And the Republican Sex Scandals Continue:

 

*Yawn*

 

Yep, it's only republicans.

 

Sorry, keep on cheerleading.

 

*Yawn*

 

Yep, it's only republicans.

 

Sorry, keep on cheerleading.

I'm with you on this one. Utterly ridiculous to point out sex scandals of one party only. It's an apolitical issue.

 

EDIT: I would also prefer that politicians stop telling people how to act behind closed doors. It's situations like this that come back to haunt them. And we both know it's primarily conservatives preaching to others.

Edited September 9, 200916 yr by BigSqwert

I'm with you on this one. Utterly ridiculous to point out sex scandals of one party only. It's an apolitical issue.

 

Kinda like the tax thing isn't a dem issue, it just has more of them recently. It's a people issue.

Kinda like the tax thing isn't a dem issue, it just has more of them recently. It's a people issue.

Agreed. The only reason I cared about the Sanford thing is because it was bizarre and f***ing hilarious. And I like to mock hypocrites (social conservatives who cheat on their wives and/or secretly perform homosexual acts, telling other people it's immoral). But this really isn't a "Dem" or "GOP" thing.

In the interest of being fair and balanced...I'd like to note that I still am no fan of these sorts of manufactured political theater events, like the one we're going to see tonight, no matter who is at the podium. It'll be interesting to see the results perhaps, and the presence of a gifted orator might make it more interesting than usual, but still, I'm just blah about all of them.

Good post, sir.

Women get more liberal after babies; men get more conservative.

 

And yes, I do read a science daily website. My life is like a rap video.

I can totally see this.

From the first reports out of the Supreme Court today, a majority of justices seemed to be leaning towards the side of eliminating every corporate campaign finance limitation on the books.

 

(Tonight's speech by the President, brought to you by Wellpoint insurance).

I don't understand that. Corporations are run by people but they aren't people themselves. That they have rights is understood, but human rights? Come on now. Modern corporations didn't even exist when the Constitution was written so I don't get that angle, either. I just don't see how you could draw a conclusion like that. The CEO of a corporation making political donations and statements is one thing, Corporation X run by said CEO doing the same thing is quite another and that's a path to corruption and oligarchy that will never be turned back from.

 

Before someone jumps on me with the inevitable "union" counterpoint, no, I don't really think unions should have as much say and influence either. Union members should, certainly (just like a corporation's employees), even speaking in public about their preferences, but the union itself, no.

There is a long legal history there, but the U.S. code says they are, and some interpretations of the law could be read that way. It's entirely within the realm of published discussion that they could be declared to have the same rights as people under the first amendment, and since money=speech, they could do whatever they wanted.

 

This post brought to you by Cigna.

he left wing opposition does it too, but not nearly as loudly or effectively as the right wing's fringe.

 

Oh, I wouldn't say that. The left wing fringe is just as loud and effective.

 

but anyways, check this out

 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109314

 

 

Edited September 9, 200916 yr by mr_genius

From the first reports out of the Supreme Court today, a majority of justices seemed to be leaning towards the side of eliminating every corporate campaign finance limitation on the books.

 

(Tonight's speech by the President, brought to you by Wellpoint insurance).

 

Justice Kennedy, who often plays a swing vote role, spoke repeatedly of "an ongoing chill" on the speech of corporations and other harms caused by the McCain-Feingold law that banned independent corporate spending on campaigns.

 

I guess corporations bribing congress with billions just isn't enough.

I guess corporations bribing congress with billions just isn't enough.

Nope.

 

This post brought to you by Kaiser Permanente. We promise we'll actually consider paying for your treatment!

I don't understand that. Corporations are run by people but they aren't people themselves. That they have rights is understood, but human rights? Come on now.

 

They are treated as fictional persons who have the same/ similar legal rights to actual persons.

Anybody catch Governor Sanford's news conference in South Carolina today (well, yesterday now)? He might be just as crazy as Blago.

I was reading Huffpo comments yesterday and I had no idea there were so many Truthers on that site. They get hostile if you challenge them too.

 

edit: whoops, I thought I posted this in the Dem thread.

Edited September 12, 200916 yr by lostfan

I was reading Huffpo comments yesterday and I had no idea there were so many Truthers on that site. They get hostile if you challenge them too.

 

haha, did you challenge?

haha, did you challenge?

I don't actually post there, I just read. Maybe I should post there because there is an echo chamber effect (not as bad as Dailykos but it's still there). They would probably think I was a Freerepublic troll though.

lol

http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/

From the lowest forms of humanity gathered in our great capital today:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I love the juxtaposition of "Marxist czars." Its almost as if most people have virtually no understanding of Marxism, communism, socialism or 20th century history in general.

Oliver Willis in attendance. One of his tweets:

 

Man this crowd almost as big as the one they had when Bush ran up the deficit... Oh wait that didn't happen

I love the juxtaposition of "Marxist czars." Its almost as if most people have virtually no understanding of Marxism, communism, socialism or 20th century history in general.

almost as if?

 

fake naivety on my part. Most people have literally no understanding of Marxism, communism, socialism, nazism, Stalinism, 20/19/18/17th etc century history, capitalism/ modern economics or most other crap politicians emotionally play games with.

 

"More czars than the USSR!" :facepalm:

 

I recently had someone try to argue to me that the October Revolution put Marx into power with a socialist system first and then Lenin came along a while latter to install communism (socialism->communism slippery slope). :facepalm:

fake naivety on my part. Most people have literally no understanding of Marxism, communism, socialism, nazism, Stalinism, 20/19/18/17th etc century history, capitalism/ modern economics or most other crap politicians emotionally play games with.

 

"More czars than the USSR!" :facepalm:

 

I recently had someone try to argue to me that the October Revolution put Marx into power with a socialist system first and then Lenin came along a while latter to install communism (socialism->communism slippery slope). :facepalm:

Man that is funny as s***. The communists KILLED the czar. I think I learned that in 6th grade.