Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Awesome Republican Primary Thread
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 241 of 1485 (636693)
10-09-2011 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Taz
10-09-2011 6:08 PM


They're all cults, but it's unfair to pick on the newly minted ones.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Taz, posted 10-09-2011 6:08 PM Taz has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


(1)
Message 470 of 1485 (645679)
12-29-2011 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 469 by Dr Adequate
12-29-2011 12:23 AM


Re: Things Michele Bachmann Doesn't Know
Dr Adequate writes:
Also, Things Rick Perry Doesn't Know:
Every barrel of oil that comes out of those sands in Canada is a barrel of oil that we don’t have to buy from a foreign source, Mr. Perry said in Clarinda, earning a loud round of enthusiastic applause.
That's ignorance squared, as the Canadian tar sands oil, once refined in the U.S., is earmarked for export.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 469 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-29-2011 12:23 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 508 of 1485 (646854)
01-06-2012 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 507 by Theodoric
01-06-2012 9:10 PM


Re: Things Rick Santorum Worries About
Sick Rantorum recently opined that states have the constitutional authority to ban contraception and sodomy: if that state's residents don't like it, they can move or vote out the legislators responsible.
Quite aside from the lack of the former increasing the practicality of the latter, I think, akin to what Dr A has suggested about Perry, that Rantorum fails to realize that sodomy includes all sexual acts other than procreative sex, without regard to the gender of the participants.
Or perhaps he does: like the dog in the manger, he can't be eaten, and neither can anyone else.
If you asked Romney about banning blow jobs, he'd probably reply, "What? What?" The entire GOP field is comprised of men who appear desperately in need of a blow job.
Maybe, in tribute to their nativist 1850s forerunners, they will become known as the Blow-Nothings.
I'm trying to visualize a campaign logo. Okay, now I'm not.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 507 by Theodoric, posted 01-06-2012 9:10 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 511 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-06-2012 10:51 PM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 681 of 1485 (651568)
02-08-2012 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 680 by nwr
02-08-2012 9:39 AM


Re: In Late News ...
nwr writes:
For myself, I am enjoying it as entertainment. It does look as if the Republican party might self-destruct over this.
I recall my amusement when George Bush won the GOP nomination.
Then one day in the mail came a prescient, pre-election issue of The Nation, featuring the cover below. At first I dismissed it, but then I did indeed begin to worry--rightly, as it turned out.
Never underestimate the ability of the American people to vote against their own best interests, and never underestimate the power of the Democratic coalition to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 680 by nwr, posted 02-08-2012 9:39 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 685 by nwr, posted 02-08-2012 12:37 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 688 of 1485 (651627)
02-08-2012 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 685 by nwr
02-08-2012 12:37 PM


Re: In Late News ...
nwr writes:
On the other hand, I only have one vote and I intend using that sensibly. In the meantime, I can enjoy the entertainment.
Ditto.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 685 by nwr, posted 02-08-2012 12:37 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


(4)
Message 709 of 1485 (654001)
02-26-2012 1:10 AM


"Rick Santorum's Despicable And Hurtful Health Care Lie"
An article from Forbes' health care policy reporter, Rick Ungar, explaining how Rick Santorum combines contemptible lying with the exploitation of his daughter, Bella, who suffers from the genetic disorder, Trisomy 18.
Rick Santorum's Despicable and Hurtful Health Care Lie
I hoped I could post something funny in this thread eventually, but I just want to puke.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

Replies to this message:
 Message 710 by Trixie, posted 02-26-2012 6:15 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 713 of 1485 (654036)
02-26-2012 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 710 by Trixie
02-26-2012 6:15 AM


Re: "Rick Santorum's Despicable And Hurtful Health Care Lie"
Trixie writes:
Don't forget the claim made that if Stephen Hawking had lived in the UK he'd have been dead already
Hawking is brilliant, famous and successful in multiple media.
He must be an American.
Palin has recently complained about U.S. media reports of Santorum dashing about crying, "Satan is coming! Satan is coming!"
In their topsy-turvy world, reporting what they say conclusively demonstrates your liberal bias.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 710 by Trixie, posted 02-26-2012 6:15 AM Trixie has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 799 of 1485 (656032)
03-15-2012 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 798 by Dr Adequate
03-15-2012 5:54 PM


Re: LOOK! Over here! Something shiny!!!
I once had a co-worker who arrived each morning and set about finding the latest killing rampage on the web. Then she would gush about it.
"I can't imagine what would possess a person to do something like that! I just can't understand it!"
Me: "Of course you can't understand them, Jan, they're insane."
"But I can't imagine what would possess a person to do something like that! I just can't understand it!"
Me: "Of course you can't, Jan..."
Reiterate for a seeming eternity.
Then one day...
"I can't imagine what would possess a person to do something like that! I just can't understand it!"
Me: "If you understood, Jan, you'd be killing me...or I'd have to kill you."
In her widening eyes, an understanding dawned; after that day, she gushed no more.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 798 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-15-2012 5:54 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 877 of 1485 (708265)
10-07-2013 5:47 PM


The Dark Boehner Rises
Best Wordless Comment from New York Magazine
Jonathan Chait's words there are good, too.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


(4)
Message 954 of 1485 (708716)
10-12-2013 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 947 by New Cat's Eye
10-12-2013 11:56 AM


Can you do the propaganda?
CS writes:
What!? There was a payroll tax increase in January that affected everybody who was employed. My weekly check dropped by almost 5%.
Just when I think I can go Inactive and lurk, you have to post this kinda crap.
In January, a temporary tax holiday expired. The payroll tax reverted to 6.2%, marking the end of a temporary reduction. Both Romney and Obama, and both parties in Congress, supported the expiration of a tax holiday meant to help working/middle class folks weather the recession.
Conservative Republicans in Congress opposed the original tax holiday, as well as the several extensions, all championed by Democrats.
Forbes--those rabidly pro-Obama folks--have a great summary:
quote:
When originally enacted in December 2010, the 2% reduction was originally scheduled to last only one year, its finite nature evidenced by its description in the statute as a payroll tax holiday.
The point of the provision, as you might imagine, was to help lower and middle-class taxpayers weather the recession by putting more after-tax cash in their pockets. Specifically, the payroll tax cut replaced and expanded upon the Making Work Pay Credit, which during 2009 and 2010 saved individuals earning less than $75,000 up to $400 and married couples earning less than $150,000 up to $800. Because the 2% payroll tax cut reduction applied to the first $106,800 of a taxpayer’s wages, the new law could save an indivdual as much as $2,136, or twice that for married couples.
As 2011 drew to a close and the sun was due to set on the payroll tax cut, Congress did what it does best, agreeing to a last-minute, ill-conceived two-month extension that was not offset with any increased revenue or spending cuts. In February, they did it again, this time extending the 2% reduction through the end of 2012.
Throughout this time, Americans got accustomed to their fatter paychecks. But if they’d been paying attention, they would have noticed that the end was near.
Leading up to the Presidential election, neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney promised to further extend the payroll tax cut. In fact, if one were to dig deep into each man’s tax proposals, one would see that both Obama and Romney intended to allow the tax cut to expire. And effective January 1, 2013, it did.
Naturally, Republicans, especially TP Republicans, are now hootin' and hollerin' that "Obama has raised your taxes"--skating past the facts that they opposed any tax holiday at all, opposed its extension and insisted on its temporary nature.
So, yes, Obama lowered your taxes--over the protests of the GOP.
He extended that tax holiday--over the protests of the GOP.
So when you hear otherwise from conservative sources, know you are hearing deliberate, contemptible lies.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 947 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-12-2013 11:56 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1018 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-25-2013 11:35 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 1006 of 1485 (709328)
10-24-2013 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1004 by Jon
10-24-2013 5:57 PM


Re: Using liberal logic
petrophysics1 writes:
I supported the appointment of Clarence Thomas to the SCOTUS.
You did not.
The ONLY reason you could possibly have for not supporting his appointment is that he is black.
Therefore you are a racist and I am not.
Strange since I would consider myself part of the Tea Party movement.
Taq writes:
What I have always found ironic is that Obama is taking Republican policies and feeding them back to the Republicans. Obamacare is the Republican health care reform policy from the 1990's, including the individual mandate and health insurance exchanges. The only reason that I can think of is that Republicans really, really hate Obama for some irrational reason.
Jon writes:
Have you considered that the Republican party of today isn't the same as the Republican party of the 90s?
The Republican Party has embodied the backlash, defined by race and class, of the ancien regime for decades. They made their deal with the devil when they sought to peel off southern Democrats with their Civil Rights resentment-centered Southern Strategy.
Their fever dream of white protestant privilege assassinated our greatest hopes in the 60s and yearns to punish the nation for betraying them now.
Is the Tea Party racist?
Gee, as someone who failed to understand the subtleties of fascist attraction, I hesitate (just this long) to say: the Tea Party draws its peculiar venom from racism, whether the individual Tea Partier pleads ultimate motivation from fiscal prudence or Obama Derangement Syndrome.
Tea Partiers who swallow the explicit racist behavior and speech of TP activists in silence are like Log Cabin Republicans who bowed their heads to DOMA or suburban moms who vote for men who oppose the reproductive freedom those moms support.
You can say you supported Mussolini because he made the trains run on time.
You still have blood on your hands.
NB: OK, this Inactive thing isn't working.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1004 by Jon, posted 10-24-2013 5:57 PM Jon has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


(4)
Message 1038 of 1485 (709465)
10-26-2013 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 1035 by xongsmith
10-26-2013 4:19 PM


xongsmith writes:
What kind of hard ass would boo this story?
Really Petro?
You should set aside ideological differences and use the precise term of art.
He's a dick.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1035 by xongsmith, posted 10-26-2013 4:19 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 1187 of 1485 (710569)
11-06-2013 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1183 by ringo
11-06-2013 12:20 PM


Re: Toronto's Mayor
ringo writes:
I don't consider smoking crack to be behaving badly. If he behaved badly while under the influence - e.g. harassing women, etc. - than that bad behaviour should be considered on its own demerits.
The mayor is just another wet brain giving all drugs a bad name.
My first sergeant in the combat engineers told me he'd rather have a battalion of stoners any day--"It's the boozers who tear up my barracks and start shit."
Busted me anyway, though. He retired to become a Texas state cop. I haven't been there since.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1183 by ringo, posted 11-06-2013 12:20 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 1261 of 1485 (711735)
11-21-2013 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1233 by AZPaul3
11-19-2013 6:29 PM


Cover me, Koch Inc., I'm gonna take that hill.
AZPaul3 writes:
Nowhere in our constitution are there any rights of government to curtail political speech in any way. There is no distinction between private (voting) citizen and corporate (non-voting) citizen (yet).
Who’d a’thunk that a SCOTUS ruling upholding the integrity of unfettered political speech in this country could be seen as wrong?
I have yet to hear a corporation speak.
When I stand in line to vote, I notice no corporations waiting with me.
When I carried arms for my country, I found no corporate buddies marching with me to face enemy fire.
I have no desire to see any laws restrict political speech. I don't see what that has to do with corporations.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1233 by AZPaul3, posted 11-19-2013 6:29 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1262 by NoNukes, posted 11-21-2013 7:02 PM Omnivorous has replied
 Message 1263 by AZPaul3, posted 11-21-2013 7:46 PM Omnivorous has replied
 Message 1296 by ramoss, posted 11-22-2013 5:51 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3973
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


(1)
Message 1297 of 1485 (711842)
11-22-2013 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1262 by NoNukes
11-21-2013 7:02 PM


Re: Cover me, Koch Inc., I'm gonna take that hill.
NoNukes writes:
All corporations are ultimately owned and operated by humans. So curtailing corporation speech always involves curtailing some human being's speech.
Every human being involved in a corporation--directors, stockholders, miscellaneous employees--enjoys free speech, whatever limits are placed on corporate money in politics.
Money is not speech.
Now obviously the ownership and control by human beings need not be the end of the analysis, but pretending that there are no humans involved whatsoever and then claiming that you "don't see" any First Amendment issue at play is surely too simplistic.
If I had pretended no humans were involved with corporations, that would indeed be simplistic. I'm glad I didn't.
George Bush, Barrack Obama, and Bill Clinton never went on patrol with me on a submarine. So they need to shut up?
I contrasted living human beings and corporations: why ask me about contrasting human beings and human beings?
I'm suggesting that only people--not only vets--should be citizens.
Edited by Omnivorous, : Removed stupid snark, replaced with last two paras.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1262 by NoNukes, posted 11-21-2013 7:02 PM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1301 by AZPaul3, posted 11-22-2013 8:17 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024