Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => The SGA => Topic started by: AUChizad on November 06, 2008, 08:58:43 AM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K41g2ttyK4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K41g2ttyK4)
-
So what do Al and Jesse do now? Do they even get a quarter percent of the support they had before?
-
While watching Obama's speech, the camera panned to Jesse Jackson and he was crying. I turned to my wife and said "He's crying because he just got put out of business."
There are no more excuses.
-
While watching Obama's speech, the camera panned to Jesse Jackson and he was crying. I turned to my wife and said "He's crying because he just got put out of business."
There are no more excuses.
Exactly.
-
I just can't comprehend voting for someone not because of policies or what he believes in or what direction he wants to take the country in...but just because the color of his skin. That blows me away...
-
The point of the thread was the first half of that video.
If you don't listen to her, listen to him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bss6lTP8BJ8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bss6lTP8BJ8)
-
While watching Obama's speech, the camera panned to Jesse Jackson and he was crying. I turned to my wife and said "He's crying because he just got put out of business."
There are no more excuses.
My man..you could not have nailed it any better than that. There was a part of me that was okay with Obama being elected for that very reason. Can we FINALLY just go on with our lives and leave race out of every issue that's controversial? An African/Muslim American has risen to the highest position possible in this country. Equality has been preached and hammered home for decades and I don't know what more could possibly be done to achieve that goal. It's here. No more excuses.
-
We're listening to you Chad, you posed that to Kaos, and his response ought to be interesting, yet in contrast to what you're poking for. You should get the "debate" you're looking for. I agree with what you're posting, but it IS only a couple days past the election and it's not such a far reach that people that feel as passionate as they do about some things might not be ready lay off and openely embrace what's still ultimately a BIG unknown. I'm for one willing to see what's up and chill and see.... With you there....
Well said on the JJ and ASharpton dealio Birdman.
SO, what does this do for affirmative action? Is it still necessary? Interesting debate there to be had...
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K41g2ttyK4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K41g2ttyK4)
Just to play devils advocate here......
If we are now supposed to as good Americans support President-elect Obama why did Bush not get the same consideration?
There were MANY things that Bush has done and not done that I do not agree with but I seem to recall Whoopi amongst others not being good Americans and supporting their president.
Just pointing out the double standard.
-
Just to play devils advocate here......
If we are now supposed to as good Americans support President-elect Obama why did Bush not get the same consideration?
There were MANY things that Bush has done and not done that I do not agree with but I seem to recall Whoopi amongst others not being good Americans and supporting their president.
Just pointing out the double standard.
To quote you: "Two wrongs and all that".
Don't be hypocrites.
And by the way, I'm not saying you have to agree with every thing the man says. I'm just saying, stop bashing him relentlessly for superficial things, and start giving him the benefit of the doubt.
-
To quote you: "Two wrongs and all that".
Don't be hypocrites.
Who's being hypocrites?
-
To quote you: "Two wrongs and all that".
Don't be hypocrites.
I'm not going to be hypocritical. I will support my next president. Just like I would still defend my constitution against any enemies foreign or domestic. I am only pointing out that only now is the other side preaching presidential support. It's a hell of a lot easier for them to say it now that they've won. Would they be preaching the same thing had they not won? We will never know for sure but I would put to you that their treatment of Bush lends credibility to my thought that they would not.
Just an observation.
As in war, those that win get to write the history books.
-
I am only pointing out that only now is the other side preaching presidential support. It's a hell of a lot easier for them to say it now that they've won. Would they be preaching the same thing had they not won? We will never know for sure but I would put to you that their treatment of Bush lends credibility to my thought that they would not.
I think you're getting at the point that Chad is making: For 8 years those who opposed Bush's policies and actions were told to support their president and honor the office of the presidency. We'll have a chance now to see if those same people who chastised for 8 years can walk the walk.
-
I think you're getting at the point that Chad is making: For 8 years those who opposed Bush's policies and actions were told to support their president and honor the office of the presidency. We'll have a chance now to see if those same people who chastised for 8 years can walk the walk.
:thumbsup:
-
I think you're getting at the point that Chad is making: For 8 years those who opposed Bush's policies and actions were told to support their president and honor the office of the presidency. We'll have a chance now to see if those same people who chastised for 8 years can walk the walk.
I like to believe that the common conservative is more supportive of a president than the common liberal but that may be my own perception. Time will tell on this one.
-
I like to believe that the common conservative is more supportive of a president than the common liberal but that may be my own perception. Time will tell on this one.
I think that you're probably correct, as long as we're talking about true conservatives and not the fanatical religious right that has co-opted the Republican party in recent years.
-
I like to believe that the common conservative is more supportive of a president than the common liberal but that may be my own perception. Time will tell on this one.
That may be true, but you're basing that mostly on Bush, who eventually pretty much everyone agreed was a fuck up. Some of us just took longer to admit it.
-
That may be true, but you're basing that mostly on Bush, who eventually pretty much everyone agreed was a fuck up. Some of us just took longer to admit it.
I think it could be argued that Republicans and Conservatives were the targets of much of the aggression, not just Bush. Also, how would you explain attacks on outlets such as Fox News by people like Bill Burton (Obama Campaign Spokesperson) that were nasty. Attacks on Palin? Not all, most of these types of attacks were completely targeting the NON-democratic, or perceived non "in the tank" outlets.
From an individual standpoint, I agree with what you're saying Chad, but there is PLENTY out there that could cause a slow recovery from the angst a lot of people will carry for a time.
I think that is understandable, and it will be interesting to see if Obama suffers the same scrutiny, and then in turn, the democratic party and support suffer in the end as well. Only time will tell.
-
I think that you're probably correct, as long as we're talking about true conservatives and not the fanatical religious right that has co-opted the Republican party in recent years.
True dat.
I think think that's part of why I'm so irritated by the the whole thing.
Facebook has taught me that I have a shitload of ignorant friends.
The night of the election, facebook statuses were coming in by the second, ranging from "I'm not going to live in a socialist nation, I'm moving to Canada" (Seriously. And there were at least 30 or 40 of those), to "I'm praying that God does not punish America for it's terrible decision" as well as many other blogs about trying to come to terms with how God could allow such a tragedy to happen.
One friend made this his profile picture:
(http://profile.ak.facebook.com/profile6/1999/22/n7020970_1284.jpg)
And made his status "Nolan is wondering why a Muslim is our President? Please tell me he's not a muslim then see my profile picture, explain that shit!"
To which I posted:
"Holy Shit, Bush is Asian! There's no telling how deep this goes!"
(http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v372/174/83/7008041/n7008041_39322023_1449.jpg)
-
I think it could be argued that Republicans and Conservatives were the targets of much of the aggression, not just Bush. Also, how would you explain attacks on outlets such as Fox News by people like Bill Burton (Obama Campaign Spokesperson) that were nasty.
You did see where it was revealed (McClellan, ax to grind obviously...though his claim was never disputed) that the White House fed talking point memos to Fox News, right? These talking points would then become "news items".
I think criticism of Fox is easily justified when they try to wear the mantle of the Fourth Estate.
-
You did see where it was revealed (McClellan, ax to grind obviously...though his claim was never disputed) that the White House fed talking point memos to Fox News, right? These talking points would then become "news items".
I think criticism of Fox is easily justified when they try to wear the mantle of the Fourth Estate.
I readily admit that virtually all other news outlets are left biased, but Fox takes bias to a whole new level. I guess it's a one-stop equalizer for the combined bias of all other televised news.
-
You did see where it was revealed (McClellan, ax to grind obviously...though his claim was never disputed) that the White House fed talking point memos to Fox News, right? These talking points would then become "news items".
I think criticism of Fox is easily justified when they try to wear the mantle of the Fourth Estate.
I can agree that some people are going to see Fox News the way some others see NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CBS, ABC, MPR and others....
Also, wasn't McClellan the Press Secretary before the elections? Also, he "apologized" and publicly admitted that it was false that Fox, and O'Reilly were EVER given talking points.
There are many links...here's one..
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/30/mcclellan-apologizes-oreilly-bill-wasnt-sent-talking-points (http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/30/mcclellan-apologizes-oreilly-bill-wasnt-sent-talking-points)
I completely understand that Fox might lean to the Center right..and I agree... Not debunking your theory there....
-
I readily admit that virtually all other news outlets are left biased, but Fox takes bias to a whole new level. I guess it's a one-stop equalizer for the combined bias of all other televised news.
I'd submit that MSNBC and Keith Oberman have the market cornered on the "highest level of bias" market.
JMO...haha..
-
To which I posted:
"Holy Shit, Bush is Asian! There's no telling how deep this goes!"
(http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v372/174/83/7008041/n7008041_39322023_1449.jpg)
Putin also. Of course, it could be argued that Putin is actually half Asian since the USSR stretched over both continents.
Discuss.
-
I can agree that some people are going to see Fox News the way some others see NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CBS, ABC, MPR and others....
Also, wasn't McClellan the Press Secretary before the elections? Also, he "apologized" and publicly admitted that it was false that Fox, and O'Reilly were EVER given talking points.
There are many links...here's one..
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/30/mcclellan-apologizes-oreilly-bill-wasnt-sent-talking-points (http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/30/mcclellan-apologizes-oreilly-bill-wasnt-sent-talking-points)
Nice. I never saw that. Thanks, Scott, you fuckin pusbag...way to hang me out.
-
I'd submit that MSNBC and Keith Oberman have the market cornered on the "highest level of bias" market.
JMO...haha..
Really? More than O'Reiley, Hannity, and the Fox & Friends crew?
There's a difference between the regular news staff, and the opinion shows.
By the way, what about Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Tucker Carlson (although I guess he's recently gone), Willy Geist, Chuck Todd?
-
Really? More than O'Reiley, Hannity, and the Fox & Friends crew?
There's a difference between the regular news staff, and the opinion shows.
By the way, what about Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Tucker Carlson (although I guess he's recently gone), Willy Geist?
Each side ('Pub/Dem) is going to see the other (MSNBC/FOX) as the extremity of bias. And they both are when viewed from those perspectives. It's a shame we can't have honest news broadcasts. The $$$$ wins again.
-
Really? More than O'Reiley, Hannity, and the Fox & Friends crew?
There's a difference between the regular news staff, and the opinion shows.
Hannity IS an opinion maker, and sits 3 feet from a Liberal Alan Colmes (who even has his own show too on Fox News Radio....) O'Reilly is a Libertarian and has bashed Bush, Conservatives, basically undressed McCain this election, and actually gave Obama much love after his interview.... You actually have to listen to them to know that...
Actually Judge Andrew Napolitano is a Libertarian as well....
Sounds like you might not quite know enough, like most there to bitch TOOOO much about them. Besides, I supported your other arguements, but I know it's fun to argue...
By the way, what about Joe Scarborough, Pat Buchanan, Tucker Carlson (although I guess he's recently gone), Willy Geist?
Who sits in check with MSNBC on Countdown? Trust me... Fox has the Joe's, Pat's and Tuckers on the Democratic side as well....
-
Each side ('Pub/Dem) is going to see the other (MSNBC/FOX) as the extremity of bias. And they both are when viewed from those perspectives. It's a shame we can't have honest news broadcasts. The $$$$ wins again.
True.
-
Just curious as to why we need a party system anyway. Exactly what is accomplished by that other than polarizing a nation?
-
Just curious as to why we need a party system anyway. Exactly what is accomplished by that other than polarizing a nation?
I couldn't agree more. Surely someone will come to the defense of the Two Party system, and say you're a pussy if you don't hard-headedly support 100% of the official party line, to which there are exactly two alternatives.
I'm not one of those people.
-
Just curious as to why we need a party system anyway. Exactly what is accomplished by that other than polarizing a nation?
Our first president was wise well beyond his years when he urged Americans in his farewell address to "forswear excessive party spirit and geographical distinctions".
-
Shoot, even Obama has suggested an 8 party playoff syst...wait... what are we talking about?
-
Just to play devils advocate here......
If we are now supposed to as good Americans support President-elect Obama why did Bush not get the same consideration?
There were MANY things that Bush has done and not done that I do not agree with but I seem to recall Whoopi amongst others not being good Americans and supporting their president.
Just pointing out the double standard.
Because Republicans are generally decent, God-fearing, patriots. We support our country even when we may disagree. Democrats, as a rule, do not. People are making a huge deal out of Elisabeth because she did what TRUE patriots do. She got on the bus. She said, "okay, my guy lost. I'm an American first. So I'm going to give the new administration my support and hope we can keep it from screwing up." A Democrat would never do that: See 2004, 2000, 1988....
I support the country. I do not and will not support Obama now or ever. I will actively work to see that he isn't re-elected. That's the way things work.
-
I readily admit that virtually all other news outlets are left biased, but Fox takes bias to a whole new level. I guess it's a one-stop equalizer for the combined bias of all other televised news.
Good GOD, have you bothered to watch MSNBC or CNN? Talk about taking bias to a whole new level. Those two networks were basically Obama infomercials for six months. Fox hit both sides.
-
Because Republicans are generally decent, God-fearing, patriots.
I just fucking threw up in my mouth.
Put your broad-brush away. You're better than that.
-
I just fucking threw up in my mouth.
Put your broad-brush away. You're better than that.
Wouldn't have been better to say, that his generalization of the democratic party was unjustified? I think it was, and a barb looking for a response like yours.... I know you don't believe that Republicans "aren't" generally decent, God-fearing, patriots...right?
-
Anyone who believes that Fox is as right as the others are left is a COMPLETE idiot. Independent studies done over the last 2 years have proved as much. Not to mention, just watch Fox and see.
The big difference is the others blow whatever left-wing candidate there is at the time and Fox does not blow anyone.
You hardly EVER see any criticism of the magic ONE on any of the lefty stations.
Fox has consistently called out Bush and McCain.
This country is going in the shitter with with the big shit that was just elected. WHEN he becomes president, I will support the office. But I will never support the man. Now that does not mean I will be full of hate toward him. We just disagree on, well, every damn thing he stands for. Any God-fearing gun-toting southerner that supports the magic ONE, should turn in their southern card and move north of the Mason-Dixon line. Or Florida.
And screw all libs if they think I will lay down and kiss anyone's ass. For 8 years the bastards have been hateful to the max, they can expect a little discomfort for the next four.
-
Anyone who believes that Fox is as right as the others are left is a COMPLETE idiot. Independent studies done over the last 2 years have proved as much. Not to mention, just watch Fox and see.
The big difference is the others blow whatever left-wing candidate there is at the time and Fox does not blow anyone.
You hardly EVER see any criticism of the magic ONE on any of the lefty stations.
Fox has consistently called out Bush and McCain.
This country is going in the shitter with with the big shit that was just elected. WHEN he becomes president, I will support the office. But I will never support the man. Now that does not mean I will be full of hate toward him. We just disagree on, well, every damn thing he stands for. Any God-fearing gun-toting southerner that supports the magic ONE, should turn in their southern card and move north of the Mason-Dixon line. Or Florida.
And screw all libs if they think I will lay down and kiss anyone's ass. For 8 years the bastards have been hateful to the max, they can expect a little discomfort for the next four.
You're a bitter red neck :rimshot:
-
Thank you Mark, You racist bastard. Oh. Wait. I'm sorry. Redneck is not a race. Go ahead say what you will about me. I'm white so nobody gives a shit.
-
Just curious as to why we need a party system anyway. Exactly what is accomplished by that other than polarizing a nation?
Because without a two-party system then America will become a dying country like Italy. Do you really want a president that will be elected with maybe 20% of the vote? In that case normal people with similiar ideas will have spread their votes out among a number of similiar candidates and some lunatic could become president.
-
Wouldn't have been better to say, that his generalization of the democratic party was unjustified? I think it was, and a barb looking for a response like yours.... I know you don't believe that Republicans "aren't" generally decent, God-fearing, patriots...right?
I would definitely argue the "decent" tag. I would also like to quiz some on their concept of "patriotism".
To be clear: I'm speaking only of the non-traditional Republicans.
-
I would definitely argue the "decent" tag. I would also like to quiz some on their concept of "patriotism".
To be clear: I'm speaking only of the non-traditional Republicans.
I was only talking about Elisabeth anyway. She exhibited grace and class on The View. That's why the left-leaning media was so surprised as were her co-hosts. Grace and class are traits with which they are not familiar.
God Bless Elisabeth.
Hasselbeck/Palin 2012.
-
Anyone who believes that Fox is as right as the others are left is a COMPLETE idiot. Independent studies done over the last 2 years have proved as much. Not to mention, just watch Fox and see.
...
The big difference is the others blow whatever left-wing candidate there is at the time and Fox does not blow anyone.
You hardly EVER see any criticism of the magic ONE on any of the lefty stations.
Fox has consistently called out Bush and McCain.
This country is going in the shitter with with the big shit that was just elected. WHEN he becomes president, I will support the office. But I will never support the man. Now that does not mean I will be full of hate toward him. We just disagree on, well, every damn thing he stands for. Any God-fearing gun-toting southerner that supports the magic ONE, should turn in their southern card and move north of the Mason-Dixon line. Or Florida.
And screw all libs if they think I will lay down and kiss anyone's ass. For 8 years the bastards have been hateful to the max, they can expect a little discomfort for the next four.
As a bitter gun owner who clings to God and religion I could not agree with you more.
Fox has consistently been "fair and balanced" whereas the other "news" programs (and I do watch them from time to time) have not; they've been in the tank for The Obama since day one; even the Hildebeast got the short shrift by them whereas when she's been on several Fox News news and opinion programs she was treated fairly.
As a general note all of the commentators on the various networks have their own subjective views which do surface in the form of personal opinions. Hannity and Colmes are good examples of commentators as is Bill O'Reilly, the loathsome Keith Olbermann, the Democrat socialist sycophant Chris Matthews, and the gollum-like Larry King.
Just curious as to why we need a party system anyway. Exactly what is accomplished by that other than polarizing a nation?
We have a two-party system because that's the result of Alexander Hamilton's and Thomas Jefferson's disagreement over the function of a Federal government as defined by the Constitution.
Hamilton favored a more centralized/federalized approach to government by basically allowing a more classically liberal interpretation of the Constitution and the authority defined within it. He feared anarchy without a strong central government.
Jefferson favored a far more limited federal government by allowing only a strict interpretation of the powers defined for government within the Constitution. He feared that a liberal interpretation of the Constitution would give us another tyrannical government which he'd just help fight a war against.
Federalist versus democrat. Two philosophical approaches which fit nicely with our bi-cameral Congress and provided an instant and additional layer of checks and balances.
Unfortunately that philosophical approach became one major reason for the later War of Northern Aggression. And the Federalist approach won it. And, over the years, the Federalists became Republicans, the Jeffersonian democrats became Democrats...then the Democrats became socialists and the Republicans became the old Jeffersonian democrats.
And the past few years the Democrats have become more socialistic and the Republicans have become more like the big government, FDR Democrats leaving real conservatives who cling to their guns and religion trying to keep the party more in line with the Jeffersonian democrat philosphy of smaller and less intrusive government, decentralized power, responsible budgeting, etc.
Anyway, I digress, the real failure lately has been that both parties have been more alike than not and the two-party system is designed to make third parties fail with little or no electoral rewards for their effort; that is why other parties have merged with larger parties in the past.
Because Republicans are generally decent, God-fearing, patriots. We support our country even when we may disagree. Democrats, as a rule, do not. People are making a huge deal out of Elisabeth because she did what TRUE patriots do. She got on the bus. She said, "okay, my guy lost. I'm an American first. So I'm going to give the new administration my support and hope we can keep it from screwing up." A Democrat would never do that: See 2004, 2000, 1988....
...
Generally I think that you are correct but there are men and women of ill-repute in the Republican Party just like in the Democrat socialist party. Republicans are almost ALWAYS held to a higher standard than Democrats socialists by the MSM (unfortunately) but by the public too by extension. And that is, in part, why we were thumped in the elections this week.
...
I support the country. I do not and will not support Obama now or ever. I will actively work to see that he isn't re-elected. That's the way things work.
I support my country and will always respect the office of the Presidency. However, I will not respect a President who has not earned it as I opined in an earlier post this week.
The Obama has done nothing to earn anything but disdain from me right now. This man has Hamas endorsing him!
Any candidate with the Republican Party that had had his background NEVER would have made it through the primary season vetting process if that far so why in the hell should I give him any kind of leeway?
I too will actively work to make sure that Democrats socialists like him are NOT re-elected but the work begins by helping to cull the socialists out of my own political party and getting us focused back on the conservative philosophy of Jefferson democratic ideals.
Our first president was wise well beyond his years when he urged Americans in his farewell address to "forswear excessive party spirit and geographical distinctions".
That's correct Sani but that does not mean that I and bitter clingers like me must embrace Democrat socialist elected representatives or their philosphy. I don't think that being the loyal opposition (loyal to my country but opposed to Pelosi, Reid, and The Obama) is excessive party spirit. It's called honest disagreement.
As mentioned, part of the problem with the Republican Party as I see it is that we've been all too happy to compromise with the Democrats socialists and they NEVER compromise with us. Hell, our candidate this year was one of the biggest Republican compromisers in Senate apart from Jim Jeffords (who was replaced by a real socialist), Lindsay Graham, and a handful of others who represented half of the "Gang of 14" if you'll recall! Look what the hell running him got us! Look what having a compromiser in the White House got us at least for the past couple of years...yes, I voted for him but he was a hellava lot better than Gore and Kerry ever would have been!
That may be true, but you're basing that mostly on Bush, who eventually pretty much everyone agreed was a fuck up. Some of us just took longer to admit it.
He was on a lot of things but he's carried the war on the jihadist terrorists to their land and probably made them think twice before ever trying to hit us again. They've clearly been hurt and hurt badly but we'll never know the true story because the MSM won't report it since it might help make President Bush "look" good in the public eyes. My ONLY real regret for W is that he did not get Bin Laden and that is a bitter disappointment indeed.
At least he didn't compromise with the jihadists whereas The Obama wants to negotiate with them!
Anyway, I'm done with this for a little while...I'm leaving for Las Vegas in the morning...we'll see yall on the dark side of the moon.
By the bye, I'm not a mod but I'm really glad to see the activity in the SGA this week...sometimes I think I'm like the John the Baptist in the desert here.
Carry on...
-
...
Anyway, I'm done with this for a little while...I'm leaving for Las Vegas in the morning...we'll see yall on the dark side of the moon.
By the bye, I'm not a mod but I'm really glad to see the activity in the SGA this week...sometimes I think I'm like the John the Baptist in the desert here.
Carry on...
Forgot to say "War Eagle" to my X'er friends...see yall next week.
-
As a bitter gun owner who clings to God and religion I could not agree with you more.
Fox has consistently been "fair and balanced" whereas the other "news" programs (and I do watch them from time to time) have not; they've been in the tank for The Obama since day one; even the Hildebeast got the short shrift by them whereas when she's been on several Fox News news and opinion programs she was treated fairly.
As a general note all of the commentators on the various networks have their own subjective views which do surface in the form of personal opinions. Hannity and Colmes are good examples of commentators as is Bill O'Reilly, the loathsome Keith Olbermann, the Democrat socialist sycophant Chris Matthews, and the gollum-like Larry King.
We have a two-party system because that's the result of Alexander Hamilton's and Thomas Jefferson's disagreement over the function of a Federal government as defined by the Constitution.
Hamilton favored a more centralized/federalized approach to government by basically allowing a more classically liberal interpretation of the Constitution and the authority defined within it. He feared anarchy without a strong central government.
Jefferson favored a far more limited federal government by allowing only a strict interpretation of the powers defined for government within the Constitution. He feared that a liberal interpretation of the Constitution would give us another tyrannical government which he'd just help fight a war against.
Federalist versus democrat. Two philosophical approaches which fit nicely with our bi-cameral Congress and provided an instant and additional layer of checks and balances.
Unfortunately that philosophical approach became one major reason for the later War of Northern Aggression. And the Federalist approach won it. And, over the years, the Federalists became Republicans, the Jeffersonian democrats became Democrats...then the Democrats became socialists and the Republicans became the old Jeffersonian democrats.
And the past few years the Democrats have become more socialistic and the Republicans have become more like the big government, FDR Democrats leaving real conservatives who cling to their guns and religion trying to keep the party more in line with the Jeffersonian democrat philosphy of smaller and less intrusive government, decentralized power, responsible budgeting, etc.
Anyway, I digress, the real failure lately has been that both parties have been more alike than not and the two-party system is designed to make third parties fail with little or no electoral rewards for their effort; that is why other parties have merged with larger parties in the past.
Generally I think that you are correct but there are men and women of ill-repute in the Republican Party just like in the Democrat socialist party. Republicans are almost ALWAYS held to a higher standard than Democrats socialists by the MSM (unfortunately) but by the public too by extension. And that is, in part, why we were thumped in the elections this week.
I support my country and will always respect the office of the Presidency. However, I will not respect a President who has not earned it as I opined in an earlier post this week.
The Obama has done nothing to earn anything but disdain from me right now. This man has Hamas endorsing him!
Any candidate with the Republican Party that had had his background NEVER would have made it through the primary season vetting process if that far so why in the hell should I give him any kind of leeway?
I too will actively work to make sure that Democrats socialists like him are NOT re-elected but the work begins by helping to cull the socialists out of my own political party and getting us focused back on the conservative philosophy of Jefferson democratic ideals.
That's correct Sani but that does not mean that I and bitter clingers like me must embrace Democrat socialist elected representatives or their philosphy. I don't think that being the loyal opposition (loyal to my country but opposed to Pelosi, Reid, and The Obama) is excessive party spirit. It's called honest disagreement.
As mentioned, part of the problem with the Republican Party as I see it is that we've been all too happy to compromise with the Democrats socialists and they NEVER compromise with us. Hell, our candidate this year was one of the biggest Republican compromisers in Senate apart from Jim Jeffords (who was replaced by a real socialist), Lindsay Graham, and a handful of others who represented half of the "Gang of 14" if you'll recall! Look what the hell running him got us! Look what having a compromiser in the White House got us at least for the past couple of years...yes, I voted for him but he was a hellava lot better than Gore and Kerry ever would have been!
He was on a lot of things but he's carried the war on the jihadist terrorists to their land and probably made them think twice before ever trying to hit us again. They've clearly been hurt and hurt badly but we'll never know the true story because the MSM won't report it since it might help make President Bush "look" good in the public eyes. My ONLY real regret for W is that he did not get Bin Laden and that is a bitter disappointment indeed.
At least he didn't compromise with the jihadists whereas The Obama wants to negotiate with them!
Anyway, I'm done with this for a little while...I'm leaving for Las Vegas in the morning...we'll see yall on the dark side of the moon.
By the bye, I'm not a mod but I'm really glad to see the activity in the SGA this week...sometimes I think I'm like the John the Baptist in the desert here.
Carry on...
Have you by chance written on this subject before. If not, please reccomend a good read or two on this subject. Here, you've basically said everything I know to be true- only you can formulate it into a flowing, coherent, rational thought.
-
Have you by chance written on this subject before. If not, please reccomend a good read or two on this subject. Here, you've basically said everything I know to be true- only you can formulate it into a flowing, coherent, rational thought.
He is a learn-ent man.
-
The point of the thread was the first half of that video.
If you don't listen to her, listen to him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bss6lTP8BJ8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bss6lTP8BJ8)
I'm confused.
Feb 2008 thru Oct 2008, Obama's race is not significant.
November 5th it is all of sudden about Obama's race and the biggest victory ever for the African American race.
IMO, The Dems have pulled the biggest scam ever over on America (black and white).
-
He is a learn-ent man.
He is much smarter than his appearance would let on.
-
I'm confused.
Feb 2008 thru Oct 2008, Obama's race is not significant.
November 5th it is all of sudden about Obama's race and the biggest victory ever for the African American race.
IMO, The Dems have pulled the biggest scam ever over on America (black and white).
Get ready for a wonderful four years. And we are already seeing it with some folks on this site. Say, bitch, laugh, poke fun at anyone, BUT THE BLACK MAN. I may not make it four years.
When the magic ...one.....performs his magic on our paychecks, I may just call him things that are not suitable for public.
-
Have you by chance written on this subject before. If not, please reccomend a good read or two on this subject. Here, you've basically said everything I know to be true- only you can formulate it into a flowing, coherent, rational thought.
I certainly appreciate the generous comment and will reply to you in a PM regarding the recommended reading. To answer your first question I've made a few posts in this forum on that subject but nothing in-depth although others might disagree with the degree of brevity of my posts.
He is a learn-ent man.
"I also hold a number of other advanced degrees, including the baccalaureate from a school in Paris, France, called the Sorbonne."
He is much smarter than his appearance would let on.
Yes, but I've been known to clean-up real nice.
-
"I also hold a number of other advanced degrees, including the baccalaureate from a school in Paris, France, called the Sorbonne."
My! That is a lot of lettas.