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.

(NYPost)   Watch out Democrats, when the GOP talks about giving you the "push back" at your own convention, you'd better watch out   (nypost.com) divider line 43
    More: Interesting, GOP, Democrats, political convention, Republican, Jason Chaffetz, Martin O'Malley, Priebus, Mary Fallin  
•       •       •

3381 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Sep 2012 at 1:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-09-04 01:41:19 PM
7 votes:
I'm certainly not better off than I was four years ago, but at least I know why, you obstructionist douche-weasels.
2012-09-04 03:04:42 PM
6 votes:

Il Douchey: CPennypacker: Your answer to my question is "because" and then you just repeated your bad argument again. You're a true gem.

I think we're having communication difficulties. Let's try it this way:

Your quarterback keeps losing football games, but it's only because the other team has such a good defense. Next year their defense will be even better, but your quarterback won't be. You can't get rid of the other team, but you can bench your quarterback. Or, you can keep losing by even larger margins


Wouldn't a better analogy be that the president is the quarterback, and Congress is the rest of the offense. Together, they're supposed to score points for the country, not against each other.

To use your example, it would be like the quarterback keeps losing games because his own players are tackling him. Do you replace the quarterback, or the players that don't know how to play the game?
2012-09-04 02:10:25 PM
6 votes:

Il Douchey: Calmamity: I'm certainly not better off than I was four years ago, but at least I know why, you obstructionist douche-weasels.

If you blame Obama's failure on GOP obstruction, you should know that the GOP will probably gain strength in both houses of Congress this year. So if Obama wins, it will mean even harder Obama failure, even more Obama excuses and you will be even worse off four years from now.

/We can't survive another term of failure, excuses and decline


I won't put words in your mouth, but that sounds like you are insinuating the Republicans are unwilling to work with Obama on anything and they will continue to put party before country for another four years. But instead of taking responsibility for your party in both houses, you blame Obama.

did I understand you correctly?
2012-09-04 01:25:40 PM
6 votes:
Empty chairs, empty threats, empty heads

/Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2012 GOP
2012-09-04 01:58:35 PM
5 votes:
www.nypost.com

ct.politicomments.com
2012-09-04 01:44:28 PM
5 votes:
tucsoncitizen.com

It's all they got.
2012-09-04 02:15:40 PM
4 votes:

Il Douchey: If you blame Obama's failure on GOP obstruction, you should know that the GOP will probably gain strength in both houses of Congress this year. So if Obama wins, it will mean even harder Obama failure, even more Obama excuses and you will be even worse off four years from now.


Given the choice between four more years of deadlock, heightened partisan tensions and rhetoric, economic hostage-taking, political footballs being made of any governmental action no matter how trivial, petty poutrage, no actual budgets being passed, and general incompetence that leads to a slow, stilted decline that leads to a point of no return and eventual complete sociopolitical and economic collapse...

...or Republicans having undeterred and unchallenged political power for 2-4 years...

...I'll still take Obama, thanks.
2012-09-04 02:30:57 PM
3 votes:

Il Douchey: busy chillin': did I understand you correctly?

Not exactly. I'm saying that if opposition is your excuse for why Obama failed in his first term, he will only fail worse if he gets a second term. So rather than quibble over why it's not working, let's just concede that it's not working so we can turn the page.


So you're saying that we should reward the guys who saw Party over Country so that they will finally get to work and quit trying to be douchebags?
2012-09-04 02:27:14 PM
3 votes:

Il Douchey: busy chillin': did I understand you correctly?

Not exactly. I'm saying that if opposition is your excuse for why Obama failed in his first term, he will only fail worse if he gets a second term. So rather than quibble over why it's not working, let's just concede that it's not working so we can turn the page.


If you concede that the republican obstructionism was the cuase of the problems of the last 4 years, how can you still claim it was Obama that failed?
2012-09-04 02:44:31 PM
2 votes:

zappaisfrank: sprawl15: zappaisfrank: Term limits for every seat in Congress

With a proper political system, term limits are oppressive.

Tough. It's the only way to weed out the career politicians. You don't want term limits? Remove them from the Presidency then.


Why do you assume that a "career politician" is synonymous with "corrupt politician"?

Term limits are an excellent way to replace career politicians - the ones who have actual experience in legislating and the arcane processes by which legislatures work - with unaccountable lobbyists and professional staffers. It's an excellent way to replace career politicians with people whose only concern would be leveraging their influence into a cushy job once they're unable to run for office. It's an excellent way to remove the only power the voters have. It's an excellent way to shield legislators from any long-term consequences of their policies.

If you think term limits solve any problems, you're sadly mistaken. The only "problem" they solve is the problem of elected officials having to go back to their district and be held to account by the voters.

/yes, remove them from the President as well
2012-09-04 02:39:54 PM
2 votes:
Well no, I'm not better off than I was 4 years ago because I lost a nice little business in St Augustine around that time. With that being said, I still wouldn't vote for the assholes that caused me to lose my business... even if I was living in the woods right now. Most people remember who caused their problems and it wasn't Obama.
2012-09-04 02:28:05 PM
2 votes:

Il Douchey: busy chillin': did I understand you correctly?

Not exactly. I'm saying that if opposition is your excuse for why Obama failed in his first term, he will only fail worse if he gets a second term. So rather than quibble over why it's not working, let's just concede that it's not working so we can turn the page.


replacing the party first members of congress is a good idea.
2012-09-04 02:10:15 PM
2 votes:
Hey, how about that RNC convention bounce?

FiveThirtyEight Odds of Romney winning the election:
Aug 26: 30.6%
Sep 3: 25.2%
2012-09-04 01:56:36 PM
2 votes:

zappaisfrank: Actually, I am better off than I was four years ago.

So "nyah", Republidouches.


So am I, and so is the country--by a helluva lot. The Republicans are playing with fire--by inviting comparisons to the end of the Bush presidency. Serious shiat was on the verge of going down.
2012-09-04 01:51:40 PM
2 votes:
"Every president since the Great Depression, except Jimmy Carter and President Obama, who asked voters for a second term could look back at the last four years and say: 'You are better off today than you were four years ago,' the Charlotte-based team asked Monday"

Housing bubble burst.....yea.......equity is a shackle......you're better off without it
Jobs lost under Bush......hey....more time to spend with family
Lives lost to the war....well.....family time is overrated

What color is the sky in their world?
2012-09-04 01:44:53 PM
2 votes:

vartian: [oi47.tinypic.com image 525x300]


Why is "No" in quotation marks? That's one of those fingernails-on-chalkboards thing, right there.
2012-09-04 07:09:37 PM
1 votes:

Magorn: vartian: [oi47.tinypic.com image 525x300]

Is it just my over-tuned antennae or is thee one screaming hell of a racist dog-whistle in that banner behind those guys?


IMHO your antennae are tuned well within spec.


/f*ckers
2012-09-04 06:52:52 PM
1 votes:

that bosnian sniper: Fart_Machine: So what you're saying is that we should elect Romney so the GOP can fast track the failure unopposed. Sounds like quite the plan there.

I know more than a few people across the socialist spectrum, from full-on Marxist-Leninist all the way to Democratic Socialist, who are voting Romney for exactly that reason. Were I to ever vote Romney, that would be why.

The extreme left believes a Romney administration would be such an utter, unforgettable train wreck that it will cause an unprecedentedly hard, nationwide, swing to the left unprecedented by even the leftward swing during the FDR administration. Therefore, quite a few are voting for him.

What does that say about Romney as a candidate, here?


I don't know what it says about Romney, but it tells me that the people who believe that (and I have seen them in the wild as well) have the attention span of a ferret and the common sense of a canned ham.
2012-09-04 05:02:54 PM
1 votes:

Pinner: Term limits could work... If someone knows they are in for 2 terms max, you'd think that they would, in the meantime, be grooming a few new candidates to take the reigns, then help them get elected.


No, they wouldn't. If a Congressional Representative knows they are in for two terms max, they would be currying favor to land a cushy job once they hit their term limit. The only reason this doesn't happen with the President is because Former President is a cushy job.

Pinner: Who really thinks they have a shot against a three or four term politician unless they are truly going senile or raped and murdered a girl in 1991?


Wouldn't this imply that the three or four term politician has the support of his or her electorate? If they're happy with their representative's performance, why would the electorate vote for someone else? Why should they be forced to vote for someone else?
2012-09-04 04:40:20 PM
1 votes:

Super_pope: Term limits are a bad idea. You just can't RUN a government without professional legislators. Real statesmen with real working knowledge of how a country is run. People with actual civic knowledge who have passed their share of omnibus spending bills.

I think what we need though is a structural overhaul so that we can capture what is good and what is bad about our legislators. Things like social issues and budgeting need to be informed by a broad range of viewpoints. Subcommittee on transportation? Put some old guys on there. Defense? Sure. Anything to do with science, or technology, or other issues that are evolving more and more rapidly in our society like copyright? Form a third house of congress that covers nothing but emerging science and technology. Make half of them direct elections. 2 "Science Senators," per state, and have a combination of accreditation boards, college faculty senates, and professional organizations like SAE and elect the other half.



I think the bigger problem is that the people governing may understand politics and legislature, but they don't understand what it is they're actually governing anymore. Being a profession politician makes them so far detached from what "normal" people go through, that they can't possibly understand what they're doing. Why should they care about healthcare for the poor when they have the best healthcare available and can be made exempt from any changes they institute. Why worry about wage fairness when you get to directly vote for your own salary.

Also: Bachmann on an intelligence committee and Akin on a science committee. We need a farking competency exam for these positions.
2012-09-04 03:30:15 PM
1 votes:
the quarterback keeps losing games because his own players are tackling him. Do you replace the quarterback, or the players that don't know how to play deliberately sabotage the game?


FTFY
2012-09-04 03:20:02 PM
1 votes:

Il Douchey: CPennypacker: If you concede that the republican obstructionism was the cuase of the problems of the last 4 years, how can you still claim it was Obama that failed?

Because it was Obama that failed. It was caused by a variety of factors, but for the sake of argument, let's just say Obama's failure was entirely due to GOP obstruction. That obstruction will be more powerful next term, ergo, his failure would be more profound next term.


So, what you're saying is that the GOP will hold the country hostage unless we give into their terrorist demands? You're saying America should give into terrorist demands?
2012-09-04 03:03:37 PM
1 votes:

Il Douchey: Your quarterback keeps losing football games, but it's only because the other team has such a good defense. Next year their defense will be even better, but your quarterback won't be. You can't get rid of the other team, but you can bench your quarterback. Or, you can keep losing by even larger margins


Please stop perpetuating the "Politics is a team sport" analogy. It isn't anything like it.
2012-09-04 03:02:51 PM
1 votes:

Il Douchey: CPennypacker: Your answer to my question is "because" and then you just repeated your bad argument again. You're a true gem.

I think we're having communication difficulties. Let's try it this way:

Your quarterback keeps losing football games, but it's only because the other team has such a good defense. Next year their defense will be even better, but your quarterback won't be. You can't get rid of the other team, but you can bench your quarterback. Or, you can keep losing by even larger margins


We're having communication difficulties because you're drooling all over yourself
2012-09-04 03:01:18 PM
1 votes:

that bosnian sniper: The extreme left believes a Romney administration would be such an utter, unforgettable train wreck that it will cause an unprecedentedly hard, nationwide, swing to the left unprecedented by even the leftward swing during the FDR administration. Therefore, quite a few are voting for him.


Thats an interesting theory, but it's also one hell of a gamble. If you're wrong, you've basically doomed the country.
2012-09-04 02:56:03 PM
1 votes:

Il Douchey: CPennypacker: If you concede that the republican obstructionism was the cuase of the problems of the last 4 years, how can you still claim it was Obama that failed?

Because it was Obama that failed. It was caused by a variety of factors, but for the sake of argument, let's just say Obama's failure was entirely due to GOP obstruction. That obstruction will be more powerful next term, ergo, his failure would be more profound next term.


I'm more curious about the "failure" here. Please list said failures, and show that they are more numerous and bigger than any other President.

I'd really like to see him compared to his predecessor. That would be interesting. I'll even give you the full 8 year sof Bush, or just the past 4, your choice. Keep in mind that economic slides don't have 4 wheel anti-lock disc brakes, they don't stop the day a President takes office, so you'll have to factor in the continuing economic slide, and the reaction since it has stopped, to be fair.
2012-09-04 02:53:02 PM
1 votes:

TheMysticS: Yay for you adopting a child.
Consider this an internets pat on the back. Good jorb. You make me proud to be a human.


Thanks! Little guy is a miracle every day of my life.

Working on the second adoption now. And in an adoption ministry to educate more people about adoptions and foster care. The tax credit was just the icing on the cake, but it certainly made the expenses of a baby easier - and made those legal costs affordable.
2012-09-04 02:43:22 PM
1 votes:

zappaisfrank: AnEvilGuest: Il Douchey: busy chillin': did I understand you correctly?

Not exactly. I'm saying that if opposition is your excuse for why Obama failed in his first term, he will only fail worse if he gets a second term. So rather than quibble over why it's not working, let's just concede that it's not working so we can turn the page.

replacing the party first members of congress is a good idea.

Term limits for every seat in Congress, just like most state legislatures have.


Actually, term limits are a two edged sword. You replace corrupt sitting legislator with corrupt party machines. Who picks the candidates? The political machine. And with constant churn, legislators never have any time to build up their own gravatas apart from that which put them in office.

The real problem is political parties. The Constitution was never designed with them in mind. It was intended to have each legislator be reasonably independent, focusing on the needs of their constituents. Every X amount of people were entitled to a representative. When the number of representative was capped at 435 we started getting perversions like a representative in PA representing 1,000,000 people vs a representative in Wyoming representing 40,000.
2012-09-04 02:40:55 PM
1 votes:

Il Douchey: Calmamity: I'm certainly not better off than I was four years ago, but at least I know why, you obstructionist douche-weasels.

If you blame Obama's failure on GOP obstruction, you should know that the GOP will probably gain strength in both houses of Congress this year. So if Obama wins, it will mean even harder Obama failure, even more Obama excuses and you will be even worse off four years from now.

/We can't survive another term of failure, excuses and decline


So what you're saying is that we should elect Romney so the GOP can fast track the failure unopposed. Sounds like quite the plan there.
2012-09-04 02:40:51 PM
1 votes:

Il Douchey: busy chillin': did I understand you correctly?

Not exactly. I'm saying that if opposition is your excuse for why Obama failed in his first term, he will only fail worse if he gets a second term. So rather than quibble over why it's not working, let's just concede that it's not working so we can turn the page.


...Republicans Are Bad So Vote Republican?

Well, that's certainly a new one.
2012-09-04 02:37:30 PM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: Weaver95: Just outside the security perimeter of the Democratic National Convention, Republicans have set up a "rapid response" unit whose job it is to make sure the pro-Obama message this week does not go un-challenged.

And I hope the cops treat these Republicans exactly the same way that cops around the country have been treating the Occupy movement.

I'd imagine that the GOP has the necessary permits. Your comparison was excellent otherwise


the Occupy people try to get permits (and often times they have them in hand)...but you know as well as I do that even assuming the OWS people can get a permit without being blocked by local governments, it's no protection from the cops beating the snot out of them.

but you're right - the GOP probably has sufficient cash on hand to bribe the locals and pay off the cops for protection.
2012-09-04 02:31:37 PM
1 votes:
Just outside the security perimeter of the Democratic National Convention, Republicans have set up a "rapid response" unit whose job it is to make sure the pro-Obama message this week does not go un-challenged.

And I hope the cops treat these Republicans exactly the same way that cops around the country have been treating the Occupy movement.
2012-09-04 02:19:49 PM
1 votes:
Il Douchey:

I also like that how this insinuates the Republicans will just start bringing up bills for jobs and debt reduction. Okay guys, time to get to work. Like they will just start farting rainbows all over America. And that their goals will remotely line up with the citizens goals.

Deregulate everything!
2012-09-04 02:18:43 PM
1 votes:

Calmamity: I'm certainly not better off than I was four years ago, but at least I know why, you obstructionist douche-weasels.


Neither am I, but mostly it's because I finished grad school last year. Somehow I managed to be worse off than being a grad student.

Also, Congress sucks. When they prioritize party victories over actual success, there's going to be a problem. I can only hope that the GOP loses a lot of seats just so they realize that not compromising on anything will get them nowhere.
2012-09-04 01:53:26 PM
1 votes:

mlkmandan: "Every president since the Great Depression, except Jimmy Carter and President Obama, who asked voters for a second term could look back at the last four years and say: 'You are better off today than you were four years ago,' the Charlotte-based team asked Monday"

Housing bubble burst.....yea.......equity is a shackle......you're better off without it
Jobs lost under Bush......hey....more time to spend with family
Lives lost to the war....well.....family time is overrated

What color is the sky in their world?


Whatever color Fox News tells them it is.
2012-09-04 01:45:06 PM
1 votes:

Dr Dreidel: What is that NDGT macro all about? I suspect is it feigned concern over the sarcastically-termed "badass"-ness, but from whence did it come?


Here you go.
2012-09-04 01:41:40 PM
1 votes:
What is that NDGT macro all about? I suspect is it feigned concern over the sarcastically-termed "badass"-ness, but from whence did it come?

// also, wasn't Romney the one saying that campaigning during the other convention was "degrading"?
// or is that only for Blah Presidents who campaign against Romney?
2012-09-04 01:14:42 PM
1 votes:
image.spreadshirt.com
2012-09-04 01:13:18 PM
1 votes:
image.spreadshirt.com
2012-09-04 01:08:34 PM
1 votes:
image.spreadshirt.com
2012-09-04 01:08:18 PM
1 votes:
image.spreadshirt.com
2012-09-04 01:01:31 PM
1 votes:
image.spreadshirt.com
2012-09-04 12:37:59 PM
1 votes:
image.spreadshirt.com
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report