Barack Obama, our next President

[sonicfilter]

BLOOMING IDIOTS wrote:

<quoted text>Fast and Furious scandal: House panel recommends contempt vote on Eric Holder
By Sari Horwitz and Ed O’Keefe,June 20, 2012
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted 23 to 17 to recommend…A congressional committee voted Wednesday to recommend that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. be held in contempt after the Obama administration, citing executive privilege for the first time, refused to turn over documents pertaining to a botched gun-trafficking operation.
The party-line vote at a marathon session of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee intensified a feud between the Obama administration and Republican lawmakers and dealt an embarrassing blow to the nation’s highest-ranking law enforcement official.
House leaders said they will schedule a vote of the entire chamber on the matter next week unless the attorney general turns over certain documents on Operation Fast and Furious. If the full House votes to find Holder in contempt, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia — who is employed by the Justice Department — will have to decide whether to criminally prosecute him.
HOW COME COME Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. WAS NOT ARRESTED?THATS RIGHT HE AND OBAMA ARE ABOVE THE LAW!!!YOU ARE SO FULL OF SHIT!!!!!!!!!!

full of it? did i present an opinion? like when House Republicans issue one? that come to nothing?

your reaction is the usual nutjob deal when presented with that that they didn't want to hear. and just as amusing as usual.

[sonicfilter]

finding wrote:

<quoted text>he's got to try and get out of this mess he is in.

sure. shut down the House. if only an EO was possible....

that would fix most of it.

[sonicfilter]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, to my eye the whole scenario is kinda like DB in here. He's hanging onto the Constitution for all it's worth, blissfully unaware that it ain't worth the sheep it's printed on. For Christ's sake God didn't write it. Anyways, if I know anything I know this: when southerners fight it's generally a short process. They get angry, do whatever it is they think will alleviate it (beat the wife, whatever) and then it's pretty much of a bum's rush to get back to whatever "game" they were watchin'. They are not people known for their attention span. Nor are they people who look far into the future, witness Iraq.
Probably the simplest way to handle them in a crisis is to leave crates of beer and paper money scattered around the country and then give them hints every so often as to where they might be. Keep the hints pretty general - "it's over there" - or you risk them getting bored, but pretty much all you've got to do is print boxes of money all day and they'll never make the connection. After a while they'll each have a house or trailer full of money and will kill other family members who they suspect of trying to take it. Within a month or two half of them will be dead. These are NOT strategic thinkers. "Hiss" huh? I like that.

hanging on whilst ignoring who interprets the Constitution.

and what they have to say about assault weapons is not what he wants to hear.

kinda like what they had to say about abortion.

[sonicfilter]

Glenn Beck Attempts a Laughable Make Over as a Libertarian

It took me a few days to stop laughing.

Glenn Beck is rebranding himself as–get this–the alternative to “far-right, far-left” polarized debates on cable news, dominated by people “yelling at each-other.”

“We're not going to play in that crazy space as a network," he announced earnestly.

The irony meter just died. Hypocrisy and chutzpah had a child.

....Glenn Beck used his 15 minutes of fame to cast himself as King of the Wingnuts, eventually becoming too extreme for even Roger Ailes to put up with on FoxNews.

But Glenn Beck can read the tea leaves and the ratings. He can see that Sean Hannity’s viewers are tanking post-election. Rush Limbaugh’s audience is aging out of existence and advertisers are looking elsewhere. And so the man who once described himself as a “Rodeo Clown” decided it was time for a new disguise.

....In some ways, this new guise is clarifying because it definitively answers a lingering question about Beck–is he sincere in his beliefs or was his right-wing rhetoric just showmanship, part of a business plan to appeal to an agitated audience?

It was all just an opportunistic con job. And the dupes are the folks who bought into the shtick, carrying signs at Tea Party rallies that read “Glenn Beck is my hero.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01...

[Anonymous of Indy]

gossamer wrote:

Live in Detroit for a day. You will become racist.

you right, Blacks there are the worst Socially which is why the Detroit & surrounding area is considered the most racist city in the United States and the Book Detroit Divided even confirms it and explains why which the blacks have brought upon themselves there in Detroit which they have no desire to change socially & economically and rather be part of the entitlement society which is why I dont miss having to go work in the the Detroit on occassions.

Detroit Divided

https://www.russellsage.org/publications/detr...

[Atmore Al]

OldRaider wrote:

<quoted text>
Looks like waxturd/goober and the kids are done watching Sunday morning cartoons. We'll have to wait until they take a nap to continue the adult conversation.

Well, I guess that eliminates you; now you can go to Rev. Wright's church and worship Obama without missing any information for the next 20 years.

[DBWriter]

Death of Tenzing wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't know, don't care; it wasn't my day to watch him.
The Treasury.
See? Not so hard.

I believe your first answer. You don't care if Obama is just a cardboard cutout of a commercial to make it appear as if someone's actually president, when the truth is Obama isn't in charge of anything and doesn't have a clue what's happening in government. He's just a prop for dupes.

And, correct me if this is wrong, but the Treasury is 16.5 trillion dollars in debt and doesn't have any money.

So, the question remains:

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

The Treasury can't generate money and is 16.5 trillion dollars in debt. You actually have to identify a source of money.

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

[sonicfilter]

hey judge it idiot. change it up once in while. your self gratification is showing.

uber-strong personality eh?

[DBWriter]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
sure. shut down the House. if only an EO was possible....
that would fix most of it.

Well, dufus, an executive order isn't possible as long as the Constitution defines our government. An executive order is limited solely to the Executive Branch of government.
However, Obama intends to install a fascist dictatorship where he can write his own laws to suit his whim.

How do you feel about that?

[sonicfilter]

White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire

Armando Falcon Jr. was preparing to take on a couple of giants.

A soft-spoken Texan, Mr. Falcon ran the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, a tiny government agency that oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two pillars of the American housing industry. In February 2003, he was finishing a blockbuster report that warned the pillars could crumble.

Created by Congress, Fannie and Freddie — called G.S.E.’s, for government-sponsored entities — bought trillions of dollars’ worth of mortgages to hold or sell to investors as guaranteed securities. The companies were also Washington powerhouses, stuffing lawmakers’ campaign coffers and hiring bare-knuckled lobbyists.

Mr. Falcon’s report outlined a worst-case situation in which Fannie and Freddie could default on debt, setting off “contagious illiquidity in the market”— in other words, a financial meltdown. He also raised red flags about the companies’ soaring use of derivatives, the complex financial instruments that economic experts now blame for spreading the housing collapse.

Today, the White House cites that report — and its subsequent effort to better regulate Fannie and Freddie — as evidence that it foresaw the crisis and tried to avert it. Bush officials recently wrote up a talking points memo headlined “G.S.E.’s — We Told You So.”

But the back story is more complicated. To begin with, on the day Mr. Falcon issued his report, the White House tried to fire him.

At the time, Fannie and Freddie were allies in the president’s quest to drive up homeownership rates; Franklin D. Raines, then Fannie’s chief executive, has fond memories of visiting Mr. Bush in the Oval Office and flying aboard Air Force One to a housing event.“They loved us,” he said.

So when Mr. Falcon refused to deep-six his report, Mr. Raines took his complaints to top Treasury officials and the White House.“I’m going to do what I need to do to defend my company and my position,” Mr. Raines told Mr. Falcon.

Days later, as Mr. Falcon was in New York preparing to deliver a speech about his findings, his cellphone rang. It was the White House personnel office, he said, telling him he was about to be unemployed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21...

[sonicfilter]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, dufus, an executive order isn't possible as long as the Constitution defines our government. An executive order is limited solely to the Executive Branch of government.
However, Obama intends to install a fascist dictatorship where he can write his own laws to suit his whim.
How do you feel about that?

how do i feel about nutjobs spouting the same failed crap from 4 years ago?

i pretty much just get uncontrollable giggles. like most people.

[DBWriter]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
hanging on whilst ignoring who interprets the Constitution.
and what they have to say about assault weapons is not what he wants to hear.
kinda like what they had to say about abortion.

The core principle of the Constitution, and one of its most brilliant aspects is, it is written so the average person can easily read and understand it. It doesn't need interpretation. It only needs enforcement.
If the Supreme Court says the sky is green, the sky doesn't change color tomorrow. It stays blue. Perhaps Obama will write an executive order changing the definition of "green" and "blue" to make it look like the sky submited to the all-powerful dictatorship. But, that may depend on what the definition of "is" is.

It's obvious the Supreme Court is schizophrenic.
There exists a ruling that any law that is vague or to complex to be understood by the average person is unconstitutional.
How's this for an example of that:

The members of Congress that actually wrote the ObamaKare law stated that their intent was a "penalty" written in the law.
The members of the Supreme Court read the exact same text and concluded that there was a "tax" written in the law.

Now, how on Earth can anyone say this law doesn't fit the requirement of the Supreme Court decision that any law that is vague is unconstitutional?
The authors say "penalty".
The Supreme Court reads that very same law and says "tax".

That is the very definition of vague.

This is just one of the many reasons ObamaKare is unconstitutional.

Since it's so obvious this law is unconstitutional, why is our Supreme Court so disfunctional it can't see this obvious fact?

[carol]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
I believe your first answer. You don't care if Obama is just a cardboard cutout of a commercial to make it appear as if someone's actually president, when the truth is Obama isn't in charge of anything and doesn't have a clue what's happening in government. He's just a prop for dupes.
And, correct me if this is wrong, but the Treasury is 16.5 trillion dollars in debt and doesn't have any money.
So, the question remains:
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?
The Treasury can't generate money and is 16.5 trillion dollars in debt. You actually have to identify a source of money.
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

You kinda like a broken record ain't you? Everybody in here answer you answers but you still here beatin' the drum cause you not get the answers you want? Man say, "Not my job to watch the Pres." An' then you say, "Yeah but who's watchin' the Pres?" Man say, "The Treasury." An then you say, "No, the Treasury cain't do it." So here's the thing o rhetorical master: Answer you own fuckin' "questions." That's the problem with engineers: they stoopid.

[DBWriter]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
how do i feel about nutjobs spouting the same failed crap from 4 years ago?
i pretty much just get uncontrollable giggles. like most people.

The subject you're running away from concerns the limit of authority of an executive order.
An executive order has no authority outside the Executive Branch of government. You have to first eliminate the Constitution from government to extend the authority of an execitive order beyond the Executive Branch of government.

Now, try again. This time, stay on topic and answer the post.

Well, dufus, an executive order isn't possible as long as the Constitution defines our government. An executive order is limited solely to the Executive Branch of government.
However, Obama intends to install a fascist dictatorship where he can write his own laws to suit his whim.
How do you feel about that?

[Chicagoan by Birth]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
Banks were not forced to make loans to peple who culd not pay it back.
This is a lie.

BS Davey Boie, I have a relative that works in the Banking & Loan industry, Freeloaders were encouraged to apply. This fiasco is so far above your sophomoric education you will never understand..

[carol]

Sides, when you get to aroun' a trillion dollars or mo, you no longer "in" debt, you jus' an investment vehicle. When clowns like you start bangin' the debt drum it assumes that no one will notice that in order to be "in debt" you need to "owe" somebody. So to whom do "we" "owe" 16.5 trillion dollars? The suggestion has been made of late - tongue in cheek - to just print a few 1 trillion dollar coins. But I have a much better and mo' efficient idea.

[carol]

Here, try this: everybody join hands... if you want you can hol' my pecker cause you not likely to see another one like this - an' we all say together.. "BY THE GREAT GOD JEHOVAHOWITZ, AS OF TODAY... AMERICA NO LONGER OWES ANYBODY ANYTHING! WE WILL BE DISTRIBUTING BOXES OF GLASS BEADS OUT IN THE LOBBY SHORTLY, PLEASE FILE OUT IN AN ORDERLY FASHION AND GET YOURS, THANK YOU FOR COMING. Now, exactly who's gonna argue? ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION!!!!

[Death of Tenzing]

sonicfilter wrote:

Glenn Beck Attempts a Laughable Make Over as a Libertarian
It took me a few days to stop laughing.
Glenn Beck is rebranding himself as–get this–the alternative to “far-right, far-left” polarized debates on cable news, dominated by people “yelling at each-other.”
“We're not going to play in that crazy space as a network," he announced earnestly.
The irony meter just died. Hypocrisy and chutzpah had a child.
....Glenn Beck used his 15 minutes of fame to cast himself as King of the Wingnuts, eventually becoming too extreme for even Roger Ailes to put up with on FoxNews.
But Glenn Beck can read the tea leaves and the ratings. He can see that Sean Hannity’s viewers are tanking post-election. Rush Limbaugh’s audience is aging out of existence and advertisers are looking elsewhere. And so the man who once described himself as a “Rodeo Clown” decided it was time for a new disguise.
....In some ways, this new guise is clarifying because it definitively answers a lingering question about Beck–is he sincere in his beliefs or was his right-wing rhetoric just showmanship, part of a business plan to appeal to an agitated audience?
It was all just an opportunistic con job. And the dupes are the folks who bought into the shtick, carrying signs at Tea Party rallies that read “Glenn Beck is my hero.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01...

Neo-liberals took "liberal" now clowns like Beck are taking "libertarian". So much for the convenience of labels.

"Oh yeah, I'm a liberal but not an FDR/Johnson "liberal" so I'm a libertarian but not like Beck or Stossel so ..."

[Realtime]

sonicfilter wrote:

Glenn Beck Attempts a Laughable Make Over as a Libertarian
It took me a few days to stop laughing.
Glenn Beck is rebranding himself as–get this–the alternative to “far-right, far-left” polarized debates on cable news, dominated by people “yelling at each-other.”
“We're not going to play in that crazy space as a network," he announced earnestly.
The irony meter just died. Hypocrisy and chutzpah had a child.
....Glenn Beck used his 15 minutes of fame to cast himself as King of the Wingnuts, eventually becoming too extreme for even Roger Ailes to put up with on FoxNews.
But Glenn Beck can read the tea leaves and the ratings. He can see that Sean Hannity’s viewers are tanking post-election. Rush Limbaugh’s audience is aging out of existence and advertisers are looking elsewhere. And so the man who once described himself as a “Rodeo Clown” decided it was time for a new disguise.
....In some ways, this new guise is clarifying because it definitively answers a lingering question about Beck–is he sincere in his beliefs or was his right-wing rhetoric just showmanship, part of a business plan to appeal to an agitated audience?
It was all just an opportunistic con job. And the dupes are the folks who bought into the shtick, carrying signs at Tea Party rallies that read “Glenn Beck is my hero.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01...

LMAO, Carol and her new bff must have put up a thousand posts each proclaiming the genius of Glenda Beck.

Well, he said in 2010 that he was more interested in the entertainment end of politics than the news end.

[Lily Boca Raton Fl]

GhostofRaygun wrote:

<quoted text>You are a hypocrite. Bush signed 291 EOs. Most were after 9/11 and most were about spying on the American public without court orders. Were you outraged back then??????????

He was white and republican