Meathead Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 lets be real for a moment at this instance in time the gop is totally obamas B word. splap splap splap go get me a drank not to despair my conservative brothers and sisters, these things never last. you do have to reinvent yourselves going forward, but all hope certainly is not lost as the sands in the hourglass surge ever downward, so does political reality note that the hillary tsunami is also looming so if there ever was a time you need to get your sh together now would be it reject the crazies. reject the selfish. adopt moderation. vote huntsman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 lets be real for a moment at this instance in time the gop is totally obamas B word. splap splap splap go get me a drank not to despair my conservative brothers and sisters, these things never last. you do have to reinvent yourselves going forward, but all hope certainly is not lost as the sands in the hourglass surge ever downward, so does political reality note that the hillary tsunami is also looming so if there ever was a time you need to get your sh together now would be it reject the crazies. reject the selfish. adopt moderation. vote huntsman Your cellophane isn't tight enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 i might vote for huntsman...might even become republican again if he's nominated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 i might vote for huntsman...might even become republican again if he's nominated. ... !@#$ me... This is funny on levels you aren't equipped for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 They run a socialist bent on "fundamentally changing the USA" yet WE are the extreme crazies. Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 They run a socialist bent on "fundamentally changing the USA" yet WE are the extreme crazies. Right. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL omg its so funny that a) you really believe that, and 3) that you dont see the total irony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL omg its so funny that a) you really believe that, and 3) that you dont see the total irony Your thinking is as mixed up as the way you've set up this sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) lets be real for a moment at this instance in time the gop is totally obamas B word. splap splap splap go get me a drank not to despair my conservative brothers and sisters, these things never last. you do have to reinvent yourselves going forward, but all hope certainly is not lost as the sands in the hourglass surge ever downward, so does political reality note that the hillary tsunami is also looming so if there ever was a time you need to get your sh together now would be it reject the crazies. reject the selfish. adopt moderation. vote huntsman They really look weak and rudderless. I've heard of lame duck presidents, theyre a lame duck party. Edited January 19, 2013 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted January 19, 2013 Author Share Posted January 19, 2013 i really hope they can pull it together by next election and nominate someone awesome. heck its been so bad lately that id take someone who is not a circus freak. huntsman seems like the best candidate now but someone else could emerge by then how fantastic would it be to have hillary and someone else really good going against each other. two great candidates for the first time in many decades. it would be good for the country and is what im rooting for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) i really hope they can pull it together by next election and nominate someone awesome. heck its been so bad lately that id take someone who is not a circus freak. huntsman seems like the best candidate now but someone else could emerge by then how fantastic would it be to have hillary and someone else really good going against each other. two great candidates for the first time in many decades. it would be good for the country and is what im rooting for I hear you, but I'd say there's very little chance of that happening. The party is hamstrung by religious zealots/NRA gun lovers/and Ozzie and Harriet stone age "family values". They elevate issues that either the general electorate doesn't place a priority on, or worse has the opposing view, like abortion and gay marriage. Edited January 19, 2013 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 They run a socialist bent on "fundamentally changing the USA" yet WE are the extreme crazies. Right. Dude, you really believe this? They really look weak and rudderless. I've heard of lame duck presidents, theyre a lame duck party. It looked that way after 2008 and they came back for 2010. Like every party over time their influence and power will wax and wan. Right now they're in the phase of trying to figure out what they want to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 I hear you, but I'd say there's very little chance of that happening. The party is hamstrung by religious zealots/NRA gun lovers/and Ozzie and Harriet stone age "family values". They elevate issues that either the general electorate doesn't place a priority on, or worse has the opposing view, like abortion and gay marriage. So, in other words, they're hamstrung by the fact that they aren't Democrats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) So, in other words, they're hamstrung by the fact that they aren't Democrats?yeah, I love the argument. mind blowing isn't it?I do sort of agree though. the gay marriage debate is over, the abortion debate is over. I'm not casting a value judgement on either issue, but people have made up their minds. generally, people don't react well to an intrusive govt. I believe that within 20 years, the gop will more closely resemble the libertarian party of today. Edited January 19, 2013 by sodbuster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) yeah, I love the argument. mind blowing isn't it?I do sort of agree though. the gay marriage debate is over, the abortion debate is over. I'm not casting a value judgement on either issue, but people have made up their minds. generally, people don't react well to an intrusive govt. I believe that within 20 years, the gop will more closely resemble the libertarian party of today. The gay marriage debate is far from over, but it looks as if the right side is going to win, and that's a good thing. The abortion "debate" isn't really a debate at all, rather it's an entrenched difference of moralities which will never go away. I, for instance, believe abortion to be abhorent, and I refuse to associate with those vile creatures who support the murder of infants. I won't, however, try to legislate against them. I'm content to show my outward contempt, and to shun them. It's impossible to change my stance on the issue, as it's cut and dried, black and white. As to the notion that people don't react well to intrusive government, look around, take stock of the current situation, and try to say that again with a straight face. Edited January 19, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 The GOP will adopt and move forward with the favors of the Libertarian platform, at least on social issues. Its one way they can attract the young, minority, and women who want freedom, government restraint, yet wish to live and let live. They need to shed the short term reputation of being obstructionist, because the polls are beginning to show the American People believe they are just that. Americans are afraid, scared, on their heels. Who will win the People is the party that shows them ideas, hard work and taking a risk is what made America great... Nothing in life is easy , predictable for guaranteed, the R's need to show the people of America that while the Democrat pledge is noble, it is a fallacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 The gay marriage debate is far from over, but it looks as if the right side is going to win, and that's a good thing. The abortion "debate" isn't really a debate at all, rather it's an entrenched difference of moralities which will never go away. I, for instance, believe abortion to be abhorent, and I refuse to associate with those vile creatures who support the murder of infants. I won't, however, try to legislate against them. I'm content to show my outward contempt, and to shun them. It's impossible to change my stance on the issue, as it's cut and dried, black and white. As to the notion that people don't react well to intrusive government, look around, take stock of the current situation, and try to say that again with a straight face. I'm talking about the social issues specifically. I have my beliefs, but I don't expect others to feel the same way, and I may try to convince them it is a better life, but it's their life to ruin. Plus on the off chance that I am living my life the wrong way, at least it is only my life I ruined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 I'm talking about the social issues specifically. I have my beliefs, but I don't expect others to feel the same way, and I may try to convince them it is a better life, but it's their life to ruin. Plus on the off chance that I am living my life the wrong way, at least it is only my life I ruined. That's the way things should operate, for sure. I'm 100% willing to allow folks to live as they please, just so long as I don't have to pay for the outcomes of their, or their parents (grandparents, etc.), poor decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 That's the way things should operate, for sure. I'm 100% willing to allow folks to live as they please, just so long as I don't have to pay for the outcomes of their, or their parents (grandparents, etc.), poor decisions. Then you need to buy an island.... We all pony up for others, while on the flip side get the upside of others bad decisions... You just hope the split leaves you well ahead in the end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Obama knows well that the American electorate are clueless to a great extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Then you need to buy an island.... We all pony up for others, while on the flip side get the upside of others bad decisions... You just hope the split leaves you well ahead in the end If I'm forced to pay for their outcomes, then I demand the authority to limit their freedom in their decision making process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 That's the way things should operate, for sure. I'm 100% willing to allow folks to live as they please, just so long as I don't have to pay for the outcomes of their, or their parents (grandparents, etc.), poor decisions. this is funny on levels you aren't equipped for. have you ever even considered that your circumstance might change (and judging by your propensity to support armed revolt, i'm thinking that would likely be a good thing for you)? someday (or maybe now), you might need someone's help.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 this is funny on levels you aren't equipped for. have you ever even considered that your circumstance might change (and judging by your propensity to support armed revolt, i'm thinking that would likely be a good thing for you)? someday (or maybe now), you might need someone's help.... I don't want the help of anyone who is forced to provide it. I'm sorry, but I'm just not so comfortable in the role of slave master as you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Man, ya gotta love liberals. They're in the second term of their own guy -- a guy who can barely complete a full sentence without words being spoon fed to him by a machine -- and they're all ready to jump ship to the GOP if only it will go with John Huntsman. And the GOP is the party in a mess? Thanks for the chuckle, libs. You never get old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 this is funny on levels you aren't equipped for. have you ever even considered that your circumstance might change (and judging by your propensity to support armed revolt, i'm thinking that would likely be a good thing for you)? someday (or maybe now), you might need someone's help.... Another Birddog strawman. You either support coercive "charity" to whoever "needs" it, or you want to let the needy freeze and starve. Another failed attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHowardman Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 (edited) Obama's First Presidential Term Accomplishments Numbered List: 1. Rich are richer. 2. Poor are poorer. 3. Black unemployment higher. 4. More Americans on food stamps. 5. More Americans on welfare. 6. More illegals deported under Obama in four years than W did in eight. 7. National debt balloons under Obama that the middle-class is going to have to pay for. Please feel free to add more Republican Barack Obama's "accomplishments" to this list. Edited January 20, 2013 by PearlHowardman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted January 20, 2013 Author Share Posted January 20, 2013 I'm talking about the social issues specifically. I have my beliefs, but I don't expect others to feel the same way, and I may try to convince them it is a better life, but it's their life to ruin. Plus on the off chance that I am living my life the wrong way, at least it is only my life I ruined. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/19/CBS-News-Political-Director-Obama-Destroy-GOP The author of this outrageous left-wing fever dream is John Dickerson, whom Slate describes as "Slate's chief political correspondent". What Slate leaves out of its little bio, though, is that Dickerson is also the political director at CBS News. Dickerson is merely being Dickerson, and there's no doubt he speaks for legions upon legions of those in the media today. What is worthy of note, though, is that a CBS News' political director is now comfortable openly calling for the destruction of the Republican Party. He obviously fears no admonitions from his colleagues or his employer. And why should he? Earlier this week, Bob Schieffer, a CBS News "living legend," was perfectly comfortable publicly comparing the NRA to Nazis. You lump all of this with CNN chief Jeff Zucker applauding Piers Morgan's shameless feasting off the dead children of Sandy Hook for ratings and attention, and what you have is a media that's finally … coming out. And yet, even as they do, even as they openly celebrate their left-wing biases out of one side of their mouth, out the other, they will claim they remain objective and unbiased. The Big Lie has officially arrived. And somewhere Dan Rather's thinking, "Oh, so now it's okay!?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Man, ya gotta love liberals. They're in the second term of their own guy -- a guy who can barely complete a full sentence without words being spoon fed to him by a machine -- and they're all ready to jump ship to the GOP if only it will go with John Huntsman. And the GOP is the party in a mess? Thanks for the chuckle, libs. You never get old. I don't think there is 1 single Democrat that thinks the GOP should change anything... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 I don't think there is 1 single Democrat that thinks the GOP should change anything... not really. i'd like 2 parties that weren't so polarized. i'd even like more moderation on the dem side, more pragmatism and less ideology. a lot more would get accomplished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 a partisan democrat, which is most of them since most party members are deeply partisan, wouldnt want the gop to change bc they are immolating themselves. but the country needs a healthy balance between the parties or else things always get completely fubared im not sure the gop can complete its transformation by the next presidential election, but im hopeful. if they cant make it this time, two hillary terms certainly should do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 (edited) i might vote for huntsman...might even become republican again if he's nominated. Dude, the guy is a staunch conservative, just because he believes in Global Warming doesn't mean he's some sort of Moderate R. He believes in balancing the budget through spending cuts. He believes in cutting taxes. He believes that Private insurers are better for the U.S than State run health care. He believes in smarter and less regulation. And he's pro Life to boot. Please, you would never in your life time even come close to considering him as someone you would vote for. Edited January 21, 2013 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Dude, the guy is a staunch conservative, just because he believes in Global Warming doesn't mean he's some sort of Moderate R. He believes in balancing the budget through spending cuts. He believes in cutting taxes. He believes that Private insurers are better for the U.S than State run health care. He believes in smarter and less regulation. And he's pro Life to boot. Please, you would never in your life time even come close to considering him as someone you would vote for. all true though he is for an insurance mandate. don't know what he feels the solution is for the uninsured. don't really care what way a prez candidate swings on abortion...i'm anti abortion but i don't think the law will be changed substantially in my lifetime regardless of the prez. cutting spending is ok and needed too, as long as it's done fairly. i don't like paying high taxes anymore than anyone but i think revenues need to be increased. i think practically, he would find this, too. but if he can find a way to get out of our mess without me having to pay more, i'd be happy ( i won't be holding my breath, though).so, yeah, we don't have matching beliefs on some issues. what i like about him is his apparent integrity, something i didn't perceive in romney. integrity goes a long way with me (and yes, it's obviously been lacking in some dem prez candidates as well- john edwards anyone?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 all true though he is for an insurance mandate. don't know what he feels the solution is for the uninsured. don't really care what way a prez candidate swings on abortion...i'm anti abortion but i don't think the law will be changed substantially in my lifetime regardless of the prez. cutting spending is ok and needed too, as long as it's done fairly. i don't like paying high taxes anymore than anyone but i think revenues need to be increased. i think practically, he would find this, too. but if he can find a way to get out of our mess without me having to pay more, i'd be happy ( i won't be holding my breath, though).so, yeah, we don't have matching beliefs on some issues. what i like about him is his apparent integrity, something i didn't perceive in romney. integrity goes a long way with me (and yes, it's obviously been lacking in some dem prez candidates as well- john edwards anyone?). Well, he isn't afraid to say what he believes. But he's not your kinda dude, you're pretty close to being a full blown socialist, he's on the opposite side of the spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Well, he isn't afraid to say what he believes. But he's not your kinda dude, you're pretty close to being a full blown socialist, he's on the opposite side of the spectrum. If every liberal I know would STFU about Huntsman, I'd probably take him more seriously. But his name almost always comes at the end of the stereotypical progressive rant that starts with "The GOP is imploding!" It's only slightly more predictable than the next liberal chiming in with "I don't think there is 1 single Democrat that thinks the GOP should change anything..." Yeah, okay. Thanks for the input, folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 If every liberal I know would STFU about Huntsman, I'd probably take him more seriously. But his name almost always comes at the end of the stereotypical progressive rant that starts with "The GOP is imploding!" It's only slightly more predictable than the next liberal chiming in with "I don't think there is 1 single Democrat that thinks the GOP should change anything..." Yeah, okay. Thanks for the input, folks. Get use to it.... Obama right now believes he's untouchable, and with that feeling of invincibility it's only natural that his followers will have the same level of arrogance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 (edited) Well, he isn't afraid to say what he believes. But he's not your kinda dude, you're pretty close to being a full blown socialist, he's on the opposite side of the spectrum. Well, he isn't afraid to say what he believes. But he's not your kinda dude, you're pretty close to being a full blown socialist, he's on the opposite side of the spectrum. i don't consider myself a socialist. my highest economic priorities when voting are for universal healthcare (canada has that and i don't think many would label it a socialist country), a living wage (like in that socialist hotbed, switzerland) , a safety net for the truly helpless (just about every first world country has one but lets use the uk for an example) and economic sustainability while providing these. alone or together, these don't necessarily imply socialism to me. do they to you? would huntsman support these? don't know but if he supports insurance mandates that implies supporting universal healthcare. on the others, i think he's at least center right which is a far cry from far right. but given what looks like integrity, he likely won't play to the far right ala romney and will therefore probably never get nominated. that's where i think the issue is with support for him on the left: a win for him signals a loss for the far right. Edited January 21, 2013 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meathead Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 birdog +2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 but i think revenues need to be increased. Yeah, because the government touching between $.17 and $.20 of every dollar generated in this country isn't nearly enough. Dear God you liberals are freakin' retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 OT, but I didn't want to start a new thread. While Obama is "B word slapping" the GOP the media is enthusiastically sucking him off. ABC "News" just knocked down a straight hour of happy, positive, joyful "coverage" of the inauguration & the universal glee that America is experiencing. Strange how we're not getting the same solemn, matter of fact coverage, with constant reminders of the problems facing the president we saw 8 years ago. I wonder why that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 you might need someone's help.... If this is the "help" you are referring to, I would avoid it. http://voices.yahoo.com/governmental-social-welfare-programs-countrys-2125290.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts