Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Congratulations to Obama and his supportersFollow

#102 Nov 08 2012 at 11:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
The honest answer is "no one who gets through the GOP primary process"


Mmm hmm. For how ethnically uniform the Republican party is it certainly has a variety of different viewpoints wrapped under it's umbrella. Seems like quite the pickle energizing all of your respective bases sufficiently while still appealing to the moderate swing voters.

Especially when compromise is such a dirty word. Not much common ground to rally on there... Smiley: rolleyes

Edited, Nov 8th 2012 9:05am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#103 Nov 08 2012 at 11:36 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,516 posts
Tumblr, I love you.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#104 Nov 08 2012 at 11:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
The 'next' and 'previous' arrows are on the wrong side. It's confusing. Smiley: frown
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#105 Nov 08 2012 at 12:25 PM Rating: Decent
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,110 posts
The GOP needs to figure out what it wants to be: A truly conservative party, be that socially and/or fiscally or Democrat Party-lite, which is what they are right now despite the laughable idea I read on this board that they are anti-women, anti-gay, anti-cute puppy, anti-minorities, and anti-freshly baked chocolate chip cookie.

Personally-- and I am sure that many if not most of you here would vehemently disagree with me on this --I believe that because we are just that, the Democrat Party-lite, the voters reject us, because why vote for the diet version of liberalism when you can have all the taste and satisfaction of the real thing by voting for the actual Democratic Party.

When you have two parties which espouse the same basic brand of politics, you go with the one which is the genuine article. Is the Democratic Party moderate? Yes, it encompasses political moderates. But it is, at its' core, beholden philosophically to the far Left which has its' present anscestoral roots in Communism and anti-democratic ideals. And this is the direction it is continually pulled toward.

Whether or not conservatism is palatable to you is immaterial. What is necessary is for the voting American public to have a real choice between two-- or three --competing philosophies. That is something we have not had for some time.

Before each of you pile on, let me point out that the differences between Dubya Bush and Obama and Romney are not much. Nearly every major position each has taken has aped the other. War in the Middle East? Same. Bailouts? Same. Gitmo? Same. Universal health care coverage? Same. And so on and so forth. The Democratic Party just does it better.

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#106 Nov 08 2012 at 12:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
Totem wrote:
Before each of you pile on, let me point out that the differences between Dubya Bush and Obama and Romney are not much. Nearly every major position each has taken has aped the other. War in the Middle East? Same. Bailouts? Same. Gitmo? Same. Universal health care coverage? Same. And so on and so forth. The Democratic Party just does it better.


I'll largely buy that. The biggest difference being with the Republicans at the moment you get the added bonus of having the government take a greater role in regulating morality; which I'd rather not have.

Also the anti-cute puppy thing needs to be dropped already, how can you guys seriously believe that? Smiley: confused

Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#107 Nov 08 2012 at 12:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
While I disagree with Totem, I suppose it's to my advantage if the GOP follows the "We're not conservative enough!" path.

Limbaugh's "soul searching" today led him to decide that Latinos don't vote Democratic because of immigration, they vote Democratic because they're all lazy welfare junkies who want free stuff. And then the GOP wonders why putting Marco Rubio on a stage isn't enough to pick up the Hispanic vote.

Edited, Nov 8th 2012 12:43pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#108 Nov 08 2012 at 12:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I wrote a post elsewhere about Hispanics and the GOP and may as well get a free +1 by pasting it here.

1) Obama will likely aggressively seek immigration reform this term. The GOP will either be the guys who blocked it or the guys who facilitate giving Democrats a big win with Latinos.

(2) Conservatives seem legitimately befuddled when they trot a minority out on stage before a sea of white people and that doesn't magically make things better. Romney was using "self deportation" as an immigration platform, making dog-whistle welfare attacks, talking about the "47%" of welfare and government benefit moochers and leeches, and saying he'd reverse Obama's immigration enforcement policies. Then he loses minorities in huge numbers and... "But we had Rubio and Rice and Martinez on a stage! What else could they want?"

(3) Number 2 doesn't even address the rank-and-file members of the GOP who press for Constitutional amendments against "anchor babies", "English as National Language" laws, compare undocumented aliens to rapists and child molesters because "They broke the law!", call for barbed wire fences and machine gun nests along the border, think "Put them all in cattle cars and send them to Mexico" is an immigration policy, ID laws treating Hispanics as second-class citizens, etc.

(4) The GOP underwent a campaign to actively disenfranchise minority voters in many states. Conservatives are putting up billboards in minority neighborhoods threatening arrest if the people vote without (legally unnecessary) ID and there's a question of why they're losing votes? GOP allies are sending fliers out to minority voters giving incorrect voting dates and locations and then people wonder why the GOP got 7%? No one else sees the dissonance there?

(5) Immigration isn't the silver bullet that will bridge the rift between Latinos and the GOP. The GOP won't reap tons of free votes based just on religion: Latino Catholicism isn't Italian, Irish or Polish Catholicism and there's a stronger tilt towards social justice and familial compassion as opposed to sin guilt and adherence to dogma. Hostility to immigration is just one piece of a much larger and systemic issue and, until it's addressed in full, trotting out Rubio or Martinez will be rightfully seen as tokenism.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#109 Nov 08 2012 at 1:09 PM Rating: Good
Totem wrote:
The GOP needs to figure out what it wants to be: A truly conservative party, be that socially and/or fiscally or Democrat Party-lite, which is what they are right now despite the laughable idea I read on this board that they are anti-women, anti-gay, anti-cute puppy, anti-minorities, and anti-freshly baked chocolate chip cookie.


I think the GOP's problem is that they cater to those "fringe" issues voters in order to secure their votes, when in order to win moderates they should outright reject those ideas. While maybe it won't inspire as many conservatives to the polls, at the same time the GOP is going to have those "fringe" votes anyway. If anything, giving the crazier candidates (Bachman, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, etc.) such a long & drawn out primary, coupled with the rise of the tea party, was to the benefit of the Democrats. Obama's attack adds on Romney ended up being the less crazier versions of the attacks on Romney during the primary made by his own party.

Joph wrote:
(2) Conservatives seem legitimately befuddled when they trot a minority out on stage before a sea of white people and that doesn't magically make things better. Romney was using "self deportation" as an immigration platform, making dog-whistle welfare attacks, talking about the "47%" of welfare and government benefit moochers and leeches, and saying he'd reverse Obama's immigration enforcement policies. Then he loses minorities in huge numbers and... "But we had Rubio and Rice and Martinez on a stage! What else could they want?"


Newt said something the other day about inclusion. Inclusion isn't inviting minorities to the table, it's having them there in the first place. Given the changing electorate, the party of old rich white men needs to adapt or die.



____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#110 Nov 08 2012 at 1:10 PM Rating: Decent
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,110 posts
Interesting and provocative post, Jo. Unquestionably, the GOP is as scattered on immigration as Romney was on nearly every issue. How to fix that? I don't know, but at its' present state, our national immigration policy is in shambles. I personally think that an agreement with Mexico where our industries are given greater lattitude to operate there for greater access of their populace to our working markets or some varient of that is a good starting place.

In the meantime, deport illegals by placing them on a plane and sending them on a one-way trip to the farthest reaches of the Yucitan peninsula is sound policy. Hey, don't mock it! That particular policy was VERY effective at stopping recidivist illegals from using the revolving door up until Mexico complained and got Texas to stop.

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#111Totem, Posted: Nov 08 2012 at 1:20 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I dunno, Omega. Fringe issues like the Democrat's fixation on gay rights? In terms of the total populace, they only make up perhaps 4% of the total, yet domminate the discussion. If there was ever a "fringe" group, gays would be it. There are multitudes of other larger groups or special interests who beleive their "rights" are being infringed upon, who get not nearly the love that the LGBT crowd gets.
#112 Nov 08 2012 at 1:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
Totem wrote:
Unquestionably, the GOP is as scattered on immigration as Romney was on nearly every issue. How to fix that? I don't know, but at its' present state, our national immigration policy is in shambles. I personally think that an agreement with Mexico where our industries are given greater lattitude to operate there for greater access of their populace to our working markets or some varient of that is a good starting place.


Or you could just go to talk to different Hispanic populations, ask them how they want the law reformed, and then do that.

Edited, Nov 8th 2012 11:33am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#113 Nov 08 2012 at 1:40 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,156 posts
I dunno, Omega. Fringe issues like the Democrat's fixation on gay rights? In terms of the total populace, they only make up perhaps 4% of the total, yet domminate the discussion. If there was ever a "fringe" group, gays would be it. There are multitudes of other larger groups or special interests who beleive their "rights" are being infringed upon, who get not nearly the love that the LGBT crowd gets.


Not understanding that gay marriage isn't a "4% of the population" issue that only gay people care about is the primary reason this election was lost.

Anyway, from a strategy point of view the GOP is @#%^ed if they're relying on winning these demographics. They should rely on turning out more voters with real candidates, and narrow their platform of some of the crazier bullsh*t that has no chance of ever becoming law.

You won on guns, you won on taxes, you lost on prayer in schools, you lost on gays, you lost on debt and spending issues.

People want lower taxes and more services and candidates who look like the image they hold of themselves. It's not rocket science.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#114 Nov 08 2012 at 1:44 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,509 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Totem wrote:
Before each of you pile on, let me point out that the differences between Dubya Bush and Obama and Romney are not much. Nearly every major position each has taken has aped the other. War in the Middle East? Same. Bailouts? Same. Gitmo? Same. Universal health care coverage? Same. And so on and so forth. The Democratic Party just does it better.


I'll largely buy that. The biggest difference being with the Republicans at the moment you get the added bonus of having the government take a greater role in regulating morality; which I'd rather not have.

Also the anti-cute puppy thing needs to be dropped already, how can you guys seriously believe that? Smiley: confused

Smiley: disappointed
The differences in platform on social issues are huge - in fact in many cases they're polar opposites. And with every issue the Republicans come down on the opposite side of the social group that is being affected by any change to policy. No wonder they lose elections.

Economically, Republicans want to cut taxes, Dems want to raise taxes - Austerity vs stimulus.

On foreign policy, even energy and the environment I could agree the platforms have similarities. Healthcare - no. Bush only simplified and pushed forward a health care plan that the Clinton administration created. Since Bush has been out of office the Republicans have made it very clear they oppose Universal Health Care.





Edited, Nov 8th 2012 8:45pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#115 Nov 08 2012 at 1:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Totem wrote:
Interesting and provocative post, Jo. Unquestionably, the GOP is as scattered on immigration as Romney was on nearly every issue. How to fix that? I don't know, but at its' present state, our national immigration policy is in shambles.

But that's just it, it's not all immigration.

Who is the most actively revered figure in Latino Catholicism? It's not Jesus, it's Mary. The most successful Protestant missionary movements in Central and South America have been ones that took on a Marian theology. These Hispanics aren't as taken by Italian-style guilt and threats of hell for sinning or Polish-style stoicism, they're attracted to Marian ideals of love, compassion, helping the downtrodden, caring for the weak, etc. And that attitude isn't purely a religious one but one that has become cultural.

Republican conservatism doesn't fit. Conservative ideals of "You should be charitable but the government shouldn't be" is like being told "Well, you should give but the Church as an institution isn't going to give anything to the poor. You do that yourself." The Republican stance on immigration (such as there is one) is hostile to those ideals. It splits families and attacks the poorest and most vulnerable. Attacks on welfare, social services, unemployment, etc are much the same.

That's absolutely not to say that they are not hard working or want to be on those programs. But rather their philosophy is that the programs should be there and should be strong. Democrats support that idea more than Republicans do.

I find it interesting because I've always subscribed to the same myth the GOP does, that if you just smoothed out immigration, Hispanics would culturally become good socially conservative Republicans. Catholicism was always the keystone of that argument. But I was looking at it through the lens of my own Polish Catholic "Keep quiet and get back to work; you're a good Catholic by working hard and following the rules" upbringing. And I think most Republicans expect all the other Papists to follow the same sort of European rules (along with the Italian guilt theology) and I don't think it holds.

I'll footnote by saying I'm glossing over very Democratic aspects of European Catholicism as well since they are somewhat irrelevant to my greater point.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#116 Nov 08 2012 at 1:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
Elinda wrote:
Economically, Republicans want to cut taxes, Dems want to raise taxes - Austerity vs stimulus.


I bet if you look at the total amount of money collected in taxes and total government expenditures of a Democrat and Republican budget plan they'd be within a couple % of each other on both ends. That's hardly a difference.

Elinda wrote:
Healthcare - no. Bush only simplified and pushed forward a health care plan that the Clinton administration created. Since Bush has been out of office the Republicans have made it very clear they oppose Universal Health Care.


Didn't we already do the Obama stole Romneycare from the Republicans and applied it nationwide thing? Granted they've hardened their stance since 5 years ago, but still...

Social issues are a killer though. Smiley: frown

Edited, Nov 8th 2012 11:59am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#117 Nov 08 2012 at 2:12 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,509 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Economically, Republicans want to cut taxes, Dems want to raise taxes - Austerity vs stimulus.


I bet if you look at the total amount of money collected in taxes and total government expenditures of a Democrat and Republican budget plan they'd be within a couple % of each other on both ends. That's hardly a difference.
Nor should it be. Incremental change is all one administration can pull off (a couple %). The party in power, if they're effective at all, will push that little incremental change in their direction.

People vote for which direction they want to try and get the pendulum swinging. Our government is designed to keep it from swinging too much in any direction.

Obama and Romney were hardly preaching similar economic strategies - yet both were supposedly representative of party platform.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#118 Nov 08 2012 at 2:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,516 posts
Even if the GOP itself isn't fundamentally anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-color, anti-poor, etc., that honestly doesn't matter when we're talking about voting. What matters is the perception.

As a gay man, I can't support the GOP's ruling stance on gay rights (and I define ruling stance in terms of majority--most opposition to gay right laws comes from the right, and the right is left is most active in fighting for them). That's not universal amongst all Republicans, or all Democrats, but it's a very, very strong correlation.

I'd also imagine that many of those politicians do imagine they're opposing it for reasons other than "teh gay is icky." Most of them are probably convinced that they are not homophobic. I happen to disagree, of course. Thing is, either way, I don't care.

I'm obviously going to side with the party that is actively trying to give me, and other groups like me, rights and protections. Not the party that is doing everything it can to ensure that doesn't happen. Even if you believe that we aren't a disenfranchised group, it doesn't matter. We obviously believe that.

Repeat this for all those "fringe" groups and it's no surprise the GOP is struggling. Even if you actually believe the GOP's policy aren't anti-whatever, that actually makes no difference. The point is that those groups feel abandoned by your party, and they aren't going to support you as long as that continues. That's what it comes down to.

If it's simply a perception issue, than your job should be exceedingly simple--prove that those groups are important to you, a part of your central platform. That's what the Dems have been doing for decades now. The GOP hasn't been--they've failed miserably in maintaining their image if they actually aren't the party of wealthy white men.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#119 Nov 08 2012 at 2:29 PM Rating: Good
Totem wrote:
I dunno, Omega. Fringe issues like the Democrat's fixation on gay rights? In terms of the total populace, they only make up perhaps 4% of the total, yet domminate the discussion. If there was ever a "fringe" group, gays would be it. There are multitudes of other larger groups or special interests who beleive their "rights" are being infringed upon, who get not nearly the love that the LGBT crowd gets.


The GOP can't be the party of exclusion & win the Presidency any longer. The majority of the voting populace is for equality; racial equality, gender equality, tax equality, religious equality, & equal rights for gays. Running on a platform of opposing these things, or pandering to the demographic that do, is no longer a winning strategy.

____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#120 Nov 08 2012 at 2:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
Elinda wrote:
People vote for which direction they want to try and get the pendulum swinging. Our government is designed to keep it from swinging too much in any direction.

Obama and Romney were hardly preaching similar economic strategies - yet both were supposedly representative of party platform.


And I totally understand that; a large disruptive change is hardly beneficial to anyone. But given the amount of time they spend bickering over relatively minor changes you'd think the world was going to end or something. Smiley: rolleyes

Besides, the Republicans are the ones who want to raise my taxes. Smiley: bah
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#121 Nov 08 2012 at 3:06 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,010 posts
Totem wrote:
Fringe issues like the Democrat's fixation on gay rights?


Actually, I hear more about gay rights (or the denial thereof) from religious Republicans. Democrats aren't fixated on the issue, they just don't take a step back in fear and disgust when asked about it. Republicans made the denial of gay rights, cleverly hidden under the illusion of "protecting marriage", central to their platform. It backfired, because while a lot of folks want to cite small percentages of the population actually being gay and an even smaller percentage as being affected by the denial of marriage equality, the issue is far broader than just our minority group. It's a long history of hatred in very general terms towards all minority groups throughout our short history in America. It's racism. It's misogyny. It's bigotry. And, it's rampant.

It's just our turn to push back, that's all.
#122 Nov 08 2012 at 3:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,921 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Tumblr, I love you.

HA! I think I know the girl in this picture (it's from Gainesville, which I left in September). I kinda want to post it to her wall... but I already pissed off her husband and father-in-law, so perhaps not Smiley: grin
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#123 Nov 08 2012 at 3:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
"A Romney supporter, who refused to give her name..."

*snrk*
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#124 Nov 08 2012 at 3:30 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Tumblr, I love you.


Yep just what I figured. The republican party is full of drama queens.

Edit: I absolutely love the look in the little girls eyes in this image. Smiley: laugh

Edited, Nov 8th 2012 4:32pm by Criminy
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#125 Nov 08 2012 at 5:03 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,181 posts
I love how everyone is able to imply that all Republicans want to take away women's rights, deport everyone who isn't blond, wage endless war, etc. Believe it or not, there are smart, articulate, passionate, caring people on both sides of the aisle.

The biggest successes in American history depended on bipartisan support and compromise; this constant us versus them is what drives politicians further and further from the center, stalemates the government, and weakens this country.

Both Republicans and Democrats are equally guilty of the type of demagoguery that drives people apart: all Republicans are racists, all Democrats want welfare. Unwillingness to compromise or even accept that the other side has viable ideas will continue harming this country more than any one president from either party.
____________________________
- No animals were harmed in the making of this post.
#127 Nov 08 2012 at 5:21 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,181 posts
^ Case in point.
____________________________
- No animals were harmed in the making of this post.
#128 Nov 08 2012 at 5:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
11,397 posts
allenjj wrote:
I love how everyone is able to imply that all Republicans want to take away women's rights, deport everyone who isn't blond, wage endless war, etc.


Universal statements are always wrong. Smiley: clown

It isn't that all that all Republicans are nutty, it's about how do you keep the nutty ones from scaring away swing voters. I'm sure you can put ultra-evangelicals and gun nuts in the same category as environmental doomsday prophets, socialists, etc.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#129 Nov 08 2012 at 5:29 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,181 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
allenjj wrote:
I love how everyone is able to imply that all Republicans want to take away women's rights, deport everyone who isn't blond, wage endless war, etc.


Universal statements are always wrong. Smiley: clown

It isn't that all that all Republicans are nutty, it's about how do you keep the nutty ones from scaring away swing voters. I'm sure you can put ultra-evangelicals and gun nuts in the same category as environmental doomsday prophets, socialists, etc.


I couldn't agree more. The majority of both parties is moderate; if they weren't, we would have had a second Civil War by now. The problems exacerbate when the extreme edges of both parties gain so much publicity that moderate members of the parties start to think that's how they should act.
____________________________
- No animals were harmed in the making of this post.
#130 Nov 08 2012 at 5:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,516 posts
I think the point people are trying to make is that the image of the GOP is rules by the super (socially) conservative, religious, white crowd. The image of the left is generally as a more diverse group. They've done a much better job of keeping the crazy from being what people see.

Of course, they've had help. The most extreme radicals on the left quite often stop identifying as democrats entirely. Occupy, for instance, isn't all that radical a movement, and its only been loosely linked to the Democratic Party at all.

nd I imagine part of that is that once you identify as a socialist, you arent going to be happy with the Democrats. Because they're really not any less capitalistic than the right, they just think what is necessary for a happy and healthy capitalistic market/ population is different.

That doesn't happen with the GOP. They get the Tea Party.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#131 Nov 08 2012 at 8:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
allenjj wrote:
I love how everyone is able to imply that all Republicans want to take away women's rights, deport everyone who isn't blond, wage endless war, etc. Believe it or not, there are smart, articulate, passionate, caring people on both sides of the aisle.

The problem isn't "all" Republicans. The problem is when you elect Republicans to a national stage whose best immigration idea is "Make them so miserable, they flee the country", who say "The scary black man is taking away work requirements for welfare", who say we don't need abortion because women don't get pregnant from legitimate rape and, besides, with today's medicine there's never a time her life would be in danger from a pregnancy. Republicans who call for anti-Muslim witch hunts and congressional investigations into how dangerous Muslims are. Republicans who cheer and laugh when prominent radio hosts call a woman a slut and a whore for testifying about contraception. Republicans who fight tooth and nail to stop same sex marriage.

And not just those people but also the people in the party who fight for them, nominate them to represent them, put them into office and defend their actions. You don't need "all" Republicans to make the party look bad but it's not just some tiny lunatic fringe that elects these people in a primary and again in a general election knowing full well what they represent.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#132 Nov 08 2012 at 8:34 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Joph's all fired up.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#133 Nov 08 2012 at 8:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Yeah! Let's have another one of them there election thingies!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#134 Nov 08 2012 at 9:32 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,181 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Republicans who cheer and laugh when prominent radio hosts call a woman a slut and a whore for testifying about contraception.


If Republicans have to claim Rush, you have to claim Bill Maher.
____________________________
- No animals were harmed in the making of this post.
#135 Nov 08 2012 at 9:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,156 posts
If Republicans have to claim Rush, you have to claim Bill Maher.

Bill Maher is a comedian.
John Stewart s a comedian.
Rush Limbauh is an opinion leader in the GOP, and taken quite seriously by a large majority of GOP voters.

See the difference?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#136 Nov 08 2012 at 9:43 PM Rating: Good
******
43,138 posts
It's more like Bill Maher and Dennis Miller. Coincidentally, neither very good comedians.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#137 Nov 08 2012 at 9:45 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,069 posts
Dammit, now I want to see the infamous Hitler meltdown scene subtitled to Romney losing the election.

____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and the League of Extraordinary Crafters
#138 Nov 08 2012 at 9:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,156 posts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW3bLs5ortQ
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#139 Nov 08 2012 at 9:55 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,181 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
If Republicans have to claim Rush, you have to claim Bill Maher.

Bill Maher is a comedian.
John Stewart s a comedian.
Rush Limbauh is an opinion leader in the GOP, and taken quite seriously by a large majority of GOP voters.

See the difference?


So everything Rush Limbaugh (who I can honestly say I've never listened to) says must be automatically synonymous with the Republican party? This would be a direct reference to my earlier comment about extreme fringes of the party not defining the party.

In all fairness I'm less Republican as I am Independent, but defining an entire party based on the statements of one person (even the President), or implying that every member of a party follows rank-and-file behind the statements of the extreme fringe is disingenuous at best.
____________________________
- No animals were harmed in the making of this post.
#140 Nov 08 2012 at 10:04 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,069 posts



YES
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and the League of Extraordinary Crafters
#141 Nov 08 2012 at 10:09 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,156 posts
So everything Rush Limbaugh (who I can honestly say I've never listened to) says must be automatically synonymous with the Republican party?

Must be? Of course not. Happens to be? Yes.

This would be a direct reference to my earlier comment about extreme fringes of the party not defining the party.

Limbaugh isn't the fringe, though. He's the mainstream of the Republican Party. There really isn't an equivalent on the Left, because there's much more of a fragmented coalition. Not everyone who thinks gay people should be able to marry is also an atheist. Not everyone who thinks social safety nets are a good idea is also an advocate for ending the war in Afghanistan. It's far rarer for 2nd amendment advocates to be pro choice, etc.

In all fairness I'm less Republican as I am Independent, but defining an entire party based on the statements of one person (even the President), or implying that every member of a party follows rank-and-file behind the statements of the extreme fringe is disingenuous at best.

In that abstract that's probably true. In the case of Limbaugh, he's part of an established media wing of the Republic Party. He parrots talking points that become part of the party platform. Does he create them? I have no idea. Doesn't seem particularly relevant. Obviously he doesn't own the Republican Party (the Koch family owns the Republican Party).

As for the "I'm an independent" bullsh*t, I'm sure it sounds intelligent to you and gives you a warm feeling of self reliance, but it makes you a fucking fool in a two party system. There are valid reasons to support either party given your political philosophy or social views. There is no valid reason to not be sure which one appeals to you.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#142 Nov 08 2012 at 10:14 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,516 posts
allenjj wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
If Republicans have to claim Rush, you have to claim Bill Maher.

Bill Maher is a comedian.
John Stewart s a comedian.
Rush Limbauh is an opinion leader in the GOP, and taken quite seriously by a large majority of GOP voters.

See the difference?


So everything Rush Limbaugh (who I can honestly say I've never listened to) says must be automatically synonymous with the Republican party? This would be a direct reference to my earlier comment about extreme fringes of the party not defining the party.

In all fairness I'm less Republican as I am Independent, but defining an entire party based on the statements of one person (even the President), or implying that every member of a party follows rank-and-file behind the statements of the extreme fringe is disingenuous at best.


What is with you assuming everything we say about the party is meant to be applicable to every member of said party? They aren't, because we aren't idiots who believe in the division fallacy.

The GOP definitely has key opinions, many of most of wish Rush Limbaugh purports. That obviously doesn't mean it's true of every member of the GOP. But because they all organize under that banner and actively support the institution pushing for those causes, it ends up being much the same. Republicans who don't support the apparent majority feeling of the GOP aren't doing much to change it, because the GOP keeps offering up essentially the same candidates over and over and over again.

So either the majority of Republicans support them, or they're @#%^ing idiots.

And because they are actively supporting the institution of the GOP, even if they don't personally agree with all its stances, they remain blameworthy for all those stances.

I voted for Obama. I don't agree with all his positions. But I knowingly supported his bid for presidency aware that he would be doing things I don't agree with. I don't get to just cherry pick responsibility. I helped put him in office, for good and for bad.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#143 Nov 08 2012 at 10:25 PM Rating: Good
***
1,181 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
As for the "I'm an independent" bullsh*t, I'm sure it sounds intelligent to you and gives you a warm feeling of self reliance, but it makes you a fucking fool in a two party system. There are valid reasons to support either party given your political philosophy or social views. There is no valid reason to not be sure which one appeals to you.


It's foolish to see merits and flaws in both parties? It's not that I am unsure as to which party appeals to my political philosophy and social views, it's that I'm willing to accept that neither party absolutely personifies my beliefs.

I vote for whichever candidate will push the issues I believe are important. For example, I support Obama's plan to draw down military spending after the withdrawl from Afghanistan in 2014. I also support Romney's desire to increase and strengthen relations with Israel. Although I support both candidates for those individual ideas, I based my vote on which candidate would push the issues I assess to be most important to America's future success.

Blindly following a party line regardless of policy is foolish.
____________________________
- No animals were harmed in the making of this post.
#144 Nov 08 2012 at 10:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
29,156 posts
It's foolish to see merits and flaws in both parties? It's not that I am unsure as to which party appeals to my political philosophy and social views, it's that I'm willing to accept that neither party absolutely personifies my beliefs.

Tell us your beliefs. Perhaps you are that magical special snowflake who can't find a home.


I vote for whichever candidate will push the issues I believe are important. For example, I support Obama's plan to draw down military spending after the withdrawl from Afghanistan in 2014.


This one's easy: That's a lie. There won't be a draw down in military spending.


I also support Romney's desire to increase and strengthen relations with Israel.

Also easy, also a lie. There is no way to "strengthen" relations with Israel. Why it would seem like a good idea to do so is equally mystifying.


Although I support both candidates for those individual ideas, I based my vote on which candidate would push the issues I assess to be most important to America's future success.


Just state what you think that is. It's not so hard.

I believe:

Government's job is to provide safety nets for it's citizens to provide basic human needs when misfortune or bad judgement would otherwise put them at risk. These needs include food, housing, health care, education, infrastructure etc.

Done.

Rational conservatives believe:

Government lacks the ability to provide these things efficiently and it's attempts to do so hamper free market actions that would more efficiently provide similar services, reducing waste and increasing the standard of living for all.

I disagree, but it's simple to state the position.

Pick one.


Blindly following a party line regardless of policy is foolish.


Wrong. It's wise. Structural power in this country resides in the individual parties. When you vote for someone who puts the D or the R before his or her name on the ballot, you're voting for the *structure*, not the individual. Why do you think party leadership exists? Mr. Smith isn't running in your district, trust me on this.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#145 Nov 08 2012 at 10:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,516 posts
The ruling American belief that the executive branch of our government rules it seriously disturbs me, and is proof that we REALLY need to increase civics in our schools.

End of the day, president doesn't have much power. Unless you can actually get a third party in the seat, you ARE voting for that party. How often do you see a president vetoing bills supported by their party's side? Almost never.

Now, if we had a larger independent representation in the government, this would be a different story. As it stands, all you're really doing is picking which party gets a stronger position in Washington.

Also, how much stronger can our ties with Israel even get? Making them a state?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#146 Nov 08 2012 at 11:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
allenjj wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Republicans who cheer and laugh when prominent radio hosts call a woman a slut and a whore for testifying about contraception.
If Republicans have to claim Rush, you have to claim Bill Maher.

If trying to play tit-for-tat is your defense, you've already completely missed the point.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#147 Nov 09 2012 at 1:36 AM Rating: Excellent
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And I imagine part of that is that once you identify as a socialist, you arent going to be happy with the Democrats. Because they're really not any less capitalistic than the right, they just think what is necessary for a happy and healthy capitalistic market/ population is different.


As someone who identifies as socialist, I'm not what I would call "happy" with the Democrats. They're not nearly liberal enough for me, and it amuses me when I tell conservative friends of mine this, and watch their eyes pop out of their head. But, what other choice do I have? None. I'm a registered Democrat, because my state has closed primaries, and I do my best to vote in people who are more left leaning. I laugh when people talk about how our country is turning into Socialist France. Seriously, I wish.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#148 Nov 09 2012 at 6:53 AM Rating: Default
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,110 posts
"Government's job is to provide safety nets for it's citizens to provide basic human needs when misfortune or bad judgement would otherwise put them at risk. These needs include food, housing, health care, education, infrastructure etc." --Smasharoo

I have no problem with this-- up to a point. When misfortune is the result of determined and intentional bad judgement and bad judgement is no longer an isolated occurance, but a willful lifestyle, then no, government's role is not to step in, but to allow nature to take its' course.

As John Smith so famously said (based from 2 Thes 3:10), "He who does not work, neither shall he eat." Everyone needs a hand (or handout) once in a while. However, as his quote implies, even in dire circumstances, such as famine in the face of a struggling colony, there were thouse who either thought themselves too good to labor or were too lazy to join in the group effort towards success.

And so it is with today's welfare recipients. There should be three choices after a reasonable amount of time: you should either become gainfully employed, do community service work to pay your debt to society, or go off the dole.

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#149 Nov 09 2012 at 7:26 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,509 posts
Totem wrote:
"Government's job is to provide safety nets for it's citizens to provide basic human needs when misfortune or bad judgement would otherwise put them at risk. These needs include food, housing, health care, education, infrastructure etc." --Smasharoo

I have no problem with this-- up to a point. When misfortune is the result of determined and intentional bad judgement and bad judgement is no longer an isolated occurance, but a willful lifestyle, then no, government's role is not to step in, but to allow nature to take its' course.

As John Smith so famously said (based from 2 Thes 3:10), "He who does not work, neither shall he eat." Everyone needs a hand (or handout) once in a while. However, as his quote implies, even in dire circumstances, such as famine in the face of a struggling colony, there were thouse who either thought themselves too good to labor or were too lazy to join in the group effort towards success.

And so it is with today's welfare recipients. There should be three choices after a reasonable amount of time: you should either become gainfully employed, do community service work to pay your debt to society, or go off the dole.

Totem

It would be nice if our societal choices could be boiled down to three options. Unfortunately things have gotten a bit more complicated.

The reality is, there will be peoples and families that are always dependent on the system - in fact, we all are to some extent. Fortunately our country is advanced enough and our humanity evolved to the point where we will never have to knowingly allow someone to simply starve on the street - regardless of how lazy you think they are. However, simply because someone is on food stamps indefinitely or is being treated for a chronic illness that is paid for by medicaid, doesn't mean they're not contributing to society. Nor can you even factually state that any particular indigent person is costing the federal government more to support that it pays to support you or I (gainfully employed peoples).

Further our welfare system has steadily moved towards one in which the goal is self-sufficiency. Note how welfare is called Temporary Aid for Needy Families now versus Aid to Families with Dependent Children.

Healthcare (medicaid/medicare) is the money sink now. A single-payer system or socialized medicine would go a long way in reducing the amount of money we pay via our federal/state taxes, in our workplace premiums, and straight out our pockets.

edit - When will be the new signature unveiling ceremony?



Edited, Nov 9th 2012 3:59pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#150 Nov 09 2012 at 7:50 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,516 posts
Totem wrote:
"Government's job is to provide safety nets for it's citizens to provide basic human needs when misfortune or bad judgement would otherwise put them at risk. These needs include food, housing, health care, education, infrastructure etc." --Smasharoo

I have no problem with this-- up to a point. When misfortune is the result of determined and intentional bad judgement and bad judgement is no longer an isolated occurance, but a willful lifestyle, then no, government's role is not to step in, but to allow nature to take its' course.

As John Smith so famously said (based from 2 Thes 3:10), "He who does not work, neither shall he eat." Everyone needs a hand (or handout) once in a while. However, as his quote implies, even in dire circumstances, such as famine in the face of a struggling colony, there were thouse who either thought themselves too good to labor or were too lazy to join in the group effort towards success.

And so it is with today's welfare recipients. There should be three choices after a reasonable amount of time: you should either become gainfully employed, do community service work to pay your debt to society, or go off the dole.

Totem


"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#151 Nov 09 2012 at 8:28 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,138 posts
Deuteronomy 22:11 wrote:
You shall not wear a garment of diverse sorts, as of woolen and linen together.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 35 All times are in CDT
Aethien, Elinda, ElneClare, lolgaxe, Anonymous Guests (31)