Support NeoGAF

[Diablos]

Is Wolf to the left or right of Schwartz?

Not sure, but if I were to guess, slightly to the right of her as he is more business-savvy, but as I continue to read about him on the issues I'd say he's about the same. He has his own company, The Wolf Organization, "the largest supplier of kitchen and bath cabinetry in the U.S., and a major supplier of building products". He apparently sold off the company only to buy it back at a loss, and he has been getting a lot of negative ads over it from Schwartz... but it doesn't seem to be making a dent. He did prevent it from going out of business which also prevented mass layoffs, so depending on how you spin it this is a plus.

What you have to understand is that most people here in PA literally do not care who the Dem nominee is, they just know whoever it is will be so much better than Corbett. I'm not even voting in the primary as it seems like a lost cause for all the other candidates. Wolf is up by 25 points over Schwartz. He has my vote. The only thing about him I kind of don't like is that he runs ads with his own employees, which is kind of weird.

He wants to tax natural gas extraction, expand Medicaid, reverse Corbett's gutting of our education system, limit anti-union efforts by corporations and veto any legislation the limits the rights of workers, increase the minimum wage... he has a good platform.

His website: www.wolfforpa.com

Again, he has my vote. I've been so busy lately and haven't been paying attention to PA politics... the next thing I know this guy is coming out way ahead of the pack. I felt 90% certain Schwartz would have won. Whatever, as long a this guy can win, and given how Corbett is the George W. Bush of PA politics I think he will. Not to mention he put $10 million of his own into his campaign...

I still can't believe this state elected Corbett. He's such a dipshit. Even taking into account the 2010 tea party wave, if PA Dems ran the right candidate Corbett never would have stood a chance. Frankly, I think the loss is on them more than anyone else -- they knew it was a bad year nationally for Dems, so they should have stuck to what they know works... running a Democrat from Philly/suburbs or central PA. Onorato was always a loser, he isn't even that popular here in western PA, not to mention you do not run Democrats from western PA for gubernatorial races. You just don't, unless someone emerges with a rock star type of status like Obama in 2008, which given our local politics here probably has a .00000000001% chance of happening.

 

[Coriolanus]

Awesome. Hope Bill handles him the way he did last time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09i2YvLPZuE

Honestly surprised that he'd go back, after the last appearance.

 

[The Librarian]

The real question is why were her primary numbers so low- my guess is folks are getting angry at the Dem establishment from the left as not being liberal enough.

Er, what? That doesn't make any sense. Considering the state she represents, Kay Hagan has been a pretty good senator.

 

[Diablos]

lol @ Impeaching Obama over Benghazi. Good luck winning a 67 seat Senate majority, GOP.

Well if they don't capture the Senate it wont happen.

Basically if you live in NC go out and vote for Brannon to ensure a runoff.

Again, unless there's something I'm not aware of that the GOP can exploit in Senate rules, it would still be impossible as they need 2/3 of the Senate to impeach. So even if they get a 51 or 53 seat majority it won't be enough. They sure as hell aren't going to have a 2/3 majority. The House can impeach him like they did Clinton but they cannot actually remove Obama from office without 67 Senators following suit, it's in the Constitution. Good fucking luck with that.

The only thing they could do is by a simple majority prevent Obama from ever holding public office again, but they cannot remove him from the Presidency with <67 Senators.

Spoiler

Given their perverse masturbatory nature of never giving up on their utterly insane agenda they just might settle for this.

 

[Diablos]

Jesus calm down, the ACA is a smashing success and will only get better in the coming months, and the economic news that's coming in is very good and will only get better over the summer as well.

Pryor, Hagan, Landrieu, Shaheen and Begich are all leading their likely challengers, and the House is so gerrymandered that I can't see a wave in either direction at this point.

Leading them as of when? Prior to the consistent bump for GOPers on the generic ballot we've been seeing? It is still early and there is no indication in the polls that the ACA is a 'smashing success' in the eyes of the public which is all that will matter in November. A generally 52/48 law, give or take, does not make for a huge success.

The GOP needs to gain six seats in order to win the Senate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/07/business/us-trade-deficit-drops-3-6-percent.html

Oh and hey, more positive economic news, our trade deficit fell by 3.6%.

Yeah, but the real question is if people are feeling all this good economic news. Given Obama's approval rating I'd say no. Try telling someone who is unemployed, bankrupt, and already lost their house/apartment (or close to it) because UE won't ever get extended that the economy is getting better.

Yup

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/thom-tillis-divide-and-conquer-poor

That's shameful. But the scary thing is he just might win regardless... look at all the other crazy people dominating the NC state legislature, their insane Governor... dude is just gravy for them at this point. He could totally win if all those other loons did. Plus, the state will probably be a poster child for the GOP's insane voter suppression efforts and the absolute exploitation of our campaign financing system in a midterm election. Book it.

 

[Chumly]

Can you imagine if we start impeaching people over talking points. I mean are you serious? All of George bushes administration should have received the death penalty by now if we doing comparative punishments.

 

[bonercop]

man, these judical nominees:

But the White House has stood by Boggs, who is part of an all-or-nothing package of six judicial nominees that the president agreed to last summer with Georgia's Republican senators, Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson. Obama made some notable concessions in the deal -- four of the six nominees are GOP picks and only one is black, in a state with a large black population -- but administration officials say the trade-off is that Democrat-backed nominees in the package will finally move forward after years of going nowhere.

"Do we work with Republican senators to find a compromise, or should we leave the seats vacant?" White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler said in a February interview with The Huffington Post. "We believe it would be grossly irresponsible for the president to leave these seats vacant."

What was even the point of getting rid of the filibuster?

 

[Owzers]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-nye-battles-crossfires-s-e-cupp-over-climate-change-scare-tactics/



My waifu is as adorable and dumb as ever. <3

It's not working with the public!

 

[PhoenixDark]

Republicans don't expect to remove Obama from office through impeachment, they know it's impossible just as 90s republicans knew they couldn't remove Clinton. It's about appeasing their base and shaming the president in the most extreme way possible.

I don't see Boehner allowing a vote but we'll see. There simply is no case, and even if the focus is Benghazi they won't find Obama's fingerprints on anything.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I'm not sure if that's intended as a compliment, but I'll take it as a compliment in any event. Thanks.

Really neither but in all seriousness I do enjoy the discussions because they make me think, and while I can often discuss politics nobody ever wants to discuss constitutional law in the real world.

Are you talking about in the portion I quoted, or something else? In the portion I quoted, Kennedy said that the government could not require that prayers meet a government-defined nonsectarian standard. He didn't say there couldn't be any limits whatsoever. Like you point out, and like I quoted, he says that there are some limits on what may be said during legislative prayers (and how such prayers may be said). I don't see any contradiction in Kennedy's opinion.

I'm saying kennedy's position isnt logical. You can't force the prayers to be non-sectarian but you can force them not to denigrate other religions? Why? Where does that denigrating standard come from. Why is that governmental interference in prayer OK under one standard but not another?

If the rules relate to the content of a statement, then I think it clearly is censorship to base invitations on adherence to those rules. The question becomes whether such censorship is appropriate.

I don't know how some censorship is ok but others is too far. It seems to me kennedy is subistuting his own religious understanding and not applying any test. He just felt that Greece's prayers weren't that bad. The 'Who cares'? standard. I don't think that's very wise and personally I think Kennedy is underestimating the effect of these types of prayers on participation by non Christians. As someone whose not a christian they make me feel like I wouldn't be welcome and am not in the same standing as a citizen. Ceremonial deism is a bit better but I still think it is too far because though the words don't evoke Christianity Its plainly obvious what the intent often is. Nobody has a problem with someone saying a prayer with his own speaking time.

But on the question of invitations being censorship, wouldn't it follow from this that if a town has a policy of only inviting nonsectarian prayers but not overtly christian ones that they could sue to be included? So this case mandates towns endorse or provide a platform for religious promotion even if they seek to do no such thing, just because they have non-sectarian prayer? I don't see how that doesn't follow.

I think Thomas' opinion regarding the incorporation of the Establishment Clause through the Fourteenth Amendment is fascinating. It's something I'll probably look into more at some point.

Thomas' jurisprudence seems less concerned with the text of Constitution than forcing 18th century practices and cultural mores on the 21st century US government.

 

[Wilsongt]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-nye-battles-crossfires-s-e-cupp-over-climate-change-scare-tactics/



My waifu is as adorable and dumb as ever. <3

Oh Sippy Cupp...

 

[Four_Chamber]

Yup

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/thom-tillis-divide-and-conquer-poor

Wow, that's pretty despicable. So only people with disabilities get government assistance? Some in the GOP are really clueless.

That being said, Hagan's fate rests on turnout. It will all be about getting out the vote.

 

[Wilsongt]

Fox News spelling doom and gloom for Kay Hagan. Opinion backed by Karl Baby Face Rove.

 

[Aaron Strife]

The real question is why were her primary numbers so low- my guess is folks are getting angry at the Dem establishment from the left as not being liberal enough.

Uh, 77% is low?

 

[benjipwns]

Can you imagine if we start impeaching people over talking points. I mean are you serious? All of George bushes administration should have received the death penalty by now if we doing comparative punishments.

I don't know if I'd say "all" but I'm not seeing the downside here.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-nye-battles-crossfires-s-e-cupp-over-climate-change-scare-tactics/



My waifu is as adorable and dumb as ever. <3

 

[benjipwns]

Don't even need to wait for Poppa Bear, Greta takes out the "comedy" trash on her own:
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com...-a-comedian-has-of-course-way-more-lattitude/

Last night Jon Stewart opened his show with a segment about Fox News Channel&#8217;s aggressive coverage of Benghazi.

Stewart&#8217;s criticism of Fox News Channel is that Fox News Channel is more aggressive about President Obama and Benghazi than it ever was about President Bush and Iraq.

Besides the obvious &#8212; that almost all the Democrats in Congress voted for the war in Iraq and other media reporting &#8211; is my simple note to Stewart: 2 wrongs don&#8217;t make a right.

Endless annihilation of Stewart's butthurt whining in the comments:

ResQMee &#8226; a day ago
Stewart sounds a little nervous about this Congressional probe.

3ButterflyKisses &#8226; a day ago
I have never watched Jon Stewart in my life, nor do I have a desire to. I also didn't watch Fox during the Iraq war. What I do know is the Main Stream Media went after Bush with a vengeance and now the MSM is doing what Stewart accuses Fox of doing, of ignoring one President, (Obama) while aggressively going after another (Bush). Can one not see the hypocrisy of what Stewart said last night? It was fine with Stewart the MSM aggressively went after Bush, but now ignores all things Obama? All Stewart did was show us he is another Obama lap dog and will do what lap dogs do - protect their master.

2bshur &#8226; a day ago
Bush never abandoned anyone to die nor did he lie and fabricate a story to cover his butt to win an election. What Obama and Clinton did was show extreme negligence, dereliction of duty and they have obstructed justice on a level far greater than that which happened during Watergate. At least Nixon had the sense and decency to step down so we could move forward.

Informed&Concerned &#8226; a day ago
Stewart will have egg on his face when it is revealed that the "INTELLIGENCE FAILURE" he so glibly refers to originated at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

alapatriot &#8226; a day ago
Perchance he could look at his own network and not be so concerned about the industry leader. Maybe Fox is leading for a reason. Do you suppose it is because, for the most part, Fox employs journalists and professionals, not comedians and ministers without Divinity degrees?

 

[Wilsongt]

Don't even need to wait for Poppa Bear, Greta takes out the "comedy" trash on her own:
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com...-a-comedian-has-of-course-way-more-lattitude/


Endless annihilation of Stewart's butthurt whining in the comments:

Greta should know good and well why the Democrats voted for the war in Iraq. They all knew that if they went against Bush on this that they would be dragged through the mud so hard it would take years to get all of the stains out.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Wow. Hope for South Dakota yet?

Mike Rounds (R) 38
Rick Weiland (D) 28
Larry Pressler (I) 15
Gordon Howie (I) 4

Obviously trailing by 10 points is a bad spot to be in, but as PPP points out, Weiland leads Rounds among people who know both candidates (38-36), his favorables are higher (+6 compared to Rounds who's even) and voters are strongly against the Ryan budget and Medicare cuts. It's such a steep hill that I don't think it's worth investing much into, but there is the extreme optimist in me that thinks maybe Weiland can pull it out.

The two independents were both formerly Republicans - Pressler however is running a far more liberal campaign. It's hard to say who he'd be stealing more votes from.

 

[GaimeGuy]

PEOPLE DIED. OBAMA DIDN'T SAY WHY.

 

[benjipwns]

The two independents were both formerly Republicans - Pressler however is running a far more liberal campaign. It's hard to say who he'd be stealing more votes from.

Pressler is also a former Senator, he was slightly to the right of the Rockefeller Republicans back in the day.

PEOPLE DIED. OBAMA DIDN'T SAY WHY.

RPG I think. Maybe it was just a grenade launcher.

 

[bodyofanamerican]

DCCC chair Steve Israel: Boycott the GOP’s Benghazi probe, Dems

One person present described Israel’s advice as follows: “He thought, based on the lessons of the shutdown, in which to some extent Republicans and Democrats were painted with the same brush, that it was in the best interests not to participate.”
The person added Israel argued that if Dems participate, they will be “perceived as part of the problem,” because the story will be “Democrats and Republicans are fighting again on TV.” (Those are the words of the person present.)
“His point was that people are tired of hearing about this and realize it is a partisan witch hunt and that most people see it for what it is,” the source continued.
Dem Rep. James Clyburn has also called for a Dem boycott of the probe, arguing that participating in a panel with a stacked make-up is akin to “bringing a noose to my hanging.”

 

[Joe Molotov]

RPG I think. Maybe it was just a grenade launcher.

We have a right to know which one it was so we can go to Wal-Mart and buy one before Obummer repeals the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Jack Remington]

Boycotting the probe strikes me as a pretty sensible solution. Just let the panel be seven Republicans and ignore them completely.

 

[Manarola]

Greta should know good and well why the Democrats voted for the war in Iraq. They all knew that if they went against Bush on this that they would be dragged through the mud so hard it would take years to get all of the stains out.

That's a very lame excuse

 

[gcubed]

why are people all worked up about the impeachment rumors? If its true it would be the best news to come out of Washington in years.

 

[RustyNails]

PEOPLE DIED. OBAMA DIDN'T SAY WHY.

It was a glitch. The US base in Benghazi did not respawn after Obama reloaded the game.

 

[AntoneM]

We all know by now that Obama ordered a hit on Benghazi because Chris Steven found out about his forbidden love affairs with Hilary. They were both in on it and Bill was watching.

 

[benjipwns]

We all know by now that Obama ordered a hit on Benghazi because Chris Steven found out about his forbidden love affairs with Hilary. They were both in on it and Bill was watching.

This is complete conspiracy theory bullshit.

Obama only has affairs with Reggie Love. And he was too busy during one session so Hillary and Valerie Jarrett ordered the Benghazi attacks to setup Mitt Romney to be undermined during the debates by fellow collaborator Candy Crowley.

 

[Oblivion]

Actually, gentlemen. The REAL truth about Benghazi is that Chris Stevens discovered that the whole Bin Laden execution thing was staged and that he was chilling in the Embassy.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Do panels like this traditionally have more members from the majority party? I know ethics probes are even, but for instance did the 911 panel have equal members?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Do panels like this traditionally have more members from the majority party? I know ethics probes are even, but for instance did the 911 panel have equal members?

Standing committees don't besides ethics. Wasn't the congressional 9/11 investigation done by regular intelligence? I don't remember

 

[GaimeGuy]

Do panels like this traditionally have more members from the majority party? I know ethics probes are even, but for instance did the 911 panel have equal members?

Panels like this? You mean fake, manufactured scandals? I'd imagine they typically have more republicans

 

[Oblivion]

Standing committees don't besides ethics. Wasn't the congressional 9/11 investigation done by regular intelligence? I don't remember

The 9/11 commission was definitely full of equal members of both parties.

 

[East Lake]

The 9/11 commission was definitely full of equal members of both parties.

And look what it got us. The biggest cover up in history. Bigger than JFK. aliens, or loch ness.

 

[benjipwns]

The 9/11 commission was definitely full of equal members of both parties.

I'd have rather read the report that had equal members of the Libertarian, Green, Natural Law and Constitution parties.

 

[Hobbestetrician]

Someone in the Hillary thread just said they think Paul Ryan is the smartest man in Washington right now.

 

[benjipwns]

Someone in the Hillary thread just said they think Paul Ryan is the smartest man in Washington right now.

Maybe everyone else left for an early weekend?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The 9/11 commission was definitely full of equal members of both parties.

The commission wasn't congress was it? It was appointed by congress.

There was an investigation by congress itself I think. Or at least hearings.

 

[benjipwns]

The commission wasn't congress was it? It was appointed by congress.

I think it was appointed by Bush under Congressional authorization.

Both Hamilton and Kean thought it was setup to basically accomplish nothing of real value. Limited scope, limited access, limited funding, limited time, etc.

 

[WayneMorse]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/us/gop-to-open-assault-on-white-house-over-irs-and-benghazi.html

Lois Lerner found in contempt.

 

[gcubed]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/us/gop-to-open-assault-on-white-house-over-irs-and-benghazi.html

Lois Lerner found in contempt.

i love that, "found in contempt". of what? of nothing, because it means nothing and has no repercussions.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I think it was appointed by Bush under Congressional authorization.

Both Hamilton and Kean thought it was setup to basically accomplish nothing of real value. Limited scope, limited access, limited funding, limited time, etc.

Yeah, which means its different than a real congressional committee

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/us/gop-to-open-assault-on-white-house-over-irs-and-benghazi.html

Lois Lerner found in contempt.

Most corrupt administration ever

 

[benjipwns]

i love that, "found in contempt". of what? of nothing, because it means nothing and has no repercussions.

You won't be laughing when contempt of Congress is on your permanent record.

 

[Trouble]

You won't be laughing when contempt of Congress is on your permanent record.

Builds street cred. Look how baller Holder is now.

 

[gcubed]

You won't be laughing when contempt of Congress is on your permanent record.

at this rate you'd just be one of the crowd, you'd stand out more if you didn't have that on your record.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

You can become a Benghazi Watchdog (c)

House Republicans will make sure that no one will get away from Gowdy and the Select Committee.
This is going to be a national effort for a national investigation.

http://www.nrcc.org/2014/05/06/can-become-benghazi-watchdog-right-now/

GOP leaders are apparently aware that their Gowdy new look could be problematic. Republican House leaders emerging from a closed-door caucus meeting declared to the TV cameras that they were all about creating jobs &#8212; omitting from their opening statements any mention of their investigatory obsession.

&#8220;I hosted my fifth annual jobs fair,&#8221; began Rep. Lynn Jenkins (Kansas).

&#8220;Today I wanted to talk more about jobs,&#8221; announced Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers.

Boehner asserted that there are &#8220;nearly 40 pro-growth jobs bills&#8221; in the Senate passed by the House, while Majority Leader Eric Cantor said the House would &#8220;take up a big jobs bill,&#8221; extending the research-and-development tax credit.

Clowns, all of them
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...c3d550-d634-11e3-95d3-3bcd77cd4e11_story.html

 

[Chumly]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/us/gop-to-open-assault-on-white-house-over-irs-and-benghazi.html

Lois Lerner found in contempt.

They claim it's otherwise but it's exactly what boehner is claiming it isn't. A fucking circus.

 

[Joe Molotov]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/08/us/gop-to-open-assault-on-white-house-over-irs-and-benghazi.html

Lois Lerner found in contempt.

“This is not going to be a sideshow,” Speaker John A. Boehner said. “This is not going to be a circus.”

oh, 4 real?

 

[benjipwns]

They should subpoena Sandy Berger and try to find out what he stole and destroyed from the archives while they're at it.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Then, his voice rising in anger and his face darkening to red, he went through the list of investigations that conservatives have pursued to frustratingly inconclusive ends over the last several years.

LOL