Lmao

394544_413252895390213_347827778_n.jpg (33 KB)

  • Leave A Comment

  • Leave a comment ?

    50 Responses to Lmao

    1. Nayh,

      It will STILL be Bush’s Fault…

      Reply

    2. >mfw the global recession began a year before Obama was in office and they still blame him

      Reply

      • Sure – Clinton left office with a great economy in place. Sure – the beginnings of the recession were clearly coming years before we knew Obama’s name. Sure – it started before he was in office.

        But he’s in office now and IT’S STILL HERE.

        We elected him so that he would walk into the Oval Office and, bypassing congress, bypassing lobbies, bypassing the invisible hand of the free market, single-handedly hit the “Reset Economy” button like only a dictator with absolute power and infinite resources could.

        And he didn’t get the mother fucking job done.

        Reply

        • In other words, we expected him to do the implausible, and he failed?

          Okay, so that’s unfair to him, but we still have to decide if we think he or Romney will do better from here on out. Obama will never get anything done because a Republican congress will never let him do anything. Romney, on the other hand, wants to do something that all evidence says is a bad idea, but he’s not really that into it. Tough choice–useless versus useless.

          Reply

        • Wait… what? The recession ended three years ago. So the economy isn’t in an amazing state, well guess what? There was a recession only three years ago!

          Reply

          • @wisful its great how you only listen to the Media. Do YOU not remember that the first 2 years of Obama presidency the DEM’s had the house and Senate. They didn’t pass a single thing. Not only that the Dem Run Senate hasn’t pass a budget in how long???? yep 3 years that’s all of Obama’s time hes been in office. Didn’t he say he was going to stop all the lobbyist, well what a surprise they are going strong at the white house. look at Libya Used military force, Aren’t you against that. Obama is Bad for America. Look what hes doing for illegals. Hes giving the more right than US Citizens have. He wants to give them free College, while U.S. kids go into debt over College. Think for once and stop following the crowd!!!!!!!!!!!

            Reply

            • That’s actually not true, the Democrats may have had a simple majority but that doesn’t stop a filibuster from shutting down legislation. The Dems never actually had the 60 votes necessary to defeat a filibuster. In July and again in September 2009 that had 60 votes IF the independents had voted with them, but a month isn’t a lot of time to push a bill through.

              en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress#Senate

              And actually, in Libya the US didn’t act, they loaned equipment and troops to the UN to support a “no fly zone” and UN cooperation had already been approved by Congress.

              Also, the program to extend college aid to illegals is a New York State proposal, not a federal one. NY Citizens already have better aid programs, and the bill isn’t likely to pass anyway. Political vaporware.

              Reply

            • Party
              (Shading indicates majority caucus)
              Total
              Democratic Independent Republican Vacant
              End of previous congress 48 2 49 99 1
              Begin 55 2 41 98 2
              January 15, 2009 56 99 1
              January 20, 2009 55 98 2
              January 26, 2009 56 99 1
              April 30, 2009 57 40
              July 7, 2009 58 100 0
              August 25, 2009 57 99 1
              September 9, 2009 39 98 2
              September 10, 2009 40 99 1
              September 25, 2009 58 100 0
              February 4, 2010 57 41
              June 28, 2010 56 99 1
              July 16, 2010 57 100 0
              November 29, 2010 56 42
              Final voting share 58% 42%
              Beginning of the next Congress 51 2 47 100 0

              Its funny how they put the Independents on the Dems side. The only way they couldn’t have got Bills pass is for Dems not to vote with their party. The 2 independent’s in the Senate couldn’t have stopped any bill from passing.

              lol When did congress give approval for Libya???? Never happened LMAO So we loaned Navy ships like the USS Barry who launched Tomahawks missiles into Libya and countless US aircraft. At a whooping $896 million dollars.

              Guess you have never heard of the dream act? huh!

              Guess you didn’t see Obama Wanting to give Illegals amnesty. That’s OK you go ahead and live in fantasy land. Work hard, struggle to pay your bills while others live off the tax money you pay.

              Reply

            • If every Dem voted for a bill and the independents voted with them, they had the votes to beat a filibuster, but only in those two months, not two years as you stated.

              I said Congress gave authorization to cooperate with the UN, the President didn’t have to get approval for Libya because he already had it under the blanket UN cooperation resolution.

              Under the dream act college education is a requirement, not a benefit. The Federal Government pays nothing.

              California has the “California DREAM Act”, but that just allows illegals under the program to apply for private scholarships, the state does not provide funds. Illinois has a similar program.

              Reply

            • @the anon replying above in this: It looks like you posted a chart or spreadsheet, and it doesn’t seem to have formatted correctly, can you post a link or screen shot to the source?
              With regard to Libya, the Obama could have done everything with executive orders, the way Bush Sr. went in to Iraq. I’ll need to check, but I think in this case, we were acting in accord with our duties as part of NATO, so Congressional consent and support is implied by the NATO charter we signed when NATO was formed.
              If you have an account, please sign in, it’s easier to follow conversations when we know who is speaking. If you don’t have one, make one, it take a second.

              Reply

          • The recession hasn’t ended. Just because someone announced it on TV doesn’t make it true. When we have positive job growth, GDP growth greater then 3%, and a genuine increase in the housing market as a WHOLE (too many people point to this month or that segment, or both to try to make it look like good news), then I’ll believe the recession is over.
            The fact is things are getting worse, most foreclosures haven’t hit the market yet, when they do, prices will go down further. Interest rates are starting to tick up too (that’s actually a good sign, until you see that the fed is still lending at 0%).
            I think we’ll see a spike in the economy after the elections, regardless of who wins, because at least one side will feel like things are going to be better. But I also think that spike is going to dip back down if whoever’s in office at the point doesn’t work quickly to maintain it’s momentum.

            Reply

            • Recession. Read the word, there’s a clue in that. 1% growth is not a recession, 3% growth is not a recession. When the GDP is growing it’s not a recession.
              Feel free to say how bad the economy is, but calling the current state of affairs a recession isn’t honest.

              Reply

            • How do you account for the net job loss? Companies reporting greater profits at the cost of jobs isn’t GDP growth. It’s a recession, but numbers can and are manipulated to make companies look more profitable. That’s why most lay offs come at the near the end of the quarter. It’s how they are able to offset poor revenue by showing decreased costs.
              If we had REAL GDP growth, we’d have positive net job creation.

              Reply

    3. Whereas the Democrats plan is to borrow more money to throw at their supporters which strangely enough does not have a positive effect on the economy.

      Reply

      • And the Republicans plan? Repeal the only thing making the price of healthcare somewhat reasonable and reinstate Reagonomics.

        Reply

        • By reasonable, are you talking about the cost of health care? There isn’t any part of the current healthcare plan that make it more affordable to anyone. There is a provision saying that insurance companies HAVE to give you health care (there will certainly be a higher premium for it) another provision requires businesses of with over a certain number of employees to provide a health care option, but the businesses don’t have to contribute, and there is a provision saying that everyone has to get health care or pay a fee (basically a tax, it’s even going to be collected by the IRS) of just under $700 a year for NOT having health care.
          If either party really gave a shit, they’d have us all on the same plan they have for Congress members.

          Reply

      • Which is different from the Republican plan to borrow more money to throw at their supporters which strangely enough does not have a positive effect on the economy?

        Reply

    4. Hey R’s, whats the new plan when hes reelected and the “our goal is to make him a 1 term president” is over? Is it to do your actual jobs? That would be nice for america.

      Reply

    5. Republicans depend on market, Democrats depend on government. Either way you lose. No matter where you live in the world you most likely live in a predatory system that offers the illusion of choice.

      Reply

    6. Oh and might i add that the healthcare system obama implemented in some serious bullshit. Just who do you think is goin to be supplying these government run hospitals and systems with support and “care?”…Private companies.

      And for the record i am not a republican. I believe in Charity as much as anyone else, but forcing people to choose between private healthcare and “public” healthcare is about as charitable as telling a homeless man that i will buy him groceries so long as he buys from my pre-approved list of vendors. Or like Reboot once said, “It’s like solving the transportation problem by fining people for not owning a car”

      Reply

      • The affordable care act has nothing to do with government run hospitals. There is no public healthcare instated under the legislation Obama signed. It is simply reforms aimed at stopping insurance companies from unjustly denying people coverage, incentives for people to buy insurance, and CUTS to medicare. “Obamacare” actually cuts the amount of money the government spends on healthcare and encourages people to buy private insurance to get private healthcare. You have formed a political opinion on something you are not informed about, which is a huge problem in this country. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

        Reply

        • Actually, they won’t deny coverage, but they will make rates ridiculously high. Anyone who doesn’t take that coverage either has to go into a government pool of high risk individuals and pay those rates, or not have insurance and pay the health care fee (collected by the IRS, but some how they say it’s not a tax). Don’t link to wikipedia, as the article can be rewritten by anyone. Instead, look at the sources the article links to and use those.

          Reply

      • Sorry, but in the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” which has been dubbed “Obamacare” there are no “government run hospitals”(no death panels, either), just like there aren’t any under the same program in Massachusetts – “Romneycare”. The same hospitals that exist now provide the same care.

        It isn’t “public healthcare”, you can chose your own healthcare provider. You don’t even legally have to enroll, although there is a tax penalty if you don’t.

        Actually, it’s more like “no fault” car insurance – by requiring people to own insurance you eliminate freeloaders that drive uninsured and then can’t pay when they have an accident. It’s worked across the US for years.

        Reply

    7. Perhaps a list of actual achievements may enlighten opinions. The ones I researched were valid, implying the others may be factual too.
      ObamaAchievements.org/list

      Reply

    8. I don’t really care about politics, but is it not possible for the consequences of political actions to reach further into the future than 4 years?

      In other words, stuff Clinton or Bush did could still need fixing.

      Reply

    9. The best financial experts and world-wide economists, top money-brains above any and all commentators here warned us at the end of Bush’s era that this astronomical financial disaster would take more than a mere 4 or 8 years to recover from.

      Anyone that believes that Obama alone was going to cure this in one term has their heads up their patoot.

      Why is it people act like the president is the only one responsible for decisions made by the government? There are large groups of people that sit and deliberate on this shite for hours, to act like the president is the one responsible is just ignorant about how the American government system actually works and it perpetuates the stupidity of it.

      Reply

    10. Everyone makes excuses like ‘it was impossible to fix the country’, ‘he didn’t create the issues’…

      He ran under a platform of ‘change’ telling America he COULD fix it and HE FAILED.

      Whether or not it was all his own fault or if it was impossible to have a good term this latest round aside the man failed as president. He did not live up to 1% of the expectations. He failed and when you fail you don’t get to keep going. If he is re-elected America is doomed. It will never recover from another 4 years of Obama’s ineptness and concentration on only helping black people while letting the whole country fall into chaos.

      He is the worst president ever. Easily the worst. Most of you live in the evidence.

      Reply

      • If there were a viable alternative running I might agree with you. This system where everyone is voting for one failure or another delusional douchebag really sucks.

        Reply

        • What is necessary is recognizing that they’re both douchebags. Obama or *insert Republican punching bag here* are not going to help anyone but themselves.

          But in saying that the left is still wah wah. Fucking idiots. They perpetuate a broken system.

          Reply

      • Let’s see:

        *The stock market had fallen under Bush from 13,000 to 7,000 and was still crashing (fast)
        *The banking system was days from total collapse
        *Osama Bin Laden was still alive and plotting new terror attacks against us
        *We were losing 700,000 jobs a month
        *GM and Chrysler were going under
        *AIG (the biggest insurer in the country) was going under
        *Home sales were plummeting

        Seems like he changed a lot to me – he never said he could bring the country back to Clinton Era prosperity in four years, but he did stop the fall. Bush had eight years to destroy the economy, I think it’s only fair Obama gets eight to fix it.

        Reply

        • *The stock market had fallen under Bush from 13,000 to 7,000 and was still crashing (fast)

          Obama promised to fix that and didn’t. It’s only now with the news that he’s on his way out that it has recovered.

          *The banking system was days from total collapse

          That’s an outright lie. No truth to it what so ever.

          *Osama Bin Laden was still alive and plotting new terror attacks against us

          Even the guys who shot the man are calling Obama out on how little if any impact he had on that. Basically none. He was window dressing and he tried to take credit. He didn’t do a damned thing. As usual.

          *We were losing 700,000 jobs a month

          Outsourcing is the legacy of Clinton’s years. America was already losing jobs when Bush was elected.

          *GM and Chrysler were going under

          So Obama threw money at them and ramped up the deficit from around 10 billion to over 15 billion.

          *AIG (the biggest insurer in the country) was going under

          Obama fixed that? Really? How? Because he didn’t at all.

          *Home sales were plummeting

          They’re still as low as when he entered office you moron.

          So he did nothing. As everyone points out. He is a failure.

          God wants Romney in 2012.

          Reply

        • Also lol@Clinton era prosperity.

          Left wing nutjobs are all the same. Take credit when you shouldn’t and never take the blame when you should.

          Reply

    11. i hope this scumbag does not get re-elected

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Motorcycles Movie Posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas