Democrats SUCK!!

[followsthewolf]

Whatevah you say, Hankster.

[Palehorse]

I wonder who the republicans are going to follow when Beck and Limp Jaw lay down for their long dirt naps???

I wonder if there will be country anymore by the time it happens?

[me]

Quote from: Sandy Eggo on Today at 03:15:18 PM

    I did answer your question, most recently a few pages back, but that wasn't the first time. In fact, I think maybe we've all tried.

    You can leaf back through and find it...it was along the lines of being able to articulate and support your decisions and opinions w/facts, because to do otherwise makes someone seem as if they're making those choices based on superficial reasons. Of course they can still make the choices/decisions, without facts, it's a free country, but they look a whole lot less suspicious/silly and garner more respect if they can support their positions.

So by that you're saying everyone in the country who didn't vote for Obama was wrong and are racists and/or a discredit to their race.  Or in other words, everyone should have voted for Obama because he is 100% right?  Sorry but that doesn't even make sense and is very illogical.

Obama is a liberal progressive, I do not believe in liberal progressive ideas and policies, therefore I would have voted against whoever ran that had those ideologies it just happened it was Obama who ran and was elected.  Do I have to automatically change my ideas and beliefs to his now?  Wouldn't that be taking away my freedom of choice to make my decision based on what I believe?  The facts you presented are skewed in your favor just as what I believe are skewed in mine and it is my choice to believe mine are just as valid as yours and your choice to believe yours are valid.  That is how things work and are supposed to work.  If he is so right why are people who voted for him suddenly against what he's doing?  Why didn't all blacks vote for him and why are they suddenly a discredit to their race if they disagree with him?  Not everyone who disagrees with him is an uneducated redneck either there are some highly educated people who disagree with his policies so why are they labeled as stupid now?  Think Sandy, think. How many different ways do I have to put these thoughts to get it through your head?

Still waitin' on an answer. 

[Palehorse]

 

[me]

   

Quote from: Sandy Eggo on Today at 03:15:18 PM

        I did answer your question, most recently a few pages back, but that wasn't the first time. In fact, I think maybe we've all tried.

        You can leaf back through and find it...it was along the lines of being able to articulate and support your decisions and opinions w/facts, because to do otherwise makes someone seem as if they're making those choices based on superficial reasons. Of course they can still make the choices/decisions, without facts, it's a free country, but they look a whole lot less suspicious/silly and garner more respect if they can support their positions.

Quote from: me on Today at 04:22:59 PM

    So by that you're saying everyone in the country who didn't vote for Obama was wrong and are racists and/or a discredit to their race.  Or in other words, everyone should have voted for Obama because he is 100% right?  Sorry but that doesn't even make sense and is very illogical.

   Obama is a liberal progressive, I do not believe in liberal progressive ideas and policies, therefore I would have voted against whoever ran that had those ideologies it just happened it was Obama who ran and was elected.  Do I have to automatically change my ideas and beliefs to his now?  Wouldn't that be taking away my freedom of choice to make my decision based on what I believe?  The facts you presented are skewed in your favor just as what I believe are skewed in mine and it is my choice to believe mine are just as valid as yours and your choice to believe yours are valid.  That is how things work and are supposed to work.  If he is so right why are people who voted for him suddenly against what he's doing?  Why didn't all blacks vote for him and why are they suddenly a discredit to their race if they disagree with him?  Not everyone who disagrees with him is an uneducated redneck either there are some highly educated people who disagree with his policies so why are they labeled as stupid now?  Think Sandy, think. How many different ways do I have to put these thoughts to get it through your head?

Still waitin' on an answer. 

[Sandy Eggo]

Well, bless their hearts.

You're right me, that wouldn't be logical, so it's a good thing that I didn't say that.

I also don't find it very logical that you and your lil' buddy would automatically dismiss every policy or a candidate based on your superficial label. Even IF that were a valid label (And I'm not saying it is) isn't it possible that he could have a good idea or policy? Of course that wouldn't matter to you two and you'd never admit it b/c you've already decided that's impossible.

Maybe you two should stop projecting and give thinking a try.

[Palehorse]

. . .

Obama is a liberal progressive, I do not believe in liberal progressive ideas and policies, therefore I would have voted against whoever ran that had those ideologies it just happened it was Obama who ran and was elected. . .

Validating the thought that you would cut your nose off to spite your face. . .

I've voted for a lot of candidates that held ideologies I disagreed with, but their stated goals seemed to me to be the ones that were better for the country and its citizens as a whole; especially when compared to those of the candidates opposing them.

What you are saying is that if a candidate aligns him or her self with a cause or ideal that you disagree with, (say for instance the democratic platform), you automatically exclude them even if some of the things they want to do are the right things for the country and its people as a whole and you know it!

You are listening to the propagandists and accepting their tripe as gospel, instead of exercising a LITTLE initiative and objectively investigating the issues and stated goals. Exactly why this country is where it is today!

And another thing: You two keep tossing out the "you only voted for him because of his race" propaganda as if it were the truth. Yet another case of "ass thinking".

This country was in the whirlpool and about to go down the drain as election time approached, and the majority of the country damned well knew it too. We all saw the crap hitting the fan and while the republican party was running around screaming "drill baby, drill", and losing sight of the ball surrounding this economy, the democratic candidate seized the moment and went to work to provide solutions that made sense to the American people as a whole.

I saw it and so did the majority of my fellow citizens, and I voted my conscience based upon the fact that 4 more years of the same old same old would be worse for this country than what the democratic candidate was  proposing. . .

Its just a travesty that congressional republicans have chosen to practice obstructionist politics instead of paying attention to the unquestionable message the American people sent them in the elections. Instead, they've chosen to hold the least of those amongst their constituency hostage, and use them as a lever with which to stall progression and seize "control" via attrition.

Not a single one of those bastards.bitches will ever get another vote from me. Not one of them!

[The Troll]

So are you saying that I should have voted for Obama because he graduated with honors even though he campaigned on things I didn't agree with or are you saying I should have voted for him because he is black and graduated with honors? 
I would not have voted for Hillary either and when it comes down to it they're both Liberal Progressives which I happen to disagree with so why does that make a difference just because it happened to be Obama who ran?  I always thought you voted for whoever came the closest to your view of things not just because they happen to be one gender or race or another.  You just can't seem to get a grip on the fact that people voted for who they felt would do the better job based on how they felt about their campaign and they disagree with policies because they don't like the policy not because of the race of the person who happens to be president.  All this crying racist, bigot, hate monger is intended to scare us into submitting and causing problems that don't, or didn't, exist and it is creating an air of malcontent that hasn't done anything productive in the least.  Greece, (cradle to grave entitlements), and the UK, (government health care),  have had what Obama wants for us for years and they are failing so what makes you think it will be any different here?  The more given the more that is wanted and the more it costs so where is all that money going to come from?  You may be comfortable with where you're at in life at the moment but what about your children and grandchildren are they going to have the same opportunities or are they going to be slaving to pay off a huge debt brought on by all of these entitlements and unable to get ahead? 

Now just to make sure you don't miss what I want answered here.....Should I have voted for or agree with policies just because of the race or gender of the president if I don't honestly believe in their agenda?

  Let's look at what you said, reading between the lines.  You couldn't vote for Obama because he a Socialist, one step above a Communist.  A Liberal, which is one step above a welfare queen.

  You couldn't vote for Hillary, even she is like *John Wayne toilet paper, because she just like Obama, but she a woman. 

  Instead you voted for the old thief from Arizona, John McCain and one of the most intelligent women in the world, Sara Pailn.   With that kind of reasoning, I want you to replace Luger and this state won't skip a beat.  Doing Nothing.

  *John Wayne toilet paper.  It's rough, it's tough and it won't take shit off of anyone.  I know what it is.  Ford bought it all of the time and put it in their restrooms.

[me]

Well, bless their hearts.

You're right me, that wouldn't be logical, so it's a good thing that I didn't say that.

I also don't find it very logical that you and your lil' buddy would automatically dismiss every policy or a candidate based on your superficial label. Even IF that were a valid label (And I'm not saying it is) isn't it possible that he could have a good idea or policy? Of course that wouldn't matter to you two and you'd never admit it b/c you've already decided that's impossible.

Maybe you two should stop projecting and give thinking a try.

Validating the thought that you would cut your nose off to spite your face. . .

I've voted for a lot of candidates that held ideologies I disagreed with, but their stated goals seemed to me to be the ones that were better for the country and its citizens as a whole; especially when compared to those of the candidates opposing them.

What you are saying is that if a candidate aligns him or her self with a cause or ideal that you disagree with, (say for instance the democratic platform), you automatically exclude them even if some of the things they want to do are the right things for the country and its people as a whole and you know it!

You are listening to the propagandists and accepting their tripe as gospel, instead of exercising a LITTLE initiative and objectively investigating the issues and stated goals. Exactly why this country is where it is today!

I do not and did not think what he was proposing was/is in the best interest of our country.  I would feel the same if it has been Hillary in office or whom ever.  Not agreeing with the agenda and policies means you don't think what they are wanting to do/doing is in the best interest of the country.  In looking at the goals you need to access how they intend to get there and whether you think it will work the way they say it will.  I don't happen to think he can attain what he is saying are his goals the way he is wanting to do it. I listened to both sides and made the choice on my own based on what was presented to me just like a lot of other people did.  Like I said, the way you are putting what you are saying makes it appear that you think the country should have been 100% for Obama and that just say's, to me, that you think everyone should see things and think the way you do or they're wrong and stupid which is the same thing everyone in the opposing position is saying and the mainstream media is pushing it to the max.  Does that mean "you" can't think independently or reason?  Like I have said before, remove yourself from all of it and look at things as though you are just an observer and see who is doing the name calling and making vicious verbal attacks at people who disagree.  That smacks of bullying to me and if you have to bully someone into believing as you do you have accomplished nothing but having a lot of actual sheeple who are afraid to speak out against what they believe in for fear of being attacked.  I will not be bullied, sorry.

[me]

  Let's look at what you said, reading between the lines.  You couldn't vote for Obama because he a Socialist, one step above a Communist.  A Liberal, which is one step above a welfare queen.

  You couldn't vote for Hillary, even she is like *John Wayne toilet paper, because she just like Obama, but she a woman. 

  Instead you voted for the old thief from Arizona, John McCain and one of the most intelligent women in the world, Sara Pailn.   With that kind of reasoning, I want you to replace Luger and this state won't skip a beat.  Doing Nothing.

  *John Wayne toilet paper.  It's rough, it's tough and it won't take shit off of anyone.  I know what it is.  Ford bought it all of the time and put it in their restrooms.

Reading between the lines gets a lot of people in trouble because the wrong things are inserted so quit putting words in my mouth and read it exactly as written.

[Sandy Eggo]

If you "remove everything" from this ^ comment...you get "I feel" and "I believe" and not one shred of evidence to support those beliefs or feelings.

I'm amazed that you don't understand why anyone wouldn't be suspect of your evaluation of his potential.

[me]

Still waitin' on an answer:
http://theunknownzone.us/smf/index.php?topic=16915.msg370639#msg370639

[Palehorse]

I do not and did not think what he was proposing was/is in the best interest of our country.  I would feel the same if it has been Hillary in office or whom ever.  Not agreeing with the agenda and policies means you don't think what they are wanting to do/doing is in the best interest of the country.  In looking at the goals you need to access how they intend to get there and whether you think it will work the way they say it will.  I don't happen to think he can attain what he is saying are his goals the way he is wanting to do it. I listened to both sides and made the choice on my own based on what was presented to me just like a lot of other people did.  Like I said, the way you are putting what you are saying makes it appear that you think the country should have been 100% for Obama and that just say's, to me, that you think everyone should see things and think the way you do or they're wrong and stupid which is the same thing everyone in the opposing position is saying and the mainstream media is pushing it to the max.  Does that mean "you" can't think independently or reason?  Like I have said before, remove yourself from all of it and look at things as though you are just an observer and see who is doing the name calling and making vicious verbal attacks at people who disagree.  That smacks of bullying to me and if you have to bully someone into believing as you do you have accomplished nothing but having a lot of actual sheeple who are afraid to speak out against what they believe in for fear of being attacked.  I will not be bullied, sorry.

Nothing of substance other than puffery in that.

I suppose to you the majority vote means nothing and we should all just do whatever it is your idols say. Thats just what your republican representation in Washington is thinking and doing too!

At least I let Bush - Shamey screw up and lie before I started in on them, but then again its do as you say not as you do eh?

[The Troll]

I do not and did not think what he was proposing was/is in the best interest of our country.  I would feel the same if it has been Hillary in office or whom ever.  Not agreeing with the agenda and policies means you don't think what they are wanting to do/doing is in the best interest of the country.  In looking at the goals you need to access how they intend to get there and whether you think it will work the way they say it will.  I don't happen to think he can attain what he is saying are his goals the way he is wanting to do it. I listened to both sides and made the choice on my own based on what was presented to me just like a lot of other people did.  Like I said, the way you are putting what you are saying makes it appear that you think the country should have been 100% for Obama and that just say's, to me, that you think everyone should see things and think the way you do or they're wrong and stupid which is the same thing everyone in the opposing position is saying and the mainstream media is pushing it to the max.  Does that mean "you" can't think independently or reason?  Like I have said before, remove yourself from all of it and look at things as though you are just an observer and see who is doing the name calling and making vicious verbal attacks at people who disagree.  That smacks of bullying to me and if you have to bully someone into believing as you do you have accomplished nothing but having a lot of actual sheeple who are afraid to speak out against what they believe in for fear of being attacked.  I will not be bullied, sorry.

  Sweetheart you can call me name and you can try to bully me and I am not going to quack around like a ruptured duck crying and quacking how "ME" abused me with her mouth.    :rotfl.  You surly joke.

  But I got to say one thing about you, if you seen the truth and told the truth and your leg was in a big iron trap of truth, you would chew your leg off to keep from admitting it.

[me]

Nothing of substance other than puffery in that.

I suppose to you the majority vote means nothing and we should all just do whatever it is your idols say. Thats just what your republican representation in Washington is thinking and doing too!

At least I let Bush - Shamey screw up and lie before I started in on them, but then again its do as you say not as you do eh?

Was I supposed to like it just because the majority might have liked it?  Wouldn't that make me a person who just goes along with the crowd instead of thinking for myself?  If I don't agree with the message why vote for the messenger just because you and some others did?  How is that puffery?  Does that mean you just voted for him because the majority did?