because a GOP gubernatorial nominee this year is campaigning with him, and it's obvious that ted nugent is a mentally unstable moron?

(and someone else doing something stupid doesn't excuse someone else from doing something stupid)

2/21/2014 2:18:56 PM

So that's on the side of the candidate that is stupid enough to publicly have someone like Ted Nugent endorse him.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE - he just apologized. So like everything else in Hollywood and politics, its ok now. They shook hands and they're all back on the playground playing nice.

[Edited on February 21, 2014 at 2:28 PM. Reason : update]

2/21/2014 2:26:23 PM

Quote :

"So that's on the side of the candidate that is stupid enough to publicly have someone like Ted Nugent endorse him."

Not just endorse him, he campaigned with the psycho. I'm not sure if he or David Mustaine are crazier.

2/21/2014 2:35:34 PM

When I run for congress, I'm going to thoroughly vet each person that joins me on the campaign trail. That is just the common sense thing to do.

Given the intense scrutiny the media and the left already put on conservatives on the issues of gun control, race, and other issues, people like Ted Nugent are only going to energize an already small base, rather than increase a voter pool.

2/21/2014 2:46:57 PM

so it's the medias fault that Ted Nugent is an insane person?

2/21/2014 4:25:25 PM

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/south_carolina_yanks_funding_colleges_teaching_gay_themes

keep on keepin' on, dudes.

2/21/2014 11:50:45 PM

Quote :

"When I run for congress"

You lost me there.

2/22/2014 1:42:50 AM

interesting nobody here is complaining about arizona (unless i missed it)

shrug

2/22/2014 2:08:35 AM

Arizona is a lost cause

2/22/2014 12:08:27 PM

No, it's the media's fault that we even give him any air time at all.

Quote :

"[quote]When I run for congress"

You lost me there.[/quote]

You'll vote for me, I promise.

[Edited on February 22, 2014 at 5:17 PM. Reason : adsfa]

2/22/2014 5:12:43 PM

so it's the media who campaigns with him

and/or call him their blood brother?

2/22/2014 7:29:07 PM

Arizona House just passed the "Don't serve gays because of religious freedom or something" bill in the last couple of days and it is heading to Gov Jan Brewer's desk. When it does reach her desk she has 5 days to sign or veto it. Interestingly enough, in NC the gov has 30 days to sign, or veto, or not sign and it becomes law automatically.

While this bill is typically referred to as discriminating against gays in particular, it actually allows for discrimination against any group based solely on religious objections.

Anyways, the smart thing would be to veto it of course. If she doesn't veto it however, expect it to make its way to the supreme court where it will eventually put an end to all of this nonsense. Republicans are being short sighted once again. I've read that there are a handful of other R states currently in the process of pushing forth the exact same legislation seen in Arizona.

There is absolutely no longevity in this brand of legislation.

[Edited on February 23, 2014 at 2:34 PM. Reason : .]

2/23/2014 2:32:08 PM

This is what was passed in nebraska recently too wasn't it?

Hopefully the courts can step in. This is the same type of damaging legislation that made things worse for blacks after the civil war. Old white people couldn't handle seeing the black communities thrive, and started to clamp down.

Maybe they'll have learned their lesson this time...

2/23/2014 5:59:05 PM

Kansas

2/23/2014 6:05:20 PM

ooops wrong thread

[Edited on February 24, 2014 at 2:48 PM. Reason : sdfg]

2/24/2014 2:48:09 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/24/opinion/stanley-conservatives-ted-nugent/

2/24/2014 3:32:15 PM

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/02/arizona-confronting-awkward-realization-that-gay-people-have-money-buy-stuff.html

Quote :

" Carol Foyler, a Tea Party Republican who supported the anti-gay law, said that the startling bombshell that gays play a role in the state’s economy put her and her fellow lawmakers “in a tight spot.” “Quite frankly, we were blindsided by this,” she said. “We had no idea that gays had money and bought things just like regular people do.” Acknowledging that her vote for the anti-gay law might have been calamitous for the state’s economy, Ms. Foyler placed the blame for it squarely on the shoulders of one group: the gays themselves. “How was I supposed to know what gay people do with their money, etc., when I don’t personally know any gay people?” she asked. “I’m sorry, but it was up to the gays to tell us.” "

[Edited on February 25, 2014 at 5:20 PM. Reason : I assume this is satirical]

2/25/2014 5:19:57 PM

I'm totally down with this under one condition:
The fuckers that want to ban gays have to put a sign on their store saying as such so that every other civilized person knows not to shop there and can post pictures of these backwards fuckes for all to see to inform others.

2/26/2014 12:59:39 AM

^ that would be an interesting addendum. However I could see that generating extra business for a company in many parts of the state. At least in North Carolina, there are several places where that wouldn't be a detractor.

It would be delicious irony if a Muslim community organized to only do business with other Muslims. Or a Catholic community only do business with Catholics. But also this asks the question of on what basis can you determine if someone is of a belief system that you want to discriminate against. You can't look at someone to tell if they are gay, so do you have to wait for them to ask for something gay? Or what if a straight couples just for giggles wants to have two males are two females on their cake.

The law seems pretty dumb all around. Pretty mind-boggling that the politicians don't see why they are on the wrong side of history.

2/26/2014 1:17:50 AM

Quote :

"You can't look at someone to tell if they are gay"

2/26/2014 9:04:26 PM

Senate derails bill boosting veterans' benefits
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20140228_Senate_derails_bill_boosting_veterans__benefits.html

Quote :

"WASHINGTON - A divided Senate on Thursday derailed Democratic legislation that would have provided $21 billion for medical, education, and job-training benefits for the nation's veterans. The bill fell victim to election-year disputes over spending and fresh penalties against Iran. Each party covets the allegiance of the country's 22 million veterans and their families, and each party blamed the other for turning the effort into a chess match aimed at forcing politically embarrassing votes. Republicans used a procedural move to block the bill after Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) chided GOP lawmakers about their priorities. "I personally, I have to say this honestly, have a hard time understanding how anyone could vote for tax breaks for billionaires, for millionaires, for large corporations, and then say we don't have the resources to protect our veterans," said Sanders, the measure's chief author. Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20140228_Senate_derails_bill_boosting_veterans__benefits.html#lSuxqj4l6ABgfURV.99"

support our troops... going to war more often. not at home though, their boots have straps.

3/6/2014 8:51:25 PM

Quote :

"You can't look at someone to tell if they are gay"

3/6/2014 10:11:15 PM

we can all agree that CPAC is the worst, right?

3/6/2014 10:37:52 PM

Its comic con for conservatives, they should change the name to conservative-con or con-com

3/7/2014 6:08:04 AM

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/07/cpac-latest-developments-2/?hpt=hp_t2

Quote :

"Rick Santorum said the Republican Party needs to elect an unapologetic conservative, not a moderate candidate, in 2016."

Quote :

"A fired-up Gov. Rick Perry, who’s considering another presidential bid, kicked off Friday morning with a rousing speech, declaring “It’s time for a little rebellion on the battlefield of ideas.”"

Quote :

"The former governor [Huckabee] argued a bigger liability for Hillary Clinton in 2016 will be the Benghazi, Libya attack at U.S. diplomatic post in September 2012 that left four Americans killed, including the U.S. ambassador, while she was secretary of state."

[Edited on March 7, 2014 at 4:23 PM. Reason : ]

3/7/2014 4:22:46 PM

Quote :

"we can all agree that CPAC is the worst, right?"

No, you're the worst.

They don't agree with you, so bad.

I think you should direct your mewing to the nearest bar trivia and/or comic book store.

3/7/2014 4:25:13 PM

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4934754/

Quote :

"Rand Paul Hits Ted Cruz Over Foreign Policy, Ronald Reagan Comparison"

They were also first and second in the CPAC straw poll.

This could get entertaining

3/10/2014 6:47:05 PM

Rand Paul is the most likely candidate to me at the moment. A lot of the Ron Paul fanatics will probably latch onto him.

3/11/2014 1:50:35 AM

The irony of this headline was too good not to post:

Rand Paul: Cruz Needs to Work on Presenting His Own Ideas
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Rand-Paul-Ted-Cruz-foreign-policy-Hannity/2014/03/11/id/558752/

This from a guy who blatantly plagiarized several of his speeches from Wikipedia.....

3/11/2014 8:48:19 AM

I guess it takes someone of barely above average intelligence to appeal to people of the same, but rand seems wet noodly to me.

3/11/2014 9:49:53 AM

GOP re-branding fail (again)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/susanne-atanus-congress-_n_4993555.html

A Republican candidate who believes that God dictates weather patterns and that tornadoes, autism and dementia are God's punishments for marriage equality and abortion access won the GOP nomination to challenge Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) in the Chicago-area 9th Congressional District.

Susanne Atanus, of Niles, Ill., garnered 54 percent of the vote in her Tuesday win over David Earl Williams III.

"I am not in favor of abortions, I am not in favor of gay rights," Atanus told the Daily Herald, a suburban Chicago newspaper, in January.

She blamed natural disasters and mental disorders on recent advances in LGBT equality and legal abortions.

"God is angry. We are provoking him with abortions and same-sex marriage and civil unions," she said. "Same-sex activity is going to increase AIDS. If it's in our military, it will weaken our military. We need to respect God."

3/19/2014 5:55:23 PM

Why are you even pointing that out? It's a race in Chicago. There's no way in hell a Republican is going to win that district.

3/19/2014 9:16:59 PM

she won a Republican primary

it doesn't matter where it happened, she still got the majority of votes in a Republican race

you can look for trends in any race, regardless of where it's held/the outcome of the general election

3/19/2014 11:19:25 PM

That woman is fugly....

Is this gods punishment for her parents sins?

3/20/2014 8:57:23 AM

Quote :

"Why are you even pointing that out?"

because it's yet another case of republicans nominating an extremist moron to represent them?

3/20/2014 10:26:09 AM

traffic has been bad on my morning commute. damn gays!

3/20/2014 10:31:37 AM

http://youtu.be/PulUKsICY9o

#MillennialOutreach

gotta give them credit for nailing the fact that us Millennials are unable to speak and look into a camera at the same time

3/21/2014 2:01:03 PM

House To Vote On Controversial ‘No More National Parks’ Policy

Quote :

"Responding to President Obama’s decision last week to protect a stretch of California’s Coast near Point Arena as a new national monument, the House of Representatives is planning to vote next week to overturn a 108 year-old law that presidents of both parties have used to protect iconic American places, including the Grand Canyon, the Statue of Liberty, and Arches National Park. The bill, H.R. 1459, aims to block presidents from using the Antiquities Act of 1906 to establish new national monuments by putting caps on how many times it can be used, requiring congressional review of proposed monuments, and forcing local communities to engage in an ironic exercise of reviewing the environmental impacts of protecting lands for future generations. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT), criticized President Obama’s use of the Antiquities Act to expand the California Coastal Monument last week as an end-run around Congress. “In other words, the House was punked by the President,” said Bishop. However, despite arguments from Bishop and Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA) that Congress should hold exclusive power to decide whether or not to protect public lands, the House has effectively shut down all legislative efforts to protect wilderness, parks and monuments since the Tea Party takeover in 2010. Until the passage of a bill to protect wilderness lands in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore last week, Congress had not protected a single new acre of public lands since 2009, the longest such drought since World War II. Adding injury to insult, Congress also forced a 16-day government shutdown last fall that cost national parks and local communities 8 million lost visitors and $414 million in lost visitor spending. Coupled with the ongoing freeze on new parks and public lands bills, a vote next week to block the President’s creation of new monuments and park units would represent the endorsement of a de facto “No More National Parks” policy in the U.S. House of Representatives. Although members of the House could be casting controversial votes next week against new monuments and parks, H.R. 1459 is not expected to be considered by or passed in the Senate. The President would also be likely to veto such a bill. The vote — set to coincide with the one year anniversary of President Obama’s establishment of monuments honoring Harriet Tubman and Colonel Charles P. Young (with the support of Republicans and Democrats in Congress) — would also stymie a growing effort to protect sites that honor women, the LBGT community, Latinos, African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, and other communities that are currently under-represented among national parks and monuments. According to recent public opinion research, a “No More National Parks” policy would likely be deeply unpopular with voters who are still frustrated by the government shutdown and by long-standing budget cuts to parks and conservation programs. A November, 2013, survey commissioned by the Center for American Progress found that: By a margin of more than three-to-one, voters believe that leaders in Washington should be creating new parks and expanding opportunities for Americans to get outdoors, instead of closing national parks and cutting budgets for public lands. A separate survey, commissioned jointly by Republican and Democratic polling firms, found that nearly seven in ten voters in the West say they are “more likely to vote for a candidate who supports enhancing protections for some public lands, like national forests,” suggesting that, in addition to its policy impacts, the political impacts of next week’s vote may stretch into November."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/20/3416916/house-no-more-national-parks/

It's a good thing that all of the other issues facing the nation have been deftly attended to... I propose changing the meaning of 'GOP' to "Good Ol' Petulance". And before anyone bemoans the source, go ahead and see if conservative "news" wants to champion this cause....

3/21/2014 4:50:30 PM

I'm all for anything that reduces the power of the executive branch. This would be consistent with such a strategy. Parks are a waste of money, anyway. No one visits the ones we have. And just last year we saw the executive use national parks as a weapon to attempt to enrage the populace against the legislative branch by denying citizens their rightful access to federally-owned land.

Also, the GOP "hipster-on-a-fixie-bike-that-supports-right-to-work-laws" ad campaign is hilarious.

[Edited on March 21, 2014 at 6:43 PM. Reason : .]

3/21/2014 6:37:58 PM

Quote :

" Parks are a waste of money, anyway. No one visits the ones we have."

speak for yourself, couch potato

3/21/2014 9:23:46 PM

Oh, for want of a "like" button.

3/21/2014 9:40:41 PM

Quote :

"Only 13 percent of black respondents reported visiting a national park in the previous two years. That compared with 27 percent for Latinos, 29 percent for Asians and 36 percent for whites. Visitation figures are skewed even further when the visits in question are to parks that showcase wilderness and outdoor recreation.(smc: the most popular national parks showcase rapes of nature, like the Golden Gate Bridge, Washington Memorial, or Mount Rushmore) For example, at Yosemite National Park in California, a 2009 visitation survey showed that African Americans totaled just 1 percent of visitors, compared to 77 percent white and 11 percent each for Hispanics and Asians. "

In addition, four out of the top ten most visited national parks are just "parkways" that visitors pass through, perhaps by accident, while never leaving their car.

To the vast majority of Americans(at least a 2/3 majority did not visit one in the past two years) , national parks are completely irrelevant.

If anything, the ultra-white, 89% caucasion GOP is likely overrepresented in terms of park supporters. And these park supporters are smart enough to say, "No more wasted money on parks when the country is hopelessly in debt."

[Edited on March 21, 2014 at 10:28 PM. Reason : .]

3/21/2014 10:20:06 PM

Have you actually been to places like Yosemite, the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone, Glacier, Zion, Olympic, Grand Teton, etc? Without question, people use them and they desperately need federal protection.

Most of the West is one giant National Park, and it also happens to be where the fewest people live. Sorry people who live in flyover country and the swamps of the Southeast don't live closer to places that are worthy of National Park status, but us nature lovers aren't going to let climate change deniers frack/drill/trash the planet.

3/21/2014 11:25:22 PM

oh look, another Nazi reference!

3/21/2014 11:50:12 PM

Is smc joking? Wtf is wrong with republicans these days...

3/21/2014 11:50:40 PM

btw, this bill is stupid

3/21/2014 11:51:29 PM

Theodore Roosevelt, that trustbusting liberal commie and champion of the national parks system, was the original mad-with-executive-power president.

Quote :

"Roosevelt's willingness to exercise his power included attempted rule changes in the game of football; at the Naval Academy, he sought to force retention of martial arts classes and to revise disciplinary rules. He even ordered changes made in the minting of a coin whose design he disliked, and ordered the Government Printing Office to adopt simplified spellings for a core list of 300 words according to reformers on the Simplified Spelling Board."

3/22/2014 1:16:08 AM

Quote :

" Have you actually been to places like Yosemite, the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone, Glacier, Zion, Olympic, Grand Teton, etc?"

3/22/2014 11:46:21 AM

I've been to all of those but one and I absolutely think that public land use and protection should require legislative review. The executive branch has way too much power and it is being abused more and more frequently. Bush II and Obama have essentially acted as monarchs and just did/do whatever they want by executive order, it's absurd.

3/22/2014 1:05:09 PM

"Legislative review" =/= closing all National Parks

3/22/2014 1:22:21 PM