Quote:


Dude you're soooo single aren't you?

monkey_man wrote on Apr 8^th, 2009 at 3:52pm:

Again...huh?

Some Guy wrote on Apr 8^th, 2009 at 4:06pm:

Everybody calm down now. It's only another 197 weeks of Obalama.

**************NEWSFLASH***********

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20090401/capt.773ffd671ed94927aa537d663380c4cd.britain_...

The White House has stated today that President Obama did not bow to the head of Saudi Arabia.  According to the White House Press Secretary Gibbs, Obama was simply trying to blow his eminence.

Glad he cleared that up!

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korean soldiers on Wednesday celebrated the nation's defiant launch of a rocket in a mass rally, while Russia's foreign minister said any new measures to punish Pyongyang could be counter-productive.

The United States, Japan and South Korea said the North's launch on Sunday was a disguised test of a long-range missile designed to carry warheads to U.S. territory and deserved punishment because it violated U.N. resolutions.

North Korea warned the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday it would take "strong steps" if the 15-nation body took any action in response to the launch. On Wednesday, the Communist-ruled country gathered its top party and military officials for a celebration of the launch broadcast on its state TV and monitored in Seoul.

The reclusive state has threatened to boycott six-nation nuclear disarmament talks and restart a plant that makes bomb-grade plutonium. It also warned on Wednesday of military action if anyone tried to retrieve debris from the rocket.

U.S. and South Korean military officials said the missile, known as the Taepodong-2, crashed into the Pacific Ocean and that no satellite was deployed during its 3,200 km (2,000 mile) flight over Japan, as Pyongyang has said.

The North's KCNA news agency quoted a military spokesman as saying Japan's attempt to find booster stages off its coasts was "an intolerable military provocative act of infringing upon its (North Korea's) sovereignty" and would prompt a response.

DEADLOCK AT U.N.

Diplomats in New York said negotiations on a Security Council response to the launch were deadlocked. The five permanent council members -- United States, Britain, France, China and Russia -- and Japan have failed to break the impasse in several meetings.

The United States and Japan would like a legally binding resolution expanding existing financial sanctions and an arms embargo against North Korea. Critics have said the sanctions lacked enforcement.

But U.N. diplomats say the Chinese would prefer that the council either do nothing or issue a non-binding statement to the media that stops far short of condemning the launch. Japan and the three Western powers have rejected that idea.

U.S. State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters on Wednesday "there are some differences of opinion" when asked why the Council had not yet responded to the launch.

"It's going to take time," he said about the negotiations in New York. "I can't put a timeframe on it."

------------

"Deadlock at UN"

Isn't that redundant?

Riffhard wrote on Apr 8^th, 2009 at 6:30pm:

This is an excellent rant, so I thought I'd post it here. Maybe some of you missed it.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/4/8/717683/-Dear-Conservative-Teabaggers



Dear Conservative Teabaggers

by Hunter
Wed Apr 08, 2009 at 02:20:04 PM PDT

Nobody is trying to stop you from holding your "tea parties." Please stop saying you're oppressed when you're clearly not oppressed. You want to have a tea party? Go ahead! Get to it! Take to the streets, pleasantly aromatic baggies in hand!

We've had a president who decided that he could revoke the citizenship of Americans based on his own say-so -- and no conservatives were worried about their loss of rights. We've had a government assert that it could spy on any communications, without warrant or cause -- and no conservatives took to the streets, alarmed at the threat to their Constitutional protections. We found out we went to war over a weapons program that didn't exist -- oops. We found out that we subjected innocent, though brown, people to imprisonment without recourse, and others to torture so cruel that it rendered them mentally incompetent. We buried the nation in a mountain of debt -- well, them's the breaks. We forked over billions of dollars in giveaways to oil companies that were already making larger profits than any other companies in the history of the world -- hell, gotta keep John Galt in caviar. None of it raised a peep from any of you, you were all fine with it. The government could do no wrong -- except not going far enough.

But if returning to the tax policies that existed before Bush is the thing that's got a bee in your bonnet, claiming the end of the republic is at hand -- go for it. If you've suddenly decided that preventing government efforts to stave off a second Great Depression is the thing you're going to hang your collective hats on, or that saving one of the prime manufacturing sectors still left in the country is a bridge too far, by all means protest. Who's stopping you? Who's intimidating you?


On the contrary, the rest of us find your "tea bagging" to be superbly instructive. It's increasing taxes that gets your goat, and absolutely nothing else. The only Constitutional crisis possible is one that might possibly affect your wallet; offenses to other people's freedoms don't rouse a tenth of the same emotion.

And it stands as a dramatic act of solidarity with conservative leaders in government. Bloviate at every opportunity; remain steadfastly in opposition to everything; suggest nothing; claim that it is not even your responsibility to suggest anything. Like House and Senate Republicans, who have declared sitting on their hands to be an act of supreme virtue and who, when pressed, can only come up with a few terse pages of declarations that the only path forward is to give big businesses more tax breaks, and rich Americans more tax breaks, and eliminate even more regulations on financial behavior -- and that will work this time for sure, in spite of those same exact things bringing the country debt and corruption every other time they have been tried, finally leading to this current brink of economic ruin. No, it seems hard to compete with any acts of leadership as impressive as that.

So teabag your little hearts out, my noble friends! Take to the streets, and demand the conservative dream -- absolute inaction on every front! Turn the economic crisis into an opportunity to finally, at long last, give a damn about the actions of your leaders, who we have just now noticed might be of an opposing political party! Yes, take to the streets on behalf of the John Galts of the world: that's what Fox News Corporation has told you to do, and what the stock traders of CNBC demand of you! Take a day off work and wave those little white bags so that an executive responsible for financial crisis will not find their yearly bonus jeopardized by scandalous government intervention, or people making one hundred times your annual income will not be taxed a Stalinesque three percent more (marginal rate) than they presently are! Throw your little pouches of aromatic leaves high into the air, shout your grievances, demand the factories close and the government remain unresponsive, because that's what conservatives everywhere want to see!

By all means.

And then there's this. How well do you think most Americans are going to welcome this news?



Now why would Barry want to legalize so many currently illegal immigrants? Gee, do you think he may be looking to garner a permanent majority by promising these folks citizenship and all the tax paying benefits that go with it? Taxpaying benefits that we are going to have to pay for by the way! More spending on the way! Not to mention the radical reorganization of the American society just fit this fucking ideologue's plan for more and more power. And you're okay with this?


Riffy

fuman wrote on Apr 8^th, 2009 at 9:53pm:



Hispanics? Funman this may come as a shock to you but most legally immigrated Hispanics are against the blanket amnesty that Barry is planning. Not only are most legal immigrants against it but so too are most Americans in general. Don't you remember the Shamnesty Bill that Pelosi and Reid tried to push through two years ago?!

Now do you honestly think that these current illegals are going to vote against their own self interests? Of course not! They are going to vote for the party that promises them the most freebies! Which party would typically have no problem taxing the country into massive debt just to get a permanent majority?

Are you really as naive as you post? This is a political move funman! Nothing more, and nothing less. Barry knows full well that the American people have spoken out loudly against amnesty, but Barry sees a power play with an additional 12-15 million Democrat votes should he get this insanity pushed through congress.


But to answer your question, no. Most Hispanics voted for Obama in 2008.



Riffy

Zippy the pinhead strikes again:

Aides to former President George W. Bush are challenging the veracity of Vice President Joe Biden's claim this week of having privately castigated Bush, who does not remember the incident or an earlier episode in which Biden claims to have similarly rebuked Bush.

Biden spokesman Jay Carney declined to specify the dates of his boss's purported Oval Office scoldings of Bush. Nor would he provide witnesses or notes to corroborate the episodes.

"The vice president stands by his remarks," Carney told FOX News without elaboration.
Those remarks include a shot that Biden took at Bush on Tuesday.

"I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office," Biden told CNN, "'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said: 'Mr. President, turn and around look behind you. No one is following.'"

That exchange never took place, according to numerous Bush aides who also dispute a similar assertion by Biden in 2004, when the former senator from Delaware told scores of Democratic colleagues that he had challenged Bush's moral certitude about the Iraq war during a private meeting in the Oval Office. Two years later, Biden repeated his story about dressing down the president.

"When I speak to the president - and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff," Biden said on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April 2006. "And the president will say things to me, and I'll literally turn to the president, say: 'Mr. President, how can you say that, knowing you don't know the facts?' And he'll look at me and he'll say - my word - he'll look at me and he'll say: 'My instincts.' He said: 'I have good instincts.' I said: 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough.'"

Bush aides now dispute the veracity of both assertions by Biden.

"I never recall Biden saying any of that," former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said after reviewing detailed notes of Bush's White House meetings with Biden, which include numerous direct quotes from Biden. "I find it odd that he said he met with him alone all the time. I don't think that's true."

Fleischer said that whenever Bush met with Sen. Biden, the meeting also included a congressional counterpart so as to not "antagonize" the House.

Karl Rove, former White House political adviser, also was skeptical of Biden's claim to have spent "a lot of hours alone" with Bush.

"I remember checking on such a Biden exaggeration while at the White House and no one witnessed the meeting and his comments in remotely the same way," Rove said.

Candida P. Wolff, Bush's White House liaison to Capitol Hill, said the only meetings she remembered between Bush and Biden also included other lawmakers. She said such meetings were held in the Cabinet Room or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, not the Oval Office, and certainly did not last for "hours."

"The president would never sit through two hours of Joe Biden," Wolff said. "I don't ever remember Biden being in the Oval. He was such a blowhard on all that stuff - there wasn't a reason to bring him in."

Andy Card, former White House chief of staff, reviewed the two Biden claims and said: "This does not ring true to me. I doubt that it happened."

A spokesman for Bush declined comment, although a person close to the former president said Bush does not remember either episode.

This is not the first time the veracity of Biden's assertions has been challenged. In 1988, he dropped out of the presidential race after being accused of plagiarizing British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock. The Washington Post also cited "the senator's boastful exaggerations of his academic record."

Last year, liberal Slate magazine recalled that "Biden's misdeeds encompassed numerous self-aggrandizing thefts, misstatements, and exaggerations that seemed to point to a serious character defect."

Also last year, Biden came under fire for telling a questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq.

"Let's start telling the truth," Biden said during a presidential primary debate sponsored by YouTube in July. "Number one, you take all the troops out -- you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."

But when questioned about the episode afterward by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled from his claim of being "shot at" and instead allowed: "I was near where a shot landed."

Biden went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

"No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

Seven weeks after claiming to have been "shot at" in Iraq, Biden again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones -- this time on "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where my helicopter was forced down."

"If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at 10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February 2008. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

"We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
--------------



"America, my lil' teleprompter buddy here wants me to tell you that maybe I made a mistake in picking this delusional idiot as my VP"

Riffhard wrote on Apr 8^th, 2009 at 9:08pm:


riffmoof

that poll is as scientific as the thread view's for the JB birthday thread. about six people are reading that thread...but some of the six think it is funny to run up the thread view count by hitting refresh a ton of times.

fuman wrote on Apr 8^th, 2009 at 9:53pm:

This is nonsensical. How would you prevent more illegals from hopping the fence if we legalize those who already did it? This is why more & more people are against amnesties for those people. It simply doesn't work.


Regarding the hapless Obalama foreign policy: it's Carter Part Deux. As awful & ineffectual as the 1st time around. I'd love to take a 4 year nap.