Proud2baLaker
Master of Science
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
What comes out one end we feed to the other....also Indian food.
What comes out one end we feed to the other....also Indian food.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
- Thread starter dxmnkd316
- Start date
- Status
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
$200 million a day? 35 warships? All based off some anonymous Indian?
This is the type of reporting that would destroy the credibility of respectable media outlets. What is it about the far right that makes them oblivious to journalistic integrity?
$200 million a day? 35 warships? All based off some anonymous Indian?
This is the type of reporting that would destroy the credibility of respectable media outlets. What is it about the far right that makes them oblivious to journalistic integrity?
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Those intellectually bankrupt right wing journalists...
You can't make this up folks.
Those intellectually bankrupt right wing journalists...
You can't make this up folks.
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
And as a result, CBS fired producer Mary Mapes, several senior news executives were asked to resign, and CBS apologized to viewers. Pretty significant fallout for the mistake.
$200 million a absolutely ridiculus number took exactly zero experts to identify the source as an Indian, yet it was echo'd by a half dozen Fox News pundits.
So are you telling me to expect a blanket apology and several key people at Fox to be out of work by this?
And as a result, CBS fired producer Mary Mapes, several senior news executives were asked to resign, and CBS apologized to viewers. Pretty significant fallout for the mistake.
$200 million a absolutely ridiculus number took exactly zero experts to identify the source as an Indian, yet it was echo'd by a half dozen Fox News pundits.
So are you telling me to expect a blanket apology and several key people at Fox to be out of work by this?
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Do you have proof of that? Video maybe?
Do you have proof of that? Video maybe?
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
I thought that was the only reason we are here...somebody lied to me!!
I thought that was the only reason we are here...somebody lied to me!!
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
I came to Casablanca for the waters.
I came to Casablanca for the waters.
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
And yet we want more spending on the military by the Fox news pundits.
Number is a bit high for 35ships ($20million maybe). 2010 budget for navy was $154billion for 340 ships (11 aircraft carrier) which is over $500million per day.
I think the big compromise has to be cutting (freezing) both SS/medicaid/medicare and Military budget which is 85% of the total expenditure. I really don't think we need or can afford to spend 80% of total military budget of the world. Nor can we keep pumping more money into our runway health care bubble. instead we need death panels and freeze our spending at current levels and see if we can stop/slow the medical inflation. (ie wage inflation of doctors and ceos).
And yet we want more spending on the military by the Fox news pundits.
Number is a bit high for 35ships ($20million maybe). 2010 budget for navy was $154billion for 340 ships (11 aircraft carrier) which is over $500million per day.
I think the big compromise has to be cutting (freezing) both SS/medicaid/medicare and Military budget which is 85% of the total expenditure. I really don't think we need or can afford to spend 80% of total military budget of the world. Nor can we keep pumping more money into our runway health care bubble. instead we need death panels and freeze our spending at current levels and see if we can stop/slow the medical inflation. (ie wage inflation of doctors and ceos).
Rimbaud
New member
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201011030052
Story comes out on the 2nd, debunked on the 3rd by the White House, and there they are that night, talking about it.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201011030052
Story comes out on the 2nd, debunked on the 3rd by the White House, and there they are that night, talking about it.
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Hmm, thanks. That is stupid then. Just wanted to make sure, considering the source and all.
Hmm, thanks. That is stupid then. Just wanted to make sure, considering the source and all.
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Excellent article by Andrew Sullivan.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/11/the-rights-accuracy-problem.html
If a black Republican president had come in, helped turn around the banking and auto industries (at a small profit!), insured millions through the private sector while cutting Medicare, overseen a sharp decline in illegal immigration, ramped up the war in Afghanistan, reinstituted pay-as-you go in the Congress, set up a debt commission to offer hard choices for future debt reduction, and seen private sector job growth outstrip the public sector's in a slow but dogged recovery, somehow I don't think that Republican would be regarded as a socialist.
Excellent article by Andrew Sullivan.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/11/the-rights-accuracy-problem.html
If a black Republican president had come in, helped turn around the banking and auto industries (at a small profit!), insured millions through the private sector while cutting Medicare, overseen a sharp decline in illegal immigration, ramped up the war in Afghanistan, reinstituted pay-as-you go in the Congress, set up a debt commission to offer hard choices for future debt reduction, and seen private sector job growth outstrip the public sector's in a slow but dogged recovery, somehow I don't think that Republican would be regarded as a socialist.
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
How long did pay as you go last? 2 weeks?
I also enjoy his subtle play of the race card there as well. Why not say, "If a Republican president..."?
How long did pay as you go last? 2 weeks?
I also enjoy his subtle play of the race card there as well. Why not say, "If a Republican president..."?
Last edited:
moe24
Original Lawson Lunatic
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
And everyone thought the whole Birther controversy was long gone. Yeesh. While I concede this article does nothing more the fuel fire for a ridiculous movement, it does successfully prove wrong my personal assumption that someone in the federal government (or in each state's government) actually bothers to make sure candidates for federal office are actually eligible for that office. That's absurd. Seriously, how hard can it be to verify his long-form birth certificate and be done with this crap?
And everyone thought the whole Birther controversy was long gone. Yeesh. While I concede this article does nothing more the fuel fire for a ridiculous movement, it does successfully prove wrong my personal assumption that someone in the federal government (or in each state's government) actually bothers to make sure candidates for federal office are actually eligible for that office. That's absurd. Seriously, how hard can it be to verify his long-form birth certificate and be done with this crap?
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Because there is no proof for the lunatic fringe. These aren't people that can be convinced by facts, logic, or reason.
Because there is no proof for the lunatic fringe. These aren't people that can be convinced by facts, logic, or reason.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
More to the point, no one vetted Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, or W Bush's birth certificates, either.
Clearly we've been under foreign rule for decades at the least.
More to the point, no one vetted Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, or W Bush's birth certificates, either.
Clearly we've been under foreign rule for decades at the least.
moe24
Original Lawson Lunatic
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
On the contrary, at least based on posters on another political board I post on, these people are smart and well educated and would gladly drop the issue immediately. While I clearly don't agree with them the reality is they are basing their opinion on fact... the fact that Obama refuses to produce his long-form birth certificate. Produce the evidence = issue gone... period.
But the point, for me, really is that it shouldn't be a big deal for there to be a law that dictates a simple verification process for candidates for federal office meeting the constitutional requirements for that office. I know common sense law isnt the norm for congress, but this seems like it should have been and easy one to enact some 200 years ago.
On the contrary, at least based on posters on another political board I post on, these people are smart and well educated and would gladly drop the issue immediately. While I clearly don't agree with them the reality is they are basing their opinion on fact... the fact that Obama refuses to produce his long-form birth certificate. Produce the evidence = issue gone... period.
But the point, for me, really is that it shouldn't be a big deal for there to be a law that dictates a simple verification process for candidates for federal office meeting the constitutional requirements for that office. I know common sense law isnt the norm for congress, but this seems like it should have been and easy one to enact some 200 years ago.
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Maybe the law would be good before the fact, but Obama gains nothing by showing these documents now. These are people that will not be convinced. He shouldn't give them the light of day. All Obama would do is provide more fuel for those who say the evidence is insufficient. Their position is not worthy of a response, frankly.
Nor should the burden of proof be his, anyway. If the Birthers have some real evidence that Obama was not born in the United States, then they can pony up and show that evidence in court.
Maybe the law would be good before the fact, but Obama gains nothing by showing these documents now. These are people that will not be convinced. He shouldn't give them the light of day. All Obama would do is provide more fuel for those who say the evidence is insufficient. Their position is not worthy of a response, frankly.
Nor should the burden of proof be his, anyway. If the Birthers have some real evidence that Obama was not born in the United States, then they can pony up and show that evidence in court.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
It was different with them because they didn't, you know, look Jewish.
It was different with them because they didn't, you know, look Jewish.
moe24
Original Lawson Lunatic
Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?
Good point. And I certainly don't mean to make a big deal about. And you're absolutely right that the burdon of proof isn't his after the fact.
But also a lot of the rediculousness of the politcal process would be killed with common sense laws, and I think this is one of those cases.
Good point. And I certainly don't mean to make a big deal about. And you're absolutely right that the burdon of proof isn't his after the fact.
But also a lot of the rediculousness of the politcal process would be killed with common sense laws, and I think this is one of those cases.
- Status