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.

(NBC News)   Obama slowly tranforming into the dick boss from Glengarry Glen Ross:{To Republicans today} "You don't like a particular policy or a particular president? ... Go out there and win an election." Coffee is for legislators   (firstread.nbcnews.com) divider line 309
    More: Amusing, Obama, GOP, Republican  
•       •       •

3998 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Oct 2013 at 10:16 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



309 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-17 08:08:34 PM
"I'm President of the United States! What are you? You see pal, that's who I am, and you're nothing. Nice guy? I don't give a sh*t. Good Tea Party Member? F*ck you! Go home and play with your Hoverround. You wanna work here? Legislate! You think this is abuse? You think this is abuse, you c*cksucker? You can't take this, how can you take the abuse you get in a committee meeting? You don't like it, leave. I can go out there tonight with the materials you've got and make an amendment expanding SNAP funding to fetuses. Tonight! In two hours! Can you? Can YOU? Go and do likewise."
 
2013-10-17 08:11:16 PM
Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.
 
2013-10-17 08:13:05 PM
Good for him... especially for acknowledging that most of this bullshiat was about not liking him, personally.
 
2013-10-17 08:17:06 PM
Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.
 
2013-10-17 08:19:07 PM

fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.


Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.
 
2013-10-17 08:24:41 PM

serpent_sky: Good for him... especially for acknowledging that most of this bullshiat was about not liking him, personally.


I've done some of my best work with people I just could not stand ...but you know what, business is business, I've got enough friends
 
2013-10-17 08:27:18 PM
p>Obama urged Congress to "stop focusing on the lobbyists and the bloggers, the talking heads on radio and the professional activists who profit from conflict" --

Damn.
 
2013-10-17 08:32:37 PM
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-10-17 08:32:50 PM
fark you, that's my name.  Wanna know why?  'Cause you drove a Hyundai to get here tonight, I rode here in a Presidential motorcade.  *That's* my name.
 
2013-10-17 08:35:04 PM
At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.
 
2013-10-17 08:38:27 PM

DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.


That and the inevitable tell-all about the Romney campaign should be real interesting reads.
 
2013-10-17 08:39:18 PM

DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.


What the hell can he say that isn't already blatantly obvious?

And it'll only get worse.  From Carter hate, to the Clinton impeachment, to seekrit muslin, this is the new normal.  EVERY Democrat president will go through this for the foreseeable future.
 
2013-10-17 08:39:54 PM

doyner: What the hell can he say that isn't already blatantly obvious?


What John Boehner was saying behind the scenes.
 
2013-10-17 08:41:45 PM

DamnYankees: doyner: What the hell can he say that isn't already blatantly obvious?

What John Boehner was saying behind the scenes.


"Oompa Loompa, do-ba-dee-doo,
I've got a perfect puzzle for you.
Oompa Loompa, do-ba-dee-dee,
If you are wise you'll listen to me.
What do you get when you guzzle down TEA?
Eating as much as an elephant eats.
What are you at getting terribly fat?
What do you think will come of that?
I don't like the look of it
Oompa Loompa do-ba-dee-da,
Given good manners you will go far.
You will live in happiness too,
Like the oompa loompa do-ba-dee-doo.
Do-ba-dee-doo "
 
2013-10-17 08:42:39 PM
He's gonna buy them a pack of gum and teach them how to chew it.
 
2013-10-17 08:43:49 PM

Torgo_of_Manos: serpent_sky: Good for him... especially for acknowledging that most of this bullshiat was about not liking him, personally.

I've done some of my best work with people I just could not stand ...but you know what, business is business, I've got enough friends


I say that all the time at work. I'm not there to make friends, I'm there to do my job the best way possible.  I have friends and a life that said job funds, so I do it, regardless of whether or not I like the people I have to work with. And that even includes their ideas that get implemented. I learn to deal with them if I can't change them.

Amazing, people do this EVERY SINGLE DAY.
 
2013-10-17 08:44:31 PM

doyner: seekrit muslin


Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.
 
2013-10-17 08:46:05 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.


I don't remember, but it hardly makes a difference.  She may have laid the egg, but once it hatched the GOP made that poor chicken their sex slave.
 
2013-10-17 08:47:04 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.


I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.
 
2013-10-17 08:51:48 PM

NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.


Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.
 
2013-10-17 08:54:07 PM

jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.


I hope she doesn't run, to be honest.  What I'd like is for her to hint at it up until the race starts in earnest.  Let the GOP put all their focus on her in the meantime.  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?
 
2013-10-17 08:55:22 PM
A
B
L

ALWAYS

BE

LEGISLATING
 
2013-10-17 08:57:33 PM

 I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?




Elizabeth Warren
 
2013-10-17 09:14:02 PM

doyner: She may have laid the egg, but once it hatched the GOP made that poor chicken their sex slave.


You better get some funny votes for that comment. Well played.
 
2013-10-17 09:19:23 PM

what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren


If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious
 
2013-10-17 09:20:48 PM

Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious


Don't forget, first Native American president, too.
 
2013-10-17 09:32:46 PM

BKITU: "I'm President of the United States! What are you? You see pal, that's who I am, and you're nothing. Nice guy? I don't give a sh*t. Good Tea Party Member? F*ck you! Go home and play with your Hoverround. You wanna work here? Legislate! You think this is abuse? You think this is abuse, you c*cksucker? You can't take this, how can you take the abuse you get in a committee meeting? You don't like it, leave. I can go out there tonight with the materials you've got and make an amendment expanding SNAP funding to fetuses. Tonight! In two hours! Can you? Can YOU? Go and do likewise."


Holy shiat, I've never used the phrase done in one before, but if I were going to now would be the time.
 
2013-10-17 09:32:53 PM

NeoCortex42: Don't forget, first Native American president, too.


Oh god, the racist jokes they will attempt to make at her expense that will backfire because it'll make them look (understandably) racist. I can just see them now.
 
2013-10-17 09:33:43 PM

nmrsnr: NeoCortex42: Don't forget, first Native American president, too.

Oh god, the racist jokes they will attempt to make at her expense that will backfire because it'll make them look (understandably) racist. I can just see them now.


"Can we trust her not to gamble away our future?"
 
2013-10-17 09:37:09 PM

nmrsnr: NeoCortex42: Don't forget, first Native American president, too.

Oh god, the racist jokes they will attempt to make at her expense that will backfire because it'll make them look (understandably) racist. I can just see them now.


I don't know, that guy who called Obama uppity twice and thought nothing of it was priceless.
 
2013-10-17 09:37:17 PM

RedPhoenix122: "Can we trust her not to gamble away our future?"


That's tame. I'm thinking photoshop and feathered headdresses, and for the more esoteric, photoshop and Custer's Revenge references. But maybe I'm just a terrible person.
 
2013-10-17 09:39:26 PM

nmrsnr: RedPhoenix122: "Can we trust her not to gamble away our future?"

That's tame. I'm thinking photoshop and feathered headdresses, and for the more esoteric, photoshop and Custer's Revenge references. But maybe I'm just a terrible person.


"We have reservations"
 
2013-10-17 09:41:21 PM

NeoCortex42: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious

Don't forget, first Native American president, too.




And an actual liberal.
 
2013-10-17 09:41:24 PM

doyner: nmrsnr: RedPhoenix122: "Can we trust her not to gamble away our future?"

That's tame. I'm thinking photoshop and feathered headdresses, and for the more esoteric, photoshop and Custer's Revenge references. But maybe I'm just a terrible person.

"We have reservations"


"Why does she insist on destroying the TP?"
"She says she's going to ______.  I have one question: How?"
 
2013-10-17 09:42:31 PM

what_now: NeoCortex42: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious

Don't forget, first Native American president, too.

And an actual liberal.


Oh, God.  The rhetoric of Obama being super-libby communist would look tame by comparison.  Can the derp go to 12?
 
2013-10-17 09:58:00 PM

NeoCortex42: Can the derp go to 12?


It can go all the way to potato!
 
2013-10-17 10:19:49 PM
I wish he had dropped the mic on the floor after his press conference.
 
2013-10-17 10:20:46 PM
I hope this is a good sign that Obama has realized what the rest of us in the world already knew years ago; that the gop is totally batsh*t insane and you cannot ever, EVER, reason with them, about anything. You either steamroller them or they will steamroller you.
 
2013-10-17 10:21:14 PM
Elizabeth Warren / Susan Rice 2016

The tears will be delicious.
 
2013-10-17 10:23:06 PM

The Dog Ate My Homework: I wish he had dropped the mic on the floor after his press conference.


By the time he actually does the mic drop it will be passe.
 
2013-10-17 10:23:12 PM
If it's Hillary or Elizabeth Warren, expect to see the misogyny turned up to 11.  I doubt they'd be able to help themselves, much like they have been unable to contain their party's racism with the current president.
 
2013-10-17 10:28:48 PM
"What's your name?"

i.imgur.com

"President fark You, that's my name."
 
2013-10-17 10:29:08 PM
Obama's so good when he's in "Alpha male" mode.  He can smack down anyone and never seems to cross the line into petty dickishness.

I'm not sure if it's the "uppity negro" thing or something else that keeps him from just staying in that mode all the time, but when he's Wussbama(tm), we wind up with crap like the first debate from last year.
 
2013-10-17 10:31:17 PM
Dick boss? Not really so much of dick move.

i293.photobucket.com

Like a boss? Oh, yeah.
 
2013-10-17 10:31:21 PM

NeoCortex42: jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.

I hope she doesn't run, to be honest.  What I'd like is for her to hint at it up until the race starts in earnest.  Let the GOP put all their focus on her in the meantime.  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Cory Booker.  Two black guys in a row?  The derp will be MAGICAL.
 
2013-10-17 10:31:49 PM

what_now: p>Obama urged Congress to "stop focusing on the lobbyists and the bloggers, the talking heads on radio and the professional activists who profit from conflict" --

Damn.


www.geeklegacy.com
 
2013-10-17 10:32:04 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: The Dog Ate My Homework: I wish he had dropped the mic on the floor after his press conference.

By the time he actually does the mic drop it will be passe.


I still want him to do what's in the popular GIF... walk up to the podium, drop one line, walk away from the podium, kick down the door, and walk through it.
 
2013-10-17 10:32:53 PM

shanrick: He's gonna buy them a pack of gum and teach them how to chew it.



But for now, he's out of gum.
 
2013-10-17 10:34:40 PM

DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.


And I can't WAIT. I also hope he grows a goatee.
 
2013-10-17 10:35:00 PM

DamnYankees: doyner: What the hell can he say that isn't already blatantly obvious?

What John Boehner was saying behind the scenes.



"Pass this legislation, man..  Man I got these cheeseburgers, man...  Please man...  I'll suck yo dick!"
 
2013-10-17 10:35:31 PM
Well, glad to see the federal firefighters back on the job after that burn.
 
2013-10-17 10:36:10 PM
Well Obama has got a pretty good point.
 
2013-10-17 10:37:07 PM

NeoCortex42: doyner: nmrsnr: RedPhoenix122: "Can we trust her not to gamble away our future?"

That's tame. I'm thinking photoshop and feathered headdresses, and for the more esoteric, photoshop and Custer's Revenge references. But maybe I'm just a terrible person.

"We have reservations"

"Why does she insist on destroying the TP?"
"She says she's going to ______.  I have one question: How?"


"Her skin will be red from the drubbing she'll get at the polls."

"She's having a pow-wow with her staff."

"There's no room in the tipi for job creators."

"She's handing the peace pipe to our enemies."
 
2013-10-17 10:37:44 PM

blackminded: DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.

And I can't WAIT. I also hope he grows a goatee.


Kinda like this?

www.beautymagzine.com

/Deep impact baby!
 
2013-10-17 10:37:52 PM

dookdookdook: Obama's so good when he's in "Alpha male" mode.  He can smack down anyone and never seems to cross the line into petty dickishness.

I'm not sure if it's the "uppity negro" thing or something else that keeps him from just staying in that mode all the time, but when he's Wussbama(tm), we wind up with crap like the first debate from last year.


When he's Trollbama, I have hope for this country.

When he's EpicFailBama, I weep.
 
2013-10-17 10:38:21 PM

NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.


Obama has way more mandate than Bush had, and uses only a fraction of it. He is a thousand times more reserved than the tea party, yet they cry about how he disrespects them.

But it isn't racism, and can he not just sit down at the table with boehner for a conversation. That is really all these gentle conservatives want.


/farkers make me sick.
 
2013-10-17 10:38:21 PM

NeoCortex42: When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.


Voter fraud.  You forgot voter fraud!
 
2013-10-17 10:38:50 PM

JerseyTim: Elizabeth Warren / Susan Rice 2016

The tears will be delicious.


I'm tempted to say "not likely" on a Warren bid, because she's a tiny bit green, but in retrospect, I probably had pretty similar misgivings about Obama in '04 when some eternal optimists proposed him running four years later against the undefeatable GOP, right?

/I like being wrong, sometimes.
 
2013-10-17 10:39:40 PM

HMS_Blinkin: NeoCortex42: When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Voter fraud.  You forgot voter fraud!


Don't forget Benghazi. I'm sure its to blame somehow.
 
2013-10-17 10:40:59 PM

dookdookdook: Obama's so good when he's in "Alpha male" mode.  He can smack down anyone and never seems to cross the line into petty dickishness.

I'm not sure if it's the "uppity negro" thing or something else that keeps him from just staying in that mode all the time, but when he's Wussbama(tm), we wind up with crap like the first debate from last year.


I'm still not entirely convinced the first debate wasn't intentional...
 
2013-10-17 10:41:44 PM
Well, the Republicans did win the House.
 
2013-10-17 10:43:35 PM

legion_of_doo: Well, the Republicans did win the House.


With, what, a million fewer votes?
 
2013-10-17 10:47:08 PM

DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.


And that day I'll call "shut up and take my money Day".

Should be a good read.
 
2013-10-17 10:47:27 PM
NeoCortex42:  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?

Biden will bring the muffins.
 
2013-10-17 10:50:13 PM
Please tell me that's a direct quote.

*clicks*

www.trade2win.com

Nicely done.
 
2013-10-17 10:50:57 PM
Yeah I used to be the Speaker. Tough racket
 
2013-10-17 10:51:13 PM

TV's Vinnie: I hope this is a good sign that Obama has realized what the rest of us in the world already knew years ago; that the gop is totally batsh*t insane and you cannot ever, EVER, reason with them, about anything. You either steamroller them or they will steamroller you.


Listen and understand. The GOP is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
 
2013-10-17 10:52:10 PM
Dug this out of the comments:

To those complaining about the President's message...
"I'm tired of these Democrats acting like they won the election. Somebody needs to stand up and say, "When you win the election, you pick the nominees. Until then, shut up! Just shut up! Just go away! Bury yourselves in your rat holes and don't come out until you win an election."
- Rush Limbaugh / 2005
 
2013-10-17 10:52:36 PM
Why is he becoming a dick to the Republicans?

Because he spent 5+ years being diplomatic, polite, professional and concillatory.  Which lead to them insulting him, mocking him, belittling him, and trying to extort him.

He proposed the Republican Healthcare Reform package. . .and they turned against their own longtime position just to spite him.   He asked for permission to take the US military to Syria.  More specifically, he asked the same group of people who gave Bush Jr. a blank check for Iraq on the suspicion of WMD's for permission for limited intervention in a country with confirmed and admitted WMD's and they balked.  He ordered a hit on Osama Bin Laden when Bush Jr. let him get away. . .and they call him weak on terrorism.

He has spent half a decade now trying to be a great statesman who would unite people and take the moral high ground.

He's learned that the ONLY thing they respect is force.  So, he's using political force to take a stand.  No more Mr. Nice President (at least from their POV).

If the Republicans had been willing to negotiate, starting years ago, they could have got a LOT of concessions and ground, instead they devoted themselves to being The Party of NO, the people who considered making him a one-term President (and failing miserably at that) more important than actually legislating things for the good of the country.
 
2013-10-17 10:52:55 PM

BKITU: "I'm President of the United States! What are you? You see pal, that's who I am, and you're nothing. Nice guy? I don't give a sh*t. Good Tea Party Member? F*ck you! Go home and play with your Hoverround. You wanna work here? Legislate! You think this is abuse? You think this is abuse, you c*cksucker? You can't take this, how can you take the abuse you get in a committee meeting? You don't like it, leave. I can go out there tonight with the materials you've got and make an amendment expanding SNAP funding to fetuses. Tonight! In two hours! Can you? Can YOU? Go and do likewise."


+1 coffee
 
2013-10-17 10:54:11 PM

PackofJokers: Dug this out of the comments:

To those complaining about the President's message...
"I'm tired of these Democrats acting like they won the election. Somebody needs to stand up and say, "When you win the election, you pick the nominees. Until then, shut up! Just shut up! Just go away! Bury yourselves in your rat holes and don't come out until you win an election."
- Rush Limbaugh / 2005


Silly boy, thinking transcripts or video actually count as evidence is Freeperville.
 
2013-10-17 10:54:23 PM
Uh, wrong analogy - Alec Baldwin's character, "Fark You," wasn't the boss, he was a consultant sent by Mitch and Murray.

Better to say that President Obama was sent to Washington by 65,899,660 citizens,  ON A MISSION OF MERCY...
 
2013-10-17 10:55:47 PM
Everyone involved won an election. Someone needs to stop confusing presidency with divinity.
 
2013-10-17 10:58:42 PM

jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.


On the other hand, President Hillary would have gotten Congressional investigations rolling on repub transgressions during the Bush administration. Bush would be in jail right now and Cheney's head would be on a pike outside the Pentagon. When Obama was elected the entire GOP held its breath for a year waiting for the indictments to come down. When they didn't, they concluded that Obama was a wimp who could be pushed around at will, and to a certain extent they were right. I'm strongly opposed to Presidential nepotism and would have been very unhappy with Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton in the history books, but a healthy helping of vicious-biatch-in-charge circa 2009 would have solved a lot of problems over the past five years and avoided a slew of others.
 
2013-10-17 11:01:59 PM

PackofJokers: Dug this out of the comments:

To those complaining about the President's message...
"I'm tired of these Democrats acting like they won the election. Somebody needs to stand up and say, "When you win the election, you pick the nominees. Until then, shut up! Just shut up! Just go away! Bury yourselves in your rat holes and don't come out until you win an election."
- Rush Limbaugh / 2005


Silly, that only applies when it's Republicans losing elections.  Remember:

When Republicans win, it's because they have a clear mandate from the people and the Party has absolute power.

When Republicans lose: It's because Liberals have rigged the election, by the Black Panthers or Muslim Brotherhood or ACORN intimidating voters, or massive voter fraud of people voting when they shouldn't be able to, or George Soros had somebody hack the Diebold voting machines.

To their own logic, they can never legitimately lose an election.  If they lose, it's because of liberal trickery.  Thus, when they win they get to dictate the agenda.  When they lose, they get to dictate the agenda.  They want a one-party state where they are the only political party.

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator" - George W. Bush, December 18, 2000. (Commenting on having to deal with Democrats in Congress)
 
2013-10-17 11:02:18 PM

jjorsett: Everyone involved won an election. Someone needs to stop confusing presidency with divinity.


Who did that?
 
2013-10-17 11:06:08 PM
You know what?  I'm glad Obama finally found his pimp hand.  He spent 4 1/2 years bending over backwards to try to build consensus, and what he ended up with is accusations of being a tyrant and the Antichrist.  Looks like he finally got the message, and is going to start playing hardball from now on.
 
2013-10-17 11:08:54 PM

Silverstaff: PackofJokers: Dug this out of the comments:

To those complaining about the President's message...
"I'm tired of these Democrats acting like they won the election. Somebody needs to stand up and say, "When you win the election, you pick the nominees. Until then, shut up! Just shut up! Just go away! Bury yourselves in your rat holes and don't come out until you win an election."
- Rush Limbaugh / 2005

Silly, that only applies when it's Republicans losing elections.  Remember:

When Republicans win, it's because they have a clear mandate from the people and the Party has absolute power.

When Republicans lose: It's because Liberals have rigged the election, by the Black Panthers or Muslim Brotherhood or ACORN intimidating voters, or massive voter fraud of people voting when they shouldn't be able to, or George Soros had somebody hack the Diebold voting machines.

To their own logic, they can never legitimately lose an election.  If they lose, it's because of liberal trickery.  Thus, when they win they get to dictate the agenda.  When they lose, they get to dictate the agenda.  They want a one-party state where they are the only political party.

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator. Heh heh heh, heheh" - George W. Bush, December 18, 2000. (Commenting on having to deal with Democrats in Congress)


FTFY
 
2013-10-17 11:09:38 PM
orangepunch.blog.ocregister.com

As you all know, first prize is the White House. Anybody want to see second prize? Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is you're fired.
 
2013-10-17 11:14:51 PM
A.B.C. Always be campaigning!
 
2013-10-17 11:17:50 PM
Libbummer Saddam Hussein Hitlerama is a farkin elitist and u libs have no chance in 2014
 
2013-10-17 11:18:35 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.


Yes. Yes she did.
 
2013-10-17 11:20:04 PM

sirbissel: dookdookdook: Obama's so good when he's in "Alpha male" mode.  He can smack down anyone and never seems to cross the line into petty dickishness.

I'm not sure if it's the "uppity negro" thing or something else that keeps him from just staying in that mode all the time, but when he's Wussbama(tm), we wind up with crap like the first debate from last year.

I'm still not entirely convinced the first debate wasn't intentional...


Obama has to be a chess or poker player. He's almost always looking a few moves ahead. The debate was one example, this was another.
 
2013-10-17 11:20:04 PM

what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren


I'd say she's up there, but a lot of what she is trying to do (kick the banks and Wall St in the balls) is behind the scenes and she doesn't get much attention for it. She'd need some major legislation to get passed to propel her to the forefront.
 
2013-10-17 11:21:18 PM

NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.


There's nothing to prevent it. John Quincy Adams served in the House for 17 years after his presidential term (and was a far more effective representative than he was a president).

In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton. And I'd want that simply because the GOP butthurt would be absolutely delicious.
 
2013-10-17 11:22:40 PM

valkore: blackminded: DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.

And I can't WAIT. I also hope he grows a goatee.

Kinda like this?



/Deep impact baby!


Titty sprinkles.
 
2013-10-17 11:23:12 PM
Don't kid yourself. These guys are pros.
www.trbimg.com
Obama: These freshman are totes out of control. Okay, y'all know the drill. John, you keep them occupied and running in circles. Mitch, you and Harry work up a bill for the next round. And Nancy,,why, don't you just look lovely today dear!
 
2013-10-17 11:25:43 PM

MustangFive: In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton.


Personally I'd like to see President Warren appoint Supreme Court justices Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.
 
2013-10-17 11:26:03 PM

MustangFive: In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton. And I'd want that simply because the GOP butthurt would be absolutely delicious.



Or better yet, Pelosi back as Speaker of the House, and Barack Obama as Chief Justice.
 
2013-10-17 11:26:12 PM

blackminded: DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.

And I can't WAIT. I also hope he grows a goatee.


Dark Timeline Obama?
 
2013-10-17 11:27:20 PM

OhioUGrad: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

I'd say she's up there, but a lot of what she is trying to do (kick the banks and Wall St in the balls) is behind the scenes and she doesn't get much attention for it. She'd need some major legislation to get passed to propel her to the forefront.


Warren's a no-go, no matter how much I love her. Biden doesn't ooze presidential gravitas, no matter how much I love him as Vice. Hillary's the default, establishment candidate, depending on if she runs. By the time 2016 rolls around, Booker will have molded himself as Obama 2.0 and could make a "hope and change" run at it. He's already running the exact same plays that Obama did to get elected.
 
2013-10-17 11:28:43 PM
THUMP

THUMP

THUMP
 
2013-10-17 11:29:34 PM

jjorsett: Everyone involved won an election. Someone needs to stop confusing presidency with divinity.


Whats the matter is your ass still hurting from last night shill?
 
2013-10-17 11:30:37 PM

MustangFive: NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.

There's nothing to prevent it. John Quincy Adams served in the House for 17 years after his presidential term (and was a far more effective representative than he was a president).

In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton. And I'd want that simply because the GOP butthurt would be absolutely delicious.


Barack is going to retire to the Supreme Court.
 
2013-10-17 11:31:05 PM

clambam: jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so. I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more. I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.

On the other hand, President Hillary would have gotten Congressional investigations rolling on repub transgressions during the Bush administration. Bush would be in jail right now and Cheney's head would be on a pike outside the Pentagon. When Obama was elected the entire GOP held its breath for a year waiting for the indictments to come down. When they didn't, they concluded that Obama was a wimp who could be pushed around at will, and to a certain extent they were right. I'm strongly opposed to Presidential nepotism and would have been very unhappy with Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton in the history books, but a healthy helping of vicious-biatch-in-charge circa 2009 would have solved a lot of problems over the past five years and avoided a slew of others.


Great. Y'all can vote me in.
 
2013-10-17 11:31:23 PM
I smiled throughout the whole press conference while listening on the local public radio station over the interwebz, with headphones. My co-workers (mostly republicans) wondered why I had that look... I told them when they go home, watch any network but FoxNoise and they would understand.

Can't wait for work tomorrow.
 
2013-10-17 11:32:01 PM

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: OhioUGrad: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

I'd say she's up there, but a lot of what she is trying to do (kick the banks and Wall St in the balls) is behind the scenes and she doesn't get much attention for it. She'd need some major legislation to get passed to propel her to the forefront.

Warren's a no-go, no matter how much I love her. Biden doesn't ooze presidential gravitas, no matter how much I love him as Vice. Hillary's the default, establishment candidate, depending on if she runs. By the time 2016 rolls around, Booker will have molded himself as Obama 2.0 and could make a "hope and change" run at it. He's already running the exact same plays that Obama did to get elected.


I'm not a Warren supporter but if the inbreds keep up like this much longer we could run farking Stalin and still walk away with it.
 
2013-10-17 11:32:30 PM
Here's what you should do, Republicans.

The RIGHT attitude to have:

Say, "FARK THAT GUY! I'm gonna come up with the greatest farking law that anybody has ever seen! It's gonna fix SO MANY GODDAMN PROBLEMS that it's going to make the Democrats shiat bricks! And I'll walk it right over to the farking White House and DOUBLE DOG DARE Obama to veto that farker!"

The WRONG attitude to have:

"Well, we shouldn't come up with any bills that actually makes America better, because then Obama will look good!"

But you won't do this, because you're all a bunch of worthless blubbering vaginas.
 
2013-10-17 11:32:38 PM

Kittypie070: THUMP

THUMP

THUMP


"Villains! Dissemble no more! I admit the deed! --tear up the planks! here, here! --It is the beating of his hideous heart!"
 
2013-10-17 11:32:45 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: She may have laid the egg, but once it hatched the GOP made that poor chicken their sex slave.

You better get some funny votes for that comment. Well played.


Got mine. That's pure genius.
 
2013-10-17 11:34:33 PM

Asa Phelps: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

Yes. Yes she did.


No, she didn't.

Internet chain emails alleging Obama was a Muslim began emerging in 2007. No one claims "credit" for them, of course, but the Fwd: Fwd: Fed: chain email was then as it it now a tactic used by right wingers.

In 2007 a religious based e-mag called Insightmag[dot]com published a discredited story that "Hillary's team has questions about Obama's Muslim background".

2 days later FOX and Friends highlighted the article without discrediting it. Hill and co denied the article and any connection to the story whatsoever a day later.

Hill admittedly added fuel to the fire when she made her famous "as far as I know" modifier when asked if Obama was a Muslim during a tv interview but have no doubt that that smear campaign was originated and perpetuated by the GOP.
 
2013-10-17 11:34:43 PM

ScaryBottles: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: OhioUGrad: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

I'd say she's up there, but a lot of what she is trying to do (kick the banks and Wall St in the balls) is behind the scenes and she doesn't get much attention for it. She'd need some major legislation to get passed to propel her to the forefront.

Warren's a no-go, no matter how much I love her. Biden doesn't ooze presidential gravitas, no matter how much I love him as Vice. Hillary's the default, establishment candidate, depending on if she runs. By the time 2016 rolls around, Booker will have molded himself as Obama 2.0 and could make a "hope and change" run at it. He's already running the exact same plays that Obama did to get elected.

I'm not a Warren supporter but if the inbreds keep up like this much longer we could run farking Stalin and still walk away with it.


I wouldn't get too cocky, but I am optimistic.  If the Tea Party split happens before 2016, which looks likely, the results will be interesting.  With the GOP vote split, I wouldn't be surprised if every "battleground" state ended up going to the Democrat, and maybe even one or two of the solidly red ones.
 
2013-10-17 11:36:27 PM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-17 11:36:35 PM

NeoCortex42: jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.

I hope she doesn't run, to be honest.  What I'd like is for her to hint at it up until the race starts in earnest.  Let the GOP put all their focus on her in the meantime.  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Castro, for the lulz
 
2013-10-17 11:36:48 PM

Solon Isonomia: Uh, wrong analogy - Alec Baldwin's character, "Fark You," wasn't the boss, he was a consultant sent by Mitch and Murray.

Better to say that President Obama was sent to Washington by 65,899,660 citizens,  ON A MISSION OF MERCY...


I drove here in a million dollar armored Cadillac, you drove a Hyundai.
 
2013-10-17 11:36:55 PM

legion_of_doo: Well, the Republicans did win the House.


img.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-17 11:39:14 PM

Notabunny: legion_of_doo: Well, the Republicans did win the House.

[img.photobucket.com image 470x284]


They are pushing that narrative like a motherfarker today aren't they.
 
2013-10-17 11:40:10 PM

NeoCortex42: ScaryBottles: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: OhioUGrad: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

I'd say she's up there, but a lot of what she is trying to do (kick the banks and Wall St in the balls) is behind the scenes and she doesn't get much attention for it. She'd need some major legislation to get passed to propel her to the forefront.

Warren's a no-go, no matter how much I love her. Biden doesn't ooze presidential gravitas, no matter how much I love him as Vice. Hillary's the default, establishment candidate, depending on if she runs. By the time 2016 rolls around, Booker will have molded himself as Obama 2.0 and could make a "hope and change" run at it. He's already running the exact same plays that Obama did to get elected.

I'm not a Warren supporter but if the inbreds keep up like this much longer we could run farking Stalin and still walk away with it.

I wouldn't get too cocky, but I am optimistic.  If the Tea Party split happens before 2016, which looks likely, the results will be interesting.  With the GOP vote split, I wouldn't be surprised if every "battleground" state ended up going to the Democrat, and maybe even one or two of the solidly red ones.


So says the surrender caucus.
 
2013-10-17 11:41:03 PM
Obama Taunts Freedom-Loving Americans: 'If You Don't Like a Particular Policy Win An Election'

http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/kingobamafinger. jpg

OK, voting is tyranny? Elections are oppression?

George Orwell, please come to the white courtesy phone, paging Mr George Orwell...
 
2013-10-17 11:43:34 PM

JerseyTim: Elizabeth Warren / Susan Rice 2016

The tears will be delicious.


Elizabeth Warren / Harold Ford, Jr 2016
 
2013-10-17 11:43:58 PM

nmrsnr: Kittypie070: THUMP

THUMP

THUMP


uh, yeah, Poe Slaw.


Oh FFS, you don't know the joke whose punchline had a president bopping his wang on the edge of the sink three times?

Ya know what?

Never mind, dullard.
 
2013-10-17 11:44:21 PM

NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.


I doubt it.  That has created volume upon volume of GOPBaggers saying unbelievably stupid shiat and doing even more stupid shiat.  I'd say it was the greatest troll of all times if I didn't know just how selfish her original motives were when she "accidentally" started all that insanity.  Either way, that little gem has done more to make the GOP look like frothing dumbshiats than just about anything I can think of, possibly even surpassing that whole starting wars on false pretense thing.  And they keep coming back with "Well, Hillary started it, so derp-derp" as if that makes them look any less tarded.
 
2013-10-17 11:44:36 PM

Notabunny: JerseyTim: Elizabeth Warren / Susan Rice 2016

The tears will be delicious.

Elizabeth Warren / Harold Ford, Jr 2016


Booker/Warren 2016

Then we get racism and misogyny from the Tea Party.
 
2013-10-17 11:45:25 PM

NeoCortex42: Notabunny: JerseyTim: Elizabeth Warren / Susan Rice 2016

The tears will be delicious.

Elizabeth Warren / Harold Ford, Jr 2016

Booker/Warren 2016

Then we get racism and misogyny from the Tea Party.


Well, that sounds efficient
 
2013-10-17 11:45:30 PM
That's true, Grover. You guys DID win 30 Governorships. And 26 of those Governors rejected the Medicare expansion for their states, purely out of spite. And now 26 states of our Union have a lot of poor people scratching their heads, wondering why their state insurance exchanges are so crappy. And a lot of them are probably blaming it on Obama, because they don't know how their own Governors farked them over.

So...uh...good job, I guess.
 
2013-10-17 11:49:02 PM

Kittypie070: Obama Taunts Freedom-Loving Americans: 'If You Don't Like a Particular Policy Win An Election'

http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/kingobamafinger. jpg

OK, voting is tyranny? Elections are oppression?

George Orwell, please come to the white courtesy phone, paging Mr George Orwell...


War is Peace! Ignorance is Strength! Ted Cruz is Really a Native Born American!
 
2013-10-17 11:49:18 PM

jaytkay: MustangFive: In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton.

Personally I'd like to see President Warren appoint Supreme Court justices Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.


I'm down with President Warren and Supreme Court Justice Hillary Clinton, but I think Bill would be the best House Majority Whip ever. The man can schmooze like no other and knows how to play hardball, FOAD politics.

phaseolus: Or better yet, Pelosi back as Speaker of the House, and Barack Obama as Chief Justice.

I like this combo very much.

So -
President Elizabeth Warren
Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Senate Majority Leader Biden
House Majority Whip Bill Clinton
Chief Justice Barack Obama
Associate Justice Hillary Clinton

Bonus GOP Head-assplodey Goodness:
Vice President Jerry Brown
Secretary of State Al Franken
Attorney General Andrew Cuomo
Secretary of Homeland Security Susan Collins

/Limbaugh's on-air stroke would be a wonderful thing to listen to
 
2013-10-17 11:49:37 PM

Kittypie070: Oh FFS, you don't know the joke whose punchline had a president bopping his wang on the edge of the sink three times?


I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.

Ya know what?

Never mind, dullard.


I'm okay with that.
 
2013-10-17 11:51:45 PM
"Oh I don't get a moment to spare for some Oompa Loompa down in the polls lately?  Fark you, John.  You know you got a big mouth. You pass a bill, this whole place stinks with your farts for a week - how much you just ingested. Oh, what a big man you are! "Hey, let me buy you a pack of gum. I'll show you how to chew it." The government reopens, all that comes out of your mouth is bile. How farked-up you are!
 
2013-10-17 11:52:35 PM

Notabunny: Harold Ford, Jr


ewww, no

Supporter of bank deregulation and the Iraq War. DLC. Anti-gay. Bankster.

Nope
 
2013-10-17 11:54:00 PM

Hickory-smoked: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x375]


Funniest thing I've seen today.  Thank you.
 
2013-10-17 11:55:43 PM

NeoCortex42: Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.


Chief Justice Obama.  There would be a new industry based around the bricks that would be shat.
 
2013-10-17 11:57:09 PM

NeoCortex42: Notabunny: JerseyTim: Elizabeth Warren / Susan Rice 2016

The tears will be delicious.

Elizabeth Warren / Harold Ford, Jr 2016

Booker/Warren 2016

Then we get racism and misogyny from the Tea Party.


Ooh, me like!
 
2013-10-18 12:04:21 AM

NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.


President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
The media tells us that you have received the largest number of popular votes of any president in America's history. Congratulations!
In your re-election, God has graciously granted America-though she doesn't deserve it-a reprieve from the agenda of paganism. You have been given a mandate. We the people expect your voice to be like the clear and certain sound of a trumpet. Because you seek the Lord daily, we who know the Lord will follow that kind of voice eagerly.
Don't equivocate. Put your agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ. Honor the Lord, and He will honor you.
Had your opponent won, I would have still given thanks, because the Bible says I must (I Thessalonians 5:18). It would have been hard, but because the Lord lifts up whom He will and pulls down whom He will, I would have done it. It is easy to rejoice today, because Christ has allowed you to be His servant in this nation for another presidential term. Undoubtedly, you will have opportunity to appoint many conservative judges and exercise forceful leadership with the Congress in passing legislation that is defined by biblical norm regarding the family, sexuality, sanctity of life, religious freedom, freedom of speech, and limited government. You have four years-a brief time only-to leave an imprint for righteousness upon this nation that brings with it the blessings of Almighty God.
Christ said, "If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my father honour" (John 12:26).
The student body, faculty, and staff at Bob Jones University commit ourselves to pray for you-that you would do right and honor the Savior. Pull out all the stops and make a difference. If you have weaklings around you who do not share your biblical values, shed yourself of them. Conservative Americans would love to see one president who doesn't care whether he is liked, but cares infinitely that he does right.
Best wishes.
Sincerely your friend,
Bob Jones III
President

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=7202
 
2013-10-18 12:05:21 AM

NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.


The reality is they won their elections at the exact same time as Obama. Recall how Obama lost his house majority? If you're reading chicken bones that doesn't mean "pass bit of everything that this guy dreams up," it means Americans want some moderation. Which we aren't getting and Obama: you'renothelping.jpg
 
2013-10-18 12:08:11 AM

pedobearapproved: mericans want some moderation. Which we aren't getting and Obama: you'renothelping.jpg


Obamacare is beyond moderation. The Republicans watered it down again and again and again before the vote - where they all voted nay.

We would have Medicare (which teabaggers love) for all if moderation had prevailed.
 
2013-10-18 12:09:30 AM

pedobearapproved: NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.

The reality is they won their elections at the exact same time as Obama. Recall how Obama lost his house majority? If you're reading chicken bones that doesn't mean "pass bit of everything that this guy dreams up," it means Americans want some moderation. Which we aren't getting and Obama: you'renothelping.jpg


Uh. No, what it means is that heavily GOP districts became moreso in 2012 thanks to redistricting in 2010. "Moderation"? Are you kidding me?
 
2013-10-18 12:09:42 AM

Bacontastesgood: NeoCortex42: Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.

Chief Justice Obama.  There would be a new industry based around the bricks that would be shat.


Is it weird that I know you're jerking off as you say that.
 
2013-10-18 12:10:15 AM

HeartBurnKid: You know what?  I'm glad Obama finally found his pimp hand.  He spent 4 1/2 years bending over backwards to try to build consensus, and what he ended up with is accusations of being a tyrant and the Antichrist.  Looks like he finally got the message, and is going to start playing hardball from now on.


Realistically, he has another year or 18 months. After that, he's lame duck and the dog and pony show has moved along to the next big thing. I hope he uses the time wisely, and with tremendous force.
 
2013-10-18 12:12:29 AM

pedobearapproved: Americans want some moderation.


Then Americans had better stop voting for dangerous, radical lunatics like the Teatards or the marginally saner GOPers who shiat their pants at the thought of being primaried by the Teatards..
 
2013-10-18 12:12:39 AM

Hickory-smoked: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x375]


www.he-manreviewed.com
 
2013-10-18 12:20:21 AM
FTFA: Whether congressional Republicans could resolve their differences with Obama

img1.fark.net

imageshack.us
 
2013-10-18 12:20:33 AM
Someone should re-enact the "what?/tasty burger" scene from Pulp Fiction with Obama playing Jules and the GOP leaders playing their marks.

Boehner, "Wwwwhat?"
 
2013-10-18 12:20:45 AM

NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.


John Quincy Adams was President from 1825 to 1829.

Then he returned to Congress from 1830 to 1848.

So basically yes.

Andrew Johnson (the Clinton of his day) also returned to serve in the Senate after his presidency.
 
2013-10-18 12:24:39 AM

DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.


I hope so. I'm really looking forward to him being able to finally vent his spleen.

/Do the kids still say that? "Vent your spleen?"
 
2013-10-18 12:26:51 AM
great thread title...
 
2013-10-18 12:31:12 AM

MustangFive: NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.

There's nothing to prevent it. John Quincy Adams served in the House for 17 years after his presidential term (and was a far more effective representative than he was a president).

In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton. And I'd want that simply because the GOP butthurt would be absolutely delicious.


Taft was Chief Justice after his term (and after losing 59 pounds). I think that would be a much better position for Obama, seeing as how he's a former Constitutional Law professor and all.
 
2013-10-18 12:31:47 AM

The Dog Ate My Homework: I wish he had dropped the mic on the floor after his press conference.


Or this
i299.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-18 12:32:59 AM
He's not a dick boss, he's just a democrat that won't go into the fetal position when confronted. You people have no experience with that.
 
2013-10-18 12:33:31 AM

BKITU: "I'm President of the United States! What are you? You see pal, that's who I am, and you're nothing. Nice guy? I don't give a sh*t. Good Tea Party Member? F*ck you! Go home and play with your Hoverround. You wanna work here? Legislate! You think this is abuse? You think this is abuse, you c*cksucker? You can't take this, how can you take the abuse you get in a committee meeting? You don't like it, leave. I can go out there tonight with the materials you've got and make an amendment expanding SNAP funding to fetuses. Tonight! In two hours! Can you? Can YOU? Go and do likewise."



this....

http://s167.photobucket.com/user/XxU2girlyxX/media/gifs/tumblr_lg9q1 bU 1031qcypet.gif.html

and this..

media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-18 12:34:54 AM

pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?


Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?
 
2013-10-18 12:43:10 AM

Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?


Hope and change much?

/both sides suck
 
2013-10-18 12:44:35 AM

pedobearapproved: Is it weird that I know you're jerking off as you say that.


Oh, look... a "conservative" imagining other men masturbating. Shocker!
 
2013-10-18 12:45:25 AM

pedobearapproved: The reality is they won their elections at the exact same time as Obama. Recall how Obama lost his house majority? If you're reading chicken bones that doesn't mean "pass bit of everything that this guy dreams up," it means Americans want some moderation. Which we aren't getting and Obama: you'renothelping.jpg


In the last national election House Republicans got 1.4 million less votes than their Democratic challengers.
 
2013-10-18 12:50:45 AM

pedobearapproved: . Which we aren't getting and Obama: you'renothelping.jpg


You're overlooking the fact that apparently quite a few Republican members of the House want nothing to do with the crazy brigade, but can't really get anything done since it appears in the House if you ain't crazy they don't want to hear from you, political party be damned.
 
2013-10-18 12:52:07 AM

legion_of_doo: Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?

Hope and change much?

/both sides suck


You forgot the vote Republican at the end.
 
2013-10-18 01:00:49 AM

Fuggin Bizzy: DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.

I hope so. I'm really looking forward to him being able to finally vent his spleen.

/Do the kids still say that? "Vent your spleen?"


I'd like to start again. It's a good phrase.
 
2013-10-18 01:02:06 AM

legion_of_doo: Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?

Hope and change much?

/both sides suck


'Both sides suck', the call of mental midgets everywhere.

Anyway, hearing his comments earlier, and reading them in the thread, they really seem Rick Romero-ish to me.  He's explaining things that he really shouldn't HAVE to explain, except that the GOP obviously  does NOT know this stuff.

Course, if the GOP clearly and accurately described what they wanted to do, no one would vote for them.
 
2013-10-18 01:08:46 AM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-18 01:13:11 AM

Alphax: legion_of_doo: Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?

Hope and change much?

/both sides suck

'Both sides suck', the call of mental midgets everywhere.

Anyway, hearing his comments earlier, and reading them in the thread, they really seem Rick Romero-ish to me.  He's explaining things that he really shouldn't HAVE to explain, except that the GOP obviously  does NOT know this stuff.

Course, if the GOP clearly and accurately described what they wanted to do, no one would vote for them.


The average American simply doesn't know how the government works, nor how legislation is made, nor the actual functions of any of the 3 branches. They remember fuzzy bits of info from high school, but it's been so muddled up with too much American Idol, Survivor and Dancing With The Stars that they can't remember who gets immunity from being voted off the senate floor if Len Goodman gives a "10" to a bill that was originally performed by Rascal Flatts.
 
2013-10-18 01:16:44 AM

Fuggin Bizzy: DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.

I hope so. I'm really looking forward to him being able to finally vent his spleen.

/Do the kids still say that? "Vent your spleen?"


The cool ones do.

*adjust onion-belt*
 
2013-10-18 01:17:32 AM

Hickory-smoked: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x375]

www.lushquotes.com

 
2013-10-18 01:36:35 AM
I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.
 
2013-10-18 01:37:12 AM

enry: sirbissel: dookdookdook: Obama's so good when he's in "Alpha male" mode.  He can smack down anyone and never seems to cross the line into petty dickishness.

I'm not sure if it's the "uppity negro" thing or something else that keeps him from just staying in that mode all the time, but when he's Wussbama(tm), we wind up with crap like the first debate from last year.

I'm still not entirely convinced the first debate wasn't intentional...

Obama has to be a chess or poker player. He's almost always looking a few moves ahead. The debate was one example, this was another.


Think about it.  What's are the two lines we remember from all of the debates put together?

Mostly "proceed" followed by a little of "bayonets"

NOTHING from the first debate, where Romney won, is remembered.
 
2013-10-18 01:41:41 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


img.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-18 01:42:22 AM
It doesn't matter.

Too many Americans still view Obama as a "lesser of two evils" choice when they should know damn well there is a huge gulf between Democratic and Republican party ideology. By now they should.

Oh but Obama doesn't do enough/does too much and both sides of Congress are playing political theater while trillions are being wasted. I'd better think about voting Republican to spite the Democrats or write in Ron/Rand Paul to really make a huge point about it all.
 
2013-10-18 01:42:48 AM

Atillathepun: NOTHING from the first debate, where Romney won, is remembered.


I do kinda remember Romney saying he'd strangle Big Bird personally and have his private chef prepare the remains under glass with an orange glaze and an apple in his beak.

/That's paraphrased, of course, my memory of that first debate is somewhat muddy because vodak
 
2013-10-18 01:44:02 AM
Obama isn't going to be chief justice. Roberts is only 58. Unless something odd happens, he will be chief justice for another twenty years. That was the main point in Bush picking him, that he was relatively young. Obama could potentially be an associate justice. It's an interesting question of if he'd want the job. Unlike Bill Clinton who has gone on to work on projects around the globe, Obama is much less of a people person and more of a cerebral bookworm. It'd be a good match for him but would also make him stuck in DC for most of the rest of his life.
 
2013-10-18 01:46:33 AM

Dimensio: The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership.


lolwut
 
2013-10-18 01:47:16 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


i1282.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-18 01:47:17 AM
i40.tinypic.com
 
2013-10-18 01:50:20 AM

Dimensio: This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


Jesus Christ my sides.
 
2013-10-18 01:50:46 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


False premise.. well, the biggest one.. districts are not people.  And the ones that are mostly empty land tend to pick antisocial congressmen, for some reason.
 
2013-10-18 01:55:03 AM

Alphax: . districts are not people.  And the ones that are mostly empty land tend to pick antisocial congressmen, for some reason.


I can attest to this. In WA in these kind of districts they are old-skool right wingers who are trying to push the whole bootstrappy anti-government stance while the reality is they receive buttloads in federal agricultural subsidies and other goodies that amount to a lot more $$$ than than the chickenfeed it would take to fund Obamacare.
 
2013-10-18 01:57:21 AM
I see President Obama and Sen. Reid departing the peaceful town of Rock Ridge, getting into their limo and riding off into the sunset as a triumphal orchestra plays.
 
2013-10-18 01:57:22 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


Well done sir.  10/10
 
2013-10-18 02:01:43 AM

nmrsnr: NeoCortex42: Don't forget, first Native American president, too.

Oh god, the racist jokes they will attempt to make at her expense that will backfire because it'll make them look (understandably) racist. I can just see them now.


How?

/you're right, that was easy
 
2013-10-18 02:02:32 AM

legion_of_doo: Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?

Hope and change much?

/both sides suck


Medicare and Democrats standing up to GOP-holes?  Looks like big change to me.  I have hope that the GOP will one day be a faint memory of bad times.  So yeah, thanks!
 
2013-10-18 02:03:10 AM

sugardave: legion_of_doo: Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?

Hope and change much?

/both sides suck

Medicare Obamacare and Democrats standing up to GOP-holes?  Looks like big change to me.  I have hope that the GOP will one day be a faint memory of bad times.  So yeah, thanks!


Damn, it's smoky in here.
 
2013-10-18 02:03:43 AM
I hope he turns to Teddy Roosevelt's 'Bully Pulpit' for the rest of his term

How about challenging the GOP - You've tried 40 times to repeal ACA, and failed every time

Instead of wasting time, come up with an alternative way to make sure that everyone gets health care

let's hear your positive suggestions

(or don't you care about the 47%?)
 
2013-10-18 02:04:28 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


Is that the base for which I should calibrate my smarmometer and sarcasmometer?
 
2013-10-18 02:04:32 AM

NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.


I believe that one president may have been elected to the senate afterwards.  There is no rule against it.
 
2013-10-18 02:10:37 AM

flondrix: NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.

I believe that one president may have been elected to the senate afterwards.  There is no rule against it.


Several, actually.
 
2013-10-18 02:10:40 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


And look at that Obama guy eatin' those crackers!
 
2013-10-18 02:10:58 AM

Huck And Molly Ziegler: I see President Obama and Sen. Reid departing the peaceful town of Rock Ridge, getting into their limo and riding off into the sunset as a triumphal orchestra plays.


i.telegraph.co.uk

He rode a blazing saddle, he wore a shining star
His job to offer battle to bad men near and far
He conquered fear and he conquered hate
He turned dark night into day
He made his blazing saddle a torch to light the way
(Ya! <whipcrack>)
 
2013-10-18 02:11:16 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


7/10. Very strong effort but you gave it away too early.
 
2013-10-18 02:12:34 AM
Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.
 
2013-10-18 02:12:46 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


I got a genuine kick out of what you did there. Great buildup!

Anyway, I always enjoy seeing Obama call out bullshiat for what it is, but I never think it will have much of a lasting impact.

I've been hearing republicans call Obama the worst president ever since before he was even elected, and the argument hasn't changed much since then. Their echo-chamber appeals to their base, and unfortunately, their base is what's been holding Washington hostage throughout all of these manufactured crises. I don't agree with the vast majority of it, but they're certainly unified in their message.

I wouldn't call Democratic leadership disjointed, but I'd certainly welcome a more unified, thoughtful approach from their messaging efforts. The Democratic base will always be appeased- but the true independents will resonate with, and ultimately benefit from a more cohesive communications approach to the public.
 
2013-10-18 02:21:56 AM

karmaceutical: Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.


That's the RW claim and it is, of course, a lie.
 
2013-10-18 02:26:37 AM

quatchi: karmaceutical: Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.

That's the RW claim and it is, of course, a lie.


Republicans wouldn't have even noticed he was black if it wasn't for Hillary.

/thanks Obama!
 
2013-10-18 02:34:04 AM

quatchi: karmaceutical: Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.

That's the RW claim and it is, of course, a lie.


yep
 
2013-10-18 02:34:44 AM

Chaide: quatchi: karmaceutical: Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.

That's the RW claim and it is, of course, a lie.

Republicans wouldn't have even noticed he was black if it wasn't for Hillary.

/thanks Obama!


not...
 
2013-10-18 02:40:02 AM

thomas666: Chaide: quatchi: karmaceutical: Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.

That's the RW claim and it is, of course, a lie.

Republicans wouldn't have even noticed he was black if it wasn't for Hillary.

/thanks Obama!

not...


Relax, it was sarcasm.
 
2013-10-18 03:02:25 AM

MustangFive: NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.

There's nothing to prevent it. John Quincy Adams served in the House for 17 years after his presidential term (and was a far more effective representative than he was a president).

In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton. And I'd want that simply because the GOP butthurt would be absolutely delicious.


www.supremecourthistory.org

Taft, who served as an effective Supreme Court Chief Justice after he was President.

/of course, everybody else just remembers the stupid fat jokes
 
2013-10-18 03:06:37 AM

blue_2501: Taft, who served as an effective Supreme Court Chief Justice after he was President.


skreened.com
 
2013-10-18 03:10:14 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


For some reason I read that entirely in Newt Gingrich's voice.

And now I need a shower.
 
2013-10-18 03:12:21 AM

NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.


Hey, hey, that's my schtick:

When Republicans win, it's the will of the people. When they lose, it's a Soros-funded, ACORN-backed plot to subvert the will of the people.
 
2013-10-18 03:18:51 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


Someday I am going to host an underground World Trolling Championships and you just got yourself an invitation
 
2013-10-18 03:32:33 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


i.imgur.com
/please don't hit me because naughty word
 
2013-10-18 03:42:12 AM
Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Duckworth in 2016.. that'd be epic..
 
2013-10-18 04:00:37 AM

SnakeLee: Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.

Someday I am going to host an underground World Trolling Championships and you just got yourself an invitation


I typically attempt to include a reference to "potato" in such postings, but I was unable to conceive of a relevant use of the word.
 
2013-10-18 04:04:26 AM

pedobearapproved: Bacontastesgood: NeoCortex42: Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.

Chief Justice Obama.  There would be a new industry based around the bricks that would be shat.

Is it weird that I know you're jerking off as you say that.


That is weird actually. What exactly have you been up to?
 
2013-10-18 04:08:13 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


Yeah sure. Fair and square even if they did get the minority of the votes. Nothing dodgy there at all, right?
 
2013-10-18 04:08:24 AM

iq_in_binary: Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.

Is that the base for which I should calibrate my smarmometer and sarcasmometer?


That is nearing Pocket Ninja in its quality and eruditeness. Eruditiouness. Erudition. OK, the last one is a word.
 
2013-10-18 04:12:59 AM
Dimeniso didn't fool me.
 
2013-10-18 04:14:39 AM

Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.


Ooh, as a fan of subtlety and satire I gotta tell ya, that some quality work, right there.
 
2013-10-18 04:18:30 AM

log_jammin: Dimeniso didn't fool me.


I had hoped the actual intent of my posting to be obvious.

/Perhaps I should have reworked it until I could insert a "potato" reference.
 
2013-10-18 04:19:16 AM

Gyrfalcon: iq_in_binary: Dimensio: I observe that the "echo chamber" effect of Fark is quite prevalent in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that the House members all won their own elections, fairly, in their evenly and fairly established Congressional districts. The majority of those members are Republicans, meaning that the majority of the nation's districts prefers Republican leadership. This means that the American people as a whole wish for the Democratic President to compromise his beliefs with the Republican leadership in the House by coming over to their position and enacting their entire policy agenda, yet he has consistently refused to do this, and at every turn he has arrogantly advocated that some of his policy items be enacted in addition to Republican agenda positions.

Is that the base for which I should calibrate my smarmometer and sarcasmometer?

That is nearing Pocket Ninja in its quality and eruditeness. Eruditiouness. Erudition. OK, the last one is a word.


Who, me?

Dimmy over there was the one who laid the troll egg.
 
2013-10-18 04:21:59 AM

Dimensio: I had hoped the actual intent of my posting to be obvious.


Not in this day and age.
 
2013-10-18 04:25:06 AM

kg2095: Yeah sure. Fair and square even if they did get the minority of the votes. Nothing dodgy there at all, right?


Even if we totally lay aside all the gerrymandering and voter suppression tactics, their point is still silly - the House still doesn't get to make law on their own. If they want to change the law without President Obama, they need 2/3 of the House and Senate - in other words, go win an election in a ridiculous, virtually impossible at this point landslide, assholes.
 
2013-10-18 04:49:55 AM

flondrix: Huck And Molly Ziegler: I see President Obama and Sen. Reid departing the peaceful town of Rock Ridge, getting into their limo and riding off into the sunset as a triumphal orchestra plays.

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x415]

He rode a blazing saddle, he wore a shining star
His job to offer battle to bad men near and far
He conquered fear and he conquered hate
He turned dark night into day
He made his blazing saddle a torch to light the way
(Ya! <whipcrack>)


"No dash gangit goll durnit! I said the President is a n-BONG!"
 
2013-10-18 04:50:03 AM

Dimensio: log_jammin: Dimeniso didn't fool me.

I had hoped the actual intent of my posting to be obvious.

/Perhaps I should have reworked it until I could insert a "potato"




Don't change a thing... Being subtle, satire and trollish worked really well.
 
2013-10-18 05:06:13 AM
I think the turning point for President Obama was how the GOP attempted to throw him under the bus rather than have his back when he was dealing with Syria. He realized there was no working with them or compromises to be made by them no matter how far he goes on his half of the deal. He realized it wasn't political posturing but hate on a personal level. So he turned the tables on them and decided to be a dick back to them. In the end, the majority of Americans finally saw the Tea Party thugs for what they are and President Obama won.
 
2013-10-18 05:08:02 AM
/looks at 2010 results

Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

Elections have consequences when liberals win them in the mind of Obama.
 
2013-10-18 05:08:29 AM

heavymetal: I think the turning point for President Obama was how the GOP attempted to throw him under the bus rather than have his back when he was dealing with Syria. He realized there was no working with them or compromises to be made by them no matter how far he goes on his half of the deal. He realized it wasn't political posturing but hate on a personal level. So he turned the tables on them and decided to be a dick back to them. In the end, the majority of Americans finally saw the Tea Party thugs for what they are and President Obama won.


I think it might have been the Fiscal Cliff fight... but regardless of the trigger, I think we agree on the result.
 
2013-10-18 05:09:25 AM

randomjsa: /looks at 2010 results

Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

Elections have consequences when liberals win them in the mind of Obama.


I don't recall liberals shutting down the government or shutting down default when they couldn't enact their primary policy goal in 2005.
 
2013-10-18 05:10:02 AM

Rhino_man: randomjsa: /looks at 2010 results

Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

Elections have consequences when liberals win them in the mind of Obama.

I don't recall liberals shutting down the government or shutting down threateningdefault when they couldn't enact their primary policy goal in 2005.


Preview is my friend.
 
2013-10-18 05:15:05 AM
How's that n***erdick taste, Republicans? Don't forget to work the shaft and muck out the taint.
 
2013-10-18 05:17:37 AM

heavymetal: I think the turning point for President Obama was how the GOP attempted to throw him under the bus rather than have his back when he was dealing with Syria. He realized there was no working with them or compromises to be made by them no matter how far he goes on his half of the deal. He realized it wasn't political posturing but hate on a personal level. So he turned the tables on them and decided to be a dick back to them. In the end, the majority of Americans finally saw the Tea Party thugs for what they are and President Obama won.


not being up for reelection helped a lot.
 
2013-10-18 05:18:13 AM

JesusJuice: How's that n***erdick taste, Republicans? Don't forget to work the shaft and muck out the taint.


wow....
 
2013-10-18 05:24:17 AM

log_jammin: JesusJuice: How's that n***erdick taste, Republicans? Don't forget to work the shaft and muck out the taint.

wow....


Yeah.  I don't even...


www.troll.me
 
2013-10-18 05:27:40 AM
I've had JesusJuice on ignore for a while, but IIRC, he seemed to be a troll in the style of preaching the Gospel of Supply Side Jesus.
 
2013-10-18 05:30:24 AM

Rhino_man: log_jammin: JesusJuice: How's that n***erdick taste, Republicans? Don't forget to work the shaft and muck out the taint.

wow....

Yeah.  I don't even...

[www.troll.me image 554x376]


*blink*

Okay, yeah, I'm going to bed now.

Too much whargaarble is just too much.
 
2013-10-18 05:30:24 AM
I'm sure it's just a difference of opinion is all....
 
2013-10-18 05:32:13 AM

Lando Lincoln: That's true, Grover. You guys DID win 30 Governorships. And 26 of those Governors rejected the Medicare expansion for their states, purely out of spite. And now 26 states of our Union have a lot of poor people scratching their heads, wondering why their state insurance exchanges are so crappy. And a lot of them are probably blaming it on Obama, because they don't know how their own Governors farked them over.

So...uh...good job, I guess.


It's not just that. Just as a for-instance, our Republican governor is so genuinely awful that he's pretty much locked Republicans out of the Governorship for a GENERATION. Every single Republican who runs after him is going to have to run against him. We're going to go back to rocking back and forth from two-term Democrats to two-term Independents again.
 
2013-10-18 05:35:09 AM

NeoCortex42: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious

Don't forget, first Native American president, too.


The Super Chief
 
2013-10-18 05:51:31 AM

Shostie: A
B
L

ALWAYS

BE

LEGISLATING


I chuckled.
 
2013-10-18 06:17:06 AM

GardenWeasel: what_now: p>Obama urged Congress to "stop focusing on the lobbyists and the bloggers, the talking heads on radio and the professional activists who profit from conflict" --

Damn.

[www.geeklegacy.com image 550x315]


You know, I was waiting for someone to post Vir's excellent rant at Morden in one of the threads on the ongoing "negotiations".  A bit late, but f%$# it, why not:

I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would gaze up into your lifeless eyes and wave, like this.

upload.wikimedia.org

Can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden McConnell?
 
2013-10-18 06:47:15 AM
They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.
 
2013-10-18 06:51:28 AM
The GOP farked themselves in this whole debacle... If their asses are sore, they have no one to blame but themselves.

They gave the most extreme elements in their party the keys to the bus, refused to take them away and now they're all scratching their heads trying to figure out how the bus got run into a ditch.

The GOP is nothing but a gaggle of proudly ignorant ideologues.
 
2013-10-18 06:55:10 AM

doyner: DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.

What the hell can he say that isn't already blatantly obvious?

And it'll only get worse.  From Carter hate, to the Clinton impeachment, to seekrit muslin, this is the new normal.  EVERY Democrat president will go through this for the foreseeable future.


This is why if they have a great female candidate for President at some point in the near future, the Democrats would really benefit long term if they could get her elected President - you just know they will pile on the misogyny so thick for years they GOP couldn't fail to permanently alienate millions of women
 
2013-10-18 07:00:03 AM

Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.


They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.
 
2013-10-18 07:02:26 AM
peasandcarrots:
It's not just that. Just as a for-instance, our Republican governor is so genuinely awful that he's pretty much locked Republicans out of the Governorship for a GENERATION. Every single Republican who runs after him is going to have to run against him. We're going to go back to rocking back and forth from two-term Democrats to two-term Independents again.

And at the federal level, running complete nuts lost them at least three Senate seats in 2010. They doubled down on the derp in 2012, and it cost them at least two more that they ought to have won. They'll probably run more unelectable candidates in 2014, which will allow the Democrats to keep the Senate until 2016, which should be a bloodbath given the seats being defenderd. And they've turned the House -- which, structurally, should be theirs for a decade -- into a possible contest in the next cycle.

All they had to do after Obama was elected for the first time: oppose, to the extent that the minority party always opposes, and wait for the correction to the 2008 landslide that was always going to happen, given that the economy was always going to continue sucking short-term. But nope, they had to go full retard, and now they have at least eight years of a Democratic president, potentially a decade or more of Democratic Senate control, a bloody civil war and a bunch of purple states that likely won't be electing Republican governors for many years to come.

And such is the irony of Obama's tenure, that a guy who was elected with the genuine intention of getting shiat done even if it meant major concessions in the spirit of bipartisanship may be on his way to being remembered as the president who crushed his opponents beneath his heel, simply by existing.
 
2013-10-18 07:15:08 AM

DamnYankees: At some point he's gonna write one hell of a post-Presidency memoir describing these nutjobs.


I would read the HELL out of that book.
 
2013-10-18 07:19:24 AM

Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.


You don't seem to understand that 78 representatives from 30 states signed a letter to Boner insisting that he go along with their cunning plan. He did, even though the house had the votes to pass the clean CR and debt ceiling without them. Boner refused to schedule a vote because he was using the Hastert Rule, which says that the (R) rethuglickers have to have a majority of their people on board with any given piece of legislation in order to bring it to a vote - the "majority of a majority" rule.
He did it until things started to explode, then just ignored it and allowed a vote, which passed the bills hastily at the very last moment.

This is all on Boner's head.
 
2013-10-18 07:33:54 AM

what_now:  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren


Bout time for a teddy Roosevelt corporate monopoly busting president...
 
2013-10-18 07:37:19 AM

Virulency: what_now:  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

Bout time for a teddy Roosevelt corporate monopoly busting president...


I'd prefer to keep her on the Senate Banking Committee.  It's where she can do the most good.
 
2013-10-18 07:38:45 AM

what_now: NeoCortex42: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious

Don't forget, first Native American president, too.

And an actual liberal.


Who cares if they call her a super liberal; she actually is (by today's standards).  It only perturbs me that they use that language with Obama because he's centrist if not center-right.
 
2013-10-18 07:40:05 AM

Alphax: Virulency: what_now:  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

Bout time for a teddy Roosevelt corporate monopoly busting president...

I'd prefer to keep her on the Senate Banking Committee.  It's where she can do the most good.


OK, how about Russ Feingold?


/I read "While America Sleeps" a few months back.
 
2013-10-18 07:41:26 AM

Yes please: Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions.


or you don't understand how laws are passed and repealed.
 
2013-10-18 07:42:58 AM

EyeballKid: Alphax: Virulency: what_now:  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

Bout time for a teddy Roosevelt corporate monopoly busting president...

I'd prefer to keep her on the Senate Banking Committee.  It's where she can do the most good.

OK, how about Russ Feingold?


/I read "While America Sleeps" a few months back.


Since he's not in office now, sure.
 
2013-10-18 07:52:11 AM
He's just echoing what the head of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh, said a few years back when liberals complained about Bush the Lesser.

Win some elections, until then SHUT UP!
 
2013-10-18 07:53:54 AM

Czechzican: Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Duckworth in 2016.. that'd be epic..


It would be fun to see the Republican outrage against Duckworth ("She never apologized to America for getting her legs blown off, so this is just another reason why women shouldn't be in the military. Oh, and gays, too, for good measure").

Granted, we already saw a bit of this with Joe Walsh: "God, all she talks about is her military service. True Heroes...that's the last thing in the world that they want to talk about."
 
2013-10-18 08:00:21 AM

Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.



Your analogy is a loaded statement.
The President is a dictator or he is stupid to understand constitutional procedure.

Everyone seems to gloss over the procedural maneuver the Republicans used to bring the government to a halt.

Looked like the Republicans unionized and stopped worked until their demands were met.
I know several companies in the south that would shutter a plant, fire all employees and start a rehiring than give in to those tactics but that's a parliamentary system. That's a mixed metaphor.

So the GOP for unions and striking huh?
 
2013-10-18 08:08:16 AM
I seem to recall kinda vaguely some guy named...uh....Greg or George or Walker or was that Wanker, possibly joking about himself being some sorta non-elected type of head of state, or whatever, because heh heh heh it would make his job easier as long as it was him.

Can anyone fill me in on specific details, or am I just hallucinating?
 
2013-10-18 08:13:24 AM

Kittypie070: I seem to recall kinda vaguely some guy named...uh....Greg or George or Walker or was that Wanker, possibly joking about himself being some sorta non-elected type of head of state, or whatever, because heh heh heh it would make his job easier as long as it was him.

Can anyone fill me in on specific details, or am I just hallucinating?


None of the libertarians on Fark know this enigmatic, nameless character of whom you speak. Maybe, they propose, he only existed in our imagination.
 
2013-10-18 08:14:28 AM
Okay folks, you have until Monday to get this celebration out of your systems, then we need to focus.  The nation is still redistricted all to hell and back, the teabaggers are TALKING about "just not voting, in protest" but they specialize in talking big before marching to the nearest authoritarian's orders.

Come January this shiatstorm rolls in again.  Ted Cruz is still in office, the Republicans haven't allowed a budget to pass in 5 years, and the media is still droning "BSABSVR, BSABSVR, BSABSVR," like cultists on acid.
 
2013-10-18 08:15:31 AM

EyeballKid: Kittypie070: I seem to recall kinda vaguely some guy named...uh....Greg or George or Walker or was that Wanker, possibly joking about himself being some sorta non-elected type of head of state, or whatever, because heh heh heh it would make his job easier as long as it was him.

Can anyone fill me in on specific details, or am I just hallucinating?

None of the libertarians on Fark know this enigmatic, nameless character of whom you speak. Maybe, they propose, he only existed in our imagination.


I have no idea who you're talking about. Besides, he was a RINO and no one supported him, and he was the best president of the last 20 years so shut your mouth.
 
2013-10-18 08:16:34 AM

randomjsa: /looks at 2010 results

Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

Elections have consequences when liberals win them in the mind of Obama.


You're correct.  They complained, and loudly.  Then, after they had used the system to compromise on what they could and cast a no vote where they wanted to, they let the policy stand.  They did not attempt to shut down the government in order to defund the war in Iraq.
 
2013-10-18 08:18:12 AM

NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.

 
2013-10-18 08:22:20 AM

Bocasio: NeoCortex42: Precious Roy's Horse Dividers: what_now: I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren

If the first female president follows the first black president, the exploding heads will be oh so delicious

Don't forget, first Native American president, too.

The Super Chief


She's a Super Chief, Super Chief, she super-chiefy...
 
2013-10-18 08:23:23 AM

Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.


So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.
 
2013-10-18 08:31:33 AM

Yes please: Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.

So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.


You're intentionally conflating "shutting down everything" with "normal legislative process". They can do as much of the latter as they want, be as vocal as they want. But they can't just oppose everything and shut the government down.

Those are the only limits being proposed. Nobody is trying to disempower the minority.
 
2013-10-18 08:32:11 AM
ABC

ALWAYS

BE

...Congressing?
 
2013-10-18 08:34:33 AM

randomjsa: Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"


No, the 2004 election resulted in me saying "Why did these paperless voting machines in Ohio report more votes for Bush than there were people in the precinct?  Could it have something to do with the president of Diebold publicaly promising to deliver Ohio to president Bush?"
 
2013-10-18 08:40:39 AM

LasersHurt: Yes please: Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.

So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.

You're intentionally conflating "shutting down everything" with "normal legislative process". They can do as much of the latter as they want, be as vocal as they want. But they can't just oppose everything and shut the government down.

Those are the only limits being proposed. Nobody is trying to disempower the minority.


I'm not conflating. I actually agree with you in general, up until your last sentence. But in his words yesterday Obama seems to be explicitly saying that.
 
2013-10-18 08:42:30 AM

NeoCortex42: doyner: nmrsnr: RedPhoenix122: "Can we trust her not to gamble away our future?"

That's tame. I'm thinking photoshop and feathered headdresses, and for the more esoteric, photoshop and Custer's Revenge references. But maybe I'm just a terrible person.

"We have reservations"

"Why does she insist on destroying the TP?"
"She says she's going to ______.  I have one question: How?"


Blanket statements.
 
2013-10-18 08:42:45 AM

TheBigJerk: Okay folks, you have until Monday to get this celebration out of your systems, then we need to focus.  The nation is still redistricted all to hell and back, the teabaggers are TALKING about "just not voting, in protest" but they specialize in talking big before marching to the nearest authoritarian's orders.

Come January this shiatstorm rolls in again.  Ted Cruz is still in office, the Republicans haven't allowed a budget to pass in 5 years, and the media is still droning "BSABSVR, BSABSVR, BSABSVR," like cultists on acid.


Dude...you think I'm gonna forget?

I'll be keeping an eye on the ^VIX come January anyhow so the regular media doesn't farking Hitler me again.

^VIX reading at 20 and under = good, approaching 30 = not good, over 30 = EVERYBODY RHUMBAAAAAAAA.

I just need to know specifics on what to do other than this.
 
2013-10-18 08:46:09 AM

flondrix: randomjsa: Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

No, the 2004 election resulted in me saying "Why did these paperless voting machines in Ohio report more votes for Bush than there were people in the precinct?  Could it have something to do with the president of Diebold publicaly promising to deliver Ohio to president Bush?"


Crazy, 'cos it had me saying, "Wait a minute. Isn't Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell also co-chairman of the Bush Cheney campaign? Didn't he throw out a lot of votes? How is that legal in any allegedly democratic republic?"
 
2013-10-18 08:47:22 AM
The mishigoss in Washington apparently cost the country $24 billion. My personal loss comes to $80, which is not so much when you think about it. If you are a Tea Party/Republican/supporter of the shutdown, I'd appreciate reimbursement. Check or money order is fine. I also accept PayPal.
 
2013-10-18 08:47:28 AM
So he was blindsided?
 
2013-10-18 08:52:59 AM

Yes please: LasersHurt: Yes please: Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.

So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.

You're intentionally conflating "shutting down everything" with "normal legislative process". They can do as much of the latter as they want, be as vocal as they want. But they can't just oppose everything and shut the government down.

Those are the only limits being proposed. Nobody is trying to disempower the minority.

I'm not conflating. I actually agree with you in general, up until your last sentence. But in his words yesterday Obama seems to be explicitly saying that.


How? The actual context he said them in is about the shutdown. It seems like you have to ignore the context, then extrapolate what you think that means.
 
2013-10-18 08:57:43 AM

NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.


Andrew Johnson, so far, was the first and only ex-president to serve in the Senate. JQA was the first and only for the House.

I'm tempted to start a White House Petition to urge the president to run for Senate again. Or maybe the House, and then lean on the next president to nominate him to Justice.

Government Trifecta: The sound you just heard was every red state imploding.
 
2013-10-18 08:59:00 AM
i don't remember ed harris and jack lemon threatening to burn down the office if they didn't get the new leads.
 
2013-10-18 09:00:25 AM
media.screened.com

it takes brass balls to legislate
 
2013-10-18 09:01:02 AM

LasersHurt: Yes please: LasersHurt: Yes please: Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.

So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.

You're intentionally conflating "shutting down everything" with "normal legislative process". They can do as much of the latter as they want, be as vocal as they want. But they can't just oppose everything and shut the government down.

Those are the only limits being proposed. Nobody is trying to disempower the minority.

I'm not conflating. I actually agree with you in general, up until your last sentence. But in his words yesterday Obama seems to be explicitly saying that.

How? The actual context he said them in is about the shutdown. It seems like you have to ignore the context, then extrapolate what you think that means.


Not to mention, this is specifically about setting goals that cannot be reasonably obtained and then shutting down the government when you can't obtain them.  They were NEVER going to dismantle the ACA.  It just was not going to happen.  They could have set their sights on other items, pushing for locking in the sequestration level spending (not just for the CR, but for good), or potentially making tweaks to the ACA that would have had bipartisan support (like repealing the medical device tax, which I disagree with, but you could get Dems on board for that).

Instead they chose to tilt at windmills and bring this nation, and the entire world economy, to the brink of disaster...for nothing.  Just to satisfy their rabid base.

The word "compromise" is not the same as "surrender".  The teabaggers were unwilling to compromise, and so they got stuffed, hard, by everyone else, though only at the last minute.  Obama's words are a warning to them - you overreached this time, learn your damned lesson and work WITH the rest of Congress (including your own god damned party) instead of against them.
 
2013-10-18 09:01:52 AM

LasersHurt: Yes please: LasersHurt: Yes please: Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.

So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.

You're intentionally conflating "shutting down everything" with "normal legislative process". They can do as much of the latter as they want, be as vocal as they want. But they can't just oppose everything and shut the government down.

Those are the only limits being proposed. Nobody is trying to disempower the minority.

I'm not conflating. I actually agree with you in general, up until your last sentence. But in his words yesterday Obama seems to be explicitly saying that.

How? The actual context he said them in is about the shutdown. It seems like you have to ignore the context, then extrapolate what you think that means.


I'd argue it's inappropriate in any context. And that's not in any way defending the shutdown or anyone responsible for it.
 
2013-10-18 09:05:57 AM

Yes please: I'd argue it's inappropriate in any context.


I would argue this is an excessively silly and oversensitive idea. Legislators SHOULD convince people of their position, not shut things down like petulant children.
 
2013-10-18 09:09:29 AM

Dr. Whoof: LasersHurt: Yes please: LasersHurt: Yes please: Alphax: Yes please: They did win elections. That's precisely why they're able to cause such difficulty for Obama. Either he's suggesting this should be a dictatorship or he doesn't understand how congressmen get their positions. I doubt it's the latter.

They did not win enough elections to choose how the nation is run.  And even if they did, refusing to do their jobs for the past 3 years, and trying to bring down the nation from within is not appropriate.

So if you're not in the majority, you (and by extension, the people you represent) don't matter? If that was what I was being told I wouldn't show up for work either.

You're intentionally conflating "shutting down everything" with "normal legislative process". They can do as much of the latter as they want, be as vocal as they want. But they can't just oppose everything and shut the government down.

Those are the only limits being proposed. Nobody is trying to disempower the minority.

I'm not conflating. I actually agree with you in general, up until your last sentence. But in his words yesterday Obama seems to be explicitly saying that.

How? The actual context he said them in is about the shutdown. It seems like you have to ignore the context, then extrapolate what you think that means.

Not to mention, this is specifically about setting goals that cannot be reasonably obtained and then shutting down the government when you can't obtain them.  They were NEVER going to dismantle the ACA.  It just was not going to happen.  They could have set their sights on other items, pushing for locking in the sequestration level spending (not just for the CR, but for good), or potentially making tweaks to the ACA that would have had bipartisan support (like repealing the medical device tax, which I disagree with, but you could get Dems on board for that).

Instead they chose to tilt at windmills and bring this nation, and the entire world economy, to the brink of disaster... ...


Look, all they wanted was for the Democrats to enact a more conservative plan for healthcare reform, maybe based on some idea that was supported by the Heritage Foundation back in the 90s, possibly something that was tested out on the state level by a conservative governor.  But NOOO!  We got Obamacare instead...
 
2013-10-18 09:11:12 AM

Yes please: 'd argue it's inappropriate in any context. And that's not in any way defending the shutdown or anyone responsible for it.


They threatened to destroy the global economy if they didn't get their way.  That is NOT how our government is meant to work.  EVER.  If they want to make such significant changes to a law passed by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court, they need to do it the right way and win elections, not hold the entire damned world hostage.

These people are at best sociopaths, and they no, they do not deserve the posts they hold, not after this.  So if they need talked down to like the petulant children they've made it abundantly clear they are, then so be it.

And yes, you are defending them.  Saying you aren't isn't fooling anyone.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-10-18 09:27:09 AM

LasersHurt: Yes please: I'd argue it's inappropriate in any context.

I would argue this is an excessively silly and oversensitive idea. Legislators SHOULD convince people of their position, not shut things down like petulant children.


Since people are acting like children, explain it to them like children.

www.boston.com

There are TWO houses of the U.S. Congress, where legislative power is held.
If a bill is passed (say, a bill to repeal another bill) BOTH houses have to agree.
The President has the power to veto bills.
The Congress can override that veto if 2/3 of both houses agree.

What did we have happen here:
The House, controlled by Republicans, wanted a bill that their corporate buddies didn't like repealed.  Their corporate buddies dole out the goodies, and since they like goodies they wanted it repealed badly.
The Senate did not agree with the House.  The bill can't be repealed.
The House therefore decided to not to part of their job the Constitutionally required to do.

It's as simple as that.  Anyone that goes beyond that either doesn't understand how Congress really works or they are trying to propagandize you.
 
2013-10-18 09:37:02 AM
4.bp.blogspot.com
Awwww, you mother-farkers. Okay. Alright. I'm putting cases on all you biatches! Huh. You think you can do this si&*. John! You think you can do this to me?! You mother-farkers will be playing basketball in Pelican Bay when I get finished with you! SHU program, nubian. 23 hour lockdown! I'm the man up in this piece! You'll never see the light of.....who the fark do you think you're farking with? I'm the police, I run shiat around here. You just live here! Yeah, that's right, you better walk away! Go on and walk away, 'cause I'm gonna burn this motherfarker down.  King Kong ain't got shiat on me!That's right, that's right. S%^T, I don't, fark. I'm winning anyway, I'm winning... I'm winning any motherfarking way. I can't lose
 
2013-10-18 09:39:14 AM

Solon Isonomia: Uh, wrong analogy - Alec Baldwin's character, "Fark You," wasn't the boss, he was a consultant sent by Mitch and Murray.

Better to say that President Obama was sent to Washington by 65,899,660 citizens,  ON A MISSION OF MERCY...


Obama should follow our advice and fire their farking asses because a loser is a loser.
 
2013-10-18 09:39:50 AM

what_now:  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


Elizabeth Warren


Esto
 
2013-10-18 09:40:15 AM

EyeballKid: flondrix: randomjsa: Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

No, the 2004 election resulted in me saying "Why did these paperless voting machines in Ohio report more votes for Bush than there were people in the precinct?  Could it have something to do with the president of Diebold publicaly promising to deliver Ohio to president Bush?"

Crazy, 'cos it had me saying, "Wait a minute. Isn't Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell also co-chairman of the Bush Cheney campaign? Didn't he throw out a lot of votes? How is that legal in any allegedly democratic republic?"


The same way Ken Cuccinelli will be in charge of the State's legal representation in any case arising FROM HIS OWN GUBERNATORIAL BID NEXT MONTH IN VIRGINIA.
 
2013-10-18 09:41:59 AM

quatchi: Asa Phelps: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

Yes. Yes she did.

No, she didn't.

Internet chain emails alleging Obama was a Muslim began emerging in 2007. No one claims "credit" for them, of course, but the Fwd: Fwd: Fed: chain email was then as it it now a tactic used by right wingers.

In 2007 a religious based e-mag called Insightmag[dot]com published a discredited story that "Hillary's team has questions about Obama's Muslim background".

2 days later FOX and Friends highlighted the article without discrediting it. Hill and co denied the article and any connection to the story whatsoever a day later.

Hill admittedly added fuel to the fire when she made her famous "as far as I know" modifier when asked if Obama was a Muslim during a tv interview but have no doubt that that smear campaign was originated and perpetuated by the GOP.


C'mon now, let's think about this. i'm a big Clinton fan, and there is no way she is dumb enough to have her fingerprints directly on an attack like that. Follow the money. The timing, the insinuation - it all points right at Hillary. That reads right out of Political Dirty Tricks V.2, abridged.
 
2013-10-18 09:45:09 AM

NeoCortex42: Well, he's not wrong.

When the Republicans win, it's a mandate by the people to follow through on their policies.
When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Once the GOP embraces reality, maybe they'll have more success.


Hold on there.  Embrace reality?  Let's not go crazy here.  Let them at least become aware of reality first.  Let's not push our luck.
 
2013-10-18 09:46:40 AM

flondrix: randomjsa: Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

No, the 2004 election resulted in me saying "Why did these paperless voting machines in Ohio report more votes for Bush than there were people in the precinct?  Could it have something to do with the president of Diebold publicaly promising to deliver Ohio to president Bush?"


Oh, and there's this:
 imageshack.us
 
2013-10-18 09:49:47 AM

clambam: jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.

On the other hand, President Hillary would have gotten Congressional investigations rolling on repub transgressions during the Bush administration. Bush would be in jail right now and Cheney's head would be on a pike outside the Pentagon. When Obama was elected the entire GOP held its breath for a year waiting for the indictments to come down. When they didn't, they concluded that Obama was a wimp who could be pushed around at will, and to a certain extent they were right. I'm strongly opposed to Presidential nepotism and would have been very unhappy with Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton in the history books, but a healthy helping of vicious-biatch-in-charge circa 2009 would have solved a lot of problems over the past five years and avoided a slew of others.


No, she wouldn't. She wouldn't risk them digging out Whitewater, Vince Foster, Travelgate, Monica Lewinsky for a counterattack. Even without those, no President is ever going to start investigations of their predecessor. They know that if they do that, they are opening the door to the next President investigating THEM. Only a fool would open that door.
 
2013-10-18 09:50:41 AM
A Democrat won the white house, but Republicans won Congress.  Which seems to indicate Americans want a socialist country with tight purse strings.
 
2013-10-18 09:54:55 AM

Kangaroo_Ralph: A Democrat won the white house, but Republicans won Congress one half of Congress, and actually LOST seats in that half in the last election, leaving a razor thin majority.  Which seems to indicate Americans want a socialist country with tight purse strings.


FTFY.
 
2013-10-18 10:01:19 AM

legion_of_doo: Fart_Machine: pedobearapproved: Recall how Obama lost his house majority?

Yeah, it had something to do with the GOP claiming they would dedicate a laser-like focus on creating jobs.  How's that going anyway?

Hope and change much?

/both sides suck


One side tends to suck a little bit harder and with more force and suction.
 
2013-10-18 10:11:11 AM

clambam: The mishigoss in Washington apparently cost the country $24 billion.


Does that word share a root with "meshugga"?

For some reason that made me think of "meshuggoth" and all the possibilities that opens up...
 
2013-10-18 10:12:39 AM

iron_city_ap: HMS_Blinkin: NeoCortex42: When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Voter fraud.  You forgot voter fraud!

Don't forget Benghazi. I'm sure its to blame somehow.


On Wednesday night, as all the cable news networks were covering the vote, I flipped over to Fox to see their take. While they had a camera on the voting, the talking heads were saying that now we can turn our attention to Benghazi and who gets fired for the Obamacare rollout.
 
2013-10-18 10:16:28 AM

stevetherobot: No, she wouldn't. She wouldn't risk them digging out Whitewater, Vince Foster, Travelgate, Monica Lewinsky for a counterattack. Even without those, no President is ever going to start investigations of their predecessor. They know that if they do that, they are opening the door to the next President investigating THEM. Only a fool would open that door.


Yes, she would. Whitewater, Vince Foster, Travelgate, all that crap was dragged out of the closet by the repubs during the Clinton administration. They farking impeached Clinton over the Lewinsky affair. And Vince Foster? Puh-lease. Her dirty laundry has been thoroughly aired.  Compare that to:

-- Dick Cheney conspiring in secret with Big Oil to raise gasoline prices.
-- At best incompetence and at worst malfeasance in the events leading up to 9/11.
-- 4,500 dead American soldiers in Bush's ginned-up war in Iraq.

Now those are crimes--high crimes and misdemeanors--treason, if you will--worth investigating.
 
2013-10-18 10:16:55 AM

MustangFive: Chief Justice Barack Obama


I would want to see the nominating process for this; do those TP asshats really want to match wits with Obama?
 
2013-10-18 10:28:22 AM
Not sure if already raised in thread but if you treat someone like shiat no matter what he does you really provide absolutely no incentive for them to act the way you would like them to.

Can anyone honestly expect Obama to play nice with GOP?  Honestly?
 
2013-10-18 10:33:53 AM

LasersHurt: Yes please: I'd argue it's inappropriate in any context.

I would argue this is an excessively silly and oversensitive idea. Legislators SHOULD convince people of their position, not shut things down like petulant children.


I don't think anyone from either side convinced the other side to change their position. Shutting things down obviously isn't a good solution. Neither is insisting you must be right all the time because you got 52% of the vote. This isn't a BSABSVR argument. As long as they consider each other opponents, both sides are just bad.
 
2013-10-18 10:35:39 AM

mrshowrules: Not sure if already raised in thread but if you treat someone like shiat no matter what he does you really provide absolutely no incentive for them to act the way you would like them to.

Can anyone honestly expect Obama to play nice with GOP?  Honestly?


Yes. The GOP does.

Honestly, they feel they deserve it.
 
2013-10-18 10:39:01 AM

Heliovdrake: mrshowrules: Not sure if already raised in thread but if you treat someone like shiat no matter what he does you really provide absolutely no incentive for them to act the way you would like them to.

Can anyone honestly expect Obama to play nice with GOP?  Honestly?

Yes. The GOP does.

Honestly, they feel they deserve it.


This was the same political party whose justifications for impeachment of a president in the 90s ranged from "revenge for Watergate" to "because it was Bob Dole's TURN, dammit!" But, I'm sure the next incarnation won't be as petty at all. In fact, I can imagine them as being, to turn a phrase, compassionate conservatives.
 
2013-10-18 10:45:57 AM

NeoCortex42: jake_lex: NeoCortex42: antidisestablishmentarianism: doyner: seekrit muslin

Didn't Hillary start that in the primaries with the birth certificate thing? I don't really remember.

I think so.  I wonder if she regrets opening that can of worms.

Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign was so slimy and nasty that it drained any bit of enthusiasm I might have had about her and made me support Obama that much more.  I still would have voted for her over McCain and Palin, but I would not have felt good about it at all.

I hope she doesn't pul the same shiat in 2016, but I am not holding my breath.

I hope she doesn't run, to be honest.  What I'd like is for her to hint at it up until the race starts in earnest.  Let the GOP put all their focus on her in the meantime.  I don't know he the leading candidate would be right now.  I'm not sure if there's any obvious front-runners for it, other than maybe Biden?


owaityou'reseriousletmelaughevenharder.jpg
 
2013-10-18 10:48:54 AM

d23: The Senate did not agree with the House.  The bill can't be repealed.
The House therefore decided to not to part of their job the Constitutionally required to do.

It's as simple as that.


I think you accidentally the whole thing, but otherwise thanks for trying to teach the chilluns.
 
2013-10-18 11:02:43 AM

Yes please: LasersHurt: Yes please: I'd argue it's inappropriate in any context.

I would argue this is an excessively silly and oversensitive idea. Legislators SHOULD convince people of their position, not shut things down like petulant children.

I don't think anyone from either side convinced the other side to change their position. Shutting things down obviously isn't a good solution. Neither is insisting you must be right all the time because you got 52% of the vote. This isn't a BSABSVR argument. As long as they consider each other opponents, both sides are just bad.


Clearly, it's a "I am completely stretching and misinterpreting comments in the most negative way because I do not like the President" situation. I don't know that it's a conscious decision you're making, just an effect. You're greatly exaggerating the statement but probably think you're being reasonable.
 
2013-10-18 11:06:50 AM

Albino Squid: peasandcarrots:
It's not just that. Just as a for-instance, our Republican governor is so genuinely awful that he's pretty much locked Republicans out of the Governorship for a GENERATION. Every single Republican who runs after him is going to have to run against him. We're going to go back to rocking back and forth from two-term Democrats to two-term Independents again.

And at the federal level, running complete nuts lost them at least three Senate seats in 2010. They doubled down on the derp in 2012, and it cost them at least two more that they ought to have won. They'll probably run more unelectable candidates in 2014, which will allow the Democrats to keep the Senate until 2016, which should be a bloodbath given the seats being defenderd. And they've turned the House -- which, structurally, should be theirs for a decade -- into a possible contest in the next cycle.

All they had to do after Obama was elected for the first time: oppose, to the extent that the minority party always opposes, and wait for the correction to the 2008 landslide that was always going to happen, given that the economy was always going to continue sucking short-term. But nope, they had to go full retard, and now they have at least eight years of a Democratic president, potentially a decade or more of Democratic Senate control, a bloody civil war and a bunch of purple states that likely won't be electing Republican governors for many years to come.

And such is the irony of Obama's tenure, that a guy who was elected with the genuine intention of getting shiat done even if it meant major concessions in the spirit of bipartisanship may be on his way to being remembered as the president who crushed his opponents beneath his heel, simply by existing.


The Republicans may well be a permanent minority party now. Imagine if Obama had tried.
 
2013-10-18 11:13:52 AM

NeoCortex42: fusillade762: Well that clinches it, I'M certainly not voting for him again.

Would he be allowed to run for Senate and become Majority Leader?  Because the reactions that would be hilarious.


Nothing bars him from serving in Congress or taking a federal judgeship after his term is over. In fact, let's make him a Supreme Court Justice in 2018.
 
2013-10-18 11:15:05 AM

Chaide: thomas666: Chaide: quatchi: karmaceutical: Yep, Hillary came up with that whole secret-kenyan-muslofacist business.  Pretty sure that never would have come up if not for Hillary breaking the case on the nature of Barack Hussein Obama's colorful origins.

That's the RW claim and it is, of course, a lie.

Republicans wouldn't have even noticed he was black if it wasn't for Hillary.

/thanks Obama!

not...

Relax, it was sarcasm.


apologies, I'm sometimes inept on the humor. Lots of tardos stalking me on Fark lately...
 
2013-10-18 11:16:23 AM

flondrix: clambam: The mishigoss in Washington apparently cost the country $24 billion.

Does that word share a root with "meshugga"?

For some reason that made me think of "meshuggoth" and all the possibilities that opens up...


Yep. Meshuggah = crazy: mishigoss = craziness.

"Dress British, think Yiddish."
 
2013-10-18 11:18:09 AM

danfrank: iron_city_ap: HMS_Blinkin: NeoCortex42: When the Republicans lose, it's only because the will of the people was ignored and it's up to them to push through their policies.

Voter fraud.  You forgot voter fraud!

Don't forget Benghazi. I'm sure its to blame somehow.

On Wednesday night, as all the cable news networks were covering the vote, I flipped over to Fox to see their take. While they had a camera on the voting, the talking heads were saying that now we can turn our attention to Benghazi and who gets fired for the Obamacare rollout.


The Healthcare.gov servers are in Benghazi.
 
2013-10-18 11:19:36 AM

Yes please: As long as they consider each other opponents, both sides are just bad.


The Tea Party Republicans consider the House Democrats, the House moderate Republicans, the Senate Democrats, the Senate Republics, and Obama as their opponents.

Obama only considers the Tea Party House Republicans as opponents because that is what the Tea Party comports themselves to be.  Everyone else he considers as a potential or actual ally.
 
2013-10-18 11:23:58 AM

jaytkay: MustangFive: In my dream world, we'd see Speaker of the House Obama passing legislation in partnership with Senate Majority Leader Biden (with members being pulled into line by House Majority Whip Bill Clinton) and signed into law by President Hillary Clinton.

Personally I'd like to see President Warren appoint Supreme Court justices Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.


I just had a schadenfreud-gasm.

I honestly think that scenario would result in actual deaths from impotent rage.

/Faces of Death Potato--Tea Party Edition
 
2013-10-18 11:30:04 AM
All you assholes in elected office had better win an election and get elected before you go acting like you got elected!!
 
2013-10-18 11:42:32 AM

jigger: All you assholes in elected office had better win an election and get elected before you go acting like you got elected!!


It seems even ClownHall agrees with Obama.

Even the chief architect of the "defund" strategy conceded that it was never going to happen. That inspires tons of confidence in those looking to push the same failed tactics again in two months' time. Question: What exactly would another government shutdown achieve? As far as I can tell, the only way to rid ourselves of Obamacare is to win elections. We tried "defunding" it -- that failed, naturally -- and fully repealing it was never a viable option given political realities. (Why on earth would the president repeal a law he himself spent years trying to pass?)

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2013/10/18/cruz-no-i-cann ot -guarantee-another-shutdown-wont-happen-in-january-n1726680

If America was so dead set against ObamaCare, Republicans would've gained enough seats in the Senate to pass a bill repealing it, and President Romney would've signed it already.

Instead, they'll have to go out and win some elections in the future, so President Santorum can sign it.
 
2013-10-18 11:45:50 AM

HighOnCraic: President Santorum


img1.fark.net
 
2013-10-18 11:54:59 AM

Albino Squid: And such is the irony of Obama's tenure, that a guy who was elected with the genuine intention of getting shiat done even if it meant major concessions in the spirit of bipartisanship may be on his way to being remembered as the president who crushed his opponents beneath his heel, simply by existing.


...and heard the lamentations of their women.
 
2013-10-18 11:57:21 AM
Good teabagger?  fark you.  Go home and play with your constituents.
 
2013-10-18 12:55:24 PM

LasersHurt: Yes please: LasersHurt: Yes please: I'd argue it's inappropriate in any context.

I would argue this is an excessively silly and oversensitive idea. Legislators SHOULD convince people of their position, not shut things down like petulant children.

I don't think anyone from either side convinced the other side to change their position. Shutting things down obviously isn't a good solution. Neither is insisting you must be right all the time because you got 52% of the vote. This isn't a BSABSVR argument. As long as they consider each other opponents, both sides are just bad.

Clearly, it's a "I am completely stretching and misinterpreting comments in the most negative way because I do not like the President" situation. I don't know that it's a conscious decision you're making, just an effect. You're greatly exaggerating the statement but probably think you're being reasonable.


That's a completely ridiculous interpretation, but you're clearly a fawning sycophant, so what else should I expect? I suppose I should applaud your restraint in not calling me a racist. I must have forgotten that it was impossible to be critical of someone's words unless you disliked them personally. Thanks for setting me straight.
 
2013-10-18 01:22:55 PM
Explaining to them how the laws of the country work and giving them good advice is being a Dick Boss? I think the average person subjected to the disrespect, insanity, and maliciousness thrown at Obama by Republicans would have snapped and gone on a shooting spree. He rarely even name-calls.
 
2013-10-18 03:40:51 PM

HighOnCraic: It seems even ClownHall agrees with Obama.


So?

It's still a stupid thing to say to a person who won their election.
 
2013-10-18 06:00:43 PM

randomjsa: /looks at 2010 results

Yeah, about that. I don't recall the 2004 election results resulting in liberals nation wise saying "Oh well we just have to do what Bush wants then"

Elections have consequences when liberals win them in the mind of Obama.


Democrats when Junior was president: "Is this a good idea, or not? It may not be, seeing as he's made some piss-poor decisions in the past. Let's think about it first."

Republicans when Obama is president: "That ni-bong Obama and his whore of a ni-bong heifer b*tch said that breathing air is good for you! Goddammit I'm gonna hold my breath because there is no way I'm gonna let these ni-bongs tell me what to do!!"
*sucks in lungful of air*
*turns red, then blue*
*passes out*

The difference is obvious.
 
2013-10-18 08:54:36 PM

jigger: HighOnCraic: It seems even ClownHall agrees with Obama.

So?

It's still a stupid thing to say to a person who won their election.


But they didn't win enough elections to accomplish their goal.

Once again:  As far as I can tell, the only way to rid ourselves of Obamacare is to win elections. We tried "defunding" it -- that failed, naturally -- and fully repealing it was never a viable option given political realities. (Why on earth would the president repeal a law he himself spent years trying to pass?)

It's a message to the party in general:  repealing ObamaCare was a central part of their various campaigns in 2012 and they lost seats in both the House and the Senate, as well as losing the presidential election.  They'll have to win enough seats in Congress in 2014 to override a veto if they want to repeal ObamaCare.  It would be nice if they came up with a plan for healthcare reform to replace ObamaCare.  Maybe the Heritage Foundation can come up with something...

Are you purposefully failing to understand that?
 
2013-10-18 09:07:39 PM

clambam: stevetherobot: No, she wouldn't. She wouldn't risk them digging out Whitewater, Vince Foster, Travelgate, Monica Lewinsky for a counterattack. Even without those, no President is ever going to start investigations of their predecessor. They know that if they do that, they are opening the door to the next President investigating THEM. Only a fool would open that door.

Yes, she would. Whitewater, Vince Foster, Travelgate, all that crap was dragged out of the closet by the repubs during the Clinton administration. They farking impeached Clinton over the Lewinsky affair. And Vince Foster? Puh-lease. Her dirty laundry has been thoroughly aired.  Compare that to:

-- Dick Cheney conspiring in secret with Big Oil to raise gasoline prices.
-- At best incompetence and at worst malfeasance in the events leading up to 9/11.
-- 4,500 dead American soldiers in Bush's ginned-up war in Iraq.

Now those are crimes--high crimes and misdemeanors--treason, if you will--worth investigating.


yep and lets not forget the 30,000 wounded...10,000 of whom are permanently damaged. Put that in your pipe and smoke it you chicken hawk, not my son but someone else's, armchair general, never served my country thats for the poor I know better f*ckwad d#ckshiat punk teabager scumheads and suck it! Same mentality that draft dodged all thru our country's history...Total clueless selfish trash. Throw out the trash!
 
2013-10-18 09:28:12 PM

sirbissel: dookdookdook: Obama's so good when he's in "Alpha male" mode.  He can smack down anyone and never seems to cross the line into petty dickishness.

I'm not sure if it's the "uppity negro" thing or something else that keeps him from just staying in that mode all the time, but when he's Wussbama(tm), we wind up with crap like the first debate from last year.

I'm still not entirely convinced the first debate wasn't intentional...


The way I saw it Obama is a guy that likes to be very prepared. Obama had prepared to debate the Mitt Romney fool that won the Republican Primary. He made the mistake of assuming Romney had convictions or any sincerity. It took that first debate for Obama to recognize the Mitt Romney fool that ran for President. Once Obama correctly identified Romney as a moronic double-talking liar, he easily displayed him as that to the public.
 
2013-10-18 09:35:45 PM

HighOnCraic: jigger: HighOnCraic: It seems even ClownHall agrees with Obama.

So?

It's still a stupid thing to say to a person who won their election.

....

Are you purposefully failing to understand that?


Unfortunately, the TP views "compromise" as something to be ashamed of.  The ability to compromise is highly regarded in all aspects of human society, except with Teabaggers.  They simply do not understand things the way one might have expected of normal people of voting age ten or more years ago.

These are people who can only process information in black and white, declarative statements.  They have been trained since birth to feel victimized by everyone at all times.  To them, the universe is scarier than shiat, and just being able to turn on Fox News while simultaneously breathing already requires that they dial their brain stems up to 11.  Their only way of expressing themselves is by complaining that the people they hate are actively destroying all that is good in heaven and earth.  The phrase "checks and balances" has as much meaning to them as the Voynich Manuscript.
 
2013-10-18 09:51:22 PM

mofa: HighOnCraic: jigger: HighOnCraic: It seems even ClownHall agrees with Obama.

So?

It's still a stupid thing to say to a person who won their election.

....

Are you purposefully failing to understand that?

Unfortunately, the TP views "compromise" as something to be ashamed of.  The ability to compromise is highly regarded in all aspects of human society, except with Teabaggers.  They simply do not understand things the way one might have expected of normal people of voting age ten or more years ago.

These are people who can only process information in black and white, declarative statements.  They have been trained since birth to feel victimized by everyone at all times.  To them, the universe is scarier than shiat, and just being able to turn on Fox News while simultaneously breathing already requires that they dial their brain stems up to 11.  Their only way of expressing themselves is by complaining that the people they hate are actively destroying all that is good in heaven and earth.  The phrase "checks and balances" has as much meaning to them as the Voynich Manuscript.


The main problem is, they don't realize that ObamaCare WAS a compromise.  The plan was to use the Heritage Foundation plan to get bipartisan support, since the Democrats expected the Republicans to lose their shiat if they pushed for a single-payer plan.  And yet the Republicans lost their shiat anyway...
 
2013-10-18 10:05:46 PM

Girl Sailor: C'mon now, let's think about this. i'm a big Clinton fan, and there is no way she is dumb enough to have her fingerprints directly on an attack like that. Follow the money. The timing, the insinuation - it all points right at Hillary. That reads right out of Political Dirty Tricks V.2, abridged.


Hillary was fingered by the same RW hacks who propagated the Birther nonsense using chain fwd: fwd: fwd: emails.

That's the Republican edition of Political Dirty Tricks V,2, abridged.

That Hillary started the rumors is part of the narrative and has been since the get go.
 
2013-10-18 10:11:56 PM

quatchi: Girl Sailor: C'mon now, let's think about this. i'm a big Clinton fan, and there is no way she is dumb enough to have her fingerprints directly on an attack like that. Follow the money. The timing, the insinuation - it all points right at Hillary. That reads right out of Political Dirty Tricks V.2, abridged.

Hillary was fingered by the same RW hacks who propagated the Birther nonsense using chain fwd: fwd: fwd: emails.

That's the Republican edition of Political Dirty Tricks V,2, abridged.

That Hillary started the rumors is part of the narrative and has been since the get go.


Tom Craighead, guest column New window
Date: Monday, 14 May 2007 15:57

Author, publisher, and internet pundit Tom Craighead recently wrote the following to his subscribers. It is reproduced here with permission. After reading this, you can visit his website. His book, The Lethal Liberal Society in America, is available on Amazon.

Barack Obama vs An Angel From Heaven, Angela McGlowan

Barack Hussein Obama. What color is he? I think of him as a chameleon, you know, the little lizard that changes colors all the time. He is playing the "race card", changing colors to suit his audience.

When Barack talks to black audiences, he talks "ebonic" to show his black brothers he is one of them. "Yassah, vote fo me, and I'll keep those welfaya checks a commin'. I'm with y'all, heah?"

Obama was educated in "Ivy League" schools. He is very bright, and speaks with a golden tongue when he addresses white audiences. And yes he sounds very convincing. And yes he can change his color to suit his audience. He is playing the "race card".

Obama's downfall will be (hopefully) that he is an anti-war Democrat, and he so often states, "I voted against the war from the beginning!" Is he being honest with the people? Telling one group one thing, and another group something else - in his effort to FOOL America. Or as my friend Angela McGlowan very appropriately put it, he is BAMBOOZLING America. More on Angela further down in this blog.

How powerful is Obama? Well, he beat the conservative of all conservatives Alan Keyes for the senate race in Illinois. Granted, Keyes is not from Illinois, he was sent there to run against Barack. But hey, Barack is not 'from' Illinois either. He was born in Hawaii before it was a state. Hmmm, it was a territory of the US, but not yet a state. Hmmm again.

 /The link is dead, but it's from former Fox Spokesmodel Angela MacGlowan's old website.
 
2013-10-19 03:18:50 AM

JesusJuice: How's that n***erdick taste, Republicans? Don't forget to work the shaft and muck out the taint.


a day later and this comment is still here.

Thank god you're just a racist and you didn't call someone stupid JesusJuice or your comment would have been instantly deleted.
 
2013-10-19 03:49:55 AM

HighOnCraic: The main problem is, they don't realize that ObamaCare WAS a compromise.


Which cannot be repeated often enough or loudly enough so that these morons can get it through the concrete-filled spaces they call heads.
If the democrats had their way they would have called for single payer or full on Medicare for everybody and f*ck the insurance corporations right in the ear. Instead we got the ACA, a piss-poor compromise that doesn't even approach what could and should have been done, and the republican teaderper piss-babies still cry and b*tch.

F*ck'em.
 
2013-10-19 12:08:38 PM

HighOnCraic: But hey, Barack is not 'from' Illinois either. He was born in Hawaii before it was a state. Hmmm, it was a territory of the US, but not yet a state. Hmmm again.

 /The link is dead, but it's from former Fox Spokesmodel Angela MacGlowan's old website.


Ah, ta for that.

So the rumor that BHO wasn't legit originated on the right and was sustained by them but also was blamed on the left as part of the narrative. Charming people.
 
Displayed 309 of 309 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report