a political candidate asking for donations via apparel???

THAT'LL BE THE DAY

5/31/2012 1:28:50 PM

ugh, next thing you know they'll be handing out pins with campaign slogans on them!!

5/31/2012 1:47:50 PM

The president said that I had a chance to have dinner with him for a paltry donation of just $3. Whom does he think he is, NPR!?!?

(I made the donation)

5/31/2012 3:25:09 PM

Who gives a shit about his campaign apparel?

You guys can't be bothered with the fact that Obama is fucking slaughtering people and defining anyone in a strike zone as as "combatant", but some dispute about his campaign t-shirts warrants multiple posts. I don't get it.

5/31/2012 4:33:00 PM

^ who exactly is that in response to?

I'm pretty sure Obama has just about completely lost the support of the left at this point.

5/31/2012 4:40:41 PM

I guess it's being discussed in the "liberal credibility" thread as well. I'm just disappointed that it's even a topic of discussion when there is serious shit going on that doesn't really get talked about here.

5/31/2012 4:48:54 PM

i read that in the other thread as well. those topics only really get brought up by the far-right posters, though.

5/31/2012 4:51:58 PM

How dare you respond to someone's post instead of talking about the topics that only d357r0y3r deems important?

In the time it took you to type that bullshit, more children died of disease and starvation than any Obama-ordered military action. Oh shit, there's something more devastating to humanity going on than Obama killing people. Guess you can't talk about that either.

5/31/2012 5:04:10 PM

yes my post about campaign apparel is being hashed out in the other thread, and yes mitt romneys store is bullshit too.

i was just pointing out these disgusting fucks that are going to be our next president.

you cant point out every kid thats dying of whatever cause that they are remotely responsible for.

i can however point to a goddamn t-shirt and say "oh wow, how presidential (tacky)."

5/31/2012 6:37:53 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/301474/president-obama-shuns-lech-walesa-rory-cooper

Quote :

"President Obama Shuns Lech Walesa By Rory Cooper June 1, 2012 4:00 A.M. Lech Walesa was once a trade-union activist. He was often arrested for speaking his mind against Communist oppression behind the Iron Curtain in Poland and for defying the Soviet Union. He was an electrician who, with no higher education, led one of the most profound freedom movements of the 20th century — Solidarity. He became president of Poland and swept in reforms, pushing the Soviet Union out of his homeland and moving the country toward a free-market economy and individual liberty. And President Obama doesn’t want him to set foot in the White House. According to the Wall Street Journal, Polish officials requested that Walesa accept the Medal of Freedom on behalf of Jan Karski, a member of the Polish Underground during World War II who was being honored posthumously this week. The request makes sense. Walesa and Karski shared a burning desire to rid Poland of tyrannical subjugation. But President Obama said no. Administration officials told the Journal that Walesa is too “political.” A man who was arrested by Soviet officials for dissenting against the government for being “political” is being shunned by the United States of America for the same reason 30 years later. Meanwhile, one of the recipients of the Medal was Dolores Huerta, the honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America. So socialist politics are acceptable, but not the politics of a man who stood up and fought socialism. This revelation follows an eruption of outrage in Poland after President Obama referred in his remarks at the Medal of Freedom ceremony to “Polish death camps,” a phrase that Poles have battled since the end of the Cold War. The phrase suggests that Poles were complicit in Nazi concentration camps, which of course is not the case. In fact, Poles were exterminated in the camps. The White House’s flippant response to the uproar caused the Polish president and prime minister to demand more thoughtful and personal reactions. But White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that the president has no plans to reach out to his Polish counterparts and has shrugged off the outrage in Poland. Few observers are suggesting that President Obama’s written remarks noting “Polish death camps” were intentionally malicious. The comment was more likely a result of historical ignorance and careless inattention. This is the same ignorance and carelessness that would cause a president to turn away Lech Walesa and label him as “too political.” Ironically, Lech Walesa shares a distinction with President Obama: They both won Nobel Peace Prizes. Walesa earned his in 1983 after years of fighting for peace and freedom, and being monitored, harassed, and jailed for it. President Obama received his award in 2009. Some may think that this would be enough of a bond for President Obama to set aside political differences for the greater good. But instead, President Obama treated Walesa the same way he treated the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize winner, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, who was ushered out the White House kitchen past piles of garbage in 2010. The likelihood is that President Obama didn’t want Walesa in the White House because Walesa has made critical remarks toward the president’s policies and in 2010 warned that the United States was slipping toward socialism. But rather than taking the mature and diplomatic path and respecting Walesa’s right to have a differing perspective, Obama chose to shun his lifetime of achievements. Congratulating Walesa on his Nobel Prize in 1983, President Ronald Reagan said: “For too long, the Polish government has tried to make Lech Walesa a non-person and destroy the free trade-union movement that he helped to create in Poland. But no government can destroy the hopes that burn in the hearts of a people. The people of Poland have shown in their support of Solidarity, just as they showed in their support of His Holiness Pope John Paul II during his visit to Poland, that the government of that nation cannot make Lech Walesa a non-person, and they can’t turn his ideas into non-ideas.” The White House should not treat President Walesa as a non-person, and they cannot turn his ideas into non-ideas. "

6/1/2012 10:37:45 AM

Quote :

"American employers added just 69,000 jobs in May, the fewest in a year, and the unemployment rate ticked up to 8.2 percent from 8.1 percent. Economists had forecast a gain of 158,000 jobs. "

Guy is such a failure

6/1/2012 11:16:22 AM

dude must have one hell of an ego

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-embarrassing-photo-of-president-obama-actually-real/




bahahahah obama sounds like a robotic idiot

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/amazing-danish-tv-clip-ridicules-obamas-robotic-copycat-statements/


[Edited on June 1, 2012 at 10:25 PM. Reason : ]

6/1/2012 10:16:08 PM

So I got this email sent to me from a family member saying neither Barack or Michelle are able to practice law any more and that the reasons for such are suspicious. Here's part of the email:

Quote :

"1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is not really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew your license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when you've been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender" your license five seconds before the state suspends you. 2 Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993. after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud! 3. So, we have the first black President and First Lady - who don't actually have licenses to practice law. Facts. Source: http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license/ 4. A senior lecturer is one thing, a fully ranked law professor is another. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago. 5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama(D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school-but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008. 6. "He did not hold the title of Professor of Law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law. "

I checked the links and it seems legit. Am I missing something here? I mean, I feel like if this was true the GOP would have jumped all over this repeatedly and beat it like a dead horse.

6/5/2012 8:45:58 AM

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp

6/5/2012 8:56:48 AM

Thanks!

6/5/2012 9:09:22 AM

lol

6/5/2012 9:15:46 AM

Jesus fucking Christ you people in the right are so goddamn stupid. You will believe fucking anything as long as it fits your dumbass worldview.

6/5/2012 10:16:55 AM

Statistical analysis of which side is more gullible aside, anyone who believes anything they find in their inbox should have their head examined

6/5/2012 10:29:03 AM

I thought only really old people still got scammed through e-mail?

6/5/2012 11:52:20 AM

Quote :

"So I got this email sent to me from a family member saying neither Barack or Michelle are able to practice law any more and that the reasons for such are suspicious. Here's part of the email: I checked the links and it seems legit. Am I missing something here? I mean, I feel like if this was true the GOP would have jumped all over this repeatedly and beat it like a dead horse."

Quote :

"1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is not really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew your license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when you've been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender" your license five seconds before the state suspends you. 2 Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993. after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her license or standing trial for Insurance fraud! 3. So, we have the first black President and First Lady - who don't actually have licenses to practice law. Facts. Source: http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license/ 4. A senior lecturer is one thing, a fully ranked law professor is another. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago. 5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama(D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school-but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008. 6. "He did not hold the title of Professor of Law," said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law. "

The right-wing are despicable liars.



[Edited on June 5, 2012 at 1:49 PM. Reason : .....................]

6/5/2012 1:48:20 PM

Quote :

"I checked the links and it seems legit. Am I missing something here? I mean, I feel like if this was true the GOP would have jumped all over this repeatedly and beat it like a dead horse."

Lol what links did you check that made you think this was legit?

6/5/2012 2:19:08 PM

Quote :

"So I got this email sent to me from a family member"

It's a lie. Next.

6/5/2012 2:31:33 PM

Obama administration has been desperately trying to hide evidence that would help in the defense of American freedom fighter Bradley Manning.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/06/bradley-manning-defence-wikileaks-damage?newsfeed=true


The president personally orders foreign assassinations, including those of American citizens.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all


United Nations human rights committee to investigate United States over civilian murders during airstrikes.
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=data/international/2012/June/international_June145.xml§ion=international


Obama administration has repeatedly claimed that no civilians were killed in drone attacks, but only because they consider all adult males to automatically be combatants unless proven otherwise(proven when? by whom? after they're dead?) The real numbers is likely in the hundreds, all in countries that are not currently war zones.
http://www.businessinsider.com/is-the-obama-administration-really-using-drones-to-target-civilians-2012-6

The indiscriminate execution of all males in an area has been repeatedly prosecuted as a war crime for decades.


[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM. Reason : .]

6/7/2012 3:29:20 PM

As bad as the Nazis. Got it.

6/7/2012 4:22:39 PM

Murder = murder.

At least 168 children have been killed in Pakistan alone.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8695679/168-children-killed-in-drone-strikes-in-Pakistan-since-start-of-campaign.html

Quote :

"[Drone strikes] mean a president elected on a manifesto promising to close Guantanamo Bay does not have hundreds more detainees to process. "As long as these peoples sit in jails they remain a problem, a living liability, so there seems to be a drive to kill them," said Mr Gul. "

This is criminal, pure and simple.

[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 5:55 PM. Reason : .]

6/7/2012 5:43:00 PM

if you're totally against all war, then i understand your sentiment. because no matter whether it's planes dropping bombs, drones dropping bombs, ground troops dropping mortars, etc. etc., civilians are going to die in war. is that it? are you totally against all war? or are you just against drone strikes that are now taking place while obama is president?

6/7/2012 6:00:31 PM

fuck obama.

6/7/2012 6:00:47 PM

Wait wait wait...There's a war on? Why didn't anyone tell me?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/us/Seven-children-among-dead-in-drone-attack-on-Texas-drug-cartel.html?_r=1&agewanted=all

[Edited on June 7, 2012 at 6:09 PM. Reason : .]

6/7/2012 6:07:22 PM

now you're just making it clear that you weren't paying attention when bush was in office.

6/7/2012 6:08:26 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/world/asia/pakistan-launches-nuclear-attacks-on-american-bases-in-retaliation-for-deadly-drone-mishap.html

6/7/2012 6:16:59 PM

now you're just being silly and evasive. are you trying to make points?

6/7/2012 6:38:00 PM

Do you really think smc would support Bush if he had been doing these things?

Don't be the asshole defending the killing that has occurred under Obama.

6/7/2012 6:42:45 PM

I think he would.

6/7/2012 8:35:47 PM

Quote :

"Do you really think smc would support Bush if he had been doing these things?"

militants and civilians were being killed while bush was in office, in pakistan and elsewhere. i'm trying to understand if the outrage is because of the ramped up use of drone attacks, and why that's different than deaths by other means.

Quote :

"Don't be the asshole defending the killing that has occurred under Obama"

for the record, i'm not really defending it, i'm just trying to understand if people are mad about the targeted use of drones that don't risk american lives, if they support other means of war, if they're just unhappy about going into pakistan, or if they are just trying to find reaons to reinforce their hatred of obama

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 9:33 AM. Reason : ]

6/8/2012 9:15:25 AM

I bring attention to drone attacks because it's the only issue I think we might be able to actually stop.

American citizens are already completely accepting of perpetual traditional war; there's no use even wasting my breath.

But maybe there are still enough people that find killing people in 20 different countries simultaneously distasteful enough to stop this madness.

I'm not optimistic though.

Now that we're actively killing American citizens without trial without a public outcry in response, there really is no possibility of national salvation.

Not that citizenship really matters, either, but it's yet another line in the sand that even the most cowardly of chickenhawks once feared to cross.

[Edited on June 8, 2012 at 10:26 AM. Reason : .]

6/8/2012 10:23:38 AM

Again, is any of this new? What about that Adam Gadahn guy? Wasn't he an american citizen, and hasn't he been targeted, before Obama even took office? I can understand that you being against war because innocents are killed, but i'm not understanding why you're using this to equate obama with nazis and stuff. Again, did you feel the same way about Bush II? Bush I? Nixon? Or is it just obama?

6/8/2012 10:46:40 AM

In order for him to have been outraged about terrible things Bush did during his terms, Fox news would have had to actually report on them.

6/8/2012 10:50:11 AM

^^You forgot that asshole Johnson.

In response to the NYT's damning story of Obama's deadly drone program, Republicans today roundly condemned the president for his killing of civilians.

Just kidding, they attacked the journalist for "endangering Americans" and are seeking to prosecute the source of the information leak.

The Republic is doomed.

6/8/2012 11:19:37 AM

Sorry, I didn't quite get your point there

Quote :

"You forgot that asshole Johnson."

the more you post, the more it seems your issue is more with obama and other democrats, not the killing of people in the mountains of pakistan, who may or may not be al queda associated militants.

6/8/2012 11:25:15 AM

http://tinyurl.com/crd9jff

6/8/2012 2:35:32 PM

Definite gets some credibility on his assessment on the economy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvUMvknc228

24 hours later...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWZFe1KVM7U

pryderi, could you embed these for me please?

kkthx

6/8/2012 9:53:09 PM

-5 for refusing to enforce federal law and deport illegal immigrants, no matter who they are

6/16/2012 1:42:39 PM

Does the law demand deportation? I don't think it does..

Legally, it's on the same level as a speeding ticket.

It's violating the rules of a visa that recommend deportation, but sneaking across the border doesn't necessarily.

6/16/2012 3:46:12 PM

At least he's not assassinating them.

6/16/2012 4:31:00 PM

yet.

6/16/2012 4:47:53 PM

why would he assassinate people who would vote for him if given the chance?

6/16/2012 5:52:57 PM

Reminder that illegal immigration scapegoating and scaremongering has been the tactic du jour of nearly every fascist to ever rise to power, and the only place in recent memory to actually suffer immigration as serious as the right suggests, so as to completely decimate the employment, property, and sovereignty of its former inhabitants, is Israel via European jews.

[Edited on June 18, 2012 at 1:42 PM. Reason : .]

6/18/2012 1:41:55 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder#Diagnosis

Quote :

"The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition, DSM IV-TR, a widely used manual for diagnosing mental disorders, defines narcissistic personality disorder (in Axis II Cluster B) as: A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following: 1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) 2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love 3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions) 4. Requires excessive admiration 5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations 6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends 7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others 8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes"

Still relevant.

6/18/2012 3:31:05 PM

10. The President of the United States

6/18/2012 3:34:19 PM

Bush said God told him to do things. You point is invalid.

6/18/2012 5:37:32 PM