Adam Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 What people are you referring to? The same people talking about contraception? Those people? And the people responding to them all the time......both. The church has an agenda, just like every other group. Just like every other group, there are blockades to prevent them from realizing that agenda. Could you imagine what our country would be without those blockades?
IDBillzFan Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 And the people responding to them all the time......both. The church has an agenda, just like every other group. Just like every other group, there are blockades to prevent them from realizing that agenda. Could you imagine what our country would be without those blockades? I've been getting a sense of it for the past three years, yes.
Adam Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 I've been getting a sense of it for the past three years, yes. LOL, try being an independent and listening to that from both sides for a very long time! Bush Bad, Obama Bad.......Impeach Clinton......Bush raised Taxes, Reagan sold weapons......Carter ruined the economy.......
IDBillzFan Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 LOL, try being an independent and listening to that from both sides for a very long time! Bush Bad, Obama Bad.......Impeach Clinton......Bush raised Taxes, Reagan sold weapons......Carter ruined the economy....... This may surprise you, but in spite of rants that I'm a right-wing extremist partisan hack, the truth of the matter is simply that I'm a conservative who believes in smaller government, less government intrusion, as well as fiscal and personal accountability. I believe our military should protect us, and yes, that sometimes means in other places than just here, however I'm no more a "bombs away" guy than I am a Ron Paul "tuck tail and run away" guy. I'm certain there are trillions in wasted taxpayer dollars, including in the military (where we can undoubtedly start by cutting many of the useless bases meant to keep Sgt. Stillmans in an igloo). Social issues are a waste of time to me because in my mind, you can't believe in personal accountability and simultaneously expect the federal government to push a social issue, whether it's gay marriage or elimination of Happy Meals. It's state stuff, not federal. It's dawned on me that the problem with our two party system is not that it needs a third party, but that it doesn't need the two parties at all. Because all we do is try to categorize people based on those two-party cliches. Whether you refer to yourself as a Reagan Democrat or a Kennedy Republican, the two party names are still there. How about we're all independents and work our way from there? Are you a Reagan Independent, Paul Independent, Obama Independent? Okay, granted, the last one is an oxymoron so the concept needs work, but you get my point.
Adam Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 This may surprise you, but in spite of rants that I'm a right-wing extremist partisan hack, the truth of the matter is simply that I'm a conservative who believes in smaller government, less government intrusion, as well as fiscal and personal accountability. I believe our military should protect us, and yes, that sometimes means in other places than just here, however I'm no more a "bombs away" guy than I am a Ron Paul "tuck tail and run away" guy. I'm certain there are trillions in wasted taxpayer dollars, including in the military (where we can undoubtedly start by cutting many of the useless bases meant to keep Sgt. Stillmans in an igloo). Social issues are a waste of time to me because in my mind, you can't believe in personal accountability and simultaneously expect the federal government to push a social issue, whether it's gay marriage or elimination of Happy Meals. It's state stuff, not federal. It's dawned on me that the problem with our two party system is not that it needs a third party, but that it doesn't need the two parties at all. Because all we do is try to categorize people based on those two-party cliches. Whether you refer to yourself as a Reagan Democrat or a Kennedy Republican, the two party names are still there. How about we're all independents and work our way from there? Are you a Reagan Independent, Paul Independent, Obama Independent? Okay, granted, the last one is an oxymoron so the concept needs work, but you get my point. There is a reason the founding fathers were against a two-party system (or at least I heard that they were). Sometimes we seem right or left wings, because of conversations we are drawn into, more than our own stance.
/dev/null Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 It's dawned on me that the problem with our two party system is not that it needs a third party, but that it doesn't need the two parties at all. LABillzFan FTW
OCinBuffalo Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 As usual people don't really know how the industry works. Netflix is at the mercy of the studios. They're the ones who decide what gets aired. Netflix just took a big hit when Starz pulled their movies and shows in March. I finally got it a few months ago. I think there are a lot more good movies on there than people think. You might not have heard of them, but they're there. I just wish there were more Wes Anderson movies to stream. Right, me "not knowing how the industry works" = Netflix false advertising. Dude, I've done work for Hollywood. I know how the industry works, probably better than you do. That said, the stat of neither of our knowledge absolves Netflix for their advertising. 7.99/month is simply not worth what you get, because I sincerely doubt I would rent $96 worth of awful movies in one year. Maybe $40 And, last year getting to see all 3 original Girl with the Dragon Tattoo movies was cool. (So, yeah, there are some unexpected gems here and there) But, the rest ain't worth $96. I am sure there are things I haven't found. However, I am just as sure there's a lot of crap. There is a reason the founding fathers were against a two-party system (or at least I heard that they were). Sometimes we seem right or left wings, because of conversations we are drawn into, more than our own stance. Or, sometimes people realize that they are in the minority on an issue, or set of issues. And, the clever amongst that minority understand that no matter what happens for the rest of their lives, they will always be in the minority. So, they go looking for another issue, or set of issues, that somebody else cares about, they pick the side that's winning, and when it wins, they claim that it was because of their help. Then, they claim that the people in the other group owe them. Now, they say they are a majority. (This is how the college professors/professional left/socialist-progressives have usurped the Democratic party from the working person) (and, it's also how the Neo-Conservatives were able to steamroll Bush over McCain in 2000) Now they say they are a political party. Are they? Well, there's more people, and they start claiming that they have a "big tent". Nothing could be further from the truth. And, if attacked by external forces, this single issue, extremist-led version of a party is likely to splinter quite quickly. Things like the Iraq War or Obamacare, which were both, clearly, extremist minority-driven, get you crushed politically and your big tent disappears.
RkFast Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 What people are you referring to? The same people talking about contraception? Those people? I dont want to get all "Jesse Ventura" here (conspiracy loon, not pro wrestler) but am I the only one that noticed that George Stephanopouslosuspos threw a contraception question WAY the !@#$ out from left field earlier this year at one of the debates and then a month later its THE subject in our "national discussion?"
IDBillzFan Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 I dont want to get all "Jesse Ventura" here (conspiracy loon, not pro wrestler) but am I the only one that noticed that George Stephanopouslosuspos threw a contraception question WAY the !@#$ out from left field earlier this year at one of the debates and then a month later its THE subject in our "national discussion?" As the trail of Sandra Fluke's sudden fame wraps its way back to the WH's Anita Dunn, the timing of the George Snuffaluffagous question is, in retrospect, as obvious as anything else that is doctored by the left these days.
Chef Jim Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 As the trail of Sandra Fluke's sudden fame wraps its way back to the WH's Anita Dunn, the timing of the George Snuffaluffagous question is, in retrospect, as obvious as anything else that is doctored by the left these days. This is just politics as usual. I was going to say that I'm surprised that an Administration that cut it's chops on Chicago politics isn't better at it but I think that Chicago is so corrupt it was jut a lot easier there.
3rdnlng Posted March 15, 2012 Author Posted March 15, 2012 As the trail of Sandra Fluke's sudden fame wraps its way back to the WH's Anita Dunn, the timing of the George Snuffaluffagous question is, in retrospect, as obvious as anything else that is doctored by the left these days. Our old friend Ann has an opinion on Ms. Fluke: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=50215
DC Tom Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Our old friend Ann has an opinion on Ms. Fluke: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=50215 Not a Coulter fan - in fact, she generally annoys the **** out of me. But Liberals' idea of questioning authority is to check with the authorities to see if a "Question Authority" bumper sticker would be popular. Is funny because it's true.
3rdnlng Posted March 15, 2012 Author Posted March 15, 2012 Not a Coulter fan - in fact, she generally annoys the **** out of me. But Is funny because it's true. She's like Rush, or Hannity who are most always right on the issues but state them in a way that's going to get the left all up and crazy. It helps their bottom line. Sort of like what we do to DIN. Glass houses, right?
B-Man Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 (edited) Not a Coulter fan - in fact, she generally annoys the **** out of me. But Liberals' idea of questioning authority is to check with the authorities to see if a "Question Authority" bumper sticker would be popular. Is funny because it's true. Just like this Tom ? The Quit and the DeadBy Mark Steyn March 14, 2012 Pamela Geller was struck by that ad The New York Times ran the other day, “It’s Time To Quit The Catholic Church“, an “open letter to ‘liberal’ and ‘nominal’ Catholics”. So she sent in her own ad, “It’s Time To Quit Islam“, an “open letter to ‘moderate’ Muslims”. Analogous artwork, same pitch, only difference being the intended target. The Times’ Senior Vice-President for Corporate Hogwash called to tell Miss Geller that – surprise! surprise! – they were way less eager to rush this one into print: Bob Christie, Senior Vice President of Corporate Communications for the New York Times, just called me to advise me that they would be accepting my ad, but considering the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, now would not be a good time, as they did not want to enflame an already hot situation. They will be reconsidering it for publication in “a few months.” So I said to Mr. Christie, “Isn’t this the very point of the ad? If you feared the Catholics were going to attack the New York Times building, would you have run that ad?” Thus the courage of the secular left.............................. If you’re going to be “provocative”, it’s best to do it with people who can’t be provoked. Pamela is right. If you want to be treated with respect by The New York Times and the rest of the multiculti establishment, make it clear you’re willing to kill them............................ That’s an interesting message to send. Mark Steyn Edited March 15, 2012 by B-Man
IDBillzFan Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 (edited) More on Fluke. Man, she has some REALLY rich friends. Note to B-man, this is what I was referring to earlier. Three years ago, no one on the right would be spending this kind of effort on a Pelosi plant like Fluke. This will be a much different election for Obama because he can run, but this time, he can't hide. Edited March 15, 2012 by LABillzFan
1billsfan Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 I dont want to get all "Jesse Ventura" here (conspiracy loon, not pro wrestler) but am I the only one that noticed that George Stephanopouslosuspos threw a contraception question WAY the !@#$ out from left field earlier this year at one of the debates and then a month later its THE subject in our "national discussion?" There's no conspiracy. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN are all controlled by the Obama administration (i.e. the federal government). It's they way the Marxists like it. Even Fox News has softened it's approach on criticism of Obama, his corrupt administration, and of his driving the country over the cliff. Fox News should be hammering Obama and demanding answers. Other than Hannity, they're simply not doing it. They're being way too polite.
GG Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 More on Fluke. Man, she has some REALLY rich friends. Note to B-man, this is what I was referring to earlier. Three years ago, no one on the right would be spending this kind of effort on a Pelosi plant like Fluke. This will be a much different election for Obama because he can run, but this time, he can't hide. That's quite a site ... the only thing was missing was a picture of Fagin with horns.
IDBillzFan Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 That's quite a site ... the only thing was missing was a picture of Fagin with horns. Yes. It's not a site I've every been to before, but I thought that was a crapload of supported detail you're not going to find at your basic website. I mean, it's not like everyone is sending a bunch of reporters to her home state because some of her emails are about to be released.
Just Jack Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 More on Fluke. Man, she has some REALLY rich friends. Note to B-man, this is what I was referring to earlier. Three years ago, no one on the right would be spending this kind of effort on a Pelosi plant like Fluke. This will be a much different election for Obama because he can run, but this time, he can't hide. She has a boyfriend? I thought we figured she was a lesbian.
Recommended Posts