No, it is yoooouuuuu who will have to read some of... Ah forget it.
No, it is yoooouuuuu who will have to read some of... Ah forget it.
Yep. Standing shoulder to shoulder "to make Obama fail" is compromise.
Compromising ethics that is.
oldsaw wrote: Or, temper your posts so all us losers will know that you understand humility and compromise are the tools to address the problems the country has to address.
Honest to God, I don't know- maybe I'm just a really poor comunicator. Who did I call a loser? Isn't this pretty much exactly what I said? I just used a lot more words.
fast_eddie_72 wrote: It's kinda funny reading this thread. It's like a micro look at what's going on with the country. "You're deflecting!" "No, it is *you* who is deflecting!" "You're ill-informed!" "No, it is *you* who is ill-informed!" We talk about each other to avoid talking about real issues. Sorry, I saw Obama say "we're going to take our country back!" and then I saw Rand Paul say "we're going to take our country back!" Stop. You're both wrong. There's nobody to take the country back from. We're all Americans. I agree with some Americans about political issues. I disagree with other Americans. But like it or not, Americans elected Obama President. He didn't take your country, your guy just lost. Get over it. And what happened Tuesday wasn't anyone taking the coutry away from Democrats. A bunch of our guys just lost. It's not the end of the world! Truth is, Democrats did some stupid stuff. I've heard a lot of stuff in the last couple of days that leads me to believe Republicans will do a lot of stupid stuff over the next two years. Really? We're going to start investigating the White House? This is what the voters were saying? We want you to waste two years investigating eacy other to *prove* you're better than they are? Come on. We're going to overturn all the legislation passed in the last two years? Way to move forward guys. God knows we haven't yet wasted enough time talking about healt care reform. I bet the voters are going to LOVE another summer of debate over that issue. Mitch McConnel couldn't wait 24 hours to say they're going to drive Obama out of the White House. Don't worry about getting anything done Mitch, just focus on winning. Thanks for the help.
Ah dang. I just realize there are several typographical errors and misspellings in that post. Well, I guess you win after all.
OMFGHESTALKINGABOUTPOLITICS!!!1!11!!!
LYNCHTHEBERKELEYER!!!!!!!!
fast_eddie_72 wrote: No, it is *yoooouuuuu* who will have to read some of... Ah forget it.
Eddie, Ignorant (upper-case i) is one of the board's dork-status posters who is compelled to "win" on his terms. Your assertions that "I win" mimic those of Ig. My sincere apologies if my posts suggest I think you are ignorant (lower-case i); clearly you are not.
What IS clear is that we disagree on some ideological issues and agree on (other) related issues.
It is the rhetorical (real or feigned) indignance towards those who disagree that distract people from honestly sharing and (if willing) reaching compromise. Compromise is the lynch-pin that formed this country and it's what make for fulfilling/long lasting relationships.
I insert myself in these discussions with full knowledge of the frailties and failures of opposing sides - they both suck. That means that I embrace "some" facets of liberalism and "some" from conservatism - resulting in my self-appointed label as a Conservatarian.
We (as in the board, society and the country) will be better served when we stop throwing E36 M3 at the "other guys" and get on with the challenge of resolving differences.
oldsaw wrote:fast_eddie_72 wrote: No, it is *yoooouuuuu* who will have to read some of... Ah forget it.Eddie, Ignorant (upper-case i) is one of the board's dork-status posters who is compelled to "win" on his terms. Your assertions that "I win" mimic those of Ig. My sincere apologies if my posts suggest I think you are ignorant (lower-case i); clearly you are not.
This country was founded on winning. Our founding fathers wanted us to win. are you a communist?
In reply to ignorant:
A communist?
As much as you are, winner!
I've just read this entire post and the only question I have is.............would Jim Rockford vote dem or rep?
oldsaw wrote: In reply to ignorant: A communist? As much as you are, winner!
since most everything you say is backwards..
I'll take that to say.. I'm a winner and you're a communist.
oldsaw wrote: Eddie, Ignorant (upper-case i) is one of the board's dork-status posters who is compelled to "win" on his terms. Your assertions that "I win" mimic those of Ig. My sincere apologies if my posts suggest I think you are ignorant (lower-case i); clearly you are not.
I was ignorant of this.
nicksta43 wrote: I've just read this entire post and the only question I have is.............would Jim Rockford vote dem or rep?
Wasn't he from Hollowood? I'm just sayin'
Your right I didn't think that through.
oldsaw wrote: It is the rhetorical (real or feigned) indignance towards those who disagree that distract people from honestly sharing and (if willing) reaching compromise. Compromise is the lynch-pin that formed this country and it's what make for fulfilling/long lasting relationships.
Back to this...
Well yeah! That's what I was saying!
If you look at my posts you'll see I'm pretty darn trasparent about this stuff. I'm a Democrat, but I am not 100% pleased with what they've done over the last couple of years. Still, it's not anything, remotely as bad as the Republicans make it out to be.
And I'm pretty disheartened, after the text book screw up the Democrats displayed, to hear the Republicans already suggesting that they won't do anything to solve any problems either, they're just going to focus on winning the 2012 election. I suspect this will be a very, very hard idea to sell to voters.
nicksta43 wrote: Your right I didn't think that through.
I got a little bummed one day when I found out Steve McQueen was a Republican. Made me question everything I thought I stood for.
fast_eddie_72 wrote:nicksta43 wrote: Your right I didn't think that through.I got a little bummed one day when I found out Steve McQueen was a Republican. Made me question everything I thought I stood for.
that doesnt surprise me. McQueen was all man after all.
Cone_Junky wrote:914Driver wrote:What do I think about the President travelling abroad? Improving international relations has been one of Obama's strongest assets. Korea, China, and India are very significant players in international politics and economics. Thank goodness he is taking the time to "vacation" around the world. Although, being that he is taking hundreds of business people with him, it's far from a vacation. I guess he could spend 2/3 of his Presidency hanging out at his ranch in Texas... Before the cost thing gets regurgitated from AM radio- read this- http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/11/obamas-india-trip----not-as-expensive-as-you-may-have-heard/1Cone Junky said: We need jobs! OK, how about I try to keep major AMERICAN manufacturers alive and employing people?Maybe I'm confused again, it happens. I heard Obama wants to get out of Dodge after the election by flying to India. Some joked that he wanted to visit a Mosque, I dunno. I live hear the original General Electric site which is now a pretty big company, maybe you've heard of it. The talking head this morning said Mr. President was bringing with him to India 250 businessman and rattled off a few names including the head of GE. I'm not a Democrat, I'm not a Republican, some times my medication doesn't kick in and a few times I have been "detained for my own safety" but what do you think about this? Dan
I read it. I'm not regurgitating AM radio and history may show that Bush didn't really spend 2/3 of his time at a Ranch .
Why?
Not asking why Mrs. President packed up 40 people to Spain, I'm asking why the Commander in Chief would travel to India with a bunch of businessmen.
Listen Coner, I'm not busting your stones, I don't usually do Political threads. Why? That's my question.
I work for the Army, I make guns. I did it when Clinton was in, I did it for Reagan, I did it for Jimmy Carter. My pay is the same, my product is the same, my politics are between me and God. I never blasted Bush and I don't recall saying negative things about Obama and don't much care what Clinton does. Don't be defensive. Every President needs a day off, look through history (google it?) and see which presidents took what amount of time off. I think Grover Cleveland wins, but my original question is why?
What's to be gained dragging business people to India? I understand the Secret Service, Navy, Army whoever is going to be doing something or nothing regardless of. their boss's schedule so money isn't an issue. Get paid the same for marching as you do for fighting? You betcha.
Dan
Can we all agree that ballots need a place to choose
None of the above
Google Machine says he's speaking to the U.S.-India Business Council- an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. I belive the "businessmen" are dudes who work for companies the U.S. -India Business Council represent. Sounds like they're trying to drum up business in India.
I don't see the scandal here.
fast_eddie_72 wrote: Google Machine says he's speaking to the U.S.-India Business Council- an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
except that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce just dumped millions of untracebale dollars into the election.
ignorant wrote:fast_eddie_72 wrote: Google Machine says he's speaking to the U.S.-India Business Council- an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.except that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce just dumped millions of untracebale dollars into the election.
"Closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, according to both liberal and conservative election-law lawyers and campaign finance documents." The controversy says "more about the Washington spin cycle -- where an Internet blog posting can be quickly picked up by like-minded groups and become political fodder for the president himself -- than it does about the vagaries of campaign finance." - New York Times
wcelliot wrote:ignorant wrote:"Closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, according to both liberal and conservative election-law lawyers and campaign finance documents." The controversy says "more about the Washington spin cycle -- where an Internet blog posting can be quickly picked up by like-minded groups and become political fodder for the president himself -- than it does about the vagaries of campaign finance." - New York Timesfast_eddie_72 wrote: Google Machine says he's speaking to the U.S.-India Business Council- an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.except that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce just dumped millions of untracebale dollars into the election.
Nice quote. Release the records and we'll look for ourselves. How do we count money that could be funneled through say BP to their american companies for distribution here?
Overseas or not, dosen't actually matter to me. It's the millions of untraceable dollars pulling strings in this election.
ignorant wrote:wcelliot wrote:Nice quote. Release the records and we'll look for ourselves. How do we count money that could be funneled through say BP to their american companies for distribution here? Overseas or not, dosen't actually matter to me. It's the millions of untraceable dollars pulling strings in this election.ignorant wrote:"Closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, according to both liberal and conservative election-law lawyers and campaign finance documents." The controversy says "more about the Washington spin cycle -- where an Internet blog posting can be quickly picked up by like-minded groups and become political fodder for the president himself -- than it does about the vagaries of campaign finance." - New York Timesfast_eddie_72 wrote: Google Machine says he's speaking to the U.S.-India Business Council- an affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.except that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce just dumped millions of untracebale dollars into the election.
Can we say the same about all the organizations that donate to democratic candidates?
Toyman01 wrote: Can we say the same about all the organizations that donate to democratic candidates?
It's possible- do you have an example?
Toyman01 wrote: Can we say the same about all the organizations that donate to democratic candidates?
Umm yes. I want transparency in all.
http://www.necn.com/11/02/10/Video-Blumenthal-tells-supporters-This-w/landing_politics.html?blockID=344462&feedID=4212 said: "Connecticut today had an election, not an auction.
I don't like Blumenthal but I agree with his sentiment.
Also.. I originally posted the wackiness above as an obvious inflammatory non-sequitur... It's very funny that both you and Wcelliot took the bait. It's also very telling that you believed that I meant it as an attack against conservatives.
"I read it. I'm not regurgitating AM radio and history may show that Bush didn't really spend 2/3 of his time at a Ranch .
Why?
Dan"
You're right, I exagerrated. It was only 1/3 of his Presidency.
487 days at Camp David
490 days at Crawford Ranch
43 days at Kennebunkport Compound
Total: 1020 days, more than 1/3rd of his presidency. Bush set the record for most vacation time taken by president.
But Obama improving foreign policy and promoting American business is the same thing a mowing the lawn at his ranch.
You'll need to log in to post.
