Page 70 of 76
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:59 pm
by thibodeaux
A couple of weeks back, a friend posted this on facebook:
To my republican friends. Your party is engaged in unprecedented obstruction and lies. And it's not a case of "well both parties are bad". Don't give me that crap. You're either oblivious to it, or you don't care.
Along with it, he posted this link:
http://www.politifact.com/ohio....nge-ran
My response:
TL;DR. Is the gist that while the actual debt IS $16 trillion, it's not all Obama's fault? Is that it? Wow, those lying liars!
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:18 pm
by GORDON
Someone had a facebook picture the other day, something to the effect of, "My friends are making it hard to be friends with them after the election."
Seems like the closet dicks are becoming bold. The dude starts a post, "To my republican friends..." and closes the statement calling them either stupid, or evil. Yep, that's a good friend, right there.
Edited By GORDON on 1349292145
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:40 pm
by Malcolm
thibodeaux wrote:A couple of weeks back, a friend posted this on facebook:
To my republican friends. Your party is engaged in unprecedented obstruction and lies. And it's not a case of "well both parties are bad". Don't give me that crap. You're either oblivious to it, or you don't care.
Along with it, he posted this link:
http://www.politifact.com/ohio....nge-ran
My response:
TL;DR. Is the gist that while the actual debt IS $16 trillion, it's not all Obama's fault? Is that it? Wow, those lying liars!
Towards the end, he admits they're only responsible for a third of it or so. Granted, that's still FIVE TRILLION dollars, a number even scientists and mathematicians are too lazy to write out fully most of the time and instead elect to abbreviate with scientific notation.
The stimulus package came with a $787 billion price tag. If you include all growth in the national debt under the Obama administration, it’s roughly $5.4 trillion, not $16 trillion. The administration inherited a national debt of more than $10 trillion when it came into office.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:01 pm
by thibodeaux
Exactly! It's not ALL Obama's fault! Bush did it!
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:06 pm
by GORDON
thibodeaux wrote:Exactly! It's not ALL Obama's fault! Bush did it!
You're either oblivious or you just don't care.
~ A "friend."
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:42 pm
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:thibodeaux wrote:Exactly! It's not ALL Obama's fault! Bush did it!
You're either oblivious or you just don't care.
~ A "friend."
I'm in the second of those two categories.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 5:32 pm
by TheCatt
At least when I post libertarian stuff, people just don't care.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 5:46 pm
by TPRJones
I'm so glad I don't book face.
Edited By TPRJones on 1349300813
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 5:56 pm
by GORDON
TPRJones wrote:I'm so glad I don't book face.
You're probably missing a ton of gatherings.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:51 pm
by GORDON
GORDON wrote:White House tells contractors to break federal law and not inform employees ahead of time of layoffs, prior to the election.
http://money.cnn.com/2012....ex.html
And promises to pay their legal bills when they get sued.
This guy liken it to a "mini-coup," since the rule of law no longer applies to the White House. Says this is the act of an "imperial presidency."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner....w-cooke
Graham is deeply concerned about the move, and about the lack of attention it is receiving — within and without Congress. The manouvre is “incredibly disturbing,” he told me. How disturbing? “It is exhibit A in the march toward an imperial presidency.” The “statute is clear,” Graham continued, “the WARN Act is the law of the land.” Here, “we have a White House saying, ‘we don’t care what the law we signed says.’” The OMB analysis — which holds that as the law might change, there is no need for businesses to comply with it — is “absurd on its face,” the senator told me, and the Department of Labor’s advisory opinion “a political move.” It is “patently illegal for the federal government to absorb the financial cost of a private company for not following the law. Never have we put the taxpayer on the hook for a private company failing to follow the law.”
Edited By GORDON on 1349312028
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:36 pm
by Malcolm
Never have we put the taxpayer on the hook for a private company failing to follow the law.
The fuck you haven't, you lying son-of-a-goat-fucking-whore-bitch.
Edited By Malcolm on 1349314585
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:17 am
by TPRJones
GORDON wrote:You're probably missing a ton of gatherings.
Another good reason!
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:18 am
by GORDON
TPRJones wrote:GORDON wrote:You're probably missing a ton of gatherings.
Another good reason!
I used to miss a ton of gatherings, but then I would get a bunch of shit about not showing up. So I had to join facebook to get on the invite lists.
Sigh.
Someday this war will end.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:18 am
by GORDON
So who won the debate? The facebook posts stopped, so i assume romney did well.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:52 am
by TheCatt
Rmoney wins.
Sure, why not... CNN and ABC aren't saying who won, so I guess romney did.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:56 am
by TPRJones
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:29 am
by GORDON
The commentary I have been seeing today from the left is, generally, ROMNEY JUST LIED ALL NIGHT WHY DIDN'T OBAMA CALL HIM ON IT?
I guess that's the crux of the problem. Romney lists a string of facts about Obama's 4 years that make Obama look really bad, and half the country doesn't believe it could possibly be true.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:00 am
by Leisher
Left wing The Slate says [url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... _challenge
r.html]Obama got his ass kicked.[/url]
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:21 am
by TheCatt
Eh, in 1 month, we still get turd sandwich.
Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
by GORDON
TheCatt wrote:Eh, in 1 month, we still get turd sandwich.
I'm hoping for the turd sandwich who said he would repeal Obamacare. I can't afford it. Most people will find out the same thing.