Scalia dead

1234568

Comments

  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 29,538
    I've got passport always ready got plenty of family in Chile need be i'm outta here as soon as some nut case gets elected and this country goes to the toilet or another financial crisis i'm gone .........
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • njnancy said:

    Some people despised Scalia because of his arrogance in always voting conservatively and showing preferential treatment to lawyers he liked and being openly offensive & snarky to those he did not. Scalia was polarizing - on purpose - and this causes strong feelings in people. That has come out in some not giving a shit about his death and being happy that his influence is gone from the court.

    Some people did not like Scalia for the same reasons but have been surprised at how only an hour after we learned of his death, McConnell issued a statement saying that the President should neglect his Constitutional duties. And the chiming in began. Here people have not expressed hatred for the man, have given him props for his place in history and are participating in the guessing game about what will happen next. Strong feelings about the GOP's statements are often expressed.

    Some people don't really care that much either way about the whole thing but have a point about something they want to make - no emotions stated about his death either way.

    Some are Scalia fans who want his death to be taken more seriously.

    Some have lumped every single non conservative into one group and accuse us of dancing on the man's grave while whining about our President carrying out his Constitutional duties I don't know if this is from true convictions.or if they are using supposed outrage just to litigate against Obama because it all comes back to Obama not being held in the same regard as those before him and liberals are just clueless whiners who need to be shown the light.

    I fall into the second group, and do not begrudge anyone else their opinion, unless they have shown an inability to be civil to those who have different opinions or values. You can't be neutral on a moving train, but you shouldn't be demeaning. Like our great ex President GWB said yesterday, labels are for soup cans.

    Great ex president GWB?

    Great?

    Seriously?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rr165892rr165892 Posts: 5,697

    I've got passport always ready got plenty of family in Chile need be i'm outta here as soon as some nut case gets elected and this country goes to the toilet or another financial crisis i'm gone .........

    Ha,I'm calling bullshit Jose.
  • SmellymanSmellyman Posts: 4,524

    njnancy said:

    JC29856 said:

    I knew nothing about the man, but I think people have a right to be concerned if there was foul play involved in the death of man who holds such a powerful position in this country. After my dad's so-called "heart attack", I will never look at death the same way again. I believe there are many forces at work in this world--more than we can fathom.

    Wooooow! Where is the foul play coming from?
    Right wing radio has brought up a conspiracy theory that Obama had Scalia killed. He was going to kill Trump next and then Ron Paul. He probably used his friends in Isis, since he really is a secret Muslim warrior, to do the hit. Bangs head on wall.
    the sad part is some people actually believe some of this stuff.
    There are so many mouth breathers on the right, it is real easy to dupe them. They have been duped for the past 16 years. Now Trump is their leading candidate. LOL
  • josevolutionjosevolution Posts: 29,538
    rr165892 said:

    I've got passport always ready got plenty of family in Chile need be i'm outta here as soon as some nut case gets elected and this country goes to the toilet or another financial crisis i'm gone .........

    Ha,I'm calling bullshit Jose.
    It's always an option for me seriously ..
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • njnancynjnancy Posts: 5,096

    njnancy said:

    Some people despised Scalia because of his arrogance in always voting conservatively and showing preferential treatment to lawyers he liked and being openly offensive & snarky to those he did not. Scalia was polarizing - on purpose - and this causes strong feelings in people. That has come out in some not giving a shit about his death and being happy that his influence is gone from the court.

    Some people did not like Scalia for the same reasons but have been surprised at how only an hour after we learned of his death, McConnell issued a statement saying that the President should neglect his Constitutional duties. And the chiming in began. Here people have not expressed hatred for the man, have given him props for his place in history and are participating in the guessing game about what will happen next. Strong feelings about the GOP's statements are often expressed.

    Some people don't really care that much either way about the whole thing but have a point about something they want to make - no emotions stated about his death either way.

    Some are Scalia fans who want his death to be taken more seriously.

    Some have lumped every single non conservative into one group and accuse us of dancing on the man's grave while whining about our President carrying out his Constitutional duties I don't know if this is from true convictions.or if they are using supposed outrage just to litigate against Obama because it all comes back to Obama not being held in the same regard as those before him and liberals are just clueless whiners who need to be shown the light.

    I fall into the second group, and do not begrudge anyone else their opinion, unless they have shown an inability to be civil to those who have different opinions or values. You can't be neutral on a moving train, but you shouldn't be demeaning. Like our great ex President GWB said yesterday, labels are for soup cans.

    Great ex president GWB?

    Great?

    Seriously?
    I was being facetious.
  • njnancynjnancy Posts: 5,096
    JimmyV said:

    Scalia's chair draped in black. I am uncomfortable with the gleeful piling on that has followed this man's death, in spite of how reprehensible I found him to be in life. I am much more in favor of attacking the living than the dead. With that in mind I must point out...if recent history is any indication, the drapery in this picture will ask as many questions in future Supreme Court hearings as will Clarence Thomas.

    image

    Thank you for the picture - it is a powerful image.
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944
    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    I am not surprised his death is being cheered on the Train. Some of you continue to have blinders on and just do not see how full of hate you are and completely intolerant of others opinions. The guy doesn't get to the supreme court and be respected by the most liberal judges on the court (even great friends with and travel companions) by being a bigot. He just interprets the constitution from his viewpoint and others view it differently. He still respected his peers on the court and they respected him, but on the Train it is the epitome of "My way or the highway" per usual. Cheering death for anyone you disagree with.

    I do not cheer for death of people just because I disagree with them. I cheer for the death of people who I think are rotten human beings who cause harm to the world. Scalia applies.

    PS - couldn't care less if you think being glad he's dead is bad taste. That guy was a motherfucker as far as I'm concerned and I am pleased as punch that his voice is gone from the US supreme court. Death was the only thing that would shut the fucker up.
    Classy.
    Oh please.
    I see no difference between the way you think Trump runs his mouth and the expletive train you just unleashed.
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944
    rgambs said:

    njnancy said:

    myoung321 said:



    give it 50 years. scalia's rulings will be judged by history to be as backwards as the dred scott decision and separate but equal.

    No different than the rest of the Conservatives throughout our history

    Conservatives opposed the American Revolution
    Conservatives opposed freeing the slaves
    Conservatives opposed women’s suffrage
    Conservatives opposed public school
    Conservatives opposed fighting fascism in Europe
    Conservatives opposed minimum wage and child labor laws, the 8-hour work day, weekends, sick leave… etc.
    Conservatives opposed humane treatment of animals
    Conservatives opposed the Social Security Act
    Conservatives opposed the Farm Act
    Conservatives opposed the Interstate Highway System
    Conservatives oppose clean air and water
    Conservatives opposed the Civil Right’s Act
    Conservatives opposed the G.I. Bill
    Conservatives opposed Medicare
    Conservatives oppose Equal Protection Under the Law
    .....etc...etc..etc..

    the list is endless......!!!!!

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the conservatives were the complete opposite of what they are now!!

    Also Scalia was just slightly out of touch with the world,no?!?
    Republicans used to be more moderate and tolerant - ie - Lincoln and slavery. Then Southern Democrats - Dixiecrats - split with Democrats and went to Republicans and the moral majority and conservatism in social issues became a large part of the Republican party platform and Democrats became more socially liberal. Conservatism is an ideology in the Republican party.

    Scalia was very comfortable in his view of the world. It's just that it was not in touch with the change in attitudes of most Americans. Hence - the cry to 'take our country back'. I always want someone to finish the sentence with who they are taking it back from.
    Taking it back from people who do not allow a non-liberal/progressive viewpoint. For example, Mozilla CEO being fired because he gave a $1,000 to the wrong PAC due to a few whiny people on social media.

    Hahaha awww poor baby! He will probably only be rich for the rest of his life :bawling:

    That's how the free market works, people vote with their wallets. It's all fine and good for him to donate money to actively deny rights to American citizens, but not ok for American citizens to say "Bullshit" and refuse to do business with said bigot? It seems like you are biased towards those who try to make bigots own their words. Strange.
    How many citizens though? Do you think more than .1% of the polulation care about his political views? I just think it is a slippery slope and right now you views align with the vocal minority that is pressuring companies, but I don't think you would like it if you were on the other side of it. I don't see how you can think it is a good thing to suppress different viewpoints. We live in a country that has laws and legislators. People can have different ideas and the voters should settle things at the polls and force politicians to act based on their voting. A guy that has a different viewpoint shouldn't be forced out of his job. Now if he is discriminating against people illegally, if he is verbally or phsyically abusive to others, then that is a different story.
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944
    rgambs said:

    njnancy said:

    myoung321 said:



    give it 50 years. scalia's rulings will be judged by history to be as backwards as the dred scott decision and separate but equal.

    No different than the rest of the Conservatives throughout our history

    Conservatives opposed the American Revolution
    Conservatives opposed freeing the slaves
    Conservatives opposed women’s suffrage
    Conservatives opposed public school
    Conservatives opposed fighting fascism in Europe
    Conservatives opposed minimum wage and child labor laws, the 8-hour work day, weekends, sick leave… etc.
    Conservatives opposed humane treatment of animals
    Conservatives opposed the Social Security Act
    Conservatives opposed the Farm Act
    Conservatives opposed the Interstate Highway System
    Conservatives oppose clean air and water
    Conservatives opposed the Civil Right’s Act
    Conservatives opposed the G.I. Bill
    Conservatives opposed Medicare
    Conservatives oppose Equal Protection Under the Law
    .....etc...etc..etc..

    the list is endless......!!!!!

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the conservatives were the complete opposite of what they are now!!

    Also Scalia was just slightly out of touch with the world,no?!?
    Republicans used to be more moderate and tolerant - ie - Lincoln and slavery. Then Southern Democrats - Dixiecrats - split with Democrats and went to Republicans and the moral majority and conservatism in social issues became a large part of the Republican party platform and Democrats became more socially liberal. Conservatism is an ideology in the Republican party.

    Scalia was very comfortable in his view of the world. It's just that it was not in touch with the change in attitudes of most Americans. Hence - the cry to 'take our country back'. I always want someone to finish the sentence with who they are taking it back from.
    Taking it back from people who do not allow a non-liberal/progressive viewpoint. For example, Mozilla CEO being fired because he gave a $1,000 to the wrong PAC due to a few whiny people on social media.

    Hahaha awww poor baby! He will probably only be rich for the rest of his life :bawling:

    That's how the free market works, people vote with their wallets. It's all fine and good for him to donate money to actively deny rights to American citizens, but not ok for American citizens to say "Bullshit" and refuse to do business with said bigot? It seems like you are biased towards those who try to make bigots own their words. Strange.
    How many citizens though? Do you think more than .1% of the polulation care about his political views? I just think it is a slippery slope and right now you views align with the vocal minority that is pressuring companies, but I don't think you would like it if you were on the other side of it. I don't see how you can think it is a good thing to suppress different viewpoints. We live in a country that has laws and legislators. People can have different ideas and the voters should settle things at the polls and force politicians to act based on their voting. A guy that has a different viewpoint shouldn't be forced out of his job. Now if he is discriminating against people illegally, if he is verbally or phsyically abusive to others, then that is a different story.
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944

    does anybody think for one second that if the shoe were on the other foot, republican president, democratic senate, that the republican president would stand down and wait for the election??

    if you believe that they would, i have a bridge to sell you.

    and a donkey kong msg poster.

    No question.
  • dignindignin Posts: 9,336

    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    I am not surprised his death is being cheered on the Train. Some of you continue to have blinders on and just do not see how full of hate you are and completely intolerant of others opinions. The guy doesn't get to the supreme court and be respected by the most liberal judges on the court (even great friends with and travel companions) by being a bigot. He just interprets the constitution from his viewpoint and others view it differently. He still respected his peers on the court and they respected him, but on the Train it is the epitome of "My way or the highway" per usual. Cheering death for anyone you disagree with.

    I do not cheer for death of people just because I disagree with them. I cheer for the death of people who I think are rotten human beings who cause harm to the world. Scalia applies.

    PS - couldn't care less if you think being glad he's dead is bad taste. That guy was a motherfucker as far as I'm concerned and I am pleased as punch that his voice is gone from the US supreme court. Death was the only thing that would shut the fucker up.
    Classy.
    Oh please.
    I see no difference between the way you think Trump runs his mouth and the expletive train you just unleashed.
    Well, one is running for president.....so there's that.
  • njnancy said:

    njnancy said:

    Some people despised Scalia because of his arrogance in always voting conservatively and showing preferential treatment to lawyers he liked and being openly offensive & snarky to those he did not. Scalia was polarizing - on purpose - and this causes strong feelings in people. That has come out in some not giving a shit about his death and being happy that his influence is gone from the court.

    Some people did not like Scalia for the same reasons but have been surprised at how only an hour after we learned of his death, McConnell issued a statement saying that the President should neglect his Constitutional duties. And the chiming in began. Here people have not expressed hatred for the man, have given him props for his place in history and are participating in the guessing game about what will happen next. Strong feelings about the GOP's statements are often expressed.

    Some people don't really care that much either way about the whole thing but have a point about something they want to make - no emotions stated about his death either way.

    Some are Scalia fans who want his death to be taken more seriously.

    Some have lumped every single non conservative into one group and accuse us of dancing on the man's grave while whining about our President carrying out his Constitutional duties I don't know if this is from true convictions.or if they are using supposed outrage just to litigate against Obama because it all comes back to Obama not being held in the same regard as those before him and liberals are just clueless whiners who need to be shown the light.

    I fall into the second group, and do not begrudge anyone else their opinion, unless they have shown an inability to be civil to those who have different opinions or values. You can't be neutral on a moving train, but you shouldn't be demeaning. Like our great ex President GWB said yesterday, labels are for soup cans.

    Great ex president GWB?

    Great?

    Seriously?
    I was being facetious.
    LOL!

    Sorry.

    And... pshew!
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • SmellymanSmellyman Posts: 4,524
    edited February 2016

    rgambs said:

    njnancy said:

    myoung321 said:



    give it 50 years. scalia's rulings will be judged by history to be as backwards as the dred scott decision and separate but equal.

    No different than the rest of the Conservatives throughout our history

    Conservatives opposed the American Revolution
    Conservatives opposed freeing the slaves
    Conservatives opposed women’s suffrage
    Conservatives opposed public school
    Conservatives opposed fighting fascism in Europe
    Conservatives opposed minimum wage and child labor laws, the 8-hour work day, weekends, sick leave… etc.
    Conservatives opposed humane treatment of animals
    Conservatives opposed the Social Security Act
    Conservatives opposed the Farm Act
    Conservatives opposed the Interstate Highway System
    Conservatives oppose clean air and water
    Conservatives opposed the Civil Right’s Act
    Conservatives opposed the G.I. Bill
    Conservatives opposed Medicare
    Conservatives oppose Equal Protection Under the Law
    .....etc...etc..etc..

    the list is endless......!!!!!

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the conservatives were the complete opposite of what they are now!!

    Also Scalia was just slightly out of touch with the world,no?!?
    Republicans used to be more moderate and tolerant - ie - Lincoln and slavery. Then Southern Democrats - Dixiecrats - split with Democrats and went to Republicans and the moral majority and conservatism in social issues became a large part of the Republican party platform and Democrats became more socially liberal. Conservatism is an ideology in the Republican party.

    Scalia was very comfortable in his view of the world. It's just that it was not in touch with the change in attitudes of most Americans. Hence - the cry to 'take our country back'. I always want someone to finish the sentence with who they are taking it back from.
    Taking it back from people who do not allow a non-liberal/progressive viewpoint. For example, Mozilla CEO being fired because he gave a $1,000 to the wrong PAC due to a few whiny people on social media.

    Hahaha awww poor baby! He will probably only be rich for the rest of his life :bawling:

    That's how the free market works, people vote with their wallets. It's all fine and good for him to donate money to actively deny rights to American citizens, but not ok for American citizens to say "Bullshit" and refuse to do business with said bigot? It seems like you are biased towards those who try to make bigots own their words. Strange.
    How many citizens though? Do you think more than .1% of the polulation care about his political views? I just think it is a slippery slope and right now you views align with the vocal minority that is pressuring companies, but I don't think you would like it if you were on the other side of it. I don't see how you can think it is a good thing to suppress different viewpoints. We live in a country that has laws and legislators. People can have different ideas and the voters should settle things at the polls and force politicians to act based on their voting. A guy that has a different viewpoint shouldn't be forced out of his job. Now if he is discriminating against people illegally, if he is verbally or phsyically abusive to others, then that is a different story.
    Again when you are a bigot and run a non profit that runs on donations there will be repercussions. People can vote with their wallet too
    Post edited by Smellyman on
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,840
    edited February 2016
    Oh good. Scalia was staying at the resort of someone who received a favorable (albeit a pretty typical) Supreme Court ruling last year for free.

    AMERICA!

    Post edited by Cliffy6745 on
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,675
    Smellyman said:

    rgambs said:

    njnancy said:

    myoung321 said:



    give it 50 years. scalia's rulings will be judged by history to be as backwards as the dred scott decision and separate but equal.

    No different than the rest of the Conservatives throughout our history

    Conservatives opposed the American Revolution
    Conservatives opposed freeing the slaves
    Conservatives opposed women’s suffrage
    Conservatives opposed public school
    Conservatives opposed fighting fascism in Europe
    Conservatives opposed minimum wage and child labor laws, the 8-hour work day, weekends, sick leave… etc.
    Conservatives opposed humane treatment of animals
    Conservatives opposed the Social Security Act
    Conservatives opposed the Farm Act
    Conservatives opposed the Interstate Highway System
    Conservatives oppose clean air and water
    Conservatives opposed the Civil Right’s Act
    Conservatives opposed the G.I. Bill
    Conservatives opposed Medicare
    Conservatives oppose Equal Protection Under the Law
    .....etc...etc..etc..

    the list is endless......!!!!!

    Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the conservatives were the complete opposite of what they are now!!

    Also Scalia was just slightly out of touch with the world,no?!?
    Republicans used to be more moderate and tolerant - ie - Lincoln and slavery. Then Southern Democrats - Dixiecrats - split with Democrats and went to Republicans and the moral majority and conservatism in social issues became a large part of the Republican party platform and Democrats became more socially liberal. Conservatism is an ideology in the Republican party.

    Scalia was very comfortable in his view of the world. It's just that it was not in touch with the change in attitudes of most Americans. Hence - the cry to 'take our country back'. I always want someone to finish the sentence with who they are taking it back from.
    Taking it back from people who do not allow a non-liberal/progressive viewpoint. For example, Mozilla CEO being fired because he gave a $1,000 to the wrong PAC due to a few whiny people on social media.

    Hahaha awww poor baby! He will probably only be rich for the rest of his life :bawling:

    That's how the free market works, people vote with their wallets. It's all fine and good for him to donate money to actively deny rights to American citizens, but not ok for American citizens to say "Bullshit" and refuse to do business with said bigot? It seems like you are biased towards those who try to make bigots own their words. Strange.
    How many citizens though? Do you think more than .1% of the polulation care about his political views? I just think it is a slippery slope and right now you views align with the vocal minority that is pressuring companies, but I don't think you would like it if you were on the other side of it. I don't see how you can think it is a good thing to suppress different viewpoints. We live in a country that has laws and legislators. People can have different ideas and the voters should settle things at the polls and force politicians to act based on their voting. A guy that has a different viewpoint shouldn't be forced out of his job. Now if he is discriminating against people illegally, if he is verbally or phsyically abusive to others, then that is a different story.
    Again when you are a bigot and run a non profit that runs on donations there will be repercussions. People can vote with their wallet too
    The market has spoken. Laissez faire capitalists should be happy.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,953
    edited February 2016

    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    I am not surprised his death is being cheered on the Train. Some of you continue to have blinders on and just do not see how full of hate you are and completely intolerant of others opinions. The guy doesn't get to the supreme court and be respected by the most liberal judges on the court (even great friends with and travel companions) by being a bigot. He just interprets the constitution from his viewpoint and others view it differently. He still respected his peers on the court and they respected him, but on the Train it is the epitome of "My way or the highway" per usual. Cheering death for anyone you disagree with.

    I do not cheer for death of people just because I disagree with them. I cheer for the death of people who I think are rotten human beings who cause harm to the world. Scalia applies.

    PS - couldn't care less if you think being glad he's dead is bad taste. That guy was a motherfucker as far as I'm concerned and I am pleased as punch that his voice is gone from the US supreme court. Death was the only thing that would shut the fucker up.
    Classy.
    Oh please.
    I see no difference between the way you think Trump runs his mouth and the expletive train you just unleashed.
    LMAO. The difference is that he's running for president and is full of shit and lies, I'm just someone on a message board who honestly just didn't like Scalia. Also, I swear more. =)
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • InHiding80InHiding80 Posts: 7,623
    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    I am not surprised his death is being cheered on the Train. Some of you continue to have blinders on and just do not see how full of hate you are and completely intolerant of others opinions. The guy doesn't get to the supreme court and be respected by the most liberal judges on the court (even great friends with and travel companions) by being a bigot. He just interprets the constitution from his viewpoint and others view it differently. He still respected his peers on the court and they respected him, but on the Train it is the epitome of "My way or the highway" per usual. Cheering death for anyone you disagree with.

    I do not cheer for death of people just because I disagree with them. I cheer for the death of people who I think are rotten human beings who cause harm to the world. Scalia applies.

    PS - couldn't care less if you think being glad he's dead is bad taste. That guy was a motherfucker as far as I'm concerned and I am pleased as punch that his voice is gone from the US supreme court. Death was the only thing that would shut the fucker up.
    Classy.
    Oh please.
    I see no difference between the way you think Trump runs his mouth and the expletive train you just unleashed.
    LMAO. The difference is that he's running for president and is full of shit and lies, I'm just someone on a message board who honestly just didn't like Scalia. Also, I swear more. =)
    Yep, he's part of the "I'm above the law and do as I say not as I do because I say so GOP" club.

  • PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    I am not surprised his death is being cheered on the Train. Some of you continue to have blinders on and just do not see how full of hate you are and completely intolerant of others opinions. The guy doesn't get to the supreme court and be respected by the most liberal judges on the court (even great friends with and travel companions) by being a bigot. He just interprets the constitution from his viewpoint and others view it differently. He still respected his peers on the court and they respected him, but on the Train it is the epitome of "My way or the highway" per usual. Cheering death for anyone you disagree with.

    I do not cheer for death of people just because I disagree with them. I cheer for the death of people who I think are rotten human beings who cause harm to the world. Scalia applies.

    PS - couldn't care less if you think being glad he's dead is bad taste. That guy was a motherfucker as far as I'm concerned and I am pleased as punch that his voice is gone from the US supreme court. Death was the only thing that would shut the fucker up.
    Classy.
    Oh please.
    I see no difference between the way you think Trump runs his mouth and the expletive train you just unleashed.
    LMAO. The difference is that he's running for president and is full of shit and lies, I'm just someone on a message board who honestly just didn't like Scalia. Also, I swear more. =)
    Yep, he's part of the "I'm above the law and do as I say not as I do because I say so GOP" club.
    As opposed to Secretary of State I can use my home computer for official government business?

    This type of characterization is no good for either side as both can pile up the ethically questionable maneuvers.

    Let's be above the my team vs your team.
    Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
  • JC29856JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    Is the Obomba not attending Scalia services on Sat true?
    If so is it a big deal?
  • JimmyVJimmyV Posts: 19,171
    Is true.

    Is not really a big deal but kind of strange.

    Will be made out to be a HUGE deal.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,445
    Yeah and Obama and his team know it's going to be made a big deal so very confusing
    hippiemom = goodness
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576

    Yeah and Obama and his team know it's going to be made a big deal so very confusing

    Yeah, why give them the ammunition? Unless he has something scheduled with children, vets, or sick/disabled people, he is only risking criticism that isn't totally unfounded.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,592
    It's possible that he was looking at the level of of disruption that comes with a presidential visit or presence at an event.

    For all we know he has contacted the family and secured their permission or blessing to be absent.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    mickeyrat said:

    It's possible that he was looking at the level of of disruption that comes with a presidential visit or presence at an event.

    For all we know he has contacted the family and secured their permission or blessing to be absent.

    Hahaha maybe they don't want Nobama!

    :dizzy:
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,675
    mickeyrat said:

    It's possible that he was looking at the level of of disruption that comes with a presidential visit or presence at an event.

    For all we know he has contacted the family and secured their permission or blessing to be absent.

    Agreed. If this is the request from the family due to not having the circus, then Jay Carney needs to make that clear in the press briefing. If it isn't the case, he should go.
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,592
    mrussel1 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    It's possible that he was looking at the level of of disruption that comes with a presidential visit or presence at an event.

    For all we know he has contacted the family and secured their permission or blessing to be absent.

    Agreed. If this is the request from the family due to not having the circus, then Jay Carney needs to make that clear in the press briefing. If it isn't the case, he should go.
    Jay no longer works for the administration. Josh Earnest is Press Sec
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • JC29856JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    mickeyrat said:

    It's possible that he was looking at the level of of disruption that comes with a presidential visit or presence at an event.

    For all we know he has contacted the family and secured their permission or blessing to be absent.

    Pres is going Friday privately.
    If the family requested he not go then the family should say so not the Pres. I doubt he gives a shit what people think anyway.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 29,675
    mickeyrat said:

    mrussel1 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    It's possible that he was looking at the level of of disruption that comes with a presidential visit or presence at an event.

    For all we know he has contacted the family and secured their permission or blessing to be absent.

    Agreed. If this is the request from the family due to not having the circus, then Jay Carney needs to make that clear in the press briefing. If it isn't the case, he should go.
    Jay no longer works for the administration. Josh Earnest is Press Sec
    Didn't even realize that...Thanks. Maybe Ari Fleisher can put out a memo.
  • muskydanmuskydan Posts: 1,013
    JC29856 said:

    Is the Obomba not attending Scalia services on Sat true?
    If so is it a big deal?

    He probably has a tee time which to me is Obummers only redeeming quality being a golfer. What really pisses me off is all the golf this phony plays he is still a total chop...I mean really really bad. What I wouldn't give to Stick it to ole Barry on the course and then share some stories about the storefront rev-runs and community activists of Chicago we both know very well from back in the day.
This discussion has been closed.