My God, you are an idiot.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Really? Obama picking the date of a GOP debate isn't cynical enough to deserve an equally cynical response?

Really? Is there anyone who is going to watch the GOP debate (apart from reporters who get paid for it) who wants to watch Obama? Truly, that is the null set.

eta: Also, the idea that Obama is somehow advantaged if no one watches the GOP debate is completely wrong. His re-election may hinge on persuading people that the nominee is from the lunatic fringe. He should be sending every voter a DVD with the GOP debates on it.

Fuck both of them. The more I watch them maneuver, the more I think they make a perfect couple. At this point, the only end game the two of them give a fuck about is self-preservation.

I know "a pox on both houses" is your default setting, but (a) Obama is the President, (b) he raised the date with Boehner's office beforehand and they didn't object, and (c) no Speaker has ever said this to a President before.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Really? Is there anyone who is going to watch the GOP debate (apart from reporters who get paid for it) who wants to watch Obama? Truly, that is the null set.

Yes

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

I believe you've been told that this is wrong on more than one occasion.

Congressional level or above, control of $$$? No way any of these simps had control of dollars. Oh, beg your pardon, "you simps."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

A few years ago, I showed you that your notion that I was a slip-and-fall lawyer in West Bumfuck was idiotic (or, pure Hankness).

So now you pretend that you know where I went to college and what I studied? What next -- you going to claim that I went to Bob's Elementary School and Tackle Shop?

I apologize. Let's have a deep conversation. What Australopithecine lineage did your college professor believe ended up merging into the Homos?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Yes

I want to watch neither, so I guess I'm projecting.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I want to watch neither, so I guess I'm projecting.

2. You shouldn't trouble yourself to form your own opinions. What blogs will you read to inform you how you should feel about the two events?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

2. You shouldn't trouble yourself to form your own opinions. What blogs will you read to inform you how you should feel about the two events?

I don't expect either event to matter much to anyone, and if something happens that turns out to be important I'm sure I can catch it later on video.

eta: Not that you really care, but I look at blogs less and less and rely on my Twitter feed more and more. I think Twitter is awesome.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I don't expect either event to matter much to anyone, and if something happens that turns out to be important I'm sure I can catch it later on video.

eta: Not that you really care, but I look at blogs less and less and rely on my Twitter feed more and more. I think Twitter is awesome.

Twitter is different from blogs how?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Twitter is different from blogs how?

Seriously?

My Twitter feed aggregates hundreds of accounts, some of which are traditional news organizations, academic and professional journals, industry sources, bloggers, and friends. Many of them retweet stuff from other sources as well.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Seriously?

My Twitter feed aggregates hundreds of accounts, some of which are traditional news organizations, academic and professional journals, industry sources, bloggers, and friends. Many of them retweet stuff from other sources as well.

but ultimately you are been fed things to read. In a sense before you at least chose the blogs you read, now others even control that?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

BREAKING -- John Boehner is an asshole.

Boy, this rope-a-dope nonsense never gets old.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

but ultimately you are been fed things to read. In a sense before you at least chose the blogs you read, now others even control that?

No. I choose who to follow. That's the point.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

No. I choose who to follow. That's the point.

were you forced to read certain blogs, ala Robot Chicken?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This is a dumb debate, but I can't help myself: Eisenhower?

Now, to address your flawed argument... Clinton would have presided over a disastrous economy had the Internet not come along. And as he was leaving, the economy was sliding into a recession. A recession you probably think should have been Al Gore's.

And why did Clinton not fuck up a good economy with which he was gifted? Because he wasn't really a Democrat. He was what would have been called a Rockefeller Republican years ago (before the GOP merged with the Jesus Crazies and Randians).

Carter oversaw a four year slide and, had he been re-elected, would have seen four more. LBJ? Nothing but growth there, right?

It's dumb to fixate on parties. Stop doing it. It's annoying and I know you know better, which makes it all the more irritating.

No, Garfield. In office about 6 whole recession free months. It was a long, long time ago.

Clinton did something truly unique in the history any of us can remember - he balanced a budget. Yes, the Rs helped and gridlock helped, but, still, hasn't every other president (including Reagan) solved gridlock with a mutual spend-fest, and doesn't resisting that count for something?

I don't buy the idea that the internet was the salvation of the 90s economy. I think Japanese stupidity was. By causing their economy to stagnate, they let us rebuild some of the basic industries that otherwise would have just disappeared. Hank has Japan to thank for Detroit's continued existence.

Party does matter; Ike was able to do things for civil rights no Democrat could have done at the time, and Clinton was able to do something on the budget no R could have done at the time. Had the Rs had the Presidency and the House, you would have seen a spendfest on their issues - as we did with Bush.

[sgtclub]

I'm now convinced Santorum is by far the smartest R candidate out there.