It depends on your definition of waste. If it gets swatted down, then the legislators can say that they tried to stop the evil that is Obamacare, but were only prevented by the activist liberal courts. This is a much better position for them than if it actually passes constitutional muster, and they get blamed for the results.
He wants them to know it so much, he’s made their size part of a bilingual campaign ad that, apparently, is supposed to get Latinos to support his Minuteman ass.
He wants McDonald’s to pay Californians $20/hour. Um, someone slap me.
Funny that his costar in that commercial also appeared with another California governor in a different context.
NO! no. What? No… no? Nooooo … no! Noooooooh! I don’t even - I mean - what? How? I give up.
This isn’t beyond parody, this is *beyond *beyond parody. They’re just making shit up at this point.
Ah, lovely. Oklahoma state representative Sally Kern (R), thinks that homosexuality is a human wrong.
You just know she patted herself on the back for making such a clever play on words.
It’s not entirely clear that this would violate the Supremacy Clause.
As a recent citizen of Tennessee, I am not that surprised.
They REALLY hate Mr. Obama around these here parts.
No, I don’t think his comments must be meant as excusing or fantasizing about rape. He’s merely explaining why it’s common in the military. That doesn’t imply that he approves of it.
At the very least, he’s excusing it. It sounds very much like he’s making a “boys will be boys” argument.
I’m having a hard time reading "“Wouldn’t you love to have a group of 19-year-old girls under your control, day in, day out?” as anything but portraying military rape in a positive (for the rapist) fantasy light, whether from his own younger-self perspective or another 25-year-old. It is definitely sympathetic in tone, and not remotely prosecutorial. He is supposed to be defending the 19-year-old girl victims, not the assailants.
It is also creepy. Really, really creepy.
Well, it is primarily because “he ain’t our kind”.
I didn’t move here because it is a progressive community.
The place is beautiful and peaceful.
The land and the people I know are wonderful.
But, the folks who have lived here for generations are somewhat backwards.
It is something of a timewarp to drive into town and shop for groceries.
The supermarket is relatively modern, but the clientele? Less so.
It was only a decade ago that I first spotted a real live black couple shopping here.
Two of my close friends shopping with me (who happen to be black) noticed them first.
We debated whether we should say, “Hello” or just smile when we saw them.
We ended up saying “Hello” and gained a couple of new friends. They are from Indiana and apparently intend to retire here. Things have changed for the better since the 1990s but still, there is a strong residue of bigotry and racism remaining.
But, I am from the city and was raised as anti-racist as it was possible to be in Atlanta in the mid 20th century. I am a fish out of water. I am sure all the folks around here consider themselves to be good people who are just worried about somebody they don’t feel comfortable with being President.
And they vote.
Actually I must admit that watching that ad improved my image of him. Before watching it I would have thought he was a bigoted asshole, now I think he’s a bigoted asshole with a sense of humor. It was actually quite funny, which is hard to find in the right side of the aisle.
It’s possible that he’s not saying that he would like it, he’s saying the rapists like it. Doesn’t mean he approves of what they like. He’s explaining their state of mind.
You have to consider veracity. Is it that he’s simply explaining, or do you really believe that this guy, who is supposed to defend victims, is openly sympathizing with rapists and enying them? (Though reading all the crap in this thread has certainly made me realize that there are some real crazies out there who really do mean what they say, I’ll give you that.)
It is. He should choose his words better.
I think he’s explaining human nature, and why rape is so common in the military. He’s not sympathizing with it. He should have said it better though.
Fine, but his solution, intrinsic in his poorly stated thought, seems to be, “get those hot pieces of tail away from the strapping boys,” not, “get those boys to stop fucking raping people.”
Again, I don’t see that implication at all.
Right. In the same way that marital rape is “just human nature”. That’s the “boys will be boys” argument and even if it isn’t a full excuse it is minimizing the seriousness of the offense.
Plus, of course, if there’s one thing soldiers are supposed to have it’s a little goddamn self-discipline.