PDA

View Full Version : Hypocrisy



Pages : [1] 2

Chris
05-31-2015, 01:07 PM
A Rep ad but how can Dems vote for this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOheL_ScEqE

Cigar
05-31-2015, 01:15 PM
You guys worry more about Hillary than the 20 GOP Candidates :laugh:

She just a Woman, what are you afraid of? :huh:

Just like Obama was just a Community Organizer :grin:

Chris
05-31-2015, 01:28 PM
You guys worry more about Hillary than the 20 GOP Candidates :laugh:

She just a Woman, what are you afraid of? :huh:

Just like Obama was just a Community Organizer :grin:



I like how you justify hypocrisy.

Cigar
05-31-2015, 02:11 PM
I like how you justify hypocrisy.

I like how you justify denial.

Chris
05-31-2015, 02:13 PM
I like how you justify denial.

What am I denying, cigar, I pointed out Hillary's hypocrisy, I'm not in denial about it, you are.

Thanks, bt, for bumping this back to the top. You're useful.

PattyHill
05-31-2015, 02:17 PM
The "dead broke" context was "when they left the white house". She has regretted the comment since then, but she was probably right -when they left the White House they were dead broke if you added their assets vs. their debts.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/10/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-says-she-and-bill-were-dead-broke/

Of course, they did have the ability to change that situation unlike many of us.

And rightfully, she got flack for that statement because of who they were and their ability to earn a lot of money out of office.

But I do think in the larger picture they understand scrambling to cover debts. And that's what she was discussing.

maineman
05-31-2015, 02:20 PM
exactly Patty. It was a factual statement when she made it. Ergo, no hypocrisy.

Chris
05-31-2015, 02:25 PM
The "dead broke" context was "when they left the white house". She has regretted the comment since then, but she was probably right -when they left the White House they were dead broke if you added their assets vs. their debts.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/10/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-says-she-and-bill-were-dead-broke/

Of course, they did have the ability to change that situation unlike many of us.

And rightfully, she got flack for that statement because of who they were and their ability to earn a lot of money out of office.

But I do think in the larger picture they understand scrambling to cover debts. And that's what she was discussing.



That addresses the dead broke comment, about 0.1% of the video, and really besides the point.

Cigar
05-31-2015, 02:25 PM
What am I denying, cigar, I pointed out Hillary's hypocrisy, I'm not in denial about it, you are.

Thanks, bt, for bumping this back to the top. You're useful.


Why do you care, are you Voting for a Democrat?

Or are you just Bitching?

What's next, Emails and Benghazi? You're worse than an Ex-Wife :laugh:

maineman
05-31-2015, 02:31 PM
I'm curious... has anybody EVER seen the original long form birth certificate for Hillary?

Cigar
05-31-2015, 02:33 PM
I'm curious... has anybody EVER seen the original long form birth certificate for Hillary?

Or any of the other hundreds of candidates? :laugh:

maineman
05-31-2015, 02:36 PM
I remember when the right used to think that was a very important document. Now.... not so much.

MisterVeritis
05-31-2015, 02:40 PM
You guys worry more about Hillary than the 20 GOP Candidates :laugh:

She just a Woman, what are you afraid of? :huh:

Just like Obama was just a Community Organizer :grin:
Something for nothing continues to sell with the bottom feeders. Unfortunately there are a very large number of bottom feeders these days. The Marxist-Democratic party has succeeded is growing dependency. I suppose the destruction of the country is something you can be proud of.

domer76
05-31-2015, 03:18 PM
A Rep ad but how can Dems vote for this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOheL_ScEqE

Trite word

Cigar
05-31-2015, 03:27 PM
Something for nothing continues to sell with the bottom feeders. Unfortunately there are a very large number of bottom feeders these days. The Marxist-Democratic party has succeeded is growing dependency. I suppose the destruction of the country is something you can be proud of.

You have no idea how much pleasure it gives me to come on this Forum and read all the Whining and Bitching from Crybabies everyday. :grin:

Please continue.

Peter1469
05-31-2015, 03:28 PM
http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2013/04/15/10636249/Feiss%20Xera%20mirror.jpg

Redrose
05-31-2015, 03:30 PM
You guys worry more about Hillary than the 20 GOP Candidates :laugh:

She just a Woman, what are you afraid of? :huh:

Just like Obama was just a Community Organizer :grin:


Put an (R) behind her name and then tell us you feel the same way. :yo2:

Cigar
05-31-2015, 03:31 PM
Put an (R) behind her name and then tell us you feel the same way. :yo2:

I don't care, so long as the (R)s keep getting what they deserve :laugh:

Peter1469
05-31-2015, 03:45 PM
lol

Only fools think the establishment of (D) and (R) are different.

Cigar?

Cigar
05-31-2015, 03:48 PM
Just think, The GOP can't beat a Chicago Community Organizer, and it's going to take 20 GOP Candidates to challenge a Clintion Machine. But Barock had not problem. :grin:

Chris
05-31-2015, 03:48 PM
Trite word

Cigar, here's your denial.

Peter1469
05-31-2015, 03:48 PM
lol

Cigar
05-31-2015, 03:48 PM
lol

Only fools think the establishment of (D) and (R) are different.

Cigar?

At least the Democrates are talking about real issues. :grin:

Peter1469
05-31-2015, 03:50 PM
At least the Democrates are talking about real issues. :grin:

lol

sheep.... Hello Cigar

http://nutritionwonderland.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/sheep_face1.jpg

Cigar
05-31-2015, 03:51 PM
Cigar, here's your denial.

Fact: Barack Obama kicked The GOP's Ass ... Twice, Back-2-Black :laugh:

Would you deny that ... Sport? :grin:

Cigar
05-31-2015, 03:51 PM
Sure beats following Losers :laugh:

Peter1469
05-31-2015, 03:52 PM
http://nutritionwonderland.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/sheep_face1.jpg

Redrose
05-31-2015, 04:04 PM
I don't care, so long as the (R)s keep getting what they deserve :laugh:


They can't, because the (D)s keep lying and playing dirty pool in presidential elections. They only way the (D)s can win is to be manipulative, dishonest, filthy and corrupt. Hillary is the poster child for that.

Redrose
05-31-2015, 04:09 PM
lol

sheep.... Hello Cigar

http://nutritionwonderland.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/sheep_face1.jpg

11704

Cigar
05-31-2015, 04:09 PM
They can't, because the (D)s keep lying and playing dirty pool in presidential elections. They only way the (D)s can win is to be manipulative, dishonest, filthy and corrupt. Hillary is the poster child for that.

Don't like it, do you. :grin:

Losing Sucks.

Chris
05-31-2015, 04:11 PM
Fact: Barack Obama kicked The GOP's Ass ... Twice, Back-2-Black :laugh:

Would you deny that ... Sport? :grin:

Not real sure what that has to do with Hillary's hypocrisy. Are you still in denial too?

Chris
05-31-2015, 04:12 PM
Sure beats following Losers :laugh:

Like Hillary.

PolWatch
05-31-2015, 04:14 PM
I don't think any one party has cornered the market on dishonesty or dirty tricks. I remember Karl Rove's campaign against Ann Richards when GWB was running for gov of Texas. He was famous for dirty rumors about John McCain....anything to win campaigning. Even 'Meghan McCain’s 2012 book slammed Rove (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/29/meghan-mccain-karl-rove-book_n_1552759.html) for having “never publicly apologized for his cowardice and culpability for what was said about my little sister in South Carolina during the 2000 race.”

Neither party has clean hands.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/05/13/3437277/karl-rove-smear-hillary-clinton/

Chris
05-31-2015, 04:20 PM
That's right. I don't any of them are not hypocrites and liars. But this is just to point our Hillary's.

Redrose
05-31-2015, 04:25 PM
Don't like it, do you. :grin:

Losing Sucks.


When you talk that way I envision you in a cheerleading outfit with a big blue felt "O" on your chest and blue and white pom poms flying.

This is not a game, it's our life.

No sane person wants to see crazy extremists-FROM EITHER PARTY-destroy this nation.

Cigar
05-31-2015, 04:39 PM
Need a tissue? :grin:

Chris
05-31-2015, 04:40 PM
Need a tissue? :grin:

Yours are all wet already.

PattyHill
05-31-2015, 04:46 PM
That addresses the dead broke comment, about 0.1% of the video, and really besides the point.


I usually don't watch videos, so just went off the front picture.

Chris
05-31-2015, 05:07 PM
I usually don't watch videos, so just went off the front picture.

Dead broke was just the kicker to how much they made and they're being in the top 0.1%:

http://i.snag.gy/50SP7.jpg

The hypocrisy being her speaking out against the top 1%.

PattyHill
05-31-2015, 05:11 PM
Dead broke was just the kicker to how much they made and they're being in the top 0.1%:

http://i.snag.gy/50SP7.jpg

The hypocrisy being her speaking out against the top 1%.


So can only jewish people speak out in favor of jewish issues? and only women speak out for women's rights? and only kids speak out against child porn?

Or...is it possible...that people can have empathy and understanding for other groups EVEN THOUGH THEY AREN'T A MEMBER OF THEM?

I think those in the top 1% who understand we need a safety net are a lot more admirable than those who say "I got mine. Everyone else can go stuff it"

Chris
05-31-2015, 05:27 PM
So can only jewish people speak out in favor of jewish issues? and only women speak out for women's rights? and only kids speak out against child porn?

Or...is it possible...that people can have empathy and understanding for other groups EVEN THOUGH THEY AREN'T A MEMBER OF THEM?

I think those in the top 1% who understand we need a safety net are a lot more admirable than those who say "I got mine. Everyone else can go stuff it"


Anyone can speak out against something. Even hypocrites who engage in what they speak out against. I'm sure it will buy some votes.

Redrose
05-31-2015, 05:39 PM
Need a tissue? :grin:


Tissue? I hardly know you. :grin:

maineman
05-31-2015, 06:49 PM
When you talk that way I envision you in a cheerleading outfit with a big blue felt "O" on your chest and blue and white pom poms flying.

This is not a game, it's our life.

No sane person wants to see crazy extremists-FROM EITHER PARTY-destroy this nation.

I am a sane person. I don't think that there are any crazy extremists from MY party that are trying to destroy America. YMMV

Bob
05-31-2015, 06:56 PM
The "dead broke" context was "when they left the white house". She has regretted the comment since then, but she was probably right -when they left the White House they were dead broke if you added their assets vs. their debts.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jun/10/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-says-she-and-bill-were-dead-broke/

Of course, they did have the ability to change that situation unlike many of us.

And rightfully, she got flack for that statement because of who they were and their ability to earn a lot of money out of office.

But I do think in the larger picture they understand scrambling to cover debts. And that's what she was discussing.

i saw the entire video.

She is a hypocrite. She is okay, those earning her sum of money are not okay.

How can you stand her hypocrisy?

say, do you think Hillary has ever prayed? I doubt her black president has. (Bill called himself the first black president when he was in office)

PattyHill
05-31-2015, 07:06 PM
i saw the entire video.

She is a hypocrite. She is okay, those earning her sum of money are not okay.

How can you stand her hypocrisy?

say, do you think Hillary has ever prayed? I doubt her black president has. (Bill called himself the first black president when he was in office)


Bob, you have a very thin skin. You whined over the cops & robbers & real estate agents, calling the implication just way out of line or whatever you said.

And now you have the gall to question the faith of two people who have been pretty open about their christianity.

That's pretty low. And you call for "civility". Maybe you should practice some yourself.

Bob
05-31-2015, 07:08 PM
Bob, you have a very thin skin. You whined over the cops & robbers & real estate agents, calling the implication just way out of line or whatever you said.

And now you have the gall to question the faith of two people who have been pretty open about their christianity.

That's pretty low. And you call for "civility". Maybe you should practice some yourself.

Thanks for the blast to the chops.

But you are civil, eh?

Incidentally, though i did not whine, I certainly protested her running me down because I am a member of the Real estate brokers fraternity.

That was a low blow. Seems as you approve such low blows. Worse, she lied saying I called her husband a crook.

I would never call a woman's husband a crook.

PattyHill
05-31-2015, 07:13 PM
Thanks for the blast to the chops.

But you are civil, eh?

Incidentally, though i did not whine, I certainly protested her running me down because I am a member of the Real estate brokers fraternity.

That was a low blow. Seems as you approve such low blows. Worse, she lied saying I called her husband a crook.

I would never call a woman's husband a crook.


You did more of an implication about her husband being a crook than she did about you being a real estate agent meant you were a crook.

And you were quick to complain about something that wasn't even an insult.

But slam someone else's claim to be a christian? you got NO PROBLEM with that.

Bob
05-31-2015, 07:33 PM
You did more of an implication about her husband being a crook than she did about you being a real estate agent meant you were a crook.

And you were quick to complain about something that wasn't even an insult.

But slam someone else's claim to be a christian? you got NO PROBLEM with that.

That is not true.

My actual comment is

I NEVER would call your husband a cROOK

No capitals but those are my words.

Why you might ask did I say that to her?

She gave me a snotty reply saying I was a crook.

You needed to read her earlier replies.

She specifically posted a sentence in a way to have strong implication I am a crook. She even called me a thief.

PolWatch
05-31-2015, 07:37 PM
Bob, you are so busy trying to back away from what you said you must be tripping over your butt. Read your own posts....because no one else is interested.

PattyHill
05-31-2015, 07:37 PM
That is not true.

My actual comment is

I NEVER would call your husband a cROOK

No capitals but those are my words.

Why you might ask did I say that to her?

She gave me a snotty reply saying I was a crook.

You needed to read her earlier replies.

She specifically posted a sentence in a way to have strong implication I am a crook. She even called me a thief.


Honestly, I don't give a fuck. I only brought up that other thread to mention how VERY PICKY YOU ARE if you think you might possibly be insulted, but you have no problem saying the Clintons are lying about their faith.

You want civility? practice it.

domer76
05-31-2015, 07:48 PM
Cigar, here's your denial.

Oh for Chrissakes Chris. Other than "hate", probably the most overused word on forums like this is "hypocrite". Find something original for once.

Chris
05-31-2015, 07:50 PM
Oh for Chrissakes Chris. Other than "hate", probably the most overused word on forums like this is "hypocrite". Find something original for once.

I think it's Hillary who needs to find something original, for my sake, your sake, everyone's sakes.

Bob
05-31-2015, 07:55 PM
Honestly, I don't give a fuck. I only brought up that other thread to mention how VERY PICKY YOU ARE if you think you might possibly be insulted, but you have no problem saying the Clintons are lying about their faith.

You want civility? practice it.

Don't get so defensive over the Clinton's .

Have you ever heard of either praying or even attending some church?

domer76
05-31-2015, 07:55 PM
I think it's Hillary who needs to find something original, for my sake, your sake, everyone's sakes.

She really doesn't need to. She'll most likely walk away with the election without having to do much of anything. Why? Because of the fuckups the Republicans insist on fielding.

But cut the tired and lame hypocrite bullshit. It's old and overused. I hate that!

Chris
05-31-2015, 08:06 PM
She really doesn't need to. She'll most likely walk away with the election without having to do much of anything. Why? Because of the fuckups the Republicans insist on fielding.

But cut the tired and lame hypocrite bullshit. It's old and overused. I hate that!

WHy? Because Democrats who constantly decry the outrageous oppression by the 1% are, in the interest of winning alone, are more than willing to overlook Hillary's hypocrisy of being in the 0.1%.

I'm glad you hate it. You should.

maineman
05-31-2015, 08:10 PM
WHy? Because Democrats who constantly decry the outrageous oppression by the 1% are, in the interest of winning alone, are more than willing to overlook Hillary's hypocrisy of being in the 0.1%.

I'm glad you hate it. You should.

not all rich people are oppressive.

Chris
05-31-2015, 08:17 PM
not all rich people are oppressive.

Only the 1% minus Hillary. I get it.

maineman
05-31-2015, 08:18 PM
Only the 1% minus Hillary. I get it.

I never said that... there are MANY benevolent and magnanimous wealthy people who give a great deal of time and money to helping those less fortunate.

domer76
05-31-2015, 08:32 PM
WHy? Because Democrats who constantly decry the outrageous oppression by the 1% are, in the interest of winning alone, are more than willing to overlook Hillary's hypocrisy of being in the 0.1%.

I'm glad you hate it. You should.

You missed it. I employed the other trite and overused word.

Fuck o dear, Chris. Every goddam one of us is a hypocrite. Get over it.

GrassrootsConservative
05-31-2015, 08:36 PM
I'm curious... has anybody EVER seen the original long form birth certificate for Hillary?

Amazing how you care about now that it is a white person running.

maineman
05-31-2015, 08:37 PM
Amazing how you care about now that it is a white person running.

I guess sarcasm is something they don't really teach at the ESL classes one takes for their GED these days. pity.

Chris
05-31-2015, 08:43 PM
I never said that... there are MANY benevolent and magnanimous wealthy people who give a great deal of time and money to helping those less fortunate.

That's not Hillary though, is it. She talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.

I get it though, you Democrats can't criticize her.

GrassrootsConservative
05-31-2015, 08:44 PM
I guess sarcasm is something they don't really teach at the ESL classes one takes for their GED these days. pity.

I wouldn't know. My English has always been impeccable. I don't remember the last time I was too ignorant to start a sentence with a lowercase letter like you did with "pity."

Pity.

Chris
05-31-2015, 08:46 PM
You missed it. I employed the other trite and overused word.

Fuck o dear, Chris. Every goddam one of us is a hypocrite. Get over it.

You sound angry. All I've done is point out Hillary's hypocrisy, however trite you might find it.

Tahuyaman
05-31-2015, 08:48 PM
I like how you justify denial.


That is an odd response. Especially when no one was denying anything.

I guess some people form their response before they read the comment they are supposedly responding to.

Chris
05-31-2015, 08:51 PM
That is an odd response. Especially when no one was denying anything.

I guess some people form their response before they read the comment they are supposedly responding to.

It was his way of denying Hillary's hypocrisy.

maineman
05-31-2015, 08:55 PM
I wouldn't know. My English has always been impeccable. I don't remember the last time I was too ignorant to start a sentence with a lowercase letter like you did with "pity."

Pity.
i'm a big fan of e.e. cummings. ever read any of his work? probably not in Field and Stream, is it?

Tahuyaman
05-31-2015, 08:55 PM
The left wing hacks should just admit that they don't give a shit about their candidate's character flaws. They only care about the other guy's, whether they are real or made up out of thin air.

maineman
05-31-2015, 08:55 PM
That's not Hillary though, is it. She talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.

I get it though, you Democrats can't criticize her.

do you know how much she gives to charity? yes or no?

maineman
05-31-2015, 08:57 PM
The left wing hacks should just admit that they don't give a $#@! about their candidate's character flaws. They only care about the other guy's, whether they are real or made up out of thin air.

everybody's got character flaws. everybody. everybody on the whole big planet. I simply read the party platforms and vote for the candidate from the party whose platform I identify with.

Tahuyaman
05-31-2015, 08:59 PM
I know she's received millions in charitable donations. Much of which ended up in her personal bank account.

Tahuyaman
05-31-2015, 08:59 PM
Glad to see he admits to being a partisan hack.

maineman
05-31-2015, 09:01 PM
Glad to see he admits to being a partisan hack.

so someone who believes in a party platform and the ideals it espouses and the goals it sets forth is a "partisan hack"?

how droll.

maineman
05-31-2015, 09:02 PM
I know she's received millions in charitable donations. Much of which ended up in her personal bank account.

prove it.

Tahuyaman
05-31-2015, 09:03 PM
Partisan hacks vote for someone based on party affiliation. They can always find a way to justify it.

GrassrootsConservative
05-31-2015, 09:04 PM
i'm a big fan of e.e. cummings. ever read any of his work? probably not in Field and Stream, is it?

Hmm? Try and stick to the topic at hand, you tried to attack me and call me ESL with shit grammar and got called the fuck out. OWN IT!

GrassrootsConservative
05-31-2015, 09:05 PM
:dau: POW! Right in the kisser!

maineman
05-31-2015, 09:07 PM
the fact that sarcasm was lost on you is not my fault. sorry.

Chris
05-31-2015, 09:12 PM
All these distractions yet Hillary's hypocrisy still stands.

Thank you all for keeping it up top all day.

maineman
05-31-2015, 09:17 PM
it's the least I could do, Chris.

maineman
05-31-2015, 09:57 PM
Partisan hacks vote for someone based on party affiliation. They can always find a way to justify it.

"justify" voting for the candidate that stands on the platform that I believe in? I don't need any justification. I do it because it is the right thing for any patriotic American to do. To let oneself be swayed by which candidate they would feel more comfortable drinking a beer with is the height of intellectual laziness and unpatriotic citizenship.

Tahuyaman
05-31-2015, 10:00 PM
Like I said, partisan hacks can always find a way to justify it. I would have a bit of respect for them if they just would be honest and say party affiliation was the most important factor, but they won't. I don't know why.

domer76
05-31-2015, 10:03 PM
i'm a big fan of e.e. cummings. ever read any of his work? probably not in Field and Stream, is it?

When I criticize people for their logical fallacies, it comes, in part, from e.e. cummings and his poem about Effie, her head being filled with 6 gingerbread crumbs. They are named:

May
Might
Must
Would
Could
Should

I add my own - if - to expand that list to the Seven Deadly Fallacies. Would, Could, Should never happen. If/would even less.

maineman
05-31-2015, 10:24 PM
Like I said, partisan hacks can always find a way to justify it. I would have a bit of respect for them if they just would be honest and say party affiliation was the most important factor, but they won't. I don't know why.

I have just said that. My party's platform is what I am voting for. Every four years, I take the time to read each party's platform from cover to cover. And then, I re-decide which party I chose to affiliate myself with based upon the content of that platform. I vote for the candidate who stands on the platform I support. Each and every time - except 1980, when I was so pissed off at Carter for not bombing Tehran back to the stone age that I voted for Anderson. I regret that vote.

TrueBlue
05-31-2015, 11:16 PM
Don't get so defensive over the Clinton's .

Have you ever heard of either praying or even attending some church?
Yes Bob, for your information, we HAVE!

Here is an excellent report from CNN talking about Hillary's devotion to the Methodist Church where she attends with her husband Bill and daughter, Chelsea. This is an article every Democrat and Republican should read from top to bottom, through and through and become familiar with.

Clinton talks faith, family in personal speech to Methodist women
Posted by CNN's Dan Merica

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/26/clinton-talks-faith-family-in-personal-speech-to-methodist-women/

"Greeted with raucous applause from the 6,500 women (and a few men) in attendance, the former secretary of state touted her knowledge of the faith, spoke about her family's Methodist roots and addressed how the teachings of Jesus and John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, have guided her career."

maineman
05-31-2015, 11:46 PM
Like I said, partisan hacks can always find a way to justify it. I would have a bit of respect for them if they just would be honest and say party affiliation was the most important factor, but they won't. I don't know why.because you can't read.

now you know why.

post#84.

Bob
05-31-2015, 11:59 PM
Yes Bob, for your information, we HAVE!

Here is an excellent report from CNN talking about Hillary's devotion to the Methodist Church where she attends with her husband Bill and daughter, Chelsea. This is an article every Democrat and Republican should read from top to bottom, through and through and become familiar with.

Clinton talks faith, family in personal speech to Methodist women
Posted by CNN's Dan Merica

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/04/26/clinton-talks-faith-family-in-personal-speech-to-methodist-women/

Jesus as it turns out was not all that generous and this is no slight on him.

It was all he had.


Clinton cited the Scripture Mark 6:30-44 - where Jesus instructs his disciples to organize their followers into groups and to feed them with five loaves of bread and two fish - as the central biblical passage of her speech. She jokingly called the story "the first great pot luck supper," and said she has always been fond of the passage.

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 08:55 AM
I never said that... there are MANY benevolent and magnanimous wealthy people who give a great deal of time and money to helping those less fortunate.


Yeppers. Thank goodness!

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 08:57 AM
"justify" voting for the candidate that stands on the platform that I believe in? I don't need any justification. I do it because it is the right thing for any patriotic American to do. To let oneself be swayed by which candidate they would feel more comfortable drinking a beer with is the height of intellectual laziness and unpatriotic citizenship.


Isn't that the whole point of platforms? What does tuyahaman base his/her vote on, what color the sky is that day?

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:02 AM
Yeppers. Thank goodness!

Let's be honest, oppression is just the liberal progressive slant on things. There are no oppressors.

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:03 AM
I have just said that. My party's platform is what I am voting for. Every four years, I take the time to read each party's platform from cover to cover. And then, I re-decide which party I chose to affiliate myself with based upon the content of that platform. I vote for the candidate who stands on the platform I support. Each and every time - except 1980, when I was so pissed off at Carter for not bombing Tehran back to the stone age that I voted for Anderson. I regret that vote.



And yet your party's talking points are consistently demonizing the top 1% but, apparently, based on this thread, gives Clinton a pass.

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:05 AM
When I criticize people for their logical fallacies, it comes, in part, from e.e. cummings and his poem about Effie, her head being filled with 6 gingerbread crumbs. They are named:

May
Might
Must
Would
Could
Should

I add my own - if - to expand that list to the Seven Deadly Fallacies. Would, Could, Should never happen. If/would even less.



Except none of those are logical fallacies. You're being illogical in the guise of logic.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:09 AM
And yet your party's talking points are consistently demonizing the top 1% but, apparently, based on this thread, gives Clinton a pass.

my party does not demonize the top 1%. that is simply false. We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans.

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:22 AM
my party does not demonize the top 1%. that is simply false. We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans.

Hillary in the video did. Elizabeth Warren does. Bernie Sanders does. It's also found in liberal progressive economists like Reich, Krugman, Piketty, and others.

And you, immediately after denial, admit it: "We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans."

del
06-01-2015, 09:26 AM
criticizing some equals criticizing all in chrisworld

lol

texan
06-01-2015, 09:28 AM
You guys worry more about Hillary than the 20 GOP Candidates :laugh:

She just a Woman, what are you afraid of? :huh:

Just like Obama was just a Community Organizer :grin:

And you worry more about the 20 candidates than the 1 coattail hack of a politician that wants to lead your party. Why is that if she is so good what difference do the 20 make?

At least Obama earned it.

Think Bill said this? "Of course I'd love to help children with bad hearts, pay me $500,000 and I will speak so you can lose money."

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:30 AM
And you worry more about the 20 candidates than the 1 coattail hack of a politician that leads your party. Why is that if she is so good what difference do the 20 make?

they don't make a DIFFERENCE, it's just entertaining, that's all. Clowns and circuses have enthralled folks for centuries. Why should this be any different?

the GOP is gonna do what it's gonna do.... it will, somehow, figure out a way to systematically weed through the clown parade and you'll end up with a candidate at the end of the process. Like the kinds of candidates that Barack Obama pistol whipped twice in a row. That's what you DO. It's fun to watch.

texan
06-01-2015, 09:34 AM
Been sayin........Nothing will change the spending it is not changing (a little here and there but nothing substantial).

If you want to do something for the country remove politicians that run around BSing everyone on Global Warming and vote business friendly...........We need jobs and an economy more than we need more regulations and programs that weigh us down further.

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:42 AM
criticizing some equals criticizing all in chrisworld

lol

LOL, that made no sense, del, try again.

del
06-01-2015, 09:44 AM
LOL, that made no sense, del, try again.

you're inability to think ain't my problem

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:48 AM
you're inability to think ain't my problem

Now you're flailing, del. Grasping at straw, attacking messengers instead of messages. I doubt anyone expects much more.

Mac-7
06-01-2015, 09:51 AM
Now you're flailing, del. Grasping at straw, attacking messengers instead of messages. I doubt anyone expects much more.

Since both of you speak Liberish fluently you should not be having these misunderstandings.

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:54 AM
Since both of you speak Liberish fluently you should not be having these misunderstandings.

And mac with his usual noncontributory nonsense.

Mac-7
06-01-2015, 09:56 AM
And mac with his usual noncontributory nonsense.



I was jus sayin'.

Chris
06-01-2015, 10:03 AM
I was jus sayin'.

Right, just sayin' nuttin'. Stop trolling, mac, it's not working.

Mac-7
06-01-2015, 10:06 AM
Right, just sayin' nuttin'. Stop trolling, mac, it's not working.

Trolling?

No.

Since I knew you couldn't top that I was hoping you would not reply at all and just let it stand as the last word.

del
06-01-2015, 11:36 AM
Now you're flailing, del. Grasping at straw, attacking messengers instead of messages. I doubt anyone expects much more.

he says, attacking the messenger and appealing to authority

you really are the whole package lol

Chris
06-01-2015, 12:25 PM
he says, attacking the messenger and appealing to authority

you really are the whole package lol

I'm talking about what you post and do not post, del. You attack messengers. You do not address messages. We might now add as evidence by your post that in your flailing to attack messengers you will do anything to twist messages including pretending criticism of your message is criticism of you the messenger.

You're really no different than mac except you exhibit a bizarre sense of humor and he does not.

del
06-01-2015, 12:28 PM
I'm talking about what you post and do not post, del. You attack messengers. You do not address messages. We might now add as evidence by your post that in your flailing to attack messengers you will do anything to twist messages including pretending criticism of your message is criticism of you the messenger.

You're really no different than mac except you exhibit a bizarre sense of humor and he does not.

you should change the thread title to irony

Chris
06-01-2015, 12:35 PM
you should change the thread title to irony

Why's that, del? Do you have something of substance to add to the topic?

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 12:46 PM
Been sayin........Nothing will change the spending it is not changing (a little here and there but nothing substantial).

If you want to do something for the country remove politicians that run around BSing everyone on Global Warming and vote business friendly...........We need jobs and an economy more than we need more regulations and programs that weigh us down further.


So you'd be ok with filthy air and filthy water that killed your kids off (and you off) before your time because you don't like regulation?

You'd be ok with pintos blowing up and other crap cars on the road because "we need jobs!!!"

You'd be ok with food poisoning us with e coli and other impurities because "jobs!"

There's a reason we have regulations and programs.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 01:00 PM
Isn't that the whole point of platforms? What does tuyahaman base his/her vote on, what color the sky is that day?


I base my vote on the positions held by the candidate. I do not require a candidate to fall in lock-step with a party platform. I value ideas which do not conform to the elites who think they make up all the rules.

I see nothing wrong with a candidate disagreeing with planks of a party platform.

But that's just me. I'm not some partisan hack who is too lazy to examine the issues and develop my own thoughts.

Chris
06-01-2015, 01:01 PM
So you'd be ok with filthy air and filthy water that killed your kids off (and you off) before your time because you don't like regulation?

You'd be ok with pintos blowing up and other crap cars on the road because "we need jobs!!!"

You'd be ok with food poisoning us with e coli and other impurities because "jobs!"

There's a reason we have regulations and programs.



But that is driven by consumerism. It's what we as a society/culture demand.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 01:04 PM
So you'd be ok with filthy air and filthy water that killed your kids off (and you off) before your time because you don't like regulation?

You'd be ok with pintos blowing up and other crap cars on the road because "we need jobs!!!"

You'd be ok with food poisoning us with e coli and other impurities because "jobs!"

There's a reason we have regulations and programs.

And these people are the ones who have destroyed the Democrat party.

They believe by opposing their ideas one is advocating death, destruction and environmental disaster. They are completely void of any common sense or ability to think for themselves.

maineman
06-01-2015, 01:22 PM
Hillary in the video did. Elizabeth Warren does. Bernie Sanders does. It's also found in liberal progressive economists like Reich, Krugman, Piketty, and others.

And you, immediately after denial, admit it: "We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans."

that is not admitting that we criticize the top 1% only the ones who do not feel the need to give back to the society that helped make them wealthy.

If I said, "A-Rod is a horrible person and should not ever be admitted to the HOF", would you then say that I am demonizing all American Leaguers?

maineman
06-01-2015, 01:25 PM
And these people are the ones who have destroyed the Democrat party.

They believe by opposing their ideas one is advocating death, destruction and environmental disaster. They are completely void of any common sense or ability to think for themselves.

there is a difference between "advocating death, destruction and environmental disaster" and turning an uncaring, unconcerned eye on things that cause it.... although the end result is pretty much the same.

If you oppose strict inspections of the country's meat supply, that is not advocating death by e coli, but it certainly facilitates it.

Chris
06-01-2015, 01:28 PM
that is not admitting that we criticize the top 1% only the ones who do not feel the need to give back to the society that helped make them wealthy.

If I said, "A-Rod is a horrible person and should not ever be admitted to the HOF", would you then say that I am demonizing all American Leaguers?



I think what you're failing to see is that it amounts to the same thing. You pick and choose who you criticize. You choose not to criticize Hillary for obvious partisan reasons.

The left does demonize the 1% generally, excluding of course those like Hillary they turn a blind eye to. There's no comparison with criticizing a specific baseball player, the analogy doesn't hold at all.

Bob
06-01-2015, 01:30 PM
that is not admitting that we criticize the top 1% only the ones who do not feel the need to give back to the society that helped make them wealthy.

If I said, "A-Rod is a horrible person and should not ever be admitted to the HOF", would you then say that I am demonizing all American Leaguers?

Why do people say they never gave back?

First comes those paychecks. One thing the rich do a lot of is pay people to work.
Then the rich pay extortion rates of income taxes.

Suppose they construct a 10 million dollar yacht.

They had to employ a lot of people just to collect cash for the yacht.

Mind you, we pay next to nothing in income taxes while the Rich pay millions in dollars in taxes.

Then the company making the yacht employs. Maybe they hire one more person or 20 more workers. Spending ten million dollars creates jobs. The engines I am told (on a TV program I saw over the weekend) cost a quarter million dollars each.

The accouterments found on such boats cause many others to be hired.

One thing the rich clearly do, they are the funders of this government.

As much as they fund, they are simply hated. They drive the economy. I don't hate such people. I admire them.

maineman
06-01-2015, 01:31 PM
I think what you're failing to see is that it amounts to the same thing. You pick and choose who you criticize. You choose not to criticize Hillary for obvious partisan reasons.

The left does demonize the 1% generally, excluding of course those like Hillary they turn a blind eye to. There's no comparison with criticizing a specific baseball player, the analogy doesn't hold at all.

I am a card carrying member of the left. I do not demonized the 1%. I disagree with your characterization of my demonizing those who reject giving back something to the society that helped them be wealthy as "demonizing" an entire slice of the socio-economic scale. There is a difference between rich people and grotesquely selfish rich people. We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 01:37 PM
I think what you're failing to see is that it amounts to the same thing. You pick and choose who you criticize. You choose not to criticize Hillary for obvious partisan reasons.

The left does demonize the 1% generally, excluding of course those like Hillary they turn a blind eye to. There's no comparison with criticizing a specific baseball player, the analogy doesn't hold at all.

It is a fact that if one opposes an environmental position of the left, they then say that you are for breathing dirty air and drinking poisonous water.

If you oppose an economic policy initiative, they claim that you Are in favor of starving children and throwing people out into the streets.

If you support a cut in any tax rate or oppose the creation of any new tax, they claim you are stealing from those who can afford it the least and want to burn down government.

Those people are intellectually lazy

silvereyes
06-01-2015, 01:40 PM
Like I said, partisan hacks can always find a way to justify it. I would have a bit of respect for them if they just would be honest and say party affiliation was the most important factor, but they won't. I don't know why.

When was the last time you voted outside your preferred party parameters, who did you vote for, and why?

Pleaseandthankyou!

Chris
06-01-2015, 01:44 PM
I am a card carrying member of the left. I do not demonized the 1%. I disagree with your characterization of my demonizing those who reject giving back something to the society that helped them be wealthy as "demonizing" an entire slice of the socio-economic scale. There is a difference between rich people and grotesquely selfish rich people. We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter.



I do not demonized the 1%.

Earlier you said you did: "We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans."

And you are now: "We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter."


Make up your mind.

maineman
06-01-2015, 01:49 PM
It is a fact that if one opposes an environmental position of the left, they then say that you are for breathing dirty air and drinking poisonous water.

If you oppose an economic policy initiative, they claim that you Are in favor of starving children and throwing people out into the streets.

If you support a cut in any tax rate or oppose the creation of any new tax, they claim you are stealing from those who can afford it the least and want to burn down government.

Those people are intellectually lazy

ah... the homogenous, amorphous, un-quotable "they".

If, by "they" you refer to democrats, I consider myself to be one of "them", but I have NEVER said any of those things.

Who are these "they" people? are they on this board in any great numbers? Can you provide quotes from here that would prove all those things you say that THEY say?

silvereyes
06-01-2015, 01:51 PM
I'm talking about what you post and do not post, del. You attack messengers. You do not address messages. We might now add as evidence by your post that in your flailing to attack messengers you will do anything to twist messages including pretending criticism of your message is criticism of you the messenger.

You're really no different than mac except you exhibit a bizarre sense of humor and he does not.

I like his sense of humor. :)

The Sage of Main Street
06-01-2015, 01:58 PM
I never said that... there are MANY benevolent and magnanimous wealthy people who give a great deal of time and money to helping those less fortunate. They don't help people with talent because those are a threat to their lucky and predatory class of elevated mediocrity. It's like a coach who is told by jock-haters to be "magnanimous" and spend all his time trying to improve the skills of the naturally unfit whom he had to cut in tryouts.

Chris
06-01-2015, 01:59 PM
I like his sense of humor. :)

When he's being humorous.

The Sage of Main Street
06-01-2015, 02:06 PM
they don't make a DIFFERENCE, it's just entertaining, that's all. Clowns and circuses have enthralled folks for centuries. Why should this be any different?

the GOP is gonna do what it's gonna do.... it will, somehow, figure out a way to systematically weed through the clown parade and you'll end up with a candidate at the end of the process. Like the kinds of candidates that Barack Obama pistol whipped twice in a row. That's what you DO. It's fun to watch. Kochist cavalcade of clowns tooting kazoos.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 02:23 PM
When was the last time you voted outside your preferred party parameters, who did you vote for, and why?

Pleaseandthankyou!

That would be a longer list than you would expect and take quite a while. I have voted for Republicans, Democrats and third party people in state and county elections.

i will admit that I have never voted for a Democrat for President. There are times I did not vote as none of the candidates were someone I could support.

Im sure you vote a straight Democrat ticket from top to bottom. I've heard partisan hacks defend that and actually make it sound reasonable.

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 02:25 PM
I am a card carrying member of the left. I do not demonized the 1%. I disagree with your characterization of my demonizing those who reject giving back something to the society that helped them be wealthy as "demonizing" an entire slice of the socio-economic scale. There is a difference between rich people and grotesquely selfish rich people. We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter.


I think you had a typo - you meant " We tend to demonize the latter, and not the former"


Yes, Ms. Clinton is now a very wealthy woman. But she worked damn hard to get there. Good for her. So no, I don't demonize her because even though she is rich she is still working hard for people who aren't rich. She knows what it's like and hasn't forgotten.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 02:25 PM
ah... the homogenous, amorphous, un-quotable "they".

If, by "they" you refer to democrats, I consider myself to be one of "them", but I have NEVER said any of those things.

Who are these "they" people? are they on this board in any great numbers? Can you provide quotes from here that would prove all those things you say that THEY say?


You can't remember what you say from post to post, so your claims are not credible.

Chris
06-01-2015, 02:27 PM
I think you had a typo - you meant " We tend to demonize the latter, and not the former"


Yes, Ms. Clinton is now a very wealthy woman. But she worked damn hard to get there. Good for her. So no, I don't demonize her because even though she is rich she is still working hard for people who aren't rich. She knows what it's like and hasn't forgotten.



What work did she do?

Who is she working for who isn't rich?

I think all she does for both is talk a lot.

maineman
06-01-2015, 02:29 PM
You can't remember what you say from post to post, so your claims are not credible.

you claim that "THEY" say all these things, but cannot produce a quote where anyone (other than you) said those things.

and please realize that, after sending me a raft of unsolicited homo-erotic PM's, the fact that YOU, of all people, question my credibility is quite funny.

maineman
06-01-2015, 02:30 PM
That would be a longer list than you would expect and take quite a while. I have voted for Republicans, Democrats and third party people in state and county elections.

i will admit that I have never voted for a Democrat for President. There are times I did not vote as none of the candidates were someone I could support.

Im sure you vote a straight Democrat ticket from top to bottom. I've heard partisan hacks defend that and actually make it sound reasonable.

please explain how voting for the candidate that stands on the platform that you support is anything BUT reasonable.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 02:31 PM
Earlier you said you did: "We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans."

And you are now: "We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter."


Make up your mind.


He can't make up his mind because he can't remember what he says. He's just a knee jerk reactionary.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 02:32 PM
If a candidate agrees with every plank of a party platform, he or she is a mindless boob.

maineman
06-01-2015, 02:33 PM
Earlier you said you did: "We might criticize those wealthy Americans who do not feel as if they need to give anything back to the country that facilitated their wealth, but only those, not a blanket criticism of all wealthy Americans."

And you are now: "We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter."


Make up your mind.
asked and answered.

maineman
06-01-2015, 02:33 PM
If a candidate agrees with every plank of a party platform, he or she is a mindless boob.

whoever said they had to?

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 02:34 PM
What work did she do?

Who is she working for who isn't rich?

I think all she does for both is talk a lot.


Seriously? she was a lawyer; First Lady (not a paid position, but hard work); a Senator; and a Secretary of State.

What work have you done?

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 02:39 PM
What work did she do?

Who is she working for who isn't rich?

I think all she does for both is talk a lot.

She rode the coat tails of a successful man. She had to put up with him publicly humiliating her continually. A strong woman of character would not have put up with it like she did.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 02:40 PM
Seriously? she was a lawyer; First Lady (not a paid position, but hard work); a Senator; and a Secretary of State.

What work have you done?

of course no one can name a single accomplishment attributed to her, but that's another story.

Chris
06-01-2015, 02:40 PM
Seriously? she was a lawyer; First Lady (not a paid position, but hard work); a Senator; and a Secretary of State.

What work have you done?

She's been a politician. Hard work. For herself.

I work. Let's not make this personal.

The Xl
06-01-2015, 02:44 PM
Hilary got rich not on the merits of her ability or how hard she worked, she got rich because of the prestige of her husband and the hilariously overpriced speeches they make

Chris
06-01-2015, 02:45 PM
What has she done to earn $30 million, to get into the top 0.1%, to get those contributions?

http://i.snag.gy/udpoI.jpg

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:07 PM
you claim that "THEY" say all these things, but cannot produce a quote where anyone (other than you) said those things.

and please realize that, after sending me a raft of unsolicited homo-erotic PM's, the fact that YOU, of all people, question my credibility is quite funny.

I had to eliminate the PM feature becasue he tried to solicit an act I oppose and he would not stop when requested.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:35 PM
I offered 15 reasons why I won't vote for Hillary. Add her position on Monsanto's board as another reason.

If anyone can give me logical arguments countering those issues, I'll vote for Hillary.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:35 PM
Hilary got rich not on the merits of her ability or how hard she worked, she got rich because of the prestige of her husband and the hilariously overpriced speeches they make

And that's why she put up with the humiliation he put her through. And putting up with that humiliation is why many liberals believe she "deserves" to be elected President.

They can't name one single positive accomplishment attributed to her.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:36 PM
I offered 15 reasons why I won't vote for Hillary. Add her position on Monsanto's board as another reason.

If anyone can give me logical arguments countering those issues, I'll vote for Hillary.

why was her involvement with Monsanto so important to you?

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:37 PM
why was her involvement with Monsanto so important to you?

Because I think Monsanto is a bad company. The kind of policies they push are harmful.

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 03:37 PM
I offered 15 reasons why I won't vote for Hillary. Add her position on Monsanto's board as another reason.

If anyone can give me logical arguments countering those issues, I'll vote for Hillary.


I don't particularly care if you vote for her or not.

Chris
06-01-2015, 03:39 PM
I offered 15 reasons why I won't vote for Hillary. Add her position on Monsanto's board as another reason.

If anyone can give me logical arguments countering those issues, I'll vote for Hillary.


She's a liberal progressive social democrat Democrat. Oh, wait, you wanted logical reasons to vote for her. My bad.

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 03:46 PM
I offered 15 reasons why I won't vote for Hillary. Add her position on Monsanto's board as another reason.

If anyone can give me logical arguments countering those issues, I'll vote for Hillary.

Besides, in that thread I believe someone gave you a lot of reasons to vote for her, but they just weren't good enough for you. So - don't vote for her. Vote for one of the republicans that want to take away LGBT rights. Go for it.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:46 PM
Because I think Monsanto is a bad company. The kind of policies they push are harmful.


Is it possible for someone to try to change a company from within and leave becasue they knew they were fighting a losing battle?

I'm not saying that is the case with her, becaaue it wasn't.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:47 PM
Besides, in that thread I believe someone gave you a lot of reasons to vote for her, but they just weren't good enough for you. So - don't vote for her. Vote for one of the republicans that want to take away LGBT rights. Go for it.

I don't have any intention of voting for an anti-LGBT Republican. I'll most likely end up voting for whoever the Green Party nominee is.

Why so defensive, Patty? And rude, to boot.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:48 PM
Is it possible for someone to try to change a company from within and leave becasue they knew they were fighting a losing battle?

I'm not saying that is the case with her, becaaue it wasn't.

Sure, I think that's possible. I just typically am highly skeptical of politicians having those crises of consciousness, because it almost always happens right before an election.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:49 PM
Besides, in that thread I believe someone gave you a lot of reasons to vote for her, but they just weren't good enough for you. So - don't vote for her. Vote for one of the republicans that want to take away LGBT rights. Go for it.

i just saw a new one. It's now not just LGBT, it's LGBTQI.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:52 PM
i just saw a new one. It's now not just LGBT, it's LGBTQI.

Frankly, I think the whole acronym is ridiculous, but I'll typically just use "LGB" unless I'm responding to someone that uses the full thing.

But that's a subject for a different thread.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:54 PM
I don't have any intention of voting for an anti-LGBT Republican. I'll most likely end up voting for whoever the Green Party nominee is.

Why so defensive, Patty? And rude, to boot.
Green Party? You may as well not vote.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:55 PM
Green Party? You may as well not vote.

Not voting isn't an option. It's my civic responsibility to vote. It's my moral responsibility to vote only for candidates that I believe will do the right thing. That excludes most Democratic and Republican candidates.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:55 PM
Frankly, I think the whole acronym is ridiculous, but I'll typically just use "LGB" unless I'm responding to someone that uses the full thing.

But that's a subject for a different thread.


How about just "G"? Doesn't that kind of include the whole thing?

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 03:57 PM
How about just "G"? Doesn't that kind of include the whole thing?

That's my perspective on the issue, yep. "Gay" pretty well encompasses the only part of the movement that matters.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 03:58 PM
Not voting isn't an option. It's my civic responsibility to vote. It's my moral responsibility to vote only for candidates that I believe will do the right thing. That excludes most Democratic and Republican candidates.


I understand and what you are saying, but I don't buy into this notion that it's my "duty", or moral obligation to vote. Where is the duty or moral obligation to offer acceptable candidates? Where is the moral obligation to live by the laws imposed upon us?

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 04:00 PM
I understand and what you are saying, but I don't buy into this notion that it's my "duty", or moral obligation to vote. Where is the duty or moral obligation to offer acceptable candidates? Where is the moral obligation to live by the laws imposed upon us?

I believe that we have the right to acceptable candidates and a moral obligation to live by just​ laws. The trouble is getting everyone else to believe that.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 04:02 PM
I believe that we have the right to acceptable candidates and a moral obligation to live by just​ laws. The trouble is getting everyone else to believe that.

and the right and responsibility to reject them all.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 04:06 PM
and the right and responsibility to reject them all.

Sure. I'm not suggesting you should always vote. If you feel like there are no candidates that you can support, then you shouldn't vote.

maineman
06-01-2015, 04:13 PM
and the right and responsibility to reject them all.

but "none of the above" will ever work. the only way to even marginally change the system is by staying involved and by voting for the party that has the better chance of moving the country in a direction you, individually, approve of. Third party votes, write-in votes....they're all just pipe dream fictions that might make the individual voter feel good about him or herself PERSONALLY, but do nothing to advance the country.

Look at Green Party voters in New Hampshire in 2000. Now I realize that folks on the right may criticize Al Gore for his personally wasteful energy use, but there can be no doubt that, if you were an environmentalist in 2000, and Nader had NOT been on the ballot, your choice for the more environmentally friendly and sympathetic candidate would have undoubtedly been Gore over Oil Man Bush. The greenies in New Hampshire elected Bush. Their votes elected him. If they had not thrown their votes away in a symbolic gesture, Gore would have not needed hanging chads or Florida to win. But voting for Nader, the environmentalists insured that the least environmental of the two major party candidates would become president. Is that really what they wanted to have happen? No. Of course not. They WANTED Ralph Nader to be President, but, as I said at the beginning, that always was nothing more than an adolescent pipe dream.

Chris
06-01-2015, 04:44 PM
Staying involved in the system only supports and promotes it, a system we all romanticise as good but which in reality is not.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Jnf9GILjFM

maineman
06-01-2015, 04:46 PM
Staying involved in the system only supports and promotes it, a system we all romanticise as good but which in reality is not.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Jnf9GILjFM

good or bad... it is what it is. And, short of armed revolution, it will not change.

Chris
06-01-2015, 04:51 PM
good or bad... it is what it is. And, short of armed revolution, it will not change.

Because of that attitude, no, it won't.

But it's simple as this:

http://i.snag.gy/cPFja.jpg

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 05:13 PM
Because I think Monsanto is a bad company. The kind of policies they push are harmful.


Speaking of Monsanto, have you heard Neil Young's new tune attacking them? Well, give it a listen. No matter how you feel about Monsanto, you'll be embarrassed for him. I am and I'm a big Neil Young fan.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 05:16 PM
Sure. I'm not suggesting you should always vote. If you feel like there are no candidates that you can support, then you shouldn't vote.

and I won't if I have to compromise my principles to do so.

Mac-7
06-01-2015, 05:19 PM
I am a card carrying member of the left. I do not demonized the 1%. I disagree with your characterization of my demonizing those who reject giving back something to the society that helped them be wealthy as "demonizing" an entire slice of the socio-economic scale. There is a difference between rich people and grotesquely selfish rich people. We tend to demonize the former, and not the latter.

Your fuhrer and his field marshals like senator Pokahontas do demonize the rich.

maineman
06-01-2015, 05:59 PM
Because of that attitude, no, it won't.

But it's simple as this:

http://i.snag.gy/cPFja.jpg


ah well.... you guys all TALK a big game...but you never really actually DO anything. I wish you well, however.

maineman
06-01-2015, 06:01 PM
Your fuhrer and his field marshals like senator Pokahontas do demonize the rich.

as I said, and as I know first hand, there is a difference between being wealthy and being wealthy AND greedy AND selfish. Democrats don't demonize the former.

Chris
06-01-2015, 06:04 PM
as I said, and as I know first hand, there is a difference between being wealthy and being wealthy AND greedy AND selfish. Democrats don't demonize the former.

IOW, as long as people conform to your intolerance, they're ok by you. Hillary, despite being wealthy AND greedy AND selfish, sends you the right message and it confirms your bias.

maineman
06-01-2015, 06:06 PM
IOW, as long as people conform to your intolerance, they're ok by you. Hillary, despite being wealthy AND greedy AND selfish, sends you the right message and it confirms your bias.

I disagree with your characterization of Mrs. Clinton. Let's just agree to disagree, shall we?

and if I thought I could better explain my position with "OTHER WORDS" I would have fucking chosen them in the first place.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 06:20 PM
IOW, as long as people conform to your intolerance, they're ok by you. Hillary, despite being wealthy AND greedy AND selfish, sends you the right message and it confirms your bias.

I would say she's a money grubber. I believe the accumulation of wealth by any means has been her life long obsession.

no deal or get rich quick scheme has been too dishonest or illegal for her. Sham land deals, insider trading, skimming from a charitable foundation..... You name it.

MisterVeritis
06-01-2015, 06:22 PM
I disagree with your characterization of Mrs. Clinton. Let's just agree to disagree, shall we?

and if I thought I could better explain my position with "OTHER WORDS" I would have $#@!ing chosen them in the first place.
It is very hard work selling your office. She needs to be investigated, charged, tried, convicted and put in prison for the rest of her life.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 06:24 PM
ah well.... you guys all TALK a big game...but you never really actually DO anything. I wish you well, however.

I agree with him, and I've done quite a lot.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 06:26 PM
It is very hard work selling your office. She needs to be investigated, charged, tried, convicted and put in prison for the rest of her life.


I'm not sure about this "rest of her life" business, but she sure has violated the law in her obsessive quest for money.

Personally, I don't believe there's any satisfaction by accumulating wealth dishonestly. That's why I think she is so sour and cold hearted. She has nothing in her life to be satisfied with. She's never accomplished anything honestly on her own merit. I think it is wearing on her. She's obviously not a happy person.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 06:29 PM
I agree with him, and I've done quite a lot.

I will admit that I am an underachiever, but I've done fairly well. I've done Better than I could have expected considering the effort I made.

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 06:30 PM
I will admit that I am an underachiever, but I've done fairly well. I've done Better than I could have expected considering the effort I made.

That's all anyone can do, really.

MisterVeritis
06-01-2015, 06:32 PM
I'm not sure about this "rest of her life" business, but she sure has violated the law in her obsessive quest for money.

Personally, I don't believe there's any satisfaction by accumulating wealth dishonestly. That's why I think she is so sour and cold hearted. She has nothing in her life to be satisfied with. She's never accomplished anything honestly on her own merit. I think it is wearing on her. She's obviously not a happy person.
I would prefer an execution but don't believe there is sufficient support in the law.

She is unhappy because she is evil.

MisterVeritis
06-01-2015, 06:33 PM
I'm not sure about this "rest of her life" business, but she sure has violated the law in her obsessive quest for money.

Personally, I don't believe there's any satisfaction by accumulating wealth dishonestly. That's why I think she is so sour and cold hearted. She has nothing in her life to be satisfied with. She's never accomplished anything honestly on her own merit. I think it is wearing on her. She's obviously not a happy person.
I would prefer an execution but don't believe the law supports it.

She is unhappy because she is evil.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 06:37 PM
That's all anyone can do, really.

some people have a desire to work much harder and longer than I did. My focus was on building a comfortable nest egg then being able to enjoy it for as long as possible.

I'm not complaining though. I'm at a point now where I can enjoy life in just about any way I want. In spurts.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 06:40 PM
She is unhappy because she is evil.

That's actually a good point. If anyone sold their soul to the devil to accumulate wealth, she did.

Chris
06-01-2015, 06:41 PM
I disagree with your characterization of Mrs. Clinton. Let's just agree to disagree, shall we?

and if I thought I could better explain my position with "OTHER WORDS" I would have fucking chosen them in the first place.

You and some others have been disagreeing without showing she's not exactly that.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 06:49 PM
You and some others have been disagreeing without showing she's not exactly that.

Now remeber the guy you just called out is the guy who was bragging about being a tequila aficionado and when I told him of a brand I drink, he didn't know what it was, so he googled it and posted comments from a review as his own.

maineman
06-01-2015, 07:39 PM
Now remeber the guy you just called out is the guy who was bragging about being a tequila aficionado and when I told him of a brand I drink, he didn't know what it was, so he googled it and posted comments from a review as his own.

the "brand" you drink isn't even tequila, it's mexican moonshine. The brand I happen to drink is tequila, good tequila and way past your price point, "underachieving", "done fairly well" surfer dude.

and regarding Hillary, it's really difficult to have someone prove something like "greed" and "selfishness" based upon one's public statements and activities, don't you think?

maineman
06-01-2015, 07:42 PM
I will admit that I am an underachiever, but I've done fairly well. I've done Better than I could have expected considering the effort I made.

this is the first honest post I think I've read from you. "An underachiever who's done fairly well, considering my lack of effort."

That could be your epitaph. I bet your folks are so proud.

maineman
06-01-2015, 07:47 PM
I agree with him, and I've done quite a lot.

to what result?

I used to have a skipper who would say, "I don't really care what you DO, I care what you GET DONE."

maineman
06-01-2015, 07:48 PM
You and some others have been disagreeing without showing she's not exactly that.

again... what in her public life has she done that would show that she is either "greedy" or "selfish"?

Or would your examples merely be things that YOU interpret to be indicative of such character traits?

Chris
06-01-2015, 07:54 PM
again... what in her public life has she done that would show that she is either "greedy" or "selfish"?

Or would your examples merely be things that YOU interpret to be indicative of such character traits?


Watch the video.

Your turn, show how Hillary has ever been altruistic in more than words.

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:01 PM
Watch the video.

Your turn, show how Hillary has ever been altruistic in more than words.

she chose a life of public service rather than that of a Wall Street lawyer.... she believes elective office is a noble calling. So do I.

I have a really smart sister... she and her husband chose a life of academia... both got PhDs... both with 30/40 years in the classroom... both published authors.... they are doing well, but not SUPER well. Their eldest son - my little nephew - is now a senior JP Morgan VP.... he's made way more money in his 40 years on this planet than they made their entire 40 year career in academia.

You don't think that the Clinton's could have found a faster track to millionaire status than the one they chose????

really???

MisterVeritis
06-01-2015, 08:05 PM
she chose a life of public service rather than that of a Wall Street lawyer.... she believes elective office is a noble calling. So do I.

I have a really smart sister... she and her husband chose a life of academia... both got PhDs... both with 30/40 years in the classroom... both published authors.... they are doing well, but not SUPER well. Their eldest son - my little nephew - is now a senior JP Morgan VP.... he's made way more money in his 40 years on this planet than they made their entire 40 year career in academia.

You don't think that the Clinton's could have found a faster track to millionaire status than the one they chose????

really???
I agree. It is hard work shaking down companies and countries for hundreds of millions of dollars. Selling high office has got to be exhausting work. I hope for an execution but believe that life in prison is the best that I can hope for with HillBill.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 08:16 PM
this is the first honest post I think I've read from you. "An underachiever who's done fairly well, considering my lack of effort."

That could be your epitaph. I bet your folks are so proud.

Actually my parents, when they were alive, were quite proud of what I did with my life. I accomplished things that people like you can not even imagine. If I would have applied myself to the fullest of my potential I would have accomplished more, but I would not have had nearly as much fun. Fun is probably another foreign concept to you.

You see, I'm not like you. I know where my strengths and weaknesses are. You are pompous ass who can't even remember what you say post to post.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 08:22 PM
Watch the video.

Your turn, show how Hillary has ever been altruistic in more than words.

Not one Hillary supporter can tell us of even one accomplishment. All they have are clichés and platitudes.

The fact is, no one can show anything she's accomplished in her public service life that has helped anyone other than herself.

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:29 PM
Actually my parents, when they were alive, were quite proud of what I did with my life. I accomplished things that people like you can not even imagine. If I would have applied myself to the fullest of my potential I would have accomplished more, but I would not have had nearly as much fun. Fun is probably another foreign concept to you.

You see, I'm not like you. I know where my strengths and weaknesses are. You are pompous ass who can't even remember what you say post to post.

you haven't done too badly for an underachiever who didn't apply himself. congratulations.

And I am sure that hanging out on the beach drinking mexican moonshine with your surfer buddies is tons of fun. If you hit the "pick three", pick up a bottle of 3,4 y 5.... it'll be a real change of pace.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:32 PM
but "none of the above" will ever work. the only way to even marginally change the system is by staying involved and by voting for the party that has the better chance of moving the country in a direction you, individually, approve of. Third party votes, write-in votes....they're all just pipe dream fictions that might make the individual voter feel good about him or herself PERSONALLY, but do nothing to advance the country.

Look at Green Party voters in New Hampshire in 2000. Now I realize that folks on the right may criticize Al Gore for his personally wasteful energy use, but there can be no doubt that, if you were an environmentalist in 2000, and Nader had NOT been on the ballot, your choice for the more environmentally friendly and sympathetic candidate would have undoubtedly been Gore over Oil Man Bush. The greenies in New Hampshire elected Bush. Their votes elected him. If they had not thrown their votes away in a symbolic gesture, Gore would have not needed hanging chads or Florida to win. But voting for Nader, the environmentalists insured that the least environmental of the two major party candidates would become president. Is that really what they wanted to have happen? No. Of course not. They WANTED Ralph Nader to be President, but, as I said at the beginning, that always was nothing more than an adolescent pipe dream.

You do realize that the only reason that they are pipe dream fictions is that so many assholes will only vote for the two main parties because they feel they are the best shot they have, right? If people had the balls to vote for who they truly believe in, then things would be much better. Keep voting the one party that keeps winning, though, and fuck us all over. (by that I mean the DemocraticRepublican party, because in practice, both are the same)

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:33 PM
You do realize that the only reason that they are pipe dream fictions is that so many $#@!s will only vote for the two main parties because they feel they are the best shot they have, right? If people had the balls to vote for who they truly believe in, then things would be much better. Keep voting the one party that keeps winning, though, and $#@! us all over. (by that I mean the DemocraticRepublican party, because in practice, both are the same)

If "If's" and "but's" were candy and nuts, what a Merry Christmas we would have.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:35 PM
ah well.... you guys all TALK a big game...but you never really actually DO anything. I wish you well, however.

Because most people don't have the balls to make a stand. They'd rather continue to be sheep.

Chris
06-01-2015, 08:40 PM
If "If's" and "but's" were candy and nuts, what a Merry Christmas we would have.

In short you have no argument and choose to exit poetically.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:41 PM
If "If's" and "but's" were candy and nuts, what a Merry Christmas we would have.

I guess congratulations are in order for you being so proud that you have no nuts, but I can't live with myself for not standing up for what I believe, no matter how unlikely my beliefs are to come to pass.

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:41 PM
Because most people don't have the balls to make a stand. They'd rather continue to be sheep.

and you don't have the balls to make a stand either. How exactly would you make this stand, even if you dared to? How, practically, does one bring about the sort of revolutionary change you are alluding to short of actually starting an armed revolution - which I don't believe you have the balls to actually do. You're a sheep, too... you just bleat loudly.

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:42 PM
I guess congratulations are in order for you being so proud that you have no nuts, but I can't live with myself for not standing up for what I believe, no matter how unlikely my beliefs are to come to pass.

again... how does this "standing up for what you believe" actually translate outside the interwebz?

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:42 PM
In short you have no argument and choose to exit poetically.

did you think I was leaving?

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:46 PM
and you don't have the balls to make a stand either. How exactly would you make this stand, even if you dared to? How, practically, does one bring about the sort of revolutionary change you are alluding to short of actually starting an armed revolution - which I don't believe you have the balls to actually do. You're a sheep, too... you just bleat loudly.

First, by refusing to vote for those I don't fully believe in. Second, by persuading others that there is another way. I don't want a revolution, but will fight if necessary. I would prefer that the people realize the power they can hold rather than use physical violence. However, people that refuse to deviate from the main two parties (which are the same, don't let a stated platform fool you, look at the actual actions) are simply deciding to hand their power away, which is the most foolish thing a person can do.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:47 PM
again... how does this "standing up for what you believe" actually translate outside the interwebz?

Simply put, working toward a change.

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:50 PM
Simply put, working toward a change.

flapping gums. what's your plan? what are you going to DO? Better yet, what are you going to GET DONE?

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:51 PM
First, by refusing to vote for those I don't fully believe in. Second, by persuading others that there is another way. I don't want a revolution, but will fight if necessary. I would prefer that the people realize the power they can hold rather than use physical violence. However, people that refuse to deviate from the main two parties (which are the same, don't let a stated platform fool you, look at the actual actions) are simply deciding to hand their power away, which is the most foolish thing a person can do.

how long have you been on this quest, and how many people have you persuaded thus far?

Bob
06-01-2015, 08:52 PM
First, by refusing to vote for those I don't fully believe in. Second, by persuading others that there is another way. I don't want a revolution, but will fight if necessary. I would prefer that the people realize the power they can hold rather than use physical violence. However, people that refuse to deviate from the main two parties (which are the same, don't let a stated platform fool you, look at the actual actions) are simply deciding to hand their power away, which is the most foolish thing a person can do.

Half the country won't vote.

Welcome to their club. LOL

By the way, the two major parties are not the same.

I have voted for both parties. I would not have changed to republican had they been like Democrats are.

This forum is nuts to keep saying things like that.

For instance, were you a republican when I was still a Democrat, I would have clawed your eyes out for being a worthless POS scum.

Surely I would not have become republican thinking that way?

I have explained a lot of times what converted me.

Primarily I started with A time for Truth and this led me to the works of Thomas Paine.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:54 PM
flapping gums. what's your plan? what are you going to DO? Better yet, what are you going to GET DONE?

I didn't feel I needed to say as much, since I said more in the previous post, but change starts small. You have to convince few before you can convince many, and I have done that. I am working on convincing more and more. Unfortunately, some refuse to see how we are being fucked over, but keep defending those that are fucking us over. The type that does that won't last in what is coming. I hope that it will be a peaceful change in power, but I admit that is not as likely.

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:55 PM
First, by refusing to vote for those I don't fully believe in. Second, by persuading others that there is another way. I don't want a revolution, but will fight if necessary. I would prefer that the people realize the power they can hold rather than use physical violence. However, people that refuse to deviate from the main two parties (which are the same, don't let a stated platform fool you, look at the actual actions) are simply deciding to hand their power away, which is the most foolish thing a person can do.

let me recommend a song for you:

"Sad Cafe" from the Eagle's album "Long Run"

maineman
06-01-2015, 08:56 PM
I didn't feel I needed to say as much, since I said more in the previous post, but change starts small. You have to convince few before you can convince many, and I have done that. I am working on convincing more and more. Unfortunately, some refuse to see how we are being $#@!ed over, but keep defending those that are $#@!ing us over. The type that does that won't last in what is coming. I hope that it will be a peaceful change in power, but I admit that is not as likely.

so an armed minority is prepared to forcibly wrest control of the government from the majority if they don't see things the way YOU do? Have I got that right?

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 08:57 PM
You and some others have been disagreeing without showing she's not exactly that.

If she was greedy and selfish, she never would have run for Senator; she wouldn't have taken on SOS; and she wouldn't be running for President.

She and Mr. Clinton were able to get lots of money without her putting herself out there, doing what she can to secure the safety net, and taking all the crap that people like the ones on this board give her.

Peter1469
06-01-2015, 08:59 PM
Half the country won't vote.

Welcome to their club. LOL

By the way, the two major parties are not the same.

I have voted for both parties. I would not have changed to republican had they been like Democrats are.

This forum is nuts to keep saying things like that.

For instance, were you a republican when I was still a Democrat, I would have clawed your eyes out for being a worthless POS scum.

Surely I would not have become republican thinking that way?

I have explained a lot of times what converted me.

Primarily I started with A time for Truth and this led me to the works of Thomas Paine.


Yet things continue in the same direction when establishment (D) and (R) are in charge.....

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 08:59 PM
how long have you been on this quest, and how many people have you persuaded thus far?

How long? I'd say about 10 years. How many? I don't really keep track. If I only convinced one, that would be a success, although, I know I have convinced far more than that.

TrueBlue
06-01-2015, 09:00 PM
Not one Hillary supporter can tell us of even one accomplishment. All they have are clichés and platitudes.

The fact is, no one can show anything she's accomplished in her public service life that has helped anyone other than herself.
If you'd only quit huffin' and puffin' enough to read about Hillary's accomplishments you might actually learn something.

Here’s A List Of Hillary Clinton’s Accomplishments, So Quit Saying She Doesn’t Have Any
Author: Ryan Denson

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/13/heres-a-list-of-hillary-clintons-accomplishments-so-quit-saying-she-doesnt-have-any/

"You don’t have to like Hillary Clinton or her ideas. I get it. She’s a Democrat, a progressive (in most eyes), and conservatives don’t like that. However, you cannot say she does not have any accomplishments. Here are just a few:"

And here's even more of her accomplishments.

ATTACK: RIGHT WING IGNORES HILLARY CLINTON’S ACHIEVEMENTS AS SENATOR

http://correctrecord.org/the-points/attack-right-wing-ignores-hillary-clintons-achievements-as-senator/

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:03 PM
Half the country won't vote.

Welcome to their club. LOL

By the way, the two major parties are not the same.

I have voted for both parties. I would not have changed to republican had they been like Democrats are.

This forum is nuts to keep saying things like that.

For instance, were you a republican when I was still a Democrat, I would have clawed your eyes out for being a worthless POS scum.

Surely I would not have become republican thinking that way?

I have explained a lot of times what converted me.

Primarily I started with A time for Truth and this led me to the works of Thomas Paine.

Actually, I vote religiously.

I've voted for both parties too, but looking at what they actually do, I can't see a difference. For example, Obamacare was originally a Republican plan, so by hating it, you're hating what Republicans tried to accomplish.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:03 PM
How long? I'd say about 10 years. How many? I don't really keep track. If I only convinced one, that would be a success, although, I know I have convinced far more than that.

if you convinced one, it would be a success? Well... that is certainly one way to feel good about yourself: set the bar REALY low.

Congratulations. Has your rate of successful convincing been such that you can see your way clear toward victory in -what? - the lifetime of your great great great great grandchildren?

Or when will you lose your patience and, even though those of your ilk might still be in the distinct minority, you'll just pull out your guns and try to take what you want?

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:08 PM
so an armed minority is prepared to forcibly wrest control of the government from the majority if they don't see things the way YOU do? Have I got that right?

No, actually, you've got it completely wrong. First, the dissatisfied have become the majority. Second, I didn't say they saw things the way I do. Third, I don't know that they're completely prepared right now, but it's obvious that things are moving in that direction.

Bob
06-01-2015, 09:08 PM
Yet things continue in the same direction when establishment (D) and (R) are in charge.....

You are still fairly young.

In the past almost quarter Century, the Demorats ran the show. Even when we had a republican president he was strung out by Democrats. Presidents 8 yr R vs 16 D.

If they are the same, why are they unable to get along?

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:10 PM
If she was greedy and selfish, she never would have run for Senator; she wouldn't have taken on SOS; and she wouldn't be running for President.

She and Mr. Clinton were able to get lots of money without her putting herself out there, doing what she can to secure the safety net, and taking all the crap that people like the ones on this board give her.

Wait, so someone that's greedy and selfish wouldn't try for more power? That makes absolutely no sense.

Peter1469
06-01-2015, 09:10 PM
Actually, I vote religiously.

I've voted for both parties too, but looking at what they actually do, I can't see a difference. For example, Obamacare was originally a Republican plan, so by hating it, you're hating what Republicans tried to accomplish.
If I recall, the Heritage Foundation plan was state run.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:13 PM
No, actually, you've got it completely wrong. First, the dissatisfied have become the majority. Second, I didn't say they saw things the way I do. Third, I don't know that they're completely prepared right now, but it's obvious that things are moving in that direction.

Just being dissatisfied is nowhere near enough. the dissatisfied have to become so dissatisfied that they are willing to pick up arms and be ready to lay down their lives in order to wrest control away from the existing power structure.

Let's say I agree with you that we might, in some theoretical way, be "moving in that direction". If you optimistically drew that trend line out to where it hit the theoretical tipping point, how many decades to you think that would take? Honestly.

Chris
06-01-2015, 09:14 PM
The Republican/Heritage Foundation Plan was altogether different.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:14 PM
Wait, so someone that's greedy and selfish wouldn't try for more power? That makes absolutely no sense.

again... if you think that Hillary and Bill picked the fast track to millionaire status, you're a fool.

PattyHill
06-01-2015, 09:15 PM
Yet things continue in the same direction when establishment (D) and (R) are in charge.....

Clinton in charge: surplus, welfare reform, country booming

Bush Jr in charge: two wars, massive recession, country NOT booming


Yeah, no different... really...(eye roll)

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 09:17 PM
Liberals love the accomplishments of a Republican congress.

TrueBlue
06-01-2015, 09:18 PM
For those who have their undies in a twist wanting to know about Hillary's accomplishments, here they are. Maybe you can finally learn something. Tahuyaman are you listening?

Here’s A List Of Hillary Clinton’s Accomplishments, So Quit Saying She Doesn’t Have Any
Author: Ryan Denson

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/13/heres-a-list-of-hillary-clintons-accomplishments-so-quit-saying-she-doesnt-have-any/

"You don’t have to like Hillary Clinton or her ideas. I get it. She’s a Democrat, a progressive (in most eyes), and conservatives don’t like that. However, you cannot say she does not have any accomplishments. Here are just a few:"

And here's even more of her accomplishments.

ATTACK: RIGHT WING IGNORES HILLARY CLINTON’S ACHIEVEMENTS AS SENATOR

http://correctrecord.org/the-points/attack-right-wing-ignores-hillary-clintons-achievements-as-senator/

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 09:18 PM
Wait, so someone that's greedy and selfish wouldn't try for more power? That makes absolutely no sense.

It makes sense to her, so who are you to judge?

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:19 PM
if you convinced one, it would be a success? Well... that is certainly one way to feel good about yourself: set the bar REALY low.

Congratulations. Has your rate of successful convincing been such that you can see your way clear toward victory in -what? - the lifetime of your great great great great grandchildren?

Or when will you lose your patience and, even though those of your ilk might still be in the distinct minority, you'll just pull out your guns and try to take what you want?

You don't get how things work, do you? If I were to convince one, and that one was to convince another, with time, all would be convinced. I'm smart enough to know that I can't convince everyone myself. However, as I stated, I do know that I have convinced far more than one.

Well, If I'm not successful in my lifetime, others will be in my lifetime. Your precious Democrat/Republican monarchy won't last as long as I will.

You don't realize that I don't support violent action, do you? There is no amount of time that would force me to use violence to support my beliefs. However, there is a growing number of those so dissatisfied that they will use violence. My hope is that things will change before they actually do use violence.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 09:22 PM
For those who have their undies in a twist wanting to know about Hillary's accomplishments, here they are. Maybe you can finally learn something.

Here’s A List Of Hillary Clinton’s Accomplishments, So Quit Saying She Doesn’t Have Any
Author: Ryan Denson

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/13/heres-a-list-of-hillary-clintons-accomplishments-so-quit-saying-she-doesnt-have-any/

And here's even more of her accomplishments.

ATTACK: RIGHT WING IGNORES HILLARY CLINTON’S ACHIEVEMENTS AS SENATOR

http://correctrecord.org/the-points/attack-right-wing-ignores-hillary-clintons-achievements-as-senator/


So, her accomplishments are that she has nothing to claim as an accomplishment after being a senator and Sec of State. That's an accomplishment in itself. It must be tedious spending all that time doing nothing.

I guess her accomplishment is that she at least was present and voted most of the time.

Bob
06-01-2015, 09:23 PM
Actually, I vote religiously.

I've voted for both parties too, but looking at what they actually do, I can't see a difference. For example, Obamacare was originally a Republican plan, so by hating it, you're hating what Republicans tried to accomplish.

I keep hearing we started Obamacare. Seems this comes to me from Democrats. They never show proof either.

While you probably mean Romney, he governed Democrats. He agreed to their plan.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:23 PM
You don't get how things work, do you? If I were to convince one, and that one was to convince another, with time, all would be convinced. I'm smart enough to know that I can't convince everyone myself. However, as I stated, I do know that I have convinced far more than one.

Well, If I'm not successful in my lifetime, others will be in my lifetime. Your precious Democrat/Republican monarchy won't last as long as I will.

You don't realize that I don't support violent action, do you? There is no amount of time that would force me to use violence to support my beliefs. However, there is a growing number of those so dissatisfied that they will use violence. My hope is that things will change before they actually do use violence.

Hal... can I ask you a serious question? How old are you? I am guessing, by your fervor and your idealism, that you are in your 20's. Is that anywhere near correct?

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:25 PM
Just being dissatisfied is nowhere near enough. the dissatisfied have to become so dissatisfied that they are willing to pick up arms and be ready to lay down their lives in order to wrest control away from the existing power structure.

Let's say I agree with you that we might, in some theoretical way, be "moving in that direction". If you optimistically drew that trend line out to where it hit the theoretical tipping point, how many decades to you think that would take? Honestly.

Have you not been paying attention to things that have been happening? People have been standing up against the establishment more and more.

At most, it will take 30 years, though I think it far more likely to happen much sooner. I must admit that optimism is not something I can do right now.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:26 PM
So, her accomplishments are that she has nothing to claim as an accomplishment after being a senator and Sec of State. That's an accomplishment in itself. It must be tedious spending all that time doing nothing.

clearly, reading is tough for you. put don the mexican moonshine and leave the men's room.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:28 PM
Hal... can I ask you a serious question? How old are you? I am guessing, by your fervor and your idealism, that you are in your 20's. Is that anywhere near correct?

I'm older than your estimate, but I'm not going to say by how much. Idealism? How am I being idealistic?

Peter1469
06-01-2015, 09:30 PM
Clinton in charge: surplus, welfare reform, country booming

Bush Jr in charge: two wars, massive recession, country NOT booming


Yeah, no different... really...(eye roll)

Slow increasing power of the State, or I should say the establishment. Under Clinton, and Bush.

The two parties share power while telling their base that they are different.

TrueBlue
06-01-2015, 09:30 PM
So, her accomplishments are that she has nothing to claim as an accomplishment after being a senator and Sec of State. That's an accomplishment in itself. It must be tedious spending all that time doing nothing.

I guess her accomplishment is that she at least was present and voted most of the time.
Can you top her accomplishments? What's your excuse?

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:30 PM
Have you not been paying attention to things that have been happening? People have been standing up against the establishment more and more.

At most, it will take 30 years, though I think it far more likely to happen much sooner. I must admit that optimism is not something I can do right now.

Hal... I have been paying attention to things that have been happening since before you were born, I would reckon. How much further would you have to go in your drive to awaken the people before they could rise up and, by the thousands and thousands, flood the Washington DC beltway and bring the city to a complete standstill?

I watched students and every day people against the Vietnam war do that very thing 46 years ago. Look at what they accomplished. Look at all that has changed.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:32 PM
Can you top her accomplishments? What's your excuse?

his excuse? He was, by his own admission, an underachiever who has only done "fairly well" considering how little effort he expended in his life.

I wonder how he spins that on his resume?

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 09:41 PM
Have you not been paying attention to things that have been happening?

He's one of these guys who has the unique ability to witness events, but come to the exact opposite conclusion as to what just happened. Of course that's only when he actually notices that something actually happened.

TrueBlue
06-01-2015, 09:41 PM
his excuse? He was, by his own admission, an underachiever who has only done "fairly well" considering how little effort he expended in his life.

I wonder how he spins that on his resume?
http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/remake/biggrin.gif

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 09:42 PM
Hal... I have been paying attention to things that have been happening since before you were born, I would reckon. How much further would you have to go in your drive to awaken the people before they could rise up and, by the thousands and thousands, flood the Washington DC beltway and bring the city to a complete standstill?

I watched students and every day people against the Vietnam war do that very thing 46 years ago. Look at what they accomplished. Look at all that has changed.

How much more would I have to do to bring about change peacefully? I don't know. Honestly, I don't have enough faith in people to believe that change will happen peacefully, but I have a moral duty to try.

Tahuyaman
06-01-2015, 09:43 PM
clearly, reading is tough for you. put don the mexican moonshine and leave the men's room.
Hmm, "put don the Mexican moonshine". Ok, I'll put it don.

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:47 PM
Hmm, "put don the Mexican moonshine". Ok, I'll put it don.
you should. and leave the men's room while you're at it. You could catch a disease in there.

as a self described underachiever, you would be unable to attain an erection, and still catch an STD....but you wouldn't have tried very hard.

lol

maineman
06-01-2015, 09:48 PM
How much more would I have to do to bring about change peacefully? I don't know. Honestly, I don't have enough faith in people to believe that change will happen peacefully, but I have a moral duty to try.

how much of your life do you devote to the cause?

Green Arrow
06-01-2015, 10:05 PM
so an armed minority is prepared to forcibly wrest control of the government from the majority if they don't see things the way YOU do? Have I got that right?

Why not? That's how this nation got started.

maineman
06-01-2015, 10:10 PM
Why not? That's how this nation got started.

why not? because I think all this "dissatisfaction" is just whining and very few, if any of those whiners will be willing to lay down their lives to become marginally less dissatisfied. That's why not. They are all hot air and rhetoric, but not so tough when it comes to actually slamming in a magazine, chambering a round, walking out the front door and meeting their maker. But who knows? I could be wrong. Maybe you tough guys will throw yourselves into the fray and die for the cause. I will say, I'll be mightily surprised if you do....

and, since I'm living here in Mexico in a walled compound, I really can't get too worked up about it in any case.

Hal Jordan
06-01-2015, 10:14 PM
how much of your life do you devote to the cause?

Sorry, I don't have a percentage for you, but I would say most times I am being social.