The Conservative Cave

Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: TheSarge on January 02, 2010, 10:20:49 PM

Title: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: TheSarge on January 02, 2010, 10:20:49 PM
(http://www.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/Politics/Ben-Nelson_monster_397x224.jpg)

A Democratic senator from Nebraska who played a crucial role in getting health care legislation passed in the Senate last month has asked South Carolina's top attorney to "call off the dogs" -- a reference to the state official's threat to challenge the constitutionality of the bill.

In a phone call Thursday, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., urged South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster to reconsider, Politico reported. McMaster is  the head of a group of 13 GOP state attorneys general who are threatening to file a lawsuit against the Senate health care bill.

Nelson asked McMaster to "call off the dogs," according to a copy of the memo sent by McMaster's chief of staff to other GOP state attorneys general detailing the call and obtained by Politico.

The attorneys general are challenging the constitutionality of a Medicaid provision in the bill that they say benefits Nebraska at the expense of other states.

The deal Nelson cut with Senate Democratic leaders to gain his critical vote would exempt Nebraska from having to pay for the coverage of new enrollees into its Medicaid program and leave the tab with the federal government -- a move expected to cost Uncle Sam $100 million over the next 10 years.

But Nelson told McMaster that the deal wasn't his idea and that the same Medicaid exemption would be offered to every state, according to the memo.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/02/senate-dem-asks-south-carolinas-attorney-dogs/?test=latestnews%3ftest=latestnews
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: NHSparky on January 02, 2010, 10:21:59 PM
Damn, that 30-point nosedive in the polls must be a BITCH, eh Ben?
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: TheSarge on January 02, 2010, 10:27:11 PM
Damn, that 30-point nosedive in the polls must be a BITCH, eh Ben?

Apparently Senator nelson is ignorant of the history that South Carolina has of telling the Federal Government to GFYS.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Oceander on January 02, 2010, 10:32:01 PM
Go fcuk yourself, Nelson.  You should have thought about how costly were the wages of political sin before you sinned, not after.  He who pays the piper, calls the tune - so you're stuck dancing with Herr-y Reid and the rest of the New Fascists.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 02, 2010, 10:33:09 PM
Go fcuk yourself, Nelson.  You should have thought about how costly were the wages of political sin before you sinned, not after.  He who pays the piper, calls the tune - so you're stuck dancing with Herr-y Reid and the rest of the New Fascists.

Roger that.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: NHSparky on January 02, 2010, 10:39:20 PM
Apparently Senator nelson is ignorant of the history that South Carolina has of telling the Federal Government to GFYS.

Well, given his whoring ways, he's certainly ignorant of the Constitution.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Mr Mannn on January 02, 2010, 10:40:27 PM
Isn't this just the saddest face you ever saw? Its the face of a man who political career is ruined by not just accepting a bribe, but by betraying his own stated beliefs. Its the face of a man who's constituents know he is a liar. Its the face of a man who's son will never be trusted to follow in his footsteps.
Its the face we're gonna see more of in 2010.
(http://www.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/Politics/Ben-Nelson_monster_397x224.jpg)

Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Crazy Horse on January 02, 2010, 10:43:52 PM
Apparently Senator nelson is ignorant of the history that South Carolina has of telling the Federal Government to GFYS.

Really, I never knew South Carolina to take States Rights serious..............sorry channeling Nelson

I can imagine the AG laughing during and after that phone call

 :lmao:
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Oceander on January 02, 2010, 10:49:55 PM
Really, I never knew South Carolina to take States Rights serious..............sorry channeling Nelson

I can imagine the AG laughing during and after that phone call

 :lmao:

(http://i758.photobucket.com/albums/xx221/B_Oceander/GIF_Animations/Elmo-ROFL_big.gif)
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 02, 2010, 11:16:50 PM
Isn't this just the saddest face you ever saw? Its the face of a man who political career is ruined by not just accepting a bribe, but by betraying his own stated beliefs. Its the face of a man who's constituents know he is a liar. Its the face of a man who's son will never be trusted to follow in his footsteps.
Its the face we're gonna see more of in 2010.
(http://www.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/Politics/Ben-Nelson_monster_397x224.jpg)



Let's hope so.

I'd like to see every single incumbant replaced this November.  From both parties.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 03, 2010, 12:32:14 AM
He is a lying sack of sh!t when he says that the deal offered him will apply to other states. Read the bill; it says no such thing. Maybe he will get religion and vote against it the second time around. I doubt it though because these DC turkeys think they know best, and that we are stupid.   
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: diesel driver on January 03, 2010, 01:26:00 AM
Isn't this just the saddest face you ever saw? Its the face of a man who political career is ruined by not just accepting a bribe, but by betraying his own stated beliefs. Its the face of a man who's constituents know he is a liar. Its the face of a man who's son will never be trusted to follow in his footsteps.
Its the face we're gonna see more of in 2010.
(http://www.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/Politics/Ben-Nelson_monster_397x224.jpg)


This is a look that a lot of Dim faces will have after November, 2010....

It's a look I will enjoy seeing....    :-)
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Carl on January 03, 2010, 08:27:02 AM
He is a lying sack of sh!t when he says that the deal offered him will apply to other states. Read the bill; it says no such thing. Maybe he will get religion and vote against it the second time around. I doubt it though because these DC turkeys think they know best, and that we are stupid.   

Even if he did it won`t matter now as a simple majority is all that will be required for final passage of the reconciled bill from the House.

If I am wrong there forgive and please correct me.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lord Undies on January 03, 2010, 09:03:04 AM
Senator Nelson, recall your vote and insist the senate bill be withdrawn.  Change your vote to NO.    

What?  Rules say you can't change your vote?  Rules matter now?  Ha ha ha ha ha.  Look around you.  The rules are like bread dough.

Change your vote, senator.  Insist on it.  Tell the world the senate bill DID NOT PASS and must be withdrawn NOW.

Then we'll talk about solving your personal problems.  
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: SVPete on January 03, 2010, 09:34:27 AM
Quote
I can imagine the AG laughing during and after that phone call

I can imagine the AG asking, "What? Am I hurtin' ya pal? Good!" And then calling the AGs of the other 49 states to urge the other dozen or so who plan to challenge the bill to stay the course, and to urge the others to get on board. Even CA's Jerry Brown keeps a finger firmly planted in the wind and would seriously consider hopping onto the bandwagon.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on January 03, 2010, 09:56:46 AM
Even if he did it won`t matter now as a simple majority is all that will be required for final passage of the reconciled bill from the House.

If I am wrong there forgive and please correct me.

No, you are exactly correct.  Filibuster was the only real chance to stop this POS, we are going to get 'Something' our of the reconciliation process that will be passed by simple majority in both houses.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Ladywinter on January 03, 2010, 10:09:19 AM
“But Nelson told McMaster that the deal wasn’t his idea...”

This is like watching a bad soap opera, on a daily basis!  Geez, Nelson - a least “man” up about it!!  His face looks worried, and it should cause he’s gone and pissed off the devil now too...  :evil:

The devil went down to Nebraska
He was lookin’ for a soul to steal
He was in a bind
‘Cause he was way behind
And he was willin’ to make a deal

When he came upon Senator Ben Nelson
Chewin’ on a 2000+ page bill...
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lord Undies on January 03, 2010, 10:12:25 AM
“But Nelson told McMaster that the deal wasn’t his idea...”

This is like watching a bad soap opera, on a daily basis!  Geez, Nelson - a least “man” up about it!!  His face looks worried, and it should cause he’s gone and pissed off the devil now too...  :evil:

The devil went down to Nebraska
He was lookin’ for a soul to steal
He was in a bind
‘Cause he was way behind
And he was willin’ to make a deal

When he came upon Senator Ben Nelson
Chewin’ on a 2000+ page bill...


Very appropriate. 
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: TheSarge on January 03, 2010, 10:30:50 AM
Ben Nelson...Bless his heart.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: SVPete on January 03, 2010, 10:50:57 AM
Quote
Bless his heart

 :rotf: A Texan taught my kids that the interpretation of this would be, "What an idiot!" :rotf:
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: TheSarge on January 03, 2010, 10:59:16 AM
:rotf: A Texan taught my kids that the interpretation of this would be, "What an idiot!" :rotf:

My fellow Texan was correct in his teachings  :-)
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Oceander on January 03, 2010, 11:04:01 AM
“But Nelson told McMaster that the deal wasn’t his idea...”

This is like watching a bad soap opera, on a daily basis!  Geez, Nelson - a least “man” up about it!!  His face looks worried, and it should cause he’s gone and pissed off the devil now too...  :evil:

The devil went down to Nebraska
He was lookin’ for a soul to steal
He was in a bind
‘Cause he was way behind
And he was willin’ to make a deal

When he came upon Senator Ben Nelson
Chewin’ on a 2000+ page bill...


Hee, hee!  Good lyrics; I'm sure Charlie Daniels would approve.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 03, 2010, 11:19:45 AM
Even if he did it won`t matter now as a simple majority is all that will be required for final passage of the reconciled bill from the House.

If I am wrong there forgive and please correct me.

I think you are correct but I heard from one of the Repub Senators that some type of parliamentary procedure could force the final vote to have 60 votes.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: BlueStateSaint on January 03, 2010, 11:23:00 AM
Hee, hee!  Good lyrics; I'm sure Charlie Daniels would approve.

Carl, I think that you heard correctly; and maybe Charlie Daniels has already written some lyrics to reflect this . . .
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Javelin on January 03, 2010, 04:21:22 PM
Really, I never knew South Carolina to take States Rights serious..............sorry channeling Nelson

I can imagine the AG laughing during and after that phone call

 :lmao:

I am from SC.  Its a unique state and a lot of the old ways still exists.  They tend to take things quite patiently, waiting and watching.  Yet when they get pissed off they dont mind ripping the house apart like a scorned woman.  Keep in mind SC was the first state to seceded in the Civil War.  Even if you go to Charleston you can still see a lot of that old south mentality.  The upstate is a little more middle of the line and liberals try to forge their way in but they have a hard time.  Some of the poorer mid to low country counties can have a more liberal leaning, yet keep in mind when I say liberal leaning its a far cry from what you find up North or in Cali.

Around where I live we already had one guy kill two sheriffs deputies due to the State taking part of his land for road construction, no joke.  People take this stuff seriously here.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: bkg on January 03, 2010, 05:14:04 PM
Y'all expected any different?

I didn't.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 03, 2010, 07:25:59 PM

Around where I live we already had one guy kill two sheriffs deputies due to the State taking part of his land for road construction, no joke.  People take this stuff seriously here.

I hope you do not think that this was justified. The sheriff deputies were only following orders. This kind of crap does not end well for anyone.

Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 03, 2010, 08:17:25 PM
I hope you do not think that this was justified. The sheriff deputies were only following orders. This kind of crap does not end well for anyone.



I suspect we will be seeing more of such if things keep progressing as they have been for the past several decades.

People eventually reach a point where they say enough is enough and are willing to kill to stop what they see as wrong.

Two major points in US history show this.  The US Revolution and the Civil War.

Now we can debate the finer point of both occassions until the cows come home.  But the bottom line IMO is that folks had had enough and opted to fight back.

I suspect that we will see another such major turning point for the US Republic within another generation or so.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lord Undies on January 03, 2010, 08:34:03 PM
I suspect we will be seeing more of such if things keep progressing as they have been for the past several decades.

People eventually reach a point where they say enough is enough and are willing to kill to stop what they see as wrong.

Two major points in US history show this.  The US Revolution and the Civil War.

Now we can debate the finer point of both occassions until the cows come home.  But the bottom line IMO is that folks had had enough and opted to fight back.

I suspect that we will see another such major turning point for the US Republic within another generation or so.

That's what I was thinking.  History teaches that it becomes justifiable at some point.  The relentless pushing around by government creates a breaking point in the most reasonable men. 

No, those particular deputies should not have been shot - that's beyond the point.  The point is those "deputies" types are becoming too commonplace.  When one is stealing liberty, "just following orders" is not an excuse.  Somebody has to be the first to say "NO!".  Maybe it should be the "deputies"?     
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Oceander on January 03, 2010, 08:51:47 PM
I hope you do not think that this was justified. The sheriff deputies were only following orders. This kind of crap does not end well for anyone.



There are two sides to that coin (at least - sometimes the ridges on the edges are where all the action is :-) ).  To preface, in this instance, based on the facts, I agree with you that such a killing was unjustified because the taking of private property (his land) for public purposes (building a road) is perfectly legitimate - certainly under the Constitution - provided that just compensation was awarded (which should not be confused with fair market value).

With that out of the way, "just following orders" is an extremely weak justification that will excuse ordinary pecadilloes, but not the really big stuff.  In particular, "just following orders" was not a justification for any of the Germans, or other nationalities, who were involved with the death camps, irrespective of the fact that simple insubordination (e.g., telling your superior officer that you refuse to obey his orders) would have garnered you prison time or, quite possibly, your own berth in one of the death camps.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 03, 2010, 10:33:53 PM
I suspect we will be seeing more of such if things keep progressing as they have been for the past several decades.

People eventually reach a point where they say enough is enough and are willing to kill to stop what they see as wrong.

Two major points in US history show this.  The US Revolution and the Civil War.

Now we can debate the finer point of both occassions until the cows come home.  But the bottom line IMO is that folks had had enough and opted to fight back.

I suspect that we will see another such major turning point for the US Republic within another generation or so.

I don't have a problem fighting back thru legal and peacfull means; however, in this case, the man that killed the two sheriff deputies is bat shit crazy. He should be executed for murder. What the hell do you think about that?

For many, many, many, many years the state has the right to confiscate and pay you for property if they are building a road. What part of that fact do you not understand. My parents owned a rent house in the 60's that the state took to build an interstate.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on January 04, 2010, 10:19:55 AM
I think you are correct but I heard from one of the Repub Senators that some type of parliamentary procedure could force the final vote to have 60 votes.

As I understand it, the thing could be done either way, customarily it would be subject to another filibuster opportunity, but the current rules of the Senate (Which changed with the shift of majority party) could be applied in such a way as to frustrate that, and I wouldn't put it past Weasel-faced Harry to do that.  Still, the Senate procedural rules are full of arcane little subtleties, so I wouldn't bet the rent on either the 50 (Plus Biden for the tie-breaker) or 60 votes being an absolute lock.     
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: The Village Idiot on January 04, 2010, 10:24:08 AM
I can imagine how confused he is, he brought home bacon. Rotted bacon it was.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Javelin on January 04, 2010, 05:47:11 PM
I hope you do not think that this was justified. The sheriff deputies were only following orders. This kind of crap does not end well for anyone.



Ive been gone for a bit.. but when I come back I find this....

Now... Lacarnut... Where in my statement do I suggest that anything is justified on either side?  I would like for you to point out where I said I justify anything? 

What did I say... People take things seriously where I am from and apparently this guy did as well when his land was to be taken.

Now can you imagine some old grandma raiding the doctors office with an AK47 because she was put on a waiting list to see a doctor... if you want to see it move to where I am.  Coming to a theater near you.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 04, 2010, 11:36:53 PM
Ive been gone for a bit.. but when I come back I find this....

Now... Lacarnut... Where in my statement do I suggest that anything is justified on either side?  I would like for you to point out where I said I justify anything?  

What did I say... People take things seriously where I am from and apparently this guy did as well when his land was to be taken.

Now can you imagine some old grandma raiding the doctors office with an AK47 because she was put on a waiting list to see a doctor... if you want to see it move to where I am.  Coming to a theater near you.

I did not suggest anything. I asked you a question. Plus, I can not imagine a grandma shooting anyone with a AK47. Furthermore, I would not want to move to a place where a bunch of crazies live; that theater is not here.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 05, 2010, 05:35:30 AM
I don't have a problem fighting back thru legal and peacfull means; however, in this case, the man that killed the two sheriff deputies is bat shit crazy. He should be executed for murder. What the hell do you think about that?

For many, many, many, many years the state has the right to confiscate and pay you for property if they are building a road. What part of that fact do you not understand. My parents owned a rent house in the 60's that the state took to build an interstate.

I didn't say I approved of this guys actions.

I stated that I expect to see more of that type of thing if more folks feel that they have had enough from an abusive government.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: JohnnyReb on January 05, 2010, 06:07:40 AM
SC AG McMaster was on local talk radio yesterday. He made a good case for the suit.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: ConservativeMobster on January 05, 2010, 08:11:46 AM
http://www.thestate.com/politics/story/1096044.html

But U.S. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, a Columbia Democrat who will be a party to the conference negotiations in Washington over the health care bills, said he would use the Nebraska provision as a chance to bring home a better deal for South Carolina.

Clyburn said earlier this month he will push for the federal government to cover as much as 95 percent of the cost for a Medicaid expansion in each state.

"I will work to have all states treated fairly," Clyburn said in a statement Monday. "If I were in Mr. McMaster's shoes, I would be very careful. Sometimes we are better off with equity than equality."

I am also in SC and I can say this much...we have our work cut out for us.  This is fast becoming a state of extremes and for good or no, this better end quickly.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: The Village Idiot on January 05, 2010, 01:06:57 PM
Here in TX I am still awaiting word that the AG is investigating the so-called weatherization of 7 homes, costing $2 million in Stim-dollars.

Not that I am paying close attention, but I would love to know where the money really goes.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 05, 2010, 05:14:34 PM
I didn't say I approved of this guys actions.

I stated that I expect to see more of that type of thing if more folks feel that they have had enough from an abusive government.


I don't think taking your land because of a road crossing it qualifies as abusive. The government has been doing it for over 50 years that I know about.

Like I said, this guy is guilty of murder. There is no justification for what he did. 
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 05, 2010, 05:18:43 PM
I don't think taking your land because of a road crossing it qualifies as abusive. The government has been doing it for over 50 years that I know about.

Like I said, this guy is guilty of murder. There is no justification for what he did. 

Just because the government declares something as legal doesn't mean that the people see such actions by the government as just, fair or non-abusive.


And I'll say this agian:  I never stated that I approve of this guys actions.

Nor have I tried to justify it.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 05, 2010, 05:29:53 PM
Just because the government declares something as legal doesn't mean that the people see such actions by the government as just, fair or non-abusive.



Life is not just, fair or nonabusive. I am a right winger from the word go. However, I do not see that hatred that everything the government stands for as helpfull to conservatives. It just gives screwballs in this  administration and Nappy ammunition.  
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 05, 2010, 06:08:53 PM
Life is not just, fair or nonabusive. I am a right winger from the word go. However, I do not see that hatred that everything the government stands for as helpfull to conservatives. It just gives screwballs in this  administration and Nappy ammunition.  

Dude...

I ain't talking about conservatives.  I am talking about people in general.

Of course life isn't fair.  But I do expect our Republic form of government to act in a just and non-abusive manner. 

Otherwise it is merely tyranny under color of law.  Just like our Founders had under dear ole King George.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 05, 2010, 06:45:51 PM
Dude...

I ain't talking about conservatives.  I am talking about people in general.

Of course life isn't fair.  But I do expect our Republic form of government to act in a just and non-abusive manner. 

Otherwise it is merely tyranny under color of law.  Just like our Founders had under dear ole King George.

Well, Dude, I am talking about conservatives. This is a conservative site. However, let me make it plain and clear. Anarchy will result in disastrous results for all concerned. Plus, it does seem we have nuts that want to go that route. As a conservative, that is not my bag. 
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: rich_t on January 05, 2010, 07:13:57 PM
Well, Dude, I am talking about conservatives. This is a conservative site. However, let me make it plain and clear. Anarchy will result in disastrous results for all concerned. Plus, it does seem we have nuts that want to go that route. As a conservative, that is not my bag. 

I'll grant you that this site membership is more conservative than not.

Who besides you, mentioned anything about anarchy?

It looks to me like you are reading into things not posted.

I expressed an opinion that "I" expect to see more of such actions in the future.

No more, no less.

Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 05, 2010, 07:34:00 PM
I'll grant you that this site membership is more conservative than not.

Who besides you, mentioned anything about anarchy?

It looks to me like you are reading into things not posted.

I expressed an opinion that "I" expect to see more of such actions in the future.

No more, no less.


See Javelin posts above. Grandma's with AK47's shooting up a doctors office and that just the way it is here. This is coming to where you live. I do not know what that sounds like to you but it sounds like anarchy (lawlessness) to me. Like I said, this type of talk just gives ammo to O and his administration. If you want them to pass more gun laws, keep this kind of stupid talk up. BTW, this is directed at everyone. So don't get your diapers in a wad.   
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Javelin on January 05, 2010, 11:05:52 PM
See Javelin posts above. Grandma's with AK47's shooting up a doctors office and that just the way it is here. This is coming to where you live. I do not know what that sounds like to you but it sounds like anarchy (lawlessness) to me. Like I said, this type of talk just gives ammo to O and his administration. If you want them to pass more gun laws, keep this kind of stupid talk up. BTW, this is directed at everyone. So don't get your diapers in a wad.  


There is a bit of satire in my post, just in case your actually so ignorant that you cannot see that Lacar.... come on man.

In all seriousness though, I dont know where your from, but there are some people that are more than willing to uphold the oath that we took.  You know, to defend our nation from all enemies forign and domestic.  Within civilizations there are periods when the rubber just meets the road and all the talk is over.  For our founding fathers it was a letter sent to the Congress by King George informing them that no matter the peaceful measures they were seeking, they would all be branded as traitors and killed.  I do see the potential for this kind of extreme in our time.  If one cannot, then they better take another close hard look at Washington today.

I for one will defend my family, home and rights.  First I will exhaust every peaceful means available, but when they are done talking and we are informed that its put up or shut up... well... I simply cannot shut up.

I do not expect everyone to be in the same mindset that I am on this by any means.  A three percenter is not called a three percenter for nothing.

Oh and by the way, they will pass whatever gun laws they wish despite whatever is said.  I surely hope you do not live inside of that kind of delusion... or if you do, perhaps you could be more politically correct to please them or better yet, join their side.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 06, 2010, 12:31:19 AM
There is a bit of satire in my post, just in case your actually so ignorant that you cannot see that Lacar.... come on man.

In all seriousness though, I dont know where your from, but there are some people that are more than willing to uphold the oath that we took.  You know, to defend our nation from all enemies forign and domestic.  Within civilizations there are periods when the rubber just meets the road and all the talk is over.  For our founding fathers it was a letter sent to the Congress by King George informing them that no matter the peaceful measures they were seeking, they would all be branded as traitors and killed.  I do see the potential for this kind of extreme in our time.  If one cannot, then they better take another close hard look at Washington today.

I for one will defend my family, home and rights.  First I will exhaust every peaceful means available, but when they are done talking and we are informed that its put up or shut up... well... I simply cannot shut up.

I do not expect everyone to be in the same mindset that I am on this by any means.  A three percenter is not called a three percenter for nothing.

Oh and by the way, they will pass whatever gun laws they wish despite whatever is said.  I surely hope you do not live inside of that kind of delusion... or if you do, perhaps you could be more politically correct to please them or better yet, join their side.

I am from south Louisiana. Your satire is who the nuts at H.S. are referring to as home grown terrorists. Your big mouth can get you in a lot trouble. That's what I call ignorant.

You think you are some kinda of bad ass. Got news for you; there are just as many people that will defend their their family here as where you live. You might think you have a patent on that but you don't.

Oh, and by the way, you give the government ammunition and they will pass more gun laws. So keep running your mouth off. You are doing a lot of good. Not. Big brother might show up on your doorsteps with all your yakking. FYI, I am a right winger with a few guns and plenty of ammo. 
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Javelin on January 06, 2010, 08:11:17 AM
I am from south Louisiana. Your satire is who the nuts at H.S. are referring to as home grown terrorists. Your big mouth can get you in a lot trouble. That's what I call ignorant.

You think you are some kinda of bad ass. Got news for you; there are just as many people that will defend their their family here as where you live. You might think you have a patent on that but you don't.

Oh, and by the way, you give the government ammunition and they will pass more gun laws. So keep running your mouth off. You are doing a lot of good. Not. Big brother might show up on your doorsteps with all your yakking. FYI, I am a right winger with a few guns and plenty of ammo. 

WATCH YOUR MOUTH!!! Shhhhhh the black helicopters might hear you... you know your on the list now.. you said the "G" word.

Once again, if you live inside of the delusion that if we were to act like the perfect child that they would not pass more gun control laws... your the friggin nutcase.  I am being honest here.

As to what I say, ever hear the phrase "Speak without fear"?  I am not threatening anyone nor anything.  I am stating my natural born right to defend myself, home, family and my rights just as every other human being on this planet has.  And FYI I have physically defended my and your rights when I served with the USMC, worked in military intelligence and served as a civilian contractor. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with stating the obvious facts and if you for one second believe they have not already calculated this very "American" mindset into their figures as if what we are discussing is something new, youve lost your mind.

You sound like some kind of scared hide under a rock individual that has no backbone.  Tell you what, those guns you have are not going to do you a bit of good.  Do yourself a favor and send them to me.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: dandi on January 06, 2010, 09:28:02 AM
I'd like to see every single incumbant replaced this November.  From both parties.

That would definitely be something I would love to see.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Eupher on January 06, 2010, 10:37:38 AM
That would definitely be something I would love to see.

I share that sentiment as an emotion, but from a practical perspective, if that were to happen the only people running the ******* Congress would be the lobbyists and the current administration.

That isn't a good option.

No, instead of throwing all the asshats out, I think there ought to be some extremely rigid and publicly acknowledged requirements for serving in the Congress. These are a few of my thoughts:

There's more but that'll do for now.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: TheSarge on January 06, 2010, 10:47:44 AM
That would definitely be something I would love to see.

And that would accomplish what exactly?
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: ConservativeMobster on January 06, 2010, 11:23:02 AM
Has anyone read the book "The 5000 Year Leap"?  Takes about 5 chapters to really get into the point of the book, but it was an eye-opener for me and I would suggest it as recommended reading for all high schoolers.

Our Founding Fathers thought of serving in a political position in our new country as a calling to be looked upon as a duty of sorts, not a position of gain or power....are those days gone forever?
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Ladywinter on January 06, 2010, 11:41:59 AM
No, instead of throwing all the asshats out, I think there ought to be some extremely rigid and publicly acknowledged requirements for serving in the Congress. These are a few of my thoughts:

  • Term limits of NMT 8 years for a House member and 12 years for a senator
  • No arrest record of any kind, for any reason
  • Once identified as the subject of an investigation, the congresscritter is not eligible to run for election until the inquiry clears his/her name
  • Congress may not investigate itself. That's like the fox watching the henhouse.
There's more but that'll do for now.

I like the way you think! :bow:
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 06, 2010, 12:47:02 PM
WATCH YOUR MOUTH!!! Shhhhhh the black helicopters might hear you... you know your on the list now.. you said the "G" word.

Once again, if you live inside of the delusion that if we were to act like the perfect child that they would not pass more gun control laws... your the friggin nutcase.  I am being honest here.

As to what I say, ever hear the phrase "Speak without fear"?  I am not threatening anyone nor anything.  I am stating my natural born right to defend myself, home, family and my rights just as every other human being on this planet has.  And FYI I have physically defended my and your rights when I served with the USMC, worked in military intelligence and served as a civilian contractor. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with stating the obvious facts and if you for one second believe they have not already calculated this very "American" mindset into their figures as if what we are discussing is something new, youve lost your mind.

You sound like some kind of scared hide under a rock individual that has no backbone.  Tell you what, those guns you have are not going to do you a bit of good.  Do yourself a favor and send them to me.

Sonny Boy, I was serving my country in the Army before you were born. I am not scared. Just concerned with punks like you running your mouth off. If you do not think that Janet N. is not making a list you are crazy. If you want to get on that list, be my guest.

As far as sending my guns to you. Come take them if you think you are man enough.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Javelin on January 06, 2010, 02:33:28 PM
Sonny Boy, I was serving my country in the Army before you were born. I am not scared. Just concerned with punks like you running your mouth off. If you do not think that Janet N. is not making a list you are crazy. If you want to get on that list, be my guest.

As far as sending my guns to you. Come take them if you think you are man enough.


Now thats the spirit Im talking about  :cheersmate:

By the way, Im already on the list.  Due to the nature of my former job I would be crazy to assume I am not.  Most likely you already are as well.

There is a very real difference in being a Patriot and a terrorist.  I do not confuse the two, so do not confuse me with the other anarchist idiots in the world.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: dandi on January 06, 2010, 03:13:55 PM
And that would accomplish what exactly?

Oh, I dunno, maybe getting a good majority of the leaches off the body politic? 

Yes, I know it won't happen and, yes, some incumbents are actually doing a good job.  But, dammit, if I can't have a pony, at least I can "hope" for something.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: dandi on January 06, 2010, 03:15:06 PM
I share that sentiment as an emotion, but from a practical perspective, if that were to happen the only people running the ******* Congress would be the lobbyists and the current administration.

That isn't a good option.

No, instead of throwing all the asshats out, I think there ought to be some extremely rigid and publicly acknowledged requirements for serving in the Congress. These are a few of my thoughts:

  • Term limits of NMT 8 years for a House member and 12 years for a senator
  • No arrest record of any kind, for any reason
  • Once identified as the subject of an investigation, the congresscritter is not eligible to run for election until the inquiry clears his/her name
  • Congress may not investigate itself. That's like the fox watching the henhouse.
There's more but that'll do for now.

Yes, I am acquainted with reality.  I would love to see the bloodsuckers cut off from the host, though.   :-)
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: DefiantSix on January 06, 2010, 03:20:16 PM
Yes, I am acquainted with reality.  I would love to see the bloodsuckers cut off from the host, though.   :-)

If I remember correctly, standard proceedure for removing leeches from a host is to burn them with a lit cigarette, repeating as necessary.

Hell, following that proceedure, I could spend 10 hours on SanFran Nancy alone.  Sounds like a hoot...  :naughty:
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: TheSarge on January 06, 2010, 03:23:29 PM
Oh, I dunno, maybe getting a good majority of the leaches off the body politic? 

Just seems to be throwing the baby out with the bath water is all.

Quote
Yes, I know it won't happen and, yes, some incumbents are actually doing a good job.  But, dammit, if I can't have a pony, at least I can "hope" for something.

A man can always have a dream
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Lacarnut on January 06, 2010, 03:46:26 PM
Now thats the spirit Im talking about  :cheersmate:

By the way, Im already on the list.  Due to the nature of my former job I would be crazy to assume I am not.  Most likely you already are as well.

There is a very real difference in being a Patriot and a terrorist.  I do not confuse the two, so do not confuse me with the other anarchist idiots in the world.

Fair enough. I do think this country is going to hell in a hand basket. I am prepared for it, and have a plan so that an old fart like me can survive to a ripe old age. If the health care bill passes, I will implement it sooner rather than later. 
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: dandi on January 07, 2010, 07:43:00 AM
If I remember correctly, standard proceedure for removing leeches from a host is to burn them with a lit cigarette, repeating as necessary.

Hell, following that proceedure, I could spend 10 hours on SanFran Nancy alone.  Sounds like a hoot...  :naughty:

Considering where she's from, that may be something she would like.

Just sayin'.....   :evillaugh:
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Splashdown on January 07, 2010, 08:55:45 AM
I share that sentiment as an emotion, but from a practical perspective, if that were to happen the only people running the ******* Congress would be the lobbyists and the current administration.

That isn't a good option.

No, instead of throwing all the asshats out, I think there ought to be some extremely rigid and publicly acknowledged requirements for serving in the Congress. These are a few of my thoughts:

  • Term limits of NMT 8 years for a House member and 12 years for a senator
  • No arrest record of any kind, for any reason
  • Once identified as the subject of an investigation, the congresscritter is not eligible to run for election until the inquiry clears his/her name
  • Congress may not investigate itself. That's like the fox watching the henhouse.
There's more but that'll do for now.

Respectfully, I disagree.

I am uncomfortable with point number two, because that should be up to the voters--an underage drinking arrest in college shouldn't disallow someone from getting elected. And the third one, that could be turned into political hay.

And who would investigate Congress?


Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: The Village Idiot on January 07, 2010, 09:21:44 AM
•Once identified as the subject of an investigation, the congresscritter is not eligible to run for election until the inquiry clears his/her name

Eric Holder announced today that every Republican who votes against ObamaCare will be investigated.

Democrats win.

Nice.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Eupher on January 07, 2010, 10:34:33 AM
Respectfully, I disagree.

I am uncomfortable with point number two, because that should be up to the voters--an underage drinking arrest in college shouldn't disallow someone from getting elected. And the third one, that could be turned into political hay.

And who would investigate Congress?


I understand your contention and I welcome this opportunity to respond to it. These are my expressed opinions, so you won't see any supporting links.

I firmly believe that anybody who calls himself a leader at the national level, indeed just about any level where you're involved with making decisions that affect people's lives, need to conform to a standard of behavior that is reflective and supportive of the laws on the books. This means that those who stray from the law and are caught, convicted, and punished have forfeited the responsibility of leading. We can quibble all day long about misdemeanor offenses, different classes of felonies, etc., but I think that a person who professes to want to aspire to one of the highest offices in the land -- as a US Congressman or Senator -- should be upholding those values and demonstrating them through their own behavior, past and present.

We see over and over and over again examples of congressional malfeasance and graft, greed and corruption that certainly isn't new, but has soured our collective opinions of our elected "leaders" to the point that cynicism is a polite word anymore.

Political hay, regarding your contention with Point #3, is what it's all about. If Congresscritter is under investigation, he's simply ineligible to run again until the issue is resolved one way or the other. This stops the foot-dragging and throwing up roadblocks such that these so-called "investigations" go on for months and years.

Any "committee" that calls itself any kind of "ethics committee" within Congress is a fundamental joke. They're an insult to our collective intelligence. I'm supposed to believe that congresscritter x is supposed to really dig into the allegations on congresscritter y when congresscritter x needs congresscritter's y support on a contentious bill? Ludicrous on its face.

As to who investigates Congress, that's a very good question.

1.  Every Congressman allocates 5% of his salary to a fund that is used to receive, review, investigate, and act on allegations of congress' illegal activities. This is done up front. If a Congressman goes through his career without being investigated, his salary is reimbursed, less interest earned. Again, we can get wrapped around the axle with definitions here, but for the sake of brevity, the rules that Congress makes for itself, along with the laws that we all live under, comprise the standard against which these people are judged.

2.  Who investigates Congress? Ordinary people do, much in the way that we serve on juries. These people come from the district or state that elected the alleged perp. Except that these ordinary people, when called to serve on such a committee, do so not at the risk of sustaining a financial or career-based penalty (because they'll be compensated for their service and because the law will protect and hold their jobs).

3.  Investigations should not take longer than 3 months to fully explore. If they take longer, the committee publishes a report that explains why it's taking longer. Far too many times, investigations drag on and on and on with no resolution for the simple reason there's no incentive to resolve the issue. Committees are not fully compensated until the investigation is complete and is reviewed.

4.  All kinds of problems will surface with this kind of proposal, of that I'm sure. Who is to say that committee member x has a clue about the complexities of ethical behavior and the law? I'm not sure how to respond to that except to say that in order for a committee member to serve, there would have to be a screening process again in the manner that a jury is selected.

My main point is, stuff doesn't get done unless there's an incentive for it to get done. Systems are designed with that in mind - that mandated completion is the expectation within the prescribed time window. Exceptions are allowed, with justification.

Congress investigating itself is a joke. Common sense in the hands of ordinary people will hold their elected officials accountable.

Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Splashdown on January 07, 2010, 10:47:08 AM
Great points.

I guess I am of the opinion that we get the government that we deserve. I know some great leaders who have made stupid mistakes in their youths. I know people who have never, ever round afoul of the law--not even a parking ticket--whom I wouldn't trust with a nickel.

I think the key to improving our leadership is not term limits or more stringent rules for Congress eligibility, but a more educated electorate. We wouln't need term limits, for example, if voters paid attention to their voting responsibilities.

Of course, I don't know which of our ideas is more "pie in the sky," because Congress will never enact your rules, and the average American voter is amazingly gullible.

Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Eupher on January 07, 2010, 11:31:11 AM
Great points.

I guess I am of the opinion that we get the government that we deserve. I know some great leaders who have made stupid mistakes in their youths. I know people who have never, ever round afoul of the law--not even a parking ticket--whom I wouldn't trust with a nickel.

I think the key to improving our leadership is not term limits or more stringent rules for Congress eligibility, but a more educated electorate. We wouln't need term limits, for example, if voters paid attention to their voting responsibilities.

Of course, I don't know which of our ideas is more "pie in the sky," because Congress will never enact your rules, and the average American voter is amazingly gullible.



And I completely agree with your point that an educated voter bloc would make all these "rules" essentially unncessary.

The average American voter is completely gullible, as you've pointed out, because he/she doesn't think to question the pablum that is spoon-fed to them by the MSM, which has, of course, a leftist agenda.

We're like horses with blinders on. We see our X-box, our VCR, our computer, our iphone, our ipod and that damned dog that shits on our lawn. We don't see the unscrupulous and evil congresscritter that is raping us left and right.
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Ladywinter on January 07, 2010, 12:15:00 PM
Of course, I don't know which of our ideas is more "pie in the sky," because Congress will never enact your rules, and the average American voter is amazingly gullible.

Excellent point!
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Ladywinter on January 07, 2010, 12:31:14 PM
We're like horses with blinders on. We see our X-box, our VCR, our computer, our iphone, our ipod and that damned dog that shits on our lawn. We don't see the unscrupulous and evil congresscritter that is raping us left and right.

I completely agree with you also.  I spend many, many hours researching who is (or will be) on the "ticket".  When I cast my vote, I do not do it blindly. 

An interesting poll question was posed on another forum (back some time ago): 
How old should one be, to be able to "vote"?
    or something to that nature...

A. 18  B. 21  C. 25  D. 30

My first instinct was to say 18.  However, after some thought, I did not choose 18; as I believe it is too young. 

Your example of X-box, ipods, etc. was exactly what I thought about when answering the poll question.  IMO, many of our youth displayed ignorance in this past Presidential election because they did not do the research necessary when casting such an important vote... 
Title: Re: Senate Dem Asks South Carolina's Top Attorney to 'Call Off the Dogs'
Post by: Javelin on January 07, 2010, 02:58:23 PM
I completely agree with you also.  I spend many, many hours researching who is (or will be) on the "ticket".  When I cast my vote, I do not do it blindly. 

An interesting poll question was posed on another forum (back some time ago): 
How old should one be, to be able to "vote"?
    or something to that nature...

A. 18  B. 21  C. 25  D. 30

My first instinct was to say 18.  However, after some thought, I did not choose 18; as I believe it is too young. 

Your example of X-box, ipods, etc. was exactly what I thought about when answering the poll question.  IMO, many of our youth displayed ignorance in this past Presidential election because they did not do the research necessary when casting such an important vote... 

I dont know about other people here, but if this were to ever be put into a real vote....

D. 30

Thats what I say anyway.