President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama

This thread is dedicated soley to discussing the new President. This includes his inauguration, policies, etc. If it involves President Obama, discuss it here.

"Obama Campaigns Outside Washington to Win Insiders on Stimulus"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090209/pl_bloomberg/acfhbxl0pxdi

" While lawmakers in Washington debate some of the most costly spending plans in history today, President Barack Obama is leaving town.

His calculation: The best way to win support for his economic stimulus and bank-rescue programs is to return to a campaign-style format to draw the connection between the votes in the capital and the depressed precincts of Elkhart, Indiana, and Fort Myers, Florida.

With this swing, Obama is seeking to dial up pressure on Congress to keep the stimulus package from losing elements he views as crucial for getting the economy back on track.

Elkhart County, where Obama travels today, has seen its jobless rate more than triple, to 15.3 percent, in just a year as its recreational vehicle industry has been slammed by the recession and high gas prices. In Fort Myers, where he goes Feb. 10, the unemployment rate has risen to 10 percent from six percent in a year because of soaring foreclosures and sinking tourism.

Tonight, in another effort to speak directly to the public, the president will hold his first prime-time news conference at 8 p.m. EST.

Just as Ronald Reagan went straight to the public to win support for tax cuts, Obama is trying to generate backing for his program by rallying Americans.

Stirring Up Constituents

“Obama is hoping similarly to move inside-Beltway opinion by arousing constituents outside,” said Rogan Kersh, associate dean of New York University’s Wagner School of Public Service.

“Photos of huge, cheering crowds will remind fence-sitting legislators how Obama got to the White House in the first place,” said Kersh.

Both Indiana and Florida helped propel Obama to the White House, and he is returning there to try to generate support for his financial-rescue plans as the Senate prepares to vote Feb. 10 on its version of a spending plan that could top $800 billion. The U.S. House has passed an $819 billion stimulus plan and the differences between the chambers must be reconciled before any legislation would land on the president’s desk.

“Americans need jobs, and the best way to get this economy kick-started again is through a recovery and reinvestment plan that will save or create millions of them,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said in an interview yesterday.

Republican Arguments

While the president’s approval ratings are close to 70 percent, much of the public has been persuaded by arguments from congressional Republicans that the stimulus package is loaded with projects that won’t spur economic growth, according to Charles Jones, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

So Obama is trying to command attention. In both the town hall and news conference, he will highlight the depths of the economic distress many Americans are feeling, difficulties that he will argue the stimulus package would ease.

The jobless picture across the nation reflects the strain of the recession. On Feb. 6, the Labor Department announced that the unemployment rate rose to 7.6 percent in January from 7.2 percent in December. Payrolls fell by 598,000.

Elkhart is a place in need of help. Elkhart County’s 15.3 percent unemployment rate is up from 4.7 in the last year. The city of Elkhart is even higher, at 18 percent, according to Mayor Dick Moore.

Shovel-Ready Projects

“Everyone knows that with an 18 percent unemployment rate in the city of Elkhart, we need this stimulus package,” Moore said in a telephone interview. “There’s no pork in this proposal. We’ve got 17 projects that are shovel-ready. What a great idea it is to be able to jump-start these programs and at the same time create jobs.”

The city of 52,000 people in northwest Indiana, located 109 miles from Chicago, has prepared its own wish list of projects should it receive money from the stimulus plan. Though Obama won Indiana, Elkhart County voted for Republican John McCain, 55 percent to 43 percent.

Just three weeks into his presidency, Obama is facing partisan strains.

“The most damaging thing that has come out of the White House was basically a line of argument that says, ‘We want bipartisanship and the reason the Republicans should vote for us is because we won the election,’” said Vin Weber, a Washington lobbyist and former Republican member of Congress from Minnesota.

Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, a Democrat, said that Republicans were voting against the plan as a strategy rather than on the merits. “I question whether or not with some of these folks there is good-faith intent,” he said in an interview. “Because I think he has made a Herculean effort to be bipartisan.”

E-Mail Campaign

Obama is also using his public approval to communicate directly to Americans and not in the frame of a public debate with Republicans. In addition to the town-hall and news conference, he is employing a new political group, Organizing for America, to generate support by leveraging the group’s 13-million person e-mail list to promote Obama’s policies.

Last weekend, the group facilitated 3,000 house gatherings to get people engaged in discussions about the stimulus plan, and he sent his radio address via e-mail to his mailing list.

“One power that the president traditionally has in moments like these is to go into the states and legislative districts and light a fire under constituents to make sure their congressmen and congresswomen support the White House,” said Julian Zelizer, a history and public affairs professor at Princeton University in New Jersey.

“He clearly lost some momentum,” Zelizer said. “Conservatives did a better job than expected in depicting this as a huge piece of pork-barrel spending that will do little for the economy.”

Obonga

The Clintons

Originally posted by Bald Corpse:

Obonga

Conspiracy nutter

Originally posted by Macallan:

Originally posted by Bald Corpse:

Obonga

Conspiracy nutter

"In a 34-page memorandum and opinion, the judge said Berg's allegations of harm were "too vague and too attenuated" to confer standing on him or any other voters.

Surrick ruled that Berg's attempts to use certain laws to gain standing to pursue his claim that Obama was not a natural-born citizen were "frivolous and not worthy of discussion."

The information available at the website I linked to proves beyond reasonable doubt that Obonga is in fact, not a natural-born citizen of the U.S, and if anyone is convinced that this proof may not be so, they better start explaining how.

"frivolous and not worthy of discussion" just doesn't cut it.

May you be touched by the FSM's Noodly Appendage Bald Corpse.

So THEY faked everything right from his birth so he could become president 47 years later? Yeah, right

Originally posted by Macallan:

So THEY faked everything right from his birth so he could become president 47 years later? Yeah, right

No, they faked the certificate when people started asking about it. Read the Polarik's Final Report on the "Colb Facts" section from the link I provided.

I don't even know how anyone can seriously discuss or debate this. This makes as much sense as debating someone from the flat earth society.

Originally posted by BernG:

I don't even know how anyone can seriously discuss or debate this. This makes as much sense as debating someone from the flat earth society.

The flat grassy knoll society?

Originally posted by BernG:

I don't even know how anyone can seriously discuss or debate this.

They can't. It's pure and unmolested ing.

Originally posted by BernG:

This makes as much sense as debating someone from the flat earth society.

Or debating Bush about foreign policy...

Apparently it's another case of quote mining. Is anyone surprised?

Originally posted by Macallan:

So THEY faked everything right from his birth so he could become president 47 years later? Yeah, right

What's wrong with you? Didn't you know that. Also his middle name is....Hussein Clearly a Moslem terrorist if I ever saw one

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Originally posted by Macallan:

So THEY faked everything right from his birth so he could become president 47 years later? Yeah, right

What's wrong with you? Didn't you know that. Also his middle name is....Hussein Clearly a Moslem terrorist if I ever saw one

It's much worse. THEY actually brought his mother-to-be to Honolulu so he'd be born on US territory. By three men in black who brought gifts after following some bright object in the sky that only they could see

Originally posted by Macallan:

THEY actually brought his mother-to-be to Honolulu so he'd be born on US territory. By three men in black who brought gifts after following some bright object in the sky that only they could see

THEY stop at nothing!

Here's what happens when you Google "They"


http://images.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.stargods.org/TheyLiveNikolaiValuevEyes2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.stargods.org/TheyLiveAmongUs.html&usg=__7QM8RodjN3hgRpi_9DeW3e0wL5I=&h=321&w=341&sz=9&hl=en&start=13&um=1&tbnid=jS1Q0P0NGDY5xM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dthey%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dopera%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN

"For THEY have taken some of their daughters as wives for themselves and their sons, so that the holy seed is mixed with the peoples of those lands. Indeed, the hand of the leaders and rulers has been foremost in this trespass."So when I heard this thing, I tore my garment and my robe, and plucked out some of the hair of my head and beard, and sat down astonished."
Ezra 9:2-3

Damn THEM! Damn THEM to bloody hell!

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Damn THEM! Damn THEM to bloody hell!

Long time no post Sang.
Have a

Sanguinemoon

Posts: 20805

who thats a lot, tho you have been on since 2003

Macallan

Posts: 42917



I did do my first presidential election vote during this election. I know things won't happen instantly. In order even try to judge a president they have to be in office for more than a month

President Obama appointed Adolfo Carrion and Derek Douglas to head Urban Affairs - thus reaffirming his commitment to the major metropolitan areas where 80% of the entire population lives and works. It's not Socialism - it's common sense.

Why would you purposely neglect 80% of a population - which is exactly what the Republican Party does everytime they are in office?

I have my ideas as to why; and, with all the recent talk about Chimpanzees(), I leave you with this view:

"We can't leave people in abject poverty. So, we need to raise the standard of living for 80% of the world's people - while bringing it down considerably for the 20% who are destroying our natural resources."

- Dr. Jane Goodall

A Christian, a Jew and Barack Obama are in a rowboat in the middle of the ocean. Barack Obama says, "This joke isn't going to work because there's no Muslim in this boat."

Originally posted by boazjones:

"We can't leave people in abject poverty. So, we need to raise the standard of living for 80% of the world's people - while bringing it down considerably for the 20% who are destroying our natural resources."

- Dr. Jane Goodall

I can live with this view.

Originally posted by Daveski17:

Originally posted by boazjones:

"We can't leave people in abject poverty. So, we need to raise the standard of living for 80% of the world's people - while bringing it down considerably for the 20% who are destroying our natural resources."

- Dr. Jane Goodall

I can live with this view.

Yup... they're called X-Wves.

The United States has a great deal of influence in the world beyond the realm of military power - always has.

Not the least of which is the cultivation of a climate during the Bush Administration that gave defacto support to groups like the BNP and Fainna Fáil.

In a similar fashion, the advent of the Obama Administration has seen a shift away from Nationalism in the West - perhaps influencing the defeat of Republican/Nationalist groups throughout Europe.

I guess the Bush Administration was a bad example of a good idea - or, perhaps a good example of a bad one!

Success on the part of the Obama Administration will mark the extinction of the Republican Party in the United States; and, with any fortune, the rest of the western world as well.

Originally posted by boazjones:

Success on the part of the Obama Administration will mark the extinction of the Republican Party in the United States; and, with any fortune, the rest of the western world as well.

As much as I dislike the Republican party, this would be dumb as hell. We'd have a one party country. Then what? Remember throughout history different countries have tried this dangerous path you are suggesting.
I'd be all for the destruction of the Republican party but only if another party took it's place. I'd be overjoyed if Libertarians took their place.
I'd guess you would too 'eh Jonesy?

it would be hard for the GOP to just die out. State governments still have strong republican leaders. don't get me wrong i wish it could, TN has a repub maj. in the house and senate. go figure huh?

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by boazjones:

Success on the part of the Obama Administration will mark the extinction of the Republican Party in the United States; and, with any fortune, the rest of the western world as well.

As much as I dislike the Republican party, this would be dumb as hell. We'd have a one party country. Then what? Remember throughout history different countries have tried this dangerous path you are suggesting.
I'd be all for the destruction of the Republican party but only if another party took it's place. I'd be overjoyed if Libertarians took their place.
I'd guess you would too 'eh Jonesy?

Now, now - let's look this over in a positive light.

The United States needs to evolve. Think of it as natural selection - politically speaking...

The American Landscape has changed - and so, politics must keep pace. Think of it as the end of a non-viable political organism whose extinction will free up resources for a more evolved political entity.

As it stands right now, I wouldn't call the Libertarian Party a new political "species" - I would simply call it a variation or different race of the Republican Party.

Perhaps the extinction of the Republican Party will give rise to something that is better than both major parties. I certainly hope so - but one thing is certain:

Look at the demographics of the Republican Party - it is clear that it needs to evolve into something different in order to be a viable representation of the American people.

heres to hoping

Originally posted by boazjones:

I wouldn't call the Libertarian Party a new political "species" - I would simply call it a variation or different race of the Republican Party.

Well that's you and your opinion. We must keep in mind opinions are like armpits, we all have them. No one person's is better than the others.
I have stated several times that you pay us Libertarians a great disrespect by calling us or equating us with Repubs. Did you not see what I posted to Dave in another thread?

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

It is most accurate to say that libertarians are what Democrats used to be, as that is the party founded by Jefferson, an idol of libertarians. He is given token appreciation by Democrats who disagree with everything he stood for but is still famous and well regarded.

The differences between the Republican Party and the Libertarian Party can be found in their platforms. One party is a party of centralized government control of just about everything but lacking a unifying central ideology. The other is a party driven by a central ideology of liberty and defines everything else in the platform by that unifying central idea.

The Republicans are economic interventionists in spite of their claims otherwise, but are interventionists for the big and powerful, unlike Democrats who are interventionists for the bottom of the ladder. Libertarians are strict economic non-interventionists at all times.

The Republicans believe in social engineering to make everyone more moral, just like the Democrats believe in social engineering to make everyone more politically correct. Libertarians oppose social engineering by the government.

In truth there is slightly more in common between Libertarians and Democrats, because in the Democratic Party there is a small caucus that is both anti-war and pro-civil-liberty AT THE SAME TIME. In the Republican Party that caucus is roughtly one person.

The difference between Libertarians and Democrats is that while they both seek greater civil liberty and greater civil rights (as well as greater economic fairness), they define them entirely differently. The Republicans don't seek them at all.

I just don't know about deregulating the economy... thats really what got us in todays mess. however if health care and a down size in military comes with it... I'll take it.

Originally posted by MSNBC:

It’s 24-7 and not just cable anymore, but also instantaneous live-blogging and Twittering by the punditry.
[ ... ]
For now, the White House has chosen to deal with it by flooding the zone. Instead of pushing a single storyline a week, they try to sell multiple messages.

Can the Blackberry White House keep up the pace?
(source)

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

Originally posted by MSNBC:

It’s 24-7 and not just cable anymore, but also instantaneous live-blogging and Twittering by the punditry.
[ ... ]
For now, the White House has chosen to deal with it by flooding the zone. Instead of pushing a single storyline a week, they try to sell multiple messages.

This is interesting from several perspectives, at least in my febrile mind.

First, please note that the MSNBC talking and writing heads are doing the very same thing...they are part of the Twittering punditry.

Second, while it's true that the new administration is "flooding the zone" (this one has to be a mystery to our European brethren because they know as much about American football as we know about futbol), there are reasons for it because there are problems aplenty to solve.

Third, the economic problems are so complex and so threatening that if anybody could sort through them and come up with a solution, hardly anybody else would agree since it wouldn't be distinguishable from the plethora of other "solutions" out there that would do nothing or make matters worse. There are no genuine experts in the field who can really wrap their minds around this mess. Anybody who claims to have the solution to what ails us is a fool and a poltroon, and should be ignored.

By their very nature, writers have to write and press pontiffs have to pontificate. Political opponents have to pretend that they have a better idea. The Bush admin gave us TARP. It was so difficult to comprehend and enact that it never got started. So they tried something else, and nobody liked that either...and we still don't know whether it has helped or hurt us.

We need a papal nuncio!

Jeeze... I only meant to preface an "it's only been a month or two"-type comment. (And test a new User JavaScript...)

Originally posted by Jaybro:

Anybody who claims to have the solution to what ails us is a fool and a poltroon, and should be ignored.

You're serious, aren't you?

Anyone who has an answer should hang his head in shame! (Before you'd have him hanged in the public square.) Efigy, thy name is democracy...

Originally posted by OakdaleFTL:

You're serious, aren't you?

I'm waiting for you to tell me who will do the trick.
Of course I'm serious.

Originally posted by boazjones:

Now, now - let's look this over in a positive light.

The United States needs to evolve. Think of it as natural selection - politically speaking...

The American Landscape has changed - and so, politics must keep pace. Think of it as the end of a non-viable political organism whose extinction will free up resources for a more evolved political entity.

As it stands right now, I wouldn't call the Libertarian Party a new political "species" - I would simply call it a variation or different race of the Republican Party.

Perhaps the extinction of the Republican Party will give rise to something that is better than both major parties. I certainly hope so - but one thing is certain:

Look at the demographics of the Republican Party - it is clear that it needs to evolve into something different in order to be a viable representation of the American people.

The Democratic Party needs to evolve as well. They don't have any guarantees of eternal existence, either. They're still too besotted with FDR and JFK. Obama might have a hard time pushing a TARP II or a Stimulus II.

The Republican/Nationalist Party was fired because they are a hideous choice to represent the American people - 95% of which they don't give a damn about anyway since they aren't rich.

The Democrats are not perfect - but they working for the good of 95% of the population.

Good is better - because it's nicer...

Originally posted by boazjones:

The Republican/Nationalist Party was fired because they are a hideous choice to represent the American people - 95% of which they don't give a damn about anyway since they aren't rich.

The Democrats are not perfect - but they working for the good of 95% of the population.

Good is better - because it's nicer...

Right. The Democrats have been "fired" a good many times in their history as well. They are working for the good of 95% of the population? What both parties are working for is the good of their own political offices. Of course, what they want you to believe with rapt devotion is that they're just trying to help you and usher in the glorious era of peace and prosperity for all. It's all about building gullible voting blocs for reliable votes to keep sorry asses in office.

(edit) PS -- Say, boazjones, have you noticed the similarities between Bush and Obama on things like the rights of detainees? Gitmo? Look it up.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

(edit) PS -- Say, boazjones, have you noticed the similarities between Bush and Obama on things like the rights of detainees? Gitmo? Look it up.

Ah, Monsieur Fanfarón. Como sa va? Bién?

President Obama has reaffirmed his commitment to developing the major metropolitan areas where 80% of the entire population of the United States lives and works. President Obama "gets it". He doesn't have an aid whispering in his ear trying to explain to him how local and state government works - he already knows. This is evident in his appointment of Adolfo Carrion and Derek Douglas as White House Urban Affairs directors.

Obama isn't from Wasilla, Alaska or West butt-fu*k Texas - he's from the midwest. The midwest has been has been devastated by the loss of manufacturing. President Obama doesn't have to rely on some aid whispering in his ear telling him, "...sir, I don't know how to tell you this; but, there are actually people in this country that make below $250,000 per year."

Originally posted by boazjones:

President Obama has reaffirmed his commitment to developing the major metropolitan areas where 80% of the entire population of the United States lives and works. President Obama "gets it". He doesn't have an aid whispering in his ear trying to explain to him how local and state government works - he already knows. This is evident in his appointment of Adolfo Carrion and Derek Douglas as White House Urban Affairs directors.

Obama isn't from Wasilla, Alaska or West butt-fu*k Texas - he's from the midwest. The midwest has been has been devastated by the loss of manufacturing. President Obama doesn't have to rely on some aid whispering in his ear telling him, "...sir, I don't know how to tell you this; but, there are actually people in this country that make below $250,000 per year."

I think you're confusing "major metroplitan areas" with "urban centers". That's far from saying that 80% of the US population lives in NY, Philly, Chicago, Cleveland, LA, etc. Besides, people in Wasilla and West Bumf*** are people, too. A good many of them work, are productive, and pay taxes. I would have thought that a populist like you would realize that. Or is it that only people in "major metropolitan areas" count?

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Originally posted by boazjones:

President Obama has reaffirmed his commitment to developing the major metropolitan areas where 80% of the entire population of the United States lives and works. President Obama "gets it". He doesn't have an aid whispering in his ear trying to explain to him how local and state government works - he already knows. This is evident in his appointment of Adolfo Carrion and Derek Douglas as White House Urban Affairs directors.

Obama isn't from Wasilla, Alaska or West butt-fu*k Texas - he's from the midwest. The midwest has been has been devastated by the loss of manufacturing. President Obama doesn't have to rely on some aid whispering in his ear telling him, "...sir, I don't know how to tell you this; but, there are actually people in this country that make below $250,000 per year."

I think you're confusing "major metroplitan areas" with "urban centers". That's far from saying that 80% of the US population lives in NY, Philly, Chicago, Cleveland, LA, etc. Besides, people in Wasilla and West Bumf*** are people, too. A good many of them work, are productive, and pay taxes. I would have thought that a populist like you would realize that. Or is it that only people in "major metropolitan areas" count?

Typical useless, deceptive Republican double-talk! You focus on a syntax error - like a missing comma in order to draw attention away from the emptiness of what you have to say.

In fact, you have said absolutely nothing but restate what I just said.

Is it a game? You're so much smarter than I am. I'm already intimidated.
Looks like I can't take you seriously anymore.

As if...

Originally posted by boazjones:

Typical useless, deceptive Republican double-talk! You focus on a syntax error - like a missing comma in order to draw attention away from the emptiness of what you have to say.

In fact, you have said absolutely nothing but restate what I just said.

Is it a game? You're so much smarter than I am. I'm already intimidated.
Looks like I can't take you seriously anymore.

As if...

Mistaking "major metropolitan area" for "urban center" and "urban clusters" (which can range in population from 2500 to 200,000+ ...and can include places like Wasilla and West Bumf****) is not an error in syntax; it's a factual error undercutting your "80% of the population" argument. If you can't get your facts straight, you're the one that can't be taken seriously. You're entitled to your own opinion -- Democratic, Republican, whatever -- but not your own facts.

I'm out kickin' it at "Club Liquid" with my girl. She's in the lady's room - so, I wanted to take this opportunity to offer the Republicans/Nationalists some encouragement:

"...extinction is the death of every member of a species or group of taxa." - wikipedia

Republicans: Bad/Non-Viable

Democrats: Good/Viable

Good is better - because it's nicer...

Here's to Natural Selection...

Originally posted by boazjones:

Republicans: Bad/Non-Viable

Democrats: Good/Viable

Good is better - because it's nicer...

Here's to Natural Selection...

A true believer. I'll file this one away for future reference.

Originally posted by boazjones:

Republicans: Bad/Non-Viable

Democrats: Good/Viable

How about:

Republicans= Filthy corrupt wankers
Democrats= Flithy corrupt wankers who are in power now

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Republicans= Filthy corrupt wankers
Democrats= Flithy corrupt wankers who are in power now

That's a lot of auto-eroticizing politicians!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhSspSOiBJw

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by boazjones:

Republicans: Bad/Non-Viable

Democrats: Good/Viable

How about:

Republicans= Filthy corrupt wankers
Democrats= Flithy corrupt wankers who are in power now

Now, now Mr. Dawgfan - the United States of America seems to disagree with you.

Originally posted by Daveski17:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhSspSOiBJw

I haven't seen that in a long time.

Originally posted by boazjones:

Now, now Mr. Dawgfan - the United States of America seems to disagree with you.

So?
Most of the US cares about politics only during election time. They're not like you and myself.
They're to freakin busy watching American Idol or Queer Eye.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by Daveski17:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhSspSOiBJw

I haven't seen that in a long time.

I just wondered if turning japanese is slang for the same thing in the US as it is in the UK....I reckon so..

While I am in You Tube...

Suddenly... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXYa_qklKPc&feature=related

Originally posted by boazjones:

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by boazjones:

Republicans: Bad/Non-Viable

Democrats: Good/Viable

How about:

Republicans= Filthy corrupt wankers
Democrats= Flithy corrupt wankers who are in power now

Now, now Mr. Dawgfan - the United States of America seems to disagree with you.

Heh...yeah, one the one hand, a lot of them voted for Bush as well; on the other, there are a lot of people waiting for their mortgages to be paid off and their gas tanks filled for free, along with herds of magical unicorns crapping Skittles all over the countryside. My estimation of the typical voter has gone down quite a bit over the past several years.

i must add this, if you thought clinton was bad, wait four years, then start posting a topic on why McCain shoould have won.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Heh...yeah, one the one hand, a lot of them voted for Bush as well; on the other, there are a lot of people waiting for their mortgages to be paid off and their gas tanks filled for free, along with herds of magical unicorns crapping Skittles all over the countryside. My estimation of the typical voter has gone down quite a bit over the past several years.

You have the Republican Party to thank for that.

Come to think of it, the Republicans lied so badly that it felt like a Koala was trying to crap a rainbow in my brain everytime I saw a Republican News Conference.

I'm so freakin' glad they've been fired I don't know what to do...