ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%

  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%
  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
P19978 said:
Republicans should welcome Paul's alternate views; in the long run, dissenting views are healthy and can help the party grow, as opposed to everyone "toeing the party line".
Click to expand...
The GOP unseated many moderate Dems in 2012 because they refused to dissent from the party line and coverup at the VA, around the healthcare act, and various other events. Everything from the left today is about winning, nothing else. Immigration is the most blatant example of that.
 
On a local note about immigration...so the illegal that ran over the cyclist on Sunday in Georgetown (carrying him in the bed of his truck for 3 miles, btw) had been arrested 3 times since 2010 for DUI and had just recently gotten notice of a deportation hearing. Condolences to the Dems on here, looks like he won't get to vote anytime soon. If he is smart though he will claim depression from his lack of citizenry or claim he is gender confused and depressed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AustinTXCat
If you don't agree with John McCain, you are a Democrat. That's a level of sophistication you can only get from a member of the Party of Science. Brilliant thinkers abound in that party, apparently
 
Willy4UK said:
No shit. Looks like he trying to separate himself from the Neo-cons. Good for him. Too bad that Dems lack the ability to critique themselves. I'd say that Rand is "evolving", right Dems?
Click to expand...
The GOP will no doubt do a lot of critiquing in the weeks to come. Bobby Jindal has just said Paul is "unsuited to be commander-in-chief". And Rick Santorum compared Paul to Bernie Sanders.


But I disagree with with them.
I like Paul a lot. It would be great if he legalized weed and pulled US forces out of the Persian Gulf. I heard he's a fan of the Allman Brothers so that's just a bonus.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rick-santorum-slams-rand-paul-isis-id-expect/story?id=31343065
 
From-the-stands said:
The GOP will no doubt do a lot of critiquing in the weeks to come. Bobby Jindal has just said Paul is "unsuited to be commander-in-chief". And Rick Santorum compared Paul to Bernie Sanders.


But I disagree with with them.
I like Paul a lot. It would be great if he legalized weed and pulled US forces out of the Persian Gulf. I heard he's a fan of the Allman Brothers so that's just a bonus.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rick-santorum-slams-rand-paul-isis-id-expect/story?id=31343065
Click to expand...


Well the GOP part that is critiquing, Bobby Jindhal is an idiot and Santorum is the next biggest smuck next to Bauchman. Whenn I hear them speak, they don't speak for me. and lol at Bernie Sanders. Dude is a farce.
 
FTS, this is where you are wrong with Paul. I think he can tear into the Neo-con and then trash Obama's term. Sounds like to me that he's got a pretty damn good game plan.
 
Willy4UK said:
FTS, this is where you are wrong with Paul. I think he can tear into the Neo-con and then trash Obama's term. Sounds like to me that he's got a pretty damn good game plan.
Click to expand...
It might come as a surprise to you to learn that I pulled the lever for Gary Johnson in 2012. I'd like to see Paul do well, but if I'm right about the mindset of the Republican base he will not gain any traction.
 
FTS- Good deal. Paul can actually win this. Here's how he can do it. Stay off the social issues. Anybody asks him about it and he can stick with current law mantra. "well gays do have the Federal right to marry" When asked his opinion on it "Well, my opinion doesn't matter". Lump all the social issues into that mindset. And make the issues less about his opinion and stick with current law.

Break off the healthcare, just like military, from a social issue perspective and treat it as monetary reform. He can stick with the ACA but with amendments to reform parts of it. If he can't get rid of that craptastic Act, the best he can do is try amend whatever he can of it.

He plays it like that. He can stay off the hot button issues, run on gov't reform and be in like a champ.
 
Willy4UK said:
FTS, this is where you are wrong with Paul. I think he can tear into the Neo-con and then trash Obama's term. Sounds like to me that he's got a pretty damn good game plan.
Click to expand...

If he can get out of the primary. That's why I cringe everytime another neo con announces they'll run. One more cook to bring Rand down into the mire, where he'll have to say things that will kill him in the general.

Either way, I don't see him winning sadly. No way the fed gets audited. They'll flood every one of his opponents with so much cash itll be impossible to overcome. Also with all their power, anything and everything hes ever done, or thought about doing, will come out. If there isn't enough, they'll manufacture it.

One way or another, the fed will not be audited. Way too much power that wants to stay in the shadows.
 
bigblueinsanity said:
If he can get out of the primary. That's why I cringe everytime another neo con announces they'll run. One more cook to bring Rand down into the mire, where he'll have to say things that will kill him in the general.

Either way, I don't see him winning sadly. No way the fed gets audited. They'll flood every one of his opponents with so much cash itll be impossible to overcome. Also with all their power, anything and everything hes ever done, or thought about doing, will come out. If there isn't enough, they'll manufacture it.

One way or another, the fed will not be audited. Way too much power that wants to stay in the shadows.
Click to expand...


Sadly, I think you're right. The Fed Gov't is at a level where it has so much power that it can't it lose. Gonna be tough for anyone to overcome that, and unfortunately I think it's too late. We're headed straight to a more advanced Orwellian Police state. YAY! Life is so awesome and precious.
 
I really cannot get over the fact that are DOJ is going after foreign soccer officials for corruption. One of the most corrupt administrations in history going afteer others for corruption.
 
Bill Cosby said:
I really cannot get over the fact that are DOJ is going after foreign soccer officials for corruption. One of the most corrupt administrations in history going afteer others for corruption.
Click to expand...

Birds of a feather flock together.
 
Willy4UK said:
FTS- Good deal. Paul can actually win this. Here's how he can do it. Stay off the social issues. Anybody asks him about it and he can stick with current law mantra. "well gays do have the Federal right to marry" When asked his opinion on it "Well, my opinion doesn't matter". Lump all the social issues into that mindset. And make the issues less about his opinion and stick with current law.

Break off the healthcare, just like military, from a social issue perspective and treat it as monetary reform. He can stick with the ACA but with amendments to reform parts of it. If he can't get rid of that craptastic Act, the best he can do is try amend whatever he can of it.

He plays it like that. He can stay off the hot button issues, run on gov't reform and be in like a champ.
Click to expand...
That's be nice to see. But I'm not sure there's anyway to avoid the issues held so dearly by the evangelicals, who dominate the GOP electorate.
poll1_zpsl9jmwbus.jpg

This poll came out this morning. Huckabee is running very strong in the key Tea Party/Very Conservative/Born Again polling group. He will pick up voters from Cruz and Carson when they bail. Walker will get his share of votes as long as he's in. I believe the race hinges on Bush and Rubio. If both stay in the race until the end they will split the moderate vote, and that would create a pathway for Walker or Huckabee to win.
 
From-the-stands said:
That's be nice to see. But I'm not sure there's anyway to avoid the issues held so dearly by the evangelicals, who dominate the GOP electorate.

This poll came out this morning. Huckabee is running very strong in the key Tea Party/Very Conservative/Born Again polling group. He will pick up voters from Cruz and Carson when they bail. Walker will get his share of votes as long as he's in. I believe the race hinges on Bush and Rubio. If both stay in the race until the end they will split the moderate vote, and that would create a pathway for Walker or Huckabee to win.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about Walker fully, but he appears to be one of those candidates that feels social issues are more important than the increasing lack of transparency surrounding gov't corruption and power. So he'll not get my vote. As for Huckabee, lol. He'll lose in a landslide.
 
So now its a good thing that your candidate is rich and not self made? This writer thinks so. I thought the GOP was the party of the rich? And I thought Hillary was broke?

Nah. No MSM bias to see here. Just a full story on yahoos front page that reads more like a campaign brochure. Move along.
 
So let's pretend we don't remember FTS on here defending BO at every turn during the 2012 campaign, pretend he doesn't have him in his sig.....so he went from voting for Johnson in 2012 to being all in for HRC 18 months out from this election? What is up with people lying about who they voted for. Losers.

And if evangelicals control the GOP why have the past two candidates not been evangelicals?
 
Willy4UK said:
I'm not sure about Walker fully, but he appears to be one of those candidates that feels social issues are more important than the increasing lack of transparency surrounding gov't corruption and power. So he'll not get my vote. As for Huckabee, lol. He'll lose in a landslide.
Click to expand...

I actually get the feeling that Walker would rather not discuss social issues, although I'm sure he has opinions. He seems more about budgets, jobs, breaking govt unions, etc.
 
wkycatfan said:
I actually get the feeling that Walker would rather not discuss social issues, although I'm sure he has opinions. He seems more about budgets, jobs, breaking govt unions, etc.
Click to expand...

Oh, he loves him some social issues. Made law in Wisconsin that gay people couldn't visit their partners in hospitals that gained national attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mashburned
qwesley said:
So let's pretend we don't remember FTS on here defending BO at every turn during the 2012 campaign, pretend he doesn't have him in his sig.....so he went from voting for Johnson in 2012 to being all in for HRC 18 months out from the election? What is up with people lying about who they voted for. Losers.

And if evangelicals control the GOP why have the past two candidates not been evangelicals.
Click to expand...
Look at the avi carefully Qwesley - Coach Cal is the matador and you are the dumb bull who can't help charging blindly. I did not vote for Obama in 2012, but I doubt if anyone else here cares if you think I'm lying. I know I don't.
 
Willy4UK said:
No shit. Looks like he trying to separate himself from the Neo-cons. Good for him. Too bad that Dems lack the ability to critique themselves. I'd say that Rand is "evolving", right Dems?
Click to expand...

Agree and the polls I have seen indicate that his positions on foreign policy is fairly popular with Pubs not just Libs. Now if only he would acknowledge the reality of science. . . .
 
bigblueinsanity said:
If he can get out of the primary. That's why I cringe everytime another neo con announces they'll run. One more cook to bring Rand down into the mire, where he'll have to say things that will kill him in the general.
Click to expand...

The voters are fairly split so IMO he's in much better shape getting the half that are Doves, instead of one of the other 19 that's splitting the other half that are Hawks.
 
Deeee, I am not sure what to tell you about the science situation. I don't know anything about climate change and prolly neither does Rand. However, right now, gov't reform to me is more important some rising temperature levels. Not saying that temperature isn't important, just saying we've created a government monster that needs to be tamed first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mashburned, AustinTXCat and warrior-cat
FTS, humor us by explaining your evolution for backing Johnson to backing HRC 18 months out from this election.
 
Defense's scientific method.

1. Determine governmental policy desired
2. Ask what problem could we use to enact desired government policy
3. Do experiments designed to prove existence of problem
4. Adjust data to allign with with preconceived notion of problem
5. Declare problem worse than previous thought, i.e. "Crisis"
6. Declare science as "being settled" and thus no one can study the given topic any longer
7. Label anyone who questions your methodology a "science denier"

Rinse. Repeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wildcatadam6, Rex Kwon Do and drawing_dead
Deeeefense said:
Agree and the polls I have seen indicate that his positions on foreign policy is fairly popular with Pubs not just Libs. Now if only he would acknowledge the reality of science. . . .
Click to expand...


I hate the climate debate and I'll tell you why Deee. It's a hot button issue.

At this point in time, what is the % of U.S's liability in Global Warming? I don't know, that's why I am asking you. Because even if the U.S were to get rid of 100% liability in furthering Global Warming, there are still over 200 countries in the world that will still be causing it. So actually what should a sitting U.S president do Deeee? Should he/she throw tax payer dollars at other countries to stop their % of liability of Global Warming, while also supporting almost 40% of the global police costs through tax payer's money? It's a hot button to get emotional people riled up. Thankfully Europeans are doing their part, but dude, China and India alone.
 
P19978 said:
Well, at least we know Dee isn't eating eggs, chocolate, salt, avocadoes, or butter... because science said they're bad for you.

Wait, what...?

And then there are these gems: http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php
Click to expand...

Mostly true. I don't eat chocolate becasue I'm allergic to it, nor salt because it runs up blood pressure, or butter becasue it's high in cholesterol, but eggs are actually beneficial as long as you don't overdo it.

BTW cute presentation, but like the mounting federal debt, the warming of the planet is not a theory.
 
Last edited:
Willy4UK said:
I hate the climate debate and I'll tell you why Deee. It's a hot button issue.

At this point in time, what is the % of U.S's liability in Global Warming? I don't know, that's why I am asking you. Because even if the U.S were to get rid of 100% liability in furthering Global Warming, there are still over 200 countries in the world that will still be causing it. So actually what should a sitting U.S president do Deeee? Should he/she throw tax payer dollars at other countries to stop their % of liability of Global Warming, while also supporting almost 40% of the global police costs through tax payer's money? It's a hot button to get emotional people riled up. Thankfully Europeans are doing their part, but dude, China and India alone.
Click to expand...

It's a good question Willie, and my answer has always been the problem of global warming will not be solved through treaties, laws, or regulations, but rather through economics. When it becomes more attractive to Southern Company, Duke Power or the Government of China to built wind farms and solar farms rather than coal-fired steam plants, and when electric or hydrogen fuel-cell powered vehicles become more popular and practical to own than internal combustion engine powered vehicles you will see an accelerated shift away from polluting and CO2 producing sources to cleaner, renewables. Even nat gas powered truck fleets will be an improvements.

Here is where you and I will differ. I think government can and should play a roll in that transformation by incentivizing the development of higher tech, clearer more efficient energy sources made right here in the USA and exported around the world. That would mitigate the damage from global climate change, enhance the economy and benefit national security by making us less depending on Saudi Arabia and Venezuela etc.
 
Deeeefense said:
Here is where you and I will differ. I think government can and should play a roll in that transformation by incentivizing the development of higher tech, clearer more efficient energy sources made right here in the USA and exported around the world. That would mitigate the damage from global climate change, enhance the economy and benefit national security by making us less depending on Saudi Arabia and Venezuela etc.
Click to expand...

Gov't meaning our tax money? While also making us foot the damn bill for almost 40% of world's policing? Hey if the U.S can play a role in that transformation without footing the bill on the American people, then lett'em roll. But if that role means spending endless money in unaffordable alternate power and endless spending on research, then no. That's not going to help. Spending money, OUR money is not going to fix the WORLD's climate changing.
 
The problem with Defense's version of government "playing a 'rol'" in the transformation is that government isn't just playing a role and never does. It's flat out crippling politically undesireable industries and handing out cash to cronies in the name of "green energy".

That's not government playing a role. That's just the government picking winners and losers regardless of market forces.

And as it stands, that's the American way.

I'd much prefer the market decide rather than the Federal government. If you'd prefer the federal government decide then you are a goddam idiot. The federal government has been completely incompetent at every "business" it has tried. Other than killing people (which they're just the only legal player in that business).
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigblueinsanity and Willy4UK
Willy4UK said:
Gov't meaning our tax money? While also making us foot the damn bill for almost 40% of world's policing? Hey if the U.S can play a role in that transformation without footing the bill on the American people, then lett'em roll. But if that role means spending endless money in unaffordable alternate power and endless spending on research, then no. That's not going to help. Spending money, OUR money is not going to fix the WORLD's climate changing.
Click to expand...
It is one of the main reasons why I think a lot of the world agrees with our stance. The money being poured in from the US to other countries is ridiculous. Couple that with the money we spend policing the world and you could seriously cut in to our debt. As I said before, if they want our help militarily, they should foot the bill and spearhead or at least help spearhead any attacks our military is engaged in.
 
Willy4UK said:
Gov't meaning our tax money? While also making us foot the damn bill for almost 40% of world's policing? Hey if the U.S can play a role in that transformation without footing the bill on the American people, then lett'em roll. But if that role means spending endless money in unaffordable alternate power and endless spending on research, then no. That's not going to help. Spending money, OUR money is not going to fix the WORLD's climate changing.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily spending but providing tax incentives, low or no interest loans, and some grant money to US companies to develop the technology. The return to the gov would be significant through the economic development which in turn would mean more tax revenue down the road. I see it as a win/win economically while helping to solve the GCC problem as well. This would be what at least some Republicans would refer to as a free market solution. As the world's only superpower we need to take the leadership role, but that doesn't mean financing other countries solutions. But it would be nice to SELL them the solutions, and they would buy them if it would lower their energy costs.

If someone has a better idea I'm all ears.
 
Dee reminds me of a poor schmuck in a pyramid scheme.

"No, seriously my 3rd grade level economic plan is perfect in every way and cheap and no side effects and all natural. It literally has no downside!"

"Why can't you or anyone else sell much of it, then?"

":flushed:"

If there was a market for "green" energy sources then companies would make them. Pretty simple to understand. If it is a win for literally everyone involved like you say, why has no one jumped on board for this golden opportunity? And how is government redistributing money a free market in any sense of the word? Is there any doubt Dee thought ethanol was going to cure all of our oil problems circa 2006?

Dee also thinks a grant (giving someone money with no expectation that it will be repaid) isn't "spending" money. This post is all over the place because I keep looking up and reading new lines of Deee's stupidity. Christ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SemperFiCat
  • Poll

Lebron a 25 time All-Star?

Replies
26
Views
2K
The Paddock - General Discussion Forum
WayneDougan
WayneDougan
Random UK Fan
  • Poll

Poll: Your Vote For The Next HC

Replies
19
Views
2K
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
FtWorthCat
FtWorthCat
Random UK Fan
  • Poll

Halftime Poll; Does UK Beat Oakland?

Replies
5
Views
717
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
Seth_C
S
dcw62

So what really happened with Robic?

Replies
41
Views
8K
Rupp Rafters - Basketball Forum
Pygmy Sasquatch
Pygmy Sasquatch
T

PSA - Thread Titles

Replies
17
Views
835
The House of Blue
Jeff Drummond
Jeff Drummond
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back