10/27/2008 11:01:49 AM

LOL

I'm not so sure that the financial meltdown was a Republican issue, but otherwise, yep pretty much.

10/27/2008 11:09:39 AM

because you hate responsiblity and working? I dunno, I dont understand it.

10/27/2008 11:10:25 AM

VOTE W

10/27/2008 11:17:49 AM

I know there have to be some other inept cronies to put up there.

10/27/2008 11:18:05 AM

^another confused Dem.

10/27/2008 11:18:33 AM

^^ Alberto Gonzales deserves a spot due to his failure on multiple issues.

Maybe throw in some pervs like Sen. Foley for shits n giggles.

10/27/2008 11:23:39 AM

Quote :

"because you hate responsiblity and working? I dunno, I dont understand it"

That's funny coming from someone who supports a party that refuses to take responsiblity for anything.

10/27/2008 11:33:19 AM

I simply pick the lesser of two evils nuts. You dont see me walking around with tshirts, rallies, yard signs. I simply HATE the direction this country is going in, and I see Obama pushing us alot harder into that direction.

btw, just for shits and giggles, what exactly are you referring to nuts.

[Edited on October 27, 2008 at 11:45 AM. Reason : .]

10/27/2008 11:44:55 AM

Quote :

"I simply pick the lesser of two evils nuts. You dont see me walking around with tshirts, rallies, yard signs. I simply HATE the direction this country is going in, and I see Obama pushing us alot harder into that direction."

I am just looking for a good manager. One that demands results and can choose the best people. GWB has shown what happens when we are more focused on our agenda and filling top level positions with cronies. He also has not ever replaced anyone until their incompetence was at crisis level.

The number of missed opportunities and fuckups in the McCain campaign is a good indicator of how a McCain presidency might be. I could vote for either party pretty easily but the republican party is so fucked up right now I think they need some time to regroup.

10/27/2008 12:07:37 PM

Quote :

"btw, just for shits and giggles, what exactly are you referring to nuts."

The failings in the Iraq War, Katrina, torture, the politicization of the Justice Department. The list goes on and on.

10/27/2008 12:27:14 PM

So we should vote Democratic because George Bush is a Republican?

10/27/2008 12:32:52 PM

Let's continue to reward the same inept intellectually bankrupt policies that got us here in the first place. Great idea.

10/27/2008 12:37:01 PM

Quote :

"So we should vote Democratic because George Bush is a Republican?"

No.

When this campaign started I thought McCain was going to lead his party back to being in touch with the American people. Instead his screwed up party lead him. The answers to our problems do not lie on either end of the political spectrum, they lie somewhere in the middle.

As the republican party continues to move further to the right they will continue to alienate voters. They need to respond to the biggest segment of the population, not just the loudest conservatives on the far right.

I do not even agree with everything Obama is preaching but at least he has made a clear case for where he stands. The other side has been all over the place the whole time. I also know that Obama will not be able to do everything he has promised, but at least he was listening to the voters well enough to know what they need to hear.

Understanding what the issues are is the best place to start solving them.

10/27/2008 1:14:58 PM

10/27/2008 3:58:39 PM

I like when people politicize hurricanes

10/27/2008 4:03:45 PM

So, one of the largest demonstration of inept governing by the Republicans is politicization?

10/27/2008 4:12:13 PM

You have to give them credit. Dems do have better cartoonists. (I guess bc pubs stop playing with crayons in childhood, dems never leave thiers.) just kidding fellas

10/27/2008 4:12:58 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Nast



[Edited on October 27, 2008 at 4:24 PM. Reason : +]

10/27/2008 4:14:02 PM

10/27/2008 4:16:44 PM

10/27/2008 6:37:15 PM

^ and, once again, the irony is that you don't even understand your professed enemies(s)

10/27/2008 6:55:40 PM

I'll vote for Obama so that I can sit around and not work all day and collect government handouts. I also feel that we should leave Iraq immediatly because the war is a lost cause and we shouldn't be there. I also want to keep the border open so that anyone who wants to come here can. I don't care that terrorists can sneak in they have the same rights as I do and, even though they want to destroy us and whip us off the map, they are people. I also like the way Obama words his speeches and feel he expresses his emotions better too. Also I think the wealth should be spread around. I plan on having numerous children in the future with different people and want to ensure that I can get rid of one or two if I want to at no charge to myself. I also don't like president Bush.

10/27/2008 9:50:21 PM

I knew you'd come around!

10/27/2008 9:53:50 PM

Quote :

"I like when people politicize hurricanes. So, one of the largest demonstration of inept governing by the Republicans is politicization?"

What..are we letting mayor Nagin and Gov. Blanco off the hook? The Dems have been running Louisiana for..forever. The state should have been a liberal nirvana. The democrat gov't in Louisiana screwed up much more than Bush. (although Bush did screw his part up too).

10/27/2008 10:14:29 PM

^no, b/c its a lot easier to rely on and blame it on the Federal Gov't.

Its just unthinkable for a state to actually handle its own shit.

10/27/2008 10:16:28 PM

8.65/10

10/27/2008 10:50:37 PM

As long as we're all just posting whatever the fuck we feel like saying regardless of truth, may I add that Joe Biden sold me crack?

10/28/2008 12:23:47 AM

Okay, I'll give you "Brownie," for sure.

10/28/2008 12:32:11 AM

^harriet myers?

10/28/2008 12:36:36 AM

Quote :

"Its just unthinkable for a state to actually handle its own shit."

Maybe I am wrong but I assumed we paid federal taxes for things like FEMA, so that when am entire state is completely decimated there will be a Federal Emergency Management Agency, to "manage" the "emergency".

I must have gotten that all screwed up. I guess those tax dollars are supposed to fuel a dumping ground for political cronies with no experience and when an entire region is destroyed it should be left to fend for itself. This should be true even if the majority of government resources in that region are destroyed or immobilized from the disaster.

10/28/2008 12:39:34 AM

The GOP richly deserves its fate. They rode into power in '94 with a great conservative agenda and then got drunk with power. They tried to out-democrat the democrats in a spending frenzy.

The repubs should go sit in the corner and think about what they've done. They should jetison the religious right and get back to being a fiscally conservative party.

Unfortunately, the dems are running someone who will damage our country for years to come. I would prefer Bush-III to Carter-II.

10/28/2008 10:58:06 AM

You like socialists more than fascists.

10/28/2008 12:35:42 PM

Obama Tax Proposal...

$0-$18,891 = $567 tax cut
$18,982-$37,595 = $892 tax cut
$37,596-$66,354 = $1,118 tax cut
$66,355-$111,645 = $1,264 tax cut
$111,646-$160,972 = $2,135 tax cut
$160,973-$226,918 = $2,796 tax cut
$226,919-$603,402 = $121 tax increase
$603,403-$2.87 million = $93,709 tax increase
$2.87 million-plus = $542,882 tax increase

10/28/2008 12:37:37 PM

Quote :

"I would prefer Bush-III to Carter-II."

Uh, why? At least Carter didn't get us into a war. His focus on human rights, though inconsistent, probably saved thousands lives across the world.

10/28/2008 12:41:36 PM

Quote :

"The answer is you either stand to benefit immediately from the thievery OR you like to ignore history, let your emotion rule your intellect, to have a deeply buried hate for the common folk (and the American warrior), AND to live within the doors of the academy (oh, and listen to NPR, love that idiot Keith Olberman, participate in candlelight vigils, and to trap all your farts in a jar to prevent global warming)."

LOL

10/28/2008 12:45:14 PM

Quote :

"I would prefer Bush-III to Carter-II."

And herein lies the problem. You make a great case as to why the GOP deserves to sit one out and then immediately contradict it. Next election that rolls around you'll do exactly the same thing.

It's awfully hard to bench a player that you keep sending in.

10/28/2008 12:51:15 PM

Quote :

"You like socialists more than fascists."

That's like saying you like republicans more than republicans.

10/28/2008 12:55:44 PM

According to Andrew Young, an Obama presidency would free women in Saudi Arabia. No shit. FORAtv daily podcast two days ago.


Seriously, a lot of you Obama supporters are going to be severely disappointed by this man.

10/28/2008 1:05:22 PM

here's why NOT to vote for Obama.

Quote :

"Obama's 'Redistribution' Constitution The courts are poised for a takeover by the judicial left. One of the great unappreciated stories of the past eight years is how thoroughly Senate Democrats thwarted efforts by President Bush to appoint judges to the lower federal courts. Consider the most important lower federal court in the country: the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In his two terms as president, Ronald Reagan appointed eight judges, an average of one a year, to this court. They included Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Kenneth Starr, Larry Silberman, Stephen Williams, James Buckley, Douglas Ginsburg and David Sentelle. In his two terms, George W. Bush was able to name only four: John Roberts, Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith and Brett Kavanaugh. Although two seats on this court are vacant, Bush nominee Peter Keisler has been denied even a committee vote for two years. If Barack Obama wins the presidency, he will almost certainly fill those two vacant seats, the seats of two older Clinton appointees who will retire, and most likely the seats of four older Reagan and George H.W. Bush appointees who may retire as well. The net result is that the legal left will once again have a majority on the nation's most important regulatory court of appeals. The balance will shift as well on almost all of the 12 other federal appeals courts. Nine of the 13 will probably swing to the left if Mr. Obama is elected (not counting the Ninth Circuit, which the left solidly controls today). Circuit majorities are likely at stake in this presidential election for the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal. That includes the federal appeals courts for New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia and virtually every other major center of finance in the country. On the Supreme Court, six of the current nine justices will be 70 years old or older on January 20, 2009. There is a widespread expectation that the next president could make four appointments in just his first term, with maybe two more in a second term. Here too we are poised for heavy change. These numbers ought to raise serious concern because of Mr. Obama's extreme left-wing views about the role of judges. He believes -- and he is quite open about this -- that judges ought to decide cases in light of the empathy they ought to feel for the little guy in any lawsuit. Speaking in July 2007 at a conference of Planned Parenthood, he said: "[W]e need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges." On this view, plaintiffs should usually win against defendants in civil cases; criminals in cases against the police; consumers, employees and stockholders in suits brought against corporations; and citizens in suits brought against the government. Empathy, not justice, ought to be the mission of the federal courts, and the redistribution of wealth should be their mantra. In a Sept. 6, 2001, interview with Chicago Public Radio station WBEZ-FM, Mr. Obama noted that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren "never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society," and "to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical." He also noted that the Court "didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted." That is to say, he noted that the U.S. Constitution as written is only a guarantee of negative liberties from government -- and not an entitlement to a right to welfare or economic justice. This raises the question of whether Mr. Obama can in good faith take the presidential oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" as he must do if he is to take office. Does Mr. Obama support the Constitution as it is written, or does he support amendments to guarantee welfare? Is his provision of a "tax cut" to millions of Americans who currently pay no taxes merely a foreshadowing of constitutional rights to welfare, health care, Social Security, vacation time and the redistribution of wealth? Perhaps the candidate ought to be asked to answer these questions before the election rather than after. Every new federal judge has been required by federal law to take an oath of office in which he swears that he will "administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich." Mr. Obama's emphasis on empathy in essence requires the appointment of judges committed in advance to violating this oath. To the traditional view of justice as a blindfolded person weighing legal claims fairly on a scale, he wants to tear the blindfold off, so the judge can rule for the party he empathizes with most. The legal left wants Americans to imagine that the federal courts are very right-wing now, and that Mr. Obama will merely stem some great right-wing federal judicial tide. The reality is completely different. The federal courts hang in the balance, and it is the left which is poised to capture them. A whole generation of Americans has come of age since the nation experienced the bad judicial appointments and foolish economic and regulatory policy of the Johnson and Carter administrations. If Mr. Obama wins we could possibly see any or all of the following: a federal constitutional right to welfare; a federal constitutional mandate of affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent; a right for government-financed abortions through the third trimester of pregnancy; the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants; ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors; and approval of huge punitive damage awards, like those imposed against tobacco companies, against many legitimate businesses such as those selling fattening food. Nothing less than the very idea of liberty and the rule of law are at stake in this election. We should not let Mr. Obama replace justice with empathy in our nation's courtrooms."

Awesome, I can't wait!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122515067227674187.html

10/28/2008 6:25:48 PM

very nice

10/28/2008 6:27:40 PM

you cant really be serious about a fucking hurricane that hits an area under sea level, fema okay, but the storm... (insert spike lee's racist ass)

economy, last i checked we have a democratic congress

10/28/2008 7:12:57 PM

Let's say, for arguments sake, that the Obama presidency gets off to a rocky start and all the promise and hope of the campaign begins to fade. Will the same people who have piled on Bush, McCain, Cheney, Palin, Rice ... you know the crew ... be able to lampoon the President?

10/30/2008 9:32:07 AM

Quote :

"Obama Tax Proposal... $0-$18,891 = $567 tax cut $18,982-$37,595 = $892 tax cut $37,596-$66,354 = $1,118 tax cut $66,355-$111,645 = $1,264 tax cut $111,646-$160,972 = $2,135 tax cut $160,973-$226,918 = $2,796 tax cut $226,919-$603,402 = $121 tax increase $603,403-$2.87 million = $93,709 tax increase $2.87 million-plus = $542,882 tax increase"

Kainen do you have a source for this?

10/30/2008 9:34:10 AM

Quote :

"Seriously, a lot of you Obama supporters are going to be severely disappointed by this man."

i guess here's to hoping he turns out to be Hitler II for the people who love to loathe him

gotta be one absolute or the other

10/30/2008 9:42:34 AM

Quote :

"Seriously, a lot of you Obama supporters are going to be severely disappointed by this man."

and a lot of you Obama haters who think he's a muslim, a terrorist sympathizer, the Anti-Christ, a socialist, whatever, are going to be "disappointed" when the country doesn't go to hell in a hand basket.

Seriously, though, I have some family members who hate Obama so badly now that I don't think that anything he does could possibly come off as good to them. And there are still a large number of people who literally think Obama is the Anti-Christ. Are any of these people even capable of giving him a fair shot?

10/30/2008 10:18:57 AM

[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 11:04 AM. Reason : ]

10/30/2008 10:38:19 AM

Quote :

"Will the same people who have piled on Bush, McCain, Cheney, Palin, Rice ... you know the crew ... be able to lampoon the President?"

They will, only in a much different way. The jabs are a lot more gentle when it's a democrat president. For instance, during the 1970s, I remember SNL poking fun at Carter. The running gag was that he was too smart for the room, everyone around him was stupid.

In the 1980s, it was switched for Reagan. He was the dolt and everyone around him was smart.

I guess the humor around Obama would be similar to Carter's, with bits about how he is funking up the White House.

10/30/2008 10:47:01 AM

Quote :

"cali_j2004: economy, last i checked we have a democratic congress"

LOL youre kidding right?

we have 6 years of republican rule -- Congress AND the Executive -- and we go from best surplus in history, to the worst deficit in history.

so then lets give it to the Dems and cry that they havent "fixed it" in a year.

jesus.

you aren't really that stupid, are you?




[Edited on October 30, 2008 at 10:54 AM. Reason : ]

10/30/2008 10:54:09 AM

I guarantee you if Obama is as bad of a president as Bush has been, I'll support impeachment as much as I support impeachment of Bush. The only difference would be that there would be nowhere to turn as far as leadership is concerned because both parties would be in the shitter and they would have both proven it. The only thing is, there's no way in hell Obama will be as bad as Bush has been or as bad as McCain would be.

I'll eat my hat if I'm wrong and you can hold me to that.

10/30/2008 11:01:54 AM