1 AK-47%  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:18:42pm

Never had the Sitzfleisch to sit through a TED talk...

2 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:22:06pm

re: #1 AK-47%

Never had the Sitzfleisch to sit through a TED talk...

I could never figure out which of them was Ted.
/

3 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:23:34pm

Image: tumblr_mc0ndhIEvu1rj8amio1_1280.jpg

4 AK-47%  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:24:23pm

re: #2 Kragar

I could never figure out which of them was Ted.
/

Koppel?

5 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:24:27pm

Not sure how I stumbled onto this Twitter feed, but here's some industrial strength lunacy:

@Letichiarose

Profile:

The Antichrist don't realize that the same Protective God of Blood River is still the same God protecting our Christian Boere Nation today.

6 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:25:36pm

re: #5 Charles Johnson

Not sure how I stumbled onto this Twitter feed, but here's some industrial strength lunacy:

@Letichiarose

Profile:

What?

7 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:27:22pm

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE! READ A NONFICTION BOOK FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

8 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:27:40pm

re: #5 Charles Johnson

Not sure how I stumbled onto this Twitter feed, but here's some industrial strength lunacy:

@Letichiarose

Profile:

"Boere" "Blood River" It's from an Afrikaaner.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

9 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:28:06pm

re: #7 Kragar

[Embedded content]

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE! READ A NONFICTION BOOK FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

She's got jesus in her eye.

10 AK-47%  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:28:13pm

re: #5 Charles Johnson

Not sure how I stumbled onto this Twitter feed, but here's some industrial strength lunacy:

@Letichiarose

Profile:

This is the kind of shit you could hear most any night of the week if you hung out at the right bar, now it is all over the Intertubes for us to amaze at.

Thanks for reminding me again why i do not Twitter

11 Hercules Grytpype-Thynne  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:28:37pm

re: #7 Kragar

[Embedded content]

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE! READ A NONFICTION BOOK FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

Because we all know there's no blind book-following behind Creation Science.

12 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:28:53pm

re: #10 AK-47%

This is the kind of shit you could hear most any night of the week if you hung out at the right bar, now it is all over the Intertubes for us to amaze at.

Thanks for reminding me again why i do not Twitter

The problem with Twitter is its full of twits.

13 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:29:15pm

re: #8 Decatur Deb

"Boere" "Blood River" It's from an Arfikaaner.

Yes, some kind of bizarre South African racist Christian Identity type.

14 AK-47%  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:29:37pm

Science is all about blindly following what we are indocrinated in as children, remember? Religion is about critical thinking and demanding objective proof.

And I am a jelly doughnut...do I not bleed when you squeeze me?

15 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:29:44pm

Gotta love someone condemning others for blinding teaching from a book while promoting creationism. No cognitive dissonance there whatsoever. None.

16 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:30:19pm

re: #11 Hercules Grytpype-Thynne

Because we all know there's no blind book-following behind Creation Science.

What is there to teach?

Sky Uncle waves hands, makes Earth and animals and people. End.

Maybe she just wants to go home early.

17 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:31:41pm

re: #13 Charles Johnson

Yes, some kind of bizarre South African racist Christian Identity type.

Just think of the Internet cults still out there to be discovered...

18 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:31:58pm

re: #16 erik_t

What is there to teach?

Sky Uncle waves hands, makes Earth and animals and people. End.

Maybe she just wants to go home early.

It would be easier to study you have to admit.

19 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:32:00pm

Breaking: Dennis Miller endorses Mitt Rom.... zzZZZzzz.....

20 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:32:38pm

I find your lack of understanding basic science disturbing.

21 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:33:19pm

re: #19 Charles Johnson

Breaking: Dennis Miller endorses Mitt Rom.... zzZZZzzz.....

1. Who?

2. link

He is a regular political commentator on Fox News Channel's The O'Reilly Factor in a segment called "Miller Time", and previously appeared on the network's Hannity & Colmes in a segment called "Real Free Speech."

Well, I will attempt to contain my surprise.

22 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:33:39pm

re: #19 Charles Johnson

Breaking: Dennis Miller endorses Mitt Rom.... zzZZZzzz.....

Well, that will definitely swing that crucial block of undecided Dennis Miller fans.

23 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:35:46pm

"Hmm, I've sat thru 10 months of primaries, conventions, debates and polls, but I just can't make up my mind... wait, who does Dennis Miller endorse?"

24 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:37:30pm

re: #22 Kragar

Well, that will definitely swing that crucial block of undecided Dennis Miller fans.

Both of them?

25 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:38:09pm

re: #11 Hercules Grytpype-Thynne

Because we all know there's no blind book-following behind Creation Science.

or napkins!

26 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:39:21pm

Megyn Kelly scolds ‘focus group’ member who refused to bash Candy Crowley

Fox News host Megyn Kelly became agitated on Wednesday after a member of her “focus group” noted that the panel had only been assembled to criticize debate moderator Candy Crowley because of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s poor performance.
...
But Kelly’s “focus group” hit a snag when Bernard Whitman, a Democratic pollster, pointed out that the premise of the entire panel was to cover for Romney’s “poor performance” at the debate.

“Candy Crowley did a great job pushing back against a bully in Mitt Romney,” Whitman noted. “It’s sort of amazing that in the face of a relatively poor performance by Romney, all we’re talking about is the moderator, Candy Crowley. That sort of underscores…”

“Don’t start with me,” Kelly interrupted, scolding Whitman. “This is a two-hour program, this is what this panel is focused on. We got a lot of other things in this show.”

27 Charleston Chew  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:39:32pm

re: #5 Charles Johnson

Not sure how I stumbled onto this Twitter feed, but here's some industrial strength lunacy:

@Letichiarose

Profile:

Whenever I read something like that on the web, in my head I hear an announcer voice saying, "This sentence brought to you by The Internet."

28 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:40:40pm

re: #26 Kragar

Megyn Kelly scolds ‘focus group’ member who refused to bash Candy Crowley

How dare the mean lady running the show interrupted the man trying to make a point!

Wait, what?

29 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:40:44pm

re: #26 Kragar

Megyn Kelly scolds ‘focus group’ member who refused to bash Candy Crowley

because they are all brainwashed liberal drones who refuse to think for themselves and repeat everything they hear on Fox News?

30 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:43:22pm

re: #26 Kragar

Megyn Kelly scolds ‘focus group’ member who refused to bash Candy Crowley

I swear Fox, just do us and yourselves a fucking favor and declare yourselves a right wing propaganda arm. Stop with even the pretense that you're trying to be impartial. It insults all of our intelligence.

31 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:44:15pm

Fischer: Getting cut off by CNN host was "Journalistic Terrorism"

Seriously? What a dickweed.

32 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:46:24pm

re: #31 Kragar

Fischer: Getting cut off by CNN host was "Journalistic Terrorism"

Seriously? What a dickweed.

And the winner of the "utter lack of perspective" award goes to Bryan Fischer. Congratulations Bryan, your prize, a gay marriage Holocaust.//

33 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:47:03pm

The Crowley outrage affirms republicans dog-like obedience to the talking points they are fed. Brainless really.

34 dragonfire1981  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:48:51pm

re: #31 Kragar

Fischer: Getting cut off by CNN host was "Journalistic Terrorism"

Seriously? What a dickweed.

I'm sure he meant to say "Terror" instead.

35 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:49:16pm

How Do You Solve a Problem Like Bryan Fischer?

A New York Times story this week highlighted a challenge facing journalists covering the activities of the religious right movement. How do you cover an extremist like the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer?

Fischer is a primary spokesperson for the American Family Association. His radio show is a continuously erupting volcano of bigotry, bile and bullying. He shows the utter lack of concern for the truth that characterizes the Obama-hating right wing. He defines irresponsible extremism in the public arena. Fischer does not deserve to be treated as a credible spokesperson. In a more reasonable world, he would simply be ignored.

Unfortunately, though, in the world we live in, Fischer and the American Family Association sometimes do real harm, in ways that merit news coverage.

36 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:50:48pm

re: #31 Kragar

Fischer: Getting cut off by CNN host was "Journalistic Terrorism"

Seriously? What a dickweed.

It wasn't Journalistic Terrorism, but it was an Act of Journalistic Terror.

37 Daniel Ballard  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:52:37pm

re: #36 erik_t

Good one.

38 sagehen  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:53:34pm

Tomorrow night is the Al Smith dinner, Obama and Romney keynote speakers. They both have to try to be funny...

(on C-Span)

39 Kragar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:55:49pm

re: #38 sagehen

Tomorrow night is the Al Smith dinner, Obama and Romney keynote speakers. They both have to try to be funny...

(on C-Span)

Romney: "And he said rectum, damn near killed him, but the President didn't call it an act of terror for another 2 weeks!"

40 Gretchen G.Tiger  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:56:37pm

Have a great afternoon all!

41 William Barnett-Lewis  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:58:51pm

re: #10 AK-47%

Thanks for reminding me again why i do not Twitter

This. Oh, so very much this.

42 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 2:59:14pm

Just hit me that I won't be watching Monday night's debate since I do trivia that night. I think Obama will do really well at that one. Foreign policy is I think where he's able to show the difference between him and Romney the most effectively. Romney when he's talking foreign policy just sounds so eager to sound tough rather than to add actual substance. But I guess that's not shocking if you look at the fact that Bolton's advising him.Bollton, who pals around with Pam Geller.

43 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:02:25pm

re: #41 William Barnett-Lewis

This. Oh, so very much this.

I was in that camp, but it really is good for getting breaking news (especially about the election), also good for the jokes. I was really trying not to join, and was just manually following a few accounts, and now I'm sadly hooked.

44 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:06:04pm

Hugh Hefner...

Image: 420383_10151124680549317_1520202286_n.jpg

Yes, indeed he does.

45 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:07:01pm

Voter Fraud Billboards Targeting Minorities?

I've seen these around Milwaukee as well. Same thing 4 years ago.

46 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:07:23pm

re: #44 darthstar

Hugh Hefner...

Image: 420383_10151124680549317_1520202286_n.jpg

Yes, indeed he does.

Heh more like C Drives.

47 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:07:55pm

re: #45 Amory Blaine

Voter Fraud Billboards Targeting Minorities?

I've seen these around Milwaukee as well. Same thing 4 years ago.

So fuckin' typical.

48 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:09:42pm

Bzzt...

Will a Mitt #Romney Fundraiser be Held Alongside Former Members of the Young Socialist Alliance?

49 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:12:50pm

re: #48 Gus

Bzzt...

Will a Mitt #Romney Fundraiser be Held Alongside Former Members of the Young Socialist Alliance?

Oh that's different. Now if they were Obama fundraisers, there'd be holy hell being raised.

50 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:13:17pm

More wingnuttery from their epicenter, Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Man Who Put Up ‘Hang Obama’ Sign Swears He’s a Huge Fan of the President

A controversial sign posted on Highway 21 near Redgranite, Wisconsin, has drivers wondering if they made a wrong turn somewhere and ended up in the past.

With the words "hang" and "Obama" in red, and the words "in there" written in black next to a drawing of a noose, many have concluded the obvious: That a sign that ostensibly reads "hang in there Obama" is meant to be a less-than-covert death threat aimed at the President.

But signmaker Thomas Savka claims he had no idea why people think his sign is anything but a message of love and support.

"It's my attitude for it," he told Fox 11 News. "Everybody's picking on Obama. It's the attitude of 'hang in there, buddy!' It isn't over ‘til you're done kicking."

Savka says the noose was merely thrown in to grab people's attention. "That got your attention," said Savka. "It got you to look at the sign."

True enough, but what about the sign's apparent allusions to the racist practice of lynching? "This has nothing to do with color," Savka insists. "It's to get people's attention. If they're taking that direction from it, they're not reading the sign."

Yeah. He's so fucking clever.

51 The Mongoose  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:14:17pm

re: #42 HappyWarrior

Just hit me that I won't be watching Monday night's debate since I do trivia that night. I think Obama will do really well at that one. Foreign policy is I think where he's able to show the difference between him and Romney the most effectively. Romney when he's talking foreign policy just sounds so eager to sound tough rather than to add actual substance. But I guess that's not shocking if you look at the fact that Bolton's advising him.Bollton, who pals around with Pam Geller.

The more I look at it the more I think Romney needs to drop the tough guy persona on foreign policy. If I were him I'd go out there, disagree with the President respectfully where needed, but generally just act presidential and try to ensure the debate bores everyone to death. So far in this campaign, Romney has picked up ground every time jobs and the economy are the focus. When it's anything else, he loses. He can't win by picking fights on foreign policy...a subject that can't win him this election anyways.

52 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:14:48pm

re: #49 HappyWarrior

Oh that's different. Now if they were Obama fundraisers, there'd be holy hell being raised.

I'm morphing into a lefty Gus Breitbart.

//

53 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:14:52pm

re: #50 Amory Blaine

More wingnuttery from their epicenter, Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Man Who Put Up ‘Hang Obama’ Sign Swears He’s a Huge Fan of the President

Yeah. He's so fucking clever.

Not the Onion? Who does this dummy think he's fooling?

54 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:15:10pm

re: #46 HappyWarrior

Heh more like C Drives.

Never keep the goods on yer C drive brah! ;)

55 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:15:44pm

Has anyone actually done the math on how much money will be "saved" by capping deductions at $25,000 (or $15,000, or $20,000, depending on which day you're talking to Mitt), and whether or not that even comes remotely close to the $5 trillion he's planning on cutting? (I'm guessing it probably winds up being off by...oh....only a few trillion or so)

56 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:16:24pm

re: #51 The Mongoose

The more I look at it the more I think Romney needs to drop the tough guy persona on foreign policy. If I were him I'd go out there, disagree with the President respectfully where needed, but generally just act presidential and try to ensure the debate bores everyone to death. So far in this campaign, Romney has picked up ground every time jobs and the economy are the focus. When it's anything else, he loses. He can't win by picking fights on foreign policy...a subject that can't win him this election anyways.

Thing is he's been doing this tough guy act since his first run for president. I don't see him changing that in the last three weeks.

57 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:16:42pm

re: #52 Gus

I'm morphing into a lefty Gus Breitbart.

//

Haha.

58 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:17:10pm

re: #51 The Mongoose

The more I look at it the more I think Romney needs to drop the tough guy persona on foreign policy. If I were him I'd go out there, disagree with the President respectfully where needed, but generally just act presidential and try to ensure the debate bores everyone to death. So far in this campaign, Romney has picked up ground every time jobs and the economy are the focus. When it's anything else, he loses. He can't win by picking fights on foreign policy...a subject that can't win him this election anyways.

This intelligent strategy will not be adopted because Romney's campaign does not frequently act in an intelligent manner.

59 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:17:25pm

Obama's speaking in Ohio - streaming

[Link: www.c-span.org...]

After talking about voting and what not, got right into the "He doesn't have a five point plan......" Now he's talking about the tax cut.

He's focused.

60 The Mongoose  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:18:26pm

re: #56 HappyWarrior

Thing is he's been doing this tough guy act since his first run for president. I don't see him changing that in the last three weeks.

I don't either, but I think it's a mistake. Chirping the President on foreign policy comes off as disrespectful and borderline unpatriotic. State your case, sure, but stay out of the President's face on this stuff. I have no idea who's advising him otherwise, but it feels more like riling the base than trying to win the election.

61 dragonfire1981  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:18:59pm

re: #35 Kragar

How Do You Solve a Problem Like Bryan Fischer?

That story on Fischer linked to a great, in depth piece about resistance to anti-bullying laws/policies by religious groups.

62 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:19:57pm

I wonder what the last time was when a candidate said "Actually, [SITTING PRESIDENT] and I agree on this and that issue, so let's talk about something else".

I'm sure it happened back in the bad old days of actual uncanned debate.

63 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:20:24pm

"And the people looking through his jobs plan found out it was (just as phony) as his tax plan!"

"He's got a tax plan that doesn't lower taxes, a jobs plan that doesn't create jobs, and a deficit plan that doesn't lower the deficit"

64 Randall Gross  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:20:56pm

re: #5 Charles Johnson

Not sure how I stumbled onto this Twitter feed, but here's some industrial strength lunacy:

@Letichiarose

Profile:

Quick skim reveals fundamentalist / creationist / White nationalist maybe from South Africa, but definitely Dutch influenced if not.

65 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:20:58pm

re: #60 The Mongoose

I don't either, but I think it's a mistake. Chirping the President on foreign policy comes off as disrespectful and borderline unpatriotic. State your case, sure, but stay out of the President's face on this stuff. I have no idea who's advising him otherwise, but it feels more like riling the base than trying to win the election.

I just wish he would stop with the goddamn apology tour lie. That's the line one I resent the most. Anyhow, I think his advisers are part of his problem. Mtit still acts somewhat as if this is a primary and he has to convince the GOP voters that he's one of them, a "severe conservative" as he called himself at one of their debates.

66 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:22:33pm

And... it already shows up in a Google search.

67 The Mongoose  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:23:08pm

re: #62 erik_t

I wonder what the last time was when a candidate said "Actually, [SITTING PRESIDENT] and I agree on this and that issue, so let's talk about something else".

I'm sure it happened back in the bad old days of actual uncanned debate.

This is part of what I'd do on Monday if I were Romney. Start with that, then filibuster for as long as possible on small points of disagreement. "The President and I agree on this, but I feel America should more forcefully state our case on blah blah blah."

Honestly, where would President Obama have to run with it? He'd get sucked into debating foreign policy minutiae while Romney gets to look like he's reasonable and presidential.

Fortunately for the president's supporters, I don't think there's much chance Romney's advisers will go that route.

68 Digital Display  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:23:48pm

Geez Lizards.. I've past 40,000 upding mark.
We don't agree on everything but I have always shown great respect for people here and consider it an honor how you have shown respect for me.
Thanks!

69 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:25:02pm

Shoe meets other foot... The Communists Behind Kerry's Anti-War Protests - JTF.org

70 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:25:37pm

re: #55 JamesWI

Has anyone actually done the math on how much money will be "saved" by capping deductions at $25,000 (or $15,000, or $20,000, depending on which day you're talking to Mitt), and whether or not that even comes remotely close to the $5 trillion he's planning on cutting? (I'm guessing it probably winds up being off by...oh....only a few trillion or so)

Somebody needs to ask him if he considers capital loss write offs as deductions for the purposes of this cap. I guarantee he doesn't.

71 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:26:25pm

re: #69 Gus

Shoe meets other foot... The Communists Behind Kerry's Anti-War Protests - JTF.org

...

YSA was - and still is - the youth group of the Trotskyite Socialist Workers Party. Devoted to the hideously evil philosophy of Communist terrorist Leon Trotsky, YSA openly called for a Communist takeover of America while it was co-sponsoring anti-war rallies with Kerry and the VVAW.

YSA also openly called for the extermination of Israel - and still does to this day. "We call for the abolition of Israel," YSA proclaims on its current web site.

72 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:27:13pm

In Conference Call, Romney Urged Businesses To Tell Their Employees How to Vote (You might have trouble accessing the link, it gave me "Server reset" the first few times I tried)

Romney was addressing a group of self-described "small-business owners." Twenty-six minutes into the call, after making a lengthy case that President Obama's first term has been bad for business, Romney said:

"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections. And whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view, I hope, I hope you pass those along to your employees."......

......In the June call, Romney went on to reassure his audience that it is perfectly legal for them to talk to their employees about how to vote:

"Nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well. "

He's correct that such speech is now legal for the first time ever, thanks to the Citizen United ruling, which overturned previous Federal Election Commission laws that prohibited employers from political campaigning among employees.

73 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:27:49pm

re: #71 Gus

...

"YSA was - and still is - the youth group of the Trotskyite Socialist Workers Party."

The YSA formally dissolved in 1992.

Derp.

74 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:29:00pm
75 The Mongoose  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:29:01pm

re: #70 goddamnedfrank

Somebody needs to ask him if he considers capital loss write offs as deductions for the purposes of this cap. I guarantee he doesn't.

Are they currently treated as straight deductions, or can they only be written off against previous gains?

76 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:29:40pm
77 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:30:11pm

re: #74 JamesWI

[Embedded content]

And I bet Romney the cowardly dickhead said nothing to that because he knows he'd get booed like McCain did when McCain to his credit called out that nonsense four years ago.

78 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:31:02pm
79 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:31:03pm

"We don't need to order up binders to find talented qualified, (etc.) women"

80 Artist  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:34:18pm

re: #7 Kragar

[Embedded content]

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE! READ A NONFICTION BOOK FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

Creation Science is an oxymoron, moron.

81 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:34:40pm

Okay...this is what I hoped. The second debate did have fewer viewers than the first, but only by about two million.

[Link: mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com...]

The second debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney reached nearly as many people as the first debate, according to Nielsen, reflecting robust and sustained interest in the presidential election three weeks before Election Day.

Nielsen said 65.6 million viewers watched the Tuesday night town hall format event on television at home, down just 2.4 percent from the debate on Oct. 3. Untold millions more watched the two debates on TV sets in public places and watched on computers, phones and tablets, but those viewers are not counted in Nielsen’s totals.

82 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:35:49pm

re: #78 darthstar

Why am I not surprised?

83 blueraven  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:38:31pm

re: #51 The Mongoose

The more I look at it the more I think Romney needs to drop the tough guy persona on foreign policy. If I were him I'd go out there, disagree with the President respectfully where needed, but generally just act presidential and try to ensure the debate bores everyone to death. So far in this campaign, Romney has picked up ground every time jobs and the economy are the focus. When it's anything else, he loses. He can't win by picking fights on foreign policy...a subject that can't win him this election anyways.

That wont happen. It is not in Romney's nature.

84 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:39:50pm

re: #75 The Mongoose

Are they currently treated as straight deductions, or can they only be written off against previous gains?

You can write off all capital gains plus another $3000 in losses that exceed current gains against other forms of income, and also carry over any excess into future years.

85 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:41:12pm

re: #78 darthstar

[Embedded content]

Another fake story to manufacture phony outrageous outrage. Did you actually listen to the audio? I did.

86 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:41:39pm

re: #81 darthstar

Okay...this is what I hoped. The second debate did have fewer viewers than the first, but only by about two million.

[Link: mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com...]

Fox had 11.1 million viewers. That's 11.1 million Mitt Romney supporters who saw that their candidate is a petty asshole who doesn't believe women deserve fair pay, is afraid to commit on immigration, blames unwed mothers for gun violence, politicizes the deaths of Americans for personal gain, and doesn't give a shit about 47% of the population.

87 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:41:50pm

LO fucking L

88 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:43:24pm

re: #85 Killgore Trout

Another fake story to manufacture phony outrageous outrage. Did you actually listen to the audio? I did.

What did you learn Dorothy?

"I hope you make it very clear to your employees what you believe is in the best interest of your enterprise and therefore their job and their future in the upcoming elections."

He's telling employers to issue thinly veiled threats.

89 HappyWarrior  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:43:29pm

re: #87 JamesWI

LO fucking L

[Embedded content]

And the land of the president's a sekrit Muslim?

90 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:43:43pm

Updated the page!

Found this in Google groups:

alt.politics.socialism.trotsky › ex trot celebs

A couple more "ex-trot Celebs": MIKE & IRENE MILIN. These two bounced around several leftist groups including Progressive Labor until they signed up with the YSA/SWP in 1971. They soon developed political differences & founded the "Revolutionary Internationalist Tendency" in 1973, which was a Spart Fifth column in the SWP. They were expelled shortly after the 1973 convention. the last time I saw them, they were selling "Workers Vanguard" outside of South Hall at the 1974 SWP conference in Oberlin, Ohio.

Several years later I was flipping channels late at night when I came across one of those half-hour "infomercials" on TV. I told my wife, "Hey, that guy looks familiar," and then I realized it was MIKE MILIN! He and Irene had remade themselves as real estate moguls and went around the country giving seminars on "How You Too Can Be a Millionaire." They were promoting a number of other get-rich-schemes as well. The Milins, David Thorstad, Lyndon LaRouche - who says SWP grads don't go places?

BTW, the prominent folk singer who was a member of the Workers Leage was Dave Van Ronk.

David Altman

91 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:47:03pm

re: #87 JamesWI


92 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:48:02pm

re: #88 goddamnedfrank

What did you learn Dorothy?

He's telling employers to issue thinly veiled threats.

interesting you left this part out. "and whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view"

93 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:48:51pm

re: #92 Killgore Trout

interesting you left this part out. "and whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view"

.....Man, you really are pathetic.

94 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:49:32pm
Youtube Video

About 26:40 for the "outrageous" part.
95 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:49:37pm

Update 2:

The Revolutionary Internationalist Tendency was basically a front for the Spartacist League. It was composed of exactly four people: Mike Milin and Irene Gorgosz in Detroit and Gerry Clark and another guy in Berkeley.

Mike & Irene were expelled after the Political Committee sent people to skulk around with telephoto lenses outside a Spartacist League summer camp, where they were photographed. After a couple of years with the Sparts they dropped out of politics until they resurfaced in 1986 in a late-night infomercial with the English toady Robin Leach pimping one of those get-rich-quick real-estate schemes. Every now and then they will pop up on late-night TV with some racket or another.

I recruited Mike & Irene to the YSA at Arizona State in 1971. What a mistake that was! Some day I'll post some more stuff about them.

96 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:51:04pm

Deleting as it violates our phone number policy...sorry about that.

97 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:51:26pm

re: #94 Killgore Trout

[Embedded content]


About 26:40 for the "outrageous" part.

He's talking to AN ANTI-UNION GROUP. You honestly think that Romney believes any of them are going to go out and tell their employees that they need to vote for Obama?

Jesus fucking Christ, every time I think you can't dig any deeper, you surprise me.

98 blueraven  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:51:33pm

re: #94 Killgore Trout

[Embedded content]


About 26:40 for the "outrageous" part.

Looks like the only one outraged here is you KT.

99 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:52:19pm

re: #92 Killgore Trout

interesting you left this part out. "and whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view"

Right, he's telling employers on both sides to issue thinly veiled threats. Of course the fact that he believes small business owners are automatically on his side never entered his mind. It's the kind of advice only a complete asshole would either give or act upon.

100 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:53:27pm

The group Romney is speaking to:

On its website, the National Federation of Independent Business states that it is a "nonprofit, nonpartisan organization founded in 1943" and "represents the consensus views of its members in Washington and all 50 state capitals."[2] Its PAC is called Save America's Free Enterprise Trust (SAFE).[3] The organization's donations tend to strongly favor Republicans.[4]

In 2010, 25 of its members, all Republican, were elected to the 112th Congress.[5] A number of them, such as Rand Paul, Jeff Duncan, Paul Gosar and Kristi Noem, are affiliated with or endorsed by the Tea Party movement. The same year, the NFIB opposed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act health care reform legislation while some other small business advocates supported the measure.[6] The organization joined 26 states in the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Act. The case was picked up by the Supreme Court, which issued its ruling on National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius on June 28, 2012, upholding most provisions of the Act.

Yep, I'm sure there were a lot of Obama supporters there, Killgore, you desperate hack.

101 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:53:45pm

re: #93 JamesWI

.....Man, you really are pathetic.

It's a fake story, it seems the moonbats edited his remarks to manufacture a fake outrage. If you listen to the tape there's nothing outrageous about it.

102 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:54:00pm
103 Page 3 in the Binder of Women  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:54:19pm

re: #85 Killgore Trout

Another fake story to manufacture phony outrageous outrage. Did you actually listen to the audio? I did.

Why do you hate America?

104 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:54:49pm

I'm concerned I'm going to pull a muscle from laughing so hard.

105 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:56:28pm

"mike milin" trotskyite

106 SidewaysQuark  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:57:27pm

The polls are beginning to concern me.

America seems to be inclined that since its damaged Ferrari isn't running well (and it's not), that the proper course of action is turn the keys back over to the drunks who wrecked it in the first place.

107 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:58:08pm

re: #106 SidewaysQuark

The polls are beginning to concern me.

America seems to be inclined that since its damaged Ferrari isn't running well (and it's not), that the proper course of action is turn the keys back over to the drunks who wrecked it in the first place.

Are you posting this from two weeks in the past or two weeks in the future? Posting it today doesn't make very much sense.

108 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:58:33pm

Romney tells group of anti-union, anti-Obamacare, pro-Tea Party small business owners to go out and tell their employees that their job depends on which way they vote......

But since he said something about how they could say it about Obama too, that makes it a fake story!

Fucking idiot.

109 blueraven  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:58:57pm

Speaking of polls and polling

110 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:59:09pm

Sounds like Romney is encouraging voter intimidation by employers.

111 SidewaysQuark  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:59:19pm

re: #107 erik_t

Are you posting this from two weeks in the past or two weeks in the future? Posting it today doesn't make very much sense.

Call me a nervous nelly, but I'm not optimistic about current numbers. I've said before, Romney is a formidable opponent (one I want to see beaten). This election will be close, IMO.

112 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:59:45pm

re: #106 SidewaysQuark

The polls are beginning to concern me.

America seems to be inclined that since its damaged Ferrari isn't running well (and it's not), that the proper course of action is turn the keys back over to the drunks who wrecked it in the first place.

What polls? You mean A poll (Gallup)? Every other poll is starting to move to Obama, and we haven't even got into the polling from after this debate.

113 sagehen  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 3:59:46pm

re: #81 darthstar

Okay...this is what I hoped. The second debate did have fewer viewers than the first, but only by about two million.

[Link: mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com...]

George Will and Josh Marshall are in agreement that it was the best presidential candidates debate ever ever ever.

114 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:00:15pm

re: #108 JamesWI

Romney tells group of anti-union, anti-Obamacare, pro-Tea Party small business owners to go out and tell their employees that their job depends on which way they vote......

Fucking idiot.

Exactly...it was a CYA add-on so he could say he wasn't telling his Republican supporters to tell their employees to vote for him.

115 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:01:12pm
“If we elect candidates who want to spend hundreds of billions in borrowed money on costly new subsidies for a few favored cronies, put unprecedented regulatory burdens on businesses, prevent or delay important new construction projects, and excessively hinder free trade,” read a cover letter signed by Koch Industries President Dave Robertson, “then many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences, including higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation and other ills.”

The letter was careful to note that the employees’ political decisions are “yours and yours alone.”

The obvious implication is that if Koch's investigators find you've been donating to Obama's campaing or the DNC you won't be getting that promotion, and might just find yourself fired on some flimsy pretext. The political decisions are the employee's, and so are the consequences. This kind of naked political coercion is completely unethical and doesn't belong in the workplace.

116 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:01:38pm

You know what employers should do every other November? Give their employees voting day off and otherwise butt the fuck out.

But but both sides... criminy.

117 sagehen  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:03:33pm

re: #92 Killgore Trout

interesting you left this part out. "and whether you agree with me or you agree with President Obama, or whatever your political view"

Right. 'Cause there's just all kinds of Obama supporters on a Mitt Romney donors conference call.

118 SidewaysQuark  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:03:48pm

re: #112 JamesWI

What polls? You mean A poll (Gallup)? Every other poll is starting to move to Obama, and we haven't even got into the polling from after this debate.

I'm saying given the lunacy of Republicans right now, the overall numbers are too close for comfort for my tastes. Obama did well last night, but I think he missed a few key opportunities. One that stood out was his opportunity to proclaim the outrage and uprising of Libyan citizens against the militants (likely) responsible for the murder of our diplomat, who represented, in his life, a stroke of huge success of American foreign policy. (Just one example)

I'm on your side - I want Obama to win, but I'm not honestly confident about it now. I think he'll barely eke it out, in the end.

119 blueraven  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:05:19pm

re: #118 SidewaysQuark

I'm saying given the lunacy of Republicans right now, the overall numbers are too close for comfort for my tastes. Obama did well last night, but I think he missed a few key opportunities. One that stood out was his opportunity to proclaim the outrage and uprising of Libyan citizens against the militants (likely) responsible for the murder of our diplomat, who represented, in his life, a stroke of huge success of American foreign policy. (Just one example)

I'm on your side - I want Obama to win, but I'm not honestly confident about it now. I think he'll barely eke it out, in the end.

Monday is the FP debate. There will be another opportunity to talk about this.

120 Obdicut  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:05:41pm

Remember guys, calling up a business to tell them you're not going to buy their product because they advertise with Rush Limbaugh is economic extortion and terrible and horrible.

But telling your employees that you really want them to vote for Romney obviously carries no economic threat at all. In a business like that, feel free to display your pro-Obama stuff. I'm sure you won't wind up getting fired. And since most states these days are 'right-to-work' states, your employer doesn't have to present a reason.

121 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:06:39pm

re: #101 Killgore Trout

It's a fake story, it seems the moonbats edited his remarks to manufacture a fake outrage. If you listen to the tape there's nothing outrageous about it.

I listened to it, and the fact is that doing what Mitt Romney is urging employers to do used to be illegal, until the Citizens United ruling. So no, it's not illegal, but it sure is another instance of the incredible damage Citizens United has done to the electoral process.

And I didn't hear any edits at all in the recording. What's your source for that claim?

122 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:06:42pm

re: #118 SidewaysQuark

I'm saying given the lunacy of Republicans right now, the overall numbers are too close for comfort for my tastes. Obama did well last night, but I think he missed a few key opportunities. One that stood out was his opportunity to proclaim the outrage and uprising of Libyan citizens against the militants (likely) responsible for the murder of our diplomat, who represented, in his life, a stroke of huge success of American foreign policy. (Just one example)

I'm on your side - I want Obama to win, but I'm not honestly confident about it now. I think he'll barely eke it out, in the end.

Every scientific poll after the debate had Obama winning beyond the margin of error, and winning even bigger among independents. Even CNN's poll, which even they acknowledged had about a +8% Republican bias, had Obama winning by 7%.

It was a clean victory for Obama. The only reason why it didn't look bigger in those polls is because, unlike liberals, the conservatives aren't willing to admit a loss. At worst, they call it a tie.

123 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:07:57pm

SWP Uses Watergate Methods Against Trotskyists
[First printed in Workers Vanguard #29, 28 September 1973]

DETROIT~Taking time out from their international faction fight and legal suit against Nixon for his Watergate-type harassment of them, the leadership of the Socialist Workers Partj recently expelled three of its members using evidence gathered with its own (rather inept) brand of "dirty tricks." Among other things, the SWP had four of its members hiding in the bushes around the Spartacist League summer camp in August and instructed a YSA member to act like a Spartacist sympathizer in the time-honored agent-provocateur manner, The victims, Irene Gorgosz and Michael Milin, both of the Detroit branch, and Gerald Clark of the Oakland-Berkeley branch, were the three signers of the "Declaration of Revolutionary Internationalist Tendency" submitted to the SWP preconvention discussion. The charges brought against these comrades were "collaboration with the Spartacist League" and double recruiting. At the three sham "trials," the charges against these comrades were patently only pretexts for a political expulsion, exposing the hypocrisy and intriguing of the SWP majority.

124 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:07:57pm

re: #122 JamesWI

Every scientific poll after the debate had Obama winning beyond the margin of error, and winning even bigger among independents. Even CNN's poll, which even they acknowledged had about a +88 Republican bias, had Obama winning by 7%.

It was a clean victory for Obama. The only reason why it didn't look bigger in those polls is because, unlike liberals, the conservatives aren't willing to admit a loss. At worst, they call it a tie.

Oops, that should say +8%...not 88%....THAT would be a story!

125 SidewaysQuark  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:08:38pm

re: #122 JamesWI

Every scientific poll after the debate had Obama winning beyond the margin of error, and winning even bigger among independents. Even CNN's poll, which even they acknowledged had about a +88 Republican bias, had Obama winning by 7%.

It was a clean victory for Obama. The only reason why it didn't look bigger in those polls is because, unlike liberals, the conservatives aren't willing to admit a loss. At worst, they call it a tie.

I'm aware of that - but forgive me if I don't trust the "science of polls" 100%. Human society is a tough cookie to parametrize - it can make last minute turns. Forgive my tendency to play devils' advocate - I guess I'm a "glass half empty" kind of guy....

126 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:10:05pm

Obama's 24 hour slide on Intrade.

Image: chart135047743085131027.png

Make that an electric slide.

127 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:10:07pm

If you feel like getting the urge to claw your eyes out in horror at possibly the lamest wingnut humor ever witnessed by mankind, search YouTube for Steven Crowder's latest video in which he puts on makeup and does the worst David Bowie impression you've ever seen.

128 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:10:33pm

Obama is already raking in an almost 2 to 1 fundraising advantage from active duty military and defense department employees because in general they can see what's in their best interest. Now imagine if the President went out and said as head of the US government that government employees had better vote for him because Romney wants to fire a bunch of them and send the rest to die in Iran.

It's true but people would rightly shit bricks because it would be seen as coercive abuse of employees by management.

129 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:11:18pm

re: #125 SidewaysQuark

I'm aware of that - but forgive me if I don't trust the "science of polls" 100%. Human society is a tough cookie to parametrize - it can make last minute turns. Forgive my tendency to play devils' advocate - I guess I'm a "glass half empty" kind of guy....

I'm usually pessimistic too, but when you have this many polls, all saying it was a clean win, I take it seriously.

Cherry-picking one or two polls that favor your side is always a recipe for disaster, but when all of them have good news, that's good news.

130 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:11:35pm

re: #121 Charles Johnson

#88 left out crucial context. The audio is in tact but the excepted quote is not complete. I'm not sure if this is related to citizens united. I think it's always been legal for employers to discuss political issues with employees.

131 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:11:47pm

re: #110 Gus

Sounds like Romney is encouraging voter intimidation by employers.

Only Republican ones.

132 SidewaysQuark  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:11:48pm

re: #129 JamesWI

I'm usually pessimistic too, but when you have this many polls, all saying it was a clean win, I take it seriously.

Cherry-picking one or two polls that favor your side is always a recipe for disaster, but when all of them have good news, that's good news.

I sincerely hope you're correct :-)

133 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:11:57pm

re: #126 darthstar

Obama's 24 hour slide on Intrade.

Image: chart135047743085131027.png

Make that an electric slide.

Intrade's pictures don't show up. They block hotlinking (I've tried it a few times before)

134 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:12:25pm

re: #133 JamesWI

Intrade's pictures don't show up. They block hotlinking (I've tried it a few times before)

Ah...I see. Damn.

135 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:12:51pm

re: #130 Killgore Trout

#88 left out crucial context. The audio is in tact but the excepted quote is not complete. I'm not sure if this is related to citizens united. I think it's always been legal for employers to discuss political issues with employees.

It's right there in the article. You read it, right?

He's correct that such speech is now legal for the first time ever, thanks to the Citizen United ruling, which overturned previous Federal Election Commission laws that prohibited employers from political campaigning among employees.

136 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:12:54pm

re: #130 Killgore Trout

#88 left out crucial context. The audio is in tact but the excepted quote is not complete. I'm not sure if this is related to citizens united. I think it's always been legal for employers to discuss political issues with employees.

Whether or not it's legal, it's reprehensible and slimy as fuck, in the absolute worst traditions of our political system.

137 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:13:45pm

re: #130 Killgore Trout

#88 left out crucial context. The audio is in tact but the excepted quote is not complete. I'm not sure if this is related to citizens united. I think it's always been legal for employers to discuss political issues with employees.

The story has the full quote, including the "even if you're an Obama supporter" BS you're desperately clinging to. You're just making up shit now. PA-THE-TIC.

138 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:14:50pm

re: #126 darthstar

Obama's 24 hour slide on Intrade.

Image: chart135047743085131027.png

Make that an electric slide.

Those Intrade market graph images live in a temp folder and are immediately deleted after they're generated for your viewing pleasure. You've got to save the image to a service like tinypic to share with others.

139 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:15:04pm

Remember people.....Outing a pedophile's real name is WORST THING EVER!!!!!!!!

But telling a group of your supporters that they should tell their employees their job depends on who they vote for....FAKE STORY!!!!!

You're not fooling anyone.

140 darthstar  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:15:31pm

re: #130 Killgore Trout

#88 left out crucial context. The audio is in tact but the excepted quote is not complete. I'm not sure if this is related to citizens united. I think it's always been legal for employers to discuss political issues with employees.

Legal, yes. Ethical, No.

[Link: www.cnbc.com...]

It's always been frowned upon because employers can abuse such power. But nobody ever accused Republicans of being ethical.

141 dragonath  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:16:36pm

Image: tumblr_mc0o0z5OGu1rj8amio1_500.jpg

142 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:16:44pm

HuffPo poll tracker has it dead even: 47-47.

[Link: elections.huffingtonpost.com...]

143 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:17:29pm

Defense of a candidate saying that employers should pressure their employees on how to vote.

What. fucking. planet. am. I. on.

144 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:18:02pm

I keep getting a shit ton of postal spam from some org calling itself LetThePeopleDecide.org which is actually a front group for "Americans For Prosperity" and Matty Moroun the Bridge Troll. Apparently Matty got a ballot proposal that requires a general election in order to build another bridge to Canada (a general election where voters have to vote on whether to allow anybody to compete with Matty Moroun!)

These assholes fill up my mailbox with crap spam but I will grant them this: every proposal they are against, I will VOTE FOR and every proposal they endorse I WILL VOTE AGAINST.

They send out separate mailings for the "VOTE YES" and the "VOTE NO" proposals, so as not to confuse the stupid people they think they are dealing with.

145 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:19:37pm

re: #135 Charles Johnson

It's right there in the article. You read it, right?

Some moonbat put that on a web page, no links or verifying information. I have no idea if it's true or not. I suspect it's not true.

146 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:19:47pm

re: #142 Charles Johnson

HuffPo poll tracker has it dead even: 47-47.

[Link: elections.huffingtonpost.com...]

But the electoral map shows Obama ahead 277-206.

I just hope we don't have a Gore/Bush election situation. That would totally suck.

147 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:20:01pm

re: #143 erik_t

Defense of a candidate saying that employers should pressure their employees on how to vote.

What. fucking. planet. am. I. on.

But we should totally believe him when he says he's an Obama supporter....that is, if he can be bothered to vote this time.

148 MittDoesNotCompute  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:21:34pm

re: #121 Charles Johnson

I listened to it, and the fact is that doing what Mitt Romney is urging employers to do used to be illegal, until the Citizens United ruling. So no, it's not illegal, but it sure is another instance of the incredible damage Citizens United has done to the electoral process.

And I didn't hear any edits at all in the recording. What's your source for that claim?

Because shut up, that's why...

149 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:21:54pm

re: #145 Killgore Trout

Some moonbat put that on a web page, no links or verifying information. I have no idea if it's true or not. I suspect it's not true.

Bust out a 'Donk'. You know you want to.

150 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:22:16pm

UAW employees where I work get Election Day off, but because I am a salaried contractor I don't get the day off. :(

151 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:22:36pm

re: #140 darthstar

Legal, yes. Ethical, No.

[Link: www.cnbc.com...]

It's always been frowned upon because employers can abuse such power. But nobody ever accused Republicans of being ethical.

Ah, thanks...

Legal experts say there is no law that expressly forbids company executives from giving their political views or even threatening lay-offs if a certain candidate is elected. (Read more: Calfornia Squeezed By a 'Munger Sandwich')

A spokesperson for Federal Elections Commission also said there are laws that restrict employers from inducing employees to give money or fundraise for a certain candidate

But there are no federal election laws relating to voting recommendations or even implied threats.

“There is no specific federal law for this kind of communication, as far as I know” said Stacey Mark, an employment lawyer at Ater Wynne in Oregon who mostly represents companies.

So it looks like this is completely unrelated to Citizen's united.

152 Page 3 in the Binder of Women  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:22:47pm

Jimmah! you still here? im behind in thread, but want to ask, i read one of the old lgf threads and there was a poster aye pod. do tell!

153 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:23:25pm

re: #152 Page 3 in the Binder of Women

Jimmah! you still here? im behind in thread, but want to ask, i read one of the old lgf threads and there was a poster aye pod. do tell!

Aye pod? Is that some kind of old-timey MP3 player?

154 MittDoesNotCompute  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:23:55pm

re: #140 darthstar

Legal, yes. Ethical, No.

[Link: www.cnbc.com...]

It's always been frowned upon because employers can abuse such power. But nobody ever accused Republicans of being ethical.

Took the words right out of my mouth...

155 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:24:01pm

Something tells me if this was Obama talking to group of union bosses, just throwing in a "or you could tell them to support Romney!" wouldn't be enough to make the story fake for our resident concern troll.....

156 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:27:42pm

re: #151 Killgore Trout

Ah, thanks...

So it looks like this is completely unrelated to Citizen's united.

Hidden Fallout From Citizens United Case: Employers Allowed to Badger Employees With Election Propaganda - AllGov - News

The Citizens United court ruling did more than unleash the wealthy when it comes to spending unlimited sums on elections. It also gave them the legal authority to badger their employees about whom they should vote for.

When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned longstanding limits on contributions, it nullified as well rules by the Federal Election Commission that strictly limited how employers could directly express their opinions on campaigns and candidates.

Prior to the 2010 Citizens United ruling, employers could only solicit campaign donations from rank-and-file employees twice a year and such contributions could remain anonymous. In addition, partisan communications with rank-and-file employees was prohibited. All that changed with the Citizens United ruling. Federal law still does not allow employers to threaten employees if they support the "wrong" candidate.

However, in the words of Paul Secunda of the Yale Law Journal, no "federal law exists that prevents corporations from requiring, on pain of termination, that employees attend one-sided partisan speeches, rallies, videos, or other events that advocate the election of specific candidates or parties. Nor is there any law that prohibits corporations from requiring that supervisors engage their subordinates in express advocacy conversations during work time and requiring that employees participate in such conversations.... nothing prohibits employers from requiring employees to participate in one-sided political propaganda events. There is no requirement that opposing candidates be offered equal time, or even that employees themselves be permitted to ask questions or voice their own opinions."

157 allegro  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:29:42pm

re: #145 Killgore Trout

Some moonbat put that on a web page, no links or verifying information. I have no idea if it's true or not. I suspect it's not true.

So we know the GOP has been purging legitimate voters from rolls, trying to limit minority accessibility to voting, sending out fake voting instructions and intimidating minority voters with billboards and other shenaningans... but you suspect this particular ploy isn't true?

It is to laugh.

158 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:30:52pm

re: #145 Killgore Trout

Some moonbat put that on a web page, no links or verifying information. I have no idea if it's true or not. I suspect it's not true.

Here's confirmation that it's true, from the Yale Law Journal:

Prior to Citizens United, the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), as amended in 1976, provided that corporations were permitted unlimited communication with and solicitation of shareholders and executive and administrative personnel (the corporation’s “restricted class”). Rank-and-file employees, on the other hand, could be solicited for corporate Political Action Committees (PACs) only twice a year (originally pegged to primary and general election seasons), only by mail sent to their home addresses, and only through an accounting system that made it impossible for management to know which employees did or did not contribute. Partisan political communication to rank-and-file employees, moreover, was completely prohibited.

Now, post-Citizens United, express advocacy outside a corporation’s restricted class is no longer restricted. Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, held: “We return to the principle . . . that the Government may not suppress political speech on the basis of the speaker’s corporate identity. No sufficient governmental interest justifies limits on the political speech of nonprofit or for-profit corporations.” Most commentary has focused on what this might mean for corporate and union campaign contributions during future federal elections. But when Citizens United invalidated 2 U.S.C. § 441b(b)(2)(A), it also permitted corporations to freely use their treasury funds to advocate for candidates and political parties to their rank-and-file employees.

In the absence of the FECA prohibition, no other federal law exists that prevents corporations from requiring, on pain of termination, that employees attend one-sided partisan speeches, rallies, videos, or other events that advocate the election of specific candidates or parties. Nor is there any law that prohibits corporations from requiring that supervisors engage their subordinates in express advocacy conversations during work time and requiring that employees participate in such conversations. Although federal law does still prevent employers from issuing explicit or implicit threats against employees who vote for the “wrong” candidate, short of that, nothing prohibits employers from requiring employees to participate in one-sided political propaganda events. There is no requirement that opposing candidates be offered equal time, or even that employees themselves be permitted to ask questions or voice their own opinions.

I'd like to take this opportunity to call you a complete ponce.

159 dragonath  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:31:00pm

Holy cow, I'd forgotten the insane lie where Romney accused Obama of having overseas investments in China and the Cayman islands.

Totally fake.

Here is Obama's actual tax return.

160 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:31:03pm

re: #157 allegro

So we know the GOP has been purging legitimate voters from rolls, trying to limit minority accessibility to voting, sending out fake voting instructions and intimidating minority voters with billboards and other shenaningans... but you suspect this particular ploy isn't true?

It is to laugh.

Nevermind that we've already seen numerous stories about CEOs and bosses DOING EXACTLY WHAT MITT IS TALKING ABOUT HERE.

Fake story.

161 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:32:15pm

And, regarding the video that is at the top of this post:

1. Steal underwear!
2.
3. Profit!

162 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:35:13pm

re: #140 darthstar

Legal, yes. Ethical, No.

[Link: www.cnbc.com...]

It's always been frowned upon because employers can abuse such power. But nobody ever accused Republicans of being ethical.

It wasn't even legal before CU. See my re: #158

163 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:36:15pm

re: #151 Killgore Trout

Ah, thanks...

So it looks like this is completely unrelated to Citizen's united.

Nope, wrong, it's directly related to CU. See my re: #158

164 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:38:28pm
165 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:39:30pm

re: #163 goddamnedfrank

Nope, wrong, it's directly related to CU. See my re: #158

Oh, he's probably done on this thread. Every aspect of his argument has been trashed, and we know he can't ever admit when he's wrong.....

166 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:39:38pm

re: #156 Charles Johnson

It was legal for employers to discuss politics before citezens united so Mitt's recommendations are nothing new and would not have been illegal before the decision.

167 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:41:48pm

re: #166 Killgore Trout

It was legal for employers to discuss politics before citezens united so Mitt's recommendations are nothing new and would not have been illegal before the decision.

Shorter Killgore - "I'll just ignore the evidence showing that I was completely wrong, and continue to argue as if it didn't exist."

168 researchok  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:43:22pm

I for one will be very happy when this election cycle is over and things return to normal.

169 Killgore Trout  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:43:50pm

re: #167 JamesWI

Shorter Killgore - "I'll just ignore the evidence showing that I was completely wrong, and continue to argue as if it didn't exist."

Take it up with lawyers from the FEC

A spokesperson for Federal Elections Commission also said there are laws that restrict employers from inducing employees to give money or fundraise for a certain candidate

But there are no federal election laws relating to voting recommendations or even implied threats.

170 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:44:03pm

I'll post this excerpt in bold, in case his eye sight is going

Prior to Citizens United, the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), as amended in 1976, provided that corporations were permitted unlimited communication with and solicitation of shareholders and executive and administrative personnel (the corporation’s “restricted class”). Rank-and-file employees, on the other hand, could be solicited for corporate Political Action Committees (PACs) only twice a year (originally pegged to primary and general election seasons), only by mail sent to their home addresses, and only through an accounting system that made it impossible for management to know which employees did or did not contribute. Partisan political communication to rank-and-file employees, moreover, was completely prohibited.

171 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:45:01pm

re: #169 Killgore Trout

Take it up with lawyers from the FEC

Yes, an article written two years after Citizens United says there aren't any laws against it......BECAUSE OF CITIZENS UNITED.

Jesus Christ, you can't really be this dense, right? This is just an act?

172 Lidane  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:50:53pm

re: #171 JamesWI

This is just an act?

It's not an act. It's concern.

173 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:51:09pm

Let's recap.....We have a Yale Law Journal piece saying partisan communications from boss-to-employees were prohibited until Citizens United.

And we have a CNBC article written 2 years after Citizens United saying there currently aren't any laws against partisan communications from boss-to-employees.

KT says this is proof that partisan communications from boss-to-employees were never prohibited.

(fucking facepalm)

174 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:54:20pm

We've gone from people defending the context of Romney's 47% words to people nitpicking whether or not Romney was actively encouraging people to break the law.

I kinda like the direction this is going.

175 McSpiff  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:54:54pm

Sigh, KT lies people. No need to act shocked.

176 goddamnedfrank  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:55:21pm

I get all my legal analysis from random contrarian luthiers.

177 Gus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:56:19pm
178 b_sharp  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:56:39pm

re: #159 dragonath

Holy cow, I'd forgotten the insane lie where Romney accused Obama of having overseas investments in China and the Cayman islands.

Totally fake.

Here is Obama's actual tax return.

I think Romneybot was claiming that the fund backing Obama's pension had those investments.

179 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:57:31pm

re: #168 researchok

I for one will be very happy when this election cycle is over and things return to normal.

If this cycle ends badly we might not ever regain old normal. "New Normal", you won't like.

180 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:59:06pm

re: #127 Charles Johnson

Now I feel like punching myself in the face.

181 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:59:18pm

re: #178 Gangnam Style

I think Romneybot was claiming that the fund backing Obama's pension had those investments.

Something pensioners have virtually no control over.

182 kirkspencer  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 4:59:37pm

OK, a brief explanation as to why I'm not concerned about who will win the presidential election. The simple is that the polling averages have never, barring the use of nonrandom selection of polls averaged, put Romney ahead.

Look, any poll can be off. That's the basic point of the margin of error. (Simplifying, statisticians.) But as you use more and more polls, the cluster that develops is more and more reflective of the population being sampled.

If you've zeroed a firearm you've seen this same principle in action. Aim at the target point and fire several (three is sufficient, more just prove the point) bullets. The center of the grouping of bullet holes is the 'real' place where the barrel points when the sights are aimed at the center.

Even with Mitt's bump, the center mass never climbed enough. And Biden's debate stopped (and to some extent reversed) the bump.

Barring something catastrophic, the presidential election isn't really in doubt. For that matter we are very close to being almost as certain that the Dems will keep the Senate.

Me, I'm still watching the house. The Republicans should keep control despite losing seats, but it's still possible for that to change. Not likely, but more possible than Romney becoming president of the US.

183 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:01:21pm

re: #146 Sheila Broflovski

But the electoral map shows Obama ahead 277-206.

I just hope we don't have a Gore/Bush election situation. That would totally suck.

Brooks Brothers riot. With binders.

184 erik_t  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:03:45pm

Servermas is almost upon us!

185 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:04:08pm

Is there any doubt if not for federal laws, discrimination against minorities, women, gays etc. would be at least 10x worse than it is now?

186 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:04:25pm

re: #182 kirkspencer

OK, a brief explanation as to why I'm not concerned about who will win the presidential election. The simple is that the polling averages have never, barring the use of nonrandom selection of polls averaged, put Romney ahead.

Look, any poll can be off. That's the basic point of the margin of error. (Simplifying, statisticians.) But as you use more and more polls, the cluster that develops is more and more reflective of the population being sampled.

If you've zeroed a firearm you've seen this same principle in action. Aim at the target point and fire several (three is sufficient, more just prove the point) bullets. The center of the grouping of bullet holes is the 'real' place where the barrel points when the sights are aimed at the center.

Even with Mitt's bump, the center mass never climbed enough. And Biden's debate stopped (and to some extent reversed) the bump.

Barring something catastrophic, the presidential election isn't really in doubt. For that matter we are very close to being almost as certain that the Dems will keep the Senate.

Me, I'm still watching the house. The Republicans should keep control despite losing seats, but it's still possible for that to change. Not likely, but more possible than Romney becoming president of the US.

Voter suppression (yeah fading)
Last minute media avalanche
Anti-gay action from some black churches
RC Bishops willing to blow their tax-exempt status
Felony disenfranchisement
"Normal" dirty tricks
Solid South

We need to fight this thing to the limits of our strength.

187 dragonath  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:04:54pm

re: #178 Gangnam Style

I think Romneybot was claiming that the fund backing Obama's pension had those investments.

Which was found inconclusive by ABC. I'm sure that the Republicans in the Illinois General Assembly couldn't be moved either way, which makes the charge even more hypocritical.

188 nemus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:05:12pm

Not sure if you all have seen this yet Supposed October Surprise to be revealed Oct 21 or 22 the date has fluctuated)

The fark.com digital detective squad is working diligently on figuring out who runs the site , where it comes from, what the blurred docs might be, etc - here's a thread over on fark to read the digital digging that's going on in regards to it. At this point, I'm 1/2 tempted to dismiss it as a viral stunt from someone, but, you never know.

189 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:05:49pm

Now at T minus 56 minutes for the new web server installation to begin.

I'll be putting the site in maintenance mode while we copy things over and test to make sure everything's there, at about 6 pm Pacific if we start as planned. Hopefully it won't take too long - the database server took all night because we had to re-import 9 gigabytes of data. This should be a much quicker process.

190 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:06:18pm

re: #183 Amory Blaine

Brooks Brothers riot. With binders.

Eh, I don't think it will be close enough in any state to get anything as bad as that recount.

Obama just needs Wisconsin, Ohio, and one other toss-up. Right now he has them. If this debate (and next week's) provides any bump, he'll have them safely. If the debate does nothing and he continues to slide (or, more plausible, if something big happens to hurt Obama), at least one will probably be safely Romney's.

191 b_sharp  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:06:20pm

re: #171 JamesWI

Yes, an article written years after Citizens United says there aren't any laws against it......BECAUSE OF CITIZENS UNITED.

Jesus Christ, you can't really be this dense, right? This is just an act?

You haven't done the math.
2010 - 1971 = 39
3 + 9 = 12
1 + 2 = 3
3 is a magic number in the Aztec calendar.
Taking the current year, 2012;
2 + 0 + 1 + 2 = 5
Divide 3 by 5 = 3/5
3/5 is the value of nonwhites for tax purposes pre-1865.
Therefore paid and unpaid employees can be abused in every month greater than 27 days.

192 Charles Johnson  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:07:30pm

In fact, I should start a new thread with this notice so it's on the front page.

193 dragonath  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:09:59pm

re: #188 nemus

I see someone on that thread posted this:

Modmins, I don't think this is a FarQ violation, especially since I've munged the data a bit:

OctSurprise is registered to:

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC ([Link: www.godaddy.com)...]
Domain Name: OCTSURPRISE.COM
Created on: 15-Oct-12
Expires on: 15-Oct-13
Last Updated on: 15-Oct-12

Registrant:
Domains By Proxy, LLC
DomainsByProxy.com
xxxxx N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States

Administrative Contact:
Private, Registration
Domains By Proxy, LLC
DomainsByProxy.com
14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
(480) xx4-2599 Fax -- (480) xx4-2598

Why is this interesting? Because look at how MittRomney.com sites is registered:

mittromney.com
Registrant
Domains By Proxy, LLC
DomainsByProxy.com
xxxxx N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC ([Link: www.godaddy.com)...]
Domain Name: MITTROMNEY.COM
Created on: 08-Feb-02
Expires on: 08-Feb-13
Last Updated on: 30-May-12

Administrative Contact:
Private, Registration M­I­TTRO­MNEYC­OMyxo­rp­ybs­nia­mod­com
Domains By Proxy, LLC
DomainsByProxy.com
xxxxx N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
(480) xx4-2599 Fax - (480) xx4-2598

194 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:11:12pm

re: #190 JamesWI

Eh, I don't think it will be close enough in any state to get anything as bad as that recall.

Obama just needs Wisconsin, Ohio, and one other toss-up. Right now he has them. If this debate (and next week's) provides any bump, he'll have them safely. If the debate does nothing and he continues to slide (or, more plausible, if something big happens to hurt Obama), at least one will probably be safely Romney's.

Nate Silver is keeping me away from the gaspipe. Even he only carries Obama at 2:1. That's far too close for a chance that these medieval motherfuckers might get the presidency, the house, and 3 more SC justices.

195 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:11:47pm

Informed voters:

196 William Barnett-Lewis  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:11:48pm

Please stop playing KT's game people. It's time to stop feeding the troll.

197 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:12:15pm

re: #190 JamesWI

Marquette's latest poll has Obama +1 in Wisconsin.

198 nemus  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:12:46pm

re: #193 dragonath

Yep, if you dig down deeper in the thread (around 300 - 400 replies in or so) they actually manage to nail down the name of the guy who more than likely runs the site amongst other things. I'll give the fark crowd credit for this much - the 'hivemind' over there can be quite resourceful. Heck, they're currently responsible for trying to buy Joe Biden a Trans Am.. lol.

One thing to be aware of re: the Registrar info there.. thats the default 'private domain name registration' service used by GoDaddy - which means that if you register a site through GoDaddy and want to hide your registrar info, by default, that's the info that gets put in there / the company who handles it.

199 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:12:56pm

re: #194 Decatur Deb

Nate Silver is keeping me away from the gaspipe. Even he only carries Obama at 2:1. That's far to close for a chance that these medieval motherfuckers might get the presidency, the house, and 3 more SC justices.

If Romney wins, I expect the Senate Dems to do everything they can to block any SC appointees. I'd bet we'd have a short-staffed Court for a while.

200 JamesWI  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:14:08pm

re: #197 Amory Blaine

Marquette's latest poll has Obama +1 in Wisconsin.

One poll. Average of reputable polls would put it around 2 or maybe even three. Not safe right now, but like I said, if Obama gets a bump from the debate (and avoids any major fuckups), it should get pretty safe.

201 Decatur Deb  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:17:17pm

re: #199 JamesWI

If Romney wins, I expect the Senate Dems to do everything they can to block any SC appointees. I'd bet we'd have a short-staffed Court for a while.

The future of the country could rest on Harry Reid's ability to be a resourceful pain in the ass.

202 Amory Blaine  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:19:34pm

Marquette's polls of the senate race has had wild swings in it. One poll had Thompson up by 14 then the next poll had Baldwin up by 14.

203 MittDoesNotCompute  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:23:09pm

re: #166 Killgore Trout

It was legal for employers to discuss politics before citezens united so Mitt's recommendations are nothing new and would not have been illegal before the decision.

re: #173 JamesWI

Let's recap.....We have a Yale Law Journal piece saying partisan communications from boss-to-employees were prohibited until Citizens United.

And we have a CNBC article written 2 years after Citizens United saying there currently aren't any laws against partisan communications from boss-to-employees.

KT says this is proof that partisan communications from boss-to-employees were never prohibited.

(fucking facepalm)

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

204 MittDoesNotCompute  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:26:20pm

re: #181 Decatur Deb

Something pensioners have virtually no control over.

And something that wealthy financial-industry sharks like Romney have complete control over (their own investments, that is).

205 CuriousLurker  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:28:59pm

*opens door, walks over to KT, kicks him, walks back out and goes upstairs to sit with wrenchwench* // Just for good measure.

206 b_sharp  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:35:11pm

re: #205 CuriousLurker

*opens door, walks over to KT, kicks him, walks back out and goes upstairs to sit with wrenchwench* // Just for good measure.

Hey, wait.

Can you take this wrench upstairs with you?

It used to be embedded in KT's backside.

207 MittDoesNotCompute  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:38:05pm

re: #206 Gangnam Style

Hey, wait.

Can you take this wrench upstairs with you?

It used to be embedded in KT's backside.

Wrenchwench's wrench? I could have sworn that it looked like a corn cob...

208 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Oct 17, 2012 5:42:38pm

re: #164 Gus

That's brilliant!


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 64 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 167 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1