heh...yeah I know him. Probably wanting a cig.

He does have a habit of crying on the floor of the House:

But he is such a fucking hypocrite when it comes to the old Republican House rules that, as part of the leadership, he helped implement as opposed to the new Democratic House rules that make him cry...its hard to take him seriously.

All the ladies in town who think they're somebody would swooooooon over Boehner, the men just kiss his butt. Ugh.

"I love you and I miss you." :lol2:

http://revver.com/video/903981/sen-b...dy-i-love-you/

.

Soccer. heh.

It's like a sport, only without men. Like Olympic Womens' Badminton.

We should have another new sport at the O games next time. Extreme bitterness.

Wow if that happens we could have a gold medalist in our midst.

I can do that. Dibs on team captain.

ahh... hell w/dat!

plus they're prolly some of our atheletes that could have been exposed to secondhand potsmoke.
Not to mention the whale penis episode.

However bitter, I enjoy your posts. Welcome to the Cellar.

Thank you.

And what the hell was all that nonsense about, anyway? Phelps is - by definition - the greatest athlete ever, and they get pissy because he ripped a bong?

WTF?

Just say no? How impolite. Just say no, thank you.

But I'd rather say yes, please pass the funz stuff. ;)

Mazda, who's using Phelps to sell their cars in China, had him make an apology to the Chinese people. That's it, all is forgiven, here's your million dollars, let's sell some cars. Fuck Kellogg's.

Agreed!

He's a kid, relatively. So he smoked some doobage...is that so wrong?

Actually it should be a promotional. Maybe he stomps the shit out of everyone else because they don't bump the bongo, eh?
RE: Kellogg's
LOFL... yep. I think they have someone who'll keep 'm crunchitized.
We need this dude on our swim team. Let's all send him some weed.
New thread alert!!!!!

~~~Cellar Weed Exchange~~~

Special K! Theyyyyyyyy're Gr...uh, what was I talking about?

I think there's a difference between the demographics for a car manufacturer and a breakfast cereal. I can understand Kellogs point of view here. Lots of kiddies eat cornflakes and Phelps is a role model.

You don't want your kids sucking a pipe after their bowl of cornies do you?...well do you???

Actually, considering the munchies, maybe it was a bad decision to dump him. Instead, they could have come up with a new slogan. Something like, "For the times when you just have to eat something!"

Heehee, I think I made the point earlier that they missed a great marketing connection with the munchies.

Now, about this new Cellar exchange...

So, of course, he has to stop being anything resembling an actual person, thus rendering him totally unbelievable.

My kids don't have a clue who he is. Now, if you ask them about the latest music video star, well, that's another story.

Oh, yeah. Or "Kellogs: Because stuffing your face with Doritos is gauche".

.Attachment 21892

My opinion is that sports stars get paid a lot of money and most of that comes only because they are loved by the public. You don't shit where the money's coming from. Yes you can have a normal life, but learn to be discreet and try not to get caught breaking the law, no matter how archaic that law might happen to be.

My kids know who he is and I suspect most kids in school know who he is. maybe yours are too young.

repeat Ali's sentiments

Ali:"My opinion is that sports stars get paid a lot of money and most of that comes only because they are loved by the public. You don't shit where the money's coming from. Yes you can have a normal life, but learn to be discreet and try not to get caught breaking the law, no matter how archaic that law might happen to be."

"My kids know who he is and I suspect most kids in school know who he is. maybe yours are too young."

No problem.
pssstt... you could have just read her post again.;)

After years of rigorous training, the Olympics, then a whirlwind of TV shows, interviews and being told do this/do that, he finally had a chance to relax with old friends.
:cry: Leave Michael Alone :cry:

Some great friends he has. lol

MICHAEL:

We love your stroke even though you smoke.

Your stroke is long, even with a bong


You swim like fish, even though you smoked a dish.


NP, man...people don't really care.

:lol:

Just to get back on topic....

Where's the President Obama who promised to unite us?

I'm not sure I get your point?

One conservative columnist at the NY Post who thinks Obama deserves most of the blame for the continued partisanship after one month....represents what? Public opinion?

You could have simply posted Limbaugh.

Obama--the grumblings?

Where are the grumblings coming from other than Republicans who are unwilling to budge from their rigid ideology at all (the stimulus plan MUST be mostly tax breaks!) Damn, you got 1/3 of the package in tax breaks - an accommodation by Obama.....(the Democrats are passing the burden on to our kids)....hypocrites...look at your own record and policies that contributed to the mess we're in before you start throwing stones.

All I have heard for the last few weeks is a lot of misrepresentations of the stimulus bill (the mouse, the mouse!) and lots whining when they don't get everything they want.

Suck it up...you're the minority. You have to give a little. In fact, you have to give alot to get a little. That's what it means to be the minority.

But I honestly don't believe the Republicans want to compromise or build consensus. I think they have chosen the strategy of putting all their eggs in the basket that if Obama fails, it will be to their advantage in 2010.

Maybe he should have just posted a poll.:D

Actually, said "rigid ideology" is better called adult thinking. Being sloppy about this drives inflation more powerfully than anything else: I'll predict that the Act will cause noticeable inflation at a greater rate.

Simply put, Government debt drives inflation, and the Government is going to create dollars out of nothing. Real antiinflationary measures mean retiring at least eight tenths of that debt. Libertarians like me consider that outside of genuine emergencies like prosecuting a war, there's really nothing a government does that necessitates borrowing money to cover anyway.

You cannot, however, absolve the Democrats of fiscal blame -- not while Barney Frank yet lives and whose record is one of mandating that financial institutions make those poorly secured loans rather than erring on the side of security; nor can you with the Democrats' record of doing things that declare their economic illiteracy. I've never encountered a display of sound, conservative, anti-deficit management by Democratic Administrations in all my fifty-two years. Clinton may possibly have approached it, some argue, but we'd've needed another ten years of peacetime to actually have achieved a paydown of the national debt or a genuine surplus.

Nah...you and Classic can keep posting your partisan editorials and claim they represent something resembling public opinion.

Adult thinking is not limited to one economic model...unless you are a rigid ideologue.

Another equally adult economic model is that government spending gets you out of deep recession and hundreds of thousands of job losses every month.

We tried the adult thinking of deregulation and supply side trickle down economics....and it that didnt work....in fact, it contributed to the problems we're now facing.

Why do you believe that one?! Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson to repair your thinking.

Name, if you can, one example of a government EVER ONCE ANYWHERE spending a nation into prosperity: public sector spending doesn't make prosperity -- it can protect prosperity generated elsewhere. An antelope's horns don't contribute to him fattening up or increasing bone and muscle, yet they cost him some energy and materials (resources) to make. But those horns not only attract mates, they stick a lion pretty good too. The antelope benefits, but the benefits should be correctly understood.

The New Deal was recently and authoritatively deconstructed, was it not? The Depression continued right through the New Deal, altogether unaffected -- though the public works projects of the time were indisputably helpful afterwards. Only the increase of production and employment caused by the Second World War, combined with not getting those factories and producers of the sinews of both war and wealth bombed or even hardly damaged (Port Chicago's dockside explosion being perhaps the loudest exception to the trend), ended the Great Depression.

The scales have long fallen from my eyes, Redux. Should you therefore remain blinded, not quite off your road to Damascus?

I'm more of a Keynesian.

Nice revisionist history on the New Deal.

The New Deal raised the GDP significantly between 32-37...until FDR slowed it down in 37 because of pressure from Republicans that it was creating deficits. Then the growth stopped until WW II.

The short term spending is to get out of the deep hole created by supply side economics and deregulation. It is not intended as a long term growth strategy but rather a short term fix to stabilize the economy.

Hey..im still waiting for you to respond to my post on your claim that Republicans have more integrity....but you went silent on that one.

And I'll just keep laughing at your polls and pointing out how weak of statistical significance they have among real number crunchers.

Cool !

I reckon the only thing worth doing is the longterm, and be damned to the short -- even the present batch of pols tell us "we didn't get into this overnight and we won't get out of it overnight." I see no example of spending into prosperity from anywhere or anywhen comes to mind.

Redux, dear, stick to the question at hand rather than hurriedly changing the subject. That doesn't work; only a moron will so continue having been advised of this, okay? The record speaks for itself: the Republicans think like adults. The Democrats need to. This is why no man of palpable sense supports them, until they wise up. Wisdom, in our Capitol, remains in too short supply.

UG...have you been drinking too much brandy again? ;)

UG...I'm not surprised you dont want to respond to links I posted on the Republican corruption of the 109th Congress (and the influence peddling of the K Street Crowd)...or the internal DOJ reports on illegal politicizing of the DoJ.

Adult thinking and behavior?

Keeps those blinders on.

I just might keep raising those issues every time you sling the "republicans think like adults" or have more "integrity" bullshit. :)

I understand your point here but you do realize that the one department criticized in the report is only One of Sixty-One Divisions in the DOJ. You are heaping the bad behavior in one department and basically punishing another 60 departments by your sensationalism over the improper activities of one. The DOJ is filled with good people who do good hard work for all the right reasons. Keep things in perspective will you so you don't sound like a mouth piece for MoveOnDotOrg. I am not criticizing the factual statements of the report, things were defiantly amiss in the organization. Those guys just happened to get caught IMHO.

http://www.usdoj.gov/02organizations/02_1.html

That’s what this thread is for – to post grumblings about Obama.
Who else do you think they are going to come from other than the R’s?

The R’s have a lot of culpability for their actions – AGREED!
Repeating the R’s mistakes will not help. Obama ran his campaign on “Change.” I’m still hopeful that this is what we are going to get.
Agreed. The R’s need to deal with it and stop whining. Whining isn’t going to accomplish anything.

I am not really blaming Obama as much as those involved in the congressional war that is taking place. This is where real change needs to take place. The D’s are doing what the R’s did when they were in power. Nothing has changed at all. The R’s are going to do NOTHING for the next two years and play everything off, as it was the D’s plans and programs. That is bullshit on both sides. I think the R's really believe that the public is stupid enough to believe that. Well good – then those idiots won’t get elected either. The party needs to be purged of those people anyway. They are delusional. The D's want some R's to sign on so that they can claim bipartisanship and not be solely responsible for the success or failure of Pelosi's plan. I think there is plenty of culpability on both sides. This is the same old shit - not change at all.

Additionally, I do not see a rebalancing in the 2010 elections where the R’s regain lost seats. If anything I think they will lose more. If Obama's programs don’t work the D’s still have the “We didn’t create this mess” or “It takes time” to respond with. Both of which are relatively reasonable.

I hope the natural cycle of the economy combined with whatever measures the Gov’t has done so far will enable that to happen.

That’s my grumble for the moment with a ray of sunshine - perhaps.

Lets see:

We have the former AG Gonzales facing possible obstruction of justice and perjury charges for lying to Congress about the firing of the US Attorneys. (link)

We have the former head of the Civil Rights Divisions action of politicizing the department as described in the above investigation, including blocking the work of hard working DoJ attorneys. (link)

W have several DoJ attorneys DoJ attorneys who may have "deliberately slanted their legal advice to provide the White House with the conclusions it wanted to justify torture." (link)

We have a former top aid to the AG who stated under oath that she violated the Civil Service Act as many as 40 times by basing hiring on political affiliation and a DOJ report found the same (link)

We have another internal investigation of the firing of the US attorneys that concluded that it severely damaged the credibility of the Department and raised doubts about the integrity of Department prosecutive decisions. (link)

I would say that is the worst politicization of the DoJ, the one department that is supposed to enforce the law and be above politics, in our lifetime.

I would say it is sensationalizing a few bad apples at the top. Their rot did not always trickle down. Only one department has had formal complaints, there are some others under investigation. So far no one has been charged. Most of the problems were in the Civil Rights Divsion as you point out or with the political appointment of Gonzales. The rest are speculative or under investigation. Don't accuse the whole department because of a few bad actors.

I am not accusing the whole department, I am accusing those "adult thinking" political appointees with "integrity" at the top.

Most wont be charge with a crime because their acts were not criminal. For the most part, with the exception of Gonzales' alleged perjury, they were violations of administrative law and department policies and procedures that results in firing. Most resigned before they could be fired. Others may face disbarment.

Every single member of the DOJ is an adult and capable of clear, concise, moral judgement.

I agree, but UG seems to be of the opinion that only Republicans are "adult thinking" and have "greater integrity". That was the point of my posts. But I dont expect to respond.

but I have to laugh at how you guys keep finding a way to excuse the actions of the Bush administration.

Speaking of the Justice Department....

From here

The good news is that she went from yearly contract to permanent. The bad news is that they have still not admitted guilt and paid her legal fees.

Whatever happened to Monica Goodling?

Don't lump me in with that thinking. I don't think that way. I make no excuses for Bush that I can't and don't relate to any previous administration, including but not limited to Demoncrats.

I would guess the question is did they sue for legal fees at the time of the original complaint? Or did she just bargin with them.

For a lighter recollection of Monica and the DoJ

She was a top deputy to Ashcroft when he was AG and was the one who reportedly ordered drapes to be placed over the partially nude statue of the Spirit of Justice in the Justice Department's Great Hall where he would hold press conferences.

The press would takes pics from an angle to show Ashcroft right below her breasts or so they were accused by Monica of doing it deliberately to embarrass stuffy old Ashcroft.

http://www.zpub.com/un/statue300ap.jpg

And then this came out after she had the statue covered.."I hide you, babe"

http://polisat.com/ashcroft/ihideyoubabe.html

In some ways, the "cover up" was very symbolic of the Bush DoJ.

I think John was just worried that people would be distracted trying to figure out which one was the bigger boob.;)

Once you find the rot, you assume the whole tree is bad until you prove otherwise.

Much to my shock and surprise, he turned out to be okay in the end...I am referring to when Gonzales and his flunky tried to get him to go along with illegal wiretapping and torture while he was whacked out from surgery.

Yeah, but once the decision was made after he stepped down, I didn't hear anything about him criticizing it.

I will give him props for having limits when noone else did.

Not his place, in his mind, I suppose. He was quitted, so he left.

Him, Russ Fiengold, Ron Paul, Chuck Hagel. That's about it.

Redux, that's because it's so hard to find adult thought among the common run of the Democrats. Once you've totted up Joe Lieberman, then who? It gets thin after that.

The stimulus is nothing other than a borrowing to cover the damage of bad borrowing, is it not? That's the overarching grounds for criticizing the stimulus bill. Doesn't sound like something to repose confidence in to me, yet remarkably large numbers of Democratic congresscritters are alllllllll for it. Somebody is NOT PAYING ATTENTION to the federal deficit, and that is the thing that debases the currency. But who's stopping the debasement of the currency?

Liebermann isn't a democrat.

And I was impressed with Fiengold's record, during the last 8 years of fucked up lawmaking.