"why the hell are republicans still talking like they even deserve to look down on Obama? You lost that right putting up the world's biggest self-serving douchebag in office. I'm sure Obama won't do any worse."
I am a Republican; I did not put Bush in to office, despite your claim here.
First...
berto wrote:
What are you talking about? Nowhere did I say that. I specifically said in my post that I was directing my statements to people who voted for bush. The only mistake I see was in one of my earlier posts where I specified 'Republicans' which I should have initially changed to say people who voted for Bush. Nowhere did I say that people who don't like or didn't vote for Obama like/love Bush. Quit putting words in my mouth.
Second...
zkissane wrote:
Hmm... I seem to remember when liberals got their panties in a twist (and rightly so, for what it's worth) over the "if you don't support Bush you're not patriotic" meme. But now, when the winds change, they change their tune to "if you don't support Obama you must love that miserable failure Bush". Don't liberals hate it when people stereotype?
I love double standards.
This is your original claim, not what you are now arguing. Where did I say you love Bush because you hate Obama? I clarified my mistake in referencing 'Republicans' but even as the old sentence stands, I didn't say they loved Bush because they hated Obama. I simply said they put him in office so they don't have any room to down-talk Obama until he actually fucks up. I'm not seeing a double standard, however, I do apologize for the confusion my original post caused.
it's a shame Ron Paul didn't win. so far as i know he would have minimized the scope of govenment dramatically
Fifthed. IMO the reason he didn't win was because cutting red tape & reducing the size of the government is unpopular with the people who control the parties (they want to stay in power). We no longer have a government by the people for the people. Accountability, and a small size needs to be brought back to the federal government.
Also, I feel that the states should have more power over governing in their own borders. If you and all your neighbors in live in Kansas and want to have your taxes go to farmers, you shouldn't have some man in Washington tell you that California just has so many representatives that Congress has decided to send more tax money there. Or if you live in Louisiana and want your taxes to go towards rebuilding from natural disasters and not to some greedy executives on Wall Street who are suffering because they overextended themselves in housing and sub-prime lending - you should have that say.
The federal government should not be forcing anyone's agenda down the entire country's throat. Example: The reason there's a national 21 drinking age? Congress blackmails states with taxes from their own people - if the state doesn't agree with this age then they loose out on lots of federal tax dollars - which they just can't afford.
_________________
BigPeeOn wrote:
Here's the deal: chemistry is the devil. Anything beyond balancing an chemical equation is black magic.
"Its a shame Ron Paul didn't win" Oh no its not. Libertarianism has a few good ideas that go towards increasing personal freedoms, but if ever fully enacted would quickly turn this country into a hellhole. The "free market" that magically fixes everything, is absolute horeshit. This isn't some wacky socialist idea either, Adam Smith himself would freely admit that.
Edit:
As bad as the 2 party system seems, the Green, Libertarian, and other parties seem like they don't even try. It's going to take a lot more that Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney to get mainstream America excited about third parties. I can't really blame the major news outlets for those two chucklefucks.
Joined: Sun 08-14-2005 8:36PM Posts: 2174 Location: in a Google Fiberhood. Suck it bitches!
Source: Somewhere On Campus
tommytomtomtom wrote:
"Its a shame Ron Paul didn't win" Oh no its not. Libertarianism has a few good ideas that go towards increasing personal freedoms, but if ever fully enacted would quickly turn this country into a hellhole. The "free market" that magically fixes everything, is absolute horeshit. This isn't some wacky socialist idea either, Adam Smith himself would freely admit that.
I'll agree with you on that one. But that's the good thing about our system of government. If you put a radical like Ron Paul (who some of his ideas honestly are kinda scary) in the presidency, the house and senate would temper his ideas and I believe we would get some happy medium.
_________________ They let us play with markers, but i keep trying to draw infinity
"Its a shame Ron Paul didn't win" Oh no its not. Libertarianism has a few good ideas that go towards increasing personal freedoms, but if ever fully enacted would quickly turn this country into a hellhole. The "free market" that magically fixes everything, is absolute horeshit. This isn't some wacky socialist idea either, Adam Smith himself would freely admit that.
Edit:
As bad as the 2 party system seems, the Green, Libertarian, and other parties seem like they don't even try. It's going to take a lot more that Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney to get mainstream America excited about third parties. I can't really blame the major news outlets for those two chucklefucks.
Just a taste of Ron Paul would be way better than anything we'd had for the last 50 years. There used to be a time when the country was free and they've slowly chipped away at your freedom until you are so used to it that you freak out if someone tries to give it back. Social Security was a slow addicting drug that people eventually got hooked on and if they were to take it away, people would have withdrawal like a crack addict.
_________________ Don't do drugs because if you do drugs you'll go to prison, and drugs are really expensive in prison.
"Its a shame Ron Paul didn't win" Oh no its not. Libertarianism has a few good ideas that go towards increasing personal freedoms, but if ever fully enacted would quickly turn this country into a hellhole. The "free market" that magically fixes everything, is absolute horeshit. This isn't some wacky socialist idea either, Adam Smith himself would freely admit that.
Edit:
As bad as the 2 party system seems, the Green, Libertarian, and other parties seem like they don't even try. It's going to take a lot more that Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney to get mainstream America excited about third parties. I can't really blame the major news outlets for those two chucklefucks.
Just a taste of Ron Paul would be way better than anything we'd had for the last 50 years. There used to be a time when the country was free and they've slowly chipped away at your freedom until you are so used to it that you freak out if someone tries to give it back. Social Security was a slow addicting drug that people eventually got hooked on and if they were to take it away, people would have withdrawal like a crack addict.
I love how old people are like hardcore conservative, xenophobic, etc... but boy do they cling to that social security.
_________________ I have now been banned three times. Join the club
Joined: Sun 09-12-2004 8:22PM Posts: 657 Location: somewhere
Source: Kappa Sigma
benm wrote:
I love how old people are like hardcore conservative, xenophobic, etc... but boy do they cling to that social security.
When the government takes ~15% of your pay for 47 years*, claiming to be paying for your pension/unemployment/other benefits, you're going to want some of that money back too.
* 47 years is assuming that you start work at 18 and retire at 65. In reality, most people start work (at some kind of job) earlier and will probably not retire at 65.
_________________ if you woke up as me everyday, you'd hate yourself too.
As bad as the 2 party system seems, the Green, Libertarian, and other parties seem like they don't even try. It's going to take a lot more that Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney to get mainstream America excited about third parties. I can't really blame the major news outlets for those two chucklefucks.
No, they really don't try. Its really a strategical problem....you can't just start out at the top, running for president. If the 3rd parties ever want a shot at the White House, they need to get their candidates elected to local office first, then onto congress, and then onto the presidency so the people can get familiar with the party and the candidates.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum