Grim1
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 4,908
- 6,897
The State of the Union isDEAD. Obama killed eveything that matters.this thread is gayer than richard simmons tossing buck angels salad while getting fucked in the ass by neil patrick harris
The State of the Union isDEAD. Obama killed eveything that matters.this thread is gayer than richard simmons tossing buck angels salad while getting fucked in the ass by neil patrick harris
Take it you've never driven a standard, down shift slows you downEver try to stop a car that has it's brakes cut? All you can do is take your foot off the accelerator and dodge obstacles, braking doesn't work without brakes.
If you were talking about a minor issue (equivalent to going 5-10 mph) I'd agree those things should be rectified. Even the 20 mphish stuff like Gitmo is annoying to not be dealt with yet. But when you're dealing with a complete clusterfuck (90 mph) that's a long time of coasting to get it back down to normal. [and he's been making headway in many cases - although some do seem to be sidelined - probably from juggling so much...]
Retard.The State of the Union isDEAD. Obama killed eveything that matters.
When it comes down to the gay marriage argument, I'm at a loss because it's a lot like the weed debacle. National polling is all in favor of it but yet, nothing gets done and that's what bothers me, just fucking pass the laws so people can go about smoking their weed and fucking dudes in the butt.Apparently with the "instant fix" mentality that many in the thread have - they do expect just that. (Irony being these same people will be quick to quote that "Congress isn't designed to move quickly" - and most changes involve some level of Congressional involvement....)
Lighten up, Francis.The State of the Union isDEAD. Obama killed eveything that matters.
The Presidents play this game too, and they grab every little scrap of power that they can.The amount of credit/blame we assign to the President is completely out of whack relative to their actual power in general. Humans just have this fixation with 'leadership' and 'scapegoats' that they just can't get over. For most issues, the Presidency largely just acts as a decoy to take the heat off of Congress, and we always let them get away with it. You'll see Congressmen go on camera and blame the President for shit like "out of control" spending. Something they themselves control. It's hilarious and sad at the same time.
The White House should stop using women's choices to construct a false claim about social inequality that is poisoning our gender debates. And if the President is truly persuaded that statistical pay disparities indicate invidious discrimination, then he should address the wage gap in his own backyard. Female staff at the White House earn 88 cents on the dollar compared to men. Is there a White House war on women?
But if you actually looked at the article the discrepancy narrows to 5 cents.Except that "bogus statistic" as they state also has a discrepancy within the same fucking field when women decide to work the same field as a man in many cases. But you know... Garglechimps gonna garglechimp.
That's not the proper figure, not that the President's used figure covers that either - the discrepancy in identical POSITION (not degree like the article used as false equivalency) was around 17 cents last time I read up on the matter in HR periodicals (probably about a year or so ago, been lazy about reading the ones I still have coming).But if you actually looked at the article the discrepancy narrows to 5 cents.
where is lithose so he can fuck you over? you are more dense than republican diehard.Except that "bogus statistic" as they state also has a discrepancy within the same fucking field when women decide to work the same field as a man in many cases. But you know... Garglechimps gonna garglechimp.
If you are going to make claims you have to back them up with some kind of reference, you seem to think working in HR makes you an authority on 50 different subjects, no i'm not going to take your word for it.last time I read up on the matter in HR periodicals
The Trayvon remarks aren't the same. In theory, his remarks could've been slightly different and I might agree with you that he was just being politically expedient, but that didn't happen. You're reading too much into it and seeing something that isn't there. His comments were completely appropriate and not even remotely as opportunistic as they could've been given the political climate at that time.Atleast you see through that deception even if you don't see how to same exact methodology is in play for the remarks of the trayvon case.