lowing is correct
He knows it.usmarine wrote:
lowing is correct
To be honest, most of the people you're describing won't bother to vote and so aren't really relevant.lowing wrote:
Lets see GOP has a problem snagging voters who don't have a job, have no responsibility, have no idea what they are doing, or even give a shit about the world around them? Yeah, those are most definately democrat votes the GOP is trying to steal.Spearhead wrote:
LOL
"Republicans have a serious problem with young voters. In Florida, they overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama over John McCain and since the 2008 election, voters 18-29 have continued registering Democratic far more than Republican.
Because early voting habits tend to become long-term voting habits, the Florida GOP understands the gravity of the trend and is taking action. Its secret weapon for winning back the Twitter/Facebook generation? Brace yourself.
Panel discussions! And that's not all. Bruce Jenner, too!
On Aug. 22, the state Republican Party is hosting a "Drive the Discussion Exchange '09" youth conference in Orlando. Targeting Floridians 15 to 35, the conference promises panel discussions, "exciting speakers" and a voter registration drive.
The keynote speaker is Bruce Jenner, who won his Olympic gold medal before most of the event's target demographic was born. Jenner is surely better known to the future Republican leaders as the regular on Keeping Up with the Kardashians."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/a … 013967.ece
family values mkay
Young people typically are less productive, but most of those who don't have jobs or any sort of responsibility or care about the world won't be voting.
don't tell me, tell the GOPBertster7 wrote:
To be honest, most of the people you're describing won't bother to vote and so aren't really relevant.lowing wrote:
Lets see GOP has a problem snagging voters who don't have a job, have no responsibility, have no idea what they are doing, or even give a shit about the world around them? Yeah, those are most definately democrat votes the GOP is trying to steal.Spearhead wrote:
LOL
"Republicans have a serious problem with young voters. In Florida, they overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama over John McCain and since the 2008 election, voters 18-29 have continued registering Democratic far more than Republican.
Because early voting habits tend to become long-term voting habits, the Florida GOP understands the gravity of the trend and is taking action. Its secret weapon for winning back the Twitter/Facebook generation? Brace yourself.
Panel discussions! And that's not all. Bruce Jenner, too!
On Aug. 22, the state Republican Party is hosting a "Drive the Discussion Exchange '09" youth conference in Orlando. Targeting Floridians 15 to 35, the conference promises panel discussions, "exciting speakers" and a voter registration drive.
The keynote speaker is Bruce Jenner, who won his Olympic gold medal before most of the event's target demographic was born. Jenner is surely better known to the future Republican leaders as the regular on Keeping Up with the Kardashians."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/a … 013967.ece
family values mkay
Young people typically are less productive, but most of those who don't have jobs or any sort of responsibility or care about the world won't be voting.
Hahaha. The young people involved in politics really couldn't give a shit about "exciting speakers", they pride themselves upon being at least somewhat aware of real world issues.
Just goes to show how out of touch the GOP is.
Just goes to show how out of touch the GOP is.
No they are involved in ideals that do not fit real world situations. and why? because they do not live in the real world, they have esrned nothing, and have been leeching since birth, and that is EXACTLY why young people are more democratic. Some grow out of it, some do not. Guess who is whoAtaronchronon wrote:
Hahaha. The young people involved in politics really couldn't give a shit about "exciting speakers", they pride themselves upon being at least somewhat aware of real world issues.
Just goes to show how out of touch the GOP is.
lowing, you've earned more than Warran Buffet?
Warren Buffet, did not earn his fortune through liberal socialist ideology. He did it through capitalist ideology and the free market. So although I respect the man for his accomplishments, he is a bit of hypocrite for PREACHING socialist banter while PRACTICING capitalism.Spearhead wrote:
lowing, you've earned more than Warran Buffet?
I will also add, that I do not feel entitled to any of his earnings. How 'bout you?
Last edited by lowing (2009-07-05 06:35:28)
So lowing, people in the defense industry are hypocrites for starting out in the military (a pretty socialist organization) and then going into the private sector and preaching capitalist banter?
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socailist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I dont feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socailist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I dont feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
How is that even related? No, there is not a fine line, it is a very clear and wide line. Our federal government and the 2 parties have made it look like a fine line. In reality it is a choice between having as much opportunity to succeed and fail as possible, or be coddeled by the government so that any success or failure on my part is absorbed by the collective. I would choose my own failure vs. being bailed out by any government.Spearhead wrote:
So lowing, people in the defense industry are hypocrites for starting out in the military (a pretty socialist organization) and then going into the private sector and preaching capitalist banter?
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socailist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I dont feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
Show me where I ever stated anything to the contrary. Or is it that you just like to argue?lowing wrote:
No they are involved in ideals that do not fit real world situations. and why? because they do not live in the real world, they have esrned nothing, and have been leeching since birth, and that is EXACTLY why young people are more democratic. Some grow out of it, some do not. Guess who is whoAtaronchronon wrote:
Hahaha. The young people involved in politics really couldn't give a shit about "exciting speakers", they pride themselves upon being at least somewhat aware of real world issues.
Just goes to show how out of touch the GOP is.
What a desperate post.Spearhead wrote:
So lowing, people in the defense industry are hypocrites for starting out in the military (a pretty socialist organization) and then going into the private sector and preaching capitalist banter?
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socialist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I don't feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
don't ask me who has built wealth through liberal socialist ideology, not my job to answer that. If you are telling me I am wrong, you prove me wrong. as it is, I can not think of a single example of someone who built an empire through liberalism. Can you?
show you where you said anything to the contrary??? Ummm how about your entire post i responded to? If not please explain thisAtaronchronon wrote:
Show me where I ever stated anything to the contrary. Or is it that you just like to argue?lowing wrote:
No they are involved in ideals that do not fit real world situations. and why? because they do not live in the real world, they have esrned nothing, and have been leeching since birth, and that is EXACTLY why young people are more democratic. Some grow out of it, some do not. Guess who is whoAtaronchronon wrote:
Hahaha. The young people involved in politics really couldn't give a shit about "exciting speakers", they pride themselves upon being at least somewhat aware of real world issues.
Just goes to show how out of touch the GOP is.
"The young people involved in politics really couldn't give a shit about "exciting speakers", they pride themselves upon being at least somewhat aware of real world issues."
Norway?lowing wrote:
What a desperate post.Spearhead wrote:
So lowing, people in the defense industry are hypocrites for starting out in the military (a pretty socialist organization) and then going into the private sector and preaching capitalist banter?
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socialist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I don't feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
don't ask me who has built wealth through liberal socialist ideology, not my job to answer that. If you are telling me I am wrong, you prove me wrong. as it is, I can not think of a single example of someone who built an empire through liberalism. Can you?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Switzerland?Varegg wrote:
Norway?lowing wrote:
What a desperate post.Spearhead wrote:
So lowing, people in the defense industry are hypocrites for starting out in the military (a pretty socialist organization) and then going into the private sector and preaching capitalist banter?
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socialist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I don't feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
don't ask me who has built wealth through liberal socialist ideology, not my job to answer that. If you are telling me I am wrong, you prove me wrong. as it is, I can not think of a single example of someone who built an empire through liberalism. Can you?
Please remember I said earned it. Norway does not generate wealth, it takes it.Varegg wrote:
Norway?lowing wrote:
What a desperate post.Spearhead wrote:
So lowing, people in the defense industry are hypocrites for starting out in the military (a pretty socialist organization) and then going into the private sector and preaching capitalist banter?
The fact is, whether you realize it or not, there is no fine line between socialism and capitalism.
Also lowing, I will ask you who has earned money through "liberal socialist ideology"? And I know exactly what your answer will be. "No one". How convenient.
And no I don't feel I'm entitled to any of his earnings. I'm better off than a lot of other people.
honestly lowing. For the 5 thousandth time people have been telling you, pull your head out of your ass.
don't ask me who has built wealth through liberal socialist ideology, not my job to answer that. If you are telling me I am wrong, you prove me wrong. as it is, I can not think of a single example of someone who built an empire through liberalism. Can you?
same thing, does not generate wealth, it seizes it. But hey, keep going, yourl ack of a real response to the question does nothing but prove me correct.AussieReaper wrote:
Switzerland?Varegg wrote:
Norway?lowing wrote:
What a desperate post.
don't ask me who has built wealth through liberal socialist ideology, not my job to answer that. If you are telling me I am wrong, you prove me wrong. as it is, I can not think of a single example of someone who built an empire through liberalism. Can you?
I won't even get into the fact that Norway or Switzerland is not "someone"
Last edited by lowing (2009-07-06 07:37:46)
Switzerland has a GDP of $303.2 billion (2007 est.)lowing wrote:
same thing, does not generate wealth, it seizes it. But hey, keep going, yourl ack of a real response to the question does nothing but prove me correct.AussieReaper wrote:
Switzerland?Varegg wrote:
Norway?
Is that not generating wealth?
ummm nope... Like I said, Switzerland does not EARN an income, it gets its money through taxes.AussieReaper wrote:
Switzerland has a GDP of $303.2 billion (2007 est.)lowing wrote:
same thing, does not generate wealth, it seizes it. But hey, keep going, yourl ack of a real response to the question does nothing but prove me correct.AussieReaper wrote:
Switzerland?
Is that not generating wealth?
So you're saying you don't know what a GDP is?lowing wrote:
ummm nope... Like I said, Switzerland does not EARN an income, it gets its money through taxes.AussieReaper wrote:
Switzerland has a GDP of $303.2 billion (2007 est.)lowing wrote:
same thing, does not generate wealth, it seizes it. But hey, keep going, yourl ack of a real response to the question does nothing but prove me correct.
Is that not generating wealth?
Do yourself a favour and look it up.
Then work out that Switzerland has one of the highest GDP per capita in the world.
actually, maybe you better look it up. Govts. do not generate INCOME, or produce goods or services. Companies do this. Switzerland seizes this income for redistribution in the form of socialization.AussieReaper wrote:
So you're saying you don't know what a GDP is?lowing wrote:
ummm nope... Like I said, Switzerland does not EARN an income, it gets its money through taxes.AussieReaper wrote:
Switzerland has a GDP of $303.2 billion (2007 est.)
Is that not generating wealth?
Do yourself a favour and look it up.
Then work out that Switzerland has one of the highest GDP per capita in the world.
your argument is even more desperate than the other. If you want to name "SOMEONE", that has built wealth through liberalism socialist ideology, if not move along, naming entire countries is pretty ridiculous especially since it is not even true, unless of course you consider seizing wealth from others as earning wealth.
Last edited by lowing (2009-07-06 07:55:27)
Oh well, so much for that non-sense, anyway, back to you Spearhead.
Eh ... maybe you should look it up lowing ... Statoil, the Norwegian government oil company is ... wait for it ... owned by the government and thus generates income to Norway ... we have a oil fund that ... wait for it ... is owned by the government that invests in stocks and generates an income to Norway ... we even own 0,7% of the US debt that generates interest rates every year ... collecting taxes is actually way down on the list of government income in Norway ...lowing wrote:
actually, maybe you better look it up. Govts. do not generate INCOME, or produce goods or services. Companies do this. Switzerland seizes this income for redistribution in the form of socialization.AussieReaper wrote:
So you're saying you don't know what a GDP is?lowing wrote:
ummm nope... Like I said, Switzerland does not EARN an income, it gets its money through taxes.
Do yourself a favour and look it up.
Then work out that Switzerland has one of the highest GDP per capita in the world.
your argument is even more desperate than the other. If you want to name "SOMEONE", that has built wealth through liberalism socialist ideology, if not move along, naming entire countries is pretty ridiculous especially since it is not even true, unless of course you consider seizing wealth from others as earning wealth.
And Norway is a liberalistic style democracy with a touch of capitalism and delicately sprinkled with socialism ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Your response had absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote and you countered a point I never made.lowing wrote:
show you where you said anything to the contrary??? Ummm how about your entire post i responded to? If not please explain thisAtaronchronon wrote:
Show me where I ever stated anything to the contrary. Or is it that you just like to argue?lowing wrote:
No they are involved in ideals that do not fit real world situations. and why? because they do not live in the real world, they have esrned nothing, and have been leeching since birth, and that is EXACTLY why young people are more democratic. Some grow out of it, some do not. Guess who is who
"The young people involved in politics really couldn't give a shit about "exciting speakers", they pride themselves upon being at least somewhat aware of real world issues."
I never said that all young people involved in politics are liberals, nor did I side with a liberal point of view. I made the point that the GOP is foolish for thinking young people care about "exciting speakers."
Nowhere did I side with a liberal point of view.
Statoil is, wait for it, funded by the people of Norway. It is run by, wait for it, money seized by the people. the employees of it are paid by, wait for it, money seized by the people. If it loses money, it is the, wait for it, people of Norway that lose who, other than having its money seized by Norway, has nothing to do with stateoil.Varegg wrote:
Eh ... maybe you should look it up lowing ... Statoil, the Norwegian government oil company is ... wait for it ... owned by the government and thus generates income to Norway ... we have a oil fund that ... wait for it ... is owned by the government that invests in stocks and generates an income to Norway ... we even own 0,7% of the US debt that generates interest rates every year ... collecting taxes is actually way down on the list of government income in Norway ...lowing wrote:
actually, maybe you better look it up. Govts. do not generate INCOME, or produce goods or services. Companies do this. Switzerland seizes this income for redistribution in the form of socialization.AussieReaper wrote:
So you're saying you don't know what a GDP is?
Do yourself a favour and look it up.
Then work out that Switzerland has one of the highest GDP per capita in the world.
your argument is even more desperate than the other. If you want to name "SOMEONE", that has built wealth through liberalism socialist ideology, if not move along, naming entire countries is pretty ridiculous especially since it is not even true, unless of course you consider seizing wealth from others as earning wealth.
And Norway is a liberalistic style democracy with a touch of capitalism and delicately sprinkled with socialism ...
Norway, would have no money if it did not seize it from its people. It would have no oil company if it did not seize its money from its people, therefore, Norway does not generate wealth, it seizes it, and continues to fund its projects by seizing it, an entity that can not lose because it can always tap its citizens is not a company. It is a program
Now, if you care to get back to what I actually said, and show me "SOMEONE" who has built wealth through liberal ideology I am all ears. I guess, in order to counteract your smart ass responses I must add the obvious. I meant built private wealth.