|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Feb 19, 2010 19:21:35 GMT -5
I love this man. Mitt Romney 2012
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Feb 20, 2010 22:06:21 GMT -5
oh, mitt romney, the only man i know of who is greasier than his hair. p.s. i am having a laugh at who won the cpac straw poll: ron paul. oh, what a difference three years make.
anyways, every time you post something by or about mitt romney, i'm going to counter it with material by george carlin that will surely offend you. so let's begin.
|
|
|
Post by thomaslivesforever on Mar 4, 2010 10:23:16 GMT -5
NL4E why do you support a party that stunts progress?
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 6, 2010 20:08:17 GMT -5
because his ilk believe "progressivism" is a cancer. women's rights, the abolition of slavery, the voter's rights act, desegregation, universal healthcare, repealing child labor laws, electoral reform... bad things! true conservatism has been dead since at least 1980.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 7, 2010 19:25:43 GMT -5
I hate liberals because dependency is death to initiative. I hate the idea of big government
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 8, 2010 5:37:51 GMT -5
I hate liberals because dependency is death to initiative. I hate the idea of big government Great soundbite. You should be a member of David Cameron's shadow cabinet.
|
|
|
Post by caro on Mar 8, 2010 16:02:23 GMT -5
oh, mitt romney, the only man i know of who is greasier than his hair. p.s. i am having a laugh at who won the cpac straw poll: ron paul. oh, what a difference three years make. anyways, every time you post something by or about mitt romney, i'm going to counter it with material by george carlin that will surely offend you. so let's begin. a few far stretched points but some funny parts. i am totally pro choice but then i am more of a conservative person. politics in the US are so frustrating.... it is all black or white, superconservative or superliberal... no inbetween... so anyway, i enjoyed the chicken part
|
|
|
Post by caro on Mar 8, 2010 16:09:21 GMT -5
oh yeah i wanted to say that the passing or not of obama care heavily depends on the public funding of abortion... WTF? I'm all for it not passing but abortion being one of the reasons why is totally beyond anything... having this debate about abortion is retarded... abortion was made legal in the 70's in france and that's the end of it... it is not debated anymore...
i mean, even the so called democrats are saying they won't fund it... but what is the big deal? when you look at it, women and girls who seeks for abortion are bound to be public funds dependent anyway! so if you look at it, letting them have an abortion, publicly funded or not will save tons of public bucks... i'm just talking about money there and not about any emotional issues... anyway, it drives me crazy that it is such a big deal!
being french in the US is quite interesting and weird sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 8, 2010 19:35:16 GMT -5
abortion has been one of the most heated arguments for the past forty years or so. i personally believe that no man has the right to say what a woman can or cannot do with her body. abstinence only education only makes the problem worse, as the programs don't usually teach about condoms. georgie said it best: pro-choice is anti-woman.
what you've been seeing for decades is the democrats' inability to cope with a unified opposition party. there are different types of democrats, and they have infighting. the republicans just kick out people who don't stick to the party's policies. they've become an opposition party that says no to any plan from the democrats. why? because it's from the democrats. hell, the democrats didn't do that even during the bush years.
and l4e, don't complain about socialism if you used, use or plan to use public libraries, public education, call 911 or the fire department, mail or receive a letter. they're all socialist policies, so stray from the soundbites. this economic situation was caused by libertarian thinking with free market, no government intervention/probing, etc. (and i admit i was wrong, as i supported it.) the markets do not regulate themselves when we have corrupt bankers and members of congress.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 9, 2010 3:40:51 GMT -5
oh, mitt romney, the only man i know of who is greasier than his hair. p.s. i am having a laugh at who won the cpac straw poll: ron paul. oh, what a difference three years make. anyways, every time you post something by or about mitt romney, i'm going to counter it with material by george carlin that will surely offend you. so let's begin. politics in the US are so frustrating.... it is all black or white, superconservative or superliberal... no inbetween... Aye that would really piss me off too. When you really think about it, it's a bit mad that the most powerful country in the world has such a narrow political system. Our general election will be held in the next couple of months and I'll probably have around 10 candidates to pick from on my voting form (if I decide to vote), not just two. Granted only 3 or 4 of them have a chance of winning, but at least the choice is there for the voter.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 9, 2010 3:43:41 GMT -5
Oh and I 100% agree with what you said about abortion caro, why that's even being debated in 2010 is quite unbelievable.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 9, 2010 14:10:21 GMT -5
politics in the US are so frustrating.... it is all black or white, superconservative or superliberal... no inbetween... Aye that would really piss me off too. When you really think about it, it's a bit mad that the most powerful country in the world has such a narrow political system. Our general election will be held in the next couple of months and I'll probably have around 10 candidates to pick from on my voting form (if I decide to vote), not just two. Granted only 3 or 4 of them have a chance of winning, but at least the choice is there for the voter. that's the way the constitution is, though. the way it was written only allows two major parties. look at the list of american presidents--the last one who wasn't a democrat or republican was millard fillmore in 1850, from the whig party (which could be considered one of the major parties at the time).
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 10, 2010 2:20:30 GMT -5
Aye that would really piss me off too. When you really think about it, it's a bit mad that the most powerful country in the world has such a narrow political system. Our general election will be held in the next couple of months and I'll probably have around 10 candidates to pick from on my voting form (if I decide to vote), not just two. Granted only 3 or 4 of them have a chance of winning, but at least the choice is there for the voter. that's the way the constitution is, though. the way it was written only allows two major parties. look at the list of american presidents--the last one who wasn't a democrat or republican was millard fillmore in 1850, from the whig party (which could be considered one of the major parties at the time). Really? I didn't know that, that's mental. What was the reason for that being written into the constitution? Surely in a democracy an individual should be free to start any kind of political party they like?
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 10, 2010 17:12:49 GMT -5
while saying there are only two major parties at a time wasn't specifically written in the constitution, the way the constitution constructed how the government works made it so.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 11, 2010 2:31:26 GMT -5
Ah right, so my plan to move to the US and start the "Islamc Communist Gay and Lesbian Party" is a non starter then?
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 11, 2010 15:01:17 GMT -5
i would pay to see that. hell, i'd vote for it just to see the reaction from fox news.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 21, 2010 17:00:26 GMT -5
and l4e, don't complain about socialism if you used, use or plan to use public libraries, public education, call 911 or the fire department, mail or receive a letter. if i compare the discussion in the united states about obamas health care bill with the existing situation in germany... jesus, looks like i am living in a socialistic country! but eventhough we don't really have a perfect system (cause i guess i perfect health care system is utopia), i think it is disturbing, that so many people in the strongest economical country live without health care. and why does that the word "social" obviously cause a mass hysteria amongst the american people? there is a difference between social polictics and socialism. to me, from an external perspective, it is also disturbing that the republicans claim that obamas health care reform has anything to do with hitler. or that they link it with communist countries... also: why they say that this bill will lead to panels that decide about grannies death is just beyond me. i must admitt, i am not an expert in american home policy but some things confuse me...
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 17:14:27 GMT -5
and l4e, don't complain about socialism if you used, use or plan to use public libraries, public education, call 911 or the fire department, mail or receive a letter. if i compare the discussion in the united states about obamas health care bill with the existing situation in germany... jesus, looks like i am living in a socialistic country! but eventhough we don't really have a perfect system (cause i guess i perfect health care system is utopia), i think it is disturbing, that so many people in the strongest economical country live without health care. and why does that the word "social" obviously cause a mass hysteria amongst the american people? there is a difference between social polictics and socialism. to me, from an external perspective, it is also disturbing that the republicans claim that obamas health care reform has anything to do with hitler. or that they link it with communist countries... also: why they say that this bill will lead to panels that decide about grannies death is just beyond me. i must admitt, i am not an expert in american home policy but some things confuse me... Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. Those numbers of uninsured are inflated anyway - many comprise of illigal immigrants and the "invincible" (youths who don't have insurance because they don't believe they need it) Then there's the financial aspect of this. It's going to add to the deficit (let' be honest, it will). It's going to increase taxes. And in such a bad economy how can we afford this? We should be focused on creating jobs, not this health care issue. Furthermore, big government does not mean better government. Just look at England's NHS, it's a disaster. And there are panels in this bill, but the GOP spins it to make it seem worse than it probably is. Before anyone says that's wrong, both parties engage in playing politics. Also, this is a vastly unpopular bill. To me, dems are damned if they do, damned if they don't. When this passes tonight, and it will, this will be the end of the Democrats for awhile. Voting yes is political suicide, and the GOP will make massive gains in November. The Civil Rights bill in the 1960s killed the Democrats for 40 years. Of course that was a good bill, but the comparisons are rife here - the unpopularity of this could destroy the Dems for some time This is historic alright. A historic mistake.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 17:18:33 GMT -5
Also, tonight ends nothing. This bill is unconstitutional and it's going to go to the supreme court. This is far from over.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 21, 2010 19:38:32 GMT -5
Then there's the financial aspect of this. It's going to add to the deficit (let' be honest, it will). It's going to increase taxes. ooooooooh, and of course, bushis wars are gonna finance themselves by digging out dollars in the desert of iraq. it may be new to you, but war is damn expensive. and how does america pay bushis wars? right - it is publicly financed. and what do you do if you don't have the money to pay for this? right - raise taxes. soooooo, the point is: obama cares about the health of the nation. he thinks that everybody should get health care - that will cost the united states some amount of money. bushi thought about the health care, too - he declared that iraq had some wmds that threatened america, started some stupid war and claimed that the billions spend there were necessary for americas security. unfortunately, these dollars were sunk costs, cause they just didn't have wmds.... i guess you should give obama a try.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 19:43:00 GMT -5
Then there's the financial aspect of this. It's going to add to the deficit (let' be honest, it will). It's going to increase taxes. ooooooooh, and of course, bushis wars are gonna finance themselves by digging out dollars in the desert of iraq. it may be new to you, but war is damn expensive. and how does america pay bushis wars? right - it is publicly financed. and what do you do if you don't have the money to pay for this? right - raise taxes. soooooo, the point is: obama cares about the health of the nation. he thinks that everybody should get health care - that will cost the united states some amount of money. bushi thought about the health care, too - he declared that iraq had some wmds that threatened america, started some stupid war and claimed that the billions spend there were necessary for americas security. unfortunately, these dollars were sunk costs, cause they just didn't have wmds.... i guess you should give obama a try. Obama spent more in one day on the ineffective stimulus package than bush did in 7 years over freeing iraqis from an oppressive regime. Also Bush spent like a Democrat, and look where that got him with popularity. And two wrongs dont make a right Debate over
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 21, 2010 19:45:02 GMT -5
Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. good! so you should really understand why i am irritated why those stupid republicans say that obama is a socialist and that he wants to implement hitlers laws.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 19:45:59 GMT -5
Hitler was a fascist, not a socialist. good! so you should really understand why i am irritated why those stupid republicans say that obama is a socialist and that he wants to implement hitlers laws. Hitler's name has never once been uttered.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 21, 2010 19:51:00 GMT -5
Obama spent more in one day on the ineffective stimulus package than bush did in 7 years over freeing iraqis from an oppressive regime. uh, i forgot. the latest justification for this war is that the iraqis were freed from this regime... yeah, it is pretty hard not to get confused, you know. iraq supported AQ at 9/11, iraq has wmds with nuclear power, iraq had the wheapons but took them to syria...
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 19:55:00 GMT -5
Obama spent more in one day on the ineffective stimulus package than bush did in 7 years over freeing iraqis from an oppressive regime. uh, i forgot. the latest justification for this war is that the iraqis were freed from this regime... yeah, it is pretty hard not to get confused, you know. iraq supported AQ at 9/11, iraq has wmds with nuclear power, iraq had the wheapons but took them to syria... Ok. He was wrong. But so was Al Gore and Clinton in the 90s when they used that rationale to send in cruise missiles. Everyone thought Saddam had WMD. They were wrong. This doesn't mean Bush lied. But a world without Saddam and a better Iraq not only helps to stabilize the middle east, but makes the world safter, too. And if you looked closer, Saddam had loose links with AQ (although he was not involved in 9/11).
|
|