PDA

View Full Version : Democrats = Pussies



Beefy
11-07-2007, 12:47 AM
They're going to confirm this guy? Why would they let tis happen? Is there nothing left but political whoring on Capitol Hill? Unreal. As far as I'm concerned, the Democrats are going to be complicit in any of the torture shit that happens from the point of Mukasey's confirmation on forward, to an equal degree as the Republicans. Good fucking greif.

__________________________________________________ ______________


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- After weeks of controversy over Michael Mukasey's views on waterboarding, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday approved the former judge's nomination for attorney general.


Former federal Judge Michael Mukasey's nomination for attorney general now goes to the full Senate.

The committee voted 11-8 to send Mukasey's nomination to the Senate floor, where it is expected to be approved.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said the full Senate would take up the nomination sometime next week.

Last week, a leading Democrat, speaking on condition of anonymity, conceded Mukasey's nomination likely would be confirmed if it emerged from the Judiciary Committee.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/06/senate.mukasey/index.html

Cancel7
11-07-2007, 05:26 AM
Yep, they are complicit at this point. They will use torture in the primaries to play to their bases but the truth is the dems don't care. There's probably a couple of dozen of them in the House who really do care, who really are deeply offended, who really will fight...and none in the Senate, and that's about it. Here is a great piece by Nora Ephron, who suffers only a touch of the Dowd strain of Mad Cow Disease. I disagree with her about Edwards, and just the fact that she would quote Peggy Noonan just goes to show that at a certain level these guys are all buddies. See, no matter how famous of a writer I became I would never ask Condi Rice "who designed your dress Condi" like Arianna did, and I would never be buddies with Peggy Noonan and if she walked by my table at Elaine's I would call her a whore, and if she turned around and looked at me I'd get up and say "did you wanna make something of that, whore?" and that is one of the many reasons why I will never be a famous writer.

Anyway, here is the half and half Ephron:

It's hard to be a Democrat, don't you think? There's no alternative, of course, but it's hard. Someone asked me the other day to write something about why I was a Democrat, and I had no trouble making a list of 10 reasons. Of course, five of those reasons were the Supreme Court, and the other five were more or less historical -- reasons like FDR, which is not meant to mean Franklin Delano Roosevelt exactly but some fantasy blob of Democratic values that are a distant racial memory.

But it's hard. It's especially hard to remember that the real enemies are the Republicans, when the Democrats tend to break your heart and the Republicans are just the boys you'd never go out with anyway. (I could not agree more with this)

It's hard when you watch a debate and decide that in the end you're probably going to throw your vote away in the primary and vote for someone who doesn't have a chance, like Dennis Kucinich. I mean, look at them, look at the front runners: Hillary Clinton, who can't help being Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama, who was a disappointment from the beginning and whose new-found attack mode is as dispiriting as his low energy level used to be; John Edwards, whom I am afraid I will never be able to think of again (after this week's Peggy Noonan column in the Wall Street Journal) as anything but a desperate furry little woodland animal.

And then there are the Democrats in the Congress. What a bunch of losers, hiding behind the fact that it takes 60 votes to shut down debate and 67 to override a presidential veto. So what? So pass a law and make Bush veto it. Make him veto something every single day. Drive the guy crazy. What have you got to lose? And meanwhile what have you done? You've voted for the surge, you've voted to authorize a war against Iran, and you're about to vote in favor of an attorney general-designate who refuses to call waterboarding torture.

Which brings me, I'm afraid, to Chuck Schumer. I can't honestly say that Chuck Schumer broke my heart last week, because he's never really had my heart. He's Captain Bromide. And I can't even look at him without being reminded of an old radio-and-television show called Quiz Kids, which featured a boy genius named Joel Kupperman who was always waving his hand wildly whenever a question was asked and shouting, "I know! I know!" In addition, and because he happens to be my Senator, I have watched Schumer transform himself: he used to be a schlepper (as they say in Schumer's former congressional district) and now he's groomed to a fare-thee-well. I salute any man who takes charge of a thinning hairline with so much product, but Schumer's makeover always seemed to me a worrisome sign, and not merely a symptom of my own shallowness: it seemed to me to show that he had left Brooklyn and New York, in some fundamental way, for the Beltway -- which is not meant to mean the Beltway exactly but instead a nonstop series of cable and network television appearances that add up to very little in the way of action and a great deal in the way of bluster.

Nonetheless, when I read on Friday that Schumer had decided to support Michael Mukasey for attorney general, thus making Mukasey's confirmation by the Senate inevitable, my heart sank. I read his justification of his vote. He said that Mukasey was the best we could hope for from this administration. He said the Justice Department needed to be rebuilt. He said that no nominee for attorney general was ever going to come out against waterboarding, and that Mukasey at least promised to follow the law if (somehow) the Senate passed an anti-waterboarding law (that survived a Bush veto). It's probably unfair to blame Schumer entirely for this; after all, Dianne Feinstein made the same decision. And more than half the Democrats in the Senate are apparently prepared to vote for Mukasey.

But here's what they should do instead:

Reject Mukasey.
Make Bush send up another nominee.
Reject that nominee if he won't take a position on waterboarding.
And just keep on doing it.

Because it's the right thing to do. Because waterboarding is torture. Because we are torturing people and it has to stop, and it will never stop unless the Democrats make it stop.

And forget about the Justice Department. No one will fix the Justice Department until there's a new president.

And he or she has got to be a Democrat.

That goes without saying.

Because after all, there's the Supreme Court.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nora-ephron/its-hard-to-be-a-democra_b_71142.html?view=print

uscitizen
11-07-2007, 07:01 AM
Ahh , Catching on that virtually all politicians suck ?

Cypress
11-07-2007, 07:06 AM
Well, it was two democrats. Not "the democrats". Its still pathetic. I hope DiFi has a primary challenger so I can vote against her.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 08:42 AM
Yep, they are complicit at this point. They will use torture in the primaries to play to their bases but the truth is the dems don't care. There's probably a couple of dozen of them in the House who really do care, who really are deeply offended, who really will fight...and none in the Senate, and that's about it. Here is a great piece by Nora Ephron, who suffers only a touch of the Dowd strain of Mad Cow Disease. I disagree with her about Edwards, and just the fact that she would quote Peggy Noonan just goes to show that at a certain level these guys are all buddies. See, no matter how famous of a writer I became I would never ask Condi Rice "who designed your dress Condi" like Arianna did, and I would never be buddies with Peggy Noonan and if she walked by my table at Elaine's I would call her a whore, and if she turned around and looked at me I'd get up and say "did you wanna make something of that, whore?" and that is one of the many reasons why I will never be a famous writer.

Anyway, here is the half and half Ephron:

It's hard to be a Democrat, don't you think? There's no alternative, of course, but it's hard. Someone asked me the other day to write something about why I was a Democrat, and I had no trouble making a list of 10 reasons. Of course, five of those reasons were the Supreme Court, and the other five were more or less historical -- reasons like FDR, which is not meant to mean Franklin Delano Roosevelt exactly but some fantasy blob of Democratic values that are a distant racial memory.

But it's hard. It's especially hard to remember that the real enemies are the Republicans, when the Democrats tend to break your heart and the Republicans are just the boys you'd never go out with anyway. (I could not agree more with this)

It's hard when you watch a debate and decide that in the end you're probably going to throw your vote away in the primary and vote for someone who doesn't have a chance, like Dennis Kucinich. I mean, look at them, look at the front runners: Hillary Clinton, who can't help being Hillary Clinton; Barack Obama, who was a disappointment from the beginning and whose new-found attack mode is as dispiriting as his low energy level used to be; John Edwards, whom I am afraid I will never be able to think of again (after this week's Peggy Noonan column in the Wall Street Journal) as anything but a desperate furry little woodland animal.

And then there are the Democrats in the Congress. What a bunch of losers, hiding behind the fact that it takes 60 votes to shut down debate and 67 to override a presidential veto. So what? So pass a law and make Bush veto it. Make him veto something every single day. Drive the guy crazy. What have you got to lose? And meanwhile what have you done? You've voted for the surge, you've voted to authorize a war against Iran, and you're about to vote in favor of an attorney general-designate who refuses to call waterboarding torture.

Which brings me, I'm afraid, to Chuck Schumer. I can't honestly say that Chuck Schumer broke my heart last week, because he's never really had my heart. He's Captain Bromide. And I can't even look at him without being reminded of an old radio-and-television show called Quiz Kids, which featured a boy genius named Joel Kupperman who was always waving his hand wildly whenever a question was asked and shouting, "I know! I know!" In addition, and because he happens to be my Senator, I have watched Schumer transform himself: he used to be a schlepper (as they say in Schumer's former congressional district) and now he's groomed to a fare-thee-well. I salute any man who takes charge of a thinning hairline with so much product, but Schumer's makeover always seemed to me a worrisome sign, and not merely a symptom of my own shallowness: it seemed to me to show that he had left Brooklyn and New York, in some fundamental way, for the Beltway -- which is not meant to mean the Beltway exactly but instead a nonstop series of cable and network television appearances that add up to very little in the way of action and a great deal in the way of bluster.

Nonetheless, when I read on Friday that Schumer had decided to support Michael Mukasey for attorney general, thus making Mukasey's confirmation by the Senate inevitable, my heart sank. I read his justification of his vote. He said that Mukasey was the best we could hope for from this administration. He said the Justice Department needed to be rebuilt. He said that no nominee for attorney general was ever going to come out against waterboarding, and that Mukasey at least promised to follow the law if (somehow) the Senate passed an anti-waterboarding law (that survived a Bush veto). It's probably unfair to blame Schumer entirely for this; after all, Dianne Feinstein made the same decision. And more than half the Democrats in the Senate are apparently prepared to vote for Mukasey.

But here's what they should do instead:

Reject Mukasey.
Make Bush send up another nominee.
Reject that nominee if he won't take a position on waterboarding.
And just keep on doing it.

Because it's the right thing to do. Because waterboarding is torture. Because we are torturing people and it has to stop, and it will never stop unless the Democrats make it stop.

And forget about the Justice Department. No one will fix the Justice Department until there's a new president.

And he or she has got to be a Democrat.

That goes without saying.

Because after all, there's the Supreme Court.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nora-ephron/its-hard-to-be-a-democra_b_71142.html?view=print

From my perspective, leaving the Democratic Party was not only easy, it's also the right thing to do. Supporting the Democratic Party is like giving crack to an addict, then wonder why they don't change their behavior. Neither that addict, nor the Democratic Party will ever change as long as we keep supporting their habit.

There has never been a clearer demonstration of the adage that "the lessor of two evils still gets you evil." You've made reasonable and rational points about why one would support evil .. slightly less evil. I can't reconcile my supporting evil in any moderation.

I certainly mean no affront to you sister, but it's not just the Democratic Party that lacks the political courage to take bold steps in the direction that's best for the nation and the future of our children. The Left in this country has been reduced to a shell of it's former self. This is not the left of the struggles for worker's rights, the Civil Rights era, or during the Vietnam War, or even during the fight for women's rights, and without question this is not the Democratic Party that led those struggles. Don't allow history and memories of it to interfere with your responsibility and duty as a citizen .. in my opinion.

If you need some background, read the Declaration of Independace

Today's Democratic Party has PROVEN beyond ALL reasonable doubt that they do not have the backbone for leadership in this time of crisis ..nor does the two-party system work in America's best interest. It has allowed this country to morph into a plutocracy where the corporate will has replaced the will of the people. The plutocrats control America not it's people.

Both democrat and republican voters continue to fool themselves with illusions of democracy which has been sold to the highest bidder, and because of that lack of vision and interpretation, America deserved George Bush .. and both democrats and republicans are responsible for him.

After the neocons stole the presidency AGAIN in 2004, it appears that the rest of the world no longer had confidence that Americans were capable of stopping the neocon horde and began to move even further away from this country. They were correct in their assessment and correct to distance themselves from what we have become.

Today, being a democrat means being slightly less evil than being a republican.

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 08:46 AM
From my perspective, leaving the Democratic Party was not only easy, it's also the right thing to do. Supporting the Democratic Party is like giving crack to an addict, then wonder why they don't change their behavior. Neither that addict, nor the Democratic Party will ever change as long as we keep supporting their habit.

There has never been a clearer demonstration of the adage that "the lessor of two evils still gets you evil." You've made reasonable and rational points about why one would support evil .. slightly less evil. I can't reconcile my supporting evil in any moderation.

I certainly mean no affront to you sister, but it's not just the Democratic Party that lacks the political courage to take bold steps in the direction that's best for the nation and the future of our children. The Left in this country has been reduced to a shell of it's former self. This is not the left of the struggles for worker's rights, the Civil Rights era, or during the Vietnam War, or even during the fight for women's rights, and without question this is not the Democratic Party that led those struggles. Don't allow history and memories of it to interfere with your responsibility and duty as a citizen .. in my opinion.

If you need some background, read the Declaration of Independace

Today's Democratic Party has PROVEN beyond ALL reasonable doubt that they do not have the backbone for leadership in this time of crisis ..nor does the two-party system work in America's best interest. It has allowed this country to morph into a plutocracy where the corporate will has replaced the will of the people. The plutocrats control America not it's people.

Both democrat and republican voters continue to fool themselves with illusions of democracy which has been sold to the highest bidder, and because of that lack of vision and interpretation, America deserved George Bush .. and both democrats and republicans are responsible for him.

After the neocons stole the presidency AGAIN in 2004, it appears that the rest of the world no longer had confidence that Americans were capable of stopping the neocon horde and began to move even further away from this country. They were correct in their assessment and correct to distance themselves from what we have become.

Today, being a democrat means being slightly less evil than being a republican.

Pill bill welfare giveaway (Liberal dem idea), largest ever increase in education with NCLB (thanks to Ted Kennedy), NEA increase, foreign aid increase, Medicare/Medicaid costs out of control, SS choice scuttled.
The left has had virtually their whole agenda (sans Iraq) put in place, and they still try and pretend that they are the victims and we are on a Conservative course with Bush.
BULLSHIT

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 08:47 AM
Well, it was two democrats. Not "the democrats". Its still pathetic. I hope DiFi has a primary challenger so I can vote against her.

That's not true my brother.

Watch how many democrats fall in line and vote for this evil.

I could have called this before the process even started .. and so could you brother. Look no further than the Lieberman legislation.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 09:04 AM
Pill bill welfare giveaway (Liberal dem idea), largest ever increase in education with NCLB (thanks to Ted Kennedy), NEA increase, foreign aid increase, Medicare/Medicaid costs out of control, SS choice scuttled.
The left has had virtually their whole agenda (sans Iraq) put in place, and they still try and pretend that they are the victims and we are on a Conservative course with Bush.
BULLSHIT

Stupid ass backwater brain-dead bullshit like this is like that dog that won't hunt anymore. Only the totally stupid still spout this programmed crap.

Take a look around you sir .. the failure of your goose-steppin' ideology could not be more apparent and the right is in retreat and marginalized.

The Republican Party is in danger of becoming the fucking Whigs.

Who gives a fuck what you and your cronies think?

Americans are decidely against the war .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Americans are decidely FOR nationalized healthcare .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Americans are FOR spending our tax dollars on infrastructure and our own citizens, not war and global misdventures .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Feel free to spout that talk-radio-can't-think-for-myself-because-I'm-an-idiot dribble anytime you chose sir.

It's good for big smiles and grins and reminds people how truly ignorant the right is.

AnglScarlett
11-07-2007, 09:08 AM
Stupid ass backwater brain-dead bullshit like this is like that dog that won't hunt anymore. Only the totally stupid still spout this programmed crap.

Take a look around you sir .. the failure of your goose-steppin' ideology could not be more apparent and the right is in retreat and marginalized.

The Republican Party is in danger of becoming the fucking Whigs.

Who gives a fuck what you and your cronies think?

Americans are decidely against the war .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Americans are decidely FOR nationalized healthcare .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Americans are FOR spending our tax dollars on infrastructure and our own citizens, not war and global misdventures .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Feel free to spout that talk-radio-can't-think-for-myself-because-I'm-an-idiot dribble anytime you chose sir.

It's good for big smiles and grins and reminds people how truly ignorant the right is.


Danoman RJS is sick and tired of watching you be cyber-skewered by black, you are a bottom of the barrel, remainder bin poster, and I would like to trade you to the libs for one of their players, I might even take asshat, butt, would rather have LadyT, what say you libs, wanna trade, one Danoman for LadyT crossing over to our side? I will even throw in a copy of fatty Moore’s new dvd “Sicko”, an autobiograby, to sweeten the deal?

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 09:17 AM
Stupid ass backwater brain-dead bullshit like this is like that dog that won't hunt anymore. Only the totally stupid still spout this programmed crap.

Take a look around you sir .. the failure of your goose-steppin' ideology could not be more apparent and the right is in retreat and marginalized.

The Republican Party is in danger of becoming the fucking Whigs.

Who gives a fuck what you and your cronies think?

Americans are decidely against the war .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Americans are decidely FOR nationalized healthcare .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Americans are FOR spending our tax dollars on infrastructure and our own citizens, not war and global misdventures .. who gives a fuck what you think?

Feel free to spout that talk-radio-can't-think-for-myself-because-I'm-an-idiot dribble anytime you chose sir.

It's good for big smiles and grins and reminds people how truly ignorant the right is.
AHAHAHAHA, you see? You couldn't deny ALL that huge list of lefty spending goodies got passed or enacted.
The only ONE thing you can pretend is moving this country in a more Conservative direction is the war - and the war support is going down while all wars end anyway.

What Bush proves more than anything, is that Liberalism isn't any more successful under a Repub than it is under a Dem and we have the debt and underperforming economy to prove that.

Robdawg
11-07-2007, 09:19 AM
AHAHAHAHA, you see? You couldn't deny ALL that huge list of lefty spending goodies got passed or enacted.
The only ONE thing you can pretend is moving this country in a more Conservative direction is the war - and the war support is going down while all wars end anyway.

What Bush proves more than anything, is that Liberalism isn't any more successful under a Repub than it is under a Dem and we have the debt and underperforming economy to prove that.

Dano you ever lose a family member in a war? It really pisses me off the lack of compassion you have for families who lose sons daughters husbands wives, and it seems all you post about are , "Eh, the war will end someday anyways" some losses cost more than any monetary amount, yet you dismiss that everytime. Guess you just don't care how many die.

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 09:35 AM
Dano you ever lose a family member in a war? It really pisses me off the lack of compassion you have for families who lose sons daughters husbands wives, and it seems all you post about are , "Eh, the war will end someday anyways" some losses cost more than any monetary amount, yet you dismiss that everytime. Guess you just don't care how many die.
Of course I do, but pretending a war that is fading in popularity as some direction away from Liberalism America (Repubs and Dems) are taking is BS.

How many people die in crime-ridden, welfare neighborhoods Liberal Democrats created after passing the Great Society? Do you seem them care or do they just want to spread that to the rest of America?

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 09:38 AM
AHAHAHAHA, you see? You couldn't deny ALL that huge list of lefty spending goodies got passed or enacted.
The only ONE thing you can pretend is moving this country in a more Conservative direction is the war - and the war support is going down while all wars end anyway.

What Bush proves more than anything, is that Liberalism isn't any more successful under a Repub than it is under a Dem and we have the debt and underperforming economy to prove that.

Perhaps next time I can draw my response to you in crayon which may give you a better chance of interpreting it.

I've already mentioned issues like healthcare and infrastructure, and it doesn't really take much brainpower to recognize that republican chances at the White House in '08 are slim to non-exsistent .. nor does it take much brainpower to see how far down the list conservative "value" issues are to the American people .. not to be able to interpret all the other signs of a fading failed ideology.

AND .. just who do you think is going to buy your "Bush liberalism" clown show? :shock:

Dude, have you no honor?

The nation has taken a nose dive because republicans have been at the wheel for far too long .. and that's being corrected as we speak.

You guys are hilarious

evince
11-07-2007, 09:41 AM
Partys can be fixed. I will remain a Dem and vote for the people who best represent the fix.

Can anyone tell me how anything else is more effective?

Voting third party will only help the Rs keep the power.

uscitizen
11-07-2007, 09:44 AM
Partys can be fixed. I will remain a Dem and vote for the people who best represent the fix.

Can anyone tell me how anything else is more effective?

Voting third party will only help the Rs keep the power.

At this point I have to go with Desh. The Dems are the lesser of the evils at this point as BAC pointed out.
Now if a viable 3rd party candidate comes up...that is an entirely different matter.
btw I do not consider RP in any way viable.
And more scary than a true Republican.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 09:45 AM
Partys can be fixed. I will remain a Dem and vote for the people who best represent the fix.

Can anyone tell me how anything else is more effective?

Voting third party will only help the Rs keep the power.

Please don't tell me you're going down that "Nader made Gore lose" hopeless trail.

evince
11-07-2007, 09:46 AM
Nader helped them effect the theft. Nader is not wholey responsible though.

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 09:54 AM
Nader helped them effect the theft. Nader is not wholey responsible though.
How is Nader "responsible" for anything other than the votes he gets?
You are confusing responsibility with consequences.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 10:10 AM
How is Nader "responsible" for anything other than the votes he gets?
You are confusing responsibility with consequences.

I agree

LadyT
11-07-2007, 10:13 AM
Danoman RJS is sick and tired of watching you be cyber-skewered by black, you are a bottom of the barrel, remainder bin poster, and I would like to trade you to the libs for one of their players, I might even take asshat, butt, would rather have LadyT, what say you libs, wanna trade, one Danoman for LadyT crossing over to our side? I will even throw in a copy of fatty Moore’s new dvd “Sicko”, an autobiograby, to sweeten the deal?

ugh. I don't want to be put in the same boat with Dano.

AnglScarlett
11-07-2007, 10:25 AM
ugh. I don't want to be put in the same boat with Dano.

I am not putting you in Danoman’s boat LadyT, I am putting you in the Jaws “bigger boat”, as in “we cons are going to need a bigger boat” and we cannot afford leaks like Danoman? You are a superior poster to Danoman by far that is why I am trying to trade Dano to the libs and get them to give me you, and knowing libs they are just stupit enough to make the trade? Think about it, what do you have to loose, on the conservative side you can be a big fish in a little pond, butt still take a back seat to the mensaman of course. Stay with the libs and you are a big fish in a big pond, you will make a much bigger splash with us, other than mensaman our heaviest hitter is SuperFreak, who would be considered a pee wee herman, mental midget type poster on any other board, need I say moore?

BRUTALITOPS
11-07-2007, 10:55 AM
Please don't tell me you're going down that "Nader made Gore lose" hopeless trail.

you could say gore made nader lose :)

uscitizen
11-07-2007, 11:00 AM
nader made nader lose.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 11:02 AM
nader made nader lose.

I agree, but the same would be true of Gore, would it not?

BRUTALITOPS
11-07-2007, 11:09 AM
Stupid ass backwater brain-dead bullshit like

Americans are decidely FOR nationalized healthcare .. who gives a fuck what you think?


As a general principle perhaps, but the tune changes dramatically when they have to look at the bill and how it will be implemented.

Oh sure, all americans WANT there to be no hunger, disease, or poverty in our country... but guess what? That doesn't mean america would support specific POLICIES that CLAIM to take us in that direction.

As for caring what the fuck dano, or anyone thinks - could you sound anymore selfish? Americans were decidedly for maintaining slavery, who gave a FUCK what they thought?

Americans were decidedly against women suffrage, who gave a FUCK what they thought?

In a democratic system you are going to get a divergence of opinion, and you are going to get people that are going to try to PUSH for change in whatever direction, REGARDLESS if it is popular at the time.

You stupid, ignorant prole... you belong to an idealogy (progressive) that has a heritage of pushing for change during times when it might not have been popular, but did so anyway because you believed it to be the right thing.... (progressives always deal with being the political minority at first)...only now to have the AUDACITY to disparage those that may have a viewpoint that is not the majority.

It's hypocritical, selfish, tyrannical, and stupid.

But then again..

Who the FUCK cares what you think?

Certainly not I.

Cancel 2016.2
11-07-2007, 11:10 AM
Nader helped them effect the theft. Nader is not wholey responsible though.

well gee, then by that logic Clinton and Gore never should have been in office either.... cause Perot helped them steal the election from Bush I.

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 11:10 AM
I am not putting you in Danoman’s boat LadyT, I am putting you in the Jaws “bigger boat”, as in “we cons are going to need a bigger boat” and we cannot afford leaks like Danoman? You are a superior poster to Danoman by far that is why I am trying to trade Dano to the libs and get them to give me you, and knowing libs they are just stupit enough to make the trade? Think about it, what do you have to loose, on the conservative side you can be a big fish in a little pond, butt still take a back seat to the mensaman of course. Stay with the libs and you are a big fish in a big pond, you will make a much bigger splash with us, other than mensaman our heaviest hitter is SuperFreak, who would be considered a pee wee herman, mental midget type poster on any other board, need I say moore?

Who is this guy? Is he for real?
Yeah man, I'm sure I'd do real well over in the Liberal camp, why I shore can't think of any other rightie that loves Liberals more than I do!

Cancel 2016.2
11-07-2007, 11:12 AM
I am not putting you in Danoman’s boat LadyT, I am putting you in the Jaws “bigger boat”, as in “we cons are going to need a bigger boat” and we cannot afford leaks like Danoman? You are a superior poster to Danoman by far that is why I am trying to trade Dano to the libs and get them to give me you, and knowing libs they are just stupit enough to make the trade? Think about it, what do you have to loose, on the conservative side you can be a big fish in a little pond, butt still take a back seat to the mensaman of course. Stay with the libs and you are a big fish in a big pond, you will make a much bigger splash with us, other than mensaman our heaviest hitter is SuperFreak, who would be considered a pee wee herman, mental midget type poster on any other board, need I say moore?

ROFLMAO

uscitizen
11-07-2007, 11:12 AM
I agree, but the same would be true of Gore, would it not?

Of course not everyone knows that Nader made Gore lose :rolleyes:

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 11:14 AM
ugh. I don't want to be put in the same boat with Dano.
You wouldn't be, didn't you hear him? I would go over to the Liberal side and you would go over to the Conservative side.
So we'd still be on opposite teams sweetheart.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 11:50 AM
As a general principle perhaps, but the tune changes dramatically when they have to look at the bill and how it will be implemented.

Oh sure, all americans WANT there to be no hunger, disease, or poverty in our country... but guess what? That doesn't mean america would support specific POLICIES that CLAIM to take us in that direction.

As for caring what the fuck dano, or anyone thinks - could you sound anymore selfish? Americans were decidedly for maintaining slavery, who gave a FUCK what they thought?

Americans were decidedly against women suffrage, who gave a FUCK what they thought?

In a democratic system you are going to get a divergence of opinion, and you are going to get people that are going to try to PUSH for change in whatever direction, REGARDLESS if it is popular at the time.

You stupid, ignorant prole... you belong to an idealogy (progressive) that has a heritage of pushing for change during times when it might not have been popular, but did so anyway because you believed it to be the right thing.... (progressives always deal with being the political minority at first)...only now to have the AUDACITY to disparage those that may have a viewpoint that is not the majority.

It's hypocritical, selfish, tyrannical, and stupid.

But then again..

Who the FUCK cares what you think?

Certainly not I.

Well you are certainly entitled to that opinion, but you might want to rethink the word "stupid."

While it is indeed true that most Americans favored slavery at one time, they got smarter, and I think it's fairly safe to say that it ain't (eb) ever going to favored again in this country. Would you have any doubts about that?

I also think that's fairly safe to say about women's rights as well.

It seems I need a lot of crayons around here because I wasn't mocking unpopular opinion .. I was mocking right-wing opinion .. make that failed right-wing opinion. If you had been following the bouncing ball in my conversation with Dano, you could have figured that out. .. I know, it's that hand/eye coordination thing.

Additionally, I'm not a progressive .. which is what liberals who fear what republicans say about liberals call themselves.

I assume by the twitching of your panties that you're a conservative.

With all that is known and before the world today .. you're talking about the failures of who? .. "Progressives" ???

That's deep.

I can see you are truly a deep dude.

Ahh, Mr. Deepness .. try taking a slow ass stroll past that thing they call a mirror.

Progressives? .. Yep, that's what's wrong with America .. "progressives"

Incredible

BRUTALITOPS
11-07-2007, 11:59 AM
A) When you say... "X is mainstream so who cares what you think".. you are implying that because you supposedly have majority support that dano's specific minority opinion doesn't matter. You can deny all you want but that's what you were doing.

B) I use the term progressive as one who pushes for change. I wasn't using it in the political colloquial sense. Progressive: 1 a: of, relating to, or characterized by progress b: making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities.

C) I made NO mention OR implication of the failures of progressives, nor did I say progressives are what's wrong with america. NOW who needs the crayons?

The rest of your post is just babble.

uscitizen
11-07-2007, 12:10 PM
Is change always progress Grind ? Bush made lots of changes, but few seem to be steps forward to me.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 12:22 PM
A) When you say... "X is mainstream so who cares what you think".. you are implying that because you supposedly have majority support that dano's specific minority opinion doesn't matter. You can deny all you want but that's what you were doing.

B) I use the term progressive as one who pushes for change. I wasn't using it in the political colloquial sense. Progressive: 1 a: of, relating to, or characterized by progress b: making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities.

C) I made NO mention OR implication of the failures of progressives, nor did I say progressives are what's wrong with america. NOW who needs the crayons?

The rest of your post is just babble.

"Babble" is a good word.

A) Those of us who knew that the war on terror, Saddam has WMD, and the plethora of lies and deceptions was all bullshit did so from the minority opinion. I fought against electronic voting from the minority opinion .. which has become the majority opinion.

I'll be more than happy to debate you if you can find something honest to talk about beyond the .. what was that word .. babble.

Grab your Etch-A-Sketch and draw this .. "blackascoal was taking about failed opinion, not unpopular opinion."

Get back to me when you read it.

B) Makes sense.

I simply have a knee-jerk reaction to being compared to most liberals and progressives.

C) "only now to have the AUDACITY to disparage those that may have a viewpoint that is not the majority."

Audacity is another good word and absolutely I have the audacity to call what is proven failed and stupid, failed and stupid. Once again, I mock the stupid, not the unpopular.

You're a smart guy and I'm betting that you can form an argument that challenges my AUDACITY to mock the stupid.

Give it a shot

evince
11-07-2007, 01:27 PM
I agree, but the same would be true of Gore, would it not?


Gore won the election. The felons list gave Bush the election by disenfranchising voters in Florida.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 01:34 PM
Gore won the election. The felons list gave Bush the election by disenfranchising voters in Florida.

Then Gore bent over, dropped his pants, and cried "Mommy."

Clinton handed Gore the presidency and Gore ran away from it.

Nader had nothing to do with that .. and what makes you think that people who voted for Nader, like me, would have voted for Gore if Nader was on the ticket?

Trust me, Gore/Lieberman was never going to get my vote and Gore wouldn't get it now as long as Lieberman was on the ticket.

evince
11-07-2007, 01:46 PM
Like I said Nader helped by trimming the vote so Bush could steal it.

I never said Nader should not have been on the ballot.

If the felons list in Florida had not exsisted then thousands of legal voters would have been allowed to vote. Gore would have won even with Nader running. Yes Liberman is a asshole. Gore chose him to fight the R calls of being the liberal extreme. He should have just picked someone else because the Rs will call anyone in the Dem party liberal extreme. The republican party cheats and will cheat in the next election.

Cancel 2016.2
11-07-2007, 02:03 PM
The democratic party cheats as well... but you will ignore that ....won't you desh.

TheDanold
11-07-2007, 02:08 PM
Like I said Nader helped by trimming the vote so Bush could steal it.

I never said Nader should not have been on the ballot.

If the felons list in Florida had not exsisted then thousands of legal voters would have been allowed to vote. Gore would have won even with Nader running. Yes Liberman is a asshole. Gore chose him to fight the R calls of being the liberal extreme. He should have just picked someone else because the Rs will call anyone in the Dem party liberal extreme. The republican party cheats and will cheat in the next election.

It sounds like you're saying that if rapists, sex offenders and murderers were able to vote, then Gore would have won.
It's almost certainly true, they would of course vote for candidates who are softer on crime, which is of course the Democrat party.

blackascoal
11-07-2007, 02:56 PM
Like I said Nader helped by trimming the vote so Bush could steal it.

I never said Nader should not have been on the ballot.

If the felons list in Florida had not exsisted then thousands of legal voters would have been allowed to vote. Gore would have won even with Nader running. Yes Liberman is a asshole. Gore chose him to fight the R calls of being the liberal extreme. He should have just picked someone else because the Rs will call anyone in the Dem party liberal extreme. The republican party cheats and will cheat in the next election.

But you never answered the question of what makes you think Nader voters would have voted for Gore. That's the giant gaping hole in the "Nader did it" theory.

Of course republicans are going to cheat, that's what they do and caging is the next trojan horse .. but just as consistent as republican cheating is the knowledge that democrats won't do a damn thing about it.

In 2003, Walden O'Dell of Diebold announced that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." And he did just that very thing and Ohio replaced Florida as the center of a bloodless coup.

Democrats just scratched their heads and did nothing.

Gore's loss in 2000 was tainted of course, but so was his misreably weak strategy and he didn't have the balls to stand and fight.

Hey, maybe he finally figutred out that if he won, there was going to be Mossad bullet with his name on it.

Then where would global warming be. :cool:

FUCK THE POLICE
11-07-2007, 04:57 PM
You guys just wait until my Liberal Party of Mississippi comes through. There's a winner there.

FUCK THE POLICE
11-07-2007, 04:58 PM
It sounds like you're saying that if rapists, sex offenders and murderers were able to vote, then Gore would have won.
It's almost certainly true, they would of course vote for candidates who are softer on crime, which is of course the Democrat party.

As we all now, rapists, sex offenders, and murders are 99% of felons.

I really don't care who they are just they they vote for Gore.

Minister of Truth
11-07-2007, 05:22 PM
LOL That's a nice broad coalition of voters there Watermark. Personally, I prefer the values voters.

FUCK THE POLICE
11-07-2007, 05:26 PM
I prefer voters.