|
Who writes this poo poo?
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
crime fighting hog posted:Who writes this poo poo? Your aunt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 21:14
|
|
|
Actually the Founders did debate setting term limits on the Congress and Executive branches. They eventually reasoned, though, that if voters liked their Congressman why should they not have the option to return them to Congress? At least I think that was the reason...
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 21:18
|
|
|
Dr. Tough posted:Your aunt. Great answer, though my family is die hard conservative and watches o'reilly and beck every night, they refuse to touch computers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 21:57
|
|
|
crime fighting hog posted:Great answer, though my family is die hard conservative and watches o'reilly and beck every night, they refuse to touch computers. That's usually how it is until one of them "discovers" email and unleashes a thousand horrors upon civilization.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 22:02
|
|
|
As an outside observer I'm morbidly fascinated by the Tea Party movement but how big is it really? They take up a lot of attention in this forum and I realize they are very vocal and entertaining but when all is said and done it's surely still just a tiny minority?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 22:07
|
|
|
Anosmoman posted:As an outside observer I'm morbidly fascinated by the Tea Party movement but how big is it really? They take up a lot of attention in this forum and I realize they are very vocal and entertaining but when all is said and done it's surely still just a tiny minority? I don't know the exact number but if you're talking about people who have actually gone to a protest or a gathering it's tiny. The media just loves to put cameras on angry white people. They're the talk of the town because GOPer's love talking about this grass roots movement that claims to be all about what they claim to be about and the Dems love making fun of them. It's kind of like the nations' girlfriends' ugly dog. If you're lumping in people who just subscribe the idea and don't elevate their action beyond forwarding an email or calling someone a human being liberal on a news stories comment section it's larger...but still not a majority in any way. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Mar 24, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 22:19
|
|
|
Anosmoman posted:As an outside observer I'm morbidly fascinated by the Tea Party movement but how big is it really? They take up a lot of attention in this forum and I realize they are very vocal and entertaining but when all is said and done it's surely still just a tiny minority? They are sponsored by the Republican party and Fox News while claiming they are a grass roots organization. They represent the 20%-40% of Americans who think the Bush Jr years were good ones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 22:19
|
|
Anosmoman posted:As an outside observer I'm morbidly fascinated by the Tea Party movement but how big is it really? They take up a lot of attention in this forum and I realize they are very vocal and entertaining but when all is said and done it's surely still just a tiny minority? If you're vocal in American Media you get coverage. That's really the way it works. They represent <1% of America but get the most coverage due to the fact they are loud and stupid.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 22:56
|
|
|
I know this may not be the thread to ask but I don't know where else to put it and don't want to open a thread to get mocked, so: What's the deal with Reagan? Why do I feel like he's the conservative...Jesus of the right wing? From what I understand of his presidency he did some really horrible things and kinda hosed the economy up, so why is he so idolized? Did I miss an entry about him curing cancer or something? I'm being really honest, I just don't get it. Have I just read wrong and he wasn't responsible for stuff like Hamas and star wars?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 23:18
|
|
|
There's a lot of reasons but the big one is Reaganomics aka trickle down economics. He basically cut taxes for the rich saying that if the rich are making more money they spend it on good and services the lower classes are selling, therefore cutting taxes of the rich helps everyone. It's basically controlled Republican's views on economics ever since.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2010 23:26
|
|
|
Well I think there's a little more to it than just trickle down economics, although that's a biggie. The Cold War, which had defined a couple of generations of America, ended during the Reagan Administration. Whether or not you credit the Reagan era defense buildup with this or not, it's a huge plus for any president or administration to have on their record. Big things, good or bad, that happen during presidencies define them, and the presidents generally receive credit or blame accordingly whether deserved or not. So the defining events of the GWB presidency are 9/11, the Iraq invasion, Katrina, and the mortgage/financial meltdown. The Iraq invasion he entirely owns, having shoved it down a (willing) country's throat, Katrina he can largely own since the horrible federal response was his and was in large part responsible for the severity of the disaster, and the degree of culpability for 9/11 and the financial meltdown can be vigorously debated. Reagan and his people promoted the idea of American exceptionalism and an unapologetic, aggressive America where greedy self interest was a high virtue, and jingoistic nationalism was central. After a Carter presidency largely remembered for humiliations like the Iranian hostage crisis, energy crisis and gas shortages, the "malaise" speech etc., these were messages that a lot of people really wanted to hear. So it's the fact that Reagan got the end of the Cold War, had a big economic expansion, and promoted nationalism/jingoism right on the heels of the Carter Administration. And, just like with Palin, because Reagan was a plain spoken dude who used simple language, this caused a lot of people to identify with him as "one of us", although I think he was a million times the speaker Palin is, at least he was coherent. Initially.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 00:01
|
|
|
Yeah I knew there was more to it, but I think Reaganomics is the most persisting of them all. Trickle down economics is a mantra still used today, it's outclassed the cold war as a political tactic to garner support.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 00:12
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:Yeah I knew there was more to it, but I think Reaganomics is the most persisting of them all. Trickle down economics is a mantra still used today, it's outclassed the cold war as a political tactic to garner support. Most of the appeal of Reagan is a myth. http://www.salon.com/books/excerpt/2009/02/02/ronald_reagan/print.html is an excerpt of a book that tears down the Reagan myth. This myth telling is a whole point of the neoconservative movement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 00:22
|
|
|
More facebook dad-chatdad posted:conservatives are not in favor of state enforcement of any trade or industry. You confuse us conservatives for liberals who use the force of government all the time to control business. It's liberals in government that make insestuous relations with unionized labour and force companies to enter into contracts that are unsustainable. And don't be so quick to degrade the pursuit of profit. It is exactly that which is the reason any one achieves any thing. In order for one person to profit they must first offer some one else a good or service which is deemed useful and pleasing. Of course there are a few exceptions but the exceptions prove the rule. LOVE YOU. See, the only reason anyone does anything is profit, duh, Econ 101.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 03:00
|
|
|
dat one portagee posted:More facebook dad-chat REPEAL CHILD LABOR LAWS. LOVE YOU.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 03:14
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:So it's the fact that Reagan got the end of the Cold War, had a big economic expansion, and promoted nationalism/jingoism right on the heels of the Carter Administration. Not just the Carter Admin, the country had been in loving hell since Kennedy's assassination -- war, cold war, hostages, recession, inflation, the military in a shambles, political scandals, people angry at government, distrustful of politicians (even more than now), our country a laughing stock. While Reagan did some shady things and implemented a horrible economic concept; he was largely responsible for restoring our country's pride and respect. He kicked the dirt bags out of the military, made sure discipline was restored, improved training, flexed a little muscle in Grenada, got the hostages back; there were many positive things that came from his presidency even though many people have forgotten, or want to forget. Reagan was really more of a conservative democrat anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 06:32
|
|
|
Please tell me you're quoting a crazy forwarded political email there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
wormil posted:Not just the Carter Admin, the country had been in loving hell since Kennedy's assassination -- war, cold war, hostages, recession, inflation, the military in a shambles, political scandals, people angry at government, distrustful of politicians (even more than now), our country a laughing stock. While Reagan did some shady things and implemented a horrible economic concept; he was largely responsible for restoring our country's pride and respect. He kicked the dirt bags out of the military, made sure discipline was restored, improved training, flexed a little muscle in Grenada, got the hostages back; there were many positive things that came from his presidency even though many people have forgotten, or want to forget. Reagan was really more of a conservative democrat anyway. It's awesome you can admit those soldiers in Vietnam were dirt bags! He really was the pimp Democrat of his time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 06:46
|
|
|
downout posted:It's awesome you can admit those soldiers in Vietnam were dirt bags! He really was the pimp Democrat of his time. I realize what you're trying to say there but you're not saying what you think you're saying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 08:43
|
|
|
One of my uncles spent last summer going on and on about the cash for clunkers program. He picked up from somewhere that the engine seizing process was to use a nebulous "chemical" and you had to run the engine hours while it spit out noxious fumes before seizing, and then metal couldn't be recycled after that. That didn't make a lot of sense to me since you could just drain the oil, dump some sand in there, and kill it quick. Sure enough, all they do is replace the oil with a sodium silica solution and it dies in a minute or two, then get sent to scrap for processing. Any idea where he picked that crap up from? I figured it was talk radio, but I haven't been able to find another source repeating that story.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 20:51
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:One of my uncles spent last summer going on and on about the cash for clunkers program. He picked up from somewhere that the engine seizing process was to use a nebulous "chemical" and you had to run the engine hours while it spit out noxious fumes before seizing, and then metal couldn't be recycled after that. That didn't make a lot of sense to me since you could just drain the oil, dump some sand in there, and kill it quick. Sure enough, all they do is replace the oil with a sodium silica solution and it dies in a minute or two, then get sent to scrap for processing. Haven't seen a source myself. It may have just come from ignorance about the claims that destroying the engines was dumb and that the program was enviromentally unsound due to the pieces of the cars that were ruined so they couldn't be used again either in another car or having the dealer resell the car.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 21:27
|
|
|
notcreativeenough posted:Haven't seen a source myself. It may have just come from ignorance about the claims that destroying the engines was dumb and that the program was enviromentally unsound due to the pieces of the cars that were ruined so they couldn't be used again either in another car or having the dealer resell the car. Yeah, and that all is bunk because it either keeps those cars on the market which defeats the purpose or it floods the market with used replacement parts so its cheaper to keep the other ones that weren't traded in running. Just another random rumor by idiots, for idiots I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 21:30
|
|
downout posted:It's awesome you can admit those soldiers in Vietnam were dirt bags! He really was the pimp Democrat of his time. Look up the "Hollow Army" After the end of the draft, the recruiting standards were lowered drastically. The Army really was a shambles from about 1975 to early 80's.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 03:50
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:Yeah, and that all is bunk because it either keeps those cars on the market which defeats the purpose or it floods the market with used replacement parts so its cheaper to keep the other ones that weren't traded in running. Just another random rumor by idiots, for idiots I guess. Well they did take as much of the car as possible to reused in other cars. Just not the engine or axle which is you know the major parts of the car that are fuel inefficent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 04:07
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Look up the "Hollow Army" Well if those drat conservatives hadn't claimed pimples multiple times or an rear end boil as the reason they couldn't enlist the standards wouldn't have been lowered.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 04:08
|
|
notcreativeenough posted:Well if those drat conservatives hadn't claimed pimples multiple times or an rear end boil as the reason they couldn't enlist the standards wouldn't have been lowered. Post Vietnam and Post draft, the Army was a very unpopular organization. It was rife with crime, drug use, and had poor equipment and lacked funding. The military was really turned around during the 80's.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 04:21
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Post Vietnam and Post draft, the Army was a very unpopular organization. It was rife with crime, drug use, and had poor equipment and lacked funding. The military was really turned around during the 80's. True. When I joined in the mid-80's, soldiers openly smoked pot in the barracks during the day. If someone was being kicked out it took months and they lingered around the unit forced to do poo poo jobs, trying to make everyone else miserable and being paid in the process. There were guys who probably should have been in a VA outpatient facility but were still active duty. Things were already beginning to turn around though, discipline was increased, drug testing was enforced, training was taken more seriously and the Army got rid of tons of people either through early outs or just giving them the boot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 05:19
|
|
|
Miss Fats posted:Got a couple good ones guys. Now we can stop talking about who got spit on when. I like this part the most: quote:"On September 25,
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 12:46
|
|
|
swarthmeister posted:I like this part the most: But...but...Christian Nation...
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 15:34
|
|
|
Ugh. I got this doozy forwarded:quote:Dear Friend in Christ, ...in addition to a rambling email from my father about how Protestantism has corrupted Catholicism in the US, pissing on the Kennedys (not too surprising) and "94% of house Catholics vote [sic] for a bill that allows abortion funding" (if I remember correctly, this is outright wrong because of the executive order), and how the life of the unborn trumps all else. I hate getting these emails. At least the abortion funding bit is outright wrong so I can easily refute that, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 16:34
|
|
|
I stopped the video once I read the description of "When 94 percent of Catholic senators vote to kill children..."
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 16:38
|
|
|
Navaash posted:Ugh. I got this doozy forwarded: The only mention in the entire bible of anything like abortion is something to the effect of: If a man beats a pregnant woman and she has a miscarriage, the man pays monetary compensation to the husband, if the husband wants it. And no, the bill does not have any provisions for providing money for abortions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 17:00
|
|
|
Gripen5 posted:The only mention in the entire bible of anything like abortion is something to the effect of: True, but their argument is that unborn children are alive - therefore, the 6th Commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' applies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 17:11
|
|
|
dja98 posted:True, but their argument is that unborn children are alive - therefore, the 6th Commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' applies. The funny thing about the commandments is that they are extremely vague laws and just about the only laws/rules in the entire bible that have no associated punishment or penalty. "Don't do it... or else!" "Ok, Dad."  Hell different sects can't even agree on how they are numbered. Not to mention they are for the most part the same laws that have been the basis of just about every law system since Hammurabi's code. I hate the 10 Commandments. They are underwhelming and useless. Edit: Sorry if I sound anti-religion or anything. Not really my intention. I just think the glorification of the 10 Commandments (especially by Christians) is just silly. Gripen5 fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Mar 26, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 18:11
|
|
|
Gripen5 posted:The funny thing about the commandments is that they are extremely vague laws and just about the only laws/rules in the entire bible that have no associated punishment or penalty. I read a theologian once, and now I can't recall who or where, that had an interpretation of the 10 commandments that I really liked - he argued that they weren't a list of things that humans Had To Not Do even though we all really wanted to all the time, but instead a list of how to live in order to be content and happy. Basically, that the commandments were a set of instructions on how to avoid discontent and be happy with your life - how to avoid jealousy, and anger, and revenge, and all the stupid crap that contributes to melodrama and people being upset. I really like that interpretation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 19:11
|
|
|
So you're telling me if I don't go around murdering, raping, stealing and lying, I might have an easier time getting along with others?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 19:37
|
|
|
I HAVE A PLAN The only way to fix the economy is to get rid of the federal reserve (google the money masters for more info). To do that we need to unite and have ANOTHER DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE!!!!! Before the Rothschild’s, Shiffs and Warburg’s took control of the US dollar in 1913, the US manufactured more than the next three advanced economies combined (i.e. France, Britain and Germany). Since then, they have been able to stop the US growth by pushing it into a War or a financial crisis every decade. As long as they keep you scared of one buggy man after another, you will give up one right after another and pay your taxes without a murmur. How do they get away with it? They first took over control of the media (ref. “Who Rule America” on natall , but don’t join). With the mass media in the hand of Zionist Jews, they went after the whistleblowers. They did this by labeling every independent thinker as conspiracy theorists. Even Ron Paul, the brightest and most patriotic man in congress, cannot speak the truth without FOX calling him a flake to discredit the truth he speaks. Are you free? Can anyone in American speak out against his oppressor? NO- They dare not mention the word Jewish bankers Can the American people think-on-their-own? NO- They fear challenging the media even on scientific issues which has stifled critical thought and has put the US 27 in the world in Math and Science. So what is the solution? Read The World Order by Eustice Mullins and help Close the Fed. Boycott all Jewish owned media outlets and visit globalresearch dot ca for news TEACH OTHERS WHY THEY ARE NOT GETTING AHEAD AND ORGANIZE A DATE WHEN ALL AMERICANS: 1. Stop paying taxes 2. Stop making Mortgage payments 3. Stop making Credit Card payments AND START A PEACEFUL MOVEMENT OF INDEPENDENCE
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
quote:2. Stop making Mortgage payments We already did those ones
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2010 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
dja98 posted:True, but their argument is that unborn children are alive - therefore, the 6th Commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' applies. Thou shalt not kill -- except when it's executing people who couldn't afford a good lawyer, or in yummy wars
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2010 00:52
|
|