Are Republcians against hope and change?

maineman said:
I didn't leave ANYTHING out... do you deny that a MAJORITY of democrats combined, in congress - in both chambers - voted against the reolution?

yes or no, asshole?
Click to expand...

you left out the majority of democrats in the senate, that is a fact, this fact harms your claim and you know it

sorry, but you left it out on purpose to bolster your claim, no need to get pissy
 
Yurt said:
you left out the majority of democrats in the senate, that is a fact, this fact harms your claim and you know it

sorry, but you left it out on purpose to bolster your claim, no need to get pissy
Click to expand...

I made a claim. it is factual. it is accurate. either prove me wrong, or admit that I am right... you little disgusting gay puke.
 
maineman said:
I made a claim. it is factual. it is accurate. either prove me wrong, or admit that I am right... you little disgusting gay puke.
Click to expand...

lol...no need to get pissy because you purposefully left out that the majority of dems in the senate voted for it....you could have included it, but you know it would hurt your stance...

nice job mr. honesty :rolleyes:
 
I didn't leave anything out. take the number of democratic senators in 2002...add it to the number of democratic representatives. divide that number by two and call the result "X".

next, take the number of democratic senators who voted against the use of force... add it to the number of democratic representatives who voted against the use of force and call that result "Y".

My assertion is -and has always and only been - that Y>X

I am PROUD of the fact that a majority of my party's elected members of congress voted against the measure, and I remain disappointed with those members who voted for it.
 
maineman said:
I made a claim. it is factual. it is accurate. either prove me wrong, or admit that I am right... you little disgusting gay puke.
Click to expand...
Its up to you to prove your claim not up to someone else to prove that you are wrong.

Why do you use gay as an insult? As a preacher who would happily perform a marriage ceremony for queers, what aspect of their lifestyle do you find so disgusting?
 
Southern Man said:
Its up to you to prove your claim not up to someone else to prove that you are wrong.
Click to expand...

the roll calls are a matter of public record. That a majority of democrats in congress voted against the use of force resolution is a matter of fact.

I do not have to go provide a link to those roll calls on your whim anymore than I have to provide photographic evidence if I say that the moon was full last month.
 
maineman said:
the roll calls are a matter of public record. That a majority of democrats in congress voted against the use of force resolution is a matter of fact.

I do not have to go provide a link to those roll calls on your whim anymore than I have to provide photographic evidence if I say that the moon was full last month.
Click to expand...
Why do you use gay as an insult? As a preacher who would happily perform a marriage ceremony for queers, what aspect of their lifestyle do you find so disgusting?
 
Southern Man said:
Why do you use gay as an insult? As a preacher who would happily perform a marriage ceremony for queers, what aspect of their lifestyle do you find so disgusting?
Click to expand...


if I knew that you were really self conscious about your male pattern baldness, I would call you "baldy". That, in no way, suggests that I find baldness disgusting, only that I know it will get a rise out of YOU.
 
maineman said:
if I knew that you were really self conscious about your male pattern baldness, I would call you "baldy". That, in no way, suggests that I find baldness disgusting, only that I know it will get a rise out of YOU.
Click to expand...
Except baldness is not a political issue championed by liberals. :)
 
Southern Man said:
Except baldness is not a political issue championed by liberals. :)
Click to expand...

I never said it was....I only said that when people insult other people, they try to push the buttons they know cause a reaction. they do NOT push buttons that would upset themselves if they know that it would not upset the target. understand?

I have no problem with people who are homosexuals. clearly you do and so does yurt.
 
maineman said:
I never said it was....I only said that when people insult other people, they try to push the buttons they know cause a reaction. they do NOT push buttons that would upset themselves if they know that it would not upset the target. understand?

I have no problem with people who are homosexuals. clearly you do and so does yurt.
Click to expand...
Except your insult also upsets queers that you would happily bind in holy matrimony. :)
 
maineman said:
I never use it as an insult when speaking to gays.

understand?
Click to expand...
Interesting. So if it became commonplace to refer to extremely bigoted people as "being a maineman" would it not be insulting to both you and the person that I used this particular insult on? (I'm not suggesting that you are such, just pointing out actual effect here).

Imagine: "You're such a freakin' maineman, you should just join the SS now and get it over with."

It would insult you and the person I was speaking to at the same time. Using "fag" etc. as an "insult" only with those who aren't homosexual would pretty much have the same effect it seems. Does this make any sense to others?
 
bravo said:
Ancient history...The Iraqi War Authorization could not have passed without Democratic support...

And as we have shown before, a number of Democrats voted FOR the WAR RESOLUTION, otherwise there would have been no war.....so most wasn't enough was it....the most prominent Democrats voted for war....\

And they were banging the war drums loud and clear if you'd open your ears...just because the particular word 'invasion' was not uttered is irrelevant...

All the spin in the world won't change history...
Click to expand...

maineman said:
can you fucking READ? I NEVER said that there was not some degree of democratic support for the resolution. I said, quite accurately, that the republicans overwhelmingly voted FOR the measure and a MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS VOTED AGAINST IT.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can read ... how about you?

you just repeat exactly what I said in my post....I'll mark it for you...
 
Onceler said:
I always think the rush to give Dems "credit" is hilarious. It speaks volumes about how posters like bravo feel about the decision to invade at this point.

If Iraq had been some monumental success, that didn't cost incomprehensible amounts of blood & treasure, the narrative we'd be hearing would be more in line with Bush the unwavering leader, who pushed into Iraq despite fierce Democratic opposition and practically single-handedly changed history.

Instead, we get "Dems voted for it too!"
Click to expand...

Only because they earned some credit for passing the "WAR AUTHORIZATION" ...thats undeniable....
 
Last edited:
Jeff said:
You may want to re read my post, the Republicans tried to discuss it with the president, they sent many different plans and not one answered, his arrogance will now cost the Dems the Majority, or so some believe
Click to expand...

You said repubs sent many different plans and not one answered. How is that any different from Obama proposing a plan and not one repub answering? I believe repubs were 100% opposed to Obama's plan (if that's wrong, I stand corrected). How is it that not even one person found enough common ground that he could say "I disagree with almost everything BUT...", and then make an attempt to work with the dems?

Of course this applies to both parties yet I'm a little suspicious of GOP motivation when they united against the plan right from the start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top