PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Behold a pale horse?
Explain please
Legitimately the worst fake laugh I have ever heard.
Bob McDonnell is popping up on my twitter feed as a promoted tweet from the Republican Governor's Association. "Stand with Scott." The Republican party seems determined to die on that hill.
But don't you see? Newt asked for forgiveness from the right god. It is not like they would be loving Newt if he asked for forgiveness from Allah.Oh it's hilarious the cognitive dissonance in the republicans.
"So long as Newt made his peace with God who am I to judge him? Romney's a Mormon? I'll NEVER vote for him!!".
I'm watching the video of Newt answering King's question, and it so fucking hilarious. The guy doesn't answer the question, goes off about how the news media sucks, makes vague references about everyone feeling pain, says how despicable the question is... He does all this and shuts up King as effectively as if he would have answering the question.
That's it. I'm converting.
Newt for GOP 2012!
This is my all time favorite right-wing logic. If your business fails, it's because there were too many regulations. If you can't afford the lifestyle to which you feel entitled, it's because your taxes are too high. It's never, ever your fault. Party of Personal Responsibility!tm Except when you fail; then it's not merely someone else's fault, but inevitably the government's fault.
So the Obama police state shut down meaupload?
That guy is doing everything he can to lose the youth vote. Everything. Hes leaving no stone unturned.
Look, if megavideo was actually a problem, the private market would use the invisible hand to correct the problem. Why do we need big government to come in and regulate, killing jobs?
To get off the subjects of the race real quick, here's an interesting philosophical point I've been thinking about recently. I was reading this article that details the story of an idiot right winger's idiot brother who tried to start a business but was stifled thanks to Obama's job killing regulations and such. The whole article is amusing, but what was noteworthy was the author's thesis:
It's funny, isn't it? If a poor person fails to become rich, it's entirely his fault, and no one should ever help these people out. But if one of the beloved "job creators" can't get richer, it's everyone else's fault, and we all have to accomodate to help these people out as much as possible.
So the Obama police state shut down meaupload?
That guy is doing everything he can to lose the youth vote. Everything. Hes leaving no stone unturned.
Look, if megavideo was actually a problem, the private market would use the invisible hand to correct the problem. Why do we need big government to come in and regulate, killing jobs?
Dude, don't come in with that "police state" thing I mean just look at what justice Obama dealt to those in charge of the financial crisis.....oh wait...
Would be nice if Gingrich could win SC. That would mean a different candidate has won each of the 3 primaries/caucus'. Can't call Romney an inevitable with those results
Youre right, corporate private security state.
I expect Blackwater to be conducting TSA style scans at local mall by 2014.
Thats what Im hoping for too.
The Buddy can win Florida, and Ron Paul is huge in nevada right?
How do you guys even stomach a Republican debate? Especially with this candidate field.
I'd like to invite all of my fellow PoliGaffers to #ga. We often discuss politics and similar topics in there. Connect your IRC client to irc.wiicafe.com or irc.browsingtheinternet.com (wiicafe seems to be more reliable, for me at least). If you need help, PM me.
Then, join #ga. Rule #1 (think Fight Club, but not) has been abolished; the floodgates have been opened!
Looking forward to seeing you there.
How do you guys even stomach a Republican debate? Especially with this candidate field.
Youre right, corporate private security state.
I expect Blackwater to be conducting TSA style scans at local mall by 2014.
The Department of Defense and the New York Police Department (NYPD) are developing a remote controlled device that could detect if individuals are carrying concealed firearms or explosives.
...
Although the current range of the electronic frisking device is limited, developers are working to expand its reach to 75 feet, meaning police could begin electronically scanning citizens without their knowledge or consent. That possibility has raised concerns with civil libertarians like NYCLU's Donna Lieberman, who told Fox:
Wait just a second, everybody knows the point of Mitt's taxes and getting to see them isn't because anybody thinks there's something illegal, right?
It's to point out that he pays less taxes than the dude who washes your car! He pays less taxes than you! That's the point. Nobody thinks he's doing anything illegal--they think he's doing something immoral. And seeing the taxes puts the lie to the system, and you bet your ass that tax rate on carried interest is going up in the next 4 years, double taxation be damned.
Wow, and look at what pops up on my news feed an hour later....
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/nyc-police-developing-electronic-frisking-device-171749275.html
Which makes me wonder, is Mitt Romney the Republican Frankenstein Monster, a creation distilled with the perfect visual and verbal cues of its creator, that its result is so ghastly that it must be cast aside. Will the Republicans finally begin to question the validity of their economic prowess? Or is it simply that Mitt's religion is too acidic for the party?
The difference between Obama's birth certificate and Romney's tax return:
Obams - Was being asked to provide proof of citizenship in a way few (if any) other presidential candidates were asked.
Mittens - Is being asked to provide financial documentation which every single presidential candidate has done in the modern era.
Obams - Largely ignored the calls for his birth certificate and when asked directly he handled it in a calm stern fashion.
Mittens - Became a complete stammering mess on multiple occasions when asked about the release of his tax returns even though a blind man could see the questions coming a mile away.
Obams - Outside of wild conspiracies from the fringes, there was never any questionable details uncovered. No embarrassing info. Nothing to make you say, "Ah, that's why he didn't want to release it right away".
Mittens - We're already finding out that he's paid a very low income tax rate and that he has funds in the Cayman Islands. Meaning, there's already evidence why he wants to keep this stuff under wraps.
That said, I agree liberals need to be careful not to get conspiratorial on what's in Romney's tax returns. It's not that he did anything illegal. It's just his tax returns (especially if it goes back several years) will show how rich guys game the system. That in itself is pretty damning when the mood of the country has shifted to questioning economic inequality.
The fact Obama's mother was an American citizen is all the proof that should have been needed, or are we questioning his parentage now?You missed one:
Being a natural born citizen is a requirement to be President so asking for a birth certificate is looking for proof of that requirement. Revealing your taxes is not and really just serves for political fodder.
And since John King pressed the issue, saying that it is "tradition" and Romney's father released 12 years of tax returns, I look forward to him asking the same thing of Obama about his academic records, which is also pretty much tradition.
You missed one:
Being a natural born citizen is a requirement to be President so asking for a birth certificate is looking for proof of that requirement. Revealing your taxes is not and really just serves for political fodder.
And since John King pressed the issue, saying that it is "tradition" and Romney's father released 12 years of tax returns, I look forward to him asking the same thing of Obama about his academic records, which is also pretty much tradition.
You missed one:
Being a natural born citizen is a requirement to be President so asking for a birth certificate is looking for proof of that requirement. Revealing your taxes is not and really just serves for political fodder.
And since John King pressed the issue, saying that it is "tradition" and Romney's father released 12 years of tax returns, I look forward to him asking the same thing of Obama about his academic records, which is also pretty much tradition.
I think ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. do get more viewers than cable networks (by virtue of not needing to pay for cable to watch them), so there's that. But you're right, the 'liberal media' is just a conservative meme that's been used to maximum effectiveness to discredit any station that doesn't tow the conservative line. The problem is the other cable networks themselves have fallen victim to it and have now hitched their wagon to some silly notion of 'neutrality' in an effort to shed the liberal media label. CNN is probably the worst in this respect.I saw part of the debate and I'm curious; what's this elite media that's protecting Obama? Where is this "liberal" media I keep hearing about? It seems to me that talk radio is dominated by right wing radio. You have fox news, who is watched by a lot more people than CNN or MSNBC. ABC, CBS, and NBC don't really have very strong news shows.
Is it just that some of the facts being brought up are things the candidates don't want to talk about, or do facts have a left leaning slant?
I saw part of the debate and I'm curious; what's this elite media that's protecting Obama? Where is this "liberal" media I keep hearing about? It seems to me that talk radio is dominated by right wing radio. You have fox news, who is watched by a lot more people than CNN or MSNBC. ABC, CBS, and NBC don't really have very strong news shows.
Is it just that some of the facts being brought up are things the candidates don't want to talk about, or do facts have a left leaning slant?
Wait just a second, everybody knows the point of Mitt's taxes and getting to see them isn't because anybody thinks there's something illegal, right?
It's to point out that he pays less taxes than the dude who washes your car! He pays less taxes than you! That's the point. Nobody thinks he's doing anything illegal--they think he's doing something immoral. And seeing the taxes puts the lie to the system, and you bet your ass that tax rate on carried interest is going up in the next 4 years, double taxation be damned.
Obama, or any other representatives' GPA doesn't really seem as relevant as a person in power, who has the ability to make economic policy that is DRASTICALLY slanted in their favor. There's nothing wrong with wanting to see where someone stands with their financials when they're in the position to create lasting monetary policy, and the can help control the economic trajectory of this nation and the hundreds of millions of people in it.
So, yeah, academic records and financial records aren't even remotely close to the same thing. In other words, shut the fuck up, Kosmo.
We all know the motivation behind the request for Obama's academic records.
I can't believe Newt might get away with his infidelity/open marriage issue. If Newt were a GAFer, and he made TWO threads about how he was going to leave his wives because they had cancer and MS, and he'd been cheating on them besides, conservative- and liberal-GAF would howl for his banning. He cheated on his 2nd wife FOR SIX YEARS! And then asked if it was okay that he keep his mistress! How is that not the vilest of acts for a family-values voter?
Yep. Ignore stellar performance while at Harvard Law School, and focus on underwhelming undergraduate grades to bitch about affirmative action.
Congress may take books, musical compositions and other works out of the public domain, where they can be freely used and adapted, and grant them copyright status again, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
In a 6-2 ruling, the court ruled that just because material enters the public domain, it is not territory that works may never exit. (PDF)
The top court was ruling on a petition by a group of orchestra conductors, educators, performers, publishers and film archivists who urged the justices to reverse an appellate court that ruled against the group, which has relied on artistic works in the public domain for their livelihoods.
They claimed that re-copyrighting public works would breach the speech rights of those who are now using those works without needing a license. There are millions of decades-old works at issue. Some of the well-known ones include H.G. Wells Things to Come; Fritz Langs Metropolis and the musical compositions of Igor Fyodorovich Stravinsky.
The court, however, was sympathetic to the plaintiffs argument. Writing for the majority, Justice Ruth Ginsburg said some restriction on expression is the inherent and intended effect of every grant of copyright. But the top court, with Justice Elena Kagan recused, said Congress move to re-copyright the works to comport with an international treaty was more important.
For a variety of reasons, the works at issue, which are foreign and produced decades ago, became part of the public domain in the United States but were still copyrighted overseas. In 1994, Congress adopted legislation to move the works back into copyright, so U.S. policy would comport with an international copyright treaty known as the Berne Convention.
In dissent, Justices Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito said the legislation goes against the theory of copyright and does not encourage anyone to produce a single new work. Copyright, they noted, was part of the Constitution to promote the arts and sciences.
The legislation, Breyer wrote, bestows monetary rewards only on owners of old works in the American public domain. At the same time, the statute inhibits the dissemination of those works, foreign works published abroad after 1923, of which there are many millions, including films, works of art, innumerable photographs, and, of course, books books that (in the absence of the statute) would assume their rightful places in computer-accessible databases, spreading knowledge throughout the world.
Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project at Stanford University and a plaintiffs lawyer in the case, called the decision unfortunate and said it suggests Congress is not required to pay particularly close attention to the interests of the public when it passes copyright laws.
The majority, however, rebuffed charges that a decision in favor of Congress move would amount to affording lawmakers the right to legislate perpetual copyright terms.
In aligning the United States with other nations bound by the Berne Convention, and thereby according equitable treatment to once disfavored foreign authors, Congress can hardly be charged with a design to move stealthily toward a regime of perpetual copyrights, Ginsburg wrote.
Its not the first time the Supreme Court has approved the extension of copyrights. The last time was in 2002, when it upheld Congress move to extend copyright from the life of an author plus 50 years after death to 70 years after death.
The lead plaintiff in the case, Lawrence Golan, told the high court that it will not longer be able to perform Prokofievs Classical Symphony and Peter and the Wolf, or Shostakovichs Symphony 14, Cello Concerto because of licensing fees.
Supreme Court rules Congress can re-copyright public domain works
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ress-can-re-copyright-public-domain-works.ars
Not really sure how I feel about this...
To whom exactly would they be restoring the copyright to?Supreme Court rules Congress can re-copyright public domain works
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...ress-can-re-copyright-public-domain-works.ars
Not really sure how I feel about this...
To whom exactly would they be restoring the copyright to?
Ding ding.
Lobbyists win again?