"Stay Classy" Politicians

E

egofed

CAGiversary!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/30013.html

Borrowing .43 cent of every dollar spent, yet spending "$2,993 in taxpayer money on flowers between June and October." R's and D's living it up on the taxpayer dime. Dems say we have no spending problem, while Repubs shout fiscal conservatism while "House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) spent about $24,116 on food and beverage." Flowers for funerals and food/drink should come out of your grossly over inflated salaries in any case, but especially when we are in such crazy debt and have had our credit rating downgraded twice for the first time in our history.
 
[quote name='berzirk']I touch myself while I think of ponies that shit rainbows.[/QUOTE]

tumblr_m5qf8nssHo1qbaj4uo1_500.gif

1344150857449.gif

the-rock-clapping.gif

u8awa.gif


You earned these...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's just the tip of the iceberg though. We're to the point where these yokels aren't even worried about hiding this kind of taxpayer abuse. This is what they show us.
 
If I were president I wouldn't use a bunch of top shelf pens to sign a bill into law. I'd use a Bic pen and sign it in my underwear without the pomp and circumstance and 50 children standing around you. Cutting spending should start from the top.
 
[quote name='egofed']have had our credit rating downgraded twice for the first time in our history.[/QUOTE]

By the same groups that rated subprime-mortgage stuffed collateralized debt obligations as "Triple-A."

Whoopee-doo. Why do we worship at the altar of fiscal snake oil salesmen?

BTW, this thread should be "BOTH PARTIES DO IT HURR DURR," since that appears to be what you want to try to convey here. We are currently lacking in terms of vital judge positions, no head of the ATF, no head of the CFPB (and also CFTC, if I'm not mistaken) - and we currently do not have a secretary of defense. Perhaps you can point to when Democrats obstructed to the same degree. I look forward to it.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']By the same groups that rated subprime-mortgage stuffed collateralized debt obligations as "Triple-A."

Whoopee-doo. Why do we worship at the altar of fiscal snake oil salesmen?

BTW, this thread should be "BOTH PARTIES DO IT HURR DURR," since that appears to be what you want to try to convey here. We are currently lacking in terms of vital judge positions, no head of the ATF, no head of the CFPB (and also CFTC, if I'm not mistaken) - and we currently do not have a secretary of defense. Perhaps you can point to when Democrats obstructed to the same degree. I look forward to it.[/QUOTE]

Joke's on you Myke because there was no CFPB before Obama was President. You lose. Both sides do it :)
 
http://now.msn.com/cows-near-the-cliff-congress-scrambles-to-avoid-dollar6-gallons-of-milk

Way to go! Unforeseen economic effects of gov't over regulation and legislation leading to more subsidies, who cares!

http://m.now.msn.com/nancy-pelosi-says-cutting-congress-pay-undermines-dignity-of-job

She would still get to spend 3 grand in tax payer money in flowers....in 4 months!

http://now.msn.com/alaska-senators-murkowski-and-begich-denounce-congressional-pay-raise

And last, but not least, a bi-partisan couple that lives in the real world.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']By the same groups that rated subprime-mortgage stuffed collateralized debt obligations as "Triple-A."

Whoopee-doo. Why do we worship at the altar of fiscal snake oil salesmen?

BTW, this thread should be "BOTH PARTIES DO IT HURR DURR," since that appears to be what you want to try to convey here. We are currently lacking in terms of vital judge positions, no head of the ATF, no head of the CFPB (and also CFTC, if I'm not mistaken) - and we currently do not have a secretary of defense. Perhaps you can point to when Democrats obstructed to the same degree. I look forward to it.[/QUOTE]

Pretty sure "economics" are run political too...
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Given that cluster of articles, I have to wonder - just what in the world is this thread supposed to be about, thematically?[/QUOTE]

I believe berzirk answered this question already. You're the one that wanted to go down that rabbit hole so personal responsibility and all that...:lol:
 
[quote name='Clak']I give this thread a D. It shows no effort, and a complete lack of thinking.[/QUOTE]

I give this post an F. Mainly because it resembles every other post you make in every other topic in this thread.
 
Our whole political system, federal, state, and local, is full of fraud and corruption. Giving more power and control over our lives to a system that has proven its ineptitude and lack of morality is foolish. There has got to be a better way...
 
[quote name='Clak']Apparently it's OK when state governments fuck up, because it's their right.[/QUOTE]

In a nutshell, and this is all you will ever get. Government screws up, its ok when Republicans screw up because they want to drown in a bath tub.
 
And I don't understand that, if anything my local/state government pisses me off more than the federal. They're the ones that won't fix the pot holes I run over every day and are acting homophobic about discussing homosexuality in schools.
 
I am neutral on my local government (city and county), very negative on my state government and hopeless on our federal government.

Hell, I had jury duty today at the local courthouse and thought they did a good job of it. Courts are one of the few things I would like to see increased funding for. In my state we pander to over-funded schools while letting the third branch of government be dismembered.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/02/21/55047.htm

Cantil-Sakauye pointed to San Bernardino County, which recently closed three of its outlying courthouses, to illustrate the effects of budget cuts.
"So now ... a San Bernardino resident, to get his or her day in court, has to travel 175 miles one way. You have to assume they have transportation, that they can leave work to spend the day in court. Then they have a 175-mile trip back."
She also cited Los Angeles, which will close 10 courthouses by June, and Fresno, which has closed seven courthouses.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='dohdough']He's the head of the Illuminati. Didn't you know!!!???:roll:[/QUOTE]

I doubt Beyonce would have anything to do with him. :roll:
 
[quote name='Vader582']I doubt Beyonce would have anything to do with him. :roll:[/QUOTE]
I doubt it. She's his successor. Her song "Single Ladies" was about turning girls into feminazis to enslave men. Soros don't got shit on Beyonce. Get your facts straight before they clandestinely take over with hypnotically reductive pop music.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Nothing like citing a super conservative free daily paper that reads like a tabloid to get your "facts," right?

Btw, there's already a Stay Classy Obama thread.


He's the head of the Illuminati. Didn't you know!!!???:roll:[/QUOTE]


So you have some "facts" disputing the info presented? Here's another take from a gal you must love;)

http://michellemalkin.com/2013/02/23/obamacare-loan-complaints/

Recipient of $341 million Obamacare CO-OP loan runs insurance company with New York’s worst record of complaints



If it's a fabrication, please let me know. Obamacare and these special waivers and loans are like the Iraqi War and Haliburton. Gov't making its friends rich off of taxes.
 
[quote name='egofed']So you have some "facts" disputing the info presented? Here's another take from a gal you must love;)

http://michellemalkin.com/2013/02/23/obamacare-loan-complaints/

Recipient of $341 million Obamacare CO-OP loan runs insurance company with New York’s worst record of complaints



If it's a fabrication, please let me know. Obamacare and these special waivers and loans are like the Iraqi War and Haliburton. Gov't making its friends rich off of taxes.[/QUOTE]
Let's be honest with each other: you don't give a shit about facts and you don't give a shit about even understanding the issues because instead of making your own arguments, you post shitty links from more than questionable sources that border on being tabloid rags at a checkout line. You even can't ass yourself into typing up a few sentences to frame an argument.

If you can't explain it, then you don't understand it, so stop pretending that you do. But hey, I guess it's better to support someone that made their conservative chops by writing about how people of Japanese decent and US citizenship deserved and were rightfully interred in concentration camps. How absolutely libertarian of you.

You know who else is bombing threads with stupid youtube clips in vs? Some 18 year old kid that really just started developing his political consciousness. This isn't something that I should have to explain to the type of adult that you claim to be.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Let's be honest with each other: you don't give a shit about facts and you don't give a shit about even understanding the issues because instead of making your own arguments, you post shitty links from more than questionable sources that border on being tabloid rags at a checkout line. You even can't ass yourself into typing up a few sentences to frame an argument.

If you can't explain it, then you don't understand it, so stop pretending that you do. But hey, I guess it's better to support someone that made their conservative chops by writing about how people of Japanese decent and US citizenship deserved and were rightfully interred in concentration camps. How absolutely libertarian of you.

You know who else is bombing threads with stupid youtube clips in vs? Some 18 year old kid that really just started developing his political consciousness. This isn't something that I should have to explain to the type of adult that you claim to be.[/QUOTE]


Hhahaahhhaahhahahaha...I should have known that you would keep attacking the source rather than the facts. The FACTS frame the argument.

As far as "stupid" youtube clips, just ignore them, bro. I ignore half the liberal responses on here because they are such off topic drivel. Are you getting paid to respond here?:roll:
 
[quote name='egofed']Hhahaahhhaahhahahaha...I should have known that you would keep attacking the source rather than the facts. The FACTS frame the argument.

As far as "stupid" youtube clips, just ignore them, bro. I ignore half the liberal responses on here because they are such off topic drivel. Are you getting paid to respond here?:roll:[/QUOTE]
What facts? I don't see any facts here. Have you supplied any? All you do is post other people's arguments without making your own.

Since you believe in personal responsibility, do your own damn fact checking.
 
[quote name='dohdough']What facts? I don't see any facts here. Have you supplied any? All you do is post other people's arguments without making your own.

Since you believe in personal responsibility, do your own damn fact checking.[/QUOTE]

Ummmm, are you saying that the money wasn't given, the poor rating doesn't exist, or that Obama/Horowitz didn't have a previous relationship?
 
[quote name='egofed']Ummmm, are you saying that the money wasn't given, the poor rating doesn't exist, or that Obama/Horowitz didn't have a previous relationship?[/QUOTE]
Did you read the report? Do you have a listing of other agencies that got those funds? Do you know what the requirements are to be an agency to set up a co-op? Do you know under what provisions in the PPACA would even allow an organization like the one that got the grant to exist? Of course you don't because the sky is blue. Pepsi cans are blue. And that means the sky is a giant Pepsi can because they're both blue because FACTS!
 
I don't think any of the questions dohdough is asking are ridiculous. If the claims of cronyism are going to be thrown around, show that that's actually the case. That can't be known unless we know just how much money anyone else got, if her organization qualified legitimately, etc. Just saying she got $341 million from Obamacare and that she knew Obama a decade or so ago really provides very little context. As of yet, no evidence has been provided that her former relationship with Obama somehow unfairly benefited her or her company.
 
So, nothing to back it up then? Got it.

Also, have to say I find it amusing that requesting more information is seen as wearing blinders in your eyes. Pretty ironic, that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Cantatus']So, nothing to back it up then? Got it.

Also, have to say I find it amusing that requesting more information is seen as wearing blinders in your eyes. Pretty ironic, that.[/QUOTE]

Pretty much doing what you're doing. You want proof for blatant things that seem amiss. Were you so forgiving and understanding during the previous administration? Did you trust them until someone showed you proof otherwise? I bet you, nor dohdough, did not.

Be honest with yourself and fair to other presidents and admit that you're giving this administation the benefit of doubt when you didn't do so for previous ones.
 
If I was giving the benefit of the doubt, I wouldn't be here asking for more information and trying to have a discussion. I'm not going to immediately jump to conclusions based on a couple scant details. I'm willing to accept things might be amiss, but that'll be when people can actually back up the assertion.

The fact that you'd rather try to characterize my point of view and jump to conclusions even there makes me think you must be unable to do so.
 
[quote name='Vader582']Pretty much doing what you're doing. You want proof for blatant things that seem amiss. Were you so forgiving and understanding during the previous administration? Did you trust them until someone showed you proof otherwise? I bet you, nor dohdough, did not.[/quote]
Dude, you're defending a tabloid "news" site and what is basically a blog post on some Coulter-pundit-wannabe's website. I mean shit, why don't I just spam the board with shit from Gawker or DailyKos to troll up all the conservatives on the board and treat it like revelatory stuff like they try to do? I have plenty of criticisms against Obama, but conservatives are more interested in trying to create the latest stupid -gate to pin on him...which is exactly what you and egofed are doing here. There is so much shit to hammer the guy on that it isn't even funny, but no, you guys just go for the low hanging fruit.

You want credit for blowing up his spot? Then you better start demonstrating a pattern instead of using tenuous relationships. But hey, SOROS rules the world, amirite?:roll:

Be honest with yourself and fair to other presidents and admit that you're giving this administation the benefit of doubt when you didn't do so for previous ones.
Click to expand...
Freedom fries, buddy. Freedom fries...
 
[quote name='dohdough']Dude, you're defending a tabloid "news" site and what is basically a blog post on some Coulter-pundit-wannabe's website. I mean shit, why don't I just spam the board with shit from Gawker or DailyKos to troll up all the conservatives on the board and treat it like revelatory stuff like they try to do? I have plenty of criticisms against Obama, but conservatives are more interested in trying to create the latest stupid -gate to pin on him...which is exactly what you and egofed are doing here. There is so much shit to hammer the guy on that it isn't even funny, but no, you guys just go for the low hanging fruit.

You want credit for blowing up his spot? Then you better start demonstrating a pattern instead of using tenuous relationships. But hey, SOROS rules the world, amirite?:roll:


Freedom fries, buddy. Freedom fries...[/QUOTE]

I'm actually attacking the fact that the gov't is giving OUR money to for profit insurance companies, let alone one's with such a crappy customer service record and an ol Obama chum. Obama is just another in a long line of politicians padding their buddies pockets at our expense.
 
[quote name='egofed']I'm actually attacking the fact that the gov't is giving OUR money to for profit[/QUOTE]

Let me stop you right there. That's not true. You're mad because it's a Democratic President doing this.

If you want to reduce government spending by eliminating profitability, then, that's a tall order, my friend. Your weaponized keynesians on the right won't appreciate that.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Let me stop you right there. That's not true. You're mad because it's a Democratic President doing this.

If you want to reduce government spending by eliminating profitability, then, that's a tall order, my friend. Your weaponized keynesians on the right won't appreciate that.[/QUOTE]


Nahhh, dude. I even mentioned the Haliburton/Bush/Cheney relation. I'm against the gov't handing our money out to pretty much any private company. Solar energy BS companies, oil companies, auto manufacturing companies, unions, etc. should not see a dime of forcibly collected tax payer money. I dislike all politicians, Dems just aren't as capable at hiding their corruption.;)
 
[quote name='egofed']Nahhh, dude. I even mentioned the Haliburton/Bush/Cheney relation. I'm against the gov't handing our money out to pretty much any private company. Solar energy BS companies, oil companies, auto manufacturing companies, unions, etc. should not see a dime of forcibly collected tax payer money. I dislike all politicians, Dems just aren't as capable at hiding their corruption.;)[/QUOTE]

That is such bullshit and you know it. Your entire argument was predicated on thinking we were stupid enough to fall for your claim about cronyism, which is exactly how you characterized it on a previous page, and when we questioned the veracity of those claims, you fold up like a cheap lawn chair and shift the goal posts.

fuck, man. Just because a post is on another page in the thread, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist anymore.
 
[quote name='egofed']Nahhh, dude. I even mentioned the Haliburton/Bush/Cheney relation. I'm against the gov't handing our money out to pretty much any private company. Solar energy BS companies, oil companies, auto manufacturing companies, unions, etc. should not see a dime of forcibly collected tax payer money. I dislike all politicians, Dems just aren't as capable at hiding their corruption.;)[/QUOTE]

What do you do for a living?
 
http://bearingdrift.com/2013/02/25/guess-who-owns-the-largest-tax-increase-in-virginia-history/

Way to go, Republicans!!! You gotta be kidding me...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleae...s-7-tax-hikes-on-under-250000-a-year-earners/


"Obama’s pledge against any form of tax increase on Americans making less than $250,000 a year “was thrown out the window” when he signed the healthcare law, says John Kartch, communications director with Americans For Tax Reform (founded by anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist)."

At most jobs, lying gets you fired, not another 4 years of free vacations...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top