OBAMASPIRACY
― congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 5 January 2012 19:15 (twelve years ago) link
oh that is not "obama's piracy" btw
― congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 5 January 2012 19:16 (twelve years ago) link
OBAMA SPI RACY?
― Do you know what the secret of comity is? (Michael White), Thursday, 5 January 2012 19:19 (twelve years ago) link
Obama does have a racy private investigator, though.
― Bon Ivoj (jaymc), Thursday, 5 January 2012 19:21 (twelve years ago) link
Bob Wright c/o Sully:
I think viewing an anti-Romney holy war as the capstone of Gingrich's career gives short shrift to Newt's skills as a hatemonger. After all, Mitt Romney is only one person, and Gingrich has reason to be mad at him. The hallmark of truly vintage Gingrichian toxicity is the fomenting of hatred toward whole groups of people whom Gingrich has no personal reason to dislike. It isn't that he wishes these people ill; it's just that he would profit politically if they were hated more deeply by more people.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/newt-gingrich-a-hater-not-a-quitter/250879/
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 5 January 2012 19:49 (twelve years ago) link
"I don't believe a Massachusetts moderate is in a very good position to debate Barack Obama"--that's it? That's the best you can do? You've got $10 million to burn in the next few weeks. Go find the people who did Hillary's 3:00-in-the-morning ad. I want dark, ominous clouds rolling across the screen...scary morphing...the Castaways' "Liar, Liar" blaring in the background...some truly vintage Gingrichian toxicity. Something. Anything.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/newt-tries-out-his-new-romney-bashing-stump-speech.php?ref=fpb
― clemenza, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:28 (twelve years ago) link
Sorry--the opening's there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8rCy173y7Y
― clemenza, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:30 (twelve years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaK5pebdlXY
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:31 (twelve years ago) link
So really, why don't libs argue for Obama to use the bully pulpit? (My answer wd be that he's not an advocate for lib positions.)
― Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Thursday, January 5, 2012 3:06 PM (6 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
Kev, IIRC, argues for this all the time, among others ITT. It's always when I know the situation is hopeless.
Obama gave a million speeches on issues like healthcare and didn't budge public opinion at all; it still barely passed and most people hate it for the wrong reasons. In fact, most people barely know what's in the bill.
I guess there's an ok track record for Presidents using speeches to scaremonger the country into war. But for major political and social movements and changes it's mostly a fantasy.
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:31 (twelve years ago) link
most of the ppl itt who argue for Obama to use the bully pulpit do not describe themselves as liberals iirc
― Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:33 (twelve years ago) link
oh look Bono likes Santorum
lol catholics
― The Silent Extreme (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, January 5, 2012 5:43 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
I doubt this is a Catholic thing. Remember when Bono bro'd out with Strom Thurmond? If you're willing to work with Bono on anything he'll praise you for it. I also think he disarms these ultra-rightwingers by being so open to their support. I respect him for it.
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:34 (twelve years ago) link
― Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Thursday, January 5, 2012 9:33 PM (55 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
I didn't realize there was anyone itt who wouldn't describe themselves as liberal tbh.
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:35 (twelve years ago) link
progressive != liberal
― Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:35 (twelve years ago) link
I describe myself as smitten by Ginger. That's as much as I'll commit to.
― clemenza, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:36 (twelve years ago) link
square!=rhombus
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:37 (twelve years ago) link
well no, actually a square IS a rhombus
― Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:39 (twelve years ago) link
but is a square is a rhombus!
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:39 (twelve years ago) link
haha crosspost
most progressives vacillate between begrudging affection for liberals & outright hatred of them
― unlistenable in philly (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:40 (twelve years ago) link
bono has never been a catholic, raised in the church of ireland(anglican) iirc
― Best-Penis (buzza), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:40 (twelve years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw
― Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Thursday, January 5, 2012 9:39 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
it's a KIND of rhombus
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:44 (twelve years ago) link
someone getting upset about being called a liberal when really they're a progressive... I dunno bros
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:46 (twelve years ago) link
these are not real stable categories
― goole, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:46 (twelve years ago) link
I mean I say this as a liberaltarian liberal progressive socialist interventionist.
I'd be upset if I was a square tbh
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:47 (twelve years ago) link
but it's hip to be one
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:48 (twelve years ago) link
All squares are rhombuses; not all rhombuses are squares. All Mitts are Romneys (as far as I know); not all Romneys are Mitts.
― clemenza, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:49 (twelve years ago) link
Liberals decided they wanted to be called progressives when they thought the L-word had too much Naive Gullible Ineffectual baggage attached to it. Well, guess what...
― Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:55 (twelve years ago) link
But the senator grimaced when he was introduced, and as Romney delivered his own stump speech, an increasingly impatient McCain pulled up his sleeve and checked his watch. McCain gave his endorsement address without mentioning Romney’s Iowa win until the end. “By the way, we forgot to congratulate him on his landslide victory last night,” he said, laughing. Romney ignored him.
Did McCain "endorse" Romney just to troll him?
― Nicole, Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:55 (twelve years ago) link
another political compass thread
let's split the progressive/liberal hairs here
also LOL @ Nicole's quote
― Bam! Orgasm explosion in your facehole. (DJP), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:56 (twelve years ago) link
btw aero, we need some new lyrics (again) to the Ochs song, I nominate you as this year's Jello Biafra.
― Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 5 January 2012 21:57 (twelve years ago) link
I saw someone else yesterday wonder if McCain's endorsement was consciously meant to hurt Romney...CNN just played 90% of an attack ad against Romney, tried to get Matlin and Brazile to guess who'd put it out (neither could), then played the rest, and of course it was a McCain ad.
― clemenza, Thursday, 5 January 2012 22:02 (twelve years ago) link
― Matt Armstrong, Thursday, January 5, 2012 4:31 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
yah i read some poli sci research somewhere that said in a lot of cases a president can actually hurt his cause via over agressive selling due to obvs partisan factors
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:10 (twelve years ago) link
always thought progressive was just the new word for liberal once the gop machine successfully ruined that brand
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:11 (twelve years ago) link
anyway i like the word progressive, i mean progress yeah who doesnt love progress
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:12 (twelve years ago) link
liberal is cool too, its like do what you want and we will still love you be free be yrself alls good
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:14 (twelve years ago) link
u mean like smartphones? xp
― Dr Morbois de Bologne (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:14 (twelve years ago) link
conservative, yuck no fun daddyo
yes like smartphone who doesnt love a good smart phone u can do whatever you want on there
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:15 (twelve years ago) link
admire this mans balls
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/santorum-gets-into-testy-debate-on-gay-marriage/?hp
The session ended with many of the students booing Mr. Santorum as he left for his next event.
It takes a man willing to take risks or a total idiot to show up to an event and have the shit booed out of him...
― strongly recommend. unless you're a bitch (mayor jingleberries), Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:51 (twelve years ago) link
well he was well known to be the stupidest senator
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:56 (twelve years ago) link
also he brought his stillborn child home and cuddled on it w/his family for a couple hours
― lag∞n, Thursday, 5 January 2012 23:57 (twelve years ago) link
i can't believe he has a law degree. he gets asked about why he opposes two men getting married, and repeatedly deflects to asking about what the questioner thinks about 3 or more men getting married? what? comparing his approach to the Socratic method, like the NYT does in that article, is just absurd.
― your pain is probably equal (Z S), Friday, 6 January 2012 00:04 (twelve years ago) link
tbf Socrates would've totally married three men
― The Silent Extreme (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 6 January 2012 00:05 (twelve years ago) link
I might too on a Thursday.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 6 January 2012 00:06 (twelve years ago) link
Socrates: may we do evil?Crito: of course not, Socrates.Socrates: so you're saying that no men ever do evil?Crito: what? no, I would never say that, you must-Socrates: and so you agree that all men must do as their masters command, even if the command is evil?Crito: i'm not following what you're-Socrates: we're going to have a civilized discussion here, ok?
― your pain is probably equal (Z S), Friday, 6 January 2012 00:09 (twelve years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76p_ncbffCE
― strongly recommend. unless you're a bitch (mayor jingleberries), Friday, 6 January 2012 00:09 (twelve years ago) link
itt socrates is waaaaaasted
Nah, Shakey. Socrates had a pretty conventional marriage to Xantippe and fathered some kids with her. According to Plato's Symposium (Xenophon wrote one, too) Socrates spurned Alkibiades's sexual advances. So, not much evidence for your assertion there.
― Aimless, Friday, 6 January 2012 00:12 (twelve years ago) link