A reason to vote for Obama this year

Yah, but the poll is a year old. If you are going to go back that far, you should have selected one that had him in the high 60s .

 

It looks like it's 49% approval rating overall.

 

Actually, that already happened with the ATF selling guns to Mexican drug cartels so that they'd be smuggled back into the U.S. which would reaffirm the Dem's attack on gun ownership and why guns need to be removed from the public as if the bad guys couldn't get them if they wanted to.

 

And let's not forget that Obama also signed the NDAA, which he initially said that he would veto because it's asinine to authorize the military to detain Americans without due process, yet signed it over New Years in the middle of the night when no one was around to protest in outrage to possibly one of the worst pieces of legislation ever to be signed by an American president.

 

Ah, I see - facts are emotions to you now.

Let's return to my original post, shall we?

Yeah, I looked at your link. Clearly a bi-partisan vote, but don't let that stop you.

Can we agree that there was not enough votes to sustain a Presidential veto - not even close? So, we can agree that if Obama vetoed the Patriot Act, it would have failed, right? That without Obama's signature, the Patriot Act would not have passed, correct?

So, you Hypocritical Left, why aren't you outraged that Obama SIGNED the Patriot Act? Why? Why didn't Obama veto the Patriot Act?

Why didn't Obama veto the Patriot Act?

C'mon, you hypocrites, what's today's pathetic excuse???

OOPS! Can't wait to hear the Liberal's excuse on THAT one!

 

Why do I feel inspired to buy a Chevy Volt from Government Motors?

 

"Emotional outburst" was just the kindest phrase I could think of to describe your post. Many of your posts remind me of an angry 5 yr. old. Anyway, let's recap (again).

Bushranger was absolutely correct in saying the Republicans overwhelmingly voted to keep it going. If you read the House vote to extend the Patriot Act, 196 Republicans voted to extend it, compared to only 54 Democrats. 122 Democrats voted against it, while only 31 Republicans voted against it. In the article you posted above about Rand Paul and Harry Reid, you were trying to insinuated that Republicans were against it. But, in actuality, there was a significantly higher percentage of Republicans that were voting to extend the Patriot Act. No one here is arguing as to whether Obama ultimately signed it.

 

(Oh my....is that the theme song for the EXTREMIST RIGHT WING??) so apropos.

It looks like you left out an exception. BIG TOUGH SCREAMING AND YELLING OUTLANDISH BE PROVOCATIVE AND INSPIRE ENDLESS ANGER: ie Rush Limbaugh APOLOGIZED.

I guess when all that big mouth stuff gets so out of hand and you lose at current count about 90 advertisers...and you are being paid $50 million/year by a highly leveraged business that teeter totters on financial stability....you better apologize for moronic statements....and FAST.


oh and btw: Common sense and facts, Rebecca. Well done.

 

Case and point. Rush apologized and look at where it got him. Nowhere. That's because the people running this little distraction don't want an apology. They want a distraction.

Rush handing out the apology might put a cherry on top of their Hypocrisy pie, but other than that, it was pointless.

 

@ EarlPearl Thanks

Limbaugh created the distraction.


On a side note:

I don't really watch gas prices. But in regards to the gas chart above, look at a larger time frame. This is from the same site as your chart, but showing from 2006.


http://www.use.com/images/s_3/1579da7bbdbd20ff303c.gif

Source: GasBuddy

 

Actually Limbaugh created the fuel for the distraction. Its team Obama that is keeping the fire going. He wants your vote .

Too bad the chart doesn't go back even further. The 2008 oil/gas price spike was what sealed the Republican's fate in a landslide election which was a referrendum on the economy. We had never seen $4.12/gallon gas. The highest had been 3.11, with mid 2s being the norm. Here we are 3 years into "the Obama recovery" and its looking like we will hit a national average approaching $5/gallon by summer, following last years 3.90/gallon. Problem exacerbated, not made better, by team Obama. Any real leader would have fallen on his own sword by now.

 

You are the man, O_Nation: Spin baby spin. I get dizzy watching you. Were you a ballet dancer?

Rush has had a national syndicated show since 1988. He has viciously attacked people on the left thousands and thousands of times. And as you liked to say O_Nation:

With thousands of vicious attacks Rush virtually never apologizes. Never!!!! thousands of attacks often incredibly vicous...maybe less than a handful of apologies. Rush is a prime example of your theme: "Never apologize! Its a sign of weakness!"


Lets take all this back to your theme song O_Nation:

"Never Apologize!!! Its a sign of weakness!!!

Rush did apologize. Once after thousands and thousands of miserable mean spirited attacks. People are pissed off. They have come up with this effort to get back at Rush...where it counts...in the pocket book.

And its all happening while parent company Clear Channel is constantly struggling with money while paying Rush $50 million/year.


I believe that would create the kind of pressure from the rich guys/bosses at Clear Channel to apologize. It has nothing to do with hypocracy. It has everything to do with the dollar!!!

It will be interesting to watch!!!

This latest vicious attack on a student was probably way too much for sane and common sense people to stand. Now they are boycotting his show. Just saw some news....latest reports say around 140 advertisers might have fled his show.

that has to represent a lot of people incredibly pissed off and letting those advertisers know about it.

Its not hypocracy at all. Its the straw that broke the camel's back. Now folks are responding in a way that could become very serious....for Rush and his parent company.

Its very interesting to watch this phenomena. Rush is paid by Clear Channel Communications; a private company that went into a huge leveraged buyout in 2008. Who arranged the buyout? Bain Capital...the business that Mitt Romney started and from whom most of his income comes.

The buyout was arranged 2 years earlier with huge amounts of borrowed capital: In 2008 the lenders, banks tried to walk from the deal. You remember 2008. The economy collapsed big time. Bain and its partner had to sue the banks to make it happen. Enormous fees for Bain!!!!! The banks had to come up with $18 billion. While the original deal was for $26 billion, Bain and partners sold off TV stations. Near as I can tell there is about $700 million in equity and $18 billion in debt.

And THAT IS WHY THEY CALL IT LEVERAGE.

The deal went bad immediately. Everything went wrong. (from Wikipedia)

Meanwhile they gave Rush Limbaugh an 8 year contract for $400 million. Wow. Clear Channel and its venture capitalists give Rush incredible amounts of money and fire over 2400 people. (that is why Rick Perry labeled Romney a vulture capitalist--don't you think?).

Clear Channel is up the kazoo with high cost junk bond, high interest loans. In a time of low interest rates they are carrying C rated junk bonds and paying up the nose for this deal.

(I was a deal maker for 20 years. When deals look miserable everyone tries to walk. Why did they stay in this deal in 2008 when the banks were tanking? Only thing I can think of is the fees. Fees Fees Fees. That is what motivates businesses like Bain!!!

Uh uh oh.

A subsidiary of Clear Channel....Clear Channel Outdoors has just been sued by an investor who is claiming essentially they are stealing from Clear Channel Outdoors to pay off Clear Channel Communications.

(UH OH--investors fighting investors). Its ugly look at how ugly this is Bain and Clear Channel sued over $656 million transfer Wow...stealing from 1 set of rich guys to buttress Bain (One of Romney's main sources of support)

Clear Channel has been on the brink of disaster since this deal occurred in 2008. In April 2010 an inside legal news article described how bad things were and referenced possible on going bankruptcy hearings: source

 

Oh no? Perhaps you should ask Rebecca how she feels about Maher's use of the word "Cunt". Or "Twat". Or Shultz's use of the word "bimbo".

Before you go declaring it "not hypocrisy", perhaps you should check with the specific group of people that has a right to be offended about this type of language.

Personally, I find identity politics disgusting, but the president has quite literally built a campaign out of it. I wonder if he'll be able to cook up an "uncle tom" word to disparagingly apply to women who don't vote Democrat. Wouldn't put it past him.

 

I can only speak for myself, obviously, not for all women. I don't have a problem if everyone doesn't see it the same way. This is just how I personally feel, but Maher calling Palin that word, isn't just an insult to Palin. It's insulting to all women. The reason why is that there are certain words in the American English language used to degrade women in general. He called her that, and said, "There’s just no other word for her.” I mean, really? I think with Limbaugh, he treated Fluke like an object. He didn't like her political views, so he proceeded to call her a "slut" and a "prostitute", talking about how much sex she must have, and saying he was entitled to sex videos. Here it is:

Maybe Limbaugh and Maher could start hanging out? Anyway, all she did to "deserve" this was to believe birth control should be covered by her insurance (and happen to be a woman). I don't support legal action against Limbaugh. Even though offensive, I think it's still in the realm of freedom of speech. However, I'll admit, I am happy about the public scorn, and boycott of his show.

Even with Peter Gabriel, I read Limbaugh played the song "Sledgehammer" in the background while calling Fluke a slut. Peter's representative came back on Facebook with:

[video=youtube;hqyc37aOqT0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqyc37aOqT0[/video]

 

Yes, I am. THAT is my original Argument.

Why is there no outrage from the left over the fact that Obama did not veto The Patriot Act?

BTW, by today's standards, that was a bi-partisan vote. Had those 54 Democrats not voted FOR it, the "Republicans overwhelmingly voted to keep it going" would not have been "overwhelming" - right?

Why is there no outrage from the left over the fact that Obama did not veto The Patriot Act?

Yeah, it's best to be a racist woman-hating anti-semite anti-Christian liberal bigot like Bill Maher. He can call a woman a "cunt" and Christians "stupid". He's on HBO where there are no sponsors!

 

Rebecca: Thanks for your comments. As a guy, they are educational for me. Over time, from time to time I get educated as to how people with different backgrounds, sex, all sorts of differences respond to language and events that don't hit me at all.

Frankly when those from the extreme right refused to respond directly on the Limbaugh insults and started throwing around the Mahar insults I had to research them. Didn't know they occurred and referenced one response first. Didn't know at first he had used other language. I had to walk through it personally as either a father, husband, boyfriend of a woman to react to the Mahar insult and then said I thought it was inappropriate.

As a guy I don't recall ever using that term directly to a woman. Certainly as a guy I've used the terms among other men.

It takes comments like yours to appreciate other people's concerns.

Politically, coming from the center and left and because it was so well publicized I was offended by the Limbaugh attack. Additionally I found it offensive that a big shot would attack a student in such a vile way for expressing her point of view. On the other hand, I have to admit...people in the public eye, such as Sarah Palin, Obama, politicians, athletes, celebrities are always in the public eye and take a lot of hits from commentators. Sarah Palin, as opposed to Sandra Fluke, is a very public figure. By choice. She is going to take hits just like all the other public figures. Some language is inappropriate in our society that tries to lift itself above the gutter.

Just as Sandra Fluke had a first amendment right to speak her mind on this topic so too did Rush Limbaugh. Neither are being prosecuted.

I do find it sweet justice though that a boycott is proceeding against Limbaugh.

 

Nice excuse for the inexcusable. Have we heard you call for a boycott of Maher's sponsors yet? Thats what is commonly called hypocrisy.

 

Hypocracy my butt. Go ahead. boycott Mahar. While you whine and scream and get things all confused....people are boycotting Rush...getting on his advertisers and to date a lot of have left show.

go do it yourself with Mahar.


Quit whining whining whining and quit misdirecting and misdirecting. Go do it.

While all of you right wing extremists are whining and claiming hypocracy...real people who essentially sit in the middle found Rush Limbaugh to be disgusting, a bully, and got sick of him.

there is nothing hypocritical about any of this. People are acting on their beliefs and while a relatively few extremists are trying to create diversions real people keep contacting real businesses in large enough numbers that the businesses are walking with their feet from Rush's show.

 

Yes, we are all "whining" and "angry", right ?

Earl, you lost the conversation as far as I'm concerned.

 

More one sided outrage, otherwise known as hypocrisy. Funny stuff.