The Goat Pen

But then you also ignored ...


..a contrived/partisan re-call that never had a chance? Sure, the unions were pissed, too bad their whining or the dem legislators fleeing the state was just a big embarrassment. But good for Wisconsin changing course, electing a tough, responsible governor that kept them from being the next Detroit.

Texas got it right.

Wendy Davis had some nerve running for Governor. I mean here is a woman whose husband (her second) gets her into Harvard Law School, he pays for it (pays all her expenses living in Massachusetts while he lives and works in Texas), and just one day after he pays off the very last one of her law school loans, she divorces him. If there is a working text book definition of the word C-V-N-T, one could argue that Wendy Davis perfectly describes that word.

I'm glad she got her ass kicked. She is not fit to live in such a great state, let alone run it. Shame on her.

C-V-N-T = Charming Virgin Non-Teaser?

Toemeesleather wrote:

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

Toemeesleather wrote:Walker did it one of the bluest states, not that it matters, with tons of DNC money flowing against him. But it does reveal certain math aptitudes around here.

Not that Walker isn't a winner and an impressive politician, but Wisconsin ain't exactly one of the bluest states. Republicans served as Governor there from 1987-2003. Remember Tommy Thompson?

Bluer States: Hawaii, Washington, California, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, & Maryland. Arguably Pennsylvania and Oregon too.

Admittedly though there is a prgressive streak in the state's politics that goes back to Robert La Follette

...and the last time Wisconsin electoral votes went to a Republican was Reagan....and the point remains, comparing margins of victory of a dem winning a senate seat in Illinois to a repub winning the governor in Wisconsin(and getting re-elected) ain't apples to apples....unless you're a warmist or a gobbler.

Republicans won the election for Governor of Wisconsin in 1964, 1966, 1968, 1978, 1986, 1990, 1994, and 1998...so I'm failing to see how Walker is like some sort of pioneer in the state or whatever it is exactly that you're claiming.

innocentbystander wrote:Texas got it right.

Wendy Davis had some nerve running for Governor. I mean here is a woman whose husband (her second) gets her into Harvard Law School, he pays for it (pays all her expenses living in Massachusetts while he lives and works in Texas), and just one day after he pays off the very last one of her law school loans, she divorces him. If there is a working text book definition of the word C-V-N-T, one could argue that Wendy Davis perfectly describes that word.

I'm glad she got her ass kicked. She is not fit to live in such a great state, let alone run it. Shame on her.

He speaks very highly of her, FWIW, and apparently had the $$$ to spare.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... -governor/

Poor ti k. Imhear that the result of the election means the partiex beed to rork togeathet. Ala read.

aTm wrote:
Is he an Uncle Tim?

I really, really, really struggled to keep from calling him that.

How bout uppity. Egro?

10ac wrote:Poor ti k. Imhear that the result of the election means the partiex beed to rork togeathet. Ala read.

aTm wrote:
Is he an Uncle Tim?

I really, really, really struggled to keep from calling him that.

How bout uppity. Egro?

That's MY title.

..some sort of pioneer in the state or whatever it is exactly that you're claiming...

Not claiming anything about being a pioneer, simply stating that a Repub won (no matter the margin) in a blue (ok, not the bluest, I should have said bluer) state....our local math genius was comparing Walker's vote total to W's win as governor in a RED state and Obola's win as senator in a BLUE state....same local math genius poses that in order for Walker to be viable Prez candidate he should have won some 65-70% of the vote in Wisky. (like W and Obola did)

Judging from his typing, I think 10ac was celebrating with a little Tennessee tranquilizer.

Another good jobs report. Guessing the R's will start to take credit for these rather than denouncing them all as a pack of lies.

[img2]http://moneymorning.com/images3/SSDI-chart-1.png[/img2]


[img2]http://www.trivisonno.com/wp-content/up ... Yearly.jpg[/img2]



Great news on unemployment! Question....when will the slope of the above graphs start to match the slope of the unemployment graph? Or.....should they match, I'm old school and never took community organizer econ. Is this what is known nowadays as the new norm?

Wow, look at that disability trend! Fucking Obama! What has he started?!?!?!

Food stamps have been on the rise since 2001! Fucking Obama and his community organizing!!

Johnette's Daddy wrote:

innocentbystander wrote:Texas got it right.

Wendy Davis had some nerve running for Governor. I mean here is a woman whose husband (her second) gets her into Harvard Law School, he pays for it (pays all her expenses living in Massachusetts while he lives and works in Texas), and just one day after he pays off the very last one of her law school loans, she divorces him. If there is a working text book definition of the word C-V-N-T, one could argue that Wendy Davis perfectly describes that word.

I'm glad she got her ass kicked. She is not fit to live in such a great state, let alone run it. Shame on her.

He speaks very highly of her, FWIW, and apparently had the $$$ to spare.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... -governor/

(shrugs shoulders)

I'm sure the DNC paid him money to say those things about the ex-wife who frivorced him, at least enough bribe to restore his 401K he has to plunder to make her whole while at Harvard. its either that or he is a mangina-white-knight beta male and I feel nothing but pity for him.

And actually (Pastor JD) you know as well as I do that he committed adultry for marrying her in the first place (Luke 16:18), so maybe her taking him to the cleaners was punishment for violating God's Law? Either way, you (of all people) should not be making excuses for her. Shame on her for what she so selfishly did and shame on you JD for not calling her out for the whore that she is.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:Food stamps have been on the rise since 2001! Fucking Obama and his community organizing!!

So, in your opinion the slope from 2001-2008 is the same as 2009-2013. Interesting....whatever, like I said I'm old school. What I was taught is that these were transfer payments, now we hear they are investing in people and communities...guess I need to get w/the times.

Toemeesleather wrote:

Dr. Strangelove wrote:Food stamps have been on the rise since 2001! Fucking Obama and his community organizing!!

So, in your opinion the slope from 2001-2008 is the same as 2009-2013. Interesting....whatever, like I said I'm old school. What I was taught is that these were transfer payments, now we hear they are investing in people and communities...guess I need to get w/the times.

Keep preaching it Toem! They are transfer payments. And as long as they go up (disability and food stamps) our country is going down....

....it is not entirely President Obama's fault, but his policies make him a big part of the problem.

“Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”
― George Orwell, 1984

C-Span Caller Live: Republicans Hate that N---er Obama

http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture ... content%26

'Anthony from San Diego' used the racial slur on live television when trying to explain how the Republican party didn't need to overreach after their midterm election victory.

A live debate Thursday on C-SPAN's Washington Journal turned nasty when a caller identifying himself as a California Republican called President Obama the N-word, the New york Daily News notes.

During the open phone call portion of the show, Anthony from San Diego--as he identified himself--told his fellow Republicans not to rest on their midterm election victory.

"I would just like to say, that the Republicans -- and I'm a Republican -- please do not overreach," the caller said. "I know they're going to overreach but I'm telling you, if you advocate for the repeal of Obamacare and you get too extreme, then Hillary Clinton will be elected President in 2016."

"This is about race," the caller noted.

"The Republicans hate that n----r Obama."

C-SPAN host Steve Scully stopped the caller and quickly apologized to viewers.

"Okay, I'm gonna stop you there," Scully said. "We're not gonna use that kind of language."

"You can certainly make your point, but you cross the line when you use language like that," he added. "And so to our viewers and listeners, I want to apologize."

A representative for C-SPAN told the New York Daily News "that the network does not use a delay for calls into their programs."

"The live, town-hall format of our call-ins can occasionally give rise to calls that contain factual inaccuracies or distasteful language," C-SPAN wrote on their website.

"Fact-checking for live viewer calls is impractical, something of the nature of the beast. Regarding distasteful language: When a caller makes ad hominem attacks or uses indecent language or obviously racist language, program hosts are certainly permitted to step in. Given that this involves quick judgment during a live television production, it's an imperfect process. The network does not endorse any comments made by our callers, or, for that matter, our guests," the description added.

The Daily News notes that the C-SPAN website still had the original version of the call including the unedited version of the caller's racial slur against the president.

innocentbystander wrote:And actually (Pastor JD) you know as well as I do that he committed adultry for marrying her in the first place (Luke 16:18), so maybe her taking him to the cleaners was punishment for violating God's Law? Either way, you (of all people) should not be making excuses for her. Shame on her for what she so selfishly did and shame on you JD for not calling her out for the whore that she is.

Maybe she divorced her 1st husband under Matthew 19:9 or Mark 5:32.

In any event - and from a theological standpoint - I no longer believe that a merciful God requires people to serve a life sentence for a poor choice they made at an age when they were not capable of making better ones. She married at 17 and separated at 19. The highest percentage of divorces occur in women who marry at age 18 or earlier. I know that had I married at age 18 or 19, I would have been an awful husband, and none of the girls I was involved with would have been able to put up with me as a husband.

We can move this to the theology hut, but let me sum up by saying this is another reason why we are now under Romans 7:6.

Johnette's Daddy wrote:We can move this to the theology hut

I left a comment for you there.... pastor (or is it, prophet?)