Page 15 of 22 FirstFirst ... 51011121314151617181920 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 212
  1. #141
    Silver Poster yodajazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    3,184

    Default Re: Read it and weep...

    Quote Originally Posted by Stoked
    His position is all over the place which means only one thing for an ultra liberal... the eventual ban of all handguns. You may want to take special note that he believes that state or local government has the right to supersede the constitution... just the kind of socialist we need running this country.

    http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/...un_Control.htm
    I hope that you may come to realize that your arguments make no logical sense. No state or local government has the right to supercede the US Constitution. If jurisdictions make laws which violate the constitution, and individuals or groups have a right to question it in court, until a decision is made on the issue. Obama’s position on gun control, as you state it would be considered a “states rights”, or a ‘community rights’ position. At one time state’s rights, used to be at the center of the conservative agenda. Yet when a man like Obama advocates the same position, he is labeled a socialist by some people.

    But your post brings me to another issue. I notice that some people like you resort to labeling, or name calling, rather than discuss issues. Saying words like ‘liberal’ or ‘socialist’ really don’t define much in today’s society. But they have been branded as code words to keep people from exploring subtleties of important issues, such as health care. Obama addressed this tendency of name calling in his acceptance speech. In the past eight years people who question whether a government policy is effective, are called names, like ‘America bashers’. I agree with Obama when he says this is the time to debate public policies, not name calling.

    "Stoked", I challenge you to either define your terms “ultra liberal” and “socialist”, or to discuss any issue in depth. But it is not possible for any one man, not even the president, to ban handguns. Have you studied government at all? Do you know that our government has three branches? I believe that the rumor that, ‘Obama is going to take away our guns’, is just a way use fear to manipulate people. It is just another way to divert attention from wasting 1 trillion dollars of public money, and unleashing the forces which have killed 100,000 plus, people.



  2. #142
    Silver Poster yodajazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    3,184

    Default

    Stoked
    I will give you some credit, for trying do discuss something, rather than just name calling in your last post. But…

    I challenge your statement “Gun control in practice, is the banning of guns.” It sounds like you are saying that anything other than allowing everyone free access to all guns at all times is banning guns? There are government regulations on all sorts of activities, such as driving motor vehicles, voting, buying cigarettes, marriage, etc. The list is endless. Are any of these activities in the process of being banned? In all of those activities, there are minimum requirements needed for government approval. But you are in essence saying that elementary school students should be allowed to carry assault weapons. What about prison inmates? Your statement doesn’t make common sense when examined in depth.



  3. #143
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkThanos
    Quote Originally Posted by Realgirls4me
    Quote Originally Posted by JanetElise
    Here is a nice little video to watch.

    Keep in mind this is not Fox News.

    You have got to be kidding?


    No, it isn't Fox "News". Just another little subjective, highly partisan right-wing kook who fits the Fox News lemming demographic.
    RealGirls, Chris Matthews is far from that description...

    I'm pretty sure Matthews was a die-hard Clinton supporter. Some might still label that as 'right-wing' lol (she is to the right of Obama anyways), but regardless I think that is his position.



  4. #144
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    39

    Default

    You gotta love McCain. He knows the American people don't want two senators getting on the job training for running their country (Democrats seem not to understand this), so him going for a governor was an obvious choice.

    He could have gone for the conventional safe choice that would shore up the base. Lieberman was only a possibility if he needed to throw a hail mary at this point, but running neck and neck McCain only needs to shore up the conservative base. Romney was an obvious choice, but McCain clearly despises Mitt so that was a no go. Tim Polente seemed a good safe choice, but surely wouldn't get anyone talking. Instead, McCain went with the young conservative woman. She shores up the base and will assuredly peel off a fair amount of those Hillary voters who are still on the fence about Obama. Was it a political move? No question there, but you have to make the moves that will give you the best chance of winning. Over the last 6 weeks or so McCain has shown he understands what the right political moves are while Obama has been floundering.

    What does picking Palin say about McCain? It says John McCain runs his campaign. It's been decades since we've seen a major party presidential candidate actually be the one who calls the shots, and I must say I find it very refreshing.

    The real question here is how will the Democrats respond? They is no way they were ready for this one, and John McCain knew it. The Dems were gearing up for attacking the typical white male conservative, and McCain threw a wrench in. It's not surprising that the Dem knee jerk reaction is to say she's inexperienced. While this will work with the already Obama faithful, the rest of us understand that she is at least as experienced a politician as Obama (she has held elected office longer than him), and the American people would much rather have the inexperienced candidate learning as a number 2 than leading as the number 1.

    A friend of mine bet me a couple of weeks ago that his guy Obama was going to win. I accepted his bet and made an additional bet that McCain would win at least 43 states. After yesterday my friend conceded that I would probably win both bets and he even said he's now considering voting for McCain. Fickle, yes; A bellweather representation of the American electorate as a whole, you better believe it.

    BTW I am not voting for McCain or Obama unless the state of New York becomes close in the polls (alert to the Obama people who have essentially ignored the safe state of New York: Your poll numbers here have been on a steady decline and the state is less 'safe' everyday). Third party candidates offer up so much more substance so I'm happy to cast my vote for a deserving candidate so long as my vote doesn't matter in my state.



  5. #145
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    39

    Default Re: A call for change, but more of the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Stoked
    "After ten years as a prominent Chicago politician and in his first year in the Senate, Obama got a $1.32 million loan below market rates without paying the normal extra fees — a rate which saved him $300 per month on his mortgage. Obama managed to do this despite the extraordinarily large mortgage and his lack of history with the lender"

    Can you say sweetheart deal?

    Are you fucking kidding me? Do you have any clue how much money Cheney made from the fact that Halliburton was awarded billions of dollars in no-bid contracts in Iraq? You know he kept a significant portion of his stock with the company... he made money off a war and your talking about this mortage thing? What a joke.



  6. #146
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galadriel
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkThanos
    Quote Originally Posted by Realgirls4me
    Quote Originally Posted by JanetElise
    Here is a nice little video to watch.

    Keep in mind this is not Fox News.

    You have got to be kidding?


    No, it isn't Fox "News". Just another little subjective, highly partisan right-wing kook who fits the Fox News lemming demographic.
    RealGirls, Chris Matthews is far from that description...

    I'm pretty sure Matthews was a die-hard Clinton supporter. Some might still label that as 'right-wing' lol (she is to the right of Obama anyways), but regardless I think that is his position.
    Chris Matthews was the one who, immediately following the Obama speech defending Reverend Wright, said it sent shivers up his leg and that the speech is the most important speech on race ever given and should be required viewing in every high school across the country. Non-partisan journalism at its best...



  7. #147
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    30

    Default

    She kinda looks like a television sex expert psychologist. Like ya call into the show and ask questions and she gives sex advise. I guess its those glasses that make me think that.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	gov_palin_2006_official_122.jpg 
Views:	220 
Size:	213.8 KB 
ID:	196550  



  8. #148
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mugiwara
    A friend of mine bet me a couple of weeks ago that his guy Obama was going to win. I accepted his bet and made an additional bet that McCain would win at least 43 states. After yesterday my friend conceded that I would probably win both bets and he even said he's now considering voting for McCain. Fickle, yes; A bellweather representation of the American electorate as a whole, you better believe it.

    You're a moron. McCain has no chance of winning of New York. 43 states? What planet are you living on??



  9. #149
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galadriel
    Quote Originally Posted by mugiwara
    A friend of mine bet me a couple of weeks ago that his guy Obama was going to win. I accepted his bet and made an additional bet that McCain would win at least 43 states. After yesterday my friend conceded that I would probably win both bets and he even said he's now considering voting for McCain. Fickle, yes; A bellweather representation of the American electorate as a whole, you better believe it.

    You're a moron. McCain has no chance of winning of New York. 43 states? What planet are you living on??
    I study politics very closely. You'll be eating those words in two months buddy



  10. #150
    Junior Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    136

    Default

    This is a of Bill Maher last night about Sarah Palin. Absolutely hilarious.
    Like VP Cheney shooting his hunting buddy in the face, comedy writers have just been handed a treasure of new material. Thanks John!



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •