You mad at Obama?WERE YOU MAD WHEN..........?

[abates 10+ year member]

Which words are you having trouble with?

republicans, conservatives, reagan, bush, tax cuts, deregulation, outsourcing, levine, hannity, boortz, limbaugh, o'reilly, fox, savage, beck, murdoch, rove, coulter, malkin, ingram

 

[Proximity 10+ year member]

Reading between the lines, racist is a liberal attack mantra that you are all too anxious to use, no matter how irrational it may be.
You just showed 1) you dont know what the word racism really refers to, and 2) you wont let that stop you from using it in a sentence.

You're like John McCain yelling "It's not in the policy" over and over again when faced with the facts that gays in the military are being investigated and kicked out (and I mean this in general). You only look at the theory side and think that the practice side is irrelevant because theory is solid. You think that being a legal immigrant or not is independent of race, so if some feels unsafe because illegals are getting drivers licenses or voting, they just CAN'T be racist. However you ignore the fact that if all mexicans were just "regular white people", you wouldn't be hearing this stuff. Like I said, read between the lines.

 

[Proximity 10+ year member]

republicans, conservatives, reagan, bush, tax cuts, deregulation, outsourcing, levine, hannity, boortz, limbaugh, o'reilly, fox, savage, beck, murdoch, rove, coulter, malkin, ingram

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

You're like John McCain yelling "It's not in the policy" over and over again when faced with the facts that gays in the military are being investigated and kicked out (and I mean this in general). You only look at the theory side and think that the practice side is irrelevant because theory is solid. You think that being a legal immigrant or not is independent of race, so if some feels unsafe because illegals are getting drivers licenses or voting, they just CAN'T be racist. However you ignore the fact that if all mexicans were just "regular white people", you wouldn't be hearing this stuff. Like I said, read between the lines.

You've gone off the deep end, even for you. Illegal immigrants can be caucasian, asian, black, etc. Race is not the point when discussing illegal immigrants, their legal status in regards to living here is the point. But then again, the illegal immigrant issue is perceived as largely a republican issue, so obviously you will see the situation as evil republicans just being racist pricks because they dont like mexicans. Your tune just never changes. If you disagree with someone, that person (or people) obviously have selfish, greedy, devious and unethical motives behind their beliefs. Your view of the world is sadly pessimistic. I honestly mean that. It must be awful thinking such a large segment of our society is such terrible people. I hope you grow out of that, I really do.

"You only look at the theory side and think that the practice side is irrelevant because theory is solid."

I only look at the theoretical side of things? How long have you been out in the real world, paying your own bills, maintaining your own job, buying your own school books? Reality time. You are a college kid, probably a freshman, who thinks he has the whole economy figured out when he hasn't even attended econ 101 yet (because it didnt fit your credit goals), and you want to preach to me about reality versus theory? You are swimming in your own ignorance.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

republicans, conservatives, reagan, bush, tax cuts, deregulation, outsourcing, levine, hannity, boortz, limbaugh, o'reilly, fox, savage, beck, murdoch, rove, coulter, malkin, ingram

That's a lot of words you dont understand, bro. No wonder your points are so nonsensical.

Try google. Im sure that's where Prox gets all his real world experience too.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

LOL, "reality idiots"? Yeah, those stupid people who base their beliefs off of reality. How stupid of them.

Just like everything else you want to take it to mean that I ignore reality when it is you that fails to see your crap doesn't work and you ignore reality. Your answer to everything is to have a nanny state and have government do everything. You can look at examples of our government over history and clearly see they do not work and then gets misrepresented.

You also ignore facts and then shift blame because others do it as well. Take racism for example, liberals will have you believe it is republicans who are racist because a democrat was president (LBJ) when the version of civil rights we use now was passed. Simple facts of the matter, it was Woodrow Wilson (democrat) who started to segregate and even the "great" FDR went along expanded and went along with it. Without these things going on why would have we needed a civil rights act? 8 years before the Civil Rights Act was passed LBJ was against the civil rights movement created by republicans because it didn't allow government to control people and business via the commerce clause. More control is seized by the government and those who opposed the use of the commerce clause in the Civil Rights Act (especially the republicans) got labeled as racist hate mongers when it was indeed the democrats who opposed the act both times with and without the use of the commerce clause. A republican who would state the bill 8 years prior was better would get labeled as racist and this is all over the commerce clause. Now lets look at the facts, for over 50 years after the Civil War our country was not segregated then Woodrow Wilson starts it up creating the need for Civil Rights 35-40 years later and to implement Civil Rights the government used the Commerce Clause which is what the federal government always tries to use to gain more power than they had before and in many cases when challenged new powers being collected by use of the commerce clause are shot down via the supreme court as being unconstitutional. Look into cases where this is done for yourself and if you can get back to me anything that looks good let me know and I will throw up really idiotic cases the government has won over its own citizens all in the name of being "fair" which it doesn't even make sense using the commerce clause. Just letting you know that if you try to say the democrats are for the little guy you would have a very hard stone to grind to prove this, outside of controlled welfare payments which you must follow rules to get or lose the aid, big government more times than not defends its special interests and will deem one side more special than the other especially if one side has more money than the other in the name of "defending businesses/prices/commerce". You tie these powers down and what is done judicially and what is decided through precedence and what gets changed ignoring precedence (calling it new) you will see the government always tries to amass more power over you without giving up any power.

What is also funny is this government and others in the past deal with different people differently where it is not fair straight across the board be it health care, to tax incentives and government programs. Hope you realize that when this happens this is indeed pandering and is NOT FAIR. When people get into this hub bub about the past and its your turn for this that or the other thing there is nothing fair nor equal in it and they are indeed just as bad as the the evil doers they point out from the past, present or future.

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

Man, I love political threads. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

republicans, conservatives, reagan, bush, tax cuts, deregulation, outsourcing, levine, hannity, boortz, limbaugh, o'reilly, fox, savage, beck, murdoch, rove, coulter, malkin, ingram

? This Mark Levine? Mark LeVine: A Critical Voice of the New Generation or this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levine_(journalist)

 

[abates 10+ year member]

Just like everything else you want to take it to mean that I ignore reality when it is you that fails to see your crap doesn't work and you ignore reality. Your answer to everything is to have a nanny state and have government do everything. You can look at examples of our government over history and clearly see they do not work and then gets misrepresented. You also ignore facts and then shift blame because others do it as well. Take racism for example, liberals will have you believe it is republicans who are racist because a democrat was president (LBJ) when the version of civil rights we use now was passed. Simple facts of the matter, it was Woodrow Wilson (democrat) who started to segregate and even the "great" FDR went along expanded and went along with it. Without these things going on why would have we needed a civil rights act? 8 years before the Civil Rights Act was passed LBJ was against the civil rights movement created by republicans because it didn't allow government to control people and business via the commerce clause. More control is seized by the government and those who opposed the use of the commerce clause in the Civil Rights Act (especially the republicans) got labeled as racist hate mongers when it was indeed the democrats who opposed the act both times with and without the use of the commerce clause. A republican who would state the bill 8 years prior was better would get labeled as racist and this is all over the commerce clause. Now lets look at the facts, for over 50 years after the Civil War our country was not segregated then Woodrow Wilson starts it up creating the need for Civil Rights 35-40 years later and to implement Civil Rights the government used the Commerce Clause which is what the federal government always tries to use to gain more power than they had before and in many cases when challenged new powers being collected by use of the commerce clause are shot down via the supreme court as being unconstitutional. Look into cases where this is done for yourself and if you can get back to me anything that looks good let me know and I will throw up really idiotic cases the government has won over its own citizens all in the name of being "fair" which it doesn't even make sense using the commerce clause. Just letting you know that if you try to say the democrats are for the little guy you would have a very hard stone to grind to prove this, outside of controlled welfare payments which you must follow rules to get or lose the aid, big government more times than not defends its special interests and will deem one side more special than the other especially if one side has more money than the other in the name of "defending businesses/prices/commerce". You tie these powers down and what is done judicially and what is decided through precedence and what gets changed ignoring precedence (calling it new) you will see the government always tries to amass more power over you without giving up any power.

What is also funny is this government and others in the past deal with different people differently where it is not fair straight across the board be it health care, to tax incentives and government programs. Hope you realize that when this happens this is indeed pandering and is NOT FAIR. When people get into this hub bub about the past and its your turn for this that or the other thing there is nothing fair nor equal in it and they are indeed just as bad as the the evil doers they point out from the past, present or future.

Your answer to everything is to have a nanny state and have government do everything?

Who said this ^

Proxy is right, you can't deal with what is said so you chage it to something else that is defeatable in your mind. Dude, you are a weak debater. Its good entertainment but nothing beyond that.

 

[abates 10+ year member]

Just like everything else you want to take it to mean that I ignore reality when it is you that fails to see your crap doesn't work and you ignore reality. Your answer to everything is to have a nanny state and have government do everything. You can look at examples of our government over history and clearly see they do not work and then gets misrepresented. You also ignore facts and then shift blame because others do it as well. Take racism for example, liberals will have you believe it is republicans who are racist because a democrat was president (LBJ) when the version of civil rights we use now was passed. Simple facts of the matter, it was Woodrow Wilson (democrat) who started to segregate and even the "great" FDR went along expanded and went along with it. Without these things going on why would have we needed a civil rights act? 8 years before the Civil Rights Act was passed LBJ was against the civil rights movement created by republicans because it didn't allow government to control people and business via the commerce clause. More control is seized by the government and those who opposed the use of the commerce clause in the Civil Rights Act (especially the republicans) got labeled as racist hate mongers when it was indeed the democrats who opposed the act both times with and without the use of the commerce clause. A republican who would state the bill 8 years prior was better would get labeled as racist and this is all over the commerce clause. Now lets look at the facts, for over 50 years after the Civil War our country was not segregated then Woodrow Wilson starts it up creating the need for Civil Rights 35-40 years later and to implement Civil Rights the government used the Commerce Clause which is what the federal government always tries to use to gain more power than they had before and in many cases when challenged new powers being collected by use of the commerce clause are shot down via the supreme court as being unconstitutional. Look into cases where this is done for yourself and if you can get back to me anything that looks good let me know and I will throw up really idiotic cases the government has won over its own citizens all in the name of being "fair" which it doesn't even make sense using the commerce clause. Just letting you know that if you try to say the democrats are for the little guy you would have a very hard stone to grind to prove this, outside of controlled welfare payments which you must follow rules to get or lose the aid, big government more times than not defends its special interests and will deem one side more special than the other especially if one side has more money than the other in the name of "defending businesses/prices/commerce". You tie these powers down and what is done judicially and what is decided through precedence and what gets changed ignoring precedence (calling it new) you will see the government always tries to amass more power over you without giving up any power.

What is also funny is this government and others in the past deal with different people differently where it is not fair straight across the board be it health care, to tax incentives and government programs. Hope you realize that when this happens this is indeed pandering and is NOT FAIR. When people get into this hub bub about the past and its your turn for this that or the other thing there is nothing fair nor equal in it and they are indeed just as bad as the the evil doers they point out from the past, present or future.

Also, I live in a heavily conservative area. Several conservatives here are racists, just yet another fact for you to ignore. Do you think KKK members are Democrats? lol

 

[abates 10+ year member]

You've gone off the deep end, even for you. Illegal immigrants can be caucasian, asian, black, etc. Race is not the point when discussing illegal immigrants, their legal status in regards to living here is the point. But then again, the illegal immigrant issue is perceived as largely a republican issue, so obviously you will see the situation as evil republicans just being racist pricks because they dont like mexicans. Your tune just never changes. If you disagree with someone, that person (or people) obviously have selfish, greedy, devious and unethical motives behind their beliefs. Your view of the world is sadly pessimistic. I honestly mean that. It must be awful thinking such a large segment of our society is such terrible people. I hope you grow out of that, I really do.
"You only look at the theory side and think that the practice side is irrelevant because theory is solid."

I only look at the theoretical side of things? How long have you been out in the real world, paying your own bills, maintaining your own job, buying your own school books? Reality time. You are a college kid, probably a freshman, who thinks he has the whole economy figured out when he hasn't even attended econ 101 yet (because it didnt fit your credit goals), and you want to preach to me about reality versus theory? You are swimming in your own ignorance.

Maybe he is smart enough to notice that people that are WAY smarter than all of us combined in this thread know that the better answer is the left. You know people like Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey, & the Rooney's who ALL are Obama supporters. Are you trying to sell yourself as on par with these highly successful people when it comes to politics? Your condescending & arrogants remarks tell me the answer.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Several conservatives here are racists

What a meaningful comment.

Do you think KKK members are Democrats? lol

I honestly didnt know the answer to that question, so I googled it. Bet you cant guess what the answer is. lol

"The first Klan was founded in 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee by veterans of the Confederate Army. Although it never had an organizational structure above the local level, similar groups across the South adopted the name and methods. Klan groups spread throughout the South as an insurgent movement during the Reconstruction era in the United States As a secret vigilante group, the Klan focused its anger reacted against Radical Republican and sought to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans. In 1870 and 1871 the federal government passed the Force Acts, which were used to prosecute Klan crimes. Prosecution of Klan crimes and enforcement of the Force Acts suppressed Klan activity. In 1874 and later, however, newly organized and openly active paramilitary organizations, such as the White League and the Red Shirts, started a fresh round of violence aimed at suppressing Republican voting and running Republicans out of office. These contributed to segregationist white Democrats regaining political power in all the Southern states by 1877."

"Lifting the Klan mask revealed a chaotic multitude of antiblack vigilante groups, disgruntled poor white farmers, wartime guerrilla bands, displaced Democratic politicians, illegal whiskey distillers, coercive moral reformers, sadists, rapists, white workmen fearful of black competition, employers trying to enforce labor discipline, common thieves, neighbors with decades-old grudges, and even a few freedmen and white Republicans who allied with Democratic whites or had criminal agendas of their own. Indeed, all they had in common, besides being overwhelmingly white, southern, and Democratic, was that they called themselves, or were called, Klansmen."

Ku Klux Klan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oops?

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Maybe he is smart enough to notice that people that are WAY smarter than all of us combined in this thread know that the better answer is the left. You know people like Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey, & the Rooney's who ALL are Obama supporters. Are you trying to sell yourself as on par with these highly successful people when it comes to politics? Your condescending & arrogants remarks tell me the answer.

Yep, all the smart people in the world are Democrats. Good call, bro.

 

[audiolife 5,000+ posts]

Also, I live in a heavily conservative area. Several conservatives here are racists, just yet another fact for you to ignore. Do you think KKK members are Democrats? lol

The KKK was mostly democrats, Dennis Byrd Democratic Senator from West Virginia who just died while still in office was a leader in the KKK many years ago. Supreme Court Judge Hugo Black appointed by FDR? the KKK hate Catholics and a deciding vote by Black gives you the actual definition the democratic party uses in the definition of "the separation of church and state" from the case of "Everson v. The Board of Education" in 1947. Trickery is libs will try to say it was actually in a non bill political explanation in a letter by Thomas Jefferson who used the words "separation of church and state". They will leave off who defined it as it was in 1947. It is also not in the Constitution but rather interpreted from the 1947 case.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

The KKK was mostly democrats, Dennis Byrd Democratic Senator from West Virginia who just died while still in office was a leader in the KKK many years ago. Supreme Court Judge Hugo Black appointed by FDR? the KKK hate Catholics and a deciding vote by Black gives you the actual definition the democratic party uses in the definition of "the separation of church and state" from the case of "Everson v. The Board of Education" in 1947. Trickery is libs will try to say it was actually in a non bill political explanation in a letter by Thomas Jefferson who used the words "separation of church and state". They will leave off who defined it as it was in 1947. It is also not in the Constitution but rather interpreted from the 1947 case.

He is indisputably wrong, with 100% proof posted to verify. This means there is virtually no chance he will address this point again.