Welfare to work? Never!

[JustRalph]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4764841/Why-work.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News

Uk story

Benefits are so good they pass on jobs

[badcompany]

That's about as good an example as you're gonna find of the entitlement mentality and the abject failure of the welfare state.

Let the absurd rationalizations and pathetic excuses from liberals begin!

[ElKabong]

Entitled to the money their parents paid in taxes>....Goodness sakes

[TJDave]

I maintain that these people wouldn't be worth a flip at any job, ever.

Would you hire them?

[HUSKER55]

I have a solution. Suppose we all do our share to clean up our continent and let those people re-cycle the city dumps.

No more unemployment
no more generational welfare
we recycle the product which mean we use less natural resources
Going Green either has value or it does not

The list goes on.

let us suppose that, with current technology, we could reduce the size of the dumps by60% minimum. What is the value of that. I say, "alot".

just a thought at the begining of a monday morning

[acorn54]

well i remember when there was the ceata program during the bad recession when i was growing up. if anyone was out of a job, one could go down to the labor department and get a job.

[lamboguy]

this whole country is based on welfare. for one minute does anyone not believe that the fractional banking system is nothing short of welfare? how about TARP programs and corporate bailouts.

i am not saying that welfare on any level is any good for the moral fiber of this country either. the amount of money that have bailed out somewhat in need family's is nothing compared to corporate welfare.

[so.cal.fan]

This situation is no more outrageous than what goes on here in California, JR.
You know that. I notice you have moved to Texas.
A guy on Texas radio last night (I listen online) said over 400,000 people have recently moved to Texas from CALIFORNIA. Not surprising.
Some people want to work for their $$$$$. It builds character. Something these losers in the article will probably never develop.
Disgusting!

[badcompany]

this whole country is based on welfare. for one minute does anyone not believe that the fractional banking system is nothing short of welfare? how about TARP programs and corporate bailouts.

i am not saying that welfare on any level is any good for the moral fiber of this country either. the amount of money that have bailed out somewhat in need family's is nothing compared to corporate welfare.

This is a classic Liberal platitude that's never backed up with facts.

There are over 100 different Federal "anti-poverty" programs which cost taxpayers about a trillion a year.

While I don't deny that corporate welfare exists, at least corporations provide good and services. For example, GM makes cars, as opposed to deadbeats like those in that article, who are completely useless.

[lamboguy]

This is a classic Liberal platitude that's never backed up with facts.

There are over 100 different Federal "anti-poverty" programs which cost taxpayers about a trillion a year.

While I don't deny that corporate welfare exists, at least corporations provide good and services. For example, GM makes cars, as opposed to deadbeats like those in that article, who are completely useless.there is nothing liberal about my statements, financial institutions borrow TRILLIONS from us the taxpayers for .25% and lend it back to US in the form of TREASURY BILLS and get over 2 1/2% with no risk. in my world that is called welfare and is probably one of the main reasons that half this country doesn't work and gets food stamps and other handouts.

[JBmadera]

Given my current career trajectory I am on the work to welfare glide path.. :eek:

[Valuist]

The story from the UK should make Paul Krugman feel good. His dream scenario.

[badcompany]

there is nothing liberal about my statements, financial institutions borrow TRILLIONS from us the taxpayers for .25% and lend it back to US in the form of TREASURY BILLS and get over 2 1/2% with no risk. in my world that is called welfare and is probably one of the main reasons that half this country doesn't work and gets food stamps and other handouts.

There is currency risk, but I don't disagree with you. It still stems from the same problem, an overarching Government.

[soupan]

First of all, lets call a spade a spade here.

Who owns THE SUN?... Same jerkoff who owns The Post and Fox.

Rupert Murdoch uses his Media to push his right wing agenda, fair and balanced, of course.

So let's cut to the chase here. I'll ask all of you right wingers, how A Typical do you think that welfare family is in the UK?

How A Typical would they be in the US?

I'm not going to pretend to have an answer to those questions, but would any of you be willing to wager that the percentage (of those skirting the system and not truly in need) is greater then 5%?
I'm also not saying that 5% is acceptable either, because it's not, but articles like that one only inflame those who are struggling to believe that 98% of those on some form of public assistance are skirting the system and that's just not true.

The bottom line is that left wingers on this board are just as disgusted by a couple like the one illustrated as you right wingers are. We're just not foolish enough to buy the skewering of the system as reported by Mr. Phone Tap.

Every hard working American wants to put an end to that kind of entitlement.

[Tom]

Every hard working American wants to put an end to that kind of entitlement.

Bottom line, soup bone, that is 0nly about 47% of us here.
The REST want entitlements increased.
The dems want it increased to the point of dependency on government.
The local left wingers here are NOT disgusted by ANYTHING the dems do - they will rationalize it all night long.

Pay attention.

[soupan]

Bottom line, soup bone, that is 0nly about 47% of us here.
The REST want entitlements increased.
The dems want it increased to the point of dependency on government.
The local left wingers here are NOT disgusted by ANYTHING the dems do - they will rationalize it all night long.

Pay attention.

You make statements that are ridiculous. Yeah, Democrats want to increase entitlements and Gov't dependency, according to who?

BTW...nice reply with the name calling.

Your problem is that you get beaten up so badly in your debates with Mosty and Hcap that it's beyond embarrassment and humiliation.

You're not capable of factually backing your posts so you're an easy target.

Keep up the name calling, it reinforces my point.

[NJ Stinks]

First of all, lets call a spade a spade here.

Who owns THE SUN?... Same jerkoff who owns The Post and Fox.

Rupert Murdoch uses his Media to push his right wing agenda, fair and balanced, of course.

So let's cut to the chase here. I'll ask all of you right wingers, how A Typical do you think that welfare family is in the UK?

How A Typical would they be in the US?

I'm not going to pretend to have an answer to those questions, but would any of you be willing to wager that the percentage (of those skirting the system and not truly in need) is greater then 5%?
I'm also not saying that 5% is acceptable either, because it's not, but articles like that one only inflame those who are struggling to believe that 98% of those on some form of public assistance are skirting the system and that's just not true.

The bottom line is that left wingers on this board are just as disgusted by a couple like the one illustrated as you right wingers are. We're just not foolish enough to buy the skewering of the system as reported by Mr. Phone Tap.

Every hard working American wants to put an end to that kind of entitlement.

Excellent post, Soupan. I was going to post something myself about the Murdoch connection. I especially appreciated the eloquence of this line:

"We're just not foolish enough to buy the skewering of the system as reported by Mr. Phone Tap."

[Tom]

You make statements that are ridiculous. Yeah, Democrats want to increase entitlements and Gov't dependency, according to who?
To them.
Pay attention.

And name calling, Simple Simon, started with YOU.
As I told you on about your day one, you are a zero - you have no point.
you are a mouth the spews nothing. There is no earthly reason to treat you as if your were capable of discussion because you aren't.
So get back under your bridge, troll. :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

I am not a republican, so I cannot vote in primaries.
SO who is the real idiot here......HCAP!

btw, you rally are becoming a vile like A hole lately.
Why don't you take advantage of some that free Obama-mental health care?
Or see if they will transplant a personality into you.

To them.
Pay attention.

And name calling, Simple Simon, started with YOU.
As I told you on about your day one, you are a zero - you have no point.
you are a mouth the spews nothing. There is no earthly reason to treat you as if your were capable of discussion because you aren't.
So get back under your bridge, troll. :lol:

Tom, there is nothing more refreshing than a lecture by you about the horrors of being vile. :rolleyes:

[fast4522]

When something looks like shit, and also smells like shit, the next thing to note is where did this shit comes from. Here we have Hcaps distress rock flipped and out from under that rock Soupan appears, for those who have not put 2 + 2 together yet I would not expect you to ping his IP. You know the boy does have some experience in manufacturing, know your opponent and profile him.

[hcap]

When something looks like shit, and also smells like shit, the next thing to note is where did this shit comes from. Here we have Hcaps distress rock flipped and out from under that rock Soupan appears, for those who have not put 2 + 2 together yet I would not expect you to ping his IP. You know the boy does have some experience in manufacturing, know your opponent and profile him.You know I have not posted on this thread up until now? Totally unbelievable as usual. Same usual tripe from righties-grossly exaggerated but at least within the bounds of reason-albeit wrong, but manageable. Then there is Tom and his pal Fast. :eek: :eek: :eek:

Both of you somehow manage to cast all right wingers everywhere with a worse than lunatic stink.

[elysiantraveller]

I'm not going to pretend to have an answer to those questions, but would any of you be willing to wager that the percentage (of those skirting the system and not truly in need) is greater then 5%?

Though I understand your point I would say without a doubt it is greater than 5%. Probably 10-15%.

[BlueShoe]

The bottom line is that left wingers on this board are just as disgusted by a couple like the one illustrated as you right wingers are.
Yea, right. Disgusted that the young couple is not getting MORE, and that the USA is not more like the UK. :rolleyes:

Every hard working American wants to put an end to that kind of entitlement.
Left wingers work hard? :eek:

[hcap]

Bottom line, soup bone, that is 0nly about 47% of us here.
The REST want entitlements increased.
The dems want it increased to the point of dependency on government.
The local left wingers here are NOT disgusted by ANYTHING the dems do - they will rationalize it all night long.
Pay attention.Your problem is that you get beaten up so badly in your debates with Mosty and Hcap that it's beyond embarrassment and humiliation.

You're not capable of factually backing your posts so you're an easy target.

Keep up the name calling, it reinforces my point.
Speaking of facts. Let's talk red vs blue states once again. This time the so-called welfare of SSI and Social Security Disability. And the maker/taker fallacy that is bandied about here in hushed tones as the end all, be all truth of economics. Righty Style of course

http://www.offthechartsblog.org/the-geography-of-disability/

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy organization working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals.

The Geography of Disability

About 6 percent of the nation’s working-age population receive disability payments from Social Security or Supplemental Security Income (SSI), but some southern and Appalachian states have much higher rates —over 10 percent. While some critics see this disparity as evidence of problems with the programs, it mostly reflects a few key demographic and economic factors:

Less-educated workforce. This is by far the most powerful factor: states with low rates of high-school completion generally have high rates of disability receipt, as you can see by comparing the two maps below. For older workers, SSI and Social Security disability insurance explicitly consider vocational and educational factors in determining eligibility, since less-educated people whose physical or mental impairment is so severe that they can’t do their previous work are less able to adapt to other employment than better-educated people are.


http://www.offthechartsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11-28-12bud1.jpg

http://www.offthechartsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11-28-12bud2.jpg

So.......

Of the 15 states that have more than seven percent of the population on disability, 10 are Red states. The two states with the biggest percentage of the population on disability—Kentucky and West Virginia—are both VERY Red at the federal level.

[sammy the sage]

First of all, lets call a spade a spade here.

Who owns THE SUN?... Same jerkoff who owns The Post and Fox.

Rupert Murdoch uses his Media to push his right wing agenda, fair and balanced, of course.

So let's cut to the chase here. I'll ask all of you right wingers, how A Typical do you think that welfare family is in the UK?

How A Typical would they be in the US?

I'm not going to pretend to have an answer to those questions, but would any of you be willing to wager that the percentage (of those skirting the system and not truly in need) is greater then 5%?
I'm also not saying that 5% is acceptable either, because it's not, but articles like that one only inflame those who are struggling to believe that 98% of those on some form of public assistance are skirting the system and that's just not true.

The bottom line is that left wingers on this board are just as disgusted by a couple like the one illustrated as you right wingers are. We're just not foolish enough to buy the skewering of the system as reported by Mr. Phone Tap.

Every hard working American wants to put an end to that kind of entitlement.

I would wager EVERTHING I own in a heartbeat...you :rolleyes:

Really don't know how to track it...but sure I'm right.... :bang: :faint:

[Valuist]

First of all, lets call a spade a spade here.

Who owns THE SUN?... Same jerkoff who owns The Post and Fox.

Rupert Murdoch uses his Media to push his right wing agenda, fair and balanced, of course.

So let's cut to the chase here. I'll ask all of you right wingers, how A Typical do you think that welfare family is in the UK?

How A Typical would they be in the US?

I'm not going to pretend to have an answer to those questions, but would any of you be willing to wager that the percentage (of those skirting the system and not truly in need) is greater then 5%?
I'm also not saying that 5% is acceptable either, because it's not, but articles like that one only inflame those who are struggling to believe that 98% of those on some form of public assistance are skirting the system and that's just not true.

The bottom line is that left wingers on this board are just as disgusted by a couple like the one illustrated as you right wingers are. We're just not foolish enough to buy the skewering of the system as reported by Mr. Phone Tap.

Every hard working American wants to put an end to that kind of entitlement.

Isn't it terrible there's one American media outlet that isn't in lockstep with Obama? What's wrong with them? How dare they question the Anointed One? Isn't state run media the best for all?

[PaceAdvantage]

First of all, lets call a spade a spade here.

Who owns THE SUN?... Same jerkoff who owns The Post and Fox.You're right. Stuff like that is totally out of the realm of normalcy.

There are hardly ANY people on welfare, and even LESS are the number of people ON welfare who are looking for steady work and are just down on their luck.

Oh brother...nothing worse than the "if it's written in a paper or spoken on a network owned by Murdoch, it must be false."

BTW, how is it the guy in that picture is 21 years old. He looks an easy 37 from where I sit...

[PaceAdvantage]

Excellent post, Soupan. I was going to post something myself about the Murdoch connection. I especially appreciated the eloquence of this line:

"We're just not foolish enough to buy the skewering of the system as reported by Mr. Phone Tap."Another one...you guys are as bad as those you criticize on the right for always going after the source and not the actual content.

What do guys on the left around here label that? Deflecting? Avoiding the point and/or the question?

Listening to you two spout off, one would think there are NO entitlements necessary in the US...what are we spending on welfare every year in the country?

You mean to tell me ALL that money is legitimate? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

According to you two, it almost has to be... :rolleyes:

[Tom]

You hippo-crites might want to check out the story about why Obama and Hillary chose to do an interview together on 60 Minutes with that particular interviewer (??).....they even admit the REAL reason! :lol::lol::lol:

Talk about lame - your guys are truly a joke!

[badcompany]

Tom, there is nothing more refreshing than a lecture by you about the horrors of being vile. :rolleyes:

But not as touching as you and your left wing buddies geriatric circle jerk :lol:

What guys like you won't acknowledge is that the Welfare State incentivizes this type of behavior. When someone is on the dole and considering getting a job, they do the math and subtract the bennies they would be giving up from the pay rate of the job and often come to the conclusion that they're better off on the dole.

That's the case with that couple as they even admit they could easily get a job.

[Mike at A+]

What guys like you won't acknowledge is that the Welfare State incentivizes this type of behavior. When someone is on the dole and considering getting a job, they do the math and subtract the bennies they would be giving up from the pay rate of the job and often come to the conclusion that they're better off on the dole.
BINGO!

[Tom]

They are saying we need immigration reform becasue we need workers to do low paying jobs Americans will not do. They make more money on welfare.
Well, make it mandatory to take the jobs or lose the welfare. Simple.
Or is the left willing to admit we need to take advantage of these people to do the crappy jobs...sort of slavery for the modern era?

If the immigrants will do the work, then why do we need to keep the anchors?
How about we trade Mexico 11 million anchors for 11 million people willing to work?

[Actor]

What guys like you won't acknowledge is that the Welfare State incentivizes this type of behavior. When someone is on the dole and considering getting a job, they do the math and subtract the bennies they would be giving up from the pay rate of the job and often come to the conclusion that they're better off on the dole.Wouldn't you go on the dole if it paid better than any job you could get? Would it not be foolish to do otherwise?

[Actor]

Is everyone posting on this thread aware that the subject article is about the U.K.? That's England, not the U.S.

[elysiantraveller]

Is everyone posting on this thread aware that the subject article is about the U.K.? That's England, not the U.S.

Yes, but I'm also aware that at least 1 out of 5 or 6 on government assistance is gaming the system.

- Experience: Dealing with senior benefits. Working at a bank.

[mostpost]

This whole thread and the article that started it is a perfect example of anecdotal evidence vs. empirical evidence. Anecdotal evidence is of no value. A story about one couple gaming the system is of no value in determining if others are doing the same.

Present my with a story that contains relevant and verifiable statistics on the percentage of welfare recipients with the attitudes of the couple in this story, and I may agree with your take on it. Whether I do or not would depend on what those percentages are.

Soupan thinks they are around 5%. ET is "aware" that one out of five or one out of six are gaming the system. I wonder if he could tell us how he became aware of this? What official study did he find?

[johnhannibalsmith]

... Anecdotal evidence is of no value. ...

Ever try to curry support from the public-at-large with data? Doesn't work. Tell them about the little kid that had this or that happen to them or the lady that was a victim of such and such, name the law after them, and bingo, you're in the legislative money. Anecdotal evidence may be of little value analytically, but it's all the rage the other 99.99999999999999% of the time 'round this hemisphere when it comes to stripping liberty.

[Tom]

Anecdotal evidence is of no value.

You mean like Obama with all those kids on stage with him recently?
Or all those actors in white coats on stage with him when he announced Obama-care?

[mostpost]

Another one...you guys are as bad as those you criticize on the right for always going after the source and not the actual content.
And just what is the actual content here? All this story proves is that Danny Creamer and Gina Allen would rather sit at home a collect welfare than go out and look for a job. It does not prove one thing about what others on welfare would do or are doing. As Soupan stated, they are not typical, they are atypical.

Furthermore, I am not at all sure this is a legitimate story. Gina and Danny strike me as actors, their home is much neater than I would expect from people who have such little self pride. The letter sofa and chair are certainly not normally found in home occupied by welfare recipients. That whole picture is just a little too posed to be convincing. Of course, that is just my opinion.

[badcompany]

Wouldn't you go on the dole if it paid better than any job you could get? Would it not be foolish to do otherwise?

Yes, that's the whole point. A generous Welfare State leads to this:

The Tragedy of the Commons

In economics, the tragedy of the commons is the depletion of a shared resource by individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, despite their understanding that depleting the common resource is contrary to the group's long-term best interests. In 1968, ecologist Garrett Hardin explored this social dilemma in "The Tragedy of the Commons", published in the journal Science.[1]

[PaceAdvantage]

And just what is the actual content here? All this story proves is that Danny Creamer and Gina Allen would rather sit at home a collect welfare than go out and look for a job. It does not prove one thing about what others on welfare would do or are doing. As Soupan stated, they are not typical, they are atypical.

Furthermore, I am not at all sure this is a legitimate story. Gina and Danny strike me as actors, their home is much neater than I would expect from people who have such little self pride. The letter sofa and chair are certainly not normally found in home occupied by welfare recipients. That whole picture is just a little too posed to be convincing. Of course, that is just my opinion.Wow.

[soupan]

This whole thread and the article that started it is a perfect example of anecdotal evidence vs. empirical evidence. Anecdotal evidence is of no value. A story about one couple gaming the system is of no value in determining if others are doing the same.

Present my with a story that contains relevant and verifiable statistics on the percentage of welfare recipients with the attitudes of the couple in this story, and I may agree with your take on it. Whether I do or not would depend on what those percentages are.

Soupan thinks they are around 5%. ET is "aware" that one out of five or one out of six are gaming the system. I wonder if he could tell us how he became aware of this? What official study did he find?

At least Soupan is smart enough to guesstimate the 5% figure, where ET KNOWS it's either side of 20%.

Again I'll repeat for those too thick headed to understand.
It's not in anyone's interest to have fraud in the system and and to game it.

But since all you rednecks are so concerned about the inner city folk gaming the system, have'n all those kids and such, I guess you have no problem with the gaming of the system with US tax dollars by the citizens of say, Pakistan? Iraq?...how's about Egypt?
Hey Mike at A+, you fool, did you know you're working 15 minutes every day so the elite in Egypt can eat steak and lobster?
Halal meat, of course.

You lot are a bunch of misguided fools.

[Tom]

You lot are a bunch of misguided fools.


And you are what.....enlightened? :lol::lol::lol:

All that soup and no spoons!

[mostpost]

Wow.
The same front page that had the story about Danny and Gina also had this story. "Katie, Hubby In Porn Star Sex Tape." So, WOW yourself.

[soupan]

And you are what.....enlightened? :lol::lol::lol:

All that soup and no spoons!

Tom, you don't earn as much as Mike, you only work 9 minutes a day so Baghdad Bob can have a new jacuzzi. He also thanks you for the new Cadillac we bought him this year.
"Buy American" is his motto...."we need the tax flow to continue in your country so the payments to us can remain "timely".
"You guys wouldn't want all that money you spent and lives lost to be wasted with the country being controlled by say, Iran, would you"?

And your furious about your fellow Americans extorting you. :lol: :lol:

[mostpost]

Wouldn't you go on the dole if it paid better than any job you could get? Would it not be foolish to do otherwise?
I would take a job that paid less than what I was collecting in unemployment benefits, but I would not take it right away. I would allow myself reasonable time to find a better paying job, because it is easier to job hunt if you are not at work all day. Bosses frown on you leaving work to go on interviews.

The key here is to actively be looking for work. It's also important to know the economic climate at the time.

[Tom]

Take as long as you like, as long I am not paying for you while you look.

[Actor]

This whole thread and the article that started it is a perfect example of anecdotal evidence vs. empirical evidence. Anecdotal evidence is of no value.Not quite true. Anecdotal evidence is widely used in the behavioral and social sciences.

A story about one couple gaming the system is of no value in determining if others are doing the same.Absolutely true. You cannot draw a valid scientific conclusion from a single anecdote. You need a collection of anecdotes from which you may hopefully glean a grain of truth from all the chaff.

What seems to be happening here is people are taking a single anecdote from the U.K. and using it to support their opinions of what is happening in the U.S.

[badcompany]

What seems to be happening here is people are taking a single anecdote from the U.K. and using it to support their opinions of what is happening in the U.S.

No, it's a validation of what those of us who live in big cities see everyday: a professional victim class.

A Mostpost, who lives in a quaint little town, can stick his head in the sand and pretend this doesn't exist on a large scale. I can't.

[elysiantraveller]

At least Soupan is smart enough to guesstimate the 5% figure, where ET KNOWS it's either side of 20%.

Again I'll repeat for those too thick headed to understand.
It's not in anyone's interest to have fraud in the system and and to game it.

But since all you rednecks are so concerned about the inner city folk gaming the system, have'n all those kids and such, I guess you have no problem with the gaming of the system with US tax dollars by the citizens of say, Pakistan? Iraq?...how's about Egypt?
Hey Mike at A+, you fool, did you know you're working 15 minutes every day so the elite in Egypt can eat steak and lobster?
Halal meat, of course.

You lot are a bunch of misguided fools.

Wow... you infer a lot.

I actually agreed with your call to compassion in the original post but you then asked would I wager everything I had that more that 5% are gaming the system and I said yes. I then listed off where I would put the number... somewhere around 15-20%. I cited my personal experience in the banking world as my evidence.

You then refer to people like me as a redneck... I'm not...

The area I work, not live, in is 90% white, has a median income on par with the national average, and consistently votes red. I would put that area as 1 in 6 are gaming the system so I'm okay extrapolating that nationally.

You talk about me complaining that people are gaming the system... where did I do that? Where in the @#!$ did I even say I was concerned with it?...

... I'm not. If we are going to offer welfare programs, which I think we should, a certain percentage of people are going to game the system. I can live with that as I believe (and feel free to search this on here) in a natural unemployment rate. That being there is a certain percentage (probably 3-5%) of healthy people that are simply unemployable for whatever reason and I'm okay with taking care of them.

Since you've gone ahead and politicized this issue I'll follow suit and say I'm much more concerned than on year 4 and going on 5 of the current administration the enrollment in these programs is continuing to increase. We are still not creating nearly enough jobs to dent those figures.

You asked if I would wager 5% of people cheat the system and I responded yes, nothing more. Sorry if my above response doesn't fit into your's, hcap's, or mostie's preconceived notion of a right wing, anti-science, bible-thumping, redneck, rape-baby supporting, NASCAR watching, automaton.... Deal with it.

[Mike at A+]

Hey Mike at A+, you fool, did you know you're working 15 minutes every day so the elite in Egypt can eat steak and lobster?
Halal meat, of course. You lot are a bunch of misguided fools.
Hey soupy, you're a real funny guy. You should post more often. Are the Egyptians importing their lobster from Maine?

[hcap]

...hcap's, or mostie's preconceived notion of a right wing, anti-science, bible-thumping, redneck, rape-baby supporting, NASCAR watching, automaton.... Deal with it.

Preconceived?

1-Many are anti science. For instance the House Science Committee is an oxymoron.

2-Bible thumping comprises a large part of the conservative base

3-Redneck I do not use that term often if at all. But I have pointerd out red states are the takers and the blue the makers

4-Raoe/baby crappola played a part in why repugs lost

5-Never used Nascar

6-Automaton? Is that like ObamaClone but red instead? :)

[NJ Stinks]

Yea, right. Disgusted that the young couple is not getting MORE, and that the USA is not more like the UK. :rolleyes:


Left wingers work hard? :eek:

Even you don't believe I want this young couple to get more. If not, there's no hope we will find common ground anywhere.

[NJ Stinks]

Isn't it terrible there's one American media outlet that isn't in lockstep with Obama? What's wrong with them? How dare they question the Anointed One? Isn't state run media the best for all?

What is terrible is that an Australian conservative is allowed to invest his vast wealth in U.S. TV stations and newspapers that present as "news coverage" day after day a total contempt for the sitting U.S. president and his party .

If you think this country is better off since Rupert Murdoch bought his way into U.S. media, we disagree completely.

[badcompany]

What is terrible is that an Australian conservative is allowed to invest his vast wealth in U.S. TV stations and newspapers that present as "news coverage" day after day a total contempt for the sitting U.S. president and his party .

If you think this country is better off since Rupert Murdoch bought his way into U.S. media, we disagree completely.

Americans seem to want what he's selling and he's not even offering free goodies:

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/photo4.png

[johnhannibalsmith]

What is terrible is that an Australian conservative is allowed to invest his vast wealth in U.S. TV stations and newspapers ....

Why?

If you give me anything that has to do with the nonsense that followed the dots, I'll start questioning your beliefs on free expression, so tell me why you don't like foreigners investing in American industries.

[NJ Stinks]

Americans seem to want what he's selling and he's not even offering free goodies:



If so many Americans want what he's selling, Obama would have been crushed in the last election and the GOP would now have the majority in the Senate.

[badcompany]

If so many Americans want what he's selling, Obama would have been crushed in the last election and the GOP would now have the majority in the Senate.

C'mon, grow up. Politics is cyclical. The Repubs had the Presidency from '80 to '92; the Dems from '92 to '00. Repubs '00 to '08. Dems '08 to '16.

Would you bet your house on the Dems in '16?

[JustRalph]

If so many Americans want what he's selling, Obama would have been crushed in the last election and the GOP would now have the majority in the Senate.

Stretching that slim margin for all it's worth huh?

[NJ Stinks]

Why?

If you give me anything that has to do with the nonsense that followed the dots, I'll start questioning your beliefs on free expression, so tell me why you don't like foreigners investing in American industries.

I don't believe foreign interests should be allowed to buy its way into the U.S. media. That includes Al Jezeera and BBC America. It's one thing for a U.S.-owned TV station to buy a foreign program and broadcast it here. It's a whole other thing for a foreign interest to control content themselves here.

Anyway, it used to be illegal for any company/person to own a newspaper and TV station in the same market. Why? Too much control over the news. That law should have never been changes IMO.

[NJ Stinks]

C'mon, grow up. Politics is cyclical. The Repubs had the Presidency from '80 to '92; the Dems from '92 to '00. Repubs '00 to '08. Dems '08 to '16.

Would you bet your house on the Dems in '16?

No. I don't want to grow up! :D

I wouldn't bet my house on the Dems at 4-9. Anything close to even money or better - I'd consider it.

[NJ Stinks]

Stretching that slim margin for all it's worth huh?

Ralph, if it was a horse race, Obama won by 4 lengths hand ridden to the wire.

[Jay Trotter]

No. I don't want to grow up! :D

I wouldn't bet my house on the Dems at 4-9. Anything close to even money or better - I'd consider it.The odds don't really matter. You don't get paid! :ThmbDown:

[NJ Stinks]

The odds don't really matter. You don't get paid! :ThmbDown:

Speaking of which, Trotter. I wish you had never made that bet with BigMack.

Because as it turns out you never got paid and Mack is no longer around.

In short, nothing good came from that bet IMO.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I don't believe foreign interests should be allowed to buy its way into the U.S. media. That includes Al Jezeera and BBC America. It's one thing for a U.S.-owned TV station to buy a foreign program and broadcast it here. It's a whole other thing for a foreign interest to control content themselves here.

Anyway, it used to be illegal for any company/person to own a newspaper and TV station in the same market. Why? Too much control over the news. That law should have never been changes IMO.

What is the problem? We're all just complete idiots and the fact of the matter is that all news is actually propoganda and we should be excited to get propoganda from domestic sources but not foreign sources?

Do you think that the perspectives often recited and promoted on Murdoch owned US media outlets is a perspective that was developed in Australia? Do you believe that if whatshisnamethatranagainstObama had been elected in November that FOX would have shifted gears and demonstrated "total contempt for the sitting U.S. president"? You think we'd be better off without FOX and its content or without Murdoch as its owner? If Murdoch died and FOX went defunct, you believe that no domestic corporation would jump to recreate the FOX product, like, yesterday? It would probably be NBC.

I'm not completely defiant of your position in that I can see the underlying premise, but in 2012 and all practical applications of media in general now, and the instant access from anywhere in the whole friggin' galaxy that we have from even our portable telephones that never leave us -- I just don't really get the issue NEARLY to the degree that you like to portray it.

Your last line is just ridiculous in contemporary society. Few people even get a printed paper like me. I have no idea why I even get a newspaper - 99.235632% of the news I read is online now. How you going to enforce some law like that if you tried to implement a contemporary replacement? Jurisdictionally? Please.

[Jay Trotter]

Because as it turns out you never got paid and Mack is no longer around.Hold on thar Deputy Dawg! He's not here because of Dahoss, not me! :faint:

[johnhannibalsmith]

Speaking of which, Trotter. I wish you had never made that bet with BigMack.

Because as it turns out you never got paid and Mack is no longer around.

In short, nothing good came from that bet IMO.

Mack left because of the bet with DaHoss90210. It's plausible that had he not made the bet with DaHoss that Trot would have gotten paid since he'd have at least a mild incentive to pay him beyond not wanting to live with the fact that his word means shit. That should be ample incentive, actually, so probably Trots was screwed anyway. Since I know he's a fan of films...

ipH1KL5Dk-Y

[NJ Stinks]

Hold on thar Deputy Dawg! He's not here because of Dahoss, not me! :faint:

Forgot about the bet with DaHoss.

I stand corrected, Trotter! :cool:

[hcap]

Mach was the perfect example of how to OD on Fox news. :)

[Actor]

No, it's a validation of what those of us who live in big cities see everyday: a professional victim class.How is anything that happens in the U.K. a validation of anything in the U.S.?

validation
Web definitions
the act of validating; finding or testing the truth of something.

[NJ Stinks]

What is the problem? We're all just complete idiots and the fact of the matter is that all news is actually propoganda and we should be excited to get propoganda from domestic sources but not foreign sources?

Do you think that the perspectives often recited and promoted on Murdoch owned US media outlets is a perspective that was developed in Australia? Do you believe that if whatshisnamethatranagainstObama had been elected in November that FOX would have shifted gears and demonstrated "total contempt for the sitting U.S. president"? You think we'd be better off without FOX and its content or without Murdoch as its owner? If Murdoch died and FOX went defunct, you believe that no domestic corporation would jump to recreate the FOX product, like, yesterday? It would probably be NBC.

I'm not completely defiant of your position in that I can see the underlying premise, but in 2012 and all practical applications of media in general now, and the instant access from anywhere in the whole friggin' galaxy that we have from even our portable telephones that never leave us -- I just don't really get the issue NEARLY to the degree that you like to portray it.

Your last line is just ridiculous in contemporary society. Few people even get a printed paper like me. I have no idea why I even get a newspaper - 99.235632% of the news I read is online now. How you going to enforce some law like that if you tried to implement a contemporary replacement? Jurisdictionally? Please.

Just read this post.

I don't consider news from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN to be filled with propaganda. Unlike FOX News and MSNBC.

I think Murdoch developed his conservative side and lack of scruples in Australia for sure. He didn't buy his way into the U.S. until 1985 when he was around 55 years. We're talking about a guy with so much strength of character/love of country that he renounced his Aussie citizenship for a few dollars more. (You have to be a U.S. citizen to own non-cable TV stations in the U.S.)

Do you know why the UK wouldn't let Murdoch buy into another station over there last year? Do you think the UK now has buyer remorse for allowing Murdoch to buy media influence there?

Of course, somebody would buy the Murdoch news TV station. Murdoch has a proven formula for making money. Just swear over and over again that you are fair and balanced in reporting the news and spend a ton on glittering production and the prettiest babes. (Why do I feel like the circus came to town when Murdoch got here?)

I think the issue - a national news station bashing the sitting president 24 hours a day - is bad for this country. I don't care if its FOX News or MSNBC doing the bashing. (MSNBC is less bad because MSNBC doesn't pretend to be unbiased.) The thing these stations do best is divide us.

I brought up the last point about not being allowed to own a TV station and a newspaper in the same town to show we used to care about delivering news a in balanced manner. Now we let anybody buy their way into our living rooms via cable TV stations.

John, you may well have a point that I'm too out-dated in my thinking here. But I do think you overestimate the number of people getting their news on the Internet exclusively. My guess is most have no desire to even read the news online. It's just not a fun thing to do. But packaged the right way on TV, people may watch something once in a while...

[PaceAdvantage]

Speaking of which, Trotter. I wish you had never made that bet with BigMack.

Because as it turns out you never got paid and Mack is no longer around.

In short, nothing good came from that bet IMO.There never should have been a bet in the first place. And as far as I know, there wasn't.

[thaskalos]

There never should have been a bet in the first place. And as far as I know, there wasn't.

There had to be something.

'Mack disappeared right after the election.

[PaceAdvantage]

There had to be something.

'Mack disappeared right after the election.Yeah, because he bet Dahoss that if Obama won, he would leave the board.

I'm talking monetary bets. If there was a bet, I don't know about it, and I don't wanna know about it...

[lamboguy]

Speaking of which, Trotter. I wish you had never made that bet with BigMack.

Because as it turns out you never got paid and Mack is no longer around.

In short, nothing good came from that bet IMO.i miss him too, if he wanted to come back i would offer to pay part of his losing bets. he was a 24 hour a day guy here

[Tom]

There had to be something.

'Mack disappeared right after the election.

Man of honor.
His word means something.
Must be he is not a democrat! :lol:

[badcompany]

How is anything that happens in the U.K. a validation of anything in the U.S.?

validation
Web definitions
the act of validating; finding or testing the truth of something.

Thank you, Noah Webster:jump:

The reason is that Psychology is universal. The Welfare State has the same corrosive effect whether it be in the U.K, Greece, Sweden or even here in the Good Ol' USA:

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/l/long_island_rail_road/index.html


In September 2008, The New York Times ran an investigation on former employees of the Long Island Rail Road. Drawing on government records and dozens of interviews, reporters found that nearly all retirees from this commuter rail service — the busiest in the nation, according to its Web site — were applying for and receiving federal disability payments.

The articles revealed that a web of doctors and facilitators were helping the workers file papers claiming they were disabled. The doctors ran what amounted to “disability mills,” which prepared false medical assessments for the retirees to file with the Railroad Retirement Board. Facilitators were liaisons between the doctors and the workers.

[badcompany]

Just read this post.

I don't consider news from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN to be filled with propaganda. Unlike FOX News and MSNBC.


Hmmm, let's think of some of the hosts on the major networks:

Whoopie, Oprah, Ellen Degenerate, Katie Couric, Joy Behar, and a few blasts from the past Phil Donahue and Rosie O'Donnell.

Not exactly a bastion of Conservative thought, now, is it?


Btw, if Obama won by 4 lengths this is the difference between Fox and its cable news competitors:

http://www.secretariat.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Belmont_-Stakes_-31-lengths_photo1.jpg

[Tom]

I don't consider news from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN to be filled with propaganda.

Did you watch 60 Minutes this week, and the story that followed about 60M basically being an Obama Publicity Department?

Did you forget the CNN's Candy Butterbutt interjected herself intot the dabate and actually lied for Obama while pretending to be a neutral moderator?

Man, your standard are.....convenient to your agenda.
Or, you have no clue what is going on.:rolleyes:

[rastajenk]

Here is yet another story about NBC News' distortions to support an agenda. (http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2013/01/29/just-nbc-yet-another-deceptive-edit/) They seem to have no shame manipulating what their viewers receive. A far cry from the days of Huntley and Brinkley, for sure.

[Tom]

At that point, people realize that their respectful silence is being taken for assent, and they begin chiming in “The second amendment.”

The media’s claim? he was callously “heckled” and interrupted while speaking. (http://twitchy.com/2013/01/29/outrageous-how-the-left-wing-media-lied-about-newtown-hecklers/?utm_source=autotweet&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=twitter)



To the left, any mention of the constitution qualified as callous heckling.
Some media moron was blabbering over the weekend that the constitution was outdated and that we should not allow those old white men who owned slaves dictate how we live - you know, typical liberal BS.

The media bias is so obvious, I seriously question the mental health of those who deny it. It is not just bias, it is false reporting and manipulating information. FOX may lean right at times, but they at least report ALL the news. Lefties are afraid when the truth is told.

[Ocala Mike]

[QUOTE=badcompany].


Btw, if Obama won by 4 lengths this is the difference between Fox and its cable news competitors:

http://www.secretariat.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Belmont_-Stakes_-31-lengths_photo1.jpg

{/QUOTE]


You're comparing Fox News to Secretariat, now? Maybe that's why they called him Big Red (State).

One thing for sure, we're never going to hear an announcer say that Sarah Palin's "moving like a tremendous machine" on Fox!

[badcompany]

[QUOTE=badcompany].


{/QUOTE]


You're comparing Fox News to Secretariat, now? Maybe that's why they called him Big Red (State).



Why exactly is the comparison not valid? Is this not dominance?

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/2012-ratings-fox-news-number-one-for-11-straight-years_b160939

2012 Ratings: Fox News Number One For 11 Straight Years
By Alex Weprin on January 4, 2013 10:50 AM

2012 saw Fox News mark 11 years as the number one cable news channel in total viewers and the demo, though the election didn’t provide much in the way of a ratings bump, with the network only up a bit in total viewers, and down slightly in the demo.

■Primetime: 2.043 million total viewers/ 423,000 A25-54
■Total Day: 1.152 million total viewers/ 273,000 A25-54

Unlike CNN, which was down in both total and demo viewers just about every hour, and MSNBC, which was up in both categories just about every hour, Fox News had some high points and low points, with most of its programs roughly on par with their 2011 performances. That said, the network still drew more viewers than CNN, MSNBC and HLN combined in primetime. It was also the second-highest delivery for the network ever in total viewers.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Some media moron was blabbering over the weekend that the constitution was outdated and that we should not allow those old white men who owned slaves dictate how we live - you know, typical liberal BS...

I'm guessing that you are talking about Louis Michael Seidman, who isn't a "media moron" per se, but is a Georgetown Constitutional Law scholar/professor/author.

He's an interesting guy who happens to be liberal and with whom I often disagree, but he's not too very typical at all. I didn't care at all for his piece and his most recent attack on the merit of the Constitution, but if someone is going to promote the notion, he's at least able to make his case honestly and will engage dissent without getting all pissy. Some of his past work is much more interesting to me, even though a lot of it falls under the same umbrella manufacturer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Michael_Seidman

The op-ed that encapsulated the position he has been pushing in the media and is incorporated, naturally, in a new book he's pimping:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/lets-give-up-on-the-constitution.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Tom]

I'm guessing that you are talking about Louis Michael Seidman, who isn't a "media moron" per se, but is a Georgetown Constitutional Law scholar/professor/author.

OK, I stand corrected.
He is not a media moron.
He is collegiate moron. Lots those out there.

Whatever, the man's opinion is idiotic.
I guess when you live in the make believe world of academia, your ties to reality are tenuous. Remember 46? :lol:

[johnhannibalsmith]

... Remember 46? :lol:

Remember? I go through the archives just to laugh at his old posts I miss him so much. :D

[mostpost]

Hmmm, let's think of some of the hosts on the major networks:

Whoopie, Oprah, Ellen Degenerate, Katie Couric, Joy Behar, and a few blasts from the past Phil Donahue and Rosie O'Donnell.

Not exactly a bastion of Conservative thought, now, is it?


Btw, if Obama won by 4 lengths this is the difference between Fox and its cable news competitors:

http://www.secretariat.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Belmont_-Stakes_-31-lengths_photo1.jpg

Of the people you named, only Katie Couric was a newscaster. The rest were entertainers. The difference between ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and Fox is that Fox distorts and falsifies the news in support of its agenda.

As for your Secretariat in the Belmont photo, it may be an accurate representation of Fox's lead in the ratings. But in terms of quality of coverage and honesty, Fox would be bettered represented by Sham or Private Smiles.
FYI they finished last and next to last in that race.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... The difference between ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and Fox is that Fox distorts and falsifies the news in support of its agenda.

...

Adios credibility.

[badcompany]

Of the people you named, only Katie Couric was a newscaster. The rest were entertainers.

Since Obama appeared on "The View," I guess he's an "Entertainer," too.


-199_etCjK8

[mostpost]

Here is yet another story about NBC News' distortions to support an agenda. (http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2013/01/29/just-nbc-yet-another-deceptive-edit/) They seem to have no shame manipulating what their viewers receive. A far cry from the days of Huntley and Brinkley, for sure.
There is no difference between the two tapes. Did you listen to them both? Did you watch the timer at the bottom? On both tapes Mr. Heslin asks the question (paraphrasing) "Why does any one need an assault rifle?) On both tapes there is a four or five second pause. Then he says, (again paraphrasing) "No one can answer that question." On both tapes, the answers come back immediately, "The second amendment shall not be infringed"
or words to that effect. There was no editing of the tape by MSNBC.

Having said all that, I disagree with MSNBC's contention that the gun rights people were heckling Mr. Heslin. I think they were responding to a question he asked the room and they only did so after he repeated the question. Furthermore their answers were not at all confrontational.

To summarize:
MSNBC did not edit the clip. That is clear if you watch both clips. They are identical.
MSNBC presented the clip as a sincere example of what they felt was heckling by gun rights advocates. I disagree. I think the comments were in response to a direct question and were respectful. Technically the gun rights should not have responded at all since they were in the gallery and the gallery is supposed to maintain silence, but that is a nitpick.

[rastajenk]

I just now copied and pasted this from the bottom of the story on MSNBC.com:

Editor’s note: This story has been amended from the original version to clarify the context of the remarks; the original video has been replaced with a fuller version.

I suppose if they hadn't been called out on it, they wouldn't have had a reason to "amend" it with a "fuller" version. :rolleyes:

[Mike at A+]

Since Obama appeared on "The View," I guess he's an "Entertainer," too.


-199_etCjK8
Gee he crosses his legs just like one of the gals.

[NJ Stinks]

I just now copied and pasted this from the bottom of the story on MSNBC.com:

Editor’s note: This story has been amended from the original version to clarify the context of the remarks; the original video has been replaced with a fuller version.

I suppose if they hadn't been called out on it, they wouldn't have had a reason to "amend" it with a "fuller" version. :rolleyes:

Anybody who listens to either clip can easily see the man was not heckled, disrespected, etc. My beef is with the headline - not the clip IMO.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Anybody who listens to either clip can easily see the man was not heckled, disrespected, etc. ...

And yet... it was described as "heckling" in a HERD of on-line, print, and television newscasts... and none of those were under the directive of an Australian. :D

It's an unfair attempt to portray gun owners the way the media wants to portray them, as maniacs that hate children and lack empathy, but that's journalism these days. So it goes.

[NJ Stinks]

:lol: And yet... it was described as "heckling" in a HERD of on-line, print, and television newscasts... and none of those were under the directive of an Australian. :D

It's an unfair attempt to portray gun owners the way the media wants to portray them, as maniacs that hate children and lack empathy, but that's journalism these days. So it goes.

What print? Where? Does NBC own a paper I don't know about? More likely its some guy working at the NBC website or the Huffington Post trying to lure viewers to click. (If this clip was on TV, I didn't see it there either.)

Here's an article on this by the USA Today. No heckling reported.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/28/newtown-shooting-legislative-subcommittee/1870581/


Same with the NY Daily News:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/parents-slain-sandy-hook-kids-call-national-dialogue-gun-madness-article-1.1239915


In fact, I couldn't find any legit news source reporting heckling except the MSNBC website and the Huffington Post.


But you convinced me, mate. From now on its FOX News for me. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:



:lol: :lol:

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
But you convinced me, mate. From now on its FOX News for me. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:



:lol: :lol:

Just stick with Beckel and Shep, you aren't missing much else... :D


Sorry, I'm not going to go for the touchdown and spend 30 minutes with you since you'll just vanish if you feel like it. :cool:

But, here's from just two pages of Goooooogle. And no, these aren't different sources linking to the same story. These, as near as I can tell since I'm already a few minutes late and trying to tie this up quickly, are unique authors all using almost identical headlines about "Newtown father heckled by gun activists":

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/gun-rights-advocates-heckle-father-newtown-victim-article-1.1250124

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Father-of-Newtown-victim-heckled-at-hearing-4228992.php

http://www.greenwichtime.com/local/article/Father-of-Newtown-victim-heckled-at-hearing-4230614.php

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/father-of-sandy-hook-shoo_b_2570058.html

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/29/father_of_newtown_victim_heckled_at_gun_control_he aring/

http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2013/01/29/gun-rights-advocates-heckle-father-murdered-sandy-hook-boy/

http://politix.topix.com/homepage/4350-newtown-dad-heckled-by-gun-rights-activists

http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/01/29/sandy-hook-dad-neil-heslin-heckled-gun-activist-testmony-son-jesse-killed/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/29/1183069/-Pro-Gun-Activists-Heckle-Newtown-Dad#

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/41535_In_Newtown_Gun_Nuts_Heckle_Father_of_Murdere d_Child

http://hypervocal.com/news/2013/newtown-victim-father-heckled/

[dartman51]

Ever try to curry support from the public-at-large with data? Doesn't work. Tell them about the little kid that had this or that happen to them or the lady that was a victim of such and such, name the law after them, and bingo, you're in the legislative money. Anecdotal evidence may be of little value analytically, but it's all the rage the other 99.99999999999999% of the time 'round this hemisphere when it comes to stripping liberty.

This guy had it right. "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." :ThmbUp:

[NJ Stinks]

Just stick with Beckel and Shep, you aren't missing much else... :D


Sorry, I'm not going to go for the touchdown and spend 30 minutes with you since you'll just vanish if you feel like it. :cool:

But, here's from just two pages of Goooooogle. And no, these aren't different sources linking to the same story. These, as near as I can tell since I'm already a few minutes late and trying to tie this up quickly, are unique authors all using almost identical headlines about "Newtown father heckled by gun activists":



Don't ever embarass me like this again! :mad:


Really, I googled and got another NY Daily News story link and not much more. :)

[johnhannibalsmith]

Don't ever embarass me like this again! :mad:


Really, I googled and got another NY Daily News story link and not much more. :)

It's okay, I know you just read the printed copy of the Turnpike Record. I've become OCD about visiting all kinds of online news sources from both "sides" trying to find something that makes sense to me. I must have read the headline fifty times yesterday between my usual stops and the links I followed. I read the actual transcript somewhere early on so I just laughed every time I read the same friggin' headline over and over and over and over and over again. I just sort of chalked it up to business as usual and was actually surprised anyone actually objected to what looked like a pretty coordinated attempt to put forth what seemed like an awfully lame smear.

[JustRalph]

Ralph, if it was a horse race, Obama won by 4 lengths hand ridden to the wire.

Agreed......

[badcompany]

Really, I googled and got another NY Daily News story link and not much more. :)

Maybe you should move out of Jersey. Apparently, The Google there is terrible :(

[NJ Stinks]

Maybe you should move out of Jersey. Apparently, The Google there is terrible :(

The only other state I'd consider moving to is New York. Tom tells me it's sort of liberal and I know you love it there too! :p :)

[JustRalph]

http://twitchy.com/2013/01/29/outrageous-how-the-left-wing-media-lied-about-newtown-hecklers/

Heckle news

[badcompany]

The only other state I'd consider moving to is New York. Tom tells me it's sort of liberal and I know you love it there too! :p :)

Yeah, it makes you wonder how this guy ever got elected Mayor, twice.


http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fMAfnJIFB-c/0.jpg

[Mike at A+]

Yeah, it makes you wonder how this guy ever got elected Mayor, twice.


http://i.ytimg.com/vi/fMAfnJIFB-c/0.jpg
After Dinkins and the "wilding" episodes, New Yorkers saw the merits of law and order.