Just because they're truly stupid and wanted King Obama over Palin doesn't mean they're not totally stupid, too. Of the four principals in the 2008 election, the only candidate with valid credentials to be president was Palin. She was born in the US, unlike Obama. She wasn't a traitor, unlike McCain. She wasn't stupid, like the Court Jester. She not only HAS sound conservative principles, she was the only candidate any rational person could believe in.
Wow. I hadn't thought in terms of insanity before, but now it seems quite clear. I think it's the drooling that gives it away. Meanwhile, we'll see what fortunes future elections bring. Every election, there is a straw poll in the insane asylums, and every election these results very closely match the actual national vote.
Would we really want a president who quit halfway through? Mind you, I would LOVE to see the Republicans nominate Palin. You betcha.
Gee...go visit a school when class is in session sometime. Oh, that's no complicated to figure out. The tests should never be multiple guess, the tests should cover the entire curriculum, and the tests are only required to be applied to a statistically significant RANDOM sample. English sections of the test require essay answers, math components require show-your-work grading, and teachers found cheating or otherwise compromising the exam face prison time for fraud, as well as de-certification. We'll keep that in mind, just in case some other country is ever founded on the ideal that all men are created equal, since, as present, all other nations in the world are based on geographical and racist...er racial identity. No, in the US, they combine Health with Sex. Nobody can impose morality, certainly not the government. The government should simply stick with presenting the facts, namely, that teen aged girls that get knocked up have their lives ruined. The propagandists ruining...er, "running" the schools in the US have decided to promote the idea that the child is the only one qualified to make the decision about when they're going to have sex...the parents are clearly evil and detrimental .... ....anyone that 's read 1984 recognizes the state's desire in this matter to assume total control of the child as early as possible in the child's life, cutting out the influence of any parent that wishes to divert their child from the course Big Brother has chosen for them.
If he's right, it would have to be one of the most rarest of occasions! As far as congressmen are concerned, he seems to talk the most (*)(*)(*)(*), tied with fascist Pelosi. I still can't get over some of his greatest bull(*)(*)(*)(*).. Like he was tortured, and always says he was against torture, and yet if you check his actual record, he always votes pro-torture. Also that "maybe even biological weapons" bit in reference to Assad was amusing.. Yeah John, go ahead and tack on a baseless bio-scare onto your antagonist rants. His latest, he has just issued damm near a threat to Russia while throwing his hissyfit over the Snowden asylum offer. He is forgetting that Russia are still considered partners to the USA... Allies have diplomatic disagreements all the time; you don't go insisting on "serious repercussions". And then when the USA granted asylum to the accused Chechen terrorist leader that Russia asked to be returned, McCain said he met with the man three times and determined he loves peace! What a hypocrite!
Sure. The Mayor isn't some child, insecure and dependent on the opinions of others. As a real American, he's aware of the abilities of his own mind, and aware all the faults of his inferiors, the socialists. The opinion of the socialist towards the American is irrelevant. People needing the support of group-think aren't qualified to have opinions on people who can think.
True, but I tend to disregard people like you when I make statements like "we can all agree that X is stupid", because you're usually the person saying it. Case in point: Jesus (*)(*)(*)(*)ing Christ. Any republicans care to back me up to this guy that he's saying things that are completely (*)(*)(*)(*)ing looney? Yosh? Mac? Peabody? Montra? Anyone? Come on, you guys can't be this oblivious. This is the reason why the republican party is a complete (*)(*)(*)(*)ing laughingstock outside of the USA. Because you don't just allow people like this to exist, but you all too often give them a national pedestal and hang on their every word (Trump, Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, Palin, Monckton, etc.).
They're 'blatantly wrong' in the media you absorb. You are not insulated from the NY Times, et al, no matter how far afield you range. Most folks start thinking for themselves when they mature. Nothing is less popular than conservatism. Fealty requires a level of responsibility for one's self that the lazy, the narcissistic and the greedy just can't meet.
Um... No. They are objectively blatantly wrong. People who claim Obama is a fascist are wrong by any rational definition of the word fascist. People who claim Obama is a socialist do not know what socialism is. There is nothing subjective about this, and if your view differs depending on the media you consume, then your media is (*)(*)(*)(*)ed. Look, I'll be frank. If you don't look at Snorkum's posts and say, "Yep, that's crazy", then there's something seriously wrong with your education. It's like if someone started talking about the chips the CIA implanted in their brain. And voting republican requires a disregard for facts and economic theory that the intelligent can't meet. There is no reality in which the most pressing issue for our economy is not the massive un- and underemployment, and there is no reality in which cutting government spending across the board would not make this worse. There is no reality in which Obama is a socialist, a fascist, or, and I quote, " hates the white people that can create jobs, so he makes it impossible for them to create jobs". Well, other than the reality in some people's demented minds.
I am not a republican but I do dislike Obama. He is a slightly different version of all the other war craving authoritarians that have been president in my lifetime. I do not think he is a socialist, fascist or a commiunist. He has little regard for the constitution but they never have that I can remember except on the campaign trail. The republican party is changing hopefully into something I can support as a libertarian. It will have to die before it can be rebuilt hopeful into a more socially liberal organization that does not believe in being the worlds police force or empire building. I won't hold my breath waiting on that but one can dream.
Why not call Obama a fascist? That's what he is both politically and economically. I think most of the rabid see-no-evil Obama apologists do not understand what fascism is.
You seem at least somewhat sane. Help me out here. Is the reason I think so many conservatives on this site are of Snorkum's caliber because of confirmation/selection bias, or because they actually are that crazy? This forum depresses me. You know, you're not the only one hoping the republican party changes into something more resembling sense. Seriously, I'd like to see the republican party throw out its Akins and Brouns, its creationists and goldbugs, and the people who actually turn the party into an international laughingstock. I'm not happy with the democrats, but there's not exactly a lot of choice. I could not in good conscience vote for Romney in the last election, despite thinking that Obama was largely disappointing. You know why? Because that is what the modern GOP looks like to most people who aren't part of it. I don't know if libertarianism is the way to go; largely because it seems to be a pipe dream that has never been realized and seems to not really have a lot of solutions to society's ills other than "hope the free market sorts it all out". But we need two legitimate parties in America. Not one subpar party and one... Well, this: Somehow, this is how I see the GOP.
Republicans as fascists? Many Repubs in Washington have more in common with Obama than dare admit to their base back home. They worship big government almost as much as he does so the fascist label applies to some of them also.
I am no Obama apologist. Just see no reason to use scary terms that are not accurate. If you combine the extremes from both sides it may be closer to accurate but we are not there yet.
Obama fits most of the prerequisite to be a fascist that you offer. I guess we could use a softer term like progressive instead but eventually that term will represent the same oppressive government that fascism does. But it would confuse the public long enough for Obama and his fascist pals to achieve more of their agenda.
Silly lefty, where did they get that graph? JFK gave the rich their biggest tax break. Failed to include that? Democrats have not given any tax breaks since, are you counting the Bush tax cuts again and then just factoring in Obama hikes at the end? This graph is pretty meaningless if you don't show how it was compiled. But all you need to know is: 1.) JFK gave the rich their biggest tax cut. Followed by Reagan. 2.) Prosperity followed both tax cuts and we were lifted from recession 3.) Real Median incomes soared as a result 4.) Republicans pushed all tax cuts since then of any importance 5.) Democrats have pushed all tax hikes since then of any importance. 6.) Obama recently enacted the largest tax increase against the middle class since FDR's massive middle class tax hike. Which has to be absent from your graph. Apparently the only count cuts, and not hikes too, or all your numbers show a raise in everyone's taxes across the board. 7.) Just because you don't want to call it a tax doesn't mean it is not a tax. 8.) Leftists will show dumb graphs that mean nothing and were compiled as a result of partisan hackery and a good dose of dishonesty. Do not fall for them. 9.) You are not counting the rise in excise taxes again, mostly pushed by Democrats, like Obama's big $1 on ea. pack tax hike, and the other $1 hike he is trying to get passed. Those disproportionally effect the middle and lower income groups. 10.) Reagan got tax brackets for everyone tied to inflation. That has saved the middle class billions as inflation moved people up in nominal but not real income. You can't be counting that to get your numbers. 11.) You are not counting EITC either, Republicans did that and it increases your number at the bottom end by at least a factor of 2, but for most people 8. etc...
I am not conservative by American standards. The actual republicans I know in real life do not act like those on this forum. While many are highly religious they do not seem so extreme as the most vocal on here. I think the Internet just brings out the worse in some people and leads them to act out in ways they would not in real life. They make themselves seem unappealing to say the least. LOL, I would not waste a vote for either party in their current states. I have not voted since Perot(I was 18 and did not know any better) in 1992 have no intention of doing so anytime soon. While the most known libertarians are very conservative or complete anarchist they run the entire left right spectrum. While most won't admit it even Karl Marx was on the libertarian side of the spectrum albeit way left. To increase individual freedom as much as possible while keeping a more limited federal government as a nessary evil would be the ultimate goal. With another party like the democrats it will never be the "pipe dream" some have, hopefully a happy medium. The exact details would be to complicated and off topic in this thread. Yes the bible thumping anti-science part of the republican party has held it back. While they are unlikely to go away. Without the libertarians they have no chance at growth hopefully they will change for the better. If not then the dems have a easy road for the next 10 years at least. Likely that will happen no matter what changes are made. I do not see the Clintons losing and I dislike them far worse than Obama.
The republicans resemble quite a few themselves. If you combine them we are scary close. It was not all done by Obama we have been going that direction longer than I have been alive. Reagan, the Bushes, Clinton, and Obama have lead us to where we are now. With congress helping and the American people enabling them and continuing to allow it to happen. As I said I do not like Obama but to me he is just more of the same. The last Bush did us no favors and he is the reason we have Obama today. That and the incompetence of the republican party. They had to try real hard to lose the last election. The economy in disrepair with high unemployment. Anyone should have beat him but somehow here we are.
Juan McAmnesty, hero of Kosovo, has no useful information for the Republican party other than that our primary system is broken. He never should have been our standard bearer. If he is suggesting the Republicans be an echo, not a choice, they're still hosed. If they want to be Democrats light (and they are, so I changed party's to Libertarian) they will lose. Why would anyone vote Democrat light rather than for the real thing. Whether one drives a car off the cliff at 100 MPH, or 95, it really makes little difference. Can we have someone that would stop, or even change the car's direction?
It was blatantly obvious when mega-lobbyist GOP-insider Dick Armey took the hapless "FreedomWorks" for a cool $8 million, but maybe the TPs are finally coming to grips with how shamelessly they've been used. By definition, elitists cannot muster the numbers to succeed in democratic elections. It is essential that they manipulate others.
Dick Armey is the man. Is there anything about the policies he has promoted that you don't like? Specifically? One of our best congressman by far. He built freedom works by the way over decades. He has taken less boult still paid money then Obama has taken by force from the taxpayers and given to his own superpac. By a multiple of like 100. You must hate Obama if you feel this way about dick, am I right?
