Quote :

"McCrory Campaign Illegally Coordinated with Independent Expenditure Committee A top official of Pat McCrory's campaign for governor was involved in setting up a purportedly "independent" political committee that spent $625,000 in an unsuccessful effort to help McCrory win the 2008 gubernatorial election, according to a complaint filed this week by North Carolina Democratic Party Executive Director Andrew Whalen. According to the committee's organizational report submitted to the State Board of Elections, ten individuals from Illinois, Georgia, Indiana and Texas contributed a total of $77,400 in May 2008 to launch the RGA North Carolina 2008 Committee. All ten had ties to McCrory campaign manager Richard Hudson and his now fiancée, Renee Howell. The RGA North Carolina 2008 Committee was organized on May 5th, just one month before news reports first identified Hudson as McCrory's campaign manager. The ten initial contributions were made between May 5th and 12th. State law allows independent expenditure political committees to make large expenditures to influence the outcome of an election only if those expenditures are made independently of the candidate who benefits from them. Under state law, an expenditure is not independent if it is made "with the cooperation or prior consent of, or in consultation with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate or candidate's agent." Illegal coordination between a candidate and those conducting an independent expenditure on his or her behalf could greatly improve the candidate's chances for victory by assuring that both entities use their money in ways that are most beneficial to the candidate. "It seems implausible that all of these incestuous connections are merely a coincidence," said NC Democratic Party executive director Andrew Whalen. "There needs to be a full investigation by the State Board of Elections or other authorities of the relationship between McCrory's campaign and this supposedly independent committee. Now that all these relationships have come to light, that committee doesn't appear to be so independent.""

-NCDP

5/1/2010 1:27:40 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p_1E5d5bfE

Quote :

"This is video of Florida State Senator Mike Bennett viewing a pornographic image on his Senate-issued laptop computer during the second to last day of session. He says it was an unexpected email from a woman he knows. See the video for yourself. (black sensor bar added by Sunshine State News)"

Apparently I don’t know the right women, because no one ever sends me n00ds.

5/3/2010 9:09:38 PM

Hey there's nothing racist about that arizona immigration la-

Quote :

"Don Black is a Florida-based white supremacist who is banned from the UK for inciting hatred. Arizona State Senate Majority leader Chuck Gray—a proponent of the recent immigration bill—follows him, and another white power feed, on Twitter."

http://gawker.com/5529952/arizona-republican-leader-follows-white-supremacist

5/3/2010 10:53:34 PM

Go figure the top GOP nominee joins teh corruption party along with an already rotten to the core NC democratic leadership team of the leaving Mike Easley and newly elected Bev Perdue.

5/3/2010 11:33:01 PM

GOPish.... ?

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0504/christian-leader-caught-rent-boy-needed-luggage/

5/4/2010 4:02:27 PM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704247904575240812672173820.html

guess we can wrap this thread up

5/13/2010 2:57:11 PM

5/13/2010 4:05:49 PM

^^ OH SHIT the wall street journal thinks the republicans are gaining support?

5/13/2010 7:09:01 PM

http://gawker.com/5540073/this-campaign-ad-is-the-most-american-thing-ever-made

Is this guy for real? It looks like a Daily Show parody.

5/16/2010 10:35:59 PM

^haha, I came in here to post that. I love when he just randomly pulls that rifle out of nowhere.

5/17/2010 9:01:04 AM

Quote :

"Indiana Rep. Mark Souder (R) will resign his congressional seat after an affair with a staffer came to light, he said in a statement this morning. "It is with great regret I announce that I am resigning from the U.S. House of Representatives as well as resigning as the Republican nominee for Congress in this fall's election," said Souder. "I sinned against my God, my wife and my family by having a mutual relationship with a part time member of my staff," added Souder. "I am so shamed to have hurt those I love." The revelations regarding Souder come two weeks after he survived a serious primary challenge from car dealer Bob Thomas who spent considerable sums of his own money on the race. Souder won the primary with less than 50 percent of the vote. How Souder will be replaced on the ballot remains to be seen. State Republican officials suggested that a replacement could be chosen at the state convention next month. Souder joins a succession of Members of Congress embroiled in sex scandals in recent years, including Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.), Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) and Sen. David Vitter (R-La.). Massa resigned, while Ensign and Vitter are still serving in the Senate. Souder was elected in the GOP wave election of 1994. He represents the Fort Wayne area in northeast Indiana. "

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/house/mark-souder-to-resign.html

5/18/2010 9:52:57 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37237288/ns/politics/

Quote :

"WASHINGTON - It was strike two for a major science funding bill Wednesday as House Republicans again united to derail legislation they said was too expensive. Going down to defeat was legislation that would have committed more than $40 billion over three years to boost funding for the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies involved in basic and applied science, provided loan guarantees to small businesses developing new technologies and promoted science and math education. Congress enacted a first version of the legislation in 2007 with a large majority in the House and a unanimous vote in the Senate."

Quote :

"Last week Republicans forced Democrats to pull the bill, H.R. 5325, from the floor by pushing through an amendment that combined substantial cuts to many of the main initiatives in the bill with a provision cracking down on federal workers caught viewing pornography on their office computers. Many Democrats, fearful that a vote against an anti-pornography measure could be used against them in election ads, went along with the GOP amendment."

The GOP tried to make the health care reform bill about Viagra for criminals, and now they are trying to make the math/science/technology bill about pornography.

5/20/2010 12:54:02 PM

D'Annunzio v. Fetzer... NC GOP are rumbling:



http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/05/23/1452353/top-gop-leaders-line-up-against.html

Quote :

" Republican Party leaders have escalated an unprecedented campaign against one of their own congressional candidates, with N.C. GOP chairman Tom Fetzer calling Tim D'Annunzio "unfit for public office at any level." Fetzer's remarks came after copies of D'Annunzio's court records were circulated among party officials in Raleigh and Washington. D'Annunzio finished first in the May 4 primary. But his party has since gone to increasing lengths to portray him as unelectable. "By my personal observation of his behavior, and by acquaintance with his record and background, I consider Mr. D'Annunzio unfit for public office at any level," said Fetzer. "What he could do to the party as our nominee is secondary in my view to what he could do to the country if he got elected. If he got elected, for crying out loud, that would be a disaster.""

5/26/2010 8:53:01 PM

http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-01/second-video-surfaces-of-senate-candidate-kirk-making-false-military-claim.html

Quote :

"Another video featuring U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kirk of Illinois making false claims of being the U.S. Navy’s intelligence officer of the year has surfaced as he campaigns for a seat once held by President Barack Obama. Kirk, a five-term Republican congressman and Navy reservist from Chicago’s northern suburbs, said last week that the 1999 award was actually given to an ad-hoc intelligence team he created and ran, not to him individually. "

6/1/2010 10:22:52 PM

"Batshit" Bachmann complains that government isn't big enough:

Quote :

"The administration, they were hands off. They didn't do anything. Where were the boats that could have been commandeered by the government to be sent into this region to deal with that oil plume as it was coming up to the water and destroying marine life? Nowhere to be found. Why? The administration was hands off on this policy."

The woman who advocated refusing to respond to the census because the government was being too intrusive is now complaining that Obama didn't commandeer private boats to "deal with that oil plume".

wow, gg GOP

6/2/2010 9:26:02 AM

Quote :

"Lexington state Sen. Jake Knotts called political rival and Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley a “raghead” on an Internet political talk show Thursday evening. The term is a slur typically used against Arabs or other ethnic groups who wear turbans or headdresses. Haley, a state representative from Lexington, is the child of Indian immigrants. “We already got one raghead in the White House,” Knotts said. “We don’t need another in the Governor’s Mansion.” Knotts said his comments were meant as humor. “My ‘raghead’ comments about Obama and Haley were intended in jest,” Knotts said in a statement. “Bear in mind that this is a freewheeling, anything-goes Internet radio show that is broadcast from a pub. It’s like local political version of ‘Saturday Night Live.’ “Since my intended humorous context was lost in translation, I apologize. I still believe Ms. Haley is pretending to be someone she is not, much as Obama did, but I apologize to both for an unintended slur.”"

http://www.thestate.com/2010/06/03/1315978/knotts-uses-slur-to-describe-haley.html

That's quite an apology there.

6/4/2010 11:23:31 AM

Especially considering exactly what he's said.

http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat=1992209084141467&act=post&pid=11860406103619087

Quote :

" “She’s a f#!king raghead,” Knotts said. He later clarified his statement. He did not mean to use the F-word. Knotts says he believed Haley has been set up by a network of Sikhs and was programmed to run for governor of South Carolina by outside influences in foreign countries. He claims she is hiding her religion and he wants the voters to know about it. “We got a raghead in Washington; we don’t need one in South Carolina,” Knotts said more than once. “She’s a raghead that’s ashamed of her religion trying to hide it behind being Methodist for political reasons.”"

Later in the article

Quote :

" After the broadcast, Knotts stood in a corner on the deck of the bar and defended his remarks. “This isn’t the first time I’ve said it,” Knotts said. “I’m not on a crusade to downgrade her, but if someone asks me I’ll tell ‘em. And look here, someone wants to vote for her knowing the truth, vote for her.” Knotts said that South Carolina is a religious community. “We need a good Christian to be our governor,” he said. “She’s hiding her religion. She ought to be proud of it. I’m proud of my god.” Knotts says he believes Haley’s father has been sending letters to India saying that Haley is the first Sikh running for high office in America. He says her father walks around Lexington wearing a turban. "

OH NOES HE WEARS A TURBAN!!!! That can only mean one of two things, he's a terrorist or he's hiding Voldemort.

[Edited on June 5, 2010 at 12:40 PM. Reason : Yeah, I went there.]

6/5/2010 12:39:38 PM

awww jeez. >.<

6/5/2010 1:43:17 PM

That feels more like a "stupid, backward South Carolinian" story than anything else.

6/5/2010 1:46:13 PM

"What is wrong with the new law on immigration in Arizona?"

"We ought to pass the same exact fair law."
-Pat McCrory 6/5/2010

6/6/2010 1:12:41 PM

again, its basically the same as the existing federal law. whats the difference if every state passes it? i still fail to see the big deal. the people frothing at the mouth about it should be in Obama's face just as much.

6/6/2010 10:35:58 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Catherine Crabill (R). She is running for a Republican nomination for US Congress from Virginia's 1st congressional district.

6/8/2010 11:50:00 AM

Quote :

"Voters endorsed incumbents of both parties in Congressional primaries in New Jersey on Tuesday, ending conservatives’ hopes that Tea Party candidates would motivate anti-establishment voters."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/nyregion/09jersey.html

Good for the GOP... support that status quo!

6/9/2010 10:57:39 AM

Quote :

"OH NOES HE WEARS A TURBAN!!!!"

ALSO

HINDUS AND MUSLIMS LIKE THE SHIT OUT OF EACH OTHER

right?

6/9/2010 11:00:44 AM

http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/john-mccain-i-would-never-tax-snookis-tanning-bed/?hpt=T3

6/10/2010 5:05:14 PM

lol I think that's funny, even if it probably wasn't him

"u r right"

6/10/2010 5:29:28 PM

http://bluenc.com/nc-republicans-and-their-warped-ideology#new

Quote :

" Could a 30-day waiting period for marriages performed by magistrates be in North Carolina’s future? Rep. Bill Current, R-Gaston, said he hopes the idea results in making marriages stronger. “Most ministers won’t marry you unless they talk to you for a while,” Current said, explaining why the suggestion wouldn’t put a similar requirement on ministers. Current said that local and state officials spend a lot of time trying to fix problems that are a result of marriages falling apart."

Quote :

" Not only will this bill (if and when it's written) curtail freedoms by imposing such restrictions, it also shows preference to religious entities over secular ones. And on top of that, it adds an additional cost (marriage counseling fees) onto the shoulders of young couples."

6/14/2010 5:56:10 PM

That's the problem that comes about when you think marriage is a privilege provided by the government, rather than a right. I bet some of these same "conservatives" rail against government power grabbing, but see no problem with it when it supports their bigotry.

6/14/2010 6:58:48 PM

Quote :

""I'm ashamed of what happened in the White House yesterday," said Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.) during a hearing on Thursday morning with BP's CEO Tony Hayward." I think it is a tragedy in the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a shakedown -- in this case a $20 billion shakedown -- with the attorney general of the United States, who is legitimately conducting a criminal investigation and has every right to do so to protect the American people, participating in what amounts to a $20 billion slush fund that's unprecedented in our nation's history, which has no legal standing, which I think sets a terrible precedent for our nation's future." "I'm only speaking for myself. I'm not speaking for anyone else, but I apologize," Barton added. "I do not want to live in a county where anytime a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong, [it is] subject to some sort of political pressure that, again, in my words, amounts to a shakedown.""

6/17/2010 12:28:11 PM

GOP: Where we protect large companies instead of hard-working, blue-collar Americans.

6/17/2010 12:37:26 PM

What blue collar Americans? There aren't any left.

6/17/2010 1:27:40 PM

Sorry, I didn't use the GOP term...

What I meant to say was

GOP: Where we protect large companies instead of REAL America.

6/17/2010 1:29:27 PM

They protect the part of america that's worth protecting.

6/17/2010 2:03:29 PM

Quote :

"The Tea Party movement, of which Paul is both a leader and beneficiary, feeds the comforting illusion that we can have all we've come to expect from government without paying for it. We buy into this illusion at our own peril. "

Read more: http://www.kentucky.com/2010/06/16/1309158/rand-pauls-ideas-crash-into-reality.html#ixzz0r9U6ECAV

6/17/2010 6:27:08 PM

Quote :

"What blue collar Americans?"

Good, we needed to start using the world's unskilled labor and start forcing our workforce to take advantage of the opportunity they have to start making themselves more productive.

6/17/2010 8:20:50 PM

^^...right. If anyone got that from Rand Paul's message, they already made up their mind beforehand. There's no way Rand Paul thinks we can have everything the government promises without paying for it. We can't even pay for it in the first place. We have no money. The hand outs will either come to an end, or they eventually won't be worth anything. There's no reforming our way out of this one.

The fact that Rand Paul gets paid through Medicare or Medicaid means nothing. I'm a libertarian, and I don't believe in the government giving out money. Guess what, though? If the government offers to create some money for me, I would gladly take it. I can use the money. I would disagree with the decision to do it, but I would be forced to act in my own self-interest. No doctor is going to be able to get by without taking Medicare, and why would they? What would be the benefit? The government and health care are so intertwined at this point that you just have to play the system to make a living.

Another example is government subsidized student loans. I don't think there should be such a thing, yet I myself took out a subsidized loan. Is that inconsistent of me? Should I have said, "No, I'm going to take a private loan, at higher interest, out of principle!" That would be fucking retarded. It wouldn't fix the problem, it would just make me poorer. When there's an incentive to do the wrong thing, that's called a moral hazard, and we have plenty of it in this country to go around.

The point, which I've seen brought up so many times, is, "hey, you benefited from government subsidies or funding! therefore, you can't be against those subsidies in principle!" It's a fallacy, and it doesn't work. Paul would rather there not be Medicare, but he also acknowledges that it's here, and for the time being, it's necessary. That doesn't mean we should keep it forever. We have to get rid of it eventually, because it's bankrupting us.

6/17/2010 9:05:00 PM

So you're advocating having principles and choosing to ignore them because your self-interest is more important?

You know what that makes him? One more idiot politician that talks out of both sides of his mouth. He's a hero to no one.

6/17/2010 9:09:37 PM

He's not ignoring his principles. The fact that you think he is shows that you don't understand his positions, or even the issue at hand.

Here's an example of a principle he might have: There shouldn't be Medicare. Pretty simple. I agree with him. The reality is that we do have Medicare, and it has severely distorted the health care market. He, like most Americans, is forced to pay into the failing system. Medicare, along with other problems within the tax code, has driven up the cost of health care substantially. Most doctors get a large percentage of their payment through Medicare. Almost all of them get it through some sort of insurance program. Rand Paul is not saying, "There shouldn't be Medicare, and no one should be taking advantage of it in its current form." If he was, then he would be ignoring his principles. If it's there, it's going to get used. His point is that we should move towards a health care system without Medicare. That's an ideal. We're not to that point yet.

[Edited on June 17, 2010 at 9:22 PM. Reason : ]

6/17/2010 9:18:54 PM

^ The issue is, if the article is accurate, that Rand Paul is not merely just taking the medicare, he's supports the medicare system.

6/17/2010 9:32:37 PM

He opposed cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, but that makes perfect sense. We've nurtured a culture of dependency. There are old and disabled people that depend on Medicare and Medicaid for survival. The question is whether or not Medicare, in its current form, is sustainable. If asked whether or not Medicare should have been created to begin with, I'm sure he'd say it shouldn't have been, and that the federal government had no authority to do so. It's just not practical to scrap the whole thing at once, though. Now it's a matter of getting rid of Medicare without having people die in streets at the same time.

6/17/2010 9:42:34 PM

Quote :

"He opposed cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, but that makes perfect sense. ... Now it's a matter of getting rid of Medicare without having people die in streets at the same time."

How does that make any sense, at all?

This is the issue with the right... they'll scream at the top of their lungs about how taxes and services are socialism and fascist, etc., but when it comes time to do something about it, they don't.

How do you expect to get people off medicare, without cutting medicare? I hate to use cliches, but you can't make an omlet without breaking some eggs.

If the right really believed in any of their small government BS rhetoric, they'd be able to stand up to the AARP and curtail social security (the real culprit for our budget woes) and medicare and medicaid. Instead, their policies over the past several years have done nothing to help the majority of Americans and has only served to increase the wealth gap under the feigned guise of being in support of "smaller government" all the while congressional officials feel more polarized and are less likely to try and cooperate to reach real solutions.

[Edited on June 17, 2010 at 10:05 PM. Reason : ]

6/17/2010 10:02:21 PM

Two words can fix social security: Need based.

But it'll never happen

6/17/2010 10:07:08 PM

Quote :

"How do you expect to get people off medicare, without cutting medicare? I hate to use cliches, but you can't make an omlet without breaking some eggs."

You wouldn't cut it for the people currently benefiting from Medicare. You'd phase it out. The younger generations, that aren't going to get anything anyway, would pay into the system and get no return, while the people that are dependent on it would still get their payments. No matter what we do about it, people our age are screwed, but we might as well accept it and figure how to move on.

Quote :

"If the right really believed in any of their small government BS rhetoric, they'd be able to stand up to the AARP and curtail social security (the real culprit for our budget woes) and medicare and medicaid. Instead, their policies over the past several years have done nothing to help the majority of Americans and has only served to increase the wealth gap under the feigned guise of being in support of "smaller government" all the while congressional officials feel more polarized and are less likely to try and cooperate to reach real solutions."

This goes back to the same point, but you can't simply cut SS and Medicare. Even Ron Paul isn't suggesting we do that. It wouldn't be right, but it's also not right to enslave future generations to a state-sanctioned ponzi scheme.

I don't disagree that most of these alleged "small government" conservatives end up growing government. The problem is that once a government department, program, or law comes into existence, it's almost impossible to get rid of. Shrinking government takes a lot of balls on the part of politicians. Most of them do not have balls. They're concerned with kicking the can along and winning the next election.

Imagine the current Congress coming into session and getting serious about fixing the budget deficit. How absurd would that be? I mean, there would have to be massive cuts to big parts of government. We're talking about abandoning and selling dozens of military bases, and probably bringing down troops sizes. That'd be the easiest thing to cut. Past that, though, where are we going to make up the balance? Entitlements are the biggest chunk of the budget, at this point. No one wants to cut any of those. Unemployment/welfare (often claimed to be an insignificant portion of the budget) isn't a popular thing to cut. No matter how you look at it, cutting things is not popular, and taxing people to cover the deficit isn't popular. The only real option, to politicians, is to borrow the money. It's akin to a house wife going off to the store and maxing out a credit card, without a concern in the world for how the principle or interest will be paid. Of course, there's a limit to how much can be put on a credit card. For Congress, there is no limit. There's a debt ceiling, but they just vote to increase it every time we get close.

6/18/2010 12:39:03 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/02/george-bush-worse-richard-nixon-president-poll
George Bush was worse than Richard Nixon says president poll

7/1/2010 9:14:25 PM

7/2/2010 11:04:58 AM

Quote :

"George Bush was worse than Richard Nixon says president poll"

The poll also puts Obama at #15.. It ranks his prior experience level above Ronald Reagan. So I think we know where this small New York college is coming from.

7/2/2010 11:14:10 AM

Ronald Reagan's years as a Hollywood actor definitely bumps his credibility as a politician.

7/2/2010 1:07:13 PM

^ In fairness to Reagan, he wasn't just an actor. He held multiple positions with the Screen Actors Guild and was even the organization's president for a number of years, during which time he dealt with important related issues such as labor-management disputes, the Taft-Hartley Act, the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) hearings, and Hollywood blacklisting. In addition, Reagan was a U.S. military officer and a two-term governor of one of the largest and most populous states in the nation.

That's much more executive experience than Obama brought to the table.

7/2/2010 1:24:54 PM

^ the Smoot-Hawley Tariff??

thafuckyoutalkinboutwillis?





[Edited on July 2, 2010 at 4:04 PM. Reason : ]

7/2/2010 4:03:45 PM

Hawaii's House & Senate passed a civil unions bill. The republican governor just vetoed it despite support by a majority of the public there according to the polling.

7/6/2010 9:21:41 PM