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.

(Inquisitr)   National Park police close Mt. Vernon, find out after the fact that it is privately owned and funded. OOPS our bad, whodathunkit?   (inquisitr.com) divider line 331
    More: Asinine, obama regime  
•       •       •

11483 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2013 at 6:28 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-05 10:20:41 PM

TuteTibiImperes: If you're pissed off, direct your ire to the House Republicans, this is entirely on them.


Heh.

On another note, the coining of the term, "Barrycades" is pretty funny.
 
2013-10-05 10:21:14 PM

Danger Avoid Death: Atypical Person Reading Fark: And there are a lot of fairly young, new hires in California, working at the low end of the ranger totem pole to begin with.

/too lazy to get the preposition off the end of that sentence

That is a heresy up with which I shall not put.


I knew there was a good reason you're a favorite of mine.  I'm going to send that out to some English teachers I know.
 
2013-10-05 10:25:46 PM

EnderX: Mrbogey: By LAW they have to shut down anything that is open to the public. It says right there in the Declaration of Independence, ipso facto QED!

You better listen to him, he's pre-med.


There you go now, just leave everything to me.
 
2013-10-05 10:27:37 PM
Lsherm:
Answer me this, chumpy mcfarkstick, if the NPS wasn't in the wrong, why did they remove the barricades?  I thought so.

While I would warn you of the danger of forcing a zealot to shed his misconceptions and see reality for the first time, there is really no danger of these particular zealots of ever seeing reality.  Republicans=evil, Obama=god.  Period, the end.
 
2013-10-05 10:28:05 PM
I toured Mt. Vernon last summer, and they made a big deal that it was a private operation, there were a lot old newspapers chronicling the salvation of the estate.

The Feds closed a parking lot outside the estate, chickenshirted bastards.
 
2013-10-05 10:31:46 PM

TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout

Do you honestly think blatant lies help make your case?

PolitiFact

This seems to be a real problem for you.

FTA: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who decides which bills will be considered, told reporters on July 10, 2012, that no spending bills were likely to be approved this year because of an ongoing dispute with House Republicans over how much the federal government should spend.

The bills passed the House and Senate budget committees, but Reid realizes that there's no point in the Senate voting for something the House will never accept.  The Senate doesn't want to waste it's time debating and voting on a bill with no change of passing the House.  The House on the other hand, apparently has no problem trying to repeal the ACA 33 times despite knowing that it will never pass the Senate.  It's not inaction for inaction's sake, it's pragmatism.

That being said, I'd love to see a budget passed, but it should be the budget that Obama proposes, not some cut-down austerity fantasy out of the House.


Again, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to pass a budget quite literally, for years.
 
2013-10-05 10:36:44 PM

GORDON: Lsherm:
Answer me this, chumpy mcfarkstick, if the NPS wasn't in the wrong, why did they remove the barricades?  I thought so.

While I would warn you of the danger of forcing a zealot to shed his misconceptions and see reality for the first time, there is really no danger of these particular zealots of ever seeing reality.  Republicans=evil, Obama=god.  Period, the end.


Please, cite a single source of any liberal person or organization making any genuine messianic claims about Obama.

Only republicans seem to think he's the second coming of Jesus, and they hate him for it, because they oppose everything Jesus stood for.
 
2013-10-05 10:41:29 PM

Atypical Person Reading Fark: Danger Avoid Death: Atypical Person Reading Fark: And there are a lot of fairly young, new hires in California, working at the low end of the ranger totem pole to begin with.

/too lazy to get the preposition off the end of that sentence

That is a heresy up with which I shall not put.

I knew there was a good reason you're a favorite of mine.  I'm going to send that out to some English teachers I know.


Thanks. I can't take credit for that one, though. I've seen it used in several articles on archaic rules of grammar. Apparently the whole "don't end a sentence with a preposition" thing stems from 19th century teachers applying Latin grammar rules to the English language.

Your English teacher friends might also enjoy this link.
 
2013-10-05 10:44:06 PM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout

Do you honestly think blatant lies help make your case?

PolitiFact

This seems to be a real problem for you.

FTA: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who decides which bills will be considered, told reporters on July 10, 2012, that no spending bills were likely to be approved this year because of an ongoing dispute with House Republicans over how much the federal government should spend.

The bills passed the House and Senate budget committees, but Reid realizes that there's no point in the Senate voting for something the House will never accept.  The Senate doesn't want to waste it's time debating and voting on a bill with no change of passing the House.  The House on the other hand, apparently has no problem trying to repeal the ACA 33 times despite knowing that it will never pass the Senate.  It's not inaction for inaction's sake, it's pragmatism.

That being said, I'd love to see a budget passed, but it should be the budget that Obama proposes, not some cut-down austerity fantasy out of the House.

Again, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to pass a budget quite literally, for years.


The Senate would pass a budget in a heartbeat if they thought it would also pass the House.  There's no point in passing a budget that won't ever be accepted by the House Republicans, and the Senate certainly isn't going to kowtow to the House Republicans and pass the budget that they want.

The House seems willing to vote on silly measures that will never pass the Senate, while the Senate has enough sense not to bother bringing something to vote if the House won't consider it.
 
2013-10-05 10:49:02 PM
New rule of thumb - put every single poster to the main tab on ignore.
 
2013-10-05 10:52:48 PM
If it's privately owned and funded, there shouldn't be ANY govt employees "guarding" it to begin with.
 
2013-10-05 10:57:19 PM

badhatharry: TuteTibiImperes: OgreMagi: Radioactive Ass: OgreMagi: Nope. Excluding military (which is notoriously low paid), you are going to make more working for the Feds than in the private sector, unless the job requires a PhD.

The social contract there is that you are paid less for a more stable job. Private sector jobs rely upon the economy (local and national) while government jobs usually perform services that are paid for out of taxes and thus are immune to a lot of that economic pressure.

Go back and read that chart again.  You get paid MORE working for the Feds.

Only after benefits are considered.  Federal jobs typically have lower salaries but better benefits packages.  If you want to compare salary vs salary, the private sector pays more most of the time.

Here is a good trivia question: 6 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the US are suburbs of what city?


Here's the question - are we distinguishing between federal contractors and employees of the federal government?
 
2013-10-05 10:57:25 PM

TuteTibiImperes: The Senate would pass a budget in a heartbeat if they thought it would also pass the House.


That has nothing to do with your claim that the House was the body not passing a budget when it was the Senate that refused to do so.

Remember this?

TuteTibiImperes: Next, the President writes the budget, and then sends it to the House and Senate for approval. Once the House and Senate agree on a budget, it becomes binding and can go to appropriations. The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout, and the one causing trouble, resulting in these repeated CRs.


If you can't make a point without lies, then stop posting.

dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-10-05 10:58:01 PM

Lost Thought 00: New rule of thumb - put every single poster to the main tab on ignore.


So.....you're going to ignore yourself.   Um.....have fun?
 
2013-10-05 11:01:44 PM

Lsherm: cameroncrazy1984: Oh and here's the contingency plan. Nowhere does it state that there is a difference between NPS grounds. It states that ALL NPS property is to be shut down:

http://www.doi.gov/shutdown/fy2014/upload/NPS-contingency-plan.pdf

Mt. Vernon isn't NPS property.


Don't mind him, he's all in for basically anything Obama does.
 
2013-10-05 11:02:26 PM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: The Senate would pass a budget in a heartbeat if they thought it would also pass the House.

That has nothing to do with your claim that the House was the body not passing a budget when it was the Senate that refused to do so.

Remember this?

TuteTibiImperes: Next, the President writes the budget, and then sends it to the House and Senate for approval. Once the House and Senate agree on a budget, it becomes binding and can go to appropriations. The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout, and the one causing trouble, resulting in these repeated CRs.

If you can't make a point without lies, then stop posting.

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 480x360]


Nothing I said was a lie.  The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted.  The House is the sticking point.  You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.
 
2013-10-05 11:03:19 PM
I'm finding it interesting that  the press and dems aren't getting a whole lot of traction out of their attempts to stir up outrage over the shutdown. They are both also finding that most citizens see through the govt's attempts to inflict as much needless pain on the populace as they can to exaggerate the effects of the shutdown and the citizens aren't buying it.

And while all this is happening Obamacare is being rolled out in a very unimpressive fashion.

This should all be a whole lot of fun to watch play out.

Should be interesting to see where this all goes.
 
2013-10-05 11:03:32 PM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: The President and Senate have had no problem agreeing on a budget - the House is the holdout

Do you honestly think blatant lies help make your case?

PolitiFact

This seems to be a real problem for you.

FTA: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who decides which bills will be considered, told reporters on July 10, 2012, that no spending bills were likely to be approved this year because of an ongoing dispute with House Republicans over how much the federal government should spend.

The bills passed the House and Senate budget committees, but Reid realizes that there's no point in the Senate voting for something the House will never accept.  The Senate doesn't want to waste it's time debating and voting on a bill with no change of passing the House.  The House on the other hand, apparently has no problem trying to repeal the ACA 33 times despite knowing that it will never pass the Senate.  It's not inaction for inaction's sake, it's pragmatism.

That being said, I'd love to see a budget passed, but it should be the budget that Obama proposes, not some cut-down austerity fantasy out of the House.

Again, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to pass a budget quite literally, for years.


Oh aren't you cute.

The Senate cannot enact a budget without 60 votes. (At a bare minimum.) A realistically impossible task given the seats held by the GOP especially the Tea Party wack jobs. But you go on spreading your lies.
 
2013-10-05 11:05:28 PM

fullyfarked: TuteTibiImperes: brimed03: WippitGuud: It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A large part of that is due to the GOP media machine manufacturing outrage over this and trying to paint it as a deliberate Democratic Party move to hurt people instead of the reality that these moves are just to ensure the just public safety and integrity of federal property.

The GOP has no plan to fix this shutdown, and they're refusing to do the one fair thing that would end it right now - pass a clean CR.  They're trying to obfuscate the issue, which is par for the course.  They don't actually do anything, they just obfuscate and obstruct.

^^^^^^^
100% pure, unedited top-shelf Democrat party talking points... right down to the "Clean CR" reference, which was invented out of nothing just to have something high-and-mighty sounding to spice up sound bites.


Are you employed by the RNC or are you a volunteer?
 
2013-10-05 11:08:25 PM

Lost Thought 00: New rule of thumb - put every single poster to the main tab on ignore.


Alright, guys. It's now safe to go back to talking about his mother.
 
2013-10-05 11:09:42 PM

fullyfarked: ginandbacon: WippitGuud: ginandbacon: WippitGuud: It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.

SO WHAT SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN???????? It's a farking gorram government shutdown! That's kind of how they work, ya know?

It should be when the farking gorram government employees GO HOME and STFU instead of being sent out to intentionally inflict inconvenience and take away access to PUBLIC property that is not otherwise restricted when they're all at work feeding from the public trough.


OMG! Inconvenience in visiting national parks and monuments while the government is shut down. Oh, the horror!
 
2013-10-05 11:10:37 PM

Danger Avoid Death: Lost Thought 00: New rule of thumb - put every single poster to the main tab on ignore.

Alright, guys. It's now safe to go back to talking about his mother.


But I've never met his mother.
 
2013-10-05 11:12:06 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Nothing I said was a lie. The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted. The House is the sticking point. You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.


Aside from the part where the Senate never passed a budget but the House did??

ginandbacon: The Senate cannot enact a budget without 60 votes.


... and another lie...

This time I'll pull out the Washington Post's fact checker.

Newly-named White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was not only recently budget director for President Obama; he was also the budget director for former President Bill Clinton. So when he speaks about the budget process, you would think he speaks with authority.

That's why his comment on CNN jumped out at us. He also said something similar on NBC's "Meet the Press," when asked about the number of days since Senate Democrats passed a budget plan (1,019). Lew's response: "One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something."

We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the "need to be honest."

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.

We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.


www.washingtonpost.com

Seriously, stop posting or stop lying, or stop claiming to represent liberals.
 
2013-10-05 11:16:07 PM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: Nothing I said was a lie. The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted. The House is the sticking point. You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.

Aside from the part where the Senate never passed a budget but the House did??

ginandbacon: The Senate cannot enact a budget without 60 votes.

... and another lie...

This time I'll pull out the Washington Post's fact checker.

Newly-named White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was not only recently budget director for President Obama; he was also the budget director for former President Bill Clinton. So when he speaks about the budget process, you would think he speaks with authority.

That's why his comment on CNN jumped out at us. He also said something similar on NBC's "Meet the Press," when asked about the number of days since Senate Democrats passed a budget plan (1,019). Lew's response: "One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something."

We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the "need to be honest."

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.

We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.

[www.washingtonpost.com ...


Not pass you fool, enact.

Stop being ignorant. 

I'm tired of correcting you. Do some research.
 
2013-10-05 11:19:01 PM

Bucky Katt: fullyfarked: ginandbacon: WippitGuud: ginandbacon: WippitGuud: It's funny how a government shutdown has become entirely focused on National Parks. Rather than, oh, I dunno... fixing the farking shutdown.

Well before this there was the giant kerfuffle over the cessation of WH tours. I guess we have a fairly good Rorschach test for Republican values.

To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.

SO WHAT SHOULD BE SHUT DOWN???????? It's a farking gorram government shutdown! That's kind of how they work, ya know?

It should be when the farking gorram government employees GO HOME and STFU instead of being sent out to intentionally inflict inconvenience and take away access to PUBLIC property that is not otherwise restricted when they're all at work feeding from the public trough.

OMG! Inconvenience in visiting national parks and monuments while the government is shut down. Oh, the horror!


You must not know much about the Parks and the economy, especially for the communities that surround the Parks.
 
2013-10-05 11:22:47 PM
Growing up in Illinois I thought holding stuff people want hostage until politicians get what they want was just how politics works. With a president trained in Illinois politics I've learned it might be as common a practice as I thought.
 
2013-10-05 11:23:29 PM
 
2013-10-05 11:24:54 PM

ginandbacon: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: Nothing I said was a lie. The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted. The House is the sticking point. You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.

Aside from the part where the Senate never passed a budget but the House did??

ginandbacon: The Senate cannot enact a budget without 60 votes.

... and another lie...

This time I'll pull out the Washington Post's fact checker.

Newly-named White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was not only recently budget director for President Obama; he was also the budget director for former President Bill Clinton. So when he speaks about the budget process, you would think he speaks with authority.

That's why his comment on CNN jumped out at us. He also said something similar on NBC's "Meet the Press," when asked about the number of days since Senate Democrats passed a budget plan (1,019). Lew's response: "One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something."

We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the "need to be honest."

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.

We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.

[www.washingtonp ...


Wow, you've been churning this thread all day. Why don't you go harass cops or occupy something you commie.
 
2013-10-05 11:28:41 PM

BullBearMS: ginandbacon: Stop being ignorant.

Again with the lies?

The Bush administration routinely passed budgets with only 50 votes in the Senate.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House scored a major victory Thursday by securing support from all 50 Senate Republicans for President Bush's budget, which contains his $1.6 trillion, 10-year tax cut and a $60 billion immediate tax cut this year.

Early Thursday, the White House had pledges from 47 of the 50 Republicans. Commitments from the other three were won late Thursday at a meeting called by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott.

"We've got the votes," said a senior Senate Republican aide. "And it's because members understood this was about the president's agenda and our ability to control the floor."

60 votes are not required for a budget in the Senate and haven't been for decades.


HE HAD 65 VOTES YOU CRETIN!!!

OMG I am done with you.
 
2013-10-05 11:31:02 PM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: Why don't you go harass cops or occupy something you commie.


They haven't come back tonight. I think I scared them.
 
2013-10-05 11:34:41 PM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: Wow, you've been churning this thread all day. Why don't you go harass cops or occupy something you commie.


What can I say. I get pissed off when people pushing some agenda resort to a constant stream of lies.

It's like, Jebus Tittyfarking Christ, can't you make your point honestly?
 
2013-10-05 11:35:37 PM

ginandbacon: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Why don't you go harass cops or occupy something you commie.

They haven't come back tonight. I think I scared them.


I don't blame em. You scare me too sometimes.

Hey, I saw LFBN for the first time in forever in a thread a few minutes ago.
 
2013-10-05 11:39:50 PM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: ginandbacon: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Why don't you go harass cops or occupy something you commie.

They haven't come back tonight. I think I scared them.

I don't blame em. You scare me too sometimes.

Hey, I saw LFBN for the first time in forever in a thread a few minutes ago.


Meh, smart people are scared of me...

LFBN? Refresh my memory? Maybe offline so as not to piss off the madmins?
 
2013-10-05 11:40:33 PM

leadmetal: Growing up in Illinois I thought holding stuff people want hostage until politicians get what they want was just how politics works. With a president trained in Illinois politics I've learned it might be as common a practice as I thought.


Know how I know you're FOS?

Illinois isn't even in the top 10 in political corruption.

Of the top 10, the first 8 are solid red states, with north Dakota holding the title.
 
2013-10-05 11:41:26 PM
 
2013-10-05 11:42:10 PM

WippitGuud: To be honest, I've lost quite a bit of respect for liberal-minded Americans who are trying to defend the closures as well. Because, quite frankly. spending the first week of a government shutdown arguing over tourist attractions is a bit stupid.


Some of those shutdowns have put many businesses in jeopardy. In some communities it is a really big deal. Ask the smaller communities around Yosemite.
 
2013-10-05 11:46:17 PM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: Nothing I said was a lie. The budget the Senate would agree to is essentially the same as the one Obama drafted. The House is the sticking point. You're arguing semantics instead of anything substantive.

Aside from the part where the Senate never passed a budget but the House did??


A single branch of Congress passing a budget means nothing.  Both have to agree for anything to be done.  The President and the Senate are generally on the same page as to what the budget should be, the House is off in left field.  It doesn't matter if the House passes a budget if what they pass isn't reasonable to The President or the Senate.

The Senate has no reason to pass a budget if they know the House won't accept it - it would be a waste of time and money to do so, so why do it?  It's only worth passing a budget if the President, Senate, and House can all come to an agreement on one that works.  The House is the odd man out here, they're the ones holding up what the President and the Senate want.  The House passing a ridiculous budget that the other two won't accept is meaningless.
 
2013-10-05 11:52:58 PM
They should also stop all free haircuts, landscaping, travel expense, meals, parking, internet, cable TV, phone, healthcare, dental care, lodging, and anything under the sun these farking leeches we call politicians get for free due to their so called "service" to our country. When are we going to stop funding these millionaire law creators with tax payer dollars?? As they live in their ivory towers claiming their "American dream" robbing the very essence of our nation they build more multi billion dollar carriers in which to house their pilot-less drones to suppress any and all resistance. A farking push button defense system run by chosen fingers. Eisenhower was right, but, instead of calling it the Military industrial complex he should have just called it the corporation..
 
2013-10-06 12:02:18 AM

udhq: Please, cite a single source of any liberal person or organization making any genuine messianic claims about Obama.


The joke isn't that liberals think he's actually Jesus. It's that they treat him as an almost messianic figure. That his elevation to the presidency will herald a new age whereby hope flourishes and the people "left out" of America will reach the promised land.

Bucky Katt: Danger Avoid Death: Lost Thought 00: New rule of thumb - put every single poster to the main tab on ignore.

Alright, guys. It's now safe to go back to talking about his mother.

But I've never met his mother.


You remember that time you don't remember? Yea.. that one.
 
2013-10-06 12:03:21 AM

TuteTibiImperes: A single branch of Congress passing a budget means nothing.


The Senate didn't pass a budget for four freaking years, numbnuts. They only got off their asses and passed one this year because it was required to protect the Bush Tax cuts from finally expiring as scheduled.

You know, the tax cuts the Republicans managed to pass with only 50 votes in the Senate?
 
2013-10-06 12:09:29 AM

udhq: Know how I know you're FOS?

Illinois isn't even in the top 10 in political corruption.

Of the top 10, the first 8 are solid red states, with north Dakota holding the title.


I assume you're using the prosecution rate to define it. I don't think that's entirely fair if so. Corruption is a hard thing to quantify. It's highly subjective.
 
2013-10-06 12:13:10 AM

BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: A single branch of Congress passing a budget means nothing.

The Senate didn't pass a budget for four freaking years, numbnuts. They only got off their asses and passed one this year because it was required to protect the Bush Tax cuts from finally expiring as scheduled.

You know, the tax cuts the Republicans managed to pass with only 50 votes in the Senate?


How many times do I have to say this before you get it - the Senate could pass a budget at any point if they wanted to.  There's just no reason to do so because the budget they want won't be accepted by the House.  Until the GOP is out of power in the House, the President and the Democratically controlled Senate aren't going to get the budget they want.  Why then, would the Senate pass a budget that won't be accepted?

The Senate isn't the problem here.  The House is.  Two out of three, the President and Senate, can agree on the same budget, the House can't.  If you can't see how in this situation the House is the one holding things up, you're bring deliberately obtuse.
 
2013-10-06 12:14:40 AM

Mrbogey: udhq: Know how I know you're FOS?

Illinois isn't even in the top 10 in political corruption.

Of the top 10, the first 8 are solid red states, with north Dakota holding the title.

I assume you're using the prosecution rate to define it. I don't think that's entirely fair if so. Corruption is a hard thing to quantify. It's highly subjective.


No, political criminality is a real, quantifiable thing.

What you're thinking of is actually the imaginary conservative victimization which gave us the "Chicago machine" myth when in reality, Chicago is simply one of the only municipalities in America that consistently holds its political leadership legally accountable.
 
2013-10-06 12:23:16 AM

udhq: What you're thinking of is actually the imaginary conservative victimization which gave us the "Chicago machine" myth when in reality, Chicago is simply one of the only municipalities in America that consistently holds its political leadership legally accountable.


So how many years did Dick Daley do for all the sweetheart deals he pulled and unethical crap? The man bulldozed an airstrip in the dead of night because he wanted a park. Didn't even bother to tell the FAA or the owners of the planes at the field. How's Daley's kids doing with those jobs he hooked them up with via his political patronage?

There's two types of people who swear Chicago isn't corrupt, those in on it and those naive enough to believe what they're told. I hope you're the former because the latter is just sad.
 
2013-10-06 12:30:36 AM

Mrbogey: udhq: What you're thinking of is actually the imaginary conservative victimization which gave us the "Chicago machine" myth when in reality, Chicago is simply one of the only municipalities in America that consistently holds its political leadership legally accountable.

So how many years did Dick Daley do for all the sweetheart deals he pulled and unethical crap? The man bulldozed an airstrip in the dead of night because he wanted a park. Didn't even bother to tell the FAA or the owners of the planes at the field. How's Daley's kids doing with those jobs he hooked them up with via his political patronage?

There's two types of people who swear Chicago isn't corrupt, those in on it and those naive enough to believe what they're told. I hope you're the former because the latter is just sad.


Congrats on being able to name a single instance of corruption in the 3 rd largest population center in the country.

The only ddemonstrable difference between red state corruption and blue state corruption is that blue state criminals like Blago and William Jefferson go to prison, while red state criminals like David Vitter get re-elected.
 
2013-10-06 12:35:17 AM

Mrbogey: So how many years did Dick Daley do for all the sweetheart deals he pulled and unethical crap?


But I've always heard that the people of Chicago wanted Dick Daley.

/wait ... um ....
 
2013-10-06 12:36:25 AM

TuteTibiImperes: How many times do I have to say this before you get it


As many times as you are willing to tell the same lie, ignoring the fact that the Senate refused to even pass a budget for four freaking years.
 
2013-10-06 12:40:44 AM

udhq: Congrats on being able to name a single instance of corruption in the 3 rd largest population center in the country.

The only ddemonstrable difference between red state corruption and blue state corruption is that blue state criminals like Blago and William Jefferson go to prison, while red state criminals like David Vitter get re-elected.


I named the most over the top example of strongman corruption. It's by far not the only one.

You realize William Jefferson and David Vitter are both in the same state, right? Jefferson got busted by federal charges led by a Republican. David Vitter, while hardly being a paragon of ethics, isn't involved in many corruption issues that I'm aware of. I'm as far from politically connected as you can get with the current crop of politicos but all I've ever heard is he is the typical deal-breaking say what needs to be said politician.

If you wanted to go with a red state, you had far far better choices. Trying to make it local for me wasn't a good idea.
 
2013-10-06 12:41:53 AM
I hope the shut down lasts till after the leaves change so I dont have to put up with leafers.
 
2013-10-06 12:47:16 AM

TuteTibiImperes: BullBearMS: TuteTibiImperes: A single branch of Congress passing a budget means nothing.

The Senate didn't pass a budget for four freaking years, numbnuts. They only got off their asses and passed one this year because it was required to protect the Bush Tax cuts from finally expiring as scheduled.

You know, the tax cuts the Republicans managed to pass with only 50 votes in the Senate?

How many times do I have to say this before you get it - the Senate could pass a budget at any point if they wanted to.  There's just no reason to do so because the budget they want won't be accepted by the House.  Until the GOP is out of power in the House, the President and the Democratically controlled Senate aren't going to get the budget they want.  Why then, would the Senate pass a budget that won't be accepted?

The Senate isn't the problem here.  The House is.  Two out of three, the President and Senate, can agree on the same budget, the House can't.  If you can't see how in this situation the House is the one holding things up, you're bring deliberately obtuse.


The Senate passing a budget would be highly symbolic.  Doing it wouldn't be a waste of time.  It would send the message, "we're hard at work, what about those other guys?"
 
Displayed 50 of 331 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report