Digg - A Second of Drama on the Senate Floor

Remove

Discover breaking news from Macworld 2009
Digg your favorite stories in Upcoming or check out the most popular ones in the Apple topic.

280 Comments
Who Dugg It?

voxlisa999, on 10/02/2008, -15/+363So this is McCain's idea of bipartisanship and we're going to fix Washington together?

"Obama walked over to the Republican side of the chamber to extend a greeting McCain." Obama was man enough to enter McCain's turf and what did he get?

"Mr. McCain responded with a chilly look, a turn of his head and a brief return handshake."

"Mr. Obama, who first arrived on the Senate floor at 5 p.m., presented his argument in favor of the legislation in a 13-minute speech. "

"When Mr. McCain arrived shortly before 8 p.m., he did not join other Republicans in addressing the Senate."

Here's the killer sentence:
"Senate aides said Mr. McCain did not want to be preceded or followed by Democratic senators, so he chose not to offer remarks on the bill."

"As Mr. Obama worked the floor of the Senate, holding a long conversation with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York and walking around to greet other colleagues, Mr. McCain largely stayed near his seat."

McCain proving time and time again that he is a LIAR and certainly not willing to work with his colleagues. He may have been many years ago from time to time, but now we see THE REAL MCCAIN.
- neognostic, on 10/02/2008, -4/+14Spot on as usual my friend! Keep up the great work!
- whahaa, on 10/02/2008, -20/+6john mccain hates black people.
  - Mustard911, on 10/02/2008, -16/+5Yep lets divide the camps. Hey how about we not support either. They' re both corrupt.
  - theaceoffire, on 10/02/2008, -1/+3I have heard some comments that he supposedly made regarding his adopted daughter.
    
    However, until I can verify them, there is no point spreading them around.
- Ljay90, on 10/02/2008, -10/+15R.I.P John McCain 1936-2006
  - alex7575, on 10/02/2008, -1/+10Didn't he turn sour before that?
  - Mujokan, on 10/02/2008, -1/+18I remember that guy. Such a maverick...
  - davidkeithjones, on 10/02/2008, -1/+14The word maverick is so overused now that its now repulsive to hear it. The Dallas Mavericks need to change their name now.
  - GLMonkey, on 10/02/2008, -0/+6GOOOOOSE!!!
- metaliq, on 10/02/2008, -3/+46"Senate aides said Mr. McCain did not want to be preceded or followed by Democratic senators, so he chose not to offer remarks on the bill."
  
  What. The. *****.
  - thespiff, on 10/02/2008, -3/+16Yeah I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt (which McCain doesn't deserve) and say that must be a misquote or something. I mean, it's totally absurd. If all politicians followed that rule there would be no dialogue between parties whatsoever.
  - Ki77erB, on 10/02/2008, -1/+21"I'll speak, but only on the condition that no one speaks before or after me...deal?" WTF indeed.
  - KMartSheriff, on 10/02/2008, -0/+10Seriously. He sounds like a 6 year old throwing a tantrum.
- Barackalypse, on 10/02/2008, -1/+27You misunderstand bi-partisanship, its merely both parties realizing they have a common enemy and banding together to screw the taxpayer, like they did with this bailout bill.
- Touchdown, on 10/02/2008, -27/+3"As Mr. Obama worked the floor of the Senate, holding a long conversation with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York and walking around to greet other colleagues, Mr. McCain largely stayed near his seat."
  
  Perhaps because Mr. McCain doesn't care so much about his image and was not trying to grandstand like Obama
  - danlowlite, on 10/02/2008, -2/+13Perhaps...but even as a common act of courtesy, he could have said something nice when he shook Obama's hand.
    
    Why do I feel compelled to explain that I'm not voting for either of these guys here?
  - FeloniusMonkey, on 10/02/2008, -0/+17Shenanigans... if McCain didn't care so much about his image, he wouldn't be a sleazy politician.
  - noahhoward, on 10/02/2008, -0/+14Political cooperation is now grandstanding. Well *****, what do we pay them for then. They obviously have to just sit in their seats and not say anything.
  - Ljay90, on 10/02/2008, -0/+20The man who said he was suspending his campaign and might skip the debate at a HUGE press conference all of the sudden cares about not grandstanding? Really now?
  - humperdinck, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2Whoever the next president will be, they stand to get a lot more accomplished if they have the respect of congress. Grandpa Sourpuss sulking in the corner isn't doing much to garner that respect.
- Mustard911, on 10/02/2008, -10/+2Prince Hall Mason handshakes a conventional Mason.
  - emehrkay, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3What does this mean?
  - Bertram23, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1I think he is comparing Barack Obama to Haile Selassie presumably because both of them are black and that he is implying that both Obama and McCain are Freemasons.
  - OMGWTFROFLMAOx2, on 10/02/2008, -0/+8I'm not a mason, so I could be wrong, but I do know that Prince Hall Masons are, for the most part, black masons. Because they weren't allowed to join the "regular" Masons (due to racism..the stuff that built this country) , black people had to essentially form a different Mason sect within the same organization. The first Prince Hall Mason lodge was formed in the north by a freed slave named Prince Hall (hence the name). Eventually the began being recognized by the regular Masons as true masons, but that wasn't until after desegregation and the civil rights movement.
    
    http://www.masonicdictionary.com/prince.html
    
    Yes, even secret societies are racist.
  - Bertram23, on 10/02/2008, -0/+0Heh, guess I should have done my googling rather than jumping to conclusions.
  - republicker, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1And yes they are both illuminati.
- chaserm, on 10/02/2008, -18/+6yeah well Obama just lost my vote for selling us out with this bailout!!!!!!!!
  - philosophiste, on 10/02/2008, -15/+3AMEN. They whine about McCain not being sufficiently nice to Obama and ignore that Obama is championing this daylight robbery.
  - LaceKing, on 10/02/2008, -2/+11I thought he lost it back during the Rev. Wright smear, and then back during the FISA fiasco.
    
    So this is the third time that he has [for the first time, last, and only time] lost your vote?
    
    whatever.
  - rotundo, on 10/02/2008, -2/+6So you're going to vote for McCain, who also supported it? Where's the logic in that?
    
    Oh wait: you're going to vote third party? Or not vote? Same thing: whoever wins got the benefit of your wasted vote.
    
    Yeah, it's a complex world. We have to make decisions with less than ideal options. Good luck. I'm still voting for Obama, even though I think the bailout bill was a mistake.
  - humperdinck, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4Needs more exclamation points.
- rdwarlock, on 10/02/2008, -15/+2You sir are an idiot. There is no video evidence, so because it ends up in a newspaper, usually linked with liberal views, does not accurately portray how the event took place.
  
  I might not always agree with John McCain or Obama, however John McCain has worked hand in hand with the opposite side. Lets remember that John McCain and Kennedy worked together on a bill for Illegal Immigration that he received bad criticism from the right side.
  
  Stop for a second, and think before you type. It might actually make you look intelligent.
  - vertexoflife, on 10/02/2008, -0/+10But now he sold out his great ideals and hard work to instead win the republican nomination.
    
    John McCain was a good man. Candidate McCain has sold out everything John McCain stood for.
  - rblancarte, on 10/02/2008, -0/+6Wait. Vox is commenting on the article - an article on NYTimes.com - which is supposed to be trusted as a reputable news source. So what you are, indirectly, saying is that NYTimes is not to be trusted for an article they posted?
    
    You tell this guy to think before typing? Why not consider that he is just quoting the article, and pointing out what has been reported. And really, the only thing that doesn't have video proof is the handshake, which I don't care one way or the other what happened with that. The fact is, watch C-SPAN - they have video proof that McCain didn't speak during this session. I agree with the top post - that does speak volumes.
    
    As far as McCain's past deeds - old news. We are talking about the McCain of right now. The one that "suspended" his campaign until a deal got done. A deal that ISN'T yet done, and a campaign that IS currently running.
    
    You want to tell others to think before posting, listen to your own advice.
  - charm803, on 10/02/2008, -0/+7That behavior is actually consistent to McCain's behavior.
    
    McCain's Prickly TIME Interview
    (Actual title from Time!)
    
    http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1 ...
    
    John McCain at the Des Moines Register Editorial Board
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHcPXfgD4jM
    
    He disrespects people who don't agree with him.
  - RhoVisions, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1What I find particularly funny, the N.Y. Times was commented in another few Digg articles as being one of the only remaining unbiased new sources (next to Fox)... someone unconfuse me!
- incredibilistic, on 10/02/2008, -0/+6True, there's no video evidence of the so-called "chilling" look but I'm sure the record will state that McCain arrived after 8pm and that he didn't offer any comments on the bill. So while the rest of article could be total fiction the fact that he didn't comment on his position doesn't smell right.
  
  He was supposed to be the one taking any and all necessary steps to resolve this issue and get the Senate to agree on a bill and then he just sits back and says nothing?
  
  Also, I would hardly call the NYT a liberal media forum. I just read an article where they practically rip in to Biden for making $250k per year, having a house worth several million dollars and going over his expenses like the IRS. I'm sure there are liberal and conservative writers in all media but passing blame to the paper is a bit shrill. Unless, of course, it's totally legitimized like Fox News.
- DoctorQuigley, on 10/02/2008, -1/+6What you should be worried about: How the senators actually voted, and how terrible the bill was.
  What you are worried about: How the senators interacted with one another personally.
  
  You really cannot distinguish between the soap opera of politics and what is actually important, can you?. McCain sucks, not because of silly ***** like this, but because of his policies. Whoever diggs up this story as something actually significant is a ***** moron.
  - Tenbatsu404, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1Preach it brother.
  - analogkid01, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1I had already written to my representative telling them to vote against this bill. Now that that's over and done with, I am interested in the personalities of the candidates. I want to know the type of man my next President is, because my country sure as ***** didn't care about the type of man the present one is.
- Tenbatsu404, on 10/02/2008, -4/+2Bipartisan = You're really going to get ***** in the ass this time.
  
  It's funny how all of the Obamabots are so willing to bend over to their Government. You all are going to get exactly what you deserve.
  - DoctorQuigley, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2lol Tenbatsu404, you reminded me of the bumper sticker that says:
    
    Bipartisanship:
    Double Penetration
- jayzfans, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2stop the drama, vote obama.
pocee, on 10/02/2008, -9/+162When Senator McCain shows contempt as he did here and in Des Moines today, he shows it for all who will choose to vote for someone else. How does he expect to govern?
- Barackalypse, on 10/02/2008, -5/+6Contempt is the correct emotion. Some things should never be done. We don't need the Government to do anything so much as we need it to NOT do stupid things. You'll see, this bailout, if it passes, will be a disaster, it would have been much better to do nothing.
  - amoro99, on 10/02/2008, -2/+12You make it sound like Obama wrote the plan. It came from your boy W.
  - Barackalypse, on 10/02/2008, -0/+6Bush isn't my boy any more than McCain is. My boys are all long dead and buried. I'm attempting to ressurect them, let Congress fight my un-dead army of Minutemen and Founding Fathers.
  - charm803, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2barackalypse is not an Obama supporter.
  - rotundo, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2I thought McCain supported the bill? How does his contempt have anything to do with this issue? It's more just a general contempt for people who don't agree with him, which is exactly what messes up our great nation.
  - RhoVisions, on 10/02/2008, -0/+0What I find particularly funny is if the bailout does work, everyone will commend both of them on their foresight. And if its fails, the same thing will happen as if there was no bailout.
- moobies, on 10/02/2008, -2/+2Do none of you understand that this article itself was pointless and partisan?
Icebird, on 10/02/2008, -40/+127This is the same guy who just four days ago had dinner at an upscale restaurant where dishes ranged from $90-100. While our economy is struggling, and middle class families are being hit the most, McCain goes and dines on a fancy dinner with his buddy Lieberman?

I wish I could afford a SINGLE dinner that was hundreds of dollars.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/28/as-negoti ...
- bkiku, on 10/02/2008, -9/+31Not only that, he did it while Congress dealt with the "rescue", eating pizza out of a box, to save American banking, the economy, and our jobs. Guess money isn't a concern for them.
  - Gemfinder, on 10/02/2008, -5/+13Shaved geoduck clams versus pepperoni.
    Epic FAIL, McCain.
  - ammundsen, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3While I agree McCain's concerns do not lie with the average American, neither do most of the rest of Congress. They were working to save their CEO and financial buddies. They were not working for the average American who is being asked to pay for this bailout.
  - ParanoydAndroid, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4I don't like McCain at all for a wide variety of reasons, and this whole bailout fiasco isn't making him shine; however, having said that, I've eaten quite a few times at restaurants that some people would probably deem ridiculous, based on their prices. Dning at places like that, for me at least, is not only based on the excellent food, but also on the experience. In a true fine dining experience one can stay in the retaurant for hours being entertained with culinary delights, beautiful views, etc ...
    
    Some Americans are poor, some are rich, most are in the middle. I would expect a presidential candidate to fix his people's problems - I don't expect him to stop spending money that's his, in whatever way he sees fit. I don't care if he's having his scabs gold-plated as long as he's running the country well.
    
    So I say, who gives a *****? let's focus on the (multitude of) reasons he won't lead well, as opposed to whether or not he overspends on food.
  - smthop3, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1"Sometimes the people with the most ***** have to shut up and let people talk ***** about them. People with the most ***** get to say the least *****, and the people with the least ***** get to say the most *****."
    --Chris Rock
    
    In other words, you're on an internet connection and there are people dying in 3rd world countries who are probably talking ***** about you, so just know it's all relative.
- BishkekBuddy, on 10/02/2008, -8/+21I don't happen to think that ANY meal is worth $100.... and even if I had $100 to blow on a meal, I'd find some other way to spend it...
  
  Can you imagine how many homeless that $100 would feed?
  - Echota, on 01/05/2009, -1/+9You must be a mind reader! I have been thinking the same thing.
  - singebkdrft, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2I've had a $100 dollar meal before (someone else was paying, and the expensive place wasn't my choice), and truthfully I could have made something just as tasty for 1/10th the price...
  - x0rcist, on 10/02/2008, -1/+4Never had a good steak before?
  - JDoorjam, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4At that restaurant, $100 would only feed one homeless person.
  - theaceoffire, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3I have always wanted to eat at Hiroyuki Sakai's restaurant (La Rochelle), and I wouldn't mind spending some of my hard earned paycheck to try his creations...
  - Ihova, on 10/02/2008, -2/+1It would take Far more than $100 to feed the homeless..... the Dems haven't been able to do it with BILLIONS of dollars in wasted social programs.
  - RhoVisions, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1Yes... wasted... Funny how many Republicans fall back on the Christian values thing and isn't it the bible that says:
    
    Deut. 15:7. If there is a poor man among you, one of your brothers, in any of the towns of the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart, nor close your hand to your poor brother; but you shall freely open your hand to him, and generously lend him sufficient for his need in whatever he lacks.
- M4dC0ns3rv4tive, on 10/02/2008, -0/+6Gosh, after this bailout bill, a Happy Meal will cost $90 in California.
- Barbarino, on 10/02/2008, -9/+31Dude, having money in your pocket at the age of 71 is not a crime. It's called enjoying life, the man deserves it. I'm sure Obama eats fish sticks every night..
  
  Get a life...
- Sunflare670, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2mmm... Steak *drool*
- darny, on 10/02/2008, -0/+17Those with much less than you are saying the same thing about the $25 dinner that I'm sure you sometimes indulge in. Your comment is shortsighted and self righteous. Buried.
- radiofrequency, on 10/02/2008, -0/+8Don't buy an iPhone or an xbox and you can have a lot of those dinners.
  - xRand0mx, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3Like...3 of them?
- sindex, on 10/02/2008, -1/+39That's one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard. If you made $300,000 a year, would you not enjoy a nice meal with your friends? I suppose you'd still live on big macs and fries? Or whatever it is you eat?
  
  There is NO crime in making money and being rich. There is NO crime in enjoying the fruits of year and years of labor. McCain is spending McCain's money. No big deal. If McCain forgot his wallet and made YOU pay for his meal, you'd have ground to stand on.
  
  As it is, you're just bitching because he's got more money than you and that isn't the issue. The issue is when we're robbed by politicians. Be pissed he supports a tax-payer funded bailout, not that he eats at Ruth's Chris.
  - wtfamerica, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4Thank you for saying what all of us are thinking. Besides showing the gaping rift between McCain straight-talk and McCain disconnected-senator-action.. there is no significance whatsoever to the fact that he shared an expensive meal with another high profile professional. Honestly, do you expect every single wealthy person to drop all pretense of accustomed lifestyle? It's a fact - there are people in this country who will pay 100$ for a meal. There always will be.
  - tykwondingo, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1my sentiments, exactly...
    
    /had Ruth's Chris two nights ago
- beesaretasty, on 10/02/2008, -0/+5Seriously. I don't like McCain, but arguing with his views and arguing with his lifestyle are two different things. A $100 dollar meal to him is less than a dollar value meal to me or you. It is completely irrelevant.
- brainboy77, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4you can't afford a $100 meal. dude, are you ***** homeless? stop switching cell phones every month and what-do-you-know, a lot of money will be in your wallet.
  - baconz, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1seriously! i mean $100 meals aren't on my table every day, but i don't think about them the same way i do a solid gold hummer. (i'm saving up for that baby)
- Grok22, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1spending money during a recession is perhaps the bast thing one could do.
bkiku, on 10/02/2008, -9/+129McCain is coming unglued. Did you see this quote from the interview he did with the Des Moines Register, near the beginning:

In the very beginning, he talks about the current crisis, and I believe that he, in talking about the changes he would like to make, says:

"If I were a dictator, which I always aspire to be

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/sec ...
- BishkekBuddy, on 10/02/2008, -6/+18He and Bush have the same goals in life....
- magus_melchior, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2I was amazed that he let that ambition slip. Didn't he know the camera was rolling? Didn't he realize that the Register might showcase the interview to the entire world via the Internet? Doesn't he understand that there are probably still people who know first-hand what horrors a dictatorship is capable of, and that they will do anything to prevent it from happening to their children and grandchildren?
  
  What that says to me is that he is either losing it, as bkiku suggests, or he has been assured by his campaign staff that he will win, even if they cheat. Neither is acceptable.
- DrewBlood, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2The wording sounds so much like a joke. I'm sure it must be, but damn, he just kept talking and didn't crack from that serious tone. He is trying to be funny and he's failing badly.
jackoceanz, on 10/02/2008, -48/+5
- robbh66, on 10/02/2008, -3/+11epic describes the number of buries you will receive for spamming your own ***** here.
  - Spuy767, on 10/02/2008, -8/+2Yet, the irony is, that if he'd spammed his own Huffington Post submission, he's get 50+ diggs.
kroses, on 10/02/2008, -10/+69John McBush has a personality disorder of epic proportions, and it is visible for all to see. That is why he is losing this election, and losing he is, BIG TIME!!! Not only does he have a personality disorder, but also does he have a brain that has turned to MUSH!!! He is not capable of governing a tiny town, let alone a country such as ours, and that is evident by the majority of our population!!!
- logicaldog, on 10/02/2008, -0/+7I agree, I am a therapist and his behavior leads me to believe he is explosive, combative and dangerous, not to mention-a moron.
- chief2224, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1I think you've really nailed it with this comment. He wasn't wrapped too tight to begin with and he's getting worse as he ages. So is this his approach to human relationships? And, remember, this is the man who has physically attacked other members of the Senate during heated discussions! How will he treat world leaders who have managed to piss him off? This is a scary, scary man.
nernie, on 10/02/2008, -15/+103Can we finally agree that Obama is our guy? Now we just need to make sure we follow through. Please everybody, make sure you vote http://make.ourpledgetovote.com/
- odigity, on 10/02/2008, -3/+6WTF?
  
  Why are all of you so obsessed with McCain/Obama drama, rather than being concerned that they both voted for the bailout? Isn't how they voted ultimately more important than any words or drama?
  
  Can we finally agree that NEITHER is our guy?
  Vote Third Party.
  - why3th, on 10/02/2008, -1/+3Freedom: The ability to vote either for the man who bails out the rich or the man who bails out the rich.
- beanphoner, on 10/02/2008, -1/+6I pledge to vote third party!
Gemfinder, on 10/02/2008, -6/+116"Senate aides said Mr. McCain did not want to be preceded or followed by Democratic senators, so he chose not to offer remarks on the bill."

Pfft. Fine. Don't talk, then.
Probably didn't have anything of real use to say anyway.
- diggapleeeze, on 10/02/2008, -0/+10I could just see him trying to pull this stunt at the UN. He would be a very dangerous President.
- sapped, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3To make it worse. Could he not rustle up to Republicans to "bracket" him for his speech.
  
  How pathetic. This man can't even rustle up to Republicans to talk alongside him, but wants us to believe that he can run a "bipartisan" country.
  
  BTW, I hate it when they pull out that bipartisan crap. It doesn't matter which side does it. The action is important. e.g. the Patriot act was bipartisan, but is widely believed to be a vile piece of junk.
hbrws111, on 10/02/2008, -11/+46McCain is such a crazy....Dictator!
swahlstrom, on 10/02/2008, -13/+78The man would be dangerous as president. Far too tempermental!

Obama '08
kena298, on 10/02/2008, -5/+94This is the second time that McCain has shown publicly, his contempt for Senator Obama. It seems that McCain is losing his mind slowly but. surely. He can no longer pretend that he holds Senator Obama in high regard, although he disagrees with him on the issues,. The disrespect is clear for everyone to see!
grandadswar, on 10/02/2008, -5/+28Wow, he's one angry puff ball, quick, fix the puncture before he explodes hot air then deflates.
springfels, on 10/02/2008, -8/+47TAKE ACTION: RAISE THIS ARTICLE UP ON THE NYT'S SIDE BAR:
Everyone should go to the NYT's and email this story to make it rise up on the side bar. This could really help the red voters understand the difference in character. That is what they need to be soothed into coming over to voting for Obama.
- HarryRag, on 10/02/2008, -1/+11"help the red voters understand"
  
  I gave up on that a long time ago.
- ooby, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1Are you serious? If it weren't for the internet, where posting an article is nearly free, no news outlet would have covered this handshake. What's the big deal?
- industrialphd, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1how many red voters you know that read the new york times?
sk11, on 10/02/2008, -5/+30He's such a hot head that he can't put his personal differences aside for a few days for the sake of his country. If he thinks so little of America, he's not fit to be a political representative, let alone president.
saranac7, on 10/02/2008, -6/+37really sad he is such an angry, insecure little man.
- nill0, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3...and a bit of a diva. he seems so bothered by dealing with others.
  
  Though this behavior isn't surprising, he did in the debates too.
USArugula, on 10/02/2008, -5/+62McCain was all wound up on Morning Joe today too. You could see it boiling beneath that forced smile. Contempt, anger, smugness. He continued to berate Obama, lied again about Ike's D-Day letters, and repeatedly listed "all the great things" he's done. If I repeatedly told everyone how "great" I was, I would soon find myself alone. Seems that's what's happening to McCain.

He's a bitter, angry, mean old son-of-a-bitch. I hope the rest of America catches on before November.
MediaWeasel, on 10/02/2008, -5/+27Hostility and paranoia. Just what one needs in a world leader .....

*gulp*
panicbombs, on 10/02/2008, -5/+20Archie Bunker redux.
- cmotdibbler, on 10/02/2008, -0/+0I assume you mean Archie before he got all warm and fuzzy at the end.
TCSavant, on 10/02/2008, -27/+16So it's just a reporter's word than McCain gave Obama the cold shoulder, and a reporter from the NYTimes no less.

Buried as inaccurate until a picture is provided supporting the author's description.
- jackieblu, on 10/02/2008, -7/+15Well, his behavior at the debate was very similar to this... McCain w/ his nasty smirk, could not even look Obama in the eye. He's an angry, nasty old man who should retire!
- TCSavant, on 10/02/2008, -13/+6How can you say two things look similar when you've only seen one?
- zeroeffect, on 10/02/2008, -2/+7How can you say he said the two things "look" similar when he never said "look"? Stop playing word games.
  
  How about interpreting it this way:
  Well, his behavior at the debate was very similar to how the journalist reported this followup encounter...
  - TCSavant, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1While you may be able to smell, or feel a nasty smirk as jackieblu described it, most people use their eyes, which is why I used the word look.
    
    Word games huh? Good luck with that one.
- Sogladtobehere, on 10/02/2008, -2/+4So now everything has to have pictures to be proven accurate? What about the quote from McCain's own aide? That isn't proof of hyperpartisanship?
  - TCSavant, on 10/02/2008, -2/+2It's harder to refute a picture, but if you want to base it off of hearsay, Joe Lieberman was standing right next to the both of them and stated today on CNN that no such drama occurred.
  - Sogladtobehere, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1@TCSavant,
    
    And Joe Lieberman is an uninterested party? Have you taken any basic college classes on logic? I think we can take the reporters word over McCain's best friend and adviser. But I'll leave you to your own devices.
  - TCSavant, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1It's no more different than the perspective of a NYTimes reporter. Both are biased.
- lhbaker, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2You're paranoid.
- NotedFuturist, on 10/02/2008, -3/+1Screw a pic. VIDEO or it didn't happen.
- RhoVisions, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1Interesting... normally you cite something by referring to a news source... but this guy is in the news... so he'd need to source another news article to be valid?
jackieblu, on 10/02/2008, -9/+19McCain is such a old pussy. The pussy & the pit bull!
- seomike, on 10/02/2008, -1/+3VPilf get it right
BuryHuffPost, on 10/02/2008, -7/+35I'd be grumpy too if Obama beat me to the punch.
SoyJames, on 10/02/2008, -6/+22"Senate aides said Mr. McCain did not want to be preceded or followed by Democratic senators, so he chose not to offer remarks on the bill."

So he would only speak if Democratic senators said nothing at all? What childish nonsense is this?!
- Czechxican, on 10/02/2008, -1/+12That's partisanship you can believe in.
- ldw4686, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1that is just how his aides are spinning it - I think this shows that McCain has given up. I feel that he knows when November comes, he will be defeated. And, I think he can owe that to picking Palin. Yes, in the beginning, she seemed like a 'breath of fresh air' but now that things are coming to light about her record and really how unprepared and inexperienced she really is. It's taken a huge toll on the campaign and come tonight when she debates, I think that will be the final nail in the coffin of the McCain/Palin ticket.
harrk2, on 10/02/2008, -6/+13he's so bitter.
- inajeep, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2Just wait till after the election if you want to see bitter.
rewinn, on 10/02/2008, -5/+15If McCain were in touch with the American people, he would have tried to out-smile Barack, maybe even race to be the FIRST to cross the aisle.

Independents want to see a little bipartisanship, some good humor, an end to the same-old, same-old. Once again, McCain throws away an opportunity because he just doesn't get it.
bobfell, on 10/02/2008, -7/+22Lets face it, McCain is a dick.

We've had enough dicks in the executive branch already.
- TheSkunkMonkey, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1They call him Dick... Dick Tater.
seomike, on 10/02/2008, -12/+28Both are fail because the voted "yea" for that bill.
Mustard911, on 10/02/2008, -17/+6The puppets play.

How pathetic. They're both corrupt and playing the Hegelian Dialect for the sheeple.

Did the Public get fooled with the corrupt Media's brainwashing that we had to have the second bail-out? The pumping up of the balloon that caused the problems in the first place?
- tcbishop12, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1Huh? Three dialectical stages of development: a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis. What's that got to do with the price of apples?
- papusman, on 10/02/2008, -2/+4I will bury ANYONE who uses the term "sheeple." Also, it doesn't take a corrupt media to convince me we need the bailout. Just facts.
EnderBlack, on 10/02/2008, -17/+7Buried for irrelevancy..we march toward government control of the free market and this jackass reporter is only concerned about two candidates and their handshakes?
- yacks, on 10/02/2008, -3/+3well the problem is that something like that shows that you can work with both sides, your own as well as the other.. in the Senate or House, you do not need to do it as much as President.
  - odigity, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2There aren't two sides, there's only one side - the banker's side. Partisan politics is a show to distract you and get you to pick one "side" vs the other, so that you always vote for the status quo.
- Sogladtobehere, on 10/02/2008, -1/+3There happens to be an election going on, maybe you've heard about it?
ZenFountain, on 10/02/2008, -7/+3"Senate aides said Mr. McCain did not want to be preceded or followed by Democratic senators, so he chose not to offer remarks on the bill."

I see what you did there.
Czechxican, on 10/02/2008, -3/+9McCain
Palin
-Together they're making Washington more partisan
- tcbishop12, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1Does that mean they're doing their part?
Ghoztt, on 10/02/2008, -21/+8What the hell is with all you sheeple supporting Obama when you're refusing to look at the fact THAT HE'S FOR BIG BUSINESS!? Corporate welfare for the rich! Blegh. Socialism will be voted on (and passed) here in the U.S.
I just better get used to living with you idiots while you destroy my forefathers' nation.
- nickels, on 10/02/2008, -2/+7Too late, your precious Republican party already beat us socialist liberals to it. Look around ***** - your forefather's nation is in shambles.
- Sogladtobehere, on 10/02/2008, -2/+2And your candidate is? If you say McCain, I'm gonna laugh so hard my appendix will burst.
- wayzup, on 10/02/2008, -1/+5You assume too much; just because a person can see McCain for the blowhard he is doesn't necessarily make them an Obama fan.
  
  I like Jon Stewart's description of this race...2 candidates, 1 cup. It's that sickening.
soundsofreason, on 10/02/2008, -2/+5Wow. Just... wow.
PosedMagnet, on 10/02/2008, -6/+14Why is Obama supporting the bailout?

Just kinda curious

I mean, I'm voting for him either way but, kinda strikes me as VERY ***** odd that he's supporting it.
- Mustard911, on 10/02/2008, -22/+9Obama is apart of the established corruption in global politics. His wife is on the CFR board, a group setup by those that instigated the Federal Reserve. It's a group that wants to dismantle borders and allow Zionists to be our Priests and us the cattle. All prophesied in the Bible.
  
  Obama and McCain Christians, what a laugh and tears. Same with Bush.
  - pyg13, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3Please, please tell me you forgot to give us a '/s.' Can someone post something like this seriously? You have grouped all politicians in the same bucket - with a conspiracy colored by your (apparent) extreme religious convictions. I would suggest they are (mostly) too venal to work that well together (I would provisionally exclude Sen. Webb - with what I have seen of him so far though, he is probably too principled to be very effective.)
    
    I understood from the very first that Sen. Obama was a politician. How else would he get through the back halls in Chicago. I do, however, think he is clearly the better choice.
- statrick, on 10/02/2008, -19/+9Obama supports the bailout because his masters told him to.
  
  simple as that
  
  CFR ties > democrat or republican ties
  - statrick, on 10/02/2008, -4/+4dont just dig me down, prove me wrong...
    
    thiers nothing more i would like than to be proven wrong on this...
    
    say it aint so
  - diggapleeeze, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4it ain't so.
- PosedMagnet, on 10/02/2008, -3/+9Any replies other than conspiracy theories are appreciated ;)
  - statrick, on 10/02/2008, -5/+1here, Washington is a place for the rich elite to steal from and control the quality of life of the working class, its been this way for over 100 years. their i no reason to think Obama is any different, you are not aloud to succeed in this system if you don't play by the rules of the CFR and the FED. simple as that.
    
    if you dont play by the rules you get deaded
    Paul wellstone is someone who comes to mind. his story is a crazy one thats for sure
    
    the reason the FED wants to rob America is still a little unclear to me as well. it cant have anything to do with money seeing as though they make the stuff.
    
    im guessing they want to destabilize the dollar so we beg for the Amero and the North American Union
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hiPrsc9g98
    
    which bush peeps started the plans, but i bet a democrat will introduce and finalize
  - acebrickman, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2please research your candidate's voting records and keep calling them theories.... I dare ya
  - Sigoya, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1Obama answered that question in this very particular Senate appearance during his speech:
    
    "We're in a very dangerous situation, where financial institutions across this country are afraid to lend money. And if all that meant was the failure of a few banks in New York, that would be one thing, but that's not what it means.
    
    What it means is, if we don't act, it will be harder for Americans to get a mortgage for their home or loans they need to buy a car or send their children to college.
    
    What it means is that businesses won't be able to get the loans they need to open a new factory or make payroll for their workers. And if they can't make payroll on Friday, then workers are laid off on Monday. And if workers are laid off on Monday, then they can't pay their bills or pay back their loans to somebody else. And it will go on and on and on, rippling through the entire economy. And potentially we could see thousands of businesses close, millions of jobs could be lost, and a long and painful recession could follow."
- Ghoztt, on 10/02/2008, -11/+4Here, I'll tell you why Obama is supporting the bailout, effectively installing socialism and destroying free market capitalism (as well as destroying financial responsibility for the rich ((but not the poor))--
  
  BECAUSE NOTHING WILL CHANGE. Change is just a word. It's rhetoric. IT'S RHETORIC!! "Change" "Change" "Change" "Change" "CHANGE!" There, happy?
  
  Go vote for the two party establishment. NOTHING WILL CHANGE. But I will still be here laughing.
  - RhoVisions, on 10/02/2008, -0/+0You'll still be spouting your rhetoric even if the world doesn't end. Don't you get tired?
- czeman, on 10/02/2008, -9/+2He supports it because it's supposed to help fix a problem created by the Democrats in the first place.
  - rondeth, on 10/02/2008, -2/+1It's not just CRA in the mix, credit default swaps are a large part of this fiasco as well.
- tehWhisp, on 10/02/2008, -4/+9He supports it because he recognizes the fact that the economy will be worse off if it doesn't pass. Sure, it sucks that we're giving a *****-ton of money to the people that made the mistake in the first place, but it has to happen. The point of the bill is to place restrictions on what the banks can do with their new-found fortune as to prevent a repeat of events.
  
  As it is now, a large number of banks may fail (and some already have), and many people will go completely bankrupt. No banks = no bank account. Sure, you could always transfer banks. However, this is America we're talking about and not everyone is that intelligent.
  
  Obama is simply doing what he believes will keep the country alive long enough to make serious changes.
  - PosedMagnet, on 10/02/2008, -1/+4Your bank account won't disappear. Your money is federally insured.
  - acebrickman, on 10/02/2008, -2/+2the "less worse is better than worse" approach didn't work in 2004, it shouldn't be tolerated in '08
- HappyProgrammer, on 10/02/2008, -1/+6Without a rescue package the markets and financial institutions will fall much harder. Credit will dry up. When it becomes difficult or impossible for people and businesses to get credit, businesses will close, unemployment will rise sky high and *everybody* will hurt, not just the people who created this mess.
  
  Additionally there are many many people whose retirement money is invested in the market. Markets going down will hurt them... a lot.
  - IntruderII, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1I believe it also hurts everyone when enormous amounts of money is printed out of thin air. Both ways are going to hurt everyone, and I don't claim to know which way will hurt more. I don't think anyone can know for sure. However, I am against the bailout due to the fact I believe our currency should be one of the most valued treasures of our country, not something we fallback on to print more of when times get rough.
    
    Printing money will make you feel better in the short-term, but it'll come back to bite you in the ass soon enough.
- NotedFuturist, on 10/02/2008, -7/+1What do you care why he is? You're voting for him anyway. This litte $700 billion dollar dealy shouldn't matter to you unless he says so.
  
  OBAMA IS THE MAN!!! YEAH!
  
  Just shut up and follow him to the land of change.
- nickespinosa, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2I don't know why he wouldn't come out against it, asking for some support for the homeowners to be included (at the very least).
  
  It seems like that would be a very popular political move... among the people that is.
  
  Hmm, maybe I just answered my own question.
mzx639, on 10/02/2008, -29/+8Obama is a clown.
- czeman, on 10/02/2008, -7/+5No he isn't. Clowns make me laugh. Obama makes me cringe.
- Sepeteus, on 10/02/2008, -3/+5No, clowns are ridiculous and/or scary. McCain is like that.
- grillcover, on 10/02/2008, -2/+2No, Obama is a classy ***** whose got more grace in his pinky finger than McCain's got in his whole decrepit body.
  
  Obama knew this would be noticed, he knew the figurative significance of it, and he did it because it's what's necessarily in our government right now. McCain not only is oblivious of that, but he spites the good will.
  
  I am continually disappointed that matters of mere logic fall on deaf ears time and time again.
IphtashuFitz, on 10/02/2008, -2/+16"Mr. Obama just doesn't get it."

Seems to me like he "gets it" a hell of a lot more than McCain does. McCain needs to stop using that catch phrase since it just shows how out of touch HE really is...
JaDeGirL01, on 10/02/2008, -3/+13He's bitter because he had planned on suspending his campaign in order to get the bailout signed by Monday. When that didn't happen, he looked like an old fool. Obama has the graciousness of extending a handshake and McCain can't even be bothered. That is really low. Obama '08!
Addicuss, on 10/02/2008, -5/+20Obama, always classy.

I can't say that I would personally, after the lowdown attacks by the McCain campaign, be as forgiving. But the fact that Obama is bigger than that bodes well for our nation if he gets elected. No more of the tough guy posturing that has been a staple of foreign policy for 8 years. one of the main reasons the U.S. has lost so much respect globally.
- ammundsen, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1I agree. Obama exhibits far more class than McCain. He seems more presidential, thoughtful and fair.
  
  However his understanding of economics is horrible and his policies reflect that. He voted for police state powers via the FISA bill. He is just as much beholden to monied special interests. And he is obsequious to Israel.
  
  Despite how awful McCain is I can never vote for him. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils.
  - doubleo7, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1McCain thanks you for your support. As I'm sure Bush did during 2000 when you probably also did not vote.
UncommonSoap, on 10/02/2008, -3/+12Should I even be surprised by this kind of article anymore? Obama's a better candidate than McCain, what else is new.
fleischner, on 10/02/2008, -19/+10What media bias? /s

A whole NYT article about Obama offering a handshake. That reminds me of that BHO crowd cheering when he blew his nose. "Sycophant" doesn't even *begin* to describe you people.
- Elliuotatar, on 10/02/2008, -2/+3So what are you saying, that it's not important for people to know that someone they intend to elect president would make a poor diplomat because he can't even behave in a civil manner towards someone he has contempt for when he knows cameras are rolling?
- nickels, on 10/02/2008, -1/+4You mean the ELITE media is biased? Maybe this is just another Gotcha journalist moment.
  
  OR maybe it has something to do with McCain talking endlessly about being able to cross party lines and when it comes down to it, he is nothing but a line towing windbag.
  
  No, that can't be it. It's those damn liberal elitists in the media yet again.
- diggapleeeze, on 10/02/2008, -1/+5Walking across the aisle to offer a handshake to your opponent says alot about someone. Showing contempt for said handshake also says alot about someone.
  
  Can you see why this is newsworthy or do I need to dumb it down fer ya?
  - RRJackson, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2Yeah, it says they know how to work a room. So does Kelly Ripa.
  - rondeth, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2Well, then shouldn't McCain also know 'how to work a room'? Quite important when meeting with foreign leaders who we may not agree with. If this is true (and given McCain's recent mannerism patterns, I tend to think it is), it definitely shows a dangerous quality of ol' John McCain.
  - RRJackson, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2We don't have to pander to foreign leaders. We just have to remind them that we can wipe their nations off the face of the Earth.
drifter, on 10/02/2008, -13/+6You all talk about wanting a real candidate, yet when McCain acts how he wants, you bad mouth him.

But hold on, Barack Obama who could easily and most likely is faking this crap just to look good, is ok? Stop buying into both of them.

I am fine with Obama supporters but it seems that on the internet and across campus' they make excuses for him, when he proves to be just the same old politican.
- Elliuotatar, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3Even if he is faking it, that's the job of a president, and of a good diplomat. Is McCain going to start another cold war with China by insulting their prime minister?
  - drifter, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1Case in point, I get dugg down and get a dumb comment in defense of Obama.
    
    So now that is how a candidate should act? I agree sometimes the president may have to be fake in regards to other countries leaders.
    
    But within our own government, lies and acting like you are ok with each other causes nothing but trouble in the long run.
    
    Point is none of them want to bridge the gap, which is small as it is, and you guys buy into it or make excuses.
    
    It is wrong for Obama to use this to his advantage and be fake, you make think it is ok, but then again im sure you are voting for him.
- coldpockets, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3Obama was being cordial and polite. Being "real" doesn't meaning not showing restraint. You don't punch your boss or throw a fit as soon as something doesn't go your way because you're not "real."
- DThatsMe, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2Since Obama has been in public office he's been one classy SOB from what I've seen. Way before this election.
  - drifter, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1Since he's been in office he has been working towards presidency. He never wanted to serve in the Senate, only wanted to become president. It is a joke.
    
    And dont get me wrong McCain sucks ass now. But Obama is just as bad, yet on this website and across the nation people make excuses for him.
    
    Why? He;s not your buddy and he has yet to do anything!
nofate2029, on 10/02/2008, -5/+11It takes real guts to cross party lines like that, especially in heated politics like this. Obama showed that he is the bigger man.
Mustard911, on 10/02/2008, -6/+2Prince Hall Mason handshakes a conventional Mason.
LuCiFer6, on 10/02/2008, -3/+10You know when this campaign first started I at least had more respect for McCain than Bush because he actually fought for this country and he has a son in the military which he didn't use a tool for political gains.

But after his choice for VP and then seeing the way he talked down and about Obama during debates and now this story, I'm quickly losing respect for this dedicated war hero...
Philophobic, on 10/02/2008, -18/+11You have GOT to be kidding me. This is not news worthy. This is not front page worthy.
- lhbaker, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2It would be if it were the other way around though, right?
  - Philophobic, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1I'm voting for Obama, so no, I'd still think this wouldn't be news worthy the other way around.
- otakushark, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1It's McCain who's not worthy.
HillerMylife, on 10/02/2008, -16/+10Holy *****, they shook hands. Stop the presses.
- eggsovereasy, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1Lol, that is what I was thinking
carnivore0311, on 10/02/2008, -17/+6So obama goes looking for touble in GOP territory and people applaude him for it? wtf?
- paulhendrixson, on 10/02/2008, -2/+6A handshake is "looking for trouble" to you?
  
  What a society we live in.
- xDynaBlade, on 10/02/2008, -1/+5I suppose a friendly gesture of welcome between two people who allegedly respect each other is always seen as "looking for trouble"?
- logicaldog, on 10/02/2008, -0/+4BOY you really don't get it do you, republicans are HOPELESSLY STUPID.
- ErickStevenson, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1Well what can we expect from these people.... I bet they are saying he should sit in the back with the rest of the....
- deusflac, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1playing devil's advocate here. maybe what carnivore meant by "looking for trouble" was that Obama wanted to cause some controversy by crossing lines under the auspices of good will. kinda like dumping buckets of $100 bills in the middle of the ghetto.
  
  personally i think Obama was just being a cool dude and saying hello.
KenSPT, on 10/02/2008, -18/+8Tonight we have a debate being moderated by a woman with a book coming out praising Barack Obama's campaign for the Presidency, and instead Digg's cluttered with articles like this about a handshake.

If Barack Obama walks across the aisle and shakes McCain's hand, he's seen as the great and impartial leader. If McCain did the same thing those same people praising Barack would find some way to spin it against McCain, calling it fake and cold, and nothing but a political move for the cameras.

Barack Obama is Mr. Image, he does everything he does so that people like the Digg Liberals praise him as the second coming. He's more worried about his public perception than he is the job he's campaigning to do. If you think we're seeing the real Barack Obama during this campaign, you're a fool.
- diggapleeeze, on 10/02/2008, -0/+3Um, wrong. The book is not about Obama, and she has not even written the section on him yet.
  - KenSPT, on 10/02/2008, -3/+1The title of the book is, "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama", and yes, she claims that she hasn't written the chapter yet ( which I don't believe ) Honestly, if you think for one second that the book is going to be anything but pro-Obama rhetoric, you're fooling yourself.
    
    This is the same woman who didn't allow Cheney to fully explain his answers to questions in the '04 VP debate. It's obvious she has a Liberal bias, and if you're trying to convince yourself otherwise you're a fool.
    
    A moderator for a national debate should, at the very least, feign impartial thinking. This woman cannot do that.
  - diggapleeeze, on 10/02/2008, -1/+2So because she's black it's automatically pro-Obama?
    
    The excuses for Palin's performance are already starting.
- lhbaker, on 10/02/2008, -1/+1You defend something McCain actually did, and justify his erratic behavior by positing a completely hypothetical situation. That's pretty irrational, don't you think?
  - KenSPT, on 10/02/2008, -2/+1No, irrational behavior is praising every little move Barack Obama makes, which is what I'm subject to reading everyday on Digg.
    
    You're not seeing the real Barack Obama, you're seeing a Barack Obama who is purposely molded in a certain image so to make the left wingers out there feel that he is the classy Lord and Savior for America.
  - diggapleeeze, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1And McCain wasn't trying to be the Lord and Savior for America last week by "Suspending" his campaign?
- RhoVisions, on 10/02/2008, -0/+0Lets not forget that many democrats agreed she should step down in the digg comments on that news, and Republicans spit in our faces. Why should we care?
- JavanSClark, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2How's that pathological lying going for you? For one.. the book hasn't had one page written yet. Secondly the book is about ALL black politicians in America. Of course Obama will be in it, he's the most successful Presidential Candidate (pre-Nov 4th) in our history, but he is not the focus of the book.
  
  Why is it, that you're okay with White Moderators, who have written books on white politicians..? Double standard? Why are you hoping for Bush 44? Do u really think we're in good shape, and do you think things will get better?
wlfldy, on 10/02/2008, -13/+6That's just DOES it! I don't know about you, but I'm certainly not going to vote for a man that won't shake hands with the proper adoration in his eyes when approached by such a God-like man.
- czeman, on 10/02/2008, -0/+2A God-like man? I hope you just forgot your sarcasm tags.
- logicaldog, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1is this sarcasm, what a mature defense mechanism, what are you seven?
  - wlfldy, on 10/02/2008, -0/+1I can't believe you even entertained that it would be serious!
M4dC0ns3rv4tive, on 10/02/2008, -4/+11McCain is a putz. As a Conservative he disgusts me, as well as 95% of the Republicans that have mortgaged the future of my children. The amount of debt that Bush and the Republican Congress have piled on the taxpayers is staggering. Keep in mind, not everyone pays taxes. So those of us that do, are gonna pay MORE! Those that don't, will still be taxed because the dollar will weaken, and your modest income will afford less and less. Don't take this message as if I am saying that a Democratic Congress will behave any differently. It its scary when Pelosi, Reed, and Bush are all on the same page..... last time was the Patriot Act, which taxed our personal freedoms.
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

A Second of Drama on the Senate Floor

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in US Elections 2008

Senator Al Franken PWNS Ann Coulter thumb

Login or register to add a comment

A Second of Drama on the Senate Floor

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in US Elections 2008

Senator Al Franken PWNS Ann Coulter thumb

Related by Keyword

Senator Al Franken PWNS Ann Coulter thumb

Colorado Gov. Ritter Taps Relative Unknown Bennet for Senate

The 8 most absurd devices from sci-fi movies

Login or register to add a comment