bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 07:30 pm
Aren't you glad you live in the US where people can kill Muslims?
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 07:32 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:

Just to clear this up for me, CJ...is the Obama person you are speaking of the guy what was twice elected to the highest office in the land...by the citizens of this country?


Only a fluke in cj's cosmology.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 07:35 pm
@RexRed,
I think a lot of Republicans have stopped drinking the Tea.

I also wouldn't discount his discovering a relative or friend is gay and he couldn't look in that persons face and think of one good reason to deny civil rights to that person or anyone like him/her.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 08:10 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Only a fluke in cj's cosmology.


Hardly a fluke he started campaigning for his second term all through his first.
The way he has conducted himself and the media backed lies have fooled a great many people. Although not the ones on the gravy train for special favors and personal whims. How could someone be more concerned with keeping power than how to use it. Even though his oath gave him a hint. But he is using it to corrupt what he was elected to defend.

Not really the quick study the voters thought he was. But they do not really know the scope of his errors and downright lies. If the MSM reprted what they should he would probably be gone.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 08:24 pm
Quote:
President Obama Disapproves of Continued Benghazi Probe (Gosh Really?)


Quote:
Serious implications

In the wake of 4 dead Americans (our Ambassador and Navy Seal included), and 20 additional US consulates destroyed all over North Africa and Middle East, we find that Libya is now a safe haven for a number of anti-American terrorist groups to train unmolested within that country free of retaliation by US forces! Has the federal government been compromised from within by elements of CAIR and other pro-Muslim groups or not? I would challenge anyone to try and defend the actions of our White House in the Benghazi scandal.

More of the same?

There will be a big question in all this as we await the initial results of the latest GOP effort at establishing who is responsible and why the convoluted efforts at obstructing the White House timeline of response to a well-documented series of events that transpired in the weeks before a deadly and well planned attack. Will the Republican led investigation finally lead to the lawful prosecution of those responsible, or are we going to once again witness a ceremonial mock probe, another paper tiger, just one more impotent attempt to placate public outrage?

Encouraging our enemies

It seems under the present White House numerous scandals that point to a top down origin of direction have been ignored or denied, from “Fast and Furious” to the NSA, from wiretapping of AP to the IRS scandal as Lois Lerner used the Fifth Amendment to elude questioning, it seems this Presidency is immune to prosecution. If our government has been effectively sabotaged from within just as we now find that our military veterans are being denied treatment by the VA, a dangerous signal is being sent to our enemies. An unwillingness by this administration to uphold the law and to hold those guilty accountable will only embolden the efforts of those who want to destroy this nation, especially when they see the federal government already doing its best to do the same.

http://www.politisite.com/2014/05/20/president-obama-disapproves-continued-benghazi-probe-gosh-really/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wordpress%2FFLNs+%28POLITISITE%3A+Breaking+Politics%2C+Polling%2C+Debates%2C+Elections%2C+Commentary+and+Analysis+%29
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 08:33 pm
Quote:
Obama Sues to Allow Illinois Muslims to Skip Work W/O Being Fired



Quote:
So, according to the Obama administration, if you are a Muslim in Illinois who signed a contract to work for a company, but you find that you just don’t want to do something your boss tells you to do, why, you just don’t have to do it. Oh, and if you are fired for refusing to do the work you contracted to do, why, Obama will sue your employer for you.

This is what has happened in the Land Of Lincoln with the US Government vs the Star Transport trucking company. A couple of Muslims signed a contract to work for a trucking company, a contract that says that drivers will take any load that a company administrator assigns and will deliver that payload. Period. The terms of employment are known ahead of time among all employees.

But a couple of Muslims for Star Transport found out that their boss was going to ask them to transport a load of alcohol–a job that everyone knows the company has–and these Muslims refused to take the load because: religion.

The Obama administration is suing the trucking company for violating these Muslims’ freedom of religion because after they refused to take the load as per the contract they signed, they were properly and logically fired.

Of course, there is nothing in Islam that would prevent a Muslim from transporting alcohol. Some Muslims say that drinking alcohol violates their religious tenets, but no one was demanding they drink it and their transportation job would not be for their consumption. It is for other Americans’ consumption.

Their refusal had nothing at all to do with their personal religious needs and is nothing more than another Muslim attempt to enforce on all Americans a sharia-like ban on alcohol.

After all, taken to its logical extreme, the transportation of all alcohol would have to be banned just to avoid “offending” some wandering Muslim.

In the mean time, Obama and his fellow leftists are forcing Christians to cater to gays even though they say that doing so violates their Christian religion, Obama is trying to force Churches and Christian organizations to pay for contraceptives and abortions, and Obama is calling Christians haters and bigots for wanting to follow their religions.

So, Muslims can refuse to do work claiming religious objections and escape from being fired for their refusal and that is freedom of religion, but if Christians try anything similar, they are attacked, called names, and forced to violate their religion anyway under penalty of law.

So, now, as far as Obama is concerned, a Muslim can get a job here in the US, then claim he wants to stay employed even though he doesn’t want to do any of the work and Obama will force businesses to comply, because: Islam. In Obama’s America, employers will have to pay Muslims just to be Muslims.

No wonder people think Obama is a Muslim.

The progressive double standard. This is clear example of Islamic intolerance. There is no spirit of compromise in Islam. Progressives too are intolerant. And the Congress shows the compromise totals(0)

You see why these two get along so well?

http://www.publiusforum.com/2014/02/28/obama-sues-allow-illinois-muslims-skip-work-wo-fired/
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Tue 20 May, 2014 09:11 pm
@coldjoint,
You're so ignorant, you don't understand US labor laws.
In the first place all employee-employer are contracts, but they must also follow the laws of this country.
FYI, All religions are protected under this law. Not only Muslims.

Quote:

OVERVIEW OF THE LAW

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of l964 ("Title VII") prohibits employers, except religious organizations 3 4 5, from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing, and other terms and conditions of employment. Title VII also requires employers to reasonably accommodate the religious practices of an employee or prospective employee, unless to do so would create an undue hardship upon
the employer. This means that:
 Employers may not treat employees more or less favorably because of their religion.
 Employees cannot be required to participate “or to refrain from participating “in a religious activity as a condition of employment.
 Employers must reasonably accommodate employees' sincerely held religious practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the employer.
 Employers must take steps to prevent religious harassment of their employees.
 Employers may not retaliate against employees for asserting rights under Title VII. RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION

Introduction
Religious employees often confront conflicts between their employment obligations and their religious obligations; federal law (and many state and local laws) require employers to try to accommodate those obligations. Specifically, Title VII provides that an employer must reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs and practices unless doing so would cause "undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business."

What is a “reasonable accommodation”?
A reasonable accommodation is one that eliminates the employee's conflict between his religious practices and work requirements and that does not cause an undue hardship for the employer.


Do you know what "reasonable accommodation" means?
Does the employer have other employees who can handle the job?
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 20 May, 2014 09:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Do you know what "reasonable accommodation" means?

You have been taking it in the ass so long you think everyone else wants to.

And why does the DOJ have to sue? I did not see them defending Hobby Lobby.

bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Tue 20 May, 2014 09:24 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:

You have been taking it in the ass so long you think everyone else wants to.

And why does the DOJ have to sue? I did not see them defending Hobby Lobby.


What's wrong with you? Answer the reasonably asked question.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Tue 20 May, 2014 09:27 pm
@coldjoint,
He ran all through his first term he ran for the second. So what? That's a nature of our political system.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Tue 20 May, 2014 09:30 pm
@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:
What's wrong with you? Answer the reasonably asked question.


What? It is not play time? Islam wants exception not equality. And this is the way they go about it. And the fact the government helps them is scary.

But that is no fun. **** the horse you rode in on too.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Wed 21 May, 2014 02:55 am
@coldjoint,
coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
Only a fluke in cj's cosmology.


Hardly a fluke he started campaigning for his second term all through his first.
The way he has conducted himself and the media backed lies have fooled a great many people. Although not the ones on the gravy train for special favors and personal whims. How could someone be more concerned with keeping power than how to use it. Even though his oath gave him a hint. But he is using it to corrupt what he was elected to defend.

Not really the quick study the voters thought he was. But they do not really know the scope of his errors and downright lies. If the MSM reprted what they should he would probably be gone.



So...the Obama of whom you speak is the twice elected president of the United States.

I thought so.

Really frosts your butt, doesn't it?




http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/humour-blague/clown-jonglerie/vil2-joke.gif



0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  3  
Wed 21 May, 2014 08:06 am
@coldjoint,
Obama did not have to disenfranchise voters to win...
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Wed 21 May, 2014 10:16 am


The June jobs report came out today and it was disappointing to say the least. The economy added 80,000 jobs last month which is below the rate needed to keep up with natural population growth. You can find out all the details you want about that report HERE … but my focus is on how we got to this point in the first place. Economists have been predicting for months now that the 2nd quarter would be poor due to various factors that were foreseeable and predictable. And now the Karl Rove led, anonymous billionaire backed Crossroads GPS 3rd party 501c group is committing $25 million to fund an ad campaign concentrating their firepower on “swing states” to push the narrative that the tepid economic growth is all the fault of one man … President Obama. (source)

With the exception of a transportation bill that President Obama just signed TODAY and been pushing for months and months … there has been an active attempt by the so called “loyal opposition” to prevent the American economy from successfully adding jobs. The bottom line is politics isn’t like playing a game of Hungry, Hungry Hippo. It’s not all fun and games; party before country has become the new mantra of the modern day GOP.

Republicans voted against the American Recovery
We know that 93% of Economists polled agree that the Economic stimulus helped the economy (source). But the economy lost 4 million jobs in 2008 and another 2.2 million just in the first three months of 2009 alone. Of course – Mitt Romney routinely counts those 2.2 million jobs lost under President Obama’s first three months as an Obama policy failure. Let me ask you this – if you had to make a decision between two solutions to save your kid who is on life support and 93% of the doctors said do X versus 7% that say do Y … who are you going to go with? Dr. X of course. The vast majority of Republicans voted against the economic stimulus in 2009. They think that magically America lifted itself out of losing 800k jobs lost a month to 28 months straight of private job gains.

“It’s hard to overstate how serious the collapse in the economy was. We were in free fall.”
~Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics

I’m not exaggerating about how awful the economy was; quite frankly – had we not passed the stimulus and continued down the Herbert Hoover economic school of thought … we would be in a Great Depression right now. But Americans just don’t think that way. Even the Federal Reserve acknowledges the Bush economic crisis has “wiped out nearly two decades of American wealth”. (source) The economy was a disaster … most people just do not remember The Road We Have Traveled since 2008.

The GOP war on civil servants
But – while the so called conservatives continue their war on public sector employees and “government spending” most of which is a result of Bush’s economic policies … what they do not say … what you never hear among the conservative crowds is a very simple mathematical equation. If public sector employment were maintained at the same rate as under George W. Bush … the economy would be almost at 7% unemployment. (source) It is simple math. Republicans know it; Democrats know it. And the Republicans have been ensuring that equation works to their political favor knowing the average American just doesn’t get it. It has gotten so bad that even Mitt Romney has publicly come out against hiring more teachers, police and firefighters – you know … those union goons living off the government teet. (source)

Another example of that war on civil servants is that Congress will not allow the Post Office to be successful. (source) They’re doing EVERYTHING to kill a public institution that has lasted since the days of our founders. But that’s just government excess.

The Economic Policy Institute wrote today HERE:

It should be noted that this counter-factual of 1.1 million additional public sector jobs is a perfectly reasonable benchmark. Before the Great Recession, the number of public-sector workers per 100 people had averaged right around 7.3 since the late 1980s. In other words, having 1.1 million more public-sector workers, which would put us back at 7.3 public-sector workers per 100 people, would simply restore our economy to a normal level of government employment. Further, if the public sector had simply grown in this recovery at the average rate of the last two recoveries, the labor market would currently have 1.2 million more public-sector jobs, so public-sector job growth of this pace is clearly in line with past history.

However, even that 1.1 million public-sector jobs gap leaves out an important component: public-sector job cuts also cause job loss in the private sector, for a couple of reasons. First, public-sector workers need to use inputs into their work that are sourced by the private sector. Firefighters need trucks and hoses, police officers need cars and radios, and teachers need books and desks. When public-sector jobs are lost, it stands to reason that the inputs into these jobs will fall as well, and indeed research shows that for every public-sector job lost, roughly 0.43 supplier jobs are lost.

http://www.classwarfareexists.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Chart-public-sector-jobs-e1341623114201.png

This isn’t new news … We know that Republicans in Congress are sabotaging America’s economic progress – Congress has been voting down jobs bills over and over and over – (SOURCE):

June 24th, 2010: GOP Blocks Unemployment Insurance Bill Once Again, Dems Giving Up (Open Congress)
July 29th, 2010: Republicans block small business plan in Senate (Reuters)
September 28th, 2010: GOP Blocks Bill to Punish Companies that Move Jobs Abroad (CBS News)
November 18th, 2010: House GOP blocks bill to extend jobless benefits (USA TODAY)
November 18th, 2010: Republicans vote unanimously against equal pay for women bill (Raw Story)
December 9th, 2010: Senate Republicans block 9/11 health bill (Reuters)
October 11th, 2011: Senate Republicans block Obama’s jobs package (CBS News)
October 20th, 2011: Senate blocks money for teachers, firefighters (WaPost)
November 3rd, 2011: Republicans block $60bn infrastructure bill (Financial Times)
December 11th, 2011: Senate blocks payroll tax-cut extension (MSNBC)
March 29th, 2012: Republicans Block Repeal of Oil-Company Tax Breaks Obama Sought (Business Week)
April 17th, 2012: Senate GOP blocks Obama’s ‘Buffett rule’ for minimum tax rate on millionaires (Fox News)
May 8th, 2012: GOP blocks Senate debate on Dem student loan bill (Associated Press)

Even Mitt Romney’s former adviser admits the Republicans are “rooting against the economy”. (source)

The GOP channels George W. Bush’s ghost; calls for more tax cuts, fewer regulations
You’ll often hear that somehow all of these policies under the Obama administration have choked American business to the point that it just won’t hire. If only we had fewer regulations they said … then we would have economic growth. Except – corporate profits are at an all time high (source) and as Apple, Inc has shown having lots of money in the bank doesn’t mean it goes back to employees and it doesn’t mean your consumers get a better deal. Apple has $98 billion in cash money in the bank … and the vast majority of that is going to the shareholders (source). Fewer regulations allows Wall Street to rob you blind like with oil speculation. (source)

If we have fewer regulations – we can have more banks losing what is now calculated to be $9 Billion on trades using money from YOUR bank accounts i.e. proprietary trading. (source) Mitt Romney has already said he’d work to repeal the Dodd-Frank law that would limit future bank activity such as that. Mitt Romney has said he’d repeal regulations enacted under George W. Bush meant to keep Wall Street honest … and THAT is quite a feat. If we have fewer regulations – we can look forward to more HUGE scandals like the current scandal where multiple banks have been acting against interests of other businesses and consumers to manipulate LIBOR interest rates in clear violation of anti-trust laws. (source)

Hell – if history is any guide … they’ll just make the scandal no longer illegal. Over the past 30 years … what is legal today was not legal before. That’s “smaller government” and the “free market” and “free enterprise” according to Mitt Romney. But as the Federal Reserve Business survey shows … the #1 factor inhibiting hiring is DEMAND. (source) Period. End of story. It’s not regulations and it’s not taxes.

Other miscellaneous Republican economic nonsense
Republicans have blocked the President’s bill to address housing issues HERE.

Remember that time when Mitt Romney said “I’ll take a lot of credit that <the auto> industry’s come back” after he wrote an op-ed in the NY Times called “Let Detroit Go Bankrtupt”? (source)

We know that the present day income inequality that we are experiencing … and vulnerable middle class can be attributed to “various laissez-faire economic policies” i.e. “smaller government” and “less regulation”. (source)

Just a little video of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) completely standing against everything President Obama wants to do HERE.

House Democrats proposed raising the minimum wage to $10; Republicans are against it (source). Many Republicans would like to completely repeal the minimum wage actually.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 21 May, 2014 10:23 am
@bobsal u1553115,
The article you posted pretty much explains why our recovery has been handicapped by the GOP, but that kind of factual information isn't important, because conservatives cry alot, but fail to understand the results of their voting.

They cry about not enough jobs, and ignore that the GOP continues to vote against any legislation that will help with the development of more jobs.

There's just nothing more Americans can do when we vote against our own best interests.

TNCFS

woiyo
 
  0  
Wed 21 May, 2014 10:33 am
@cicerone imposter,
Yea, amazing how with Democrats running at least 2/3's of the Government, they could not solve the problems you blame only the republicans for.

Funny how partisan nit wits think, ain't it?
coldjoint
 
  0  
Wed 21 May, 2014 10:52 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
There's just nothing more Americans can do when we vote against our own best interests.


There is plenty Americans can do. November will show you what they can do.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 21 May, 2014 11:02 am
@woiyo,
You are one ignorant arsehole. That 1/3rd of our government called the House Republicans have stopped most legislation from being approved. All legislation needs to be approved by the House and Senate before Obama can sign it into law.

How ignorant are you? Or am I repeating myself? Did you ever study civics and government?

coldjoint
 
  0  
Wed 21 May, 2014 11:04 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Or am I repeating myself?


That is about all you do.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 21 May, 2014 11:13 am
@cicerone imposter,
waiyo, Read this article to educate yourself about the current congress.

Quote:
The Most Closed Congress in History
By REP. LOUISE SLAUGHTER January 06, 2014
By now, many Americans have seen the headlines that this Congress is on pace to be the least productive in history. What is less well known is that under Republican control, we have also experienced the most closed session of Congress in history—a dubious achievement that has contributed to the historic gridlock and dysfunction that defined Washington in 2013.
Many have speculated on the forces that are driving the current polarization in Washington—from the rise of the Tea Party to the dominating influence of outside groups and a Republican majority in the House whose agenda is at odds with the views of the American people. However, it’s the manipulation of the legislative process itself that has enabled each of these forces to take root and grow.
In particular, the use of “closed rules” has excluded most House members from full participation in the legislative process. Under a closed rule, no amendments are allowed on the House floor. As a result, House Republicans are able to pursue a politically driven agenda without allowing commonsense amendments that could achieve bipartisan compromise.
This approach has also empowered the most extreme members of the House to pursue narrow policy goals at all costs, triggering a government shutdown, debt-limit brinksmanship and partisan stalemates that are seemingly the new norm.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/01/the-most-closed-congress-in-history-101794.html#ixzz32N4cQckF
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 04/23/2024 at 09:05:39