patrick.net

zzyzzx says

omeboy says

I'm trying to figure out if you are dishonest or just stupid. I already posted a chart of unemployment which clearly shows the rate started going up in 2007, WHEN BUSH WAS PRESIDENT, then began to spike in 2008, and continuing up through part of Obama's FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE, at which point it REVERSED AND BEGAN GOING DOWN AGAIN. I asked you how you could possibly blame this on Obama, when the causes of the unemployment problem clearly began on Bush's watch. And your only response is to disingenuously post some bullshit graphics that ignore the reality I presented to you? Your charts look like homemade garbage, by the way. The lettering isn't straight and the diagonal lines are pixelated. I wonder where you got those graphics, because they look like something put together in Microsoft Paint by an idiot.

By your warped logic, it would be like me owning a car for 8 years, wrecking the car in the 8th year, then selling it to you, then saying it's your fault because I drove a pristine car for 7 years and you're driving a wrecked car.

If I filled a balloon with farts and let it float away, it would be more popular than Bush was.

Obligatory (and irregardless of your politics, you can use this):

zz does that cartoon refer to the separation of powers?

FortWayne says

zz does that cartoon refer to the separation of powers?

It can refer to anything that you want it to.

The cartoon makes no point worth making.

If a moron represents your district you need to look around you, and check the mirror.

Vicente says

If a moron represents you

See I knew you would come around about Obama.

non-alcoholic beer is more popular than Bush.

sbh says

CaptainShuddup says

I bet this girl would poll better than Obama right about now.

Her answer and grasp of language represent the kind of education the Republicans intend for the future of our public. She, and that ditz from Utah, are clearly Republican bimbos.

Kinda reminds me of how you never saw a sentence you wouldn't prefer as a fragment. Remember Private, a sentence has a verb AND a subject.

I'm not the motherfucker the world is fed up with, so it don't matter.

This shit streaks days are numbered as an anointed Democrat saint, who skis through history on the coat tails of great people who actually accomplished something.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/17/politics/obama-poll-decline/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

Read em and weep, you pantaloon sniffer. There's more details, in just how many polls he's failing in. There's not one single damn poll that he has possitive favors in now.

I guess they didn't POLL Crazyfornia or Patnet.
I'm sure that demographic still has LOADS of bullshit to say about Obama. He is a Nobel peace prize wiener after all. LOL

CaptainShuddup says

Read em and weep, you pantaloon sniffer.

Pantaloons? You must be even older than that picture.

Funny how the only people who talk about Obama in terms of being a "saint", Saviour, or whatever are right-wingers. Not sure where that nonsense came from.

Pantaloons. I love that word!

edvard2 says

Not sure where that nonsense came from.

Does the first 100 days "accomplishments" jubilee, complete with the closest thing in America, to the Pope placing a Crown on a Kings head, that is the Nobel Vanity prize, ring a fucking BELL?

We are still no where closer to prognosticating the football game - what if randomly drew 22 tea partiers vs 22 OWSs. Who would win? What would be the score?

edvard2 says

Funny how the only people who talk about Obama in terms of being a "saint", Saviour, or whatever are right-wingers. Not sure where that nonsense came from.

It's called a strawman argument, and right-wingers LOVE those.

CaptainShuddup says

Does the first 100 days "accomplishments" jubilee, complete with the closest thing in America, to the Pope placing a Crown on a Kings head, that is the Nobel Vanity prize, ring a fucking BELL?

That's basically more of the same talk as indicated before, meaning nobody but right wingers typically mention that sort of baseless talk.

dublin hillz says

what if randomly drew 22 tea partiers vs 22 OWSs. Who would win? What would be the score?

Probably the Tea Partiers. They'd simply drum up some money from their corporate sponsors to actually pay for real football players. Funny how we're talking about football as its entirely appropriate given that the Tea Party is an Astroturf organization...

Vicente says

Pantaloons? You must be even older than that picture.

He's just a big Louis Rene Boquet fan.

CaptainShuddup says

Does the first 100 days "accomplishments" jubilee, complete with the closest thing in America, to the Pope placing a Crown on a Kings head, that is the Nobel Vanity prize, ring a fucking BELL?

Good thing you only have 3 years and 6 months left of ever increasing blood pressure and incoherent ranting about Obama. What to you plan to devote your life to after 2016?

bob...

I am sure their will be another idiot (republican or democrat) to rant about. Although I will say they will have to work really hard to beat the Obama circus.

bob2356 says

Good thing you only have 3 years and 6 months left of ever increasing blood pressure and incoherent ranting about Obama. What to you plan to devote your life to after 2016?

For some years now I've been hearing 8 years of Obama will result in Soviet-stye bread lines:

and probably FEMA concentration camps:

When 2016 passes and Obama has not delivered, they'll have to find a way to make it happen on their own.

sbh says

You could fuck up a wet dream.

Whoah, go easy on the Cap'n there, SBH. He's a good guy. You seriously don't think he'd stop and help you fix a flat, or push your car into the emergency lane? I'm pretty sure he's that kinda fella. I'm also failry certain he's the kinda old-school chap who'd take that call at 4AM when you're in the middle of a nervous breakdown with no dry shoulders around. He'd probably bring you meals in plastic tubs if you ever hit the skids, and pick up the bill at the bar following a little gin 'n' sympathy after some whore breaks your heart in three. I can even see him putting in a good word, or babysitting at a moments notice. He'd let you win at arm wrastling and fuck your wife in order to get you off the hook for having screwed around on her first.

With all that mind, how is it you can reserve such high-octane vitriol for such a good wholesome kid?

inflection point says

bob...

I am sure their will be another idiot (republican or democrat) to rant about. Although I will say they will have to work really hard to beat the Obama circus.

Having two of the worst administrations in history back to back is hopefully an aberration not a portent of the system being so fucked up that only idiots like bush and obama can be elected.

Well let's hope it's a republican idiot so captain crunch doesn't die on us. Wasn't captian crunch of those people who was leaving the country if Obama won? Anyone track how many actually left? I rush limburger still here?

edvard2 says

Probably the Tea Partiers. They'd simply drum up some money from their corporate sponsors to actually pay for real football players. Funny how we're talking about football as its entirely appropriate given that the Tea Party is an Astroturf organization...

I largely stay out of political debates nowadays, but as someone who was involved in several early Tea Party events here in L.A. I really can't let those little "astroturf" comments go unchallenged, Miss Pelosi.

I disassociated myself with them last year (largely because they had adopted stances on social issues, something it was never supposed to be about) but I've also met hundreds of people who spent--or lost--plenty of their own time / money to be at those events. Do you really think I flew to D.C. on a Koch Brothers credit card?

I know it's what you desperately want to believe, but my experience indicated nothing of the sort. Do you ever wonder what else you're wrong about?

edvard2 says

non-alcoholic beer is more popular than Bush.

I assure you that Miller 64 is in fact less popular than Bush or Obama! Don't take my word for it, try some Miller 64.

bob2356 says

What to you plan to devote your life to after 2016?

wait for it...

wait for it...

wait for it...

Hope and Change!

JodyChunder says

Whoah, go easy on the Cap'n there, SBH.

Thanks Jody, you're too kind,and are right on all counts, except for me screwing his wife part, I draw the line when it comes to bearded chicks. the highroad be damned.

Obama numbers plunge into generation gap -CNN(AKA Obama ass kisser number 1)

CMY says

I largely stay out of political debates nowadays, but as someone who was involved in several early Tea Party events here in L.A. I really can't let those little "astroturf" comments go unchallenged, Miss Pelosi.

I disassociated myself with them last year (largely because they had adopted stances on social issues, something it was never supposed to be about) but I've also met hundreds of people who spent--or lost--plenty of their own time / money to be at those events. Do you really think I flew to D.C. on a Koch Brothers credit card?

I know it's what you desperately want to believe, but my experience indicated nothing of the sort. Do you ever wonder what else you're wrong about?

I suggest that you follow the money trail and read about exactly how the Tea Party got its start. Numerous reports and studies back these findings too.

The way that astroturf organizations work, and in the case of the Tea Party is that you need to basically "create" a sort of grass roots movement that is believably legitimate. In the case of the Tea Party, all of the work was done up front. The desired goal was to create interest amongst the populace under the false pretense that the movement was one started by individual citizens.

In reality, you can trace the founding of what eventually became the Tea Party back to the 80's. Back then there was a single organizations called "Citizens for a Sound Economy". The organization received around 5 billion dollars from the tobacco industry and similar to how many of the things the Tea Party rails against, such as environmental regulations on business, corporate taxes and unions, etc etc, the CSE was in favor of backing an agenda that discussed the relationship between big business and government. Sound familiar? Of course it does. Its because the current tea party does the same thing: All in an effort to change public opinion for the direct benefit of the corporate backers of the movement(s)

The CSE ultimately became the "Americans for Prosperity", which though has an equally vague and patriotic-sounding name works in the same fashion, which is to basically speak and act on the behalf of corporate interests.

But getting back to the Tea Party and the thoughts of it being a "Legitimate" movement. As mentioned before, these sorts of movements are purposely engineered from the start to attract everyday citizens. It feels "Real" because people ( as you mentioned) physically show up to Tea Party events, spend their own money, get involved, all the while not realizing that they are for the most part being used by the outside interests that started the whole thing from the get-go. But to those who believe that the Tea Party is a real political movement, it again feels as such because: " Well, I went to a Tea Party event and there were people like me, so it must be real." Of course it seems that way because the whole movement was engineered to attract them to a cause that serves a different purpose. Its what astroturfing is: Creating a premise for political action under the guise of a "grass roots" body.

I have no problem with people voicing their political opinions, protesting, disagreeing with aspects of how the country is run, taxes, regulations, or whatever. That is our right and freedom to do so. To peacefully assemble.

But what I DO have an issue with is when corporations and otherwise outside interests use people for their own desires and financial concerns, and especially under a presumed cover of some sort of "Grass roots" movement.

edvard2 says

Its what astroturfing is: Creating a premise for political action under the guise of a "grass roots" body.

Using that logic, there will never be a true conservative 'grassroots' movement, ever.. which I guess is where you started from in the first place.

CMY says

Using that logic, there will never be a true conservative 'grassroots' movement, ever.. which I guess is where you started from in the first place.

No. I believe you aren't understanding my position. There are PLENTY of legitimate conservative and liberal grass roots movements. That I have no issue with. I'll also go on to say I have the same issue with liberal grass roots movements because they certainly exist and function for much of the same reason.

Also understand that I have no doubt that you and others probably have genuine passions and interests in the Tea Party. I am not trying to belittle that by any means. But the overall Tea Party movement more or less exists under the guise of being a grass roots movement while serving totally different purposes.

CMY says

Using that logic, there will never be a true conservative 'grassroots' movement, ever..

Grassroots is one of those new political words that conjure up a warm and fuzzy "Hope and Change" America, but actually divides us further and gets further away from any such reality.

Grassroots = A well funded and planned political organization, that asks a few disinterested college kids what are their thoughts on politics. Then enlist those fools, not to champion the thoughts that they expressed, but the actions of those heavy financial backers.

Like...
Transparency = Obfuscate the Democratic process

OWS = Occupy Wall Street aka Out of sight out of mind. Hey go somewhere it doesn't count and protest.

Reform = Restrict liberties even further, or create a bigger cluster fuck out of an already listing ship.

CaptainShuddup says

Grassroots = A well funded and planned political organization, that asks a few disinterested college kids what are their thoughts on politics. Then enlist those fools, not to champion the thoughts that they expressed, but the actions of those heavy financial backers.

For once I partially agree with you, except substitute your use of "college kids" with any average American.

CaptainShuddup says

OWS = Occupy Wall Street aka Out of sight out of mind. Hey go somewhere it doesn't count and protest.

OWS was probably closer to a true "grass roots" movement. Its also ironically sad that it failed in the end, and in some ways and to even perhaps contradict myself, partially did so because it didn't receive the enormous financial contribution the Tea Party has. The BIG difference is that in the case of OWS, the one financial backer ( Ben and Jerrys), made it clear that they were supporting the movement. Totally different than the otherwise invisible and purposely hidden backers of the Tea Party.

edvard2 says

Also understand that I have no doubt that you and others probably have genuine passions and interests in the Tea Party. I am not trying to belittle that by any means. But the overall Tea Party movement more or less exists under the guise of being a grass roots movement while serving totally different purposes.

I would argue that yes, today it serves many different purposes than what I originally signed up for (and which is why I'm no longer a part of it).

We can go back and forth on the foundation of it, but my experience was just a couple of local guys and gals who decided to meet up on the beach and make some noise about fiscal responsibility, limited government and lower taxes; however you'd like to twist that to suit your narrative is just fine with me.

edvard2 says

The BIG difference is that in the case of OWS, the one financial backer ( Ben and Jerrys)

I was working from home though out the whole OWS timeline, and had Fox Business on the whole time during the day.

OWS failed the second day it started, when someone anonymously sent them a considerable chunk of cash delivered to OWS movement. The problem was, there was no official OWS movement. So what did they have to do next, walk into the same bank they were protesting and fill out official papers, make an official organization, and put money in the same banks they despised. Then the waring factions between the tents started, over who was the official OWS spokes person, and who and how should the money be spent, and how could use that money to raise more money. Once money entered the picture the whole movement was corrupted and diminished.

And then that my friends was THAT!

CMY says

We can go back and forth on the foundation of it, but my experience was just a couple of local guys and gals who decided to meet up on the beach and make some noise about fiscal responsibility, limited government and lower taxes; however you'd like to twist that to suit your narrative is just fine with me.

I wasn't talking about your personal experience. I was referring to the origins and actual underlying reasons the Tea Party came into existence in the first place. As mentioned before I am not doubting that you personally did not experience a genuine sense of involvement.

CaptainShuddup says

The problem was, there was no official OWS movement.

OWS could have succeeded had they decided to broaden their approach. They for too long stuck to the single idea of "Occupying".... something. Once the tent cities were shut down that was basically the end of it because those who had some influence didn't do much with it afterwards. Interesting because at the time a majority of Americans actually agreed with their premise.

edvard2 says

OWS could have succeeded had they decided to broaden their approach.

They did, raising money.

What do you think those monkey see monkey do sons of bitches were doing in tents in Bayfront park in down town Miami. We certainly aren't a financial hub.

I don't think they did. They failed to broaden their narrative beyond simply hanging around physical locations as a form of protest. Had they instead "matured" the movement by making it less dependent on occupation, then they might have had a better go at it.

You do realize that the OWS movement didn't produce one single person who challenged to debate one single politician, that would suggest their only message was their tents.

edvard2 says

Had they instead "matured" the movement by making it less dependent on occupation, then they might have had a better go at it.

Or maybe worked on that whole rape-sexual-assault-arrest-drug-use-public-urination-defecation-theivery thing.

No. The OWS was about addressing what was perceived to be unfair practices by financial and corporate institutions, which is appropriate seeing as due to the influence that lobbys, the decision that corporations count as private citizens, corporate political contributions, and of course the various astroturf political groups aforementioned, seems like a more direct approach to changing politics: Get to the source. So a totally different, and perhaps could have been more effective.