2012 U.S. election presidential, Mitt Romney vs Barack Obama

2012-09-23 06:22:24

#201

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

AussieReaper wrote:
There was already a budget showdown, and the result was a lowered credit rating.

It's all well and good to have checks and balances, but this House has been one of record filibusters and zero jobs bills.

The GOP stance was to make the "Obama" economy look as bad as possible by passing nothing that would improve it.

But what can you expect from the party that says “Our number one priority is making Obama a one-term president.” ?

I'm glad you don't have a vote.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-09-23 07:43:00

#202

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6695|'Murka

AussieReaper wrote:
You'd love it, since you don't have to mention George Bush at all.

Which is kind of the Republican motto these days, anyway.

I'd rather take an objective, critical view.

Let me know if you don't know what those words mean.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2012-09-23 11:57:10

#203

Uzique The Lesser: Banned; +382|4539

FEOS wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
You'd love it, since you don't have to mention George Bush at all.

Which is kind of the Republican motto these days, anyway.
I'd rather take an objective, critical view.

Let me know if you don't know what those words mean.

'critical' implies an act of interpretation and reading; reading implies a subject; a subject implies subjectivity.

a subject comes with the whole baggage of personal experiences, preferences: the general lived-life, gestalt-informing, and unavoidably political.

'objective' view on politics.

laff out loud.

do you know what those words mean? really? you shouldn't talk with such cocksure smarminess. to talk of 'objective criticism' is to recycle an old joke ideology from the 1920's.

Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-09-23 11:57:32)

2012-09-23 13:45:43

#204

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

aynrandroolz wrote:
FEOS wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
You'd love it, since you don't have to mention George Bush at all.

Which is kind of the Republican motto these days, anyway.
I'd rather take an objective, critical view.

Let me know if you don't know what those words mean.
'critical' implies an act of interpretation and reading; reading implies a subject; a subject implies subjectivity.

a subject comes with the whole baggage of personal experiences, preferences: the general lived-life, gestalt-informing, and unavoidably political.

'objective' view on politics.

laff out loud.

do you know what those words mean? really? you shouldn't talk with such cocksure smarminess. to talk of 'objective criticism' is to recycle an old joke ideology from the 1920's.

I'm fairly certain he meant to look at both sides of the argument before making a decision. We might as well read HuffPo (and all the stupid that goes with that) rather than whatever Aussie decides to post.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-09-23 14:52:48

#205

RAIMIUS: You with the face!; +244|6999|US

At least HuffPo articles use some reasoning, sometimes.

Aussie, you do realize the House regularly passes bills that the Senate refuses to vote on, right? Also, both parties LOVE the filibuster when they don't have a majority, almost as much as they love to complain about the filibuster when they do have the majority.

2012-09-24 01:59:27

#206

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

Filibusters should not be part of a democratic process, shut up and vote - thats what you're paid for - if you don't have the numbers to get what you want bad luck, the people chose your numbers, thats their democratic input and should be respected.

Fuck Israel

2012-09-24 04:03:17

#207

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6437|what

House Republicans vote, again, to repeal health care law

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/11/polit … index.html

Wednesday's vote was the latest of more than 30 House GOP efforts to undermine the 2010 Affordable Care Act, including previous Republican moves to repeal the measure or cut funding for various provisions.

Imagine all the jobs repealing Obamacare would create!

2012-09-24 04:08:10

#208

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

Obamacare created jobs? You sound like a moron.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-09-24 04:13:09

#209

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6437|what

Repealing it never even had a chance in the senate the first 29 times, maybe the 30th will get through?

For a party that is focused on "job creation" they sure have their priorities in order.

I'll bet repealing the EPA seemed like it'd be a real jobs winner too!

2012-09-24 04:18:51

#210

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

AussieReaper wrote:
Repealing it never even had a chance in the senate the first 29 times, maybe the 30th will get through?

For a party that is focused on "job creation" they sure have their priorities in order.

I'll bet repealing the EPA seemed like it'd be a real jobs winner too!

You should stick to stealing pictures from reddit.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-09-24 05:57:36

#211

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

Thats some quality debating right there.

Fuck Israel

2012-09-24 07:18:28

#212

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7001

AussieReaper wrote:
I'll bet repealing the EPA seemed like it'd be a real jobs winner too!

Yeah like the states themselves don't have their own environmental laws.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2012-09-24 16:05:47

#213

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,056|7056|PNW

2012-09-24 19:03:53

#214

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6695|'Murka

aynrandroolz wrote:
FEOS wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
You'd love it, since you don't have to mention George Bush at all.

Which is kind of the Republican motto these days, anyway.
I'd rather take an objective, critical view.

Let me know if you don't know what those words mean.
'critical' implies an act of interpretation and reading; reading implies a subject; a subject implies subjectivity.

a subject comes with the whole baggage of personal experiences, preferences: the general lived-life, gestalt-informing, and unavoidably political.

'objective' view on politics.

laff out loud.

do you know what those words mean? really? you shouldn't talk with such cocksure smarminess. to talk of 'objective criticism' is to recycle an old joke ideology from the 1920's.

I know exactly what those words mean. Words have different meanings in different context--you should know that.

For you to accuse anyone of "cocksure smarminess" is the epitome of irony--especially when you're being purposefully obtuse.

Objective: Adj not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion.

Critical: Adj involving skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.; judicial: a critical analysis.

Great grasp of the English language, chief. All that money was clearly well-spent.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2012-09-24 21:20:32

#215

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5870

Cybargs wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
I'll bet repealing the EPA seemed like it'd be a real jobs winner too!
Yeah like the states themselves don't have their own environmental laws.

Yeah like the states can actually control multinational corporations.

2012-09-25 08:26:53

#216

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6695|'Murka

Macbeth wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
I'll bet repealing the EPA seemed like it'd be a real jobs winner too!
Yeah like the states themselves don't have their own environmental laws.
Yeah like the states can actually control multinational corporations.

They can control whether those businesses can operate in their states.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2012-09-25 08:51:20

#217

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5870

FEOS wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Cybargs wrote:

Yeah like the states themselves don't have their own environmental laws.
Yeah like the states can actually control multinational corporations.
They can control whether those businesses can operate in their states.

Because state aren't competing with each other and bending over backwards to attract businesses to their state.

2012-09-25 21:08:59

#218

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6695|'Murka

Macbeth wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Macbeth wrote:

Yeah like the states can actually control multinational corporations.
They can control whether those businesses can operate in their states.
Because state aren't competing with each other and bending over backwards to attract businesses to their state.

Of course they are. But if the state feels strongly enough about a company's environmental practices, they can put constraints on that company within their state or bar it completely.

Replace state with country and you have the same situation. OMG--it's a free market argument! Blasphemy!

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2012-09-25 22:03:43

#219

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5870

Companies can pull out and bully states much easier than they could the federal government.

Whatever

Last edited by Macbeth (2012-09-25 22:04:30)

2012-09-25 23:00:51

#220

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7001

Macbeth wrote:
Companies can pull out and bully states much easier than they could the federal government.

Whatever

There's no "one fit solution" to 50 states, each with their own environmental variables. That's why it's easier to let the state's themselves do the planning.

2012-09-25 23:05:07

#221

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5870

Fascinating. What that has to do with my post I don't know.

2012-09-25 23:18:40

#222

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7001

That's your problem.

2012-09-25 23:21:41

#223

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5870

Thank you for your valuable contribution.

2012-09-25 23:25:02

#224

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7001

You're welcome

2012-09-26 00:19:08

#225

iceman785: Member; +93|6957|Alaska, mother fucker.

Might as well just give Obama the next four years now so people can stop wasting their time.

BF2S Forums 2012 U.S. election presidential, Mitt Romney vs Barack Obama

AussieReaper wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

FEOS wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

FEOS wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

FEOS wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Board footer