champu 1 #76 October 9, 2009 QuoteSo this was bipartisan and comes from the already-established bill, it isn't from extra funding. 2.5B from 600B is nothing,but most importantly, it was bipartisan and Obama was against it as was McCain. This is a microcosm of an issue and you have not tied to it Obama or the Dems. Absolutely correct it is bipartisan... I said it once and I'll say it again, politicians are politicians, I'd put down the pom-poms if I were you. If the pentagon drafts a budget of $640B, and the house and senate pass a $600B defense bill that mandates $40B must be spent on sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads because lobbyists told them to then both the republicans and democrats have failed us. Can we agree here? Or would you read such a headline and paraphrase it as "democratic-lead house and senate succeed in cutting defense spending by 6.25%." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #77 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuotePolitical parties are more concerned with themselves and not the state of the country. it used to be that a president's second term was where he would get things done because he didn't have to worry about re-election. Now, the first term is where the president establishes reputation and gets re-elected, and the second term is where the president worries about the party. somewhere in there the country lost And with recent Repubs, they are concerned for their cronies with taxes. Tell me how Obama is being self-serving by wantint to raise taxes on teh rich (himself) and by getting HC to all, considering he has never wanted for HC. you keep bringing up the Obama administration. Defensive? I mentioned political parties in general. As everyone has pretty much agreed, the Obama admin hasn't had much of a chance to do a whole lot. Though you can bet that the party has a say in what happens. Have to maintain the reputation of the party.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,677 #78 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI just don’t get the reaction to the Olympics and the Nobel peace prize. We have people cheering when our team fails, and angry when our team wins a prize. I mean how obvious does it have to get? I am not saying he deserved to get the Nobel peace prize but we did win right? Unless you are more loyal to your party then your country it is a cause for celebrating. Only if you value the winning over everything else. Some people think that winning something without deserving it isn't worth anything. Who deserves to win is decided by the committee. Their prize, their decision. blah blah blah... you've already established that your opinion is meaningless With respect to who won the prize, both of our opinions are meaningless. You, however, seem unable to recognize that yours is. Do you also second guess Supreme Court decisions and baseball umpires' calls?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #79 October 9, 2009 when I don't agree with them you bet your ass I do. I don't expect that my bitching and moaning will make a difference about either though. Neither is something voted upon. My question has been pretty consistent. I wonder what he did to deserve the nomination in the first week and change of his presidency. Now that I've seen the rationale behind the comittee's decision, I understand why they did it. I think that awarding the prize based on what someone might do cheapens the name and value of the award, but I understand their thought process. .... and I know that my opinion means crap-all to the comittee. You don't hear about me calling them to correct them do you? No, because really I don't care. Certainly not now that the Nobel prize is being awarded based on potential. Especially not when it was likely awarded to try to influence policy decisions. (my opinion that means crap-all again)-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,167 #80 October 9, 2009 Quote Do you also second guess Supreme Court decisions We sure do here Quote baseball umpires' calls? Nope, those belong in Bonfire Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #81 October 9, 2009 QuoteI just don’t get the reaction to the Olympics and the Nobel peace prize. I mean how obvious does it have to get? I am not saying he deserved to get the Nobel peace prize but we did win right? Unless you are more loyal to your party then your country it is a cause for celebrating. So the question is do you support America, or your party? Who comes first in your book? You are showing blind partisan politics here. Olympics... Didn't care. I actually think that Brazil should have gotten since they had never had one before. Also, while some think it would have been an economic boom.... It has been shown to not really bring in as much as you have to spend. Still, it would have been a way to build the Chicago economy in a way that was not a total waste. Nobel... Really????? He was nominated TWO weeks after he took office and based on what he *might* do. You don't give a Nobel Prize in Physics for what you *might* do. You don't give the Nobel prize for literature for what you *might* write. There were so many other people that deserved it for what THEY HAVE DONE. To give it away before he did anything is nothing but pandering. I agreed with Carter winning it.... He DID SOMETHING."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #82 October 9, 2009 QuoteI just don’t get the reaction to the Olympics and the Nobel peace prize. We have people cheering when our team fails, and angry when our team wins a prize. I mean how obvious does it have to get? I am not saying he deserved to get the Nobel peace prize but we did win right? Unless you are more loyal to your party then your country it is a cause for celebrating. So the question is do you support America, or your party? Who comes first in your book? When I see our Own President stop "apolgizing" for our country, and Failing at everything he has attempted to do..Then Maybe I will be excited .... Republicans support the "Country" much more than the average Liberal. that just wants to follow the sheep! Gawd, and to think, back when I was Young, (And dumb) I used to call myself a liberal...I'd be ashamed to say such a thing now! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #83 October 9, 2009 Our 'engineers' (handy-men) have starting salaries of just under $40 per hour, not including overtime or graveyard. Same price for the touch-up painters. Our bussers ear $18 per hour plus tip-outs, dishwaers are $20 per hour. We had waste management strikes a couple years back- the trashmen earn salaries in the 75-85K range PLUS benefits. The BART train operators earn 63-75K annually + benefits. The best part? THEY ALL THINK THEY ARE UNDERPAID. The average manager at my property (1900+ guestrooms, we do over 120 million annually on average) makes between 45-55K... Welcome to the way the world works now. Dock workers get paid six figures now, and we wonder why we can't compete with the global market, the rest of the world ISN'T insane like our workforce. end rant BrettSo there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,677 #84 October 10, 2009 Quote Our 'engineers' (handy-men) have starting salaries of just under $40 per hour, not including overtime or graveyard. Same price for the touch-up painters. Our bussers ear $18 per hour plus tip-outs, dishwaers are $20 per hour. We had waste management strikes a couple years back- the trashmen earn salaries in the 75-85K range PLUS benefits. The BART train operators earn 63-75K annually + benefits. The best part? THEY ALL THINK THEY ARE UNDERPAID. The average manager at my property (1900+ guestrooms, we do over 120 million annually on average) makes between 45-55K... Welcome to the way the world works now. Dock workers get paid six figures now, and we wonder why we can't compete with the global market, the rest of the world ISN'T insane like our workforce. end rant Brett Why are you underpaying your managers?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dsandreas 0 #85 October 10, 2009 I want to see Obama fail with 1) his version of health care reform, 2) cap and tax, 3) union card check, 4) tax increases, and many other of his policies that harm the country. I love the country...so yes, I want Obama to fail in many of his policies. Quote Agreed. I am very surprised at the large number of people who rejoice at America's failures and mourn our successes - based purely on their desire to see America's president fail. It almost sounds like their hatred for the president is much stronger than their love for their country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #86 October 10, 2009 QuoteYou don't give the Nobel prize for literature for what you *might* write. Nor is it given for something someone has already written.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dsandreas 0 #87 October 10, 2009 p.s...I wanted Bush to fail on his version of immigration reform, his version of no child left behind, the prescription drug benefit plan, and many other of his harmful policies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #88 October 10, 2009 QuoteI suffer from logic and facts. . I appears you were cured"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,677 #89 October 10, 2009 Quotewhen I don't agree with them you bet your ass I do. I don't expect that my bitching and moaning will make a difference about either though. Neither is something voted upon. My question has been pretty consistent. I wonder what he did to deserve the nomination in the first week and change of his presidency. Now that I've seen the rationale behind the comittee's decision, I understand why they did it. I think that awarding the prize based on what someone might do cheapens the name and value of the award, but I understand their thought process. .... and I know that my opinion means crap-all to the comittee. You don't hear about me calling them to correct them do you? No, because really I don't care. Certainly not now that the Nobel prize is being awarded based on potential. Especially not when it was likely awarded to try to influence policy decisions. (my opinion that means crap-all again) Good job we'll soon have universal health care, you're going to need those blood pressure meds.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #90 October 10, 2009 Quoteside note: not all career fields have 40hour work weeks. salaried employees or sub-contractors don't get paid overtime. not all occupations have the ability to unionize. People still get hurt and to to the ER or have babies on holidays.... Most do, generally management does not, but even they can. What the original author of that statement was talking about is FDR's FLSA of 1938. Then your boy went and limited it with the Overtime Law he shoved thru congress, took him over 3 years to get it thru. It was entitled the Overtime Law, it was aimed at primarily RN's, but I think it was Walmart who took it to teh limit and tried to compel regular workers to fall under it. Who can't unionize? Are you confusing that for can't strike? QuoteNot that those aren't "good ideas" - and there have been good ideas from BOTH sides. So to discuss that let me bring up some of my stepfathers, John L. Merkt submitted bills (NOT saying that I agree with his bills; prior to his death, he and I would civilly discuss those issues) - Seatbelt laws and motorcycle Helmet use in Wisconsin - Increased the drinking age in Wisconsin - Len Bias Law Yes, you could argue that those were passed with bi-partisian efforts - but those were HIS "babies" that he pushed. And he was a Republican. Not sure how that pertains to the issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #91 October 10, 2009 QuoteAbsolutely correct it is bipartisan... I said it once and I'll say it again, politicians are politicians, I'd put down the pom-poms if I were you. The original question was something like how the Dems have fucked us, wasn't it? You still haven't established that with your microcosm of an argument. Of all military toys transport acft are the least of our worries, not to mention Obama urged against it. Again, show us how teh Dems have fucked us. QuoteIf the pentagon drafts a budget of $640B, and the house and senate pass a $600B defense bill that mandates $40B must be spent on sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads because lobbyists told them to then both the republicans and democrats have failed us. Can we agree here? It depends upon who voted for it. For example NAFTA was initiated by GHWB, then the Dem controlled congress passed it with overwhelming Repub support, even tho they were a minority. That was more Repub than Dem. Then Clinton signed it. That was an issue that was more systemeic, but it had more Repub support. Again, you're looking for a microcosm of an argument to make a major point. Let's talk debt and other longterm major issues. QuoteOr would you read such a headline and paraphrase it as "democratic-lead house and senate succeed in cutting defense spending by 6.25%." I would rather look at the budget, the issues, the intent and the result as a whole rather than a microcosm. I can take any fragment and make a point that might not be representative of the truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #92 October 10, 2009 Quoteyou keep bringing up the Obama administration. Defensive? Proud and optimistic. BTW, this is a political thread, the president might come up on occassion. QuoteAs everyone has pretty much agreed, the Obama admin hasn't had much of a chance to do a whole lot. Though you can bet that the party has a say in what happens. Have to maintain the reputation of the party. Yet he has. The first quarter of 09 the GDP was -6.4, the 2nd it jumped to -1.0, a really great improvement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #93 October 10, 2009 QuoteOur 'engineers' (handy-men) have starting salaries of just under $40 per hour, not including overtime or graveyard. Same price for the touch-up painters. Our bussers ear $18 per hour plus tip-outs, dishwaers are $20 per hour. We had waste management strikes a couple years back- the trashmen earn salaries in the 75-85K range PLUS benefits. The BART train operators earn 63-75K annually + benefits. The best part? THEY ALL THINK THEY ARE UNDERPAID. The average manager at my property (1900+ guestrooms, we do over 120 million annually on average) makes between 45-55K... Welcome to the way the world works now. Dock workers get paid six figures now, and we wonder why we can't compete with the global market, the rest of the world ISN'T insane like our workforce. end rant Brett Is that state or what? What is the employer? I find it hard to believe, is there a website? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,470 #94 October 10, 2009 >Republicans support the "Country" much more than the average Liberal. Apparently only when "their guy" is in charge. When he's not, they cheer when the US loses the Olympic games. Conservatives have expressed hopes for terrorist attacks, and described with glee the prospects of a military coup here in the US. What would you call someone who hopes for attacks against America, or talks about the violent overthrow of our government? Is that the new conservative definition of "patriot?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #95 October 10, 2009 QuoteRepublicans support the "Country" much more than the average Liberal. that just wants to follow the sheep! And the Dems led teh way in teh 20th century for 4 of teh 5 wars, inclu WWII; are they unpatriotic? QuoteGawd, and to think, back when I was Young, (And dumb) I used to call myself a liberal...I'd be ashamed to say such a thing now! To say you were young and dumb? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Thanatos340 1 #96 October 10, 2009 I cant say I cheered when Chicago Lost the Olympic bid.. But I did think the Olympic Committee made a good choice. It was the right choice and it had absolutely NOTHING to do with Obama. Seriously.. Ever been to Chicago??? The weather sucks, the people are Rude, the politicians are corrupt and the Unions are ridiculous there. Just try getting anything built there. It is insane between dealing with the local politicians and then you have to deal with the unions. Vs Brazil?? They desperately need the income, The people are beautiful, Vibrant and full of life. The politicians are just as corrupt there but it will make MUCH better viewing for the world. It wasn't Politics, It was a rational decision. And THAT should always be cheered. QuoteWhat would you call someone who hopes for attacks against America, or talks about the violent overthrow of our government? Is that the new conservative definition of "patriot?" Nut Jobs are rampant on both sides of the spectrum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,470 #97 October 10, 2009 >Seriously.. Ever been to Chicago? Yes. Have you ever been to Atlanta? >It wasn't Politics, It was a rational decision. And THAT should always >be cheered. I can think of a lot of rational decisions that you wouldn't cheer. I am sure you can think of some yourself. >Nut Jobs are rampant on both sides of the spectrum. Agreed. And right now, the ones on the right are so full of anger and hate that it's boiling out into vitriol, deceit and violence. The left probably has just as many, but they have less to be angry about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Thanatos340 1 #98 October 10, 2009 All Politics aside, The Olympics.. Good decision. The Better/more qualified candidate was chosen. The Nobel Prize, Bad Choice. The Better/more qualified candidate was not chosen. Why does saying that equate to anything other than a rational opinion? Edit: Quotethe ones on the right are so full of anger and hate that it's boiling out into vitriol, deceit and violence. The anger comes from fear Because it is their beliefs and core principals that they feel are being threatened. And the deceit also runs rampant on both sides. Every day there are talking points and spin spewed from both side and people have chosen teams and blindly follow their side. (And yes, I find this very very sad) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kbordson 8 #99 October 10, 2009 Quote QuoteNot that those aren't "good ideas" - and there have been good ideas from BOTH sides. So to discuss that let me bring up some of my stepfathers, John L. Merkt submitted bills (NOT saying that I agree with his bills; prior to his death, he and I would civilly discuss those issues) - Seatbelt laws and motorcycle Helmet use in Wisconsin - Increased the drinking age in Wisconsin - Len Bias Law Yes, you could argue that those were passed with bi-partisian efforts - but those were HIS "babies" that he pushed. And he was a Republican. Not sure how that pertains to the issue. Sorry that was actually a response to funjumpers's comments QuoteNO POSTITIVE[sic] CHANGE HAS EVER HAPPENED DUE TO CONSERVATIVE PHILOSOPHY. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,470 #100 October 10, 2009 >Why does saying that equate to anything other than a rational opinion? ?? It doesn't. You said you should always cheer a rational decision. Someday it may be rational for the world to boycott the US; it may even be seem like a good idea for the next superpower to start a nuclear war with us that they feel they can win. I suspect you won't cheer those things. Even if, for most of the world, they may be the rational thing to do. >The anger comes from fear Because it is their beliefs and core principals >that they feel are being threatened. Yes. And others prey on that fear to incite the sort of anger and violence that helps their cause. Recently an anti-Obama conservative went on a shooting spree because he thought Obama would "grab his guns." I wonder if the people spreading that sort of fear and anger cheered; it was certainly a success story for them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 4 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
jcd11235 0 #86 October 10, 2009 QuoteYou don't give the Nobel prize for literature for what you *might* write. Nor is it given for something someone has already written.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dsandreas 0 #87 October 10, 2009 p.s...I wanted Bush to fail on his version of immigration reform, his version of no child left behind, the prescription drug benefit plan, and many other of his harmful policies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #88 October 10, 2009 QuoteI suffer from logic and facts. . I appears you were cured"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,677 #89 October 10, 2009 Quotewhen I don't agree with them you bet your ass I do. I don't expect that my bitching and moaning will make a difference about either though. Neither is something voted upon. My question has been pretty consistent. I wonder what he did to deserve the nomination in the first week and change of his presidency. Now that I've seen the rationale behind the comittee's decision, I understand why they did it. I think that awarding the prize based on what someone might do cheapens the name and value of the award, but I understand their thought process. .... and I know that my opinion means crap-all to the comittee. You don't hear about me calling them to correct them do you? No, because really I don't care. Certainly not now that the Nobel prize is being awarded based on potential. Especially not when it was likely awarded to try to influence policy decisions. (my opinion that means crap-all again) Good job we'll soon have universal health care, you're going to need those blood pressure meds.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #90 October 10, 2009 Quoteside note: not all career fields have 40hour work weeks. salaried employees or sub-contractors don't get paid overtime. not all occupations have the ability to unionize. People still get hurt and to to the ER or have babies on holidays.... Most do, generally management does not, but even they can. What the original author of that statement was talking about is FDR's FLSA of 1938. Then your boy went and limited it with the Overtime Law he shoved thru congress, took him over 3 years to get it thru. It was entitled the Overtime Law, it was aimed at primarily RN's, but I think it was Walmart who took it to teh limit and tried to compel regular workers to fall under it. Who can't unionize? Are you confusing that for can't strike? QuoteNot that those aren't "good ideas" - and there have been good ideas from BOTH sides. So to discuss that let me bring up some of my stepfathers, John L. Merkt submitted bills (NOT saying that I agree with his bills; prior to his death, he and I would civilly discuss those issues) - Seatbelt laws and motorcycle Helmet use in Wisconsin - Increased the drinking age in Wisconsin - Len Bias Law Yes, you could argue that those were passed with bi-partisian efforts - but those were HIS "babies" that he pushed. And he was a Republican. Not sure how that pertains to the issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #91 October 10, 2009 QuoteAbsolutely correct it is bipartisan... I said it once and I'll say it again, politicians are politicians, I'd put down the pom-poms if I were you. The original question was something like how the Dems have fucked us, wasn't it? You still haven't established that with your microcosm of an argument. Of all military toys transport acft are the least of our worries, not to mention Obama urged against it. Again, show us how teh Dems have fucked us. QuoteIf the pentagon drafts a budget of $640B, and the house and senate pass a $600B defense bill that mandates $40B must be spent on sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads because lobbyists told them to then both the republicans and democrats have failed us. Can we agree here? It depends upon who voted for it. For example NAFTA was initiated by GHWB, then the Dem controlled congress passed it with overwhelming Repub support, even tho they were a minority. That was more Repub than Dem. Then Clinton signed it. That was an issue that was more systemeic, but it had more Repub support. Again, you're looking for a microcosm of an argument to make a major point. Let's talk debt and other longterm major issues. QuoteOr would you read such a headline and paraphrase it as "democratic-lead house and senate succeed in cutting defense spending by 6.25%." I would rather look at the budget, the issues, the intent and the result as a whole rather than a microcosm. I can take any fragment and make a point that might not be representative of the truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #92 October 10, 2009 Quoteyou keep bringing up the Obama administration. Defensive? Proud and optimistic. BTW, this is a political thread, the president might come up on occassion. QuoteAs everyone has pretty much agreed, the Obama admin hasn't had much of a chance to do a whole lot. Though you can bet that the party has a say in what happens. Have to maintain the reputation of the party. Yet he has. The first quarter of 09 the GDP was -6.4, the 2nd it jumped to -1.0, a really great improvement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #93 October 10, 2009 QuoteOur 'engineers' (handy-men) have starting salaries of just under $40 per hour, not including overtime or graveyard. Same price for the touch-up painters. Our bussers ear $18 per hour plus tip-outs, dishwaers are $20 per hour. We had waste management strikes a couple years back- the trashmen earn salaries in the 75-85K range PLUS benefits. The BART train operators earn 63-75K annually + benefits. The best part? THEY ALL THINK THEY ARE UNDERPAID. The average manager at my property (1900+ guestrooms, we do over 120 million annually on average) makes between 45-55K... Welcome to the way the world works now. Dock workers get paid six figures now, and we wonder why we can't compete with the global market, the rest of the world ISN'T insane like our workforce. end rant Brett Is that state or what? What is the employer? I find it hard to believe, is there a website? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,470 #94 October 10, 2009 >Republicans support the "Country" much more than the average Liberal. Apparently only when "their guy" is in charge. When he's not, they cheer when the US loses the Olympic games. Conservatives have expressed hopes for terrorist attacks, and described with glee the prospects of a military coup here in the US. What would you call someone who hopes for attacks against America, or talks about the violent overthrow of our government? Is that the new conservative definition of "patriot?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #95 October 10, 2009 QuoteRepublicans support the "Country" much more than the average Liberal. that just wants to follow the sheep! And the Dems led teh way in teh 20th century for 4 of teh 5 wars, inclu WWII; are they unpatriotic? QuoteGawd, and to think, back when I was Young, (And dumb) I used to call myself a liberal...I'd be ashamed to say such a thing now! To say you were young and dumb? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thanatos340 1 #96 October 10, 2009 I cant say I cheered when Chicago Lost the Olympic bid.. But I did think the Olympic Committee made a good choice. It was the right choice and it had absolutely NOTHING to do with Obama. Seriously.. Ever been to Chicago??? The weather sucks, the people are Rude, the politicians are corrupt and the Unions are ridiculous there. Just try getting anything built there. It is insane between dealing with the local politicians and then you have to deal with the unions. Vs Brazil?? They desperately need the income, The people are beautiful, Vibrant and full of life. The politicians are just as corrupt there but it will make MUCH better viewing for the world. It wasn't Politics, It was a rational decision. And THAT should always be cheered. QuoteWhat would you call someone who hopes for attacks against America, or talks about the violent overthrow of our government? Is that the new conservative definition of "patriot?" Nut Jobs are rampant on both sides of the spectrum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,470 #97 October 10, 2009 >Seriously.. Ever been to Chicago? Yes. Have you ever been to Atlanta? >It wasn't Politics, It was a rational decision. And THAT should always >be cheered. I can think of a lot of rational decisions that you wouldn't cheer. I am sure you can think of some yourself. >Nut Jobs are rampant on both sides of the spectrum. Agreed. And right now, the ones on the right are so full of anger and hate that it's boiling out into vitriol, deceit and violence. The left probably has just as many, but they have less to be angry about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thanatos340 1 #98 October 10, 2009 All Politics aside, The Olympics.. Good decision. The Better/more qualified candidate was chosen. The Nobel Prize, Bad Choice. The Better/more qualified candidate was not chosen. Why does saying that equate to anything other than a rational opinion? Edit: Quotethe ones on the right are so full of anger and hate that it's boiling out into vitriol, deceit and violence. The anger comes from fear Because it is their beliefs and core principals that they feel are being threatened. And the deceit also runs rampant on both sides. Every day there are talking points and spin spewed from both side and people have chosen teams and blindly follow their side. (And yes, I find this very very sad) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbordson 8 #99 October 10, 2009 Quote QuoteNot that those aren't "good ideas" - and there have been good ideas from BOTH sides. So to discuss that let me bring up some of my stepfathers, John L. Merkt submitted bills (NOT saying that I agree with his bills; prior to his death, he and I would civilly discuss those issues) - Seatbelt laws and motorcycle Helmet use in Wisconsin - Increased the drinking age in Wisconsin - Len Bias Law Yes, you could argue that those were passed with bi-partisian efforts - but those were HIS "babies" that he pushed. And he was a Republican. Not sure how that pertains to the issue. Sorry that was actually a response to funjumpers's comments QuoteNO POSTITIVE[sic] CHANGE HAS EVER HAPPENED DUE TO CONSERVATIVE PHILOSOPHY. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,470 #100 October 10, 2009 >Why does saying that equate to anything other than a rational opinion? ?? It doesn't. You said you should always cheer a rational decision. Someday it may be rational for the world to boycott the US; it may even be seem like a good idea for the next superpower to start a nuclear war with us that they feel they can win. I suspect you won't cheer those things. Even if, for most of the world, they may be the rational thing to do. >The anger comes from fear Because it is their beliefs and core principals >that they feel are being threatened. Yes. And others prey on that fear to incite the sort of anger and violence that helps their cause. Recently an anti-Obama conservative went on a shooting spree because he thought Obama would "grab his guns." I wonder if the people spreading that sort of fear and anger cheered; it was certainly a success story for them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
