This election in a nutshell...

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:53 am

any thread where the title has a punctuation mark should be immediately shitcanned.

H4ever · Post by **H4ever** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:36 am

Looks like the dude on the hill is taking a leak

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:37 am

The Fuck Up may not be able to fill a football stadium, but he sure can pack them in at someone's back yard.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:40 am

H4ever wrote:Looks like the dude on the hill is taking a leak

Exactly.

H4ever · Post by **H4ever** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:44 am

Van wrote:
H4ever wrote:Looks like the dude on the hill is taking a leak
Exactly.

Well then the secret service snipers aren't applying themselves. Dude could be filling a piss-bomb balloon in preparation for a downhill charge while he" la-la-la's" like a tea-party jihadist.....then launching it at Obama. I blame the Koch brothers. You KNOW they got home-boy liquored up and dared him to.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 2:45 am

War Wagon wrote:any thread where the title has a punctuation mark should be immediately shitcanned.

Thirty of the fifty threads on page one include punctuation, and your thread title was written incorrectly.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:01 am

Wolfman wrote:The Fuck Up may not be able to fill a football stadium, but he sure can pack them in at someone's back yard.

HA! YOU GOT HIM GOOD! TELL HIM HE READS PROMPTERS! THAT'LL PISS HIM OFF!

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:51 am

Are you part of the 47% or the 53%?

Inquiring minds want to know.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:34 am

Barry has a mini-me?

Rack him!

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:49 pm

Yesterday was the point in which Mittens flushed his chances away.

Perhaps all those conservatives who have knocked Obama for always using a teleprompter should consider investing in them for their future candidates.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:52 pm

You know the system is irreparably broken when speaking the truth only serves to diminish a candidate's prospects in a presidential election.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:06 pm

Speaking the truth? Are you really serious?

Do you really think that 47% of the population is sucking off the government and "not willing to take responsibility for their lives" or whatever he said?

You do realize that there are a lot of people who may not be paying any income tax (strictly speaking) that still pay a fuckload of taxes. Don't you?
Like sales taxes, gas taxes, etc., etc., and especially payroll taxes, which comprise the majority of what most of us pay anyway.
What about retired folks, who have worked all of their lives and paid taxes, living on SS (not welfare) who don't have any tax burden. Are they not taking responsibility for their lives?
Before Romney bags on ANYBODY about how much tax they pay, I would like to see how much he REALLY pays as a % of what he makes.

This is class warfare at its finest and you imbeciles are falling for it hook, line and sinker. I'll bet 50% of Romney's "base" falls into that 47% without realizing it and they're going "yeah all them fucking freeloaders really need to step the fuck up."

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:11 pm

He didn't break it down that finitely, true, so he's incorrect in making such a sweeping statement without providing any additional clarification. The gist of what he said regarding habitual government handout-dependent voters, though, was spot-on.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:17 pm

Van wrote:He didn't break it down that finitely, true, so he's incorrect in making such a sweeping statement without providing any additional clarification. The gist of what he said regarding habitual government handout-dependent voters, though, was spot-on.

No it wasn't. It was a broad generalization meant to appeal the the sense of entitlement of bunch of wealthy Private Equity donors and make them feel good about how they're so rich and the rest of the country is just trying to bleed them dry. What a fucking crock.

You don't think they benefit from "government handouts" even more than the lowest of the "47%ers" does?

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:20 pm

So you're saying that those people who are entirely dependent on government assistance won't necessarily vote the way he said they will?

That was his broad generalization. Is he wrong?

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:25 pm

Mikey wrote:Speaking the truth? Are you really serious?

Do you really think that 47% of the population is sucking off the government and "not willing to take responsibility for their lives" or whatever he said?

You do realize that there are a lot of people who may not be paying any income tax (strictly speaking) that still pay a fuckload of taxes. Don't you?
Like sales taxes, gas taxes, etc., etc., and especially payroll taxes, which comprise the majority of what most of us pay anyway.
What about retired folks, who have worked all of their lives and paid taxes, living on SS (not welfare) who don't have any tax burden. Are they not taking responsibility for their lives?
Before Romney bags on ANYBODY about how much tax they pay, I would like to see how much he REALLY pays as a % of what he makes.

This is class warfare at its finest and you imbeciles are falling for it hook, line and sinker. I'll bet 50% of Romney's "base" falls into that 47% without realizing it and they're going "yeah all them fucking freeloaders really need to step the fuck up."

NOW we're getting to this election in a nutshell.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:25 pm

Van wrote:So you're saying that those people who are entirely dependent on government assistance won't necessarily vote the way he said they will?

That was his broad generalization. Is he wrong?

That was not his generalization.

He said that everybody who pays no net INCOME TAX would vote the way he said they would.
Do you really think that everybody who pays no net income tax is entirely on government assistance? Really? Van, you need to get out more.
What's the median income in the US? About $45,000? I'll bet a good percentage of anybody below that number pays no net income taxes, but they're still paying a fuckload of taxes. And they're not "entirely on government assistance."

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:27 pm

I say let's make trev president.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:32 pm

Mikey, again, you're breaking it down into specific segments. Romney didn't do that. He was speaking off the cuff, presumably off camera. It wasn't a detailed speech so no, he didn't go into such specific detail.

The gist of his point was that there's no chance those voters who are entirely dependent on government assistance will ever vote for him, so why bother pandering to them? His chances rest solely on those few undecided voters in the center.

That was his point, and he's right.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:43 pm

No, Van, he was speaking as clearly as he can--which is as confused, simplistic and idiotic as a tired old coward like yourself. The sheer disconnect from reality displayed by the robot was fairly typical of right wing hackdom in general. Right now Hannity is desperately braying the party line--essentially defending the "essential truth" of robot's remarks. The obvious falsity of his take should be obvious, but to impossibly stupid and lard-lobed morons like you, it's just a matter of clarity. How disgusting--him and you.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:44 pm

Van wrote:Mikey, again, you're breaking it down into specific segments. Romney didn't do that. He was speaking off the cuff, presumably off camera. It wasn't a detailed speech so no, he didn't go into such specific detail.

The gist of his point was that there's no chance those voters who are entirely dependent on government assistance will ever vote for him, so why bother pandering to them? His chances rest solely on those few undecided voters in the center.

That was his point, and he's right.

If what you're saying is true (and I don't believe that for a minute) then he was absolutely incorrect.

Off the cuff? I don't think so. He specifically said those that pay no income taxes. He knows what that means. He specifically said 47% - and that is the correct percentage of people who pay no income taxes (actually down now to 46%). He knows what that means. You think he got lucky by pulling a number out of his hat? If he meant only those who are entirely on government assistance why did he say 47% when the actual number is (who knows?) probably 10% or less?

Y2K · Post by **Y2K** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:48 pm

So Mittens pissed off a lot of people who are not voting for him anyway via a hidden camera...

and meanwhile Al Queda is launhing a full assault on American intrests worldwide and our monkey in chief is trying to figure out whether to put his hands over his eyes, ears or mouth.

Amazing what people see as "real news" anymore.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:55 pm

Y2K wrote: and meanwhile Al Queda is launhing a full assault on American intrests worldwide.

Catch your breath Jack. Hyperbolize much?

Slow, deliberate typing and spellcheck can both be your friends.

You really think that

1) Obama is hiding from what's happening overseas?
and
2) The election doesn't matter?

I thought it was all about the economy.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:57 pm

Mikey, obviously he was painting the entirety of Obama's supporters with one broad brush. The gist of his point remains, which is that there's no sense in worrying about them in terms of the election. They're never going to come over to his side. His only realistic option is to sway the fence-sitters.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:19 pm

Romney clearly throws all 47% of the people who don't pay income tax into a group that "believes they are victims" and those who expect the government to provide everything for them.....food, housing, and healthcare...blah, blah, blah. Mikey correctly pointed out that there are a large number in that 47% who are employed and do pay taxes, and live without any government assistance. There are a large number of college students who don't make enough money to file a tax return who are attending college with student loans (government assistance) and many of them are young Republicans who will be voting for Romney. So much for the 47% who will vote for Obama "no matter what" bullshit. I know many people in the 47% that do not pay income tax that receive no government assistance in the way of food or housing, and Romney is, as Mikey stated, engaging in class warfare. Van is also correct in that Romney is after the undecided voters....those apparently in the 53% that do pay income taxes. You're not necessarily a deadbeat just because you are unemployed and getting food stamps and unemployment benefits, and there are a lot of people who do receive assistance who are Republicans who will vote for Romney. His comments may have been "off the cuff", but they were absolutley stupid comments to make.....aside from the one about going after the 5-10% who haven't decided who they're voting for in November.

And, yes, I'm living totally off of the taxpayers at this point in my life as a recipient of social security and a pension for public employees. So what? I paid in to both and earned the pension and social security checks that I receive each month, as will those of you who are currently employed. Romney is looking for votes amongst the fence riders and, imo, is failing miserably.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:19 pm

Another bullshit distraction. The economy is going in the tank and we're supposed to get worked up over this? Have you seen the price of gas lately? Noticed prices at the grocery store? Hold on to your wallets folks. The shit is going to hit the fan and I'm afraid even a Romney election will not be able to stop it. It's certain that 4 more year of Barry OFuckUp will mean disaster both internally and internationally.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:31 pm

Here's an example of what we can expect with 4 more years of centralized state control from DC:

"Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R., Wis.) has a post on the Hill’s Congress Blog highlighting a bizarre new regulation from the EPA requiring some gas stations to sell at least four gallons of gasoline at a time. It affects those that pump both E10 and E15 (gas with 10 percent or 15 percent ethanol) through the same hose. Since E15 is pretty terrible for small engines and old cars (Sensenbrenner says it’s “like metal in a microwave for a small engine”), the theory is that when customers whose engines cannot handle it are buying gas, the four-gallon minimum would dilute any residual E15 enough to keep it from damaging small engines. That all presents a few problems, since some motorcycles don’t even hold four gallons and some people only want to fill up one- or two-gallon fuel cans for boats, lawn mowers, etc.

It’s a historic moment for the EPA, though, as they’ve never actually forced people to buy anything before. “The EPA’s first-ever mandated purchase requirement appears to have been conceived outside the normal regulatory process,” Sensenbrenner wrote, “making this unprecedented government overreach even more offensive.” He added that the White House pushed E15 into the marketplace, despite the serious problems it can cause for drivers of old cars and motorcycles. It’s just another great example of how ugly things get when unelected bureaucrats involve themselves in the most minute decisions of individuals, like how much gas they want to buy and whether or not they want to have corn in it. Thanks, Obama!"

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 11:08 pm

Papa Willie wrote:
Wolfman wrote:Another bullshit distraction. The economy is going in the tank and we're supposed to get worked up over this? Have you seen the price of gas lately? Noticed prices at the grocery store? Hold on to your wallets folks. The shit is going to hit the fan and I'm afraid even a Romney election will not be able to stop it. It's certain that 4 more year of Barry OFuckUp will mean disaster both internally and internationally.
Watch gas go WAY down about 2-3 weeks before the election. It always does. Then Obama will say "Look at what I've done to the gas prices!"

It always goes down in the fall whether it's an election year or not. Tell me you knew?

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 11:13 pm

Wolfman wrote:Another bullshit distraction. The economy is going in the tank and we're supposed to get worked up over this? Have you seen the price of gas lately? Noticed prices at the grocery store? Hold on to your wallets folks. The shit is going to hit the fan and I'm afraid even a Romney election will not be able to stop it. It's certain that 4 more year of Barry OFuckUp will mean disaster both internally and internationally.

Thanks for the info poptart. Of course Obama controls the weather. Rush said so, after all. So you can definitely blame any recent increase in grocery prices on the big eared porch monkey, right?

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:45 am

Wolfman wrote:Here's an example of what we can expect with 4 more years of centralized state control from DC:

"Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R., Wis.) has a post on the Hill’s Congress Blog highlighting a bizarre new regulation from the EPA requiring some gas stations to sell at least four gallons of gasoline at a time. It affects those that pump both E10 and E15 (gas with 10 percent or 15 percent ethanol) through the same hose. Since E15 is pretty terrible for small engines and old cars (Sensenbrenner says it’s “like metal in a microwave for a small engine”), the theory is that when customers whose engines cannot handle it are buying gas, the four-gallon minimum would dilute any residual E15 enough to keep it from damaging small engines. That all presents a few problems, since some motorcycles don’t even hold four gallons and some people only want to fill up one- or two-gallon fuel cans for boats, lawn mowers, etc.

It’s a historic moment for the EPA, though, as they’ve never actually forced people to buy anything before. “The EPA’s first-ever mandated purchase requirement appears to have been conceived outside the normal regulatory process,” Sensenbrenner wrote, “making this unprecedented government overreach even more offensive.” He added that the White House pushed E15 into the marketplace, despite the serious problems it can cause for drivers of old cars and motorcycles. It’s just another great example of how ugly things get when unelected bureaucrats involve themselves in the most minute decisions of individuals, like how much gas they want to buy and whether or not they want to have corn in it. Thanks, Obama!"

If the EPA wanted to do us all a favor they'd regulate the toxic waste that regularly emanates from the lower half of your face.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:12 am

Van wrote:Mikey, obviously he was painting the entirety of Obama's supporters with one broad brush. The gist of his point remains, which is that there's no sense in worrying about them in terms of the election. They're never going to come over to his side. His only realistic option is to sway the fence-sitters.

This is right.

He wasn't giving a PUBLIC SPEECH, he was speaking in private (supposedly) to potential donors.

And he was speaking of voting percentage reality - and election strategy.

The Middle East is on fire in anti-American rage, the U.S. economy is on fire, and this is the supposed HUGE story of the week?

LMAO!!

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:05 pm

poptart wrote:
Van wrote:The Middle East is on fire in anti-American rage,

It is?!

When did this happen?

Sincerely,
Capt. John Testrake

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 2:27 pm

John Cocktoasten?

Wait...

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:20 pm

poptart wrote:

The Middle East is on fire in anti-American rage, the U.S. economy is on fire, and this is the supposed HUGE story of the week?

LMAO!!

OMG, you're right.

The MIDDLE EAST is in FLAMES!!!
The ECONOMY is TANKING!!
SATAN is AMONG US!!
There's a BLACK MAN in the WHITE HOUSE!!
We COULD get HIT by an ASTEROID!!
Have you SEEN my GROCERY BILLS!$! (sorry, that was wolftard)

Why would ANYBODY want to talk about a guy who's running for President with the election over a month away? Can't you smack board people find something more important to discuss?

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:59 pm

Mikey wrote:
poptart wrote:

The Middle East is on fire in anti-American rage, the U.S. economy is on fire, and this is the supposed HUGE story of the week?

LMAO!!
OMG, you're right.

The MIDDLE EAST is in FLAMES!!!
The ECONOMY is TANKING!!
SATAN is AMONG US!!
There's a BLACK MAN in the WHITE HOUSE!!
We COULD get HIT by an ASTEROID!!
Have you SEEN my GROCERY BILLS!$! (sorry, that was wolftard)

Why would ANYBODY want to talk about a guy who's running for President with the election over a month away? Can't you smack board people find something more important to discuss?

Yes, the sky must indeed be falling. :roll:

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:31 pm

Well what about Kate's tits? They're very nice and while no one is going to attack an embassy over their being displayed in photos, it's still an important and compelling issue of our day.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:51 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:
Mikey wrote:Speaking the truth? Are you really serious?

Do you really think that 47% of the population is sucking off the government and "not willing to take responsibility for their lives" or whatever he said?

You do realize that there are a lot of people who may not be paying any income tax (strictly speaking) that still pay a fuckload of taxes. Don't you?
Like sales taxes, gas taxes, etc., etc., and especially payroll taxes, which comprise the majority of what most of us pay anyway.
What about retired folks, who have worked all of their lives and paid taxes, living on SS (not welfare) who don't have any tax burden. Are they not taking responsibility for their lives?
Before Romney bags on ANYBODY about how much tax they pay, I would like to see how much he REALLY pays as a % of what he makes.

This is class warfare at its finest and you imbeciles are falling for it hook, line and sinker. I'll bet 50% of Romney's "base" falls into that 47% without realizing it and they're going "yeah all them fucking freeloaders really need to step the fuck up."

NOW we're getting to this election in a nutshell.

^^^^^^^^^^
This. Indeed we are.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:11 am

Mikey wrote: This is class warfare at its finest and you imbeciles are falling for it hook, line and sinker. I'll bet 50% of Romney's "base" falls into that 47% without realizing it and they're going "yeah all them fucking freeloaders really need to step the fuck up."

post a few more rolleyes emoticons next time so all us "imbeciles" will be sure to get the gist more forcefully.

You are a goddamn idiot who watches MSNBC too much if you really believe Romney speaking honestly in private to private donors constitutes class warfare. Hook, line and sinker? Dude, you swallowed those long ago.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 3:34 am

War Wagon wrote:
Mikey wrote: This is class warfare at its finest and you imbeciles are falling for it hook, line and sinker. I'll bet 50% of Romney's "base" falls into that 47% without realizing it and they're going "yeah all them fucking freeloaders really need to step the fuck up."

post a few more rolleyes emoticons next time so all us "imbeciles" will be sure to get the gist more forcefully.

Do you get it now you brain dead fucking imbecile?