Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(National Review)   Obama cannot claim executive privilege over a scandal he owns lock, stock, and barrel because the papers requested never involved the White House   (nationalreview.com ) divider line
    More: Ironic, President Obama, executive privilege, White House, D.C. Circuit, Furious, executive branches, DOJ, checks and balances  
•       •       •

2266 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Jun 2012 at 3:57 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-21 02:42:49 PM  

JerseyTim: Ricardo Klement: Most of CurrentTV

So YOU'RE the guy watching that.


My housemate watched it when Olbermann was on. So he's the one.
 
2012-06-21 02:51:15 PM  

Ricardo Klement: cameroncrazy1984: Ricardo Klement: I didn't say Obama was a loon. I said there are too many loons in his party

Which ones are the loons then?

Sheila Jackson Lee is a good example.

And, I hate to do this, because it will end up directly insulting farkers when I generally try to avoid launching first, but I kind of set myself up for the question and answer, so here goes...

People who believe the MIC is made up of mindless automatons and not human beings who prefer peace over war.

People who believe 9/11 was an inside job (although birthers are doing a good job of taking the title for biggest conspiracy loon).

People who think Israel runs US foreign policy (which exist in both parties, but moreso in the Democratic Party.)

Most of CurrentTV

To be fair, I'll list some of the loons in the Republican Party:

Birthers

The Grover-Nordquist crowd (absolutes are generally bad)

Young Earthers

Allen West

Most of FOX News




Rather extreme examples here.

Strawmanny.
 
2012-06-21 02:54:26 PM  

Ricardo Klement: cameroncrazy1984: Ricardo Klement: Too many PC loons in the Democratic party, and they aren't fiscally conservative

Um. What? President Obama is the only one who has come up with a plan for a balanced budget that is fiscally conservative and sound. He happens to be a Democratic President.

I didn't say Obama was a loon. I said there are too many loons in his party. He's too Keynesian for me, though I don't want to get into an unsolvable argument over the relative merits of Classic and Keynesian economics, but otherwise he governs largely from the center.


President Obama is a Rockefeller Republican.

This fact makes "official" Republicans bleed from their anuses.
 
2012-06-21 03:02:02 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: This fact makes "official" Republicans bleed from their anuses.


Meh. The current GOP purged of its 'paleo' elements likes to hold up St. Reagan, but they wouldn't run him.
 
2012-06-21 03:06:03 PM  

Party Boy: Ricardo Klement: cameroncrazy1984: Ricardo Klement: I didn't say Obama was a loon. I said there are too many loons in his party

Which ones are the loons then?

Sheila Jackson Lee is a good example.

And, I hate to do this, because it will end up directly insulting farkers when I generally try to avoid launching first, but I kind of set myself up for the question and answer, so here goes...

People who believe the MIC is made up of mindless automatons and not human beings who prefer peace over war.

People who believe 9/11 was an inside job (although birthers are doing a good job of taking the title for biggest conspiracy loon).

People who think Israel runs US foreign policy (which exist in both parties, but moreso in the Democratic Party.)

Most of CurrentTV

To be fair, I'll list some of the loons in the Republican Party:

Birthers

The Grover-Nordquist crowd (absolutes are generally bad)

Young Earthers

Allen West

Most of FOX News


Rather extreme examples here.

Strawmanny.


?

Strawman? Extreme?

That was the WHOLE POINT.

Me: "Loonies."
Cameron: "Show me."
Me: "Examples of Loonies."
You: "Hey! Those are extremes!"

No farking shiat, really?
 
2012-06-21 03:12:55 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Strawman? Extreme?

That was the WHOLE POINT.


Ricardo Klement: I said there are too many loons in his party


Ok.
The examples you provide are not example of how there are too many loons? The admittedly straw man examples provided above by you aren't an example of how there are too many loons in the party?
 
2012-06-21 03:24:35 PM  

Party Boy: Ricardo Klement: Strawman? Extreme?

That was the WHOLE POINT.

Ricardo Klement: I said there are too many loons in his party

Ok.
The examples you provide are not example of how there are too many loons? The admittedly straw man examples provided above by you aren't an example of how there are too many loons in the party?


Cameron asked for examples of loons. That's all it was. Some examples. No one is saying that they represent the entire party. No one is saying they're the majority. No one is making an argument attacking them as a proxy to defeat an other argument.

This is a subjective thing, clearly. I can say my hamburger has too many pickles. If it has 1 or 100, depends on my taste. If I consider 4 to be too many, it's too many. If I consider 2 to be too many, it's too many.

Straw man has nothing to do with this. Extremists in the party does. And, like pickles, I prefer to have fewer than the available options normally provide.
 
2012-06-21 03:30:32 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Cameron asked for examples of loons. That's all it was. Some examples.


Ricardo Klement: I said there are too many loons in his party.


You are saying there are too many loons. Then you provide examples that arent really reflective of it.

Ricardo Klement: Straw man has nothing to do with this. Extremists in the party does


Well, thats the second part. The examples are strawman distillations of positions. Theyre not really accurate, are they.

Perhaps its not as much of a concern?
 
2012-06-21 04:03:51 PM  
Can't wait for Obama to cite an NRO report clearing him of any involvement.

img.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-21 04:08:06 PM  

Vodka Zombie: I forget, what was this Fast and Furious program called when Bush started it in 2008?


2006. I feel compelled to post some Wikipedia information:

The first known ATF "gunwalking" operation to Mexican drug cartels, named Operation Wide Receiver, began in early 2006 and ran into late 2007. Licensed dealer Mike Detty informed the ATF of a suspicious gun purchase that took place in February 2006 in Tucson, Arizona. In March he was hired as a confidential informant working with the ATF's Tucson office, part of their Phoenix, Arizona field division.[23] With the use of surveillance equipment, ATF agents monitored additional sales by Detty to straw purchasers. With assurance from ATF "that Mexican officials would be conducting surveillance or interdictions when guns got to the other side of the border",[24] Detty would sell a total of about 450 guns during the operation.[22] These included AR-15s, semi-automatic AK-pattern rifles, and Colt .38s. The vast majority of the guns were eventually lost as they moved into Mexico.[7][23][25]

At the time, under the Bush administration Department of Justice (DOJ), no arrests or indictments were made. After President Barack Obama took office in 2009, the DOJ reviewed Wide Receiver in September 2009[26] and found that guns had been allowed into the hands of suspected gun traffickers. Indictments began in 2010, over three years after Wide Receiver concluded. As of October 4, 2011, nine people had been charged with making false statements in acquisition of firearms and illicit transfer, shipment or delivery of firearms.[18] As of November, charges against one defendant had been dropped; five of them had pled guilty, and one had been sentenced to one year and one day in prison. Two of them remained fugitives.[23]

Another, smaller probe occurred in 2007 under the same ATF Phoenix field division. It began when the ATF identified Mexican suspects who bought weapons from a Phoenix gun shop over a span of several months. The probe ultimately involved over 200 guns, a dozen of which were lost in Mexico. On September 27, 2007, ATF agents saw the original suspects buying weapons at the same store and followed them toward the Mexican border. The ATF informed the Mexican government when the suspects successfully crossed the border, but Mexican law enforcement were unable to track them.[4][10]

Less than two weeks later, on October 6, William Newell, then ATF's special agent in charge of the Phoenix field division, shut down the operation at the behest of William Hoover, ATF's assistant director for the office of field operations.[27] No charges were filed. Newell, who was special agent in charge from June 2006 to May 2011, would later play a major role in Operation Fast and Furious.[4][24]
 
2012-06-21 04:10:04 PM  

Vodka Zombie: I forget, what was this Fast and Furious program called when Bush started it in 2008?


A failure.
 
2012-06-21 04:10:32 PM  

Ricardo Klement: Me: "Loonies."
Cameron: "Show me."
Me: "Examples of Loonies."
You: "Hey! Those are extremes!"

No farking shiat, really?


I think the point here was that the extremes on the left you mention get pointed at and laughed about. The extremes on the right you mention have quite a bit of power in the Republican Party (Grover being a perfect example).
 
2012-06-21 04:10:58 PM  
"I want seven hearings a week, times 40 weeks."

www1.pictures.zimbio.com
 
2012-06-21 04:11:41 PM  

Ricardo Klement: cameroncrazy1984: Ricardo Klement: Too many PC loons in the Democratic party, and they aren't fiscally conservative

Um. What? President Obama is the only one who has come up with a plan for a balanced budget that is fiscally conservative and sound. He happens to be a Democratic President.

I didn't say Obama was a loon. I said there are too many loons in his party. He's too Keynesian for me, though I don't want to get into an unsolvable argument over the relative merits of Classic and Keynesian economics, but otherwise he governs largely from the center.


For those just joining in, Ricardo seems to prefer politicians who adhere to a school of economic thought that first arose around 230 years ago and lost influence around 1870.
 
2012-06-21 04:12:18 PM  

Ricardo Klement: SphericalTime: Gwendolyn: Ricardo Klement: Romney and Obama are as close to identical as we've ever had in a presidential election.

Sure they are identical...unless you happen to be a woman, a minority, of a faih other then Christianity,, an immigrant (illegal or otherwise), poor, a veteran, or LGBT. Then those differences become real farking important.

Yeah, but if you're anyone that matters, they're basically identical.

/I fall into . . . three of those categories, and I date a legal immigrant.

Read what I said: if you look at their HISTORIES not their POSITION STATEMENTS. Romney's rhetoric has zoomed off to the right as fast and as far as he could do it and get the nomination.


Romney's history aside, it's pretty clear that his agenda would be dictated by Congressional Republicans. Instead of basing your decision on Obama vs. Romney or punting because they're so similar, you could judge based on the merits and likely impact of the expected legislative agendas, which would be radically different for a second Obama administration than a Romney administration.
 
2012-06-21 04:16:50 PM  

FlashHarry: morons. farking morons. william f. buckley is spinning in his grave right now.


i149.photobucket.com
Nnnyyyess - and the rotation motion is causing nausea and vertigo, I might add!
 
2012-06-21 04:17:25 PM  

DrippinBalls: obama = bush

worthless liberals/leftists = gop/repukes.

It's the same shiat from both sides. Both sides are political idiots. Sad.


you're really bad at this.
 
2012-06-21 04:18:03 PM  

RexTalionis: Wikipedia:

"In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government. The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine, and/or derived from the supremacy of executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[1]"


Exactly. NRO is wrong. Fast and Furious does belong to Obama and cronies.
 
2012-06-21 04:21:05 PM  

DrippinBalls: obama = bush

worthless liberals/leftists = gop/repukes.

It's the same shiat from both sides. Both sides are political idiots. Sad.


so vote Republican?
 
2012-06-21 04:22:32 PM  

DrippinBalls: obama = bush

worthless liberals/leftists = gop/repukes.

It's the same shiat from both sides. Both sides are political idiots. Sad.


The important part is that you have found a way to feel superior to both.
 
2012-06-21 04:29:36 PM  
Remember: The left has Shiela Jackson Lee. The right has.... Christ, dozens of Senators, Governors, members of the House, ALL their presidential candidates but one, and...

Well, damn, you sold me, both sides are bad and clearly the left has far more loons in politics.
 
2012-06-21 04:32:36 PM  

Vodka Zombie: I forget, what was this Fast and Furious program called when Bush started it in 2008?


You're probably thinking of Wide Receiver, which ended in 2007. Fast and Furious started in 2009.
 
2012-06-21 04:33:22 PM  

Vodka Zombie: I forget, what was this Fast and Furious program called when Bush started it in 2008?


2006, actually. And it was called Operation Wide Receiver.
 
2012-06-21 04:33:30 PM  

El Pachuco: Ricardo Klement: cameroncrazy1984: Ricardo Klement: Too many PC loons in the Democratic party, and they aren't fiscally conservative

Um. What? President Obama is the only one who has come up with a plan for a balanced budget that is fiscally conservative and sound. He happens to be a Democratic President.

I didn't say Obama was a loon. I said there are too many loons in his party. He's too Keynesian for me, though I don't want to get into an unsolvable argument over the relative merits of Classic and Keynesian economics, but otherwise he governs largely from the center.

For those just joining in, Ricardo seems to prefer politicians who adhere to a school of economic thought that first arose around 230 years ago and lost influence around 1870.


Some notable economists like Lee Coppock at UVA and Arthur Laffer are supply-side. (Before you go on about the Laffer Curve, be aware that tax cuts are also Keynesian.)
 
2012-06-21 04:35:04 PM  

DrippinBalls: heap
DrippinBalls: obama = bush

worthless liberals/leftists = gop/repukes.

It's the same shiat from both sides. Both sides are political idiots. Sad.

you're really bad at this.

dickhead. Figures. Christ, it's sick.


why don't you go relax in your room put some Bieber on and come back when you're ready to be nice.
 
2012-06-21 04:35:49 PM  
Is anyone else annoyed by today's rash of "Executive Privilege" stories?

I saw one on Yahoo today that had the headline: "Top Uses of Executive Privilege: Washington, Nixon, Obama", and then went on to say that this is the ONLY time Obama has used it, and that Bush, Reagan, and CLinton ALL used it more. In fact, when they made their list of "top" users. Obama wasn't actually on it.

Jesus people, you may not like him, but please DO try and have just a smidgen of journalistic integrity for a change.

Link
 
2012-06-21 04:38:05 PM  
Newsflash 1: Barry can CLAIM executive privilege over records of Boot's and Bo's and Michelle's bowel moments. And the only way to sort it out is through judicial involvement.

Newsflash 2: This is all about making what ever Holder is hiding stay hidden until after the election.
 
2012-06-21 04:41:24 PM  

qorkfiend: Ricardo Klement: SphericalTime: Gwendolyn: Ricardo Klement: Romney and Obama are as close to identical as we've ever had in a presidential election.

Sure they are identical...unless you happen to be a woman, a minority, of a faih other then Christianity,, an immigrant (illegal or otherwise), poor, a veteran, or LGBT. Then those differences become real farking important.

Yeah, but if you're anyone that matters, they're basically identical.

/I fall into . . . three of those categories, and I date a legal immigrant.

Read what I said: if you look at their HISTORIES not their POSITION STATEMENTS. Romney's rhetoric has zoomed off to the right as fast and as far as he could do it and get the nomination.

Romney's history aside, it's pretty clear that his agenda would be dictated by Congressional Republicans. Instead of basing your decision on Obama vs. Romney or punting because they're so similar, you could judge based on the merits and likely impact of the expected legislative agendas, which would be radically different for a second Obama administration than a Romney administration.


Then let us consider. What will we get with 4 more years of Obama. That's 4 more years of a right-wing president "Aw, c'mon!"ing an ultraright Congress out to run as far right as possible just to oppose the Democratic president and the vast bulk of the liberal-left making excuses for monstrosities because their team is at bat.

With Romney we get a rightwing politician able to get compromises from the ultraright congress because they are part of the same machine and a liberal-left that will get furious and start agitating over things like "social security is on the table"

Huh. If I believed things like pragmatic voting I might have to go mitt.
 
2012-06-21 04:41:56 PM  

Aarontology: Fiscally conservative doesn't mean fiscally sound.


But at least when they take soundings, it is possible to detect the bottom.
 
2012-06-21 04:43:08 PM  
Well, I for one certainly hope Rep. Issa gets to the bottom of this and roots out everyone in the ATF responsible for gunwalking, past and present.
 
2012-06-21 04:43:21 PM  

DrippinBalls: obama = burhead. Moron, total idiot, and a lazy kneegrow. Just like all of 'em.

/yea, gimme your Goddamn worthless $5 drew bullshiat per month.


Trying to get banned?

Trolling the moderators?

Does anyone care?
 
2012-06-21 04:45:26 PM  

vygramul: Some notable economists like Lee Coppock at UVA and Arthur Laffer are supply-side. (Before you go on about the Laffer Curve, be aware that tax cuts are also Keynesian.)


Okay.

And WTF does that have to do with Ricardo's comment?
 
2012-06-21 04:45:57 PM  

Mikey1969: Jesus people, you may not like him, but please DO try and have just a smidgen of journalistic integrity for a change.

However, during the Iran-Contra scandal, Reagan waived executive privilege, making his documents, diaries and entire staff available for congressional scrutiny.


I was not aware of this. Thank you for the link. I have seen many people claiming Reagan used executive privilege during Iran-Contra.
 
2012-06-21 04:46:18 PM  

Ned Stark: qorkfiend: Ricardo Klement: SphericalTime: Gwendolyn: Ricardo Klement: Romney and Obama are as close to identical as we've ever had in a presidential election.

Sure they are identical...unless you happen to be a woman, a minority, of a faih other then Christianity,, an immigrant (illegal or otherwise), poor, a veteran, or LGBT. Then those differences become real farking important.

Yeah, but if you're anyone that matters, they're basically identical.

/I fall into . . . three of those categories, and I date a legal immigrant.

Read what I said: if you look at their HISTORIES not their POSITION STATEMENTS. Romney's rhetoric has zoomed off to the right as fast and as far as he could do it and get the nomination.

Romney's history aside, it's pretty clear that his agenda would be dictated by Congressional Republicans. Instead of basing your decision on Obama vs. Romney or punting because they're so similar, you could judge based on the merits and likely impact of the expected legislative agendas, which would be radically different for a second Obama administration than a Romney administration.

Then let us consider. What will we get with 4 more years of Obama. That's 4 more years of a right-wing president "Aw, c'mon!"ing an ultraright Congress out to run as far right as possible just to oppose the Democratic president and the vast bulk of the liberal-left making excuses for monstrosities because their team is at bat.

With Romney we get a rightwing politician able to get compromises from the ultraright congress because they are part of the same machine and a liberal-left that will get furious and start agitating over things like "social security is on the table"

Huh. If I believed things like pragmatic voting I might have to go mitt.


Wouldn't be worth it, as the costs would outweigh any benefits. Social satey nets eliminated, tax increased for the lower classes, and several exciting new unfunded wars, not to mention civil rights taking a backseat to religious zealots.

I'll Take Obama over that any day of the week. He's not perfect, but the republicans are authoritarian sociopaths.
 
2012-06-21 04:46:30 PM  
My favorite part of the F&F situation is how it's gone from "F&F weapons were found among those confiscated after the agent's death" to "F&F guns killed the agent"
 
2012-06-21 04:48:24 PM  

Ned Stark: Huh. If I believed things like pragmatic voting I might have to go mitt.


If you believed in things like pragmatic voting, you'd be considering the fact Scalia, Ginsburg, and Kennedy -- but especially the last two -- are all likely to retire from the Court in the next turn, and whoever wins in 2012 will get to replace each and every one of those seats.

Meaning that come 2016, we'll have a 6-3 split on the Court favoring one ideology or the other, opposed to the 4-4 split with a swing Justice we've had for the past few decades.
 
2012-06-21 04:48:51 PM  

El Pachuco: vygramul: Some notable economists like Lee Coppock at UVA and Arthur Laffer are supply-side. (Before you go on about the Laffer Curve, be aware that tax cuts are also Keynesian.)

Okay.

And WTF does that have to do with Ricardo's comment?


Well, generally, supply-side economists prefer to be called classical economists.
 
2012-06-21 04:53:15 PM  

BeesNuts: DrippinBalls: obama = burhead. Moron, total idiot, and a lazy kneegrow. Just like all of 'em.

/yea, gimme your Goddamn worthless $5 drew bullshiat per month.

Trying to get banned?

Trolling the moderators?

Does anyone care?


I have him listed as "apparent troll account or huge douche," so I'm going to guess... No on all of those.
 
2012-06-21 04:55:44 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-21 04:57:19 PM  

Ned Stark: qorkfiend: Ricardo Klement: SphericalTime: Gwendolyn: Ricardo Klement: Romney and Obama are as close to identical as we've ever had in a presidential election.

Sure they are identical...unless you happen to be a woman, a minority, of a faih other then Christianity,, an immigrant (illegal or otherwise), poor, a veteran, or LGBT. Then those differences become real farking important.

Yeah, but if you're anyone that matters, they're basically identical.

/I fall into . . . three of those categories, and I date a legal immigrant.

Read what I said: if you look at their HISTORIES not their POSITION STATEMENTS. Romney's rhetoric has zoomed off to the right as fast and as far as he could do it and get the nomination.

Romney's history aside, it's pretty clear that his agenda would be dictated by Congressional Republicans. Instead of basing your decision on Obama vs. Romney or punting because they're so similar, you could judge based on the merits and likely impact of the expected legislative agendas, which would be radically different for a second Obama administration than a Romney administration.

Then let us consider. What will we get with 4 more years of Obama. That's 4 more years of a right-wing president "Aw, c'mon!"ing an ultraright Congress out to run as far right as possible just to oppose the Democratic president and the vast bulk of the liberal-left making excuses for monstrosities because their team is at bat.

With Romney we get a rightwing politician able to get compromises from the ultraright congress because they are part of the same machine and a liberal-left that will get furious and start agitating over things like "social security is on the table"

Huh. If I believed things like pragmatic voting I might have to go mitt.


I guess if you want things done just for the sake of getting them done, sure.

My hope is that Obama's presence will be inhibiting enough that the far-right Congress won't bother introducing their more extreme stuff, and would give cover to filibusters by Senate Democrats should the Republicans win the chamber. We'll continue with gridlock, so things might not get done, but if they do, they'll be pretty moderate.

On the other hand, Romney's presence would almost certainly encourage the far-right Congress to move even further rightward, since Romney won't buck his party in any meaningful way. Things will get done, and they'll be extreme right.

Plus, Supreme Court Justices.
 
2012-06-21 04:59:19 PM  

Vodka Zombie: I forget, what was this Fast and Furious program called when Bush started it in 2008?


God's work.
 
2012-06-21 04:59:21 PM  

topcon: [i.imgur.com image 365x574]


there's a difference between taking care of business & creating a mess.

Obama=/=Bush, not by a long shot, not at all.
 
2012-06-21 04:59:33 PM  

that bosnian sniper: Ned Stark: Huh. If I believed things like pragmatic voting I might have to go mitt.

If you believed in things like pragmatic voting, you'd be considering the fact Scalia, Ginsburg, and Kennedy -- but especially the last two -- are all likely to retire from the Court in the next turn, and whoever wins in 2012 will get to replace each and every one of those seats.

Meaning that come 2016, we'll have a 6-3 split on the Court favoring one ideology or the other, opposed to the 4-4 split with a swing Justice we've had for the past few decades.


Scalia will hold on to his seat with both hands until there's a Republican in office.
 
2012-06-21 05:01:34 PM  
Hi, I'm a butthurt right-winger. How can you tell?

3.bp.blogspot.com

I am passionately outraged about Fast & Furious. Even though nobody else is --besides my ilk, anyway.

This is a petulant frenzy. A petulant frenzy.
I'm petulant. And I'm having a frenzy.
 
2012-06-21 05:01:37 PM  

Almet: My favorite part of the F&F situation is how it's gone from "F&F weapons were found among those confiscated after the agent's death" to "F&F guns killed the agent"


It's also nice that the right wing has finally come around to the argument that people don't kill people, guns kill people.
 
2012-06-21 05:01:54 PM  

Ned Stark: qorkfiend: Ricardo Klement: SphericalTime: Gwendolyn: Ricardo Klement: Romney and Obama are as close to identical as we've ever had in a presidential election.

Sure they are identical...unless you happen to be a woman, a minority, of a faih other then Christianity,, an immigrant (illegal or otherwise), poor, a veteran, or LGBT. Then those differences become real farking important.

Yeah, but if you're anyone that matters, they're basically identical.

/I fall into . . . three of those categories, and I date a legal immigrant.

Read what I said: if you look at their HISTORIES not their POSITION STATEMENTS. Romney's rhetoric has zoomed off to the right as fast and as far as he could do it and get the nomination.

Romney's history aside, it's pretty clear that his agenda would be dictated by Congressional Republicans. Instead of basing your decision on Obama vs. Romney or punting because they're so similar, you could judge based on the merits and likely impact of the expected legislative agendas, which would be radically different for a second Obama administration than a Romney administration.

Then let us consider. What will we get with 4 more years of Obama. That's 4 more years of a right-wing president "Aw, c'mon!"ing an ultraright Congress out to run as far right as possible just to oppose the Democratic president and the vast bulk of the liberal-left making excuses for monstrosities because their team is at bat.

With Romney we get a rightwing politician able to get compromises from the ultraright congress because they are part of the same machine and a liberal-left that will get furious and start agitating over things like "social security is on the table"

Huh. If I believed things like pragmatic voting I might have to go mitt.


Could have saved me a bunch of reading by just saying "Both sides are bad, so vote republican"
 
2012-06-21 05:02:27 PM  

topcon: [i.imgur.com image 365x574]


"Why do blacks seem to have the same problems everywhere, even in black dominant countries? It's a valid question."

If you *don't* have this guy farkied as a proper farking racist, I suggest you do so.
 
2012-06-21 05:02:46 PM  

Welfare Xmas: Newsflash 2: This is all about making what ever Holder is hiding stay hidden until after the election.


So, you actually think this is a sekrit plot to eliminate the second amendment? Do you also think Obama was born in Kenya?
 
2012-06-21 05:03:32 PM  

vygramul: El Pachuco: vygramul: Some notable economists like Lee Coppock at UVA and Arthur Laffer are supply-side. (Before you go on about the Laffer Curve, be aware that tax cuts are also Keynesian.)

Okay.

And WTF does that have to do with Ricardo's comment?

Well, generally, supply-side economists prefer to be called classical economists.


Well, when your school of thought has been peer-reviewed and found lacking, it's natural to try to re-brand and disassociate yourself from a failed ideology.

And never mind what they hope others will call them; they're still known as supply-siders. Scalia calls himself a strict Constitutionalist, but that doesn't erase his radical activism and shiftable principles.

/I prefer to be called "stud-muffin" by the ladies, but so far they're a tad uncooperative
 
2012-06-21 05:04:11 PM  
Obama and Holder have both said they knew nothing about the operation.
And everyone knows that the Bush administration started this.

Since there is nothing to hide, this must be a clever plot to trick the right-wingers, and then Obama will say "okay" and release all the documents that blame Bush.
 
Displayed 50 of 275 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report