Schoolyard Taunting

[snafu]

If you are a typical voter for President you go to the polls already knowing who is going to carry your state. To vote for a candidate tells that candidates party that you approve of that choice. Thus making it more likely they will pick someone similar in the future.

 

 

Yeah but you voted for Obaaaamaaa! The biggest commie America has ever seen.

[hugo]

So where is the communism? she's totally right.

Letting criminal aliens become citizens ain't conservative. I guess you think it is right to reward illegal activity.

[timesjoke]

Letting criminal aliens become citizens ain't conservative. I guess you think it is right to reward illegal activity.

Lord knows America never allowed people to just come to America and live before in the past............

 

 

Do you have any knowledge of the past hugo?

 

 

Your doing the same thing on this issue as you did the other, you gloss over all kinds of stuff that are important and blurt out untrue attacks on Palin. That kind of conservative against conservative garbage is actually helping the liberals put people like Obama into office, this is why I mentioned the Lamm speach because the same tactic of keeping us splintered is now being used on conservatives, being as groups like Libertarians supported Obama in the last election, it would not surprise me if these groups were created by the liberals on purpose to help the splintering process get started.

 

 

In the very interview you quoted Palin says:

 

 

Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?

No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They've got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.

 

Palin is clear, no amnesty.

 

Conservatives do not want to stop all Immigration, they want to stop all "illegal Immigration". Providing a path to citizenship is not amnesty, I have no problem with creating a guest workers program and letting people find a path to being a citizen, who else is going to pick the vegtables? Welfare queens?

 

 

 

I have a question for you hugo, if tomorrow you could get what you want and have America activate the military and go on a massive rounding up and deport mission, do you think we would get them all? And do you think they will not come back? The draw is jobs hugo, they can find work here, the only way to keep them away (short of full occupation of the border by the military at all times) is to eliminate the jobs, so how do you propose we do that?

[wez]

Hey TJ.. flip the tape over.. yawn

[RoyalOrleans]

Everything TJ said above.

 

Bottom line... this country is broke and cannot afford to continue with the current wars that we are involved or to lend European or Middle Eastern nations aid.

 

We simply do not have the funds. Keep borrowing from the Chinese? Yeah... we could do that. When will the Chinese decide to collect on the debt that we already owe them? When that happens, we will be in a world of sh t.

 

Again, we simply do not have the funds.

 

-----------

 

So keep drinking that gray Kool-Aid. Enjoy your big government hacks that are one-quarter socialist and I will continue to vote based on principle. A vote for a 100% Constitution-defending, capitalism-loving, a product of American-exceptionalism, some one who believes in a balanced budget, the end of the central bank, someone who understands Austrian economics and condemns Keynesian economics, a person who will support backing the USD with gold and silver, someone to shrink and break the central government down to a manageable size... should never be confused or lumped into the same category as someone who votes for a 25% socialist.

 

----------

 

An answer to multiculturalism is to repeal every single entitlement program ever devised, but that won't happen until the well is run dry and the people are knocking on the Hill's door asking "Where's my sh t?". Meaning: we may look different and hallow a different deity, but we are of equal importance to this country. Everybody pulls their own weight.

 

The answer to split and divided political parties will equal a better representation of the people rather than grayish shadows of ideals long lost fighting with the other party. The Republicans and Democrats won't let that happen, they are slaves to the Democracy, and ready to pander to get re-elected; because neither likes competition.

[RoyalOrleans]

Immigrants heading to Washington to push reforms

 

This looks like a perfect opportunity to round some of them up and send them back to their country.

[timesjoke]

Bottom line... this country is broke and cannot afford to continue with the current wars that we are involved or to lend European or Middle Eastern nations aid.

 

We simply do not have the funds. Keep borrowing from the Chinese? Yeah... we could do that. When will the Chinese decide to collect on the debt that we already owe them? When that happens, we will be in a world of sh t.

 

Again, we simply do not have the funds.

 

Preaching to the choir RO, again I agree with you, we need to pull back, but not completely, Ron Paul wants to pull away completely, that was my point.

 

 

So keep drinking that gray Kool-Aid. Enjoy your big government hacks that are one-quarter socialist and I will continue to vote based on principle. A vote for a 100% Constitution-defending, capitalism-loving, a product of American-exceptionalism, some one who believes in a balanced budget, the end of the central bank, someone who understands Austrian economics and condemns Keynesian economics, a person who will support backing the USD with gold and silver, someone to shrink and break the central government down to a manageable size... should never be confused or lumped into the same category as someone who votes for a 25% socialist.

 

You spoke of gray areas before I did RO, why is it you refuse to see gray area when it comes to helping conservative minded people get elected?

 

You can pretend to be voting "pure", but the system we have is the system we have. When you waste your vote on someone you know has no possibility of winning, your intentionally helping the socialist get into office. Things like this healthcare bill are only possible because of people like you who refuse to help conservatives get elected.

 

 

An answer to multiculturalism is to repeal every single entitlement program ever devised, but that won't happen until the well is run dry and the people are knocking on the Hill's door asking "Where's my sh t?". Meaning: we may look different and hallow a different deity, but we are of equal importance to this country. Everybody pulls their own weight.

 

The answer to split and divided political parties will equal a better representation of the people rather than grayish shadows of ideals long lost fighting with the other party. The Republicans and Democrats won't let that happen, they are slaves to the Democracy, and ready to pander to get re-elected; because neither likes competition.

 

As I said in another thread, the game is football, you know the game and still your trying to play baseball rules, it makes no sense to waste all that energy pretending to want conservative policies then settle for the pure socialist. If you really want conservative values, then help the most conservative people who can win get elected, then you will encourage more conservatives to try public office and we can avoid things like this last year of pure liberal agendas.

[hugo]

Immigrants heading to Washington to push reforms

 

This looks like a perfect opportunity to round some of them up and send them back to their country.

Sarah would not like that. As long as she has that R by her name TJ will support, The same kind of dumbass who voted for Specter. Sarah is supporting a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. Only a dumbass could not see that.

 

Everyone, who is not a dumbass, knew when they went to the polls in Nov of 2008 that Barack Obama would win. To vote for someone who had a chance of winning meant you had to vote for Obama. I guess that is who TJ voted for.

 

 

In every single Presidential election I have known who was going to get my states electoral votes before I went to the polls.

 

If TJ only votes for someone who has a chance of winning that means he voted for Bill Clinton twice and Barack Obama. He ain't no conservative.

[ImWithStupid]

This is the system we have. Let me offer another easier example, wasting their vote is like trying to use baseball rules during a football game, sure you wanted to play baseball, but everyone else is playing football so complaining about the reality will not get you very far. You want baseball first you have to talk everyone else into playing baseball, until then your stuck playing football.

 

 

This football/baseball analogy is f'in retarded! (Yea Sarah, I said retarded) The entire premise is that there is a firm set of rules that we not only have to have only 2 parties, but those parties have to be either Republican or Democratic parties.

 

That's the same kind of short sighted, small minded mentality that leaves us with people like John McCain, Arlen Specter, Lindsay Graham, etc... getting elected year after year after year.

 

If there's a R or D behind the name, I have to vote for him, George. (imagine an Of Mice and Men voice here)

[ImWithStupid]

As I said in another thread, the game is football, you know the game and still your trying to play baseball rules, it makes no sense to waste all that energy pretending to want conservative policies then settle for the pure socialist. If you really want conservative values, then help the most conservative people who can win get elected, then you will encourage more conservatives to try public office and we can avoid things like this last year of pure liberal agendas.

 

 

http://Off Topic Forum.com/topic/26827-off-with-her-head/page__st__60__gopid__102144entry102144

[ren]

To me going rogue is not wearing underwear

[RoyalOrleans]

Preaching to the choir RO, again I agree with you, we need to pull back, but not completely, Ron Paul wants to pull away completely, that was my point.

 

If I am preaching to the choir, then why do you consistently and continuously bring up things that I already know the answer. If anything, you've been preaching to the choir since your inception into this community.

 

 

You spoke of gray areas before I did RO, why is it you refuse to see gray area when it comes to helping conservative minded people get elected?

 

There are conservative socialists and there are the more progressive type socialists (Common era liberals), I will not be a party to electing someone who I feel doesn't cut the mustard.

 

Too many politicians float around that "gray area' that I spoke of with no allegiance to the people who elected them, but the propensity to pander to them at election time. I don't vote for politicians who I deem are addicted to the frills, ride high on power, and pillage the public treasure.

 

I vote on principles all the way into the black, because, financially it is good to be in the black. That's where we need to be: balanced budget, Federal Reserve audited, promotion of the private sector, powers enumerated, and scaled back global spending on long and sustained warfare.

 

 

You can pretend to be voting "pure", but the system we have is the system we have. When you waste your vote on someone you know has no possibility of winning, your intentionally helping the socialist get into office. Things like this healthcare bill are only possible because of people like you who refuse to help conservatives get elected.

 

You don't think your McCains of the country have their own brand of socialism to bring forth? When you vote for a 25% socialist and a 100% socialist wins the election, they'll tend to meet in middle and compromise to pass legislation.

 

Our Founding Fathers went to war for a lot less.

 

As I said in another thread, the game is football, you know the game and still your trying to play baseball rules, it makes no sense to waste all that energy pretending to want conservative policies then settle for the pure socialist. If you really want conservative values, then help the most conservative people who can win get elected, then you will encourage more conservatives to try public office and we can avoid things like this last year of pure liberal agendas.

 

Yeah... not sure how the football and baseball analogy seems so prevalent to you. It sort of reminds me of Obama comparing the purchase of auto insurance with the purchase of healthcare: stupid at best, pitifully desperate at the least.

 

I have no desire of voting for a "conservative" or a "liberal". I have no intention of voting "Democrat" or "Republican". I do have a strong inclination towards those candidates who represent the aspect of our Founding Fathers, who bide by the Constitution as the restrictions on the State, those who cherish civil rights and liberties over security, and those who believe that the federal government does more harm than good. I hate socialism in all of its forms and will always vote against it. I feel sorry for you if you can't see past the petty R and D next to their names.

[RoyalOrleans]

Come November, when some of these 25%-45% socialists on either side of the aisle are voted out of office, they will pretend to have been "conservative" all along.

[hugo]

The only time you should consider voting for the lesser evil is if 1) You live in a battleground state and 2) the election is too close to call. This has never applied to me in my lifetime.

[hugo]

To me going rogue is not wearing underwear

 

If you have any used panties, you do not need, please mail them to me so I can donate them to women in need. Do not bother washing them.

[timesjoke]

If I am preaching to the choir, then why do you consistently and continuously bring up things that I already know the answer. If anything, you've been preaching to the choir since your inception into this community.

 

The same reason you post story after story talking about Omaba messes and such, we share similar beliefs.

 

This split discussion came around because we were talking about Ron Paul as a President and I was showing that while we agree on much of these things like pulling back 'some' of our operations around the world. that is not what Ron Paul believes, and yert your willing to support someone who wants to completely isolate America.

 

 

So, where we agree, Ron Paul does not.

 

 

 

There are conservative socialists and there are the more progressive type socialists (Common era liberals), I will not be a party to electing someone who I feel doesn't cut the mustard.

 

Too many politicians float around that "gray area' that I spoke of with no allegiance to the people who elected them, but the propensity to pander to them at election time. I don't vote for politicians who I deem are addicted to the frills, ride high on power, and pillage the public treasure.

 

I vote on principles all the way into the black, because, financially it is good to be in the black. That's where we need to be: balanced budget, Federal Reserve audited, promotion of the private sector, powers enumerated, and scaled back global spending on long and sustained warfare.

 

And yet your wasted vote for someone who cannot win is instead helping the socialist win and that means we get further away from a balanced budget, more abuse of the private sector, more big brother and even the radio stations taken over by affermative action policies for more brainwashing activities. I understand what you "think" is happening with your vote of principle that allows you to pretend a kind of "purity" in your mind, but I know your smarter than that, I know you understand that any conservative minded person already sits at a disadvantage and splintering the conservative vote only help the liberals who are willing to stick together when we are not willing to stick together.

 

 

 

 

 

You don't think your McCains of the country have their own brand of socialism to bring forth? When you vote for a 25% socialist and a 100% socialist wins the election, they'll tend to meet in middle and compromise to pass legislation.

 

And yet McCain is not meeting Obama in the middle, and Obama is not willing to meet in the middle either, that is the problem, you can't possibly be saying that if McCain had gotten elected we would be facing the takeover of health insurance by the Government.

 

 

If you are trying to say that your not being fair or reasonable. Sure, each person may have some ideas that you might think are socialist, but my point has always been that humans are complex and refusing to support someone who is not 100% perfect in your mind means you will never support a conservative minded person who can win the election and as such, your really part of the liberal machine, helping them to splinter conservatives and give them an easier time at the election booth.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah... not sure how the football and baseball analogy seems so prevalent to you. It sort of reminds me of Obama comparing the purchase of auto insurance with the purchase of healthcare: stupid at best, pitifully desperate at the least.

 

No point in being insulting, we were having a prewtty good discussion and I see no reason you have to try and put me down, if your unable to understand the example I will gladly explain it.

 

 

The game is football, the teams are on the field one team against another team, consider the superbowl as an example. Everyone knows the rules and the teams are set to play the game, but several players on one tteam suddenly want to play baseball instead of football. Everyone else is looking at these guys like they have lost their minds and send them out of the field to work out their issues on their own.........but.......those few people were key members of the team, they were needed so that team could win but the guys were so stuck on their own internal desire to play baseball that they lost sight of what their team needed so they could win the game at hand.

 

 

What happened was the other team planted the idea of baseball into the minds of the first team so they could take away some key players. The second team knew that as long as the first team stuck together they could never win so they used other tactics to break apart that first team, to hurt them from division. And the best part, the lost members of the first team who stopped playing football cling to the idea that their team losing is not their fault. That they ran out on them for good reasons and have no problem with helping the second team win instead of the first team they should have been helping.

 

 

I have no desire of voting for a "conservative" or a "liberal". I have no intention of voting "Democrat" or "Republican". I do have a strong inclination towards those candidates who represent the aspect of our Founding Fathers, who bide by the Constitution as the restrictions on the State, those who cherish civil rights and liberties over security, and those who believe that the federal government does more harm than good. I hate socialism in all of its forms and will always vote against it. I feel sorry for you if you can't see past the petty R and D next to their names.

 

Certainly the titles change, old liberals would today be considered a Republican.

 

I agree that titles are not the answer, but the results, now that is the key.

 

The result of wasting votes on people who cannot win is we get an Obama President that will do things like this healthcare mess. As much as you like to say they are similar, it is not realistic to believe that someone like McCain would do something like that so in reality, when you help Obama get elected your really supporting the exact opposite from what you say you desire for America.

 

Sure, I agree someone like McCain is not going to do as much as what someone else might do for your desired cause, but nobody who believes exactly like you had a chance to get into office, you are a smart guy, you know that to be true.

 

 

 

 

Let me try a new example:

 

You like fighting and you believe only a full offense, constantly pushing foward and throwing hands is the right way to fight.

In the fight you see a punch comming for your jaw, you know there is no possible way to dodge the punch but you do have a chance to get your hand up and take the punch on your gloves.

 

You have a choice to make, try to follow your beliefs and keep throwing hands no matter what happens or accept that this punch comming will knock you out and alter your methods long enough to block the knockout punch.

 

Obama is throwing the knockout punch, all because a lot of people refused to toss up a block. If we avoid the knockout punch it will not becausae of what we conservative minded people did but instead because Obama is just too screwed up to finish the blow.

[RoyalOrleans]

The only time you should consider voting for the lesser evil is if 1) You live in a battleground state and 2) the election is too close to call. This has never applied to me in my lifetime.

 

Nor has it applied to my lifetime (of voting) in my state. A few Democrats here and there aside (mainly in more metropolitan and the Perimeter of Atlanta areas), Georgia tends to vote Republican. I could've penciled in "Dwayne Rufus Collins III" but it wouldn't have mattered, McCain still carried Georgia.

 

Than again, Jimmy Carter came from Georgia. Then we fall back on the fact he is loved by the lefties in the more metropolitan areas of Georgia. He is really disliked in my district.

[ImWithStupid]

Than again, Jimmy Carter came from Georgia. Then we fall back on the fact he is loved by the lefties in the more metropolitan areas of Georgia. He is really disliked in my district.

 

 

Gotta remember. If it weren't for Jimmy Carter, it's unlikely that we ever would have had Ronald Reagan as a President.

[ImWithStupid]

If it weren't for the horrors and utter failures of a Jimmy Carter, it's unlikely the American people would have ever elected a Ronald Reagan.

[hugo]

Gotta remember. If it weren't for Jimmy Carter, it's unlikely that we ever would have had Ronald Reagan as a President.

Probably so. Ford, like Sarah, was not fiscally conservative, he would not have taken the needed steps to end the recession, and the economy most likely would have led to a Democrat victory in 1980. Maybe some good will come out of Obama's election. He seems to have at least awaken some to the dangers of government.

[timesjoke]

Well I am not sure what calling people names has to do with if your actions helped Obama get elected or not but let me give you another example of why you should get behind the conservative who can win instead of wasting votes that end up actually helping the liberal.

 

 

 

I will use Sarah Palin as an example.

 

 

You guys pound Sarah Palin over very minor crap, she would be way better for the Country than someone like Obama, but you pound and pound and your fellow independents take up the banner and run with it and before you know it, there is a general dislike for the only person who has some conservative values and can win against the liberal. You also discourage other conservatives from running for office because who would want to be ripped apart from both sides? So by being ugly to anyone who is conservative but not perfect, you restrict the choices to someone who has no possibility of gaining enough popularity to win an election.

 

 

 

Sure, you preserve your ideology and "purity" but you lose the war and let the liberals do things like pass this healthcare bill. Will feeling good about your "purity" change the fact that the Government has taken over healthcare?

 

 

 

 

IWS, I don't know why you have a problem understanding the football example, this is the game we have "NOW". Wishful thinking and pouting about what "could" be is irrelivent. We have to play the game with the rules at hand. Getting mad and running off to play baseball leaves your side of the football team weakened and allows the other side an easy win. Your being stubborn and refusing to accept that sometimes you can't get 100% of what you want is actually causing you to lose that 100% then add on another 100% for helping the complete opposite to get elected. By refusing to acceopt compramise, you lost it all and much much more.

 

 

 

Why can't you understand the concept that splintering helps the liberals?

[ImWithStupid]

IWS, I don't know why you have a problem understanding the football example, this is the game we have "NOW". Wishful thinking and oouting about what "could" be is irrelivent. We have to play the game with the rules at hand. Getting bad and running off to play baseball leaves your side of the football team weakened and allows the other side an easy win. Your being stubborn and refusing to accept that sometimes you can't get 100% of what you want is actually causing you to lose that 100% then add on another 100% for helping the complete opposite to get elected. By refusing to acceopt compramise, you lost it all and much much more.

 

 

It's an f'in retarded analogy because football and baseball have set rules. In politics there are no rules saying there has to be a Republican or Democrat party or that those are the only two allowed, or that if there are two either of them has to be one of the parties.

 

Just because that's the way it's been, doesn't mean that's the way it has to be. To believe that it has to be that way is small minded and short thinking.

 

If there are no rules to the process, you can't be using the wrong ones.

[timesjoke]

If it weren't for the horrors and utter failures of a Jimmy Carter, it's unlikely the American people would have ever elected a Ronald Reagan.

Even if your right that does not make the things Jimmy did dissapear. We have Obama now because of a splintered conservative movement. This healthcare legislation will not go away even if we get another Ronald Reagan. Reagan did not eliminate social security, or welfare, sure he made some cuts and changes but he still increased spending on wellfare overall and after he was gone it was increased some more, and some more, and some more. Once these entitlements get rooted in, we have them for life.

[timesjoke]

It's an f'in retarded analogy because football and baseball have set rules. In politics there are no rules saying there has to be a Republican or Democrat party or that those are the only two allowed, or that if there are two either of them has to be one of the parties.

 

Just because that's the way it's been, doesn't mean that's the way it has to be. To believe that it has to be that way is small minded and short thinking.

 

If there are no rules to the process, you can't be using the wrong ones.

That is the rules as they are at the time you place your vote, you know that only one of two people can win, trying to pretend that the game is something it is not is f'in retarded.

[RoyalOrleans]

blah blah blah...

 

I consider the fact that you have a hard time wrapping your little mind around those who differ in opinion or to those who don't hitch their yoke to diluted ideals, but I am perfectly fine with that and ready to move on from there.

 

No one has principles these days... I am fine with that. I will always vote the way my heart guides me. I am far, out, and beyond compromising my integrity. I will assume that you are willing to bend to keep the same old, same old hacks in power who do nothing and reap the benefits.