Proud to be Conservative

[dsolo802]

Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.

In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with the knowledge that as impossibly unlikely as it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind.

[Goldie Locks]

Yes, put your trust and your life in the hands of your government. More people have been murdered by their own government than all previous wars.

[Smartmouthwoman]

Ahh yes... envy. The cornerstone of liberalism.

Not many folks are proud to claim they're liberals these days. Instead, they just attack the other side... it's their final hoorah on the way to defeat in November. :(

[Calypso Jones]

You do know that the Obama's are now worth 10 million don't you? And that Bono just recently cashed in on that FacePalm scam to the tune of 9 billion. But really 9 bill is not too much for a lib is it? just for a conservative.

You do know that the taxpayer is paying for Obonehead's lavish parties at the white house where he brings in questionable rappers? And we pay for their vacations? you know this right?

Who pays for mitt's vacations?

[Deadwood]

Good to see there is no radicalism in the OP. That the post is substantiated with "facts' just as the poster so consistently demands of others.

And so pleasing to see that there is "reasoned discourse" with no sweeping generalizations of an entire segment of a population of 350 million people.

Are most liberals so closed minded and judgemental? I mean this "Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars..." doesn't seem to leave room for many exceptions. I mean EVERY conservative in America?

Impressive indeed.

[Goldie Locks]

Good to see there is no radicalism in the OP. That the post is substantiated with "facts' just as the poster so consistently demands of others.

And so pleasing to see that there is "reasoned discourse" with no sweeping generalizations of an entire segment of a population of 350 million people.

Are most liberals so closed minded and judgemental? I mean this "Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars..." doesn't seem to leave room for many exceptions. I mean EVERY conservative in America?

Impressive indeed.


And no liberals/progressives or whatever they call themselves these days...LOL

[dsolo802]

Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.

In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with knowledge that as impossibly unlikely it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind.

Humbly following the example of our Conservative members whose interest in honesty, integrity, equal opportunity and concern for mankind is duly noted and with great appreciation.

I am as true to merits of the issues of today as are my beloved colleagues.

This is the liberal tactic known as 'back at ya!'

Let's throw more fuel on the flame - and, above all, PARTY ON!!

[roadmaster]

I am proud to be a conservative and a Christ Follower, Thank you.

[keymanjim]

Selfishness is a natural act. It's why animals have never evolved wheels.

[dsolo802]

Selfishness is a natural act. It's why animals have never evolved wheels.Eating one's own is only an occasional thing in the animal kingdom, fouling one's own nest just doesn't happen.

The closest parallel to the kind of selfishness this mutation of conversatism supports is cancer. A cell that does everything it can to survive and multiply at the expense of the host upon which it feeds, is one that should be irradiated to death or cut from the body. It should not be supported and lauded.

Life is interdependent, Keymanjim. One ignores that interdependency at one's own arrogant peril.

[dsolo802]

I am proud to be a conservative and a Christ Follower, Thank you.Do not suppose I am against Christianity and Jesus.

[dsolo802]

Good to see there is no radicalism in the OP. That the post is substantiated with "facts' just as the poster so consistently demands of others.

And so pleasing to see that there is "reasoned discourse" with no sweeping generalizations of an entire segment of a population of 350 million people.

Are most liberals so closed minded and judgemental? I mean this "Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars..." doesn't seem to leave room for many exceptions. I mean EVERY conservative in America?

Impressive indeed.I'm attempting to speak your language, fearandloathing. Nothing more, nothing less.

When you want to meet as a person and discuss our common bread and butter issues I'll be there. If this board wants to be a shit fest, I'll be there with shit as shitty or shittier than yours.

When rationality meets shit, rationality gets buried. I'm not that foolish to rationally discuss your shit.

Shit meets shit - That's what I call world class discussion!

[Smartmouthwoman]

I'm attempting to speak your language, fearandloathing. Nothing more, nothing less.

When you want to meet as a person and discuss our common bread and butter issues I'll be there. If this board wants to be a shit fest, I'll be there with shit as shitty or shittier than yours.

When rationality meets shit, rationality gets buried. I'm not that foolish to rationally discuss your shit.

Shit meets shit - That's what I call world class discussion!

I keep trying to get something out of your posts... but so far, all I've got is an obvious chip on your shoulder. Must be a liberal, eh?

[dsolo802]

I keep trying to get something out of your posts... but so far, all I've got is an obvious chip on your shoulder. Must be a liberal, eh?No

[Goldie Locks]

I keep trying to get something out of your posts... but so far, all I've got is an obvious chip on your shoulder. Must be a liberal, eh?


I get nothing from them either...maybe something in the water he drinks...:wink:

[Goldie Locks]

No

You started the thread titled "Proud to be a conservative". I"m sure you're not.

[dsolo802]

I get nothing from them either...maybe something in the water he drinks...:wink:You aint seen nothing yet!

It is nothing from whence we spring, and to nothing we return. God is Nothing and Everything. If you get God from my posts, I'll be the happiest guy.

[Goldie Locks]

On second thought, I don't think it's water...:wink:

[dsolo802]

On second thought, I don't think it's water...:wink:Think all you like. don't be a stranger.

[spunkloaf]

Ahh yes... envy. The cornerstone of liberalism.

Not many folks are proud to claim they're liberals these days. Instead, they just attack the other side... it's their final hoorah on the way to defeat in November. :(

It's not like that's what you're doing or anything. Jealous much? Yes. Yes you are. :sad: Too bad.

[spunkloaf]

I'm sure you guys know exactly what conservatives and liberals are. Why don't you educate us?

[coolwalker]

I keep trying to get something out of your posts... but so far, all I've got is an obvious chip on your shoulder. Must be a liberal, eh?

Ah, he's just an angry man with a big nose and a bad haircut.

[Smartmouthwoman]

It's not like that's what you're doing or anything. Jealous much? Yes. Yes you are. :sad: Too bad.

Congrats... your post makes as much sense as the OP.

[dsolo802]

Ah, he's just an angry man with a big nose and a bad haircut.At the end of the day, my nose will still be long, my hair will be no more - but you shall still be stupid.


Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.

In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with knowledge that as impossibly unlikely it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind.

Who wants to point out where I'm wrong about this?

[Smartmouthwoman]

I'm sure you guys know exactly what conservatives and liberals are. Why don't you educate us?

You can always pick out the liberals -- they're the ones doing all the whining... usually about those mean ole conservatives:

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/shemaro91/crying-baby.jpg

[coolwalker]

At the end of the day, my nose will still by long, my hair will be no more - but you shall still be stupid.



Who wants to point out where I'm wrong about this?

Maybe I'm being unfair. Is English your first language?

As for pointing out the flaws...your entire post is lacking in common sense.

[Goldie Locks]

At the end of the day, my nose will still by long, my hair will be no more - but you shall still be stupid.



Who wants to point out where I'm wrong about this?


It's an opinion, you're entitled to it. Why are you right about it?

[dsolo802]

It's an opinion, you're entitled to it. Why are you right about it?Name a part you'd like to discuss. There are several parts to it.

[dsolo802]

Congrats... your post makes as much sense as the OP.
163

[Calypso Jones]

Humbly following the example of our Conservative members whose interest in honesty, integrity, equal opportunity and concern for mankind is duly noted and with great appreciation.

I am as true to merits of the issues of today as are my beloved colleagues.

This is the liberal tactic known as 'back at ya!'

Let's throw more fuel on the flame - and, above all, PARTY ON!!

except for the fact that the conservatives are pointing out the many, varied and specific incidents and you failed to do that.

[Calypso Jones]

Name a part you'd like to discuss. There are several parts to it.

it seems to me when you get an answer like that, the poster has no where to start and couldn't substantiate it anyway.

[dsolo802]

it seems to me when you get an answer like that, the poster has no where to start and couldn't substantiate it anyway.It seems to me your concern is to disrupt meaningful chat and not support it.

[spunkloaf]

You can always pick out the liberals -- they're the ones doing all the whining... usually about those mean ole conservatives:

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll82/shemaro91/crying-baby.jpg

Yeah, you're not being mean or anything. Not at all. Your post here is very factual, productive, inspiring and respectful. You should be proud of yourself. I bet your parents would be proud. I bet if you had kids or anybody looking up to you, your demeanor would set a great example for them. You're a great American. There should be many more people like you. :smiley:

[Calypso Jones]

It seems to me your concern is to disrupt meaningful chat and not support it.

darlin'. Why don't you consider your communications with us conservatives as an opportunity to sharpen your democrat supporting debate skills. You gotta start sometime.

[Calypso Jones]

Yeah, you're not being mean or anything. Not at all. Your post here is very factual, productive, inspiring and respectful. You should be proud of yourself. I bet your parents would be proud. I bet if you had kids or anybody looking up to you, your demeanor would set a great example for them. You're a great American. There should be many more people like you. :smiley:

Concerned americans here are using specific instances of liberal hypocrisy. We can't help that you don't want to hear it.

[Smartmouthwoman]

Yeah, you're not being mean or anything. Not at all. Your post here is very factual, productive, inspiring and respectful. You should be proud of yourself. I bet your parents would be proud. I bet if you had kids or anybody looking up to you, your demeanor would set a great example for them. You're a great American. There should be many more people like you. :smiley:

When I start a whiney thread about liberals... you can scold me. In the meantime... carry on:

http://reidreport.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/crying-baby.png

[dsolo802]

darlin'. Why don't you consider your communications with us conservatives as an opportunity to sharpen your democrat supporting debate skills. You gotta start sometime.when i meet a "conservative" interested in conversation, I'll converse. As long as "conservatives" engage in the kind of broad brush group bashing I see here, I will respond in kind.

Jump out of your conservative box, whatever box i was in i've jumped out of long ago.

[Smartmouthwoman]

when i meet a "conservative" interested in conversation, I'll converse. As long as "conservatives" engage in the kind of broad brush group bashing I see here, I will respond in kind.

Jump out of your conservative box, whatever box i was in i've jumped out of long ago.

Is that why you started the thread? Because you're so above the partisan fray?

[coolwalker]

except for the fact that the conservatives are pointing out the many, varied and specific incidents and you failed to do that.

Oh Lord, you're going to confuse him now.

[spunkloaf]

When I start a whiney thread about liberals... you can scold me. In the meantime... carry on:

http://reidreport.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/crying-baby.png

Who's scolding you? You're an American and there is no need to explain your behavior to anybody. It is what it is. You represent all of us, not just conservatives or liberals. :smiley: This is how you are choosing to behave, nobody is doing that for you. It is what it is. No shame or modification required.

[dsolo802]

When I start a whiney thread about liberals... you can scold me. In the meantime... carry on.then do you join me, Smarmouthwoman, in condemning Trinnity's The liberal tactic of "shut up" thread.
So far, the folks who "genuinely" feel it is wrong for an imagined liberal to mount a broad brush attack on Conservatives have apparently been holding back in their condemnation of Trinnity's heartfelt group bashing.

Of course, I'm gratified that everyone is truly coming from their hearts!

[Calypso Jones]

Why don't you posters stop attacking the messengers and start defending the left's actions. At least then we got a place to start. And your critical thinking skills would be drawn into question.

[spunkloaf]

Let peoples' demeanor speak for them. If people want to come here to hate, then let it be so.

[coolwalker]

Alright smartie...

Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.
This is just you lashing out at something you have imagined. You are making rash statements with no backup to your claims.



In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

Disjointed sentence at best...again just your concept, no facts to back it up.



And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with knowledge that as impossibly unlikely it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind.
Grand casino...eating their own...are you on drugs?

[Smartmouthwoman]

Who's scolding you? You're an American and there is no need to explain your behavior to anybody. It is what it is. You represent all of us, not just conservatives or liberals. :smiley: This is how you are choosing to behave, nobody is doing that for you. It is what it is. No shame or modification required.

I don't represent anyone but myself, spunkloaf. Threads like this are called FLAMEBAIT. The originator isn't interested in discussion... and neither are you. The results are just what he wanted... to stir the pot.

But hey! Beats talking about his loserness Obama, doesn't it?

[spunkloaf]

Why don't you posters stop attacking the messengers and start defending the left's actions. At least then we got a place to start. And your critical thinking skills would be drawn into question.

Maybe because some of us are trying to find commonality while others are trying to draw thicker lines to divide us more than we already are divided. No names mentioned. :smiley:

[Smartmouthwoman]

then do you join me, Smarmouthwoman, in condemning Trinnity's The liberal tactic of "shut up" thread.
So far, the folks who "genuinely" feel it is wrong for an imagined liberal to mount a broad brush attack on Conservatives have apparently been holding back in their condemnation of Trinnity's heartfelt group bashing.

Of course, I'm gratified that everyone is truly coming from their hearts!

Ahhh, so it's Trinnity who's got you so riled up. Ever heard of taking your frustrations to the source instead of spreading it around to people who can't help you? She's a strong conservative woman... I'm sure she can handle your criticism... even without our help.

[spunkloaf]

I don't represent anyone but myself, spunkloaf. Threads like this are called FLAMEBAIT. The originator isn't interested in discussion... and neither are you. The results are just what he wanted... to stir the pot.

But hey! Beats talking about his loserness Obama, doesn't it?

You have anger like I do. I am sorry that whatever has caused it has caused it. Frankly I'm tired of being hated, and I'm tired of hating people for it. I don't know where else to begin other than to just absorb it. If it makes you angry that I'm not responding to your posts like you are expecting me to, then I guess I'm sorry for that as well.

[dsolo802]

Alright smartie...Yes, I am!


This is just you lashing out at something you have imagined.This is me calling you out for: Support for Communist China owning the means of our production to the great detriment of our working class, our national security and the children forced to work in China's factories.


You are making rash statements with no backup to your claims.See above.



Disjointed sentence at best...again just your concept, no facts to back it up.Ryan's plan is not a tweak of Social security and Medicare, it is the destruction of these things as an effective safety net for those who paid into it, had every right to expect it would be there, and are counting upon to be there for their very survival.


Grand casino...eating their own...are you on drugs?I'm off the drug of ideology. You should try it - then you'll see for yourself.

[keymanjim]

Eating one's own is only an occasional thing in the animal kingdom, fouling one's own nest just doesn't happen.

The closest parallel to the kind of selfishness this mutation of conversatism supports is cancer. A cell that does everything it can to survive and multiply at the expense of the host upon which it feeds, is one that should be irradiated to death or cut from the body. It should not be supported and lauded.

Life is interdependent, Keymanjim. One ignores that interdependency at one's own arrogant peril.
And, yet, you still can't explain why we haven't evolved wheels.

[coolwalker]

Yes, I am!

This is me calling you out for: Support for Communist China owning the means of our production to the great detriment of our working class, our national security and the children forced to work in China's factories.[/qoute]

China is a most favored nation, agreed by BOTH Partys. What they do with our labor force is their affair. If you don't like it, address them directly.




Ryan's plan is not a tweak of Social security and Medicare, it is the destruction of these things as an effective safety net for those who paid into it, had every right to expect it would be there, and are counting upon to be there for their very survival. If congress hadn't stolen from those areas for decades there would be no issue...this is NOT a conservative issue, it is shared equally by all members of congress who vote Yea on various "Slush Funds". Again...mis-directed anger.

I'm off the drug of ideology. You should try it - then you'll see for yourself.
So, you no longer have any idea...obviously about anything.

[dsolo802]

So, youNo you...I insist.

Stupid game, CW.

[dsolo802]

Ahhh, so it's Trinnity who's got you so riled up.The board is largely one big group bash - supported by you, or not.

Which is it?

Trinnity is where she is - beyond reach - what about you?

[dsolo802]

And, yet, you still can't explain why we haven't evolved wheels.Wheels, i was hoping for brains.

[keymanjim]

Wheels, i was hoping for brains.
I was hoping the same thing for your sake.

Animals didn't evolve wheels because they didn't build roads.

[Smartmouthwoman]

The board is largely one big group bash - supported by you, or not.

Which is it?

Trinnity is where she is - beyond reach - what about you?

I'm right here, darlin. But the only ones I'm interested in bashing are sleazy politicians like Barack Obama... and those who support him.

Will you be voting for Barry in November?

[roadmaster]

At the end of the day, my nose will still by long, my hair will be no more - but you shall still be stupid.



Who wants to point out where I'm wrong about this?

I will point out where you are wrong. Cons care about Americans while you seem not to. All races of American citizens should be taken care of before any other countries and not let illegals take benefits, taxes, and jobs we need. Liberals call it racist if we don't want illegals taking advantage of us. Got news for you, Americans legal are of all races so how can that be racist? A lot of mim wage job workers here can't afford to visit a dentist much less insurance while the hospitals around here if you are illegal charge 10 dollars for an illegal to have a child. It took our government almost 4 weeks to help the Native Americans in SD get electricity back on and some froze to death. We give money to countries just to make sure their elections go right and can't take care of our own. A lot of Americans especially over 40 that lost their jobs due to their jobs leaving the US and now without work.

We are not racist, we are for and expect a President to defend our borders and it's people.

[Aristophanes]

Humbly following the example of our Conservative members whose interest in honesty, integrity, equal opportunity and concern for mankind is duly noted and with great appreciation.

I am as true to merits of the issues of today as are my beloved colleagues.

This is the liberal tactic known as 'back at ya!'

Let's throw more fuel on the flame - and, above all, PARTY ON!!Ha. I thought that's what you were doing and this confirmed it.

I see the left-leaning members are vastly outnumbered here. Mob mentality is not pretty regardless of which side of the aisle it's coming from.

Not my gig. :wink:

[Shoot the Goose]

when i meet a "conservative" interested in conversation, I'll converse. As long as "conservatives" engage in the kind of broad brush group bashing I see here, I will respond in kind.

Jump out of your conservative box, whatever box i was in i've jumped out of long ago.

Back in that thread that got you all PO'd this AM, I challenged you. Told you to pick the topic even.

So here we are. Did you pick whining ?

If so ......... my position would have been that liberals are whiners. The evidence precedes me.

This was not hard.

[Shoot the Goose]

The board is largely one big group bash - supported by you, or not.

Which is it?

Trinnity is where she is - beyond reach - what about you?

Dsolo. I just went to about three subforums where I was most likely to find threads about Current Event topics. Looking for a liberal position to evaluate, and then debate.

I posted in several, but not to challenge a liberal position. There were virtually none there to challenge. And I try to put meat on the bones that I toss if discussion needs a kick.

I want to debate. I do not want diatribes. I do not want some lib who has to write a book every time they post. I want links and/or logical points made.

Link me to that lib when they step up.

Signed:

Shoot the Goose
aka
Shady Moose
aka
Eighty Deuce

All my alter-egos rhyme.

Now go get your friends, and let's go at it !!

[Conley]

Not that I'm complaining, but where did all you guys come from?

[Shoot the Goose]

Not that I'm complaining, but where did all you guys come from?

LOL ... I've been lurking here for a month. We're of Poltical Forums, and have waged many wars with the jackasses that run that place. I have a dozen purple hearts myself.

So I joined here. And told a couple friends. And they told a lot of folks !!!

I honestly thought we'd keep it a small party. But I was wrong ;)

We need libs.

[Conley]

LOL ... I've been lurking here for a month. We're of Poltical Forums, and have waged many wars with the jackasses that run that place. I have a dozen purple hearts myself.

So I joined here. And told a couple friends. And they told a lot of folks !!!

I honestly thought we'd keep it a small party. But I was wrong ;)

We need libs.

Oh yeah, I think someone told me that. That's the place that's always breaking down right? Well shoot (:wink:), seems like an easy sell - this place doesn't crash, knock on wood. Invite your debate buddies on over - we could definitely use more libs.

[Aristophanes]

Dsolo. I just went to about three subforums where I was most likely to find threads about Current Event topics. Looking for a liberal position to evaluate, and then debate.

I posted in several, but not to challenge a liberal position. There were virtually none there to challenge. And I try to put meat on the bones that I toss if discussion needs a kick.

I want to debate. I do not want diatribes. I do not want some lib who has to write a book every time they post. I want links and/or logical points made.

Link me to that lib when they step up.

Signed:

Shoot the Goose
aka
Shady Moose
aka
Eighty Deuce

All my alter-egos rhyme.

Now go get your friends, and let's go at it !!Shady Moose. I know you.............

[spunkloaf]

I'm right here, darlin. But the only ones I'm interested in bashing are sleazy politicians like Barack Obama... and those who support him.

Will you be voting for Barry in November?

You have a very bullheaded, closed-minded prejudice don't you?

It's okay, I'll still be open-minded to your opinions and try to have civil debate with you. You seem so quick to judge people though. Does that philosophy seem to work well for you in all areas of your life, or is it something you use as a defense-mechanism in political discussion only? I'm curious.

[Shoot the Goose]

Shady Moose. I know you.............

Yeah .... but I don't know you yet !! Gimme some alias' :)

[Shoot the Goose]

You have a very bullheaded, closed-minded prejudice don't you?

It's okay, I'll still be open-minded to your opinions and try to have civil debate with you. You seem so quick to judge people though. Does that philosophy seem to work well for you in all areas of your life, or is it something you use as a defense-mechanism in political discussion only? I'm curious.

That sweetie will carve you to the bone before you blink twice. So far, from what I've seen of your posts, you predominantly post like a not too bright liberal with a big head. Prove me wrong.

If you can post worth a hoot, fear not. You will attract all the good debate you want.

As for Smarty ... "hell hath no fury .................... ;)"

[Shoot the Goose]

Oh yeah, I think someone told me that. That's the place that's always breaking down right? Well shoot (:wink:), seems like an easy sell - this place doesn't crash, knock on wood. Invite your debate buddies on over - we could definitely use more libs.

LOL ... yup, that's the place. Trying to get libs, but it ain't easy.

[Goldie Locks]

LOL ... yup, that's the place. Trying to get libs, but it ain't easy.

Because most are chicken shit, plus the fact that there aren't enough of them....that's why Ubama will lose in November.

[spunkloaf]

That sweetie will carve you to the bone before you blink twice. So far, from what I've seen of your posts, you predominantly post like a not too bright liberal with a big head. Prove me wrong.

If you can post worth a hoot, fear not. You will attract all the good debate you want.

As for Smarty ... "hell hath no fury .................... ;)"

Do you feel like you're smarter than me? You must.

[Goldie Locks]

Do you feel like you're smarter than me? You must.

So far you haven't proven that he isn't...:wink:

[spunkloaf]

Because most are chicken shit, plus the fact that there aren't enough of them....that's why Ubama will lose in November.

Aw, honey. :grin:

You are filled with much doubt, and an abundance of blind confidence for your own convictions.

Be careful you do not build too tall that monument of yours, for the higher it is the harder the fall will be.

:kiss:

[Goldie Locks]

Aw, honey. :grin:

You are filled with much doubt, and an abundance of blind confidence for your own convictions.

Be careful you do not build too tall that monument of yours, for the higher it is the harder the fall will be.

:kiss:

There is no doubt...HONEY. I know and can see my convictions and what I believe in.

[Aristophanes]

Be careful you do not build too tall that monument of yours, for the higher it is the harder the fall will be.

:kiss:I have visions of faux Greek columns.........

:grin:

[Calypso Jones]

I have visions of faux Greek columns.........

:grin:

I think you be thinking of that Temple at Pergamon...Obamao's backdrop for his acceptance speech. That's called the Seat of Satan. apropo. heh? Actually, it's not so much a temple as an altar. And we're the sacrifice.

[Shoot the Goose]

Do you feel like you're smarter than me? You must.

Who is talking "feelings" ?

[dsolo802]

That sweetie will carve you to the bone before you blink twice. So far, from what I've seen of your posts, you predominantly post like a not too bright liberal with a big head. Prove me wrong.

If you can post worth a hoot, fear not. You will attract all the good debate you want.

As for Smarty ... "hell hath no fury .................... ;)"Goose, sure, I'd love to connect.

But, I'd like to propose to you and friends something quite different than we find at the national scene, here in this forum, on DCJ and probably any other forum these days, either "real" or virtual. Indeed, it may be different from what you are asking me to do.

I say we throw away the labels and meet as humans and Americans who share grave concerns about the country - eschew the partisan hype and listen to each other for a change.

I see lots of common ground and room for practical solutions. I'd be interested in exploring those solutions with you and anybody else who is as fed up with status quo as I am.

Of course we could continue to attribute the worst possible motives to "the opposition", bash millions of well meaning people like yourself by attacking the collective entity as we wildly imagine that fictitious entity to be - See Trinn's thread and mine.

We could also continue to allow ourselves to be divided and diverted by frivolous and mean-spirited flights of fancy about the Kenyan, Hitler-ian usurper and his Marxist drive to destroy free enterprise, pull the plug on granny, and brain wash our children in re-education camps.

But hey - If I wanted to debate "the merits" of that crap, I would have stayed at DCJ. My view is, if well-meaning people continue to "debate" those things we and the country will lose and it will lose very big.

What do you want to do?

[dsolo802]

I think you be thinking of that Temple at Pergamon...Obamao's backdrop for his acceptance speech. That's called the Seat of Satan. apropo. heh? Actually, it's not so much a temple as an altar. And we're the sacrifice.What a bunch of meaningless bluff and bluster.

This Goose is shit.

[Calypso Jones]

What a bunch of meaningless bluff and bluster.

This Goose is shit.

You could always get someone to show you how to research to see if i'm lying.

[Calypso Jones]

What a bunch of meaningless bluff and bluster.

This Goose is shit.

do you know what bluff and bluster even means?? Additionally. the post wasn't even addressing you. So. what seems to be your problem.

[dsolo802]

Yes, put your trust and your life in the hands of your government. More people have been murdered by their own government than all previous wars.I'm with Reagan on this, trust but verify.

Corruptible man is the problem. You can no more trust man in the private sector than you can trust him in the public sector. Same man.

[Goldie Locks]

Goose, sure, I'd love to connect.

But, I'd like to propose to you and friends something quite different than we find at the national scene, here in this forum, on DCJ and probably any other forum these days, either "real" or virtual. Indeed, it may be different from what you are asking me to do.

I say we throw away the labels and meet as humans and Americans who share grave concerns about the country - eschew the partisan hype and listen to each other for a change.

I see lots of common ground and room for practical solutions. I'd be interested in exploring those solutions with you and anybody else who is as fed up with status quo as I am.

Of course we could continue to attribute the worst possible motives to "the opposition", bash millions of well meaning people like yourself by attacking the collective entity as we wildly imagine that fictitious entity to be - See Trinn's thread and mine.

We could also continue to allow ourselves to be divided and diverted by frivolous and mean-spirited flights of fancy about the Kenyan, Hitler-ian usurper and his Marxist drive to destroy free enterprise, pull the plug on granny, and brain wash our children in re-education camps.

But hey - If I wanted to debate "the merits" of that crap, I would have stayed at DCJ. My view is, if well-meaning people continue to "debate" those things we and the country will lose and it will lose very big.

What do you want to do?


If you're talking both sides being at fault and usurping the Constitution, I'm widya.

[Calypso Jones]

Goose, sure, I'd love to connect.

But, I'd like to propose to you and friends something quite different than we find at the national scene, here in this forum, on DCJ and probably any other forum these days, either "real" or virtual. Indeed, it may be different from what you are asking me to do.

I say we throw away the labels and meet as humans and Americans who share grave concerns about the country - eschew the partisan hype and listen to each other for a change.

I see lots of common ground and room for practical solutions. I'd be interested in exploring those solutions with you and anybody else who is as fed up with status quo as I am.

Of course we could continue to attribute the worst possible motives to "the opposition", bash millions of well meaning people like yourself by attacking the collective entity as we wildly imagine that fictitious entity to be - See Trinn's thread and mine.

We could also continue to allow ourselves to be divided and diverted by frivolous and mean-spirited flights of fancy about the Kenyan, Hitler-ian usurper and his Marxist drive to destroy free enterprise, pull the plug on granny, and brain wash our children in re-education camps.

But hey - If I wanted to debate "the merits" of that crap, I would have stayed at DCJ. My view is, if well-meaning people continue to "debate" those things we and the country will lose and it will lose very big.

What do you want to do?

well you first. Let's see what you got.

[Shoot the Goose]

Goose, sure, I'd love to connect.

But, I'd like to propose to you and friends something quite different than we find at the national scene, here in this forum, on DCJ and probably any other forum these days, either "real" or virtual. Indeed, it may be different from what you are asking me to do.

I say we throw away the labels and meet as humans and Americans who share grave concerns about the country - eschew the partisan hype and listen to each other for a change.

I see lots of common ground and room for practical solutions. I'd be interested in exploring those solutions with you and anybody else who is as fed up with status quo as I am.

Of course we could continue to attribute the worst possible motives to "the opposition", bash millions of well meaning people like yourself by attacking the collective entity as we wildly imagine that fictitious entity to be - See Trinn's thread and mine.

We could also continue to allow ourselves to be divided and diverted by frivolous and mean-spirited flights of fancy about the Kenyan, Hitler-ian usurper and his Marxist drive to destroy free enterprise, pull the plug on granny, and brain wash our children in re-education camps.

But hey - If I wanted to debate "the merits" of that crap, I would have stayed at DCJ. My view is, if well-meaning people continue to "debate" those things we and the country will lose and it will lose very big.

What do you want to do?

You will find many of us very compatable with civil discussion about topics that have a narrowed-enough focus so as not to invite constant dumping and scattered discussions. Which would be what threads such as this one, and I understand your point with it, and know that Conservatives love to bash libs and Obama in similar threads (like going out back and yelling, only we don't have to go out back), will solicit.

I know just about all of these new folks. They can be very enjoyable in debate.

But, as I said, this site needs more liberal views to carry that good debate. I look for good debates, and they are not there yet.

If you get one going, trust that you can invite a bunch of these folks, and if they get smarmy, we will police each other. These folks are not trolls. Just bored at times.

Watch where the trolls come from though. If there is one thing I would beg of Moderation. Smack the trolls back to that Wild forum. Thread ban them when they get too stupid up here.

And thanks. Plenty of us want good debate. We want to be tested, and provoked, to better knowledge and thinking. Same as you.

[spunkloaf]

I will point out where you are wrong. Cons care about Americans while you seem not to. All races of American citizens should be taken care of before any other countries and not let illegals take benefits, taxes, and jobs we need. Liberals call it racist if we don't want illegals taking advantage of us. Got news for you, Americans legal are of all races so how can that be racist? A lot of mim wage job workers here can't afford to visit a dentist much less insurance while the hospitals around here if you are illegal charge 10 dollars for an illegal to have a child. It took our government almost 4 weeks to help the Native Americans in SD get electricity back on and some froze to death. We give money to countries just to make sure their elections go right and can't take care of our own. A lot of Americans especially over 40 that lost their jobs due to their jobs leaving the US and now without work.

We are not racist, we are for and expect a President to defend our borders and it's people.

So...who exactly are you disagreeing with when you point all of this out?

[Aristophanes]

Yeah .... but I don't know you yet !! Gimme some alias' :)You'd never guess who in a million years. :grin:

[dsolo802]

You will find many of us very compatable with civil discussion about topics that have a narrowed-enough focus so as not to invite constant dumping and scattered discussions. Which would be what threads such as this one, and I understand your point with it, and know that Conservatives love to bash libs and Obama in similar threads (like going out back and yelling, only we don't have to go out back), will solicit.

I know just about all of these new folks. They can be very enjoyable in debate.

But, as I said, this site needs more liberal views to carry that good debate. I look for good debates, and they are not there yet.

If you get one going, trust that you can invite a bunch of these folks, and if they get smarmy, we will police each other. These folks are not trolls. Just bored at times.

Watch where the trolls come from though. If there is one thing I would beg of Moderation. Smack the trolls back to that Wild forum. Thread ban them when they get too stupid up here.

And thanks. Plenty of us want good debate. We want to be tested, and provoked, to better knowledge and thinking. Same as you.Thank you Goose for your message. It was music to me.

I would rather have a good and honest sharing of views where everyone actually listens to each other, than to have a good debate. In addition to everything else this country needs, it needs unity. We can never get to unity if we become more fond of our box than our country.

In my lifetime, one of the smartest things I've ever heard anybody say about America's two party system was expressed by Jesse "the Mind" Ventura. I can't recall who was interviewing him, but he was part of a panel discussion where people were invited to say what they liked or loved or thought about our system. His remark I think was priceless. He said, "What's so marvelous about a two party system? It's just one party better than the Soviet Union."

Everyone across the political spectrum now feels betrayed by it, people who consider themselves, Repubs, Dems, Independents, Socialists - who is left that thinks it is working?

And so I say to you, when we look at what's broken in America how much sense does it make to stand inside the very boxes that comprise that broken system?

I'd love to hear your thoughts about that.

[Shoot the Goose]

You'd never guess who in a million years. :grin:

Well yeah ! And I do not have a million years ! PM me if it enhances you. Fuggetaboutit if you have too much baggage :)

[dsolo802]

Well yeah ! And I do not have a million years ! PM me if it enhances you. Fuggetaboutit if you have too much baggage :)Pardon my Zen, but the goose out!

Her identity is known.

[spunkloaf]

So far you haven't proven that he isn't...:wink:

You're a darling. :kiss: LOVE the hair, by the way. Gorgeous.

[spunkloaf]

Who is talking "feelings" ?

You tell me, genius. You're the one with all the smarts. :grin: Now educate me. Let's have your best lesson. Lay it on me, Einstein. :laugh: Slap the poisonous liberal doctrine right out of me. :wink:

Unless you're not up to the challenge and just want to be all talk. :shocked:

[dsolo802]

If you're talking both sides being at fault and usurping the Constitution, I'm widya.I'm not sure we agree about the usurping part - we might - but I am taking aim at both parties, the party system itself, and the money and vested interests that have corrupted it.

[Shoot the Goose]

Thank you Goose for your message. It was music to me.

I would rather have a good and honest sharing of views where everyone actually listens to each other, than to have a good debate. In addition to everything else this country needs, it needs unity. We can never get to unity if we become more fond of our box than our country.

In my lifetime, one of the smartest things I've ever heard anybody say about America's two party system was expressed by Jesse "the Mind" Ventura. I can't recall who was interviewing him, but he was part of a panel discussion where people were invited to say what they liked or loved or thought about our system. His remark I think was priceless. He said, "What's so marvelous about a two party system? It's just one party better than the Soviet Union."

Everyone across the political spectrum now feels betrayed by it, people who consider themselves, Repubs, Dems, Independents, Socialists - who is left that thinks it is working?

And so I say to you, when we look at what's broken in America how much sense does it make to stand inside the very boxes that comprise that broken system?

I'd love to hear your thoughts about that.

That may be a good thread. "Two Party System, Pros and Cons".

Jesse's quote is OK, but its just a one-liner. And Jesse was never the sharpest knife. Just sharper than many.

Not that I want to carry on a debate about the system. However, while it has its flaws, we are not just a lock-step two party system. Each party has factions and influences. Yes, change can be slow. But we do change. On the GOP side, we had Reagan, and now the Tea Party, as probably the two largest internal revolutions in my lifetime. Dems are the ones stuck right now. I would submit "stuck on stupid", aka the "largesse of the Treasury".

However, getting back to Jesse. If we enable 3-4 parties, as in a Parliamenary system. We can be like Italy. OK. Less extreme. Like France. Eh ?

No thanks Jesse. They are worse. Two dominant parties is the way to go. Every time a third party rises, its because one of the existing two parties needed to rebrand. See Federalists and Whigs.

Our problem is not two parties. Its much more not having term limits than it is having just two dominant parties. Its being able to run an unbalanced budget that fuels the largesse. These are what enable the political boogie-man.

I prefer Current Event types of threads myself. But there are takers for this other stuff. Just need some more liberal viewpoints to help keep it going. You will be swamped.

I am going to unwind with a Bud Lite, and the last of the BB game. Cheers.

[dsolo802]

That may be a good thread. "Two Party System, Pros and Cons".

Jesse's quote is OK, but its just a one-liner. And Jesse was never the sharpest knife. Just sharper than many.

Not that I want to carry on a debate about the system. However, while it has its flaws, we are not just a lock-step two party system. Each party has factions and influences. Yes, change can be slow. But we do change. On the GOP side, we had Reagan, and now the Tea Party, as probably the two largest internal revolutions in my lifetime. Dems are the ones stuck right now. I would submit "stuck on stupid", aka the "largesse of the Treasury".

However, getting back to Jesse. If we enable 3-4 parties, as in a Parliamenary system. We can be like Italy. OK. Less extreme. Like France. Eh ?

No thanks Jesse. They are worse. Two dominant parties is the way to go. Every time a third party rises, its because one of the existing two parties needed to rebrand. See Federalists and Whigs.

Our problem is not two parties. Its much more not having term limits than it is having just two dominant parties. Its being able to run an unbalanced budget that fuels the largesse. These are what enable the political boogie-man.

I prefer Current Event types of threads myself. But there are takers for this other stuff. Just need some more liberal viewpoints to help keep it going. You will be swamped.

I am going to unwind with a Bud Lite, and the last of the BB game. Cheers.
Enjoy the BL and the BB, TTYL - time for me to disconnect for a while

[Shoot the Goose]

You tell me, genius. You're the one with all the smarts. :grin: Now educate me. Let's have your best lesson. Lay it on me, Einstein. :laugh: Slap the poisonous liberal doctrine right out of me. :wink:

Unless you're not up to the challenge and just want to be all talk. :shocked:

LOL ...... LOL again ....... Look .... I am not going to lift a finger for you. If in a thread, and you can join the discussion without calling Palin a "****", and all the other juvenile crap that you bring, then I and others will engage you.

But so far, you are one big dumbass here. Take it as tough love. You need to lift up your game, cause I and others sure as crap are not going to even fling you a booger with the BS you post at this time.

[ramone]

Our problem is not two parties. Its much more not having term limits than it is having just two dominant parties. Its being able to run an unbalanced budget that fuels the largesse. These are what enable the political boogie-man.

Mmm, not sure i agree with that. How do the two parties differ in todays age and what are the real objectives of both? I'm thinking that big government control is foremost in both of them? Sure the left is more entitlement and socialist, but in the end both are really the same I think. When was the last time we had a balanced budget?

[Goldie Locks]

I'm not sure we agree about the usurping part - we might - but I am taking aim at both parties, the party system itself, and the money and vested interests that have corrupted it.


What's your solution?

[ramone]

I'm not sure we agree about the usurping part - we might - but I am taking aim at both parties, the party system itself, and the money and vested interests that have corrupted it.

Both parties have corrupted our government, problem is that obammy is a usurper. Everything about him has been sealed, from birth almost. Even that dipshit McCain had to put his BC on display, but it took three years for obammy to even put up something online that was verified by "Fact Check". Really, Fact check. Sure I will take their word for it. I've seen the pictures of the two who verified it. LOL, yep ,I take their word for it.

[spunkloaf]

LOL ...... LOL again ....... Look .... I am not going to lift a finger for you...

I didn't think you could back any of that talk up.

I'll leave the challenge open for you to try at any time, ok Goosey? I'm always open for a good chat.

[dsolo802]

That may be a good thread. "Two Party System, Pros and Cons".

Jesse's quote is OK, but its just a one-liner. And Jesse was never the sharpest knife. Just sharper than many.After Predator he had nuthin. But the quote was good and it was insightful.


Not that I want to carry on a debate about the system. However, while it has its flaws, we are not just a lock-step two party system. Each party has factions and influences. Yes, change can be slow. But we do change. On the GOP side, we had Reagan, and now the Tea Party, as probably the two largest internal revolutions in my lifetime. Dems are the ones stuck right now. I would submit "stuck on stupid", aka the "largesse of the Treasury".We must identify the cause of the problem, if we want to get serious about fixing "it". The debate you want to have won't go far if we start with fundamentally different places about what ails us.

If we all believed the lies the parties tell about each other - see, for example, the wonderful compilation of lies that Calyso posted here yesterday - there would be no chance of any conservative finding common ground with any progressive. Hence, the gridlock. Hence, the utter dissatisfaction by EVERYONE with our system.

Contrary to the way the parties tell the story, virtually all people across political lines:


want the dignity of labor
are not pro-abortion (pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion)
want primarily a realistic chance to take care of self and family
are for exercise of robust and diverse private religious practice - and not a secular society
are for an America with upward social mobility
believe in the vision of Adam Smith, in free enterprise and NOT Karl Marx
believe in the Constitution
know man is corruptible and that power corrupts
have values that trump pursuit of maximum money as the highest good
want equal opportunity, not equal outcomes
understand that our unity is America's strength, our division its Achilles heel (thus spake Moody's)
love this country

So why do we find ourselves at each other's throats? How is it possible that folks with so much in common treat each other with such utter contempt? Product differentiation. There is no money it for the parties to point out the places where the People all agree. With the way our system works, and is funded, all incentives drive the parties to accentuate, hype and lie about our differences. Great for party fund raising, really shitty for the unity and strength of the Country.


However, getting back to Jesse. If we enable 3-4 parties, as in a Parliamenary system. We can be like Italy. OK. Less extreme. Like France. Eh ? Yes, this country has flirted with third parties several times before. That doesn't mean, for example, that Teddy Roosevelt and his Moose Party wanted to scuttle our system for a Parliamentary system. [And hey, easy on those Freedom Fries they will anger the blood and for no good purpose. Apart from the fact that they fight with their feet, I like the French just fine.]


No thanks Jesse. They are worse. Two dominant parties is the way to go. Every time a third party rises, its because one of the existing two parties needed to rebrand. See Federalists and Whigs.Corruption is the problem, and the fewer parties, the easier it is for the monied interests to put the fix in.

With two parties, we are constantly confronted with the lesser of two evils. The greater the number, and the more choice we have, the greater the incentive for all parties to meaningfully compete for our votes, and the greater the likelihood government will actually serve the People and not the monied, vested interests. Informed citizenry, meaningful choices, good outcomes.


Our problem is not two parties. Its much more not having term limits than it is having just two dominant parties. Its being able to run an unbalanced budget that fuels the largesse. These are what enable the political boogie-man.Adam Smith believed in the invisible hand AND a place for government. Our Constitution, echoing the words of Adam Smith - not Karl Marx, provides for taxation and specific actions directed to the common good.

There is certainly room for good faith debate about exactly where the line is to be drawn, but one thing is certain: No one generally thinks it is smart to throw the baby out with the bath water. Killing government to prevent it from getting corrupted, makes as much sense as smothering our children before they can grow up to become criminals.

Man is corruptible. We all know that. Man is corruptible whether he is working in the public sector or the private one. If I adopted your rationale - as I understand it - we should nationalize the industries before corporate America becomes so powerful and corrupt that it defrauds and oppresses us all.

The solution is to act on the recognition that Man is corruptible and to put in place meaningful, right-sized checks and balances against oppression of Man emanating from both sectors. We can't do that as long as corrupt private and public sector vested interests control the game. We need to change our party system and how campaigns are financed. Money/Power has corrupted everything.

Remember: Action to prevent fraud and oppression of the People are the very things that Adam Smith says government exists to supply.

[Goldie Locks]

After Predator he had nuthin. But the quote was good and it was insightful.

We must identify the cause of the problem, if we want to get serious about fixing "it". The debate you want to have won't go far if we start with fundamentally different places about what ails us.

If we all believed the lies the parties tell about each other - see, for example, the wonderful compilation of lies that Calyso posted here yesterday - there would be no chance of any conservative finding common ground with any progressive. Hence, the gridlock. Hence, the utter dissatisfaction by EVERYONE with our system.

Contrary to the way the parties tell the story, virtually all people across political lines:


want the dignity of labor
are not pro-abortion (pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion)
want primarily a realistic chance to take care of self and family
are for exercise of robust and diverse private religious practice - and not a secular society
are for an America with upward social mobility
believe in the vision of Adam Smith, in free enterprise and NOT Karl Marx
believe in the Constitution
know man is corruptible and that power corrupts
have values that trump pursuit of maximum money as the highest good
want equal opportunity, not equal outcomes
understand that our unity is America's strength, our division its Achilles heel (thus spake Moody's)
love this country
So why do we find ourselves at each other's throats? How is it possible that folks with so much in common treat each other with such utter contempt? Product differentiation. There is no money it for the parties to point out the places where the People all agree. With the way our system works, and is funded, all incentives drive the parties to accentuate, hype and lie about our differences. Great for party fund raising, really shitty for the unity and strength of the Country.

Yes, this country has flirted with third parties several times before. That doesn't mean, for example, that Teddy Roosevelt and his Moose Party wanted to scuttle our system for a Parliamentary system. [And hey, easy on those Freedom Fries they will anger the blood and for no good purpose. Apart from the fact that they fight with their feet, I like the French just fine.]

Corruption is the problem, and the fewer parties, the easier it is for the monied interests to put the fix in.

With two parties, we are constantly confronted with the lesser of two evils. The greater the number, and the more choice we have, the greater the incentive for all parties to meaningfully compete for our votes, and the greater the likelihood government will actually serve the People and not the monied, vested interests. Informed citizenry, meaningful choices, good outcomes.

Adam Smith believed in the invisible hand AND a place for government. Our Constitution, echoing the words of Adam Smith - not Karl Marx, provides for taxation and specific actions directed to the common good.

There is certainly room for good faith debate about exactly where the line is to be drawn, but one thing is certain: No one generally thinks it is smart to throw the baby out with the bath water. Killing government to prevent it from getting corrupted, makes as much sense as smothering our children before they can grow up to become criminals.

Man is corruptible. We all know that. Man is corruptible whether he is working in the public sector or the private one. If I adopted your rationale - as I understand it - we should nationalize the industries before corporate America becomes so powerful and corrupt that it defrauds and oppresses us all.

The solution is to act on the recognition that Man is corruptible and to put in place meaningful, right-sized checks and balances against oppression of Man emanating from both sectors. We can't do that as long as corrupt private and public sector vested interests control the game. We need to change our party system and how campaigns are financed. Money/Power has corrupted everything.

Remember: Action to prevent fraud and oppression of the People are the very things that Adam Smith says government exists to supply.


All these listed can be corrected if we would just adhere to the Constitution.

[Shoot the Goose]

Mmm, not sure i agree with that. How do the two parties differ in todays age and what are the real objectives of both? I'm thinking that big government control is foremost in both of them? Sure the left is more entitlement and socialist, but in the end both are really the same I think. When was the last time we had a balanced budget?

Well, since you asked, it was Eisenhower in about '57. Clinton never balanced the budget. Never ran a surplus. Although, the collective Executive-Legislature did a better job than any term since Eisenhower.


The Tea Party is for a balanced budget. And its influence is growing.

[dsolo802]

All these listed can be corrected if we would just adhere to the Constitution.I don't think there is a single person in the country - Al Qaeda cells excepted - that would say anything good will come from NOT following the Constitution. Do you actually think Progressives are against following the Constitution as they understand it to be?

We are all here mature enough to know that what the Constitution requires is subject to good faith debate.

If the Constitution were written like a traffic code, detailing everything that must be done and how to do it, we wouldn't need a Judiciary. If you look at the Constitution and the fact that a Judiciary was created as a co-Equal branch of government you will know we have anything but a traffic code.

Just as no party has an exclusive on what God wants, no party and no person has an exclusive on what the Constitution means and how it applies to the infinite number of fact patterns that present themselves as time goes by. Under the Constitution, the responsibility for deciding what the Constitution means has been given to the Supremes, to be applied in Cases and Controversies.

Not to Ron Paul
Not to the Tea Party
Not to Congress
Not to the President
Not to me or you

Without a single "decider", there would be no law and order, no consistency, no stability - only chaos.

Does this make any sense to you?

[Shoot the Goose]

After Predator he had nuthin. But the quote was good and it was insightful.

We must identify the cause of the problem, if we want to get serious about fixing "it". The debate you want to have won't go far if we start with fundamentally different places about what ails us.

If we all believed the lies the parties tell about each other - see, for example, the wonderful compilation of lies that Calyso posted here yesterday - there would be no chance of any conservative finding common ground with any progressive. Hence, the gridlock. Hence, the utter dissatisfaction by EVERYONE with our system.

Contrary to the way the parties tell the story, virtually all people across political lines:

want the dignity of labor
are not pro-abortion (pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion)
want primarily a realistic chance to take care of self and family
are for exercise of robust and diverse private religious practice - and not a secular society
are for an America with upward social mobility
believe in the vision of Adam Smith, in free enterprise and NOT Karl Marx
believe in the Constitution
know man is corruptible and that power corrupts
have values that trump pursuit of maximum money as the highest good
want equal opportunity, not equal outcomes
understand that our unity is America's strength, our division its Achilles heel (thus spake Moody's)
love this country
So why do we find ourselves at each other's throats? How is it possible that folks with so much in common treat each other with such utter contempt? Product differentiation. There is no money it for the parties to point out the places where the People all agree. With the way our system works, and is funded, all incentives drive the parties to accentuate, hype and lie about our differences. Great for party fund raising, really shitty for the unity and strength of the Country.

Yes, this country has flirted with third parties several times before. That doesn't mean, for example, that Teddy Roosevelt and his Moose Party wanted to scuttle our system for a Parliamentary system. [And hey, easy on those Freedom Fries they will anger the blood and for no good purpose. Apart from the fact that they fight with their feet, I like the French just fine.]

Corruption is the problem, and the fewer parties, the easier it is for the monied interests to put the fix in.

With two parties, we are constantly confronted with the lesser of two evils. The greater the number, and the more choice we have, the greater the incentive for all parties to meaningfully compete for our votes, and the greater the likelihood government will actually serve the People and not the monied, vested interests. Informed citizenry, meaningful choices, good outcomes.

Adam Smith believed in the invisible hand AND a place for government. Our Constitution, echoing the words of Adam Smith - not Karl Marx, provides for taxation and specific actions directed to the common good.

There is certainly room for good faith debate about exactly where the line is to be drawn, but one thing is certain: No one generally thinks it is smart to throw the baby out with the bath water. Killing government to prevent it from getting corrupted, makes as much sense as smothering our children before they can grow up to become criminals.

Man is corruptible. We all know that. Man is corruptible whether he is working in the public sector or the private one. If I adopted your rationale - as I understand it - we should nationalize the industries before corporate America becomes so powerful and corrupt that it defrauds and oppresses us all.

The solution is to act on the recognition that Man is corruptible and to put in place meaningful, right-sized checks and balances against oppression of Man emanating from both sectors. We can't do that as long as corrupt private and public sector vested interests control the game. We need to change our party system and how campaigns are financed. Money/Power has corrupted everything.

Remember: Action to prevent fraud and oppression of the People are the very things that Adam Smith says government exists to supply.

You certainly mean well, but your posts are mostly too long for a forum discussion. For instance, just your first bullet point goes to welfare, and the 'largesse of the treasury". That in itself is one thread. For instance, you use the phrase "most people want". That is irrelevent. The problem is that we still have lrgesse that we cannot afford. Statistics support that the longer one can receive Unemployment Benefits, the more one will forestall seriously looking for a job.

So the thread would be about welfare, or "free-stuff".

Then we could have one that looks at just Medicare. It could encompass propsed solutions, like Ryan's plan. It could enlighten folks as to how massively it went over budget. As Obamacare most certainly will. :)

Then Social Security.

Term limits vs. career politicians.

Perhaps Management could set up a new sub-forum just for these types of topics. Maybe there's a good place for it already, and I just need to look around more.

[dsolo802]

You certainly mean well, but your posts are mostly too long for a forum discussion. For instance, just your first bullet point goes to welfare, and the 'largesse of the treasury". That in itself is one thread. For instance, you use the phrase "most people want". That is irrelevent. The problem is that we still have lrgesse that we cannot afford. Statistics support that the longer one can receive Unemployment Benefits, the more one will forestall seriously looking for a job.

So the thread would be about welfare, or "free-stuff".

Then we could have one that looks at just Medicare. It could encompass propsed solutions, like Ryan's plan. It could enlighten folks as to how massively it went over budget. As Obamacare most certainly will. :)

Then Social Security.

Term limits vs. career politicians.

Perhaps Management could set up a new sub-forum just for these types of topics. Maybe there's a good place for it already, and I just need to look around more.The thread as it has evolved is about me telling you I'm not interested in debate between two enemies, when we actually are anything but. It is a game that has served us ALL very, very poorly. It has divided us, diminished the nation before credit agencies and in the eyes of the world, done terrible damage to the American worker and family, and is destroying everything we have ever loved about this country.

There is no issue that you or I could bring up that can't be solved by Americans.

Is it not painfully obvious that there is virtually no issue left that democrats and republicans can resolve together?

The old game is clearly over.

[Conley]

You certainly mean well, but your posts are mostly too long for a forum discussion. For instance, just your first bullet point goes to welfare, and the 'largesse of the treasury". That in itself is one thread. For instance, you use the phrase "most people want". That is irrelevent. The problem is that we still have lrgesse that we cannot afford. Statistics support that the longer one can receive Unemployment Benefits, the more one will forestall seriously looking for a job.

So the thread would be about welfare, or "free-stuff".

Then we could have one that looks at just Medicare. It could encompass propsed solutions, like Ryan's plan. It could enlighten folks as to how massively it went over budget. As Obamacare most certainly will. :)

Then Social Security.

Term limits vs. career politicians.

Perhaps Management could set up a new sub-forum just for these types of topics. Maybe there's a good place for it already, and I just need to look around more.

The forum organization could be improved and we're always willing to consider suggestions.

[Shoot the Goose]

The thread as it has evolved is about me telling you I'm not interested in debate between two enemies, when we actually are anything but. It is a game that has served us ALL very, very poorly. It has divided us, diminished the nation before credit agencies and in the eyes of the world, done terrible damage to the American worker and family, and is destroying everything we have ever loved about this country.

There is no issue that you or I could bring up that can't be solved by Americans.

Is it not painfully obvious that there is virtually no issue left that democrats and republicans can resolve together?

The old game is clearly over.

And I see our politics more as a pendulum. We need not debate as two enemies. We most certainly can debate as two who disagree.

However, a good debate would be whether or not the current Democrat Party wants to solve these problems. Whether Obama wants to solve these problems.

Spending: Where is the Democrat Plan ? At least the Republicans have several on the table. Who are the Democrats intent on fixing this that are rising in support within the Party ? The leading Republicans would be such as Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and Rand Paul. I mention them as they are rising stars on the Right, who have certainly stuck their necks out. Where are the Dems who are sticking their political necks out with solutions ?

You said earlier that "most people want the dignity of labor".

OK. Show me where any leading Democrat wants to solve our debt problem with any earnest effort. Surely the Dems see this as a problem ? Surely "most" want to fix it ? OBTW, "the rich paying their fair share" is a friggin joke. So "Show me the money", so to speak. I submit further that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are a cancer on the Republic. As is Hillary. Who is the future of the Democrat Party that wants to fix the problems ? I submit that the Left does not want to solve this problem of debt.

I know the names of a few Dem politicians who do want to solve this problem. Trouble is, they have no support within their party right now.

[Shoot the Goose]

The forum organization could be improved and we're always willing to consider suggestions.

I am sure that a few of us have some ideas. But also no need to rush. I think that a good approach would be looking at where other sites have excelled (and not). Just one for-instance. A part of the forum should be designated for serious discussion of current events. IMMHO, a requirement to list an Event there should be a linked article to a major news source, where the thread title must be the title of the article, with no flame attached. The OP must then contain the link, and then 5-10 lines of quoted text. Then the poster can add some opinions etc.


I offer that now just as food-for-thought. I think it saves a lot of headache.

[dsolo802]

And I see our politics more as a pendulum. We need not debate as two enemies. We most certainly can debate as two who disagree.

However, a good debate would be whether or not the current Democrat Party wants to solve these problems. Whether Obama wants to solve these problems.

Spending: Where is the Democrat Plan ? At least the Republicans have several on the table. Who are the Democrats intent on fixing this that are rising in support within the Party ? The leading Republicans would be such as Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and Rand Paul. I mention them as they are rising stars on the Right, who have certainly stuck their necks out. Where are the Dems who are sticking their political necks out with solutions ?

You said earlier that "most people want the dignity of labor".

OK. Show me where any leading Democrat wants to solve our debt problem with any earnest effort. Surely the Dems see this as a problem ? Surely "most" want to fix it ? OBTW, "the rich paying their fair share" is a friggin joke. So "Show me the money", so to speak. I submit further that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are a cancer on the Republic. As is Hillary. Who is the future of the Democrat Party that wants to fix the problems ? I submit that the Left does not want to solve this problem of debt.

I know the names of a few Dem politicians who do want to solve this problem. Trouble is, they have no support within their party right now.In an open and honest discussion, why should we start from the assumption that we disagree? Why not hear each other out, and then see where we differ and where we do not?

I could nibble around the edges with you right now, and it would be a long hard slog - if you continue to think ANY Democrats believe the debt is not a problem. I don't know a single Dem who thinks that way - including Obama, Pelosi and Reid. What they did they did because the economy was sliding into a full blown Depression - not because they thought stimulus and bailouts should be standard operating procedure. On the day Obama took office our economy was shedding 800,00 workers a month.

Can you even say off the top of your head what Obama has said about the recession and debt?

And what is the basis for your conclusion that joblessness in America is the result of our Debt?

I wish you success finding a Democrat or Progressive or Independent who will chat with you assuming what you do about him or her. I assure you that such a person will insist that you honor his right to assume the worst about you. And from that position where you both think you know everything there is to know about the enemy - but you don't - good luck coming to agreement about anything.

Resorting to and reciting our competing ideologies is a very poor way to understand the causes of the various problems that afflict us all today, much less see our way clear to addressing them. Ideology by definition is a filter, a bias and kind of blindness.

Assuming the worst of each other and letting loose with dueling ideologies does not make way for clarity and for honest and meaningful conversation. And, in any case, that's just not my thing.

[Beevee]

You do know that the Obama's are now worth 10 million don't you? And that Bono just recently cashed in on that FacePalm scam to the tune of 9 billion. But really 9 bill is not too much for a lib is it? just for a conservative.

You do know that the taxpayer is paying for Obonehead's lavish parties at the white house where he brings in questionable rappers? And we pay for their vacations? you know this right?

Who pays for mitt's vacations?

How much did GE contribute? Was it more or less than they contributed to the Treasury by means of taxation?

[Goldie Locks]

I don't think there is a single person in the country - Al Qaeda cells excepted - that would say anything good will come from NOT following the Constitution. Do you actually think Progressives are against following the Constitution as they understand it to be?

We are all here mature enough to know that what the Constitution requires is subject to good faith debate.

If the Constitution were written like a traffic code, detailing everything that must be done and how to do it, we wouldn't need a Judiciary. If you look at the Constitution and the fact that a Judiciary was created as a co-Equal branch of government you will know we have anything but a traffic code.

Just as no party has an exclusive on what God wants, no party and no person has an exclusive on what the Constitution means and how it applies to the infinite number of fact patterns that present themselves as time goes by. Under the Constitution, the responsibility for deciding what the Constitution means has been given to the Supremes, to be applied in Cases and Controversies.

Not to Ron Paul
Not to the Tea Party
Not to Congress
Not to the President
Not to me or you

Without a single "decider", there would be no law and order, no consistency, no stability - only chaos.

Does this make any sense to you?

No, most libs want to interpret the Constitution to mean what they want it to mean, if by that they want to follow it...I'll agree.
The Constitution, did not delegate such a power to the Supreme Court, they took it themselves.

The Constitution does not need interpreting, it says exactly and means exactly what it says. It's only when legislators try to pull the wool over our eyes by not following it that they must come into play and they are just men and women too and they make mistakes as we have seen with some of their decisions.

[Beevee]

LOL ... I've been lurking here for a month. We're of Poltical Forums, and have waged many wars with the jackasses that run that place. I have a dozen purple hearts myself.

So I joined here. And told a couple friends. And they told a lot of folks !!!

I honestly thought we'd keep it a small party. But I was wrong ;)

We need libs.

Are you a fully paid up member of the NRA?

[dsolo802]

No, most libs want to interpret the Constitution to mean what they want it to mean, if by that they want to follow it...I'll agree.How can you presume to know that? Arrogance. Another victim of party propaganda.


The Constitution, did not delegate such a power to the Supreme Court, they took it themselves.Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1


The Constitution does not need interpreting, it says exactly and means exactly what it says.Oh really?

What is "reasonable"? You need to know what reasonable means if you are going to apply the 4th Amendment.

Goldie, the wool has been pulled over your eyes.

[Shoot the Goose]

In an open and honest discussion, why should we start from the assumption that we disagree? Why not hear each other out, and then see where we differ and where we do not?

My response was such as you had said in the post that I quoted that opposing views here had begun as "enemies". That's a bit extreme for a couple of posts in a Forum.


I could nibble around the edges with you right now, and it would be a long hard slog - if you continue to think AnY Democrats believe the debt is not a problem. I don't know a single Dem who thinks that way - including Obama, Pelosi and Reid. What they did they did because the economy was sliding into a full blown Depression - not because they thought stimulus and bailouts should be standard operating procedure.

Do not strawman what I said. I said that you cannot show a Democrat now who is concerned enough to have submitted, or endorsed, a plan. I am not talking about "what they did", nor did I even mentioned "what they did" with regard to blowing money. I submitted that they have neither submitted, much less endorsed, a plan to get debt under control moving forward.


On the day Obama took office our economy was shedding 800,00 workers a month.


Why do you state things so absurdly ? Is that to suggest that we were going to keep losing 800K jobs per month ? Obama could have done nothing and it would have bottomed just as it did. The losses bottomed before he was inaugurated. Well before Stimulus even took effect. Stimulus by itself is a great topic, btw. Massive fail there.


Can you even say off the top of your head what Obama has said about the recession and debt?


Let's go by what he does. That is a better way to analyze a liar. Works for "honest" folks too. ;)
Show me where he endorsed his own Debt Commission ?


And what is the basis for your conclusion that joblessness in America is the result of our Debt?

I did not say, or imply, such. However, the cliff we face is a debt cliff. Fuller employment will help forestall it, but the cliff is debt. If the government cannot come up with a viable plan to remedy it, private money will be kept as safe as it can be kept, and not be put at risk creating jobs, when smart money sees us going off a cliff regardless.


I wish you success finding a Democrat or Progressive or Independent who will chat with you assuming what you do about him or her. I assure you that such a person will insist that you honor his right to assume the worst about you. And from that position where you both think you know everything there is to know about the enemy - but you don't - good luck coming to agreement about anything.

I'm pretty damn smart. Thank you. I believe that you have noted that I do not suffer fools well. You are correct.


Resorting to and reciting our competing ideologies is a very poor way to understand the causes of the various problems that afflict us all today, much less see our way clear to addressing them. Ideology by definition is a filter, a bias and kind of blindness.

I named three folks that I would endorse to my utmost all the way to the top of our political ladder. There are more. I am about solutions, not singing Kumbaya, much less wearing kneepads for Obama. He is a a cancer on the Republic. He is the biggest part of the problem. Throwing him as far out of office as possible is absolutely a part of the solution. That is not ideology. It is fact. I am wise enough to know it. And I got credentials galore.


Assuming the worst of each other and letting loose with dueling ideologies does not make way for clarity and for honest and meaningful conversation. And, in any case, that's just not my thing.

The truth hurts. I am painful as Hell sometimes. But you get the cold hard truth. And my friends are like me.

I am not about feel good bullshit, and compromise for the sake of compromise.

Enough of these windbag diatribes. Let's get it on. About issues. Thanks.

[Shoot the Goose]

Are you a fully paid up member of the NRA?

More trolling from the troll. Its all you got.

[tinkerbell]

bama is getting all he can while the gettings good. Like the high falooting catpetbaggers who raped the southern states after the war. He shucked and jived his way to the whitehouse and the bama zombies are still following him. LOL!! They all have lost their common sense.

[dsolo802]

My response was such as you had said in the post that I quoted that opposing views here had begun as "enemies". That's a bit extreme for a couple of posts in a Forum.



Do not strawman what I said. I said that you cannot show a Democrat now who is concerned enough to have submitted, or endorsed, a plan. I am not talking about "what they did", nor did I even mentioned "what they did" with regard to blowing money. I submitted that they have neither submitted, much less endorsed, a plan to get debt under control moving forward.



Why do you state things so absurdly ? Is that to suggest that we were going to keep losing 800K jobs per month ? Obama could have done nothing and it would have bottomed just as it did. The losses bottomed before he was inaugurated. Well before Stimulus even took effect. Stimulus by itself is a great topic, btw. Massive fail there.



Let's go by what he does. That is a better way to analyze a liar. Works for "honest" folks too. ;)
Show me where he endorsed his own Debt Commission ?


I did not say, or imply, such. However, the cliff we face is a debt cliff. Fuller employment will help forestall it, but the cliff is debt. If the government cannot come up with a viable plan to remedy it, private money will be kept as safe as it can be kept, and not be put at risk creating jobs, when smart money sees us going off a cliff regardless.


I'm pretty damn smart. Thank you. I believe that you have noted that I do not suffer fools well. You are correct.


I named three folks that I would endorse to my utmost all the way to the top of our political ladder. There are more. I am about solutions, not singing Kumbaya, much less wearing kneepads for Obama. He is a a cancer on the Republic. He is the biggest part of the problem. Throwing him as far out of office as possible is absolutely a part of the solution. That is not ideology. It is fact. I am wise enough to know it. And I got credentials galore.



The truth hurts. I am painful as Hell sometimes. But you get the cold hard truth. And my friends are like me.

I am not about feel good bullshit, and compromise for the sake of compromise.

Enough of these windbag diatribes. Let's get it on. About issues. Thanks.Your "truth" does not hurt, it is non-responsive and boring.

The plan to be made depends upon the problem and priorities. You don't want to talk about the problem, that is already fixed for you. If you had chosen to talk about the problem, there would have been plenty to discuss. Assuming we look in good faith and are both reasonably sane, we see the nature of the problem, and then have plenty of room to talk solutions.

Unless the People come together there is no chance of reforming Washington. None. So, keep agitating and keep going with that take no prisoners tough talk.

Without some agreement about the nature of the problem, what is there to say to each other?

You will have to find someone else to play.

[tinkerbell]

Good grief, do you even know what you're talking about?Souns like mumbo jumbo to me.

[Beevee]

More trolling from the troll. Its all you got.

Then you will just have to put up with it.

[Calypso Jones]

It occurs to me...and i don't think anyone is going to say this outloud because it is just too horrible to contemplate. I believe this president is intent on destroying this country. Not just internally but also from without. Without getting into the attacks he and his administration have made on or country's security, sovereignty, society/culture and economy, he, and/or his administration and those associated with it have compromised our spies/agents and friends overseas. They have been outted and in some cases executed. And i think this is his intention. He is ruining our cred and isolating us from the rest of the world as the last bastion of freedom and hope.

[spunkloaf]

Good grief, do you even know what you're talking about?Souns like mumbo jumbo to me.

Quiet, tink. :wink:

[Calypso Jones]

Good grief, do you even know what you're talking about?Souns like mumbo jumbo to me.

It's called 'projection' tink. With a good measure of strawman.

[dsolo802]

Good grief, do you even know what you're talking about?That's a sound place to start from. Don't bother with me. I'm "obviously" too far gone. You can start by directing your question to yourself.

[dsolo802]

It's called 'projection' tink. With a good measure of strawman.Ahhh, the man with the reputation for honesty appears. Is it time for your daily - contribution?

[Beevee]

It occurs to me...and i don't think anyone is going to say this outloud because it is just too horrible to contemplate. I believe this president is intent on destroying this country. Not just internally but also from without. Without getting into the attacks he and his administration have made on or country's security, sovereignty, society/culture and economy, he, and/or his administration and those associated with it have compromised our spies/agents and friends overseas. They have been outted and in some cases executed. And i think this is his intention. He is ruining our cred and isolating us from the rest of the world as the last bastion of freedom and hope.

I may not be very or at all serious in my posts but I don't understand how you can be genuine about this.

O.K. He may well have made a gigantic mess over the last four years but to claim it's deliberate is over the top. You may not like his policies as the Democrats didn't like G.W.Bush's who, incidentally, was initially responsible for the state of the economy last January 2009, so if you are blaming one, the other should take equal responsibility.

The US looks after it's own interests first, as does every other country, so today's friends are yesterday's enemies and vice-versa. I seem to recall Bush being extremely close with the Saudi Royal family and we all know what Saudi is responsible for.

Security? I may well chide about airport security but I can't recall an instance where someone has escaped the regulations and others have paid as a result of it.

I'm not sure if you realise it but everyone is expendable when home interests are paramount. It's not as if this is something new, it has been going on for years but it's hardly something the CIA is prepared to publicise. During WWII thousands died for their beliefs all over Europe and Asia, by acting against their own regimes in the hope of giving the allies an advantage.

Why would you expect Obama to be any different from his predecessors?

[dsolo802]

darlin'.Honey, is that you?


Why don't you consider your communications with us conservativesMy lying skills can't match yours. I'm ready to concede in that department. So far, of all the people who practice dishonesty as a fine art, you are tops!

[Shoot the Goose]

That's better Beeve. I don't agree with all, but that is so much better. ;)

[tinkerbell]

http://youtu.be/N7B3vfPuJKQ

[tinkerbell]

http://youtu.be/Q1-ZgouoJso

[Jelly Bean]

I am proud to be a conservative and a Christ Follower, Thank you.

Now there is a brave one, not too many board posters admit up front they try to follow Christ. Good for you. Many folks believe though Christ was the first socialist.

[dsolo802]

Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.

In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with knowledge that as impossibly unlikely as it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind.

Read up on the Casino economy (http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12848)

[tinkerbell]

I believe its mostly liberals. I have read the bible and never found anything that would suggest that Jesus christ was a socialist.

[Beevee]

That's better Beeve. I don't agree with all, but that is so much better. ;)



It would be even better if you commented on it, instead of being patronising. :tongue:

[Shoot the Goose]

I prolly have some posts to catch up on, and those will have to wait. But I earlier pegged debt as our biggest problem, and offered an example or two of how debt is beginning to influence everything. Distorting markets and basic capitalism dynamics, to include those things which create real jobs.

Most Conservative posters know this. As folks become smarter, and "wake up", they also see the folly of liberal thought. Not braggin', just fact.

For any liberal who is looking to enlighten themselves, here is a good article that shows what debt does to money seeking a place to be put to use. Hot off the Press.

Are Investors Running Out of Safe Havens to Put Money?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/47539692

Liberal thought, as it now exists in America, is FUBAR. You can say that such talk is not conducive to solutions, or harsh, but WTF ? Liberals are the ones that went full-Monty stupid in the last 20 years. Republicans only went half-stupid with Bush. You want me to say "that's OK" ? F that. Y'all have gone too far. You need to slap the living shit out of yourselves, and come back to the table with some common sense. Show me such as Moynihan or Nunn. Sen Warner of VA. Even Mayor Booker in Newark. Instead, you are led by complete rectal discharge like Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.

If those three folks are OK with you, you are beyond help. You are part of the problem. You are wretched Americans.

[Shoot the Goose]

It would be even better if you commented on it, instead of being patronising. :tongue:

Lesson number one. Do not look a gift-horse in the mouth. You need to earn a better response. You have not yet done that grasshopper.

[Goldie Locks]

How can you presume to know that? Arrogance. Another victim of party propaganda.

Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1

Oh really?

What is "reasonable"? You need to know what reasonable means if you are going to apply the 4th Amendment.

Goldie, the wool has been pulled over your eyes.


Wrong!!!
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#jrev

http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/134322/constitutional-law/22082/Judicial-review-in-the-United-States

http://griffinelection.wordpress.com/tag/is-judicial-review-constitutional/

http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/01/the_constitution_and_judicial.html


The Framers didn't intend to establish judicial review otherwise they would have put it in the Constitution.

[Beevee]

Lesson number one. Do not look a gift-horse in the mouth. You need to earn a better response. You have not yet done that grasshopper.

If that's the best you can do, it's futile to criticise me.

[dsolo802]

Wrong!!!
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#jrev

http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/134322/constitutional-law/22082/Judicial-review-in-the-United-States

http://griffinelection.wordpress.com/tag/is-judicial-review-constitutional/

http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/01/the_constitution_and_judicial.html


The Framers didn't intend to establish judicial review otherwise they would have put it in the Constitution.Sorry Goldie, this is just the wishful thinking of people who want Federalism and the structure of our government to be other than what they are and have always been.

Madison v. Marbury was the first Supreme Court case to state the obvious, the obvious being clear from the time of Constitutional Convention, from the structure and language of the Constitution that emerged from it, and from statements made in State ratifying conventions.

13 of 15 delegates to the Constitutional Convention who made statements on this topic, acknowledged the implicit authority of the Judiciary to perform Judicial review.

Likewise, at the state ratifying conventions, over two dozen delegates in at least seven states indicated that under the Constitution, the federal courts would have the power to declare statutes unconstitutional. Professors Saikrishna Prakash and John Yoo point out, with respect to the ratification of the Constitution, that "no scholar to date has identified even one participant in the ratification fight who argued that the Constitution did not authorize judicial review of Federal statutes. This silence in the face of the numerous comments on the other side is revealing." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison


If the Framers wanted to create a traffic code specifically providing a list of all do's and don'ts they would not have created a Constitution. They certainly would not have created a necessary and proper clause making clear that Congress was provided power in addition to and incidental to those specifically granted lest the enumerated grants be ineffective.

According to Madison, treated as a traffic code, the Constitution which is brief and speaks in broad abstract language only, would have been dead letter on a delivery.

A federalism in which we have a Federal government made to reign supreme on national issues, with states to preside over matters of local concern and no mechanism for finally deciding what is of national import and what is local, would not have been a Federalism, it would have been a perpetual, festering, unresolved conflict and chaos.

Marbury v. Madison, decided when the Founders were still around to reconstitute the original Tea Party, did not generate the wild-eyed craziness we see parading around as patriotism today.


Moreover, and finally, the fact is the Court's appellate powers are not just implicit and obvious, they are explicit - or paraphrasing you, have been "put in" the Constitution itself.

Article III, section 2:


In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. [Emphasis added]



It was and is clear to everybody who has looked at this "question" without predetermining it, final appellate review and decision about how the law applies to the facts in cases and controversies is a part of the powers granted to the Judiciary.

Alexander Hamilton found that to be abundantly clear:



A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents."

—Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 78 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed78.asp)

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

—Chief Justice John Marshall, in Marbury v. Madison (http://www.supremecourthistory.org/history/supremecourthistory_history_history_marshall.htm), 1803

[Calypso Jones]

I may not be very or at all serious in my posts but I don't understand how you can be genuine about this.

O.K. He may well have made a gigantic mess over the last four years but to claim it's deliberate is over the top. You may not like his policies as the Democrats didn't like G.W.Bush's who, incidentally, was initially responsible for the state of the economy last January 2009, so if you are blaming one, the other should take equal responsibility.

The US looks after it's own interests first, as does every other country, so today's friends are yesterday's enemies and vice-versa. I seem to recall Bush being extremely close with the Saudi Royal family and we all know what Saudi is responsible for.

Security? I may well chide about airport security but I can't recall an instance where someone has escaped the regulations and others have paid as a result of it.

I'm not sure if you realise it but everyone is expendable when home interests are paramount. It's not as if this is something new, it has been going on for years but it's hardly something the CIA is prepared to publicise. During WWII thousands died for their beliefs all over Europe and Asia, by acting against their own regimes in the hope of giving the allies an advantage.

Why would you expect Obama to be any different from his predecessors?


I'm serious as a vasectomy dude.

What will America look like after Barack Obama's second term?

Here is what America will look like as we close out Barack Obama's second term.

An accurate look into the near future by a distinguished black author, Thomas Sowell.

An enlightened discussion follows.

The current Occupy Wall Street movement is the best illustration to date of what President Barack Obama's America looks like. It is an America where the lawless, unaccomplished, ignorant and incompetent rule. It is an America where those who have sacrificed nothing pillage and destroy the lives of those who have sacrificed greatly.

It is an America where history is rewritten to honor dictators, murderers and thieves. It is an America where violence, racism, hatred, class warfare and of murder are all promoted as acceptable means of overturning the American civil society.

It is an America where humans have been degraded to the level of animals: of defecating in public, having sex in public, devoid of basic hygiene. It is an America where the basic tenets of a civil society, including faith, family, a free press and individual rights, have been always rejected. It is an America where our founding documents have been now shredded and, with them, every person's guaranteed liberties.

It is an America where, ultimately, great suffering will come to the American people, but the rulers like Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, liberal college professors, union bosses and all other loyal liberal/Communist Party members will live in opulent splendor.

It is the America that Obama and the Democrat Party have now created with all the willing assistance of the American media, Hollywood, unions, universities, the Communist Party of America, the Black Panthers and numerous anti-American foreign entities.

Barack Obama has brought more destruction upon this country in 3 years than any other event in the history of our nation, but it is just the beginning of what he and his comrades are capable of.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is just another step in their plan for the annihilation of America and its cherished values that are clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights and our U.S. Constitution.

"Socialism, in general, has a record of failure that's so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it."

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. His website is www.tsowell.com (http://www.tsowell.com/).

source: http://www.unionleader.com/article/2...ON02/711089989 (http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111108/OPINION02/711089989)

and Obama is very different from his predecessors.

[dsolo802]

I'm serious as a vasectomy dude.More like as facile and flaccid as a dishonest prick, Calypso. Stop spamming up my thread.

[Calypso Jones]

your thread. lol

[dsolo802]

your thread.Yes, spam man.

[Shoot the Goose]

More like as facile and flaccid as a dishonest prick, Calypso. Stop spamming up my thread.

What ? Only your stupid endless diatribes are worth reading ? Fuck off.

[Smartmouthwoman]

http://studentlinc.typepad.com/studentlinc/images/itsmine_image.png

[Deadwood]

Gee....no baiting here.


Do you have a legitimate point to make counselor or do you only want to spew narrow minded, atavistic, name calling?

Seems someone's playing with the thesaurus

[Calypso Jones]

Yes, spam man.

I really don't know how you can call me 'spam man' on several levels.

[dsolo802]

What ? Only your stupid endless diatribes are worth reading ? Fuck off.No

[Beevee]

I'm serious as a vasectomy dude.

What will America look like after Barack Obama's second term?

Here is what America will look like as we close out Barack Obama's second term.

An accurate look into the near future by a distinguished black author, Thomas Sowell.

An enlightened discussion follows.

The current Occupy Wall Street movement is the best illustration to date of what President Barack Obama's America looks like. It is an America where the lawless, unaccomplished, ignorant and incompetent rule. It is an America where those who have sacrificed nothing pillage and destroy the lives of those who have sacrificed greatly.

It is an America where history is rewritten to honor dictators, murderers and thieves. It is an America where violence, racism, hatred, class warfare and of murder are all promoted as acceptable means of overturning the American civil society.

It is an America where humans have been degraded to the level of animals: of defecating in public, having sex in public, devoid of basic hygiene. It is an America where the basic tenets of a civil society, including faith, family, a free press and individual rights, have been always rejected. It is an America where our founding documents have been now shredded and, with them, every person's guaranteed liberties.

It is an America where, ultimately, great suffering will come to the American people, but the rulers like Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, liberal college professors, union bosses and all other loyal liberal/Communist Party members will live in opulent splendor.

It is the America that Obama and the Democrat Party have now created with all the willing assistance of the American media, Hollywood, unions, universities, the Communist Party of America, the Black Panthers and numerous anti-American foreign entities.

Barack Obama has brought more destruction upon this country in 3 years than any other event in the history of our nation, but it is just the beginning of what he and his comrades are capable of.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is just another step in their plan for the annihilation of America and its cherished values that are clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights and our U.S. Constitution.

"Socialism, in general, has a record of failure that's so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it."

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. His website is www.tsowell.com (http://www.tsowell.com/).

source: http://www.unionleader.com/article/2...ON02/711089989 (http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111108/OPINION02/711089989)

and Obama is very different from his predecessors.

I would have been impressed if you had written this yourself instead of taking it verbatim from the Knoxville News Sentinel of October 2011

[Shoot the Goose]

No

Well then, its music time !! A great tune ;)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc0mxOXbWIU

[gophangover]

Being proud to be a con is like wearing a sign that says, "I a moron and proud of it." Just like the pee brains that are WWE fans. It's that kind of mentality. Speaking of...that slimy cu nt McMahon, who's running as a con for the senate in Connecticut. Instead of World Wrestling Entertainment, it should be called Trailer Trash Entertainment. The GOP is that kind of mentality, fooling the morons. Hypocrite evangelicals don't even know that "PRIDE" is one of the seven deadly sins, according to their own bible.

[Calypso Jones]

I would have been impressed if you had written this yourself instead of taking it verbatim from the Knoxville News Sentinel of October 2011

I'm just happy to post it. Mainly cause it knocks the wind out of Obama supporters sails.

[Calypso Jones]

democrats hold women in such high esteem.

[dsolo802]

I really don't know how you can call me 'spam man' on several levels.Spam Ma'am?

Pardon.

[Calypso Jones]

Spammer is a throwaway insult.

[dsolo802]

Spammer is a throwaway insult.You are a derailer.

[Calypso Jones]

HA> No ahm not. You just don't like my opinion is all.

[dsolo802]

HA> No ahm not. You just don't like my opinion is all.Spam has a meaning. Derail has a meaning. Opinions are not facts. You have repeated multiple whopping lies.

Do you honor the thread topic? no. You derail.

You could look it up.

[Trinnity]

My lying skills can't match yours. I'm ready to concede in that department. So far, of all the people who practice dishonesty as a fine art, you are tops!That was ugly, dsolo. I don't see CJ as a liar. Why are you trolling and insulting? Can't you just say you disagree?

[ramone]

Being proud to be a con is like wearing a sign that says, "I a moron and proud of it." Just like the pee brains that are WWE fans. It's that kind of mentality. Speaking of...that slimy cu nt McMahon, who's running as a con for the senate in Connecticut. Instead of World Wrestling Entertainment, it should be called Trailer Trash Entertainment. The GOP is that kind of mentality, fooling the morons. Hypocrite evangelicals don't even know that "PRIDE" is one of the seven deadly sins, according to their own bible.

Really? Are you so short on mentality that you actually believe what you have just written? Trailer trash entertainment, LOL, search your own soul goph. It seems you need it as much or more than anybody else.

I would equate trailer trash entertainment with calling the NFL "The african hand ball federation", would that be acceptable to you?
I don't believe in god either but I don't get caught up in nonsense like liberal fools like you do. I don't watch wwf crap either but it is an entertainment industry and I suggest you deal with it. Some people do watch it and it is their choice, I don't like some of the retarded music you post but I've yet to complain about it.

Is this another double standard that you progressives demand? If you don't like it then nobody else should either, and if they disagree they are some ignorant backwoods retard? Yes, this is what you have become.

[dsolo802]

That was ugly, dsolo. The entire atmosphere of hostility surrounding what passes as chat with you is ugly, Trinnity.


I don't see CJ as a liar.What he posted and what passes as truth among you newcomers is a pack of lies. Perhaps he doesn't lie all the time. I'm just reporting on what I've seen so far.


Why are you trolling and insulting?I'm not trolling. The truth will sting when you have abused it as much as you have.


Can't you just say you disagree?There is a difference between fact and opinion. If you learn what the distinction is, then you'll understand why I am appalled by his behavior - and yours in support of it.

[Trinnity]

Aw, that wasn't very nice, dsolo. Now you have insulted me. For shame.:cry:

[spunkloaf]

That was ugly, dsolo. I don't see CJ as a liar. Why are you trolling and insulting? Can't you just say you disagree?

Why can't you handle dsolo802's opinion and explain how you disagree instead of labeling him as an insulting troll?

Typical right-wing nonsense, that is.

[spunkloaf]

Aw, that wasn't very nice, dsolo. Now you have insulted me. For shame.:cry:

Awww.

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://asproutingacorn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/jillgreenburg0.jpg&sa=X&ei=9UDBT7XbEKqmiQLPk7CsCA&ved=0CAkQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNF8TH5AnhEnnQaS4Wzq3QUlbmmHEg

[dsolo802]

Aw, that wasn't very nice, dsolo. Now you have insulted me. For shame.:cry:


179

[Shoot the Goose]

179


He's a thread for you, not so prone to diatribes. Give it a look if you may. It is relevant to us all, and is most affected by who is President in 2013. Electricity prices in the near future, impacted primarily by reduced energy from coal:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/3473-Obama-s-Energy-Policy-to-Raise-Electric-Rates-BOHICA-if-He-s-Reelected?p=79526&posted=1#post79526

[dsolo802]

Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.

In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with the knowledge that as impossibly unlikely as it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind.

We should be focusing on this, not transcript-ism and birth-ism hooey.

[pjohns]

Why can't you handle dsolo802's opinion and explain how you disagree instead of labeling him as an insulting troll?

The words of this poster, to which she was referring, are as follows:

"My lying skills can't match yours. I'm ready to concede in that department. So far, of all the people who practice dishonesty as a fine art, you are tops!"

That could certainly pass for an insult, in my book.

In another post, in this thread, the same poster ranted:

"Conservatism in America has devolved to the narrowly selfish, mean, addled and degraded pursuit of maximum dollars at the expense of the future of our children, security for our elderly, dignity for our working man, the health, peace and safety of every human on the planet, and the integrity and sustainability of life itself.

"In the religion of Conservatism money is God and before it every other virtue may be happily sacrificed: honesty, loyalty, equal opportunity, industry, and even the concept of common humanity can be swapped for admittance to a venal game of chance.

"And in the Grand casino for which it stands, billions live mean, cheap and petty lives of misery so that the few may win, staying alive by eating their own, warm with the knowledge that as impossibly unlikely as it may be they too may someday get to stand triumphant on the corpse of what was once mankind."

And again, in another post in this thread:

"More like as facile and flaccid as a dishonest prick, Calypso. Stop spamming up my thread."

This, obviously, does not amount to a mere intellectual disagreement. Rather, it amounts to a hostile attitude, that is much more closely akin to trolling than it is to serious debate...

[roadmaster]

Being proud to be a con is like wearing a sign that says, "I a moron and proud of it." Just like the pee brains that are WWE fans. It's that kind of mentality. Speaking of...that slimy cu nt McMahon, who's running as a con for the senate in Connecticut. Instead of World Wrestling Entertainment, it should be called Trailer Trash Entertainment. The GOP is that kind of mentality, fooling the morons. Hypocrite evangelicals don't even know that "PRIDE" is one of the seven deadly sins, according to their own bible.

Fooling the morons? Did Obama pay your mortgage and gas bills? People that are non-believers always think they know more than the believers and love to quote the Bible in the way they see it. McCain was not a conservative, he was a Republican and an opportunist. Are hypocrites people who don't think the way you do? Do you also consider anyone living in a trailer park or reduced housing trash? I live in a house but don't consider them to be. Maybe you should rethink and look at yourself before judging others.

[bladimz]

We should be focusing on this, not transcript-ism and birth-ism hooey.It's a real shame that some here worry so much more about the tax bills the rich have to deal with than about the untold millions who struggle mightily just to get through another day. Their poverty is theirs through no fault of their own. Their poverty is generational, and will continue, because those in charge in all countries around the world will grow their wealth on the backs of those people. It's amazing to me that postings about the rich and the powerful (and the "class-warfare" that they must deal with) take up so much space here. But dear god, don't bring up the poor and the poverty-stricken. We all know that they are nothing more than lazy, shiftless bums sucking on the teat of Uncle Sam. Right, righties? What else is there to say about them.

[Chris]

We should be focusing on this, not transcript-ism and birth-ism hooey.

Except it has nothing at all to do with conservatism other than as a typical view of what a liberal cannot understand (see Born This Way? (http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/10/born-this-way)).

[Chris]

It's a real shame that some here worry so much more about the tax bills the rich have to deal with than about the untold millions who struggle mightily just to get through another day. Their poverty is theirs through no fault of their own. Their poverty is generational, and will continue, because those in charge in all countries around the world will grow their wealth on the backs of those people. It's amazing to me that postings about the rich and the powerful (and the "class-warfare" that they must deal with) take up so much space here. But dear god, don't bring up the poor and the poverty-stricken. We all know that they are nothing more than lazy, shiftless bums sucking on the teat of Uncle Sam. Right, righties? What else is there to say about them.
Except that those nice neat abstract groups have nothing to do with the reality of individual lives.

[Mainecoons]

No but that quote sure illustrates how liberals like to separate people and demonize the successful. And BTW, the "Great Society" expanded generational poverty tremendously.

[Cigar]

Call me whatever you want ... on the Internet because that's the only place you can, but I'm for basic human and social rights for Americans and against the "My Way or The Highway" types.

I am private consultant and business man and I can see with my own eyes and my own balance sheets that Decades of Tax Cuts doesn't produce jobs. But you really don't have to be a seasoned business person to know that, just be open to the facts and common sense.

I'm intelligent enough to know that our National Infrastructure always has, and always will be built and maintained by our Government, after all who are you expect to do it? So when the GOP said NO to utilizing our American unemployed skilled labor workforce ... that's when I knew what will happen when the stupid are in control. There will NEVER be another time in our Lives when Skilled Labor will be this affordable; and once again, you don't have to be a Business Major to see the obvious business advantages to having an abundance of skilled labor and the obvious need for skilled labor.

10 Years of Tax Cuts, Unpaid Wars and the unwillingness to simply enable the unemployed to do what they are willing to do at the most reasonable cost possible. You have to be a total and complete idiot to say NOT to this, or you have an alternative motive.

In addition, I have visually seen with my own eyes and heard with my ears, undisputed evidence, directly from the source, that there are people who simply can't handle life when things don't go their way. I was never naive enough to expect change to be freely excepted by those who are against change, but I didn't expect our own paid elected officials to totally disregard an entire segment of Americans.

Yes ... I'm proud to be a Progressive Liberal ... and I will bet my life that I will never go back to the Good Old Days.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/PartyofNO.jpg
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/thumbnailaspx-1.jpg
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/OldGOP.jpg

[dsolo802]

Why can't you handle dsolo802's opinion and explain how you disagree instead of labeling him as an insulting troll?

Typical right-wing nonsense, that is.Thank you Spunk. You nailed it!

[wingrider]

................................ interesting.

[Cigar]

Why can't you handle dsolo802's opinion and explain how you disagree instead of labeling him as an insulting troll?

Typical right-wing nonsense, that is.


That's the typical default position on most Forums ... if they don't like your opinion, then it's Trolling.

[Chris]

That's the typical default position on most Forums ... if they don't like your opinion, then it's Trolling.

Be they dem or rep, lib or con, whether you call them troll or party of no, all the same substitution of rational discussion.