July 23, 2010
— Gabriel Malor Friday. W00t.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
05:13 AM
| Comments (83)
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.
No he don't be. Undercover Democrats of all colors are equal, RACIST!
Posted by: oblig. at July 23, 2010 05:19 AM (x7Ao8)
Shirley Sherrod has been named our nation's first Racial Equity Czar, a newly minted Cabinet position which gives her regulatory control over the Treasury Dept. No biggie.
Posted by: Lincolntf at July 23, 2010 05:22 AM (+O8yf)
(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration is backing legislation that includes regulations requiring U.S. businesses to provide to the government data about employee pay as it relates to the sex, race and national origin of employees.
In an orchestrated effort that included a statement by President Barack Obama and an event at the White House featuring Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, the president and his cabinet endorsed the Paycheck Fairness Act.
In a White House-issued press release, the “enhancement of enforcement” is described as “a pledge by the Department of Justice and other enforcement agencies will coordinate and collaborate through investigations, litigation, policy guidance, data analysis, and public education efforts to make meaningful progress in closing the wage gap,” the press release stated.
“Already, the Justice Department, in conjunction with the EEOC and four of its district offices, has launched a robust and intensive pilot program to coordinate the investigation and litigation of charges against state and local government employers,” it added.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at July 23, 2010 05:23 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 23, 2010 05:25 AM (qPpkJ)
This is the same kind of crap that they got added to CRA to make it easy for assholes like ACORN to sue. This is another extortionist lawyer bill that needs to go down the tubes.
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:26 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: joncelli at July 23, 2010 05:28 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel at July 23, 2010 05:28 AM (SCcgT)
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:30 AM (/jbAw)
I've been thinking and wonder what your thoughts are on this.
Does anyone here think our economy would be significantly better if John McCain had won, keeping in mind the fact that the Democrats controlled large majorities in both the House and the Senate?
Posted by: Ben at July 23, 2010 05:32 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: dananjcon at July 23, 2010 05:33 AM (pr+up)
Posted by: maddogg at July 23, 2010 05:34 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 09:30 AM (/jbAw)
We're probably fucked because Centerfold Boy and the Ugly Twins from Maine will jump on board. Fortunately McVain is facing an election and has to pretend to be a conservative so that might keep Lady Lindsey from making it a fucking landslide. Fuck that shit anyway on businesses providing that data; there is no scenario where anything good for the country can subsequently happen.
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 23, 2010 05:36 AM (qPpkJ)
I haven't gone back and looked at who voted yes/no but it hasn't made it in 2007 - 2009 so maybe they haven't jumped on board.
Every reputable study that has ever been done has shown that if you account for all the factors that there is no "disparity" in salaries.
This POS is just another make work for lawyers bill and payback to all the perpetually offended groups.
All the Senators (and House members) with JDs should be recused from voting.
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:40 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: dananjcon at July 23, 2010 09:33 AM (pr+up)
I keep seeing references to this in the comments. What'd I miss? Where? About what?
Posted by: Tami at July 23, 2010 05:42 AM (VuLos)
Does anyone here think our economy would be significantly better if John McCain had won, keeping in mind the fact that the Democrats controlled large majorities in both the House and the Senate?
Short term - probably not. Long term - yes. You would not have a massive and expensive health care bill, horrible Financial Reform bill, and a boondoggle of a stimulus. McCain fails on a lot of conservative issues, but he at least is serious about the debt and deficiet
Follow up.
I agree with you on the healthcare issue, McCain would not have pushed that. But do you really think that McCain would not have pushed a stimulus bill or signed the FinReg Bill?
I think McCain would have signed any financial regulation bill given to him by congresss. I also think McCain is the type of politician who thinks it is better to be seen doing something than nothing and would have pushed for some sort of stimulus bill
Posted by: Ben at July 23, 2010 05:42 AM (wuv1c)
Bite your tongue! That will mean that baseball is almost over. I tolerate the heat and humidity just for the pleasure of the greatest game.
And Gabe? You can stick your soccer mania where the sun don't shine!
Posted by: NJConservative at July 23, 2010 05:42 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: joncelli at July 23, 2010 05:42 AM (RD7QR)
Ace warned of a coming purge of all the hot heads and flamers.
Check the "Racism Video" threads from yesterday.
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:43 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Ben at July 23, 2010 05:44 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: dr kill at July 23, 2010 05:44 AM (w9bVp)
I don't think you'd have such lousy unemployment if you didn't have the specter of New Racio-Communismtm hanging over small businesses collective heads. McCain is a pathetic pandering squish and he would have his own problems, but I don't think the business class would be scared of the radical shit we see going on with Commissar Barry and the Funky Bunch.
Posted by: nickless at July 23, 2010 05:45 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: curious at July 23, 2010 05:45 AM (p302b)
Ace was PMSing about something. I couldn't really figure out what it was. But if you don't behave he is going to wack you. My advice is to cut and paste comments from LGF. That way you can be sure that your sycophancy will be noted and approved.
Posted by: NJConservative at July 23, 2010 05:45 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Nestor from New Haven at July 23, 2010 05:47 AM (w9bVp)
I haven't gone back and looked at who voted yes/no but it hasn't made it in 2007 - 2009 so maybe they haven't jumped on board.
Well, if Centerfold Boy decided to generate more headlines for himself by being a "maverick" that would cancel out the fat fuck who's currently roasting in Hell's vote. The Maine harridans can't be trusted either. I think our hopes lie more in the donkeycrats that are looking at their poll numbers and thinking WTF. Hopefully assholes like Webb, who had an article in the WSJ on what a fucking crock the diversity bullshit is, will be frightened by the prospect of appearing to be a craven hypocrite, even to the shitheads who voted for him, if he'd vote for it.
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 23, 2010 05:47 AM (qPpkJ)
I agree with much of the sentiment, however, I would be willing to bet if McCain won, unemployment would still be around 8.5 percent or higher. I think at best he wouldn't have impeded the recovery as much as Obama, but I also think he would have done a fair amount of damage in conjunction with the Democratic House and Senate. He definately would have passed a financial regulation bill, not to dissimilar to the one just passed. He talks about budgets a lot, but economics don't appear to be mccains strong point.
Posted by: Ben at July 23, 2010 05:48 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: President Ebola at July 23, 2010 05:49 AM (9Ep/N)
I would not have counted on that. He is the primary reason they were not permanent to begin with. (other than the normal Dem obstruction)
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:49 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Nestor from New Haven at July 23, 2010 05:51 AM (w9bVp)
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 09:49 AM (/jbAw)
Didn't he admit to having been wrong about that in the campaign (not that I'd believe anything that backstabbing fuck ever says but still......)? I'm pretty sure he did.
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 23, 2010 05:52 AM (qPpkJ)
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at July 23, 2010 05:53 AM (zgZzy)
Yeah, during the campaign he was running away from his record. I believe in following actions not rhetoric.
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:55 AM (/jbAw)
doubt that with this Congress he would have gotten it, but he would have pushed because then, when the taxes went up, he could blame the Ds....and not blaming himself is always something Johnny Mac is good at.
that's my overall feeling. That even if McCain became the president and was the man we wanted him to be, that he wouldn't have been able to get anything through congress. Even if Arlen hadn't switched, the Dems still had 59 senators and a 230+ congressmen.
Posted by: Ben at July 23, 2010 05:55 AM (wuv1c)
I was thinking the same thing earlier. It also ran through my mind this scenario. Being the lazy ass he is, and knowing his popularity will most likely continue to spiral down, Obama will not seek re-election in 2012. In rides Hillary, who still has a great support network behind her. She white horse's her way to the nomination, then wins in the general. With people still not ready to give the keys to the WH back to the Repubs, Hillary wins.....hello veto and no chance of repealing these monstrosities. Just a nagging thought.
Posted by: Lady in Black at July 23, 2010 05:56 AM (Zq7bR)
That even if McCain became the president and was the man we wanted him to be, that he wouldn't have been able to get anything through congress.
But chances are we wouldn't be dealing with this other crap we have to suffer through with Obama: Endless vacations, pissing off our allies, racism at every turn, the "Victory Mosque," etc.
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at July 23, 2010 05:57 AM (zgZzy)
Posted by: Kerry at July 23, 2010 05:57 AM (Isn+8)
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:58 AM (/jbAw)
Posted by: curious at July 23, 2010 06:00 AM (p302b)
Posted by: Captain Hate at July 23, 2010 06:00 AM (qPpkJ)
54 I always think someone is going to photo shop a poster advocating term limits and have a "poster child" contest and McCan will be one of the contestants..
Best thing to happen to this country would be term limits. That's why it'll never go through.
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at July 23, 2010 06:01 AM (zgZzy)
Having watched the "FULL" 43 minute version of the Shirely Sherrod video released by the NAACP (and edited at 21:00-23:03) I must say, Andy was actually wrong, it really was about reconciliation. Though she admitted she couldn't deal with a white man who needed her help and sent him to a white lawyer who did nothing, in the end she did the right thing and helped save the white man's farm. Though the white farmer and his wife appear quite intimidated by their inquistors from the media, they do say that she hepled them save his farm. Though she put him off at first because he was white, which clearly was discrimination, in the end, it was a good result and we should be judged by our actions and their results rather than our personal prejudices.
It is obvious she was speaking from the heart and admitting she could not help him because of the resentment she harbored of all white people, but when it came down to it, she did help and he kept his farm.
Unless there is something more in the editing in the NAACP version, Brietbart's explaination to FOX was lame. Andy is an essential part of the New Media and it is truly terrible that he has made this blunder and given the Liberal Leftist Media a real reason to discredit us all.
Goddammit Andy, watch the whole fucking thing first before you jump the gun and get snookered by the NAACP! WE NEED YOU TOO MUCH!
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 06:02 AM (tuCVl)
Posted by: dananjcon at July 23, 2010 09:33 AM (pr+up)
I keep seeing references to this in the comments. What'd I miss? Where? About what?
Posted by: Tami at July 23, 2010 09:42 AM (VuLos)
Primarily yesterday's Nightline/Breibart thread. I was delicately dressed down, something about Patriot Purists or some such nonsense. And that we did not have the intellectual honesty to admit we are wrong as it pertains to Sherrod but the Conservative MSM does.
Posted by: dananjcon at July 23, 2010 06:08 AM (pr+up)
FinReg is an interesting question. I suspect he would have pushed something along the line of limited FinReg that restricted the use of deravatives. Not the current boondaggle we have.
Posted by: Mallamutt
I wonder whether he would have the guts to deal with Fannie/Freddie Mac. That was and is still one of our biggest problems.
Would he have taken over Chyrsler and GM and screwed over the bondholders at the same time?
Would he be bowing to everyone on the planet?
Would he have assed around for over six months in Afghanistan?
Would he have pushed the Cash for clunkers and then houses?
Would he have gone out of his way to piss off the Brits, Poles, Canadians, Hondurans and Israelis?
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 23, 2010 06:08 AM (R2fpr)
Posted by: curious at July 23, 2010 06:08 AM (p302b)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 06:14 AM (tuCVl)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 10:02 AM (tuCVl)
First, thanks for the bold type and the sickening blue background. It really brought out your eyes on that post.
Second, Unless you are ready to claim that a tape showing a white person (speaking to a romm full of other white persons) candidly talking actively screwing someone over on the basis of race, and later thinking better of it, would play well anywhere, (unless that person was Robert Byrd) your post was as overwrought as it was over 'colored'.
I hereby renounce myself for complaining about that post of Color.
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 23, 2010 06:15 AM (R2fpr)
Blue Hen, my original question was specifically on the economy. Clearly on every other issues, foreign policy, apology tour, etc he would have been better.
I just don't think he would be much different on the economy.
Posted by: Ben at July 23, 2010 06:15 AM (wuv1c)
Beck described the control room freaking out trying to patch the call in and saying "who is it?" "who is it""
What Beck missed is the probable reaction at the WH....he didn't even think of that. That red phone which he has been holding up now for at least a year saying "WH, call me, call me"...rang....if they were watching did they freak out too? Did they think "who the heck is calling Beck?" "Did they assume it was one of them?
Posted by: curious at July 23, 2010 06:16 AM (p302b)
Blue Hen, my original question was specifically on the economy. Clearly on every other issues, foreign policy, apology tour, etc he would have been better.
I just don't think he would be much different on the economy.
Posted by: Ben
We're in agreement. I think that this goes back to what Beck was saying at the time of the election. Some of what Obama has done might have still occurred, but in a slightly less noxious form, and have the impression of bi-partisanship.
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 23, 2010 06:21 AM (R2fpr)
Posted by: curious at July 23, 2010 10:16 AM (p302b)
Hehe...I caught that too, thought the same thing. Can ya Imgine Jarret, Rahm and Axelrod choking on their coffee simultaneously and the look of horror on their faces?? Good Stuff.
Posted by: dananjcon at July 23, 2010 06:22 AM (pr+up)
My take is that we'd be better off, but still in bad shape. I don't think McCain would have nationalized GM and Chrysler, nor would he have put so much effort into sucking off the unions.
Not sure anyone in D.C. understands the economy, or what government can -- and cannot -- do to keep it running smoothly.
We would not, however, have had a traitor in the White House who bows to terrorists and seels out our security to every tinhorn dictator that comes along.
We wouldn't have Eric Shabazz Holder, the Wise Latina or Kagan the Terrible.
Sarah Palin would be VP. Tens of thousands of slavering comments at Tepid Air would never have been written. Allahpundit would be begging on street corners and scouring job listings.
Posted by: MrScribbler at July 23, 2010 06:22 AM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 06:23 AM (tuCVl)
I'm all for making the children of politicians ineligible for public office. For goodness' sake, no more dynasties. You gotta skip a generation.
And how about making candidates for Pres/VP/Senator resign their other elected positions (Rep/Gov/Sen etc) BEFORE THEY CAN RUN FOR HIGHER OFFICE.
Wishful thinking, I know.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at July 23, 2010 06:23 AM (P9+0W)
they need a team of forensic accountants and quants in there to figure out what occurred to make the liquidity dry up like that.
Posted by: curious at July 23, 2010 06:33 AM (p302b)
Posted by: eman at July 23, 2010 06:38 AM (9Ep/N)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS
THe NAACP, who supposedly made the original tape, was the one that dumped her, not Breitbart. And our US government canned/ accepted her resignation, not Breitbart.
This does NOT make us all look bad, unless you allow yet another double standard to hold sway. You've already acknowledged the existence of one. That's enough for one day.
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 23, 2010 06:41 AM (R2fpr)
Posted by: naturalfake at July 23, 2010 06:41 AM (I49Jm)
Really.
The Empire Goes Broke
How the mighty have fallen.....
Posted by: naturalfake
I hope that they televise the suspect line up identification. Do a think that Ace will make a cameo as an ewok?
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 23, 2010 06:43 AM (R2fpr)
Posted by: eman at July 23, 2010 06:52 AM (9Ep/N)
eman Sherrod is a bigot, Ebola is an asshole, and Breitbart was sloppy or a genius, and all of these things can be true at the same time.
Yeah, but the result this time is really bad. I don't watch enough Left Media to know how long they'll pound on this one, but they got Andy this time for real! Anyone who watches the NAACP edited version will find themselves in great sympathy for Shirley, who admitted she couldn't deal with a white guy, but did the right thing in the end.
If they play this to the hilt it could really hurt the New Media. Andy was sloppy and if fair minded people see all of this, it may turn them off in droves, or it may give them another reason to capitulate to the Jackbooted-IronFisted-Left.
I trust the American people to be fair minded, and therefore this bodes badly for the New Media, and for Andy who has now been branded a "Right Wing Provacateur" This is not good ... Only time will tell.
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 06:57 AM (tuCVl)
Blue Hen -This does NOT make us all look bad,
Andy messed up and if they play this one hard enough they could really make him look bad, and the rest of the New Media too. Let's hope they don't continue to pound this the way they are capable of doing: incessantly, every day, drip by drip, new revealation after new revealation, Andrew Brietbart the Right Wing Provacatuer, the Extreme and Dangerous Right Wing, Armed Militias, Guns and Terror, the KKK (and ineveitably) the Nazis, Minister of Propaganda, Goebbels, Goering, Hitler, Death Camps, starved naked Jews, Right Wing Provacatuers, Andrew Brietbart, Ace of Spades, 7HEAVENS, Blue Hen ...
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 07:16 AM (tuCVl)
Posted by: Errol at July 23, 2010 07:18 AM (7f/h+)
Had that yesterday, Comment in Rangel Thread. Real Firsties! It was fun watching the response on the NBC Nightly News.
And the red phone bit last night was awesome! I could imagine what 1600 Pennsylvania Ave was doing at that time!
Posted by: Jay in Ames at July 23, 2010 07:18 AM (UEEex)
Agreed, can ACE find teh funny in all of this, how 'bout it ACE?
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 07:20 AM (tuCVl)
http://tinyurl.com/2w5s6nz
The thing that got them this time? The 4 rent control apartments that he was maintaining.
This truly may be the end of this turd.
Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 07:25 AM (/jbAw)
I think you missed the point of post 68.
Breitbart released an incomplete tape. That tape triggered the Ebola Gang response.
If Breitbart had had in his possession the full tape and had released that tape, the train of events could have been very different. Breitbart should have taken more time to investigate what he had in his hands.
Posted by: eman
He might very well have. That does not, or at least should not, obviate the fact that this woman announced that she harborded racist feelings and acted upon them. She victimized people. That she later reversed herself on the dubious grounds of class warfare does not make her any sort of sterling employee. Like Joe Barton's apology, there is both an actual event and the ever present tactic of making shit up. Even if Breitbart had handled this differently, the tendency in the MFM would be to blame him. How do I know this? Look at Journolist. Look at the reactions to the ACORN videos. Even if he had remained totally silent, then there exists a chance that he would be attacked at random. Ask Fred Barnes about this.
Posted by: Blue Hen at July 23, 2010 07:30 AM (R2fpr)
47 Morning? Have we had our conservative talking points meeting yet? HuffPo said these meetings are a daily occurrence now.
Yes! Welcome to the Friday Talking Points Memo, very brief due to it being the start of a summer weekend:
Only two things we need to keep in mind this week:
1. Shirley Sherrod's firing was exactly the same offense as Alfred Dreyfus being wrongfully convicted and sent to Devil's Island to eat maggot-infested rice twice daily.
2. Maya Angelou has diamonds where her cooter should be.
Posted by: kallisto at July 23, 2010 07:49 AM (+FkcS)
Obviously, Diogenes searched for an "honest man" (or woman) in the wrong century ...
“How is there a preemption issue?” the [U.S. District] judge [Susan Bolton, a Democrat appointee] asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”Perhaps Eric Holder should apologize.
Posted by: Neo at July 23, 2010 07:57 AM (tE8FB)
Posted by: 7HEAVENS at July 23, 2010 10:02 AM (tuCVl)
Point No. 1: The NAACP audience laughed when Shirley Charade made her racist comment. That's why Breitbart used the tape -- that was originally sent to him in April -- to show the hypocrisy of the NAACP condeming the Tea Party as racist.
Point No. 2: Ben Jealous was in the audience during Ms. Charade's speech. He could've pointed out immediately that she "redeemed" herself, as you seem to think, but he condemned her ASAP.
Point. No. 3: Breitbart and those of "us" that you insist look bad because of him didn't fire Charade. Ebola did.
Point No. 4: There's a reason she was fired as fast as she was. Either she was part of the set up for Ebola and Co. to claim FOX and right-wing sites are irresponsible and therefore should be taken off the air/taken over, or, the WH knows that Charade's race-hustler past is going to be exposed, and this episode just sped up the timetable.
Point No. 5: I'm not crying any crocodile tears for what you supposedly think Andrew B. did because he accomplished his ends. He showed the NAACP for the fraud that they are and Charade will get national attention for being just another race hustler as well as far-left buddy and associate of Bill "Boom" Ayres.
Posted by: RushBabe at July 23, 2010 08:43 AM (W8m8i)
Cooper: “You think he’s racist?”
Sherrod: “Yes I do”
Boy, that sure sounds conciliatory. Are there any suras on motes and beams in eyes? Or just any about being a dumb ass?
Posted by: andycanuck at July 23, 2010 09:36 AM (7b1Uc)
POWER LINE: From Buckley To Breitbart. “With the hounds baying, Andrew deserves the support of conservatives in his struggle with the Democrat-Media complex.” In covering this story, Andrew’s journalistic fairness exceeded that of the New York Times, the Washington Post, or MSNBC. Perhaps that’s damning with faint praise, but the criticism of him is pretty weak, really.
Posted by: andycanuck at July 23, 2010 11:00 AM (7b1Uc)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at July 23, 2010 11:47 AM (3bRes)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1838 seconds, 211 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Beer in Dead Animals
From the sidebar link. This is just gross folks and it takes a special kind of Moron to come up with this as a well to sell beer.Posted by: Vic at July 23, 2010 05:14 AM (/jbAw)