Random Politics

DaveInSeattle · Post by **DaveInSeattle** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 1:53 pm

The Sybian wrote:Fallon absolutely kills the Christie/GWB story with a little help from the Boss.

And Chris Christie (absolute Bruce-FanBoy) must have died a little inside when we saw that....

DaveInSeattle · Post by **DaveInSeattle** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 1:55 pm

And now....Christie is completely screwed...

Two senior members of Gov. Chris Christie’s administration warned a New Jersey mayor earlier this year that her town would be starved of hurricane relief money unless she approved a lucrative redevelopment plan favored by the governor, according to the mayor and emails and personal notes she shared with msnbc.

The mayor, Dawn Zimmer, hasn’t approved the project, but she did request $127 million in hurricane relief for her city of Hoboken – 80% of which was underwater after Sandy hit in October 2012. What she got was $142,000 to defray the cost of a single back-up generator plus an additional $200,000 in recovery grants.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 11:43 pm

Don't fuck with the 'Boke!

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:12 pm

President 0bama believes that his race is a contributing factor to his low approval ratings in recent days link

So those voters who elected 0bama as President of the United States twice now believe that . . . ah, never mind. It's as pointless to attack that race card bullshit as it would be to defend it.

howard · Post by **howard** » Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:52 pm

I glanced at that interview. I literally avoid reading/hearing any words out of his mouth because it is all such bullshit, but my defenses were weak yesterday. He said some astonishing things, even by his high standard for ridiculousness. That was one of them. This lead paragraph from a Politico piece was another:

President Barack Obama believes his presidency can be successful even if none of his policy goals are accomplished during his term in office, Obama told New Yorker editor-in-chief David Remnick.

Barry used more weasely phrasing, but my goodness. Just a sea of lies and bullshit. So much more than any of his predecessors, more than Clinton, more than Reagan, more than fucking Nixon. To claim to be moving the nation toward the benefit of the middle and poor classes, when he has actively, intentionally done the exact opposite, with tremendously efficient effect, for five years.

That he spouts such lies I can live with. That so many millions of people believe him, after five years of evidence so many people believe he actually has not steadfastly enriched the few at the expense of the mass of the nation (and the future of the nation) knots my intestines. Shit, Reagan supporters weren't nearly this fucking gullible, certainly not by 1986.

I have ceased being sickened and disgusted by Obama. Really. Much as he has allowed literal trillions of bad debt held by the international banking system to be transferred to the Fed and to the responsibility of the US Government/People, I have transferred my disgust to my fellow citizens. I don't know what is worse; the opponents who still sincerely believe he is a socialist (not counting corporate welfare) or the supporters who still think the ACA is designed and intended to help people rather than to enrich the entrenched parasites of the medical economy.
[/MLK day rant]

At least he said something good about weed.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:07 am

But you guys have to admit, he is a pretty smooth bullshitter.

I haven't read the article yet, and I do think the race issue gets too much attention (not just Obama, but it general), but you can't deny that there are people out there who hate Obama because he is black. I have heard such eloquent political discourse as, "we need to get the nigger out of office," and "it's called the White House for a reason." Granted, these people are probably not voting Democrat anyways. Or at all, for that matter.

howard · Post by **howard** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:22 pm

The Sybian wrote:But you guys have to admit, he is a pretty smooth bullshitter.

Ayup.

but you can't deny that there are people out there who hate Obama because he is black.

Of course. But two points.

1) The context is his low popularity/current low approval polls. I think it is safe to say the people who hate Barry because he is black (and I speak as one of those) have been consistent in their disapproval over the past five years. That is, polls rise and fall, but this slice of the electorate is constant.

2) If you began to list all the reasons for people disapproving of Barry's job performance, if you count the ways, you can come up with several items, without trying too hard. Race is certainly one of those items; but one of several. But you mention/highlight race, it outshines all those other reasons, because of the nature of the topic. And all those other reasons, warmongering, spying on americans, fucking the economy via the criminal actions of the Fed, get pushed to the rear of the discussion.

Propaganda is not telling people what to think. Propaganda is telling people what to think about. And, leading people to what not to think about. Think about race; don't bother about all those other topics.

The best bullshit has an element of truth. Just cause millions of people hate him for his skin color doesn't make this not bullshit.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:59 pm

Was just going to post similarly to Howard's second point. The people who disapprove because he is black didn't just start doing that; they've been doing that all along. So what matters is the delta of the different groups who dissaprove compared to their disapproval level five years back. Those segments with high negative deltas are the ones Barry should be concerned with. What made them change their opinion?...because it wasn't because they learned he was black after years of him covering it up.

rass · Post by **rass** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:43 pm

Quiz time! Who said, it, Chris Christie or Richard Sherman?

I got 12/14.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 8:53 pm

AB_skin_test wrote:Was just going to post similarly to Howard's second point. The people who disapprove because he is black didn't just start doing that; they've been doing that all along. So what matters is the delta of the different groups who dissaprove compared to their disapproval level five years back. Those segments with high negative deltas are the ones Barry should be concerned with. What made them change their opinion?...because it wasn't because they learned he was black after years of him covering it up.

I agree with this. Not even debatable. I wasn't thinking in terms of change in opinion, just overall approval. I think people on bot sides have every right to hate on Obama. I just wish they would hate on him for the right reasons and not the petty shit thrown out to hide the fact that he is Bush III.

rass · Post by **rass** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:21 am

Here is the piece this whole "race card" discussion is based upon.

Here is the relevant paragraph:

Obama’s election was one of the great markers in the black freedom struggle. In the electoral realm, ironically, the country may be more racially divided than it has been in a generation. Obama lost among white voters in 2012 by a margin greater than any victor in American history. The popular opposition to the Administration comes largely from older whites who feel threatened, underemployed, overlooked, and disdained in a globalized economy and in an increasingly diverse country. Obama’s drop in the polls in 2013 was especially grave among white voters. “There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black President,” Obama said. “Now, the flip side of it is there are some black folks and maybe some white folks who really like me and give me the benefit of the doubt precisely because I’m a black President.” The latter group has been less in evidence of late.

Note that last sentence are the reporter's words, not the President's. There is no evidence that BHO's quotes were given in the context of discussing his current approval ratings, or even his performance in the last election. This could just be a reporter using a couple of choice quotes to support his own conclusions.

Though the article definitely supports the conclusion that Obama is a smooth bullshitter.

howard · Post by **howard** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:08 pm

The context in which this propaganda piece is published is the lowest approval polls of his five year administration. I'm not talking verbal context of the article--real world context of his failures and the slow recognition thereof.

Post by **brian** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:12 pm

howard wrote:The context in which this propaganda piece is published is the lowest approval polls of his five year administration. I'm not talking verbal context of the article--real world context of his failures and the slow recognition thereof.

Never fear, Howard. Hillary is going to fix everything.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:31 pm

Why do I feel relatively ok if Rand Paul becomes president? Like a Paul/Ryan ticket doesn't necessarily about me, but if Ted Cruz is anywhere near this level I'm losing my mind.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:01 pm

Yet another asshole TN state legislator upset that Muslims can benefit from Religious Freedom laws intended to benefit Christians. And the controversial Murfreesboro Islamic Center nonetheless. You are the idiots who passed the law allowing extra freedoms for religious orgs., you can't be pissed because a religion that isn't yours benefitted from the law.

“Unfortunately the Tennessee Religious Freedom Act, passed by the TN General Assembly, may have played a key role in allowing this cemetery to be approved,” the two-term representative wrote. “There is a difference between legislation that would protect our religious freedoms and legislation that would allow for the circumvention of laws that other organizations comply with on a daily basis.”

As the article mentions, TN Repubs strongly believe in small gov't and allowing local gov't to handle its own affairs. Except when a Muslim mosque attempts to do something, then State gov't must step in to prevent it.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:06 pm

Johnnie wrote:Why do I feel relatively ok if Rand Paul becomes president? Like a Paul/Ryan ticket doesn't necessarily about me, but if Ted Cruz is anywhere near this level I'm losing my mind.

Well, your boy Rand wants to cut off welfare for unwed women having too many kids. This should help the GOP improve their popularity with women. Prevent them from getting abortions, restrict access to birth control, then penalize them for having kids. I guess they should just engage in gay sex, so they don't run the risk of pregnancy.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:07 pm

I love when that happens.

cerrano · Post by **cerrano** » Fri Jan 31, 2014 4:50 pm

Jerloma wrote:Chris Christie is sad that his people lied to him...

Syb, you can give him the benefit of the doubt all you want but Occam's Razor cuts like a mother and the only thing left is that this mother fucker is full of shit.

you don't say...

former port authority official at the center of the lane closure controversy claims to have evidence that the guv had knowledge of lane closures.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:07 pm

I was at the gym the other day and Fox News was the only TV with subtitles, so I caught a bit of Christie coverage yesterday. The entire thing is a made up non-issue by the Liberal Media and Hoboken's Mayor is just trying to become famous.

But what really pissed me off was Megyn Kelly doing a piece on the IRS and their First Amendment violating crusade to shut down all dissent against our dictator President. I know I ranted about it before, but I'm going all Howard on this. Yes, the IRS targeted words like "Tea Party" "Conservative" and "Republican" on 501(c)(3) applications for non-profit status. They also targeted words such as "Progressive" "Liberal" and
"Democrat," as well they should. 501(c)(3) status prevent political purposes. This is the way it has always been, and is intended to be. This isn;t some evil plot to prevent dissent. Fuck, all they are doing is preventing political action groups from avoiding tax evasion. Shouldn't the Right be for that? Then the shyster POS Jay Sekulow who I hate with a passion acknowledged that lefty Obama supporting groups have also been targeted, but that is to maintain appearances. Fuck off. You are both lawyers, you goddamned know better, otherwise you are the dumbest attorneys to ever attorn. How do these people live with themselves?

howard · Post by **howard** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:14 am

Walton, Benioff Join Billionaires Backing Clinton in 2016
I wonder how many of these folks became insanely wealthy by not getting returns of their investments?

howard · Post by **howard** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 7:49 pm

That also works as straightforward description of our society, economy and polity.

The Mafia State of Mind

howard · Post by **howard** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:42 pm

VP Biden: LaGuardia like a 'third world' airport

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 6:06 pm

"If I blindfolded someone and took them at 2:00 in the morning into the airport in Hong Kong and said 'where do you think you are,' they'd say, 'this must be America, it's a modern airport,'" Biden is quoted as saying by the New York Daily News during a speech on infrastructure in Philadelphia.

*Sigh*

I guess, yet again, we have to chalk Biden's idiocy up to "well, I know what he's trying to say."

Guess what! Other countries in the world have modern airports! Many, including Hong Kong, that are infinitely nicer than just about everything in the United States.

The US is on the crumbling side of modernity. And the Bidens of the world have done fuck all to alleviate that.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:54 pm

Scottie wrote:

I guess, yet again, we have to chalk Biden's idiocy up to "well, I know what he's trying to say."

Do we? I think this one goes beyond his usual gaff into ignorant American Exceptionalism. I have no patience for that. I would hope Fox won't touch this, as American Exceptionalism is their bread and butter.

Post by **brian** » Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:10 pm

John Dingell is going to announce his retirement tomorrow. Proud to have lived in his district for awhile and been able to cast a vote for him.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 10:00 am

Here's the thing with this "religious freedom" bill that Brewer just vetoed. I'm not so sure that I disagree with it.

First of all...why would you want to give business to someone that doesn't want your business for reasons that only reflect bigotry? If someone thought I was a morally bankrupt nihilist and not a real American because of my views on religion, I wouldn't want to give that person a dime. I would absolutely want to know that's what they think.

Second, in this day and age of communication, once a business owner decides to practice their religious freedom and discriminate against say a gay person...that's going to get out there. Once it gets out there, it's boycott city. Fuck, people boycotted that chicken place not even for discriminating against gays...just for donating money to a conservative "family" organization. I say we just let business owners discriminate at will and then let them suffer the consequences of it.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:08 am

Jerloma wrote:Here's the thing with this "religious freedom" bill that Brewer just vetoed. I'm not so sure that I disagree with it.

First of all...why would you want to give business to someone that doesn't want your business for reasons that only reflect bigotry? If someone thought I was a morally bankrupt nihilist and not a real American because of my views on religion, I wouldn't want to give that person a dime. I would absolutely want to know that's what they think.

Second, in this day and age of communication, once a business owner decides to practice their religious freedom and discriminate against say a gay person...that's going to get out there. Once it gets out there, it's boycott city. Fuck, people boycotted that chicken place not even for discriminating against gays...just for donating money to a conservative "family" organization. I say we just let business owners discriminate at will and then let them suffer the consequences of it.

First, the law is completely pointless, as business owners are not prohibited from discriminating against gays. Sexual orientation is not a protected class. If a company in AZ discovers some of their employees are gay, they are free to fire them with a letter stating "I am firing you for being a faggot" and they are within their rights to do so. Federal law doesn't protect sexual orientation either.

Anyone see this classic interview where Anderson Cooper gives rope for idiot Congressman Al Melvin to hang himself? The guy clearly doesn't understand the implications of this Bill, and is completely unable to see anything other than allowing Christians to refuse service to gays. Anything outside of that, and they can't fathom or think of it. Anderson gives perfectly plausible and realistic hypos, and the fool says, "why would anyone do that? Nobody I know in AZ would discriminate." So discrimination is dead. It's just like the fools in Louisiana and Tennessee that passed pro-religion laws and were shocked when Islamic groups benefited by the laws. Then they wanted to remove the laws. I also love how this guy, who has clearly been championing a highly publicized piece of legislation feels that he is being set up when asked to name one instance, anywhere in the country, where this law would have helped. If you feel strongly that you need to draft a law, then you'd think you could name one reason why it is needed. I caught a few minutes of a similar interview with a female Congresswoman who supported the bill. Same shit, same lack of intelligence.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:19 am

First, the law is completely pointless, as business owners are not prohibited from discriminating against gays. Sexual orientation is not a protected class. If a company in AZ discovers some of their employees are gay, they are free to fire them with a letter stating "I am firing you for being a faggot" and they are within their rights to do so. Federal law doesn't protect sexual orientation either.

That's a good point...I hadn't even considered that. I guess I thought maybe they had something protecting sexual orientation at the state level. So if passed, what could change? Would a Christian business owner be allowed to discriminate against a Muslim or vice-versa?

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:25 am

But unless the people come in and say they're gay, how can you know? Has gaydar been perfected amongst bigots?

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:34 am

Jerloma wrote:
First, the law is completely pointless, as business owners are not prohibited from discriminating against gays. Sexual orientation is not a protected class. If a company in AZ discovers some of their employees are gay, they are free to fire them with a letter stating "I am firing you for being a faggot" and they are within their rights to do so. Federal law doesn't protect sexual orientation either.
That's a good point...I hadn't even considered that. I guess I thought maybe they had something protecting sexual orientation at the state level. So if passed, what could change? Would a Christian business owner be allowed to discriminate against a Muslim or vice-versa?

They would have to make an argument that their religious beliefs prevented them from serving a Muslim/Christian, but how do you disprove someone's religious beliefs? If they say they believe it, you have to accept that. What if a Muslim doctor believes all women should wear Burqas and refuses to treat women with any skin or hair showing? The people supporting this legislation would go apeshit, but the law would allow for that. Where in the Christian faith does it say that you must refuse to serve someone because of, well, anything? I fully understand a Catholic priest refusing to perform a gay wedding, even in a state that recognizes gay marriage, and nobody is trying to force them to. That is the only religious argument that I can think of for refusing to serve a gay person. Maybe a prostitute refusing to perform his or her job with a member of the same sex because the Bible prohibits gay sex. But is it anyone's religious belief that you cannot serve a hamburger to a gay person? I doubt it. This Bill's only purpose is to legalize discrimination.

I'll confess to a bit of intellectual dishonesty in saying that the Bill is pointless. It does serve to protect bigotry in the even that the Federal gov't makes sexual orientation a protected class.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:36 am

AB_skin_test wrote:But unless the people come in and say they're gay, how can you know? Has gaydar been perfected amongst bigots?

Great point. Nobody is thinking about Lyle!

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:38 am

AB_skin_test wrote:But unless the people come in and say they're gay, how can you know? Has gaydar been perfected amongst bigots?

A lot of this started with people in the wedding business refusing to make cakes or rent venues, etc.

P.D.X. · Post by **P.D.X.** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:41 am

I'm completely libertardian on this. If I start a private business, I should be able to decide who my customers are. (Fortunately I'm happy taking money from anyone.)

Sidenote: what's the deal with businesses that proclaim "the right to refuse service to anyone" in normal states? They can return the suit as long as they don't say it's for spite?

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:43 am

Syb, the thing is, holy books are written so ambiguously and left up to so much interpretation that you can use them to justify any action. If your deity commands that you should kill a certain person, what would make you think that he was okay with you serving them?

P.D.X. · Post by **P.D.X.** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:48 am

Jerloma wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:But unless the people come in and say they're gay, how can you know? Has gaydar been perfected amongst bigots?
A lot of this started with people in the wedding business refusing to make cakes or rent venues, etc.

It was the cake case in Oregon that really pissed me off. Instead of the gay couple just going to a different bakery, they threw a complete hissy-fit when they were declined. Totally jumped at the "we're victims!" opportunity. (Funny thing is is there are plenty of wedding services in OR that cater, sometimes primarily, to same-sex marriages.)

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 12:01 pm

P.D.X. wrote:
Jerloma wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:But unless the people come in and say they're gay, how can you know? Has gaydar been perfected amongst bigots?
A lot of this started with people in the wedding business refusing to make cakes or rent venues, etc.
It was the cake case in Oregon that really pissed me off. Instead of the gay couple just going to a different bakery, they threw a complete hissy-fit when they were declined. Totally jumped at the "we're victims!" opportunity. (Funny thing is is there are plenty of wedding services in OR that cater, sometimes primarily, to same-sex marriages.)

I agree to an extent. No need to throw a hissy fit but no harm in making it public. Just as the bakery has a right to discriminate against gays, the public has a right to discriminate against bigots. No need to shame them...but if you have a means to get that out there so that people that don't support intolerance can know about it, I think that's the way to go. Playing the victim card doesn't do any good though...I completely agree.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 12:22 pm

Once upon a time, way back when, I wanted to be a lawyer and a chef when I grew up. I even stated so in a 1 page speech about myself in 8th grade when we had to discuss such things. Everyone got a chuckle because who comes up with being both of those professions?

Anyhoo, some time in high school I realized that the lawyer dream was dead when I found that I couldn't comprehend books that I had to read for class. I scored very poorly on the English part of my SAT as well. I suddenly figured that lawyers have to go through too many years of law school learning how to craft language in such a manner that was light years above what I was capable of. If I couldn't understand The Mayor of Casterbridge and A Thousand Acres just how the fuck could I even begin to legislate?

So I say that to say this. I read the Senate Bill: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; It's not very long. I reread it. Then I read it again. I don't fucking get it. I cannot infer "religious business owners can tell gay people to go away" at all from that. I can only react to what everyone is talking about. Of course that leads nowhere and I figure that when the NFL chimes in and implies they're pulling the Super Bowl if it passes, I can only think that this bill is seriously jacked up. Or it could mean I suck at reading and I need to call 1-800-ABCDEFG.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 12:41 pm

Johnnie wrote:Once upon a time, way back when, I wanted to be a lawyer and a chef when I grew up. I even stated so in a 1 page speech about myself in 8th grade when we had to discuss such things. Everyone got a chuckle because who comes up with being both of those professions?

Anyhoo, some time in high school I realized that the lawyer dream was dead when I found that I couldn't comprehend books that I had to read for class. I scored very poorly on the English part of my SAT as well. I suddenly figured that lawyers have to go through too many years of law school learning how to craft language in such a manner that was light years above what I was capable of. If I couldn't understand The Mayor of Casterbridge and A Thousand Acres just how the fuck could I even begin to legislate?

So I say that to say this. I read the Senate Bill: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; It's not very long. I reread it. Then I read it again. I don't fucking get it. I cannot infer "religious business owners can tell gay people to go away" at all from that. I can only react to what everyone is talking about. Of course that leads nowhere and I figure that when the NFL chimes in and implies they're pulling the Super Bowl if it passes, I can only think that this bill is seriously jacked up. Or it could mean I suck at reading and I need to call 1-800-ABCDEFG.

That is part of the problem. They intentionally wrote the Bill incredibly broad, so it protects just about any action done in the name of religious belief. The clear intent was to allow Christians to discriminate against gays. My guess is that the bill is so broad because they didn't want to look bad in singling out gays. Judging by Al Melvin's interview and other AZ Congressmen, they have no concept of how widely this Bill could be used to justify all sorts of societally unacceptable behaviors.

howard · Post by **howard** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 12:55 pm

P.D.X. wrote:they threw a complete hissy-fit…

Ah, fuck it. The joke writes itself.

(Is 'hissy-fit' an offensive term?)

(another fuck it; as good a place as any to post this:)

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Thu Feb 27, 2014 1:11 pm

The Sybian wrote:That is part of the problem. They intentionally wrote the Bill incredibly broad, so it protects just about any action done in the name of religious belief. The clear intent was to allow Christians to discriminate against gays. My guess is that the bill is so broad because they didn't want to look bad in singling out gays. Judging by Al Melvin's interview and other AZ Congressmen, they have no concept of how widely this Bill could be used to justify all sorts of societally unacceptable behaviors.

See, I can't even gauge that. I just see words put together that doesn't seem like it's saying much at all with "free practice of religion" mixed in. I still don't get it.