StevenSeagal

I'm not clear on why an executive order affirming that federal funds will not be allocated to abortions is an affront to the pro life crowd, apart from the fact that it isn't an overturning of Roe v. Wade. Nothing is changing re: abortion here. Or is that the problem?

Where's the clause describing the operation of the gas chambers and forced labor camps? I must have missed it, because I know it's in there somewhere. Probably hidden amongst all those elitist Ivy league educated words.

If in time it does what it is proposed to do (not as proposed according to Rush), I predict it WILL stand, and will one day be looked back upon in a similar manner as Medicare, Social Security, and civil rights, all issues that the opposition were violently opposed to, the reasons for which have all been debunked by history. Gleeful? Should people who fought for this be glum, angry? Conservatives weren't the least bit smug during Bush's era, as I recall. I love this "Imposing their will"...how dare the majority party pass legislation in Congress that reflects a campaign pledge. The fact that the opposition is hysterically angry and violent (let's not mention misinformed by the hyperbole of Fox "News) doesn't change the fact that they're the minority. I can't say I'm "gleeful", though, to be fair. I think there's a lot of good things in the bill but also flaws; I don't really know if it will work as planned but I'm happy to see movement in the government on issues that need it: and the Republican strategy of doing nothing in order to facilitate their return to power, at which point the status quo of corporatocracy they cherish can be secured for yet another generation- is no option. I'm rolling with this. Let's see where it goes. You guys are such martyrs, so dramatic. Again, your anger over this issue changes not the fact that you're apparently outnumbered. When that's the case, democracy kinda sucks. Now you know how the other half felt from 2000-2008. Except we weren't plotting revolution. So who's blood do you have in mind? You polishing your guns? Good luck getting past the troops (who, despite your "support", won't hesitate to shoot civilians if so ordered). Is Glenn Beck the head of this terrorist insurgency? All of that executive power Bush/Cheney instilled and surveillance on American citizenry must not seem like such a great idea now, in retrospect... I've read that quote before. I do wonder if Jefferson's house slaves heard him say that.

you mean specifically the 2nd amendment, interpreted by the loony tea baggers as "if the majority party uses established rules of debate, procedure, and voting to pass legislation you don't agree with, it is appropriate to get your guns and attempt to overthrow the government, only of course after more civilized methods such as verbal harassment, racial epithets, intimidation, and threats of violence against lawmakers have run their course". "Hey, we warned them!"

doesn't quite have the same oomf as a care bear, does it? Actually it does, given that it was so unexpected coming from KKKKK...

They wouldn't have to do this of they didn't love their country SO MUCH!

Awhile back, I sat next to a fat, redneck woman on an airplane flight. She had a gigantic bible that she kept in her lap the entire flight, to which she continually pointed to and counseled, "it's all right here..." as her final say on every point of discussion. One of the many topics we covered, somehow, was environmental issues, during which time she authoritatively asserted to me that "the pine beetles are God's punishment to environmentalists". So j_b, get over yourself and get over the stupid resource. As this woman put it, "stop worshiping the creation and start worshipping the creator".

[video:youtube]XC73PHdQX04 [video:youtube]_0hTtsqiFCc

Actually I'll bet Glenn Beck is already mounting a fundraising drive to cover his legal expenses in this fight against "liberal witchhunts and tyranny!"

Hitler 2 Forces His Agenda Translation: Do it 100% our way or we'll shut it down. Doesn't sound obstructionist at all...good thing we have the GOP to look out for the best interests of the country. They are the only ones who understand that we need a non-functioning government (aside from the military, of course) and everybody to fend for themselves.

Hmmmm :whistle:

More true colors from the violent, hate-filled, murderous left. You have a lot of pain and suffering bred in your geneology, don't you?

also exonerated after trial (if we want to play fair) That his conviction was overturned on prosecutor misconduct which did not actually contradict damning evidence hardly equates to "exonerated". Had the prosecutors done their job right he very likely would still have been convicted. "I had no idea that that my $300,000 remodel job got paid for by someone else!"

You can bet Glenn Beck covered this new development on his show, right?

And why is that? As I stated: the Republicans vote in lockstep, including the "moderates" in part because tea baggers and talk radio hosts deluge them with populist threats to "have their job" if they dare to cross party lines to work together with the opposition. Conservative leaning Democrats have fallen victim to the same tactics. As a result, the party is not unified. But you are making it sound as though the Democrats simply chose not to do anything. Why would they do that? Little has been accomplished precisely because they, or Obama at least, chose to try bipartisanship. On another note, you also make it sound like they should have done anything they wanted to do, because they could- in which case you'd be squealing shrill notes of protest about having a liberal agenda forced down your throat. Oh wait, you do that anyway. I'll be happy to spare you that as soon as you give me demonstrable evidence that the Republicans have any interest in mind apart from reascension to power and stonewalling everything until the next election. They have NO PLAN aside from winning elections and any nefarious tactic is game for them. I concur that Pelosi is too partisan and too divisive a figure. I disagree that you lump Obama in with her, however. Whatever liberal "far left" values Obama has in him, I do believe, by observation, that it is his sincere intention to govern from the center and that he is willing to compromise on some of his policies. . He is failing to do so effectively because of the strident partisanship from both sides of Congress, who are like children in their inability to work together. As for the general state of the economy, which was the main premise if I recall related to this Obama "failure" discussion- 'you and I both know' that regardless of which party was running things, that things would still be tough right now, and will continue to be for a least another year or two. Unemployment, for the moment, has dropped, interest rates are holding (but for how long can they do that?), and housing starts are supposedly rising. While I think the crisis will pass in time, I also think that the assumption that we'll get back to "the way things were before" is not possible. This country is going to have to use its brains and muscle again- if there's anything left of them, that is.

Actually, the question is shouldn't most of the pollution controls and clean energy we are talking about implementing and developing as a means to *hopefully* curb global warming be done anyway? And why are global warming denialists entire environmental strategy summed up by "whatever is good for business is our only concern", i.e. "kill, drill and dig".

How dare these everyday people accept jobs that have good pay and benefits! They should be punished and forced to work at shittier jobs than all of us who didn't look around or were too proud and full of gov't hatred to take a gov't job ourselves!

No response. You're not really gonna make me dig up your quote, are you? Just denounce your messiah as not up to the task, and we'll move on. Hey Fairweather, Although you're directing that at Doug, I also am on record as giving Obama a year before I passed judgment, so although it is early I'll be happy to respond. I'll be the first to admit that Obama has not done well in several areas, but not the same areas you would target, I'm sure. Basically, Obama has done a terrible job at keeping his own party unified, which is endemic to the Democratic party throughout recent history. The R's are a one note bunch, but the Democrats cover a much broader range of the spectrum. When I gave Obama a year, I was also under the assumption that in a year he would have managed to keep his party together and have actually passed much important legislation, and through this time we'd then be able to see if his policies were actually working, or not. However, so far between his own party's divisions and the Republicans policy of total obstruction through any means necessary and then accusing Obama of "doing nothing" and "failing", we have very little to go on besides speculation of what might be, and an opposition party that is doing an excellent job of demonstrating that its only interest in regards to this country is to regain power, even if it means preventing legislation that they themselves would otherwise find amenable from becoming law. Anything that happens that would make the country happier and more optimistic under Obama is not an option for the Republicans and their election chances. So has Obama failed? I'm still waiting. But at least, unlike you, I am not hoping for him to fail. If he fails, who wins? I realize you get all tingly thinking of political victory when Sean Hannity fills your head with visions of Sarah Palin leading us downward bound, but for the next three years, I'm instead hoping to see this country turn around and prosper, regardless of who it makes a hero. And I'm not hearing anything out of the Republicans, or Teabaggers (same?) that suggests they have anything in mind aside from an acclerated version of what put us in this place in the first place, as well as an unquenchable will to power. By the way, Condit wasn't convicted of murder (or anything else), was he? He may have been a cheating douchebag, but how about you observe your own rules, okay?

Hey Fairweather- I'm not gay, but if it's dirty you're lookin' for, be in stall #3, C concourse at 2PM sharp!

Miss me yet?

Hi Fairweather, Are you under 18? Wanna chat? KTHXBY

You can tell by that smile he's innocent.