Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics (Read 1867236 times)

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #12660 on:** May 25, 2011, 06:58:43 PM »

Quote from: Oblivion on May 25, 2011, 06:15:10 PM

So the Senate took the vote today. Failed 57-40:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55721.html

I actually am unsure if this is a funny photo of McConnell regarding this...or just a photo of McConnell

Brehvolution · « **Reply #12661 on:** May 26, 2011, 09:25:29 AM »

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/james-okeefe/james-okeefe-travel-denied-426093

haha.gif

Mandark · « **Reply #12662 on:** May 27, 2011, 02:18:42 AM »

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304066504576343611464445594.html

Stephen Moore decries the possibility of a high marginal rate on rich people. Not new or original at all, but felt like sharing it because it's just about the most basic, generic form of the Lying With Statistics op-ed, making stock arguments that sounds plausible if you don't have a background in sorting through the bullshit.

Oddly enough, I first got familiar with this kind of jiggery-pokery reading Tom Boswell and other sports columnists.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #12663 on:** May 27, 2011, 10:55:45 AM »

i knew it was a bullshit article by scanning to the last paragraph: "Perhaps there can still be a happy ending to this sad tale of U.S. decline. If there were ever a right time to trade in the junk heap of our federal tax code for a pro-growth Steve Forbes-style flat tax, now's the time."

Oblivion · « **Reply #12664 on:** May 27, 2011, 09:26:36 PM »

Quote

Now let's consider how our tax system today compares with the system that was in place in the late 1980s—when the deficit was only about one-quarter as large as a share of GDP as it is now. After the landmark Tax Reform Act of 1986, which closed special-interest loopholes in exchange for top marginal rates of 28%, the highest combined federal-state marginal tax rate was about 33%.

Two things:

1) Was the economic boom that republicans like to mention during the Reagan years localized in his final two years?

2) Didn't we have some sort of economic crisis shortly after those tax rates were enacted?

Oblivion · « **Reply #12665 on:** May 28, 2011, 01:37:56 AM »

Also, too. Has anyone found themselves not caring about Palin saying anything anymore? I don't mean about running for president, but just anything in general. Normally when I see her say something idiotic (which is every time), I'm pretty much already convulsing, but over the past few weeks, her dumbosity's managed to not faze me in the slightest.

Part of that I think is cause of people like Trump and Gingrich siphoning distinguished mentally-challenged fellow neutrinos from her. Palin's gotta step up her game.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #12666 on:** May 28, 2011, 03:19:50 AM »

she's like Bill Russell compared to Karem-Abdul Jabar compared to Shaq. Sure, she broke through a whole bunch of barriers in dumbassery and was and would be today an undeniable competitor, but others have picked up her baton and bettered her in so many ways.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12667 on:** May 28, 2011, 07:25:53 AM »

Nobody should have given a fuck about Palin, ever. Especially past November 3, 2008. The media's constant fixation of her was pathetic. The fact that they treated Palin's dumbass tirades on the equivalent of an Obama response to an event (see: Gabrielle Giffords) is vomit inducing. I understand it garners ratings from the fans and the haters who claim that she isn't worth a shit yet can't stop talking about her but jesus.

I agree with HyperZoneWasAwesome. So many people have out-Palined Palin that she no longer has that narcissistic, marginally attractive, intellectually incurious niche to herself :'(

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #12668 on:** May 28, 2011, 01:08:56 PM »

isn't she now the gop frontrunner? i suspect her fifteen minutes aren't up yet... :'(

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12669 on:** May 28, 2011, 01:40:42 PM »

Palin won't run. If there's one thing we know about her by now, it's that she doesn't like to do anything hard. She didn't properly prepare for debates or interviews as VP, why would she decide to do it now when she could be raking in cash across the country?

Latest national GOP poll shows Gulianni is the new front runner

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12670 on:** May 28, 2011, 05:32:50 PM »

I can't wait until she makes a reality TV show about her running for 2012

While I don't think she's running either, her ego is such that she enjoys dangling the proverbial carrot in front of the face of the public and will do so for months to come. She will probably end up rallying for Bachmann. Unlike Trump where he considered running as a brief ego stroke, Palin is considering running to whip up enough fervor over her (good and bad, which leads to more good for her) to get multimillion dollar deals for a new book and/or TV show deal out of the works. It's considerably less tougher than dealing with the gotcha journalism of such devious journalists like Katie Couric. The good news is that if the winner of the primary is Giuliani or Romney or someone in that vein, Palin will be sabotaging their run, much like McCain in 2008. She doesn't know when to shut the fuck up, which make for some nice political hay for the Democrats.

Her 15 minutes aren't going to be up until she loses the MILF factor. So we could see all of this bullshit again for the 2016 race :'(

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12671 on:** May 28, 2011, 06:19:34 PM »

I almost forgot: the latest and greatest manufactured GOP outrage of the day.

This kind of conflicts with the GOP's earlier assumption that Obama did horribly in school so there are some conservatard blogs and twatter accounts that were alight over this story.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12672 on:** May 28, 2011, 06:56:31 PM »

I like how the article suggests Obama and Bush are clearly more alike than many would believe because they both went to Ivy league schools. The C student and the Harvard Law Review head, joined at the hip.

There's a difference between Obama talking off the cuff and say, Sarah Palin talking off the cuff. And that's all that needs to be said

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12673 on:** May 28, 2011, 07:23:56 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on May 28, 2011, 06:56:31 PM

I like how the article suggests Obama and Bush are clearly more alike than many would believe because they both went to Ivy league schools. The C student and the Harvard Law Review head, joined at the hip.

There's a difference between Obama talking off the cuff and say, Sarah Palin talking off the cuff. And that's all that needs to be said

The article was pretty dumb (nobody gives a shit about Obama stammering; this article is just material for the Obama cult set spank bank) but the right wing reaction to it is telling. A lot of these people still think Obama got into these schools and positions because he is black. Any mention of Obama being anything other than a gibbering tarbaby will bring right wing outrage.

Speaking of right wing outrage, a good article written by Rolling Stone regarding Fox News' Roger Ailes. It's a 13 page read but it's worth reading!

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12674 on:** May 28, 2011, 07:36:05 PM »

It's a typical white privilege argument: a black man cannot achieve anything without being the beneficiary of some advantage a white man is not privy to. Donald Trump sort of started this with his questions over Obama's school records; while republicans in the past raised the issue to question Obama's college age views or who paid for his education, Trump argued Obama was a poor student and didn't deserve to get into Harvard. Which of course insinuates that Obama, who became head of the Harvard Law Review, only got into a premier law school because he's black

And of course any pushback against the argument results in the classic "hey now, you brought race into this discussion not me!" retort.

Remember back in 08 when one of McCain's talking points was that while Obama is a great speaker, he's wrong for the country blah blah blah? Now republicans can't even acknowledge something like that, or give Obama any type of compliment. It's all apart of this long running attempt to dehumanize him at every cost. McCain played along with that too, I'm not denying it, but at least he had some sense of decency.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12675 on:** May 28, 2011, 07:44:01 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on May 28, 2011, 07:36:05 PM

It's a typical white privilege argument: a black man cannot achieve anything without being the beneficiary of some advantage a white man is not privy to. Donald Trump sort of started this with his questions over Obama's school records; while republicans in the past raised the issue to question Obama's college age views or who paid for his education, Trump argued Obama was a poor student and didn't deserve to get into Harvard. Which of course insinuates that Obama, who became head of the Harvard Law Review, only got into a premier law school because he's black

And of course any pushback against the argument results in the classic "hey now, you brought race into this discussion not me!" retort.

Remember back in 08 when one of McCain's talking points was that while Obama is a great speaker, he's wrong for the country blah blah blah? Now republicans can't even acknowledge something like that, or give Obama any type of compliment. It's all apart of this long running attempt to dehumanize him at every cost. McCain played along with that too, I'm not denying it, but at least he had some sense of decency.

Agreed but even if Republicans wanted to acknowledge something positive about Obama, they can't, lest they get beaten in their election year primary by a teabagger who will probably lose the seat to a Democrat.

"How smart is Obama really?" will be the new "where is his birth certificate?" which is basically a repackaging of calling him a distinguished black fellow. Since the GOP has done a good job of convincing themselves that Obama is absolutely toxic, they can only sink lower into dehumanization. With any luck, they will get so zealous and outrageous that anyplace other than the deep south will get turned off by it come pollin time.

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #12676 on:** May 28, 2011, 08:06:34 PM »

Quote from: The Experiment on May 28, 2011, 07:23:56 PM

Speaking of right wing outrage, a good article written by Rolling Stone regarding Fox News' Roger Ailes. It's a 13 page read but it's worth reading!

Glad I bailed on Fox News ages ago.

All my political news comes from this thread.

Edit: It's really shocking that Shepard Smith is still with Fox, since he pretty much just tosses the talking points in the trash and says what he wants.

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #12677 on:** May 29, 2011, 12:29:27 PM »

Quote from: The Experiment on May 28, 2011, 06:19:34 PM

I almost forgot: the latest and greatest manufactured GOP outrage of the day.

This kind of conflicts with the GOP's earlier assumption that Obama did horribly in school so there are some conservatard blogs and twatter accounts that were alight over this story.

There's Faux outrage, and then there's just grasping at shitstraws. Obama sometimes takes a second to construct a thought out answer, because you know, it's not like comments by the POTUS matter. Thinking before you talk? WELL I NEVER

It's funny how their image of Obama as bumbler who can't speak without a teleprompter (fuck, was that outrage of the week particularly dumb), contrasts with OBAMA THE GREAT MESMERIZER. At least keep your bullshit narratives self-consistent kayplz?

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12678 on:** May 30, 2011, 08:23:16 AM »

Last time I'll talk about Palin for a while but it looks like her Summer 2011 Tour of Fail kicked off yesterday:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-29/sarah-palin-joins-rolling-thunder-bikers-for-ride-to-freedom-.html

Here she is on a bike kickin it with bikers n' shit

Day 2: She might make a stop at Philly today!

Tristam · « **Reply #12679 on:** May 30, 2011, 05:46:38 PM »

Spot the black guy in that photograph.

Oblivion · « **Reply #12680 on:** May 30, 2011, 06:25:08 PM »

Himu · « **Reply #12681 on:** May 30, 2011, 06:34:15 PM »

oh wow i can't wait to vote for a doofus

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #12682 on:** May 30, 2011, 08:11:05 PM »

Oh so true

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12683 on:** May 30, 2011, 08:27:26 PM »

Pawlenty should grow a beard. Anything to make him stand out, and ensure my bet on him winning the nom comes true

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #12684 on:** May 30, 2011, 09:54:13 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on May 30, 2011, 08:27:26 PM

Pawlenty should grow a beard. Anything to make him stand out, and ensure my bet on him winning the nom comes true

He'll be out before Super Tuesday.

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #12685 on:** May 30, 2011, 10:30:46 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on May 30, 2011, 08:27:26 PM

Pawlenty should grow a beard. Anything to make him stand out, and ensure my bet on him winning the nom comes true

He never should have cut off the mullet

[youtube=560,345][/youtube]

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12686 on:** May 31, 2011, 01:16:13 AM »

I'd buy this

Oblivion · « **Reply #12687 on:** May 31, 2011, 01:20:05 AM »

who's the guy in the bench supposed to be

Mandark · « **Reply #12688 on:** May 31, 2011, 02:06:35 AM »

I'm trying to sort out the dynamics of the ex-presidents. Clinton and both Roosevelts are obviously on Team Evil, while three founders plus Reagan and Lincoln are horrified, but the others are vague. Whose side are JFK and Dubya on?

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12689 on:** May 31, 2011, 02:38:19 AM »

W is pointing at the distressed white man on the bench, while JFK is pointing at the trampled constitution. So I'd say they're both on Team America

Mandark · « **Reply #12690 on:** May 31, 2011, 03:28:11 AM »

Yeah, I think you're right.

I was wondering if they were making Bush sympathetic with Obama while co-opting JFK as a sort of Tea Party style "non-partisan" gesture.

Brehvolution · « **Reply #12691 on:** May 31, 2011, 09:47:43 AM »

Revisionists history at its finest. That is some delusional shit.

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #12692 on:** May 31, 2011, 10:30:20 AM »

George Washington bowing before a black man

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #12693 on:** May 31, 2011, 01:34:35 PM »

also note the scattered money on the ground, the broke-ass (depressed, you might say) dude on the bench, and Richard Nixon looking on at the "bad" presidents.

Mandark · « **Reply #12694 on:** May 31, 2011, 02:35:56 PM »

I can't tell if Nixon is glaring angrily at the bad presidents, or if that's just how his face is and he's really supporting them. Also trying to figure out Woodrow Wilson's affiliation. Maybe all the background presidents are just there to symbolize history, and don't care as much about the political conflict as the free cake they were promised to get them to show up.

And who's that way in the back just to the left of Reagan's head? I'd swear it was Edgar Allen Poe.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #12695 on:** May 31, 2011, 02:40:54 PM »

"It's time to put the WHITE back in WHITE HOUSE"

I should run the Republican campaign for whoever gets the nomination.

Mupepe · « **Reply #12696 on:** May 31, 2011, 02:48:06 PM »

Quote from: Mandark on May 31, 2011, 02:35:56 PM

And who's that way in the back just to the left of Reagan's head? I'd swear it was Edgar Allen Poe.

Kinda looks like Grant

Mandark · « **Reply #12697 on:** May 31, 2011, 02:58:37 PM »

Nah, I mean waaaay in the back, the head immediately to the left of Reagan's (and two to the right of Grant's).

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #12698 on:** May 31, 2011, 03:10:34 PM »

Quote from: Mandark on May 31, 2011, 02:58:37 PM

Nah, I mean waaaay in the back, the head immediately to the left of Reagan's (and two to the right of Grant's).

Looks like Franklin Pierce.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12699 on:** May 31, 2011, 04:44:26 PM »

Why is FDR giving his cousin Teddy such a loving glare. Perhaps this is to represent homosexuality.

Oblivion · « **Reply #12700 on:** May 31, 2011, 05:00:45 PM »

Well FDR DID marry a distant cousin iirc.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #12701 on:** May 31, 2011, 05:19:27 PM »

Quote from: Oblivion on May 31, 2011, 01:20:05 AM

who's the guy in the bench supposed to be

The white guy that didn't get into Harvard so that Obama's under achieving ass made it in. Affirmative action ruined his life, now he sucks dick in rest stop bathrooms for five dollar bills to feed his crack addiction.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12702 on:** May 31, 2011, 05:22:09 PM »

Quote from: Creepy Old Guy on May 31, 2011, 05:19:27 PM

Quote from: Oblivion on May 31, 2011, 01:20:05 AM
who's the guy in the bench supposed to be

The white guy that didn't get into Harvard so that Obama's under achieving ass made it in. Affirmative action ruined his life, now he sucks dick in rest stop bathrooms for five dollar bills to feed his crack addiction.

Sounds like Obama's gay limo driver/lover

Oblivion · « **Reply #12703 on:** May 31, 2011, 06:15:12 PM »

I do have to say, I'm somewhat surprised the Reps cast out Teddy Roosevelt. I imagine Lincoln's too well respected in elementary school history books to snub, at least for now.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12704 on:** May 31, 2011, 06:18:31 PM »

Quote from: Oblivion on May 31, 2011, 06:15:12 PM

I do have to say, I'm somewhat surprised the Reps cast out Teddy Roosevelt. I imagine Lincoln's too well respected in elementary school history books to snub, at least for now.

In 1912, one of Roosevelt's big campaign platforms was socialized health care. He may as well be Lenin.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12705 on:** May 31, 2011, 06:33:46 PM »

Roosevelt was the first president who convinced me to go to the library and learn more about him, after history class. I took a post-reconstruction through Depression class in highschool, and I was just fascinated by his...balls. I thought Andrew Jackson was badass too of course, but Teddy was right up my alley.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12706 on:** May 31, 2011, 06:37:39 PM »

Quote from: Mamacint on May 31, 2011, 10:30:20 AM

George Washington bowing before a black man

I think that is James Madison.

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #12707 on:** May 31, 2011, 06:48:04 PM »

So ... that picture means we should spend more money helping the homeless, right?

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #12708 on:** May 31, 2011, 07:19:56 PM »

Quote from: Howard Alan Treesong on May 31, 2011, 06:48:04 PM

So ... that picture means we should spend more money helping the homeless, right?

The white, Christian homeless of course.

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #12709 on:** May 31, 2011, 07:21:29 PM »

I could see a painting like that appealing to people on either side. I mean, Obama's just got this totally oblivious look on his face, he's just standing there and he doesn't care at all.

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #12710 on:** May 31, 2011, 07:22:05 PM »

Quote from: The Experiment on May 31, 2011, 06:37:39 PM

Quote from: Mamacint on May 31, 2011, 10:30:20 AM
George Washington bowing before a black man

I think that is James Madison.

Then I'm really glad I didn't go with my "Washington is trying to catch one of Obama's hard rabbit-like turds to use as teeth"

Oblivion · « **Reply #12711 on:** May 31, 2011, 07:58:34 PM »

Quote from: The Experiment on May 31, 2011, 06:18:31 PM

Quote from: Oblivion on May 31, 2011, 06:15:12 PM
I do have to say, I'm somewhat surprised the Reps cast out Teddy Roosevelt. I imagine Lincoln's too well respected in elementary school history books to snub, at least for now.

In 1912, one of Roosevelt's big campaign platforms was socialized health care. He may as well be Lenin.

Oh, I'm well aware of Roosevelt's Amurrica hatin policies, but it'd be surprising if the average tea bagger did. You'd think most people would know him for his love of shootin things.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12712 on:** May 31, 2011, 09:23:26 PM »

Actually Tea Partiers are well versed in American history thanks to Glen Beck. Notice the calm, triumphantly smug face on history's greatest monster: Woodrow Wilson

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[youtube=560,345]pWqbEB0MhRs[/youtube]

[close]

ShogunOfFear · « **Reply #12713 on:** June 01, 2011, 08:48:05 AM »

Obama's first 2012 campaign ad.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[youtube=560,345][/youtube]

[close]

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12714 on:** June 01, 2011, 11:00:05 AM »

won't get any pushback from me bro, I like that ad

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #12715 on:** June 01, 2011, 05:26:54 PM »

There are some flooding conditions in my area. The teabaggers that I work with were primarily concerned about these two things:

1) That is was definitely NOT caused by climate change effects (even though we've had three flood years in the past five; a historical first)
2) That it was definitely caused by Obama instead. He ordered those levees upstream to be as backed up as they are currently at.

They've more or less agreed to change the referencing of the flood from "the flood" to "Obama's flood."

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #12716 on:** June 01, 2011, 08:12:50 PM »

http://www.teapartyhd.com/

Brehvolution · « **Reply #12717 on:** June 01, 2011, 08:31:48 PM »

It's funny to watch repubs yank Herman Cain's chain like they would ever give him the nomination when it came right down to it.

Oblivion · « **Reply #12718 on:** June 02, 2011, 01:58:10 AM »

So, uh... no mentions of Wiener-gate so far?

EB am disappoint.

For shame.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #12719 on:** June 02, 2011, 02:02:20 AM »

$:-\$ breitbart $:-\$ http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/29/980400/-Breitbarts-#TwitterHoaxHow-It-Went-Down-(updated-wsmoking-gun)?via=siderec

News:

Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics (Read 1867236 times)