The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Ballygrl on September 06, 2010, 10:47:56 PM
-
He seems like a nice honest Liberal. I don't get to talk to many who are being honest so I have questions that I'd like answered from someone who'll be honest.
Question 1:
What do you think of the possibility of another stimulus? and why would they propose it again especially with the anger out there of the American people?
Question 2:
How do you react when you see some people justifying a possible loss in the mid-terms by saying voter fraud is going on?
Thanks!
-
He seems like a nice honest Liberal. I don't get to talk to many who are being honest so I have questions that I'd like answered from someone who'll be honest.
Question 1:
What do you think of the possibility of another stimulus? and why would they propose it again especially with the anger out there of the American people?
Zero, it is a base rallying tactic and the GOP Senate leadership smells blood in the water
Question 2:
How do you react when you see some people justifying a possible loss in the mid-terms by saying voter fraud is going on?
They are in denial, voter fraud only works when elections are close and both sides engage in it from time to time. I don't expect many close elections in 2010, where they exist they will be in places democrats are in charge and the voter fraud will be committed by democrats not the GOP. In order to commit voter fraud you need a public official to help you. If the public official is of the same party as the person making the accusation they have had fraud committed against them, I generally call bullshit on any accusation
Thanks!
-
Thanks for the answers!
-
Oh my.
A civilized discussion.
And in the DUmpster, of all places.
Thank you!
-
Okay, Jake, time for another one. On November 3rd, if the Dems lose as bloodily as I (and others) seem to think that they will, how do you see the DUmp reacting? Will they call for violence? Will they work to regain what they have lost?
-
Oh my.
A civilized discussion.
And in the DUmpster, of all places.
Thank you!
LOL, I wasn't sure where to put the thread, I wasn't sure if Jake read the other forums.
-
Okay, Jake, time for another one. On November 3rd, if the Dems lose as bloodily as I (and others) seem to think that they will, how do you see the DUmp reacting? Will they call for violence? Will they work to regain what they have lost?
Oh that's a good question, and if I can add another question that would fall in kind of the same category.
As we know, the moderates/independents tend to determine the elections, whereas the conservatives and progressives determine the primaries, so if the Democrats lose badly in the mid-terms how could they possibly use the excuse that Obama wasn't progressive enough? especially when the majority of the country is moderate/conservative. Do progressives actually understand that only a small percentage of the population subscribes to their ideology?
-
I too have a question for our colleague from Allentown:
Some times you, sir, admit to Democrat vote fraud, but then in an attempt to appear unbiased or nonpartisan, pair that with allegations that sometimes Republican vote fraud also occurs.
I'm intrigued.
Where, and under what circumstances, can Republicans possibly commit vote fraud.
In your history books, you'll find that there's only ever been about half a dozen Republican "machines" in the 221-year history of the Republic--the most prominent of them being those who ran Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, and the city of Philadelphia..
And guess how long ago that was.
The last Republican "machine," that which ran Pennsylvania for 60 years, was utterly demolished, destroyed, in 1930, right after the Great Depression got underway. As much as it pains me to say, the Republicans in Pennsylvania circa 1870-1930, produced some real "winners," such as Senator Bois Penrose who in things other than politics resembled very much a recently-late U. S. Senator from Massachusetts.
But that was a very long time ago.
In the meantime, since Aaron Burr and New York in the first decade of the 1800s, Democrat machines have proliferated and thrived, defying the old maxim that things must, inevitably, grow old, decay, and die.
There isn't enough paper to list all the Democrat state and big city machines that currently exist.
In 2000, Republican were accused of "stealing" Florida for George Bush.
In November 2000, 66 of the 67 then-county election commissioners in Florida were Democrats, and the lone Republican was from a small county--and these Democrat county election commissioners "stole" Florida for Bush?
While anything is possible, that sort of, uh, stretches the credulity.
So I ask you, sir, please--I've been asking this question since the dawn of political message-boards on the internet, and never gotten an answer--tell me where there exists, anywhere in the United States of America, a state or city Republican "machine" capable of distorting election results, such as those Democrat machines in Chicago, Boston, Milwaukee, Los Angeles, Memphis, New Orleans, Detroit, Seattle, &c., &c., &c., ad infinitum?
Even if Republicans wanted to cheat, they don't have the tools to cheat.
It's sort of like accusing an armless man of committing armed robbery.
-
Okay, Jake, time for another one. On November 3rd, if the Dems lose as bloodily as I (and others) seem to think that they will, how do you see the DUmp reacting? Will they call for violence? Will they work to regain what they have lost?
Accusations of voter fraud, laments the country is lost and going to hell, talks of taking up arms, shame to democrats who are pissed off at the party, and of course it isn't DU without mass purges.
-
I too have a question for our colleague from Allentown:
Some times you, sir, admit to Democrat vote fraud, but then in an attempt to appear unbiased or nonpartisan, pair that with allegations that sometimes Republican vote fraud also occurs.
I'm intrigued.
Where, and under what circumstances, can Republicans possibly commit vote fraud.
In your history books, you'll find that there's only ever been about half a dozen Republican "machines" in the 221-year history of the Republic--the most prominent of them being those who ran Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, and the city of Philadelphia..
And guess how long ago that was.
The last Republican "machine," that which ran Pennsylvania for 60 years, was utterly demolished, destroyed, in 1930, right after the Great Depression got underway. As much as it pains me to say, the Republicans in Pennsylvania circa 1870-1930, produced some real "winners," such as Senator Bois Penrose who in things other than politics resembled very much a recently-late U. S. Senator from Massachusetts.
But that was a very long time ago.
In the meantime, since Aaron Burr and New York in the first decade of the 1800s, Democrat machines have proliferated and thrived, defying the old maxim that things must, inevitably, grow old, decay, and die.
There isn't enough paper to list all the Democrat state and big city machines that currently exist.
In 2000, Republican were accused of "stealing" Florida for George Bush.
In November 2000, 66 of the 67 then-county election commissioners in Florida were Democrats, and the lone Republican was from a small county--and these Democrat county election commissioners "stole" Florida for Bush?
While anything is possible, that sort of, uh, stretches the credulity.
So I ask you, sir, please--I've been asking this question since the dawn of political message-boards on the internet, and never gotten an answer--tell me where there exists, anywhere in the United States of America, a state or city Republican "machine" capable of distorting election results, such as those Democrat machines in Chicago, Boston, Milwaukee, Los Angeles, Memphis, New Orleans, Detroit, Seattle, &c., &c., &c., ad infinitum?
Even if Republicans wanted to cheat, they don't have the tools to cheat.
It's sort of like accusing an armless man of committing armed robbery.
Purging voter rolls of eligible voters and voter suppression. Mostly done in the South to ethnic minorities. There are republican machine areas in Lehigh and Northampton county and there has been shenanigans in the past.
Elections are only stolen when the margin of victory is less than 1%. In that case it is a coin flip anyway on who won.
Barcoded paper ballots seem like a good way of preventing fraud in my opinion.
-
Oh that's a good question, and if I can add another question that would fall in kind of the same category.
As we know, the moderates/independents tend to determine the elections, whereas the conservatives and progressives determine the primaries, so if the Democrats lose badly in the mid-terms how could they possibly use the excuse that Obama wasn't progressive enough? especially when the majority of the country is moderate/conservative. Do progressives actually understand that only a small percentage of the population subscribes to their ideology?
The labels are kind of stupid right now. Obama loses the mid terms it is because his economic policies failed. Moderates/Independents could care less about the name of the policy, only if it works.
-
I will weigh in with one.
Do you feel that the dem leadership in DC right now really believe their policies are workable to create and sustain a growing private economy or more to what we here feel?
That is they are simply looking to consolidate power through the use of the government to create dependency.
-
I will weigh in with one.
Do you feel that the dem leadership in DC right now really believe their policies are workable to create and sustain a growing private economy or more to what we here feel?
That is they are simply looking to consolidate power through the use of the government to create dependency.
I think the dem leadership in congress put their policies together to reward campaign contributers and any actual policy effects were secondary. I also believe the GOP leadership did something similar from 2003-2007.
-
Here is mine..
In your opinion, would President Obama rather have a Democrat majority house and senate that do not work well with him (as has been evident over the last 20 months) or lose at least one of them to Republicans, giving him an 'enemy foil' to rail against ?
One is better to get things done, the other better to get reelected.
-
Here is mine..
In your opinion, would President Obama rather have a Democrat majority house and senate that do not work well with him (as has been evident over the last 20 months) or lose at least one of them to Republicans, giving him an 'enemy foil' to rail against ?
One is better to get things done, the other better to get reelected.
This isn't 1994, if he thinks it is he's a moron. He might have a foil to rail against. Bill Clinton had an improving economy and was able to work on a few legislative issues in the period of 1995 to the 1996 election.
I don't see an improving economy, and I don't see Obama able to work with the GOP without facing a serious primary challenger.
You also have to remember, people perceived as losers in DC get less jobs in lobbying etc. Obama has a whole bunch of spoiled supporters he has to take care of. He'd rather keep the house, that keeps his friends in the lobbying firms making big $$$$$
-
This isn't 1994, if he thinks it is he's a moron. He might have a foil to rail against. Bill Clinton had an improving economy and was able to work on a few legislative issues in the period of 1995 to the 1996 election.
I don't see an improving economy, and I don't see Obama able to work with the GOP without facing a serious primary challenger.
You also have to remember, people perceived as losers in DC get less jobs in lobbying etc. Obama has a whole bunch of spoiled supporters he has to take care of. He'd rather keep the house, that keeps his friends in the lobbying firms making big $$$$$
This is a good answer, and almost exactly how I would have answered the same question myself. The only difference is I do expect a primary challenger regardless. And I expect it to be HRC. The signal will be if after January 2011 she decides to step down to 'be with family' - though it is possible she will become a kingmaker as Palin seems to have for the GOP.
-
This is a good answer, and almost exactly how I would have answered the same question myself. The only difference is I do expect a primary challenger regardless. And I expect it to be HRC. The signal will be if after January 2011 she decides to step down to 'be with family' - though it is possible she will become a kingmaker as Palin seems to have for the GOP.
2012 is an eternity away, economically, he may pull an LBJ. Open primary opens up all kinds of possibilities.
I don't expect a GOP congress to improve the economic situation that much.
I wouldn't be surprised to see 12% to 13.5% U3 and an over 20% U6 by March of 2011.
I of course view this as a regulatory failure and a broken banking system. I expect the TBTF banks to have another liquidity crisis by year end, particularly with the what is going on in Europe.
I don't think the sun is coming up from the deleveraging till half way through 2013-2014.
2012 might be the first Independent President since George Washington. Some Billionaire that mixes social moderate policies and is a fiscal conservative.
-
2012 is an eternity away, economically, he may pull an LBJ. Open primary opens up all kinds of possibilities.
I don't expect a GOP congress to improve the economic situation that much.
I wouldn't be surprised to see 12% to 13.5% U3 and an over 20% U6 by March of 2011.
I of course view this as a regulatory failure and a broken banking system. I expect the TBTF banks to have another liquidity crisis by year end, particularly with the what is going on in Europe.
I don't think the sun is coming up from the deleveraging till half way through 2013-2014.
2012 might be the first Independent President since George Washington. Some Billionaire that mixes social moderate policies and is a fiscal conservative.
Agree, though Id pin that as unlikely for the reasons you list (Obama = LBJ) - as for an Independent president - it's not out of the realm of possibility, but I think its more likely that one of the parties gets remade into an independent, populist sort of thing. At this time, I'd say its the GOP thats getting the full image makeover. Love them or loathe them, the TEA partiers seem to be transforming the Republican brand, instead of going 'I'.. - I suspect memories of one H. Ross Perot have quite a bit to do with that. Especially when one considers several of his planks, Perot was TEA before TEA was cool. But Perot split the vote, and torpedoed his own campaign with the worst running mate in history.. Not to mention his own crazy "I'm in.. I'm out.. I'm in..." antics.
-
Bloomberg is candidate A. I wouldn't be surprised if Bill Gates is candidate B if the economic conditions are shitty enough.
Perot, was pretty much right on every issue from Nafta to the national debt. He had absolutely no political experience.
He had no real media experience either.
Gates or Bloomberg would fit the bill properly. Gates has plenty of media experience. Bloomberg has been mayor of a major city for 3 terms.
Both men could fund their own campaign and still have substantial wealth.
I don't think John Bohener has changed much since 2007...unfortunately nor do I think he has learned the lessons of that time frame.
I don't expect a professional politician to be able to get us out of this mess.
The other possibility is Petraeus with a business leader running mate. I could see those two estates coming together to give an FU to the 3rd estate (the Washington chattering class of both parties).
We need a Washington and a Jefferson.
-
The labels are kind of stupid right now. Obama loses the mid terms it is because his economic policies failed. Moderates/Independents could care less about the name of the policy, only if it works.
That's kind of the point though, Progressive Economic Policy hurts more than it helps, we're not a nation of Progressives who just want to give out hand-outs or receive them.
-
This isn't 1994, if he thinks it is he's a moron. He might have a foil to rail against. Bill Clinton had an improving economy and was able to work on a few legislative issues in the period of 1995 to the 1996 election.
I don't see an improving economy, and I don't see Obama able to work with the GOP without facing a serious primary challenger.
You also have to remember, people perceived as losers in DC get less jobs in lobbying etc. Obama has a whole bunch of spoiled supporters he has to take care of. He'd rather keep the house, that keeps his friends in the lobbying firms making big $$$$$
Do you seeing Obama facing a challenge within the party in 2012? I have to say the Clinton's surprised me, I thought for sure by now Hillary would've jumped off a sinking ship. Do you see anything going on with the Clinton's involving 2012? Also, I kind of think it was a bad move for the Democrats to get rid of Howard Dean, did you think it was a bad move then? or do you think it's a bad move now?
Take your time answering, I don't want you to get overwhelmed having all these questions thrown at you.
-
I have to say the Clinton's surprised me, I thought for sure by now Hillary would've jumped off a sinking ship.
Though you aren't asking me, I expect she will continue to wait until after midterms, and the seating of the new congress. Leaving after an election cycle is considered the right time to do so, any other time labels you as a quitter.
-
Bloomberg is candidate A. I wouldn't be surprised if Bill Gates is candidate B if the economic conditions are shitty enough.
Perot, was pretty much right on every issue from Nafta to the national debt. He had absolutely no political experience.
He had no real media experience either.
Gates or Bloomberg would fit the bill properly. Gates has plenty of media experience. Bloomberg has been mayor of a major city for 3 terms.
Both men could fund their own campaign and still have substantial wealth.
I don't think John Bohener has changed much since 2007...unfortunately nor do I think he has learned the lessons of that time frame.
I don't expect a professional politician to be able to get us out of this mess.
The other possibility is Petraeus with a business leader running mate. I could see those two estates coming together to give an FU to the 3rd estate (the Washington chattering class of both parties).
We need a Washington and a Jefferson.
Very interesting!
BTW I'm not a fan of Boehner at all, and would love to see an over-haul of both parties elected officials and have all new faces. It just seems like it's business as usual once they're elected, though I hope the Tea Party Candidates if elected won't go the same old same old route.
-
Though you aren't asking me, I expect she will continue to wait until after midterms, and the seating of the new congress. Leaving after an election cycle is considered the right time to do so, any other time labels you as a quitter.
I'm actually surprised at the polling info I saw on her recently, I personally don't think she's been an outstanding Secretary of State and didn't think she warranted such high approval numbers.
-
Do you seeing Obama facing a challenge within the party in 2012? I have to say the Clinton's surprised me, I thought for sure by now Hillary would've jumped off a sinking ship. Do you see anything going on with the Clinton's involving 2012? Also, I kind of think it was a bad move for the Democrats to get rid of Howard Dean, did you think it was a bad move then? or do you think it's a bad move now?
Take your time answering, I don't want you to get overwhelmed having all these questions thrown at you.
Bally, I don't see the Clintons "jumping ship" until after the bloodbath of 11/2/10. Just a thought. Then, Obama is fair game. But, as I have posted in the past, Obama changed the rules at the DNC to favor the imcumbent--him--in 2012, at the least (RedState had a piece on this some months ago). Hillary would face a lot steeper climb this time than in 2008. 'Course, maybe Obama knew that he'd probably face a primary challenge from Hillary, so that's why he did two things--1) The aforementioned above changing of the rules; and 2) Made Hillary his Secretary of State, in the idea of "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."
-
Bally, I don't see the Clintons "jumping ship" until after the bloodbath of 11/2/10. Just a thought. Then, Obama is fair game. But, as I have posted in the past, Obama changed the rules at the DNC to favor the imcumbent--him--in 2012, at the least (RedState had a piece on this some months ago). Hillary would face a lot steeper climb this time than in 2008. 'Course, maybe Obama knew that he'd probably face a primary challenge from Hillary, so that's why he did two things--1) The aforementioned above changing of the rules; and 2) Made Hillary his Secretary of State, in the idea of "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."
I always thought a challenge to Obama in 2012 by Hillary would alienate the black community, now I'm not so sure, they've been hurt much harder by the economy, so I kind of think they might be quietly supportive of her.
-
Bloomberg is candidate A. I wouldn't be surprised if Bill Gates is candidate B if the economic conditions are shitty enough.
Perot, was pretty much right on every issue from Nafta to the national debt. He had absolutely no political experience.
He had no real media experience either.
Gates or Bloomberg would fit the bill properly. Gates has plenty of media experience. Bloomberg has been mayor of a major city for 3 terms.
Both men could fund their own campaign and still have substantial wealth.
I don't think John Bohener has changed much since 2007...unfortunately nor do I think he has learned the lessons of that time frame.
I don't expect a professional politician to be able to get us out of this mess.
The other possibility is Petraeus with a business leader running mate. I could see those two estates coming together to give an FU to the 3rd estate (the Washington chattering class of both parties).
We need a Washington and a Jefferson.
I don`t see either of them gaining a lot of traction,Bloomberg because he has no appeal to those outside political machinery and Gates because I doubt he is interested.
I also think if 2010 does turn into the blood bath many predict (I am keeping my powder dry on that one for now) then unless the pendulum swings as quickly and sharply to the left again no dem will want to get near the Presidential election of 2012.
-
I always thought a challenge to Obama in 2012 by Hillary would alienate the black community, now I'm not so sure, they've been hurt much harder by the economy, so I kind of think they might be quietly supportive of her.
But, the Obamessiah's poll numbers are still stratospheric amongst the black community, so I don't see them jumping ship on a "brutha." Some may go. Most probably won't.
-
I don`t see either of them gaining a lot of traction,Bloomberg because he has no appeal to those outside political machinery and Gates because I doubt he is interested.
I also think if 2010 does turn into the blood bath many predict (I am keeping my powder dry on that one for now) then unless the pendulum swings as quickly and sharply to the left again no dem will want to get near the Presidential election of 2012.
Neighbor, the over/unders that I have been proposing are 10.5 Senate seats flipping, and 114.5 House seats flipping to the Republicans. I'm taking the over on both.
-
I always thought a challenge to Obama in 2012 by Hillary would alienate the black community, now I'm not so sure, they've been hurt much harder by the economy, so I kind of think they might be quietly supportive of her.
A second Hillary/Barack feud would end the democratic party. You guys should be cheering that.
-
But, the Obamessiah's poll numbers are still stratospheric amongst the black community, so I don't see them jumping ship on a "brutha." Some may go. Most probably won't.
Openly yes because people protect their own when around others who are different from them, but I have no doubt when blacks are amongst themselves they're doing plenty of venting.
-
Very interesting!
BTW I'm not a fan of Boehner at all, and would love to see an over-haul of both parties elected officials and have all new faces. It just seems like it's business as usual once they're elected, though I hope the Tea Party Candidates if elected won't go the same old same old route.
I expect chaos in December and a young start to challenge Boner if they get the house, and it won't be Cantor.
Frankly as an FDR democrat, a former democratic party treasurer, and a former member of the county executive board I look forward to watching the knife fights on your side when you get power. :tongue:
Mostly because I'm still pulling the ones out of my own back from when we took power.
-
A second Hillary/Barack feud would end the democratic party. You guys should be cheering that.
There's another part of me that wonders if Obama even cares to run again in 2012, he just doesn't seem that into the job.
-
There's another part of me that wonders if Obama even cares to run again in 2012, he just doesn't seem that into the job.
No matter what happens he is the first ethnic minority President of the United States. His history book picture was taken on January 20, 2009
-
I expect chaos in December and a young start to challenge Boner if they get the house, and it won't be Cantor.
Frankly as an FDR democrat, a former democratic party treasurer, and a former member of the county executive board I look forward to watching the knife fights on your side when you get power. :tongue:
Mostly because I'm still pulling the ones out of my own from when we took power.
LOL, see, now that would shock me, I pretty much expect Boehner to get the position but I would love a challenge, I personally love Bachmann. I think it's so sad that the people with the cajones in the Republican Party are the women, there are a few men with them, but it seems like it's mostly the women out there putting themselves on the line.
-
No matter what happens he is the first ethnic minority President of the United States. His history book picture was taken on January 20, 2009
I have no problem with that, as long as he DOESN'T make it on Mt. Rushmore I'll be happy LOL.
-
Neighbor, the over/unders that I have been proposing are 10.5 Senate seats flipping, and 114.5 House seats flipping to the Republicans. I'm taking the over on both.
Am curious about Jakes view on the numbers and while only a guessing game at this point I do think there is something politically unique happening this election cycle.
The feeling among those who are not politically informed that they had the wool pulled over their eyes by the O campaign and the media fawning.
They feel like they have been played for a fool and are out for revenge.
That may be a factor that has not played into politics at anytime in my life.
I would dare say that if I am correct and the result is as you suggest we go back to a clean slate again and it is still O`s to win or lose but his party will let him stand alone in that.
-
I expect chaos in December and a young start to challenge Boner if they get the house, and it won't be Cantor.
Frankly as an FDR democrat, a former democratic party treasurer, and a former member of the county executive board I look forward to watching the knife fights on your side when you get power. :tongue:
Mostly because I'm still pulling the ones out of my own back from when we took power.
It will depend on the magnitude of victory (assuming it happens)...take the House back by a minimal number of seats and the normal seniority system and nuts and bolts organizing will prevail.
If the result was seismic then it is also fair to suggest the old guard will take notice and adapt as needed,I am not at all sure there will be knife fights as you put it.
Perhaps here and there with committee appointments but as far as policy issues not so much.
-
Am curious about Jakes view on the numbers and while only a guessing game at this point I do think there is something politically unique happening this election cycle.
The feeling among those who are not politically informed that they had the wool pulled over their eyes by the O campaign and the media fawning.
They feel like they have been played for a fool and are out for revenge.
That may be a factor that has not played into politics at anytime in my life.
I would dare say that if I am correct and the result is as you suggest we go back to a clean slate again and it is still O`s to win or lose but his party will let him stand alone in that.
50 D 3I 47R
Lieberman and Sanders caucus with the democrats, Charlie out of Florida knowing which way the wind blows caucusing with the GOP.
House 10 seat majority GOP.
-
50 D 3I 47R
Lieberman and Sanders caucus with the democrats, Charlie out of Florida knowing which way the wind blows caucusing with the GOP.
House 10 seat majority GOP.
That Crist really annoys me :censored:, I think he said he'd caucus the the Democrats but he's the type of guy who no doubt would make a deal with the Republicans to caucus with them, which is why I'm surprised that Skinner and others at DU are supporting him. I do think Crist will lose though so I guess it doesn't matter.
-
That Crist really annoys me :censored:, I think he said he'd caucus the the Democrats but he's the type of guy who no doubt would make a deal with the Republicans to caucus with them, which is why I'm surprised that Skinner and others at DU are supporting him. I do think Crist will lose though so I guess it doesn't matter.
Crist is your new Arlen.
-
Crist is your new Arlen.
Crist is creepy, you can have him.
-
Crist is creepy, you can have him.
They are all creepy, on varying degrees.
-
Crist is your new Arlen.
LOL, no thanks, you can keep him.
-
They are all creepy, on varying degrees.
He is friggen orange.
-
Here's my question for Jake:
When did people start believing in low taxes without spending cuts to offset them? Why is there this have my cake, and eat it too mentality?
-
He is friggen orange.
I expect for him to be challenged. From what I hear, he is quite lazy but very astute.
-
Here's my question for Jake:
When did people start believing in low taxes without spending cuts to offset them? Why is there this have my cake, and eat it too mentality?
The 1960s too many Disney retelling of German fairy tales.
-
I have a question for you AllentownJake and please don't take this the wrong way:
Is English your first language? I mean did you grow up speaking it? I am not putting down your English skills BTW... it just seems to me like that maybe it isn't your first language. It is so... proper is the way I would describe it. Not typical I guess would be the word I should use.
I don't mean to offend you... I was just curious. :cheersmate:
-
:rofl: There are a few people here I'd like to ask that question to. "Does your keyboard work?" "Do you know where the period key is?"
-
I have a question for you AllentownJake and please don't take this the wrong way:
Is English your first language? I mean did you grow up speaking it? I am not putting down your English skills BTW... it just seems to me like that maybe it isn't your first language. It is so... proper is the way I would describe it. Not typical I guess would be the word I should use.
I don't mean to offend you... I was just curious. :cheersmate:
I'm an accountant that got a C- in every English course he ever took.
Next.
-
:rofl: There are a few people here I'd like to ask that question to. "Does your keyboard work?" "Do you know where the period key is?"
LOL! :-)
-
I'm an accountant that got a C- in every English course he ever took.
Next.
LOL!!! I had trouble with grammar myself... and my mom was an English teacher! Thank God for the literature portion or I would have never passed grade school! :fuelfire:
-
:rofl: There are a few people here I'd like to ask that question to. "Does your keyboard work?" "Do you know where the period key is?"
I'm probably one of them, especially when I post with my iPhone.
-
I like numbers more than words. Always have. Sue me.
-
I like numbers more than words. Always have. Sue me.
Give me hexadecimal or binary and I'll agree with you. :tongue:
:-)
-
Give me hexadecimal or binary and I'll agree with you. :tongue:
:-)
Math has an inability to lie. I like it. I love the Accounting equation, I hate perversions to it. I see a lot of perversions going on right now.
-
Math has an inability to lie. I like it. I love the Accounting equation, I hate perversions to it. I see a lot of perversions going on right now.
I got a D in accounting. It wasn't logical. :fuelfire:
Give me hex or give me death!!!
:-)
Edited to fix space bar malfunction
-
Purging voter rolls of eligible voters and voter suppression. Mostly done in the South to ethnic minorities. There are republican machine areas in Lehigh and Northampton county and there has been shenanigans in the past.
Elections are only stolen when the margin of victory is less than 1%. In that case it is a coin flip anyway on who won.
Barcoded paper ballots seem like a good way of preventing fraud in my opinion.
Good answer, sir, but I still feel as if I'm trying to hunt a live dinosaur, looking around for a credible big city or state machine run by Republicans; not only the ones that count the ballots, but also control city and state jobs and do other expensive favors (city and state contracts, for example, to adherents of the machine--that tunnel in Boston and that bridge in Minneapolis were this sort of payoff, and we all know what happened there) so as to keep voters loyal.
I dunno why even barcoded paper ballots are necessary; all my own life, in Nebraska, we've used those things resembling SAT examinations in high school; rows of ovals in which one uses a pencil to darken the oval of one's choice. Also, voter identification should be required.
And third, election returns within states should be revealed all at the same time, city and rural. I'm really tired, for example, of St. Louis manufacturing votes after the rural Missouri numbers are in, so as to overcome any shortfalls. Ditto for Chicago and downstate Illinois. The results should all be released at the exact same time.
I'm still trying to figure out where St. Louis "found" those 200,000 votes that elected Claire McCaskill to the U.S. Senate in 2006, for example. Two hundred thousand "votes" that were released after St. Louis had claimed all totals were in, and after the results of Missouri outside of St. Louis had been reported.
I'm also in favor of uniform voting times, one twelve or fourteen hour period that covers all 48 continental states, with adjustments for Alaska and Hawaii. And no early voting; that gives malicious hands more time to tamper with things.
No machines. I voted by machine in Allentown, and I didn't trust it. A piece of paper.
-
I got a D in accounting. It wasn't logical. :fuelfire:
Give me hex or give me death!!!
:-)
Edited to fix space bar malfunction
Classification is some what of an art. However, once you understand the rules, you understand the language, you understand business.
-
Classification is some what of an art. However, once you understand the rules, you understand the language, you understand business.
I'd rather understand the computer and how it works. The rules don't change. :tongue:
-
And third, election returns within states should be revealed all at the same time, city and rural. I'm really tired, for example, of St. Louis manufacturing votes after the rural Missouri numbers are in, so as to overcome any shortfalls. Ditto for Chicago and downstate Illinois. The results should all be released at the exact same time.
I'm still trying to figure out where St. Louis "found" those 200,000 votes that elected Claire McCaskill to the U.S. Senate in 2006, for example. Two hundred thousand "votes" that were released after St. Louis had claimed all totals were in, and after the results of Missouri outside of St. Louis had been reported.
I like that idea a lot.
-
I like numbers more than words. Always have. Sue me.
I'm just the opposite. I see words in my head and am a natural speller. You say "ball" to most people and they'll see something round. I see the word b-a-l-l in my head. Message boards don't count for anyone, though, because they're informal enough that people shouldn't feel obligated to be perfect. Unless they're posting about someone else's lack.
Cindie
-
I'm just the opposite. I see words in my head and am a natural speller. You say "ball" to most people and they'll see something round. I see the word b-a-l-l in my head. Message boards don't count for anyone, though, because they're informal enough that people shouldn't feel obligated to be perfect. Unless they're posting about someone else's lack.
Cindie
Agreed there, also if anyone on here was a published author, they'd have a person very proficient at Grammar reading their work and making corrections.
-
Bloomberg is candidate A. I wouldn't be surprised if Bill Gates is candidate B if the economic conditions are shitty enough.
Both of them DIW out of the gate. You would not be able to sell big business liberals (one being an eeeevilll corporate baron) to voters in the South and Midwest.
The other possibility is Petraeus with a business leader running mate. I could see those two estates coming together to give an FU to the 3rd estate (the Washington chattering class of both parties).
This would be an interesting pairing.
We need a Washington and a Jefferson.
Agree with you 110%. I don't think for one second that the media wouldn't use everything at their disposal to tear a common sense candidate limb from limb, though.
-
50 D 3I 47R
Lieberman and Sanders caucus with the democrats, Charlie out of Florida knowing which way the wind blows caucusing with the GOP.
House 10 seat majority GOP.
Charlie Crist is not going to win FL.
-
I'm probably one of them, especially when I post with my iPhone.
Bobo?
-
Bobo?
:lmao:
-
:lmao:
:-)
-
There's another part of me that wonders if Obama even cares to run again in 2012, he just doesn't seem that into the job.
Obama is a meglomaniac, no way he won't run. And Michelle would have his...well, he doesn't have any where she's concerned but his little tidbits wouldn't be safe if the WH partying was over. And the entourage, the overseas vacations, the TV face time, etc
-
Charlie Crist is not going to win FL.
I think he's gonna have trouble finishing a close third to Meek when Rubio beats both of them.
And either Jake is pulling our chain with his Senate prediction or he's the last Democrat left in the U.S. that believes that the Kommunist Kiddies will still be in charge when the next Congress is sworn in.
-
I think he's gonna have trouble finishing a close third to Meek when Rubio beats both of them.
And either Jake is pulling our chain with his Senate prediction or he's the last Democrat left in the U.S. that believes that the Kommunist Kiddies will still be in charge when the next Congress is sworn in.
Well, anyone that thinks the government should be doing infrastructure projects at a prevailing wage.....
-
Well, anyone that thinks the government should be doing infrastructure projects at a prevailing wage.....
:naughty:
8 seat pick-up.
Sorry you aren't winning California, Illinois, New York or Wisconsin.
-
:naughty:
8 seat pick-up.
Sorry you aren't winning California, Illinois, New York or Wisconsin.
I just got done reading the article in the Washington Post talking about Wisconsin, I wouldn't be so sure about us not picking it up. I think we have a good shot in California, Illinois, Nevada, Washington and Wisconsin.
-
I just got done reading the article in the Washington Post talking about Wisconsin, I wouldn't be so sure about us not picking it up. I think we have a good shot in California, Illinois, Nevada, Washington and Wisconsin.
Turnout will be interesting. As for Nevada, what should have been a sure thing, Republican Mayors have turned on Angle
-
:naughty:
Sorry you aren't winning California, Illinois, New York or Wisconsin.
Denial - she ain't a river in Egypt...
-
Purging voter rolls of eligible voters and voter suppression. Mostly done in the South to ethnic minorities. There are republican machine areas in Lehigh and Northampton county and there has been shenanigans in the past.
Elections are only stolen when the margin of victory is less than 1%. In that case it is a coin flip anyway on who won.
Barcoded paper ballots seem like a good way of preventing fraud in my opinion.
Perhaps in "local" elections. Not a frikkin' chance in state-wide or federal! You're tryin' to pass the buck instead of answering frank's question.
-
Do you seeing Obama facing a challenge within the party in 2012? I have to say the Clinton's surprised me, I thought for sure by now Hillary would've jumped off a sinking ship. Do you see anything going on with the Clinton's involving 2012? Also, I kind of think it was a bad move for the Democrats to get rid of Howard Dean, did you think it was a bad move then? or do you think it's a bad move now?
Take your time answering, I don't want you to get overwhelmed having all these questions thrown at you.
I've seen different viewpoints on Fox and read stuff online, and many have said she is expected to leave soon after the first of the year. No one consensus on what she's going to do....some have said run for President, other's have mentioned becoming a Supreme Court Justice. Not sure how she could ever become a SCJ, with her "issues" in the past....but it would make sense that she would want it....lot of power, and for the rest of her life, if she chooses to stay that long.
As far as why people think she's doing a good job? Compared to Obama...she is. Not that she's really done anything remarkable...but neither has she ever done anything horrible. She's just been maintaining the status quo. Can't ruffle too many feathers that way, nor does it give any ammunition to use against her, and in the meantime, she's meeting any and every important and not so important leader in the world. Gathering knowledge every day....and knowledge always equates to power.
-
You guys do realize, I don't really care that much. I see the same thing happening regardless which group of corrupt thugs take power.
Even if the GOP picks up 12 seats they have to overcome a democratic fillibuster on everything and a Presidential veto.
Given the state of the banking system, bailout part II should be fun to watch.
-
Turnout will be interesting. As for Nevada, what should have been a sure thing, Republican Mayors have turned on Angle
I try not to talk politics with a couple of family members because our views are different and I just don't want politics to come between us, but I have to find a way to bring this up with my cousin in Nevada, she's what we would call a moderate, her hubby is a progressive, I really want to know what their opinion is on the race in Neavda.
-
:naughty:
8 seat pick-up.
Sorry you aren't winning California, Illinois, New York or Wisconsin.
Like I said...
;)
-
I try not to talk politics with a couple of family members because our views are different and I just don't want politics to come between us, but I have to find a way to bring this up with my cousin in Nevada, she's what we would call a moderate, her hubby is a progressive, I really want to know what their opinion is on the race in Neavda.
My half sister spends half of her time in northern Ohio, and the rest in Las Vegas where her husband is a casino host at the Bellagio.
No way in hell, are there political discussions. While I am not as extreme right as she thinks I am, nor is she Dummy material (too smart and makes tooooo much money with IBM as a computer engineer)....she's still very much a Democrat - though she is not as much of a Democrat as she thinks she is. :-)
-
My half sister spends half of her time in northern Ohio, and the rest in Las Vegas where her husband is a casino host at the Bellagio.
No way in hell, are there political discussions. While I am not as extreme right as she thinks I am, nor is she Dummy material (too smart and makes tooooo much money with IBM as a computer engineer)....she's still very much a Democrat - though she is not as much of a Democrat as she thinks she is. :-)
How about I ask your sister about Nevada and you ask my cousins LOL.
-
How about I ask your sister about Nevada and you ask my cousins LOL.
:lmao:
I've only known about her for 3 years, and met her a couple of months later. She's 3.5 months older than me - today's her birthday!
She "assumes" I have attitudes and agendas - politically - that I don't have and has chosen to opt for little communication, except through an occasional text. I guess in that way, she is a typical liberal in that it's easier to assume than to discuss differing viewpoints. ::)
We have a half brother who is 15 years younger than us...I was still living at home and in HS when he was born. He is somewhere in the middle of us politically, so he gets along fine with both of us. It helps that his wife is a modern day "hippie earth mother"....also very bright but somewhat "scattered"..... :lmao:
-
:lmao:
I've only known about her for 3 years, and met her a couple of months later. She's 3.5 months older than me - today's her birthday!
She "assumes" I have attitudes and agendas - politically - that I don't have and has chosen to opt for little communication, except through an occasional text. I guess in that way, she is a typical liberal in that it's easier to assume than to discuss differing viewpoints. ::)
We have a half brother who is 15 years younger than us...I was still living at home and in HS when he was born. He is somewhere in the middle of us politically, so he gets along fine with both of us. It helps that his wife is a modern day "hippie earth mother"....also very bright but somewhat "scattered"..... :lmao:
I don't understand that attitude at all, that's why they're not liberals, no matter what, liberals stood for differing opinions even if they disagreed with it, they had a mature view of politics, whereas progressives are so totally immature that they can't listen to another POV without getting mad.
-
Jake you mentioned that you do not believe Bill Gates would be interested in running for president--why is that.?
He is better equipped to run the country then any other candidate I know of.
#1 He knows every leader in both the free world and the not so free.
#2 He has successfully at a young age navigated and fought off the crooks and slimeballs trying to take over his business.
#3 In order to become as wealthy as he has, he knows how to choose advisers that are loyal far seeing into the future.
#4 Security of his business is at the top of his agenda and I imagine that if he ran security for our country he would be top notch at it.
I like the idea of giving him a shot for even just 4 years as President.
-
Jake you mentioned that you do not believe Bill Gates would be interested in running for president--why is that.?
He is better equipped to run the country then any other candidate I know of.
#1 He knows every leader in both the free world and the not so free.
#2 He has successfully at a young age navigated and fought off the crooks and slimeballs trying to take over his business.
#3 In order to become as wealthy as he has, he knows how to choose advisers that are loyal far seeing into the future.
#4 Security of his business is at the top of his agenda and I imagine that if he ran security for our country he would be top notch at it.
I like the idea of giving him a shot for even just 4 years as President.
It would take things to be very bad in my opinion for Mr. Gates to want to go into government. Frankly he's one of the wealthiest men in the world and this would be a personal sacrifice to try to fix things on behalf of his nation. He doesn't have anything to prove to anyone....which if you look back to the first Presidents, is how we selected our leaders.
-
You guys do realize, I don't really care that much. I see the same thing happening regardless which group of corrupt thugs take power.
Even if the GOP picks up 12 seats they have to overcome a democratic fillibuster on everything and a Presidential veto.
Given the state of the banking system, bailout part II should be fun to watch.
Jake, I primarily just lurk on these political boards these days, but I have to say how great it is to see someone engage in thoughtful, intelligent and polite discussions on a board dominated by people who disagree with you. How you survived on the DUmp is truly a mystery.
In the past, I served as a guest correspondent of PJ-Comix's DUmmie FUnnies, and I must say, if all the inhabitants were like you, PJ would be out of a job. A-and if all conservatives were like you, I would still be a regular on FR.
-
It would take things to be very bad in my opinion for Mr. Gates to want to go into government. Frankly he's one of the wealthiest men in the world and this would be a personal sacrifice to try to fix things on behalf of his nation. He doesn't have anything to prove to anyone....which if you look back to the first Presidents, is how we selected our leaders.
I don't think he would, ever. Not that its a matter of liking or disliking the US, just that politics aren't in his wheelhouse. Especially now. I would say that politics is now more than ever the art of compromise - which Gates isn't known for.
But, since we are playing this game, I would submit that Edward Whitacre Jr. would be the right billionare CEO for the job. He is tough, pulled himself through the ranks of the Bell System, Eventually became CEO of Southwestern Bell, Later remade into SBC, and was instrumental in the merger of SBC, AT&T, and BellSouth. After AT&T, he did a couple of other things, the most notable being cutting the fat at GM as CEO, which is soon to return its bailout money to the United States.
He knows business.
He knows money.
He has balls.
And most importantly, he has the ability to make hard decisions.
-
I don't think he would, ever. Not that its a matter of liking or disliking the US, just that politics aren't in his wheelhouse. Especially now. I would say that politics is now more than ever the art of compromise - which Gates isn't known for.
But, since we are playing this game, I would submit that Edward Whitacre Jr. would be the right billionare CEO for the job. He is tough, pulled himself through the ranks of the Bell System, Eventually became CEO of Southwestern Bell, Later remade into SBC, and was instrumental in the merger of SBC, AT&T, and BellSouth. After AT&T, he did a couple of other things, the most notable being cutting the fat at GM as CEO, which is soon to return its bailout money to the United States.
He knows business.
He knows money.
He has balls.
And most importantly, he has the ability to make hard decisions.
We need a man or woman with nothing to prove to make hard decisions.
The first few Presidential elections, expressing an interest in the job disqualified you for it. It was viewed as a position of power you were drafted into.
-
We need a man or woman with nothing to prove to make hard decisions.
The first few Presidential elections, expressing an interest in the job disqualified you for it. It was viewed as a position of power you were drafted into.
I am not sure that is exactly true regarding John Adams the second President nor Jefferson the third and so on.
-
I am not sure that is exactly true regarding John Adams the second President nor Jefferson the third and so on.
You had to pretend you weren't interested. You didn't campaign on your own.
Most early 18th century and 19th century political campaigns were done through surrogates. Expressing interest in the office made you ambitious and a threat to liberty.
-
You had to pretend you weren't interested. You didn't campaign on your own.
Most early 18th century and 19th century political campaigns were done through surrogates. Expressing interest in the office made you ambitious and a threat to liberty.
Do not forget that the election system of the day was very different.
Have read that Adams lamented the office of VP (not a running mate but a runner up) was "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/johnadams
There would seem some ambition there and the historical record of Hamilton,Burr and Jefferson also shows a level of ambition.
From what I have read Andrew Jackson and Presidents of that second era had no qualms of politicking.
-
Do not forget that the election system of the day was very different.
Have read that Adams lamented the office of VP (not a running mate but a runner up) was "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/johnadams
There would seem some ambition there and the historical record of Hamilton,Burr and Jefferson also shows a level of ambition.
From what I have read Andrew Jackson and Presidents of that second era had no qualms of politicking.
Next to Jefferson, I love me some Jackson. The Federal Reserve Note baring his name is a slap in the face posthumously.
-
Next to Jefferson, I love me some Jackson. The Federal Reserve Note baring his name is a slap in the face posthumously.
I will agree on that part and also will admit that I don`t understand all the issues regarding the federal bank of the day that he hated.
Still though that is a bit of a diversion from your point that early Presidents were somehow not political,history does not show that to be the case and you need to stick to and defend statements you make.
Not trying to push a fine point but please when folks here ask or challenge you on things that you perhaps don`t feel secure answering or maybe aren`t accurate about just say so and move on.
Vague diversions that seem to be an attempt to change the subject fall short.
Carry on and also wonder how you have related your basically polite and civil (I know there are exceptions) treatment and overall willingness to have honest discussions here to OET or other sites you may frequent.
-
I will agree on that part and also will admit that I don`t understand all the issues regarding the federal bank of the day that he hated.
Still though that is a bit of a diversion from your point that early Presidents were somehow not political,history does not show that to be the case and you need to stick to and defend statements you make.
Not trying to push a fine point but please when folks here ask or challenge you on things that you perhaps don`t feel secure answering or maybe aren`t accurate about just say so and move on.
Vague diversions that seem to be an attempt to change the subject fall short.
Carry on and also wonder how you have related your basically polite and civil (I know there are exceptions) treatment and overall willingness to have honest discussions here to OET or other sites you may frequent.
Apologies, I love Andrew Jackson and got excited you mentioned him.
If you do this 10,000 will starve. If I don't 50,000 will later.
:bow2:
-
Apologies, I love Andrew Jackson and got excited you mentioned him.
If you do this 10,000 will starve. If I don't 50,000 will later.
:bow2:
The history of the Presidency is something of a hobby to me although won`t pretend to be a scholar on the subject or any one in particular.
-
The history of the Presidency is something of a hobby to me although won`t pretend to be a scholar on the subject or any one in particular.
They are all a mixed bag. You have to evaluate what they gave.
Even a conservative can admire Roosevelt's ability to pick just the right men to lead the war effort in WW2.
Even a liberal can admire Nixon's pragmatism in foreign policy.
The lessers both can criticize.
Even a conservative can not be happy with W's call for shopping after 9-11
Even a liberal can cry foul to Obama's ignorance on the causes of the depression that is turning into the 2nd Great one...quickly.
-
Even a conservative can not be happy with W's call for shopping after 9-11
WTF?????
Are you actually finding fault with W's speech about how we should go on with our lives rather than give in to terrorism in order to stave off an economic downturn?
No wonder your handle is AllenTownJerk!
-
WTF?????
Are you actually finding fault with W's speech about how we should go on with our lives rather than give in to terrorism in order to stave off an economic downturn?
No wonder your handle is AllenTownJerk!
I could find many things that I didn't like that Bush did, that wasn't one of them. I would trade Presidents right now in a heart beat.
-
I could find many things that I didn't like that Bush did, that wasn't one of them. I would trade Presidents right now in a heart beat.
I was hoping for war bonds and a declaration of war and a complete mobilization of the home front.
Who knows if that would have worked out well.
-
I was hoping for war bonds and a declaration of war and a complete mobilization of the home front.
Who knows if that would have worked out well.
That's exactly what my other half and my son were looking for...as were many other people I know. I'm also sure there were many that I don't know, who would have been behind that decision in a heart beat.
However, then as now, there are too many people in this country who would never have gone along with it. If I remember back then ...they were called "Liberals". Now they refer to themselves as "Progressives". You may have heard of them?
Personally, I thought carpet bombing should have been considered. Particularly when, 3 months after my son took his oath to serve his country.....we began to bomb Iraq for a few days....
-
That's exactly what my other half and my son were looking for...as were many other people I know. I'm also sure there were many that I don't know, who would have been behind that decision in a heart beat.
However, then as now, there are too many people in this country who would never have gone along with it. If I remember back then ...they were called "Liberals". Now they refer to themselves as "Progressives". You may have heard of them?
Personally, I thought carpet bombing should have been considered. Particularly when, 3 months after my son took his oath to serve his country.....we began to bomb Iraq for a few days....
I don't agree with going to war when it isn't an all in proposal. I don't think it is fair to our troops. Probably something in my mind from my parents.
-
I don't agree with going to war when it isn't an all in proposal. I don't think it is fair to our troops. Probably something in my mind from my parents.
I was not even referring to Congress....I was talking about the general public.
There would have been horrendous outcry from the Left. There are too many of them still around...who spent their late teens and early 20's protesting VietNam. I went to college with several thousand of them.
-
I don't agree with going to war when it isn't an all in proposal. I don't think it is fair to our troops. Probably something in my mind from my parents.
Have you felt that way for the last nine years?
-
I don't agree with going to war when it isn't an all in proposal. I don't think it is fair to our troops. Probably something in my mind from my parents.
As a civilian I stay clear of discussion of military matters but do agree with that sentiment.
I don`t know if it would have been practical logistically and will defer to military folks on that.
Pretty sure the leftist media would have been in hysterics and done all they could to undo that...look at your former board and their idiotic claims of war crimes to this day.
-
As a civilian I stay clear of discussion of military matters but do agree with that sentiment.
I don`t know if it would have been practical logistically and will defer to military folks on that.
Pretty sure the leftist media would have been in hysterics and done all they could to undo that...look at your former board and their idiotic claims of war crimes to this day.
I question after 9 years we can occupy a country in combat without a formal declaration of war. We are really inventing laws as we go along in my opinion.
I don't think torture is a good idea because I question its effectiveness other than as a propaganda tool. I think the enemy surrenders easier if they think they will be treated well. Could be totally wrong.
As far as war crimes go, I'm not sure why we sign these treaties. You are declaring an intention to engage in uncivilized behavior (killing people) to reach an objective. I don't know how people think you can create rules for that.
I've been thinking about that more and more lately. How can you create rules for when an objective is to kill another person and their objective is to kill you.
-
I question after 9 years we can occupy a country in combat without a formal declaration of war. We are really inventing laws as we go along in my opinion.
The one flaw in your argument here is this: What exactly comprises a formal declaration of war, and where is that formal declaration of war outlined in the Constitution? It isn't, and that may be a deliberate area of vagueness for which the Framers intended.
-
Jake, I primarily just lurk on these political boards these days, but I have to say how great it is to see someone engage in thoughtful, intelligent and polite discussions on a board dominated by people who disagree with you. How you survived on the DUmp is truly a mystery.
In the past, I served as a guest correspondent of PJ-Comix's DUmmie FUnnies, and I must say, if all the inhabitants were like you, PJ would be out of a job. A-and if all conservatives were like you, I would still be a regular on FR.
Ummm....Lithium....it's not just for breakfast anymore...yummm...
Credibility...grASSp the concept...
-
No matter what happens he is the first ethnic minority President of the United States. His history book picture was taken on January 20, 2009
Not according to Bill Clinton! :-)
-
I don't think torture is a good idea because I question its effectiveness other than as a propaganda tool. I think the enemy surrenders easier if they think they will be treated well. Could be totally wrong.
Define torture.
As far as war crimes go, I'm not sure why we sign these treaties. You are declaring an intention to engage in uncivilized behavior (killing people) to reach an objective. I don't know how people think you can create rules for that.
I've been thinking about that more and more lately. How can you create rules for when an objective is to kill another person and their objective is to kill you.
Have you ever read the Geneva Conventions, specifically the one from 1949?
-
I don't think torture is a good idea because I question its effectiveness other than as a propaganda tool. I think the enemy surrenders easier if they think they will be treated well. Could be totally wrong.
Personally I think you are wrong.
These are individuals from a culture that thinks it's ok to strap bombs to the body of a CHILD or a PREGNANT WOMAN and explode them just to kill more people and to make some sort of idealogical point!!!!
Do you really and truly think they will tell the truth about their activities if they think they will be treated well?
If you do, you are not only totally naive, but incredibly delusional!
If our Special Forces, or CIA, or whomever it is that interrogates the terrorists...think that an individual as knowledge of intent to harm our countrymen - anywhere in the world, or here at home....I want them to do whatever it takes to get the information from a prisoner!!! And pray to God, they are telling the truth and not hiding the truth!
-
I have to ask Jake this.
Jake, when you see some really kooky off the wall posts, posts such as 9/11 conspiracy theories etc, do you just feel like you want to smack them upside the head? I'm only asking this because as a conservative, years ago we had a very young conservative poster who would be a little off the wall at times and we would talk to him and tell him to stop stuff like that because it reflects badly on us, does it drive you crazy that people who post off the wall stuff get in the way of sane discussions?
-
Ummm....Lithium....it's not just for breakfast anymore...yummm...
Credibility...grASSp the concept...
Complementing someone I disagree with on a message board now means I'm manic-depressive? Or do you not know what lithium is used for?
Credibility? I have no idea why you would question that.
Civility...grASSp the concept...
-
Complementing someone I disagree with on a message board now means I'm manic-depressive? Or do you not know what lithium is used for?
Credibility? I have no idea why you would question that.
Civility...grASSp the concept...
Obviously you could not.
Hence the content and tone of your retort.
-
Obviously you could not.
Hence the content and tone of your retort.
He was a guest host at PJ's? No kiddin'?
He left FR because "Conservatives" were not more like the AllenTown"Jerk"?
He wonders why the "Jerk" lasted as long as he did at the DUmp?????????? Was this before or after he was a guest host?
Color me amazed!
Another guy tellin' us what a conservative is, yet hasn't a clue!
-
He was a guest host at PJ's? No kiddin'?
He left FR because "Conservatives" were not more like the AllenTown"Jerk"?
He wonders why the "Jerk" lasted as long as he did at the DUmp?????????? Was this before or after he was a guest host?
Color me amazed!
Another guy tellin' us what a conservative is, yet hasn't a clue!
Meh... Not worth my time. But do tell me when I told you what a conservative is. I said nothing of the sort. The conversation at FR has degenerated to the same level as DU during the Bush administration. I'd also like to know when Jake acted like a jerk on THIS board. He answered questions and was civil in doing so. I commented on that and that only.
-
Meh... Not worth my time. But do tell me when I told you what a conservative is. I said nothing of the sort. The conversation at FR has degenerated to the same level as DU during the Bush administration. I'd also like to know when Jake acted like a jerk on THIS board. He answered questions and was civil in doing so. I commented on that and that only.
Oh, please!
When you tell the "Jerk" he's more to your liking as a conservative, and if they at FR were more like him you'd still be there, that doesn't mean you expect that from us conservatives? Right? Sure as hell sounds that way to me!
If you had more than a dozen posts, you'd know we had an influx of so-called conservatives tellin' us what conservatism is. Sorry, but you're posts givin' the AllenTownJerk a pass, fall right in with them. Since you're the expert, why don't ya point out his "conservatism"? Not the posts where he says, "I've never really thought about it", or" I'll have to look it up", rather than answer a question? He sure as hell had an opinion over at the DUmp!!!!!!!!!!
Also, apparently you're familiar with "Jerks" posts at the DUmpster, so even though his posts were over the top over there, where he took occasion to call us out, he is forgiven because he changes what board he posts to! Got it!
Don't work that way here. You piss in our cornflakes, we're bound to call ya on it.
And you're right! MEH, it's not worth my time!
See ya! Mr, "I was a guest host"........ You sound more like the Jerk's sock puppet to me, since it appears the two of ya are never on at the same time and it looks like he took a powder.
-
Meh... Not worth my time. But do tell me when I told you what a conservative is. I said nothing of the sort. The conversation at FR has degenerated to the same level as DU during the Bush administration. I'd also like to know when Jake acted like a jerk on THIS board. He answered questions and was civil in doing so. I commented on that and that only.
What is it like to drill a 4" hole into your frontal lobes, insert a 4" Bobby Flay blender blade in and hit the "High Speed Burst" button?
DUmmy Troll et all...
ETA - There is a BIG difference between "acting like a jerk" and being disingenuous.
Try that shit here and we will crunch your Raisenette nut-sack in a virtual vice.
-
What is it like to drill a 4" hole into your frontal lobes, insert a 4" Bobby Flay blender blade in and hit the "High Speed Burst" button?
DUmmy Troll et all...
ETA - There is a BIG difference between "acting like a jerk" and being disingenuous.
Try that shit here and we will crunch your Raisenette nut-sack in a virtual vice.
I'm still thinkin' it's the Jerk's sock puppet! Brain Dead Mutha Fu...........
-
He answered questions and was civil in doing so.
He may have been "civil", but have you noticed that when the questions got a little more tough, he bailed? Some of his "answers" were off the wall and some questions have never been answered.
I would suggest that you do a little more research on ATJ and his behavior towards members of this forum when he first started posting here; specifically when he was treated kindly and went back trash talking this site and it's members on the lib boards.
Then come back and whine about the tone.
-
Oh, please!
When you tell the "Jerk" he's more to your liking as a conservative, and if they at FR were more like him you'd still be there, that doesn't mean you expect that from us conservatives? Right? Sure as hell sounds that way to me!
If you had more than a dozen posts, you'd know we had an influx of so-called conservatives tellin' us what conservatism is. Sorry, but you're posts givin' the AllenTownJerk a pass, fall right in with them. Since you're the expert, why don't ya point out his "conservatism"? Not the posts where he says, "I've never really thought about it", or" I'll have to look it up", rather than answer a question? He sure as hell had an opinion over at the DUmp!!!!!!!!!!
Also, apparently you're familiar with "Jerks" posts at the DUmpster, so even though his posts were over the top over there, where he took occasion to call us out, he is forgiven because he changes what board he posts to! Got it!
Don't work that way here. You piss in our cornflakes, we're bound to call ya on it.
And you're right! MEH, it's not worth my time!
See ya! Mr, "I was a guest host"........ You sound more like the Jerk's sock puppet to me, since it appears the two of ya are never on at the same time and it looks like he took a powder.
I'm sorry for how I came across in my few posts here.
I didn't dig into Jake's posting history, here or at the DUmp and what I said was juvenile. I hope there are no hard feelings.
Mr. "I was a guest host". Man, that is pretty funny. Jeeze, I'm such an asshole sometimes.
-
I didn't dig into Jake's posting history, here or at the DUmp
So are we to assume that you now have researched his posting history?
-
I would suggest that you do a little more research on ATJ and his behavior towards members of this forum when he first started posting here; specifically when he was treated kindly and went back trash talking this site and it's members on the lib boards.
Then come back and whine about the tone.
That seems to be ATJs MO. Hell, he even comes here and trashes the members of Lib boards he belongs to; specifically the one called Old Elm Tree where he looks to still be a member with his own 'column'. Poor thing can't seem to find a happy place.
Not one of the places I've seen him would allow a conservative to remain more than a few posts, yet they all crow about their tolerance.
-
I'm sorry for how I came across in my few posts here.
I didn't dig into Jake's posting history, here or at the DUmp and what I said was juvenile. I hope there are no hard feelings.
Mr. "I was a guest host". Man, that is pretty funny. Jeeze, I'm such an asshole sometimes.
J F'n Kerry, is that you????????????
-
That seems to be ATJs MO. Hell, he even comes here and trashes the members of Lib boards he belongs to; specifically the one called Old Elm Tree where he looks to still be a member with his own 'column'. Poor thing can't seem to find a happy place.
Not one of the places I've seen him would allow a conservative to remain more than a few posts, yet they all crow about their tolerance.
There is no happy place.
I'm conservative on few things, liberal on a few things, and pretty much a 1950s Republican on everything else.
Frankly I look around and I'm stuck in a culture that has abandoned thinking before it speaks or making sure they know what they are talking about before they open their mouths.
I blame TV and marketing.
As far as liberal tolerance, you should have seen the reaction I got locally when I publicly denounced the Health Care bill as a very bad piece of legislation and an economic disaster. I think I would have gotten less vitriol if I denied the Holocaust.