First of all, who turned off the email notification?!?! I haven't receive anything for a couple days, at least.

@pumkinandstorm

PaS, PaS, PaS... I'm your friend. The w/e-way-the-wind-blows Pill-Popper, the Cliquies, and the Badgers running to your "defense" are not. They care not for you nearly as much as they care that you represent 10% of every future star point. You have been beguiled and bamboozled by those whose thin skins betray the indignance-laced Kool-aid they have been drinking for years. They are your Roman Catholic Church. I am your Martin Luther. They are your Tom Cruise. I am your Tory Christman. They are your SLA. I am your windowless black van. They are your enablers, co-dependents. I am your friend. They want your upvotes and the kind of affirmation and vindication they can only receive by collective membership into their twisted groupthink. I want nothing.

Another prolific poster here once left due to the shenanigans of a recently-returned and reformed (?) exile. VS didn't miss a beat. Other people filled in and the same stuff she would have sifted got sifted by others. That's why it was somewhat comical to me when she returned to posting and threatened to stop if the exile was allowed to return. Exile is back, thankfully, and she is still posting, predictably. If you measure your value here by votes and badges, it is a lie. You've been caught up. They are participation ribbons. Everyone gets something eventually, and they don't mean jack shit to those who just want to see the two-headed calf and Journey concert.

Whatever your story... and I mean whatever your story, I stand by what I said. You could be nose-up in an iron lung pecking out smiley faces with a chopstick in your teeth, and I would still maintain that there are infinitely more interesting, meaningful, and rewarding (in RL) pursuits to dedicate hours and hours every day of your life to.

[edit: formatting broke again]

Used up all my own hissy-fit points on this site-I promise to continue to exercise at will, the voting up or down of offerings according to stated guidelines.

Like ant, sometimes the motivation for a downvote may or may not be apparent.(plan rto rock the down vote this go-round, please get ready. Not voting is the same as voting up or down, right?? Be happy the attention you desired was received, be it good, bad, etc.

Feel bad when you get a downvote?? Ask me and I'll tell you of the motivation.
OR, hold a grudge and form an opinion based on an emotional reaction....

The latter method works great if you want an insular hidey-hole of ostracization (like the one I dug for choggie!)

chingalera is simply a somewhat emasculate version of choggie....BUT, at least we got the package fondled, eh?

All I ever really wanted was to be able to fix all of choggie's old dead embeds! Oh, and to piss folks off with thin skin~
S'good for ya, toughens ya up-helps to prepare you for the coming Ignorapacalypse

I am aware. Did you notice I responded to some of your points in it like accusing me of not watching the right wing hitjob video?

The rest I didn't bother responding to. But after second thought, I'll respond to the question of whether Obama is extreme to the left or not. And this is a really easy one...

Name a single thing Obama has done that's honestly extreme to the left. An actual policy. I'm not talking a moderate-left policy. Raising taxes on the top income earners from 35-38% wouldn't be an extreme left idea. It's moving the dial a notch or two to the left. If he proposed raising it to 50%, that would be a hard left move.

See, I don't really care if *some* of Obama's appointments are far to the left. I care about policies proposed or enacted.

Yet another thing I get irritated about - characterizing someone you don't like as a political caricature to the extreme side of that political direction. Don't like George W. Bush? Paint him as a Nazi because he's more to the right than you. Don't like Obama? Paint him as a godless communist because he's to the left of you. Of course the extremes in the parties complain their own guys aren't conservative/liberal enough. This way, nobody is happy, and everyone complains about how crappy our gov't is!

>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^heropsycho:
For the record, I AM NOT thin-skinned about Obama. I get pissed off when people criticize Romney for firing people when he worked at Bain, when that was his FREAKING JOB! If he didn't do that, and Bain was unsuccessful, then the left would have attacked him for being a crappy businessman like George W. Bush was with a baseball team. You can't have it both ways.
Or that his dog was tied to the top of the roof on a family vacation...
Or he, along with friends, picked on someone they thought was gay decades ago in prep school, ignoring the fact everybody did stupid things in high school. It has no bearing on them decades later.
It's totally ridiculous, unproductive, divisive, and doesn't do anybody any good whatsoever. But most importantly, it detracts from honest debate about issues that actually matter.
I don't have any problems with people criticizing Obama for real issues. Him being impolite?! I watched your idiotic right-wing bent hit job video. That's impolite for a leader?! They slammed Obama for making comments where he respectfully disagreed with the Supreme Court. What should he have said instead? Did he scream at them? You know, like the dude who screamed "YOU LIED!"? NO! Him being impolite wasn't the issue. Conservatives are really just upset that he voiced his disagreement with their view, and it's spun to accuse him of being rude and disrespectful. It's ridiculous. He took Eric Cantor to task in a political discussion. Did he scream at him? Cuss at him? NO!
Here's the difference:
If you want to criticize Obama for perhaps overstepping his bounds and the ideal of separation of powers when he criticized the Supreme Court decision? Fine, I disagree, but that's an honest debate. I wouldn't be chewing you out for that.
I watched the video. I didn't see a single instance of him being overly impolite as a leader. If that's the case, every single damn president we ever had is an asshole. And where was your outrage then?!
I'm tired of this shit from both sides. I get pissed off at partisan hackery and absurd distortions of the truth. You, sir, are doing that with this drivel about Obama. I don't care if you dislike him as a President. I'm not a big fan, either. But if you're gonna trope this idiotic crap out, expect to get reamed for it by reasonable people.
>> ^shinyblurry:
>> ^messenger:
Yeah, I'm gonna vote Romney because he has promised not to put his feet on the coffee table. WTF? This is your criteria for a good President? Until he walks with people, he's a bad President? Get off it.>> ^shinyblurry:
I'd like him to be more polite {video}


Why is everyone so thin skinned about Obama? That's my question. I was being somewhat facetious, although I think the video, while humorous, shows a definite pattern of behavior. In any case, I'm not voting for Romney. Although I share some of his views on social issues, that isn't enough to get me past our theological differences, which are great. My prediction is that Romney will actually be far worse for this country, spiritually, than Obama. That is the reason I won't vote for anyone who doesn't worship God in spirit and in truth.


You responded to the wrong post. You can find the one where I replied to you here:
http://videosift.com/video/What-More-Do-We-Wan
t-This-Man-To-Do-For-Us?loadcomm=1#comment-1458730

>> ^heropsycho:

For the record, I AM NOT thin-skinned about Obama. I get pissed off when people criticize Romney for firing people when he worked at Bain, when that was his FREAKING JOB! If he didn't do that, and Bain was unsuccessful, then the left would have attacked him for being a crappy businessman like George W. Bush was with a baseball team. You can't have it both ways.
Or that his dog was tied to the top of the roof on a family vacation...
Or he, along with friends, picked on someone they thought was gay decades ago in prep school, ignoring the fact everybody did stupid things in high school. It has no bearing on them decades later.
It's totally ridiculous, unproductive, divisive, and doesn't do anybody any good whatsoever. But most importantly, it detracts from honest debate about issues that actually matter.
I don't have any problems with people criticizing Obama for real issues. Him being impolite?! I watched your idiotic right-wing bent hit job video. That's impolite for a leader?! They slammed Obama for making comments where he respectfully disagreed with the Supreme Court. What should he have said instead? Did he scream at them? You know, like the dude who screamed "YOU LIED!"? NO! Him being impolite wasn't the issue. Conservatives are really just upset that he voiced his disagreement with their view, and it's spun to accuse him of being rude and disrespectful. It's ridiculous. He took Eric Cantor to task in a political discussion. Did he scream at him? Cuss at him? NO!
Here's the difference:
If you want to criticize Obama for perhaps overstepping his bounds and the ideal of separation of powers when he criticized the Supreme Court decision? Fine, I disagree, but that's an honest debate. I wouldn't be chewing you out for that.
I watched the video. I didn't see a single instance of him being overly impolite as a leader. If that's the case, every single damn president we ever had is an asshole. And where was your outrage then?!
I'm tired of this shit from both sides. I get pissed off at partisan hackery and absurd distortions of the truth. You, sir, are doing that with this drivel about Obama. I don't care if you dislike him as a President. I'm not a big fan, either. But if you're gonna trope this idiotic crap out, expect to get reamed for it by reasonable people.
>> ^shinyblurry:
>> ^messenger:
Yeah, I'm gonna vote Romney because he has promised not to put his feet on the coffee table. WTF? This is your criteria for a good President? Until he walks with people, he's a bad President? Get off it.>> ^shinyblurry:
I'd like him to be more polite {video}


Why is everyone so thin skinned about Obama? That's my question. I was being somewhat facetious, although I think the video, while humorous, shows a definite pattern of behavior. In any case, I'm not voting for Romney. Although I share some of his views on social issues, that isn't enough to get me past our theological differences, which are great. My prediction is that Romney will actually be far worse for this country, spiritually, than Obama. That is the reason I won't vote for anyone who doesn't worship God in spirit and in truth.



You responded to the wrong post. You can find the one where I replied to you here:

http://videosift.com/video/What-More-Do-We-Want-This-Man-To-Do-For-Us?loadcomm=1#comment-1458730

For the record, I AM NOT thin-skinned about Obama. I get pissed off when people criticize Romney for firing people when he worked at Bain, when that was his FREAKING JOB! If he didn't do that, and Bain was unsuccessful, then the left would have attacked him for being a crappy businessman like George W. Bush was with a baseball team. You can't have it both ways.

Or that his dog was tied to the top of the roof on a family vacation...

Or he, along with friends, picked on someone they thought was gay decades ago in prep school, ignoring the fact everybody did stupid things in high school. It has no bearing on them decades later.

It's totally ridiculous, unproductive, divisive, and doesn't do anybody any good whatsoever. But most importantly, it detracts from honest debate about issues that actually matter.

I don't have any problems with people criticizing Obama for real issues. Him being impolite?! I watched your idiotic right-wing bent hit job video. That's impolite for a leader?! They slammed Obama for making comments where he respectfully disagreed with the Supreme Court. What should he have said instead? Did he scream at them? You know, like the dude who screamed "YOU LIED!"? NO! Him being impolite wasn't the issue. Conservatives are really just upset that he voiced his disagreement with their view, and it's spun to accuse him of being rude and disrespectful. It's ridiculous. He took Eric Cantor to task in a political discussion. Did he scream at him? Cuss at him? NO!

Here's the difference:

If you want to criticize Obama for perhaps overstepping his bounds and the ideal of separation of powers when he criticized the Supreme Court decision? Fine, I disagree, but that's an honest debate. I wouldn't be chewing you out for that.

I watched the video. I didn't see a single instance of him being overly impolite as a leader. If that's the case, every single damn president we ever had is an asshole. And where was your outrage then?!

I'm tired of this shit from both sides. I get pissed off at partisan hackery and absurd distortions of the truth. You, sir, are doing that with this drivel about Obama. I don't care if you dislike him as a President. I'm not a big fan, either. But if you're gonna trope this idiotic crap out, expect to get reamed for it by reasonable people.

>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^messenger:
Yeah, I'm gonna vote Romney because he has promised not to put his feet on the coffee table. WTF? This is your criteria for a good President? Until he walks with people, he's a bad President? Get off it.>> ^shinyblurry:
I'd like him to be more polite {video}


Why is everyone so thin skinned about Obama? That's my question. I was being somewhat facetious, although I think the video, while humorous, shows a definite pattern of behavior. In any case, I'm not voting for Romney. Although I share some of his views on social issues, that isn't enough to get me past our theological differences, which are great. My prediction is that Romney will actually be far worse for this country, spiritually, than Obama. That is the reason I won't vote for anyone who doesn't worship God in spirit and in truth.

>> ^messenger:

Yeah, I'm gonna vote Romney because he has promised not to put his feet on the coffee table. WTF? This is your criteria for a good President? Until he walks with people, he's a bad President? Get off it.>> ^shinyblurry:
I'd like him to be more polite {video}



Why is everyone so thin skinned about Obama? That's my question. I was being somewhat facetious, although I think the video, while humorous, shows a definite pattern of behavior. In any case, I'm not voting for Romney. Although I share some of his views on social issues, that isn't enough to get me past our theological differences, which are great. My prediction is that Romney will actually be far worse for this country, spiritually, than Obama. That is the reason I won't vote for anyone who doesn't worship God in spirit and in truth.

Well, this seems to have turned into a public forum....

I, too, miss the QUALITY contributions of blankfist, @RhesusMonk. The QUALITY contributions have been stellar. Some of the funniest things on the Sift came from his observations. Funny and smart. What's not to like?

Let me tell you.

It wasn't just the obvious trolling.

I don't miss the personal attacks, and the thin-skinned whining that followed when blankie was told off by fellow Sifters and then ultimately dag. Talk about being able to dish it out but not being able to take it!

If anyone has received preferential treatment, it has been blankie. Blankie has been responsible for driving many folks away from the sift, but because he did make QUALITY contributions, he was allowed to come back again and again.

Besides, I think this is a perfect way to flameout on the Sift, and is an absolutely PERFECT final troll on the Sift. A mere 90 or so vids away from Galaxy, and to walk away from that glory? That is classy, funny, in-your-face proud and defiant. Listed on the Top Ten with the Circle Line logo as a Galaxy symbol, as @Fusionaut noted?

The Perfect Troll. Absolutely Perfect Troll.

Just stop the sexist bullshit. The rest I couldn't care less about.

In reply to this comment by Fletch:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Alright Fletch. This misogynist harassment needs to stop. @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://dag.videosift.com" title="member since February 16th, 2006" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#008800">dag @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://lucky760.videosift.com" title="member since May 2nd, 2006" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#0044ff">lucky760
In reply to this comment by Fletch:
DFT & IK, it's so cute how you upvote each other's comments and videos. It sorta reminds me of the Terri Schiavo case, where her husband, Michael, supported her and efforts to bring her back to consciousness for years, even though it was obvious she was vegetative.

@sugartits.

And Berticus... oh, nm.

>> ^Fletch:
>> ^Issykitty:
It's a KITTEN, dipshit. Wow, you took the time to look at when it was uploaded. That's precious.

@Sugartits
What a strange reply to a compliment. Checking the age of a video that I knew I had seen before is no more difficult or time-consuming than viewing your ignored comments. Click. Done.



Wow. You edited your comment after submitting it. How strange. The original was reasonable and to the point ("Alright Fletch. That's enough"). When I got the email, I was just going to respond with something like "no problem, but I don't take kindly to name-calling", or something along those lines, but the new version with "misogynist harassment" sounds like a typical IK comment. You know, buzzwords intended to support a desperate, gutless fabrication. I'm sorry, but there is no way you wrote "misogynist harassment". I've just read way too much of what you've written in the past. You just aren't prone to shrill exaggeration. Buzzwords... that's IK. If I'm wrong... I'm wrong. Sorry about that.

I don't use the sarcasm box. Never will. I think it's stupid. Unfortunately, not doing so gives those who need a windmill to slay an opportunuty to be offended by something, and may give those who wish to offend a free ticket to do so. (I recently saw a comment by Lucky ((?) I think; maybe dag) tell someone that if they didn't check the sarcasm box, they would be banned for a time. Or something. Insane.) If you choose to take what I say literally, and resolve it into "misogynist harassment", then the joke is on you. I'm sorry, but it started with "dipshit". Everything after that was a REPLY. She asked for it. But that's her MO... name-calling, condescension, that strange you-must-really-want-my-attention act that is just so tired/weird, all followed by threats and the circling of wagons when none of those tactics result in the last word. That's my perception/experience with her, anyway. Call me names, it's on. I won't allow anyone to talk to me like that without responding. If she is going to be so thin-skinned about it, she should really consider carefully what she types before hitting "submit new comment".

I am an equal-opportunity stale and stupid cat video down-voter. I have no idea why she thinks she's so special. Maybe she just lives for badges, or something sad like that.

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://dag.videosift.com" title="member since February 16th, 2006" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#008800">dag @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://lucky760.videosift.com" title="member since May 2nd, 2006" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#0044ff">lucky760

DFT didn't quote everything. Here's the whole "conversation".

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Alright Fletch. This misogynist harassment needs to stop. @dag @lucky760
In reply to this comment by Fletch:
DFT & IK, it's so cute how you upvote each other's comments and videos. It sorta reminds me of the Terri Schiavo case, where her husband, Michael, supported her and efforts to bring her back to consciousness for years, even though it was obvious she was vegetative.

@sugartits.

And Berticus... oh, nm.

>> ^Fletch:
>> ^Issykitty:
It's a KITTEN, dipshit. Wow, you took the time to look at when it was uploaded. That's precious.

@Sugartits
What a strange reply to a compliment. Checking the age of a video that I knew I had seen before is no more difficult or time-consuming than viewing your ignored comments. Click. Done.



Wow. You edited your comment after submitting it. How strange. The original was reasonable and to the point ("Alright Fletch. That's enough"). When I got the email, I was just going to respond with something like "no problem, but I don't take kindly to name-calling", or something along those lines, but the new version with "misogynist harassment" sounds like a typical IK comment. You know, buzzwords intended to support a desperate, gutless fabrication. I'm sorry, but there is no way you wrote "misogynist harassment". I've just read way too much of what you've written in the past. You just aren't prone to shrill exaggeration. Buzzwords... that's IK. If I'm wrong... I'm wrong. Sorry about that.

I don't use the sarcasm box. Never will. I think it's stupid. Unfortunately, not doing so gives those who need a windmill to slay an opportunuty to be offended by something, and may give those who wish to offend a free ticket to do so. (I recently saw a comment by Lucky ((?) I think; maybe dag) tell someone that if they didn't check the sarcasm box, they would be banned for a time. Or something. Insane.) If you choose to take what I say literally, and resolve it into "misogynist harassment", then the joke is on you. I'm sorry, but it started with "dipshit". Everything after that was a REPLY. She asked for it. But that's her MO... name-calling, condescension, that strange you-must-really-want-my-attention act that is just so tired/weird, all followed by threats and the circling of wagons when none of those tactics result in the last word. That's my perception/experience with her, anyway. Call me names, it's on. I won't allow anyone to talk to me like that without responding. If she is going to be so thin-skinned about it, she should really consider carefully what she types before hitting "submit new comment".

I am an equal-opportunity stale and stupid cat video down-voter. I have no idea why she thinks she's so special. Maybe she just lives for badges, or something sad like that.

@dag @lucky760

DFT didn't quote everything. Here's the whole "conversation".

The sarcasm box is for the malleable and thin-skinned.

Can we also get "edgy", "wtf", "not to be a dick, but...", "I know this sounds stupid, but...", "I am not a racist, but..." (aka "some of my best friends are ____... but"), "not to change the subject, but...", "I just read this on Wikipedia...", "I just Googled...", "IANAL", "rant", "ignorant rant", "red herring", "dubious/fabricated sources quoted", "correct me if I'm wrong", and "I'm so high right now" boxes?

So far, the 112th congress--which is GOP/Tea Party--is the least productive congress in history

Pht - not to put too fine a point on it - but the LESS PRODUCTIVE government is, the better off the American people are. Clinton got saddled with a GOP congress in 1992 that put the brakes on his agenda. And America BENEFITED. President Reagan and Bush1 had Democrat congresses to put the brakes on them. And America BENEFITED.

Who are the two worst presidents in American history. Bush2 and Barak Obama. Why? Because under both of them government spending has skyrocketed, fiscal policy has deteriorated, and government has increased in size, scope, lack of transparency, and lack of accountability. And what is the common thread to both of these presidents? The Congress was the SAME PARTY as the President, and thier administrations were "highly productive" (in the sense that they passed a ton of legislation).

So you guys should be praising the Tea Party for slamming the brakes on a lousy government, because when thin-skinned, tin-plated self-deluded dictator-wannabes like Obama take office we NEED a 'do nothing' Congress shutting them down. Problem with Obama is he is such a crazy dictator that he just keeps doing what he wants with czars and cabinets. In a sane world, every American would demand he be thrown out of office, pilloried in town square, and then run out of town on a rail to be dumped in Cuba, or Venezuala, Iran, or some other communist dictatorship where he could feel more at home.

These ***holes won't even debate an unbelievably important ... jobs bill,"

Good, because it isn't important. It's a disaster. And you are allowed to whine about the GOP 'not debating it' only after it makes it out of the SENATE, which is controlled by the Democrats. The fact that even the Democrats can't stand this loser piece of crap should tell you a lot about how awful it is.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Palin is thin-skinned? She's been media-assassinated by cowards from the moment McLame anounced her as running mate.
She should run; can't do any worse than the kenyan kenyanesque hawaiian.


She wasn't assassinated by the media; she was assassinated by McCain and he was smart to do it. They realized pretty quickly that she was a moron as did everyone else, including most of the Republican party. She doesn't have the fortitude to deal with opposition or challenges. She had a months-long breakdown over being asked what she reads. At the end of it all she wasn't even smart enough to be embarrassed and disappear.

Now she's surrounded herself with a team of yes-men and she's traveling the country rallying the rest of the morons. Why hasn't she thrown her hat into the race? Because she's afraid to face the criticism. She's afraid to have to answer questions from people who aren't her friends. She wants to live in her bubble-world for as long as possible. If she does throw in, it will be at the last possible minute to avoid as many debates and interviews as possible.

Three words for you ---

Terrorist Fist Jab.

Don't be silly, qm. This is how it is. You have to have a thick skin. It is ugly out there. She got upset because Rove made a SPECULATION that she might be running.

She is a train wreck. I know someone who knew her in high school, and she says she was mean, mean, mean even then.

Give it up. The truth is just coming to light.


>> ^quantumushroom:

Palin is thin-skinned? She's been media-assassinated by cowards from the moment McLame anounced her as running mate.
She should run; can't do any worse than the kenyan kenyanesque hawaiian.

Palin is thin-skinned? She's been media-assassinated by cowards from the moment McLame anounced her as running mate.

She should run; can't do any worse than the kenyan kenyanesque hawaiian.

Far too long....

>> ^quantumushroom:
QM:I'm happy to see that you accept the label 'right wing nutjob', that saves us time.
If it makes you happy to believe that, go right ahead. And there is no time being saved here at the sift.


Make me happy? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
It saved me time to waste on other stupidness.


I wonder where you get your 90% figure (or your implication that 100% of teachers unions are democrat)...if true, why don't right wingers believe in education and journalism? No one is stopping them from being teachers or journalists.
"MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.
The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms."


So, in your small sampling, it's 87%. I somehow think the sampling may have been intentionally skewed, but OK. Note I didn't disagree with your stat, just questioned it's origin, if it was Faux, I would discount it offhand.


You're part right about McCain, I did respect him for the most part (but didn't always agree with him) until he sold his soul and lost his mind in/after 2000 when the 'straight talk express' took a 90 deg right turn into a sewage filled ditch of lies, direction changes, blatant pandering, and BS. It makes me shudder to think what might have been if he had been president during his 'right wing wind sock' days, turning whichever way the right wing wind blew that day.
Yeah, because things are going SO great with the clueless community organizer at the helm. Did you see the Dow drop 500 points today? No confidence in the Obamateur, from Americans or the world.


You seem to assume that because I think McCain is worthless now that Obama must be my preferance, and that I support his policies and actions and think he's leading us strongly. That is an incorrect, and all to often made assumption. Why must you continue to make an ass out of umption, do what you like to yourself.


You have no idea when or how I was raised, so you should refrain from commenting on that subject. Let's just say your statement is wrong, as I'm sure are most of your assumptions about me.
Well, you're not overtly libertarian or conservative. So what's LEFT?


I'm what used to be republican. I'm a social liberal, and fiscal conservative. There is no sane party I can call home today.


The idea that the left is 'running roughshod' over the right is more complete insanity, the left is incapable of being cohesive enough to do much of anything intentionally. The right is cohesive, but their ideas are insane and proven repeatedly to be wrong for the most part. I do give them credit for knowing how to get their agenda furthered, I just disagree with their agenda as enacted.

Obama is on track to spend more than bush, but he has not yet. The reasons for the respective spending sprees and amount of each is another discussion in itself.
Sorry, this is untrue. Obama so far has spent 3 trillion in 3 years, whereas Bush spent close to 5 trillion in eight years, much of it opposed by the Right.


This is why people call you nuts...you are insisting that 3 trillion is more than 5 trillion, and that spending sprees and tax (revenue) cuts under total republican control were against republican (the right's) wishes.


All taxpayers tired of being 'over' taxed are not right wing nutjobs, or even right wingers. That's an utter falicy and insulting BS. It's seemingly easy for you to point at the failings of one underfunded, over administrated program (public schools) and make the leap to the theory that all governmental programs are failures, but that is a gross simplification of a multifaceted problem.
Goverment schools are "underfunded"? On what planet? BTW, there is no direct correlation between school performance and how much money is spent per student. I believe DC spends the most per student and you can see how well that turned out.


Underfunded because of insane administration costs, better? More money doesn't automatically make better schools, but it helps, but not if it's all spent on non-school related administration expenses.


Even so, that theory doesn't hold water. The 'free market' for higher education shows that many, if not all completely 'private' schools provide sub par education (if any at all) while many schools using 'public' funds are among the highest ranked in the nation.
And yet how many liberal politicians send THEIR kids to private schools, even as they need teacher union votes? Competition weeds out crappy private schools while failing government schools keep churning out dummies. Government schooling is a racket, as well as unconstitutional at the federal level.


I'm not sure your arguement here...I'm not a liberal politician, or a true supporter of them, so how does what they do relate to me? I've been to good and bad private and public schools, the ones with money always had a leg up. I really believe if you have children, you should be taxed the cost of a decent education and allowed to spend it at the school you prefer (excluding religious school, that's another issue). Since this doesn't happen, I prefer decent public education be purchased with my tax dollar rather than prison cells and barbed wire. I do see it as an either or situation.


I'm sure you did call the feds attempt at stoping the failed CEO's from looting the failing companies we had just bailed out "obamatrons trying to loot corporations in the name of "social justice" ", so why isn't it 'the far right trying to loot the pensions and paychecks of the teachers' in the name of social justice? What's good for the goose...right? A legal contract is a legal contract, right?
I was never a fan of any bailout. Bush was barely conservative as it was. The left was too busy hating Bush to notice him rubber-stamping most of their spending requests. Stupid Hillary is on record claiming she'd like to seize all of the oil companies' profits. To the best of my knowledge, some states are making some teachers pay a tiny fraction more for their own health insurance and/or pension. Hardly the a$$rape by unnamed "far right" specters you're insinuating.


I'll never understand the arguement that, when confronted with their own abhorrent behavior people answer with 'look, that other guy I always call an a$$hole is doing bad stuff too'.
As I understand it, many states are cutting back on pension payments, or not paying them at all. At the same time they are regulating teachers, denying them union status, and forcing renegotiation of in place pay and work hours/load contracts. Not total a$$ rape, but close, and certainly not fair or acceptable treatment.

I'm not sure if you are ignoring my last statement there or if that's some kind of 1/2 assed, racist response. Either way, TOTAL FAIL.
Knowing me, I probably just didn't give a sh1t. Nothing personal. Youse guys have such thin skins when it comes to these faux-racial matters. What part of 'Kenyanesque Hawaiian' is racist? Odumbo's fadda was Kenyan and he (the son) was purportedly born in Hawaii. Where's the racism? Only in your mind.

I said:Letting right wing nutjobs re-write contracts and negate our obligations was one of our biggest mistakes.

You replied: Fail. The Kenyanesque Hawaiian never met a spending cut he liked. He's overclocked this economy because he wants to cripple it. Here comes the broom to sweep the moonbats out of the belfry.

The ridiculous infactuation with his ancestory (race) is where the racism is. Kenyanesque only applies if he acts Kenyan, and he does not. It is intended to be racially insulting, you know it, we know it. Either give it up or own it.
It's sad that you just don't give a sh!t about your people being so unstable that you can't trust any agreement made with them. That's my issue, not so much their political party, but their actions and trustworthyness. I'm hardpressed to find a politician of either party I wouldn't call fectless and feculant. I call out the right more often because they went bat sh!t crazy and deserted me, leaving me partyless.