America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

‘Be a Leader. Be F—king Presidential’


Samuel L. Jackson has some harsh words for President Barack Obama.

“Be a leader. Be f-king presidential,” Jackson told Playboy magazine in a wide-ranging interview on his career and political beliefs.

The “Pulp Fiction” star donated $2,500 to the president’s re-election campaign, but he seems particularly incensed by Obama’s attempts to come off as a “common man” by dropping the g’s in his speeches and public statements and adapting a folksy tone.

“Look, I grew up in a society where I could say ‘It ain’t’ or ‘What it be’ to my friends,” Jackson told the magazine. “But when I’m out presenting myself to the world as me, who graduated from college, who had family who cared about me, who has a well-read background, I f-king conjugate.”

When it came to partisan gridlock in Washington, D.C., Jackson thought that Republicans were responding defensively to the possibility of a second President Clinton.

“If Hillary Clinton decides to run, she’s going to kick their fu-king asses, and those motherf-kers would rather see the country go down in flames than let the times change,” Jackson said.

On a happier note, he’d be open to the possibility of playing Mace Windu in the new “Star Wars” trilogy. So even if the country goes to hell, there’s that to look forward to.


Yeah...I suppose there's always that to look forward to...whoopie! Maybe he can take his Jar Jar Binks President on a plane or something.

a Royal with cheese

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

HEY!

Show some respect for the Office...you don't have to like the President...but you will respect the Office of the Presidency!!!

As much as she wants it...she won't be able to overcome the mess she oversaw in Benghazi.

you'd think so.... many people will ignore it... she's already campaigning....

I'm not sure half of her constituency have ever heard of Benghazi. I'm guessing Obama's core support won't make out since there won't be a novelty on the ballot. But, where does tht leave us? I've yet to see anyone on the horizon either willing or capable to steer this country in a more prosperous direction.

Regardless of who gets elected it will be more of the same. Lobbyist paid by big business run things.

This.

Them versus us, liberals versus conservatives, republicans versus democrats...it's pretty much all a charade to keep us proles busy squaring off against one another. Misdirection...works every time in both stage magic and politics.

There may be a few politicians who actually believe what they say and follow the Constitution and their conscience. But we will never, ever see them living in the White House.

Benghazi? You mean old Ben Ghazi, from the clone wars?

I haven't seen Rick around lately....

nobody ever thinks of Ram...


he has a bat...

This is true for the primary race.
But if she won the primary it would cease to matter at all.

Hillary Clinton will be the next President of the United States.

Plan for it now. Get ahead and avoid the last-minute rush.

Ted Cruz just bet his future on Obamacare crashing.

A lot of people make a lot of money off the process of elections. Otherwise running Romney and "Maverick" should have just been scored as a forfeit.

good point on both counts


You know for a Republican "maverick" he always seems to polish Democrat knob.
Why pretend? Become a Democrat & let everyone know you want open borders and hate the 2nd amendment.The fake.

+1 I am looking forward to it!

He likes the mushy center.

Hill-Dog/Jeb Bushy would be his wet dream ticket.

No. I think she is better than anyone the Rs will dig up up right now. Jeb, if his last name wasn't Bush, would beat her. So would Christie, for that matter. But, they aren't "true Republicans" are they.

If you think Jeb is in the middle on social and fiscal issues, you know him not. I disliked him as our governor, but know he would make an excellant President. He'd cut through all the budget and fiscal crap- and that would be best for all of us.

Who do you think the Rs should run?

Double Post Outrage.

And... it is all Bush's fault, right?

I generally agree too. Was just being sarcastic. What i don't agree with is interest rates remaining low. They have to rise. It will be slow if we work out of the recession slowly over time and will be sudden if we try to finish the back end of recession recovery fast.

We will get the figurative separated branches if we start respecting each others' rights to differing opinions and stop the infantile bickering and name calling.

No Robert it is not. Unless, see below.....

According to my 9th grade Civics class spending legislation must originate in the House. In order for that legislation to make it to the Senate it must receive a majority vote of at least 218 in the House.

Then that bill is sent to the Senate. In order for it to pass the Senate, it must receive 51 votes in favor unless a Senator chooses to filibuster. If so, it will require a super majority of 67 yay votes.

Unless the Senate passes the exact bill it is sent to a conference committee of members of both houses who try to reconcile both versions. That committee report then goes to the house and the Senate to be voted on.

Assuming the conference report is passed, the bill the goes to the President to sigh, not sign or to veto.

If the President signs the legislation that means a minimum of 270 agreed to the legislation. If at any point it was filibustered then at least 286 people would have to agreed to the legislation. If the President vetoes the legislation, it must receive at least 357 votes (67 in the Senate, 290 in the house) in an over ride to enact the legislation into law.

(Hey Victor, "How is that for 3rd grade math?")

Last I checked there has only been one Bush in the above scenario at any one time.



For simpler explanation, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3KHBczTYxA

I don't think the Fed will even think about raising rates anytime soon. Think of the repercussions.

It would require another significant increase in the debt. Which would in turn require an even higher percentage of taxes go to paying off that debt, lest the Fed says fuqq it we're not gonna pay this month. In that case, if taxes are not raised then cuts will have to be made elsewhere which leaves entitlement programs or defense. Good luck knifing any of that. I can't see any Repub voting for tax increase at this point.

So where does that leave us? A new spending cap which adds more to the national debt, which increases the percentage of taxes for debt service, which.....and the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round....

Doesn't the Fed set bench mark interest rates? In turn Treasury Securities are offered at auction by the Treasury Department with a set interest rate. But, the relative discount or premium the securities are sold at is in direct relationship to the current market supply and demand. However, if these instruments are sold at a discount (interest rates rising), then more securities must be auctioned off to obtain the same amount of cash had those securities sold at face value or at a premium.

Should the Fed increase rates, then the marginal rates on the securities will either increase, or they will be sold at a deeper discount than before. I'm thinking either scenario leads to a larger percentage of tax dollars needed to pay interest on the current debt.