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

(Daily Mail)   CNN commentator says that before the debate Biden and Ryan were "as nervous as a hooker in church"   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 268
    More: Interesting, CNN, Biden, Paul Begala, Danville, Mayfair, Ann Curry  
•       •       •

1395 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Oct 2012 at 8:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-12 12:40:08 PM

I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: I think you're mistaken on how budget funds are allocated.


Are you?
Impoundment of funds

Did you read that before you posted?



the part where by law the President isn't allowed to redirect funds as directed by Congress?
 
2012-10-12 12:48:29 PM

Lord_Baull: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: I think you're mistaken on how budget funds are allocated.


Are you?
Impoundment of funds

Did you read that before you posted?


the part where by law the President isn't allowed to redirect funds as directed by Congress?


That has to do with withholding not redirecting. So if congress says you have to buy 2 aircraft carriers the president could prior to 1974 say, no i'm not going to do that.

Does the security budget specifically state what embassy/consulate gets in terms of funding?
 
2012-10-12 12:49:45 PM

I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: sprawl15: I alone am best: 2-3 levels above the embassy is still the state department which is part of the administration.

So what?

The claim wasn't that some middle management bureaucrat turned down the request for extra security, it was that Biafra Jellobama personally turned it down. You're asserting a level of concern that makes it a personal failing for Obama if some FBI agent beats his wife and his boss doesn't report it.

No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

The President isn't a dictator who can pull from other budgets if Congress votes it down which is what happened with their security budget.

I think you're mistaken on how budget funds are allocated.


So you believe the State Department is just given a pile of money and that votes on allocation are just for show then.
 
2012-10-12 12:51:48 PM

I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: Satanic_Hamster: I alone am best: No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

Right, so it's Reagan's fault the Marine Corps barracks was bombed, it was Bush's fault that 9/11 happened, and Obama gets to take credit for killing Bin Laden.


And the 7 embassy attacks during the Bush years made him soft on terror.

I specifically remember liberals claiming it was his fault. That changed though when Obama was elected.

We had congressional hearings on the seven embassy attacks when Bush was President?

The 9/11 commission was fake?


I wasn't aware that the 9/11 commission was dealing with the 7 embassy attacks.
 
2012-10-12 12:53:39 PM

I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: I think you're mistaken on how budget funds are allocated.


Are you?
Impoundment of funds

Did you read that before you posted?


the part where by law the President isn't allowed to redirect funds as directed by Congress?

That has to do with withholding not redirecting. So if congress says you have to buy 2 aircraft carriers the president could prior to 1974 say, no i'm not going to do that.

Does the security budget specifically state what embassy/consulate gets in terms of funding?


That would be why congress gets to vote on the security budget for specific embassy expenses.
 
2012-10-12 12:57:11 PM

I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: Satanic_Hamster: I alone am best: No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

Right, so it's Reagan's fault the Marine Corps barracks was bombed, it was Bush's fault that 9/11 happened, and Obama gets to take credit for killing Bin Laden.


And the 7 embassy attacks during the Bush years made him soft on terror.

I specifically remember liberals claiming it was his fault. That changed though when Obama was elected.

We had congressional hearings on the seven embassy attacks when Bush was President?

The 9/11 commission was fake?


The WTC was a US embassy on foreign soil?
 
2012-10-12 01:07:13 PM

Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: I think you're mistaken on how budget funds are allocated.


Are you?
Impoundment of funds

Did you read that before you posted?


the part where by law the President isn't allowed to redirect funds as directed by Congress?

That has to do with withholding not redirecting. So if congress says you have to buy 2 aircraft carriers the president could prior to 1974 say, no i'm not going to do that.

Does the security budget specifically state what embassy/consulate gets in terms of funding?

That would be why congress gets to vote on the security budget for specific embassy expenses.


But not specific embassies. So redirecting funds from on embassy to another is acceptable as long as it isn't specifically designated for another purpose or expressly prohibited in the appropriation.

So if the budget calls for 70 million for furniture you cannot use that to build a new embassy but you could allocate the funding to the embassies as you see fit.
 
2012-10-12 01:16:56 PM

imontheinternet: I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: Satanic_Hamster: I alone am best: No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

Right, so it's Reagan's fault the Marine Corps barracks was bombed, it was Bush's fault that 9/11 happened, and Obama gets to take credit for killing Bin Laden.


And the 7 embassy attacks during the Bush years made him soft on terror.

I specifically remember liberals claiming it was his fault. That changed though when Obama was elected.

We had congressional hearings on the seven embassy attacks when Bush was President?

The 9/11 commission was fake?

The WTC was a US embassy on foreign soil?


US embassies are, by definition, "on American soil".
 
2012-10-12 01:18:26 PM

Dr Dreidel: imontheinternet: I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: Satanic_Hamster: I alone am best: No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

Right, so it's Reagan's fault the Marine Corps barracks was bombed, it was Bush's fault that 9/11 happened, and Obama gets to take credit for killing Bin Laden.


And the 7 embassy attacks during the Bush years made him soft on terror.

I specifically remember liberals claiming it was his fault. That changed though when Obama was elected.

We had congressional hearings on the seven embassy attacks when Bush was President?

The 9/11 commission was fake?

The WTC was a US embassy on foreign soil?

US embassies are, by definition, "on American soil".


Popular myth actually.
 
2012-10-12 01:34:13 PM

imontheinternet: I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: Satanic_Hamster: I alone am best: No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

Right, so it's Reagan's fault the Marine Corps barracks was bombed, it was Bush's fault that 9/11 happened, and Obama gets to take credit for killing Bin Laden.


And the 7 embassy attacks during the Bush years made him soft on terror.

I specifically remember liberals claiming it was his fault. That changed though when Obama was elected.

We had congressional hearings on the seven embassy attacks when Bush was President?

The 9/11 commission was fake?

The WTC was a US embassy on foreign soil?


Both were terrorist attacks.
 
2012-10-12 01:39:57 PM

mrshowrules: Dr Dreidel: US embassies are, by definition, "on American soil".

Popular myth actually.


According to this, it looks like a distinction without a difference. (If I had instead said "within US jurisdiction", I'd be correct, and most people don't really differentiate those, outside legal people.)

// I'm calling both of us technically correct
 
2012-10-12 01:45:42 PM

Dr Dreidel: According to this, it looks like a distinction without a difference. (If I had instead said "within US jurisdiction", I'd be correct, and most people don't really differentiate those, outside legal people.)


Eh, it's kind of the difference between denying government entry without consent/a warrant and claiming an allodial title.
 
2012-10-12 02:06:51 PM

Dr Dreidel: mrshowrules: Dr Dreidel: US embassies are, by definition, "on American soil".

Popular myth actually.

According to this, it looks like a distinction without a difference. (If I had instead said "within US jurisdiction", I'd be correct, and most people don't really differentiate those, outside legal people.)

// I'm calling both of us technically correct


What you state has a degree of practical truth to it but seeing as you were using it to define something else (attack on US soil), you have taken that too far.

Only one of us is technically correct.

"Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.[5][6] Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."
 
2012-10-12 02:11:57 PM

I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: I alone am best: I think you're mistaken on how budget funds are allocated.


Are you?
Impoundment of funds

Did you read that before you posted?


the part where by law the President isn't allowed to redirect funds as directed by Congress?

That has to do with withholding not redirecting. So if congress says you have to buy 2 aircraft carriers the president could prior to 1974 say, no i'm not going to do that.

Does the security budget specifically state what embassy/consulate gets in terms of funding?

That would be why congress gets to vote on the security budget for specific embassy expenses.

But not specific embassies. So redirecting funds from on embassy to another is acceptable as long as it isn't specifically designated for another purpose or expressly prohibited in the appropriation.

So if the budget calls for 70 million for furniture you cannot use that to build a new embassy but you could allocate the funding to the embassies as you see fit.


So then you admit that the budget for electric cars in Vienna comes from a different appropriation that security for Libya.

Incidentally the GOP has been pushing security cuts since 2011. Ryan wanted even more for 2013.
 
2012-10-12 02:16:17 PM

I alone am best: imontheinternet: I alone am best: Fart_Machine: I alone am best: Lord_Baull: Satanic_Hamster: I alone am best: No it was that the administration turned it down. Obama is the boss, that fall on him that his employee's borked it up. That's why they call it the Obama administration.

Right, so it's Reagan's fault the Marine Corps barracks was bombed, it was Bush's fault that 9/11 happened, and Obama gets to take credit for killing Bin Laden.


And the 7 embassy attacks during the Bush years made him soft on terror.

I specifically remember liberals claiming it was his fault. That changed though when Obama was elected.

We had congressional hearings on the seven embassy attacks when Bush was President?

The 9/11 commission was fake?

The WTC was a US embassy on foreign soil?

Both were terrorist attacks.


And apples and oranges can both be eaten.

The difference is Bush got a huge amount of bipartisan support following 9/11. Obama got blamed for the death of Stevens by the GOP even though they pushed for the security cuts.
 
2012-10-12 02:17:49 PM

President Raygun: Uchiha_Cycliste: EyeballKid: Graffito: Uchiha_Cycliste: Likewise, are they too stupid to recognize Romney and Ryan's lies for what they are? Or do they simply not care?

Romney is taller than Obama so he looked more presidential. That's all they needed to know.

Plus, he looked more, ahhhhh, how you say...um....well, you know.....he was just...uh....he looked a....ahh....he didn't.....you know, er.....he didn't um.....look so....um..."socialist?"

black exactly.

What did you say about Blah people?


I think I said exactly.
 
2012-10-12 02:20:30 PM

mrshowrules: Dr Dreidel: mrshowrules: Dr Dreidel: US embassies are, by definition, "on American soil".

Popular myth actually.

According to this, it looks like a distinction without a difference. (If I had instead said "within US jurisdiction", I'd be correct, and most people don't really differentiate those, outside legal people.)

// I'm calling both of us technically correct

What you state has a degree of practical truth to it but seeing as you were using it to define something else (attack on US soil), you have taken that too far.

Only one of us is technically correct.

"Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.[5][6] Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations."


Take it. Whatever.

// but I did learn something, so that's a win for me
// nyah
 
2012-10-12 05:01:11 PM
It seems more likely that the pastor would be nervous when the hooker is in church.
 
Displayed 18 of 268 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report