|
Post by Evil Yoda on Mar 4, 2015 21:07:01 GMT -5
An alternative is that the court could decide the law is wrong as written but delay striking it to give Congress a chance to fix it. Whereupon the TEA Party will do everything it can to ensure the Republicans lose 2016, badly. Should be amusing to watch. Standing on principle, and losing a vote, is still a win. Repealing Puppettax would be a great thing for the country. Impeaching The Puppet would, as well, but that will never happen. Yeah, but if you lose all your political power then it's a win in name only. And it's their last. They can't compromise any more, chiefly thanks to the TEA party. And it's going to kill them.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Mar 4, 2015 21:19:15 GMT -5
Oh I donno... they ran hard against Obamacare in 2014. Doing everything they said they would do, doesn't strike me as a road to failure. In a lot of ways the Tea Party has won the last two mid-terms. We'll see. The Democrats will paint them as the party that cost all those people their subsidies, and it will work. The Republicans aren't trusted, which is a big part of why they have trouble getting their message out. I donno... the media isn't trusted anymore either, because they've been playing favorites and everyone can see it. The GOP has taken control of a sizable majority of state legislatures and governorships along with the US Congress. Largely this has happened in spite of the media's refusal to honestly report the GOP's message, and because people are experiencing Democrat incompetence (and blatant lies) first hand. And the Democrats aren't getting the message either. Here in PA, the Democrat that we just elected governor has started out his term by proposing a whole bunch of new taxes (including sales and income tax hikes) which I'm sure will go over just fine. LOL And of course, there's Obama's refusal to acknowledge that, in 2014, he lost. If the world doesn't end as promised with the Republicans running the states, the Democrats are likely to end up with an impossibly small, aging, and extreme bench to draw from at the national level. Hillary would be smart not to run... I suspect her ego will make her do it, but this stuff coming out about her e-mail when she was Sec. State; and the donations to the Clinton foundation would completely disqualify her in a country not being victimized by an extreme-left media that covers for her whenever possible. If she doesn't run, the GOP candidate will likely run away with the White House.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Mar 4, 2015 21:35:33 GMT -5
I wouldn't bet on that...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Mar 4, 2015 21:44:13 GMT -5
I wouldn't bet on that... Ok. If Hillary doesn't run, who do the Democrats have that could win the Presidency? You don't really think Elizabeth Warren is a viable candidate, do you?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 4, 2015 21:47:14 GMT -5
Standing on principle, and losing a vote, is still a win. Repealing Puppettax would be a great thing for the country. Impeaching The Puppet would, as well, but that will never happen. Yeah, but if you lose all your political power then it's a win in name only. And it's their last. They can't compromise any more, chiefly thanks to the TEA party. And it's going to kill them. Good. Their "compromises" are surrenders, which means they are doing nothing that they were elected to do. The latest surrender is just the latest example. They should have shut down the entire government over the illegal amnesty.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Mar 4, 2015 22:03:03 GMT -5
Good. Their "compromises" are surrenders, which means they are doing nothing that they were elected to do. The latest surrender is just the latest example. They should have shut down the entire government over the illegal amnesty. What happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for their lack of compromise? They'll have no power to effect change, then. The Dems will do whatever they wish.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Mar 4, 2015 22:09:07 GMT -5
Good. Their "compromises" are surrenders, which means they are doing nothing that they were elected to do. The latest surrender is just the latest example. They should have shut down the entire government over the illegal amnesty. What happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for their lack of compromise? They'll have no power to effect change, then. The Dems will do whatever they wish. Sort of depends on whether or not they voted for the Republicans for insisting they wouldn't compromise with the Democrats, doesn't it? To flip your question around, what happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for not standing up for anything and compromising their core values? It might be a good idea to reacquaint yourself with what happened to Pappy Bush after he broke his promise of "No New Taxes." The GOP has been too reluctant to let the Democrats shut the government down. How many people actually noticed last time?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Mar 4, 2015 22:23:53 GMT -5
To be honest, not shutting it down is a serious mistake the GOP keeps making. I mean, what happens to the Democrats if 80% of the country discovers it can function just fine without the federal government for like 2-3 months at a time? Core functions continue, even with a shutdown. What happens to the Democrats when 80% of the people discover they don't need anything BUT the core functions that continue anyway? What does that do to the budget process?
The first thing Boehner should have done last time was say: "the government shut down yesterday. Did you notice?" And he should have done that every day, until the party of big government buried itself with the rest of the shut down bits.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Mar 4, 2015 22:57:27 GMT -5
I wouldn't bet on that... Ok. If Hillary doesn't run, who do the Democrats have that could win the Presidency? You don't really think Elizabeth Warren is a viable candidate, do you? No, I don't...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Mar 4, 2015 23:09:26 GMT -5
SOME DECENT CONVERSATION OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, GUYS... IT'S ALWAYS BETTER TO TALK WITHOUT CONSTANTLY ATTACKING EACH ANOTHER... WHICH ACCOMPLISHES NOTHING... THANKS MUCH...
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Mar 4, 2015 23:50:24 GMT -5
To be honest, not shutting it down is a serious mistake the GOP keeps making. I mean, what happens to the Democrats if 80% of the country discovers it can function just fine without the federal government for like 2-3 months at a time? Core functions continue, even with a shutdown. What happens to the Democrats when 80% of the people discover they don't need anything BUT the core functions that continue anyway? What does that do to the budget process? The first thing Boehner should have done last time was say: "the government shut down yesterday. Did you notice?" And he should have done that every day, until the party of big government buried itself with the rest of the shut down bits. Obama's kissbutts will close down things that get noticed, like last time keeping 90 yr old WW2 vets in wheelchairs from visiting their memorial on the Mall
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Mar 5, 2015 6:15:40 GMT -5
To be honest, not shutting it down is a serious mistake the GOP keeps making. I mean, what happens to the Democrats if 80% of the country discovers it can function just fine without the federal government for like 2-3 months at a time? Core functions continue, even with a shutdown. What happens to the Democrats when 80% of the people discover they don't need anything BUT the core functions that continue anyway? What does that do to the budget process? The first thing Boehner should have done last time was say: "the government shut down yesterday. Did you notice?" And he should have done that every day, until the party of big government buried itself with the rest of the shut down bits. Obama's kissbutts will close down things that get noticed, like last time keeping 90 yr old WW2 vets in wheelchairs from visiting their memorial on the Mall Yes they will, but ultimately, if the worst thing that happens to most taxpayers due to a shut down is the local national park is closed, I suspect most voters aren't going to be all that upset by it.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Mar 5, 2015 7:36:40 GMT -5
Obama's kissbutts will close down things that get noticed, like last time keeping 90 yr old WW2 vets in wheelchairs from visiting their memorial on the Mall Yes they will, but ultimately, if the worst thing that happens to most taxpayers due to a shut down is the local national park is closed, I suspect most voters aren't going to be all that upset by it. Funny, I see just the opposite! Important stuff goes unnoticed. Nixon abolished Bretton Woods and put up a great big "Get Creative" sign for the worlds central banks. Reagan raised the Payroll tax by 40% and our treasury was overwhelmed with monies to be spent in a two decades long frenzy. Yet, hardly a murmur from the cheap seats. But close a park or a senior center and all hell breaks loose!
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Mar 5, 2015 10:48:20 GMT -5
What happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for their lack of compromise? They'll have no power to effect change, then. The Dems will do whatever they wish. Sort of depends on whether or not they voted for the Republicans for insisting they wouldn't compromise with the Democrats, doesn't it? To flip your question around, what happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for not standing up for anything and compromising their core values? It might be a good idea to reacquaint yourself with what happened to Pappy Bush after he broke his promise of "No New Taxes." The GOP has been too reluctant to let the Democrats shut the government down. How many people actually noticed last time? The Republicans appear to be where the Democrats were two or three decades ago - divided against each other. The Democrats came through it, but they were in pain for a long time. The Republicans, too, likely will survive. How long it takes them to reintegrate and what form they will take when that's done are still open questions. Socially, most of the country appears to reject the message of the religious wing. Fiscally may be a different story, especially as Obamacare falls apart, which I believe will happen.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 6, 2015 11:22:19 GMT -5
Good. Their "compromises" are surrenders, which means they are doing nothing that they were elected to do. The latest surrender is just the latest example. They should have shut down the entire government over the illegal amnesty. What happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for their lack of compromise? They'll have no power to effect change, then. The Dems will do whatever they wish. The Pubs just won historic landslides, and very few of them ran on a platform of "compromise" with The Puppet and his criminal conspiracy. They all ran on repealing Puppettax, stopping the illegal amnesty, and turning back the illegal destruction of the Constitution. What makes you think that people will now decide that "compromise is what we really want, despite the fact that we just overwhelmingly elected you to do just the opposite"?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 6, 2015 11:25:37 GMT -5
Sort of depends on whether or not they voted for the Republicans for insisting they wouldn't compromise with the Democrats, doesn't it? To flip your question around, what happens when people utterly reject the Republicans for not standing up for anything and compromising their core values? It might be a good idea to reacquaint yourself with what happened to Pappy Bush after he broke his promise of "No New Taxes." The GOP has been too reluctant to let the Democrats shut the government down. How many people actually noticed last time? The Republicans appear to be where the Democrats were two or three decades ago - divided against each other. The Democrats came through it, but they were in pain for a long time. The Republicans, too, likely will survive. How long it takes them to reintegrate and what form they will take when that's done are still open questions. Socially, most of the country appears to reject the message of the religious wing. Fiscally may be a different story, especially as Obamacare falls apart, which I believe will happen. No, the LR media and the paid screamers reject it. The country just elected, overwhelmingly, those that support the message of morals, integrity, and principle, things the Democrats threw away decades ago.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Mar 6, 2015 12:36:41 GMT -5
No, the LR media and the paid screamers reject it. The country just elected, overwhelmingly, those that support the message of morals, integrity, and principle, things the Democrats threw away decades ago. Not really. They may have elected the Republicans expecting fiscal sanity (which they won't get, the Pubs are also the party of big government - their preferred welfare queens are just large corporations). But the ones who revealed their dopey religious fanaticism got laughed at and then lost. Surely you remember some of these: Various Republicans believe women can't get pregnant from rape. Todd Akin believes that, "If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways of shutting that whole thing down.” In Idaho a politician wondered if a woman could swallow a small camera so doctors could visualize her uterus before an abortion. Either these people failed high school biology, or they cynically lied to appeal to people who did. Rick Santorum once said that "birth control was a license to do things in the sexual realm that are counter to how things are supposed to be". He also said, "I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you… rape victims should make the best of a bad situation.", Basically, he thinks a woman should be required to bear her rapist's child. What. An. Ass. And where is he now? On the political scrapheap where he belongs. Then there's Clayton Williams of (no surprise) Texas: "Rape is kinda like the weather. If it's inevitable, relax and enjoy it." And George H. W. Bush, one of the few who won despite this repugnant view: (Sherman is Richard Sherman then of the American Atheist news journal): Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists? Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church? Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists. But go ahead. Encourage that kind of stupidity. And I guess we'll see if you're right. I tend to doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 6, 2015 13:09:43 GMT -5
No, the LR media and the paid screamers reject it. The country just elected, overwhelmingly, those that support the message of morals, integrity, and principle, things the Democrats threw away decades ago. Not really. They may have elected the Republicans expecting fiscal sanity (which they won't get, the Pubs are also the party of big government - their preferred welfare queens are just large corporations). But the ones who revealed their dopey religious fanaticism got laughed at and then lost. Surely you remember some of these: Various Republicans believe women can't get pregnant from rape. Todd Akin believes that, "If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways of shutting that whole thing down.” In Idaho a politician wondered if a woman could swallow a small camera so doctors could visualize her uterus before an abortion. Either these people failed high school biology, or they cynically lied to appeal to people who did. Rick Santorum once said that "birth control was a license to do things in the sexual realm that are counter to how things are supposed to be". He also said, "I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you… rape victims should make the best of a bad situation.", Basically, he thinks a woman should be required to bear her rapist's child. What. An. Ass. And where is he now? On the political scrapheap where he belongs. Then there's Clayton Williams of (no surprise) Texas: "Rape is kinda like the weather. If it's inevitable, relax and enjoy it." And George H. W. Bush, one of the few who won despite this repugnant view: (Sherman is Richard Sherman then of the American Atheist news journal): Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists? Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. Sherman (somewhat taken aback): Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church? Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists. But go ahead. Encourage that kind of stupidity. And I guess we'll see if you're right. I tend to doubt it. And how many Pubs think Guam is going to capsize, that we have a flag planted on Mars, or that minorities are their friends because so many of them are taxi drivers? Or that Israel is really the aggressor? Or that unemployment payments are 'the best economic engine'? Or that "we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it"? You claim Pubs are religious fanatics, but not many of them are anxious to destroy the country over the myth of "global warming", nor do they worship at the altar of income redistribution. Both are religious tenets, both are myths, yet you seem to have no problem with the Dems that hold those infantile views, and force them on the rest of us. As for Santorum's comment, I agree with it. Should you put a child to death because his father killed someone? Should a child be imprisoned because his mother stole something? If not, why do you condemn a child for the actions of a criminal?
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Mar 6, 2015 13:19:43 GMT -5
And how many Pubs think Guam is going to capsize, that we have a flag planted on Mars, or that minorities are their friends because so many of them are taxi drivers? Or that Israel is really the aggressor? Or that unemployment payments are 'the best economic engine'? Or that "we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it"? Democrats certainly have their idiots. But those people aren't trying to force ME to believe their idiocy. Republican religious nuts ARE. You claim Pubs are religious fanatics, but not many of them are anxious to destroy the country over the myth of "global warming", nor do they worship at the altar of income redistribution. Both are religious tenets, Annnnnd, that's where your comment went off the rails. As for Santorum's comment, I agree with it. Should you put a child to death because his father killed someone? Should a child be imprisoned because his mother stole something? If not, why do you condemn a child for the actions of a criminal? Say, rather, I don't demand the mother spend a minimum of nine months reliving the assault. We already know we don't agree on when life begins. What you refuse to accept is that this remains a matter of opinion. By agreeing, you reveal the kind of Republican that insists others believe what he believes. That's the kind of Republican that's working hard to alienate the country. But it doesn't matter what I believe or you believe. It matters whether the country as a whole accepts such views. In Santorum's case, it emphatically did not, which was my point.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 6, 2015 14:13:33 GMT -5
And how many Pubs think Guam is going to capsize, that we have a flag planted on Mars, or that minorities are their friends because so many of them are taxi drivers? Or that Israel is really the aggressor? Or that unemployment payments are 'the best economic engine'? Or that "we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it"? Democrats certainly have their idiots. But those people aren't trying to force ME to believe their idiocy. Republican religious nuts ARE. You claim Pubs are religious fanatics, but not many of them are anxious to destroy the country over the myth of "global warming", nor do they worship at the altar of income redistribution. Both are religious tenets, Annnnnd, that's where your comment went off the rails. As for Santorum's comment, I agree with it. Should you put a child to death because his father killed someone? Should a child be imprisoned because his mother stole something? If not, why do you condemn a child for the actions of a criminal? Say, rather, I don't demand the mother spend a minimum of nine months reliving the assault. We already know we don't agree on when life begins. What you refuse to accept is that this remains a matter of opinion. By agreeing, you reveal the kind of Republican that insists others believe what he believes. That's the kind of Republican that's working hard to alienate the country. But it doesn't matter what I believe or you believe. It matters whether the country as a whole accepts such views. In Santorum's case, it emphatically did not, which was my point. Of course they are. "Global warming" religious zealots, income redistributionists, one world government fanatics, all are Democrats, and all are doing their best to force us all into their religions. Really? So, The Puppet and his fellow Marxists aren't forcing us all to pay for the leech's health care, welfare, unemployment, WIC, food stamps? They haven't put record numbers on those programs through their insane lack of comprehension over the economy? They aren't flooding the country with illegals so they can put even more in Puppettax, on welfare, and food stamps? What Pubs, other than Boehner and McConnell have done any of that? No, it's not opinion. It's biological fact. The baby's heart starts beating before most women even know they are pregnant. If you claim that it's not "life" until the baby actually start's thinking, you would open "late term" abortion to include the entire Democrat Party, starting with The Puppet. And it's not the baby's fault his mother was raped, what you advocate is the punishment of the innocent for crimes over which he/she had no control, no hand in, and knew nothing about.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Mar 6, 2015 15:26:47 GMT -5
Of course they are. "Global warming" religious zealots, income redistributionists, one world government fanatics, all are Democrats, and all are doing their best to force us all into their religions. Really? So, The Puppet and his fellow Marxists aren't forcing us all to pay for the leech's health care, welfare, unemployment, WIC, food stamps? They haven't put record numbers on those programs through their insane lack of comprehension over the economy? They aren't flooding the country with illegals so they can put even more in Puppettax, on welfare, and food stamps? What Pubs, other than Boehner and McConnell have done any of that? The fact that you disagree with something does not make it a religion, sorry. Religion is based on faith: circular as it sounds, people believe because they believe. The ideas you've tossed about here are not based on faith. They may be based on data you do not accept or derived from reasoning you disagree with, but that does not make them religion. No, it's not opinion. It's biological fact. The baby's heart starts beating before most women even know they are pregnant. If you claim that it's not "life" until the baby actually start's thinking, you would open "late term" abortion to include the entire Democrat Party, starting with The Puppet. And it's not the baby's fault his mother was raped, what you advocate is the punishment of the innocent for crimes over which he/she had no control, no hand in, and knew nothing about. My opinion, which is as valid as yours, is that life begins when the baby can be disconnected from the mother and survive. Your opinion differs. That's fine: how about you folks organize your lives around your opinion - no one has tried to stop you - and grant others that courtesy. That's called compromise. It's how folks live together. The rest of your argument derives from the incorrect idea that your opinion is fact. The TEA party does not understand compromise either, and the Democrats like that a lot!
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Mar 10, 2015 17:56:32 GMT -5
Democrats certainly have their idiots. But those people aren't trying to force ME to believe their idiocy. Republican religious nuts ARE. Annnnnd, that's where your comment went off the rails. Say, rather, I don't demand the mother spend a minimum of nine months reliving the assault. We already know we don't agree on when life begins. What you refuse to accept is that this remains a matter of opinion. By agreeing, you reveal the kind of Republican that insists others believe what he believes. That's the kind of Republican that's working hard to alienate the country. But it doesn't matter what I believe or you believe. It matters whether the country as a whole accepts such views. In Santorum's case, it emphatically did not, which was my point. Really? So, The Puppet and his fellow Marxists aren't forcing us all to pay for the leech's health care, welfare, unemployment, WIC, food stamps? They haven't put record numbers on those programs through their insane lack of comprehension over the economy? They aren't flooding the country with illegals so they can put even more in Puppettax, on welfare, and food stamps? What Pubs, other than Boehner and McConnell have done any of that?That's a tough sell red! The Federalist Party has done all of the above and more! One could not possibly be a relevant political entity in America without championing all the functions you list. Actually from the beginning! (Party of Lincoln?) The Democrats were laggards and had to be dragged into the world of public schools, phony currency and economic protectionism.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 11, 2015 8:39:28 GMT -5
Of course they are. "Global warming" religious zealots, income redistributionists, one world government fanatics, all are Democrats, and all are doing their best to force us all into their religions. Really? So, The Puppet and his fellow Marxists aren't forcing us all to pay for the leech's health care, welfare, unemployment, WIC, food stamps? They haven't put record numbers on those programs through their insane lack of comprehension over the economy? They aren't flooding the country with illegals so they can put even more in Puppettax, on welfare, and food stamps? What Pubs, other than Boehner and McConnell have done any of that? The fact that you disagree with something does not make it a religion, sorry. Religion is based on faith: circular as it sounds, people believe because they believe. The ideas you've tossed about here are not based on faith. They may be based on data you do not accept or derived from reasoning you disagree with, but that does not make them religion. No, it's not opinion. It's biological fact. The baby's heart starts beating before most women even know they are pregnant. If you claim that it's not "life" until the baby actually start's thinking, you would open "late term" abortion to include the entire Democrat Party, starting with The Puppet. And it's not the baby's fault his mother was raped, what you advocate is the punishment of the innocent for crimes over which he/she had no control, no hand in, and knew nothing about. My opinion, which is as valid as yours, is that life begins when the baby can be disconnected from the mother and survive. Your opinion differs. That's fine: how about you folks organize your lives around your opinion - no one has tried to stop you - and grant others that courtesy. That's called compromise. It's how folks live together. The rest of your argument derives from the incorrect idea that your opinion is fact. The TEA party does not understand compromise either, and the Democrats like that a lot! Those are not opinion, since every view held by those that believe in those things is based on faith. There is no evidence that the earth is warming because of man, there is nothing but lies, "data" made up from whole cloth, or manipulated to produce a particular outcome. The faith is deeply held by those that worship Gaiea that man is inherently evil, and is destroying their earth god. It's a religion. Just like Islam, those that don't believe, or believe as deeply as the fanatics must be destroyed. Same with income redistribution and one world government believers. All are part of the same religion, worship of Gaiea. They are convinced that Communism WILL WORK, if the "right people" are put in place, and that the only way to further their religion is to force it on the entire world through a world government. As for life, by your parameters, life doesn't begin until about the age of 5. And your view of "compromise" is a bit skewed, since it was Dingy Harry that prevented any bills from passing through the Senate for 2 years, and even killed the filibuster to get his owner's judges installed. And is now using the filibuster to stop any and all bills that don't follow exactly the Communist Manifesto that his owner demands be enacted.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Mar 11, 2015 8:44:16 GMT -5
Really? So, The Puppet and his fellow Marxists aren't forcing us all to pay for the leech's health care, welfare, unemployment, WIC, food stamps? They haven't put record numbers on those programs through their insane lack of comprehension over the economy? They aren't flooding the country with illegals so they can put even more in Puppettax, on welfare, and food stamps? What Pubs, other than Boehner and McConnell have done any of that? That's a tough sell red! The Federalist Party has done all of the above and more! One could not possibly be a relevant political entity in America without championing all the functions you list. Actually from the beginning! (Party of Lincoln?) The Democrats were laggards and had to be dragged into the world of public schools, phony currency and economic protectionism. But that's because they realized that "BLACKS" would be allowed to be educated, and use that phony currency. Racism is the primary motivation behind the Democrat party, and all of it's programs. Keeping blacks subservient is the goal, and now they intend the same thing with hispanics. The reason that it's impossible to govern without the handouts is because the Dems made sure to get as many blacks enrolled in the slavery programs as possible, so they could use accusations of racism against anyone trying to modify, or repeal their pet programs. Now, The Puppet is importing as many new slaves as possible to make sure that there is never a free society again.
|
|