• on a comment on A mother of three over 5 years ago
    Oh please, could the drama be toned down around here?
    The very fact that you are posting here, along with all the other sad faced whiners shows that  you aren't silent or "censored".
    How do you explain you own troll rating of other posts? Are you trying to silence people?
  • it is not only racist, it's also bigoted.
    Since you rec'd this piece of shit diary, you must agree with the diarist that gays, AAs, women, and other minorities should just "get over it'?
    You sure weren't taking that tack the other day about Rick Warren, were you?
  • Well your resentment and a buck will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks, maybe. Knowing of Obama's record of supporting issues important to the GLBTs, I'm more interested in what happens after the inauguration.

  • comment on a post That "Oh, sh*t!" moment... over 5 years ago

    Deficit spending is the only thing we have left to stimulate the economy at this point. Too bad we wasted so much money propping up the banks that are hoarding it for their Christmas bonuses.

  • First of all, I never said to shut up about it, so don't pull that crap on me. I think the anger against Warren is justified, and can be used (in the right way) to start a public discourse about equal rights.
    Learn to read before responding next time.
  • The man is saying a prayer at the inauguration, not joining Obama's cabinet. Does anyone remember who said the prayer at the last inauguration we had? I sure don't.
    The decision to include Warren (as much of an intolerant bigot as he is) is a reach out to evangelicals in America, not a swipe at gays.
    Obama has always been about reaching out to the other side, and people who are surprised at this move didn't bother to look at his history.
    What is more important to me is his voting record, and his public statements, both of which show he strongly supports most GLBT issues.
    I understand the anger of some of my friends, especially after the loss in California and then this Warren thing comes right on top of it.
    The one thing good that is coming from this anger is that the issue is on the national stage, and Obama made a statement to the press (showing me he isn't tone deaf about the Warren controversy) publically stating he supports GLBT issues.
    When was the last time we had a president elect say that?
  • comment on a post Breaking news on our broken economy. Is this snark? over 5 years ago

    Thanks, Bob, you put this in language I can almost understand.
    I have some money in the market through retirement accounts, so I try to educate myself, but it's like some people are talking in a foreign language (have you ever seen Bonddad's diaries at DK? Yikes).
    I received an e-mail today talking about Oppenhemier (sp) funds:

    By the end of March, the Core portfolio carried around $400 million in securities exceeding its (then) $2.2 billion in net assets via transactions that were effectively akin to margin borrowing. It also had roughly $800 million in long exposure to corporate credit via default swaps--including  American International Group (AIG), Lehman Brothers,  Wachovia (WB), Washington Mutual, and Bear Stearns--and around $600 million in total return swap exposure to a volatile slice of Barclays' AAA rated CMBS index, all of which by normal reporting convention were not included on the fund's balance sheet and thus not in its net assets. By the end of September, just before the Treasury Department's Troubled Asset Relief Program proposal and right around the time the market sailed off into uncharted mania, Core Bond's credit exposure to those various markets totaled more than 180% of net assets on a dollar basis. In other words, for every dollar of shareholder capital in the fund, it was exposed to the credit-driven movement of more than $1.80 worth of securities.

    What kind of crazy shit is that to do with other people's money? It's outrageous.

  • comment on a post Media Matters Gets Help from Clinton, Carville over 5 years ago
    I love Media Matters, and donate to them pretty regularly.
    It's good to see Hillary trying to raise money for them.
  • comment on a post Three Carols for Hillary's Senate Seat over 5 years ago
    I think Caroline Kennedy would be a fine choice.
    I've never heard of Maloney, but she sounds like a great choice, as well.
    Someone who sings a one note song about gun control, not so much. Single issue candidates don't belong in the US Senate.
  • comment on a post Who's keeping the Obamas out of the Blair House? over 5 years ago

    we have discovered Cheney's previously undisclosed location...

  • comment on a post GM = Get Money over 5 years ago
    Actually, Ford and Chevy models both ranked up there with Lexus and Honda on JD Power's dependability studies for 2008 and in 2007, Ford ranked #1 in initial quality.
    Ironically, the vehicle that got the highest ratings for fewest defects was the Lincoln Town car, whose plant in Michigan was closed last year.
    So please don't buy into the meme that all American cars are gas guzzlers or that they all are pieces of crap.
    I have an 11 year old Ford Explorer with 160,000 miles that's never had a major repair or problem and I plan to keep it until I hit 200,000 miles before I buy another.
  • Cenk on the Young Turks was talking about Romney this morning, he evidently collected a lot of money for his PAC to allegedly help downticket candidates, and then only used 12% of the money for candidates other than himself. He's the anti-Palin, I think.

  • Good to see you back, Chris.

  • comment on a post Trolls and the Broken Window Theory over 5 years ago
    Spiff, while I appreciate the sentiment, and the research, I fear you are more like Don Quixote tilting at windmills, rather than a troll beset Hamlet, wondering where it all went wrong.
    The people who run this blog aren't interested in moderating when a "troll" diary gets hundreds of comments.
    But thank you for the effort.
  • comment on a post p over 5 years ago
    Pardon me, but this diary is based on a ridiculous premise. You assume that you would be fired because your boss might see a photo of you from the internet?
    As Anna said above, if that premise were true, most men wouldn't have a job.
    Why don't you look up the statistics of the number of rapes going on in our military right now?
    Why don't you check into the number of women murdered by their husband or boyfriend in a drunken rage (or dead sober, for that matter)?
    Why don't you peruse the racks of your local porn video store?
    You are either very naive, very young or very stupid.
    By the way, Mr. Favreau apologized a couple of days ago, and as always, Senator Clinton was gracious and forgiving.


Advertise Blogads