The Big Ass Second Term/Politics thread part IV [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

KevinNYC

02-18-2014, 03:07 AM

So in the other thread, I mentioned that since Hillary Clinton has such a commanding lead in early polling for 2016, we can expect three years of Lewinsky and Benghazi.

Well, it's on. We can all expect to hear tons about folks we last thought of in '90s.

Rand Paul (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/01/28/rand_paul_clinton_was_committing_workplace_violenc e_we_all_should_be_opposed_to.html) has been trying to portray the Lewinsky scandal as something other than consensual.

But really I think while there was a huge amount of media attention towards Bill Clinton and his affairs this wasn't an affair. This was a work place sexual harassment. And the Democrats want to be all high and mighty like they're the party to champion women. Well, gosh, their standard bearer seems to be a guy that was committing workplace kind of violence that we all should be opposed to.

I don't know how he is going to get Americans to forget how the affair began when the Starr report sold in the millions. But good luck to him.

I did not expect to hear the name Kathleen Wiley so soon. Apparently she is making the rounds and will be on Megyn Kelly's show on Fox tomorrow.

Wiley claims that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her. It was on the day of her husband committed suicide. The FBI later found she lied to them and the White House released a dozen or so positive letters she sent to Clinton after the alleged assault. One of the folks who testified against her credibility was Linda Tripp, the Clinton hater who illegally recorded her phone calls with Lewinsky. Tripp said that Wiley wanted to bed Clinton and was always trying to be where he would be.

Years later when she had a book to sell, she claimed that Clinton had her husband killed.

It's going to be three years of insanity folks.

gigantes

02-18-2014, 03:28 AM

figuratively i'd like to line those lewinsky people up and...... give them enough retrograde TLC until they turned in to actual decent human beings.

but as i see it with the GOP, the more time you spend flinging toxic sludge around, the more your intellectual atrophy. seems like they've become the party that defeats themselves, at least on the presidential level.

HarryCallahan

02-18-2014, 07:18 AM

Why you gotta start a new thread every week?

Because she's got such a "commanding lead" i'll bet $5 and the tip of my dick Hillary doesn't win.

Balla_Status

02-18-2014, 07:20 AM

Why you gotta start a new thread every week?

Because she's got such a "commanding lead" i'll bet $5 and the tip of my dick Hillary doesn't win.

KevinNYC has gotta be the biggest wanker on this website. Yeah, let's vote the same person in again and again. Dude has his head in the sand when it comes to any criticism to his beloved democrat party.

HarryCallahan

02-18-2014, 07:58 AM

KevinNYC has gotta be the biggest wanker on this website. Yeah, let's vote the same person in again and again. Dude has his head in the sand when it comes to any criticism to his beloved democrat party.

6 months in Australia and you're already calling people wanker. :applause:

KevinNYC

02-18-2014, 08:56 AM

Yeah, because I'm making this stuff up. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/30/hillary-clinton-is-the-biggest-frontrunner-for-the-democratic-presidential-nomination-ever-yes-ever/)
Hillary Clinton is the biggest frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination ever. Yes, ever.
Hillary Rodham Clinton's 61-point edge over Joe Biden in new Washington Post-ABC News polling makes her the single biggest frontrunner for a Democratic presidential nomination in the history of the poll, an affirmation of the conventional wisdom that the nomination is hers for the taking.
Clinton stands at an eye-popping 73 percent in a hypothetical 2016 primary race with Biden, the sitting vice president, who is the only other candidate in double digits at 12 percent. Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who has signed a letter along with a handful of other Democratic senators urging Clinton to run, is at 8 percent. And that's it.

The point being nobody knows who is going to be the GOP nominee, but it's going to be hard for any other Democrat to win, which means GOP folks know who to train their attacks on. You won't be hearing any negative stories about Biden from the GOP anytime soon.

Yes, it's like 1,000 days until the election, but this is a very unusual situation.

Gabi

02-18-2014, 09:04 AM

Panta Rhei proving it is a fact in US since Obama.

HarryCallahan

02-18-2014, 09:12 AM

Yeah, because I'm making this stuff up. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/30/hillary-clinton-is-the-biggest-frontrunner-for-the-democratic-presidential-nomination-ever-yes-ever/)

The point being nobody knows who is going to be the GOP nominee, but it's going to be hard for any other Democrat to win, which means GOP folks know who to train their attacks on. You won't be hearing any negative stories about Biden from the GOP anytime soon.

Yes, it's like 1,000 days until the election, but this is a very unusual situation.

Nobody was saying you're making shit up, just that you're a fgt, which you are.

KevinNYC

02-18-2014, 09:23 AM

Yeah, I highly doubt people will bring up Clintons affairs much. Especially since Im sure that Hillary is probably the last person who would defend what he did.
That being said Id say Christie has a good chance of beating her if he runs. Thats coming from a guy who hates Christie despite usually leaning republican.

Karl Rove has said that it's not good politics for Rand Paul, but it's going to be near impossible for GOP groups, if not candidates to stay away from. Some outside group is going to realize that they can raise money and build up their mailing list, by going after Clinton this way.

As for Christie, he always had a tough road through the primaries to win the nomination, but it's a lot worse after the Bridge scandal. He would have to survive the rest of the investigations unscathed. There were some polls when he was leading Clinton, but that is gone. (http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-christie-vs-clinton) His support among independents has crumbled. More importantly, the argument that might have worked against Republicans who were 100% fans is gone too, the idea that he had the best chance of being elected president. If he survives to the primaries in a strong enough position to make a run, every GOP candidate is going to aim their fire at him and they will all use the Bridge stuff.

I don't see how things don't get worse for Christie seeing as we still haven't got to who made the decision and why. For now, his staff is fighting the subpoenas, but how long will that last. Also the federal prosecutor will be subpoenaing people. Would they be able to stiff arm him, like they are trying to do with the legislature?

HarryCallahan

02-18-2014, 09:40 AM

Karl Rove has said that it's not good politics for Rand Paul, but it's going to be near impossible for GOP groups, if not candidates to stay away from. Some outside group is going to realize that they can raise money and build up their mailing list, by going after Clinton this way.

As for Christie, he always had a tough road through the primaries to win the nomination, but it's a lot worse after the Bridge scandal. He would have to survive the rest of the investigations unscathed. There were some polls when he was leading Clinton, but that is gone. (http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-christie-vs-clinton) His support among independents has crumbled. More importantly, the argument that might have worked against Republicans who were 100% fans is gone too, the idea that he had the best chance of being elected president. If he survives to the primaries in a strong enough position to make a run, every GOP candidate is going to aim their fire at him and they will all use the Bridge stuff.

I don't see how things don't get worse for Christie seeing as we still haven't got to who made the decision and why. For now, his staff is fighting the subpoenas, but how long will that last. Also the federal prosecutor will be subpoenaing people. Would they be able to stiff arm him, like they are trying to do with the legislature?

Karl Rove hates Rand Paul and anyone who attempts to change the political discussion from "the state should be doing things this way or that way" to "the state should be less involved or more involved."

Rand will probably win. Looks like the best candidate to win Iowa and New Hampshire, and it's going to be tough to stop that kind of momentum. IF Jeb runs he could pick up a lot of steam by rolling through SCarolina and Florida, but he stands no-chance of winning a general election.

MightyWhitey

02-18-2014, 05:32 PM

So in the other thread, I mentioned that since Hillary Clinton has such a commanding lead in early polling for 2016, we can expect three years of Lewinsky and Benghazi.

Well, it's on. We can all expect to hear tons about folks we last thought of in '90s.

Rand Paul (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/01/28/rand_paul_clinton_was_committing_workplace_violenc e_we_all_should_be_opposed_to.html) has been trying to portray the Lewinsky scandal as something other than consensual.

I don't know how he is going to get Americans to forget how the affair began when the Starr report sold in the millions. But good luck to him.

I did not expect to hear the name Kathleen Wiley so soon. Apparently she is making the rounds and will be on Megyn Kelly's show on Fox tomorrow.

Wiley claims that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her. It was on the day of her husband committed suicide. The FBI later found she lied to them and the White House released a dozen or so positive letters she sent to Clinton after the alleged assault. One of the folks who testified against her credibility was Linda Tripp, the Clinton hater who illegally recorded her phone calls with Lewinsky. Tripp said that Wiley wanted to bed Clinton and was always trying to be where he would be.

Years later when she had a book to sell, she claimed that Clinton had her husband killed.

It's going to be three years of insanity folks.
3 years of insanity compared to the 2 terms we're going through right now :facepalm

gigantes

02-18-2014, 06:10 PM

3 years of insanity compared to the 2 terms we're going through right now :facepalm
well, making a complicated situation more difficult doesn't seem like something to especially look forward to.

longhornfan1234

02-18-2014, 06:22 PM

CBO report: raising min wage to 10.10 to cost us 500,000 jobs by 2016.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995

longhornfan1234

02-18-2014, 06:24 PM

So in the other thread, I mentioned that since Hillary Clinton has such a commanding lead in early polling for 2016, we can expect three years of Lewinsky and Benghazi.

Well, it's on. We can all expect to hear tons about folks we last thought of in '90s.

Rand Paul (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/01/28/rand_paul_clinton_was_committing_workplace_violenc e_we_all_should_be_opposed_to.html) has been trying to portray the Lewinsky scandal as something other than consensual.

I don't know how he is going to get Americans to forget how the affair began when the Starr report sold in the millions. But good luck to him.

I did not expect to hear the name Kathleen Wiley so soon. Apparently she is making the rounds and will be on Megyn Kelly's show on Fox tomorrow.

Wiley claims that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her. It was on the day of her husband committed suicide. The FBI later found she lied to them and the White House released a dozen or so positive letters she sent to Clinton after the alleged assault. One of the folks who testified against her credibility was Linda Tripp, the Clinton hater who illegally recorded her phone calls with Lewinsky. Tripp said that Wiley wanted to bed Clinton and was always trying to be where he would be.

Years later when she had a book to sell, she claimed that Clinton had her husband killed.

It's going to be three years of insanity folks.

I'm not scared of Hilary. She lost to an inexperienced community organizer in '08.

Rasheed1

02-18-2014, 06:36 PM

Rand Paul is a total idiot if he thinks that harping on Monica Lewinsky is going to help him :lol

Its going to help hillary and hurt him..

KevinNYC

02-18-2014, 06:44 PM

I'm not scared of Hilary. She lost to an inexperienced community organizer in '08.

Yeah, that guy never had any electoral success against Republicans, oh wait....
Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice.........

Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who did it in 1952 and 1956, and the first Democrat to do so since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four consecutive White House races. Roosevelt received 53.4 percent of the vote -- his lowest -- in his last race in 1944.

Also when you do a cost/benefit analysis you need to do consider both the costs and the benefits. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/02/18/cbo-obamas-minimum-wage-plan-would-cost-jobs-but-help-millions/)

At the same time, the report finds that about 16.5 million low-wage Americans would see an increase in their earnings as a result of the hike in the minimum wage.

If I remember my schooling correctly, 16.5 million is bigger than 500,000.

MightyWhitey

02-18-2014, 07:02 PM

well, making a complicated situation more difficult doesn't seem like something to especially look forward to.
Here's the thing though,,, Hillary Clinton has been riding on her husbands coattails for far too long and has not earned anything on her own merit. Bubba had to basically corner Obama to make her his SoS. So if bringing up Lewinsky for 3 years is going to make a complicated situation more difficult then she is not fit to run for office period.

gigantes

02-18-2014, 07:30 PM

Here's the thing though,,, Hillary Clinton has been riding on her husbands coattails for far too long and has not earned anything on her own merit. Bubba had to basically corner Obama to make her his SoS. So if bringing up Lewinsky for 3 years is going to make a complicated situation more difficult then she is not fit to run for office period.
pretty much everything you just said is wrong.

she was one of the most active and involved 1st ladies in history. she served as a legit federal senator for how long? and it was more like the other way around from what i understand-- obama had to get over his stubbornness and ask what the clintons wanted as a concession for their absolutely crucial support. it doesn't sound like obama and bubba are very chummy, in fact.

you can make the case that bubba helped hillary to an appreciable extent... probably gave her key advice on a semi-regular basis... but she also has a strong independent streak and has been serving in her own high-pressure and high-profile situations for ages. TBH i'm not sure the GOP has a single member that can come close to her.

anyway, i don't know if she'd actually make a good president... just saying.

also, i don't see how the lewinski thing particularly hurts hillary, anyway. and i was addressing the original point which you were replying to-- that it's going to get messy for everyone involved the next three years.

personally, if you're bringing up the lewinski stuff after all this time, it's something of an indicator of how flaccid your overall campaign is.

Balla_Status

02-19-2014, 04:48 AM

Hillary started crying last time she ran for president because it was so stressful. She was so fake.

Balla_Status

02-19-2014, 04:49 AM

Yeah, that guy never had any electoral success against Republicans, oh wait....

Also when you do a cost/benefit analysis you need to do consider both the costs and the benefits. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/02/18/cbo-obamas-minimum-wage-plan-would-cost-jobs-but-help-millions/)

If I remember my schooling correctly, 16.5 million is bigger than 500,000.

CBO is anything but nonpartisan.

russwest0

02-19-2014, 05:10 AM

Hillary Clinton has a commanding lead for the polling in 2016?

Where did you see this at?

KevinNYC

02-19-2014, 10:20 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-2016-hillary-clinton-has-commanding-lead-over-democrats-gop-race-wide-open/2014/01/29/188bb3f4-8904-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html

Clinton has the biggest lead in the Democratic primary ever.

Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a commanding 6 to 1 lead over other Democrats heading into the 2016 presidential campaign, while the Republican field is deeply divided with no clear front-runner, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Clinton trounces her potential primary rivals with 73 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, reinforcing a narrative of inevitability around her nomination if she runs. Vice President Biden is second with 12 percent, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) is third with 8 percent.

Then against possible Republican challengers she has at least an 8 point lead (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/02/11/217724/mcclatchy-marist-poll-christie.html)at this point. That is actually the worst poll I found for her. Christie in particular has collapsed against her. Some polls had him slightly ahead in December, but it a poll from last week she was leading Christie by 21 points.

I just saw this poll which would worry me, if I was a Republican strategist. She's particularly strong in Florida according to Quinnipiac.

Florida: Christie vs. Clinton
Clinton 51, Christie 35 Clinton +16
Florida: Bush vs. Clinton
Clinton 49, Bush 43 Clinton +6
Florida: Ryan vs. Clinton
Clinton 52, Ryan 39 Clinton +13
Florida: Paul vs. Clinton
Clinton 53, Paul 38 Clinton +15
Florida: Rubio vs. Clinton
Clinton 51, Rubio 41 Clinton +10
Florida: Cruz vs. Clinton
Clinton 54, Cruz 34 Clinton +20

If you take the states that voted Democratic in the last 6 Presidentials elections, that's 242 votes right there, if you add in Florida's 29 electoral votes, that's enough to win the presidency.

KevinNYC

02-19-2014, 10:27 AM

Granted it's still early, but she's in a very strong position.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/
http://www.270towin.com/2016-polls/2016-general-election-matchups/

Pollster has her closest GOP competition as Rand Paul and Paul Ryan and she leads them by 11 and 12 points.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-paul-vs-clinton

KevinNYC

02-20-2014, 04:43 AM

I did not expect to hear the name Kathleen Wiley so soon. Apparently she is making the rounds and will be on Megyn Kelly's show on Fox tomorrow.

Wiley claims that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her. It was on the day of her husband committed suicide. The FBI later found she lied to them and the White House released a dozen or so positive letters she sent to Clinton after the alleged assault. One of the folks who testified against her credibility was Linda Tripp, the Clinton hater who illegally recorded her phone calls with Lewinsky. Tripp said that Wiley wanted to bed Clinton and was always trying to be where he would be.

Years later when she had a book to sell, she claimed that Clinton had her husband killed.
Wow. This interview just made me feel bad for Kathleen Willey.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-kelly-file/transcript/2014/02/19/kathleen-willey-hillary-clinton-war-women

Megyn Kelly also gave her 8 minutes of air time before she challenged Willey with all the evidence of her own dishonesty. She also never brought up that Willey had claimed that she suspected the Clintons of killing her husband, who in actuality killed himself. (http://www.wnd.com/2007/11/44397/)

MightyWhitey

02-20-2014, 01:58 PM

KevinNYC

02-20-2014, 06:26 PM

http://conservativeamerican.org/the-hillary-clinton-lies-list/

If the GOP agreed to make this the centerpiece of the 2016 campaign, I would shoot, direct and edit those commercials for free. Totally willing to follow your vision too.

Question: Do you want to cover each of the 164 points in individual ads? Or ten ads with 16 points in each one? I say we go bold and do one long infomercial. If we condense the 28 points on Benghazi we should be able to keep it under three hours. We could air it opposite the Super Bowl.

MightyWhitey

02-20-2014, 06:33 PM

If the GOP agreed to make this the centerpiece of the 2016 campaign, I would shoot, direct and edit those commercials for free. Totally willing to follow your vision too.

Question: Do you want to cover each of the 164 points in individual ads? Or ten ads with 16 points in each one? I say we go bold and do one long infomercial. If we condense the 28 points on Benghazi we should be able to keep it under three hours. We could air it opposite the Super Bowl.
Maybe the Super Bowl should have had this as a commercial: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/obama-admin-knew-millions-could-not-keep-their-health-insurance-v21213547

Droid101

02-20-2014, 06:35 PM

This is a link to the list of lies by Hillary Clinton http://conservativeamerican.org/the-hillary-clinton-lies-list/

Here's another list of lies spread by Hillary http://byteboy.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/list-of-ten-hillary-clinton-lies/
You sound concerned.

If she's as bad as you say, it should be an easy Republican victory, right? So wouldn't you want her to run?

MightyWhitey

02-20-2014, 06:40 PM

You sound concerned.

If she's as bad as you say, it should be an easy Republican victory, right? So wouldn't you want her to run?
Let her run. This is all democrats have left. Republicans are going to crush her and her campaign.

MightyWhitey

02-20-2014, 06:42 PM

http://www.inquisitr.com/1128361/healthcare-gov-enrolled-9-million-experts-object-to-obamacare-lies/

I guess lying is not above Obama. This is good for the nation to see over and over and over again.

Droid101

02-20-2014, 06:42 PM

Let her run. This is all democrats have left. Republicans are going to crush her and her campaign.
kay

MightyWhitey

02-20-2014, 07:27 PM

http://smashinginterviews.com/interviews/authors/noam-chomsky-interview-obama-is-carrying-out-the-most-extreme-global-campaign-of-terror-that-i-can-remember

Noam Chomsky Interview: "Obama is Carrying Out the Most Extreme Global Campaign of Terror That I Can Remember"

American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, logician, political commentator and activist Noam Chomsky is sometimes known as the

KevinNYC

02-20-2014, 07:39 PM

Maybe the Super Bowl should have had this as a commercial: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/obama-admin-knew-millions-could-not-keep-their-health-insurance-v21213547

This the best post you've made yet and Obama does deserve criticism for this.

One for simplifying to the point of distortion and two for not realizing the loophole in the law that the insurance companies would exploit.

But let's not pretend the individual market for health insurance wasn't filled with scams and shoddy products. If you didn't get group insurance like through your employer or through an association like a union you were screwed. You often had health insurance until you got sick and then you pretty much didn't. They were the medical equivalent of the shitty mortgages created to rip off poor people.

Here's a Consumer Reports article on the reality of the low end of the individual health insurance market.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2012/03/junk-health-insurance/index.htm

I like this part

In September 2010, Missouri regulators issued more than $1 million in fines against 13 companies and individuals that sold discount plans misrepresented as comprehensive health insurance. ..... One woman bought a plan to get the advertised free flu shot. A year and a half later, all she had to show for her $1,717 in payments was one denied claim … for the flu shot.

KevinNYC

02-20-2014, 07:44 PM

Also from http://conservativeamerican.org/ to Chomsky? You're eclectic.

Droid101

02-20-2014, 08:09 PM

[QUOTE=MightyWhitey]http://smashinginterviews.com/interviews/authors/noam-chomsky-interview-obama-is-carrying-out-the-most-extreme-global-campaign-of-terror-that-i-can-remember

Noam Chomsky Interview: "Obama is Carrying Out the Most Extreme Global Campaign of Terror That I Can Remember"

American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, logician, political commentator and activist Noam Chomsky is sometimes known as the

MightyWhitey

02-21-2014, 12:02 AM

Also from http://conservativeamerican.org/ to Chomsky? You're eclectic.
Nothing eclectic about it. Chomsky makes a valid educated point about our President. And the conservativeamerican.org articles on Obama and Hillary shine differently than the kid glove handling from liberal media outlets you're used to reading I am sure.

KevinNYC

02-21-2014, 12:54 AM

And the conservativeamerican.org articles on Obama and Hillary shine differently than the kid glove handling from liberal media outlets you're used to reading I am sure.

Yeah, because recycling wingnut fantasies about the Clintons murdering Vince Foster is sticking it to the man!

This country would be better off if we smart, functioning republican party, supported by quality conservative media. We don't. Because most of the base doesn't care. They don't actually care about finding the truth, it's much more fun to peddle fantasies about Bill Clinton killing Vince Foster because HE KNEW TOO MUCH!

This one is my favorite bit from that list
Hillary’s ‘Catching Osama’ Picture was Doctored, but Why?
1/7/14 – From Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post: “In this May 1, 2011, image released by the White House and digitally altered by the source to obscure the details of a document in front of Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, at right with hand covering mouth…” — So what document did she have that needed to be hidden from the public?
http://conservativeamerican.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/hillaryosama.jpg
I believe this is called political derangement syndrome where every single thing a person does needs to be viewed in the worst possible light. Of course, had the White House released a photo that revealed a classified document, the very same folks would scream about that too! I mean it's boring tendentious claptrap, but I guess it floats your boat.

Droid101

02-21-2014, 01:00 AM

I believe this is political derangement syndrome where every single thing a person does needs to be viewed in the worst possible light.
http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1324596542030_7713053.png

KevinNYC

02-21-2014, 01:13 AM

Forgot why I came to this thread. Even though their prospects for 2016 aren't looking so hot, the GOP is looking pretty good in 2014. Off election year voters skew older and the 6th year of presidency is usually good for the other side.

MightyWhitey

02-21-2014, 02:27 AM

Yeah, because recycling wingnut fantasies about the Clintons murdering Vince Foster is sticking it to the man!

This country would be better off if we smart, functioning republican party, supported by quality conservative media. We don't. Because most of the base doesn't care. They don't actually care about finding the truth, it's much more fun to peddle fantasies about Bill Clinton killing Vince Foster because HE KNEW TOO MUCH!

This one is my favorite bit from that list
I believe this is called political derangement syndrome where every single thing a person does needs to be viewed in the worst possible light. Of course, had the White House released a photo that revealed a classified document, the very same folks would scream about that too! I mean it's boring tendentious claptrap, but I guess it floats your boat.
Oh that is hilarious. But this is equally hilarious http://www.mrc.org/press-releases/conservative-movement-liberal-media-irs-scandal-deserves-constant-merciless-scrutiny

Liberal media burying bad news :eek: No...Nooo......nooooooooo :applause:

MightyWhitey

02-21-2014, 02:39 AM

http://live.wsj.com/video/opinion-obama-troublesome-irs-denials/EE3EE4F9-5C4E-420D-8B61-2742059F5746.html#!EE3EE4F9-5C4E-420D-8B61-2742059F5746

We can't just let the IRS scandal go by.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/poll-most-democrats-think-more-than-a-smidgen-of-corruption-at-irs-for-targeting-conservative-groups-114939/

MightyWhitey

02-21-2014, 04:22 PM

pretty much everything you just said is wrong.

she was one of the most active and involved 1st ladies in history. she served as a legit federal senator for how long? and it was more like the other way around from what i understand-- obama had to get over his stubbornness and ask what the clintons wanted as a concession for their absolutely crucial support. it doesn't sound like obama and bubba are very chummy, in fact.

you can make the case that bubba helped hillary to an appreciable extent... probably gave her key advice on a semi-regular basis... but she also has a strong independent streak and has been serving in her own high-pressure and high-profile situations for ages. TBH i'm not sure the GOP has a single member that can come close to her.

anyway, i don't know if she'd actually make a good president... just saying.

also, i don't see how the lewinski thing particularly hurts hillary, anyway. and i was addressing the original point which you were replying to-- that it's going to get messy for everyone involved the next three years.

personally, if you're bringing up the lewinski stuff after all this time, it's something of an indicator of how flaccid your overall campaign is.
I found this great article about Hillary for you (and everyone else) to read:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/what-has-hillary-actually-achieved-in-public-life/story-fnb64oi6-1226828701330#

What has Hillary actually achieved in public life?

Andrew Sullivan |
The Times |
February 17, 2014 12:00AM

THERE is one question, it seems, that no supporter of Hillary Clinton wants to answer. I stumbled across this in a dinner conversation with a ridiculously smart and informed Democrat, who was one of the Clintons

mr.big35

02-21-2014, 04:48 PM

KevinNYC

02-21-2014, 05:49 PM

ВИКТОР ЯНУКОВИЧ УЛЕТЕЛ В ХАРЬКОВ!!!!!

gigantes

02-21-2014, 11:37 PM

I found this great article about Hillary for you (and everyone else) to read:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/what-has-hillary-actually-achieved-in-public-life/story-fnb64oi6-1226828701330# ...
re: the post that you took a minor geological era to answer,
re: the puff-piece article in question that you just posted,

what would you say is it that you are actually trying to say, please?

kentatm

02-22-2014, 02:37 AM

I found this great article about Hillary for you (and everyone else) to read:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/what-has-hillary-actually-achieved-in-public-life/story-fnb64oi6-1226828701330#

well its by Andrew Sullivan.

he's usually pretty good about seeing things rationally though he does tend to obsess a bit about the Clintons and he can get a bit dramatic. I don't care for his promotion of the Bell Curve but I do understand his explanation.

russwest0

02-22-2014, 02:48 AM

Jesse Ventura 2016.

This is a dude that literally won Governor of Minnesota from just showing up to the debates and shitting on everybody. He had 0 funding, 0 corporate sponsors, etc. He even wore tie dye shirts and shit. He's just a beast at shitting on these corporate puppets.

He belongs to no political party, his stances on everything are all right in line with what we need, he'll expose the corruption, end the federal reserve, etc.

KevinNYC

02-22-2014, 03:28 AM

Here's the thing though,,, Hillary Clinton has been riding on her husbands coattails for far too long and has not earned anything on her own merit. Bubba had to basically corner Obama to make her his SoS. So if bringing up Lewinsky for 3 years is going to make a complicated situation more difficult then she is not fit to run for office period.Here's the thing though, all the information you've posted about Hillary is known. Perhaps there's some younger voters who don't know all the ins and outs out Whitewater, but none of what you are posting is new. Yes, there are going to be some people who strongly hate Hillary, but even given all that, she is polling very strongly and as a known quantity to folks, it's going to make it harder for the Republicans to define who she is. Everybody knows who she is, and she is still getting numbers like these. (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-and-centers/polling-institute/ohio/release-detail?ReleaseID=2010)

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sweeps the 2016 presidential field in Ohio ....... according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

49 - 36 percent over NJ Gov. Chris Christie
51 - 36 percent over former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush;
50 - 36 percent over U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida;
51 - 38 percent over U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky;
49 - 40 percent over U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin;
51 - 34 percent over U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas;
51 - 39 percent over Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Ohio voters say 55 - 39 percent that Clinton would make a good president. No Republican listed gets a positive score on this question, as even Gov. Kasich gets a negative 34 - 47 percent. Christie gets a big negative 31 - 48 percent, compared to a positive 44 - 32 percent November 27.

I think at this stage Paul Ryan might be the GOP frontrunner.

MightyWhitey

02-25-2014, 05:32 PM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/23/obamacare-medical-device-tax-led-to-loss-of-33000-/

Obamacare medical device tax led to loss of 33,000 jobs, report says

33,000 laid off or not hired
A new survey says Obamacare

Lakers Legend#32

02-25-2014, 06:27 PM

Posting links from conservative Washington Times? No agenda there.

KevinNYC

02-25-2014, 06:51 PM

Posting links from conservative Washington Times? No agenda there.
Also the report is from a Lobbying group.
http://advamed.org/news/89/new-survey-reveals-real-world-impact-of-medical-device-tax

MightyWhitey

02-25-2014, 07:43 PM

Also the report is from a Lobbying group.
http://advamed.org/news/89/new-survey-reveals-real-world-impact-of-medical-device-tax
So the report is not true because it's a lobbying group?

Posting links from conservative Washington Times? No agenda there.
So because I didn't use BET it's no good :biggums:

https://www.ijreview.com/2014/02/117067-33000-jobs-just-one-industry-lost-obamacare-sebelius-lied/

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/02/24/study-33000-jobs-impacted-due-to-obamacares-medical-device-tax/

Here's 2 more sites reiterating the news. Just because you guys don't like who the sources are does not mean it's not true.

MightyWhitey

02-25-2014, 07:47 PM

http://economiccollapsenews.com/2014/02/24/public-sector-cutting-hours-to-avoid-paying-insurance-under-obamacare/

Public sector cutting hours to avoid paying insurance under Obamacar
Much like the private sector has been doing over the past two years, the public sector across the United States is slashing hours for their employees in order to avoid paying healthcare coverage mandated under Obamacare, according to a report from the New York Times.

The Obama administration has delayed complete implementation of the healthcare law for the private and public sectors twice, but public entities have already taken measures to cut part-time shifts that affect an array of works: cafeteria workers, school administrators, police dispatchers, prison guards.
Here are just some of the examples (courtesy of Newsmax):

- Medina, Ohio has reduced the limit for part-time employees from 35 hours per week to 29, which has hurt park inspectors, office clerks and sanitation workers.

- Vigo County, Indiana schools have limited field trips for children and cut back on transportation for athletic events.

- The University of Akron has slashed the hours of its 400 part-time faculty members.

Congressional Republicans are pointing to these facts as proof that Obamacare is a drain on both the public and private sectors and is hurting the national economy. With the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report projecting job losses, the GOP may gain some support from both Democrats and voters.

KevinNYC

02-25-2014, 07:51 PM

http://economiccollapsenews.com
:roll:

MightyWhitey

02-25-2014, 09:38 PM

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisconover/2014/02/24/obamacare-will-cost-2-9-million-or-more-jobs-a-year/

Obamacare Will Cost 2.9 Million or More Jobs a Year

Nearly two years ago, I assured readers Obamacare would result in the equivalent of a loss of 1 million or more jobs. Little did I realize the true figure would turn out to be closer to 2.9 million. What changed? The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office recently reported that Obamacare will shrink the economy by the equivalent of 2.5 million full-time (FTE) workers

KevinNYC

02-25-2014, 10:47 PM

[QUOTE=MightyWhitey]The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office recently reported that Obamacare will shrink the economy by the equivalent of 2.5 million full-time (FTE) workers

longhornfan1234

02-25-2014, 10:51 PM

Lakers Legend#32

02-26-2014, 02:31 AM

Now he's quoting Forbes?
They won't ever let you subscribe unless you are a millionaire Republican.

KevinNYC

02-26-2014, 03:01 AM

Now he's quoting Forbes?
They won't ever let you subscribe unless you are a millionaire Republican.

The Forbes website is now a content farm. They have thousands of "contributors." It's like Huffington Post and other sites.
It's essentially a blog platform with a Brand.

http://www.emediavitals.com/content/forbes-well-manicured-content-farm

longhornfan1234

02-27-2014, 01:38 PM

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/27/news/economy/obamacare-restaurants/index.html?iid=Lead
Several restaurants in a Florida chain are asking customers to help foot the bill for Obamacare.

:facepalm

MightyWhitey

02-27-2014, 02:30 PM

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/27/news/economy/obamacare-restaurants/index.html?iid=Lead
Several restaurants in a Florida chain are asking customers to help foot the bill for Obamacare.

:facepalm
This is just the beginning.

kentatm

02-27-2014, 03:34 PM

Pentagon Plans to Shrink Army to Pre-World War II Level

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/us/politics/pentagon-plans-to-shrink-army-to-pre-world-war-ii-level.html?_r=0

Sigh...when you advocate for large reductions in defense.... in reality... you're advocating for fundamental shifts in our foreign policy (and arguably... in our economic policies... as well).

:roll: :roll: :roll:

why do we need to have a military that keeps growing and growing in size when we are using new tech like unmanned drones that make things like massive amounts of ground troops, fighter jets, and tanks obsolete?

Do we need to make sure we have as many battleships as in WW2 as well?

MightyWhitey

02-27-2014, 06:00 PM

:roll: :roll: :roll:

why do we need to have a military that keeps growing and growing in size when we are using new tech like unmanned drones that make things like massive amounts of ground troops, fighter jets, and tanks obsolete?

Do we need to make sure we have as many battleships as in WW2 as well?
Hope all those people affected by this cutback are ready financially.

MightyWhitey

02-27-2014, 06:05 PM

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303945704579390772732855560

Obamacare are wonders galore :facepalm

MightyWhitey

02-28-2014, 10:57 AM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-putin-russia-bashar-assad-ukraine-olympics-oped-20140225,0,7396588.column

Obama's brain-dead approach to global bullies

Let's face it: The goal of the 2014 Winter Olympics was to stomp Vladimir Putin's Russian Federation, but good.

Didn't happen. The odious Putin now revels in his victory, having reversed the ignominy of the 2010 Winter Olympics when we trounced Russia in the total medal count, 37 to 15.

Not that the Olympics are a surrogate for chauvinistic conflicts on a much broader scale

kentatm

02-28-2014, 11:21 AM

Hope all those people affected by this cutback are ready financially.

:rolleyes:

KevinNYC

02-28-2014, 11:50 AM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-putin-russia-bashar-assad-ukraine-olympics-oped-20140225,0,7396588.column

Obama's brain-dead approach to global bullies

Can you learn how to use Quote tags?

Also I'm a better political prognosticator that this guy. Here's him the day before the last election.

Here's How Romney can Win (http://www.chicagonow.com/dennis-byrnes-barbershop/2012/11/heres-how-romney-can-win/)

Here's me three days before that (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7913306&postcount=9)

MightyWhitey

02-28-2014, 12:33 PM

Can you learn how to use Quote tags?

Also I'm a better political prognosticator that this guy.

:lol Ok. I'm glad you have a career in ISH journalism but please stop swerving what was originally posted in the article to an ad hominem attack on the man who wrote that particular piece. Why do liberals have to resort to low blow tactics :confusedshrug:

Droid101

02-28-2014, 01:45 PM

:rolleyes:
Right? Apparently the "government doesn't provide jobs!!!" talking point only applies when not talking about the military.

boozehound

02-28-2014, 02:00 PM

Some numerical data on our military spending relative to the rest of the world.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/02/26/chart_u_s_defense_spending_vs_other_countries.html

As one example, we have 19 aircraft carriers (including 10 that are massive). The rest of the world? has 12 total. combined. all other countries. SMFH at people crying about military cuts. We need to cut our military spending (not to mention the trillions spend on war that was not part of the DOD budget). Even if we cut our spending in half, we would still spend more than the next 5 biggest military budgets.

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/business_insider/2014/02/26/chart_u_s_defense_spending_vs_other_countries/140226_bi_aircraft.jpg.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg

KevinNYC

02-28-2014, 04:39 PM

:lol Ok. I'm glad you have a career in ISH journalism but please stop swerving what was originally posted in the article to an ad hominem attack on the man who wrote that particular piece. Why do liberals have to resort to low blow tactics :confusedshrug:

A. Pointing out someone doesn't know what they are talking about is not ad hominem. You keep making low value posts. If you're going to quote 18 paragraphs from a blog called the barberbshop, because the metaphor is he knows as much a guy in a babershop, Why should I read that. Also please put it quotes, so I can see if you adding anything to the argument.

B. If you are concerned about logic, why are you not concerning about giant the non-sequiturs in the column you posted. The US team's performance at the Olympics is somehow related to Obama or his foreign policy? Uh, what?

I can't even figure out what this guy wants. Should be invade the Ukraine?, Russia itself? Should we have bombed Sochi when Shaun White failed to medal?

KevinNYC

02-28-2014, 04:59 PM

Speaking of Putin.

It appears that Russia is going to seize Ukranian territory or at least help Crimea secede. Crimea is heavily Russian and doesn't share the Western Ukraine's wish to move towards the European Union.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/28/putin-s-shadow-shock-troops-roil-ukraine.html
The world woke up Friday morning to the spectacle of Russia staging a non-invasion invasion of Ukraine: mysterious armed men in uniforms occupied the airport in the Crimean capital of Simferopol while what appeared to be conventional Russian troops reportedly blockaded the military airport at Sevastopol. The previous day, in the pre-dawn dark, another group of men had occupied the regional parliament building. And all this took place against the background of 150,000 Russian troops on the move and Russian jets roaring through the skies just across the border.

Ukraine’s acting interior minister, Arsen Avakov, raged over what he called “an armed invasion and occupation” in Crimea. He declared the airport takeovers were in violation of “all international treaties and norms” and claimed they were intended to provoke “armed bloodshed.”

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304071004579410931310849454

http://world.time.com/2014/02/28/ukraine-russian-military-blockades-crimean-airports-and-roads/

SpecialQue

02-28-2014, 06:55 PM

DonDadda59

02-28-2014, 07:14 PM

Lulled us to sleep with dancing bears at the Olympics... sneaky commies :mad:

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/t_ku-medium/19eyj2xszpuelgif.gif

MightyWhitey

03-01-2014, 05:46 PM

ALBballer

03-01-2014, 05:47 PM

New data reveals amount of federal aid to states in 2012

Gotta love how these hypocritical "conservative" states have the highest percentages. Ye they are for state rights but when it comes to federal handouts they are all for it.

http://www.statebudgetsolutions.org/publications/detail/new-data-reveals-amount-of-federal-aid-to-states-in-2012

1 Mississippi 45.35% $7,725,294
2 Louisiana 43.95% $11,136,334
3 Tennessee 41.02% $11,198,575
4 South Dakota 40.85% $1,630,220
5 Missouri 39.42% $10,440,927
6 Montana 38.46% $2,202,444
7 Georgia 38.06% $13,794,726
8 Arizona 38.04% $10,394,549
9 New Mexico 36.61% $5,171,367
10 Maine 36.50% $2,883,526

MightyWhitey

03-01-2014, 05:52 PM

A. Pointing out someone doesn't know what they are talking about is not ad hominem. You keep making low value posts. If ?
Have you seen this mans credentials - http://www.dennisbyrne.net/15801.html

And you compare yourself to him :wtf: What are your credentials? My supposed "low value" posts come from legitimate journalists or people with the proper credentials to make a fair and honest assessment. Stop :cry: like a liberal little girl because you're the smelly used sock no one cares about.

KevinNYC

03-02-2014, 01:10 AM

Have you seen this mans credentials - http://www.dennisbyrne.net/15801.html

And you compare yourself to him :wtf: What are your credentials? My supposed "low value" posts come from legitimate journalists or people with the proper credentials to make a fair and honest assessment.

Dude, it was an opinion column from a local reporter, anybody can find dozens if not hundreds arguing one way or the other. Who cares? It was not even a well-written column.

My credentials are I'm just a guy who follows the news. That was my exact point. I'm not in the media, but it was apparently to anyone with eyes in November 2012 that Romney was not getting to 270. If in November 2012, you were arguing he could, you were either engaging in propaganda or wishful thinking.

MightyWhitey

03-02-2014, 11:35 AM

http://m.townhall.com/columnists/ben...3356/page/full*Ben kicks ass.

Why Democrats Hate Work
Feb. 12, 2014
Last week, the Congressional Budget Office released a report discussing the ramifications of Obamacare. The report revealed that the work-hour equivalent of approximately 2.5 million jobs would disappear from the workforce, thanks to Obamacare, in a voluntary process in which employees would simply dump out of their jobs, knowing they could get health care through expanded Medicaid and federal subsidies they would lose by working.Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., an ideological leftist thought leader, spun the report as a massive positive for Obamacare: "The single mom, who's raising three kids (and) has to keep a job because of health care, can now spend some time raising those kids. That's a family value." And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., celebrated the report as a defeat for the dreaded condition known as "job lock" -- the situation in which you have to stick at a job you don't like for the benefits. "We have the CBO report," Reid stated, "which rightfully says, that people shouldn't have job lock. If they -- we live in a country where there should be free agency. People can do what they want."But, of course, people can only do what they want by taxing other Americans, borrowing from foreign creditors, and burdening future generations with unsustainable debt. And unfortunately, Schumer's proclamation that the greatest beneficiaries of Obamacare will be single mothers turns out to be false: One of the studies relied upon by the CBO stated that those who benefit from the end of job lock are disproportionately white, single and of work age.In reality, the Democratic vision of the world centers on the notion that work itself is a great evil to be avoided, and that any program allowing people to free themselves of work -- whether to finger-paint or start a garage band -- is an unmitigated good. "Job lock," according to the definition Reid gives, goes by another name, according to those who live in the real world: "having a job." There are times that everyone hates his or her job. Were they freed from the economic consequences of having these jobs, they'd drop out of the workforce.There are only two problems with this strategy: First, someone has to pay for it; second, it is not the recipe for human fulfillment. Leisure time is only leisure time when it is earned; otherwise, leisure time devolves into soul-killing lassitude. There's a reason so many new retirees, freed from the treadmill of work, promptly keel over on the golf course: Work fulfills us. It keeps us going.This doesn't mean every job fulfills us, naturally. But we have all worked rotten jobs in order to get to jobs we like. Capitalism doesn't mean, as my grandmother used to say, that you don't have to walk through some manure to get to the roses. It just means that if you walk through enough manure, you'll likely get to the roses sooner or later. In the leisure-first world of the left, however, wallowing in mire is a preferred road to happiness over the hard work that brings true fulfillment.The European style of living is seductive: fewer hours worked, more hours at the cafe, less concern over self-betterment. But that style of living does not produce a purposeful life. Perhaps we'd all be happier in the short run were we somehow freed of our job lock. But we certainly would not contribute to the betterment of ourselves or the community around us. We'd leave the world worse than we found it. The opt-out society opts us out of societal happiness.**

Lakers Legend#32

03-02-2014, 04:46 PM

Townhall.com another right wing website with an agenda. And this is Whitey's "news" source?

What's the matter, was Michael Savage's website down?

MightyWhitey

03-02-2014, 05:45 PM

Townhall.com another right wing website with an agenda. And this is Whitey's "news" source?

What's the matter, was Michael Savage's website down?
I guess anything that goes against the grain is bad huh :lol I love it. Ben Shapiro is a genius. He single handedly destroyed Piers Morgan on his own show. I guess we don't like the content here so we cherrypick on the source :rolleyes:

rufuspaul

03-02-2014, 05:52 PM

KevinNYC

03-03-2014, 01:54 AM

Maine is a liberal state. North and South Carolina are very conservative and they're not in the top 10.

Maine's kind of purplish, the vote Democratic for President, but moderate Republicans do very well in Senate races, they currently have one Republican and one Independent senator.

KevinNYC

03-03-2014, 01:55 AM

This sounds cheery. (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/world/europe/pressure-rising-as-obama-works-to-rein-in-russia.html?referrer=)

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany told Mr. Obama by telephone on Sunday that after speaking with Mr. Putin she was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. “In another world,” she said.

Rasheed1

03-03-2014, 09:55 AM

This sounds cheery. (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/world/europe/pressure-rising-as-obama-works-to-rein-in-russia.html?referrer=)

sounds about right.. he walks around in the woods with his shirt off wrestling bears and sh*t

:lol the guy is loco

ALBballer

03-03-2014, 10:57 AM

Maine is a liberal state. North and South Carolina are very conservative and they're not in the top 10.

I don't really take sides with other parties since I don't really see much of a difference. But the party that advocates for state rights and fiscal responsibility make up the majority of the top 10 states in that list.

KevinNYC

03-03-2014, 11:07 AM

Stocks down worldwide due to Crimea tension.

However, Russian stocks are really down and are being "crushed." (http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2014/03/03/the-invasion-of-crimea-is-crushing-russias-stock-and-currency-markets/) This same Forbes writer predicted these economic consequences yesterday (http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2014/03/02/the-invasion-of-crimea-is-russias-worst-foreign-policy-blunder-in-a-generation/) and said Putin just made Russia's worst foreign policy blunder in a generation
he economic costs to Russia will also be severe. The Moscow stock market is going to get absolutely clobbered when it opens tomorrow, and many foreign investors are going to bolt for the exits as quickly as they can. Depending on the severity of the situation in Ukraine, the Russian financial system could come screeching to a halt. It’s a given that many of these decisions impacting Russia’s economy will be made in haste and without a sober calculation of costs and befits, but that’s the way the world works: investors often overreact to political events and they will certainly overreact to a military invasion of a neighboring country. Russia’s economy has already been slowing down for the past several quarters, and the absolute last thing that it needs at the moment is a huge acceleration in capital flight. The ruble is also going to suffer, and while a cheaper ruble could eventually be good for domestic manufacturers in the short term a much weaker ruble is likely to spark inflation (perhaps cause the Central Bank to raise interest rates).

Russia will “succeed” in the narrow sense of taking over Crimea and, perhaps, other parts of Eastern Ukraine. But from a strategic perspective its intervention in Ukraine will be a disaster: it will seriously weaken an already stuttering economy and will poison relations with a host of countries with which Russia needs to have productive working relationships. It might appear that Russia is confidently asserting its power in its neighborhood, but it is actually making a blunder of historic proportions.

KevinNYC

03-03-2014, 11:14 AM

The ruble is an at an all time low against the dollar and the euro. It's down 10% this year.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26414285

Interest rates just jumped in Russia which means they are probably headed for a recession. If this writer is correct, it will be internal Russian pressure that gets Putin to back down and find a solution.

Oil prices will go up which will help Russia, but if sanctions start kicking in, I wonder how that will affect Russia oil sales.

ALBballer

03-03-2014, 11:17 AM

[quote]Today

Dresta

03-03-2014, 11:37 AM

I don't really take sides with other parties since I don't really see much of a difference. But the party that advocates for state rights and fiscal responsibility make up the majority of the top 10 states in that list.
So? How is that 'hypocritical' exactly? So you're telling me you ram federal support down these people's throats against their will, and then complain when they accept it? Southern states are poorer and less industrial, this has always been so, but how can you complain when it seems you are in favour of federal handouts?

DukeDelonte13

03-03-2014, 11:50 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/27/not-safe-to-display-american-flag-in-american-high-school/

Another example how we are willing to give up our rights in the name of "safety."

:facepalm

without even reading i'm sure the opinion is just letting schools enforce their own dress codes.

Students don't have the same 1st amendment rights within their schools. That's been the case for a very very long time.

Lakers Legend#32

03-03-2014, 04:02 PM

Of all people to make this prediction Sarah Palin in 2008 said under Obama Russia would invade Ukraine http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/03/01/palin-mocked-2008-warning-putin-may-invade-ukraine-if-obama-elected

If Sarah Palin said this, it's only because someone put a 3X5 card in her hand to read.

Another FOX News source I see.

MightyWhitey

03-03-2014, 06:54 PM

If Sarah Palin said this, it's only because someone put a 3X5 card in her hand to read.

Another FOX News source I see.
I am happy you are aware of the sources I've been using. Is the content in that link biased or wrong in any capacity? Or is it that you are biased when the sources don't add up to your politics?

Dresta

03-03-2014, 07:12 PM

Sarah Palin and Obama are one and the same - cynical demagogues merely praying on popular prejudices of two different groups of morons :lol

longhornfan1234

03-04-2014, 01:02 PM

President Obama's budget would boost spending by 6.8% to $3.9 trillion in 2015.* I just heard it on the radio. I'm going to try find a source.

MightyWhitey

03-04-2014, 05:41 PM

President Obama's budget would boost spending by 6.8% to $3.9 trillion in 2015.* I just heard it on the radio. I'm going to try find a source.
https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-budget-increases-spending-63-percent-increases-debt-83-trillion_784129.html

[QUOTE]
Obama's Budget Increases Spending 63 Percent, Increases Debt By $8.3 Trillion

11:30 AM, Mar 4, 2014

MightyWhitey

03-04-2014, 05:53 PM

Romney was right about Russia in 2012 as well. Liberal wingnuts seem to have this way of mocking people that always seems to come back to haunt them.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2014/03/03/flashback-nostradamus-chris-matthews-mocked-mitt-romney-s-latest-mis

[QUOTE][B]Flashback: Nostradamus Chris Matthews Mocked Mitt Romney

longhornfan1234

03-04-2014, 07:14 PM

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA1Q1E820140304?irpc=932

Putin says military action will be last resort.

KevinNYC

03-06-2014, 01:50 AM

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA1Q1E820140304?irpc=932

Putin says military action will be last resort.

This allowed Russian markets to rebound, but I think they then fell back again.

This should be interesting. Did the CIA spy on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/03/04/220161/cia-monitoring-of-senate-computers.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/us/politics/cia-and-congress-at-odds-over-inquest-into-detention-policies.html?hpw&rref=politics&_r=0

travelingman

03-11-2014, 01:28 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/03/10/morning-plum-as-gop-certainty-about-ocares-collapse-deepens-number-of-uninsured-falls-again/

KevinNYC

03-12-2014, 06:17 AM

Yesterday might have been one of the more consequential days in the Obama presidency. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/feinstein-cia-searched-intelligence-committee-computers/2014/03/11/982cbc2c-a923-11e3-8599-ce7295b6851c_story.html)

Feinstein: CIA searched Intelligence Committee computers

A behind-the-scenes battle between the CIA and Congress erupted in public Tuesday as the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee accused the agency of breaking laws and breaching constitutional principles in an alleged effort to undermine the panel’s multi-year investigation of a controversial interrogation program.

Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) accused the CIA of *secretly removing documents, searching computers used by the committee and attempting to intimidate congressional investigators by requesting an FBI inquiry of their conduct — charges that CIA Director John Brennan disputed within hours of her appearance on the Senate floor.

http://www.newsweek.com/cia-pushes-back-against-accusations-it-spied-senate-231600

CIA Pushes Back Against Accusations That it Spied on Senate

Hours after Senate intelligence committee chair Dianne Feinstein, D-California, took to the Senate floor Tuesday to accuse the CIA of spying on the committee's computers, the Central Intelligence Agency's side of the story is beginning to come out.

Feinstein accused the CIA of snooping on computers used by staff of the Senate Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to investigate the spy agency's detention and interrogation program following 9/11. The committee finished a 6,300-page report last year and Feinstein is pushing to have it declassified and made available to the public.

CIA Director John Brennan publicly denied Feinstein's accusations a few hours later at an event at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C. He also sent a letter to CIA employees Tuesday, assuring them that the CIA wants to work with its congressional overseers, not against them. "CIA has tried to work as collaboratively as possible with the Committee on its report," Brennan assured his colleagues in the email, which was shared with Newsweek by a U.S. official. Messages to the CIA workforce were also shared on Capitol Hill.

KevinNYC

03-12-2014, 06:25 AM

People are throwing the terms constitutional crisis. It's all over a report on CIA waterboarding.

The dueling claims exposed bitterness and distrust that have soared to new levels as the committee nears completion of a 6,000-page report that is expected to serve as a scathing historical record of the agency’s use of waterboarding and other brutal interrogation methods on terrorism suspects held at secret CIA prisons overseas after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Displaying flashes of anger during her floor speech, Feinstein said her committee would soon deliver the report to the White House and push for declassification of a document that lays bare “the horrible details of the CIA program that never, never, never should have existed.”

The latest dispute is in some ways a proxy for a deeper conflict over that document. The CIA and the committee are at odds over many of the report’s conclusions about the effectiveness of the interrogation program, but they are battling primarily over tension that surfaced during the investigation.

KevinNYC

03-12-2014, 07:14 AM

The incidents happened in 2010 and have been kept under wraps since then. The CIA Director was not at CIA in 2010, he was the White House counter-terrorism director. However, I don't see how he stays on, he seems to have lost the confidence of the senators.

longhornfan1234

03-12-2014, 10:40 AM

[QUOTE=KevinNYC]Yesterday might have been one of the more consequential days in the Obama presidency. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/feinstein-cia-searched-intelligence-committee-computers/2014/03/11/982cbc2c-a923-11e3-8599-ce7295b6851c_story.html)

http://www.newsweek.com/cia-pushes-back-against-accusations-it-spied-senate-231600

[B]CIA Pushes Back Against Accusations That it Spied on Senate[/
A spy organization gives you a computer to check on their activities and they check on you using it. :biggums:

ALBballer

03-12-2014, 10:50 AM

longhornfan1234

03-12-2014, 12:33 PM

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304250204579433312607325596

Obamacare's secret mandate exemption. :coleman:

Rasheed1

03-12-2014, 02:59 PM

Is this the same Feinstein that was ok with NSA spying on us peons but isn't ok when she is spied on? Obama increases debt yep same old. And the republican paper soldiers want us to fight the bully Russia for occupying an area that welcomes Russians and was taken over without a person being killed. Sheesh the hypocrisy of these nutjobs.

Typical American politics herp derp

Im happy this stuff is happening.. :applause: I smile when I see Feinstein whining about being spied on and intimidated by the intelligence community.. It makes her (and lindsey graham and the others) look ridiculous

Just play back the sh*t they were saying a few months ago when was only American citizens who were being violated.. They couldn't GAF.. now they are whining about the same thing happening to them…

"Oh?? you spied on?? you don't say .. please excuse the public if we laugh at you" lol

the story lines are becoming so completely absurd that they scream for major backlash.. Not even the media can poo poo these events as if they don't demonstrate what a farce washington is..

ALBballer

03-12-2014, 04:08 PM

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]Im happy this stuff is happening.. :applause: I smile when I see Feinstein whining about being spied on and intimidated by the intelligence community.. It makes her (and lindsey graham and the others) look ridiculous

Just play back the sh*t they were saying a few months ago when was only American citizens who were being violated.. They couldn't GAF.. now they are whining about the same thing happening to them

KevinNYC

04-01-2014, 09:04 AM

Washington Post has details of the Senate tortue report. I don't think they have the actual report though.
CIA misled on interrogation program, Senate report says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-misled-on-interrogation-program-senate-report-says/2014/03/31/eb75a82a-b8dd-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html)

A report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concludes that the CIA misled the government and the public about aspects of its brutal interrogation program for years — concealing details about the severity of its methods, overstating the significance of plots and prisoners, and taking credit for critical pieces of intelligence that detainees had in fact surrendered before they were subjected to harsh techniques.

The report, built around detailed chronologies of dozens of CIA detainees, documents a long-standing pattern of unsubstantiated claims as agency officials sought permission to use — and later tried to defend — excruciating interrogation methods that yielded little, if any, significant intelligence, according to U.S. officials who have reviewed the document.

KevinNYC

04-01-2014, 09:10 AM

ACA signups have hit 7 million signups (http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/01/politics/obamacare-signups-target/) after a record breaking final day.

After a surge of sign-ups on the last day for open enrollment, Obamacare is on track to hit the White House's original target of 7 million people signing up, a senior administration official said Tuesday.
On Monday, more than 4.8 million visits were made to HealthCare.gov and 2 million calls were made to the call center, the official said.

When the website was launched filled with glitches, they scaled the target back to 6 million.

KevinNYC

04-01-2014, 09:25 AM

KevinNYC

04-01-2014, 09:33 AM

Glenn Beck has been sued for defamation (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/01/glenn-beck-sued-for-defamation-after-calling-victim-of-boston-marathon-bombings-the-money-man-behind-attack/?tid=hp_mm) by a Saudi Arabian student who Beck claimed was connected to the Boston Marathon bombing.
On a mid-April day last year, Glenn Beck was in a full lather. Less than one week had passed since a pair of bombs had exploded at the Boston Marathon, killing three and injuring hundreds more. The FBI had just identified the Tsarnaev brothers as primary suspects behind the attack. But to Beck, cloaked in a gray button-down and a sheen of indignance, this wasn’t enough.
In attendance at the marathon had been a 20-year-old Saudi Arabian student named Abdulrahman Alharbi. He was on a full ride to study at the nearby New England School of English. He’d been injured at the marathon, later questioned by police, and ultimately cleared of wrongdoing.
Beck, however, had suspicions. The radio host urged the U.S. government to release information on Alharbi or Beck would “expose” him. “Let me send this message very clear,” said Beck, who left Fox News in 2011. ”We know who this Saudi national is. … We know who this man is and, listen to me carefully, we know he is a very bad, bad, bad man.”
Beck continued days later: “While the media continues to look at what the causes were [behind] these two guys, there are, at this hour, three people involved,” he said, alleging the U.S. government had “tagged” Alharbi as a “proven terrorist.”
The broadcaster eventually called Alharbi an al Qaeda “control agent” and the “money man” behind the attacks. “You know who the Saudi is?” Beck asked. “He’s the money man. He’s the guy who paid for it.”
“Is this speculation or are you reporting something?” a co-host asked.
Beck ignored the question. “He’s the money man.”
.....
Beck, normally a frenetic Tweeter, has remained quiet since the lawsuit was filed.

Brizzly

04-01-2014, 10:09 AM

ACA signups have hit 7 million signups (http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/01/politics/obamacare-signups-target/) after a record breaking final day.

When the website was launched filled with glitches, they scaled the target back to 6 million.

Thank you Zach Galifianakis!

Brizzly

04-01-2014, 10:11 AM

KevinNYC

04-01-2014, 06:55 PM

http://www.newrepublic.com/sites/default/files/u18524/slide1_10.jpg
Fox did fix their graphic today.

KevinNYC

04-01-2014, 06:58 PM

Democrat's dilemma: getting voters out in the midterms. Their prospects look good in 2016, but not 2014
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/04/01/us/politics/democrats-scramble-to-stave-off-midterm-disaster.html?ref=us&_r=1&referrer=

MightyWhitey

04-01-2014, 10:08 PM

KevinNYC

04-02-2014, 01:26 AM

You agree with the article?
What's to agree with? It's a straight news article.

longhornfan1234

04-02-2014, 12:07 PM

The 7 million who signed up via exchanges are not the only people with policies because of ACA. It could be closer to 20 million when you count in under 26 years olds on their parents' policies and the expansion of Medicare.
http://acasignups.net/sites/default/files/the_graph_final.jpg

How will ACA opponents deal with these numbers. There's some evidence we're in for a period of denial

One Republican Senator has accused them of cooking the numbers (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/30/gop-sen-barrasso-administration-has-cooked-books-on-obamacare-numbers/)

When it looked they were going to fall short of 7 million, Fox New wanted to show you how far short
http://www.newrepublic.com/sites/default/files/u18524/slide1_10.jpg
Look how much bigger 7 million is than
.

We kicked 5 million+ off their current insurance... switched them over to Obamacare. That's not a net positive of insuring the uninsured. That's 1 person who was happily insured is now unhappily still insured... but on the Obamacare system. The law was supposed to insure the uninsured.... so minus the amount of people from that number who lost their insurance and switched over then net/net we signed up roughly 2 million who were previously uninsured.
That's before we get into who paid and who didn't.

Saying the figure is 7 million..while isn't a lie... is intellectually dishonest and entirely misleading... which shouldn't surprise anyone that's what the President is doing... Nice try... Kevin. :no:

KevinNYC

04-02-2014, 01:12 PM

We kicked 5 million+ off their current insurance... switched them over to Obamacare. That's not a net positive of insuring the uninsured. That's 1 person who was happily insured is now unhappily still insured... but on the Obamacare system. The law was supposed to insure the uninsured.... so minus the amount of people from that number who lost their insurance and switched over then net/net we signed up roughly 2 million who were previously uninsured.
That's before we get into who paid and who didn't.

Saying the figure is 7 million..while isn't a lie... is intellectually dishonest and entirely misleading... which shouldn't surprise anyone that's what the President is doing... Nice try... Kevin. :no:
The law was supposed to insure the uninsured
That's one goal of the law. The full name of Obamacare is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Another goal (the PP part of PPACA) was to do away with junk healthcare practices including those "subprime" health policies that were useful until you actually got sick, then they were useless, they wouldn't pay your bills and then the next year they could just kick you off. The ACA established that plans must "provide essential health benefits, follows established limits on cost-sharing (like deductibles, copayments, and out-of-pocket maximum amounts), and meets other requirements." These qualified healthcare plans (QHPs) ensure that
A. the policy is actually a good policy.
B consumers can shop between plans that contain the same level of care.

Saying the figure is 7 million..while isn't a lie... is intellectually dishonest and entirely misleading
It's not dishonest at all. 7 million represents the amount of people who signed up for a qualified healthcare plan on a Federal or State exchange. It does not represent the total number of people who signed up for a QHP.
And the 7 million was a target number selected by the CBO for exchange enrollments. That's why everyone from the White House to Fox News is using it. The importance of that number is that target was hit. You could have signed up for a QHP directly from an insurer. That number is estimated to be bigger than those who used an exchange. ACAsignups.net says if you add, on+off exchange QHPs you get 16 million. (http://acasignups.net/spreadsheet) (Bottom of the graph.) If you subtract 5 million, you're still at 11 million. Also since they gave a two year extension on cancelled healthcare plans, you're not talking 5 million. It's less.

It's misleading to say everyone who signed up was previously uninsured and I haven't said that. In addition to the 16 million, you have people who got insurance because they stayed on the parent's plan or due to Medicaid/CHIP expansion.

According to the LA Times link above, according to the Rand and Gallup polls there is a big drop in the number of uninsured. The Times put it at 9 million people.

Rand has been polling 3,300 Americans monthly about their insurance choices since last fall. Researchers found that the share of adults ages 18 to 64 without health insurance has declined from 20.9% last fall to 16.6% as of March 22.
Rand has been polling 3,300 Americans monthly about their insurance choices since last fall. Researchers found that the share of adults ages 18 to 64 without health insurance has declined from 20.9% last fall to 16.6% as of March 22.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obamacare-uninsured-national-20140331,0,5472960.story#ixzz2xkWEHTww

Going from 20.9 to 16.6 is a 25% drop in the uninsured.

longhornfan1234

04-02-2014, 03:45 PM

The law was supposed to insure the uninsured
That's one goal of the law. The full name of Obamacare is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Another goal (the PP part of PPACA) was to do away with junk healthcare practices including those "subprime" health policies that were useful until you actually got sick, then they were useless, they wouldn't pay your bills and then the next year they could just kick you off. The ACA established that plans must "provide essential health benefits, follows established limits on cost-sharing (like deductibles, copayments, and out-of-pocket maximum amounts), and meets other requirements." These qualified healthcare plans (QHPs) ensure that
A. the policy is actually a good policy.
B consumers can shop between plans that contain the same level of care.

Saying the figure is 7 million..while isn't a lie... is intellectually dishonest and entirely misleading
It's not dishonest at all. 7 million represents the amount of people who signed up for a qualified healthcare plan on a Federal or State exchange. It does not represent the total number of people who signed up for a QHP.
And the 7 million was a target number selected by the CBO for exchange enrollments. That's why everyone from the White House to Fox News is using it. The importance of that number is that target was hit. You could have signed up for a QHP directly from an insurer. That number is estimated to be bigger than those who used an exchange. ACAsignups.net says if you add, on+off exchange QHPs you get 16 million. (http://acasignups.net/spreadsheet) (Bottom of the graph.) If you subtract 5 million, you're still at 11 million. Also since they gave a two year extension on cancelled healthcare plans, you're not talking 5 million. It's less.

It's misleading to say everyone who signed up was previously uninsured and I haven't said that. In addition to the 16 million, you have people who got insurance because they stayed on the parent's plan or due to Medicaid/CHIP expansion.

According to the LA Times link above, according to the Rand and Gallup polls there is a big drop in the number of uninsured. The Times put it at 9 million people.

Rand has been polling 3,300 Americans monthly about their insurance choices since last fall. Researchers found that the share of adults ages 18 to 64 without health insurance has declined from 20.9% last fall to 16.6% as of March 22.

Going from 20.9 to 16.6 is a 25% drop in the uninsured.

5 million of whom had insurance already. We cancelled their plans and put them on the exchanges. That's not decreasing the uninsured... that's swapping out one insurance for another. I believe this law was sold as those poor 40 million uninsured need coverage to lower costs! Well we just finished the sign up period and 5% of them are now signed up. Awesome.

Saying 7 million is taking credit for something that 5 million already did. You honestly don't see how that's dishonest?

Moreover around 20% of these people haven't paid their premiums, meaning they will be kicked off the rolls by the insurance companies... and the backend payment system of the Obamacare law isn't even working still so many people think they have paid and will be turned away anyway.

MightyWhitey

04-02-2014, 09:17 PM

What's to agree with? It's a straight news article.
So either you agree with what you're posting or not. What is your opinion on the article? Or do you just post for the sake of posting?

KevinNYC

04-02-2014, 09:31 PM

So either you agree with what you're posting or not. What is your opinion on the article? Or do you just post for the sake of posting?

If I post something saying a Malaysian airlines plane went missing do I have to agree with that? It's a news report that I found significant. I don't see how my opinion plays into articles like that.

It seems that you are asking a different question. Go ahead and ask that.

KevinNYC

04-02-2014, 10:24 PM

Dammit! My big ass reply post got lost in a browser crash. ISH sucks on Chrome.

The 7 million is not the total number of people who got qualified health plans, just those on the exchanges.
5 million is more than the number whose plans got cancelled because they extended that for two years.

Covering the uninsured is only one goal of the ACA. Lots of the other goals were always intended to affect people who already had insurance. People not having to pay exorbitant premiums due to preexisting conditions was one goal. Not having to be locked into working at job you didn't like simply due to access to health care was another.

The target of 7 million was never intended to be 7 million uninsured people. It was intended as way of measuring if the exchange marketplace model was working and if the pool would be big enough to keep competition going and have insurers keep their rates competitive. Folks have been giddily predicting a death spiral due to the pool (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE0QkuDLrgs) being too small. That ain't happening now.

Does that mean the ACA get's an A+. No, it gets an incomplete, because we have to see what rates look like next year. But based on the recent data, it looks like it is peforming the way the wonks who built it said it would work. That as the years go by more and more uninsured people will be able to get insurance. Millions who had bad insurance will get better insurance.

There's no one place/one number to look at and see if uninsured people have insurance now. It's like the unemployment numbers you have to do polling and so far the polling seems to support that the ACA is having an impact
http://www.newrepublic.com/sites/default/files/u18524/gallup_march_10.png

KevinNYC

04-02-2014, 11:02 PM

Here's a good article about what was expected in ACA's first year and beyond
http://theweek.com/article/index/259173/forget-the-71-million-obamacares-real-enrollment-numbers-are-still-to-come

ALBballer

04-02-2014, 11:10 PM

KevinNYC

04-02-2014, 11:35 PM

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mccutcheon-v-federal-election-commission/

And this is why I can't vote for these republicnuts. With this ruling the nail has been shut on the Citizen United case. It is now a battle of the wealthy to choose our puppet politicians.

We are ****ed.

Yeah, this is a terrible ruling. The washington post headline had it right
Wealthy donors gain more sway over elections (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/)
The ruling by a sharply split court opens the door even wider for a narrow universe of donors to expand their giving by writing single checks for as much as $3.6 million that could flow directly to candidate and party committees.

Just 591 donors reached the limit on giving to federal candidates in the 2012 election, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Brizzly

04-04-2014, 06:05 PM

It is stupid to limit the amount that can be donated, I understand the concern but there will always be loopholes.

ALBballer

04-08-2014, 10:40 AM

"I also would abolish PAC's. You probably have one - I don't like them. I don't like the influence of Money - whether it's business, labor or any other group. I do not like that kind of influence. Lobbyists, I want to register, know who they are. I want to make sure gifts are limited. I think we have to really become much more vigilant in seeing the impact on money - and I don't care how it's organized - on money in politics."

- Mitt Romney (Remarks to Burlington Business

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUyBm9sjL5E

Although lets be serious, Obama received more money than McCain by 2-1, and even beat Mitt Romney in 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_for_the_2008_United_States_presidentia l_election

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance

KevinNYC

04-08-2014, 02:14 PM

Although lets be serious, Obama received more money than McCain by 2-1, and even beat Mitt Romney in 2012.

2008 was a rough, rough year to be the incumbent party. Even if you supported McCain were you going to put money on him? In midst of a financial collapse?

Also according to your link above Obama raised more, but spent less than Romney.

Romney spent $992.0m
Obama spent $985.7m

But you also have to look at the changed nature of campaign finance. The Citizens United decision gave a lot of clout to outside groups. In 2012, the groups supporting Romney outspent the ones supporting Romney more than 2 to 1.
http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/cycle_tots.php

So Romney had the spending advantage by a pretty large margin. Also the nature of contributions to Romney and Obama are different. 39% of Romney's donor's gave the max compared to 11% for Romney. 57% of Obama's contributuor's gave less than $200 bucks. So Romney had a richer support base and Obama had a broader base.

This recent ruling only affects super rich donors who can affored to Max Out their contributions. This only about 600 people and they tilt Republican
(http://wcfcourier.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/iowa-politicos-say-high-court-ruling-means-more-campaign-cash/article_72bbf47e-2b54-57a2-8c16-a6f21506a419.html)
n the 2012 campaign, about 600 donors maxed out their contributions to candidates, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics and the Center for Public Integrity. Forty-five percent gave at least 90 percent of their donations to Republicans, while 37 percent gave to Democrats.

About 1,700 people hit a separate contribution limit to national parties, with 61 percent of them Republican donors and 37 percent Democratic donors.

Brizzly

04-09-2014, 05:04 PM

might as well put this shit in here too.

The Senate failed to reach the 60 votes needed to move forward to debate on the Paycheck Fairness Act. The Senate voted 53-44 on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the measure. Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine who typically votes with Democrats, joined Republicans in blocking the measure.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/04/senate-gop-blocks-debate-on-equal-pay-bill/

YEAs ---53
Baldwin (D-WI)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Booker (D-NJ)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
Markey (D-MA)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Walsh (D-MT)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---44
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Crapo (R-ID)
Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
King (I-ME)
Kirk (R-IL)
Lee (R-UT)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=2&vote=00103

zoom17

04-16-2014, 12:43 AM

Syrian rebels get US-made 20 US-made TOW anti-tank missiles This will end well:facepalm

http://news.yahoo.com/syria-rebels-us-made-missiles-170846577.html

KevinNYC

04-16-2014, 08:15 AM

Syrian rebels get US-made 20 US-made TOW anti-tank missiles This will end well:facepalm

http://news.yahoo.com/syria-rebels-us-made-missiles-170846577.html

Probably [URL="In an article published last week by Jane

KevinNYC

04-16-2014, 08:18 AM

As Russia starts provocations in Eastern Ukraine, their economy might be paying for Putin's gambit (http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20140416-703515.html)
Russia's economy contracted in the first three months of 2014 compared with the preceding quarter as capital investment shrank, Economy Minister Alexei Ulyukayev said Wednesday.

The Ukrainian crisis hit Russia's economy and markets, sending the ruble to all-time lows, which prompted investors to postpone investment projects and instead park funds in foreign currencies, which spurred capital flight.

"Capital outflow is the most worrying thing now," Mr. Ulyukayev said, speaking in Russia's lower house of parliament.

Some $63 billion was drained from Russia in net capital outflow in the first quarter, while gross domestic product contracted by 0.5% on the quarter in seasonally adjusted terms, Mr. Ulyukayev said.

Mr. Ulyukayev said that the economy is under pressure from falling investment activity, not only in the state sector as was the case a year ago, but across the board, including private companies. In the first three months of 2014, capital investment shrank by 4.8% compared with a year ago, he said.

KevinNYC

04-16-2014, 12:23 PM

KayvonNYC (http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2014/04/16/kevin-kayvon-edson-arrested-marathon-finish-line/)

KevinNYC

04-22-2014, 11:41 PM

Democrats have found a new electoral strategy to bring out voters in off year elections.

Back around 2004, the GOP helped increase conservative turn out by putting anti-gay marriage initiatives on the ballot. The idea being that religious conservatives would be sure to get out and vote against gay marriages, and then would also overwhelming vote Republican. These were up in 11 states in 2004. (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/02/ballot.samesex.marriage/) Karl Rove for years denied he had anything to do with these campaigns. However, since 2004 Bush campaign manager Ken Melhman has come out as gay and admitted that Rove engineered these "grassroots" campaigns.

Democrats have demographics on their side in presidential elections, but struggle in off year elections. One reason for this is young people don't vote in off year elections in any where near the numbers they do in presidential elections.

Now Democrats seem to be taking a page from Rove's playbook and the election issue they are going to be using to turn out younger voters is pot. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/25/marijuana-poll-turnout/6867389/)
WASHINGTON — Warning: Increased voter turnout could be a political side effect of marijuana.

The latest George Washington University Battleground poll, a national survey of likely voters, reveals that nearly four in 10 respondents say they would be "much more likely" to vote if marijuana legalization issues were on the ballot. An additional 30% say such ballot initiatives would make them "somewhat" more likely to vote.

The numbers are encouraging to Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who conducted the survey with GOP pollster Ed Goeas, because Democrats historically have a tougher time than Republicans in turning out voters in non-presidential election years.

KevinNYC

04-22-2014, 11:46 PM

So far Alaska has a ballot initiative on legalizing marijuana and Florida has one on medical marijuana.

KevinNYC

04-22-2014, 11:57 PM

Another approach would be decriminalization, lowering the criminal penalties on pot which Maryland has done

The Alaska vote was supposed to be held during the primary election, but it got moved to election day. (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/alaska-marijuana-2014-election-105870.html) This could have the effect of keeping the Democratic incumbent senator in office and thus having the Democrats keeping control of the Senate.

KevinNYC

04-23-2014, 12:03 AM

In another baby step away from the war on drugs, Obama is supposed to change the clemency rules for non-violent drug offenders in a way that would affect thousands of prisoners. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-department-prepares-for-clemency-requests-from-thousands-of-inmates/2014/04/21/43237688-c964-11e3-a75e-463587891b57_story.html)[QUOTE]The Obama administration is beginning an aggressive new effort to foster equity in criminal sentencing by considering clemency requests from as many as thousands of federal inmates serving time for drug offenses, officials said Monday.

The initiative, which amounts to an unprecedented campaign to free non*violent offenders, will begin immediately and continue over the next two years, officials said. The Justice Department said it expects to reassign dozens of lawyers to its understaffed pardons office to handle the requests from inmates.

KevinNYC

04-23-2014, 01:09 AM

There was a post recently about a video of a Big Al Qaeda meeting in Yemen that surfaced. CNN was talking about this as a show of strength.

There was a massive attack recently on a Al Qaeda camp in Yemen. Supposedly involving not just US airstrikes, but also Yemeni commandoes on the ground. The Times says at least 36 militants were killed. (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/world/middleeast/us-drones-and-yemeni-forces-kill-qaeda-linked-fighters-officials-say.html?hpw&rref=world)[QUOTE]American drones and Yemeni counterterrorism forces killed more than three dozen militants linked to Al Qaeda

KevinNYC

05-01-2014, 02:50 PM

There are reports that the head of Al Qaeda on the Arabian Pennisula (Saudi Arabia and Yemen) was killed and the master bomb maker who tried to blow up two us airliners.

DNA tests say these two were not killed. (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/al-qaida-chief-bombmaker-ibrahim-al-asiri-escapes-cia-yemen-ambush-1446382)

KevinNYC

05-01-2014, 02:57 PM

During the debate on the minimum wage Sen. Ted Cruz stated that the real Obama minimum wage is $0.00 an hour because of the millions who have lost their jobs.

It reminded of these handy tracker put out the folks at Factcheck.org which I came across last week. (http://www.factcheck.org/2014/01/obamas-numbers-january-2014-update/)
http://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2014/01/ObamasNumbers4thquarter20131.png

That +3.2 million jobs is probably up to 4 million by now since that is using the December 2013 data.

KevinNYC

05-01-2014, 03:06 PM

Actually, there is a newer version of that chart and using the numbers through march, it's almost 4 million new jobs.

http://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2014/04/ObamasNumbers-2014-Q1.png

gigantes

05-01-2014, 09:24 PM

@irish bro,
has anyone thus far asked you how you arrived at your particular expertise and motivation upon politics?

i mean, otherwise it sounds like you are a mature and talented artist / craftsman / whatever, yet that's generally not a natural path towards exacting and fulsome political expertise, rite?

so like, WTF man? and don't just say this--
http://img.izismile.com/img/img7/20140501/1000/daily_gifdump_611_02.gif

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 12:12 AM

gigantes

05-02-2014, 06:18 AM

haha bet won

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 09:42 AM

Good looking jobs report this past month. (http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_25682589/us-economys-spring-thaw-could-boost-april-hiring)

U.S. employers added a robust 288,000 jobs in April, the most in two years, evidence that the economy is picking up after a brutal winter slowed growth.
The Labor Department also said Friday that the unemployment rate sank to 6.3 percent, its lowest level since September 2008, from 6.7 percent in March. But the drop occurred because the number of people working or seeking work fell sharply. People aren't counted as unemployed if they're not looking for a job.

In addition to the strong hiring in April, employers added more jobs in February and March than previously estimated. The job totals for those two months were revised up by a combined 36,000.

Employers have now added an average of 238,000 jobs the past three months, up from 167,000 in the previous three.

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 09:49 AM

Part of this is because growth in the first quarter was almost non-existent, which was attributed to the brutal winter in half the country. So it might be pent up demand. Based on these job numbers, the Fed is cutting back its bond buying stimulus and expects to end that completely by the end of the year. Also, if the job numbers continue to look like this, interest rates should start to go up within 6 months or a year.

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 09:54 AM

NY Times has a new data driven website called the Upshot, check out the animated lesson in polling errors (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/02/upshot/how-not-to-be-misled-by-the-jobs-report.html?rref=upshot)and how that effects the jobs report.

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 03:29 PM

Last year, House conservatives tried to get rid (http://www.rollcall.com/news/boehner_coup_attempt_larger_than_first_thought-220607-1.html) of John Boehner as Speaker of the House.

This month, they are again talking about getting rid of Boehner. (http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/house-conservatives-plot-to-oust-boehner-put-scare-into-cantor-20140410)

Today, John Boehner has not only called a vote for a Select Committee on Benghzai, he's done it with a movie-style poster.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmpH_WmCEAANpzA.jpg

Methinks these two things might be connected?

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 03:38 PM

If you're counting at home, that makes 10 congressional investigations:

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Five Separate House Committees (Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform)
The congressional "whistleblower" hearings
State Department Accountability Review Board
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

We'll probably have about 10 more before 2016 and in third week of January, we have the first Articles of Impeachment of Present Clinton II drawn up.

KevinNYC

05-02-2014, 03:43 PM

Wow, other Congressman are getting in on the act.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmpTOvSCAAEur6d.jpg

Perhaps the GOP just hired a new social media director.

KevinNYC

05-07-2014, 02:48 AM

Census "faked" 2012 unemployment numbers.

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-faked-2012-election-jobs-report/
The Biggest Jobs Report Conspiracy Just Got Destroyed (http://www.businessinsider.com/jobs-report-data-not-faked-jack-welch-2014-5#ixzz310fUb5JC)
The U.S. Commerce Department's Office of the Inspector General released a report on Thursday finding no evidence to support allegations the monthly employment data was manipulated in the months leading up to the 2012 presidential election.
The allegations first came to light last November after the New York Post published a story purporting that the Census Bureau employees conducting the household survey — which determines the unemployment rate — were pressured by higher-ups to fudge surveys and fill in data gaps when they could not get adequate response rates.

The Post's story alleged it was ramped up during President Obama's re-election campaign, when the unemployment rate dropped to 7.8% in September from 8.1% in August. At the time, the September report had former GE CEO Jack Welch and others alleging a conspiracy.

But the independent investigation, launched after the Post's story, found no evidence to support the allegations. The Office of the Inspector General said in its report that it "exhaustively investigated these allegations and found them to be unsubstantiated.

"However, during our review, we identified several areas where the Census Bureau could implement policies and improve processes to better prevent survey data falsification," the report said.

It also said it is theoretically possible, though highly unlikely, that Census Bureau employees could conspire to reduce the unemployment rate by 0.3 percentage points in a single month.

On average, according to the report, a single field representative surveys about 30 respondents each month to determine their employment status. Since the unemployment rate at the time was 8.1%, roughly 2.4 out of those 30 were unemployed.

That means, to change the unemployment rate by just 0.1%, a group of field representatives would need to change 63 people from unemployed to employed. It would take 27 field representatives changing all of their unemployed to employed to accomplish this, meaning the 27 field representatives would have a perfect rate of employed.

The Office of the Inspector General determined it would take a more widespread effort to complete the 0.3% manipulation in a single month. According to the report, about 78 field representatives would have had to participate in the scheme.

The report did find evidence of falsification from the Philadelphia office, but it was "not atypical." Of the approximately 1,200 field representatives working out of the Philadelphia region, a Census Bureau process determined that 14 falsified data. This would not be enough, however, to substantially affect the survey.

"To further reduce the risk for survey data falsification, supervisors should scrutinize workloads and staffing levels to avoid assigning atypically large workloads to field representatives," the office concluded.

KevinNYC

05-07-2014, 02:56 AM

Syrian rebels get US-made 20 US-made TOW anti-tank missiles This will end well:facepalm

http://news.yahoo.com/syria-rebels-us-made-missiles-170846577.html

Reports that Free Syrian Army (http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/despite-the-narrative-syrias-rebels-may-be-gaining-ground#ixzz310hdCpqu) is making a comeback[QUOTE]Almost everywhere in Syria

gigantes

05-08-2014, 04:19 AM

sooner or later (no okie reference).

http://www.jimbenton.com/page5/files/Jim%20Benton%20vote.jpg

gigantes

05-14-2014, 06:54 PM

i'm starting to see the resemblence.

http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/5c2bc916aa717f18d73e9e7cf56f49c8/200113419/DrEvil-steve.jpg

KevinNYC

05-23-2014, 12:58 AM

Today Obama took a walk on the Mall today and some tourists got some photos they will show to their grandkids.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZR1CvSQntE

Obviously, this isn't done casually, but it's a surprisingly effective photo op.

Yesterday, this happened (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/21/us-usa-obama-veterans-idUSBREA4K0EC20140521)

President Barack Obama vowed on Wednesday to get to the bottom of allegations that veterans suffered long delays in getting healthcare and made clear Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki's job may be on the line, as he scrambled to contain a spreading controversy.

After the Benghazi and IRS "scandals," do we have a real scandal that will stick?