Soxy Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Oh, Wisconsin. DA threatens to through teachers that teach a comprehensive sex-ed in jail for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 For obvious reasons, Drudge posted the following lines above his logo today: GINGRICH: Obama 'most radical president ever'... LIMBAUGH: Obama 'inflicting untold damage on this great country'... PALIN: Obama's Nuke Stance Like Kid Who Says 'Punch Me in Face'... LIZ CHENEY: Obama Putting America on 'Path to Decline'... HANNITY: Obama 'Is a Socialist'... SAVAGE: 'Obama The Destroyer'... Okay, let's look at the numbers since radical, socialist, damaging President Obama was inaugurated. ---The Dow? Up from 7,000 to 11,000. ---Jobs? 700,000 losses a month to 160,000 jobs created. ---Recovery/Stimulus Act? Added 1.8 million jobs. ---GDP (economic growth)? -6 percent to +6 percent. (Technically, the recession is over.) ---Housing prices? Up 20%. OH HOLY s***! What a nightmare! IEEEEEEEEEEEE! Impeach! via Cesca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Anger over the health-care overhaul has led to a nearly threefold increase in recent months in the number of serious threats against members of Congress, federal law enforcement officials said. The lawmakers reported 42 threats in the first three months of this year, compared with 15 in the last three months of 2009, said Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Terrance W. Gainer, who had information about threats involving both chambers. "The incidents ranged from very vulgar to serious threats, including death threats," Gainer said. "The ability to carry them out is another question and part of an investigation to determine what, if any, appropriate steps to take." Nearly all of the recent threats appear to come from opponents of the health-care overhaul, said Gainer, who also served four years as chief of the U.S. Capitol Police. And, he said, there have been "significantly more" threats against House members than against senators. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 that's bulls***, it was clearly the senators fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Damn you Obama for your lust to have everything run by the government: NASA unveils sweeping new programs One week before President Obama is scheduled to attend a major "space summit" in Florida, NASA unveiled sweeping new programs Thursday designed to implement the administration's proposed shift to commercial manned rockets and development of new technologies to enable eventual deep space exploration. The president's fiscal 2011 budget request, which would cancel the Bush administration's Constellation moon program, does not specify a long-range target for manned exploration or a timetable for moving beyond low-Earth orbit, factors that have generated widespread criticism. But NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, a former shuttle commander, defended the agency's new direction Thursday, saying the president's controversial "vision" is, unlike past programs, affordable and sustainable. "This budget provides an increase to NASA at a time when funding is scarce," he said. "It will enable us to accomplish inspiring exploration, science and R and D, the kinds of things the agency has been known for throughout its history." Man.... and here I was told Obama wanted to run out the private sector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 Link George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld covered up that hundreds of innocent men were sent to the Guantánamo Bay prison camp because they feared that releasing them would harm the push for war in Iraq and the broader War on Terror, according to a new document obtained by The Times. The accusations were made by Lawrence Wilkerson, a top aide to Colin Powell, the former Republican Secretary of State, in a signed declaration to support a lawsuit filed by a Guantánamo detainee. It is the first time that such allegations have been made by a senior member of the Bush Administration. Colonel Wilkerson, who was General Powell’s chief of staff when he ran the State Department, was most critical of Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld. He claimed that the former Vice-President and Defence Secretary knew that the majority of the initial 742 detainees sent to Guantánamo in 2002 were innocent but believed that it was “politically impossible to release them”. General Powell, who left the Bush Administration in 2005, angry about the misinformation that he unwittingly gave the world when he made the case for the invasion of Iraq at the UN, is understood to have backed Colonel Wilkerson’s declaration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 My local newspaper yesterday featured a 2 page spread on the scandal of a corrupt current Senator paying off his mistress's family. Oh, wait, wrong John again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 12:29 PM) My local newspaper yesterday featured a 2 page spread on the scandal of a corrupt current Senator paying off his mistress's family. Oh, wait, wrong John again. As usual, ignored until irrelevant. It would have been nice to know this 2 or 3 years ago when Edwards was lying to everyone in the country about how important his wife was to him as a central campaign issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 03:06 PM) As usual, ignored until irrelevant. Like say, the case of the Senator I'm mocking subtly with the initial post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted April 12, 2010 Author Share Posted April 12, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 03:06 PM) As usual, ignored until irrelevant. It would have been nice to know this 2 or 3 years ago when Edwards was lying to everyone in the country about how important his wife was to him as a central campaign issue. Or if you're a sitting senator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 05:43 PM) Or if you're a sitting Republican. Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 04:43 PM) Or if you're a sitting senator. Honestly, they should have at it. It is more important that a potential President be investigated than a Senator. And at the end of the day, more often than Dems, Repubs usually do the decent thing and step away. I don't ever remember a Dem doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 05:57 PM) And at the end of the day, more often than Dems, Repubs usually do the decent thing and step away. John Ensign. David Vitter. Larry Craig. Eliot Spitzer. The governor in NJ a couple years ago. Any other examples from this decade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 12, 2010 Share Posted April 12, 2010 NJ Governor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 06:14 PM) NJ Governor. Hence where I said "the NJ Governor". It really is remarkable that he could actually say the Republicans have them resign and the Dems don't when the Republicans still have several of them in Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Lemon Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 05:03 PM) John Ensign. David Vitter. Larry Craig. Eliot Spitzer. The governor in NJ a couple years ago. Any other examples from this decade? Gov. Mark Sanford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (Chet Lemon @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 08:21 PM) Gov. Mark Sanford I knew I was missing one, thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 04:57 PM) Honestly, they should have at it. It is more important that a potential President be investigated than a Senator. And at the end of the day, more often than Dems, Repubs usually do the decent thing and step away. I don't ever remember a Dem doing that. Ahahahahahahahaha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 Barack Obama's Facebook News Feed for last Friday http://www.slate.com/id/2250369/ Also, Slate is one of the few remaining places where you can see smart people commenting on articles, and people that say stupid things get ripped into and chased off the site. I drink the kool-aid and started commenting there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 12, 2010 -> 06:17 PM) Hence where I said "the NJ Governor". It really is remarkable that he could actually say the Republicans have them resign and the Dems don't when the Republicans still have several of them in Congress. I am really glad you read the post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 13, 2010 -> 02:25 AM) I am really glad you read the post. do you remember writing this? And at the end of the day, more often than Dems, Repubs usually do the decent thing and step away. I don't ever remember a Dem doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 QUOTE (bmags @ Apr 13, 2010 -> 02:04 AM) do you remember writing this? Was there sarcasm I didn't detect in that post? Did someone else get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 maybe it's that since edwards and clinton were near the president that trumps all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted April 13, 2010 Share Posted April 13, 2010 Tea Party Movement Spreads To Military The Tea Party movement has gained a foothold in the armed forces. A new Tea Party group, Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots, has grown quickly since being launched last month by an active duty Marine Corps sergeant. The group, which vows to "stand up on the very soil we defended to preserve common sense conservatism and defend our Constitution that is threatened by a tyrannical government," currently has over 400 members, who have signed up through its Facebook page, though many are not active duty military. And it has close ties to the broader Tea Party movement. "People in the military need to be heard," the group's prime organizer, Gary Stein -- a Marine Corps sergeant stationed at Camp Pendleton in southern California -- told TPMmuckraker in an interview. "Our opinions do count." Many people in the military "feel like they can't speak out against Obama or Congress," said Stein. "The armed forces should have a little bit more say than we think we do," he said. In promoting the Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots, Stein has raised the possibility of disobeying presidential orders. In one recent online posting, he wrote: My oath was to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and that oath will be kept. I won't "Just follow" orders. There is at this time a debate within the ranks of the military regarding their oath. Some mistakenly believe they must follow any order the President issues. But many others do understand that their loyalty is to the Constitution and to the people.. . I believe if this had happened 3 years ago, they would have been branded as "unpatriotic" by a certain political party. I wonder how they will handle this now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts