LeviF Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 When it comes to family: "Send money, guns, and lawyers... Dad get me out of here!" Ahem. It's, "Send lawyers, guns, and money...dad, get me out of this! Hyahhh!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Ahem. It's, "Send lawyers, guns, and money...dad, get me out of this! Hyahhh!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Wait until Romney has the Mormons baptize Saint Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, then it will be so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 "Tried and true" ?? :lol: When it comes to family: "Send money, guns, and lawyers... Dad get me out of here!" We are all American "family"... Aren't we? How much more more "patriotic" can we be! By simply protecting "our own" as if they were "family." That's ok Eric, you're not alone, most people don't understand what a managed bankrupcty is, just take solice that you and DiN fall in this category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 That's ok Eric, you're not alone, most people don't understand what a managed bankrupcty is, just take solice that you and DiN fall in this category. We will see how it plays out in the end. I really don't care about the preferred stockholders. Again, we will see how it ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 The very fact that a pos like you is repeating this garbage points to the total bankruptcy of this argument So, you think Obama has the authorization to change the law and take from one group and give to the other? You must accept him as your dictator. How does it feel to be enslaved? Wait, before you answer take a "Gallop" Poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted February 28, 2012 Author Share Posted February 28, 2012 1330384477[/url]' post='2390543']For any of you dipshits on this board that are thinking about voting for Santorum Yeah, like he'd have a real shot at beating Obama. Setting aside the social issues, you still think Rick is a good candidate on the economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Setting aside the social issues, you still think Rick is a good candidate on the economy? Well if you ask me which do I prefer a 17.5% corporate tax rate or at 28%? or only 2 income tax rates of 10% and 28% as opposed to what we have now? or Keeping all the regulations of the Presidents Health Care law, some of the EPA's regulations and all of Dodd Frank as opposed to what we have today? or allowing the expansion of domestic oil drilling and approving the keystone over this presidents policies? or An effort to cut spending more than this president? or attempting to reform entitlements, whereas this president doesn't even try? or keeping taxes at dividends at the current rates as opposed to north of 40%? Which do you prefer? Substance JA, Substance.... Edited February 28, 2012 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Well if you ask me which do I prefer a 17.5% corporate tax rate or at 28%? or only 2 income tax rates of 10% and 28% as opposed to what we have now? or Keeping all the regulations of the Presidents Health Care law, some of the EPA's regulations and all of Dodd Frank as opposed to what we have today? or allowing the expansion of domestic oil drilling and approving the keystone over this presidents policies? or An effort to cut spending more than this president? or attempting to reform entitlements, whereas this president doesn't even try? or keeping taxes at dividends at the current rates as opposed to north of 40%? Which do you prefer? Substance JA, Substance.... Substance pales in comparison to a sweater vest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted February 28, 2012 Author Share Posted February 28, 2012 Substance JA, Substance.... I'll spare you the responsive litany comparing social stances but you can't possibly think that (a) Santorum could get all that done and (b) Santorum won't sell out on some of those issues since he has a track record of loving to spend. President Santorum would send the Democrats into such a stand still that he'd never be able to get ANYTHING done. Romney won't be able to get everything he wants to get done accomplished, but he can work with the left. Santorum never will, and thus won't get anything done. Right now, Obama is nicely gridlocked on most issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I'll spare you the responsive litany comparing social stances but you can't possibly think that (a) Santorum could get all that done and (b) Santorum won't sell out on some of those issues since he has a track record of loving to spend. President Santorum would send the Democrats into such a stand still that he'd never be able to get ANYTHING done. Romney won't be able to get everything he wants to get done accomplished, but he can work with the left. Santorum never will, and thus won't get anything done. Right now, Obama is nicely gridlocked on most issues. With Obama in office that horrific health insurance act will never get repealed or neutered. With anybody else in office it will at least get neutered. Sweater vest or not, Santorum would be better for this nation than Obama. Romney would be much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Short shelf life for Mr. Obama's religious window dressing. Politico Quiet fade-out for Obama’s faith councilBy CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN | 2/28/12 His faith under attack, his contraception decision savaged on all sides, President Barack Obama could use backup in the religious community right now. But three years into his presidency, Obama’s marquee council of faith advisers has gone dark — a little-noticed postscript for a panel that he rolled out with fanfare and high expectations during his first weeks in office but ended up playing only a limited role in West Wing deliberations. The president’s first Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships delivered a 163-page report in March 2010 and then disbanded. The second council has waited more than a year for a full slate of appointees and has yet to meet. And the hottest issue — whether religious groups that receive public money can discriminate in hiring — remains unresolved more than three years after Obama promised to address it. “It’s the mysterious, disappearing faith-based council,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, who advised the first council. The extended hiatus has suddenly become more glaring as the issue of faith, an undercurrent of the 2008 campaign, makes a fierce and early appearance in the 2012 race. Obama ignited the furor last month when he decided to mandate that religious-affiliated employers provide their workers with free birth control coverage. Since then, the attacks from his Republican challengers have been relentless: Rick Santorum accused Obama of practicing a “phony theology,” Mitt Romney claimed the president has “fought against religion” and Newt Gingrich alleged that the administration is “engaged in a war on religion.” The absence of a functioning council prompted some of the original members to suggest that the White House would have benefited from one as it muddled through the contraception uproar. Some former members were so dismayed by the administration’s initial ruling Jan. 20 that they took it upon themselves to press the West Wing into reconsidering the move after the fact. They worked the phones and a handful of them signed a private letter. “It would have been the council’s role to weigh in, and we did individually,” said Arturo Chavez, an original council member and president of the Mexican American Catholic College in San Antonio, Texas. “There was a failure somewhere in really weighing the consequences of this, and I don’t think the president was advised sufficiently about the consequences with the faith community.” It was a sham from the get go. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 We will see how it plays out in the end. I really don't care about the preferred stockholders. Again, we will see how it ends. Are you talking actual preferred stockholders or stockholders in general? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 The very fact that a pos like you is repeating this garbage points to the total bankruptcy of this argument The very fact that a pos like you can't even argue against it without calling a pos like 3rd a pis points to the total bankruptcy of YOUR argument, nitwit. Are you talking actual preferred stockholders or stockholders in general? He's talking about anyone who didn't own Class D or lower... He just doesn't know it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Short shelf life for Mr. Obama's religious window dressing. Politico Obama was a sham from the get go. Fixed it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Short shelf life for Mr. Obama's religious window dressing. Politico It was a sham from the get go. . It was a complete waste of time from the start. "Faith Council?" How is that NOT completely stupid? Never mind it has no place in the White House...if you think you need it you won't listen to it anyway, and if you don't think you need it why would you bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 As terrible as Santorum is, it's still too close to call in Michigan. The Republican party is full of crazy people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 As terrible as Santorum is, it's still too close to call in Michigan. The Republican party is full of crazy people Doubly ironic, coming from 1) a democrat, and 2) THIS democrat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 As terrible as Santorum is, it's still too close to call in Michigan. The Republican party is full of crazy people Can you at least admit that both parties have been hijacked by crazy people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 As terrible as Santorum is, it's still too close to call in Michigan. The Republican party is full of crazy people When the polls actually close at 8:00pm EST then we will see. but since you are a fool, you make your pronouncement now. No one is suprised. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts