ObamaCare - exchanges ,report your states options!

[tzor]

I really hate this name. Obama doesn't really care at all. He just wants to reward his friends and punish his enemies.

[saxitoxin]

Obamacare On Verge of Repealing Itself

Six days into the launch of insurance marketplaces created by the new health-care law, the federal government acknowledged for the first time Sunday it needed to fix design and software problems that have kept customers from applying online for coverage. The website is troubled by coding problems and flaws in the architecture of the system, according to insurance-industry advisers, technical experts and people close to the development of the marketplace. Information technology experts who examined the healthcare.gov website at the request of The Wall Street Journal said the site appeared to be built on a sloppy software foundation.

Stephen Push, a 52-year-old early retiree living in McLean, Va., said he tried to log in to the website a dozen times last week, and was thwarted by website errors each time. On Friday, he called a hotline set up by the administration to help people enroll, but the customer-service representative was also unable to access the online marketplace.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 13018.html

[Metsfanmax]

I was asking you about how you feel concerning equality under the law. Sure Obama could just go back on the waivers and that would make it equal, but he's not going to do that either.

I don't believe that "equality" between businesses and individuals is even a meaningful concept, and leads to very bad things when you attempt to do that (cf. Citizens United).

The point here is that he changed the law, it's not the same law that was passed in 2010,

What's your point? Name a single major law that didn't change after it was enacted.

and the law he said he would pass was not the same law the Supreme Court ruled on; it was upheld as a tax, something Obama promised over and over and over and over again it wasn't. But looks like those things don't bother you too much.

My personal feelings are irrelevant, as are President Obama's. The Supreme Court has the final say in the interpretation, and I don't really care whether it's called a tax or not. What matters is the actual implementation.

We have every reason and every right in the world to fight it.

There are lots of things that aren't getting funded now because a minority of one house of Congress decided that it wanted to continue fighting a three-year-old law despite obviously not having the requisite support to get the changes made. I don't think Pete King is too far off in describing Ted Cruz as committing governmental terrorism. He didn't get what he wanted in the normal legislative process, so now the government is being given an ultimatum for it to function properly. This is absurd in the historical context of how Congress has operated (and that's saying something, given how dysfunctional it has been for the last few years).

If you have a majority to overturn it -- fine. But you don't, so please stop making it impossible for me to get the data I need from NASA's website.

[Phatscotty]

Obamacare On Verge of Repealing Itself

Six days into the launch of insurance marketplaces created by the new health-care law, the federal government acknowledged for the first time Sunday it needed to fix design and software problems that have kept customers from applying online for coverage. The website is troubled by coding problems and flaws in the architecture of the system, according to insurance-industry advisers, technical experts and people close to the development of the marketplace. Information technology experts who examined the healthcare.gov website at the request of The Wall Street Journal said the site appeared to be built on a sloppy software foundation.

Stephen Push, a 52-year-old early retiree living in McLean, Va., said he tried to log in to the website a dozen times last week, and was thwarted by website errors each time. On Friday, he called a hotline set up by the administration to help people enroll, but the customer-service representative was also unable to access the online marketplace.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 13018.html

Glitches, what glitches??? According to my cable news source, there aren't any glitches, and it's just a rumor created by FOX cable news! Just another lie by stupid Republicans!

[Phatscotty]

I was asking you about how you feel concerning equality under the law. Sure Obama could just go back on the waivers and that would make it equal, but he's not going to do that either.

I don't believe that "equality" between businesses and individuals is even a meaningful concept, and leads to very bad things when you attempt to do that (cf. Citizens United).

The point here is that he changed the law, it's not the same law that was passed in 2010,

What's your point? Name a single major law that didn't change after it was enacted.

and the law he said he would pass was not the same law the Supreme Court ruled on; it was upheld as a tax, something Obama promised over and over and over and over again it wasn't. But looks like those things don't bother you too much.

My personal feelings are irrelevant, as are President Obama's. The Supreme Court has the final say in the interpretation, and I don't really care whether it's called a tax or not. What matters is the actual implementation.

We have every reason and every right in the world to fight it.

There are lots of things that aren't getting funded now because a minority of one house of Congress decided that it wanted to continue fighting a three-year-old law despite obviously not having the requisite support to get the changes made. I don't think Pete King is too far off in describing Ted Cruz as committing governmental terrorism. He didn't get what he wanted in the normal legislative process, so now the government is being given an ultimatum for it to function properly. This is absurd in the historical context of how Congress has operated (and that's saying something, given how dysfunctional it has been for the last few years).

If you have a majority to overturn it -- fine. But you don't, so please stop making it impossible for me to get the data I need from NASA's website.

You are wrong. We do have a majority, led by the Tea Party.

You are partially right there, laws are usually changed, but not by the Executive. Sure, there are signing statements that are written out as the President signs the bill (which is bullshit in itself), but Obama didn't do that. He changed it all by himself over a year later, something he does not have the authority to do.

You are wrong again. The things you point out that aren't getting funded..... because of a minority in one house. Everything that isn't funded right now, the house passed a bill to fund, and it's not just a minority of one house as you say. It has all the Tea Party votes, all the Republicans, and 57 Democrats too. Those bills are sitting on Harry Reid's desk, and everything can be funded with the stroke of a pen. Harry Reid will not pick up the pen though.

We just are not going to be able to communicate on this one.

[Metsfanmax]

You are wrong again. The things you point out that aren't getting funded..... because of a minority in one house. Everything that isn't funded right now, the house passed a bill to fund,

No. The House did pass a few bills to fund specific things (FEMA, NIH, etc.). NASA is conspicuously not on that list. This is frustrating.

and it's not just a minority of one house as you say. It has all the Tea Party votes, all the Republicans, and 57 Democrats too. Those bills are sitting on Harry Reid's desk, and everything can be funded with the stroke of a pen. Harry Reid will not pick up the pen though.

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

[Phatscotty]

that doesn't change the funding is sitting on Harry Reid's desk (leader of the US Senate). He just needs to sign it. You giving reasons why Reid won't sign it is just you giving reasons why Reid won't fund the government.

Boehner has already allowed 8 votes and passed funding measures for national parks, the NIH cancer research, to give all federal workers backpay for time missed (passed in the house 407-0) as well as many other funding bills.

NASA's primary objective is Muslim outreach. It's not the super important space center you are making it out to be anymore, and Obama has already cut the ever loving shit out of it over the last 5 years to the point we are paying to piggy back our satellites on foreign countries launches.

And how can you be pissed about anything not getting funded? That's the way it goes when you don't have the money because you overspent on other things, like millions of dollars on free cell phones.

Yes, president and Reid said time and time again they want a clean bill, but put some thought into what that means. What that means is "give up all your leverage, and then I will negotiate" The American people aren't buying it, and you are balls deep in taking the silliest political talking points of the Democrats as gospel.

[thegreekdog]

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

I don't really want to get involved because you and PS are having an interesting discussion, but I will because I'm stupid like that.

It is rather funny to see how each side perceives the issue. On the one hand, the Republicans are lambasted for stopping such things as funding for NASA and to keep the national parks open, etc. On the other hand, the Democrats and the president are lambasted for the same thing. That the Republicans have come to the table to fund some things and not others makes me wonder what the Democrats' response is to criticisms leveled at them. To be fair, the lack of funding is, at the end of the day, the Republicans' fault, but the Democrats could certainly help fund some things and not others.

It's fascinating. I still haven't suffered any material effects of the shutdown (other than better traffic patterns).

[saxitoxin]

No. The House did pass a few bills to fund specific things (FEMA, NIH, etc.). NASA is conspicuously not on that list. This is frustrating.

Metsfanmax - OR SHOULD I SAY "DAVE NIELSEN" - is still mad about how Tom Tancredo shut him and his buddy Mike Huckabee down in 2007 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQbMnFl3DEU&t=7m34s

[Phatscotty]

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

I don't really want to get involved because you and PS are having an interesting discussion, but I will because I'm stupid like that.

It is rather funny to see how each side perceives the issue. On the one hand, the Republicans are lambasted for stopping such things as funding for NASA and to keep the national parks open, etc. On the other hand, the Democrats and the president are lambasted for the same thing. That the Republicans have come to the table to fund some things and not others makes me wonder what the Democrats' response is to criticisms leveled at them. To be fair, the lack of funding is, at the end of the day, the Republicans' fault, but the Democrats could certainly help fund some things and not others.

It's fascinating. I still haven't suffered any material effects of the shutdown (other than better traffic patterns).

Likewise, I have asked close to 50 people I work with and personally talk to if they know anyone who is affected by the shutdown. I only have heard 2 yesses, and both of them were Democrats who said their grandpa didn't get their social security check (which is a lie). And then they got all mad about something that didn't happen and cursed out Republicans.

The reality is that 87% of the government is up and running. That's how you can tell people who think this is a crisis and is tanking the economy watches too much cable news.

[Metsfanmax]

that doesn't change the funding is sitting on Harry Reid's desk (leader of the US Senate). He just needs to sign it. You giving reasons why Reid won't sign it is just you giving reasons why Reid won't fund the government.

This argument is tenuous given the context of the situation. Some members of the Republican party drove the van off the road and into a ditch, and are now offering to get people out of the burning wreck one by one through the window. They have the jaws of life standing by to save everyone, but they won't because they hate this one guy in the backseat and want him to die. That guy could commit suicide to save everyone else -- but he won't. What a dick.

NASA's primary objective is Muslim outreach. It's not the super important space center you are making it out to be anymore.

You don't even know what you're talking about. If you don't know what NASA actually does nowadays, you shouldn't comment on it.

And how can you be pissed about anything not getting funded? That's the way it goes when you don't have the money because you overspent on other things like free cell phones.

Wait, so do we have the ability to fund everything or don't we? Make up your mind, please.

Stop being a tool. Yes, president and Reid said time and time again they want a clean bill, but put some thought into what that means. What that means is "give up all your leverage, and then I will negotiate" The American people aren't buying it, and you are balls deep in taking the silliest political talking points of the Democrats as gospel.

There is no leverage. The house voted like 40 times to repeal the ACA and it didn't work. What you call leverage, a reasonable person calls a loaded gun pointed at the head.

[thegreekdog]

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

I don't really want to get involved because you and PS are having an interesting discussion, but I will because I'm stupid like that.

It is rather funny to see how each side perceives the issue. On the one hand, the Republicans are lambasted for stopping such things as funding for NASA and to keep the national parks open, etc. On the other hand, the Democrats and the president are lambasted for the same thing. That the Republicans have come to the table to fund some things and not others makes me wonder what the Democrats' response is to criticisms leveled at them. To be fair, the lack of funding is, at the end of the day, the Republicans' fault, but the Democrats could certainly help fund some things and not others.

It's fascinating. I still haven't suffered any material effects of the shutdown (other than better traffic patterns).

Likewise, I have asked close to 50 people I work with and personally talk to if they know anyone who is affected by the shutdown. I only have heard 2 yesses, and both of them were Democrats who said their grandpa didn't get their social security check (which is a lie). And then they got all mad about something that didn't happen and cursed out Republicans.

Yes, it is annoying. A sports talk radio show has a weekly Winner and Weasel of the Week spot. The Weasel last week was the Republican Party for shutting the government down; the host said, "I'm going to get ripped for this, but..." I laughed out loud at the pick (given the weasely sports crap happening at the time).

Ezra Klein has another great article today by the way. He talks about all kinds of "oh no" things about government. Ironically, I was uplifted by the article.

[jj3044]

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

I don't really want to get involved because you and PS are having an interesting discussion, but I will because I'm stupid like that.

It is rather funny to see how each side perceives the issue. On the one hand, the Republicans are lambasted for stopping such things as funding for NASA and to keep the national parks open, etc. On the other hand, the Democrats and the president are lambasted for the same thing. That the Republicans have come to the table to fund some things and not others makes me wonder what the Democrats' response is to criticisms leveled at them. To be fair, the lack of funding is, at the end of the day, the Republicans' fault, but the Democrats could certainly help fund some things and not others.

It's fascinating. I still haven't suffered any material effects of the shutdown (other than better traffic patterns).

Likewise, I have asked close to 50 people I work with and personally talk to if they know anyone who is affected by the shutdown. I only have heard 2 yesses, and both of them were Democrats who said their grandpa didn't get their social security check (which is a lie). And then they got all mad about something that didn't happen and cursed out Republicans.

lol... how about all of those federal workers trying to make a living with 2-year olds at home? I know one of those...

Don't pretend that this isn't affecting anyone!

[Metsfanmax]

No. The House did pass a few bills to fund specific things (FEMA, NIH, etc.). NASA is conspicuously not on that list. This is frustrating.

Metsfanmax - OR SHOULD I SAY "DAVE NIELSEN" - is still mad about how Tom Tancredo shut him and his buddy Mike Huckabee down in 2007 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQbMnFl3DEU&t=7m34s

Indeed. I find it crucially important that we have the ability to get to Mars so that I can leave Earth when Ted Cruz is elected President.

[thegreekdog]

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

I don't really want to get involved because you and PS are having an interesting discussion, but I will because I'm stupid like that.

It is rather funny to see how each side perceives the issue. On the one hand, the Republicans are lambasted for stopping such things as funding for NASA and to keep the national parks open, etc. On the other hand, the Democrats and the president are lambasted for the same thing. That the Republicans have come to the table to fund some things and not others makes me wonder what the Democrats' response is to criticisms leveled at them. To be fair, the lack of funding is, at the end of the day, the Republicans' fault, but the Democrats could certainly help fund some things and not others.

It's fascinating. I still haven't suffered any material effects of the shutdown (other than better traffic patterns).

Likewise, I have asked close to 50 people I work with and personally talk to if they know anyone who is affected by the shutdown. I only have heard 2 yesses, and both of them were Democrats who said their grandpa didn't get their social security check (which is a lie). And then they got all mad about something that didn't happen and cursed out Republicans.

lol... how about all of those federal workers trying to make a living with 2-year olds at home? I know one of those...

Don't pretend that this isn't affecting anyone!

It does affect some people (e.g. those who drive to Philadelphia to work, thus increasing my traffic, no longer are gainfully employed for the moment; I kid because I care). I have a few friends who are employed by the federal government. The only one I've heard from recently is still employed and two of my other friends are in the active military. It does beg the question whether federal employees start saving up when shit like this looks like it's going down.

[thegreekdog]

No. The House did pass a few bills to fund specific things (FEMA, NIH, etc.). NASA is conspicuously not on that list. This is frustrating.

Metsfanmax - OR SHOULD I SAY "DAVE NIELSEN" - is still mad about how Tom Tancredo shut him and his buddy Mike Huckabee down in 2007 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQbMnFl3DEU&t=7m34s

Indeed. I find it crucially important that we have the ability to get to Mars so that I can leave Earth when Ted Cruz is elected President.

You could leave the country instead. Cheaper and less government intervention (albeit, still government intervention).

[Phatscotty]

Votes are votes, but funding is funding. Most of those votes were politics. The people that got elected by promising to do everything in their power to fight Obamacare were just doing what they were sent to Washington to do. Actually a breathe of fresh air.

LMAO. 13% of the government, the non-essential parts, is closed down, and you are using the gun to the head analogy? That's pure hyperbole and rhetoric. And that kind of language certainly does not help the 2 sides come together to talk, and might even be the exact kind of supposed "tone" that supposedly got us downgraded in 2011 and 2012.

[Phatscotty]

Seriously, about the downgrades of 2010, 2011, and 2012 being blamed on the 'tone' of Republicans....So, if extremist tones by Republicans, such as 'balanced budgets' and 'spending cuts' and 'tax cuts' get us a downgrade, imagine the downgrade coming from the Democrats tone of 'terrorists, hostage takers, kidnappers, ransom seekers, extremist, budgetary jihadists, holding the gun to the American people's head'.....if that whole 'tone' argument is correct, than we're probably gonna get downgraded to junk status.

Then, of course Democrats will argue how silly it is to suggest that a credit rating measures 'tone' and not exponentially rising levels of debt and interest payments, and how it was Republicans who brought us annual trillion dollar deficits and doubled our National debt in 6 years.

[Metsfanmax]

Votes are votes, but funding is funding. Most of those votes were politics. The people that got elected by promising to do everything in their power to fight Obamacare were just doing what they were sent to Washington to do. Actually a breathe of fresh air.

No one is elected with the express purpose of "fight Obamacare." Representatives are elected with the purpose of running the government. They have failed.

LMAO. 13% of the government, the non-essential parts, is closed down, and you are using the gun to the head analogy?

It doesn't matter what percentage of the government is shut down. The tactics that are being used are what justify the gun to the head analogy.

That's pure hyperbole and rhetoric. And that kind of language certainly does not help the 2 sides come together to talk, and might even be the exact kind of supposed "tone" that supposedly got us downgraded in 2011 and 2012.

I don't have any particular reason to be especially friendly to the people who are responsible for furloughing hundreds of thousands of federal employees (and shutting down a whole swath of science). I'm not trying to get them to give me a lollipop, I'm telling them to do their fucking jobs.

[Phatscotty]

Votes are votes, but funding is funding. Most of those votes were politics. The people that got elected by promising to do everything in their power to fight Obamacare were just doing what they were sent to Washington to do. Actually a breathe of fresh air.

No one is elected with the express purpose of "fight Obamacare." Representatives are elected with the purpose of running the government. They have failed.

LMAO. 13% of the government, the non-essential parts, is closed down, and you are using the gun to the head analogy?

It doesn't matter what percentage of the government is shut down. The tactics that are being used are what justify the gun to the head analogy.

That's pure hyperbole and rhetoric. And that kind of language certainly does not help the 2 sides come together to talk, and might even be the exact kind of supposed "tone" that supposedly got us downgraded in 2011 and 2012.

I don't have any particular reason to be especially friendly to the people who are responsible for furloughing hundreds of thousands of federal employees (and shutting down a whole swath of science). I'm not trying to get them to give me a lollipop, I'm telling them to do their fucking jobs.

That's your opinion as to who's fault it is and who you should be friendly to, but I could have to you before any of this happened, no matter what happened, who you would never be friendly with no matter what, and who will get the blame no matter what. The shutdown is only temporary. It's happened over 50 times in the last 40 years. NASA isn't going to disappear.

It matters what % of the government is shut down if people are acting like it's 100% closed when it's closer to 90% open.

Yes, hundreds of thousands of government workers are furloughed, but they are going to get paid for not even working, and over 7 million employees are still working, and more than half of the amount of furloughed employees returned back to work today, and there is a stack of bills sitting on Harry Reids desk to deal with the remaining 5% who you are having an end of the world hissy fit over. The government is too big, there aren't even supposed to be 8 million federal workers. So you should be thankful all the money and work they were able to do previously, because the time where we go broke IS coming Mets. Under that light, your demands are highly profligate.

I'm glad you say nobody was elected with the express purpose to fight Obamacare, because that means you can't support Obamacare based on the case that Romney ran against it and lost, and Obama won. Because Romney did not run with the express purpose to fight Obamacare. He did not even have a plan. So that takes a card out of your hand.

this is a fight for the future. You can't win by running away and calling names and defending lies and repeating that the ends justify the means.

Although, separately, for those who have long said Obama and Romney were the exact same and didn't think anyone could name 5 differences, I gotta ask, if Romney were elected, would he be fighting against Republicans and siding with Democrats like Obama is, since they are so similar? Because this might have been a MAJOR difference. Just asking for opinion

[Metsfanmax]

No. The House did pass a few bills to fund specific things (FEMA, NIH, etc.). NASA is conspicuously not on that list. This is frustrating.

Metsfanmax - OR SHOULD I SAY "DAVE NIELSEN" - is still mad about how Tom Tancredo shut him and his buddy Mike Huckabee down in 2007 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQbMnFl3DEU&t=7m34s

Indeed. I find it crucially important that we have the ability to get to Mars so that I can leave Earth when Ted Cruz is elected President.

You could leave the country instead. Cheaper and less government intervention (albeit, still government intervention).

I am actually strongly considering doing this. The U.S. government evidently does not care very much to use my skills, so I might offer my services to a different government.

[Phatscotty]

If everything could be funded, then this issue would have been solved a while ago. The issue here is that Speaker Boehner is not allowing a vote to fund everything but only allowing votes on funding measures for specific agencies. President Obama and the Senate have said time and time again that what they want is a 'clean' bill that funds everything, rather than this piecemeal stuff.

I don't really want to get involved because you and PS are having an interesting discussion, but I will because I'm stupid like that.

It is rather funny to see how each side perceives the issue. On the one hand, the Republicans are lambasted for stopping such things as funding for NASA and to keep the national parks open, etc. On the other hand, the Democrats and the president are lambasted for the same thing. That the Republicans have come to the table to fund some things and not others makes me wonder what the Democrats' response is to criticisms leveled at them. To be fair, the lack of funding is, at the end of the day, the Republicans' fault, but the Democrats could certainly help fund some things and not others.

It's fascinating. I still haven't suffered any material effects of the shutdown (other than better traffic patterns).

Likewise, I have asked close to 50 people I work with and personally talk to if they know anyone who is affected by the shutdown. I only have heard 2 yesses, and both of them were Democrats who said their grandpa didn't get their social security check (which is a lie). And then they got all mad about something that didn't happen and cursed out Republicans.

lol... how about all of those federal workers trying to make a living with 2-year olds at home? I know one of those...

Don't pretend that this isn't affecting anyone!

I'm not pretending it doesn't affect anyone, and your emotion based leap of logic to take that when I say I don't know anyone affected somehow means that nobody in the world is affected is either disingenuous or purposefully misleading with implication to make me look like a meany. I am however saying that just because some federal workers trying to make a living with 2-year olds at home does not automatically mean that we spend trillions we don't have.

I am trying to make a living too, and I am just as important and have the same rights as that Federal worker, just that I would never choose to work a Federal job, and certainly would not start a family with a Federal job unless my spouse was rich in the private sector. Not a big fan of building my house and roof with straw and hay on a lot of quicksand.

"I didn't know" will no longer be an acceptable excuse. Whether people are ignorant or do not care the USA is going broke does not matter, or are perfectly aware and okay with robbing the next generation.... . People can no longer afford to be ignorant. All this shutdown and debt ceilings and trillions dollar deficits and not even passing a basic operating budget for 5 years in a row is because we are going broke. Not like any politician is going to admit that until after the crash and then only for purposed of the blame game. Take as truth the words of a Harvard law school graduate with political ambitions and a silver toungue who you already know for a fact lied his ass off to get elected and lied his ass off to sell Obamacare to America at your own peril.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me/can't get fooled again

[BigBallinStalin]

NASA's primary objective is Muslim outreach.

lol, quote of the week. Thanks, PS!

[Phatscotty]

NASA's primary objective is Muslim outreach.

lol, quote of the week. Thanks, PS!

You're welcome, smart person. So funny, is it not?? Here, let me laugh with ya, at me of course.



Quote it all you want, quote if for the year. Please? Just be sure to add the video with your quote to embarrass me even further. Deal?

It's blatantly clear not enough people know what's going on, not even the smart ones. Their opinions in other areas must be even more better.


(insert smackdown comments here)

[BigBallinStalin]

NASA's primary objective is Muslim outreach.

lol, quote of the week. Thanks, PS!

You're welcome, smart person. So funny, is it not?? Here, let me laugh with ya, at me of course.



Quote it all you want, quote if for the year. Please? Just be sure to add the video with your quote to embarrass me even further. Deal?

It's blatantly clear not enough people know what's going on, not even the smart ones.


(insert smackdown comments here)

You missed that 'science and engineering' bit. Is this where you start foaming at the mouth and go on about teh MUSLIMS!!!! AND NASHAARRRR!! takin over teh Obama wurld!!!