This focus on a man's pants. Where have we seen that? Oh, yes, it was NYT columnist David Brooks — putting the avid in David:
I remember distinctly an image of — we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant... and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.Here's the picture with Obama in jeans (and a work shirt with rolled-up sleeves) upon which Dowd must have cast her female gaze.
Dowd's pep talk for Democrats ends with this lame enthusiasm:
If the Republicans win the Senate, they’ll get in and find out they can’t pass legislation either. Then they’ll look bad just in time to help make a Democratic presidential candidate look good.Even NYT readers aren't buying the cheer. 2 comments from over there:
If the GOP takes the Senate then President Obama will be impeached, convicted and removed from office. Why? Because they want to. On what grounds? Because they want to.I think the impeachment scenario is highly unlikely. It wouldn't help the GOP. They'd seem irrational and aggressive. The second scenario is about right. A GOP-controlled Congress will serve up exactly the sort of legislation that will frame the best issues for 2016. Even as Democrats today are trying to move immigration reform and income inequality to the center of the political stage, the GOP will have its choices to make. It will be interesting to see what they pick. Return gun regulation and marijuana policy to the states? Sensible-seeming, woman's-health-related abortion restrictions? What would work best to set up the 2016 presidential race?
They will be able to pass bills all day long what are you talking about? Obama can veto said bills sure. In fact, America watching Obama veto bill after bill would ensure a Republican win in 2016.
Posts
239 comments:
1 – 200 of 239 Newer› Newest»Yes, I would like to see the Republicans pass an omnibus sexual freedom bill. Sure, let women abort all day everyday. You want to end irresponsible reproduction, offer women who haven't reproduced one-time payments of $10,000 to have tubal ligations.
Oh, and let's be fair to the men. Put in a "you breed 'em, you feed 'em" clause that banishes child support payments as well as AFDC. This would ensure that no one is breeding for bucks or seeking custody for cash in divorce proceedings.
Social justice.
A wise GOP Congress would pass legislation repealing job killing regulation, reduced spending and sensible defense reforms, which Rumsfeld would have done without 9/11.
They need to have veto proof majorities. That may include the rare moderate Democrats or it may include Democrats with a sense of self-preservation when Obama is a weak lame duck. If Hillary ends up too old or sick to run in 2016, it will become a rout. They have no one else.
Republicans understand that impeaching Obama would be a terrible idea. While he certainly deserves it, he is protected by his race. You don't have to like it, but it's the reality. I would be pleased to see the impeachment of Eric Holder, though.
Are we talking about Obama's pants, female gaze, or Republican politics? I don't see an impeachment in the near future. Using the Senate to frame the issues sounds good.
"I think the impeachment scenario is highly unlikely. It wouldn't help the GOP. They'd seem irrational and aggressive."
"They'd seem"? Like "irrational and aggressive" aren't how they are seen now?
Surely, Ann, you jest,...
+1 on impeaching Holder. I'm guessing that Holder will resign (and Obama will pardon him) if the GOP takes the Senate.
Tyrone Slothrop said...
Republicans understand that impeaching Obama would be a terrible idea. While he certainly deserves it, he is protected by his race.
Yeah, that protected MLK, too.
Man, you guys say crazy shit,….
And me - I'm protected by my race, too - right?
Yeah, being black has definitely stopped whites from attacking me,...
It will be interesting to see what they pick. Return gun regulation and marijuana policy to the states? Sensible-seeming, woman's-health-related abortion restrictions? What would work best to set up the 2016 presidential race?
Thoughtful conservatism died with Bill Buckley. If the GOP takes the Senate, I'm sure the main policy priorities will be an embarrassment and will work best to set up the 2016 Presidential race for the Democrats.
Who is the jeans picture even for? It's evocative of W. But the last thing the left base (and the middle as perceived by the left base) wants to think about at a time of international turmoil is George W. Bush's foreign policies. And surely it's not intended for the right. They're not going to start trusting Obama just because he dresses up like a ranch hand, and Obama doesn't seem to care if they trust him anyhow. Is it not intended for a domestic audience then? And if its meant to remind Russia or the Crimea or anyone else of W, what does that say?
Though maybe the GOP will move to save the US Postal Service by issuing a $1 stamp with a shirtless Vladimir Putin wrestling a bear on it. Based on recent commentary, that might sell very well among the GOP base and bring in much-needed income to the Postal Service.
I'm not so sure about the impeachment. This guy and his followers are the most lawless bunch we've ever seen. Once more is exposed, even those Democrats in the future minority might be forced to come out against him to save their skin.
Regardless, a Republican majority House and Senate should send a stream of bills to Obama that he vetoes.
PB Reader said...
"Once more is exposed, even those Democrats in the future minority might be forced to come out against him to save their skin."
Not going to happen with this bunch. If the only reason they come out against the lawlessness is to save their own skin that is worthless. What we need is politicians who will come out against him because they love liberty and the rule of law.
All of the conservative movement appears irrational and aggressive. "Would be" is long past. Any more anti gay or anti woman legislation in the works before the election? Or voter suppression, how about immigration? Or how about another vote to end the ACA, with nothing to replace it with. Hell, most rightist commenters here appear irrational and aggressive, and that's on a good day.
Willful ignorance doesn't become you, Crack.
The truth is, it's an affirmative action world. Impeaching a black president is just not a possibility, no matter how feckless or criminal the man may be. I don't see what MLK has to do with it.
MadisonMa'am has all the talking points down pat.
Given their recent experience with Bill Clinton, the Congress is not going to wish to impeach Obama, but it could be that they would not have a choice.
With this crew in the White House, it could happen.
But I certainly would be for impeaching Holder, Vilsack, and/or a few others that might come to light.
Bob said...
+1 on impeaching Holder. I'm guessing that Holder will resign (and Obama will pardon him) if the GOP takes the Senate.
I think that's increasingly likely. Watch him free Mumia on the way out the door too just to give an even bigger finger to America.
" +1 on impeaching Holder. I'm guessing that Holder will resign (and Obama will pardon him) if the GOP takes the Senate."
Yes and Lerner will get her pardon for taking one for the team.
Notice how George W would not pardon Libby. GOP ethics are lost on Democrats.
"Watch him free Mumia on the way out the door too just to give an even bigger finger to America. "
Even that is not an action that is out of the range of possibility. Close the charter schools and pardon the black killers. It should appeal to Crack.
Impeachment is out of the question, not so much for race but it would be tactically stupid and it is beginning to strike me that the R's - so far - don't seem to be bent on tactical stupidity this time around.
I find it interesting that many seem to be accepting the possibility of a Republican controlled Senate. One must be an extremely non-critical, and unthinking, Obama supporter to ignore the foreign policy failures of the last few months and the on-going debacle of Obamacare. Unlike others I don't think all Dem voters - and certainly not independents - are dumb.
Boy, the trolls are out today.
The most important actions of a Republican controlled Senate & House in 2015 would not be legislative. It would be joint/dual investigative committees on the various acts of malfeasance & incompetence of the Obama administration.
The WH can safely ignore most of the calls for investigations from the House. Ignoring both the House & the Senate would be a whole lot tougher. I'm sure the WH will find a way to do it, however.
The long term status of Dowd as a NYTimes columnist is an odd commentary on librealism. She is occasionaly amusing and sometimes interesting, but she virtually never says anything of substance or even tries to do so. Yet, she apparently is a much loved figure in the liberal community. Today's column is an amusing commentary or some recent events, but nothing more, and she concludes with the observaton of a republican congress not being able to pass bills, when a high school student would know a republican can pass all the bills they desire.
Tyrone Slothrop said...
Willful ignorance doesn't become you, Crack.
The truth is, it's an affirmative action world.
Unlike when the government was giving whites free tracts of land during the beginning of the country?
Or how about homesteading for whites after the Civil War?
V.A. home loans to whites after WWII?
Whites lost 20% of the country's wealth BEFORE Obama became president - has anybody gone to prison for it?
So who gets "affirmative action" again?
Who now claims to hate socialism with that history?
What you hate - as usual - is blacks getting some of it.
Or, I assume in fairness, whites plan to give all that back because blacks didn't get it before,...
If the GOP takes the Senate, they could organize a social conservative summit with their friends in the Kremlin. Oh, never mind, that's already happening.
Whites are obsessed with jeans and blacks eating seafood this political season.
Weird.
The super intelligent and sophisticated NYT reader seems to think that a majority of the Senate can convict after impeachment. Low information voters, these liberals.
"putting the avid in David."
Dear God. Seventy years on earth and I'd never heard or thought of that one.
What a missed opportunity.
A Republican Congress would force some discipline on Obama. He might finish with a few good years.
At the very least, it would prove whether he is an ideologue or pragmatic.
The first bill to send him would be the keystone pipeline.
Obama wears clothes well. Give him that. I long for the days when competence and experience were judged better qualifiers for the Presidency than a fashion sense...... Ineptitude is not an impeachable offense. He deserves impeachment as much as he deserved reelection......Whatever bills the Republicans introduce will be seen by the Democrats as the reintroduction of Jim Crow laws and the banishment of women to the kitchen. There will be major motion pictures with those themes.
If the Republicans win the Senate, they’ll get in and find out they can’t pass legislation either. Then they’ll look bad just in time to help make a Democratic presidential candidate look good.
I think they'd find it tough to "do" much new as well. But they'll find the going easier to "undo" some of the damage. People are ready for it. And a strong Republican House and Senate in 2014 would be a boon to Dems in 2016 not to mention asleep-at-the-switch "journalists" and that's why they should support it or at least not fight it in silly ways.
"Even as Democrats today are trying to move immigration reform and income inequality to the center of the political stage, the GOP will have its choices to make. It will be interesting to see what they pick."
Ok. But don't anticipate prioritization and emphasis from the GOP. Too undisciplined. Too leaderless. Too clumsy.
The biggest problem for the GOP is that they are all in favor of personal freedom except when they are not. The Democrats are the same way, except that by and large they are not running on an agenda of personal freedom. They gave that up quite a while ago.
The only thing the Republicans need to do if they win big in November is pass a real budget and let Obama sign it or veto it. And if he vetoed it keep handing him the same budget over and over again until he signs it. Along with passing bills repealing things like the Davis-Bacon Act and put the Democrats on the spot justifying why the taxpayers should grossly overpay for construction projects-things no one in their right mind would do with their personal funds. There is such a target rich environment for the Republicans if they had the stones and brains to do so.
"A Republican Congress would force some discipline on Obama. He might finish with a few good years. "
It certainly helped Clinton and saved his presidency. I don't think Obama is as smart as Clinton or as willing to learn. There are no "wise men" or "wise women" around him. Jarret is a long way from wisdom and don't mention the idiot "wise Latina."
"There is such a target rich environment for the Republicans if they had the stones and brains to do so. "
They did this for a while after 1994. Then Gingrich decided to cash out and left them rudderless. Then came Hastert, member in good standing of the Illinois Combine, to lead them into the weeds.
Impeachment would be stupid.
1) with only 2 years left in office, the process wouldn't play out to any conclusion until about a year before the next election, so why bother.
2) it will make Obama a martyr. "They just hate black people"
So very stupid idea. Which means the GOP will prob do it.
somefeller said...
If the GOP takes the Senate, they could organize a social conservative summit with their friends in the Kremlin. Oh, never mind, that's already happening.
The perianally butthurt somefeller distractively links to another story by an author who writes exclusively about LGBT issues. I wonder why that is?
Mens' pants are a longtime Dowd specialty. From the dark ages of 2003:
"After a long, painful and presumably peyote induced walkabout in the land of politics and international relations, Maureen Dowd gets back to a subject she's qualified to comment on... men's pants."
I read that long ago, but I immediately though about it when I saw this Althouse post. The enduring power of Blogger...
Hey, leave Obama and his pals alone. He's doing the best he can. The absolute best. So are all his fanboys and fanchicks in BM. The very best. Undoubtedly.
The perianally butthurt somefeller distractively links to another story by an author who writes exclusively about LGBT issues. I wonder why that is?
I'm sure you can come up with a theory and maybe even a list, chief.
1. Republicans overreached with investigations and the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I think some stuff is in order, like investigating the IRS abuses properly.
2. Republicans can go far if they say they will continue to pursue some green initiatives and actively support the further research into global warming (or not) but will not kill US energy development, hurt the US economy, and forgoe millions of new jobs that can come with more plentiful and cheaper energy. They should hammer that throughout most of the Obama Administration, prices of gas and oil producys doubled over what they were when Bush was around..
3. Republicans to work hard to shed the brand that they have become the Party of War and Neocon Adventures in Nation-Building. Mainly by rejecting Neocon scum like John McCain, reasserting the Powell Doctrine, and joining Democrats in the middle who want to break from the "Duty to Humanity" to invade and be the World's 911 service still...Samantha Powers sorts on the left.
4. Prep for 2016 by passing laws rejecting Obama's Imperial Executive Orders that bypassed Congress's powers...dare him to veto it.
5. Really tone down the Religious Right shit. Be the Party that says they value jobs and a fair deal for a good says work for men, women, whites, hispanics, asians, blacks, and gays too.....over some goobers talking about moral purity in terms of how they hated abortion back as a 5-year old even, and how Jesus wants gays suppressed.
6. Begin the needed transition from the reckless spendthift days of Bush, DeLay, Obama, Pelosi to Republicans once again standing for fiscal sanity.
They should pass bills designed to improve the economy, decrease regulations or clarifying what the CAA, for example, actually regulates.
But if they stuff all these bills with pork and payoffs withheld by not being the party in control, then the hell with them.
They'll get labeled as anti women, poor, kids, no matter but don't lead with your chin and get into social issues. Its the economy stupid.
With the Clintons, it is all about them, so they have no problems seeing what is happening and adjusting their policies to fit with the prevailing political winds as might seem advantageous at the moment.
Obama and his "inside circle" are fixed in their ideologies from childhood and have a difficult time even seeing what is happening, much less adjusting to it, besides they disapprove of such adjustments and consider it to be "selling out."
MIchael K - Yes, before DeLay, you had the grubby Porkmeister Hastert. Can't forget him.
Or that after those two, you had Pelosi and others feeding at the hog trough for themselves and "friends of Democrats" in a way that even Tom DeLay was disgusted at.
Send Obama a bill that suspends all the Obamacare mandates indefinitely, and repeals all Obamacare taxes.
Pass a budget that zeroes out Obamacare.
Leave abortion and marijuana alone for now.
Repeal the filibuster for all presidential appointments.
MadisonMa'am said...
... Or voter suppression, how about immigration? Or how about another vote to end the ACA, with nothing to replace it with.
I suppose you mean the concept of having to show ID is supressing the vote?
Or having immigration laws on the books is racist?
Or presenting health care reforms in the provate sector you disaprove of is nothing?
Sigh...continue living in your bubble.
The impeachment scenario isn't just unlikely, it is impossible. And not for the reasons you mention - it could not be the Republicans impeaching AND convicting Obama - it would HAVE to be a bi-partisan conviction. They can impeach the president on a party line vote - a conviction requires a 2/3rds vote of the Senate. That's 67 Senators. I've seen no scenario which has the Republicans picking up that many seats - the likelihood of that is no different than zero.
So if Obama were to be impeached and convicted by a Republican Senate, it would take around 15 Democratic senators, give or take, crossing the asile to vote to remove President Obama from office. I'd rate an alien invasion higher on the probability scale than that happening. And if it did (say, Obama pulled out a gun and shot Ted Cruz), no one could argue it was "Republicans" doing it "because they can." Because they can't.
"There is such a target rich environment for the Republicans if they had the stones and brains to do so. "
They did this for a while after 1994. Then Gingrich decided to cash out and left them rudderless. Then came Hastert, member in good standing of the Illinois Combine, to lead them into the weeds."
Micheal K so true that it hurts. Unfortunately the RNC Republicans can always be counted on snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.
Abortion policy is easy, leave it to the states. Some states will pass sensible laws, some will side with the Chicom genociders and North Koreans.
Pledge to keep their hands off our 401ks. Be bold, start talking about consolidating and block granting "entitlement" monies to the states, lift some disincentives in some of the programs for saving. More transparency.
Drop common core.
And go after IRS TSA and NSA with a cleaver.
"Though maybe the GOP will move to save the US Postal Service by issuing a $1 stamp with a shirtless Vladimir Putin wrestling a bear on it. Based on recent commentary, that might sell very well among the GOP base and bring in much-needed income to the Postal Service."
I'd buy it in a freakin' heartbeat.
"There is such a target rich environment for the Republicans if they had the stones and brains to do so. "
They did this for a while after 1994. Then Gingrich decided to cash out and left them rudderless. Then came Hastert, member in good standing of the Illinois Combine, to lead them into the weeds."
Micheal K so true that it hurts. Unfortunately the RNC Republicans can always be counted on snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.
SteveR said...
They should pass bills designed to improve the economy, decrease regulations or clarifying what the CAA, for example, actually regulates.
... Its the economy stupid.
Bingo
cubanbob wrote:
The only thing the Republicans need to do if they win big in November is pass a real budget and let Obama sign it or veto it. And if he vetoed it keep handing him the same budget over and over again until he signs it. Along with passing bills repealing things like the Davis-Bacon Act and put the Democrats on the spot justifying why the taxpayers should grossly overpay for construction projects-things no one in their right mind would do with their personal funds. There is such a target rich environment for the Republicans if they had the stones and brains to do so.
Yup.
Crack Emcee wrote:
Yeah, that protected MLK, too.
Man, you guys say crazy shit,….
Impeachment would be characterized by one side (your side) as attacking Obama because he's a black man, and not because he deserves to be impeached.
In other words YOUR side would play the race card.
I shall crush my enemies and envelope them in an inescapable liberty fog from my strawberry-kiwi flavored e-cigarettes.
And CPAC? I wish you would finally DO something about this tyrannically slow wifi. Waiter!?
As several here have mentioned:
Keep religion out of the social sphere and hammer the democrats on their fiscal irresponsibilities.
Here's an idea for the conservatives:
Require every federal employee sign a pledge that they have and will uphold the laws of the United States and most particularly the US Constitution.
Any who refuse to sign are choosing immediate retirement.
Any who sign and are found to have violated their pledge lose their job, their pension and any opportunities to work for the federal government ever again.
And then start investigating the agencies such as the IRS (and et cetera) to find those who should be dismissed from their positions.
Thoughts? I know it would need to be fleshed out...
Cedarford:
Abortion is only a religious issue so far as morality is concerned. However, it is principally a human rights issue, specifically our unalienable right to life. The faith-based article of spontaneous conception is a myth, which should offer no woman or man comfort when they choose to terminate a human life.
In the back alley, it is simply a mother murdering her child for sex, money, ego, or convenience. When normalized (e.g. "right") or state sponsored (e.g. population control protocol), it is an unprecedented violation of human rights. Democrats have made the wrong choice. Republicans are too moderate.
You should not base your morality or comprehension of reality from a five year old's perspective. Children are well known for possessing inadequate knowledge, which is why adults are responsible for their welfare.
That said, your other points are well considered.
somefeller said...
If the GOP takes the Senate, they could organize a social conservative summit with their friends in the Kremlin. Oh, never mind, that's already happening.
LOL
Do you think we've forgotten all the love the Western left gave the poor, misunderstood communists everywhere?
Do we have to revisit Ted Kennedy's love letter to the Soviet leadership after Reagan was elected?
You guys are currently falling all over yourself with the wonderful pedophile Ortega down in Nicaragua.
After spending over 5 years telling us that obama was literally a "God", you now have to confront the fact that he isn't, and that marxist/KGB thugs in certain places realize that as well.
So, what to do if you are a leftist?
Well, step 1: forget that obama promised his li'l pals in the Kremlin that he could be more "flexible" after the election.
I think we can all guess how obama's newest BFF's took that promise.
And they are holding him to it.
Obama has basically given the Soviets (er, Russians) Syria and now obama is busy making sure there is no possibility of standing up to Putin as Putin goes "shopping" from the south to the Baltics.
I'm surprised Putin hasn't announced that he is dating obama formally.
Back in the 50s Gillette used to run ads for their razors that said "Look sharp, feel sharp, be sharp".
The Marine Corps has spent 200 years preaching the maxim that if you don't look like a Marine, you won't feel like a Marine and you won't act like a Marine.
Proposition Joe said "Look the part, be the part"
When I was working as a manager in a pharma plant the dress code when we knew any regulatory agency would be in the plant was dress shirts and neckties. The thinking was that FDA would take someone in a necktie more seriously.
When I got into selling capital machinery, back in 85, my (then) partner told me that even though I was working alone out of a home office calling clients and potential clients, I should not do it in my skivvies. He taught me that even though nobody would see me, I should dress the part. And he was right.
Obama carrying out negotiations with Putin in jeans and a work shirt puts him at a disadvantage. This would be true even if nobody but himself knew what he was wearing. And to put out an official picture?
I don't care how good he looks in the jeans and workshirt. (And he does not look bad) The Oval Office is not the place to wear this, especially not in a negotiation like this.
I guess we should be thankful that he at least doesn't have his foot up on the Resolute desk.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/03/article-0-1B9B5C7D000005DC-17_638x428.jpg
John Henry
Poor MODO, she needs to update her PHOTO.
'm surprised Putin hasn't announced that he is dating obama formally.
Sick burn. Damn. Someone call a doctor. I'm on fire.
What funny is Dowdy felt she had to make a comment in the first place. See! I'm still relevant!
I'm just glad to see that Crack managed to avoid the mass lynchings this weekend and is able to find the courage to continue his postings knowing that the man is ready to come down on him at any moment.
It's rare in this day and age to see such courage.
Speaking of courage, I also wanted to thank both garage and somefeller for serving their nation. Sacrifice such as theirs is fully in keeping with the highest traditions of lefty keyboard commandos everywhere.
It's even more impressive for garage given that Walker has apparently, I'm told, established the 4th Reich in the area just above Illinois.
I wish you all God speed and good hunting.
garage: "Sick burn. Damn. Someone call a doctor. I'm on fire."
Can't just call a doctor now.
You should know that.
Not to worry, obama's pants are still creased, so hope springs eternal.
It would be interesting to see a picture of Putin during this negotiation.
I just looked and could not find one. I'll bet that if he did have an officially released picture, he is seated and in a coat and tie.
John Henry
Drago said...
"somefeller said...
If the GOP takes the Senate, they could organize a social conservative summit with their friends in the Kremlin. Oh, never mind, that's already happening.
LOL
Do you think we've forgotten all the love the Western left gave the poor, misunderstood communists everywhere?"
Well done Drago. I think somefeller actually believes that stuff. Amazing how history disappears down the lefty memory hole.
I wonder if garage and somefeller spend any time at all pondering what new item on Putin's agenda obama is preparing to be "flexible" about.
It's already clear that letting Assad keep all of his WMD that he acquired from....(where exactly? (like we don't know)) is another area of "red line on, red line off" flexibility.
Jeans and a work shirt?
Just another day down on the ranch wrangling a steer?
Clothes send a message. This telegraphs he doesn't think this situation is of concern. I'll fit it a phone call or 2 in between the important stuff. Or sending a message to Putin. Bad optics IMHO looking at it from a European standpoint. Or confirming what they chose to find out the hard way, they wanted Obama as president.
Assad's decided to shit in his water, he's dumping his chemical weapons into the sea. Hubby saw that on a foreign news program.
illuninati: "I think somefeller actually believes that stuff. Amazing how history disappears down the lefty memory hole."
Well, history and a hundred million human beings.
But those human beings were getting in the way of garages and somefellers narrative and power.
So, you know, they had to go.
I mean, do you remember the near feinting on the public sidewalks of NYC and elsewhere by lefties when Gorbachev came to town when the Soviets were still the Soviets?
Too funny.
During those days Putin was a young and upcoming apparatchek and KGB senior officer.
You don't get to be KGB senior without killing some of your opponents. Especially the innocent ones.
All you have to do is look at the lefty love for mass murderer Che (did you know he wanted to execute the farmers? He did.) to understand garages and somefellers attempts to change the subject away from the Putin/obama game-of-twister-like "flexibility" love fest.
Whats one thing we could do to help Europe gain the gumption to stand up to these new Soviets?
Expand oil and gas production for European markets.
Obama won't allow that.
He'll claim environmental reasons for it.
But the real reason is obama is not about to do anything that would bring real pressure to his kremlin boyfriend.
I'm simply no match for Drago's biting wit and trademark cutting edge conservative humor. I'll just sit in awe and watch The Master.
The First Amendment isn't social sphere. Obamacare & religion cannot be kept there.
Someone said that Holder would free Mumia.
Perhaps you could tell us how? As far as I know Mumia is in jail on a state, not a federal, crime.
Only the PA governor could free him. Holder has no power in this matter at all.
John Henry
Seeing Red: "Assad's decided to shit in his water, he's dumping his chemical weapons into the sea.
Correction: Assad is dumping A FEW chemical weapons into the sea.
Assad is dumping the minimum to keep Putins boyfriend obama and the west in their place.
Assad is hanging on to the rest.
'Cuz, no red line.
Except there was one.
Drawn by obama.
Until there wasn't.
Undrawn by obama.
Except obama claimed he didn't draw the line.
Even though he did.
And then obama blamed the congress and then, yes, the world.
But not obama.
It's probably the fault of "headwinds" and "ATM's".
garage: "I'll just sit in awe and watch The Master."
LOL
Like "sitting" wasn't the only option on the table for you.
Chappaquiddick Ted's love letter, o'Neill's visit and tingles talking about it, since he worked for o'Neill then.
John Henry: "Holder has no power in this matter at all."
John, in all seriousness, have you been paying attention?
Maybe garage and somefeller could hop a flight to Russian controlled Crimea and have a pic taken on an Anti-aircraft gun and then make a joke about wishing a US or NATO aircraft was in it's sights.
You know, like noted right-wing dixiecrat-republican-conservative Jane Fonda did for her bestest mass-murdering North Vietnamese communist pals.
Just for fun I'm going to take a break and reread PJ ORourkes description of what is what is what like in the Managua hotel where all the western liberal elites were hanging out the night ortega lost the internationally monitored elections.
The lefties were in tears.
tears.
Over the loss for the marxist boyfriend ortega.
Who was busy during those days bombing the indigenous Nicaraguan indians tribes into submission.
With soviet supplied weapons.
Which the left LOVED.
And remember Chappaquiddick?
I do.
And Doris Day. Loved her.
I bet garage and somefeller don't.
Because they are communists.
They love Hanoi Jane though.
But they love 300 million people losing their insurance because of ObamaCare.
LOL.
I miss Bettie Page too.
Sigh.
" Blogger John said...
Someone said that Holder would free Mumia.
Perhaps you could tell us how? As far as I know Mumia is in jail on a state, not a federal, crime.
Only the PA governor could free him. Holder has no power in this matter at all.
John Henry"
I believe the discussion was about a pardon, which Obama could do.
Maybe I'm wrong about that on state charges. There are lawyers here.
garage laughs at the thought of Mary Jo Kopechne slowly drowning in the overturned sedan that the left's hero (LION of the Senate) Teddy Kennedy left her in as he bravely, courageously, fled.
No wonder Teddy was a hero to the left.
BTW, 'cuz it deserves to be mentioned here: "War On Women!!"
Oh, and AS WE SPEAK, the fun-loving marxist leader in Venezuela continues to have his cuban-trained and armed shock troops patrol the streets in their vehicles to shoot up protesting political opponents.
And the left here LOVES Maduro.
Loves.
Completely.
Utterly.
Remember maduro, you had them at "I'm going to kill and imprison my political opponents"
@Crack Emcee
Perhaps you are not aware, so I'll give you the benefit. The Civil Rights Act was Passed in 1964, and affirmative action followed in the proceeding years. I assume you didn't know because only an idiot would suggest legislation passed in the 1960's also impacted society in the 1700's, 1860's or 1940's.
I also assume you are referring to the housing and stock market crash in 2008 when you say "20% loss in wealth."
Perhaps you should read up on the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 which made high risk mortgage loans the responsibility of the federal gov't (Fannie and Freddie). Banks, backed by the fed, began loaning billions of dollars to people who could not afford to pay the banks back--predatory lending(?). The banks, admittedly out of greed, began issuing worthless pieces of paper as securities backed by mortgages. The congress and senate with democrats in majorities decided to bail out the banks. I could be wrong, but wasn't the Dear Leader a member of the senate? And,didn't he vote in favor of TARP?
While our Beloved didn't cause the crash, he certainly supported the reasons (high risk loans for minorities), and he voted to bail out the banks.
"While our Beloved didn't cause the crash, he certainly supported the reasons (high risk loans for minorities), and he voted to bail out the banks."
The Republican House voted TARP down and it took a lot of browbeating by the bankers and the Sec Treas to prevail. I was still opposed to TARP and Nicole Gelinas explained why it was a bad idea. The banks, of course, loved it. Especially when it became a slush fund.
Here's a great photo of Reagan wielding a chainsaw.
The Obama Administration gets an "F" for image management. Where have his people been for the past 40 years?
That kink didn;t work. Maybe this one is better.
This is my review from the time.
jazzizhep said...
@Crack Emcee
Perhaps you are not aware, so I'll give you the benefit. The Civil Rights Act was Passed in 1964, and affirmative action followed in the proceeding years. I assume you didn't know because only an idiot would suggest legislation passed in the 1960's also impacted society in the 1700's, 1860's or 1940's.
You've lost me. I said whites got socialized give aways - from the government - for centuries. But now that blacks get some, there seems to be a problem - why?
I also assume you are referring to the housing and stock market crash in 2008 when you say "20% loss in wealth."
"Perhaps you should read up on the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 which made high risk mortgage loans the responsibility of the federal gov't (Fannie and Freddie). Banks, backed by the fed, began loaning billions of dollars to people who could not afford to pay the banks back--predatory lending(?). The banks, admittedly out of greed, began issuing worthless pieces of paper as securities backed by mortgages. The congress and senate with democrats in majorities decided to bail out the banks. I could be wrong, but wasn't the Dear Leader a member of the senate? And,didn't he vote in favor of TARP?"
What does any of that have to do with who lost 20% of the nation's wealth before Obama became prez?
"While our Beloved didn't cause the crash,.."
Exactly - white guys who didn't go to prison did that.
"…He certainly supported the reasons (high risk loans for minorities), and he voted to bail out the banks."
And it was his one vote that made all the difference? Sure.
Next you'll be telling me his becoming president made the racism on this thread go away,...
You'll notice that Crack considers himself just like MLK. No difference.
Except for the doctoral degree, appointment to a large and important church, political prominence, etc.
Other than that, just like Crack.
Also, Crack insists that people are "attacking" him just like MLK. Crack's a martyr. The "attacks" Crack is speaking of are simply disagreement with him on websites. This is not quite the same as assassination, but I guess it's close enough for Crack.
Talk about delusions of grandeur! A guy sitting in a room ranting and raving on the web is just like MLK, and people disagreeing with him is the same as murdering him.
In other words, Crack is a delusion nutjob case.
But, he represents all black people! Just ask him!
crack: "But now that blacks get some, there seems to be a problem - why?"
Whoa there big fella.
We have been lectured to ad nauseum that programs that benefit blacks are definitely and emphatically NOT giveaways.
But payments for services rendered.
Are you sure you're really black?
I mean, how could you make that big of a slip up?
I'm going to have place you on "authentic black" probation until you (brace yourself) get back on the left-wing rhetorical plantation.
A note will also have to be placed in your permanent record.
Your. Permanent. Record.
Anyway, to sum up:
Putin needs stuff.
Putin wants stuff.
obama promised to be "more flexible" after the election.
obama was reelected.
obama is being more flexible (red line on, red line off)
Putin is getting stuff.
The left blames the right.
You. Can't. Make. This. Up.
John Henry@1235pm/
Yes, the BBC for many years (30s-early 60s, iirc)
required their radio news announcers to wear white tie and gloves so as to intone the proper "respect" and formality that the subjects deserved.
Sensible seeming women's health related abortion restrictions... Haha. What restrictions are not going to be demagogued by the Abortion Party and their heroines like Magic Sneakers and Devout Catholic Pelosi? War on Women, anyone? We all no Professor Althouse is prepared to put the boots to any Republican who dares to be insufficiently patronizing to WOMYN!
@Drago
Yes, the possibility does exist that Crack is a white guy engaging in internet fraud for unknowable reasons. That would be interesting in a way.
The other possibility is that he's a mentally ill, incompetent, raving madman with delusions of grandeur sitting in front of a computer.
From day to day, I think the former or latter is true.
Poor Maureen. Those jeans give Obama a waistline and flared hips.
Attention must be paid to Drago.
Must.
Be.
Paid.
Who's president, or who will be president, is a much overrated issue.
Doesn't matter that much.
Mostly, we have government by lawyer. The electorate has been pretty much aced out.
I'd guess it's all going to come down to a few things here.
If the Republicans gain a majority, will it be an establishment majority or a tea party majority?
If establishment majority, I don't see a lot changing. We will continue to hear, "We can't do anything until we get a Republican President."
If it's a Tea Party route, then we'll get some stiffer spines in congress who will push for
1) Balanced Budgets
2) Repeal of Obamacare
3) Opening up the nation to drilling and fracking
4) Tougher border security
5) Definitely not approving of nominations by Obama for the Supreme Court that are radical ideologues.
And more along those lines. To include special prosecutors and investigations into this administration.
@St. George (1:38 pm): Great collection of photos. The Queen looks really serious with that rifle (and no, the reference to the Queen is not homophopic).
@Black Emcee
OK, I see what you did. You equate racism to affirmative action. I can live with that. You assert that laws/policies expressly forbidding minority participation are the same as laws/policies requiring minority participation. So you agree, Holder and Obama are racists? After all, they both are strong advocates of race as a consideration in college admissions, housing, federal contracts, school discipline, school loans etc...
You have a much stronger distaste for affirmative action than myself, but to each his own. I would never say requiring 17% African-American enrollment in a university is the same thing as laws prohibiting land ownership of freed slaves, but you have stated your case: affirmative action=racism.
As a fashionista I didn't get the Obama Mom Jeans Memo either.
I observe fashion all day, every day, on the streets. And I can smell mom jeans a mile away. Obama's jeans were not mom jeans, but the old fucks here def wear mom jeans....think of it as a compliment though, otherwise you would be tagged as a fag.
Ted Cruz and Ron Paul where manly jeans.
chick thinks he is witty but he is totally not.
For about twenty years, I have been trying in vain to figure out why anybody cares what Maureen Dowd thinks.
I want the republicans to retake the senate...granted that gun toting Mitch is defeated-by teabagger or tard.
It would be interesting all this divided government. I want massive fights and nothing getting done....similar to today. Also chick getting a semi would not be interesting but at least he would have a reason to get up....because he doesn't actually work-total taker.
Somefeller: "Attention must be paid to Drago."
Salient points not in alignment with the chosen narrative of the day must be ignored.
Must.
Be.
Ignored.
Titus: "I want the republicans to retake the senate...granted that gun toting Mitch is defeated-by teabagger or tard."
That reminds me of that cartoon that gets recycled every war.
first frame: Hunkered down American soldier yells insults about the opposing side leader.
next: Opposing side soldier fires at American.
Next: Opposing soldier insults American president.
Final: American soldier shown shaking hands with enemy soldier.
@Crack Emcee
"What does any of that have to do with who lost 20% of the nation's wealth before Obama became prez?"
Sorry, I should have been more clear. The stock market and housing market were inflated due to gov't policies that allowed banks and lending institutions to report they were far more profitable based on mortgage backed securities than was actually the case. The same type of over-valuation was apparent in '99 when the tech bubble burst. A correction in any overvalued market is mandatory--eventually. In short, the loss in wealth was a loss in inflated value.
So, to sum up Titus' position:
obama wearing mom jeans must be denied.
Just because.
Then, accuse obama's opponents of doing precisely what obama did and pretend the opponents are lame.
Bottom line: I think it's adorable the way Titus will lie to protect his precious.
Adorable.
I wonder what's made somefeller so sad.
Did Putin not call obama after he promised to?
And obama was probably waiting by the phone just waiting for it to ring so he could turn to Kerry or Hillary and say, "should I pick it up? Will I look too desperate?"
It's a regular sorority-fest going on over in the West Wing these days.
The Internet is awesome. It allows all of us to see the inner life of people we otherwise wouldn't interact with from day to day. Like Drago, for example. Please continue.
jazzizhep said...
@Black Emcee
OK, I see what you did. You equate racism to affirmative action.
Never said that.
Yeah, being black has definitely stopped whites from attacking me,...
If you were truly worried about White violence against you, you would shut the fuck up and behave.
somefeller said...
The Internet is awesome. It allows all of us to see the inner life of people we otherwise wouldn't interact with from day to day. Like Drago, for example. Please continue.
Some of these new guys are REALLY weird,...
Don't expect much. The welfare riots will burn the cities to the ground before the left surrenders. Maybe all that ammunition the government's been buying was prescient.
I think the impeachment scenario is highly unlikely. It wouldn't help the GOP. They'd seem irrational and aggressive.
Only because you, and people like you, would work tirelessly to make it so.
In a rational world, the Democratic members of Congress would be making moves to impeach this thug.
Somefeller is really butthurt today.
It's strange to see him so down.
Think of it from his perspective.
The left told us, explicitly, that they had elected a God.
And now, all of this.
I understand somefeller.
There is nothing you can say for your paper "God".
It must be upsetting.
Please continue.
Let it out. Don't hold it in.
crack: "Some of these new guys are REALLY weird,..."
Always nice when crack climbs down from the Cross to engage with little people.
Hang in there Crack. Your genius cannot be denied forever.
Nor can payment be far behind.
"While our Beloved didn't cause the crash,.."
Exactly - white guys who didn't go to prison did that.
Who's fault is that? The Bush administration prosecuted Wall Street fraud and corruption and won their cases. It is the Obama administration that has no prosecuted anyone...
Another thing that the Internet shows us is the lack of reading comprehension of many people. For example, my little japes about Putin stamps and soconfabs in Moscow wouldn't be seen as statements of sadness by people who can read. In fact, I'm laughing right now at Drago. But. He. Can't. Tell. Probably a common incident in his life.
Like I said, please continue.
@Crack Emcee
"Never said that."
Didn't you?
"How about homesteading for whites after the Civil War?"
I would call it racist to exclude freed slaves from owning land, but you call it affirmative action for whites. Don't get me wrong, I find it refreshing that an African-American other than Dr. Thomas Sowell believes affirmative action is racists.
Surely you don't mean some forms of affirmative action are racist (banks not underwriting V.A. loans for blacks for example), while simultaneously believing other forms of affirmative action are not? That would be hypocritical, right?
...talking to Putin on the phone last weekend...
What's the Russian for Bitch, please...?
somefeller: " In fact, I'm laughing right now at Drago."
Somefeller feels compelled (COMPELLED) to let us know he's laughing at someone.
He could have simply asserted something or taken a position in defense of his earthly God and presented evidence in support of that position.
But he didn't.
Because he...can't?
Sounds a bit forced.
Do continue somefeller.
What's the Russian for Bitch, please...?
Somefeller, what is the Russian for "Bitch, please..."?
Do you think it might be easier if Putin said it in Austrian?
Drago asks questions. Drago demands evidence. Attention must be paid.
The pathos is Lomanesque. And funny.
somefeller: "Another thing that the Internet shows us is the lack of reading comprehension of many people."
What it primarily shows us is how small bands of voice-actuated left wing trolls will show up on threads en masse with their assigned talking points.
Once confronted, the trolls become sad or disappear.
They rarely receive effective follow-ups for likely responses.
It's probably a training issue and if so, then just a little more time and experience should help somefeller turn the corner.
Here's hoping you fully realize your troll potential somefeller. There has got to be a way to translate that skillset (such as it is) into a real job somewhere.
Though to be honest, beyond working as an obamacare navigator, I'm not sure what the job might be.
Somefeller STILL unable to muster up a defense of his paper God.
Well, there's got to be an old Palin insult in the bag here somewhere.....
jazzizhep,
Don't get me wrong, I find it refreshing that an African-American other than Dr. Thomas Sowell believes affirmative action is racists.
That's twice now - I didn't say that.
You don't read too well, do you? Comprehension problems. I say something, you repeat what you think, but say they're my words.
No joke - that's a sign of neurosis,...
jazzizhep,
That would be hypocritical, right?
No, what would be hypocritical is for whites to accept all those goodies - which they did when blacks couldn't - and then complain about socialism or "big government" when someone else gets some.
Either give it back or shut up.
Crack: "Either give it back or shut up."
And what, explicitly, should an individual white person "give back"?
Lets start with garage, Titus and somefeller.
What should they "give back".
Remember, individuals will be paying something back, so who should they be, what should they give back, and to whom should more stuff be given?
This should be fun.
And remember crack, nothing you offer up as a reparations type action is going to force Putin to give back the Crimea and/or stop him from heading to Eastern Ukraine and then onto the whole ball of wax.
Putin wants the pipelines.
Usually, I skip Crack's comments but this one caught my eye.
"Either give it back or shut up."
So, it's reparations again, eh ?
Nothing new. He might as well be Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton.
"No, what would be hypocritical is for whites to accept all those goodies - which they did when blacks couldn't - and then complain about socialism or "big government" when someone else gets some.
Either give it back or shut up."
Is there someone here specifically you're talking to?
I haven't received whatever it is you're talking about. Instead, I've been having my money redistributed to other Americans for over 20 years now. It's not going to me, but flowing from me.
The Crack Emcee:
As a Native American I am pleased with your plan. I want my percentage** of the entire continent back. I'm fairly certain I now own just over one square mile of the continental United States.
**3.1 million square miles in the continental US.
**2.9 million Native Americans according to the Census Bureau.
Now what?
Birkel wrote:
*3.1 million square miles in the continental US.
**2.9 million Native Americans according to the Census Bureau.
Now what?
You get 1 square mile, and Crack gets 4l0 acres and a mule. No tractors. A mule.
jr565:
I don't see how The Crack Emcee can be owed anything based on a promise by people who didn't, by right (according to The Crack Emcee's "logic"), own the land to begin.
My people may debate what The Crack Emcee is owed, of course. But we will not honor the promises of an illegitimate (by The Crack Emcee's "logic) government.
He may have the mule, however.
Speaking of Affirmative Action, watching Barry get publically and repeatedly punked by Vlad is just another example of how uncomfortable it is for all concerned when Affirmative Action hires just. don't. work. out.
Birkel said...
The Crack Emcee:
As a Native American I am pleased with your plan.
Indians took slaves - shut up you sellout.
@Crack Emcee
"No, what would be hypocritical is for whites to accept all those goodies - which they did when blacks couldn't - and then complain about socialism or "big government" when someone else gets some."
Ahh yes, the "you treated my great-great-great-great grandparents wrong, now I should get to treat you wrong" defense. The "he hit me first" tactic always works in the schoolyard as well.
"You don't read too well, do you? Comprehension problems."
Perhaps my comprehension is lacking. I could have swore you equated racist policies to white affirmative action.
After re-reading your posts I offer my apologies, you did not say the policies allowing free land to whites and not blacks was racist--I only assumed as much. You also did not say that loans offered to white veterans at reduced rates, but not blacks is racist--I only assumed as much.
You called the above instances white affirmative action and I only assumed you thought they were racist. That is why I said you equated affirmative action to racism. The only way for me to be wrong is for you to say the above policies were not racist. And the only way they could not be racist, is if the exclusions are based on something other than race, n'est pas?
Either past laws are racist, and I am correct in my assumption, or they were not racist and are simply affirmative action for whites. In the latter case I am wrong, and I am sorry. However, you would be one of the few people still left claiming that past injustices were not based on race and therefore racist.
Meanwhile, of course, as others have mentioned above the President of the United States appears unserious on the world stage. His casual dress is a signal to all observers -- and they observe him quite closely overseas -- that the United States is withdrawn and distant from foreign affairs. The world has taken the measure of the man such that now even those who might have been uncertain now know this president will "lead from behind" and accomplish little.
eric,
"I haven't received whatever it is you're talking about."
Bullshit. If you don't understand what you got and how, that's one thing, but you don't live in the richest country on Earth and claim you - as a white person - haven't benefited. It's impossible.
"Instead, I've been having my money redistributed to other Americans for over 20 years now. It's not going to me, but flowing from me."
Again, bullshit. You're either in a "country" or you're not. These are either citizens with you or not. This trick whites do, pretending we're the "other" that you have no responsibility to is why no one will vote with you.
You're not American. You just mouth the words,...
Micheal K I would back off there about the TARP. Lets not forget that TARP was an emergency measure to keep the banks from collapsing and taking the country down the tubes to 1930 or worse. That Obama continued with it past the immediate emergency is another issue.
Of the several banks I deal with in my business not a one them had any great to say about the TARP-it cost them money but they also said without it the banking system would have frozen as no bank could have trusted any other bank's checks, wires or ACH's. Let me emphasize that point. We were at the edge of a depression, a real disaster and a near collapse of the economy. Bush was far more effective and competent at that moment of truth-the financial abyss than any national Democrat that one can think off.
As it is banks aren't lending what they could be lending in part because of their capital position. The new Basel requirements require banks to have higher reserves (which don't yield income unless invested is sovereigns) which limits their lending ability especially with a lot of loans on the books not being considered prime although the banks are collecting. Then of course the economy largely sucks so even with free money no one wants to borrow unless they absolutely need to borrow or the project is one with a pretty safe return and repayment. A lot these impediments are Obama/Democrat Congress initiatives.
jazzizhep,
Ahh yes, the "you treated my great-great-great-great grandparents wrong, now I should get to treat you wrong" defense. The "he hit me first" tactic always works in the schoolyard as well.
That's three times in a row you've put your words in my handwriting.
You're crazy - and we're done.
Now it comes to a head.
Any readers at this point may see that The Crack Emcee thinks all animals are equal but that black animals are more equal. Sir, you are a goof if you wish to compare the suffering of blacks to that of Native Americans.
...
Meanwhile, President Obama looks unserious on the world stage.
"What it primarily shows us is how small bands of voice-actuated left wing trolls will show up on threads en masse with their assigned talking points.
Once confronted, the trolls become sad or disappear."
Drago appears to have lapsed into hypermania today. How many comments has he posted on this thread so far?
impeachment won't happen because Joe Biden
The second scenario assumes Republicans voting as a monolithic bloc when in the majority, like the Democrats do now. With a number of people who have run against the "go along to get along" Republicans, I don't see that happening
@Crack Emcee
"You're crazy - and we're done."
It must be tough seeing the fallacies in your argument exposed. I hope it gets easier for you.
I guess I did put words in your mouth. Here is my revision.
Because whites treated my great-great-great grandparents wrong, they can not complain when "big government" wants to take things from them in the name of socialism.
You never said it was "treating me wrong," I mistakenly added such a sentiment as personal commentary. You obviously believe there is nothing wrong in doing so.
The Crack Emcee said...
Birkel said...
The Crack Emcee:
As a Native American I am pleased with your plan.
Indians took slaves - shut up you sellout.
3/9/14, 3:50 PM
True. But then again some blacks owned slaves as well and no matter your (pardon the pun )whitewashing of Africans and Muslims who sold blacks in to slavery the fact remains is that Indians hold the trump card: they didn't invite or ask anyone to come over and take their land. So with that the Indians can compute what they owe the blacks and debit what the blacks owe them and still be in 'black' so to speak. So when reparations come to blacks from the whites the Indians will take their share leaving blacks with nothing. Along with everyone else making a reparations claim. Then the whites, blacks, hispanics and everyone else not sufficiently Indian blooded can pack their bags and go to wherever their ancestors came from. Now unless that happens forget about reparations because its just not going to happen whether or not it's deserved.
jazzizhep,
Your comprehension skills are shit.
If they impeached Obama and in the investigation found HUGE wrongdoing that went right to him, no, it would not hurt them.
But if they just squeaked by a impeachment with ho-hum proof, yes it would hurt them.
Same for Holder. With good proof of big crimes, yea lock him up.
Now as for what the Republicans would do with both houses of Congress?
Well if they have a overridign majority, not unlike what Pelosi and Reid had, then repeal Obamacare and reduce taxes are obvious to-dos.
If they cannot override a Veto from Obama then it will be hard slogging.
Crack, quoting birkel and replying...
"Birkel said...
The Crack Emcee:
As a Native American I am pleased with your plan.
Indians took slaves - shut up you sellout."
Blacks owned slaves too. Ooops.
eric said...
Crack, quoting birkel and replying...
"Birkel said...
The Crack Emcee:
As a Native American I am pleased with your plan.
Indians took slaves - shut up you sellout."
Blacks owned slaves too. Ooops.
In such insignificant numbers you clown yourself for mentioning it.
"Bullshit. If you don't understand what you got and how, that's one thing, but you don't live in the richest country on Earth and claim you - as a white person - haven't benefited. It's impossible."
Funny, I was just going to write to you,
...If you don't understand what you got and how, that's one thing, but you don't live in the richest country on Earth and claim - as a black person - you haven't benefited. It's impossible.
"In such insignificant numbers you clown yourself for mentioning it."
What's the over under here? Indians owned them in insignificant numbers as well, yet you dismiss Birkel.
@Crack Emcee
"Again, bullshit. You're either in a "country" or you're not. These are either citizens with you or not. This trick whites do, pretending we're the "other" that you have no responsibility to is why no one will vote with you.
You're not American. You just mouth the words,..."
Wow, talk about comprehension. Can you please point to where in The Constitution or even The Declaration of Independence where being an American means "being responsible" for somebody else. I always thought being an American meant personal responsibility--the foundation of liberty and freedom.
The more one trusts to somebody else, the less freedom one enjoys. And you are correct, people are voting for less personal responsibility because it means less free stuff. Alexander de Tocqueville predicted as much almost a century and a half ago.
The last time I checked, the Constitution is a document that instructs what the gov't can and can't do. I missed the amendment stating "I am my brother's keeper." or "it takes a village."
eric,
...If you don't understand what you got and how, that's one thing, but you don't live in the richest country on Earth and claim - as a black person - you haven't benefited. It's impossible.
No - we were the ones with the laws saying we couldn't even freely drink water from the fountain of our choice, remember?
Y'alls stupid.
jazzizhep,
See? Your comprehension skills ARE shit - we're done.
"No - we were the ones with the laws saying we couldn't even freely drink water from the fountain of our choice, remember?"
Remember as in, what I was taught through history lessons? Yes.
eric said...
"No - we were the ones with the laws saying we couldn't even freely drink water from the fountain of our choice, remember?"
Remember as in, what I was taught through history lessons? Yes.
Liar, I told you, Jim Crow was in effect when I was a child.
You fools think this shit was a clean break, don't you?
An announcement was made and everything stopped?
Silly white people,...
Madisonman, quite a few.
Every now and again subject matter, area of interest, available time and or lack of immediate prior commitment creates an opportunity or 2 to "contribute".
Additionally a desire for a change of pace from a particular task item prompts me forward.
That confluence doesnt happen too often.
For instance i had to mosey off to catch a flight and in between phone calls here i am.
It is true though that today i am especially charged up over a specific opportunity so the adrenaline is flowing.
Whoa - a lightbulb just went off - I get it:
You guys are so used to being racist dickheads, you don't know what anybody means when they call you on it.
That makes sense. Massive ignorance and an equally heavy lack of self-awareness. Hmmm.
I might have to be nicer to you guys, you need help,...
"Liar, I told you, Jim Crow was in effect when I was a child."
You're asking me if I remembered something. I was born in 1972. How am I going to to remember something that ended almost a decade before I was born?
You keep accusing others of having comprehension problems. Maybe you should look in the mirror.
Plus i simply could allow our resident lefties walkaway from their 100 year love affair with every single communist dictator that came down the pike in response to their latest "dont look at obama!"squirrel meme.
@Crack Emcee
"See? Your comprehension skills ARE shit - we're done"
And yet you couldn't offer a single phrase to rebut my point, you use insults.
It's not hard, I hear the entire text of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence are on this website called Wikipedia (perhaps you have heard?).
An old saying for lawyers: If the facts are not on your side, use the law. If the law is not on your side, use facts. If neither are on your side, pound the table. Keep pounding the table Emcee, calling people names is always the last resort.
NOW, we are done!
@Eric
Crack's idea of a lack of comprehension is using any sort of logic to flush out what he means.
To wit:
He called past laws and policies white affirmative action. I, apparently incorrectly, assumed those policies were racist--such as the aforementioned Jim Crow laws. He told me I had comprehension problems, but I could never get him to elaborate on what I misunderstood. Are white affirmative action laws NOT racist, are all affirmative action laws racist, or are some affirmative action laws racist while others are not?
Instead I simply received insults and accusations.
" The new Basel requirements require banks to have higher reserves (which don't yield income unless invested is sovereigns) which limits their lending ability especially with a lot of loans on the books not being considered prime although the banks are collecting. "
You probably know much more about this than I do but the issue was before TARP was passed when there were a few sales of distressed MBS assets. Once TARP came on the scene, the market for these evaporated. There are lots of bad loans that were never liquidated. Japan has the same problem.
"Are white affirmative action laws NOT racist, are all affirmative action laws racist, or are some affirmative action laws racist while others are not?"
Isn't the answer obvious?
White affirmative action = Wrong
All other affirmative action = Right
eric,
How am I going to to remember something that ended almost a decade before I was born?
BWAAA-HAHAHAHA!!!
God, you're dumb. This shit didn't fully end, as we know it, until the fucking 80s, you moron.
No - we were the ones with the laws saying we couldn't even freely drink water from the fountain of our choice, remember?
Once again...that was the Democrats ( your new friends) not White people.
By the way, White people were not allowed to drink from Colored fountains either. It was rarely if ever prosecuted, and few Whites if any would want to, but it was illegal.
@Eric
The problem in his statement, in which Crack is completely oblivious, is that affirmative action policies are expressly written to further inclusion. No such policy existed to "further the inclusion" of whites, they existed to exclude minorities. He tried to use inflammatory language to prove a point that affirmative action was OK when whites used it. I am not sure if he does not understand the definition of affirmative action, or does not understand the difference between inclusion and exclusion because he just resorts to calling names.
It's all about the Treasuries and keeping the money flowing, especially since the dollar's status as thrvreserve currency is waive ring. myRa, how long before all 401ks must invest a portion in T-Bills?
*"God, you're dumb. This shit didn't fully end, as we know it, until the fucking 80s, you moron."
*Citation needed.
The Civil Rights Act (1964), the Voting Rights Act(1965), and then the 14th Amendment (1968) made it illegal for the gov't to discriminate based race (among other things)--putting an end to Jim Crow.
I don't usually call for citation because opinion varies, but what decade Jim Crow laws met their end is not an opinion.
You should check the date on the 14th Amendment.
You may have meant 1868
jazzizhep said...
*"God, you're dumb. This shit didn't fully end, as we know it, until the fucking 80s, you moron."
*Citation needed.
When we're done? Not a chance.
Learn to read.
I'm being mean - here, I'll help you out:
Does this look like the 60s?
@Birkel
I am going to try and forget you just bitch-slapped me. If I say I didn't get shit all mixed up and thought myself too smart to re-read before I post, would that be believed? If it is believable then yes, it was a typo.
The welfare riots will burn the cities to the ground before the left surrenders. Maybe all that ammunition the government's been buying was prescient.
If they played by the Left's rulebook, the Tea Party would hack the EBT system and bring it down. The blue cities would fall within a week, the government within a month.
Reading through the dialog, one thing is clear-
If spring doesn't spring soon, and life return to the planet, we're all going to @Crack!
You probably know much more about this than I do but the issue was before TARP was passed when there were a few sales of distressed MBS assets. Once TARP came on the scene, the market for these evaporated. There are lots of bad loans that were never liquidated. Japan has the same problem."
Micheal true to a point but the alternative to the TARP- 30% reduction in GDP and 25% plus official unemployement along with an equally great deflation would have been so horrible as to never have never been seriously considered. Just remember every sour loan was blessed by the regulators and every bank that failed was supervised by the regulators.
Poor old Mo Do--lost in the river of her lies. She must have naked pictures of her publisher in carnal congress with a donkey. Otherwise I don't see how she keeps her job.
jazzizhep:
I didn't mean it as an insult.
I meant to take away one thing from The Crack Emcee's playbook.
On the internet, we pedants rule!!!!
jk
Virtually every white person on here had ancestors that were slaves of the Roman Empire. When I get paid by the Italians I'm kickin' some of that over to Crack.
The Cracker Emcee said...
Virtually every white person on here had ancestors that were slaves of the Roman Empire
I've managed to get over it.
Yup. My Welsh and Cherokee selves are always warring with my Norman self.
Gee, we're all children of conquerors. But people like Crack are proof of the stubbornness of recessive genes.
Maybe he's ashamed of his ancestors? Maybe thats why he's always lashing out about his race.
I see Crack has nothing to do again today.
Birkel you are on to something: imagine if the Indians were able to collect a mere fifty cents a day in rent from every non Indian living in the USA. 313 million x .50 cents a day every day in to perpetuity. Think of it: $115,000.000 each and every single day in income divided in to 3mm Indians. If you can pull that off you will be by far the greatest Indian in all of history. If you do pull it off, be a sport and cut me a small comission check for the idea. Heck you could even pay Crack and all the blacks full reparations and still drown in cash plus going forward you would get it back in future rent from them as well. All you have to is figure out how to collect the rent and evict the deadbeats that are delinquent on the rent.
@Birkel
:-)
I was only insulted because I was off by a mere 100 years and you felt the need to correct me. If you are going to be soooooo critical, perhaps you should be a teacher or something. :-)
Yup. My Welsh and Cherokee selves are always warring with my Norman self.
Gee, we're all children of conquerors. But people like Crack are proof of the stubbornness of recessive genes.
Every time I just about cure myself of the negative stereotypes of black men, Crack comes along and proves that they are all true.
Would MoDo swoon over Barak Obama if he was wearing a bowling shirt?
Would David Brooks?
Would Joe Biden?
All such deep thinkers.
Michael K said...
". Japan has the same problem."
Yes, some of us have pointed out that, with regard to bad paper out there, we didn't learn anything from the situation Japan went through before us. They tried the same fiscal and monetary policies that we have had for the last 7 years, actually that we have had for the last 13 years. And Japan had anemic growth for what, 15 years? 20?
Rusty said...
The Cracker Emcee said...
Virtually every white person on here had ancestors that were slaves of the Roman Empire
I've managed to get over it.
You've never dealt with it - that's the advantage of being white - you can blow off what you want. Blacks have to live with it and - by your choice - we have to live with it alone.
What you guys don't get is you're here and the Romans are there, with an ocean and time between you.
Blacks are here with their abusers - supposedly our countrymen - who deny anything worth mentioning ever happened while we wallow in poverty. How about those pre-Nazi medical experiments, gentlemen? Where do they fit in your conception of the country?
There's simply no comparison.
And I'll say one more thing to you:
Say what you want about my tactics, but I'm trying with you guys. Most blacks wouldn't bother.
If you can't get along with me - semi-educated, actually concerned - you'll be hopeless with the black people I know. They wouldn't bother with your nonsense. In person, most of you would already have been beat to a pulp for some of the shit y'all say about blacks. And rightfully so.
People can only bear so much, andy blacks shouldn't have to put up with any of it any longer.
THAT's what the country should be trying to get through to you all:
We've had enough.
Shouting Thomas' answer to world hunger:
Stop talking about it!
Shouting Thomas' answer to child rape:
Stop talking about it!
Shouting Thomas' answer to female circumcision:
Stop talking about it!
Shouting Thomas' answer to genocide:
Stop talking about it!
He's the only crackpot on the planet who thinks ignoring a major problem will somehow make it better,...
Post a Comment