Have you ever mongered in Argentina?
Printable View
Have you ever mongered in Argentina?
Did it just fly over my head, or were others also unaware that Black Shirt has become an ordained minister?
What's your angle Black Shirt? Living life tax free in Bangkok? Or did you create the Church of BS? If so it sounds like a great business model, you just get people to send you money. Your margins must be fantastic.
The Republicans are going Crazy.
Rushdrugbom still on Opiates, or what ever they were. Thank God he will be on less networks next Year.
Six or so marriages, the guy that hates women.
No Kids.
I think he is secret closet faggot.
[URL]http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/10/obama-castro-handshake/3967087/[/URL]
[URL]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/12/10/mccain-compares-obama-castro-handshake-to-chamberlain-hitler/[/URL]
McCain shook hands with Muammar Gaddafi. But Gaddafi was a good man of lighter color.
But that is a little White Mistake.
The problem is that Cuba is a great country for us Mongers to go to, but the Politicians do not want us to have Fun.
PS: I forgot to tell you I have been there and the Chicas are waiting for Us.
[QUOTE=Tiny12;437042]Did it just fly over my head, or were others also unaware that Black Shirt has become an ordained minister?
What's your angle Black Shirt? Living life tax free in Bangkok? Or did you create the Church of BS? If so it sounds like a great business model, you just get people to send you money. Your margins must be fantastic.[/QUOTE]Everything you claim is true. But first, I have to find some believers. And I have had to give up the hedonistic practice of going to massage joints! Desperation can lead to ingeniouty.
[QUOTE=Esten;437041][b]Hey Punter[/b]
Have you ever mongered in Argentina?[/QUOTE][B]Hey Esten[/B]
Have you ever been to plant earth?
Both question seem a bit odd being on this thread. However I find yours somewhat intriguing, so I will answer it. But before I answer I would like to know why you would ask me such a question?
[QUOTE=TatuHei;437033]Jonathan Turley cannot be characterized simply as a "liberal." He has a strong libertarian streak. For example, he takes the libertarian position on the Second Amendment. He tends to enjoy controversy, and he has been extremely critical of all recent presidents, regardless of party.[snip]
[/quote] If being critical of all recent Presidents makes you a libertarian than I must be one. I think most libertarians tend to fall in the “liberal” camp at least on some issue, especially social issue. But being a liberal or a libertarian doesn't take away from the validity of the Jonathan Turley statements.
While libertarians tend to be liberal on many issues todays Democrat party is not “liberal” it's progressive totalitarianism, (aka: nannyism) and that's a far cry from being “liberal”.
Now I know Investors Business Daily is not on the approved reading list so here's a little (“selected”) snip from the WSJ, (probably not on the approved reading list either.)
[QUOTE]President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government. [highlight]The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which advises the president on legal and constitutional issues, has repeatedly opined that the president may decline to enforce laws he believes are unconstitutional.[/highlight] But these opinions have always insisted that the president has no authority, as one such memo put it in 1990, to "refuse to enforce a statute he opposes for policy reasons." Attorneys general under Presidents Carter, Reagan, both Bushes and Clinton all agreed on this point. With the exception of Richard Nixon, whose refusals to spend money appropriated by Congress were struck down by the courts, no prior president has claimed the power to negate a law that is concededly constitutional.
[highlight]In 1998, the Supreme Court struck down a congressional grant of line-item veto authority to the president to cancel spending items in appropriations. The reason? The only constitutional power the president has to suspend or repeal statutes is to veto a bill or propose new legislation. Writing for the court in Clinton v. City of New York, Justice John Paul Stevens noted: "There is no provision in the Constitution that authorizes the president to enact, to amend, or to repeal statutes." The employer mandate in the Affordable Care Act contains no provision allowing the president to suspend, delay or repeal it. Section 1513(d) states in no uncertain terms that "The amendments made by this section shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013." [/highlight][/quote] Does Obama think ObamaCare is unconstitutional, is he seeking to have it repealed?
[QUOTE=TatuHei;437033]The other front-page tactic of IBD is to take a fact and bend it every which way it can to make an anti-Obama statement. IBD is very worried that the bill it detests won't be implemented on schedule. How's that? It might make some sense for a Jonathan Turley, who likes the ACA, to complain about a delay in implementation. However, no one on the right seems to see that it is a bit of a paradox to be upset about a delay in something bad. "Captain, I hereby object that this ship is sinking so slowly.
The fact is that Presidents of both parties for the last 250 years have sometimes delayed the implementation of legislation. G. W. Bush took it a step beyond that by making an unprecedented number of signing ceremonies in which he said he simply wasn't going to implement parts of the legislation at all. Not a delay, a total refusal. This is a matter of record.[/quote] I think you miss the point IBD was making, the problem is not that it was delayed, the problem is Obama overstepped his authority. While it's true that other Presidents have refused to enforce legislation they did so on the ground of Constitutionality. Under the Constitution, if the President thinks a part of a bill to be unconstitutional, then he should veto. It is true that Presidents of both parties have refused to enforce what they thought were unconstitutional laws, including laws they signed, again on ground of Constitutionality. In my opinion Bush showed disregard for the Constitution but at least he claimed he was doing it on the ground of constitutionality and there was pushback on Bush for his actions. I don't think Obama can make the Constitutional claim and that makes his actions totally different from the others in the past and unconstitutional. IMHO
“Even some Democrats were also dismayed by the White House’s actions. Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and an author of the health law, questioned whether Mr. Obama had the authority to unilaterally delay the employer mandate. “This was the law. How can they change the law?” he asked.”
There is only one legitimate reason not to enforce a law and that's the Constitution. Even if past Presidents wrongly refused to enforce laws it doesn’t justify Obamas failure to enforce the law. I was taught as a wee lad that two wrongs do not equal a right, but they may not teach such thing in government schools today.
[QUOTE=Esten;437040]Exactly. IBD is another trashy, right-wing propaganda media outlet, like Breitbart, Newsmax, HotAir, Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh.[/QUOTE]I love it! You contrast a handful of conservative media outlets to a mountain of liberal media outlets and then declare parity.
[B][size=3]Obama Gets PolitiFact's 'Lie Of The Year' Prize For Healthcare Claims[/B][/size]
Better luck next year Esten.
[QUOTE=Punter127;437072][B]Obama Gets PolitiFact's 'Lie Of The Year' Prize For Healthcare Claims[/B][/QUOTE]We knew we could count on you to post this and continue your political agenda, because that's all you do on this board.
[B]ROFLMAO.[/B]
[QUOTE=Esten;437073]We knew we could count on you to post this and continue your political agenda, because that's all you do on this board.[/QUOTE]No doubt your an expert on political agendas. This is a political thread you know.
BTW.
[QUOTE][QUOTE=Esten;437041]Have you ever mongered in Argentina?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Punter127;437045][B]Hey Esten[/B]
Have you ever been to plant earth?
Both question seem a bit odd being on this thread. However I find yours somewhat intriguing, so I will answer it. But before I answer I would like to know why you would ask me such a question?[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]Sorry for the typo with the word planet, but I'm still waiting for your reply.
[QUOTE=Esten;437073]We knew we could count on you to post this and continue your political agenda, because that's all you do on this board.[/QUOTE]Look who's talking!
[QUOTE=Punter 127;437072][B][size=3]Obama Gets PolitiFact's 'Lie Of The Year' Prize For Healthcare Claims[/B][/size][/QUOTE][i]"Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it."[/i]
George Constanza
Imagine how constructive this debate could be if one looked at the merits of each others argument instead of wasting time with repetitive character assassination. Common ground & common sense makes history.
Imagine talking about a political concept in a thoughtful way, without labels or parties, just asserting common sense. Perhaps were all closer than we think.
It was supposed to be a three day event.
But on CSPAN I saw about 10 people in the room.
What happened to the rest of the Republicans?
Some of you Repubs Blow Hearts should have helped him out.
Why weren't you there?
[URL]http://wfpl.org/post/senator-mitch-mcconnell-democrats-will-regret-detonating-nuclear-option-2014[/URL]
[URL]http://kosu.org/2013/12/senate-takes-a-break-after-48-hour-debate/[/URL]
[url]http://c-spanvideo.org/program/SenateSession5368[/url]
48 hours, it looked like 6 hours.
Bangkok Post, December 15,2013 (selected).
"An estimated 400 workers went on a rampage on Dec. 6 in a district known as Little India, injuring 39 people including police officers, and destroying 25 vehicles. The riot--the first in more than 40 years in the country-- erupted after an Indian man was killed by a bus. Singapore has a population of 5.4 million but only 3.64 million are citizens and permanent residents".
This came about only about 10 days after Pope Francis made these following statements. Washington Post, November 26,2013. By Aaron Blake.
"Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and discarded. We have created a disposal culture which is now spreading. It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression but something new. Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society's underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised--they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the exploited, but the outcast, the leftovers".
He then went on to say, "When a society--whether local, national or global--is willing to leave a part of itself on the fringes, no political programmes or resources spent on law enforcement or surveillance systems can indefinitely guarantee tranquility".
Take heed. Oh, and you don't have to go on about how the Catholic Church is the greatest exploiter of them all. We already know that. We can learn from the past, but history is being invented every day.
[QUOTE=Jackson;437078]Look who's talking![/QUOTE]Ahh, but there's an important distinction. Many people who post in this thread also share information on mongering in Argentina. In my case I have certainly contributed. Then, there are those who mostly post political attacks. Punter127 being the most notorious in this category. It appears this is all he does, with zero contribution to the purpose of the board.
I remember when Jax once told me at the AP House (in a friendly manner), "Just remember what the purpose of the board is".
LOL !