Bobby Jindal
..is an idiot... And a fucking LIAR.
He is 100% more honest than that whore Pelosi. :D
Who is he?
the first Indian (India) American to be a Gov of any state, in his case the State of LA. As well versed as our half-white President.
He is the governor of New Orleans (the first Indian, from India, I believe, voted into office). And he is saying, "Americans can do anything..." which we can, but he is referring to things like universal health care. IF "Americans" could solve the problem by themselves, the problem wouldn't be here. Corporate America doesn't allow it. He is so fucking simplistic and ideological it makes me wanna puke. And, he sounds he completely insincere. He actually said earlier this week he wouldn't accept federal money in the stimulus plan for extended unemployment benefits for the people in his state.
One of the few states to actually be gaining jobs.
I don't think I heard him say we were going to cure cancer this year. :lol2:
I don't think Obama said this year either mate. ;)
He actually said earlier this week he wouldn't accept federal money in the stimulus plan for extended unemployment benefits for the people in his state.
Quite a few states said that they would not accept some of the money from the stimulus package. They should be applauded. Have you read the details of their reasons. They are quite valid.
Quite a few states said that they would not accept some of the money from the stimulus package. They should be applauded. Have you read the details of their reasons. They are quite valid.
yes, they are all republican and they are NOT looking out for the best interest's of the people who elected them. They should look to Charlie Christ and Arnold for inspirations and TRUTH. Did you see them this weekend on Meet the Press and George Stephanopoulis?
I don't think Obama said this year either mate. ;)
He's just being being his usual self. Pay no attention.
I'm just stiring the pot. :)
I don't think Obama said this year either mate. ;)
Ok, why would anyone be so stupid to even let him include it in his speech. He obviously has no clue about cancer research or how money is doled out to conduct such research. Not to mention the state of the research on cancer in the US. What a frigging moron. leaving that one bit out would have increased the validity of his talking points by 100%.
yes, they are all republican and they are NOT looking out for the best interest's of the people who elected them. They should look to Charlie Christ and Arnold for inspirations and TRUTH. Did you see them this weekend on Meet the Press and George Stephanopoulis?
Uggg, I can't watch that idiot. Stephanopoulis is a tool.
Ok, why would anyone be so stupid to even let him include it in his speech. He obviously has no clue about cancer research or how money is doled out to conduct such research. Not to mention the state of the research on cancer in the US. What a frigging moron. leaving that one bit out would have increased the validity of his talking points by 100%.
The ONLY reason why cancer has not been cured, is because it is more profitable for insurance/pharamceutical companies to TREAT it. And yes, I do believe that. Anyone who knows anything about the fraud and greed of pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies knows that is probably the truth.
Uggg, I can't watch that idiot. Stephanopoulis is a tool.
And Meet the Press?
And you can't watch George, but you watch Bill O'Reilly? bwahahahahahaahahahahaa :lol2: That is HYSTERICAL dude!
The ONLY reason why cancer has not been cured, is because it is more profitable for insurance/pharamceutical companies to TREAT it. And yes, I do believe that. Anyone who knows anything about the fraud and greed of pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies knows that is probably the truth.
You are fucking killing me!!!!! :lol2:
And you think Nobama is going to fix this! :rolleyes:
And Meet the Press?
And you can't watch George, but you watch Bill O'Reilly? bwahahahahahaahahahahaa :lol2: That is HYSTERICAL dude!
Who said that? Not me. Only that I can't watch that guy who is a Clintonite getting rich off people like you that watch him.
I didn't say that. I never said that. PLEASE show me where I said anything NEAR that.
Who said that? Not me. Only that I can't watch that guy who is a Clintonite getting rich off people like you that watch him.
I just happened to catch that particular show. I don't normally watch it. But the interview was a good one, and just because he worked for Clinton doesn't make his show invalid.
I think he and Monica may have been fighting for the spot under the desk.
Quite a few states said that they would not accept some of the money from the stimulus package. They should be applauded. Have you read the details of their reasons. They are quite valid.
In fact, his reason for not accepting the unemployment insurance extension funds in the stimulus bill is completely baseless and purely political.
Which is why when Jindal was in Congress in 2005, he co-sponsored a bill with a provision to extend federal unemployment benefits to workers who lost jobs due to Katrina for up to one year.
Now that he wants to be a potential presidential candidate for 2012..its time to play to the base and oppose a provision in the stimulus bill that would extend unemployment benefits for up to 20 weeks.
Can you say hypocrite?
*Stepping back now to watch the MercSugar show*
*Stepping back now to watch the MercSugar show*
I saved you a seat and :corn:
I do enjoy live theater...but the plot is too predictable.
In fact, his reason for not accepting the unemployment insurance extension funds in the stimulus bill is completely baseless.
I don't believe you can back that up, since he is actually a Gov and you are a nameless faceless collection of 1's and 0's. But anyway SC and GA gov are talking about the same thing. The spending package for the states come with strings attached. Among those strings are the fact that they would be required to open up the pool of people who are actually eligible for aid and in the long run that would make the problem worse since the money being offered would not cover the long term costs. So yea, they are right. I would turn it down too and I hope our Gov does so.
I do enjoy live theater...but the plot is too predictable.
But you haven't seen the special guest star yet.... can you guess who it will be?
Merc...please point to the "strings attached" language to the unemployment insurance provisions in the stimulus bil. You can find the full text of the bill on
recovery.gov website.
Cite the section of the bill, please.
BTW, you can find Jindal's co-sponsorship of the bill to extend unemployment benefits for a year
here. and the provision in that bill... "“The President shall make such assistance available for 52 weeks after the date of the disaster declaration”...
Extending unemployment benefits for up to 52 weeks in '05 when Bush is in the White House - good
Extending unemployment benefits for up to 20 weeks in '09 when Obama is in the White House and you might want to challenge him in '12 - bad
Now stop interacting with the audience and go find that cite in the stimulus bill and read it aloud before the close of this act of the play!
But you haven't seen the special guest star yet.... can you guess who it will be?
Oh please let it be UG! I need another heaping helping of his worldly banter to brighten my day. lol
Merc...please point to the "strings attached" language to the unemployment insurance provisions in the stimulus bil. You can find the full text of the bill on recovery.gov website.
Cite the section of the bill, please.
BTW, you can find Jindal's co-sponsorship of the bill to extend unemployment benefits for a year here. and the provision in that bill... "“The President shall make such assistance available for 52 weeks after the date of the disaster declaration”...
Extending unemployment benefits for up to 52 weeks in '05 when Bush is in the White House - good
Extending unemployment benefits for up to 20 weeks in '09 when Obama is in the White House and you might want to challenge him in '12 - bad
Now stop interacting with the audience and go find that cite in the stimulus bill and read it aloud before the close of this act of the play!
Google it. There is only a 2 year window for the funds with strings attached. Every news source is carrying it. You don't have to believe it. Facts are facts, I hope we turn it down.
Google it. There is only a 2 year window for the funds with strings attached. Every news source is carrying it. You don't have to believe it. Facts are facts, I hope we turn it down.
SO you cant cite it. I got it.
What strings are attached?
Why is it you only believe what Republicans say and is carried in the media?
So point me to the "strings"
Keep looking you will find it. I found it after a few minutes. Your original source links are there.
Keep looking you will find it. I found it after a few minutes. Your original source links are there.
If you found it, show me the strings...or at least give me a page number.
Or perhaps you cant find the actual language in the bill that attaches any "strings" on the states accepting the funding.
Because there are no strings?
Here's ya damn strings!
:violin:
That help you any?
;)
Cool.....musical entertainment during intermission!
[INDENT]Extension of Emergency Unemployment Compensation. Through December 31, 2009, the bill continues the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, which provides up to 33 weeks of extended unemployment benefits to workers exhausting their regular benefits. This provision is estimated to cost $26.96 billion.
Increase in Unemployment Compensation Benefits. The bill increases unemployment weekly benefits by an additional $25 through 2009. This provision is estimated to cost $8.8 billion[/INDENT]
No strings.
The states return to the current unemployment formulas.
If the need remains as great as it is today, Obama and Congress can extend it again...either nationally or a state-by-state basis as needed.
In the same manner that Bush and Jindal did in '05 for Louisiana when he was in Congress.
Still, no strings.
Originally Posted by Redux
*Stepping back now to watch the MercSugar show*
I saved you a seat and :corn:
You should see us in bed... :D
:girlband: :whip:
no thanks - ewwww I think I just threw up a little in my mouth
The ONLY reason why cancer has not been cured, is because it is more profitable for insurance/pharamceutical companies to TREAT it..
Sugar, I agree with many things you have said, but I call bullshit on this statement. Yes, pharma is a greedy lot of backstabbing mofos, but I sincerely doubt cancer will be "cured" in our lifetimes, or possibly forever. Cancer is the end-state of nuclear breakdown; as long as DNA is damageable, life will die of
something, and that 'something' is cancer. (Assuming we gain the technology/understanding to fix everything else!)
Good news, Merc.
I found the "strings" this morning....it required quite a stretch of the provision, along with the most limited thinking by those Republican governors on how to make it work.
But then I would never accuse Republicans of being broad-minded in their thinking if they can find an ideological reason not to.
Good news, Merc.
I found the "strings" this morning....it required quite a stretch of the provision, along with the most limited thinking by those Republican governors on how to make it work.
Please share. I got too tired last night to keep looking.
I am curious if this is the same issue I was talking about in another thread. The one where the states would be on the hook to continue funding certain things after the stimulus money was exhausted.
Guess it was just BS since no one else saw, heard or seems to care.
Bobby Jindal did a better job than I would have. But I have to say that it was really weird. To cut from the packed house of Obama's speech to a guy talking to a camera in the hallway of his mansion just didn't work too well. I didn't watch his whole speech, I went to bed instead, but the first few minutes seemed a bit awkward and pointless.
I'd never seen him speak before, so maybe he is usually better, but I wasn't impressed.
The network I was watching had a short interview with Ron Emmanuel between the two speeches. I had never heard him speak before. He seemed fairly fake. He used each question to parrot the talking points Obama had just made, but without answering the question. I think it actually hurt Obama's impact on those points, because Obama sounded sincere when he said the stuff, but Emmanuel sounded like a politician making sure to covering the talking points. He should stay behind the scenes in the future. I'm sure he is talented in what he does, but it's not talking to the press. He's a phoney.
Obama's speech was pretty good. In the beginning, when he was just warming up, I was really distracted by Pelosi. She kept fidgeting, and looking around, and licking her lips, and playing with her program. Then either she calmed down, or Obama started to get into the meat of his speech, because I wasn't bugged by her any more.
The applause is crazy. I wish there was a source that would show who applauded for each item. I'm curious to know if the Republican Senators from Maine who voted with the Democrats on the Stimulus package stood up and clapped when that point was brought up. Or if they tried to straddle the fence by not publicly applauding the bill they supported.
Anyway, those are just some random thoughts.
Oh, and I had to chuckle when Obama basically said that the USA invented the car. He didn't actually say it, just very strongly implied it. Of course, it was Karl Benz who invented the car. He's German. I think Obama was hoping most Americans think Henry Ford invented the automobile. It's what I was taught in grade school after all.
The ONLY reason why cancer has not been cured, is because it is more profitable for insurance/pharamceutical companies to TREAT it. And yes, I do believe that. Anyone who knows anything about the fraud and greed of pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies knows that is probably the truth.
:rotflol:
when I hear things like that it always makes me think of this:
[youtube]_c6HsiixFS8[/youtube]
Ha ha related videos are related
[youtube]Y64CaF7GXRM[/youtube]
[youtube]qNN4tMWRpHo[/youtube]
snip~
Oh, and I had to chuckle when Obama basically said that the USA invented the car. He didn't actually say it, just very strongly implied it. Of course, it was Karl Benz who invented the car. He's German. I think Obama was hoping most Americans think Henry Ford invented the automobile. It's what I was taught in grade school after all.
Benz invented the automobile and his wealthy clients enjoyed scaring the horses of the hoi polloi. But America invented the car.;)
BTW Nu Awlins don't got a flapping Governor!
Please share. I got too tired last night to keep looking.
I am curious if this is the same issue I was talking about in another thread. The one where the states would be on the hook to continue funding certain things after the stimulus money was exhausted.
Guess it was just BS since no one else saw, heard or seems to care.
The "string" is a program in the bill that offers incentives to states willing to update their UC laws to include coverage for part-time workers (and some other low income jobs), currently not covered, but an increasingly large part of the unemployed in the country. Particularly, those who were hired to replace full-time workers then subsequently fired or layed off.
There is an additional $3 billion available and the complaint from a few governors is that the states would then be on the hook to continue to provide UC benefits to these part-time workers when the federal funds dry up.
It seems to me that the state can update their laws and include a sunset provision...."these part time workers are covered until such time as federal UC funds are no longer available."
He's Barack Obama without the oratory ability.
Oh, and I had to chuckle when Obama basically said that the USA invented the car. He didn't actually say it, just very strongly implied it. Of course, it was Karl Benz who invented the car. He's German. I think Obama was hoping most Americans think Henry Ford invented the automobile. It's what I was taught in grade school after all.
They teach all kinds of horrible lies in grade school.
:rotflol:
when I hear things like that it always makes me think of this:
[youtube]_c6HsiixFS8[/youtube]
That is awesome!
He's Barack Obama without the oratory ability.
I just saw him on TV last night.
I can't help thinking the R party went like this:
Crap, Obama is popular. Gotta criticise him. He's black. Hey, lets get a black guy to criticise him. Who have we got? [awkward pause]
JINDAL! He's ... well, he's dark-ish. Good enough. He'll do, push him forwards, give him this script to read. Hope his delivery improves.
As most of you have remarked, he seems very insincere, awkward, scripted.
I just wish his name didn't rhyme with brindle. :bolt:
Jindal is also being groomed for a run in 2012. (Though maybe less so now, I think even most Republicans agree he didn't come off that great.) He was considered a top contender for the VP slot before McCain chose Palin instead.
I don't know a single American of Indian descent that is proud of him. Personally, he makes me want to vomit.
Well there you go, proof he's a real politician. :haha:
I don't know a single American of Indian descent that is proud of him. Personally, he makes me want to vomit.
Purge baby, Purge
I don't know a single American of Indian descent that is proud of him. Personally, he makes me want to vomit.
That seems fair. I'm rarely proud of those whitey politicians myself.
Jindal is also being groomed for a run in 2012. (Though maybe less so now, I think even most Republicans agree he didn't come off that great.) He was considered a top contender for the VP slot before McCain chose Palin instead.
:lol:
McCain didn't choose Palin. He wanted Liebermann, but the party wasn't having it, so they dumped Palin on him.
The results were predictable, and more than a little hilarious.
1.) We
already covered that fallacy last November. But if you'd like to take tw's version of events over Newsweek, that's your prerogative.
2.) If you think Palin lost the election for McCain, then you must not be that well-acquainted with many Republicans. They liked her more than McCain, and still do. The economy crashing just before the election is what pushed Obama over the top.
2.) If you think Palin lost the election for McCain, then you must not be that well-acquainted with many Republicans. They liked her more than McCain, and still do. The economy crashing just before the election is what pushed Obama over the top.
You don't win the presidency by winning your base over. You should already have them. That dizzy twit from Alaska had pretty much everyone that isn't a conservative Christian uber-right wing republican either laughing, embarrassed, or horrified.
Palin cost McCain the middle.
EDIT: Also, Newsweek is a worthless rag.
You don't win the presidency by winning your base over. You should already have them.
Somehow Bush won using the exact opposite of your logic.
"Having" your base is not the same thing as inspiring them to get off their asses and vote for you. It's all about who shows up.
Somehow Bush won using the exact opposite of your logic.
"Having" your base is not the same thing as inspiring them to get off their asses and vote for you. It's all about who shows up.
It is the growing independents/middle of the roaders who determined the recent outcome and will likely have the greatest impact in the short term.
The Democrats have opened their tent and expanded their constituency....The Republicans have rallied around their base and shut the center out.
That seems fair. I'm rarely proud of those whitey politicians myself.
:lol2:
You don't win the presidency by winning your base over. You should already have them. That dizzy twit from Alaska had pretty much everyone that isn't a conservative Christian uber-right wing republican either laughing, embarrassed, or horrified.
Palin cost McCain the middle.
EDIT: Also, Newsweek is a worthless rag.
She sure lost him my vote.
2.) If you think Palin lost the election for McCain, then you must not be that well-acquainted with many Republicans. They liked her more than McCain, and still do.
That doesn't invalidate the "Palin lost the election" theory. Palin did round up the Republican base and brought many people who were not going to vote to the voting booth on November 4th but with the help of other factors, Palin really only hurt McCain when it came to swing voters. It may have evened out and maybe Palin actually did help McCain compared to other potential candidates, we can never know (maybe???), but there is no doubt that Palin did not help McCain in many respects.
If McCain did win, there would be much uneasiness on how she would do, even more then Obama IMO, and her further polarizing the political landscape, while not exclusively, did nothing to help the situation as well.
Somehow Bush won using the exact opposite of your logic.
No, he didn't. Bush won over a little more than half of the middle, both times.
It is the growing independents/middle of the roaders who determined the recent outcome and will likely have the greatest impact in the short term.
The Democrats have opened their tent and expanded their constituency....The Republicans have rallied around their base and shut the center out.
...And now the Dems are doing their level best to lose in 2010.
What the hell is wrong with them? They're acting like caricatures of 1980s Dems.
Remember that story Bobby Jindal told in his big speech Tuesday night -- about how during Katrina, he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with a local sheriff who was battling government red tape to try to rescue stranded victims?
Turns out it wasn't actually, you know, true.
But now, a Jindal spokeswoman has admitted to Politico that in reality, Jindal overheard Lee talking about the episode to someone else by phone "days later." The spokeswoman said she thought Lee, who died in 2007, was being interviewed about the incident at the time.
This is no minor difference. Jindal's presence in Lee's office during the crisis itself was a key element of the story's intended appeal, putting him at the center of the action during the maelstrom. Just as important, Jindal implied that his support for the sheriff helped ensure the rescue went ahead. But it turns out Jindal wasn't there at the key moment, and played no role in making the rescue happen.
There's a larger point here, though. The central anecdote of the GOP's prime-time response to President Obama's speech, intended to illustrate the threat of excessive government regulation, turns out to have been made up.
:rolleyes:
Gee another politician who lied - unfortunately a much too common occurrence. Who's next?
:lol:
McCain didn't choose Palin. He wanted Liebermann, but the party wasn't having it, so they dumped Palin on him.
The results were predictable, and more than a little hilarious.
From what I heard, the Neocon faction of the GOP had been trying to court Palin as far back as the summer of 2007. Whether that was because they wanted to run her more nationally, or just as part of their inter-conservative tussle with the Paleocons (Palin had been a Buchanan supporter, once) is still unclear, however.
Either way, the wannabe Philosopher-Kings don't look especially smart.
From what I heard, the Neocon faction of the GOP had been trying to court Palin as far back as the summer of 2007. Whether that was because they wanted to run her more nationally, or just as part of their inter-conservative tussle with the Paleocons (Palin had been a Buchanan supporter, once) is still unclear, however.
Either way, the wannabe Philosopher-Kings don't look especially smart.
I've never assumed that the current crop of republicans is particularly intelligent. More like 40-60 year old half-bright frat boys with inherited money.
Two words can ruin the Neocon pretension to superior intellect forever more.
"
Douglas Feith".
That sounds like a description of a bunch of bankers/stock brokers.
There can only be one!
\
Sugar, I agree with many things you have said, but I call bullshit on this statement. Yes, pharma is a greedy lot of backstabbing mofos, but I sincerely doubt cancer will be "cured" in our lifetimes, or possibly forever. Cancer is the end-state of nuclear breakdown; as long as DNA is damageable, life will die of something, and that 'something' is cancer. (Assuming we gain the technology/understanding to fix everything else!)
Maybe. But I think it's possible. We never come up with cures anymore, we only come up with treatments, which benfits drug companies. Hell the FDA and pharma cos have been trying to shut down vitamin and herbal companies
for years, because it cuts into their profit margin.
And I have to say, (another thought here), how can anyone say anything with a straight face against marijuana or other illegal drugs, when all we have on TV is commercials from pharmaceutical companies promoting
(pushing) drugs? They now make drugs to make other drugs more efficient. It is a racket, and a worse racket than the illegal drug trade, IMHO.
We never come up with cures anymore,
The only "cures" we have ever come up with are vaccinations and bacteriophages (pennicillin, etc...IOW, antibiotics).
New antibiotics are developed every year.
And I have to say, (another thought here), how can anyone say anything with a straight face against marijuana or other illegal drugs, when all we have on TV is commercials from pharmaceutical companies promoting (pushing) drugs? They now make drugs to make other drugs more efficient. It is a racket, and a worse racket than the illegal drug trade, IMHO.
You just made Nancy Reagan cry. :sniff:
New antibiotics are developed every year.
So what does that say about Bobby Jindal? That he is an inspiration for antibiotics or the reason antibiotics are necessary?
So what does that say about Bobby Jindal? That he is an inspiration for antibiotics or the reason antibiotics are necessary?
Yes.
The only "cures" we have ever come up with are vaccinations and bacteriophages (pennicillin, etc...IOW, antibiotics).
New antibiotics are developed every year.
We cured polio. Or maybe eradicated is a better word, at least in this country. And TB, although it is on the rise again. Leprosy. Small Pox. Should I continue? We don't even have a vaccine or cure for herpes.
And bacteria are becoming more resistant to all our antibiotics. Even syphilis and gonorrhea are on the rise again, and the new strains are very resistant to antibiotics, probably because ranchers and chicken farmers put them in the food supply, and doctor's write prescriptions for them when they shouldn't. But that is another topic.
We never come up with cures anymore, we only come up with treatments, which benfits drug companies.
We cured polio. Or maybe eradicated is a better word, at least in this country. And TB, although it is on the rise again. Leprosy. Small Pox. Should I continue? We don't even have a vaccine or cure for herpes.
Huh? Which is it? We do or don't?
We used to. We don't anymore. Which is why I said, it is more profitable for pharmaceutical cos to treat rather than cure, and why they no longer find cures, but treatments.
We cured polio. Or maybe eradicated is a better word, at least in this country.
It ain't gone til it's dead.
So far, we've wiped out smallpox. That's it. Leprosy is still around, though recent work with the old boogeyman drug Thalidomide is showing real promise in treatment.
TB is back. Not coming back...back. You can thank both parties hamstringing the INS for that one.
You get my point though, right? If we could eradicate a disease in THIS country, we should have been able to eradicate it in the world. And, we aren't eradicating anything anymore.
If we could eradicate a disease in THIS country, we should have been able to eradicate it in the world.
An exception: malaria.
A discussions about diseases should always differentiate between bacteria, virus, and Jindal.
An exception: malaria.
A discussions about diseases should always differentiate between bacteria, virus, and Jindal.
:lol: