Rhinos are just old, fat unicorns.

>> ^luxury_pie:

But it is standing in the last second of the video, isn't it?
You can see that it rolls of his back and the head spins the right way, so it seems it is not fatally wounded.


Exactly, I can't see any blood either... just a little airborne, it's still good.

http://videosift.com/video/Simpsons-Flying-Pig

"Let me get this straight... Events of the past week:

Republicans get their way with the debt ceiling negotiations
Immediately following this S&P downgrades the US's credit rating

You claim it's the "liberals'" fault?

Action-reaction, man. The economists at S&P see the result of the debt ceiling talks as a bad plan and thus they drop the credit rating. If the democrats' policies had been followed this wouldn't have happened."

HA! You gotta love the logic in both of these posts!

In reply to this comment by bobknight33:
They all should have listen to the Tea Party.

The Liberals and RHINOs got what they wanted now we are in a bigger mess.

You cant spend your way out of debt. Fools

If you read the report, the debt situation was part of it. It should be addressed. But the major indisputable catalyst for the downgrade was the wholely irresponsible use of default as a political weapon. And having a powerful faction of the House actually want a default to happen. That is the sign of a banana republic.

I said above that ability to pay is a major factor in a credit rating. We had several teabag and republican house members and presidential candidates loudly yell that we shouldn't even be willing to pay our debt, even if we were able. Almost every proposal was rejected by the house faction, many of whom apparently pledged not to raise taxes or even raise the debt ceiling. WTF? Finally we have people who didn't want to raise the ceiling because the default would be a "loss" for Obama. I think every one of these reasons is irrational.

If I didn't think they were retarded, I would call their actions treasonous. They want to see the president fail so badly, they are willing to wreck my money (401k, buying power, etc) to do it. Well, mission accomplished, guys.

Obama is the president, but budgets and the (stupid but encoded) debt ceiling vote must come out of the House.

Bottom line: If the republicans really want to reduce the debt, they should pass an appropriate budget next time. Don't default (or even threaten to default) on our existing obligations!

>> ^quantumushroom:
Now I could be wrong, but as I understand it, FOUR trillion in cuts was required to keep the ratings degradation at bay--not to fix anything, just to keep it from happening right away.
Well, the Right failed.
TWO trillion in cuts later, the socialists, who are still the majority party, allowed this farce to proceed. So how is the Right "victorious" by failing to reach even a bare minimum in cuts? If anything, the Righties are idiots for allowing themselves to be lumped in with the Hawaiian Dunce & Friends, who spent 3 trillion in 3 years to no effect.
No, I really don't want to believe Odumbo is this sinister or ignorant, but what choice do I have? If he's dumb he should just say so and let smarter people decide what to do.
The markets will sh1t the bed on his watch tomorrow. At least he will have sealed his fate for 2012. Too bad the rest of us get to sink with him.
>> ^lampishthing:
Let me get this straight... Events of the past week:
Republicans get their way with the debt ceiling negotiations
Immediately following this S&P downgrades the US's credit rating
You claim it's the "liberals'" fault?
Action-reaction, man. The economists at S&P see the result of the debt ceiling talks as a bad plan and thus they drop the credit rating. If the democrats' policies had been followed this wouldn't have happened.>> ^bobknight33:
They all should have listen to the Tea Party.
The Liberals and RHINOs got what they wanted now we are in a bigger mess.
You cant spend your way out of debt. Fools

Now I could be wrong, but as I understand it, FOUR trillion in cuts was required to keep the ratings degradation at bay--not to fix anything, just to keep it from happening right away.

Well, the Right failed.

TWO trillion in cuts later, the socialists, who are still the majority party, allowed this farce to proceed. So how is the Right "victorious" by failing to reach even a bare minimum in cuts? If anything, the Righties are idiots for allowing themselves to be lumped in with the Hawaiian Dunce & Friends, who spent 3 trillion in 3 years to no effect.

No, I really don't want to believe Odumbo is this sinister or ignorant, but what choice do I have? If he's dumb he should just say so and let smarter people decide what to do.

The markets will sh1t the bed on his watch tomorrow. At least he will have sealed his fate for 2012. Too bad the rest of us get to sink with him.












>> ^lampishthing:

Let me get this straight... Events of the past week:
Republicans get their way with the debt ceiling negotiations
Immediately following this S&P downgrades the US's credit rating
You claim it's the "liberals'" fault?
Action-reaction, man. The economists at S&P see the result of the debt ceiling talks as a bad plan and thus they drop the credit rating. If the democrats' policies had been followed this wouldn't have happened.>> ^bobknight33:
They all should have listen to the Tea Party.
The Liberals and RHINOs got what they wanted now we are in a bigger mess.
You cant spend your way out of debt. Fools

Let me get this straight... Events of the past week:

Republicans get their way with the debt ceiling negotiations
Immediately following this S&P downgrades the US's credit rating

You claim it's the "liberals'" fault?

Action-reaction, man. The economists at S&P see the result of the debt ceiling talks as a bad plan and thus they drop the credit rating. If the democrats' policies had been followed this wouldn't have happened.>> ^bobknight33:

They all should have listen to the Tea Party.
The Liberals and RHINOs got what they wanted now we are in a bigger mess.
You cant spend your way out of debt. Fools

They all should have listen to the Tea Party.

The Liberals and RHINOs got what they wanted now we are in a bigger mess.

You cant spend your way out of debt. Fools

I want one!! A rhino/aardvark that is cute like Skrat, who knows he's in trouble sometimes. Nice work Gwiz.

>> ^bobknight33:

They who would you elect? Then possibly set term limits?

>> ^probie:
>> ^bobknight33:
Only when every Democrat and RHINO politician is voted out will the government be restored.

Fixed that for you.



I wouldn't elect anyone. I don't need to be "led", unlike some.

They who would you elect? Then possibly set term limits?


>> ^probie:

>> ^bobknight33:
Only when every Democrat and RHINO politician is voted out will the government be restored.

Fixed that for you.

>> ^bobknight33:

Only when every Democrat and RHINO politician is voted out will the government be restored.


Fixed that for you.

Only when every Democrat and RHINO is voted out will the government be restored.

Thanks for the clarification -- I have never done the research to understand what that whole 3/5 person thing was about.

But why are you laying this at the feet of Mathews? Bachmann is the one who brought up slavery, in the context of the Tea Party goals. How the heck is this Mathews fault?



In reply to this comment by bobknight33:
From Wikipedia..

"The Three-Fifths compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position."

Obliviously it wasn't to end Slavery.
Even though Chris Mathews has a valid point our country needs move on. Slavery is dead. Blacks have the same rights as anyone else in this country.

The TEA Party was created in part of all those fed up with Bush and RHINO republican who weren't fiscally responsible.

From Wikipedia..

"The Three-Fifths compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position."

Obliviously it wasn't to end Slavery.
Even though Chris Mathews has a valid point our country needs move on. Slavery is dead. Blacks have the same rights as anyone else in this country.

The TEA Party was created in part of all those fed up with Bush and RHINO republican who weren't fiscally responsible.