You should have aimed better.

I read a good article suggesting that Christie is hoping for an override of his veto. That way it won't really hurt him in 2013 when he runs for reelection and if he runs for the White House in 2016 he can tell conservatives he tried, but those damn liberals did it anyway.

Marriage equality is about to pass in Maryland. Surprisingly one of the people lobbying for equality is Dick Cheney. Maybe he's trying to redeem himself for the 2004 plan to drive the conservative vote by putting gay marriage banning amendments on state ballots.

I propose doing nothing and blaming brown people.

I think he's doing it because he disagrees with the conventional Republican base. He was always in disagreement with Bush on this issue but, contrary to popular opinion, George Bush was actually the guy in charge (for better or worse).

He's doing it because his daughter is a lesbian and viewpoints change on things once they involve someone you love.

Fixed that for you.

His daughter was a lesbian in 2004 as well. His viewpoint, from all public accounts that I've ever seen, has not changed.

He's more vocal about it today because he no longer has a boss that disagrees and is pushing a different agenda. Such is life, you don't contradict your boss publicly.

From all that I read, Cheney wasn't all that happy with the 2004 anti-gay push. That was all Rove.

Maybe I'm not remembering this right, but I could have sworn that during one of the debates between him and either Edwards or Lieberman, he explicitly expressed support for gay marriage. Or maybe it was during one of the political shows.....

I do remember him being asked if he supported gay marriage, and he said yes. Gonna have to do some digging....(aka, googling)

After putting in as much time as I'm willing to on a Saturday afternoon, about 10 minutes (I've got some CKII to play!), all I could find is that in 2000, Cheney said that "freedom means freedom for everyone", that people should be free to enter into relationships of their choosing and that the states should decide the issue (in that, he was opposed to a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage).

I also saw on YouTube the entire debate between Cheney and Lieberman is posted.

EDIT: Ok, I decided to skip through the videos to see if the topic came up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4YeiItymfo

Starts at around 3minutes in. Lieberman said he was against gay marriage and Cheney didn't explicitly say either way, but both played the political game by calling it a "tough issue" and whatnot.

Obama was great on the BS Report today.

Maybe he should try being a president instead of a celebrity.

President spends one hour speaking to someone about sports and pop culture, and people act like he's blowing off his job. As things stand, in my opinion, he's being president just fine, thank you very much.

Well, it ain't like Congress is sending him anything to sign... and with the election coming in November, it's probably just killing time until campaign season starts. If he was doing things unilaterally folks would be screaming at him for that. I mean, there's a limit of times he can meet with the ambassador from EastWTFistan..

It was like 22 minutes. I'm sure he takes contemplative shits longer than that a few times a week.

Is that like Ubeki-beki-beki-stan-stan - Wikiality, the Truthiness Encyclopedia ?

SI

I had to laugh at that. :lol:

I understand. The whole thing is dysfunctional at this point but why not just sit in the White House and not do anything like this for a couple of weeks. Make it look like you're at least working at something.

I know every day is an exaggeration but I just get irritated seeing him constantly doing stuff like this. Truth is, he doesn't even need to campaign to win the next election.

EastWTFistan is one of our key allies though.

Were they part of the Coalition of the Willing?

SI

We have to protect our valued allies in East WTF-istan from the evil Lulzamy,.. rumor has it that they're developing LOLLERBLADES and ROFLCOPTERS, in clear violation of international law..


(it was either that or try the 1984-speak "We have always been at war with East WTF-istan. West WTF-istan have always been our friends."

(besides, Obama's just getting ready for his one hour ESPN "Obama's Bracket" special***)

***I'm joking. There's no such thing &&&

&&& Although if there was such a thing, I'm sure ESPN would air it.

Or be like W. and go on countless vacations home to your ranch.

It's a non-story dude. Every President does stuff like this/even more than this. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

I know I have a habit of saying this DT, but could you back that last post off a bit, it wasn't personal until you made it personal.

Sheriff Arpaio is trying to fan the flames of birtherism.

Ariz. Sheriff Arpaio: Obama Birth Certificate 'Computer Generated Forgery' : The Two-Way : NPR

When Arapio's big point "LAYERS! SEE IT WAS COMPUTER GENERATED" was debunked a year ago.. by Fox News.. you start to realize that they're desperately trying to grab something, anything to avoid having to say "I'm wrong"

Expert: No Doubt Obama's Birth Certificate Is Legit | Fox News

You mean the "don't get your panties in a bunch" line? That wasn't me trying to make it personal...it's just an expression right? Or do people view it as something personal?

I have yet to see a manually generated PDF, for what its worth. Every single one I've ever come across has been computer generated. :)

I think Joe should be focusing on cleaning up the clusterfuck that was operation fast and furious before he practices his forgery detection skills.

I don't think one person has ever polarized internally as much as Arpaio. I love some of the stuff he does, but am absolutely appalled at some of his actions too.

Federal Judge Sent Joke Email Implying Obama’s Mother Had Sex With Dog | TPMMuckraker

Sigh.

I missed the first part of this that he was actually a federal judge. I mean, it's pretty sour overall, but moreso being in that position. To be fair, at least he initiated proceedings against himself for forwarding that email. But is it cool for judges to openly admit they are against a president? Doesn't that put in to question their interpretation of federal laws enacted by said president?

Not nearly so much as a gay judge hearing a gay marriage appeal. That seems like a considerably more vested interest than disliking an elected official.

Plus, give or take, it seems reasonable to figure that at least a third of all cases involving rulings on laws would involve a judge that liked or disliked someone in the food chain of said law. Not sure how you get around some aspects of that without eliminating humans entirely.

It's been awhile since a classic Jon quote... I knew the forum was dying, glad to see some crazy again...

It's a shame that people categorize someone by only identifying the thing that they most dislike about that person.

The nature of the beast is that judges have to be pretty political and well connected to get appointed in the first place. And they are human. And the Constitution has the mechanism in place to get rid of them--impeachment. Forwarding a racist email does not strike me as an impeachable offense. Classless. But that isn't the standard.

An independent, life-tenured judiciary is a great thing. But it comes with some downsides. And one of them is that a racist like this guy gets to stay on the bench.

As for your other point, Jon (about the gay judge), I never quite got that complaint. The argument against gay marriage, as I understand it, involves the idea that allowing gay marriage hurts and/or devalues and/or diminishes straight marriage. So why wouldn't a straight judge be just as subjected to bias in a gay marriage case? Wouldn't she have a personal incentive in keeping the value of her straight marriage and therefore a bias against gay marriage?

Or by the most relevant thing about the person with regard to the subject at hand (and the controversy about their involvement in the case)

Judge Vaughn Walker's Gay Partner Raised in Proposition 8 Case

In this case, "gay" seemed to be a lot more practical adjective for the judge in question (who I assumed everyone was familiar with) than "the federal judge who was in a long-term relationship with another man".

The latter just seems a bit wordy under the circumstances.

So then by your logic, Jon, a heterosexual judge should not be presiding over heterosexual issues? I mean, after all, there's that bias they would have.

Do they appear to be directly affected by their own ruling? If so, then no, they shouldn't be.

Remember though, the only reason I introduced that particular case to this discussion (as opposed to its own) was the suggestion that merely disliking a President was grounds for concerns about their ability to hear a case involving a federal law. Point being, it seems pretty silly to have that concern unless you're also concerned about a much more glaring situation as well.

Here's the perfect gift for the Sheriff.

I can't say I disagree with that. Not the I do agree with it, it's just a fair point you made. :)

I do think (and I'm painting with a broad brush here and very generally speaking) that a lot of judges think way too highly of their percieved usefulness and never even think about recusing themselves from cases they should.

Well, you certainly don't want to be accused as being "wordy" ;)

I understand your view. For you being gay is something someone is constantly achieving. Unlike being white or a male, one has keep acting gay to be gay.

I think it's like mana and when you use your gay you have to charge it back up or risk turning straight.

I heard they recharge during every rainbow.

Interesting tidbit about Obama's popularity in Israel. Does anyone know what Jews think of Mormonism and vice versa?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46598663/ns/world_news/

I like the "I don't bluff" and believe him (hey he went in and took out OBL). The conspiracist makes me wonder if this will/may heat up Sept, Oct timeframe and cause a rallying effect for Obama?

Obama to Iran and Israel: 'As President of the United States, I Don't Bluff' - Jeffrey Goldberg - International - The Atlantic

I get Rush is an ass but Obama calling the law student seems beneath the presidency and reeks. There are alot more worthy people/families he could be calling with his free time.

Obama calls Sandra Fluke, student dissed by Rush Limbaugh - POLITICO.com

Ugh. The drums of war beating on Iran do not have me enthusiastic or overjoyed.

How about we stay the fuck out of foreign entanglements and fix ourselves hmm? Instead of bankrupting ourselves for another generation (or since it's Iran, likely two generations).

Ugh.

LMAO - really? "Beneath the presidency??"

Give me a break.

Not sure about it being beneath the presidency but I wonder who gets more mileage out of it. Obama's supporters or Rush's? My thought is to not even acknowledge Rush and to act like he is irrelevant. This seems like it might fire up the Rush supporters more than it helps Obama.

Yeah I think it's coming no matter who wins the election. I don't claim to be an expert on the Middle East and there certainly are compelling arguments to be made on both sides on this issue but discussions I have had with coworkers/friends and comments I read online seem to believe this as a war against dirty Muslims who all want to kill us and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of room for reasoning with that line of thought. I have more hope with Obama than Romney or (dead God) Santorum but not much more.

Um, she's not just some random law student, she was a witness in a major political issue. She was called a slut in front of millions of listeners and I'm sure has had her life turned upside down as a result. I'm not sure what Obama can do now if he's going to get criticized for a simple phone call.

She just testified in congress on an issue, like tons of other people. She made herself something of a public figure, and blogs and blowhard media types talk shit about every public figure depending on political affiliation. It's courageous to put yourself in that position for something you believe in, sure, but it's really not that big a deal, she's just a commentator supporting an issue in the legislature. I don't care who Obama calls but I think it's kind of funny that he "wanted to see if she was OK" I wonder what Obama would have done if she wasn't? Would he take her out for a milkshake?

Of course, this is all great for the people that support her cause, Limbaugh raises her profile and gets in the news himself, she'll get a cushy non-profit/government job if she wants it, everybody gets to yell and cry for 12-24 hours, it's another big win for those on all sides who know how to utilize media. A fitting tribute to breitbart, in a way.

Dola- And I wonder if the "$3,000/year on birth control" thing was in there specifically with the PURPOSE of freaking out the right into going overboard and saying offensive stuff. Obviously, you're not going in there just to try to convince legislature to do something, you're thinking about the reaction of the left, the reaction of the people in the middle you want to convince, and how people on the right are going to react. It's smart to leave some tempting, dangling fruit that makes them look like idiots when they try to grab at it. Still, I'm impressed by the guts of the one who actually goes out there and executes the strategy. You have to know that there's a good chance you're at least going to get a joke on a late night talk show, and the best case scenario is the right ridiculing you in a silly ways. You WANT that for the cause, but it still can't be easy to face it individually.

Come on, that's ridiculous. Hardly anyone who testifies before congress gets the kind of attention that she's received and none have been called a slut, so it's pretty bizarre to claim she should've seen something like this coming. This was clearly a special occurrence, and I have no problem with a President calling to check on someone who was called a slut by a man with millions of listeners.

You're shocked Rush Limbaugh would have something distasteful to say about a young female law student testifying in Washington that she wants the government to pay $3,000/year for birth control? You have a lot more respect for him than I do.

If she's tough enough to put herself out there like that I think she'd survive and be OK even without Obama checking up on her. It was just a public statement in support of her testimony, which is fine, its an election year.

I think you are missing several points. I think she would like to have her employer cover it like many others do. She isn't asking the government for 3k for her pills, she's asking that she be offered coverage on it. I get why Georgetown doesn't want to, sort of. But they get millions of dollars a year in federal money, so lots of these "private" institutions are getting both ends of the deal.

I mean, once again, it's plainly stupid to not make birth control affordable, especially if you hate welfare and and things like that. If I were a chick, I wouldn't want a bunch of old white men who pretend they are the voice of religion deciding what my health needs are. I think that's the point.

I might not want to go to a school run by a bunch of old white men who pretend they are the voice of religion deciding what my health needs are, I think there's freedom considerations on all side of this.

But my only point is that this whole president/Rush Limbaugh thing worked out as a plus for her and her cause and a minus for the opposite cause, and that it was very likely planned out that way. I disagree with the portrayal that she's a victim who was bullied and Obama is checking up on her as a friend. I think that's a little insulting to her.

How are they coming up with 3K for a years supply if birth control? That's at least 2K more than a normal price.

The $3000 was the total cost while in law school, so $1000 a year. From what I've read the reason is the hormones in the standard or generic. For women who require a different hormone balance than the standard or generic birth control pills need to have a different blend made for them, which can be significantly more expensive.

Dola-
More birth control most likely means less abortion and less babies born on welfare. Why do people have an issue, it makes no sense at all.

This. I mean, what, the phone call was all of 10 minutes? It's a nice thing he did for the woman who has been unfairly slammed.

I mean seriously, if political candidates trying to kowtow to rich folk just to get their money so they can run a campaign isn't "beneath the Presidency" why is this?

Because Republicans are against anything that isn't abstinence only sex education.

I wonder if he does any "cheer up calls" to strangers outside the context of hot-button political issues he's in the middle of.

I don't care if he makes a call, but c'mon. This was an political opportunity for Obama and the law student. She doesn't need a pat on the head from someone she's never met to feel better about that no-good bully. She's obviously a strong woman with strong convictions. Maybe he'll bring her and Limbaugh in for a beer summit.

It should also be noted that the woman's testimony was about her friend who needed to be on birth control so she wouldn't develop cysts on her ovaries. She couldn't afford the pills, went off of birth control, developed cysts and had to have at least one of her ovaries removed. With that testimony, the "slut" comment seemed especially egregious. I don't know how much the ovary removal surgery cost the insurance companies, but it had to be less than monthly birth control.

If Obama really just wanted to cheer someone up he should have called that friend. That sounds worse than Rush Limbaugh saying bad stuff about you.

I guess what Obama should so is sort every person based on how much they are suffering and he can't call anyone to make them feel better unless he has called each and every person above them on the list.

I agree with you IF it wasn't publicized by his own office. When they push it out to the media organizations, it no longer is a person who is concerned about a person's well-being. It's now a political ploy to curry favor with the public who sides with her on the issue.

FWIW....I agree with the folks that are puzzled that they even bothered to push this information to the public. Ignore the idiot in the corner and you're better off.

I'm just saying it's not worthy of humanitarian praise. It's a political move. I don't have any problem with him doing it, or doing Bill Simmons interviews, on going on vacations, or watching football, or anything else. He's a human being with a life who's got a big election this year. Great. I just don't think that she's this poor weak woman whose feelings were hurt and who is personally devastated until this guy she never met thought enough to lift her up and save her confidence so she can go on. But then again, I've seen otherwise smart people buy into everything this guy has said since he came onto the scene, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

Who's saying it's anything other than a political move? FWIW it was brought up in this thread (in effect I thought) to slam him, and people are just responding saying it's no big deal. Nobody's saying he deserves an award for calling the girl or anything.

Are you incapable of arguing against what people actually said? No one said it was worthy of humanitarian praise. No one said she was a "poor weak woman whose feelings were hurt and who is personally devastated until this guy she never met thought enough to lift her up and save her confidence so she can go on."

If you actually follow the discussion properly, you'll see that the first comment was a criticism of Obama for spending 10 minutes calling someone, which many of us thought was a ridiculous complaint. Somehow you turned that into some blind naive praise for the President because I guess your desire to be some inane arbiter of justice in this thread outweighs your ability to make logical arguments based on what people actually said.

It's all political, and frankly a waste of time by any president. It's not even good political.

It's not a big thing on the internet or anything, agreed, I'm just responding to larrymcg421 and ISiddiqui

LOL, and you feel your post, "I guess what Obama should so is sort every person based on how much they are suffering and he can't call anyone to make them feel better unless he has called each and every person above them on the list." is 100% responsive to my point?

Here's what you said:

"This was clearly a special occurrence, and I have no problem with a President calling to check on someone who was called a slut by a man with millions of listeners."

Here's what ISiddiqui said:

"It's a nice thing he did for the woman who has been unfairly slammed."

I don't think the purpose of it was "to check on someone who was called a slut by a man with millions of listeners" and I don't think it was a "nice thing he did for the woman who has been unfairly slammed." I think it was regular politics through the media and I was amused that people didn't see that and thought it was more of a humanitarian gesture. I did exaggerate to make that point, that's true, but it was still more responsive to what you said that your rambling about Obama "sorting every person based on how much they are suffering". I was not saying anything about how Obama should call some people and not others, the point was obviously that this wasn't simply an act of kindness (EDIT: That is to say, if Obama really was motivated by kindness and "checking up on someone" who was wronged, obviously there were others he could check on as well that weren't in the middle of a hot-button political issue).

I think Obama deserves a second Nobel Peace Prize for calling her.

You were saying he should've called the other friend because what happened to her was worse. The initial complaint that started this said there were other people that should get calls from the president. That's what I was responding to.

Saying what the President did was nice (it clearly was even if political) and what happened to her sucks (it clearly did) certainly doesn't rise to the level of "otherwise smart people buy into everything this guy has said since he came onto the scene." If you want me to list all of the things I don't like about Obama, we'll be here for a very long time.

This is starting to sound like so many political debates. Some people arguing that this was a nice gesture, so good for Obama. Other people arguing that this is a political move, so bad for Obama. Guess what? It was a nice gesture and a political move. I know this isn't satisfying, but both side can be right with neither side being wrong. But by all means, keep focusing on only half of the situation so you can keep driving your points home.

Well played.

It is possible for something to be both a political move and a nice thing to do for someone.

Do you sincerely think that's what my point was? That Obama should sort out names and call those who are suffering the most? Well no, sorry if I was unclear, I don't feel Obama should do that. I really didn't mean to make a specific point at all. I just disagreed with the initial characterization, that's all. I read about the testimony on a Law Blog before Limbaugh's comments and it was already getting a lot of attention there, I had no doubt that people were going to have late night/offensive right wing takes on it, it was obvious. I thought, "that lady has guts". The Obama phone call was amusing, and actually kind of patronizing if you take it as sincere, just my opinion. If I stood out there on something I believed in like that and some politician called me to see "if I was OK" and told the world that he did so, I'd be a little turned off by that. But I didn't take it as sincere, but it sounded like others did.

Wish I believed his apology was sincere.

U.S. News - Limbaugh apologizes to student he called 'slut' for 'insulting word choices'

Yeah - that "apology" read like every "non-apology apology" that you make when you're not sorry.

"I'm sorry that what I said upset you" /= "I'm sorry I said what I said."

Every kid knows that game.

Anybody know the current count of advertisers that dropped him? Is it still at 3?

Latest I saw was 6.

Not surprising that someone finally forced him to issue an apology. I wonder how calculated this whole stunt was.

Sure it is. It plays to his base & occasionally shoring up the base in the run up to an election isn't a bad thing.

Oh wait, it's only good for those that don't look beyond the words for the meaning. Sort of like listening to any spin machine on either side. But for those of us that read between the lines and look at the reasons and meaning and look to bypass all that crap, it's just gold-plated crap.

Now, Limbaugh was an ass, which isn't a stretch at all. His comments that woman's birth control is related to the amount of sex that a woman has is a prime example. And the fact that he ran with it for 3 days shows his true colors.

How the fuck have we devolved to the point that birth control is now being attacked? I mean we covered this generations ago, and it's been one of the biggest advances for non-third world countries! We are actively bringing birth control to third world countries to improve their quality of life! Why are we back here? It's a complete waste of time. Move on already!

This is a president who fills out an NCAA tournament bracket on ESPN. He seems to have plenty of time.

I still don't get the problem with this bracket thing. I remember Reagan saying Family Ties was his favorite television show. I bet Obama filled out his bracket in about as much time as one episode of that show. Pretty much every president has spent time watching sporting events, hunting, or doing other frivolous activities. Why is filling out a bracket considered more a waste of time than any of these other things?

Because he's

a) black
b) a Democrat
c) a Kenyan secular-socialist

Or, because the others did that kind of stuff as a diversion from the presidency. Obama uses the presidency as a diversion from his social media blitz.

Shocking that people who hate the President, hate the President.

LMAO

This post deserves to be immortalized for its sheer ridiculousness.

I don't think we'd want a president who works 20 hours a day for 4 years. It's important to be healthy, to have a perspective, to be a human being, with a family. And really, there's only so much that's required of the job.

But it seems like people of whatever party doesn't have the presidency complain about vacations/photo ops/media appearances/etc. If Bush was doing a yearly NCAA bracket I'm sure people would be knocking him here for it.

:lol:


Fixed.

They all look so damn old and tired after a year or two on the job as is.

So he does a bracket on ESPN for 20 minutes instead cutting brush on the ranch? Good for them both. It's probably a minor miracle lately that we haven't had Presidents falling over from heart attacks or strokes from the stress.

Obama can't get a break here can he? The shit is going to hit the fan. I guess good excuse for us to pull out after more of our soldiers are killed because of this event.

U.S. soldier kills Afghan civilians, officials say - CNN.com

This is an unfortunate result of troops being in war. At some point they become attached to living that way and then its time to go home. The idea of leaving the war zone can cause a panic reaction subconsciously.

There were cases of this after WWII, Korea, Vietnam, pretty much every army in every war has had some instance of the guy who pops a transistor and goes out and does something like this.

A psychiatrist gave a lecture on this type of thing when we were leaving the gulf after the first gulf war. He did a lot of research on the topic it seems.

The soldiers subconscious uses this to reach some sort of resolution to not knowing how to let go of the war mentality, either his actions inflame the war and he continues to live the life he knows best, or he goes to the brig and never has to face the reality of a life without war.

Its a horrible thing war, it fucks up the human condition something fierce.

Yeah, things like this will eventually happen if we stay long enough. It doesn't excuse this soldier's actions, but these sorts of tragedies are inevitable. The only answer is leaving, which we should have done years ago.

Filling out a bracket is a different thing than spending time on ESPN walking people through it. Didn't he fill out a women's bracket one year?

I don't really care, I just find it a bit annoying.

Yes, I'm sure there is nothing to prioritize over picking on television the UConn/Tennessee game in the women's tournament.

Really interesting chart showing the change in government spending under Reagan and Obama.