ThinkFast: February 19, 2009
ThinkFast: February 19, 2009
“Senator Burris should consider resigning for the good of his state,” writes the New York Times editorial board, a day after the Washington Post called for Burris to step down. The Chicago Tribune today calls on Gov. Pat Quinn (D-IL) to propose a special election to fill Burris’ seat, should it open.
Canadians are “abuzz” about Barack Obama’s visit today, his first foreign trip as president. According to the CBC, “People started gathering in front of Parliament Hill before sunrise” in anticipation of Obama’s touchdown at 10:30 a.m. ET in Ottawa. Afghanistan and the economy top the agenda for Obama’s meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Gen. David McKiernan, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said yesterday that the U.S. “will have to keep about 60,000 troops in Afghanistan for at least the next three to four years to combat an increasingly violent insurgency.” McKiernan said that an additional 10,000 troops will be needed beyond the 17,000 President Obama ordered to Afghanistan this week.
The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush last year told a Baghdad court yesterday he was coerced into making a false confession of making a terrorist training film. “I said this before the guards of the prime minister after I was beaten and after my body was devoured by electricity,” Muntazer al-Zaidi said. He said Bush’s “icy smile” “enraged” him. “I felt that this person is the killer of the people, the prime murderer,” he said.
“A handful of Republican governors are considering turning down some money from the federal stimulus package,” which “opponents say puts conservative ideology ahead of the needs of constituents struggling” through the recession. Some governors, like Rick Perry of Texas and Mark Sanford of South Carolina, have opposed the stimulus, but eventually admitted they would take the money.
RNC Chairman Michael Steele says he is planning an “off the hook” PR offensive to attract younger voters, especially minorities, by applying conservative principles to “urban-suburban hip-hop settings.” “[W]e need to uptick our image with everyone, including one-armed midgets,” he explained.
“Nearly half of those surveyed said they worry about becoming unemployed — almost double the percentage at this time last year,” a new AP-GfK poll finds. Additionally, 71 percent of those surveyed said that “they know someone — a friend or a relative — who has lost a job in the past six months because of the economy.”
In anticipation of President Obama lifting a Bush-era ban, officials at the National Institute of Health have begun “drafting guidelines they will need to start funding human embryonic stem cell research that has been off-limits for nearly eight years.” Researchers all over the country are “waiting with bated breath” for Obama to follow through on his campaign pledge, which adviser David Axelrod says will happen soon.
Yesterday a federal appeals court blocked the transfer to the U.S. of 17 Chinese Muslims who are currently being held at Guantanamo Bay but are no longer designated “enemy combatants.” The decision “reversed a lower court ruling that ordered the government to release the 17 Uighurs and resettle them with Uighur families in the Washington region.”
And finally: Washington, DC’s historic Mayflower Hotel attracted considerable attention last year, when it was revealed as the place that former New York governor Eliot Spitzer had his infamous tryst with an escort. The DC Examiner now reports that Spitzer’s dad, Bernard, is coincidentally “attempting to purchase the office building at 1615 L Street NW — which happens to overlook the Mayflower Hotel.” Bernard is allegedly “awaiting his lender’s approval on the building.”
Sign up here to receive our daily e-newsletter, The Progress Report.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
RNC Chairman Michael Steele says he is planning an “off the hook” PR offensive to attract younger voters
Shouldn’t that be “off da hizzo fo shizzo” if you really want to attract the younger sect?
Only the dorkiest whites trying to sound black say “off the hook” anymore.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:03 amHere in Louisiana we are getting mixed messages about spending the stimulas money. Gov. Jindal says that he is not sure he will accept the money while at the same time DOT is going public with road projects that will be funded by the stimulas. Jindal is all smoke and mirrors and has done next to nothing to change things in our state. If he does make a run for president he sure as hell better not run on his record because it is as thin as piss on a rock.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:12 amThat’s just sad. Even when Republicans consider acting on principle, they get it wrong.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:12 amThe Republicans who refuse to take Recovery Money for their states and for their people, are like the “Grinch” who stole Christmas. The Party of No and endless negativity! They fail to see the great good the stimulus will accomplish but rather concentrate and speak on imaginary wrongs and evils, Invoking that old fear god, evil portents of tales which might never happen. Clearly, a death wish for them.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:14 amhttp://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/3743
February 19th, 2009 at 9:17 amMajor Blow to Swiss Banking System
“In a landmark development the Swiss Bank UBS has agreed to hand over data of about 300 US citizens and their banking accounts to the IRS and pay a $ 780 mn fine on top of that.”
February 19th, 2009 at 9:19 amAngellight Says:
The Republicans who refuse to take Recovery Money for their states and for their people, are like the “Grinch” who stole Christmas.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:14 am
__________
And not the animated classic version, either. They’re like the awful Jim Carrey remake version.
Side note – now I’m going to have “You’re A Mean One, Mr. Jindal” stuck in my head all morning. Thanks a lot!
February 19th, 2009 at 9:20 amThe republican party appeals one-armed midgets? Really. They’re against any sort of health care reform which would make prosthetics readily available because it’s “socialized medicine”, they’re against the Americans with Disbilities Act because it’s government intervention in peoples’ lives, they’re against any sort of anti discrimintion legislation.
Now if Steele was going after the mental midget vote…that’s change I can believe in.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:23 amsamsuncle Says:
Here in Louisiana we are getting mixed messages about spending the stimulas money. Gov. Jindal says that he is not sure he will accept the money while at the same time DOT is going public with road projects that will be funded by the stimulas. Jindal is all smoke and mirrors and has done next to nothing to change things in our state. If he does make a run for president he sure as hell better not run on his record because it is as thin as piss on a rock.
Seems like just a few days ago Jindal was “the reasonable one” and now he’s swung way over to the opposite pole. Sounds like someone took him to the woodshed.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:24 amActually, I think that any congressman who tried to obstruct the economic recovery of this country should absolutely NOT get any of the funds.
To vote no and then to squabble over how much your state gets is the height of hypocrisy.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:34 amPhil Gramm’s UBS negotiated a sweet deal with Justice for helping 17,000 wealthy Americans cheat Uncle Sam.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a_DEcZ2mRSGo&refer=home
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/18/AR2009021802541.html?hpid=sec-business
No criminal charges, despite UBS’s 2001 agreement to provide names of foreign account holders. The fine is $780 million, but that’s down from an expected $1 billion.
Of 17,000 cheats, Bloomberg reports 250 names will be given to the IRS. This settlement stinks and the Obama team approved it.
That open and transparent Obama administration?
The details were spelled out in a document filed under seal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/18/AR2009021802541.html?hpid=sec-business
February 19th, 2009 at 9:35 amThinkFast encapsulation:
‘Senator’ Burris go away,
Canadians chant “Obama, ey!”
Afghan troops home this decade,
Iraqi shoe thrower deserves a parade,
Republican sleaze won’t turn down cash,
Republican token plans PR rehash,
50% fear unemployment woes,
Science making comeback, stem cells unfroze (sorry)
Detainees from bush treason still in limbo
Spitzer hotel where he met that bimbo…
(Howzat?)
February 19th, 2009 at 9:36 amThey should all follow Jindal’s lead on this. No votie/no moola!
February 19th, 2009 at 9:36 amYes, famous shoe-thrower, we know exactly how you felt. We felt that way for 8 years. Thanks for your heroic efforts to fulfill many of our dreams. Too bad you missed.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:36 amI just can’t wait to see the list of names associated with tax fraud ala UBS style. I just can’t wait.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:37 amI can’t wait. This could produce the best unintentional lulz since ‘Dont Copy That Floppy’ the song that single handedly defeated software piracy.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:37 amShow thrower deserves a medal if you ask me. He also is a case study of precisely WHY torture doesn’t work.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:38 amCNBC ran a piece on imposing pay for performance for regulators. Recall the ten year run of executive stock options, frequesntly called the most pure form of incentive compensation. 30% of executives cheated shareholders to maximize their pay.
Obama’s P4P will do harm, just like it did on Wall Street. Stop spreading management poison.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:38 ami haven’t read it, headline caught my eye… and figured as much… isn’t LAtimes a Chicago Tribune owned paper?
[...]
Senate not likely to oust Sen. Roland Burris anytime soon
Los Angeles Times, CA – 6 hours ago
US Senator Roland Burris (D-IL), walks past the media after speaking at a City Club of Chicago luncheon February 18, in Chicago, Illinois. …
http://news.google.com/?ncl=1304089398&hl=en&topic=n
also, i heard on today that even his “home town” paper is calling for his resignation… that would be Centralia IL, and i haven’t seen that…
February 19th, 2009 at 9:38 amgummitch Says:
samsuncle Says:
Seems like just a few days ago Jindal was “the reasonable one” and now he’s swung way over to the opposite pole. Sounds like someone took him to the woodshed.
C’mon, Piyush Jindal was only putting on the act of being a moderate. He’s a Republican, meaning he’s all about power plays, not actually legislating or governing.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:38 amdeebaser: Like minds? (We both “just can’t wait) Minds crossing in cyberspace.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:38 amJindal’s flipflop is due to his naivete and ignorance. He’s got so much to learn about standing up for what he believes. If the ReThugs believe he is a viable candidate to run with Palin in 2010, I say “bring these two whackjobs on!”.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:40 amBobby Jindal’s motives are as transparent as a pair of pantyhose. This guy’s the quintessential charlatan/shill.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:41 amI trace the death of ‘off the hook’ to the usage of the phrase by Canadian alt-rock group Sum41 in their 2003(?) ‘hit’ Fat Lip.
‘off the hook’ is deader than ‘def’
February 19th, 2009 at 9:42 amBoth at 9:37 too…
JINX!!!!!
February 19th, 2009 at 9:43 am=D
“A handful of Republican governors are considering turning down some money from the federal stimulus package
It’s a long stretch between considering and political suicide. These assclowns are posturing and everyone knows it’s. So sit down and STFU
February 19th, 2009 at 9:44 amCorrection:
rimhotep Says:
Piyush “Bobby” Jindal’s motives are as transparent as a pair of pantyhose. This guy’s the quintessential charlatan/shill.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:45 amRepugniscum are determined to rewrite history while they work toward further destruction of America in the misguided hope that they will somehow appear the victor in their perpetual partisanship governance.
After giving Bush&Co a pass for years after he came into office, they began criticizing Obama in the interim between election and Inauguration (when he was not yet in office) and now that he has been in office 30 days and has signed enormous and unprecedented legislation packages, they call him a failure, they say there are not enough details in his plans, they believe he should be impeached.
They blame the deficit on the Democrats who came into power in January 2007 – but tell me what legislation was passed by those Democrats with the block of repugs united behind Dumbya?
Repugniscum governors are threatening to refuse stimulus money, and thereby further injure their citizens, because they oppose it on principle? LOL! They oppose the stimulus because it is from a Democratic administration. Period.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:46 amIt’s not surprising that some (most) elected Republicans are talking out of both sides of their collective mouths – it was a successful tactic until their actions took a bigger than usual bite out everyone’s collective confidence and and cash cache.
Talk show sound bites are still fun for some but they aren’t paying the bills! They made same mistake(s) in 1930s – guess they are slow learners – smile.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:47 amHouse of Roberts Says:
Major Blow to Swiss Banking System
“In a landmark development the Swiss Bank UBS has agreed to hand over data of about 300 US citizens and their banking accounts to the IRS and pay a $ 780 mn fine on top of that.”
I wonder how many of those 300 are still alive.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:51 amTP, please publish the 250 names UBS releases.
If enough are Congress Critters, perhaps we can actually get the IRS to audit all of them.
I’m sick & tired of corporate America hiding assets offshore while wildly waving our Flag & shouting Patriotism.
They’ve robbed us blind while hiding assets in secret accounts.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:52 amNot only is that wrong, it’s treasonous.
______
rimhotep Says:
Actually, I think that any congressman who tried to obstruct the economic recovery of this country should absolutely NOT get any of the funds.
To vote no and then to squabble over how much your state gets is the height of hypocrisy.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:34 am
______
If they don’t take the funds, does that also excuse their state’s residents from their part of the debt?
February 19th, 2009 at 9:54 amupright left Says:
If they don’t take the funds, does that also excuse their state’s residents from their part of the debt?
_______________
Do those of us who didn’t vote for Botch’s bloody war and endless deficits get to not pay that back too?
just asking?
You’re late, BTW.
We covered this several days go.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:59 amupright left Says:
If they don’t take the funds, does that also excuse their state’s residents from their part of the debt?
No. Choices have consequences.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:01 amIf they don’t take the funds, does that also excuse their state’s residents from their part of the debt?
Back up is that you? with the same question again?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:07 amThe Chicago Tribune today calls on Gov. Pat Quinn (D-IL) to propose a special election to fill Burris’ seat, should it open.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:08 am——————
Of course the right wing Chicago Tribune would like to see a special election. They see that as the only possible way Coleman can win. Unfortunately for them, the IL constitution has a method of replacing Senators, by the Governor appointing that person. Why should IL pay money they don’t have for a special election just to satisfy the conservatives? I doubt if Coleman was ahead and Franken was contesting the election, and the Governor was a Republican’t, that they would be asking for a special election.
Bilbo, you’re confusing two very messed up (and confusing )senate seating issues.
:)
February 19th, 2009 at 10:11 amBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
The Chicago Tribune today calls on Gov. Pat Quinn (D-IL) to propose a special election to fill Burris’ seat, should it open.
____________
Coleman and Franken are over in Minnesota, Bilbo.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:12 amIraq should release the show thrower al-Zaidi as soon as possible. Prosecuting a man for harmlessly acting out his rage and passion will create a martyr and hero. “Bush has bloodless and soulless eyes.”
I couldn’t have said it better. I would love to have the opportunity to heave a boot at that evil bastard. I will have to settle for a bronze bust in the library at SMU, but that’s ok. They both are soulless.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:19 amnanlichi Says:
Iraq should release the show thrower al-Zaidi as soon as possible.
______________
I’m going to take a picture of that big bronze shoe they put up ever so briefly in Iraq and have it put on some of those personalized postage stamps you can get these days…
February 19th, 2009 at 10:21 amYou’d better believe any names the public might recognize are in the 16,750 unpublished UBS account holders.
The only man criminally indicted is a Swiss citizen and legally not subject to extradition.
UBS made $200 million a year on the illegal activity. It went on for six years. The fine takes back less than four years of profit. Crime does pay, in the case of UBS.
It’s a paper tiger settlement.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:25 amHey, watchdog, isn’t the restored right to dissent wonderful?!
It’s not “big” government that is the goal. It is “responsive and efficient” government of, remember, “the people”.
Caught your tail yet?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:27 amRepugnicunts like watchcur will rage against President Obama, regardless of what he does. These dumbfcks don’t understand that if they criticize everything he does then their criticism has zippo merit.
But carry on watchcur, I for one am enjoying the rabid frothing frenzy of the racist losers. Just remember what happened to Old Yeller.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:32 amFrom one of swatchy’s links…
Jack Clark, 50, Gilbert, held a sign taller than he is that protested the stimulus. It read: “Personal Responsibility: RIP 2009.”
Wearing a T-shirt with a picture of the late President Ronald Reagan that said “Right,” Clark said he wanted to give the president a piece of his mind.
“I’m somewhat disgusted by the reaction of the country,” he said of economic stimulus efforts. “A lot of what’s happening here is people being irresponsible.”
_______________
I wonder how these “patriotic Americans” feel about Botch’s SIX TRILLION dollars of additional debt? What you say, swatchy? Did you approve?
Funny… during his time, reagan held the record for Federal defifcts, except maybe for war years… personal responsibility, indeed!
February 19th, 2009 at 10:35 amFrom the link above.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:35 amcaller to stephanie today – Young MC, acutally (whom i’ve never heard of till he called her show last week), who now lives in arizona, told her that he was there and the “protesters” were very anemic and sparse…
February 19th, 2009 at 10:35 amLarry Margasak has written an article that suggests that Democrats are committing many of the same ethics violations that they successfully charged Republicans with.
It’s relatively comprehensive. He has a point:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20090219/Culture.of.Corruption.Analysis/
February 19th, 2009 at 10:36 amThose governors should turn down the money. If they are that ideologically pure, then by all means turn it down. Although this come to Jesus fiscal enlightenment is a little too late. They were able to overlook everything and give Bush anything no matter how fiscally irresponsible, that he wanted. Anyone who voted against it should not get it. Then let them explain it to their stupid constituents who probably don’t keep up with their own legislators voting records anyway.
All of the sudden they see the light. Hypocrites. Take Christopher Bond from MO. He voted against the stimulus package. But Mo was the first to begin working on roads and producing jobs just this week. So he went to where the job started and took credit for the “jobs that have come,” etc. This liar took credit for this windfall in jobs when he voted against it days before. There is simply no end to the hypocrites in the GOP.
Swiss are opening the accounts. Good idea whose time has come. Most of corporate America are hiding accounts in the Caribbean and Dubai and other places more difficult to crack.
Christ on a crutch! I wish I could afford to leave this country.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:38 amHey watchdog,
Actually, The story you linked said the following:
“And right across the four-lane road was another crowd of about 150 chanting protestors against Obama. They were led for a few minutes by former Arizona Republican Congressman J.D. Hayworth, who briefly commanded a loudspeaker to lead the protest against the president.”
500 > 150. The other numbers 300-400 were Obama supporters.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:38 am“After the rally, conservative pundit Michelle Malkin and others stood off to the side, serving rallygoers overstuffed barbecue sandwiches.”
__________
Jeebus… Malkin was there… nuttin’ says “Patriotic American” like Michelle Malkin protesting!
February 19th, 2009 at 10:39 amC’mon! What one armed midget would want to be associated with the failure of the repuglycans! Where’s the dignity!!
February 19th, 2009 at 10:40 amwatchdog barks:
At what point did we lose the right of dissent?
Please don’t make me remember the Bush Administration’s “speech” policies.
What about the fairness doctrine?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:41 amWhat about the fairness doctrine?
Hosts on CNN were critiquing the housing rescue in mostly negative terms, but ending their commentary with “and how am I going to get help with MY mortgage?”
February 19th, 2009 at 10:42 amSo, they criticize Obama and the housing billm for whatever their lame reasons for doing so, but in the end the question is “what’s in it for me?”
Typical repugniscum rich basturds.
Larry Margasak has written an article that suggests that Democrats are committing many of the same ethics violations that they successfully charged Republicans with. It’s relatively comprehensive. He has a point:
The article’s third paragraph debunks that. Did you read it yet?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:43 amMust be a typo huh. If there were 500 protesters why are there only 5 people in both pictures? Just asking.
Oh those two guys with pig noses were frightening.
We’re not clear how a corporate tax benefit would be passed through to Paul’s personal tax payments, but that’s what Willens seems to be saying. Any tax experts out there care to clarify?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:44 amGo to Malkin’s website if you can hold down your breakfast. It shows the crowd shots of this protest. Less than 200 there by my count. Oh and those prop checks cost about $30 per print. I love the smell of freshly cut astroturf.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:45 amhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWfl1NIsy14
Repugs accept no responsibility or blame whatsoever.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:46 amwatchdog Says:
FLAGGED for a offensive comment!!!!
___________
Offensive? To whom? Midgets? One-armed people? Rethugs?
February 19th, 2009 at 10:47 amwatchdog must be a little person — and a mental midget.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:47 amYou forgot to blame President Obama for the six years these crimes were going on. Do you really think that in one month it was Obama’s Justice Department that worked out this settlement? Of course you do.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:47 amlol, what an an@lyst…
February 19th, 2009 at 10:48 am#14 on Barack Obama’s donor list: UBS at $505,017
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
#3 On Rahm Emanuel’s lifetime donor list: UBS at $86,100
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00024813
February 19th, 2009 at 10:49 amThat’s why stateofthedivision tries to pass as concerned because he’s more progressive than the rest of us.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:50 amFLAG THIS you jackass.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:57 amUh, watchdog, why don’t you flag the effing article I quoted it from!
February 19th, 2009 at 10:59 amWhy does watchdog want to flag Mr. Steele?
Does he need a date?
RNC Chairman Michael Steele says he is planning an “off the hook” PR offensive to attract younger voters, especially minorities, by applying conservative principles to “urban-suburban hip-hop settings.” “[W]e need to uptick our image with everyone, including one-armed midgets,” he explained.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:00 ambarfly. I read the article. Maybe you should take another look at it:
He lists ethical questions that have arisen over:
Rangel…Murtha…Blagojevich…Dashcle…Killefer…Geithner…Richardson…Lynn…
I didn’t see anything in the article that debunks his assertion. I do feel that after the last couple of months, it’s a difficult sell that Republicans have a monopoly on ethics problems.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:04 amAnother issue. Here’s a link to ThinkProgress stories on ethics:
http://thinkprogress.org/tag/ethics/
Rangel…Murtha…Blagojevich…Dashcle…Killefer…Geithner…Richardson…Lynn…
Besides one story on Killefer withdrawing and some stories on Blagojevich, I didn’t see much coverage of the ethics questions.
Are the ethics of Democrats ignored here?
February 19th, 2009 at 11:11 amHey backup, here’s an idea little guy, start your own damn blog and you can focus on whatever you want. Then you too can be as lonely as Trajan.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:13 amHere is a story to give one pause:
http://www.newsok.com/okc-officer-pulls-man-over-for-anti-obama-sign-on-vehicle/article/3347038?custom_click=headlines_widget
February 19th, 2009 at 11:14 ambackup Says:
I do feel that after the last couple of months, it’s a difficult sell that Republicans have a monopoly on ethics problems.
Who said republicans have a monopoly on ethical problems? They don’t. However, it is a defining characteristic of at least the politicians and pundits belonging to the conservative ideology.
And, it took “the last couple of months” to make it difficult for you to believe that the repub’s do NOT have a monopoly there? Prior to the last couple of months, you believed that ethic violations WERE the realm of repubs ONLY?
Riiiiiiiiight.
Thank you for carrying water for the GOP propoganda machine.
I’m glad to see you scrutinized Bush just as thoroughly and intently in the first month of office as you do with the Obama administration. Good to see that you are not driven by partizan party politics.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:18 amCagey. I’ve been here a couple of years. The message has been that conservatives and republicans have a monopoly on ethical problems.
I support Obama. I think he’s doing a good job. It’s just become evident in the past couple of months, that Democrats suffer from ethical problems; just like Republicans.
I know it’s only been a couple of months. But, there has been a lot of ethical problems.
That’s all I’m saying.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:24 amKeltoi Says:
Here is a story to give one pause:
Your pointing being . . . ? There are over-zealous cops in the world? I’m shocked. I mean, really shocked.
Or is your point that the Secret Service may be a little more on edge than usual?
February 19th, 2009 at 11:30 ambackup Says:
Cagey. I’ve been here a couple of years. The message has been that conservatives and republicans have a monopoly on ethical problems.
Please don’t make someone pull up a list of indicted & convicted Republicans, backup.
I support Obama. I think he’s doing a good job. It’s just become evident in the past couple of months, that Democrats suffer from ethical problems; just like Republicans.
Evident to you? It just speaks to your inability to pay attention.
I know it’s only been a couple of months. But, there has been a lot of ethical problems.
No. There have been some. And they have been noted and acknowledged here at TP. For the most part, they have been the usual political “mistakes”: forgot to pay taxes properly, forgot to pay SS . . . do you really want us to pull up that list of Republicans?
February 19th, 2009 at 11:33 ambackup Says:
I’ve been here longer (different name). Not that that means anything.
Yet, your implication is that ethical violations by non-repubs is something current: “the last couple of months”. Without having your specifics, I would wager that most if not all of said ethics violations to which you refer were ongoing issues. Or is your complaint mainly about appointments to positions? Not sure exactly what ethics violations you are refering to.
I think you’d be hard pressed to find a regular poster here who would insist that, in fact, Democrats never violate ethics rules and that republicans always do so. That position is factually untrue. I believe that most posters here would be in full support of detailed investigations into ALL of our politicians (every one of ‘em), looking for any violations of laws or ethical standards. I would support that, across the board.
From your posts, I do not see that you “support Obama”, however, I will not go any further on that. 100% negative criticism does not equate to “support”. However, perhaps you are not on Rush’s bandwagon of “I want him to fail.”
February 19th, 2009 at 11:33 amgummitch Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi Says:
Here is a story to give one pause:
Your pointing being . . . ? There are over-zealous cops in the world? I’m shocked. I mean, really shocked.
Or is your point that the Secret Service may be a little more on edge than usual?
No particular point. Just thought it was a weird story, especially for Oklahoma.
Although, I suppose a potential point might be that had this happened to someone with an anti-Bush bumper sticker it would have gotten its own thread here and people would be decrying the fascist state of Oklahoma…
February 19th, 2009 at 11:36 amKeltoi Says:
Although, I suppose a potential point might be that had this happened to someone with an anti-Bush bumper sticker it would have gotten its own thread here and people would be decrying the fascist state of Oklahoma…
When it becomes a pattern . . .
As to Oklahoma — Inhofe & Coburn — kind of speaks for itself.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:38 amI see where you’re coming from, but the sign could be interpretted as a threat against the president of the united states. Cops and Secret Service generally take ‘jokes’ like that seriously.
When I was at college someone wrote a ‘funny’ piece for the alt-paper asking God to smite GWB. Yeah the Secret Service detained him overnight. On an unrelated note, the article was not funny like most of the stuff they didnt steal from the onion.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:41 amCageyCretin. I’m not going to take the time to pull up the posts supporting Obama. Trust me, they are out there. I think he’s doing a good job. I think he is the better man for the job than McCain.
In the long run, I don’t think we are doing ourselves a favor by highlighting the problems of one party and ignoring the problems of the other.
The ethics charge was not just my assertion. Margasak makes the point, better than I do:
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20090219/Culture.of.Corruption.Analysis/
Just because we ignore it, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
P.S. I’d love to know your past moniker(s), but I understand if you’d rather not say.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:42 amThe sign said ‘Abort Obama, not the unborn’. I don’t remember any anti-bush bumper stickers calling for the president to be ‘aborted’.
Threatening the president, even indirectly or laughable way is a constitutionally acceptable limitation of free speech.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:44 ami’m calling bullshit… but, it is a good argument to remember when calling out the anti-choice rubes…
”I asked the officer, ‘Do you know what abort means?’” Harrison said. “He said, ‘Yeah, it means to kill.’ I said, ‘No, it means to remove or terminate.’”
imagine that… a spin and twister…
February 19th, 2009 at 11:48 amdeebaser Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi Says:
Although, I suppose a potential point might be that had this happened to someone with an anti-Bush bumper sticker it would have gotten its own thread here and people would be decrying the fascist state of Oklahoma…
The sign said ‘Abort Obama, not the unborn’. I don’t remember any anti-bush bumper stickers calling for the president to be ‘aborted’.
Threatening the president, even indirectly or laughable way is a constitutionally acceptable limitation of free speech.
How strange then that the police returned his sign and apologized. You can’t “abort” a 46 year old…
February 19th, 2009 at 11:49 amBTW, I am pro-Choice. I just know if I got pulled over for a bumper sticker I would be going WTF in a big way.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:51 amKeltoi Says:
Threatening the president, even indirectly or laughable way is a constitutionally acceptable limitation of free speech.
How strange then that the police returned his sign and apologized. You can’t “abort” a 46 year old…
The police investigated, contacted the Secret Service — who took it seriously enough to investigate it as well — and then determined that it wasn’t a real threat. There is NOTHING in that scenario that refutes deebaser’s comment — it was determined not to be a threat. Get it?
And it wasn’t a bumpersticker, btw. According to your own linked article, it was in the window. Just to keep the record straight.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:57 amgummitch Says:
Or is your point that the Secret Service may be a little more on edge than usual?
Actually, from the article itself, the Secret Service were cordial to the man and told the police that the sticker didn’t constitute a threat.
So it was the police officer’s fault, not the SS.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:58 ambackup Says:
…
P.S. I’d love to know your past moniker(s), but I understand if you’d rather not say.
really, squeegee??? i understand also…
February 19th, 2009 at 12:01 pmkaty. I don’t mind saying. I’ve been backup and CaptainMantastic.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:05 pmKeltoi. I’m also pro-Choice, but I agree this was heavy handed. I mistake by the cop.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:06 pmKeltoi says:
You can’t “abort” a 46 year old…
sure you can, according to harrison’s own definition…
those anti-choice idjits are always calling liberals “baby killers”, not ‘baby terminaters’ or ‘baby removers’…
that cop had every right to get the secret service involved…
i think he serves as a good example of what every citizen should do.
STOP THE HATE.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:08 pmMy bad. A mistake by the cop.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:09 pmYeah, because if you tried it’d be ‘murder’. This was why the sign was semi-seriously considered a threat. The cop shouldn’t have taken it, that was wrong, but he is required to report it to the SS.
Stupid bumpersticker commentary is stupid. It’s not chilling at all, the same thing would have happened 10, 20, 30 years ago.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:17 pmbackup Says:
katy. I don’t mind saying. I’ve been backup and CaptainMantastic.
not ’squeegee’ then? ok… so what took you so long?
i rather liked the squeege, so you don’t need to worry…
and he was just the type who would change to ‘captain mantastic’…
just sayin’…
February 19th, 2009 at 12:21 pmHere’s what probably happened:
Cop: take that sign down or you’ll get a visit from the secret service. the sign threatens the life of the president of the US.
dumbtard: abortion isnt murder (huh?) it means blah blah blah…
Cop: the heck with this, i don’t know exactly what im supposed to do in this situation so im taking your stupid sign.
Secret Service: Sir, this is a serious waste of our time. Don’t be ‘tarded. have a nice day.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:21 pmbackup Says:
In the long run, I don’t think we are doing ourselves a favor by highlighting the problems of one party and ignoring the problems of the other.
Certainly: illegal activities should never be ignored. But if, of the two parties, one tends to display legal and ethical violations more often or more obviously than the other, then they become “highlighted” simply by the fact that they are more culpable. Human beings have inclinations to act in greedy and selfish ways, and some will ignore the laws and rules and ewthics of society in order to satisfy their selfishness. No political party, no theology, no ideology is immune from those who will use those to their personal advantage in disregard of society and laws. But “the past few months” have shown nothing bizzarre or outre in the realm, and the great excesses of ethic violations that is part of the right’s theme (apart from your personal assertation) are, in the main, less than noteworthy. The GOP wants to make a tempest in a teacup, because they have nothing else to go with.
You have free choice to like or dislike Obama. I don’t particularly care what your individual opinion of him is. I am glad, however, that you are not on the traitorous bandwagon that wants to see our counrty fail just so that the Democratic party will “look bad”.
Past moniker: Mystic Agent.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:28 pmHere’s a equivalence to the abort Obama bumper sticker.
http://www.cafepress.com/mrgoodmoods.42003023
February 19th, 2009 at 12:34 pmRNC Chairman Michael Steele says he is planning an “off the hook” PR offensive to attract younger voters
Yo yo yo! The Democraps be illin’ y’all! You gotsta get jiggy with the GOP!
How in the world does Steele thing patronizing young people and minorities will make them embrace Republican “principles”?
I hope he tries this tactic – it should be worth a lot of laughs and will further endear the Democratic message to young voters for years to come.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:34 pmObama’s Justice Department made the UBS settlement. That’s where the buck stops.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:36 pmwatchdog Says:
Obama’s love fest is slowly turning into a large collective public dissent.
Apparently you’ve never met any actual high school students. This is evidence of “large collective public dissent”? I can’t figure out whether you’re intentionally lying or are just too stupid to understand what you read.
Or both, probably.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:42 pmCageyCretin. Thanks. very reasonable. Here’s one example of me supporting Obama, because it’s easy to find: (I don’t know how to link, sorry):
In regards to Obama appointing a gay man to head faith base initiatives office.
I think Obama is doing a very good job.
But, I just don’t share the idea that Democrats are better than Republicans. They have different ideology (which is really the heart of the matter), but there both politicians. In terms of ethics or good vs. evil, I don’t see the distinction.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:44 pmbackup Says:
Here’s a equivalence to the abort Obama bumper sticker.
No — no equivalence.
“Why does Al Qeda kill civilized people when they could kill Bush?”
vs
“Abort Obama, not the unborn”
I really don’t think that I NEED to go into the semantics here to point out HOW these two differ in their message.
There is a distinct difference between the two. The similarity between them is that anyone sporting either of them in public might be investigated by the secret service. That is the main function of the secret service, and they spend a lot of time in every presidency looking into threats or perceived threats to the president. The Bush admin’s secret service undoubtedly looked into “potential threats” that were not even this level of “threat” (can you say peaceful protesters?).
If you can’t take the heat, then don’t put up a sign that implies that the president should be killed.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:50 pmwatchdog Says:
__________
Somebody’s feeling sorry for themselves this morning…
___________
http://www.gallup.com/poll/114202/Obama-Upper-Hand-Stimulus-Fight.aspx
February 9, 2009
Obama Has Upper Hand in Stimulus Fight
Obama’s 67% approval rating on the stimulus is more than twice that of Republicans…
Remember when Botch had an 80% PLUS approval rating?
Good times… good times… BUT… siiiiiigh… those days are gone forever, along w/ KKKarl’s “permanent republican majority”…
TWICE… that of GOOPers…
‘Course… at this point, flaming paper bags of dog poo left on the doorstep have a higher approval rating than GOOpers…
February 19th, 2009 at 12:53 pmCageyCretin Says:
The Bush admin’s secret service undoubtedly looked into “potential threats” that were not even this level of “threat” (can you say peaceful protesters?).
___________
Well, in all fairness to the Botch Admin… tits on statues can be pretty threatening.
And Quakers have been known to play rough.
And don’t even get me started on Winky-tink and the Gay Agenda…
February 19th, 2009 at 12:55 pmThat’s a false equivalence. Anyone rocking that bumpersticker would have also risked secret service investigation.
Also, there’s a very good chance that none of those bumperstickers even exist. Cafepress has a lot of garbage on templates on their sites that has never existed in a tangible sense. Any moron can make an account to sell a bumpersticker like that.
Likewise, if you reported it to the secret service two months ago, they would have probably paid the ‘merchant’ a visit.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:58 pmIt’s pretty equivalent. Abort Obama is similar to kill Bush.
Here’s the link again. ‘kill Bush’ is highlighted in red.
http://www.cafepress.com/mrgoodmoods.42003023
They are similar. It’s a free speech issue. There is a balance of letting people express themselves and protecting our public officials.
It’s an issue that isn’t party dependent.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:58 pmbackup Says:
But, I just don’t share the idea that Democrats are better than Republicans. They have different ideology (which is really the heart of the matter), but there both politicians. In terms of ethics or good vs. evil, I don’t see the distinction.
_____________
Overall.. you’re prolly right… and specifically, the Botch Admin comes across like a giant, sprawling criminal operation. This particular group of individuals, IMHO, are one of the most odious, corrupt, bullying, and ravingly incompetent bunch of fools I’ve ever seen.
There’s that nice theoretical view of what Dems V Repubs means… and then, there are specifics… and specifically, BotchCo STUNK.
February 19th, 2009 at 12:59 pmBackup:
Well, the political realm is not binary. One is not the good guy and the other the bad guy. THAT it is Dem OR Repub is a huge problem in our politics, and will be the key to oour ultimate downfall if it is not corrected (our government was never set up to be a “two-party” system).
Democrats have flaws, because they are people. The problem with conservatives is that the ideology espouses a “I got mine, screw you” attitude and approach to everything. At the core, the conservtive ideology of the modern republican party is “selfish greed”: everything is rated in what “I” get out of it. Well, that is NOT how people in a civilized society maintain a civilized society.
Still, nice talking to you. Not sure how much longer I’ll be around today….
February 19th, 2009 at 1:03 pmlike ed just said, watchdog, you gotta take one for the team…
that would be Team U.S.A., in case you forgot…
selfish greedy idjits don’t deserve this country…
February 19th, 2009 at 1:04 pmbackup Says:
They are similar. It’s a free speech issue. There is a balance of letting people express themselves and protecting our public officials.
So you’re advocating for people sporting “kill Bush” bumper stickers?
I say, sure, it’s a free speech issue. But don’t be surprised if you get pulled over for it. It’s the real world, backup.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:39 pmHe is way out of line. President Obama is Commander-In-Chief, not David. Stand back solider.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:54 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
Well, in all fairness to the Botch Admin… tits on statues can be pretty threatening.
Absolutely. The breasts of Lady Liberty are potential WMD. See how pointy those paps are? In the movies, someone could be impaled on them… and, as the republicans seem to want to remind us these days, the movies are what we base reality on….
And don’t even get me started on Winky-tink and the Gay Agenda…
Oh… NOW you’ve gone and done it….. don’t be surprised if you are visited by the Tinky-wink enforcement League. And their purses are not filled with teddy bear stuffing.
February 19th, 2009 at 1:59 pmAnd the bumper stickers: note that one is a hypothetical question, while the other is an imperative. Note the difference in what that means, please. (and, yeah, anyone sporting the AQ/Bush bumper sticker also would have deserved being peeked at by the secret service… it IS their JOB to protect the president).
February 19th, 2009 at 2:01 pmrepugs giving up money? yeah right. hey you reprehensible repugs what is your logic? That it will economically hurt African-Americans only? You lying dizzyasses bullshitters. you know damn well you’ll be begging for more in no time flat. lame-o stop being stupid.
steele can throw down a rave at Disney World with free drugs and liquor and won’t draw a President Obama crowd. I hope steele doesn’t equate himself on the lines of President Obama.
If he does that shit is fun neeee! HAHAHAHAHAHA Dumbass.
I know exactly what he means.
February 19th, 2009 at 2:22 pmwatchdog Says:
At what point did we lose the right of dissent? What about the fairness doctrine?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey MORON the fairness doctrine had nothing to do with losing the right of dissent, you brainwashed fool, it calls for both sides of public issues to be heard that is like the OPPOSITE of losing the right to dissent. Coming into a place like this where there are a lot of well informed people and regurgitating the hivemind idiocy you were told to believe by the screechmonkeys that do your thinking for you only makes you look like the braindead idiot you are
February 19th, 2009 at 2:43 pmwatchdog Says: 104
My GOD you are ignorant and pushing the STUPIDEST rightwing talking points imaginable. Only the most extreme morons are still even TRYING those weak talking points. YOU are lucky people here dont flag for abject stupidity or you would never have a post last five minutes. MORON
February 19th, 2009 at 2:46 pmBush & Cheney had people dragged out and jailed for anything that remotely challenged their petulant power parade.
Outclassed by the gentleman from Illinois again.
February 19th, 2009 at 2:46 pm______
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
upright left Says:
If they don’t take the funds, does that also excuse their state’s residents from their part of the debt?
_______________
Do those of us who didn’t vote for Botch’s bloody war and endless deficits get to not pay that back too?
just asking?
You’re late, BTW.
We covered this several days go.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:59 am
______
I didn’t support the war, so I’d be ok with your suggestion. In fact I’d even gladly pay my share of the war debt in exchange for not paying for all the other foolish spending with which I disagreed. But, obviously, that doesn’t compare to the post to which I responded.
I don’t doubt for a minute that you’ve had time to discuss every thread. ;)
February 19th, 2009 at 3:32 pm______
PatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
upright left Says:
If they don’t take the funds, does that also excuse their state’s residents from their part of the debt?
No. Choices have consequences.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:01 am
______
That’s pretty much the point of those who are debating taking the money. They don’t want the consequences of the choices of others.
February 19th, 2009 at 3:35 pmgummitch. you’re right. you and CageyCretin have changed my mind. I can see the need for law enforcement to ensure the safety of our elected officials. Although, we don’t want law enforcement interfering with our free speech; some free speech crosses the line. Both examples (abort and kill) are in a gray area. (How likely are either these individuals going to harm the President?) But, after listening to you, I could see a justification for more inquiry by the officer.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:58 pmNYT article on Treasury’s PPP:
The Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve plan to spend as much as $1 trillion to provide low-cost loans and guarantees to hedge funds and private equity firms that buy securities backed by consumer and business loans.
The Fed is expected to start the first phase of the program, which will provide $200 billion in loans to investors, in early March.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/business/20lend.html?hp
February 19th, 2009 at 11:27 pm