Not too sure what the 'facts' are here, bet you don't know either.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I'm an adult and have been voting for the last four presidential elections. I loathed voting for Bush. The facts about Hanoi John did not allow anything else.Dilbert_X wrote:
Not too sure what the 'facts' are here, bet you don't know either.
" Nuanced ", another way of saying " has no fucking position "
Last edited by ATG (2009-01-05 19:32:44)
Dilbert, you just don't understand that when Republicans run Congress, the best thing you can do is re-elect their fuckup of a president. Doesn't it make sense?Dilbert_X wrote:
They funneled you towards Bush using smear tactics and lies of the worst kind, that even a retard could have seen through.ATG wrote:
As has become the norm, the politicians funnel us towards a certain predetermined choice. Democrats didn't want to win that election and more than republicans wanted to win the last one.
How was Kerry a shithead exactly?
It was incredible that Kerry, a decorated military combat veteran, could be presented as a coward opposite the craven draft dodgers Bush and Cheney.It was 200% obvious after the first term, and it wasn't so much Bush, he was the puppet, it was Cheney most;ly.ATG wrote:
No honest republican could have foreseen the utter disaster that the party became under George Bush.
Bush, or the Republicans, should have fired him.
Funny that people only measure their satisfaction with their politicians by their bank balance.
I do have to add though that no "honest" Republican would vote for a president that passed the Patriot Act. Doing so contradicts the very basis of smaller government.
TBH that sounds like Barry o's stance with foreign policy.ATG wrote:
" Nuanced ", another way of saying " has no fucking position "
Xbone Stormsurgezz
His silence re: Gaza is deafening.
Wise words. That's also why lol at the term Social conservative.. paradox.Turquoise wrote:
I do have to add though that no "honest" Republican would vote for a president that passed the Patriot Act. Doing so contradicts the very basis of smaller government.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
He tells us "He's not the President yet". That doesn't stop him from chiming on everything else though.ATG wrote:
His silence re: Gaza is deafening.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
This is what a Barack on Gaza would sound like;
Last edited by ATG (2009-01-05 19:59:46)
Agreed... it seems like the Republicans were much truer to smaller government before the whole Religious Right thing. They were almost Libertarians then. Democrats were Populists back then, but then again, Blue Dog Democrats are still Populist.Kmarion wrote:
Wise words. That's also why lol at the term Social conservative.. paradox.Turquoise wrote:
I do have to add though that no "honest" Republican would vote for a president that passed the Patriot Act. Doing so contradicts the very basis of smaller government.
Ron Paul is the closet thing to Conservative... just shoot me now.Turquoise wrote:
Agreed... it seems like the Republicans were much truer to smaller government before the whole Religious Right thing. They were almost Libertarians then. Democrats were Populists back then, but then again, Blue Dog Democrats are still Populist.Kmarion wrote:
Wise words. That's also why lol at the term Social conservative.. paradox.Turquoise wrote:
I do have to add though that no "honest" Republican would vote for a president that passed the Patriot Act. Doing so contradicts the very basis of smaller government.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
lol... You know... As kooky as Paul can be, some of his ideas aren't so bad. His problem is that he's too idealistic.Kmarion wrote:
Ron Paul is the closet thing to Conservative... just shoot me now.Turquoise wrote:
Agreed... it seems like the Republicans were much truer to smaller government before the whole Religious Right thing. They were almost Libertarians then. Democrats were Populists back then, but then again, Blue Dog Democrats are still Populist.Kmarion wrote:
Wise words. That's also why lol at the term Social conservative.. paradox.
What the GOP needs is a more moderate and realistic Ron Paul. I hear Jeff Flake is cool.
His top secret adviser , revealed.ATG wrote:
This is what a Barack on Gaza would sound like;
Thank you.
@ Turq, you know huck actually wasn't bad until he started weighing in on the gay thing. Seriously go back and read what he has said about the economy. It sounds a lot like Paul.
Read the whole thing: http://www.huckpac.com/?FuseAction=Blog … og_id=1899Kmarion wrote:
Quote of the day:Mike Huckabee wrote:
Frankly, I’m disappointed and disgusted with my own Republican party as I watch them attempt to strong-arm a bailout of some of America’s biggest corporations by asking the taxpayers to suck up the staggering results of the hubris, greed, and arrogance of those who sought to make a quick buck by throwing the dice. They lost, but want the rest of us to cover their bets so they won’t be effected in their lavish lifestyles as they figure out how to spend their tens of millions and in some cases, hundreds of millions in bonuses and compensation which was their reward for not only sinking their companies, but basically doing the same to the entire American economy.
It’s especially disconcerting to see the very people who pilloried me during the Presidential campaign for being a “populist” and not “understanding Wall Street” to now line up like thirsty dogs at the Washington, D. C. water dish, otherwise known as Congress, and plead for help. I thought these guys were the smartest people in America! I thought that taxpayers like you and I were similar to the people at the U. N. who have no translator speaking into their headset - that we just needed to trust those that I called the power bunch in the “Wall Street to Washington axis of power.”
The idea of a government bailout in which we’d entrust $700 billion to one man without Congressional oversight or accountability is absurd. My party or not, that is insanity and I believe unconstitutional.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I like what Huck is saying in that quote, but the reason why he was called a Populist had to do with his policies in Arkansas.
Honestly, I didn't mind his economic views so much or his economic policies, but yeah, his social views scared the shit out of me. The guy is a religious zealot. I know he has a friendly demeanor, but I wouldn't want him anywhere near social policy.
I will admit though, that his view on quarantining people with AIDS actually would be practical. Granted, doing that would be a massive violation of freedoms.
Honestly, I didn't mind his economic views so much or his economic policies, but yeah, his social views scared the shit out of me. The guy is a religious zealot. I know he has a friendly demeanor, but I wouldn't want him anywhere near social policy.
I will admit though, that his view on quarantining people with AIDS actually would be practical. Granted, doing that would be a massive violation of freedoms.
The Aids comment was 16 years ago. We didn't know nearly as much about aids then. Context is important. As far as religion yes I agree. But ultimately he has said the Fed plays no role in making those types of decisions. He is a constitutionalist like Paul. There is no perfect candidate .Turquoise wrote:
I like what Huck is saying in that quote, but the reason why he was called a Populist had to do with his policies in Arkansas.
Honestly, I didn't mind his economic views so much or his economic policies, but yeah, his social views scared the shit out of me. The guy is a religious zealot. I know he has a friendly demeanor, but I wouldn't want him anywhere near social policy.
I will admit though, that his view on quarantining people with AIDS actually would be practical. Granted, doing that would be a massive violation of freedoms.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Good points... Honestly, I hope the GOP runs someone more like Rick Perry or Mark Sanford in 2012. Both of them lean Libertarian on a lot of issues, and they seem to be fairly popular among their respective states (Texas and South Carolina).Kmarion wrote:
The Aids comment was 16 years ago. We didn't know nearly as much about aids then. Context is important. As far as religion yes I agree. But ultimately he has said the Fed plays no role in making those types of decisions. He is a constitutionalist like Paul. There is no perfect candidate .Turquoise wrote:
I like what Huck is saying in that quote, but the reason why he was called a Populist had to do with his policies in Arkansas.
Honestly, I didn't mind his economic views so much or his economic policies, but yeah, his social views scared the shit out of me. The guy is a religious zealot. I know he has a friendly demeanor, but I wouldn't want him anywhere near social policy.
I will admit though, that his view on quarantining people with AIDS actually would be practical. Granted, doing that would be a massive violation of freedoms.
Both major parties have flipped positions over our brief history. If they don't shift they are done.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
One thing is for sure... There's a growing rift between Libertarian-leaning Republicans and Authoritarian-leaning Social Conservatives (and yeah, the paradoxical term has been brought up again... ).Kmarion wrote:
Both major parties have flipped positions over our brief history. If they don't shift they are done.
Read up on Thomas Jefferson (his own writings). A Liberal "progressive thinking" conservative. .Turquoise wrote:
One thing is for sure... There's a growing rift between Libertarian-leaning Republicans and Authoritarian-leaning Social Conservatives (and yeah, the paradoxical term has been brought up again... ).Kmarion wrote:
Both major parties have flipped positions over our brief history. If they don't shift they are done.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Classical Liberals indeed.Kmarion wrote:
Read up on Thomas Jefferson (his own writings). A Liberal "progressive thinking" conservative. .Turquoise wrote:
One thing is for sure... There's a growing rift between Libertarian-leaning Republicans and Authoritarian-leaning Social Conservatives (and yeah, the paradoxical term has been brought up again... ).Kmarion wrote:
Both major parties have flipped positions over our brief history. If they don't shift they are done.
Apparently HE's going with the 'one president at a time' doctrine.ATG wrote:
His silence re: Gaza is deafening.
BTW you need to capitalise HIS from now on.
Edit: Capitalised 'HE'
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-01-06 04:44:04)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I blame the current crisis we're in on Bush. Although there are many outside factors I still hate the stupid bastard and have the following message for any more members of his dildo fucked family:
"More Bush?"
-"STFU"
"More Bush?"
-"STFU"
Last edited by ..teddy..jimmy (2009-01-06 05:07:22)
Ultra vires?..teddy..jimmy wrote:
I blame the current crisis we're in on Bush. Although there are many ultra vires factors I still hate the stupid bastard and have the following message for any more members of his dildo fucked family:
"More Bush?"
-"STFU"
Bush isn't a judge.
Besides, ultra vires in a common law use means acting outside your specified powers, so I'm pretty sure you're using it wrong there. Come on now young legal Padawan!
Last edited by Uzique (2009-01-06 04:54:14)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
More Bush and more Palin.
Sounds like a plan.
Sounds like a plan.
whateves...this just shows I've been reading too much law without any obvious effect whatsoeverUzique wrote:
Ultra vires?..teddy..jimmy wrote:
I blame the current crisis we're in on Bush. Although there are many ultra vires factors I still hate the stupid bastard and have the following message for any more members of his dildo fucked family:
"More Bush?"
-"STFU"
Bush isn't a judge.
Besides, ultra vires in a common law use means acting outside your specified powers, so I'm pretty sure you're using it wrong there. Come on now young legal Padawan!