|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
09-18-2011, 08:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If unions supported political parties equally I'm sure they would see more GOP support. They are nothing but political activist/lobbying groups now and are in the pockets of the Dems. Abortion rights? Seriously? When was the last serious challenge to abortion? Workers rights? lol Your take on political issues is so black and white it completely misses the mark, almost all the time What party opposes businesses, successful people, white males, the 2nd amendment, most of the the 1st amendment (free speech via the fairness doctrine) (impeding the free exercise of religion), ect.... 
|
|
#2
09-18-2011, 08:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
i think what it comes down to is that both parties completely suck. they both have issues they suck less at, but they still suck just the same.
arguing abortion is like arguing gun rights. both are high emotion issues, neither will ever see significant changes. but both get people riled up so they ignore the real problems. and we have plenty of those to try to tackle, but no one will step up to the plate and tackle them. NO ONE. everyone in office is too chickensh!t to actually grab any bull by the horns, as they don't want to piss off a segment of voters and possibly lose re-election. it's all that matters to the pol and the party. keeping their seats. not jobs, not ss, medicare, etc, etc....elections. our 'leaders' are in permanent election mode-but there's a way to stop that. but we know that won't happen.
|
|
#3
09-18-2011, 09:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That's the second time you have said a swell thing. 
|
|
#4
09-18-2011, 09:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
|
#5
09-18-2011, 10:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
i pay plenty of attention. i'm not enamored of any of them, and thus able to applaud if/when they come up with a good idea...not that it matters, that town operates on a you scratch my back/i will scratch yours basis. people go there with the best of intentions, but they quickly adapt. the party rules the roost. the pols pay attention and follow the party line, else they don't get support in the next primary, ala joe liebermann. just like i have no doubt that obama quickly had things explained to him after his 'i will do what's right, even if i only have one term' line. i keep my expecations low for a reason...never disappointed, almost never amazed.
|
|
#6
09-18-2011, 11:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
i think it's interesting that the patriot act is brought up with regards to the senate voting record, and instead of conceding the point, riot starts talking about everything except that senate vote...
the fact is that although on occasion, dems seem more inclined to support an individuals rights, you still have that vote referenced above, and of course a democratic president signing the defense of marriage act into law. for votes, of course. not because the dems wanted to protect rights, but to protect their own phoney baloney jobs.
|
|
#7
09-19-2011, 05:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
How in the world is listing the actual votes (disproving Chuck's claim) "talking about everything except that vote"??? That's a crazy statement.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts Last edited by Riot : 09-19-2011 at 05:15 PM.
|
|
#8
09-19-2011, 06:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The "so called" Patriot act was passed by the Senate 98-1. Seems like a whole lot of Democratic Senators were tuned into GOP.tv that day then he wrote this, re-iterating what i just linked above: 98-1 in favor of the Patriot act. but yeah, i'm just making it up. anytime someone posts something you don't want to concede the point on, you start throwing a bunch of other stuff out there, as tho people will somehow forget the point being made because you attempt to muddy the waters...much like dell in the other thread posting a link about solyndra, so you start throwing out some republicans supposedly in on the deal, as tho others being involved removes some of the tarnish from your precious president and his dem cronies. you can't explain or defend the 98-1 vote, so just throw out other garbage in an attempt to deflect.
|
|
#9
09-19-2011, 11:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That would be 98% 145 out of 207 Democratic Representatives voted yes for the Patriot Act That would be 70% So please explain to me how I was "demonstrably" wrong? 8 out of 10 Democratic Congressmen voted FOR the Patriot act including 98% of the Senators yet you want to contest my statement? LOL
|
|
#10
09-18-2011, 09:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 Quote:
 And point out how that party opposes business and success. And doesn't support the second amendment. Use reality, not just "what you think".Quote:
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts Last edited by Riot : 09-18-2011 at 10:09 PM.
|
Hybrid Mode
