The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

too early.

Yes, Gas, this is a good thread for you. Writing fiction and re-writing history to fit your fictions, are your strong points.

No one wanted to run on Bush's tail either. Or Clinton's. Or Daddy Bush or any two term pres for that matter.

Why do all the male GOP candidates look like their photos could have been from an Ernie Miller Pontiac newspaper ad?

Just pointing out the Daddy Bush was a one-term president.

 ;D

Republicans would do well to wake up and see that many of their former rank-and-file members like myself want to see them drop their long-held social issues. 

T'ain't happenin'.  At least not openly.

I'd have to agree.  They now think that they can run on the dissatisfaction with Obamacare alone

T'ain't happenin'.  At least not openly.

You mean they are...closeted...???

This thread wasn't started to talk about the actual campaign. It was started so gaspar could bash Obama and make fun of other democrats.

Yawn. That record has been played too much around here.

This thread wasn't started to talk about the actual campaign. It was started so gaspar could bash Obama and make fun of other democrats.

Yawn. That record has been played too much around here.

This thread wasn't started to talk about the actual campaign. It was started so gaspar could bash Obama and make fun of other democrats.

Yawn. That record has been played too much around here.

What we really need are more objective, fair-minded threads like "republican party seems divided".

Kinda like "How to protect yourself from Obamacare"?

Eh, some threads were started about DT construction and have turned into something about bike riding or beer drinking.

We can work with this...

What we really need are more objective, fair-minded threads like "republican party seems divided". As for idiots that perhaps should never run again:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3J7DCB3VzU[/youtube]

What we really need are more objective, fair-minded threads like "republican party seems divided". As for idiots that perhaps should never run again:

The 2016 Iowa caucuses are still more than 22 months away. But according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday, Hillary Clinton leads among all possible presidential candidates by double digits.
 
In potential presidential matchups, the former secretary of state and first lady would defeat Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (49 percent to 39 percent), former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (51 percent to 37 percent) and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (51 percent to 35 percent), the poll found.
 
Nearly half (48 percent) of Iowa voters said they would favor Clinton over scandal-plagued New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (35 percent) in a theoretical general election. In December, the same poll had Christie (45 percent) leading Clinton (40 percent).
 
Clinton is also the only candidate who a majority of Iowans (55 percent) believe would make a good president.
 
Her apparent cushion in Iowa is some rare good news for Democrats reeling from President Barack Obama's dismal approval rating.
 
The poll found that most Iowans, like the rest of the country, disapprove of the job the president is doing. Obama's approval rating in Iowa (39 percent) is in line with his national approval rating (41 percent).
 
According to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday, 33 percent of Americans say their vote in the upcoming midterm elections "will be to signal opposition to the president rather than to signal support."
 
And nearly half (48 percent) of voters polled say they will be less likely to vote for a candidate who supports the administration, while about a quarter (26 percent) say they will be more likely to vote for a pro-Obama candidate.

I love how they refer to Christie as “scandal-plagued”.  If he were a Democrat all the buzz about supposed scandals would be summarily dismissed as nothing but sheer hatred for fat people by the GOP.

I love how they refer to Christie as “scandal-plagued”.  If he were a Democrat all the buzz about supposed scandals would be summarily dismissed as nothing but sheer hatred for fat people by the GOP.

Or the GOP would actually have hatred for him because he was fat...or whatever else the GOP may hate a democrat for.  Who knows?

Are you saying that since this is not saying great things about the GOP that Yahoo is a lefty website?

If this story was reported on FOX or the Blaze...

What’s fascinating in all this is if you use the Google term: “Chris Christie, Scandal” you get hits from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Huffpoo.  Do the same for President Obama and the leading hits are from blogs or decidedly conservative sources.

I simply find it odd what the editors of what we are led to believe is “mainstream” media sources choose to include or exclude in their coverage and how long they care to cover it.  I also find it interesting that there would be an attempt to destroy a political career over a lane closure incident considering all the clearly corrupt things that go on daily within the federal government, state houses, and local governments daily.

It's the audience.  I'm guessing anyone who is not FOX news knows that FOX news has cornered the market on anything not progressive, middle of the road, or left leaning.

Out of curiosity, do you consider the Ft. Lee lane closures a “major scandal”?

What’s fascinating in all this is if you use the Google term: “Chris Christie, Scandal” you get hits from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Huffpoo.  Do the same for President Obama and the leading hits are from blogs or decidedly conservative sources.

I simply find it odd what the editors of what we are led to believe is “mainstream” media sources choose to include or exclude in their coverage and how long they care to cover it.  I also find it interesting that there would be an attempt to destroy a political career over a lane closure incident considering all the clearly corrupt things that go on daily within the federal government, state houses, and local governments daily.

But I guess the mean old FOX watchers are holding on trying to buck this trend.

I love how they refer to Christie as “scandal-plagued”.  If he were a Democrat all the buzz about supposed scandals would be summarily dismissed as nothing but sheer hatred for fat people by the GOP.

No, not at all.  I just find it interesting that anyone is still referring to Christie as “scandal-plagued” as if “Bridgegate” compares to NSA spying, IRS targeting certain political groups, nearly a billion dollars spent on the ACA website (in a no-bid contract) which was not ready for roll-out and required millions more to fix, fabricating a cover story for Benghazi, the list goes on.


I simply find it odd what the editors of what we are led to believe is “mainstream” media sources choose to include or exclude in their coverage and how long they care to cover it.  I also find it interesting that there would be an attempt to destroy a political career over a lane closure incident considering all the clearly corrupt things that go on daily within the federal government, state houses, and local governments daily.

No, not at all.  I just find it interesting that anyone is still referring to Christie as “scandal-plagued” as if “Bridgegate” compares to NSA spying, IRS targeting certain political groups, nearly a billion dollars spent on the ACA website (in a no-bid contract) which was not ready for roll-out and required millions more to fix, fabricating a cover story for Benghazi, the list goes on.

There’s very clearly a machine in place to quickly and decisively besmirch a leading GOP candidate these days.  Did we ever hear any more about Romney being a tax cheat and possible felon?  What was that all about dragging out some bullying incident from his boarding school days?  Do we hear anything about “vulture capitalists” these days? 

It doesn’t matter if Christie knew anything about the Fort Lee incident.  There’s been plenty of innuendo floated out that “someone with ties to the governor can prove he knew about it” though that person is never outed nor are they vetted for veracity.  Sort of like Harry Reid claiming he had it on “good authority” from a “Bain investor” that Romney didn’t pay taxes for ten years.

What’s fascinating in all this is if you use the Google term: “Chris Christie, Scandal” you get hits from CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, Huffpoo.  Do the same for President Obama and the leading hits are from blogs or decidedly conservative sources.

I simply find it odd what the editors of what we are led to believe is “mainstream” media sources choose to include or exclude in their coverage and how long they care to cover it.  I also find it interesting that there would be an attempt to destroy a political career over a lane closure incident considering all the clearly corrupt things that go on daily within the federal government, state houses, and local governments daily.

Thought you were supposed to be "recovering"...


So...you wanna talk about no-bid, huh?  Kind of like the Christie "no-bid" $4.5 million PSA ad campaign (see above)...?

Or some real money - the $90 billion Halliburton no-bid awards complements of Dick Cheney....?  The ones where actual criminal activity occurred rather than just penny-ante incompetence?

No-bid U.S. government contracts jump 9 percent, despite push for competition

President Obama in 2009 told federal agencies that no-bid contracts were “wasteful’’ and “inefficient.’’ Four years later, his administration spent more money on non-competitive contracts than ever before.

Federal agencies awarded $115.2 billion in no-bid contracts in fiscal year 2012, an 8.9 increase from $105.8 billion from 2009, according to government data. The jump unfolded even as total contract spending decreased by about 5 percent. Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon were top recipients of sole-source contracts.

Those top Pentagon vendors and other large contractors can draw on established relationships with procurement officers to claim a greater share of non-competitive work, said Robert Burton, former acting administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy under George W. Bush.

“It highlights a growing problem in the procurement system,’’ said Burton, who represents contractors as a partner at Venable in Washington. “The pie is shrinking, but at the same time, the number of non-competitive awards has increased. That’s a bad combination.”

Joe Jordan, head of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, said the administration “believes in taking maximum advantage of competition, including efforts to reduce sole-source contracting, and this is an important component of our overall efforts to achieve the best value for the taxpayer.’’

Record amount

Still, Obama ended his first term spending more on non-competitive orders. In 2009, contracts awarded without competition made up about 20 percent of total dollars awarded, compared with about 23 percent in fiscal 2012. The figures may be understated because the data excluded contracts for indefinite quantities of goods or services.

“While there is more work to be done, agency efforts have produced good results in our efforts to increase the use of competition,’’ Jordan said in an e-mail.

He didn’t answer questions about why no-bid contracts had increased during Obama’s first term or describe any concrete steps taken to curb the awards.

Federal agencies consider just one company for a job when they need urgent action, when a vendor has specialized expertise or when they want to keep working with a proven supplier. Such contracts save time in procuring equipment and services, though they lack the competitive bidding that can drive down prices.

Bethesda-based Lockheed Martin, the No.­ 1 U.S. contractor, captured the greatest share of no-bid contracts in the budget year that ended on Sept. 30, with about $17.4 billion. Boeing received the second-largest amount, about $17.1 billion. Raytheon in Waltham, Mass., was third with about $7.04 billion.

The Pentagon last year spent about $100 billion on no-bid contracts, the most of any federal agency, compared with $90 billion in fiscal 2009. The Department of Defense didn’t provide a comment for this story.

“We compete for many of our contracts, while in other cases we are awarded single-source contracts in those situations where the government determines that is the best course for meeting their requirements,” said Daniel Beck, a spokesman for Chicago-based Boeing.

“It is typical for a company to receive follow-on contract awards on programs that have been openly competed in the past,’’ Melissa Hilliard, a spokeswoman for Lockheed, said in an e-mail. “Such follow-on contract awards would be considered non-competitive contracts.” A spokesman for Raytheon didn’t comment.

U.S. Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.), the chairman of the House Small Business Committee, said the increase in sole-source awards “is proof that this administration is paying lip service to small business and competition.’’

Small business

Contracts awarded to small businesses fell by about 4 percent in Obama’s first term, according to government data.

“It is unacceptable that noncompetitive awards grew by $9 billion while small business awards shrunk,’’ Graves said in an e-mailed statement. “It will require more work from senior agency officials, and possibly the White House, but more must be done.’’

In his March 2009 memo to agencies, Obama said a reliance on non-competitive orders “creates a risk that taxpayer funds will be spent on contracts that are wasteful, inefficient, subject to misuse, or otherwise not well designed to serve the needs of the Federal Government or the interests of the American taxpayer.’’

Shifting to full and open competition “could result in savings of billions of dollars each year for the American taxpayer,’’ he said.

The Office of Management and Budget released guidance on the contract awards process the following October, calling for agencies to evaluate their use of no-bid contracts.

The memo said that non-competitive “contracts carry risk of overspending because they have been negotiated without the benefit of a direct market mechanism.’’ The document directed agencies to consider mitigating that risk by limiting the length of awards, ensuring fair prices and regularly assessing contractor performance.

Obama can “send out nice memos, telling agencies not to sole-source, but the law hasn’t changed,’’ said Joe Hornyak, a Tysons Corner-based partner at law firm Holland & Knight.

Hornyak said that by law, many sole-source contracts require the approval of a senior official, meaning that the administration could have crafted a better record on competition.

“I would expect senior officials to be more sensitive to the optics of a sole-source award under this administration,’’ Hornyak said.

— Bloomberg Government http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/no-bid-us-government-contracts-jump-9-percent-despite-push-for-competition/2013/03/17/9f6708fc-8da0-11e2-b63f-f53fb9f2fcb4_story.html

If there were criminal activity, don’t you think Eric Holder would have long since prosecuted over it?

No bid contracts are up under Obama’s stewardship despite his claims on the campaign trail in 2008, those days were over.  There’s even been more money for Halliburton and it’s subsidiaries.

Holder is inept.  And if you go after Bush for his criminal activities, then ya got a whole lot of Congress to go after, too.  (Can you spell "Jim Inhofe"...?)


I have certainly never meant to imply that I am a big fan of Obama...but the piles of carp from the other direction still swamp the piles of carp from his direction.  And all those piles of carp from the RWRE have blinded so many of your kind to their reality, that I just feel obligated to try to bring some light into the dark, hidden corners of the RWRE world.  (And if Blowbama starts jacking his jaws about that nonsensical gun control bucket-o-shoot, then I will go back after him again.  It's called fair and balanced - the real world version, not Fox...)

But at least you give lip service to the concept of recovery, so I feel there is tremendous hope for you!!  Will welcome you gladly to the moderate center any time!!

the Affordable Care Act (yes, in spite of propaganda, it is a major accomplishment)

Like many, you seem to confuse presidents, and executives in general, with emperors, kings and popes. But even they are at the mercy of their "princes and cardinals". Simply put, an executive leader sets the stage. Actors do the play. You may criticize the direction the play takes but likely its success or failure has multiple factors on which the director has little control. Simple thinking (politics) always blames the director.

Who would have foreseen the massive anti-Obama movement that from the start was organized, funded and committed to oppose anything the Obama administration proposed even those propositions they formerly supported? Hell, the first two years were spent trying to convince Americans that he wasn't even American! Who would have foreseen the simple thinking and raw power that the Tea Party uses to keep rational, moderate legislators from doing the right things in favor of doing the things that would keep them from being opposed by less legitimate candidates in the next election? In spite of a recovering economy, healthy stock portfolios, no new wars, the end of Bin Laden, the Affordable Care Act (yes, in spite of propaganda, it is a major accomplishment) and OU beating Alabama.......all that is reported is his failure to deliver though that delivery would mean even more dissension. Odd times.

And the hypocrisy that you would invoke the "Bush did it too" routine as not important when you've spent years using Democratic leaders actions as predication for conservative Republican actions is inexcusable. Everyone around here has used that rationalization way too much.

Your recovery is not complete. ;)

And the hypocrisy that you would invoke the "Bush did it too" routine as not important when you've spent years using Democratic leaders actions as predication for conservative Republican actions is inexcusable. Everyone around here has used that rationalization way too much.

People like you keep glossing over the fact that Obama simply continues some of the worst fiscal policies of the Bush administration.  He campaigned against many Bush policies, but has done nothing in many cases and expanded them in others.  I have no problem pointing out the flaws in Obama because I had greater hope for him that he really would be an honest politician and keep many of his campaign promises.  He hasn’t.

Gitmo is still open, no-bid contracts have increased, domestic spying has apparently gotten worse.  We still have the revolving door of lobbies and cherry administrative positions.  People excuse it by saying: “Well Bush did it!”.  How does pointing to the gross incompetence of your predecessor somehow make the same level of incompetence better?  Could you get away with that on your job?  I know I couldn’t.

I simply refuse to excuse continued waste and cronyism.  Political affiliation or lack thereof has nothing to do with my stance on it.

Some get it.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIMnIh10po0[/youtube]

I already posted that....

The bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941 was a major accomplishment too.  We didn't like that one either.

Depends on what side you were on.

Instead of working for the good of the population in making the act work well and quickly, the opposition chose to work against it by defining it as evil, bureaucratic and liberal. Then spending inordinate amounts of time and money to repeal it, convince the public of its lunacy and ignore its positive features. It was of course designed by conservative republicans and was effectively instituted by a Republican at the state level. Mere facts, nothing to see here.

Just like popes, kings, dictators, and little potentates select their courts, the president selects the members of his administration.  Unlike kings and dictators, he is not born into the position and ultimately he should be held accountable for the actions of his closest advisors and appointees.  The President is elected by a public which trusts him to look out for their best interest.  By extension, he should be expected to carry out his campaign promises which were used to influence people to vote for him.  Candidate Obama was elected president based on campaign promises he has not followed up on.  Why don’t you want to hold him to those promises?  I can’t find anyone who still supports Obama who does.  It simply becomes convenient to blame his short-comings on his predecessor or to claim his critics are somehow hypocritical because they supported someone else or someone else’s ideals.

As far as:

I’m not sure where you get I’ve spent years using Democratic leaders actions as predication... But there is a huge difference in a new leader correcting the failed policies of a previous administration of an opposing party than simply continuing failed policies of the past then essentially blaming the predecessor because the bad policies are still around.

FWIW, I’m a fan of Bill Clinton and I don’t recall ever rallying around Bush policy vs. Clinton policy other than some foreign policy issues.  In general, he was a great policy guy who had a wandering penis.  He was fortunate to preside over a great period of growth and he pretty well stayed out of the way to allow the free market to do what it did best.  If he had the moral code of Jiminy Carter, he might be considered the greatest president of modern times.

However, none of that excuses Obama from not following through with campaign promises to end BAU in DC.

Depends on what side you were on.

Instead of working for the good of the population in making the act work well and quickly, the opposition chose to work against it by defining it as evil, bureaucratic and liberal. Then spending inordinate amounts of time and money to repeal it, convince the public of its lunacy and ignore its positive features. It was of course designed by conservative republicans and was effectively instituted by a Republican at the state level. Mere facts, nothing to see here.

So you're both on the "underaged country girl lighting something on fire" distro...

It was a bad law from the beginning. They rushed it and resisted any public review. From the moment it passed, the impossible work of fixing it began, and has yet to complete. It's not failing because of fabulous GOP marketing.  It's failing because it's a terrible and burdensome law that was implemented by a highly inept group of people who demonstrated little to no understanding of what they were charged with doing.

Yesterday's ACA Bracket site (the one with the animated gifs) that I posted yesterday was hosted on the WhiteHouse.gov server, and every link they had to push people to Healthcare.gov was wrong.  4 months later and they still can't get the simple stuff right.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bi8qmIjCAAAquj5.png)

I would believe that they have OFA interns running everything, if it wasn't for the hundreds of billions of dollars they have wasted on non-functional systems that require billions more to fix.

Depends on what side you were on.

Instead of working for the good of the population in making the act work well and quickly, the opposition chose to work against it by defining it as evil, bureaucratic and liberal. Then spending inordinate amounts of time and money to repeal it, convince the public of its lunacy and ignore its positive features. It was of course designed by conservative republicans and was effectively instituted by a Republican at the state level. Mere facts, nothing to see here.

Seriously? You are blaming persons other than the crafters of the ACA for this bullcrap nightmare? It's the GOP's fault the website was/is all f'd up? That enrollments numbers are screwed?  

As for repealing it, by all means focus on the number of times that the House voted to "repeal" the Act vs. the number of waivers given from its enforcement. Here's an article addressing the number of repeal attempts by the House meme. http://washingtonexaminer.com/no-house-republicans-havent-voted-50-times-to-repeal-obamacare/article/2545733

Wrong thread.

Seriously? You are blaming persons other than the crafters of the ACA for this bullcrap nightmare? It's the GOP's fault the website was/is all f'd up? That enrollments numbers are screwed?  

As for repealing it, by all means focus on the number of times that the House voted to "repeal" the Act vs. the number of waivers given from its enforcement. Here's an article addressing the number of repeal attempts by the House meme. http://washingtonexaminer.com/no-house-republicans-havent-voted-50-times-to-repeal-obamacare/article/2545733

Gueed, You have to realize that any attempt by congress to fix Obamacare will always be perceived as a threat to Obamacare, because it would be an admission that the law is deeply flawed, and that it's provisions were simply campaign promises not meant to stand up to reality.

Of course, repeal at this point is not possible, nor is any meaningful repair.  The law will simply have to die slowly as provisions, work-arounds, and new exemptions are passed that chip away at the various mandates and public burdens imposed by the law. Eventually it will just be another ridiculous law on the books, just like the Oklahoma law that makes it illegal to wear boots in bed.

It was an expensive lesson though.

Candidates continue to run on the platform of repealing or underfunding the ACA.

And why do you think that is? And why are the dems NOT running on the ACA? Keep lobbing the softballs...

I mean no offense, but that's all balderdash. Use my analogy. You are blaming the director of the play for a traffic tie up from a freak snowstorm where the Mayor of the city failed to plan for snow removal and the governor of the state blocked traffic from nearby suburbs. So, the director must have failed because he chose the city and the state.

Your remarks imply that we don't have a balance of powers, that states rights are dead and that politics plays no part in history. I am surprised at that from you.  When the legislative branch is dominated by opponents who fail to even approve of your appointments for judicial positions, argue over your cabinet positions, who spend their time yelling out "job killer!" at proposals past Congress's have bipartisan approved, who set up confrontations to shut down government with little reason other than politics and selfish interest, then you have to be disingenuous to believe that this president, or any president in this time period could set an agenda and simply push it through with a slim majority in a single house. Then throw in backwoods, Harley riding governors (princes) who refuse to co-operate with federal programs even for their own constituents benefit and you have a mighty witches brew to lay on the back of one executive.

Do you ever accidentally come across one of your posts from years back and wonder who wrote that? I do. Sometimes I am surprised by my thought process, but generally stay fairly consistent. You will be embarrassed by those above remarks when you emerge from this time period of severe politicization and see how this country survived some very disastrous events that were handled with aplomb and intelligence. We are literally in a state of ignorance where information is carefully channeled and framed. Oklahoma.

When you pass legislation based on doing what you feel is best for the people, rather than doing what the people want, you get bad legislation.

Our government is based on individual liberty, including the liberty to choose poorly. Regardless of the perceived need for a law, people will not accept legislation if they feel their participation (their choice) in the process was circumvented or otherwise bypassed.  More than 50% of Americans oppose Obamacare. That is not because of the GOP, or the Teaheads or the Illuminati. They oppose Obamacare, because Obamacare is not what they were promised when the president and Pelosi asked for their trust.  

It must be obvious that liberty necessarily means freedom to choose foolishly as well as wisely; freedom to choose evil as well as good; freedom to enjoy the rewards of good judgment, and freedom to suffer the penalties of bad judgment. If this is not true, the word "freedom" has no meaning. – Ben Moreell

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. – C. S. Lewis

I know perception is important to you as a release from reality. But the text in purple up there is ludicrous. Opinion at best. Spin for sure. Fox worthy my friend. It must truly gaul you to know such an inept administration will last 8 years and has passed such historic legislation in spite of your best efforts.

Ok, I'll help you.

I could have swore that this thread was about the 2016 Presidential Campaign. Just as I thought, it was just another in an unending TulsaNow campaign by gaspar to attack Obama.

Does anyone have anything to say about the 2016 Presidential Campaign?

I noticed last week that one of the talking heads at MSNBC was imploring Hillary not to run, because her and other Dems have a better candidate in mind -- Elizabeth Warren.  She implored Hillary to stay out because she knew that if she got in, Warren could not beat her.  I like Warren, but I don't think she has the temperament to be a Commander in Chief.

Myself?  It's still far too early.  I think Rand Paul and Marco Rubio will toss their hats in the ring on the right.  The left?  I think is presumptive to think Hillary will run, but now she has the pressure on her to do so.  Biden will run as well.  And of course, we'll see the Green candidates like we always do.

The right will have two candidates -- one that appeals to the far right fringe of the party, and one that appeals to the moderates.

It doesn't really look...to me anyway... that this cycle will be much different than the last for the Republicans.  Christie will likely not run, as his brand might be a little too damaged, and the hard line right wingers still blame him for Obama's re-election.  I might be wrong though, and he might get there if he joins late to distance himself from all this bridge stuff.

It will be interesting to watch.

What will be more interesting is to watch to see if the Republican Party doesn't implode on itself before the 2014 midterms.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. – C. S. Lewis[/color]

I never have to question anything I’ve written a few years back. 

I could have swore that this thread was about the 2016 Presidential Campaign. Just as I thought, it was just another in an unending TulsaNow campaign by gaspar to attack Obama.

Does anyone have anything to say about the 2016 Presidential Campaign?

I am constantly changing my mind.

These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.

"What would you like me to think?"

As to Elizabeth Warren, no way.  She may be even more Cra Cra than Michelle Bachman.

Then finally this is how she defended herself:
“I have lived in a family that has talked about Native America, talked about tribes, since I’ve been a little girl,” she said. “I still have a picture on my mantle at home, and it’s a picture of my mother’s dad, a picture of my grandfather, and my Aunt Bee has walked by that picture at least a 1000 times, remarked that her father, my Pappa, had high cheekbones, like all of the Indians do."

A family that talked about Native Americans, eh?  My mother was married to a member of the Creek Nation.  That makes me about as Indian as Sen. Warren then, maybe more so.   :-*

A family that talked about Native Americans, eh?  My mother was married to a member of the Creek Nation.  That makes me about as Indian as Sen. Warren then, maybe more so.   :-*

Probably more so if the member of the Creek Nation she was married to is/was your father.

Probably more so if the member of the Creek Nation she was married to is/was your father.

That makes me about as Indian as Sen. Warren then, maybe more so.   :-*

I know you Conan. You don't have the high cheekbones, whatever that actually means.

This just in, Obama is the fifth best president...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BjMrktSCEAAkRgP.png

This just in, Obama is the fifth best president...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BjMrktSCEAAkRgP.png

So saying that military service alone does not automatically make one the best qualified to be elected a Senator is now "attacking military service?" Wow.

Whatever you say (now).

You have a strange conception of backpedaling. My dictionary says that it has something to do with changing one's position, which I have not done.

You have a strange conception of backpedaling. My dictionary says that it has something to do with changing one's position, which I have not done.

Give me the link to your dictionary definition, and I will help you. Here's one definition to get you started: Backpedaling means to "Reverse one’s previous action or opinion".  

I think you had a bad night, and you need to look no further than the parrot having joined your side--doing only what he knows.

And yet again, the clueless counselor takes a swipe thinking I give two squirts of pee about his opinion of me.

New flash, Tony...I don't.   :D

Iowa is a farm state, and it's never a good idea to disparage one of the state's chief occupations. Next, it’s particularly not a good idea to demean your state when you’re somewhere else: In this case, Braley was speaking in Texas. Next, Braley, a trial lawyer, was making his pitch to a room full of trial lawyers at a private fundraiser (which is why he didn’t think he was being recorded). Trial lawyers are perhaps the most unpopular constituency among Republican base voters—besides Obama administration officials. Since midterm elections are all about motivating your base, Braley has given his opponent a turnout gift. Next, look where Braley is standing: If you’re going to talk down to Iowa farmers, at least don't do it next to a table of booze. It makes for amusing viewing and that reinforces the idea for voters that you're not one of them.

I met a farmer from Iowa at a wedding a couple years ago. Very smart businessman with strong views on corn being used for fuel and farming in general. Of course I disagreed with him but HE was the farmer, I'm just the consumer so we laughed it off. It seems to me that professionals often carry a load of argumentative, superiority just below the surface that can erupt at the wrong times. Don't see it much at the farmer level.

At the bottom of that story, Sen Mitch McConnell adding an applause track to his speeches was pretty funny too. Miss that one?

Gotta love individual state political ads...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9Y24MFOfFU[/youtube]

Okay. Who threw it!!!

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/object-thrown-hillary-clinton-speech-23280934

Anybody know where Monica Lewinsky is?

Last I heard hanging out in cigar bars in London.

Perhaps in the humidor...

No dem even tried to run against Bridenstine?

Comments section is pretty entertaining.  “Isn’t salty banned in New York?"

At a Hillary event today, Chelsea announced that she is pregnant with her first collection of cells. 

Congrats to the clintons. If she chooses to let it live, this baby will be adorable just in time for the Clinton inauguration, making for the first woman, and grandma president.
(http://www.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/201338/rs_560x415-130408122031-1024.ChelseaClintonToday.mh.040813.jpg)

At a Hillary event today, Chelsea announced that she is pregnant with her first collection of cells. 

Congrats to the clintons. If she chooses to let it live, this baby will be adorable just in time for the Clinton inauguration, making for the first woman, and grandma president.
(http://www.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/201338/rs_560x415-130408122031-1024.ChelseaClintonToday.mh.040813.jpg)

I'm more concerned that our gene pool will be corrupted all the more. :o

(http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/30/ugedu4yn.jpg)

Hillary has a secret lunch with the President.

"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had a secret lunch with President Barack Obama on Thursday — an unannounced meeting sure to fuel extensive speculation at a time when she's widely expected to seek his job in 2016."

http://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-has-secret-lunch-with-obama-at-the-white-house-210512165.html

Giggling about fond times, like that Benghazi thingy.

If you haven't heard, [Sir Edmund] Hillary Clinton was really poor after she and Bill left the white house.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0owSPWLe9lc&list=UUdn-M_vxWEK07X3t19ximDQ[/youtube]

What do we expect?  I mean they did live in public housing for eight years.

Rough life.  Where can I send a donation?

Just curious. What does a Presidential Daughters first class Education cost? Barring the Gubment Student loans I'm sure she was denied.

Stanford University[edit]

Clinton entered Stanford in the fall of 1997 and majored in history.[21][22] The week before she arrived on campus, her mother published an open letter in her syndicated column asking journalists to leave her daughter alone. Chelsea arrived at Stanford in a motorcade with her parents, Secret Service men, and almost 250 journalists. For her security, bullet-proof glass was installed in her dorm windows and cameras were placed in hallways. In addition, Secret Service men dressed as students lived in her dorm.[23] With the exception of an occasional tabloid story written about her, Chelsea's four years at Stanford remained out of public view.[24]

Clinton graduated in 2001 with highest honors and a B.A. in History.[21][24] The topic of her 150-page senior thesis was the 1998 Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland.[24] At the time of Chelsea's graduation, President Clinton issued a statement saying, "Hillary and I are grateful for the friendships and great learning experiences Chelsea had at Stanford, and we are very proud of her on this special day."[25]

University of Oxford[edit]


 


 University College, Oxford
In July 2001, President Clinton revealed that Chelsea would be pursuing a Masters degree at the University College of the University of Oxford later that year – the same college where he studied politics between 1968 and 1970 on a Rhodes Scholarship;[26] Chelsea did not apply for a Rhodes Scholarship. Lord Butler of Brockwell, the Master of University College, said: "Her record at Stanford shows that she is a very well-qualified and able student. The college is also pleased to extend its link with the Clinton family." Upon the recommendation of British and American advisors, the university implemented security measures,[27] and fellow students were asked not to discuss her with the press.[28]

Arriving at Oxford just after the September 11 attacks on the United States, Clinton was drawn to other American students who were also feeling the emotional after-effects of the trauma. She told Talk magazine:


Every day I encounter some sort of anti-American feeling. Over the summer, I thought I would seek out non-Americans as friends, just for diversity's sake. Now I find that I want to be around Americans – people who I know are thinking about our country as much as I am.[28]

Clinton was criticized for those remarks in the London press and by the newspaper Oxford Student, which angered the university by directly attacking her in an editorial.[28] However, people who met Clinton at that time described her as charming, poised and unaffected, and she seemed to be successfully adjusting to life abroad.[28] During her time at Oxford, Chelsea adopted a more sophisticated look, reportedly assisted by a family friend, Donatella Versace, whose couture shows she attended in early 2002. Geordie Greig, the editor of Tatler, ranked her number five on the magazine's 2002 "Top 10 Girls" list.[28]

In 2003, Clinton completed an MPhil in International Relations.[29] Following her graduation, she returned to the United States.[21] In 2011, Clinton began pursuing a DPhil in International Relations from Oxford, doing her doctoral work from New York City where she resides;[30][31] she was awarded the degree in May 2014.[32]

Columbia University and New York University[edit]

In the spring of 2010, Clinton completed a Master of Public Health degree at Columbia's Mailman School of Public Health[33][34] and she began teaching graduate classes there in 2012.[35]

Starting in 2010, Clinton began serving as Assistant Vice-Provost for the Global Network University of New York University, working on international recruitment strategies.[31] She is the co-founder of the Of Many Institute for Multifaith Leadership at NYU and serves as its co-chair.[36] In 2012, Clinton received an award from the Temple of Understanding for her "work in advancing a new model of integrating interfaith and cross-cultural education into campus life," together with Imam Khalid Latif and Rabbi Yehuda Sarna.[37]

Yeah, they were broke, but Slick made up for it quickly making ~$9million his first year out of office at speaking engagements.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2652894/Hillary-Clinton-defends-200-000-speaking-fees-pay-houses-Chelseas-education.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2652894/Hillary-Clinton-defends-200-000-speaking-fees-pay-houses-Chelseas-education.html)

That will hardly keep gas in the Gulfstream!

There is two different threads where a few of you have posted a few times each all about the Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Chelsea Clinton. You have posted and discussed their income, their education, their homes and even made up facts about each of them again and again.

I sense obsession. The kind of obsession that is a little creepy.

No. A lot creepy.

Not any creepier than guido's obsession with Obama.  ::)

There is two different threads where a few of you have posted a few times each all about the Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Chelsea Clinton. You have posted and discussed their income, their education, their homes and even made up facts about each of them again and again.

I sense obsession. The kind of obsession that is a little creepy.

No. A lot creepy.

You just haven’t stumbled onto the thread where we discuss you and your wife’s income, education, homes, and where we’ve made up facts about you yet.

We are all obsessive.  We are creepy.

Especially about the good ol 1%
Broke after being the POTUS is quite a stretch of a statement. I'm not real sure but I believe good ol Bill is getting that annual Presidential sum that's given till the day they croak. It's just some peoples means of living are a bit higher than others. So don't try and come off as understanding the plight of the everyday American who faces weekly bills. Not like she has seen one in quite some time anyway.

You just haven’t stumbled onto the thread where we discuss you and your wife’s income, education, homes, and where we’ve made up facts about you yet.

We are all obsessive.  We are creepy.

Great.

I look forward to your lies about me. Please make me good-looking and charming in your stories.

Great.

I look forward to your lies about me. Please make me good-looking and charming in your stories.

Great.

I look forward to your lies about me. Please make me good-looking and charming in your stories.

You are the only guy I know with the looks and charm to sweep Mrs. America off her feet.

Not any creepier than guido's obsession with Obama.  ::)

Really? And what precisely is that obsession you are referring to? The fact that I applauded him for his position on fixing the VA?

"I listened to Obama on the VA this morning. Sounded presidential and am thankful for what he said."

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=20559.msg284426#msg284426

Or his likability:

"I have frequently said Obama has a great sense of humor. That self-deprecating humor makes him more likeable to me."

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=19563.msg255693#msg255693

You are a bigger man than I am.  I still can’t get past:

(http://gopthedailydose.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/obama-on-bike.jpg)

Not sure why DB felt compelled to call me out in dealing with RM being apparently offended where people are, gulp, talking about political figures like potential presidential candidates. It's like we are should be having that discussion in the "National & International Politics" forum. I can only imagine how wadded up RM's drawers will get over that pic you posted.

I can only imagine how wadded up RM's drawers will get over that pic you posted.

It's a cute picture, though....

Not sure why DB felt compelled to call me out in dealing with RM being apparently offended where people are, gulp, talking about political figures like potential presidential candidates. It's like we are should be having that discussion in the "National & International Politics" forum. I can only imagine how wadded up RM's drawers will get over that pic you posted.

If I was going to "call you out" I would have. I would have referred to you sounding like another poster, or I would have pointed to you directly. I was making a generalization.  Sorry if you are so thin skinned and took it as a call out. You just seem like a MSNBC Mouthbreather, that you parrot everything liberal,  and everything that is a disagreement with your thoughts is nothing but a tea/pee party view. So now, you can say I called you out.

This is what you posted: "Not any creepier than guido's obsession with Obama."  Are you properly medicated?

Yes, I am properly medicated,  actually I don't need psycotropic meds, it was a matter of sarcasm,  and if you can't take the humor, sorry if it was too subtle,  can't help that. Why don't you go spend a night with Rachel Maddow, or better yet Ann Coulter,  or how about Gretta, or Megan Kelly?  Don't get wound up so tight, you sound like Chris Matthews,  or worst yet Al Sharpton. Nobody gives a rats a$$ what BMW, Mercedes,  Lexus or Infini you buy your kid, or the gated HOA subdivision you live in.

Please stop imagining about my underwear. We have had this talk before.

^^^DB

Oh, come on....like Ruf says, "lighten up"....

Is your skin getting thinner in your "old age"...?   You are tougher than that!

Thin skin? DB said he never called me out, which is a lie. Then, out of desperation from looking like a hosshole, he wants to get into a discussion about money? Now, do I care about him? Nope. But I guess I should be more tolerant of the unfortunate.

Thin skin? DB said he never called me out, which is a lie. Then, out of desperation from looking like a hosshole, he wants to get into a discussion about money? Now, do I care about him? Nope. But I guess I should be more tolerant of the unfortunate.

Thin skin? DB said he never called me out, which is a lie. Then, out of desperation from looking like a hosshole, he wants to get into a discussion about money? Now, do I care about him? Nope. But I guess I should be more tolerant of the unfortunate.

Sorry!  My bad!  I took your post as the arrows pointing to my comment just above...and I thought DB was "code" for something else.....

As Emily would say, "Never mind...."

Boy do I miss her. She was funny.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0[/youtube]

Ahhh, grasshopper....there IS hope for you yet!!


I will endeavor to persevere....






(Got it yet...??)

Master Po.

If Hillary Clinton runs, and wins the Presidential race in 2016, the Republicans won't be the only ones with trepidation. The Secret Service, who have tangled with Hillary since she became First Lady in 1993, will also be quaking in their lace-ups.
Hillary has been known to hurl a book at the back of the head of one agent driving her in the Presidential limo accusing him of eavesdropping, forget her ps and qs by never thanking her protectors and lob profanity-laced orders when she just wanted the agents to carry her bags - a job not on agents' 'to do' list.
'Stay the f**k away from me! Just f*****g do as I say!!!' she is quoted as saying to an agent who refused to carry her luggage in the book Unlimited Access by FBI agent Gary Aldridge.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2653420/Get-f-away-Hillary-Clinton-shouted-minder-refused-carry-bag-She-treated-Secret-Service-like-hired-help-Bill-softie-hard-manage-says-former-agent-bombshell-expose.html#ixzz34Yu2XkVG
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Things that work, things that are profitable, and beneficial to individuals and society as a whole, require no mandate.

Let's impeach ol' Barry.


dumb.

The trademark characteristic of the Teabagger party.

Here's a group I think we can all support. I mean, who doesn't want a Stronger America after all?

http://strongeramerica.com/


You have to suffer from nocturnal enuresis to oppose them; right?

Cheney drumming up funding to put together his own army?

His companies named it ISIS

His companies named it ISIS

(http://i.imgur.com/qpHioTL.png)

I found it kinda funny, this exchange between Jonathan Karl of ABC and Jay Carney, during what amounts to be Carney's last official press briefing as press secretary:
KARL:  I wonder if you've had the chance to see this op-ed piece that former vice president Dick Cheney has written in the Wall Street Journal that has a rather critical tone to it toward the White House.  He says, "rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many," talking about the situation in Iraq and in the Middle East generally.
CARNEY:  Which president was he talking about?
Zing.

So even Carney isn't sure it's not Obama. Wow.

Let's see.  4400 deaths...Iraqi War 2.  Almost 3000 on 9/11.  Who was on watch for the genesis of both of those?

As the Obama Administration has so adeptly shown us, everything bad is "your" predecessor's fault. Therefore, 9/11 (2001) and the reasons for the Iraq War 2 are clearly Bill Clinton's fault.
 
 ;D

Nice try.

In this case, it was his predecessor's (Bush/Cheney) fault.  But whatever floats your bat man.

Considering the length of the Iraq and Afghani conflicts, Bush should get credit for the fewest soldiers killed for such a duration, compared to WWI, WWII, Korea, and Viet Nam. 

Wait, so Bush so foobarred relations with the Middle East that the acts of 9/11 fall squarely on his shoulders?

Considering the length of the Iraq and Afghani conflicts, Bush should get credit for the fewest soldiers killed for such a duration, compared to WWI, WWII, Korea, and Viet Nam.  No, wait, that credit would have to go to Obama.  I get it.

He should also get blame for amount of soldiers killed in a war we shouldn't have been in, just like Nixon, Johnson and possibly Truman and Ike with Korea.  WWII was a justified war; we were attacked by the Axis Powers.  And even then we waited until we were attacked.

We need to stop being the world policeman and let nations deal with their own issues.

That is your way to evaluate all wars?

Obama is winning then.

http://www.icasualties.org/

He should also get blame for amount of soldiers killed in a war we shouldn't have been in, just like Nixon, Johnson and possibly Truman and Ike with Korea.  WWII was a justified war; we were attacked by the Axis Powers.  And even then we waited until we were attacked.

We need to stop being the world policeman and let nations deal with their own issues.

You forgot Kennedy.  We already had troops in SE Asia while Kennedy was still alive. Johnson did the big escalation.

You forgot Eisenhour before that.  And the French before that... and on and on and on.  Because western European society - that includes us, since that is what we are mainly derived from - can't leave other people alone.  At least not for the last couple of thousand years or so....

I didn't Kennedy try to bring the troops home with a couple of executive actions...then Johnson rescinded them after he was executed.

I didn't Kennedy try to bring the troops home with a couple of executive actions...then Johnson rescinded them after he was executed.

At the present moment, I remember Laos being the hot spot before Viet Nam.  Neither looked good to a kid in Jr High.

No.  Kennedy sent more advisors on top of Eisenhour.  It was the "plan" to contain communism.  Even after the mess in Korea - the one we still "enjoy" today...

Your time frame is off. He did send advisors early on. Towards the end, Kennedy had expressed privately (according to his brother) that he was questioning our presence there since it was beginning to look like a sinkhole (my words, not his). That didn't sit well with the hawks. Johnson feared it had some role in his execution. Thus a new conspiracy theory emerged.

There were VN opportunities all over the world as our paranoia over communism bloomed. We chose the one with potential oil reserves in the Gulf.

In a philosophical discussion regarding the Prime Directive. Troi and LaForge argue that if there is a "cosmic plan", that the presence of Enterprise and its crew is also to be included in that plan and that this alone allows them a legitimate claim to act on behalf of a people in need. Captain Picard argues that one's personal certitude is not relevant and that the Prime Directive is meant to prevent "us" from letting our emotions overwhelm our judgment.

That is your way to evaluate all wars?

Obama is winning then.

http://www.icasualties.org/

Nice try, except we were already drawing down in Iraq by 2009.

Look at Afghanistan, 1701 killed since 2009 out of a total of 2331 American troops KIA in Afghanistan.

But you really think it is all Obama's fault.

I wonder which President started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

But you really think it is all Obama's fault.

I wonder which President started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Don't forget to ask which President got distracted like Peter Griffith (oh, shiney!!) by Iraq, leaving Afghanistan to twist in the breeze.

And see if anyone gives you a straight answer....

Trying to find the appropriate "Leave Hillary Alone" clip for ya, that way you can put away the depends. BTW. This is the freakin 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN THREAD! Nothing in the rules requires you to come in here if you don't feel like it's a relevant topic.

I found 91 posts from you about Hillary. You must think about her quite a bit.

You actually spent the time to look up 91 posts.  I think maybe you need some help too.

I found 91 posts from you about Hillary. You must think about her quite a bit.

Apparently, I am the only one thinking about Hillary. This one hurts:

(http://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2014/07/hawking2.png)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/07/07/no-one-is-reading-hard-choices-either/

Apparently, I am the only one thinking about Hillary. This one hurts:

Apparently, I am the only one thinking about Hillary. This one hurts:

Does your wife know you think about another woman all the time?
 

Obama will back Warren. She is more likely to stay the path.  Hillary will use Obama's failures as campaign fodder.

He'll back who he's told to back.

Clinton will win, he'll be told to back Clinton.

I don’t think so.  He’s arrogant enough, he doesn’t think he has to do anything unless his wife or Valerie Jarrett tells him he has to.

He will back Warren. His support of Hillary would be a handicap to her. She needs the freedom to criticise his policies and the decisions she made on his behalf as Secretary of State. He needs to be her Bush.

(http://i.imgur.com/OZehXQj.jpg)

Obama shakes the hand of Sara Jessica Parker?

The Senate voted 71-26 on Wednesday to confirm San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro to head the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

All 26 no votes came from Republicans.

"Julian has lived the American dream in his own life, and I'm confident he will help Americans across our country seize their own piece of that dream for themselves and their children," President Obama said in a statement after the vote.

Obama nominated Castro, a Hispanic and a rising star in the Democratic Party, to the job in May. As NPR's Scott Horley reported, he takes over the department at a time "when the nation's housing market has been treading water."

Castro, 39, succeeds Shaun Donovan, who was tapped to White House budget chief. He rose to national prominence as the keynote speaker at the Democratic convention in 2012.

NPR's Frank James noted at the time:

"A graduate of Stanford University and Harvard Law School (like his twin brother, Joaquin, a Texas state representative), Castro became the youngest mayor of a top 50 U.S. city in 2009.

"That, among other achievements, long ago put Castro on the radar of some of the keenest political observers as a local politician with national potential."

That’s right.  Per “the script” for future Dem President’s since 1988, didn’t he deliver the key note address at the DNC in 2012?

Some embarrassing news for Hillary. Her latest book about herself only sold 161,000 copies so far.  Well short of any amount necessary to cover her $14 million dollar advance she was given, and far short of the million copies shipped on consignment to booksellers.  This is disturbing, since the primary qualification for a liberal politician is to write and sell as many books about yourself as possible.

Some embarrassing news for Hillary. Her latest book about herself only sold 161,000 copies so far.  Well short of any amount necessary to cover her $14 million dollar advance she was given, and far short of the million copies shipped on consignment to booksellers.  This is disturbing, since the primary qualification for a liberal politician is to write and sell as many books about yourself as possible.

Perhaps she can turn things around and energize her base to go out and buy multiple copies, or perhaps get universities to start requiring it as a text.
http://pagesix.com/2014/07/08/execs-on-notice-after-hillarys-book-sales-tank/?_ga=1.246459655.2087557863.1404894755

One grazes on vegetative matter and provides an occasional ride, and the other is a horse.

VP 2016 & 2020, President 2024?

Senate Confirms Julian Castro As Housing Secretary

His twin brother is a state representative from Texas.

Vice presidential potential in 2016.

Not if he's smart. He's still young. No need to be cast as the court jester yet.

Not if he's smart. He's still young. No need to be cast as the court jester yet.

We didn't use to think of vice-presidents as fools. Then Dan Quayle came along.

Let the public shaming begin!
http://www.badvoter.org/ (http://www.badvoter.org/)
BadVoter.org
EXPLORING VOTER FREQUENCY IN OKLAHOMA
Most people can vote a few times a year, how about you? 365 days or less = Good Voter
46 days since I last voted

I rarely miss an election.   I am not going to put my D.O.B. on a website that I know nothing about so I won't get a number from them.

I rarely miss an election.   

I looked you up on my secret voter database. You have a score of 90 which is the same as mine. It means you have voted in in 90 of the last 92 elections you could vote in. You are in the top 1% of all voters.

Come on, Bill has a litter of them out there.  This is nothing new.

(http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/shared/npr/styles/placed_wide/nprshared/201502/385600123.jpg)

Throw out your hands
Stick out your tush
Hands on your hips
Give 'em a push
You'll be surprised
You're doing the French Mistake!
Voila!

Bombshell.

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/16-year-old-girl-claims-former-president-bill-clinton-is-her-father/

The source of this story is obviously beyond reproach

Weekly World News without the gravitas and respectability of Bat Boy...

Bat Boy is alive and being held against his will. I have set up a Bat Boy legal defense fund to accept donations to free him.

PM me for details.

Never cite WND as a credible source. Today they have this story linking Friday's solar eclipse to support for Israel.

http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/03/coming-solar-eclipse-seen-as-judgment/

Month of ?

Altimas?

William had posted a quote about the Hebrew month of Nisan.  I was wondering if some ad exec for Nissan had ever thought of...

eh, nevermind.

It would offend Lankford.

(http://media2.kjrh.com/photo/2014/01/20/James%20Lankford_1390251681207_2089245_ver1.0_640_480.jpg)

Hillary's husband's ex-girlfriend is out giving TED talks now.
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3044038/at-ted-monica-lewinsky-talks-cyberbullying-and-how-she-almost-lost-her-life

Coincidence?

What do you expect?  President Clinton obviously left a bad taste in her mouth.

Hillary's husband's ex-girlfriend is out giving TED talks now.
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3044038/at-ted-monica-lewinsky-talks-cyberbullying-and-how-she-almost-lost-her-life

Coincidence?

(http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070908163244/muppet/images/6/66/Fozzie-bear.jpg)

Well the community organizer/senator from Tejas has thrown his hat in the ring.

And some of the Twitter responses are hilarious as they relate to his campaign slogans.  You can find some here (some are real, but many are pretty funny).

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23tedcruzcampaignslogans&src=typd

Some favorites:

"First Out Of The Clown Car!"
"I'm That Hall Monitor Who Ratted You Out In High School."
"I'm riding to the Whitehouse the Republican way. On a dinosaur."

Keep in mind, he's not just a GOP or Texas embarrassment.  He's everyone's embarrassment.

Well the community organizer/senator from Tejas has thrown his hat in the ring.

I think the Repubs need someone to work the libs into an orgasmic froth, and I doubt Cruse needed much convincing.
 

I don't know if I'm ready for the next 19 months.  Is there enough good micro brew in this country to help with my sanity?

Dude at least you are in Oregon.  And Washington is a relatively short drive once the hops quit drowning out the noise. 

Where’s that doobie smoking emoji when you need one?

Dude at least you are in Oregon.  And Washington is a relatively short drive once the hops quit drowning out the noise.  

Where’s that doobie smoking emoji when you need one?

Yeah, plenty of brews around and now one local microw brew that makes a good porter is filling growlers. As for the doobieage, I can't, a couple of prospetive jobs in other states don't care if it's legal here, they test and it will be a guaranteed fail.

Oh, to keep this on topic- Romney isn’t running, therefore Palin won’t be his running mate. 

G’night all!

Hey, she’s still going to be around. She and Trump will flirt with running right up until they would have to file income disclosures. Looking like she’s running makes her “PAC” money.

As for Palin, hasn't she passed her expiration date by a couple of years, to the point where she's like the left overs in the fridge at work that no one claims, and no one can identify?

Yeah but even after you throw it out you can’t get past that lingering, annoying odor.

Not to worry. The American electorate will not suddenly become a majority of far-right zealots. Cruz doesn't have a realistic chance of attaining the oval office, though some think his true aim is the VP slot. A more moderate Republican with wider appeal could use him to rope in the right fringe. The question is, would Cruz' ego play along?

Not to worry. The American electorate will not suddenly become a majority of far-right zealots. Cruz doesn't have a realistic chance of attaining the oval office, though some think his true aim is the VP slot. A more moderate Republican with wider appeal could use him to rope in the right fringe. The question is, would Cruz' ego play along?

I personally like Ben Carson, but he's not a politician and hasn't lived his life in a way that would allow him to transition into that pit of fire and lies. I actually like him so much that I would rather not see him run, because I think it would be destructive to him.

“We need to look at fresh ideas,” said Carson. “I don’t have any problem with the Palestinians having a state, but does it need to be within the confines of Israeli territory? Is that necessary, or can you sort of slip that area down into Egypt? Right below Israel, they have some amount of territory, and it can be adjacent. They can benefit from the many agricultural advances that were made by Israel, because if you fly over that area, you can easily see the demarcation between Egypt and Israel, in terms of one being desert and one being verdant. Technology could transform that area. So why does it need to be in an area where there’s going to be temptation for Hamas to continue firing missiles at relatively close range to Israel?”

On several occasions, I tried to get Carson to concede that his analogy likening the U.S. to Nazi Germany was out of line (he's said that Americans under Obama are as intimidated and afraid to criticize their government as Germans under the Third Reich). But he refused to give any ground. Our longest discussion about the matter came in Jerusalem, in the cafeteria of the Holocaust museum at Yad Vashem. We'd spent the previous ninety minutes touring the museum, followed by Carson entering Yad Vashem's Hall of Remembrance and, black kippah atop his head, laying a wreath made of red, pink, and orange poppies that read "Courage and Truth Will Win: In loving memory the 6 million." Given all this, I asked Carson, did it make him reconsider his analogy?

"Not at all," he said. "It makes it even stronger."

Appearing on CNN’s “New Day,” the potential GOP presidential candidate told host Chris Cuomo that the fight for marriage equality bore no resemblance to the civil rights struggle in part because people have “no control” of their race. That prompted Cuomo to ask whether Carson believed homosexuality is a choice.

“Absolutely,” Carson replied. “Because a lot of people who go into prison go into prison straight — and when they come out, they’re gay. So, did something happen while they were in there? Ask yourself that question,” he added.

Ben Carson huh?

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/20/ben_carsons_fresh_foreign_policy_just_sort_of_slip_palestinians_down_to_egypt/
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201504/ben-carson-tea-party?currentPage=2
He's a science denying young earth creationist. Yeah, he's just great.

Ben Carson huh?

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/20/ben_carsons_fresh_foreign_policy_just_sort_of_slip_palestinians_down_to_egypt/
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201504/ben-carson-tea-party?currentPage=2
He's a science denying young earth creationist. Yeah, he's just great.

Don't worry your little head. Much like Herman Cain (a man I've actually met), the left decided Carson's fate long before he could ever mount any challenge. He represents everything that the left reviles.

He is America; hard-working, successful, morally conservative, religious, and independent of thought.  As I said above, he is not a politician so he is prone to speak his mind, his faith, and openly defend his philosophies.  To the left he is a unicorn. An anomaly that should not exist.

Your response was perfect.  ;)

He is America; hard-working, successful, morally conservative, religious, and independent of thought.  As I said above, he is not a politician so he is prone to speak his mind, his faith, and openly defend his philosophies.  To the left he is a unicorn. An anomaly that should not exist.

Not even going to defend the outright crazy of what he says then?

Cain was immediately branded a racist, who engaged in slave labor.  As he neared the primary, he was far worse.

If he makes the mistake and runs, Carson will be kin to a modern Hitler by primary season.  All of the might of the liberal media is bent on proving that unicorns are make believe.

Cain was immediately branded a racist, who engaged in slave labor.  As he neared the primary, he was far worse.

If he makes the mistake and runs, Carson will be kin to a modern Hitler by primary season.  All of the might of the liberal media is bent on proving that unicorns are make believe.

Troops from Russia and Uzbekistan are helping Turkmenistan guard its border against militant incursions from Afghanistan, an Turkmenistani exile website reports, citing residents of border areas.

According to the report on Chronicles of Turkmenistan, "residents of Afghan border villages have recently noticed the presence on Turkmen territory border units from Uzbekistan." And it added: "About a month ago military instructors from Russia also appeared on the border. Obviously, the Turkmen authorities appealed to the Russian leadership for help guarding the border with Afghanistan, a situation where, with the arrival of warm weather, has begun to heat up."

Turkmenistan has been taking various aggressive steps to address the rise of Taliban and (some claim) ISIS units in the northern provinces of Afghanistan bordering Turkmenistan. Those steps reportedly include mobilizing reserve troops and carrying out incursions into Afghan territory. However, they have seemed to be trying to prosecute the fight on their own, without any other country's help.

 I personally like Ben Carson, but he's not a politician and hasn't lived his life in a way that would allow him to transition into that pit of fire and lies. 

I have a problem with how far Right Cruz is, he says wants to appeal to concervatives but I don't fall in line with the Falwell/Robertson/700 Club conservatives. (Or can I call them Looney's?)

Also he's going for the bait and switch saying he will repeal every word of ACA, which he has to know can't be done, and then will say well it's more difficult than we thought.

As for Palin, hasn't she passed her expiration date by a couple of years, to the point where she's like the left overs in the fridge at work that no one claims, and no one can identify?

AND the funny part is that since Mrs. Cruz is now taking time off from Goldman/Sachs and will no longer be on their group insurance, the Cruz family is now on Obamacare/ACA.  That's where Congress is required to go. No worries though since it's actually very misunderstood. As you know, it's not one huge company of insurance called, "Obamacare." (You'd be surprised at how many people still believe that.) It's an exchange of the companies in the area/state. Cruz will get no subsidy and the good thing is special interest groups were banned from contributing to the premiums of those in Congress, although they offered. That was a huge reason they were protesting it...no goodies for themselves.

I personally wasn't sure that Cruz was even qualified to run since his mother was a U.S. citizen and his father was a Cuban citizen and he was born in Canada.  The father did have a green card and there is a law that was written in 1790 and changed in 1795. I thought it was confusing and open to interpretation, but he very well may qualify to run. Just hilarious considering all of the, "Where's the birth certificate" bumper stickers that were around in 07/08/09. I hope they kept them on their cars because the same can be said now and I'd hate for anyone to have to go out and buy a new one.

The best comment I've seen so far about the Cruz run was when someone posted, "He needs to follow in his dad's footsteps and start a church in south Texas. We have a lot of those crazies down here."

Except that now he's evidently 'walked back' those comments on signing up for the ACA.

His entry into the fray hasn't been exactly smooth.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/ted-cruz-obamacare-116408.html#ixzz3VUxAYiF3

Very interesting.

I like this part..."Cruz, meanwhile, slammed the media coverage of his family’s health care dilemma, saying the mainstream media is playing “gotcha games.” He doesn't think he and his entire family won't be in the spotlight if he runs? He doesn't feel that he and his cohorts don't play "Gotcha games" with those who don't agree with them?

I also love his integrity by refusing to accept an "Obama subsidy." We all know that he doesn't even qualify for one so he's basically turning down what he wasn't going to get in the first place since you can only earn 400% above the poverty level in order to even qualify for one. He's WAY over that. He's pretty easy to see through, but he does read a good bedtime story.

If he goes to the private market, his costs will be very similar to what he's going to find on the Exchange, unless he can find a company that didn't join the Exchange and will give him a good price. I love how people like him who've had cushy insurance their entire lives want to deprive everyone else of even being able to buy insurance since that's how it was in the past. (Pre-existing conditions) Now he's trying to get COBRA from his wife's job? What a man! At least this has made things easy for me. He won't even hit my radar when it's election time.

Who the dems got as back-up.....Biden.....Gore.....???

Well looking at the GOP field so far, the Dems could get just about anyone with a pulse.

That leaves out those two.....Who else....??

O Ok......

Go ahead, give it a shot.

Shot of what....???

Good job

Was that an attack....?

Yes

OK, I'll bite.   First,  why do they need a backup? 

But if Hillary should decide for what ever reason not to run, there are others.   Elizabeth Warren (who has declined) and Bernie Sanders are both favorites of the liberal wing, but are generally considered by many to be too liberal to win.  (As I write that, it's interesting that the Dems understand when someone is too liberal to win the general election, but the GOP seems to have no concept of being too conservative...)  Given that Hillary has been the de facto nominee for a while, the other possible candidates have apparently decided to sit this round out.

For fairly exhaustive list of possible future Dem candidates (along with some perennial wackos) see this wiki entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016

Hillary is a conglomeration of Wall Street groups, investment attorneys, and global media interests. 

She is a mutual fund of:

Lehman Brothers

I am curious though as to when the meek and downtrodden going to realize they still are not better off due to on and off Democrat control of the White House and alternating control of the Senate and House over the last couple of decades.  The Democrat party is no more interested in the plight of the underclasses than the Republicans are.

I am curious though as to when the meek and downtrodden going to realize they still are not better off due to on and off Democrat control of the White House and alternating control of the Senate and House over the last couple of decades.  The Democrat party is no more interested in the plight of the underclasses than the Republicans are.

NPR discussed that this morning - one of the particular items was job creation - since that seems to be the "big thing" for Republicans.  Job creation under Democrats is double that of Republican administrations.  ( On Point)

Lol...Wut.....???

You wouldn't understand....

I usually don't understand stand things that are pulled out of your a$$......

I usually don't understand stand things that are pulled out of your a$$......

Cain was immediately branded a racist, who engaged in slave labor.  As he neared the primary, he was far worse.

If he makes the mistake and runs, Carson will be kin to a modern Hitler by primary season.  All of the might of the liberal media is bent on proving that unicorns are make believe.

And the count down begins........

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/04/politics/ben-carson-2016-presidential-announcement/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/04/politics/ben-carson-2016-presidential-announcement/index.html)

It just keeps getting better every day....  the clown show just keeps on rolling!!

Carly Fiorina is now running for President.  The CEO who ran Hewlett Packard into the ground !!   Bill and Dave just gotta be soooo proud - she can do to the country what she did to their company!!  Can hardly wait....

However, while insisting he doesn't advocate "nation-building," Rubio seemed to define his policy as exactly that.

"It’s not nation-building. We are assisting them in building their nation," Rubio said of his vision for Iraq.

The clown car is running amok!

Derp.

http://www.businessinsider.com/marco-rubios-confusing-comment-about-iraq-nation-building-2015-6#ixzz3c95gGJeo

The term: “Big lump of maggot sh!t” comes to mind when I look at the bulk of the GOP field.

Even FOX news is looking at the GOP runners like they're retarded.

Has anyone read anything about any GOP candidate lately and thought, "That's our next president."?

I may not agree with them policy wise or want to vote for them, but Kasich, Rubio, and to a lesser extent Bush seem like intelligent, serious and honest candidates that want the best for the country. Christy too, but his temperament is all wrong. He’s just an old school street bully from Jersey. Maybe Paul as well, but his father is such a class A loon and so plainly stupid that I always will be very wary of Rand. And really anyone named “Rand”.

The rest, who are the ones leading in the polls, are freaken loons and liars. It's downright scary.

So were any of them "That's our next President."?

I may not agree with them policy wise or want to vote for them, but Kasich, Rubio, and to a lesser extent Bush seem like intelligent, serious and honest candidates that want the best for the country. Christy too, but his temperament is all wrong. He’s just an old school street bully from Jersey. Maybe Paul as well, but his father is such a class A loon and so plainly stupid that I always will be very wary of Rand. And really anyone named “Rand”.

The rest, who are the ones leading in the polls, are freaken loons and liars. It's downright scary.

I’m not overly thrilled with any of the “leading” options from either side so far.

I do have to ask, is “Gentle Ben” a loon or liar in your books?  Thus far, I’ve not seen anything which confirms him as a liar.  As far as some of his fundamentalist views, I wouldn’t go so far as “loon”.  My issue with Carson is the same problem I had with Obama: he has very limited leadership experience.  The crazy part is, I can’t figure out the cult of personality surrounding this guy with the conservatives.  He’s not as charismatic as Obama came off in ’08.  Let’s face it, everyone overlooked any limited leadership experience for a guy who was: "so well spoken, such a great orator”.

I have to give Cruz credit for sticking to his guns and following through with campaign promises while pissing off the Republican establishment.  I admire him for that.  There is simply something really creepy about the guy I just can’t stand.  It’s like he’s got a trunk load of bound and gagged cheerleaders.  Just cannot explain what is not right about that guy.

Hillary is no Bill when it comes to campaigning.  I honestly see no way she can win the general election as she is just too polarizing.  She does not exude excitement and she’s got the “No more Bush or Clintons!” thing working against her.

Bernie?  Even less charisma.

Cruz is very sharp but without a moral center. He will say or do anything to get himself ahead. His own peers don’t trust him. He could be Nixon 2.0 if he were to win.

This may explain some of Gentle Ben's weirdness. http://news.yahoo.com/ben-carson-says-many-americans-140928690.html

I wondered why he was a former surgeon till a friend told me he was kicked out of the profession. Something about a sponge left in someone's brain. His stances on abortion, medicare/Medicaid and the ACA are enough to tickle the looneys' fancy and eliminate him from moderate support.

Your friend’s assertion appears to be untrue, at least according to this Guardian article which seems to take an even take on his malpractice history.  Malpractice claims seem to be fairly common for any neurosurgeon, considering what part of the body they are working on.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/04/ben-carson-malpractice-claims-doctor-for-president

Coburn said weird smile too, but was a pretty pragmatic legislator.

I think Carson is very cerebral but lacks the filter between his brain and mouth most politicians possess. 

Again, his lack of leadership experience is a serious problem.  His soft-spoken demeanor doesn’t inspire confidence as a good negotiator.

I’m curious what would happen in a Bush vs. Clinton election.  Both have leadership experience and very close ties to the White House already.  But, there’s so much sentiment against anyone else from either family sitting in the White House again, it might result in record low turnout for a presidential election.  Either that or the first independent president in history.

Bush is toast.

President Webb!

I’m not overly thrilled with any of the “leading” options from either side so far.

I do have to ask, is “Gentle Ben” a loon or liar in your books? 

Ok, so he's a loon and now an admitted liar, and accused of lying about a lot more:
http://www.vox.com/2015/11/6/9681558/ben-carson-west-point

Politicians stretching the truth in their autobiographies seems to be about the norm. 

I’m trying to figure out what sort of narcissism would make a neurosurgeon write his biography at the ripe old age of 38?  This is much like Obama and his first memoir in 1995 before he had done anything to really distinguish himself on the national stage.

His particular campaign is based around his perceived intelligence and honesty. He didn’t stretch the truth, this is an entirely false narrative.

In his biography a central story to his life was that during a Veteran’s day parade in 1969 he claimed to have met General Westmoreland, just back from commanding in Vietnam, who was impressed with the then 17 year old Carson and who took Carson to dinner and urged him to attend West Point. Carson was then later offered a “full ride” to West Point that he turned down.

None of that happened. There’s no such thing as a full ride to West Point, Carson never applied to the school at all and General Westmoreland was not at that parade at all. According to the generals records he spent Veteran’s Day 1969 in Washington DC so there was no meeting Carson and no dinner.

It’s not an exaggeration or stretching of the truth, it’s a complete fabrication.

His particular campaign is based around his perceived intelligence and honesty. He didn’t stretch the truth, this is an entirely false narrative.

In his biography a central story to his life was that during a Veteran’s day parade in 1969 he claimed to have met General Westmoreland, just back from commanding in Vietnam, who was impressed with the then 17 year old Carson and who took Carson to dinner and urged him to attend West Point. Carson was then later offered a “full ride” to West Point that he turned down.

None of that happened. There’s no such thing as a full ride to West Point, Carson never applied to the school at all and General Westmoreland was not at that parade at all. According to the generals records he spent Veteran’s Day 1969 in Washington DC so there was no meeting Carson and no dinner.

It’s not an exaggeration or stretching of the truth, it’s a complete fabrication.

Actually, the quote in the book says “Memorial Day” according to the original link you posted rather than "Veteran’s Day".

I could care less whether he took a few liberties in his book.  It’s not like we’ve never elected presidential candidates with questionable integrity who have padded their resumes and memoirs with exaggerations and outright lies. 

I’m not interested in voting for the guy, but I find it plenty amusing that CNN is really picking apart his autobiography, yet they showed little interest in vetting Obama in a similar way. 

His particular campaign is based around his perceived intelligence and honesty. He didn’t stretch the truth, this is an entirely false narrative.

Apparently shoddily cobbled together by the writer for Politico:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/06/media/ben-carson-politico-west-point/

Seems a rather over-zealous attempt to go after a candidate the author wouldn’t vote for.

TULSA, Okla. (AP) — Hillary Clinton plans a public event in Tulsa as she visits the state as part of a fundraising stop.

Clinton plans to visit the Oklahoma Jazz Hall of Fame on Friday and attend a private fundraiser at the home of Tulsa philanthropists George and Cookie Kaiser. Clinton's campaign said Tuesday that the former secretary of state will discuss her economic agenda at the public event, which is scheduled for noon Friday.

The campaign says Clinton also plans to drum up local support ahead of Oklahoma's March 1 presidential primary.

Vice President Joe Biden visited Tulsa last month for a private fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee.

Wow...the Kaisers must be showing some monetary love to her campaign.

Clinton Plans Public Event at Oklahoma Jazz Hall of Fame

Is there something changing in Oklahoma that I don't know about?

Ben Carson on Friday blasted the Republican National Committee following a Washington Post report that nearly two-dozen establishment party figures were prepping for a potential brokered convention as Donald Trump continues to lead most polls.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus held a dinner in Washington, D.C., on Monday, and, according to five people who spoke with the Post, the possibility of Trump heading into the Cleveland convention with a substantial number of delegates was a topic of discussion. Some attendees suggested the establishment lay the groundwork for a floor fight that could lead the party’s mainstream wing to unite behind an alternative. Carson rejected this approach.

“If the leaders of the Republican Party want to destroy the party, they should continue to hold meetings like the one described in the Washington Post this morning,” Carson said in a statement released by his campaign.

Carson said he prays the Post’s report is incorrect and threatened to leave the GOP. “If it is correct, every voter who is standing for change must know they are being betrayed. I won’t stand for it,” said Carson, who added that if the plot is accurate, “I assure you Donald Trump won’t be the only one leaving the party.”

The retired neurosurgeon said that next summer’s Cleveland convention could be the last Republican National Convention if leaders try to manipulate it.
“I am prepared to lose fair and square, as I am sure is Donald,” Carson said. “But I will not sit by and watch a theft. I intend on being the nominee. If I am not, the winner will have my support. If the winner isn’t our nominee then we have a massive problem.”

Carson told ABC News on Friday he had no plans to run as an independent. “But I certainly don’t want to be a part of corruption,” said Carson, who stopped short of saying he would drop out of the race if he left the Republican Party.
“I’ll leave that up to you to speculate,” he added with a smile.

Just days earlier, Carson had suggested that a third-party bid by Trump could be unnecessary. "I believe that the party has pledged to be fair to him and to be fair to everybody," he told CNN. "So I don’t see where that would be necessary quite frankly. Obviously, if the people choose him, we have an obligation to respect the will of the people."

Sean Spicer, chief strategist for the Republican National Committee, downplayed the significance of Monday's dinner. “This was a discussion about the delegation selection process,” he said, likening it to past sessions held for the media. “A question was asked on whether we are ready. We are always ready.”

“The takeaway was that he (Priebus) was asked a question and he answered it,” added Spicer, who was not at the dinner but said he was briefed on it. “The chairman acknowledged that if we got to that point we would be prepared. Our job is to prepare for a successful nomination process.”

The conversation about what to do if a brokered convention occurs took up just four minutes of the two-hour session, according to a person familiar with the meeting.
Spicer, speaking to CNN Friday, said the flap over Monday's dinner was "silly" and that he was "confident" Carson and Trump would remain in the race as Republicans. "We’ll have great convention," he said. "It’ll all work out."

Trump, when asked about the possibility of a brokered convention last week, said he didn’t think it would happen. “But if it is, I’d certainly go all the way — and I think I’d have a certain disadvantage,” he told The Post. “I’ll be disadvantaged. My disadvantage is that I’d be going up against guys who grew up with other, know each other intimately, and I don’t know who they are, OK? That’s a big disadvantage.”

Trump in recent days has also entertained the idea of a third-party run, despite having pledged not to do so in September. While an independent run is “highly unlikely,” he said, the pledge is a “two-way street.”

“If they don’t treat me with a certain amount of decorum and respect, if they don’t treat me as by far the front-runner, if the playing field is not level, then certainly all options are open,” Trump told CNN’s Don Lemon.

RNC officials met with Trump’s campaign in New York on Wednesday, according to an NBC News report. One official confirmed the meeting, which was attended by several high-ranking RNC members and Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski. The official said that for RNC officials to meet with campaigns is “standard and common,” noting that they are meeting with every campaign and will continue to do so throughout the primary.

Carson's clash with the RNC isn't his first. He and Trump both threatened to boycott a CNBC debate in November without changes to the format, and they were critical of the RNC's handling of the matter. At that time, Trump and Carson were dueling for front-runner status. But now the two are on sharply different trajectories in the race: Carson has plunged in national and early-state polls following questions about his personal narrative and his readiness to handle foreign policy issues, while Trump has seen his poll numbers rise.

The news of the Priebus dinner follows the leak last week of a National Republican Senatorial Committee memo sent out by Executive Director Ward Baker that urged its members “prepare for 2016, by understanding the environment and recognizing the Trump phenomenon.” Baker outlined 11 “recommendations” to consider should Trump become the nominee. Suggestions ranged from facing the fact that “Trump is a Misguided Missile” to understanding that “Trump Can Hit the Right Chord.”

The business magnate told CBS News’ John Dickerson this week that the memo is “dishonest” but also a compliment. “They are actually saying that I will be the nominee, but they’re saying, ‘Study Trump, because he’s doing things that nobody’s ever done before and it really works,’” he said. “And obviously, you can leave some of the insults out, but you should learn from Trump.”

So which one will Pauly Shore play in the upcoming movie?

So which one will Pauly Shore play in the upcoming movie?

Cruz just fired Rick Tyler

I'll take a shot at it:

The two latest polls in Nevada average out to +2 for Cruz over Rubio but that poll was before Rubio’s strong showing in South Carolina and includes Bush. Even if Bush supporters split evenly between Kasich and Rubio, and I expect them to break strongly toward Rubio, I expect Rubio to take second easily. I see something like a Trump 43, Rubio 24, Cruz 20, Kasich 8 and Carson 5 outcome which would hurt Cruz greatly going forward.

Kasich ending under 10%, which I think is likely, probably ends his campaign and basically all his votes will go to Rubio, I’m sure he will endorse Rubio.

Who knows what Carson will do, it’s looking more and more like his campaign is of the “for profit” variety instead of a real campaign, so look for his support to continue to fall away. He’ll quit when the money dries up. His supporters at this point are of the dimwit category so they probably become Trumpers.

Super Tuesday is probably the end of Cruz. Trump is winning in the polls in 7 or 8 of the 9 states and with Rubio combining the party line Republican voters it looks like Cruz can do no better than third. Then comes the big question, do Cruz supporters go to Trump or Rubio? The party is holding out all hope it’s to Rubio, but I think they are going to split pretty evenly and that means Trump walks away easily to the nomination winning most of the rest of the states something like 60-40 over Rubio.

Sanders is going to get killed in South Carolina and is likely gone after Super Tuesday. He’s up but only within the polling error in Massachusetts and up big in irrelevant VT. Clinton is up in all seven other states, five of them by 20+ points. And these polls were before Sanders lost in Nevada.

All the lemmings are jumping on the Trump express train to the bottom. The lack of morals of the average American voter is stunning. We really are a bunch of racist, bigoted idiots. 

All the lemmings are jumping on the Trump express train to the bottom. The lack of morals of the average American voter is stunning. We really are a bunch of racist, bigoted idiots.  

Trump wins Hispanics: Nevada presented Trump’s most formidable finish so far. He not only won both moderates and conservatives, he also won among voters whose top issues were the economy (47 percent), terrorism (37 percent) and government spending (36 percent). But perhaps the most shocking demographic victory of The Donald was his solid showing with Republican Latino voters. Trump had long predicted that he would win the Latino vote, despite months of widespread criticism over his extreme positions on combating illegal immigration.

The front-runner has proposed building a wall along the Southwest border of the U.S. (financed by Mexico) to keep immigrants out and has called for a “deportation force” to round up the 11 million plus undocumented people current in the country and deport them. He has also been condemned from claiming that Mexicans who cross the border are often “killers” and “rapists.” Nevertheless, Trump won 46 percent of the Latino GOP caucusgoers, although they only made up 9 percent of the total vote.

Funny state of affairs. Tragic but entertaining.

Do any of these stalwart republican senators who oppose Obama, a former constitutional law professor, appointing the next SC justice realize that Trump may get the honor? Or, horrors...Clinton, Sanders or Cruz?

Listen, Conan, you make a good argument for just passing on this election.

Listen, Conan, you make a good argument for just passing on this election. Low turnout at the blue collar level is consistent. Anger at government is consistent because they mostly don't understand it. They don't even register. Turnout and involvement among minorities is steadily increasing. Both those work against Trump.

Data from Public Policy Polling show that a third of Mr. Trump’s backers in South Carolina support barring gays and lesbians from entering the country.

YouGov data reveal that a third of Mr. Trump’s (and Mr. Cruz’s) backers believe that Japanese internment during World War II was a good idea

According to P.P.P., 70 percent of Mr. Trump’s voters in South Carolina wish the Confederate battle flag were still flying on their statehouse grounds.

38 percent of them wish the South had won the Civil War.

Nearly 20 percent of Mr. Trump’s voters disagreed with the freeing of slaves in Southern states after the Civil War

The P.P.P. poll asked voters if they thought whites were a superior race. Most Republican primary voters in South Carolina — 78 percent — disagreed with this idea (10 percent agreed and 11 percent weren’t sure). But among Mr. Trump’s supporters, only 69 percent disagreed.

Trump did win the Latino vote in the Republican Caucus, but Latinos were only 8% of Republican voters in a state that is 28% Latino. What that vote shows more than Trump’s popularity with Latinos is that Latinos are not Republicans.

To be more accurate, I was referring to the disillusionment of Trump supporters. I had one this morning assure me he was tired of the "politics" in government and was going to vote for Trump even though he didn't think he could get anything done. Weird enough but I remember our last conversation when he told me he hadn't voted for years.

I'll vote, though in OK that's pretty much an exercise in futility.

Trump, a showman.  

Trump's supplied so many soundbites for his opposition, it's almost impossible for someone not to be rallied against him...as long as that person is educated enough to understand what Trump's followers are siding with.

Would someone really want to be clumped into a group of misogynistic, racist, hateful folks if that someone took a moment to understand the consequences?

In Oklahoma, as a people, we don't take time to understand consequences.  The folks with deep pockets outside Oklahoma understand that international business  will be tougher under a Trump presidency.  The money raised will go to his opponent.

Trump will not be POTUS

The flaw in your logic is that every time it was assumed Trump had just shot himself in foot and was done, his popularity surged 5%.

Any time the opposition tries to use Trump’s words against him, his popularity surges even more.

The more the media tries to vet him as a complete douchebag, the more popular he becomes.

It’s the damnedest thing I’ve ever seen.  Trump is a public relations dumpster fire but he just keeps on going like the Energizer Bunny.

You could give Hillary Clinton $100 billion and she still will not be elected.  She’s an awful candidate and no one seems capable of refuting it.  Trump is an awful candidate as well but he seems to thrive on that notoriety, and notoriety, good or bad is what the Trump brand has relied on for the last 30 years.

His popularity with whom?  Many of the people he's popular with have no idea how to find their polling places.

He's popular because people recognize him from his television shows.  

If you asked one of his crowd what his stance is on anything political, they will look at you and say "Mexican wall" or "No Muslims allowed."

Do you really think his presidency will be allowed to happen?  Your vote, my vote...they won't matter.  The international community and the firms who do business with the international community will take over the show and someone else will be in the oval.

The international community doesn’t have a vote.


I sense a bet over Marshall’s beer coming on here.

To your first statement quoted above...Motherscratcher, please.

To the second, case of Marshalls between you and me.  You have Trump, I have Clinton.  If we are both wrong, we meet out and buy each other Marshalls until the wives say "no mas."

They’ve been turning out at the primaries and caucuses so far.  Just wait until Super Tuesday.

Rubio and Cruz who both seem to be quite a bit more reasonable choices are getting their asses handed to them.

The international community doesn’t have a vote.

The only thing which could change this course is if Bloomberg jumps in but I don’t see the day an IND can win the White House.  He might be able to be the “Perot factor” and suck enough votes away from Trump so that Hilarity can win.

I sense a bet over Marshall’s beer coming on here.

Deal.

ooh, I'm finally interested in this presidential circus!
 

On which planet is Cruz reasonable? He's the guy that shut down the government and got our credit rating reduced over the debt ceiling. He's completely hated by his peers in the Senate. He also advocates INS teams rounding up and kicking out all illegal immigrants and carpet bombing Muslims.

Rubio and Kasich are reasonable. I may not agree with them much, but you can have an honest debate and honest disagreement on philosophy with them. I could be persuaded to vote for them, especially Kasich, over Sanders. If the election is Sanders v Trump it's hello President Bloomberg.

Cruz is a weasel and radical willing to do or say anything to get ahead. And Trump is Trump. I think Hillary beats either one of them easily. Trump is very, very unpopular with Independents and Democrats. Cruz is just plain unlikable.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-is-really-unpopular-with-general-election-voters/

I think Rubio probably beats Hillary and certainly beats Sanders, but his window is closing. 46% in Nevada is a big number because when Cruz drops most of his people probably go to Trump. I don't think Rubio can win, but he's the only shot the Republicans have in stopping Trump now.

When I was speaking of Cruz being a “reasonable choice” that’s to the Tea Party faction he’s a reasonable choice.  To the GOP establishment types, Rubio is the "reasonable choice."

I respect Nate Silver, he’s got an outstanding record with his prognostications.  Let’s see what happens when the GOP clown car finally is down to one occupant.  Do you see any scenario where Bernie could get nominated if Hilarity isn’t indicted first (yes, I know, pissing in the wind)?  I think there are too many people still of the impression that Trump won’t be the GOP nominee.  Let’s see how electable he looks when all other possibilities from the GOP side have been quashed.  That’s pretty much what Silver’s article is saying in the first place.

Per the Daily Beast, Trump is crushing Rubio in polls in Florida...Rubio's home state.

Florida...you'd think they'd have their toys taken away by now.

If he spanks Cruz in Texas, it’s over.  Anyone know if Texas or Florida are all or nothing states?

I’d kind of hoped Rubio could win Florida, Cruz Texas, and Kasich Ohio to keep it interesting.

Meanwhile, I got my invitation to vote for Bernie in next weeks Democrat primary.  That’s two mailers in two days reminding me that IND get to vote in the Dem primary.

Seven recent Democratic polls in Texas have Hillary up 26 points. Florida’s last poll was in January and Clinton was up 36 points. Bye Bye Bernie.

I’m not sure Bloomberg would be an improvement over Trump.

Same kind of douchebag, different flavor.

I’m not sure Bloomberg would be an improvement over Trump.

Same kind of douchebag, different flavor.

I'm not a huge Bloomberg supporter, but to contrast:

<Trump inherited $200-300mil in Real Estate holdings and turned that into $1 Bil in Real Estate holdings over 30 years.
>Bloomberg's dad was a bookkeeper, Bloomberg earned a degree in electrical engineering and a Harvard MBA before going to Wall Street where he rose up and ended up leaving to do his own thing. Amassing a fortune of more than $30 Billion, starting with zero.

<Trump has spent his career making money off of his name and some real estate, and failing at most other business ventures. He is also a reality TV star.
>Bloomberg revolutionized the field of business information, founded successful media companies, and leveraged other assets.

<Trump has never ran for nor held public office. He has never run a large organization other than as a dictator. Those that he did run have a greater than 50% failure rate.
>Bloomberg has been on the board of many large companies, he has started and then given up control of companies, and he has run the nations largest city.

<Trump has no political platform, no plan, and washes between positions depending on his crowd
> Bloomberg has well stated and settled positions (to disagree or agree with as one sees fit)

< Trump's main rhetorical style is to lob insults, make things up (only 7% of what he says is actually true), and yell over people
> Bloomberg is a classically trained orator who can articulate a position and engage in formal debate

< Trump is noted for being the only member of the list to regularly call Forbes and lobby to be higher on the list, to sue people for saying he is worth less than $1bil, and to give radically different assessments of his wealth in the same day. Being wealthy is the cornerstone of his identity.
> Bloomberg has given away more money in his lifetime than Donald Trump's entire net worth (there is documentation of more than $1.8 Billion in donations from Bloomberg), and still can buy and sell Trump 10 times over.
 
< Trump has been married three times and brags of cheating on wives, doesn't give away money, runs casinos and strip clubs, and tries to pretend to be religious (badly) when it suits his political whim. Yet courts the religious vote.
> Bloomberg has been married once and divorced after 27 years. He has never bragged about adultery and there is no record of such occurrences. He has never been married to a nude model. He is Jewish but doesn't utilize religion as part of his platform.

< Trump's hobbies include being rich, suing people who disagree with him, and trying to get in the media as much as possible.
> Bloomberg regularly gives commencement addresses at the nations most prestigious schools, is a commercial pilot and helicopter pilot, is a Morse fluent radio operator, a philanthropist, and collects notable awards, honorary degrees, and even a Knighthood.


I'm not advocating for Bloomberg (I'm really not that familiar with his policies), but I give credit where due. Bloomberg is a true self made man of the highest order. Even if he was an donkey and I disagreed with everything he said, he at least has that going for him.

But at least Trump is reputed to be a non-drinker, so he’s got that going for him with the evangelicals.

So.... Is Bloomburg going to run?  3rd Party?
I'd have to be crazy or ignorant to vote for one of the republican candidates this year.

I actually re-registered so that I could vote in the Dem primary.

Ham Sandwich, 2016.

Bloomberg is looking at running and reportedly will run if the choices are Sanders and Trump.

Chris Christie just endorsed Trump

Want odds on if he's Trump's VP pick?

With Trumps ego?

I suspect Trump will be Trump’s VP.

With Trumps ego?

I suspect Trump will be Trump’s VP.