• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Our new president?

It's too bad that Colbert didn't enter the primary against Obama. There's lots of Democrats that would have voted for him over the incumbent.
 
Man, is that pathetic - but so typical of self-described 'indepentents', the most ignorant faction. So, care to defend your claim that McCain/Palin would have been better?
 
Craig234 said:
Man, is that pathetic - but so typical of self-described 'indepentents', the most ignorant faction. So, care to defend your claim that McCain/Palin would have been better?
Click to expand...

haha. They just split the difference, man.

the truth about politics in the USA is that it's actually all a tribal call.
 
images
 
Craig234 said:
So, care to defend your claim that McCain/Palin would have been better?
Click to expand...

I am not answering the question for him, but as for me the answer is simple, easy, and glaringly obvious.

Obamacare would not exist.

Obamacare's purpose is not ensure that good healthcare at low prices does not exist...if that was the goal, it would not punish those who already have/provide good healthcare at low prices (the so called cadillac plans). Intead of punishing them to make them go away, it would reward companies who provide good healthcare at low prices.

This reason alone is enough to remove the horror that is Obamacare.
 
cybrsage said:
I am not answering the question for him, but as for me the answer is simple, easy, and glaringly obvious.

Obamacare would not exist.

Obamacare's purpose is not ensure that good healthcare at low prices does not exist...if that was the goal, it would not punish those who already have/provide good healthcare at low prices (the so called cadillac plans). Intead of punishing them to make them go away, it would reward companies who provide good healthcare at low prices.

This reason alone is enough to remove the horror that is Obamacare.
Click to expand...

"The horror that is Obamacare"? Even if you thought Obamacare doesn't have the best approach to reach its goal, I feel like your reaction to it is wildly out of proportion.

In any case, that's not a very good argument, IMO. Obamacare is hardly the only thing Obama has done or not done, and NOT implementing Obamacare is hardly the only think McCain would have done/not done in office. Single issue voting is, and always has been, not a very good idea.
 
cybrsage said:
I am not answering the question for him, but as for me the answer is simple, easy, and glaringly obvious.

Obamacare would not exist.

Obamacare's purpose is not ensure that good healthcare at low prices does not exist...if that was the goal, it would not punish those who already have/provide good healthcare at low prices (the so called cadillac plans). Intead of punishing them to make them go away, it would reward companies who provide good healthcare at low prices.

This reason alone is enough to remove the horror that is Obamacare.
Click to expand...

You mean that fine piece of health care legislation Obama proposed before the Republucan (ham-stringing)compromise which turned it into the "HORROR" you now call Obamacare?
 
Rainsford said:
"The horror that is Obamacare"? Even if you thought Obamacare doesn't have the best approach to reach its goal, I feel like your reaction to it is wildly out of proportion.
In any case, that's not a very good argument, IMO. Obamacare is hardly the only thing Obama has done or not done, and NOT implementing Obamacare is hardly the only think McCain would have done/not done in office. Single issue voting is, and always has been, not a very good idea.
Click to expand...
At least cybrstooge refrained from a good Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Kenyan rant.

Merely the thought that the strain of office on Mr. McCain's octogenarian heart may have propelled half-Governor Palin into the oval office is sufficient justification for an Obama vote in 2008.
 
feralkid said:
Exactly, so why would he oppose him?
Click to expand...

Plus people like Colbert and Stewart aren't political leader types. They're much better suited to being on the sidelines contributing to the debate by pointing out how politics is often absurdly ridiculous. Stewart's approach is more straightforward, while Colbert makes his point with satirical mockery...but in both cases, their place is definitely in commenting on the system rather than trying to run it.
 
cybrsage said:
I am not answering the question for him, but as for me the answer is simple, easy, and glaringly obvious.

Obamacare would not exist.

Obamacare's purpose is not ensure that good healthcare at low prices does not exist...if that was the goal, it would not punish those who already have/provide good healthcare at low prices (the so called cadillac plans). Intead of punishing them to make them go away, it would reward companies who provide good healthcare at low prices.

This reason alone is enough to remove the horror that is Obamacare.
Click to expand...

Yeah, instead we would have McCaincare. which would be about the same except for the different name.
 
FTFA:

Unemployment: "Suck it up, unemployed. It is your own damn fault that you don't have a job ... So stop scapegoating Wall Street."

Corporate taxes: "If we raise taxes on corporations, what incentive will they have to make money other than the fact that it's the sole reason they exist."

Government helping Americans in need: "I believe in pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. I believe it is possible. I saw this guy do it once in Cirque du Soleil. It was magical!"

Gays: "There is nothing wrong with being gay. I have plenty of friends who are going to hell."

America's role in world: "If our Founding Fathers wanted us to care about the rest of the world, they wouldn't have declared their independence from it."

Immigration: "This is America. I don't want my tomato picked by a Mexican. I want it picked by an American"

Muslims: "Every permit granted to a mosque is one denied to an American house of worship."
Click to expand...

Sounds like the ideal candidate
 
Gays: "There is nothing wrong with being gay. I have plenty of friends who are going to hell."

Civil rights: "I just think Rosa Parks was overrated. Last time I checked, she got famous for breaking the law."

Muslims: "Every permit granted to a mosque is one denied to an American house of worship."
Click to expand...

This is so the GOP base!
 
IGBT said:
Liberals have their "Crown Jewels" claim to fame. Dixie Democrats are ground zero for the most racist and violent time in American History..they spawned and promoted the KKK.
Click to expand...

This is intellectually dishonest.

In response to a great deal of African-american power shortly after the civil war a bunch of strong states-rights old white-people with power funded and controlled a group of religiously zealous ignorant white people afraid of change.

That's where the KKK came from.

Sometime in the 60s kids open to new experiences took over the democratic party leaving the elderly that are afraid of change to vote, briefly, for the segregationalist party. Briefly the republicans and democrats were not afraid of change: this is when the most successfully liberal president we've had in the past 40 years, Richard Nixon, was president.

Then, in response to a great deal of minority power, shortly after the civil rights movement a bunch of strong states rights old white-people with power funded and controlled a group of religiously zealous ignorant white people afraid of change.

That's where the Reagan-republican came from.
 
DixyCrat said:
This is intellectually dishonest.

In response to a great deal of African-american power shortly after the civil war a bunch of strong states-rights old white-people with power funded and controlled a group of religiously zealous ignorant white people afraid of change.

That's where the KKK came from.

Sometime in the 60s kids open to new experiences took over the democratic party leaving the elderly that are afraid of change to vote, briefly, for the segregationalist party. Briefly the republicans and democrats were not afraid of change: this is when the most successfully liberal president we've had in the past 40 years, Richard Nixon, was president.

Then, in response to a great deal of minority power, shortly after the civil rights movement a bunch of strong states rights old white-people with power funded and controlled a group of religiously zealous ignorant white people afraid of change.

That's where the Reagan-republican came from.
Click to expand...




it had nothing to do with racism. Slavery is a economic issue. The democrats of any color didn't want to pay for labor. And today's democrats still don't want to pay for labor. They rather outsource to to slave labor countries like china. The liberals are still in the slavery business.
 
IGBT said:
it had nothing to do with racism. Slavery is a economic issue. The democrats of any color didn't want to pay for labor. And today's democrats still don't want to pay for labor. They rather outsource to to slave labor countries like china. The liberals are still in the slavery business.
Click to expand...

Slavery wasn't the topic I was speaking to. I was speaking to the point you made regarding the democratic party and its historic affiliation with the KKK. The KKK was not a pro-slave organization. Your counter argument fails.

You have also lobed another complaint against the democratic party: one of being pro low-cost workers. You have done this in such a way as does not address the points I made regarding your lack of consideration of the relationship between the human-psychological factors that are similar causal mechanisms behind both the KKK supporting democrat party and the Reagan republican party.

It's called a red-haring. It detracts from the argument by adding objections instead of focusing on the topic at hand. I imagine that this, though, simply reflects how you see the world. The moment you are questioned on one point in a way you can't refute you defend your faith with whatever other part of your set of beliefs you can fill in.

Funny thing is I never argued against republicans or called them racist. I just proved that linking the democratic party and the KKK is an intellectually dishonest move. If you want to be a better person you've got to overcome the mindlessness of fan-boy ism and substantiate your point of view based on rational factual claims; Not a network of irrelevant arguments that lead to a basic emotive-stance from which it is impossible to change your point of view.
 
KKK Terrorist Arm of the Democratic Party

By Frances Rice

History shows that the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party. This ugly fact about the Democrat Party is detailed in the book, A Short History of Reconstruction, (Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1990) by Dr. Eric Foner, the renown liberal historian who is the DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University. As a further testament to his impeccable credentials, Professor Foner is only the second person to serve as president of the three major professional organizations: the Organization of American Historians, American Historical Association, and Society of American Historians.
Democrats in the last century did not hide their connections to the Ku Klux Klan. Georgia-born Democrat Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan wrote on page 21 of the September 1928 edition of the Klan’s “The Kourier Magazine”: “I have never voted for any man who was not a regular Democrat. My father … never voted for any man who was not a Democrat. My grandfather was …the head of the Ku Klux Klan in reconstruction days…. My great-grandfather was a life-long Democrat…. My great-great-grandfather was…one of the founders of the Democratic party.”


http://www.nationalblackrepublicans...oftheDemocratParty&page_id=93&tp_preview=true
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top