ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
So this is what CTR is paying for eh?
*Puts on Ted Cruz voice* "PoliGAF is just another example of the depraved, godless nature of the Clinton campaign and the Clinton machine."
So this is what CTR is paying for eh?
Well, at two cents a post, I'm raking in hella dough here no matter what I postSo this is what CTR is paying for eh?
I want a harem
Well, at two cents a post, I'm raking in hella dough here no matter what I post
Tomato
WE'RE GAY BONDING.
I can't sleep at night. Insomnia. I can even take Unisom and still not fall asleep. Ridiculous. Up all night, sleep for four hours, feel totally fine. #losingit
*Puts on Ted Cruz voice* "PoliGAF is just another example of the depraved, godless nature of the Clinton campaign and the Clinton machine."
Garrison Keillor with that ether
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...p-losing-garrison-keillor-20160831-story.html
Cookie crisp? Why don't you just poor cookies in a bowl and cover it with milk?I shouldn't eat Cookie Crisp after 10pm. This is what happens. Sad.
Hahahahahaha
Cookie crisp? Why don't you just poor cookies in a bowl and cover it with milk?
Because I am a grown up and I can't just eat cookies willy nilly.
I buy cookie flavored cereal. Like an adult.
It was for the kids. I took most of it. They have to eat Life now. Hahahaha
Guitarist/vocalist and arch Republican Lee Atwater, along with a star-studded list of soul artists, ignite on 13 blue chip live performances of great R&B songs. Chuck Jackson, Carla Thomas, B.B. King, Isaac Hayes, Sam Moore, and gospel singer Bobby Jones contribute vocals; and Michael Toles, the Memphis Horns, ex-Motown bassist Bob Babbitt and Billy Preston, the music. This pleasing set is set off by Chuck Jackson and Sam Moore's scathing rendition of "Hold On I'm Coming"; Isaac Hayes' "I'm in the Mood"; B.B. King's guitar and vocal licks on "Red, Hot & Blue" and "Buzz Me"; and Jackson and Carla Thomas' fiery version of "Rescue Me."
Hahahahahaha
Holy shit. Benji, when was this?
On Jan. 21, 1989, a very unusual concert took place in Washington.
Held in a cavernous convention center, it featured blues and soul royalty like Bo Diddley, Willie Dixon, Sam Moore, Carla Thomas, Percy Sledge and Dr. John. Yet the highlight was when President George H. W. Bush — sworn in just a day before — hammed it up onstage with Lee Atwater, his campaign manager, both with guitars in their hands and smiles on their faces.
The concert, part of President Bush’s inaugural festivities, was masterminded by Atwater, a huge fan of the music — and a musician himself — who called the night “a dream come true for me.” Long-lost video of the event will be shown on PBS stations on Saturday and released later on DVD.
Among the extraordinary performances are Dixon and Koko Taylor in a spicy “Wang Dang Doodle” and Stevie Ray Vaughan with a searing “Texas Flood.” Yet at the time, the concert drew a puzzled and sometimes harsh response in the news media, largely over questions of racial politics.
“All those issues were raised by the cynical press at the time,” said Howell Begle, a Washington lawyer and artist advocate who organized the show and is an executive producer of the videos. “But most of them never had a chance to see these performances.”
Now the concert can finally be appreciated, even if it cannot be fully separated from its political context. Bo Diddley trades guitar licks with Ron Wood of the Rolling Stones on “Hey! Bo Diddley.” Fans of Stax, the legendary Memphis soul label, will delight in watching Eddie Floyd, William Bell, Mr. Moore and Ms. Thomas backed by a band including the Stax regulars Steve Cropper and Duck Dunn.
(PBS’s one-hour program, “A Celebration of Blues & Soul: The 1989 Inaugural Concert,” is a sampling; Shout Factory will release the two-hour version on May 6.)
As historic as the concert was, the film nearly vanished. The master copy was lost and assumed destroyed, Mr. Begle said, and to his chagrin no other copies were allowed to be kept. But after he had secured the rights to the footage of the performances around 2006, a forgotten high-quality copy was found at Bose, the audio company that had provided $75,000 to help record the show. That copy has been painstakingly restored, and the resulting film is a treasure for soul music fans.
Atwater’s reputation preceded him with some of the musicians he pursued, but playing for a president is a hard gig to turn down. Bruce Iglauer, Ms. Taylor’s manager, recalled bringing the offer to his client.
“I went to Koko and said, ‘These awful people who I hate and think are a bunch of racists want you to come and perform at an inaugural ball,’ ” Mr. Iglauer said. “And she said, ‘I want to play for a president.’ ”
As the guitarist Joe Louis Walker put it, “It’s an honor for the blues to go all the way from the outhouse to the White House, no matter who the president is.”
Recalling the event, several of the surviving musicians said they were paid well and treated with respect. Still, there were odd moments. Dixon, who died in 1992, wore a “Jesse Jackson for President” button. The music scholar Peter Guralnick wrote in an essay for the DVD of seeing musicians backstage, “each wearing an expression of incredulity on his or her face that as much as said, What are you doing here?”
The PBS special and DVD have finally brought the concert to light, but it is still not complete. At the show, Atwater played guitar and sang a version of Tommy Tucker’s “Hi-Heel Sneakers,” but that is nowhere on the videos, and aside from a brief spoken introduction — “Tonight’s not a night for politics; tonight’s a night for music,” he says — he is absent. So is President Bush and the rest of the Bush family, as are celebrities including Chuck Norris and Cheryl Ladd.
One reason, Mr. Begle said, is that the film rights he purchased include only the performances, not the political figures.
I am a firm believer in the fundamental tenets of the Republican Party: individual freedom, small government, local control of issues, free speech, strong national defense and the broad vision that America is an exceptional country that gives exceptional opportunities to everyone.
I take my civic responsibilities very seriously. None more so than the solemn duty to elect the president of our country. Donald Trump is neither representative of our values nor qualified to lead the nation.
Of all the elections in which I have participated, none has become more transcendental to the definition of We the people and the very nature of our democracy than the one we face today.
No longer can we seek solace in wishful thinking or the illusion that this is just an election cycle and that by divine intervention all will be better after we vote. There is no basis in thinking that our democracy is so strong, our checks and balances so finely hedged, that no single person can lead us off the precipice. Trump can.
No longer can we hide behind the excuse that party loyalty is paramount, and that a bad candidate of our own is always better than any candidate of theirs. Blind loyalty in this case is the ultimate definition of disloyalty to our beliefs. Loyalty to our nation must be the ultimate arbiter of our choice.
I have arrived at this difficult moment. A moment that may define leaders and followers. I harbor no illusion that Hillary Clinton is perfect; none of us is. I do not see eye to eye on some issues with the former senator from New York. However, Clinton is, without doubt, a superior choice to Donald Trump.
Balancing any of her shortcomings are intelligence, experience, as well as the humility to accept that she does not have all the answers. She has delegated effectively over the decades in public service. These attributes will serve her well as president.
The republic should outlast any party. Our democratic spirit will ensure that we do and that this shining city on the hill eventually will shine even brighter.
No longer can we hide behind the excuse that party loyalty is paramount, and that a bad candidate of our own is always better than any candidate of theirs.
in 1944, following the Port Chicago disaster, the U.S. Navy asked Congress to authorize payments of $5,000 to each of the victims' families. But when Rankin learned most of the dead were black sailors, he insisted the amount be reduced to $2,000; Congress settled the amount at $3,000 per family
After HUAC's chief counsel Ernest Adamson announced: "The committee has decided that it lacks sufficient data on which to base a probe [into the actions of the KKK]," Rankin added: "After all, the KKK is an old American institution."
Rankin assumed ethnic Japanese, regardless of their circumstances, were innately and fanatically loyal to Japan. "Once a Jap always a Jap," he reasoned; "You cannot change him. You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear."
Rankin [proposed] that every person of Japanese ancestry in the United States be deported at the end of the war.
during his first term in Congress [he] introduced a bill to prohibit whites from intermarrying with African Americans or "Mongolians." A decade later, Rankin opposed Hawaii's candidacy to statehood on the basis that it would admit "two Jap senators" to Congress
Representative Jacob Javits (R-New York) who instead condemned the white mob in Peekskill for violating constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and free assembly. Angered by these comments, Rankin bellowed, "It was not surprising to hear the gentleman from New York defend the Communist enclave." He then wanted it known that the American people are not in sympathy "with that nigger Communist and that bunch of Reds who went up there."
On a point of order, Representative Vito Marcantonio (R-New York) protested to House Speaker Sam Rayburn (D-Texas) that "the gentleman from Mississippi used the word 'nigger.' I ask that the word be taken down and stricken from the RECORD inasmuch as there are two members in this house of Negro race." Rayburn claimed that Rankin had not said "nigger" but "Negro"; but Rankin yelled over him, saying "I said Niggra! Just as I have said since I have been able to talk and shall continue to say."
Speaker Rayburn defended Rankin, ruling that "the gentleman from Mississippi is not subject to a point of order... referred to the Negro race and they should not be afraid of that designation."
Rankin claimed that the Immigration and Nationality Act was opposed solely by American Jews:
"They whine about discrimination. Do you know who is being discriminated against? The white Christian people of America, the ones who created this nation ... I am talking about the white Christian people of the North as well as the South ... Communism is racial. A racial minority seized control in Russia and in all her satellite countries, such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, and many other countries I could name. They have been run out of practically every country in Europe in the years gone by, and if they keep stirring race trouble in this country and trying to force their communistic program on the Christian people of America, there is no telling what will happen to them here."
Rankin condemned Einstein on the floor of Congress, calling him a "foreign-born agitator" who sought "to further the spread of Communism throughout the world."
You need to stop reading CIA/NATO/Chipolte/World Bank imperialist sources.The alt-right only knows the word "cuck" but I think the Communism Left has a one-word vocabulary of "coup!"
Venezuela's president is trying to seize total power and defy the constitution and is mumbling about these "coup" attempts.
"Venezuela is a national security threat only because it refuses to be controlled by the United States!" as an article from 2015 when the country is currently melting really wasn't that full of foresight in retrospect.
There are times when doubts and hesitations become complicities. There are circumstances where reservations and discussions about internal contradictions of a particular political process pushed to the background by a greater evil. We may have varying degrees of agreement with some decisions, but there’s something that’s beyond any sort of doubt: the Venezuelan people have conquered, with Chavism, a way out of the hole that capitalism had buried them in. And that’s worth defending.
There are times for criticism and self-criticism, but when the enemy is closing in and seeks to take advantage of our weaknesses to give us a mortal blow, we can’t doubt and much less recede.
That’s what’s happening today in Bolivarian Venezuela, where the worst threats have materialized in a date and a slogan: “On September 1, We Must Take Over Caracas”. The internal and external opposition plays, as in 2002, a dangerous card. They are announcing a dangerous day, and it may go by without a fuss or —as has happened before when the opposition revolted— it may end in a bloodbath. They have a history of causing bloodshed: the massacre of Puente Llaguno, the kidnapping of Hugo Chavez that almost ends with his murder in La Orchila, the oil strike, the guarimbas (barricades on the streets) with snipers that shot pedestrians and drivers. They know better than anyone that they have no peaceful means to achieve their ends and so they seek to disturb and instill fear with threats of violence and terror.
Therefore, it’s time to close ranks and commit to solidarity, to support the Venezuelan people who will defend their country against the uprising. In every country, we must demonstrate outside Venezuelan embassies to express solidarity with this courageous country, its people and its democratically-elected President Nicolás Maduro, and warn the opposition that they better not attempt to promote violence, because they shall not pass.
Now that we’ve established this, as internationalist militants in every aspect and not just as writers or endorsers of manifestos, we also believe that it’s necessary for the revolutionary discourse to undergo a change towards radicalization, to deepen the process as far as it takes, no matter what, to avoid the enemy to keep blackmailing us day after day. To deepen the process means: going against the particular interests of whichever person, including those who cause the shortage of basic goods and the economic war, those who make tours around the world financed by Washington and the European right, those who practice media terrorism and those who promote the violence of paramilitarism to murder the leaders of the people or Chavist militaries. But this is also true for the “red-coated bureaucrats” that are encrusted in the government and use their seats and power for their own personal benefit and betray the Revolution. President Nicolás Maduro himself has denounced this.
The Revolution mustn’t hesitate to nationalize foreign commerce and banks, expropriate all companies that boycott the process and deepen the agrarian reform, take power from those who want a European social democratic model in a society that is quintessentially Latin American and Third-Worldly. All of this is what Chavist Venezuelans are demanding throughout the country. Capitalism can only be overcome with more socialism, and not with half-heartedness, as some defeatist ideologists propose.
Due to all of these reasons, Resumen Latinoamericano and The Dawn News call on Thursday, September 1st, to take to the streets to defend Venezuelan Embassies in every country. Latin America and the world have a great debt with Venezuela and this is why they need to act to defend our sister nation in this difficult time.
Respect Democracy in Venezuela!
For Independence and Socialism!
Massive Turnout in Defense of Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolution
Thousands of pro-government supporters staged a counter rally to defend President Nicolas Maduro after the right-wing opposition called for a "taking of Caracas" march to demand Maduro's ouster.
The Chavistas gathered in front of the presidential palace Miraflores in Caracas Wednesday where President Maduro gave a speech on the achievements of the Bolivarian Revolution and the importance of defending it.
Today in old time alt-right dickery, Mississippi Congressman John E. Rankin (serving 1921-1953) takes to the House floor:
to authorize payments of $5,000 to each of the victims' families. But when Rankin learned most of the dead were black sailors, he insisted the amount be reduced to $2,000; Congress settled the amount at $3,000 per family
haha, i didn't even notice thatClassic. I give this maneuver a 3 out of 5.
On May 6, 1921, Tinkham interrupted consideration of an Army appropriations bill by introducing a resolution instructing the House Committee on the Census to investigate disfranchisement efforts by the states and report back to the full House to provide information for a debate about reapportioning to expand the chambers membership. As usual, he did not mince words, describing southern disfranchisement schemes as the most colossal electoral fraud the world has ever known. He added, On this question moral cowardice and political expediency dominate the Republican leadership of the House.
Later that fall during floor debate about a bill sponsored by Census Committee Chairman Isaac Siegel of New York to expand Membership of the House from 435 to 483, Tinkham again injected into the dialogue the issue of upholding the 14th Amendment, noting that the word shall in Section 2 compelled Congress unconditionally to enforce reduction. Franchise equality is fundamental and profound, Tinkham declared, adding national elections can no longer be half constitutional and half unconstitutional.
Tinkham registered unconcealed contempt for House leaders who declined to investigate southern voting fraud. For this refusal by the leaders of the majority party I do not possess a command of language strong enough to use in denunciation and reprobation, he said.The real anarchists in the United States, the real leaders of lawlessness, are the Members of this House of Representatives who refuse obedience to the Constitution which they have sworn to obey.
Representative Wells Goodykoontz of West Virginia, former president of the West Virginia Bar Association, was the sole Member to join Tinkham in calling for enforcement of the 14th Amendment. He provided statistical evidence based on November 1920 voting returns in his district (85,587 votes were cast) versus the total votes recorded for the entire congressional delegations in South Carolina (67,737) and Mississippi (70,657).
In late 1922, Representative Tinkham wrote President Warren G. Harding an open letter urging him to support such an investigation. He ventured as far as to warn President Harding that the very tenure of the office you hold and the representation of the lower House of Congress is tainted with unconstitutionality. See Negro Right to Vote Is Urged on Harding, 4 December 1922, New York Times:
Had reduction been adopted, Mississippis delegation would have been halved, from 8 to 4. Rankin countered Tinkham by arguing that the 15th Amendmentin prohibiting disfranchisement because of race or colorhad by implication superseded and voided the part of the 14th Amendment that called for reduction.
Conjuring up the specter of Reconstruction, Rankin continued, the time has passed when a man or a party can successfully make political capital by holding out to the Negro the hope or promise of social and political equality.
Roiled and divided by major issues like immigration, tax policy, a soldiers bonus, and international questions such as U.S. participation in the League of Nations, Congress postponed work on the reapportionment issue from 1921 to 1927.
Tinkham made at least two more attempts to add reduction amendments before passage of a comprehensive reapportionment bill in 1929, but he was unsuccessful.
As one scholar notes, it is not surprising that congressional leaders failed to vigorously protect black voting rights, given pervasive notions among national political leaders and strategists that extending the franchise might be more harmful than the alternative.
In early December 1927, Tinkham reintroduced an (ultimately unsuccessful) amendment to create a special House panel to investigate disfranchisement by linking it to the larger issue of equitable distribution of House seats between urban and rural constituencies. See Will Urge Congress to Investigate South, 5 December 1927, New York Times: 3. In 1929, amid the deal-cutting for a key combined census and apportionment measure that permanently set the House Membership at 435, Tinkham secured enough votes to pass two amendments to a comprehensive reapportionment bill that had passed the Senate; however, Speaker Nicholas Longworth of Ohio intervened in conjunction with Majority Leader John Q. Tilson of Connecticut to kill the Tinkham provisions. House leaders feared an open debate on the issue would undo the delicate coalition of support for the overall reapportionment package.
n the 1920s, for the first (and only) time in its history, the House failed to reapportion itself based on the most recent census figures. For nine years the House haltingly debated the method for reapportioning itself, and the membership remained at the level set after the 1910 Census: 435 seats. In addition to disputing the proper statistical procedure for determining apportionment, Members contended with a number of thorny issues: Would the House become less efficient as it grew larger? How could the chamber physically hold the continually expanded memberships (required to ensure that no states lost representation)? Should African Americans and aliens be counted in the population counts, even though most could not vote?
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Random weird critiscism of 'Keeping it 1600'.
They need to stop Jon Favreau reading the advert for the mail order men's clothing line. No-one, absolutely no-one, is going to believe that he gets his clothes from there. It sounds so silly when he goes on about not having the time to buy clothes. He looks like a male mode for goodness sakes!
Too funny.Garrison Keillor with that ether
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...p-losing-garrison-keillor-20160831-story.html
I can not believe the Arizona GOP was dumb enough to create a wanted poster of Ann Kirkpatrick showing her running away from her constituents.I can not post the article since I am on my mobile phone right now.I felt like faceplaming when I read one of the articles about what the Arizona GOP did.
I mean, this is the guy who sings bluegrass after Car Talk, right? Who else read it with whistles?Too funny.
Kirkpatrick's campaign issued a statement calling it a "gross political attack" that recalls the Jan. 8, 2011, assassination attempt on then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., who suffered a near-fatal gunshot wound to the head in a mass shooting near Tucson.
“Arizonans have witnessed, firsthand, how inciteful (sic) rhetoric and imagery can influence acts of aggression and violence towards elected officials," Arizona Democratic Party Chairwoman Alexis Tameron added in a written statement. "Today's political stunt by the Arizona Republican Party illustrates not only a lack of judgment, but a complete disregard of the tragedy that traumatized so many Arizonans on January 8, 2011."
Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, said in a statement: “In a state and country that know the toll of gun violence too well, there is no room for invoking the use of firearms in our politics. Our political leaders have the responsibility to avoid a descent into messages that might suggest that elections are settled anywhere else than at the ballot box. We urge Arizonans of every political stripe to join us in asking the Arizona Republican Party to refrain from using this irresponsible imagery and to apologize.”
please don't depress me with sad memories of yo la tengo and days gone bye....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUJYXaS7J-Q
Did Isaac Hayes performed "Chocolate Salty Balls"?
That's your criticism? I just find him obnoxious.
Garrison Keillor with that ether
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...p-losing-garrison-keillor-20160831-story.html
So many gays. So magically in here.
They'll be sorry when Hillary gets in office and enacts Defense of Marriage Act 2.0 and Don't Ask Don't Tell like her husband.
Something she probably told Wall Street in those speeches.
Just heard that crazy and very dumb @morningmika had a mental breakdown while talking about me on the low ratings @Morning_Joe. Joe a mess!