| Author | Message | ||
     Kenm123t |
Mox Remember the Fables ant and the grasshopper Chicken Little comes to mind as well And to quote Hank Williams jr a Country boy can survive. When the collapse happens we need to hem in the nuts in the blue states they will try to infest the rest of the country | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Is the sky falling? Again? | ||
| Sifo |
No, you actually sound like you are ignorant of the separation of Church and State, since now you are proposing that the government should decide what religion is "valid" and what religion is "not valid". I hate to break the news to you, but our government already decides what religions are valid. How do you think they get tax exempt status. Back in the ancient days, (the '70s) it was a big tax scam to get your mail order ministers license and claim tax exemption. They cracked down on that. The rest of your rant just departs from any reality of the discussion so far. | ||
| Whatever |
Right. Whatever dude. It is people like you that just affirm my opinion that the GOP is going down like a hit battleship. The examples I gave are instances where individual's rights have been violated based on their religion. That the government won't bend to your particular personal religiuos beliefs is not religious persecution. | ||
| Sifo |
It is people like you that just affirm my opinion that the GOP is going down like a hit battleship. I don't doubt it. You read what isn't written. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
Um, Obamacare essentially codifies which religions are most favored and which are not. That 'religious' exemption for the tax is not for Christian, Protestant, Catholic, Presbyterian, Lutheran, nay even Mormon. Muslim, Amish, Scientologists - yes Christian - nope. This is already bearing out in the courts that Catholic Health Plans have to cover abortion and birth control pills - it is none of the Feds/State business. The Nation 'elected' the New Soviet - want to know what comes next - read of the old Soviets. | ||
| Whatever |
City, With all due respect... is your only hobby posting how the Red Army is coming to take us away? Whatever dudes. (Message edited by Whatever on November 10, 2012) | ||
| Sifo |
Char, I really have no idea why you have such ill will towards me. I do recall offering help once when you were asking a question on the XBoard and you attacked me there. The good news is that those are your issues. I hope you get them worked out someday. | ||
| Whatever |
I'm sorry you take it personally. There are a few people on here I strongly dislike... but to think I have ill will toward you, personally, is not reality. However, I think you are missing the larger picture of what I am saying. Hate is not part of my religion.  I am sure the name callers are lurking about. (Message edited by Whatever on November 10, 2012) | ||
| Sifo |
You have something going to attack someone who has freely offered advice in an attempt to help you out. | ||
| Whatever |
I have absolutely no clue what you are referring to. Sorry either way. | ||
| Davegess |
I don't think Whatever, or me for that matter, need to be helped out. We simply do not agree with you. She has given this much thought and you are not going to change her mind or mine. Because of that we are not stupid, short sited, blind or any other things. "Somethings happening here but you don't know what it is, do you Mr. Jones?" | ||
| Moxnix |
Romney lost, in my perception, because what he offered was not much different than Obama's Christmas presents and shrinking of civil liberties. Yearly national debt accruing at 150% of GDP, who can do the math on the financial cliff? Bueller? Bueller? The purchasing power of wages, union or not, has not increased in 40 years. Treading water will likely not last forever, in fact, the one constant is change. Over the cliff will clean the slate, but it won't be pretty. (Message edited by moxnix on November 10, 2012) | ||
| Sifo |
Dave, I don't think you read much better than Char. It was on the XBoard that I was helping her out with a bike question. I don't expect to change your mind with this sort of discussion. I recognize a closed mind. I do enjoy the chance to get a glimpse of how the liberal mind works though. You folks tend to be pretty guarded with your though processes. I don't blame you. I'm still not sure how much of this discussion was folks trying to derail the discussion with illogical and irrelevant arguments vs. how much was real discussion of your real thoughts. If it was all real, as has been claimed, then that can explain A LOT. Frankly, I'm still trying to get my mind around that possibility. So long and thanks for all the fish. (Message edited by SIFO on November 10, 2012) | ||
| Sifo |
Romney lost, in my perception, because what he offered was not much different than Obama's Christmas presents and shrinking of civil liberties. I think there's a certain amount of truth in that. Now they are rehashing it trying to figure out what could have been offered to various niches to have gotten enough votes. That may be a recipe for a successful campaign, but it isn't a recipe for a successful government. Both parties offering free stuff from the government guarantees the country will fail. I guess the good news for me is that us older folks wont be the ones paying for it. | ||
| Cowboy |
I would like to say that it is to early to tell and every one feeling are very raw now .let us step back and watch for 3 months If by then every one is working at a good job and we are doing well with our economy there is peace in the MID EAST we will know the USA made the right choise, If jobs are still hard to find and the economy is continueing to shrink then we will know that the Democrats have screwed up again. | ||
| Glitch |
Yeah, we need to take a break like Obama has and go play golf | ||
| Cowboy |
This is not the time to go off half cocked every move from now on must be very carefuly made. | ||
| Whatever |
You can't have a complete economic recovery without reversing NAFTA. The GOP could have won if they stuck a moderate Republican in the VP slot. Instead they pissed off a good 65% of women who grew up in the 50s. Obviously, Boehner is in total denial and I'd say I would be downright shocked if they all work something out before the end of the year. The current crop that came up with sequestration will make it happen so they can point fingers. While we made gains... It will get a whole lot worse before it gets better I'm afraid. I really hope I am wrong, but I don't think I am. | ||
| 99savage |
Whatever It will get a whole lot worse before it gets better I'm afraid. I really hope I am wrong, but I don't think I am. Ah, but you are, you are. - It indeed will get a whole lot worse but it will never get any better. We reached the tipping point and we are going over and there ain't squat we can do about it. - You built it enjoy it. The "coalition" that elected Barry O. was - People dependent on "free stuff", paid for by others - Special pleaders who would rather make the industrious suffer than prosper themselves - Government workers represented by unions - And - The crony capitalists who will prosper, just like they have in the previous (4) years. It is truly is a winning combination. It cannot be reversed, we can only go downhill from here. As for my self, I repeat what was posed on a local board. I want no compromise. I have been forced at gunpoint to compromise more than I am willing. I have heard for 4 years how I am the enemy. I take them at their word and I will be a smart enemy. They will not see it coming. Unity? Not on their life. My singular job now is to monkey wrench them at every opportunity. The good thing is, as Alinsky states, I will also enjoy it. Which means I will do it more frequently and with more gusto. I will be starting small but I will not accept the yoke. (Message edited by 99Savage on November 10, 2012) | ||
| Whatever |
You are wrong. The demographic you ignore is the over 55 female Democrat that didn't want vouchers. You all seem to think every Democrat is the stereotypical welfare queen. I must know over 300 people from the campaign. I can't think of one that fits your stereotype. Nope. I am talking about liberal grandmothers that did not want to return to the 50s. If the GOP hadn't embraced the extreme religious right, we would have seen different results. Even with a crap arse candidate like Mitt. | ||
| Sifo |
Char, there's no argument on what people want. I want things too. You need a fiscally sound policy to get anything though. Democrats have been promising what they can't deliver for a long time. They now have the Republicans convinced that is the only strategy for them too. That's going to lead to a very painful future for all. It's likely to be worse for those who don't recognize that it's happening. I'm pretty well resigned to the direction of things. I was before BO took office to, he is just hastening the pace. The GOP heading the direction they are now discussing will further hasten the inevitable. The sooner it happens, the sooner there can be a new beginning. Of course as 99savage points out, there will be resistance along the way.  | ||
| 99savage |
Whatever The demographic you ignore is the over 55 female Democrat that didn't want vouchers. Don't matter much what they "want", hell I still "want" pony. Failing vouchers the political expedient answers is Barry's. - Remove the funds & pay the health-care providers less. - bound to work out well, don'cha think? p.s.: what I want, I mean besides the pony, is for them just to give my contributions back.} | ||
| Moxnix |
Return to the 50s. Is that code for illegal abortions vs big families, with lack of job opportunities thrown in for good measure? The whole women's lib movement of the late 1960's, wasn't that just a manipulation by Democrats in increasing the number of working women to feed the tax machine? Or just a side effect of that era's nascent gender politics? The GOP turned it's back on Christians a while ago, wrongly thinking they'd get more votes in presidential races from conservative Dems and Independents. Hmm, how did that work out for them? Seems like Mitt lost. No one votes for the VP candidate. The election is over. Voter fraud works. Free cell phones and more free stuff promised works. Yet, we have higher debt to GDP than Greece or Spain, and austerity measures are not part of either party's lexicon. Our unemployed often have a car, a place to live, a telephone and flat screen TV, with an extension of benefits to get more votes. And an economy not offering livable wage jobs should anyone want one. When does the big ruse end? When it does, can we simply blame it in middle-aged Christian males? Why not? After all, it was written . . . | ||
| Xdigitalx |
 | ||
| Aesquire |
....didn't want vouchers. I'm missing something. Vouchers for what? Whatever, didn't think you'd be happy with O's foreign policy and the rise of Sharia in a couple of nations he helped overthrow. ( I KNOW I'M not happy about it's rise in 2 countries Bush freed, and we seem to be letting go medieval. Like Afghanistan ever got that advanced ) From US lady reporters getting gang assaulted to "virginity checks" leading to Total Sharia, all those women in Egypt are on the path to property, proper beatings, ( stick no larger than your finger. It's the Law ) and honor killings. Thanks Barack. Thanks a Bunch. ON the domestic front, Obama has done some stuff I agree with, though mostly too little, too late, or badly... but no one is perfect. Gay equality is creeping right along, slowly. ( and creeping some folk out, which is to be expected ) At least he got rid of Clinton's "don't ask, Don't tell" which has to be the biggest piece of utter dishonesty ever... and a real insight into Bill "put some ice on that" Clinton's head. I don't have a clue why Obama didn't simply sign away DADT right after he got his Obamacare through. It was only an executive order in the first place, not really law. I suppose he did it timed to get more money when he needed it, which is a bit of an insight into HIS head. My complaints with Obama, domestically, is his use of hate ( envy ) to manipulate people, ( hey, it works, it's just evil. ) the Cloward-Piven destruction of the economy, energy policy, the abandonment of the First Amendment, and the Promise to get rid of the Second. Whatever, I think the Ryan hate is mostly manufactured by the Obama Chicago Hate Machine. Why is he ( ryan ) the evil Incarnate? Seriously, I don't have a clue why you seem to dislike him. Maxnix, the Womyns Lib movement ranges from "equal opportunity, period" to the stereotypical "all sex between a man and a woman is rape" from the radical lezbian feminazis. ( yes they exist. They are a tiny minority, but loud, baby, loud and proud! Ugly too, but that's being catty.) I'm in the former camp, meaning I'll be dead before the USA goes Sharia. Sifo, my issue with your stand is that a tax break to promote stable relationships, is social engineering, plain and simple. You don't want some one else to get it, but you should, why? Stable = good. Stable gets tax break. Isn't that the idea? It's not "promote the lifestyle" ( another's you don't like ) it's "promote a rational lifestyle" If a heterosexual male runs around, is promiscuous, spreads disease, doesn't help raise the next generation, he's just as undeserving of a tax incentive to promote happy families as the guy who hangs at the baths in Chicago doing the same. OTOH people who commit to attempting a stable relationship with the advantages that gives society, ( and themselves, hopefully ) they should get the same tax break as any other "good citizen". Or perhaps there shouldn't be such an incentive. You certainly can argue that that bit of social engineering is not worth it. But if you insist on the Obama style ( Alinsky style? ) envy of another's fortune/denial of their expression, you get the cowardly answer, which is NO tax breaks for families. The same BS institutional cowardice you ( and I ) object to when it comes to Christmas displays in the Park. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/author/56454/latest# Progressives. Marriage. I am highly tempted to cut & paste the whole article. It's worth a read IMO. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332854/how- romney-lost-kevin-d-williamson .....For many years, Republicans have relied on Jude Wanniski’s “Two Santa Claus” theory, the strategy of using the promise of tax cuts to compete with Democrats’ promises of cash and other benefits. In part as a consequence of that strategy, a great many Americans pay little or no federal income taxes, while many of the other federal taxes they pay are indirect or partly hidden. Mitt Romney was right: You can’t use tax cuts to buy off people who are net recipients of tax transfers. Figuring out what we can offer them that is consistent with our principles is the task of conservatives between now and the next election. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
The Red Menace is coming.... If you didn't read the bill, why should you believe the warnings. enjoy the consequences. every last one of them. I have seen the show enough times to know how it ends. | ||
| Pwnzor |
Liberal grandmothers... Yellow dog democrats... Yeah... Four more years of the yellow dog. It just shit all over your lawn and when you step in it, I don't want to hear any Obama voters complaining about the smell. You have all given up that privilege. |
