Well his first news conference and he insults the wife of a deceased Prez. First news con and he finds a cow pie to step in.

I think his off the cuff humor attempts will be a regular source of gaffes and laughs (at him). He tends to get his wires crossed there.

I agree with you both, above. FWIW, the particulars of the gaffe here, the specifics of the wires being crosssed, are fairly interesting. Fueled by an astrologer, Nancy Reagan had the White House schedule aligned with the stars. Reagan's Chief of Staff, Donald Regan, referred to the resulting scheduling insanity as a "long-established floating seance" in his memoirs.

Actually I think he really got his wires crossed as it was Hillary that pulled from Elanor Rosevelt's power or something by some crazy stuff. I remembe the Nancy thing, but he just got it wrong, imo.

Anyway, its a joke that I would prolly use on the golf course, and I'm sure in liberal circles it is used, but it was just NOT the time to be using it here. The Tube said that he called an appologized. Not sure if thats true.

That particular line was circulating in the news years beefore, when Regan's biography came out and everyone wanted to hear about how batty it was to deal with Nancy. I remembered it (but I have a sticky memory for useless trivia). There were others who had actual seances, notably Lincoln's wife.

What was the gaffe?

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=59XB68F54kA

THE HORROR! I heard that press briefing (and it was brief) and never would have seen it as particularly insulting.

In retrospect, BO did.

Well, LOL@Bo then.

LOL at this AP article.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jye2lJN2jj4Bi5rooDwdJhZ4bsPAD94DFVF00

"95 percent of Americans will get a tax cut..."

What is the LOL for? They way it was written or for BO wanting to cut taxes for the middle class?

People saying that they'd be fine waiting for the tax cut is not the same thing as Obama saying that they'll have to.

But we see what you did there.

http://www.superobamaworld.com/

BO leaks his private meeting with the Prez. Thanks a lot BO. lol

learn how to link.

learn how to link.

www.foxnews.com

lil' help

learn how to link.

I am the link.

www.foxnews.com (http://www.foxnews.com)

lil' help

Lemme guess...something to do with Rick?

Rick who?

lol, no, I was just providing a multi-purpose link on your behalf

People saying that they'd be fine waiting for the tax cut is not the same thing as Obama saying that they'll have to.

But we see what you did there.


The AP wrote this because they're already starting to cover up for the fact that he won't cut taxes. One of the things that made Obama great was that he was able to come off as a fiscal conservative & a tax cutter in his campaign by saying all the things ppl want to hear (despite the fact he has nothing in his past to suggest he's either). I know he's not going to lower taxes, I just didn't expect the media coverup to start so soon.

Hell, at least wait til' the honeymoon's over...

I guess you've never heard the term innocent until proven guilty. Why not let the guy actually take office? I heard that when Palin runs in 2012 she's going to pick a moose as her VP candidate. Oh wait, I have no proof for that? Who cares?

Chris, the kid has already declared a 400 point drop in the Dow to be the fault of Obama. He's not waiting for anything except his skin head brethren to rise up and attempt to take over the government.

Here's Ledezma's idea of LOL@BO:
0udzl4lpYcc
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0udzl4lpYcc

Here's Ledezma's idea of LOL@BO
That's not fair. Fredo doesn't actually have ideas, he just piggy back's on other peoples ideas like the follower he is. Free thought is not his cup of tea.

mm1KOBMg1Y8

Wow, 12 random voters. Amazing.

Better the voters than their candidates.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1398/542389855_811a187e7b.jpghttp://savetherobot.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/mccain_wow.jpg

The interesting bit is that a whole lot of reporters talked about Palin seeing Russia from her house after the Tina Fey skit. I'd be hard pressed to blame anyone for not being informed about that point. Her aggressive defense of proximity to Russia qualifying as foreign policy experience was enough of a joke as it was... Tina Fey wasn't exaggerating a lot, really.

That post shouldn't even have gone in this thread. It's interesting to me how those peeps didn't know who Pelosi is, Reid, who is control of congress, etc, but when it came to who has a pregnant teenage daughter they were all correct.

I think it tells us more of what sticks in a campaign.

The other was how anything the reporter asked that was negative, the peeps thought it was JM or Palin.

I don't know what portion of the electorate they represent, but I bet it larger than we'd like to think. And you could do this on both sides.

And you could do this on both sides.

That's the key (We've all seen it done that way, including Canadians going after Americans), and it's always funny.

That post shouldn't even have gone in this thread. It's interesting to me how those peeps didn't know who Pelosi is, Reid, who is control of congress, etc, but when it came to who has a pregnant teenage daughter they were all correct.

I think it tells us more of what sticks in a campaign.

The other was how anything the reporter asked that was negative, the peeps thought it was JM or Palin.

I don't know what portion of the electorate they represent, but I bet it larger than we'd like to think. And you could do this on both sides.
:cogent:

yS4yf723kmY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS4yf723kmY

I'm wondering how many of you have already bought your Barrack Obama coin. Be honest...

Not me. The only pieces of Obama memorabilia I have are a sticker and a button, both freebies from links I posted here during the campaign.

Depending on what foreign countries I might travel to, it may make sense to buy some Obama gear. Speaking from personal experience, JFK swag will get you a lot of favorable attention in Ireland.

And if Obama's frequently a stupid sounding dumbass and someone make a calendar with all the dumbshit things he says, maybe I'll buy it for my dad like I did with Dubya.

I got the limit of 5, and I'm considering buying more under an alias or having friends buy them for me.

I got his lace undies.

For saying things will change, no more partisan politics, etc, then letting the House Dems write the bill. WTF does he expect from letting Nanci write the bill? No more partisan bickering? Please!

For saying things will change, no more partisan politics, etc, then letting the House Dems write the bill. WTF does he expect from letting Nanci write the bill? No more partisan bickering? Please!
To be fair, that's how it works.

Presidents don't write bills.

They do, however, direct how bills should be written -- sometimes in broad terms, sometimes in very specific ways. They have the power of the veto, selective enforcement, and other mechanisms (as Dubya has shown us) to "strongly encourage" what they perceive to be the right behavior to happen. If Congress doesn't want a veto or some other squeeze put on them, they create legislation that lines up with the President's vision.

In the case of appropriations bills, they originate from the House, never the Senate. So yeah, it's squarely in Nancy Pelosi's court. Unfortunately, she's again demonstrated a lack of political jiu-jitsu here, much as she did with the last big bailout bill. It's turned into a fucking free-for-all.

BO could have written this thing up. He could have consulted, but he could have authored the ground work for the bill and brought the change that he campaigned on and was elected to do.

He could have won over a bunch of peeps if he brought change here. He didn't at all, imo. And now he seems to just be out politikan about it to the press instead of going in and telling the Dems to cut out the crap and tell the Repubs we need to do more than cut taxes.

He missed an opportunity here, imo.

BO could have written this thing up. He could have consulted, but he could have authored the ground work for the bill and brought the change that he campaigned on and was elected to do.

He could have won over a bunch of peeps if he brought change here. He didn't at all, imo. And now he seems to just be out politikan about it to the press instead of going in and telling the Dems to cut out the crap and tell the Repubs we need to do more than cut taxes.

He missed an opportunity here, imo.


Not to repeat MXY, but that in't how our govt. works. Sorry man, he worked with the licks to negotiate a few things. Not like the dem congress with it's numbers isn't going to look to flex it's muscles and money grab here. It's what congresses do, new black pres or not.

Your concern trolling is getting a grade of "poor".

BO could have written this thing up. He could have consulted, but he could have authored the ground work for the bill and brought the change that he campaigned on and was elected to do.
What makes you think he hasn't?

To be clear, in particular regard to the stimulus, this isn't really what Obama was selling throughout the campaign. He was talking ~$100 billion stimulus. As the magnitude of the economic collapse became apparent in October, the dollar numbers for the stimulus (along with other dismal numbers) skyrocketed. But, sorting out specifics and priorities couldn't happen until the end-of-last-year numbers were sorted out, and even then it's a huge moving target. I doubt you could just take the old stimulus, multiply by 8-10x, and get something sensible. Of course, I'm sure that you can't just have everyone in Congress throw every wish list in a pot and get "sensible".

Not to repeat MXY, but that in't how our govt. works. Sorry man, he worked with the licks to negotiate a few things. Not like the dem congress with it's numbers isn't going to look to flex it's muscles and money grab here. It's what congresses do, new black pres or not.

Your concern trolling is getting a grade of "poor".

Say what you want about me...not sure why we can't stay on topic...

but its biz as usual in DC. BO...epic fail so far.

What makes you think he hasn't?

To be clear, in particular regard to the stimulus, this isn't really what Obama was selling throughout the campaign. He was talking ~$100 billion stimulus. As the magnitude of the economic collapse became apparent in October, the dollar numbers for the stimulus (along with other dismal numbers) skyrocketed. But, sorting out specifics and priorities couldn't happen until the end-of-last-year numbers were sorted out, and even then it's a huge moving target. I doubt you could just take the old stimulus, multiply by 8-10x, and get something sensible. Of course, I'm sure that you can't just have everyone in Congress throw every wish list in a pot and get "sensible".

Last sentence...and thats what this is. Eveyone's pork, pet projects, etc thown into a pot and throw out some bullshit rationale ..."well it will help create jobs"

Biz as usual. I expected better from him.

BO could have written this thing up. He could have consulted, but he could have authored the ground work for the bill

I've read this 5 times and I can't even understand what you are trying to say here.

He could have written the bill. He could have consulted both Dems and Reps while laying the groundwork for what the bill should look like, contain, limits, etc.

Its biz as usual and the thieves will get another trillion of our money for our kids to pay off.

He could have consulted both Dems and Reps while laying the groundwork for what the bill should look like, contain, limits, etc.




That's the perfect way to describe what he is doing/did. So no realizing this, you give him 10/10?

No actually its not according to everything I've read. He actually called Pelosi and asked that she write the bill...which is the way Gov't worked, but I thought he was supposed to change the way Gov't worked.

The bill will get passed, it will cost a boat load, it will prolly not do much but cept to have our kids pay for it.

No actually its not according to everything I've read. He actually called Pelosi and asked that she write the bill...which is the way Gov't worked, but I thought he was supposed to change the way Gov't worked.


I cut out the part about him writing it, cause that was a bad troll. Let's work with the rest.

I don't know why he hasn't appointed a couple more supreme court justices yet. Or appointed a platypus secretary of the interior.

Man you guys have thin skin. Someone doesn't like a trillion dollar spending bill and you circle the wagons and go on the attack.

But its still biz as usual in DC. Epic fail on BO's part.

I hear he may even let the house vote on it. Same old stuff.

Better luck next time friend.

I can't believe we don't have a new constitution yet. Fucking Obama.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/obama_debuts_annoying?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

Holy shit what a power grab on the census. I could only imagine if you know who did this. The press would have a coronary.

This shouldn't be in the lol @ thread. This is scary. Politicization, putting it under the WH, is bad road to go down.

I guess BO doesn't have enough on his plate.

Michigan's going to lose a district by the 2012 election...so how does that get solved as to what Rep loses their job???

2010 is the census, but the results won't be in effect til' 2012

The state government that is in place in 2010 draws the 2012 boundaries.

The LATE insertion of the 'or save' on his creating 4million jobs in the spending bill.

He's been saying that for a while now.

He's been saying that for a while now.

Yeah, he's been saying that at least a couple weeks now.

Ok, last week, I'm late in posting it but its still a lol for me.

He's been saying it longer than a week. He was saying it when they were claiming 2.5 mill jobs. That was a while ago.

Ok, last week, I'm late in posting it but its still a lol for me.

Uh, here is a story from 3 weeks ago showing what he said:

http://www.mcall.com/business/local/all-a10_stimulatingjobs.6760495jan27,0,4319789.story


Stimulus package: Jobs gained or saved?

By Christopher S. Rugaber |Of The Associated Press January 27, 2009 President Barack Obama (http://www.mcall.com/topic/politics/government/barack-obama-PEPLT007408.topic) says his $825 billion stimulus package will create or save 3 million to 4 million jobs. But what kind of jobs would they be?

If it works as planned, the stimulus proposal would create thousands of construction jobs building and repairing roads, bridges and other infrastructure. But it also aims to boost employment in the manufacturing, information technology and energy sectors, among others.

I'm not going to let facts get in the way of me lol @ BO

BTW, I'm all for some LOL@OB. This just didn't happen to be true. I'm sure there will be plenty of chances in the future.

He changed his talking points. I heard it wif my own ears. I'm not going to do it, but if one were able to google all of BO's speak, 'or save' was not in there 99% of the time before last week.

I agree that originally the "or save" was not in there originally but the change is not just a week old. I remember watching some CNN report and hearing them explain the "or save" and what it was supposed to mean and how it was relevant and I haven't been in front of a T.V. for maybe a month.

Well I hope he saves and creates 4 million jobs, I'm just not sure about it yet.

The LATE insertion of the 'or save' on his creating 4million jobs in the spending bill.
He's been saying "or save" for quite awhile:

December:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2008/12/20/obama-seeking-create-save-million-jobs/
November:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2008/11/25/a_vow_to_jolt_the_economy/?rss_id=Boston.com%20--%20Latest%20news
October:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/384027_issues20.html

If you want a real LOL@Obama, see:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/obama_peddling_stimulus?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

Someone said that BO said there was NO EARMARKS in the spending bill. If so LMAO

Another laugher is the way he projects the costs of the Iraq war and then says he saves them. Patreus got that war under control, against what BO wanted with Surge, so we can get out of Iraq. So now its coming to fruition, not because of BO, but becuase of the succss of the surge. So we go home.

What did BO do? Cut the fictional spending. He projects the Iraq war costs out to 2018 and then says he cuts them.

LOL

Shouldn't he be able to project them out till 2108?

Not since the treaty signed last fall says we'll be gone by 2010 or 2011 or something. He did for fictional budgetary purposes so it looks like he's saving money.

Not since the treaty signed last fall says we'll be gone by 2010 or 2011 or something. He did for fictional budgetary purposes so it looks like he's saving money.
Yeah, and we were done in 2003. Mission accomplished.

Yeah, and we were done in 2003. Mission accomplished.

Who said that?

Please.

Do you really want to go back over this? Bush didn't put the sign up. Bush never said the war on terror was over, etc.

BO's fiction for purposes of making him look like he's doing something, is still funny, imo. Scary funny, but funny.

Yes, it was Obama who in 2003 took Bush standing under that sign as a decree the mission was accomplished. Obama is everywhere and at all times.

Come on T, even Bush has admitted it was a mistake.

Tommy Franks put the banner up there. Bush declared the major fighting over. He was wrong, but he fixed, or I should say Patreus convinced him to follow his (Pat) plan, that worked.

The point is that we have a treaty/agreement in place that because of Bush and Patreus, we can withdraw from Iraq. I'm not getting into the 'we shouldn't have been there in the first place argument. We can withdraw by 2010 ro 2011, cuz of the surge.

Its just fictional bookkeeping (and I'll say disingenuous) for him to project the numbers out that far and then subtract for bookkeeping purposes.

LOL Way to go Bush! You ended the war! We aren't allowed to talk about starting the war in the first place though.

I guess we aren't allowed to talk about committing the US to long term foreign policy terms while on the cusp of leaving office either.

Nor about the fact that signing a treaty isn't the same as actually pulling the troops out of the damn country. If we only knew that all we had to do was write up a treaty and tell Maliki to sign it. Bush could have ended the war in 04.

Someone said that BO said there was NO EARMARKS in the spending bill. If so LMAO
One man's earmark is another man's stimulus.

LOL Way to go Bush! You ended the war! We aren't allowed to talk about starting the war in the first place though.

I guess we aren't allowed to talk about committing the US to long term foreign policy terms while on the cusp of leaving office either.

Nor about the fact that signing a treaty isn't the same as actually pulling the troops out of the damn country. If we only knew that all we had to do was write up a treaty and tell Maliki to sign it. Bush could have ended the war in 04.

Nope. Iraqis didn't have control then and frankly neither did the US. Its stable now and its time.

The stability which brought about the treaty has zero to do with BO. He was actually against the surge that brought about the environment to have a meaningful Gov't that allowed the US to withdraw.

One man's earmark is another man's stimulus.

I thought the 'depends on what the meaing of the word 'is' is' era was over with the new guy.

He's been in office for a month. Of course he didn't "stabilize" Iraq.

Wow the obsession.

Well he was a Senator.

You're a good man T.

Forgot the green text.

Another laugher is the way he projects the costs of the Iraq war and then says he saves them. Patreus got that war under control, against what BO wanted with Surge, so we can get out of Iraq. So now its coming to fruition, not because of BO, but becuase of the succss of the surge. So we go home.

What did BO do? Cut the fictional spending. He projects the Iraq war costs out to 2018 and then says he cuts them.

LOL
He didn't pull these costs out of his ass. It was a thinktank funded by the Department of Defense under Bush who came up with that:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=86838&sectionid=3510203

President Barack Obama intends to ask the US Congress for more than USD 200 billion to cover the country's war spending.

According to the US defense officials, Obama needs USD 75.5 billion for 2009 to cover the cost of the additional troops deployed in to Afghanistan this year and an another USD 130 billion for the rest of fiscal 2009.

Meanwhile, the sources added that the 2010 War spending will be part of the president's overall defense funding request to be announced on Thursday.

The war spending request will be in addition to USD 534 billion for the US Defense Department's other expenditures.

The US Congress had already approved USD 65.9 billion in emergency wartime spending for fiscal 2009.

This is while late December, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) reported that the direct cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could reach as high as USD 1.7 trillion by 2018 even with fewer troops in Iraq.

The CSBA report found that the war in Iraq alone has already cost more in inflation-adjusted dollars than every other US war except World War II.

The cost of sending a single soldier to fight for a year in Afghanistan or Iraq is about USD 775,000 - three times more than in other recent wars, the report said.

The report concluded that the nearly USD 1 trillion already spent is only a down payment on the war's long-term costs.
We have a ton of war-related IOUs to people even if the war stopped today, like I was saying in another post.

Its still crap. He's trying to make himself look good by cutting something that isn't even there.

And it wasn't even in the budget till he put it in the budget process, so he could pull it out to make himself look good.

It not being in the budget was the way your guy tried to keep himself from looking bad when he didn't cut it.

Bush definately kept it out of the budget. I don't know all the reasons, but they couldn't have been good reasons.

Its still crap. He's trying to make himself look good by cutting something that isn't even there.

And it wasn't even in the budget till he put it in the budget process, so he could pull it out to make himself look good.
It was a joke that Bush kept it off-budget, so fiscal conservatives could claim they're not overspending as badly as they really are. Making the Iraq War part of the budget and not part of supplemental bills is the proper thing to do. Let's be real, here.

And I said it was wrong for Bush not to put it in. But it was put in to pull out that number.

Because it's REAL spending. You can't claim it should have been in and then criticize putting it in. Well you can, but it makes no sense.

Now if the dude tries to hide Afghanistan spending or makes some kind of excuse for it, there's something to call out.

I don't think it's wrong to factor Iraq into the budget. It's long overdue. I don't think it's wrong to use the recent Bush estimates (which factor in an eventual withdrawal) as a starting point for deficit reduction. The notion that we stop paying for the Iraq War after we draw down combat troops doesn't factor a litany of future "contractual" costs that rack up the longer we stay.

The Anbar Awakening and our financially encouraging both sides to play nice had more to do with stabilizing Iraq than the surge. The hard part will be that paying off both sides costs money. We've done that in a number of contexts before (e.g. Egypt and Israel) to stabilizing effect, but it only works when you have money and a solid mantle economic leadership.

Fun fun fun...

Mxy is just so fucking cogent.

MANCRUSH

I don't think it's wrong to factor Iraq into the budget. It's long overdue. I don't think it's wrong to use the recent Bush estimates (which factor in an eventual withdrawal) as a starting point for deficit reduction. The notion that we stop paying for the Iraq War after we draw down combat troops doesn't factor a litany of future "contractual" costs that rack up the longer we stay.

The Anbar Awakening and our financially encouraging both sides to play nice had more to do with stabilizing Iraq than the surge. The hard part will be that paying off both sides costs money. We've done that in a number of contexts before (e.g. Egypt and Israel) to stabilizing effect, but it only works when you have money and a solid mantle economic leadership.

Fun fun fun...

Well if its costing money, how is it a cut?

This is slight of hand bullshit by a politician. I'm really surprised you aren't seeing this one Mxy.

Mxy has this one explained perfectly. It's not about whether it costs money, it obviously does. It's about correctly reporting and including and possibly even controlling or capping that cost within a budget.

And that's not even mentioning the obvious differences in government transparency doing it one way or the other.

No, Mxy doesn't.

This discussion is not about whether to put the war in the budget.

Its bullshit, fictional savings, so he can say he's saving money.

Obama's at the Bulls game tonight in DC>


And the Dow tanks!

Most federal budget savings (and spendings) are based on projections. It's not dirty pool to project spending out based on current commitments, then tweak something that projects out to less spending, and call it a cut -- as long as you are aware that it's a projection. It's not a real increase or cut until the money is actually counted.

#100

I lolled

Mxy is just so fucking cogent.

MANCRUSH
:gutsy: and :cogent:

And wrong on this one

Obama's been clear that his would-be budget cuts are relative to the Bush budget (+ Iraq, which had been off-budget for far too long) and reasonable projections from that. If you don't think that the Iraq projection is a very reasonable projection from which to do that, then tell me what's wrong with it. If you think the whole notion of projecting then cutting based off the projecting of future costs is disingenuous, well, that's been part of yearly budget concoction forever.

He's not counting the (hopefully) one-time stimulus stuff into it, except as added interest payment on the additional debt. He's not saying "I spent $800 billion now, I'm not gonna spend that $800 billion next year, it's an $800 billion cut". Now THAT would be bullshit... The real test here is -- if this stimulus thing is needed over a buncha years, will it become part of the budget? At that point, any projected "cut" goes out the window (and armageddon has likely arrived, which will satisfy the "end of days" Bushies).

BTW Tahoe... don't you worry...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v503/Oppressor/3032919041_55a9d91a27_o.jpg

lol...nice...I'm going to get back on this a lil later. And then I'm going to start a new thread about his budget. :)

Someone said that BO said there was NO EARMARKS in the spending bill. If so LMAO
Reportedly, he said that to elicit laughs from the audience.

LOL *by* BO... ;)

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/003tdjqfxOfsk/610x.jpg

Reportedly, he said that to elicit laughs from the audience.

LOL *by* BO... ;)

I did end up seeing the clip and it was done with a straight face. It must be on youtube. I'll look it up at some point.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/02/earmark-repository/


President Obama told Congress the day before it passed that he was happy it didn't contain any earmarks, eliciting gales of laughter from the Republican side of the chamber who knew better.

k6Ijej4J0NM&feature

cxxxGUeZtno

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/iain_martin/blog/2009/03/06/president_barack_obama_dislikes_britain_but_hes_ke en_to_meet_the_queen%20


President Obama has been rudeness personified towards Britain this week. His handling of the visit of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to Washington was appalling. First Brown wasn't granted a press conference with flags, then one was hastily arranged in the Oval office after the Brits had to beg. Obama looked like he would rather have been anywhere else than welcoming the British leader to his office and topped it all with his choice of present (*) for the PM. A box of 25 DVDS including ET, the Wizard of Oz and Star Wars? Oh, give me strength. We do have television and DVD stores on this side of the Atlantic. Even Gordon Brown will have seen those films too often already.

What is the point of #112? I could understand if it caused him to fall down the stairs or something...

Not at his sharpest in #113. Fumbling around pretty bad there.

Tahoe workin' the H8TER angle pretty hard. Damnable Repulsicans are nothing if not disingenuous about their H8TERNESS for anything un-white, far-right, uptight and OUTTA SIGHT!

And Moxie RULEZ. Mancrush seconded.

What is the point of #112? I could understand if it caused him to fall down the stairs or something...

He's just a dumbass, thats all. Its funny.

If Obama is a dumbass, what does that make Bush?

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooh

If Obama is a dumbass, what does that make Bush?

Bush is prolly smarter than BO.

Bush is prolly smarter than BO.

Honest question: Do you really think that?

I don't know. I haven't looked at their transcripts. The dumbass thing is just responding to Chris calling Bush a dumbass in threads across the board.

It was surprising several years ago when Bush's transcripts were compared to Gore's and Bush actually had the higher GPA, iirc.

Spending money the way BO is right now, seems really, REALLY dumb though.

Ok, so what would you do to move the economy along?

Interest rates are 0% but no one is lending or borrowing.

Cutting taxes didn't seem to do anything but make things worse.

You think channeling Herbert Hoover's gonna do the trick, or did you have something else in mind?

If Bush is smarter, why did we get in such a bind under him?

Pass the Republican bill, that didn't see the light of day, of course. Its much more targeted.

Why the bind? Cuz the Dems blocked Bush's attempt to regulate F&F and the mortgage industry in 02.

Pretty sure I posted this somewhere before, but as far as F&F's relationship to the current crisis: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53802.html

As for the Republican bill, it was largely tax cuts for pre-existing states of being. That doesn't get you your bang for the buck because it doesn't directly lead to spending or other desired activity. What's going to cause money to circulate... giving peeps mattress money?

Damn you and your facts! How the hell can the Republicans swindle a nation if you keep coming out with facts! Don't be fooled, people, the CRAZY liberal democrat is lying to you, he's just trying to trick you because he hates God!

^ Thats my line

My last Poli/Sci post...of the day. I better stop before Mxy gets riled up and starts hitin back.

isvrFuxXADU

"St. Petersburg woman who painted Obama slogans on her car lost job, faces repossession"
http://www.tampabay.com/multimedia/archive/00059/B4S_Obamacar031009_59631d.jpg
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/article982642.ece

"St. Petersburg woman who painted Obama slogans on her car lost job, faces repossession"
http://www.tampabay.com/multimedia/archive/00059/B4S_Obamacar031009_59631d.jpg
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/article982642.ece


I'd hit it!

http://prime-spot.de/Bilder/BR/obama_fingers_s.jpg

Obama's Bracket is going down in flames:

http://games.espn.go.com/tcmen/entry?entryID=2813746

Only picked lower seed the entire bracket (that was more than a 1 seed difference).

So is his presidency.

^snark

Chris opened up that door for me. I had NO choice.

I'm sure that Barack is fretting because he has lost your support.

I'm one of those peeps that increased his disaprove number to 26% from 17%.

I really was hoping he'd be a lil more in the middle of the road. No such luck.

He's hitting the Jay Leno's of the world now, so maybe his numbers will go back up.

If you were part of the original 17 how could you have increased it to 26?

I didn't disapprove at the begining.

I didn't disapprove at the begining.

LOL. you disapproved of him the moment he decided to be a democrat.

LOL. you disapproved of him the moment he decided to be a democrat.

Chris stick to the NFL forums where at least you are right once in a while. :)

find me a post where you approved of him and we'll talk.

About a week or 2 prior to the election I realized it was over and got behind the Prez. I even had a lil discussion with Wil about it.

I knew he wasn't going to govern like a Rep, but was willing to approve if he would govern from the center. He went hard left. Peeps see it, peeps disaprove.

He said there was going to be change and its biz as usual. He isn't even like Clinton, he's more of a Carter. I disapprove now, but didn't at the begining.

I'm one of those peeps that increased his disaprove number to 26% from 17%.

I really was hoping he'd be a lil more in the middle of the road. No such luck.

He's hitting the Jay Leno's of the world now, so maybe his numbers will go back up.

Fucktard conservative always say this after their guy has spent his presidency pandering to the knuckledragging anti-abortion, no stem cell, we-go-to-church-every-day-but-we-like-hot-man-man-sex-and-restroom-trysts-and-edit-fuck-the-constitution-let's-start-a-powder-keg-in-the-powder-keg-that-is-the-middle-east, bankrupt the country, give free reign to your buddies in the oil-military-industro complex, union busting, OSHA disintegrating, environment destroying, let's ruin Alaska for 2 days worth of oil crowd.

Yeah, but OBAMA better be middle of the road since Bush and Cheney were such glowing examples of bi-partisanship.

edit - That's enough of the pedo shit. -Glenn

About a week or 2 prior to the election I realized it was over and got behind the Prez. I even had a lil discussion with Wil about it.

I knew he wasn't going to govern like a Rep, but was willing to approve if he would govern from the center. He went hard left. Peeps see it, peeps disaprove.

He said there was going to be change and its biz as usual. He isn't even like Clinton, he's more of a Carter. I disapprove now, but didn't at the begining.

You'd have to find me that discussion (I missed it)

Has he really been that unexpected? What major choices has he made that differ from what he said in his campaign?

Fucktard conservative always say this after their guy has spent his presidency pandering to the knuckledragging anti-abortion, no stem cell, we-go-to-church-every-day-but-we-like-hot-man-man-sex-and-restroom-trysts-and-edit-fuck-the-constitution-let's-start-a-powder-keg-in-the-powder-keg-that-is-the-middle-east, bankrupt the country, give free reign to your buddies in the oil-military-industro complex, union busting, OSHA disintegrating, environment destroying, let's ruin Alaska for 2 days worth of oil crowd.

Yeah, but OBAMA better be middle of the road since Bush and Cheney were such glowing examples of bi-partisanship.


Fuck you you fucking fuckhead.

To me he has. To the left, prolly not.

I'm sure there are tons of items on lists out there (contrived by FoxNews and Rush btw).

The first thing that comes to mind is just that he would use nuclear and drill and now he has totally went against it. It was very disingenuous of him to say that. But he's a politician that says things to get elected just like every other politician.

Use "nuclear"? Is that bombs or energy?

Use "nuclear"? Is that bombs or energy?

Ok, get me all excited with that nuclear bomb talk, Zip. You know thats what all conservatives want.

I know. Reagan threatened Iowa for chrissakes.

The first thing that comes to mind is just that he would use nuclear and drill and now he has totally went against it. It was very disingenuous of him to say that. But he's a politician that says things to get elected just like every other politician.
If you're referring to the lack of funding for a centralized nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain, all Obama did was establish par for the course. That IS a centrist position, same as both Clintons.

Here's the deal. Most nuclear plants were engineered with the idea that the waste would end up stored in some centralized location eventually, either to be stored or reprocessed. It was a perceived problem to be solved "later". Well, "later" has arrived.

No regional guv'mint wants the waste, either to store or reprocess. All the other regional guv'mints would love to have their waste be elsewhere. They tolerate the "temporary" waste they have because they also get a nuclear power plant and jobs and taxes and such out of the deal. Whoever gets stuck with the waste is, by definition, a political loser who can't leverage much from the plants.

Yucca Mountain was thought to be the centralized solution for storage. Of course, that pissed off most everyone in Nevada. Obama said he was against it, and he acted on his promise. Quite aside from the politics, it turns out that Yucca Mountain isn't a great choice because the water flows in a way where leaks contaminate drinking water.

Of course, is there ever really going to be a good place for nuclear waste to sit? Does even the notion of a central repository for storage or reprocessing make sense? Does it make sense to transport waste across the country to make one big powderkeg, or does it make more sense to decentralize it and create a lot of little unmoving timebombs, as is done currently?

Obama's proposed a holding pattern for now, and going back to the drawing board on this, and that's fine with me. We're funding the research into power plants that can use that waste as fuel. Chu, the Secretary of Energy, is a Nobel Prize winning nuclear scientist and a vocal pro-nuke sort. I have some faith in good science being worked on to steer us correctly.

I was talking about When he said he'd use every means necesary to rid ourselves on the dependence of foreign oil...including nuclear power and he'd drill to.

Remember when gas prices were sky high?

I'm going to have to read your post again.

Nuclear energy was nowhere in his budget and neither was drilling, iirc.

Using waste for fuel sounds too good to be true. I've never heard of it, but I don't follow it closely either.

He's starting by ditching Yucca Mountain and going back to the drawing board on how to deal with the nuclear repository problem. Some people are interpreting that as anti-nuke, which certainly isn't the case. It's just acknowledging reality, really.

As far as drilling, it's not going to amount to very much, but it will be part of what we're going into:


The outer continental shelf will have its niche place in our energy policy.

Remember, drilling off-shore amounts to pennies and takes a decade or more to get the ball rolling. WTF were you expecting in 3 fucking months? That's low on the relative order of "things to do", but it's not off the radar.

It sounds like you're just bitching to bitch when you pick those particular energy items, since he's doing sane things about them. The disappoval bump is because Republicans realize they're Republicans. It's funny that Obama's disapproval rating mirrors Bush's approval rating. :)

Drilling off-shore does NOT take a decade and its more than pennies. You need to get out more. Stay off those lib talking point websites. :)

We just frickin passed, or with the help of 3 Reps, the Dems and Bo just passed a huge spending bill and he didn't fund shit according most places I read.

If CA would allow drilling we wouldn't be in this fucking mess we're in right now.

Nuclear energy was nowhere in his budget and neither was drilling, iirc.
Over half our energy research spending has been on nuclear, and it's been that way for decades. Even factoring out the nuclear weapons-specific shit, we still spend way more on nuclear energy than we will on any other "green" energy. The problem isn't a lack of money for that, as much as a lack of direction with the money purposed for that. Obama's doing some structural changes to cause the "nuclear weapons" stuff to be separate (part of DoD) so the other nuclear research isn't crowded out. Between that, and putting an actual nuclear scientist at the helm, I have some hope for good results.

Research! RESEARCH! Fuck research. France is kickin ass with nuclear power. They're selling the leftovers to the UK. US needs to research?

What we need to do is get the fucking tree huggers out of the way and build a plant.

Drilling off-shore does NOT take a decade and its more than pennies. You need to get out more. Stay off those lib talking point websites. :)
Ok, I'll limit myself to pro-oil Bush White House propaganda:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html

The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.
:)


We just frickin passed, or with the help of 3 Reps, the Dems and Bo just passed a huge spending bill and he didn't fund shit according most places I read.

If CA would allow drilling we wouldn't be in this fucking mess we're in right now.
Are you in the Democratic part of California that generates all the tax revenues, or the Republican part of California that is the beneficiary of all those tax dollars?

http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/2009/03/should_california_be_split_up.html
http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/317chart.jpg

Do you honestly believe that it'd take that long to get oil to the shore? Come on. Thats some Gov't mucky mucks spending our money for some stupid fuckin report. Turn it over the private sector and stand back.

Nobody lives in the red areas. How could that area generate any revenue to pay taxes on. I take that back a little bit. Its a lot of the farming areas to the south of Sacramento to LA. Its the most boring drive imaginable.

Ok, Mxy the game is over, so we'll pick this up tomorrow. Be ready to be owned...again. :)

If the most pro-oil administration imaginable doesn't think it makes money, if there hasn't been drilling in places where they have had the rights for years, do you think that there's big and easy profit to be had there? Personally, I think we shouldn't drill anywhere domestically because it will be worth more later when there's less of it, but I realize that's impractical.

I'm just amused at all the Republican areas of the country that suck at the government tit for tax dollars, then get outraged and regressive when their Democratic funders need their money to prop their own selves up. California's biggest budget problem is that it sends far more tax dollars to federal guv'mint than it receives back, just like Michigan.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8229012/Tax-Donor-or-Contrib-States

Ok, Mxy the game is over, so we'll pick this up tomorrow. Be ready to be owned...again. :)
Owned? By you? Keep dreaming.

I think I could argue an anti-Obama energy argument for you better, simply by replacing "nuclear" and "drilling" with "clean coal".

Ok, Mxy the game is over, so we'll pick this up tomorrow. Be ready to be owned...again. :)


Dude, you can't even RENT Moxie's pinky for the night.

Do you honestly believe that it'd take that long to get oil to the shore? Come on.
Yes. First off it takes a while for companies to get permits. I know jack shit about offshore, but drilling here in the states takes a while too. I work for an environmental consultant and our clients are about %99 oil/gas companies. It takes a solid 6 months to year to go through the processes to get approved. They have to hire someone (like us) to do an environmental assessment on the area. the EA outlines all the impact the drilling will have on the area. Land, water sources, animals, plants, everything. After they get permitted and finally decide to drill, they have to create the well pad, get a rig up there and drill before you can actually pump anything out. That could take another year. Not to mention if it's a new site you have a lot of infrastructure to create.

I can't imagine how much longer it would be when you are actually IN the water (the regs must be pretty fun). I'm sure it takes a while to construct the rig itself too. Mackinaw Bridge took 3 years to build and a long time to design. I'm sure you can't just slap up a rig offshore the day you get approval.

When prices were high last year, there were all sorts of peeps out talking about what we could now vs when a lot of these reports were written.

They also said if its has national security implications, you can bet we can get the oil to shore quickly. That might mean firms like the one you work for are cut out of the process. I mean, they pretty much know how these things work, cuz theres a few of them in Texas, LA, etc.

So the application process, approval process, etc, would be cut streamlined.

Mxy, you can bring all that study stuff, but its all a ruse by the Obama admin. He said he would use all means available to rid ourselves of depending on foriegn oil including drilling and nuclear. Remember it was popular to say that at the time.

Now you say he wants to research. Thats code for putting it off. France has nuclear plants, why do we need to research. Build the motherfucking thing.

Prices are down so its not a big deal and no one is talking about it again. Then when prices go back up, everyone will be pointing fingers again...spouting the dependence on foreign oil bull. And it will be too late to do anything then.

When prices were high last year, there were all sorts of peeps out talking about what we could now vs when a lot of these reports were written.

They also said if its has national security implications, you can bet we can get the oil to shore quickly. That might mean firms like the one you work for are cut out of the process. I mean, they pretty much know how these things work, cuz theres a few of them in Texas, LA, etc.

So the application process, approval process, etc, would be cut streamlined.
Translation: If the pro-big oil former government had wanted they could have said "fuck the environmental and future costs" and threw a shit-ton of money at people already bilking the tax payer for maximum profit to get them to construct these things immediately and recklessly. Our coast lines would be fucked, extra people would die in the building process, and we'd only be delaying the real issue, but that wouldn't really matter because they 3 guys who got all the money would just stay in their Caribbean homes more often.

Though that completely negates the "if only they'd let private industry do it things would be done already" argument since now they would be paying private industry to do it and we've all seen how well that works.

Way to call for more deregulation though, that takes gumption in the middle of what we are going through right now.

There are national security implications to turnining coastlines into oilshitpiles, too. The study I brought up wasn't by the Obama administration, but by the Bush administration. If anyone was gonna say "yeah, great idea", it'd have been them, and they didn't. I don't know all of the drilling pros and cons, but I'd expect they would. Really, my gut response to "drill baby drill" is "drill there, not here", consume other people's natural resources before our own.

Research isn't code for "putting it off". France's nuclear success was possible because the government picked winner territories and loser territories (easy to do when the French government owns the power companies involved), and because they import nuclear waste from other countries. Absent imports, I'd heard that it's not economical to run such facilities.

Tahoe, I really think you need to concede on this one

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/surrender.jpg

Don't Fuck With Moxie

http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Newsweek/Photos/Web_Exclusives/LordRings/ReturnKingViggo.widec.jpg

Mxy is right, they are researching, but its a ruse. He went back on what he said during the campaign.

Mxy, you can bring all that study stuff, but its all a ruse by the Obama admin. He said he would use all means available to rid ourselves of depending on foriegn oil including drilling and nuclear. Remember it was popular to say that at the time.

Now you say he wants to research. Thats code for putting it off. France has nuclear plants, why do we need to research. Build the motherfucking thing.

Prices are down so its not a big deal and no one is talking about it again. Then when prices go back up, everyone will be pointing fingers again...spouting the dependence on foreign oil bull. And it will be too late to do anything then.

BTW...if you want to know what the code is for other BO actions, I'm always around to inform y'all. :)

http://gayboythailand.com/bangkok-thailand//images/2008/12/obama-queeny-hats.jpg

Mxy is right, they are researching, but its a ruse. He went back on what he said during the campaign.
How would he "not go back"? What actions should he be doing that he's not doing, and in what timeframe?

I certainly don't expect every campaign promise to manifest instantaneously, and I don't have a strong sense of what "bolder" action makes any sense on some of these fronts. The biggest thing he's doing at the moment is structural, getting generals and admirals out of non-weapon nuclear budgeteering.

You really want him to be a cowboy, shooting from the hip on this stuff?

You really want him to be a cowboy, shooting from the hip on this stuff?

BT;DT

How would he "not go back"? What actions should he be doing that he's not doing, and in what timeframe?

I certainly don't expect every campaign promise to manifest instantaneously, and I don't have a strong sense of what "bolder" action makes any sense on some of these fronts. The biggest thing he's doing at the moment is structural, getting generals and admirals out of non-weapon nuclear budgeteering.

You really want him to be a cowboy, shooting from the hip on this stuff?

No, I don't want him to start shooting from the hip.

He's spending TRILLIONS of dollars. He could say we are going to build a nuclear power plant. Once prices fell, its no longer a crisis and nothing happens. Can we be proactive for once?

Build the motherfucking thing.

Really, if you have an idea about where plants can be built and the waste stored, go to D.C. and be a hero because no one else has a politically feasible plan.

The republicans were so hot for nuclear power they'd hump yellowcake like it was American Pie. Yet, they didn't just "build the motherfucking thing" three months after taking power... or three years for that matter. Tahoe to the rescue?

Really, if you have an idea about where plants can be built and the waste stored, go to D.C. and be a hero because no one else has a politically feasible plan.

The republicans were so hot for nuclear power they'd hump yellowcake like it was American Pie. Yet, they didn't just "build the motherfucking thing" three months after taking power... or three years for that matter. Tahoe to the rescue?

I knew you'd show up sooner or later. I just thought it'd be a quote of Mxy's post and a :cogent: with 6 or 10 emoticons.

http://gayboythailand.com/bangkok-thailand//images/2008/12/obama-queeny-hats.jpg

First he takes my tax dollars, NOW he's stealing my 'LOL' schtick.

Thats actually perfect right there Zip. I lolled

I knew you'd show up :cogent:

Indeed.

ZXcgpZwsBPY

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/03/20/White_House_backtracks_on_Special_Olympics/UPI-50661237525687/

No, I don't want him to start shooting from the hip.

He's spending TRILLIONS of dollars. He could say we are going to build a nuclear power plant. Once prices fell, its no longer a crisis and nothing happens. Can we be proactive for once?

Yes, Yes we can!

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_X_d6JjJ00I4/SG0uOxRQbDI/AAAAAAAAOXU/7bjf9UbNgAI/s400/barak+obama+august+ebony+cover.jpg

Tried to sell his budget to the public today.

Failed miserably.

Enthralling commentary once again by DoMa

Enthralling commentary once again by DoMa

http://www.fadedyouthblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/lion-for-lambs-premiere-in-los-angeles5.jpg

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/25/obama-rescue-eu-criticism
"road to hell"

So someone on the tube today was reporting that there aren't near the bidders for our debt that there used to be. So if countries stop buying our debt, what do we do just keep printing more money?

That coupled with the CBO( I think it was the CBO) saying BO's budget is going to cost way more than he says, (even though they are still giving him the 4% growth rate that won't happen) we could be in some real deep shit if his spending bills doesn't help.

How much more can we spend Mxy until we just plain have to stop?

So if countries stop buying our debt, what do we do just keep printing more money?

In short, yes. However, instead of literal printing presses, the US federal reserve is now set to buy debt issued by the US treasury.

We've officially ushered in the era of the banana republic of america. (http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/markets/2009/ma090324.html)

So its just kind of like a bookkeeping thing?

Who's going to break the stalemate? The reason we're spending is because no one else is causing money to move when they are being provided access to it. Instead, they are consolidating -- doing stuff that helps their position in a long-term sense perhaps, but does nothing in the short-term.

You've got to shock the person with the unbeating heart into pumping blood again, with electricity or insulin or radical means, before you tell them to cut back on their diet. Sometimes, the tracheotomy has long-term consequences but it's helpful if they breathe now.

Yeah, such analogies have hyperbole and don't capture all the dymamics, but only to a small degree. One analogy seems apt -- the shit has hit the fan.

You've got to shock the person with the unbeating heart into pumping blood again, with electricity or insulin or radical means, before you tell them to cut back on their diet. Sometimes, the tracheotomy has long-term consequences but it's helpful if they breathe now.

I show them a picture of Zip's mom or make them smell Zekly's douche stick he stole from Kelsey. 7

Did you know that if Obama were to cut the national deficit in half by tomorrow morning, our national deficit would be double what it was on inaguration day.

There's something to chew on.

So its just kind of like a bookkeeping thing?

Unfortunately, no. It really is kind of a fire up the printing presses, zimbabwe: next five exits, spinning money out of thin air thing.

Did you know that if Obama were to cut the national deficit in half by tomorrow morning, our national deficit would be double what it was on inaguration day.

There's something to chew on.
A fair chunk of that is simply because of including Iraq (and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan) in the budget, and Bush was disingenuous to keep those out of the official deficit calculations. Obama does nothing and the deficit for 2009 is in the trillion dollar range due to the financial programs he inherited from Bush. Obama adds on the stimulus and you get to $1.8 trillion.

Disingenuous? A choice he made. Prolly wrong, but not disingenuous, imo.

Don't be knockin Bush!

TARP was included in the 2008 budget, not 2009.

You can blame Bush for TARP, but that still kept the deficit under $500 billion.

There's controversy over how to factor TARP as part of the budget:

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/02/which-budget-deficit.html

Haha! Obama isn't taking federal money! What a buffoon! Is this guy stupid, or what? :)

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/55679/

At a time when people are having trouble holding on to their houses, Barack and Michelle Obama have sensibly decided not to use taxpayers’ money to renovate theirs. New presidents are allotted $100,000 to overhaul the White House residence and the Oval Office, and the Obamas hired Hollywood decorator Michael S. Smith (known, per his site, for mixing “Old World classicism with very contemporary settings”). But the First Couple isn’t spending that money. They “are not using public funds or accepting donations of goods for redecorating their private quarters,” says Camille Johnston, director of communications for the First Lady. Nor is the couple, who reported $4.2 million in household income in 2007 tax returns, using money from the White House Historical Association, a privately funded foundation that paid for a $74,000 set of china shortly before Laura Bush left town.

But does this mean they’re going to spend more than $100,000 or less? Though Michelle Obama has talked up Pottery Barn, Smith’s client list includes cost-is-no-object types like Rupert Murdoch, Steven Spielberg, and former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain—for whom he procured that $87,783 rug. “There’s no question that he’ll get it done in the way that it’s supposed to be done,” says Smith client and Democratic donor Katherine Chez. “But how, I don’t know.” The White House declined to disclose the budget, saying that all expenses would remain private as a result of the Obamas’ decision to absorb the cost.

So what happened to the promise that he all bills to be voted on would be posted on the internet for 5 days?

He just pushed a trillion of our kids money through and the bill was printed and deliverd at 11pm and voted on at 9am the next day.

This guys would be humorous if it wasn't so serious.

This thread should be compiled into a 884-page book called "Tahoe's Manifesto" when it's done.

So what happened to the promise that he all bills to be voted on would be posted on the internet for 5 days?

He just pushed a trillion of our kids money through and the bill was printed and deliverd at 11pm and voted on at 9am the next day.

This guys would be humorous if it wasn't so serious.
Theoretically, anything involving spending of money is an "emergency" and not subject to this. :)

But yeah, I mostly agree with you on this one, Tahoe. My only quibble is that the real onus here should be on the legislators, who should have enough time to read the bill (along with the constituents) before voting on it and sending it to the President. If Congress did there job, Obama's promise here wouldn't need to be honored.

Ha ha... Obama got in the middle of a fight between France and China:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/04/thats-my-man-ri.html

A real president would've put representative hotties from the two countries in a mud wrestling ring.

A_B5UrI7nAI

More tax problems:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/2008_tax_records_reveal_sasha?utm_source=onion_rss _daily

Mxy has bad breath.

Ha ha... Obama pulled a Jimmy Carter, sending out the Special Forces to do a rescue which didn't successfully wipe out piracy! He wimped out and failed the Commander In Chief test!

What a bozo Obama is! He referred to Cuba as -- get this -- Cuba!
LOL

http://generationmiami.com/2009/04/22/diaz-balart-blasts-obama-for-referring-to-cuba-as-cuba/

100 days, 100 mistakes

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/100_days__100_mistakes_166177.htm?page=0

http://i40.tinypic.com/6eeubk.jpg

The Obama Magical Mystery Tour continues with a Air Force One fly by of Manhattan. FOR A FUCKIN PHOTO OP!

Nice use of taxpayers money right there.

Anyone remember all the Congress peeps ripping the Auto execs for flying to DC?

crickets

This thread is Tahoe's "Are the Spurs DONE?"

The Obama Magical Mystery Tour continues with a Air Force One fly by of Manhattan. FOR A FUCKIN PHOTO OP!

Nice use of taxpayers money right there.

Anyone remember all the Congress peeps ripping the Auto execs for flying to DC?

crickets
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/air_force_one_photo_op_over_ny.html


President Barack Obama today ordered an internal review to determine how the decision was made to send of one of his official airplanes, accompanied by a single Air Force F-16, on a low-flying photo op past the New York City skyline.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said today that deputy chief of staff Jim Messina will lead the review. Gibbs said the point is to determine "why that decision was made and to ensure that it never happens again."

Gibbs said Obama was "furious" when he heard about the incident. Obama has called it a mistake.

Too frickin bad.

If something happened under Bush's watch, it was on him for the last 8 years.

I'm not letting y'all change the rules now.

Who the hell is BO hiring? Who are these incompetents?

I don't believe he didn't know anyway.

http://mail.google.com/mail/?attid=0.1&disp=emb&view=att&th=120ee63163cc996f

If something happened under Bush's watch, the administration blamed it on Bill Clinton for the last 8 years.

Fixed.

^tru dat

Fixed.

That is such horseshit. Bush accepted his stuff.

The press might have done that, but not Bush.

We all believe bush never knew anyway. Dude is a rock.

BO "blah blah blah has saved or created 150,000 jobs"

LMAO

Back on topic...lol @ BO

He has to call the Dems up to the WH cuz he they won't do his cap the cap and trade program he wants. And I won't even mention all the lobbyists and big wigs who will make huge jack off the new plans BEING IN THE ENERGY MEETING. The silence is deafening..remember Cheney? Y'all were all over that, but NOW its ok.

FAIL

Closing Gitmo. Dems say what is your frickin plan dude? We're not doing shit till you get your stuff together.

FAIL

Ambassador Holbrook(?) said we shouldn't set timelines cuz the enemy can wait us out. LMAO Thats what the Bush admin was saying and was ridiculed for it. Silence is deafening.

And last, but not least, the Dems want to set benchmarks in Afghanistan.

How do you know the energy guys were there?

How did you know the engergy guys were there?

How did you know the engergy guys were there?

Tahoe told me. Did you hear how he found out?

Who told me?

They

Tell "them" I said hi.

BO asks Wall Street to show some restraint, discipline and sense of responsibility. Ah hem...

BO asks Wall Street to show some restraint, discipline and sense of responsibility. Ah hem...
Now that IS pretty fucking hilarious...

Now if only we could get our elected officials to do that.

The Obama Magical Mystery Tour continues with a Air Force One fly by of Manhattan. FOR A FUCKIN PHOTO OP!

Nice use of taxpayers money right there.

Anyone remember all the Congress peeps ripping the Auto execs for flying to DC?

crickets

Yeah, what the fuck? He could start another two wars, use taxpayer money to torture people, trash the environment...oh wait...that's been done before. No wonder Obama is doing this tahoe--your guy did all the cool stuff already!

lol...nice Zip.

I wanna see those fucking 500 thousand dollear pictures. The WH said they were 'classified' ...but thanks to FOXNEWS, they filed a freedom of info act and 'some' of the pics will be released.

Props to Fox, ha Zip. :)

Now if only we could get our elected officials to do that.
In general, elected officials are the lowest common denominator in a way that Wall Street execs can't tough. Far too many people overextend themselves who vote in elections.

I wanna see those fucking 500 thousand dollear pictures. The WH said they were 'classified' ...but thanks to FOXNEWS, they filed a freedom of info act and 'some' of the pics will be released.

Props to Fox, ha Zip. :)

you can always count on them for breaking 'news'

Only lost 550k jobs last month, but no worries, Obama will increase the size of our Gov't by that much by next month. We'll just put them all in the Gov't and the taxpayers can pay for them. BRILLIANT!

Never underestimate the power of a positive feedback loop. :)

Obama fires Gen Mckeirnan cuz he wants more troops for Afghanistan. You should listen to your Gen's BO or the libs will be all over you for not doing it.



McKiernan led the way in calling for an increased troop strength in Afghanistan as U.S. President Barack Obama pushed a dual strategy that calls for non-military strategy to combat the growing regional insurgency.


BTW...the bolded part is code for "all we need to do is talk to the Taliban' strategy.

My sense is that something came out of left field, and the official vacuous explanation has little to do with what's really up. I'll LOL@Obama if some "credible leak" happens that implicates Obama, but I'm not there jusst yet.

It's odd, I'll grant you that. I just get a feeling that it's something else.

Remember the last 8 years though...So repeat after me..."Anything that happens now is on Obama"

Its like Air Force One flying over NYC, its Obamas "Mission Accomplished' moment.

Remember the last 8 years though...So repeat after me..."Anything that happens now is on Obama"

Its like Air Force One flying over NYC, its Obamas "Mission Accomplished' moment.

I know your being a bit facetious with the 8 years on Obama bit... but really, the crazed conservative folks have been blaming Obama for everything since the first day he was in office. Literally. Apparantly he has personally aborted babies, crucified jesus himself, and had a split-stream miss the White House can. Although, they do thank Obama for being the best gun salesman in their lifetime.

More on McKiernan and dhis replacement (http://www.slate.com/id/2218160/)...


An intellectual battle is now raging within the Army between an "old guard" that thinks about war in conventional, force-on-force terms and a "new guard" that focuses more on "asymmetric conflicts" and counterinsurgency.


McKiernan is an excellent general in the old mold. McChrystal, who rose through the ranks as a special-forces officer, is an excellent general in the new mold. He has also worked closely with Gates and Petraeus. (In his press conference, Gates referred to McChrystal's "unique skill set in counterinsurgency.") For the past year, McChrystal has been director of the Pentagon's Joint Staff. More pertinently, for five years before that, he was commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, a highly secretive operation that hunted down and killed key jihadist fighters, including, most sensationally, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq.


Last fall, Bob Woodward reported in the Washington Post that JSOC played a crucial, unsung role in the tactical success of the Iraqi "surge." Using techniques of what McChrystal called "collaborative warfare," JSOC combined intelligence intercepts with quick, precision strikes to "eliminate" large numbers of key insurgent leaders.


This appointment will not be without controversy. McChrystal's command also provided the personnel for Task Force 6-26, an elite unit of 1,000 special-ops forces that engaged in harsh interrogation of detainees in Camp Nama as far back as 2003. The interrogations were so harsh that five Army officers were convicted on charges of abuse. (McChrystal himself was not implicated in the excesses, but the unit's slogan, which set the tone for its practices, was "If you don't make them bleed, they can't prosecute for it.")


Remember the last 8 years though...So repeat after me..."Anything that happens now is on Obama"

In a classic "broken clock" moment, Tahoe is right on time with this one. Obama is putting his stamp on how the war in Afghanistan will be conducted and Obama will be accountable for the outcomes, good or bad.

More on McKiernan and dhis replacement (http://www.slate.com/id/2218160/)...











In a classic "broken clock" moment, Tahoe is right on time with this one. Obama is putting his stamp on how the war in Afghanistan will be conducted and Obama will be accountable for the outcomes, good or bad.

Gee, I could take you out of context and put on the wrong side of this board really quickly. :)

Also, I hope BO is correct...I just don't think he is.

I know your being a bit facetious with the 8 years on Obama bit... but really, the crazed conservative folks have been blaming Obama for everything since the first day he was in office. Literally. Apparantly he has personally aborted babies, crucified jesus himself, and had a split-stream miss the White House can. Although, they do thank Obama for being the best gun salesman in their lifetime.

Dude, seriously, if you honestly feel that, I'd hate for you to be a Bush supporter for the last 8 years. He was blamed for much, much more.

oh, and blamed his predecessor for much less.

I disagreed with some of what Bush did, but he was Swami'd continuously.

I was referring to crazy people, and being a bit facetious myself :D

Shit, I thought I was still considered crazy around here.

Obama will blame Bush who blamed Clinton who blamed Bush who blamed Reagan who blamed Carter... and so on and so forth all the way back to Washington who blamed King George.

Feel free to continue on with the thesis that "inherited troubles" is a concept invented by the current administration though.

C'mon, Tahoe. You've gotta love THIS:


Obama makes light of Notre Dame woes

Associated Press
INDIANAPOLIS -- Having put up with hecklers at Notre Dame, President Barack Obama got in a shot of his own at the school whose renowned football team has gone its longest stretch without a national championship.

After giving the commencement speech at Notre Dame, Obama spoke at an Indianapolis fundraiser Sunday night for the Democratic National Committee. He began his remarks by joking that he told The Rev. John Jenkins, the university president, that the controversy surrounding his campus appearance "paled in comparison to what to do about the football team."

The Fighting Irish had records of 3-9 and 7-6 the past two seasons -- the most losses at the school in a two-year period -- and haven't won a national championship since 1988.

"That's an issue we may not resolve within my four years," Obama said.

"Eight," shouted someone from the audience.

"All right, well, maybe in eight we might get it done," Obama said.

Obama's appearance at Notre Dame capped weeks of protests by some Roman Catholics upset that he was invited to speak at commencement despite his support of abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research.

The remarks were first reported Tuesday by The Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne.

If you consider that funny, someone wrote it for him.

I can't find the LOL@ harry reid so i'll just put it here.

He damn near said word for word today what Mitch McConell has been saying about Gitmo for months.

Once again, Bush had it right.