Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics (Read 1866764 times)

Oblivion · « **Reply #16440 on:** March 03, 2012, 01:56:02 PM »

I tried to interpret that as saying that the lib media, NFL, and "true racism" are all part of the government (which is bad, since it's a Mike Lester comic), but that still doesn't make any fucking sense!

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #16441 on:** March 03, 2012, 02:02:48 PM »

I think the proper interpretation is that the artist is a moron who doesn't understand what the original painting was about.

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #16442 on:** March 03, 2012, 02:25:47 PM »

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/closeread/2012/03/has-limbaugh-identified-the-gops-woman-problem.html#ixzz1o4u6ewJD

Quote

"So, Ms. Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here’s the deal: If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it.

And I’ll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16443 on:** March 03, 2012, 02:27:09 PM »

I refuse to be trolled by Rush

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #16444 on:** March 03, 2012, 02:29:26 PM »

I actually agree with Rush on this. Women on government-paid contraception should post their sex videos online. But only the hot ones.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16445 on:** March 03, 2012, 02:33:17 PM »

Sadly there are ten Janet Renos for every one Kristen Gillibrand on the gov payroll

Great Rumbler · « **Reply #16446 on:** March 03, 2012, 02:33:58 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 03, 2012, 02:33:17 PM

Sadly there are ten Janet Renos for every one Kristen Gillibrand on the gov payroll

:'(

Oblivion · « **Reply #16447 on:** March 03, 2012, 04:46:35 PM »

Speaking of which, the Limbaugh backlash seemed to be a little bit more severe than I thought it would be. Hopefully this'll have legs, but it'll probably die down pretty quick.

Mandark · « **Reply #16448 on:** March 03, 2012, 07:28:50 PM »

By Limbaugh's logic, we'd all be watching tape of his colonoscopy once he got on Medicare. No thankee.

HyperZoneWasAwesome · « **Reply #16449 on:** March 03, 2012, 07:43:59 PM »

I'm still surprised he survived calling New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin a "Nagger".

Since he's such an objectively terrible person, nothing he says can really shock people too badly, I mean, c'mon, he barely gave a half-assed apology for this. The only thing that will ever stop him is if he's so very awful that no sponsors want to touch his program no matter how good his ratings are (getting Glenn Beck'ed), but also he's got a direct marketing line to his sizable audience, so he really is too big to fail.

fuck that guy, BTW.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16450 on:** March 04, 2012, 07:38:31 PM »

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #16451 on:** March 04, 2012, 11:18:25 PM »

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120303/NEWS01/303030114

Ohio Gov. John Kasich turns down federal disaster aid because the federal govt. is for getting all up in women's uterii but STAY THE FUCK OUT OF OHIO WHEN IT GETS RAVAGED BY TORNADOES, BITCHES! DON'T TREAD ON ME!

I find it hard to be sympathetic to stupid people when they get what they voted for, good and hard even. Enjoy, idiots.

Joe Molotov · « **Reply #16452 on:** March 04, 2012, 11:22:22 PM »

I'm sure the people living in cardboard boxes are applauding his courage to keep big government out of our disaster areas. Something something FEMA camps.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16453 on:** March 04, 2012, 11:57:16 PM »

If Ohio can handle it on their own, more power to them. I doubt they can handle the housing problem tornadoes cost though, and I had heard an entire town got destroyed

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16454 on:** March 05, 2012, 03:23:11 PM »

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/and-so-we-enter-the-part-of-the-rush-saga-where-he-attacks-rap-music.php?ref=fpa

Gotta respect Rush's tenacious trolling

Oblivion · « **Reply #16455 on:** March 05, 2012, 04:04:35 PM »

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-things-rich-people-need-to-stop-saying/

Quote

But the second part is this idea that asking the rich to pitch in is "punishing" them.

So, Rich Guy, let me explain this as calmly and logically as I can:

Are you fucking 6 years old? Do you still think mom made you clean up your room because she was mean? In the adult world, we get asked to do things because shit needs to get done. It has nothing to do with fairness, it has nothing to do with judging you. It has nothing to do with you at all. There's a whole world out there, with people who need helping and projects that need accomplishing.

You're only being asked to pitch in because you have the resources. You're not a tall person who us dwarfs are jealously trying to cut down to size. You're a tall person being asked to get something down from a very tall shelf because nobody else can fucking reach it.

Positive Touch · « **Reply #16456 on:** March 05, 2012, 04:24:41 PM »

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2012/03/rush_limbaugh_bust_missouri_state_capitol.php

GOD WHY

Mandark · « **Reply #16457 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:06:41 PM »

McCain calls for US-led regime change in Syria.

Meanwhile Israel seems bent on attacking Iran.

Fun times!

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16458 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:08:37 PM »

I'm glad that guy isn't president

Fuck the ~~China/Russia~~ UN Security Council, let's drop bombs. Seriously?

Positive Touch · « **Reply #16459 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:10:35 PM »

it worked for bush

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16460 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:12:11 PM »

I may be forgetting details but I don't remember Russia or China giving too much of a shit about Saddam/Iraq back then

*waits for Mandark to google*

benjipwns · « **Reply #16461 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:14:52 PM »

EDIT: oops scrolled right past it when checking.

Quote from: Oblivion

Cain standing on the cliff is too much.

BlueTsunami · « **Reply #16462 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:16:06 PM »

Oh my God we've gone beyond the pale haven't we?

Quote from: Mandark on March 05, 2012, 05:06:41 PM

McCain calls for US-led regime change in Syria.

Meanwhile Israel seems bent on attacking Iran.

Fun times!

2012, Mandark :'(

Boogie · « **Reply #16463 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:16:37 PM »

Quote from: benjipwns on March 05, 2012, 05:14:52 PM

Go back one page.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16464 on:** March 05, 2012, 05:34:19 PM »

Mandark · « **Reply #16465 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:01:24 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 05:12:11 PM

I may be forgetting details but I don't remember Russia or China giving too much of a shit about Saddam/Iraq back then

*waits for Mandark to google*

IIRC France wound up being the sticking point for a resolution to use force. I read an account where a US official said they assumed the French were just posturing and would give in eventually. So the Bush admin sort of rationalized the attack by citing an earlier UN resolution on access for weapons inspectors, even though they didn't have the endorsement of the UN.

Anyways, from what I've read the Assad regime is in a lot stronger position than the Qaddafi regime was, with a better army, a less organized/powerful insurgency, and more allies and proxies that could retaliate against Israel and US interests. Plus a full air campaign with the goal of toppling Assad would mean co-ordinating with the rebels, which probably means sending in at least some special forces to establish contact, and then you sustain the bombing for at least a year...

I think there's a tendency, when a bombing campaign goes relatively right (the Balkans, Libya), to whitewash the costs, risks, and failures that came with it, and to think of the USAF as an Easy Button for dealing with leaders we don't like.

Mandark · « **Reply #16466 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:02:07 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 05:34:19 PM

Good a time as any to post this, which has been going around:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-things-rich-people-need-to-stop-saying/

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16467 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:11:01 PM »

Quote from: Mandark on March 05, 2012, 06:01:24 PM

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 05:12:11 PM
I may be forgetting details but I don't remember Russia or China giving too much of a shit about Saddam/Iraq back then

*waits for Mandark to google*

IIRC France wound up being the sticking point for a resolution to use force. I read an account where a US official said they assumed the French were just posturing and would give in eventually. So the Bush admin sort of rationalized the attack by citing an earlier UN resolution on access for weapons inspectors, even though they didn't have the endorsement of the UN.

Anyways, from what I've read the Assad regime is in a lot stronger position than the Qaddafi regime was, with a better army, a less organized/powerful insurgency, and more allies and proxies that could retaliate against Israel and US interests. Plus a full air campaign with the goal of toppling Assad would mean co-ordinating with the rebels, which probably means sending in at least some special forces to establish contact, and then you sustain the bombing for at least a year...

I think there's a tendency, when a bombing campaign goes relatively right (the Balkans, Libya), to whitewash the costs, risks, and failures that came with it, and to think of the USAF as an Easy Button for dealing with leaders we don't like.

True but then again France is no Russia. Or China. Both have ties to Syria's regime politically and economically. And as you pointed out, the situation on the ground is quite different from Libya where there was a solidified opposition vs a not particularly impressive army. With Syria there is no real opposition that can be armed or coordinated, and Syria's army is formidable.

In many ways Libya was like pressing the ezpz mode button, at least from a US perspective. That wouldn't be the case with Syria, or Iran I might add.

Eric P · « **Reply #16468 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:12:40 PM »

http://agoodcartoon.tumblr.com/

Boogie · « **Reply #16469 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:24:42 PM »

Plus, the context of the times are completely different.

In late 2002-early 2003, the US is still enjoying its unilateral moment. Its relative decline in power had not begun. Russia and China weren't as assertive. Russia was barely two years removed from the chaotic Boris Yeltsin years. China, though rising, wasn't the self-evident and confident power that it is today.

Add in that not even two years had passed since the 9/11 attacks, and no state was going to put real, serious effort at getting in America's way. In that sense, it is telling that the biggest obstacle to the attack on Iraq was France, a country that, in the big picture, is a US ally.

Contrast with today. Russia turned itself around and has reasserted itself through its oil power. China is the clear number 2 power on the planet, and confident of such. And the U.S. has spent a decade mired in inconclusive warfare, a superpower bogged down in "colonial" counterinsurgency affairs, a devastating economic crisis, etc.

It isn't that China/Russia "didn't give a shit" about Iraq back then, but somehow do about Syria and/or Iran today. It's that enough has changed over a decade in the relative balance of power that they feel confident enough to assert themselves on the subjects that they "give a shit" about.

Positive Touch · « **Reply #16470 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:30:14 PM »

my comparison was based soley on the fact that the push for the iraq war was led by a lot of people who said "fuck the u.n. let's blow em up" and now with syria mccain is saying "fuck the u.n. let's blow em up"

CALM DOWN YOU NERDS

Mandark · « **Reply #16471 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:31:24 PM »

Speaking of the Limbaugh/Fluke thing, I finally read his original comments.

Something to the effect of "she's having so much sex she can't afford birth control." I know a million people must have pointed this out, but does Rush Limbaugh not understand how the pill works? Are there adults out there who don't know this?

Positive Touch · « **Reply #16472 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:32:56 PM »

it's not the man's responsibility to know how it works, only to control who can receive it

Boogie · « **Reply #16473 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:33:23 PM »

Quote from: Positive Touch on March 05, 2012, 06:30:14 PM

my comparison was based soley on the fact that the push for the iraq war was led by a lot of people who said "fuck the u.n. let's blow em up" and now with syria mccain is saying "fuck the u.n. let's blow em up"

CALM DOWN YOU NERDS

I actually thought I was giving a counterpoint to PD, not you.

Positive Touch · « **Reply #16474 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:46:27 PM »

in that case carry on

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16475 on:** March 05, 2012, 06:59:42 PM »

Quote from: Mandark on March 05, 2012, 06:31:24 PM

Speaking of the Limbaugh/Fluke thing, I finally read his original comments.

Something to the effect of "she's having so much sex she can't afford birth control." I know a million people must have pointed this out, but does Rush Limbaugh not understand how the pill works? Are there adults out there who don't know this?

you sin, and then the pill aborts the consequence?!?

BlueTsunami · « **Reply #16476 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:05:44 PM »

Maddow made the same argument last week regarding Limbaugh and him definitely not knowing basic biology. Kept replaying various points of him saying that the more sex women have the more birth control they need. Its hilarious.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16477 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:07:43 PM »

A 1:1 ratio of pills per sperm

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #16478 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:09:42 PM »

You'll have to forgive Rush, his previous experiences with pills have lead him to believe that increased dosages are the norm.

BlueTsunami · « **Reply #16479 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:10:44 PM »

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16480 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:33:55 PM »

Boogie · « **Reply #16481 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:36:04 PM »

Quote from: Creepy Old Guy on March 05, 2012, 07:09:42 PM

You'll have to forgive Rush, his previous experiences with pills have lead him to believe that increased dosages are the norm.

Boogie · « **Reply #16482 on:** March 05, 2012, 07:50:30 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 07:33:55 PM

oh that was painful.

Inspector Thatcher · « **Reply #16483 on:** March 05, 2012, 08:29:19 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 07:33:55 PM

That's some incredibly high-class contribution to the public debate there.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #16484 on:** March 05, 2012, 09:26:15 PM »

Unsurprisingly, Rush Limbaugh (and Glenn Beck if anyone still remembers who he is) is a huge macfag

Oblivion · « **Reply #16485 on:** March 05, 2012, 10:57:33 PM »

Wow, Ann is definitely a Romney, that's for sure.

Quote from: Mandark on March 05, 2012, 06:02:07 PM

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 05:34:19 PM

Good a time as any to post this, which has been going around:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-things-rich-people-need-to-stop-saying/

Ahem:

http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=28125.msg1457963#msg1457963

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16486 on:** March 05, 2012, 11:13:31 PM »

We've got you on ignore due to spam, Mr. I Work For Obama.

Oblivion · « **Reply #16487 on:** March 05, 2012, 11:21:14 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 05, 2012, 11:13:31 PM

We've got you on ignore due to spam, Mr. I Work For Obama.

I was like you all once. :'(

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16488 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:49:23 AM »

you see what happens, you see what happens?

Quote

Despite growing disappointment in his handling of immigration issues, Latino voters favor President Barack Obama by six-to-one over any of the Republican presidential hopefuls, showed a Fox News Latino poll conducted under the direction of Latin Insights and released Monday.

...

While the poll indicates that four of five Latinos who voted for Obama in 2008 would vote for him later this year, Latinos who voted for Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain four years ago are now divided between voting for Obama and the Republican candidates. Forty percent said that they favored Obama while 38 percent said they would vote for Romney. Obama also leads Santorum 38 percent to 34, and Gingrich 40 percent to 38.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/fox-poll-obama-edges-gopers-even-with-latinos

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #16489 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:53:27 AM »

Ah, proof that trying to alienate the fasting growing minority group in the country is paying expected dividends!

Robo · « **Reply #16490 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:56:04 AM »

Quote from: Creepy Old Guy on March 05, 2012, 07:09:42 PM

You'll have to forgive Rush, his previous experiences with pills have lead him to believe that increased dosages are the norm.

I said god damn.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #16491 on:** March 06, 2012, 01:00:31 AM »

When I pull out the dagger, I USE THE MOTHERFUCKER.

Here's a bonus awesome fb response that some confused libertarian just gave me in the course of trying to convince me to vote for Ron Paul in the primary.

Quote from: confused paultard

Ron Paul has the best supporters outta all the Republican candidates.. I have never seen a Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich bumper sticker, I have never seen any of those clowns fill up a place as much Paul when it comes to rallies, there was protest in Washington D.C where Military Veterans attended with their back faced the White House and of course no Mainstream Media coverage of the event.. Ron Paul gets the most donations from Veterans then all other 3 candidates combined.. He must be doing something good if no one is willing to give him real coverage, less talking time and cuts his mike off when it comes to issues..

I was all whaaaaaaaaa

Joe Molotov · « **Reply #16492 on:** March 06, 2012, 01:07:13 AM »

The fact that Ron Paul isn't winning PROVES there's a conspiracy!

Mupepe · « **Reply #16493 on:** March 06, 2012, 08:50:26 AM »

My friend's girlfriend (who is not my friend on FB) posts all these conspiracy articles about how Ron Paul is actually going to have the most delegates at the convention and how they've been throwing away ballots from Ron Paul supporters. Of course there's no evidence. The only evidence is that Ron Paul isn't winning. They just can't comprehend that someone doesn't agree with him. If he's losing it's because there's a vast conspiracy against. It's impossible to think that it's just no one gives a shit about him.

Edit: She's also a truther. She just discovered the Loose Change videos and was posting tons of them. And now my friend is a believer too :'( :'(

Mandark · « **Reply #16494 on:** March 06, 2012, 11:48:08 AM »

A girl I know thought that the earthquake in Haiti was caused by some secret machine operated by the US government. Luckily she's too uninterested in politics generally to become an activist type, and hardly ever talks about this stuff.

Mupepe · « **Reply #16495 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:21:47 PM »

See I don't have any problem with people that have crazy beliefs if they're not all out trying to shove them in everyone's face. I mainly stay away from political talk IRL unless the person will not stop pushing it. But this girl loves to bring crap up all the time. Everything is an outrage and a conspiracy. And the sources she links to are political blogs (like Ron Paul Daily) or those youtube videos that start with "MUST SEE"

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #16496 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:25:50 PM »

I expect crazy from Paulites so my only reaction is that of glee. I prefer dealing with the slightly more realistic ones, ie those who claim Paul will magically have 500 delegates at the convention and use them in some masterful way that will CHANGE EVERYTHING. Like Ridleyscott on GAF, and a couple real life acquaintances

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #16497 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:28:52 PM »

Now another libertopian is telling me that if we have more "freedom" in the marketplace it will stop crony capitalism.

Mupepe · « **Reply #16498 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:37:32 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on March 06, 2012, 12:25:50 PM

I expect crazy from Paulites so my only reaction is that of glee. I prefer dealing with the slightly more realistic ones, ie those who claim Paul will magically have 500 delegates at the convention and use them in some masterful way that will CHANGE EVERYTHING. Like Ridleyscott on GAF, and a couple real life acquaintances

Those are the worst. Because when you try to ask them how they plan on doing that they deflect with "you just don't know how the nomination process works!" to which I can only respond with "And you definitely don't."

I really, really hope no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination. Oh god. It would be hilarious

Quote from: Creepy Old Guy on March 06, 2012, 12:28:52 PM

Now another libertopian is telling me that if we have more "freedom" in the marketplace it will stop crony capitalism.

Just take the high road and start talking about Paul's shriveled dick. Yes. That is the high road in that conversation.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #16499 on:** March 06, 2012, 12:47:34 PM »

Romney will have it sewn up by mid-late May I would imagine. In reality he's going to win the nomination no matter what due to the vast resource advantage (read: piles of money) he has over his competitors, but he's a weak candidate that base GOP voters have to talk themselves into tepidly supporting so this will drag out over time. Also, Newt Gingrich is a petty, vindictive bastard (remember he shut the government down because Clinton made him sit at the back of Air Force One) who will stay in the race just to annoy Romney. God Bless you, Newtron.

News:

Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics (Read 1866764 times)