| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/04/2008 03:48:43 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by metatate:
Any chance you can turn off the "signature" in your posts? |
I think you can turn off signatures in your preferences.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:50:30 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
DPC is such a wonderful, far left, liberal place to hang out. Must be a bunch of artists or something. :-)
 |
I turned off signatures, but I still get to look at that nifty logo! |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:52:30 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Jac:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by metatate:
Even McCain's campaign manager said this election is NOT ABOUT ISSUES.
A frightening group of people IMO. |
All the other commie pinko socialist godless Canadians here will remember that's exactly what Prime Minister Kim Campbell said during her election campaign. They will also recall that this comment is considered the reason why her party did not merely lose the election of 1993, but was completely decimated by the electorate with only two seats in the House of Commons, causing them to lose official party status. It was the end for the Conservatives in Canada for a very, very long time.
We can only hope the mass of American voters are as smart in 2008 as Canadians were in 1993. |
I was actually talking about that with my oldest son after seeing a Harper ad on TV. I was explaining to him what today's Conservative Party was comprised of. Reform Party Canadian Alliance Party and the then dead Conservative Party. |
If only Canadians would remember what the current Conservative party is really made up of. Remember when they wanted to call themselves "Canadian Reform Alliance Party"? Acronym: C.R.A.P. Not very bright. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:52:38 PM · #29 |
| I think that it's insane that this got moved to RANT because someone insisted on RANTing! |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:54:20 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by metatate:
I think that it's insane that this got moved to RANT because someone insisted on RANTing! |
Yes, why she had to do that, we'll never know. (2nd post was the first rant)
|
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:54:50 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by metatate:
I think that it's insane that this got moved to RANT because someone insisted on RANTing! |
Good point. Why don't the powers that be come down hard on disruptive people, instead of punishing those that are trying to converse? |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:56:54 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Just who do you think is going to coming to peace table? We dealt with Iraq peacefully and they made a mockery of the US and the UN. So we dealt with them the proper way. We've not invaded Iran or North Korea. We're using peaceful measures. But without the might to back up the talk, the talk means NOTHING (like an Obama promise).
Terrorists are NOT going to come to the peace table. These nuts HATE US. Not USA, but ALL OF US who are non-Muslim. Not all muslims think that way thank goodness, but these fascists do. And they will not suddenly "wise up" and seek "peace".
No, Obama is dangerous and we will not be safe with him. Don't kid yourself. Our "image" is not what's important. It's the reality. If liberal Europe is too dovish, then tough for them, we'll protect ourselves alone.
A Hawk is ALWAYS what's needed. |
Really?? You really think invading another country based on false pretenses was justifiable because their leader was thumbing his nose at the U.S. and the U.N.? Killing all of those civilians and spending the lives of U.S. soldiers was worth getting back at a Saddam for being a jerk? That's not to mention essentially abandoning the war in Afghanistan that we started and still haven't finished.
As for dealing with N. Korea and Iran, the US doesn't have any other options aside from dealing with them at the negotiating table. There's no "might to back up the talk", as you put it, the military is stretched too thin already from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
McCain and Palin are the dangerous lot. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 03:59:27 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Jac:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by metatate:
Even McCain's campaign manager said this election is NOT ABOUT ISSUES.
A frightening group of people IMO. |
All the other commie pinko socialist godless Canadians here will remember that's exactly what Prime Minister Kim Campbell said during her election campaign. They will also recall that this comment is considered the reason why her party did not merely lose the election of 1993, but was completely decimated by the electorate with only two seats in the House of Commons, causing them to lose official party status. It was the end for the Conservatives in Canada for a very, very long time.
We can only hope the mass of American voters are as smart in 2008 as Canadians were in 1993. |
I was actually talking about that with my oldest son after seeing a Harper ad on TV. I was explaining to him what today's Conservative Party was comprised of. Reform Party Canadian Alliance Party and the then dead Conservative Party. |
If only Canadians would remember what the current Conservative party is really made up of. Remember when they wanted to call themselves "Canadian Reform Alliance Party"? Acronym: C.R.A.P. Not very bright. |
lol Harper must be secretly censoring historical documents to show that never happened. It was Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance, but adding Party to it made them rethink their stategy. Oh man, i'm almost ashamed. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:12:30 PM · #34 |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:20:09 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Just who do you think is going to coming to peace table? We dealt with Iraq peacefully and they made a mockery of the US and the UN. So we dealt with them the proper way. We've not invaded Iran or North Korea. We're using peaceful measures. But without the might to back up the talk, the talk means NOTHING (like an Obama promise).
Terrorists are NOT going to come to the peace table. These nuts HATE US. Not USA, but ALL OF US who are non-Muslim. Not all muslims think that way thank goodness, but these fascists do. And they will not suddenly "wise up" and seek "peace".
No, Obama is dangerous and we will not be safe with him. Don't kid yourself. Our "image" is not what's important. It's the reality. If liberal Europe is too dovish, then tough for them, we'll protect ourselves alone.
A Hawk is ALWAYS what's needed. |
Really?? You really think invading another country based on false pretenses was justifiable because their leader was thumbing his nose at the U.S. and the U.N.? Killing all of those civilians and spending the lives of U.S. soldiers was worth getting back at a Saddam for being a jerk? That's not to mention essentially abandoning the war in Afghanistan that we started and still haven't finished.
As for dealing with N. Korea and Iran, the US doesn't have any other options aside from dealing with them at the negotiating table. There's no "might to back up the talk", as you put it, the military is stretched too thin already from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
McCain and Palin are the dangerous lot. |
Um, you're still blowing that nonsense that Iraq was invaded illegally? Sorry, we've found so many components of WMD it's not funny. Even if we hadn't, we had every right based on the violation of the 1991 UN Cease Fire. Plus the stuff we found linking him to terrorists. No the liberation of Iraq was completely justified.
The left-wing media and blogs are such a joke. Report lies then never print the corrections.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:20:48 PM · #36 |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:21:05 PM · #37 |
Guys, please do not post signatures as an actual part of your forum post in order to respect the wishes of those who do not want to see signatures and have them turned off in their preferences.
Lastly, a reminder to keep it civil here, no personal attacks and everyone should respect the viewpoints of others - let's keep the site fun for everyone.
Thanks! |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:24:47 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The left-wing media and blogs are such a joke. Report lies then never print the corrections. |
Well, since you've brought up lies --> Here You GO.
Now, can't we play nice and discuss the actual issues. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:37:31 PM · #39 |
Alonzo Fyfe has written an interesting article on Republicans and the rule of law. An excerpt:
"Torture, rendition, warrantless searches, arbitrary arrest, indefinite confinement without a trial, secret trials, secret evidence, the use of signing statements and executive orders to bypass the legislature and the courts, secret laws, there is not a single practice popular among tyrants that the Bush Administration, with the support of Republicans in the legislature and on the courts, has not put into practice or at least argued for the right to put into practice."
"If America were to succumb to tyranny, it is highly unlikely that it will be forced on us as an invasion from an outside force. Tyranny will rise in America the way that it has risen in other republics in history. The tyrant will rise from within the ranks, will take the reigns of power, and will use some element of internal or external strife to say, "Give all power to me, so that I can defend you from these forces of evil." Once he has that power, he will not relinquish it." |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:44:09 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Alonzo Fyfe has written an interesting article on Republicans and the rule of law. An excerpt:
"Torture, rendition, warrantless searches, arbitrary arrest, indefinite confinement without a trial, secret trials, secret evidence, the use of signing statements and executive orders to bypass the legislature and the courts, secret laws, there is not a single practice popular among tyrants that the Bush Administration, with the support of Republicans in the legislature and on the courts, has not put into practice or at least argued for the right to put into practice."
"If America were to succumb to tyranny, it is highly unlikely that it will be forced on us as an invasion from an outside force. Tyranny will rise in America the way that it has risen in other republics in history. The tyrant will rise from within the ranks, will take the reigns of power, and will use some element of internal or external strife to say, "Give all power to me, so that I can defend you from these forces of evil." Once he has that power, he will not relinquish it." |
Correct... the liberals are trying to bring down America from within. I doubt we'll be here in 20 years.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:52:50 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Just who do you think is going to coming to peace table? We dealt with Iraq peacefully and they made a mockery of the US and the UN. So we dealt with them the proper way. We've not invaded Iran or North Korea. We're using peaceful measures. But without the might to back up the talk, the talk means NOTHING (like an Obama promise).
Terrorists are NOT going to come to the peace table. These nuts HATE US. Not USA, but ALL OF US who are non-Muslim. Not all muslims think that way thank goodness, but these fascists do. And they will not suddenly "wise up" and seek "peace".
No, Obama is dangerous and we will not be safe with him. Don't kid yourself. Our "image" is not what's important. It's the reality. If liberal Europe is too dovish, then tough for them, we'll protect ourselves alone.
A Hawk is ALWAYS what's needed. |
Really?? You really think invading another country based on false pretenses was justifiable because their leader was thumbing his nose at the U.S. and the U.N.? Killing all of those civilians and spending the lives of U.S. soldiers was worth getting back at a Saddam for being a jerk? That's not to mention essentially abandoning the war in Afghanistan that we started and still haven't finished.
As for dealing with N. Korea and Iran, the US doesn't have any other options aside from dealing with them at the negotiating table. There's no "might to back up the talk", as you put it, the military is stretched too thin already from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
McCain and Palin are the dangerous lot. |
Um, you're still blowing that nonsense that Iraq was invaded illegally? Sorry, we've found so many components of WMD it's not funny. Even if we hadn't, we had every right based on the violation of the 1991 UN Cease Fire. Plus the stuff we found linking him to terrorists. No the liberation of Iraq was completely justified.
The left-wing media and blogs are such a joke. Report lies then never print the corrections. |
It's not nonsense. It's the truth. Simply finding some "components" of WMD's is a far cry from being under an immediate threat from WMD attack as it was presented. In any event, having some of the components is not the same as having WMD's, that's like saying everyone who has a can of gasoline is an arsonist.
What stuff linking him to the terrorists? All of the reports supposedly linking Iraqi intelligence to terrorist organizations was found to be false. Saddam hated terrorists and they hated him.
You really should quit making stuff up. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:53:12 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Listening to Sarah Palin's speach we know where the American public is getting their ideas of Obama raising taxes.
If only people would do some of their own research and not just swallow what politicians feed them. |
I came across this AP article today that corrects the misleading statements in Palin's speech. Some excerpts:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
ON TAXES:
PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:55:23 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by Louis:
Alonzo Fyfe has written an interesting article on Republicans and the rule of law. An excerpt:
"Torture, rendition, warrantless searches, arbitrary arrest, indefinite confinement without a trial, secret trials, secret evidence, the use of signing statements and executive orders to bypass the legislature and the courts, secret laws, there is not a single practice popular among tyrants that the Bush Administration, with the support of Republicans in the legislature and on the courts, has not put into practice or at least argued for the right to put into practice."
"If America were to succumb to tyranny, it is highly unlikely that it will be forced on us as an invasion from an outside force. Tyranny will rise in America the way that it has risen in other republics in history. The tyrant will rise from within the ranks, will take the reigns of power, and will use some element of internal or external strife to say, "Give all power to me, so that I can defend you from these forces of evil." Once he has that power, he will not relinquish it." |
Correct... the liberals are trying to bring down America from within. I doubt we'll be here in 20 years. |
The liberals aren't the ones who've grown the government into an Orwellian overseer. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 04:57:57 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Correct... the liberals are trying to bring down America from within. I doubt we'll be here in 20 years. |
Perhaps your "correct" is meant to be ironic. In any event, you've missed the point. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 05:06:54 PM · #45 |
| Hawkeye, your post has been hidden. Consider this the warning before suspension. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 05:10:52 PM · #46 |
| I would like to know if Palin's speech changed anyone's mind about voting/not voting for McCain. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 05:25:55 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
I would like to know if Palin's speech changed anyone's mind about voting/not voting for McCain. |
not mine. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 05:26:13 PM · #48 |
On the hypocrisy of the Republicans:
Jon Stewart Hits Karl Rove...
See video at end of story. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 05:31:33 PM · #49 |
| I thought I'd post a link with slightly more analysis without actually reading the pages and pages of each plan. |
|
|
|
09/04/2008 05:47:45 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Problem is liberals have a strange definition of what "Rich" is. Government is NOT a nanny. |
According to McCain it's anyone that makes over $5,000,000.00.
So middle class must be anyone making $4,999,999.99 or less. |
Source please?
Taxes should be fair and equal for all. (percentage not dollar amount).
Bush's tax cuts were almost that, the top brackets actually got a slightly less cut than did the poor. |
The McMan himself
You Tube video
You're right, the poor have had far to easy in this country. It's about time they ponied up. |
|
