DeathbyVolcano
Banned
Gah! I might be in Columbus on May 5th. Gonna see if I can attend the ralley.
This is nothing new, the losing party always does this.
I seem to have forgotten the ability of Obama to generate buzz. I wonder if Bams can pull crowds like this again:
.
If he can generate at least 60% of that excitement, then he is going to crush Romney. I have never seen Romney with anything like those numbers.
Can't wait for PD to dampen your spirit, Pangloss
This is nothing new, the losing party always does this.
I seem to have forgotten the ability of Obama to generate buzz. I wonder if Bams can pull crowds like this again:
.
If he can generate at least 60% of that excitement, then he is going to crush Romney. I have never seen Romney with anything like those numbers.
I seem to have forgotten the ability of Obama to generate buzz. I wonder if Bams can pull crowds like this again:
.
If he can generate at least 60% of that excitement, then he is going to crush Romney. I have never seen Romney with anything like those numbers.
This is nothing new, the losing party always does this.
this is the first time we are aware of that a President of the United States has played with a robotic ball controlled with an iPhone.
WASHINGTON The defeat of two conservative House Democrats by more liberal opponents in Tuesdays Pennsylvania primary illustrates the strong hold the new health care law still has over committed Democratic voters and foreshadows an even more polarized Congress next year in the aftermath of the latest round of redistricting.
Cross-post from the Obama 2012 thread.
Obama 2012 officially kicks off on May 5th (Cinco de Mayo) in Ohio.
There are no coincidences in electoral politics.
buzz. I wonder if Bams can pull crowds like this again:
.
Maybe at an unemployment line
Not sure if already posted, but there is some good news:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/u...ts-defeated-after-opposing-health-law.html?hp
Looks like the Democrats are waking up and fighting back against the rot in their party.
Cross-post from the Obama 2012 thread.
Obama 2012 officially kicks off on May 5th (Cinco de Mayo) in Ohio.
There are no coincidences in electoral politics.
Cinco de Mayo in Ohio. Well played, sir.
Didn't Romney recently get caught admitting that if he couldn't improve his Latino numbers, he was toast?
Genius."That'll make me fit in! Hey, my servants are Mexican!"
Bush v. Gore
I seem to have forgotten the ability of Obama to generate buzz. I wonder if Bams can pull crowds like this again:
.
If he can generate at least 60% of that excitement, then he is going to crush Romney. I have never seen Romney with anything like those numbers.
Which was 7-2 as an equal protection violation. hardly partisan.
The 5-4 was regarding an injunction on the recount that was totally in line with their approach to law.
Would have been the same vote in the opposite scenario.
It's a pipe dream, all Mitt might be able to do is get a few young voters to kind of feel apathetic enough not to vote for Obama, but he won't actually get their votes.
Well I mean sure, now it looks like there might have been consequences for Romney tacking hard right on immigration and offering to destroy planned parenthood during the primary, but once he tells voters that he was just kidding, it's a whole new ballgame!
Not at all in line with anybody's approach to law. No credible legal minds believe Bush v. Gore legitimate. Justice Souter, a Republican appointee who was one of the Justices who thought there was an equal protection violation, almost resigned over it because he thought it made so much a mockery of the court.
You're welcome.Two blue dogs down ... Jason Altmire (to fellow Rep. Mark Critz).
It was thoroughly partisan. Two dissenters thought the recount had problematic implications for equal protection. But only five justices decided to stop the Florida recount and install Bush as president.
Not at all in line with anybody's approach to law. No credible legal minds believe Bush v. Gore legitimate. Justice Souter, a Republican appointee who was one of the Justices who thought there was an equal protection violation, almost resigned over it because he thought it made so much a mockery of the court.
No way in hell.
You've shied away from demanding marriage equality for all. Are you at least willing to say that you support it on a personal level?
I'm not going to make news in this publication. I've made clear that the issue of fairness and justice and equality for the LGBT community is very important to me. And I haven't just talked about it, I've acted on it. You'll recall that the last time you and I had an interview, we were getting beat up about "don't ask, don't tell" in the LGBT community. There was skepticism: "Why's it taking so long? Why doesn't he just do it through executive order?" I described very specifically the process we were going to go through to make sure that there was a buy-in from the military, up and down the chain of command, so that it would be executed in an effective way. And lo and behold, here we are, and it got done.
Ending "don't ask, don't tell" has been the dog that didn't bark. You haven't read a single story about problems in our military as a consequence of the ending of the policy. So whether it's on that, or changing the AIDS travel ban, or hospital visitation rights, or a whole slew of regulations that have made sure that federal workers are treated fairly in the workplace, we've shown the commitment that I have to these issues. And we're going to keep on working in very practical ways to make sure that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are treated as what they are – full-fledged members of the American family.
Rolling Stones article with Obeezy, didn't see it posted, faux apology if posted already.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...e-interview-with-barack-obama-20120425?page=1
http://news.yahoo.com/chrysler-posts-best-quarterly-profit-062519432.htmlDETROIT (AP) -- Chrysler followed its strong first-quarter sales with a big profit, sending its 2009 brush with financial death farther into the rearview mirror.
The Auburn Hills, Mich., company made a net profit of $473 million, its best quarter in 13 years, mainly on the back of strong U.S. sales. From January through March, Chrysler's sales were up 39 percent as customers bought more Ram pickups, Jeep Grand Cherokee SUVs and Chrysler 200 midsize sedans.
Not bad for a company that almost died three years ago. A government auto task force deadlocked on whether to save the company in 2009, with the tie broken by President Barack Obama.
Chrysler's first-quarter profit was more than four times the $116 million that the company made in the first quarter of last year. It was Chrysler's best performance since the third quarter of 1998 when it made $682 million during the pickup truck and SUV boom.
Chrysler made more in the first quarter than it did during all of 2011, mainly because of a huge accounting charge last year for refinancing and the government loans that saved it from the auction house.
Rolling Stones article with Obeezy, didn't see it posted, faux apology if posted already.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...e-interview-with-barack-obama-20120425?page=1
To me it seems downright insane that a guy with those answers is painted as some crazy guy with a radical agenda.
One would have to demonstrate the justices came to a conclusion contrary to their judicial beliefs. The Georgetown SCOTUS project (or whichever school it was) guessed the case exactly right. It was a computer program that would input the type of case into its database to spit out who would vote what based on their previous cases and was over 90% accurate, IIRC.
Except many legal scholars agree it was correct while many don't and others say the outcome was right for the wrong reasons.
And Toobin's book was sensationalist to sell copies. It was also denied by others close to Souter. Yeah, I'm sure the dude literally spent nights weeping.
I've never seen any evidence to the contrary. I've seen legal scholars demonstrate that ruling right in line with each justice's legal beliefs.
Rolling Stones article with Obeezy, didn't see it posted, faux apology if posted already.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...e-interview-with-barack-obama-20120425?page=1
The man is a weasel
He is also a socialist whose policies are an abysmal failure
what a narcissistic sob and traitor caring nothing for the constitution except how to get around it
Jobless Claims still more than expected
I think next week's employment report won't be pretty for Obama
It seems like Black Mamba & empty vessel are both talking in absolutes. Both of you are going to have to pony up evidence. Not just assertions without links.
That so many Justices were willing to act so deeply against type, and that each ended up supporting the result that they would have preferred as a political matter, prompted many to question the legitimacy of the institution. Reaction was swift and remarkably negative. Given that the nation was almost evenly divided on the outcome of the election, one might suppose that reaction to the Court’s decision would be similarly divided—with the half of the nation that supported Bush praising the decision as a brilliant and necessary intervention, and the half that supported Gore condemning it as a partisan power grab by the Republican Justices. Yet the reaction was in fact overwhelmingly critical of the Court.
A review of unsigned editorials and op-eds published in the country’s top twenty newspapers by circulation in the week following the decision, for example, finds eighteen unsigned editorials critical of the decision and only six praising it. Signed op-eds in the same newspapers were also overwhelmingly critical, with twenty-six critical op-eds and only eight defending the decision.
Law review commentary, a rough guide for the academy’s assessment of the decision, was also predominantly critical. Of seventy-eight articles that have discussed Bush v. Gore between 2001 and 2004, thirty-five criticized the decision, and only eleven defended it. Some 625 professors signed a letter shortly after the decision expressing their dismay at the Court’s failure to abide by the rule of law.
Public polls also reflected serious questions about the Court’s legitimacy among a large segment of the population. Polls taken around the time of the decision found between 37% and 65% of respondents thought that the Justices’ personal politics influenced their decision. One poll reported that 46% of respondents said that the decision made them more likely to suspect that Supreme Court Justices have a partisan bias. Another found that 53% of respondents felt the Court’s decision to stop the recount was based mostly on politics. In short, Bush v. Gore led the press, the academy, and the public to question the Court’s legitimacy as an institution guided by principle rather than politics.
Chrysler posts best quarterly profit in 13 years
http://news.yahoo.com/chrysler-posts-best-quarterly-profit-062519432.html
What do you think would happen if democrats got back majority in house/senate this year and Obama won? Would they fuck it all up again by compromising and being nice or will they have learned their lesson and push full left legislation all the way? (Whichever congressman aren't bought obviously)
What do you think would happen if democrats got back majority in house/senate this year and Obama won? Would they fuck it all up again by compromising and being nice or will they have learned their lesson and push full left legislation all the way? (Whichever congressman aren't bought obviously)
What do you think would happen if democrats got back majority in house/senate this year and Obama won? Would they fuck it all up again by compromising and being nice or will they have learned their lesson and push full left legislation all the way? (Whichever congressman aren't bought obviously)
Ed Schultz took a jab at Fox & Friends Gretchen Carlson for criticizing President Obamas appearance on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, but praising George W. Bushs appearance on Deal or No Deal. Carlson said that she didnt think it was appropriate for someone of Obamas position to go on a comedy show. However, some years ago, she said that George W. Bushs appearance on Deal or No Deal was a pleasant breaking down of barriers between the President and the people.
An update on the popularity of PPACA.