GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Yeah, they probably would be severe critics of Obama, because of the current system that allows black people to vote and hold public office and not work as slaves.
Which is probably what he was going for in a veiled way, unfortunately.
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich spoke before a conservative audience in Naples, FL yesterday. Gingrich gave a talk about his new book, To Try Men’s Souls, which tells the story of men who played a critical role in the Revolutionary War. When a reporter with the Naples News asked Gingrich what the Founding Fathers would “say about our current issues” if they were alive today, he suggested that they would be “very severe critics” of President Obama:
I think they would be very, very severe critics of the current system. And they would tell us that if we continue to drive God out of public life and we continue to increase power in Washington, we are literally putting our freedom at risk.
In other words, Newt Gingrich has never heard of the founding fathers before.
He's heard of the mythical founding fathers that Republicans have created of magic and fairy dust since St. Ronnie was elected.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
they would tell us that if we continue to drive God out of public life and we continue to increase power in Washington, we are literally putting our freedom at risk.
they would tell us that if we continue to drive God out of public life and we continue to increase power in Washington, we are literally putting our freedom at risk.
The Federalists would like to say, "fuck you."
I was just thinking this....
Undead Scottsman on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
In November 1787, in a speech to the Maryland House of Delegates, he assailed the Constitutional Convention not only for what it was attempting to do but for how it was going about the job. He broke the pledge to secrecy under which the convention had met and informed the Maryland legislators that the Framers -- already regarded with reverence -- had wantonly violated their instructions to meet "for the sole and express purpose of revising" the Articles of Confederation.
Instead, convention delegates had taken it upon themselves to make a fresh start by creating an entirely new system of government. To Martin, such an effort was akin to launching a coup d'état. George Washington and Benjamin Franklin had backed the change of direction of the convention, but, Martin said, we should not "suffer our eyes to be so far dazzled by the splendor of names, as to run blindfolded into what may be our destruction."
In an address to the Maryland House of Delegates in November of 1787 and in numerous newspaper articles, Martin attacked the proposed new form of government and continued to fight ratification of the Constitution through 1788. He lamented the ascension of the national government over the states and condemned what he saw as unequal representation in Congress. He owned six slaves of his own and opposed including slaves in determining representation and believed that the absence of a jury in the U.S. Supreme Court gravely endangered freedom. At the convention, Martin complained, the aggrandizement of particular states and individuals often had been pursued more avidly than the welfare of the country. The assumption of the term "federal" by those who favored a national government also irritated Martin.
Around 1791, however, Martin turned to the Federalist party because of his animosity toward Thomas Jefferson, who in 1807 spoke of him as the "Federal Bull-Dog."
Martin's fortunes declined dramatically in his last years. He also continued to drink heavily, sinking into bankruptcy and madness. By the mid-1820s, he was subsisting on a special tax imposed on Maryland lawyers solely for his personal support. Eventually, he was taken in by Aaron Burr, whom he had defended at the disgraced ex-vice president's 1807 trial for treason. By this time, an irrational detestation of Thomas Jefferson, his one-time decentralist ally, led Martin to embrace the Federalist Party, in apparent repudiation of everything he had argued for so strenuously. Paralysis, which had struck in 1819, forced him to retire as Maryland's attorney general in 1822.
On July 8, 1826, at the age of 78, Luther Martin died in Aaron Burr's home in New York City and was buried in an unmarked grave in St. John's churchyard. His death came four days after the deaths on July 4 of Jefferson and John Adams.
* "The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue, but are dupes of pretended patriots"[2]
Gerry was one of the signers of the US Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. He was one of three men who refused to sign the Constitution because it did not then include a Bill of Rights. Gerry later became Governor of Massachusetts. He is known best for being the namesake of gerrymandering, a process by which electoral districts are drawn with the aim of aiding the party in power, although the pronunciation - jer - differs from the pronunciation of Gerry's name.
Randolph refused to sign the final document, however, believing it had insufficient checks and balances, and published an account of his objections in October 1787. He nevertheless reversed his position at the Virginia Ratifying Convention in 1788 and voted for ratification of the Constitution because eight other states had already done so, and he did not want to see Virginia left out of the new national government.
He represented New York at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. At this convention he greatly opposed any law that would unify the United States under one single government. When the convention decided to propose a new plan which included uniting the independent states, he and Robert Yates walked out leaving a letter for their reasons.
God bless them for reminding us how they were mostly politicians. Someone should write a book about the douchiest founders. Or a cracked top ten article.
Couscous on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
You can't see her eyes so I bet that trips a lot of people up. Everyone knows you wear sunglasses to appear older and sneak into R-rated movies. 8-)
Ehh.
I'd pee in her butt.
Peeing on a 14 year old? R. Kelly, is that you?
Hehe. I deleted it cause I thought that 1) no one would get my inside joke that I have with people who've probably never visited PA and 2) cause I thoug tI was quick enough to.
Burtletoy on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I popped this in the healthcare thread too, but videos like this make me feel decidedly less ambiguous about single party rule in the US for the next couple decades.
Oh my God, I want to punch SO MANY FACES right now. How can anyone be expected to deal with the whiny petulant childish shitheads that represent the GOP in the House? My God, it sounds like an uncontrolled kindergarten on their side of the aisle.
"I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
"Why do you object?"
".... DUNNO... I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
I popped this in the healthcare thread too, but videos like this make me feel decidedly less ambiguous about single party rule in the US for the next couple decades.
Oh my God, I want to punch SO MANY FACES right now. How can anyone be expected to deal with the whiny petulant childish shitheads that represent the GOP in the House? My God, it sounds like an uncontrolled kindergarten on their side of the aisle.
"I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
"Why do you object?"
".... DUNNO... I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
It's a call for unanimous consent, so you don't really need to have a reason it's just a procedural stalling tactic most of the time. However these weren't parliamentary requests, they were 'puppies are adorable' statements; meaning that objecting to them doesn't actually prolong debate. Neither does talking over people like a douchebag. If ever there was a reason the House has a mace, this is it.
I popped this in the healthcare thread too, but videos like this make me feel decidedly less ambiguous about single party rule in the US for the next couple decades.
Oh my God, I want to punch SO MANY FACES right now. How can anyone be expected to deal with the whiny petulant childish shitheads that represent the GOP in the House? My God, it sounds like an uncontrolled kindergarten on their side of the aisle.
"I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
"Why do you object?"
".... DUNNO... I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
It's a call for unanimous consent, so you don't really need to have a reason it's just a procedural stalling tactic most of the time. However these weren't parliamentary requests, they were 'puppies are adorable' statements; meaning that objecting to them doesn't actually prolong debate. Neither does talking over people like a douchebag. If ever there was a reason the House has a mace, this is it.
It occurs to me that at this point it doesn't matter who the Speaker is, they're going to take an be the target of ridiculous smears, so we might as well take advantage of that. Pelosi really isn't a fire breather, and whoever's holding that post is going to be tarred like one we might as well put in someone who actually is a ball buster to avoid shit like this. We have to have someone who's vicious towards jackasses, but generally likeable, who's also from a district that's north of D+10.
I popped this in the healthcare thread too, but videos like this make me feel decidedly less ambiguous about single party rule in the US for the next couple decades.
Oh my God, I want to punch SO MANY FACES right now. How can anyone be expected to deal with the whiny petulant childish shitheads that represent the GOP in the House? My God, it sounds like an uncontrolled kindergarten on their side of the aisle.
"I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
"Why do you object?"
".... DUNNO... I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
It's a call for unanimous consent, so you don't really need to have a reason it's just a procedural stalling tactic most of the time. However these weren't parliamentary requests, they were 'puppies are adorable' statements; meaning that objecting to them doesn't actually prolong debate. Neither does talking over people like a douchebag. If ever there was a reason the House has a mace, this is it.
It occurs to me that at this point it doesn't matter who the Speaker is, they're going to take an be the target of ridiculous smears, so we might as well take advantage of that. Pelosi really isn't a fire breather, and whoever's holding that post is going to be tarred like one we might as well put in someone who actually is a ball buster to avoid shit like this. We have to have someone who's vicious towards jackasses, but generally likeable, who's also from a district that's north of D+10.
There are like eight spines in the Democratic Party, I don't think any of them are in D +10 districts.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I popped this in the healthcare thread too, but videos like this make me feel decidedly less ambiguous about single party rule in the US for the next couple decades.
Oh my God, I want to punch SO MANY FACES right now. How can anyone be expected to deal with the whiny petulant childish shitheads that represent the GOP in the House? My God, it sounds like an uncontrolled kindergarten on their side of the aisle.
"I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
"Why do you object?"
".... DUNNO... I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
It's a call for unanimous consent, so you don't really need to have a reason it's just a procedural stalling tactic most of the time. However these weren't parliamentary requests, they were 'puppies are adorable' statements; meaning that objecting to them doesn't actually prolong debate. Neither does talking over people like a douchebag. If ever there was a reason the House has a mace, this is it.
It occurs to me that at this point it doesn't matter who the Speaker is, they're going to take an be the target of ridiculous smears, so we might as well take advantage of that. Pelosi really isn't a fire breather, and whoever's holding that post is going to be tarred like one we might as well put in someone who actually is a ball buster to avoid shit like this. We have to have someone who's vicious towards jackasses, but generally likeable, who's also from a district that's north of D+10.
The actual Speaker only sits in the big chair for things that are important, not stupid shit like the Women's Caucus fluffing legislation. Which is why Dingell was there. They rotate it around. If anything, his being imperturbable and acting like a sweet old grandpa that wants to give everyone butterscotch comes out better than if he went all hardass.
moniker on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
"Joe Cao just voted for socialism!"
"This will definitely hurt his reelection prospects, yes."
But upthread they were saying that the Republicans were standing as the principled opposition to a populist tidal wave! Gosh, Fox News, now I am confoozled!
Posts
Which is probably what he was going for in a veiled way, unfortunately.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
He's heard of the mythical founding fathers that Republicans have created of magic and fairy dust since St. Ronnie was elected.
But yeah, the slavery thing, too.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Obama? I barely knewa!
Article 11: As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;
drafted during Washington's final year, signed into law by John Adams. Passed the Senate unanimously
I was just thinking this....
I'm sure we'd be quoting it out of context if we presented it as evidence of sorts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_Martin (shitty Wikipedia article)
Jesus Christ, that is depressing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbridge_Gerry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Randolph#Constitutional_Convention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lansing,_Jr.
God bless them for reminding us how they were mostly politicians. Someone should write a book about the douchiest founders. Or a cracked top ten article.
I would more than likely attempt to date this girl
Says a lot about me huh
In that you are either younger than expected or a pedophile, yes
Moniker, you are a treasure
Stay golden
Well, I'm 19 and she looks 18ish
Obviously if she were underage I wouldn't date her
...
Stop looking at me like that
ageist
Apparently, only one Republican voted for it or something like that.
...dude, she looks 16. If that.
Joseph Cao of Louisiana's 2nd who replaced William 'hiding bribe money in the freezer is a great idea!' Jefferson.
14, and scenesters are the current version of these guys:
It's what makes the picture great, truly
And really? She was 14? Christ
Now I feel all pedo
Fuck
You can't see her eyes so I bet that trips a lot of people up. Everyone knows you wear sunglasses to appear older and sneak into R-rated movies. 8-)
Watching Fox News now.
They want to murder him, it's hilarious.
Hehe. I deleted it cause I thought that 1) no one would get my inside joke that I have with people who've probably never visited PA and 2) cause I thoug tI was quick enough to.
Any choice quotes?
"Joe Cao just voted for socialism!"
"This will definitely hurt his reelection prospects, yes."
...please tell me I'm making those up
So that's how socialism works...
Who said this line and when will there be a video clip online?
Monday. After the people at Media Matters and CAP finish nursing their hangovers.
Ugh
Oh my God, I want to punch SO MANY FACES right now. How can anyone be expected to deal with the whiny petulant childish shitheads that represent the GOP in the House? My God, it sounds like an uncontrolled kindergarten on their side of the aisle.
"I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
"Why do you object?"
".... DUNNO... I OBJECT I OBJECT I OBJECT"
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
It's a call for unanimous consent, so you don't really need to have a reason it's just a procedural stalling tactic most of the time. However these weren't parliamentary requests, they were 'puppies are adorable' statements; meaning that objecting to them doesn't actually prolong debate. Neither does talking over people like a douchebag. If ever there was a reason the House has a mace, this is it.
It occurs to me that at this point it doesn't matter who the Speaker is, they're going to take an be the target of ridiculous smears, so we might as well take advantage of that. Pelosi really isn't a fire breather, and whoever's holding that post is going to be tarred like one we might as well put in someone who actually is a ball buster to avoid shit like this. We have to have someone who's vicious towards jackasses, but generally likeable, who's also from a district that's north of D+10.
There are like eight spines in the Democratic Party, I don't think any of them are in D +10 districts.
The actual Speaker only sits in the big chair for things that are important, not stupid shit like the Women's Caucus fluffing legislation. Which is why Dingell was there. They rotate it around. If anything, his being imperturbable and acting like a sweet old grandpa that wants to give everyone butterscotch comes out better than if he went all hardass.
But upthread they were saying that the Republicans were standing as the principled opposition to a populist tidal wave! Gosh, Fox News, now I am confoozled!