Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Darkling

Biggest Difference between Republicans and Democrats

Recommended Posts

Guest $iLk

Democrats - are you having "buyer's remorse" yet?

Kerry is being shredded by Bush... and himself

The latest Bush ad even shows footage of Kerry himself not more than a few days ago with his famous line of Voting for before Voting against! So he can take credit for both right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:


quote:

The loss of 3 million jobs, WTF are you talking about? From when Clinton was in office to now, there are now MORE jobs then there were. Unemployment is down. Loss of 3 million jobs, HAH, check your facts before spouting off.

And Plunging dollar? WTF are you talking about, the dollar is doing fine, there have been corrections because of the BS that went on during Clintons watch, but so far I see the stock market at or above where it was, interest rates WAY down, the job market is going up and is going to stay up, according to 99% of the analysts. The economy is recovered, is recovering, and is going to stay recovered for a while, Until the Democrats get in power again and raise taxes, then it will take a dive again.

Quit with the propaganda and get facts to back up your BS please.

I am a constitutionalist, and until there is a REAL third party, I will continue to vote republican, because they are MUCH better the Democrats, and if I agree 70% of the time, it is enough for me to vote for them.

If you are willing to NOT vote for them because they don't agree with you 100% of the time, you end up putting someone in office that disagrees with you 100% of the time.

I am NOT happy with everything that Bush has done, but I will vote for him, because Kerry is FAR worse....

And puhlease, Moveon.org is the best you can do?

Do you know who finances that organization? I doubt it, look to Kerry's wife, and you'll get a clue. Yeah, they're not partisan......Get a grip, You are a Republican? I don't think so...

Just one article about
Yeah, that's an organization that ANY republican would be proud to spout from....NOT....

Jaguar, settle down, no need to burst a blood vessel. I am a Republican if you want me to scan my voter registration card I'll be happy to. Now you mentioned Moveon.org and my point is, "WHAT IS THE POINT?" Did they fabricate that piece or did it run just like that on CBS? Rumsfeld said it and stammered like an idiot. End of story.

Did someone fabricate the fact that Bush has had to admit there were NO WMDs? Well he has admitted it. Did someone fabricate the fact that both Bush and Powell have had to say, "There is no connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda."?

Now let's look at the jobless rates of Clinton (who I hated and thought was a LYING BASTARD) to that of George H. W. Bush and G.W. Bush.

Civilian Unemployment Rate - Bush 1 v. Clinton v. Bush 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1991-01-01 6.4 - President George H. W. Bush

1992-01-01 7.3 - President George H. W. Bush

1993-01-01 7.3 - President William J. Clinton

1994-01-01 6.6 - President William J. Clinton

1995-01-01 5.6 - President William J. Clinton

1996-01-01 5.6 - President William J. Clinton

1997-01-01 5.3 - President William J. Clinton

1998-01-01 4.6 - President William J. Clinton

1999-01-01 4.3 - President William J. Clinton

2000-01-01 4.0 - President William J. Clinton

2001-01-01 4.2 - President George W. Bush

2002-01-01 5.6 - President George W. Bush

2003-01-01 5.8 - President George W. Bush

2004-01-01 5.6 - President George W. Bush

Do you notice a trend under Clinton? It is always going down... to a very respectable LOW of 4.0%. Under Senior and Junior you see increases in the unemployment rate and FURTHER, the 2004 jobless rate is bolstered by 21000 jobs that were recently created. The problem with these jobs is that the majority of those jobs are TEMPORARY. Oh and one more thing, these jobs are not technical or manufacturing in nature either. I suppose if you want to work for MANPOWER it's a great day in America.

Now the dollar. I would send you here:

Currency Markets

The dollar is almost universally down against the upstart Euro (which is a new currency)... and don't even get me started on the BP. I am getting married in Scotland in June and I'm getting CREAMED on the exchange rate.

Now, let's discuss Cheney's speech. More bluster from these guys is what I saw Silk. The split screen of Cheney speaking while the hotel in Baghdad was burning was a priceless moment. Talk about dicotomy.

We could also discuss the oil markets and how Bush's affiliations with oil companies are slowly being exposed as detrimental to the nation. We are being gouged. Oil companies are INTENTIONALLY storing oil in a way that ARTIFICIALLY CREATES SHORTAGES. How? Well the oil companies knowing demand is increasing refuse to build more refineries etc. So eventhough the oil is available we have no way to store it or refine it. Any other business in this situation would build to meet demand but not the oil companies. Nope... why build more refineries when you can just charge more? I hope you aren't going to tell me that drilling in Alaska would alleviate this problem either because that is EXACTLY the kind of picture they like to paint while our SOLDIERS sit on the second largest oil reserve ON THE PLANET. What do you expect from a guy that bankrupted his own oil company... or was it two?

Buyer's regret, you bet your sweet ass I have buyer's regret. I voted for Bush and for his father before him and DOLE in between. I don't vote on one issue, it is MANY issues that I speak on.

Being a constitutionalist Jaguar I would have thought you would be more concerned by the proactive nature of the court recently. Amendments to the Constitution are also typically made to INCLUDE minorities not to EXCLUDE them. I don't have to appreciate the gay lifestyle or condone it to know that suggesting amending the constitution for this is scandalous at best and pandering at worst. Add to the long littany I have already addressed the fact that this administration is closed door in its operations and at the same time at the center of the latest censorship hysteria and I think I make a pretty compelling case for why ANYBODY BUT BUSH is where I stand. I wish someone challenged Bush from OUR party but nobody did... I can't help that.

I'm in the financial field. I have had great years with interest rates so low. The problem is I don't abandon my fellow man for the sake of my wallet and I don't want to see the standard of living degrade in this nation. I might also add that the debt being carried by people in this country and by the GOVERNMENT ITSELF is cause for alarm and financial markets are even questioning Greenspan's lacks take on this.

Anyway I made my point and I didn't even need to post one hokey trout hitting your head to do it. You like to throw around the word propaganda... if Propaganda were a magazine you'd be a subscriber. THINK.

Later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest $iLk

So what is your alternative? Life under the Democrats would be worse. An unemployment rate of below 6% is considered normal and acceptable according to my economics classes. And your point has been what? That the economy has it's ups and downs? GWB inherited an economy that had peaked and was tanking down to recession - which was accelerated by 9/11 - and has started to improve after this relatively short recession.

Are you trying to sell us on the idea that the War in Iraq would be your cause for electing a president that would bend over and take it from behind from countries like France?

quote:

Being a constitutionalist Jaguar I would have thought you would be more concerned by the proactive nature of the court recently. Amendments to the Constitution are also typically made to INCLUDE minorities not to EXCLUDE them. I don't have to appreciate the gay lifestyle or condone it to know that suggesting amending the constitution for this is scandalous at best and pandering at worst.

Society has something to say whenever Activist judges begin breaking the law to forward a special interest. The gay lifestyle only differs from pedophilia and bestiality in that it is between two consenting adults. Marriage is not a stamp of sexuality - and recognizing something as normal that isn't is insane.

I work in real estate - the largest commodity in our economy probably in terms of importance. Imagine the difficulties in trying to track back title and deeds which many times require 'assumptions' as to whether or not the person might have married. We can't assume a person's sexuality - it's always assumed they married a woman... and even then we can't always find them.

Recognizing homosexuals - you might as well recognize pedophiles and bestiality considering that if they reach a certain number of people clamoring for recognition - you can't deny it to them once you've pacified your culture to desensitization. Weakening the family weakens society as a whole.

There's a whole lot more to the issue than homophobia - considering that I don't care if people don rubber balls and leather so long as it's in private and not paraded around for the shock value or forced recognition by my children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest $iLk

Also I'd hate to measure economic success by the unemployment rate. Anyone care to find the GDP scores for those years out of curiosity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

I have LOTS of examples of Democratic hate, Hate Bush, Hate the war, Hate the economy, Hate this, hate that. Class warfare is ALL the Democrats have.

I started reading this thread, and told myself, i would'nt get involved, but throughout the argument, i noticed everything kept coming back to the idea quoted above.

I am sorry to have to say this, but as a REPUBLICAN, who has finally had it, with the PRESENT day republican IDEOLOGY:" If you dont allow our ABSOLUTE rule of thought and ideals, your an enemy to AMERICAN society and a TERRORIST"

My point is: I am NO TERRORIST. I am NOT PRO-WAR, I DO NOT believe I am unpatriotic; because, I DO NOT condone: Going to war, BASED on BLATANT LIES .

Just because you are REPULSED by the IMMORAL Actions of another, does NOT change the definitions of words.

Hate, or DISSATISFIED? which is the TRUTH? There is no SIN in standing against what you DO NOT Believe is JUST.

I could say YOUR response is a PRIME example of GOP HATE!!!, but I won't. Instead, I will say, you disagree with the Democrats Ideals of Social Improvement. And I will go further to state: WE(Yes, I am NOW a conservative DEMOCRAT)disagree with the REPUBLICANS Ideals of: RULE BY FORCE (A PURE COMMUNISTIC IDEAL, to say the least).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest $iLk

quote:

I DO NOT condone: Going to war, BASED on BLATANT LIES .

That's right - it's not based on all the security council resolutions, assassination attempt on a president, and statements by all the democrats up until Bush came into office that Sadaam needed to be stopped through force if necessary... it's all about the fact that WMD's have not been found - when EVERYONE - including Clinton thought they were there.

quote:

Just because you are REPULSED by the IMMORAL Actions of another, does NOT change the definitions of words.

Hate, or DISSATISFIED? which is the TRUTH? There is no SIN in standing against what you DO NOT Believe is JUST.

What are you talking about? Gay Marriage? There is no crime in standing against what is not normal either. Trying to legislate through the judiciary that black=white, up=down, wrong=right does not make these people civil rights heroes, and a minority of sexual deviants does not equal normality, and doesn't mean society should automatically recognize it.

quote:

Instead, I will say, you disagree with the Democrats Ideals of Social Improvement.

What? Raising the hell out of taxes to pay for an increasingly growing group of freeloaders? Damn straight...

quote:

I am NOW a conservative DEMOCRAT

Which means what? That your definition of the 'priveledged' is less broad? I'm definitely not a Republican - and I definitely don't agree with Bush on every issue. But he stands for something - which is more than I can say about what the DNC stands for. Go check out Democrats.org - it's full of blatant class-warfare propaganda. That's a Socialist ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

You claim to now about economics, but so far you have failed miserably.

A presidents policies will normally take anywhere from 2 to 10 years to take hold, depending on how heavy their tax cuts or tax hikes are. And how LONG term they are.

Clinton inherited Reagans economy, it hit really hard about the middle of his term, Bush senior and Clinton BOTH blew it with their tax hikes, so the economy started to tank at the end of Clintons watch, and now Bush inherited a disaster that Clinton created with his taxes, in less then 4 years, Bush has halted the slide, and the damage done by 911, another legacy of Clintons.

The corrections have been expected, the dollar being down has NOTHING to do with the dollar and has EVERYTHING to do with the artificial holding up of the Euro. The Euro is in trouble, you just don't know it yet.

There is only so much that can be done to hold up that currency, and when it does, the Euro is going to dive and the dollar will rise again, compared to it. The dollar is still the most respected currency in the world.

Economies have fluctuations, we just had a MAJOR recession, which we can lay at Clintons feet, then 911 did even more damage. To say that I am amazed that we are in as good a shape as we are would be an understatement.

It toook a LOT to screw up Reagans economy, but the older Bush and Clinton together were able to fry it, took them 12 years, but they did it. Now the Younger Bush is doing EXACTLY what Reagan did in order to spur our economy back on it's feet.

It is happening, but not fast enough, we need another tax cut, and a BIG on, mainly a capital gains taxcut. Cut it to 5%, and watch the economy take off like a rocket. Then again, that would be a tax cut for the rich, wouldn't it, even though it would allow the economy to take off, and employ millions. But can't have that, because it would help the "Rich".

Bah, morons, I hate Democrats, all they care about is power and taking as much money from people as possible to pay off their voters. To hell with what it does to the country and it's economy.

So, go ahead and vote democrat, and watch the economy tank AGAIN, and unemployment skyrocket AGAIN. Because they will RAISE taxes on the "rich".

Don't know about you, but I have NEVER worked for a poor person. You raise taxes on the "rich", the ones that own the business's, the ones that have the money to invest, the ones that CREATE jobs, and you kill the economy, and the Democrats do it EVERY time.

TAX THE RICH, TAX THE RICH, when in essence they are saying. DESTROY THE ECONOMY, DESTROY THE ECONOMY........ And they do it EVERY time!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ROFLMAO... uh huh... it's all about the democrats hating. I didn't say that I wanted homosexual marriage legalized, I said I don't want a constitutional amendment.

As for the comments about morons and whatnot, don't hate the debate. I guess when you throw your spam against a wall Jaguar and it doesn't stick you get uppity. Listen, you're talking to a guy that was Republican before it was "cool" or "macho". I don't need to be abused by some guy that does who the hell knows what and told that I don't know the economy. Clinton didn't inherit anything but a major recession. So let's see... hmmm, the middle 80s where it was yuppie time and junk bonds you know the time of Trump math... that was great, I agree and then the economy caught up with Reagan's spending and our spending on BMWS and the like and we had to balance the budget and get it together under WHOM? Who really dealt with the deficits? Who paid off the Reagan era debt... and yet SOMEHOW the economy flourished. Sure the Republican Congress was a part of all of that but the President had to put the budget on the table. I don't give credit to Clinton alone but he did have the BALLS to deal with it.

Look, I don't need to be insulted. I gave you facts and figures and you give me supposition and some kind of BS you got off of Rush or Hannity. I used to listen to them too but got sick of the hate... it's all hate but it's all on the part of people like... well you. Hate Europe, hate the poor, hate anybody that dares to form an opinion. It's all hypocritical BS that I've learned to ignore. Abortion is bad, but then when it comes time to EDUCATE the once fetus they don't want to do it. This is the stupidity that I can't abide anymore. Democrats want babies dead... I believed that BS for a while, then I figured out who the hell did what for the kids that were here. NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND? MY ASS.

As for the title insurance and deed argument that is so ridiculous that I cannot believe that you are actually doing searches and or anything dealing with liability on the part of the underwriter. NOBODY, not The Fund, not First American, NOT BUBBA'S TITLE would EVER assume anything if there was a question concerning chain of title. Corporations own property, several individuals might own property and be listed on a deed, trusts own property... the list could go on and on. Nobody assumes marital status especially if the bloody thing is homesteaded. *shakes his head* God help your underwriter.

Anyway, I've been insulted enough on this thread. Try to play it nice and you get it between the eyes from zealots. *Snickers* With the new MP patch I suppose we can duke it out in the cosmos... guess I'm off the Gammulan Christmas Card list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Silk, I really didnt mean for you to take my post as an attack, but you obviously did. You used quotes from my post, but entirely out of context to the meaning behind the whole.

Please, go sit, count to ten, or take a walk. when you have calmed down a bit, please reread my previous post in its entire context.

Socialism is not suppose to be what America is all about. Neither is Communisum. Terrible thing when those appear to be your only choices,,,huh?

Our political structure is described(at the PRESENT time, and by OUR own CIA) as "A CONSTITUTION BASED FEDERAL REPUBLIC with strong democratic tradition."

I think, for most. Its all about the LIES.

Preaching HATE Doctrine, and Accusing those who disagree as Preachers of such a doctrine, is one and the SAME.

just my own PERSONAL OPINION. I will discuss this topic no further,

(Smiles!!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest $iLk

My posts don't make me look upset do they? I believe that the jist of it is incredulity that anyone can believe the DNC platform - considering that they pander to people with the message of taking money from the "rich" and trickling it down to them.

quote:

ROFLMAO... uh huh... it's all about the democrats hating. I didn't say that I wanted homosexual marriage legalized, I said I don't want a constitutional amendment.

And it's 'hating' one way or the other how? If it's 'hating' not to accept sexual deviancy then I guess I'm a 'hata' playa

quote:

I used to listen to them too but got sick of the hate... it's all hate but it's all on the part of people like... well you. Hate Europe, hate the poor, hate anybody that dares to form an opinion. It's all hypocritical BS that I've learned to ignore.

Hannity and Rush are like two cuddly little bears... and you call it 'hate'? wtf?!? I could understand if you tried to draw a line across Buchannan or something but you picked out the two most nonconfrontational nicest conservatives you could... and then out one side of your mouth are saying "facts and figures this" and out the other saying everyone disagreeing with you is practicing 'hate'. I note you didn't disagree factually... you just started ranting about 'hate' and pointed to two poor examples of this 'hate' you speak of.

quote:

As for the title insurance and deed argument that is so ridiculous that I cannot believe that you are actually doing searches and or anything dealing with liability on the part of the underwriter. NOBODY, not The Fund, not First American, NOT BUBBA'S TITLE would EVER assume anything if there was a question concerning chain of title. Corporations own property, several individuals might own property and be listed on a deed, trusts own property... the list could go on and on. Nobody assumes marital status especially if the bloody thing is homesteaded. *shakes his head* God help your underwriter.


I didn't say that abstracts, title, etc. is put out on assumption - but searches ARE done through assumption of basic precepts whether you know that or not. When determining clear title you have to take into account that there may be hidden heirs, heiresses, etc. and the equation is hard enough with only half the gender pool.

quote:

@ Silk, I really didnt mean for you to take my post as an attack, but you obviously did. You used quotes from my post, but entirely out of context to the meaning behind the whole.

Please, go sit, count to ten, or take a walk. when you have calmed down a bit, please reread my previous post in its entire context.


No really I hold all these views without my heartbeat so much as fluttering outside it's normal range.

I think it's sad that we'd need a constitutional ammendment to prevent judges from legislating. I've had enough of that on a personal level with the judge handling my custody case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Race Bannon IV:

Stop trying to hold up Eisenhower and Lincoln as examples for modern Republican thought. That just doesnt wash. Niether would consistently align themselves with corporate america, standing on the shore waving goodbye to good jobs while they are shipped overseas.

One of the reasons that Reagan lowered the import taxes in the first place was because of the way that Inflation was destroying our economy. So what, you would rather have the 12% unemployment that we had during the Carter years?

Are we so greedy in the U.S. that we won't settle for having the Largest homes, Bigest cars, most highways, most entertainment, most disposable income, most highways, parks, recreation, hospitols, EVERYTHING here is the best, and even the lowest paying jobs gives you a better life than you would get in almost EVERY other country in the world? We're not satisfied with that? It's impossible for us consume more resources than every other country in the world combined and at the same time NOT export jobs. Where is all of our stuff going to be made? If we stopped exporting jobs, the only thing that would happen is we would go back to the days of Stagflation, is that what you want?

The factory doesn't export jobs they simply shut down, there that's better.

So back to the original point, yes Republicans tend to do what is for the greater good, not what's good for a few special interests.

Let's see should we continue with our protectionists policies that encourage inflation and high unemployment, or should we risk yet higher unemployment in the short term for lower inflation which leads to lower interest rates, higher stability, job growth and in the end a better standard of living? That's the question that Reagan had before him when he first got elected and I think he did the right thing. Just like Lincoln, he wanted to do what was right for the country, not necessarily what was right for a few individuals. Carter knew what needed to be done, but he didn't want to do it for fear that a few people would lose their jobs.

We had 12% unemployment back then, today it's around 5%. 4% is considered full employment, since you always have around 3-4% changing jobs, so the real unemployment rate is 1-2%.

If we passed a law today that says "All jobs must return to the US, THERE WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO FILL THE DAMMED POSITIONS! Which would lead to a shortage of goods, which would lead to inflation, which would lead to higher housing costs, which would lead to the economy crashing, which would lead to high unemployment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

Let's not even get into the plunging dollar or the loss of 3 million jobs. When Bush said he wanted to put willing workers (ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS) together with willing employers (CHEAP ASS CORPORATIONS) that's when I knew he was no CONSERVATIVE. You that are conservatives should seriously take a look at policy (expanding government, loosened immigration, jobs shipped overseas) and determine if CONSERVATIVE is a term that even applies to Republicans anymore. I read these kinds of threads and the parroting of partisans and I am left to wonder, do people THINK anymore?

Do YOU Think anymore Read my above post and you tell me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

The loss of 3 million jobs, WTF are you talking about?

The problem these guys have Jag is they don't take the Dynamic nature of our economy into consideration.

K-Mart cut 100,000 jobs, so that's all they see. Of course they don't see the fact that 99% of them were hired THE FOLLOWING DAY by Walmart, Target, Nordstroms, and a string of other Retailers that have been HUNGRY for new employees. People just don't seem to realize that Jobs change all the time. Should we lament the fact that Candlemaking used to employ 10% of all manufacturing employees and now they make up less than half of 1%? Things change, Jobs change, get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darkling I suppose you have a problem formulating a point... otherwise why all of the posts? Thanks for playing anyway, your Rice-A-Roni and your LazyBoy are at the door.

I suppose I somehow overlooked the post where you magically address that the dollar is in danger of losing its place as the most stable of currencies... *sighs*

Please spare me rebuttals like this. Self serving idiocy is still... well you figure it out.

Ciao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

1991-01-01 6.4 - President George H. W. Bush

1992-01-01 7.3 - President George H. W. Bush

1993-01-01 7.3 - President William J. Clinton

1994-01-01 6.6 - President William J. Clinton

1995-01-01 5.6 - President William J. Clinton

1996-01-01 5.6 - President William J. Clinton

1997-01-01 5.3 - President William J. Clinton

1998-01-01 4.6 - President William J. Clinton

1999-01-01 4.3 - President William J. Clinton

2000-01-01 4.0 - President William J. Clinton

2001-01-01 4.2 - President George W. Bush

2002-01-01 5.6 - President George W. Bush

2003-01-01 5.8 - President George W. Bush

2004-01-01 5.6 - President George W. Bush


Please, Clinton got LUCKY, this wasn't cause by ANY of Clinton's economic policies, it was caused by the Internet Bubble, which promply burst shortly before Clinton left, remember that Bush actually wasn't sworn in until;

"2001-01-01 4.2 - President George W. Bush"

Which is when the Internet Bubble Burst started to become apparent. Over 10,000 jobs in that sector disappeared and it had NOTHING to do with exporting jobs, these companies just simply shut down. People foolishly thought that since Al Gore CREATED the internet, they would all be billionairs.

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

We could also discuss the oil markets and how Bush's affiliations with oil companies are slowly being exposed as detrimental to the nation. We are being gouged.

We are being Gouged? Let's see, when I was about 12 years old, and Min. Wage was 2.50Hr. Gas was 1.00 to 1.25 per Gallon, and about 25% of that was taxes. Today, Gas is between 1.60 to 1.90 per gallon and 50% of that is taxes. In addition, cars today get TWICE the milage that cars used to get, so compared to average pay in the US of $35000.00 per year. we are spending FAR LESS on gas than we used to. Don't beleive me? Do the math.[/QB]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

Darkling I suppose you have a problem formulating a point... otherwise why all of the posts? Thanks for playing anyway, your Rice-A-Roni and your LazyBoy are at the door.

Well fortunately for me, and I guess unfortunately for you, I have a business to run, so I won't post for a few days, pick up where I left off and answer each post individually, instead of going through all the post and then doing one big one at the end. [/QB]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh so you have an ability to post everyday but you have to differentiate posts because you run a business? So I'm less than you? You have to be kidding me.. I've seen you post here almost every single day... you're a regular... please spare me the building yourself up BS.

Later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

Oh so you have an ability to post everyday but you have to differentiate posts because you run a business? So I'm less than you? You have to be kidding me.. I've seen you post here almost every single day... you're a regular... please spare me the building yourself up BS.

Later on.

are you talking about. This is the last post that I did before today's posts, which was 2 days ago. What I said is that I run a business so I don't always have the ability to stay on top of every single post after I make one. If you take a look at my posts, they are in response to INDIVIDUAL posts, that were placed AFTER my last one. I've ALWAYS posted this way and will continue to do so, unless Mr. Smart says otherwise. If you don't like the way that I post, then TOUGH.

Though personally, I think that the real reason you are so PISSED is because my retorts to your silly arguments make you look like a RETARD, and since you can't argue with me on an intellectual level, you resort to personal attacks, though 2 can play at that game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

Oh so you have an ability to post everyday but you have to differentiate posts because you run a business? So I'm less than you? You have to be kidding me.. I've seen you post here almost every single day... you're a regular... please spare me the building yourself up BS.

Later on.

Takvah, your attitude and rhetoric is getting old, either calm sown and behave or you will start to see your posts disapearing.

I run my own business as well, I got tired of working for someone else, but I post here a LOT, whereas you just started. So chill out, quit getting so worked up, get your FACTS straight, and we'll get along fine.

I see you spout, but you are clueless as to the real reasons behind those spouts. You start quoting Moveon.org, one of the MOST socialist organizations in existence and then tell me that you are no LONGER a Republican? Come on, get real.

The only way to turn a Republican into a Democrat is to suck his brains out, have you been labotimized lately?

Now, enough, if you can't play nice, you won't be allowed to play, that was the last snide comment you will get from me.... So hit me and then be done and be civil, OK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaguar spare me... are you going to debate facts or are you going to spew? You attack me for basically calling out a guy that says he doesn't have the time to post because he runs a business yet, he posts every day. You wanna debate the facts Jag you lemme know. I have been very civil, not resorting to your kind of ridicule by emoticon and the liberal use of the word moron. You do a good job of jumping in to help others but you don't do much to serve your own argument... anyway I think I said I was done with this argument... and crushing your thin skull is likely poor form. You inspect houses... good for you. I won't tell you about faulty electrical systems or bad roofs and you can spare me some BS about how healthy it is to run up amazing amounts of debt in government. As for being lobotimized thank you for not dissapointing me... and posting yet another nasty retort. I could comment on why I believe a guy that was recently unemployed and inspects houses should keep his mouth shut on the economy but why bother?

Oh and if you want to nuke my posts go ahead I'll consider it a victory especially given your nastiness... this is the court of ideas if you can't handle it just ask me to stop I'll let up on you. This is a political thread if you can't take the heat then why don't you just bow out or close the entire thread?

Ciao Ciao Ciao.

[ 03-19-2004, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Takvah ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

The only way to turn a Republican into a Democrat is to suck his brains out, have you been labotimized lately?


I thought it would be more on the lines of castration but a lobotomy suits nicely too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See I can take a comment like that... knowing that in essence it is words. Lord knows my balls dropped when I realized what it was to think critically as opposed to follow the leader. So I can't take seriously a comment like this. You can't claim to be a critical thinker and accept that Cheney won't divulge what he met energy companies about, why Bush commits only an hour to the 9/11 Commission and why WMDs and links to Al-Qaeda are non existent. I mean you'd have to be mildly retarded or extremely gullable to just accept this fascist rhetoric right.... right.... guys? *Throws up hands*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know what the heck I did. Had a post for this thread but stuck it in the Osama thread somehow. Ah well glad everyone is friends again. Group hug?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×