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.

(Billings Gazette)   Montana GOP congressman demands the EPA stop flying drones over ranches to enforce the Clean Water Act. EPA: no such drones exist. Senator: Um...Obama's secretive nature forces me to believe Internet rumors   (billingsgazette.com) divider line 236
    More: Dumbass, Denny Rehberg, obama, GOP, congressman, EPA, Montana, online, human beings  
•       •       •

4334 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jun 2012 at 9:48 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-20 10:21:36 PM
Good grief. I thought subby was kidding, but no, they're actually chiding Obama for not announcing his "secretive plans" to not have the EPA fly drones over Montana.

Obama trolls the GOP and they walk right into it. The right wing blogosphere trolls Obama...and the GOP walks right into it.
 
2012-06-20 10:21:39 PM
"It's the president's fault that I'm a gullible fool."

/new motto of the Party of Personal Responsibility
 
2012-06-20 10:24:52 PM
FTFA:

"The Obama Administration rarely reveals its secretive plans to anyone but its closest allies. Since Denny doesn't vote with the President 95 percent of the time, he must often rely on news reports and constituent input," wrote Jed Link, Rehberg's spokesman. "In this case, Denny heard from concerned Montanans, saw reports in the media and took the responsible first step - asking the EPA about it."

So... this guy took political action based on a couple of FW: FW: FW: FW: FW: emails?
 
2012-06-20 10:25:32 PM
I bet he is also one of those people that believe his social security number is actually the number for a swiss bank account that was set up by jews and his body is actually collateral for gold. Or however that conspiracy goes.
 
2012-06-20 10:26:05 PM
This is right up there with Bachman's claim that Obama's trip to Asia was costing $200 million a day. A claim she said was being "reported in the media".
 
2012-06-20 10:26:23 PM
Conservatives were just as farking stupid when Clinton was Pres.

Vince Foster, Hillarycare, Waco, Paula Jones, New World Order, Michigan Miitia, Montana Freemen, Ruby Ridge...

Obama being a niBong with a funny name just takes it to the next level, only this time the sub-literate mouth breathing head nodders have the internets to spread the derp around on.
 
2012-06-20 10:26:49 PM

unlikely: teabagilarious.


MY God, I might have to make that my new fark handle... Can we change them, or am I stuck with my first choice?
 
2012-06-20 10:27:39 PM

puffy999: Tickle Mittens: Believe it or not Clinton had it a little worse

In some ways, yes. The way he's been treated by Congressional Republicans when it comes to votes, and the opinions the general Republican base has for the man, Obama has it worse. Republicans are much worse than they were 12+ years ago, and that's saying something.


I would even say that's a wash, the republicans got everything they wanted WTO, NAFTA, welfare reforms etc, Clinton got minor concessions which he was able to through the power of charisma (not a dump stat in real life) and the digital boom of the 90s transform into a limited amount of political capital. One would note that the Republicans still prevented him from successfully taking down Bin Laden. I would agree that it's made the republicans more obnoxious, but the one's Clinton faced were quite devious. The danger they present is similar, one followed the other, their intents are the same, despite the emperically observed results of their actions.

So my tie breaker is accusations of murders, intricate criminal enterprises, and of course child rape. I'm not saying I'd keep my cool like Obama, but they're accusing him of having a whore for a mother, liking the kind of mustard everyone prefers, being a ner, and being simultaniously the most diabolical threat America has ever faced, and an idiot who hates Jesus. But if I was sitting on a jury and someone proved, "He was going around telling people I raped children, so I shot him in the back" I'd probably vote to acquit without anything else serious to disparage the person's character. But obviously, we're deep into the subjective at this point.
 
2012-06-20 10:31:43 PM

clkeagle: FTFA:

"The Obama Administration rarely reveals its secretive plans to anyone but its closest allies. Since Denny doesn't vote with the President 95 percent of the time, he must often rely on news reports and constituent input," wrote Jed Link, Rehberg's spokesman. "In this case, Denny heard from concerned Montanans, saw reports in the media and took the responsible first step - asking the EPA about it."

So... this guy took political action based on a couple of FW: FW: FW: FW: FW: emails?


Yes. Since he doesn't vote with the President, he is absolved of any need to confirm facts that might allay his constituents' fears before unleashing the whargarble derpfest they seem to want instead.
 
2012-06-20 10:33:56 PM

dickfreckle: "Even an American terrorist, an American al-Qaida, was killed by a drone. So now you're in the Midwest, and you know you're not a terrorist, but nonetheless, you gotta get a little squeamish when you see a drone going overhead," Fox host Megyn Kelly told viewers.

Oh go fark yourself. Did you care when Americans expressed alarm at the Patriot Act even though we had nothing to hide? No, you didn't. You championed it.

And the Patriot Act is REAL.


If you're not GUILTY, why should you worry?
 
2012-06-20 10:34:29 PM
Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont

He really puts the 'R' in 'retarded', doesn't he?
 
2012-06-20 10:35:11 PM

zappaisfrank: Conservatives were just as farking stupid when Clinton was Pres.

Vince Foster, Hillarycare, Waco, Paula Jones, New World Order, Michigan Miitia, Montana Freemen, Ruby Ridge...


The best part of the Ruby Ridge conspiracy? The fact that it happened on August 21st, 1992. Four months before Clinton's inauguration...
 
2012-06-20 10:35:25 PM

Gyrfalcon: clkeagle: FTFA:

"The Obama Administration rarely reveals its secretive plans to anyone but its closest allies. Since Denny doesn't vote with the President 95 percent of the time, he must often rely on news reports and constituent input," wrote Jed Link, Rehberg's spokesman. "In this case, Denny heard from concerned Montanans, saw reports in the media and took the responsible first step - asking the EPA about it."

So... this guy took political action based on a couple of FW: FW: FW: FW: FW: emails?

Yes. Since he doesn't vote with the President, he is absolved of any need to confirm facts that might allay his constituents' fears before unleashing the whargarble derpfest they seem to want instead.


Confirm facts? No real republican pays attention to facts, let alone confirm them, because everybody knows facts have liberal bias.
 
2012-06-20 10:37:22 PM

malaktaus: ....I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?


I'm pretty sure that courts have decided that what's out in the open is subject to surveillance without a warrant.

Unless, of course, you're a cop. Then, what you're doing out in the open is NOT subject to surveillance, especially not by citizens.
 
2012-06-20 10:37:42 PM
And cutting through the derp... here's a common-sense way to look at it.

1. Law enforcement agencies (federal, state, and local) already use aircraft in a variety of roles. Everything from surveillance to traffic enforcement to extending communications finding recently disturbed earth in missing person/murder cases.
2. Assumption - because the use of aircraft has been successful, it will continue.
3. Manned aircraft are incredibly expensive to purchase, even more expensive to operate, have huge maintenance turnaround times, and require a pilot being in the air.
4. Unmanned aircraft are less expensive, more fuel efficient, require far less maintenance, and can be flown for hours and hours by a couple of trained operators on the ground. And most importantly - the law enforcement agencies are aware of these facts and want these drones.

Politicians on either side of the aisle should be jumping on top of their chairs to support the use of drones. "We're saving taxpayer money and providing the same basic service and protection" is a statement that could come out of a D or R mouth. The Rs can be happy that they're supporting defense contractors, and the Ds can be happy that we're supporting innovation by moving forward with technology instead of clinging to outdated practices.

So here's my question. Why is this up for debate? This argument seems like two children fighting over who gets to ride shotgun when the car is going to stop by Dairy Queen on its way to Walt Disney World.
 
2012-06-20 10:37:45 PM
What really gets me about this is the fact that this douchenozzle is concerned with the use of drones, not the actual surveillance. Fourth amendment violation= good, new technology= bad. Sounds about right for the GOP. Not that the Democrats are much better.
 
2012-06-20 10:38:56 PM

PreMortem: "We can only go so far with what we read in the news," Link said of Rehberg's June 6 letter

Yes, that LameStream, MainStream Media can never be trusted. Instead, I get my facts from reputable "news" outlets like Infowars.

[static.infowars.com image 300x431]


Jesus, I thought you were kidding, then I read TFA:

Conservative talk radio host Alex Jones published the bogus drone story on his website Infowars.com on June 4, complete with a photograph of a military drone flying through blue skies.

The next day, The New American, a bi-weekly publication owned by the ultra-conservative John Birch Society, reported the bogus drone story. That story credited Nebraska's congressional delegation for the news. The gist of The New American story was that drones were being used to spy on large feedlots where cattle urine and feces are highly concentrated and potentially threaten water supplies.

On June 6, the story was picked up by The Daily Caller, a news site founded by Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel, former chief policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney. The Daily Caller made the news last week when its reporter Neil Munro heckled President Obama during a White House press conference in the Rose Garden.

Investors Business Daily also picked up the story. Montanans might recognize the politically conservative publication's featured columnist, Andrew Malcolm, former communications director for former Republican Gov. Marc Racicot.

Fox News also reported that the EPA was using military-style drones to spy on farms and ranches in the Midwest. Fox linked the bogus EPA drones to U.S. military drone use


Wow, and this guy has been entrusted by the people to make laws? Good job guys, no wonder people think your state is populated by morons. Too bad, really, it's a beautiful place...
 
2012-06-20 10:39:44 PM
Republican voters vote based on chain emails and unsubstantiated Internet rumors, so they get the leaders they deserve.
 
2012-06-20 10:40:31 PM
Them negras is crafty!
 
2012-06-20 10:40:33 PM

ghare: malaktaus: ....I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?

I'm pretty sure that courts have decided that what's out in the open is subject to surveillance without a warrant.

Unless, of course, you're a cop. Then, what you're doing out in the open is NOT subject to surveillance, especially not by citizens.


I know the courts have decided that, and it's utter bullshiat. Eventually they'll figure out a way to interpret the entire Bill of Rights out of existence, if they haven't already. Except the second amendment, of course.
 
2012-06-20 10:41:58 PM

shower_in_my_socks: Republican voters vote based on chain emails and unsubstantiated debunked Internet rumors, so they get the leaders they deserve.


FTFY
 
2012-06-20 10:42:47 PM
Rehberg's a well-financed drunk, and the majority of Montana voters know that.
 
2012-06-20 10:46:30 PM

Mikey1969: unlikely: teabagilarious.

MY God, I might have to make that my new fark handle... Can we change them, or am I stuck with my first choice?


Make it your alt before someone else does
 
2012-06-20 10:47:05 PM
"In this case, Denny heard from concerned Montanans, saw reports in the media and took the responsible first step - asking the EPA about it."

No he didn't, he got out the derpwriter and dashed off a stupid message message that ASSUMED the program was in place. "Asking" would have been typing a letter and saying 'I have had multiple constituents express concern, is this a real program or not?'.

Jesus, he just keeps digging the hole.
 
2012-06-20 10:49:29 PM

shower_in_my_socks: Republican voters vote based on chain emails and unsubstantiated Internet rumors, so they get the leaders they deserve.


The only problem with this is that these bozos make laws that effect people who actually have a brain, and it continues to be proven the stupid far outnumber the smart ones. So, basically, we are royally farked.
 
2012-06-20 10:50:17 PM

malaktaus: ghare: malaktaus: ....I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?

I'm pretty sure that courts have decided that what's out in the open is subject to surveillance without a warrant.

Unless, of course, you're a cop. Then, what you're doing out in the open is NOT subject to surveillance, especially not by citizens.

I know the courts have decided that, and it's utter bullshiat. Eventually they'll figure out a way to interpret the entire Bill of Rights out of existence, if they haven't already. Except the second amendment, of course.


Well, it's kinda hard to say the cops have to get a warrant to look at you if anyone with a plane can look at you too. I don't LIKE the surveillance, but I'm under the view of a camera from private sources basically from the second I walk out of my house. So are you. Hard to say cops can't do this too.

I don't like it any either. But, I see no escape from it.
 
2012-06-20 10:51:31 PM

TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.


I didn't pay as much attention to politics back then, I was in my 20's. All I remember is 6 straight weeks of Monica Lewinsky, and the supposed "hit list" including Vince Foster.

Really just those 2 big issues. Oh, and the $250 haircut in Air Force ONe.
 
2012-06-20 10:52:27 PM

malaktaus: ghare: malaktaus: ....I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?

I'm pretty sure that courts have decided that what's out in the open is subject to surveillance without a warrant.

Unless, of course, you're a cop. Then, what you're doing out in the open is NOT subject to surveillance, especially not by citizens.

I know the courts have decided that, and it's utter bullshiat. Eventually they'll figure out a way to interpret the entire Bill of Rights out of existence, if they haven't already. Except the second amendment, of course.


Don't forget Freedom to be a christian
Freedom of speech, including freedom from repercussions for Right wingers
 
2012-06-20 10:52:39 PM

Cewley: dumb fark tea bagger.


But you repeat yourself.

Maybe the EPA should be doing this. It sounds like Denny's "concerned constituents" may have something to hide. F*ck polluters.
 
2012-06-20 10:55:07 PM

Mikey1969: TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.

I didn't pay as much attention to politics back then, I was in my 20's. All I remember is 6 straight weeks of Monica Lewinsky, and the supposed "hit list" including Vince Foster.

Really just those 2 big issues. Oh, and the $250 haircut in Air Force ONe.


How could you forget whitewater and Ken Starr?
 
2012-06-20 10:58:09 PM

spongeboob: Mikey1969: TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.

I didn't pay as much attention to politics back then, I was in my 20's. All I remember is 6 straight weeks of Monica Lewinsky, and the supposed "hit list" including Vince Foster.

Really just those 2 big issues. Oh, and the $250 haircut in Air Force ONe.

How could you forget whitewater and Ken Starr?


Don't forget how Congressional Republicans let the government shut down because Newt Gingrich was butthurt about his seat on a plane.
 
2012-06-20 11:00:28 PM

ghare: malaktaus: ghare: malaktaus: ....I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?

I'm pretty sure that courts have decided that what's out in the open is subject to surveillance without a warrant.

Unless, of course, you're a cop. Then, what you're doing out in the open is NOT subject to surveillance, especially not by citizens.

I know the courts have decided that, and it's utter bullshiat. Eventually they'll figure out a way to interpret the entire Bill of Rights out of existence, if they haven't already. Except the second amendment, of course.

Well, it's kinda hard to say the cops have to get a warrant to look at you if anyone with a plane can look at you too. I don't LIKE the surveillance, but I'm under the view of a camera from private sources basically from the second I walk out of my house. So are you. Hard to say cops can't do this too.

I don't like it any either. But, I see no escape from it.


Yeah, the legal standard is that you need a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. While I'd like to think of the thirty acres of nothing my pot farm wood lot is on is private unless I actually make some sort of effort to enclose it or prevent people from wandering on to it I don't actually have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
 
2012-06-20 11:01:57 PM
Since Denny doesn't vote with the President 95 percent of the time, he must often rely on news reports and constituent input

That's quite a non sequitur there.
 
2012-06-20 11:02:20 PM

ghare: malaktaus: ghare: malaktaus: ....I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?

I'm pretty sure that courts have decided that what's out in the open is subject to surveillance without a warrant.

Unless, of course, you're a cop. Then, what you're doing out in the open is NOT subject to surveillance, especially not by citizens.

I know the courts have decided that, and it's utter bullshiat. Eventually they'll figure out a way to interpret the entire Bill of Rights out of existence, if they haven't already. Except the second amendment, of course.

Well, it's kinda hard to say the cops have to get a warrant to look at you if anyone with a plane can look at you too. I don't LIKE the surveillance, but I'm under the view of a camera from private sources basically from the second I walk out of my house. So are you. Hard to say cops can't do this too.

I don't like it any either. But, I see no escape from it.


"Anyone with a plane" doesn't have the ability to bring you up on criminal charges, so no, it really isn't hard to say that a cop should need a warrant. Camera surveillance by private entities is not the same farking thing.
 
2012-06-20 11:03:42 PM

TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.


As others have pointed out, militias, Black Helicopters, Ken Starr, Gingrich...

But I haven't seen anyone mention all the FEMA camps. This one is my favorite, because 3 generations of my family worked (and work still) at the Beech Grove Amtrak shop.
 
2012-06-20 11:08:26 PM

spongeboob: Mikey1969: TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.

I didn't pay as much attention to politics back then, I was in my 20's. All I remember is 6 straight weeks of Monica Lewinsky, and the supposed "hit list" including Vince Foster.

Really just those 2 big issues. Oh, and the $250 haircut in Air Force ONe.

How could you forget whitewater and Ken Starr?


You're right, I forgot Whitewater, but Kenneth Starr was just the investigator for Bill's wiliy, so it really ties in with Lewinsky.
 
2012-06-20 11:16:37 PM

xrayspx: TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.

As others have pointed out, militias, Black Helicopters, Ken Starr, Gingrich...

But I haven't seen anyone mention all the FEMA camps. This one is my favorite, because 3 generations of my family worked (and work still) at the Beech Grove Amtrak shop.


Wow that was derp filled. The whole "Look, the train station has turnstiles!!!" was just so funny. Check out this video about that Amtrak station, just about everybody in Beech Grove calls that lady that made that video crazy.
 
2012-06-20 11:18:19 PM

Mikey1969: spongeboob: Mikey1969: TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.

I didn't pay as much attention to politics back then, I was in my 20's. All I remember is 6 straight weeks of Monica Lewinsky, and the supposed "hit list" including Vince Foster.

Really just those 2 big issues. Oh, and the $250 haircut in Air Force ONe.

How could you forget whitewater and Ken Starr?

You're right, I forgot Whitewater, but Kenneth Starr was just the investigator for Bill's wiliy, so it really ties in with Lewinsky.


No that is the worst part he started looking into Whitewater and then added Lewinsky, Vince Foster, Paula Jones. What they had to do with a land deal in Arkansas I never understood.
 
2012-06-20 11:19:19 PM

Tickle Mittens: I would even say that's a wash, the republicans got everything they wanted WTO, NAFTA, welfare reforms etc, Clinton got minor concessions which he was able to through the power of charisma (not a dump stat in real life) and the digital boom of the 90s transform into a limited amount of political capital. One would note that the Republicans still prevented him from successfully taking down Bin Laden. I would agree that it's made the republicans more obnoxious, but the one's Clinton faced were quite devious. The danger they present is similar, one followed the other, their intents are the same, despite the emperically observed results of their actions.


But even he had a few stragglers in the other party who'd support him from time to time. They've gone BEYOND that era in terms of their lockstep voting. I mean, hell, a plan Repubs supported in some capacity in the mid 90s is the basis for Obamacare, and you hear 0 Republican support for it these days.

They've already started going after Obama's AG, so I fully expect them to attempt impeachment during his second term (if it comes to that, and they have the power/ability). I mean, remember, it's only been 3 1/2 years, and look how it keeps getting worse. With Citizens United, imagine the 2016 election.
 
2012-06-20 11:20:48 PM

malaktaus:
"Anyone with a plane" doesn't have the ability to bring you up on criminal charges, so no, it really isn't hard to say that a cop should need a warrant. Camera surveillance by private entities is not the same farking thing.


Does a cop need a warrant to walk up to your front door?

That's the standard you seem to be suggesting as a reasonable test - that they need a warrant to access an area generally accessible to the public. The fact that it's overhead instead of on the ground isn't really relavant to the discussion.
 
2012-06-20 11:24:53 PM

Tickle Mittens: So my tie breaker is accusations of murders, intricate criminal enterprises, and of course child rape.


Incidentally, Obama has been accused of murdering American citizens, being funded or connected to many criminal enterprises, and a LARGE percentage of people question whether he's actually a naturally born citizen(!). I guess there's no child rape, but I'll be honest and admit I don't remember that part of the Clinton saga well enough.

And, let's be honest, SOME things were the fault of the Clinton White House. Obama has done much less to receive such scrutiny. Really, he's been just as much of a corporate pushover as Clinton, and if one actually looks at the record and his actions outside of the political arena (ie: no affairs), he should be LIKED by many Republicans.
 
2012-06-20 11:27:54 PM

malaktaus: spongeboob: Although the EPA does not use surveillance drones, the agency does use manned airplanes to monitor potential pollution sources in the Midwest, a practice the agency said began 10 years ago under President George W. Bush


Is it okay to use manned planes?



I would say it's okay to use whatever surveillance equipment they like, if they have a search warrant. Are they bothering with that sort of thing anymore, or are my charmingly antiquated scruples a relic of a bygone age?


The law on that is fairly settled, intrepid young fark independent. The cops can spy on your house from a helicopter with infrared cams and watch you boink your wife (boyfriend, ladyboyfriend, prayer group, whatever floats your boat) through the window, in the name of looking for marijuana production without a warrant. So its pretty clear the EPA can do pollution monitoring from planes. Also, why do you love pollution? Do you want cancer? I mean seriosuly what is with ":conservatives" and slow painful death.
 
2012-06-20 11:28:51 PM
FTFA: Two weeks after telling the head of the Environmental Protection Agency to ground surveillance drones allegedly spying on American farmers and ranchers, Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., acknowledged the drones don't exist.

In a statement issued by his office Tuesday, Rehberg acknowledged there aren't any drones spying on farms and ranches to enforce the Clean Water Act. Rehberg's staff blamed President Barack Obama for the mix-up.

"The Obama Administration rarely reveals its secretive plans to anyone but its closest allies. Since Denny doesn't vote with the President 95 percent of the time, he must often rely on news reports and constituent input," wrote Jed Link, Rehberg's spokesman. "In this case, Denny heard from concerned Montanans, saw reports in the media and took the responsible first step - asking the EPA about it."



You folks in Montana must be very proud of this guy...
 
2012-06-20 11:29:49 PM
The EPA can conduct surprise inspections without probable cause. They aren't cops, they are a regulatory agency.
 
2012-06-20 11:33:12 PM
www.ibiblio.org


Would liked to have seen Montana, from the air.
 
2012-06-20 11:44:21 PM
So move to Somalia, you soft-assed little spoiled pinkboy biatches. They'd eat your soft ass there, but you probably think you'd be a king.
Stupid, spoiled little middle-class punks. The "rules" are the only reason ypour weak, inbred, trailer-trash ass is alive.
You pathetic little NRA "conservative" weaklings want anarchy? Yeah. let's have anarchy.
You'll last about five minutes.
 
2012-06-20 11:45:41 PM

Mikey1969: spongeboob: Mikey1969: TimonC346: Okay idiots, if we elect a white democrat, will you relax? Did people pull this shiat with Clinton? I was too young then.

I didn't pay as much attention to politics back then, I was in my 20's. All I remember is 6 straight weeks of Monica Lewinsky, and the supposed "hit list" including Vince Foster.

Really just those 2 big issues. Oh, and the $250 haircut in Air Force ONe.

How could you forget whitewater and Ken Starr?

You're right, I forgot Whitewater, but Kenneth Starr was just the investigator for Bill's wiliy, so it really ties in with Lewinsky.


People like you shouldn't be allowed to vote.
 
2012-06-20 11:47:27 PM
Foxnews strikes again!

/what a joke
 
2012-06-21 12:01:42 AM

forgotmydamnusername: People like you shouldn't be allowed to vote.


WTF is that supposed to mean? Since I can't remember all the bullshiat they pulled on Clinton? People who vote a straight Party Ticket shouldn't be allowed to vote, sure, but you're just trolling...
 
2012-06-21 12:08:26 AM

puffy999: Tickle Mittens: So my tie breaker is accusations of murders, intricate criminal enterprises, and of course child rape.

Incidentally, Obama has been accused of murdering American citizens, being funded or connected to many criminal enterprises, and a LARGE percentage of people question whether he's actually a naturally born citizen(!). I guess there's no child rape, but I'll be honest and admit I don't remember that part of the Clinton saga well enough.

And, let's be honest, SOME things were the fault of the Clinton White House. Obama has done much less to receive such scrutiny. Really, he's been just as much of a corporate pushover as Clinton, and if one actually looks at the record and his actions outside of the political arena (ie: no affairs), he should be LIKED by many Republicans.


To be fair, Obama did order the assassination of Americans, at least they're deaths he was involved in; and I would hope proud of. The closest parallel is the Breitbart lunacy, but even that is quite fringe even in republican circles compared to the play Vince Foster's alleged murder got.

Other than that, you may be slowly convincing me.

/In the event Obama is not proud of ordering the dispassionate robotic assassination of those asshats, I'm quite sure I'm proud enough for him.
 
Displayed 50 of 236 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