you could just wipe your ass with your ballot and flush it down the toilet.
Same thing, so suit yourself.


You might want to do a youtube search for ron pauls speech against the NDAA. Why would you say he WOULD vote for it when he did NOT vote for it. And spoke against it quite passionately? For show? Because his track record on voting pretty much is in alignment of how i feel about things. Last election i didn't know who ron paul was, other than every pot head i knew or saw wanted him in office. Which didn't exactly make me thrilled to want to know who the guy is. But this year i got to hear a little more, and do a little research and frankly, the guy has guts and his track record shows it.

I think the in-step republicans fear him because he could actually change how they do business. He's rocking the status quo boat and that's good enough for me...
 
2012-01-09 01:21:05 PM

bugontherug: I think this is almost the complete opposite of reality. There's a saying in Washington: "you dance with who brung ya." If Romney gets elected, it will be because of support from moderates and independents, not the conservatives who are suspicious of him. Romney won't want to risk alienating the people who put him in office by appointing far right judges.


The center by itself is not enough for Romney; he needs the right wing.

bugontherug: Justice Souter was appointed by Bush Sr. For basically the same reason I think Romney would appoint a Souter. He wanted to appeal to the political center, and not the far right. Romney is no Bush Jr. He draws his support from a very different crowd. New Hampshire moderates like Romney much more than do red blooded conservatives.


Romney the man may want to, but Romney the President and de facto leader of the GOP would be in a very tough spot. Bush Sr. was also faced with an opposition Senate in 1990, 56-44; Romney would probably be looking at a friendly Senate with roughly the same split, and it would be catastrophic for his presidency if a friendly Senate rejected his nomination.
 
2012-01-09 01:22:15 PM

qorkfiend: CeroX: Oh i know how it works, but what were the numbers passed the first time? 2/3rd? I honestly don't think that both the house and senate would feel so passionately about being able to imprison american citizens that they would override a veto for it

The vote was something along the lines of 90-7 in the Senate, and two-thirds majority in the House. If the Senate and House didn't feel so passionately about the detention provisions, why did they include them in the farking bill?


I find this fact terrifying. Yeah there's some good in that bill, but should the cost of some decent provision be the cost of our freedom? The deconstruction of our constitution?

Can you toe the party line so much that you would tear apart the constitution for them? Because that's what i'm seeing. I feel anyone who voted for the bill should be brought on charges of treason.
 
2012-01-09 01:24:24 PM

johan heggs tiny man nipples: Oh and Im not taking side, just clarifying the identity of those two clowns. I hate all the politicians involved and cant see myself voting for any of them from the GOP, and I dont know with NDAA if I can vote for Obama again.


That really doesn't "clarify" anything for me. There was a charge made of deliberate "voter intimidation". I have looked into that incident, and see no evidence thereof. What I am offered is a picture of a couple of guys standing somewhere one of them had a right to be, and from where the other was asked to leave and did, and bothering no one. Neither was arrested for any weapons violation, so apparently whatever they were allegedly carrying were not weapons.
I guess I'm supposed to be scared of them, but they just look like a couple of sad sacks to me - and as to how they allegedly feel about white folks, I could care less, and it's none of my business. Last time I checked, my right to participate in the democratic process was not dependent upon my stating that I like black folks.
And let's quit bullshiatting anyway. The only thing about those two clowns that is intimidating to anyone is their appearance and their race - this was never anything but pants pissing hysteria - as the police who were called by some hysterical flibbertygibbet established. The only problem was that one of them was not a proper poll observer, and was intoxicated - he was asked to leave, and did so peacefully.
And my question - what was there here for any mentally healthy person to be scared of - still goes unanswered.
 
2012-01-09 01:27:17 PM

CeroX: qorkfiend: CeroX: Oh i know how it works, but what were the numbers passed the first time? 2/3rd? I honestly don't think that both the house and senate would feel so passionately about being able to imprison american citizens that they would override a veto for it

The vote was something along the lines of 90-7 in the Senate, and two-thirds majority in the House. If the Senate and House didn't feel so passionately about the detention provisions, why did they include them in the farking bill?

I find this fact terrifying. Yeah there's some good in that bill, but should the cost of some decent provision be the cost of our freedom? The deconstruction of our constitution?

Can you toe the party line so much that you would tear apart the constitution for them? Because that's what i'm seeing. I feel anyone who voted for the bill should be brought on charges of treason.


The only people responsible for the content of the NDAA is Congress. If there's bad mixed in with the good, the responsibility for that lies solely at the feet of Congress.
 
2012-01-09 01:31:18 PM

CeroX: jso2897: CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...

I was angry at Obama about the NDAA - until I acquainted myself with the actual facts of the situation. Without regard to what he says (and he lies a lot) Ron Paul would have signed the exact same bill.
Now if you want to vote for him, that's your right, of course. Indeed, if you wish, you could just wipe your ass with your ballot and flush it down the toilet.
Same thing, so suit yourself.

You might want to do a youtube search for ron pauls speech against the NDAA. Why would you say he WOULD vote for it when he did NOT vote for it. And spoke against it quite passionately? For show? Because his track record on voting pretty much is in alignment of how i feel about things. Last election i didn't know who ron paul was, other than every pot head i knew or saw wanted him in office. Which didn't exactly make me thrilled to want to know who the guy is. But this year i got to hear a little more, and do a little research and frankly, the guy has guts and his track record shows it.

I think the in-step republicans fear him because he could actually change how they do business. He's rocking the status quo boat and that's good enough for me...


You misunderstand me. I did not mean that he did not vote for it in his capacity as congressman - rather that he would not have vetoed it as president - and he wouldn't have, because of the consequences - he's not that irresponsible.
And nobody fears him - he will never be anything but a congressman from some jerkwater district in Texas, and after next term he won't even be that anymore. He isn't scary - he's irrelevant.
By the way as a REAL Libertarian, I have been following his career since 1988, when he led the right-wing incursion into the Libertarian Party of which I was then a member, beginning the process of subverting the party into Republican mini-Me. I have forgotten more than you know about the guy - and he is a huge fraud - check him out for real sometime.
 
2012-01-09 01:34:29 PM
"In order to take the White House back from the dangerous, liberal, radical socialist who has nearly destroyed America, it looks like the media along with the rest of the left are doing everything they can to convince the GOP that the GOP has settled on running the guy with nearly identical policies and ideas"
FIXED!

/dream on
 
2012-01-09 01:34:36 PM
jso2897

One of those guys was a registered poll observer, who had every right and reason to be there. the other is a random drunk . Those are the facts - check 'em.
But anyway - are you telling me that you actually find those two sad sacks FRIGHTENING?
Damn, son. Don't take much to scare you.



johan heggs tiny man nipples



Actually the one with Dreadlocks is King Malik Shabazz of the New Black Panther party and the tall one is his lackey who's name I forget. They are both on record as hating white people, they are followers of Khallid Muhammud, famous for the "Kill White babies" speech. Neither are registered poll observers, both were dressed to intimidate and were carrying trunchions.



Any Dim like to respond to this? coeyagi? I didn't think so.....
 
2012-01-09 01:37:24 PM

qorkfiend: bugontherug: I think this is almost the complete opposite of reality. There's a saying in Washington: "you dance with who brung ya." If Romney gets elected, it will be because of support from moderates and independents, not the conservatives who are suspicious of him. Romney won't want to risk alienating the people who put him in office by appointing far right judges.

The center by itself is not enough for Romney; he needs the right wing.

bugontherug: Justice Souter was appointed by Bush Sr. For basically the same reason I think Romney would appoint a Souter. He wanted to appeal to the political center, and not the far right. Romney is no Bush Jr. He draws his support from a very different crowd. New Hampshire moderates like Romney much more than do red blooded conservatives.

Romney the man may want to, but Romney the President and de facto leader of the GOP would be in a very tough spot. Bush Sr. was also faced with an opposition Senate in 1990, 56-44; Romney would probably be looking at a friendly Senate with roughly the same split, and it would be catastrophic for his presidency if a friendly Senate rejected his nomination.


We're used to "base elections" these days. I.e., elections where the parties strive to energize their bases more than occupy the center. Since the American left is so weak, Obama has already spent most of his administration appealing to the center, and that will be the type of campaign he runs. Romney, on the other hand, is weak with the conservative base, and so he'll have to run an old school "appeal to the center" campaign. It will be a very different campaign from what we're used to, and if Romney wins, a very different presidency. Romney as president will act more like Bush Sr. than Bush Jr.

To put your argument that Romney needs the right to win into perspective, look at his primary campaign. Yes, Romney has derped a little to appeal to the crazy right. But even in the Republican primary, where his victory depends much more heavily on the approval of conservatives, Romney has purposely refrained from going fully off the derp end specifically so he could run a centrist campaign in the general. Romney is smarter than Scott Walker. Romney won't run a centrist campaign, only to alienate voters by implementing a far right agenda he didn't campaign on.

In short, if Romney doesn't need to electrify conservatives in order to win the GOP primary, he won't in the general. And he won't as president, either.
 
2012-01-09 01:39:49 PM

jso2897: CeroX: jso2897: CeroX: Obama's fate was sealed in my eyes with the NDAA

I will be voting for ron paul this year...

I was angry at Obama about the NDAA - until I acquainted myself with the actual facts of the situation. Without regard to what he says (and he lies a lot) Ron Paul would have signed the exact same bill.
Now if you want to vote for him, that's your right, of course. Indeed, if you wish, you could just wipe your ass with your ballot and flush it down the toilet.
Same thing, so suit yourself.

You might want to do a youtube search for ron pauls speech against the NDAA. Why would you say he WOULD vote for it when he did NOT vote for it. And spoke against it quite passionately? For show? Because his track record on voting pretty much is in alignment of how i feel about things. Last election i didn't know who ron paul was, other than every pot head i knew or saw wanted him in office. Which didn't exactly make me thrilled to want to know who the guy is. But this year i got to hear a little more, and do a little research and frankly, the guy has guts and his track record shows it.

I think the in-step republicans fear him because he could actually change how they do business. He's rocking the status quo boat and that's good enough for me...

You misunderstand me. I did not mean that he did not vote for it in his capacity as congressman - rather that he would not have vetoed it as president - and he wouldn't have, because of the consequences - he's not that irresponsible.
And nobody fears him - he will never be anything but a congressman from some jerkwater district in Texas, and after next term he won't even be that anymore. He isn't scary - he's irrelevant.
By the way as a REAL Libertarian, I have been following his career since 1988, when he led the right-wing incursion into the Libertarian Party of which I was then a member, beginning the process of subverting the party into Republican mini-Me. I have forgotten more than you know about the guy - and he is ...


I don't doubt your feelings about the guy, you obviously are very passionate about them. But I don't consider 2nd place irrelevant...
 
2012-01-09 01:42:09 PM

BillCo: Rain Man would be preferable to the moron we have in office now.



So the powers that be have added Smart and Funny buttons but still nothing for Asinine or Troll.


I guess they wanted a smaller test first...
 
2012-01-09 01:42:14 PM

Bo Giggity: "In order to take the White House back from the dangerous, liberal, radical socialist who has nearly destroyed America, it looks like the media along with the rest of the left are doing everything they can to convince the GOP that the GOP has settled on running the guy with nearly identical policies and ideas"
FIXED!

/dream on


You're right. You are dreaming.
 
2012-01-09 01:43:02 PM

CeroX: I don't doubt your feelings about the guy, you obviously are very passionate about them. But I don't consider 2nd place irrelevant...


What did Paul finish 2nd place in?
 
2012-01-09 01:48:04 PM

CeroX: I find this fact terrifying. Yeah there's some good in that bill, but should the cost of some decent provision be the cost of our freedom? The deconstruction of our constitution?


I'm less than pleased with the indefinite detention law myself. But please read this extended discussion by an informed technocrat before repeating so much of the derp that has been spread about it.

Link (new window)

While the law is important, it's not the "ZOMG!!! OSAMA THE CIVIL LIBERTIES DESTROYER HAS REDUCED US ALL TO SERFS" tyranny it's been presented as.

From the link:

So if it doesn't significantly expand the government's detention authority, doesn't authorize detention of citizens, doesn't really mandate the military detention of other terrorist suspects, and doesn't do more to prevent the closure of Gitmo than does current law, what's all the fuss about? Is it even important?

"The final bill is, indeed, far less consequential than earlier versions would have been. Much of the fuss is overblown. That said, the bill has several important elements:

* The codification of detention authority in statute is a significant development, not because it enables anything that Congress had previously forbidden but because it puts the legislature squarely behind a set of policies on which it had always retained a kind of strategic ambiguity-a tolerance for detention without a clear endorsement of it of the sort that would make members accountable. Congress has now given that endorsement, and that is no small thing.
* The transfer restrictions will continue to have negative effects on administration management of detainee affairs, reducing flexibility and agility and compelling the continued detention of people the administration does not want to detain, in a status the administration does not wish to use, and at a facility it would prefer to vacate. That this is no change from current law-indeed, that the NDAA offers slightly more flexibility than does current law-does not make these restrictions any less troublesome.
* The rump mandatory detention provision remains a bit of a wild card that could have mischievous effects in practice. Though it ends up requiring very little, it does impose-as we have described-a default option of military detention for certain categories of cases. And this option might prove politically difficult to jettison."
 
2012-01-09 01:50:21 PM
pwhp_67


BillCo: Rain Man would be preferable to the moron we have in office now.


So the powers that be have added Smart and Funny buttons but still nothing for Asinine or Troll.

I guess they wanted a smaller test first...



I saw Andrew over in the corner repeatedly pressing the smart button on one of his own comments.....


/whatadim!
 
2012-01-09 01:54:55 PM

cameroncrazy1984: CeroX: I don't doubt your feelings about the guy, you obviously are very passionate about them. But I don't consider 2nd place irrelevant...

What did Paul finish 2nd place in?


Sorry, that should be 3rd, in the caucus... my bad on that
 
Displayed 50 of 239 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report