Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Will Guam Tip Over??

  1. #1

    Will Guam Tip Over??

    I'm not going to get political here, nor will I mention the party (please, let's not get into from a political position). But here's a US Congressman that believes if there are too many people on the Island of Guam that it will "tip over"? Please this goes beyond stupidity and into the realm of "DUH?". You decide: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q&nomobile=1

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Look behind you.
    Posts
    4,737
    I watch the video and laughed through a few parts and the admiral had a hard time keeping a straight face. This person gets paid by US citizens?
    I do not think outside the box, I do not think inside the box, I do not even know where the box is.

  3. #3
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by golden-eye View Post
    Thanks for the link. I am pretty sure Jay Leno will have a follow up on this shortly.
    This incident occurred in March 2010, over 3 years ago, so he would be late to the party. Johnson's office has stated he was being deadpan facetious and not serious in his comments.

    "During a House Armed Services Committee hearing in March 2010 concerning the U.S. military installation on the island of Guam, Johnson said to Admiral Robert F. Willard, Commander of U.S. Pacific Command, "My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize", to which Admiral Willard replied, "We don't anticipate that." Johnson's office later said Johnson "is simply a tremendous deadpan" and that he was using a facetious metaphor. The video of Johnson's comments became an internet sensation in the week prior to the 2010 elections, which he went on to win."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hank_Johnson

    He got almost 75% of the popular vote in that 2010 congressional election after this incident, so his constituents obviously did not take it seriously.
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 08-08-2013 at 07:20 PM.

  4. #4
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Well, it's nice to see that Vercingentorix has tip-toed into the 21st century, albeit still a few years short of the proverbial full deck of years.
    The mounties always get their man.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    West Island
    Posts
    422
    Guam is not in danger, however some smaller rocky outlets formed by small volcanic action are under cut by the wave action of the sea and have been observed to collapse one coast on the island of Curacao is under cut and has had small portions damaged by storm action. That said the congressman should have had the nounce to look at a chart of the coast and work it out for himself. The old saying applies "Its better to appear a fool that to open ones mouth and prove it." God bless America and their Great Education system "

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by rumpleforeskiin View Post
    Well, it's nice to see that Vercingentorix has tip-toed into the 21st century, albeit still a few years short of the proverbial full deck of years.
    To quote a great man, "There you go again". You obviously lack any real meaningful contribution to the thread so as usual you go after me with a personal insult. How regretful that you obviously lack the maturity necessary to put something meaningful out there. What a shallow life....

  7. #7
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by Vercingentorix View Post
    To quote a great man, "There you go again". You obviously lack any real meaningful contribution to the thread so as usual you go after me with a personal insult. How regretful that you obviously lack the maturity necessary to put something meaningful out there. What a shallow life....
    I'm afraid that "meaningful contribution" and this "thread" represent a contradiction in terms. But thanks for sharing.
    The mounties always get their man.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by rumpleforeskiin View Post
    I'm afraid that "meaningful contribution" and this "thread" represent a contradiction in terms. But thanks for sharing.
    Sorry to hear you think so little of EB's contribution. P.S. I've increased the number in my profile yet again. It's hard to keep up with that sinking ship....LOL. But here's a link: http://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...oval-1044.html

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by EagerBeaver View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hank_Johnson

    He got almost 75% of the popular vote in that 2010 congressional election after this incident, so his constituents obviously did not take it seriously.
    Well you've told part of the story. As Paul Harvey used to say, "Now the rest of the story":

    In 2006, Johnson challenged Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney in the Democratic primary for the 4th District—the real contest in this heavily Democratic, black-majority district. He forced McKinney into a runoff by holding her under 50% in the July 18, 2006 Democratic primary: McKinney got 47.1% of the vote; Johnson 44.4%, and a third candidate got 8.5%.[22]

    In the runoff of August 8, 2006, although there were about 8,000 more voters, McKinney got about the same number of votes as in the July primary. Johnson won with 41,178 votes (59%); McKinney got 28,832 (41%).[23]

    In November, he trounced the Republican candidate, Catherine Davis, with 76% of the vote—one of the largest percentages for a Democrat in a contested election, and the largest in the history of the district. However, he had effectively clinched a seat in Congress with his victory in the primary. The 4th is one of the most Democratic districts in the South; with a Cook Partisan Voting Index of D+22 at the time of the election, it was the second-most Democratic district in Georgia (only the neighboring 4th is more Democratic). {Note a D+22 Congressional District means Democrats made up 73.2% of the electorate in a 59% Black Community. So 76% of the actual vote vs. 73.2% being Democrat Electorate**

    Then in 2010:

    Johnson won reelection over the Republican candidate, business owner Liz Carter, gaining 131,760 of 176,467 votes, or 74.67% of the total. Carter, who is white, made headlines during the campaign by maintaining that she had been initially barred from appearing at a candidate forum hosted by Newsmakers Journal due to her race, an assertion subsequently denied in a statement by the forum's organizers: http://takeastandagainstliberals.blo...-politics.html So apparently in this heavily Democratic Congressional District (BEING D+17), which has some 59% Black Voters, has problems letting anyone except a Black person winning the district. The Republican's biggest negative issue: The color of her skin!!!!

    P.S. Johnson won 74.67% of the vote in a D+17 District (i.e. 68.20% Democratic) as an INCUMBENT in a heavily Black Community. Not exactly a resounding victory.

  10. #10
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Nutblog alert!!!
    The mounties always get their man.

  11. #11
    Oh! It's so hard to keep up with the sinking rating now at -6.3. He's heading into Carter/Nixon Territory now as the media begins talking about a failed presidency......LOL

    And I just bought a new shirt that says, "I just neutered the cat. Now he's a liberal.".

  12. #12
    Maybe we should start posting a bunch of videos of republican senators and congressmen who believe the world is only 6,000 years old and that women cannot get pregnant from a 'legitimate rape', whatever the fuck that is.

    Unfortunately, those people aren't joking. They're just assholes.

    How about we start with this bunch of winners!!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAc6xzo8_Aw
    And the Lord said unto John, "Come forth and receive eternal life." But John came fifth and won a toaster.

  13. #13
    Is this really a suprise?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DHMO



    Dihydrogen monoxide:

    is called "hydroxyl acid", the substance is the major component of acid rain.
    contributes to the "greenhouse effect".
    may cause severe burns.
    is fatal if inhaled.
    contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.
    accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.
    may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes.
    has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.

    Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:

    as an industrial solvent and coolant.
    in nuclear power plants.
    in the production of Styrofoam.
    as a fire retardant.
    in many forms of cruel animal research.
    in the distribution of pesticides. Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical.
    as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products.

    When will we think of the children and ban DHMO or water.

    In February 2011, during the campaign of the Finnish parliamentary election, a voting advice application asked the candidates whether the availability of "hydric acid also known as dihydrogen monoxide" should be restricted. 49% of the candidates answered in favour of the restriction

    In 2007 Jacqui Dean, New Zealand National Party MP, fell for the hoax, writing a letter to Associate Minister of Health Jim Anderton asking "Does the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs have a view on the banning of this drug?

    In March 2004, Aliso Viejo, California almost considered banning the use of foam containers at city-sponsored events because dihydrogen monoxide is part of their production. A paralegal had asked the city council to put it on the agenda; he later attributed it to poor research.[30] The law was pulled from the agenda before it could come to a vote, but not before the city received a raft of bad publicity.

    In 2002, radio talkshow host Neal Boortz mentioned on the air that the Atlanta Water System had been checked and found to be contaminated with dihydrogen monoxide, and set about relating the hazards associated with that “dangerous” chemical. A local TV station even covered the 'scandal'. A spokesperson for the city’s water system told the reporter that there was no more dihydrogen monoxide in the system than what was allowed under the law.

    In 2001 a staffer in New Zealand Green Party MP Sue Kedgley's office responded to a request for support for a campaign to ban dihydrogen monoxide by saying she was "absolutely supportive of the campaign to ban this toxic substance". This was criticised in press releases by the National Party[citation needed], one of whose MPs fell for the very same hoax six years later

  14. #14
    It's a whole new ballgame
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Where I belong.
    Posts
    6,327
    Quote Originally Posted by Vercingentorix View Post
    Oh! It's so hard to keep up with the sinking rating now at -6.3.
    Astonishing, isn't it. His approval rating is down to only 33 points higher than that of the Republican congress.
    The mounties always get their man.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by rumpleforeskiin View Post
    Astonishing, isn't it. His approval rating is down to only 33 points higher than that of the Republican congress.
    See that's what blindly licking up Obama's pabulum will do to a brain. A person's brain just turns to mush. They forget that "Congress" is made up of the House of Representatives (controlled by the Republicans) and the Senate (Controlled by the Democrats).....DUH!!

    P.S. I really need an APP or something as BO's approval rating is dropping so quickly that I can hardly keep up. At -7.4% as of this writing. Can you say sinking in his own (you fill it in).....LOL

    Note at a 43.6% approval rating BO has official entered Carter/Nixon Territory. Congratulations to all the liberals out there, your hard work has rendered its inevitable outcome.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •