Obama took less vacation days than either George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan in his first 100 days. Totally lazy.

"...now she faces up to 180 days in jail and a $500 fine. The world is stupid."

The video clearly says 100 days...either you found another source and aren't sharing it OR you can't fucking read.

@Reefie
I commute by bike over 100 days per year in Chicago and ride in the city (to the gym, grocer, etc) another 50 to 75 days.

That cyclist is completely out of line.

I was yelled at for opening my car door one night by a cyclist in all black, no light, riding down the street. F me? No F him.


I am tired as a cyclist and driver of seeing cyclist basically ride WITHOUT rules of any kind. Cell phones while riding? Yes. No lights at night? Yes. Weaving dangerously through traffic? Yes.

5 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by chicchorea.

*isdupe>> ^Fusionaut:

dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Sharon-Jones-The-Dap-Kings-100-Days-100-Nights

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by Fusionaut. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Sharon-Jones-The-Dap-Kings-100-Days-100-Nights

The romans held gladiator games for 100 days in a row. But they were decadent.

Thankxs!

In reply to this comment by kulpims:
*promote

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

24,000 hours is not 100 days. In fact, if he only played wow for 100 days, I'd say he's doing better than most.

I agree completely. I think it backfired for conservatives, because all moderate people saw was the most extreme elements just yelling about random stuff, and Fox News spinning it as some sort of noble revolution.

Mostly I think it was insane to try to make it out to be a public outcry against Obama; he hadn't even been President for 100 days yet.

I actually believe Fox when they say they didn't plan or organize those protests, though I do think toward the end there were a lot of professional Republican-aligned advocacy groups trying to bring professional organizing to some of the rallies.

I wouldn't be surprised if next tax day we see a series of professionally organized protests. We'll see if they find a good message to push by then.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
I kid because I think it's pretty silly that the tea parties got so much attention and yet there was not a unified message conveyed to anybody about anything.

The overall message was, "we're fed up." Fed up with what? The subjects being address ranged from the irrelevant (Obama's birth certificate) to very poignant issues such as the deficit, the border, the Iraq war and so on.

You're probably right that it doesn't fall into the category of "slacktivism" but it is still ineffective. What a waste to rally that many people with no clear purpose to be united on and no clear solution being proposed.

>> ^blankfist:
I disagree with your logic. Like I said, the list is certainly petty, but 100 is a large number. I don't even think Bush did 100 bad things in 100 days that wouldn't be considered nitpicking. So, does that mean Bush did really, really well in your eyes?

Obama did a lot in his first 100 days, and I liked almost all of it. Libertarians didn't, and one wrote down 100 things they hated. I don't think the latter fact tells you much about Obama, but it tells me plenty that most of his list was "I didn't like this promise Obama kept", vs. your implied "Obama has broken many promises".

I couldn't tell you a thing about what Bush did in his first 100 days, but I wasn't terribly interested in politics then, either.

I don't think the things Obama will be remembered for have happened yet, which is why I think attempts to characterize him as having been some sort of failure or overbearing dictator is premature, to put it mildly.

Obama said, and I quote, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage." link.

Yes, many conservatives like to cherry pick that quote. Here's a quote from whitehouse.gov:

He supports full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples and opposes a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. He supports repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in a sensible way that strengthens our armed forces and our national security, and also believes that we must ensure adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation.

That sounds fairly comparable to what libertarians would say too.

War is the biggest issue.

Out of touch. The economy is the biggest issue. But do go on, I want to hear your solution which will stabilize the region, deter extremism, destroy the organization that organized the attacks of 9/11, and ends the war.

Alternatively, you can give me the talking points that will convince a majority of people that none of the rest of that matters, just ending the war.

And, Obama is looking to extend that effort into Afghanistan. What's your point? That he's "talking" about ending the war in Iraq? He's talking about downsizing that effort, and he certainly won't pull out of Iraq. The Dems will act like the Repubs for the next year saying "if we broke it, we bought it" to promote their disgustingly partisan bullshit.

Oh, instead of a solution, you just had disgustingly partisan bullshit.

I do want more from Obama on Afghanistan; what the objective is, what conditions he's looking for before winding down our presence there, etc. I also want to hear more about his plans for the Al Qaeda-controlled regions of Pakistan, since that's who we were originally after in Afghanistan. I'm concerned about us just leaving our troops in the wrong country to defend against raiders sent from Pakistan, with no clear path to resolving the overall conflict, militarily or otherwise.

If you can convince me that there's no threat of Al Qaeda gaining control of Pakistan or its nuclear weapons (or that those things aren't a danger to our safety), then I'm all for full withdrawal from the whole area. If you can't, tell me how we prevent it, and still withdraw all our troops.

Iraq I think is winding down. We have a signed treaty that requires us to leave by the end of 2011, and I currently have no reason to believe Obama will violate the treaty, or try to negotiate a new one. It's not as fast as I'd like, but it's good enough for me for the time being.

>> ^NetRunner:
I think if they needed to get that petty about things just to get to 100, Obama's doing really, really well so far.

I disagree with your logic. Like I said, the list is certainly petty, but 100 is a large number. I don't even think Bush did 100 bad things in 100 days that wouldn't be considered nitpicking. So, does that mean Bush did really, really well in your eyes?


I don't know of any elected members of the Libertarian Party, either. I guess your point is that because the 315-316 Democrats in Congress sometimes have a handful of defectors, Democrats then should never get any more votes?

There are some Libertarians elected into office, but there are so few. This is reasonably to be expected because the party has only been around since the 1970s, whereas the Dem & Repub parties have been around since the 1800s. And, I'm not speaking about Democratic defectors, unless you're talking about Obama being one? Obama said, and I quote, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage." link.

It's your entire party, NetRunner. They talk as if they care about people's rights and personal liberties, but every time they get into office, they contradict themselves. If they didn't, then every time your party got elected into office, you'd see great things like legalization of drugs and equal rights for everyone.

And, War is the biggest issue. And, Obama is looking to extend that effort into Afghanistan. What's your point? That he's "talking" about ending the war in Iraq? He's talking about downsizing that effort, and he certainly won't pull out of Iraq. The Dems will act like the Repubs for the next year saying "if we broke it, we bought it" to *promote their disgustingly partisan bullshit.