Busboy Jefe wrote:
>> The difference is that Bachmann has no impact on me whatsoever.
>> Reid and Pelosi are leaders on a national level.
> I don't limit who I define as a raging cockslap to the level upon
> which they may affect me. That aside, last I checked, Bachmann's votes
> do indeed have the power to affect us both, depending on the issue.
> She is an ignorant, science-denying moron, and an embarrassment to
> this country.
As are at least a fourth of those occupying DC. And anything Bachmann
might 'push' will have no affect on your or me. She's not likely to get
much thru her own party, much less thru a dem senate and White House.
>> The election was held about 4 days ago. What I've seen come from
>> the president was very plain and simple. He will NOT consider
>> legislation that doesn't include raising taxes on upper earners.
>> Within that same 4 days I've seen Boehner claim that raising taxes
>> is not an option within the HoR. So where are we? right back where
>> we were years ago. OTOH, Boehner DID say he would be quite willing
>> to work with the president to get rid of certain deductions in order
>> to increase revenue... so we'll see where it goes.
> So you cherry pick one stance Obama has to imply that he's been this
> way on every issue the past four years. I think you know what
> exquisite bullshit that is.
No cherry picking... I'm using the only speech I've seen from him
since the election. He was asked what the election meant as far as
him trying to push future policy. If he will not bend on raising taxes
and Boehner will not bend either - we're back to where we started, are
> If Obama were truly as you would have
> everyone believe, we'd be hearing complaints from you guys about a
> single payer healthcare system, not the repub version that he instead
> chose to pursue. A repub version that was acceptable to repubs until
> Obama embraced it, I might add. We also would not have seen an
> extension of the Bush tax cuts. And the list goes on...
You continue to say 'repub version' of health care. Yet you can
only point at a couple senators that tried. There was NO unified
<not even close> GOP bills regarding health care. Hell, OBAMA
never pushed for the single payer system. He never pushed at all.
That mongoloid 'baby' can be attributed almost fully on Pelosi and
Reid. Regarding Bush tax cuts -- let's see what Obama does when
>> What does that even mean? Do you really think there won't be
>> another GOP president in the next couple elections? Really?
> I think that if the economy doesn't continue to improve, it's possible
> we might see a repub. But if we do, it won't be one like those in the
> clown car collective we saw this time around. He/she will have to be a
> moderate. And the "businessman" thing doesn't work either.
And again, I think you are wrong. Many of those in the house or
senate run big businesses <and small ones as well>. Having
business experience on your resume is/should be, only a good thing.
The only problem regarding Romney and his time at Bain was that
he allowed the dems to paint it as something it wasn't... a people
crushing, job exporting company.
I've always "tolerated" gays. No man or woman should be treated
unfairly due to their sexual preferences. That is not the same as
saying we should redefine the word marriage. Same with minorities,
every human deserves respect until they prove otherwise. That too,
isn't to say that they deserve automatic citizenship or our welfare
> But it does
> make me wonder: as someone who claimed to be liberal before turning to
> the dark side, just what "liberal" views did you embrace?
Nearly all my social views are pretty liberal.
Having been a teen in the mid-70's, I was against
Viet Nam, listened to nothing but hard rock, was
married while sporting a ponytail that reached my belt.
You've seen me state that our drug laws are unreasonable,
you've seen me state that people should be left alone as
long as they bother no one else.
> As for the rest, what I see in those words is: they need to become
> more "white", which is pretty laughable. Sink down? I'll tell you
> what: I've been in some of those "'Merican" towns. Water couldn't find
> a level lower than those places. Maybe we should raise our own
> standards a bit before criticizing the standards of others?
No -- not more 'white'... more "AMERICAN".
You're not so far away -- you ever been to Tijuana? You want to
give me a similar example here in the states? You want me to post
the SAT averages of blacks and minorities? Go to any of the larger
cities and tell me how much english you hear being spoken.
Compare that to the asians that come here. Compare that to
those that came here 100 years ago and worked sun-up to
sundown, never receiving a dime in any kind of 'aid'.
> I have always agreed with the stance that as a transplanted foreigner,
> one should make every attempt to learn a country's language to a point
> where you can at least be conversational. It seems to me to be a
> common courtesy at the very least. But I'm less bothered by someone
> who doesn't do that than I am by some moron who embraces his/her
> ignorance and xenophobia under the guise of being a "real American".
> If we're "exceptional", we should be above that.
I only have a couple definitions that make one a 'real american'..
one of those is that if you come here that you should work your
ass off and not take from those that allowed you in.
>> And you and I both well know that those tv shots are set up
>> with exteme care and thought. Can't take a chance or miss an
> Then what would that tell you about what currently passes for the GOP?
Oh, they do it as well -- the strategically placed blacks and minorities
when Romney or a Bush is giving a speech... they are hand-picked as
to where they will stand. Gotta be all pc and shit nowadays.