But it's funny if you're locked in the room with someone you don't like, and annoyingly complains at the least of smells. Besides, my farts don't stink.
Good point. There is also a case to be made that the most dangerous jobs are almost exclusively filled by men. When are we going to hear of the women's rights activist screaming for more women to be represented among the ranks of unskilled construction labor, road construction (aka,asphalt pushers), deep sea fishermen (and it is almost exclusively men), or high-rise steel workers?
Someone who is working the grounds, skill or no, is much more likely to get hurt on the job than a kitchen worker or maid.
Is that the society we want to live in? One where you slip government officials a little something on the side with the understanding that you will be treated as a preferred citizen, and then the government welches on the deal?
Of course not, that is why the Obama administration re-negotiated the terms of the Solyndra loan so that the bribe collectors could get their investments returned first (before the taxpayers) in bankruptcy court. The fidelity of "campaign contributions" must be upheld before all else.
-Libertarians think they're getting freedom by eliminating the government. They're just getting corporate slavery.
Since the government is OWNED by the corporations:
-Democrats think they're getting freedom by enhancing the power of government to redistribute wealth. They're just getting corporate slavery. -Republicans think they're getting freedom by enhancing the police powers of government. They're just getting corporate slavery.
Well, Mr. Joe 170, you are mentally ill. You claim to have such a high IQ, but you've not figured out how to game the social system to get what you want. Instead, you've turned spiteful and bitter. At least, that is how you portray yourself in the above post. I would say that you are broken, aka mentally ill.
Because, we do not have a citizen legislature (if we ever did), and it would still be impossible to get everyone on the same page if we did.
1) When the Washington pols go off the deep end, they drag everybody down with them. 2) One size fits all rarely fits anyone. 3) Local schoolboards know better what is needed for their locality than a politician living in Washington.
The "but then something I dislike could happen in one place" is a vapid argument.
Which are the same idiots that elect your Congressmen/women.
The only difference is that the local school board members might actually visit the local school on something other than a photo-op mission one day, and might actually talk to local parents and educators about local concerns.
Maybe it was a time traveler that came back in time to save their great-grandfather from a massacre, that would have been caused by a geriatric Duke Ferdinand, which opened the door for Hitler. The time travelers caused the Holocaust!!
-"Bush hates black people." -Romney hates poor people. -Ron Paul supports the rights of states; therefore, he is a racist that wants to re-institute Jim Crow laws.
The major reason conservatives believe Obama is a Muslim is that he does so much "outreaching" to Muslim communities at the same time he has attempting to downplay the importance of the majority conservative Protestant religions. This has as much to do with the Democrat's habit of partitioning people into minority groups so that they can claim victimization, as it does the current liberal fad of portraying conservative Christians as uneducated dolts.
It's has nothing to do with racism. That's just the brain-dead branch of the liberal's goto cop-out so that they don't have to come up with an intelligent argument.
First: Veto it? He don't need no stinkin' veto. He could have asked Harry Reid not to even let it come up for a vote in the Senate, like they have done with budget proposals for the last 1134 days.
Second: Really? He had to sign it, 'cause he was scared of "right wing heads"? He is so ineffectual that he can't make a cogent argument that burying the 4th amendment and shredding habeas corpus is stupid? I knew he sucked as a President, but....that's just plain scary. Damn. Just....damn.
Your statement, combined with your sig, gave me a serious headache.
The Republicans are offering coporate slavery. The Democrats are offering government bureaucrat slavery. They both are willing to use the military, the "War on [Terror|Drugs|Poverty|Obesity|Bullying|CO2]" to get their way.
so they failed to do some research and took a bit too much risk
You mean they didn't do the research where the government employee said that the company was going to run out of money in September, so they renegotiated the loan so that Obama's campaign donor would get paid back in a bankruptcy before the taxpayer, even though it was against the law sort of research?
Posting AC so that everyone doesn't know what a dumbass you really are?
The NA's were consistently pushed off of good, arable lands to places that would barely support animal life above the size of insects. The were ripped from their cultural underpinnings which would allow them to fend for themselves, and shoved into a culture of government dependencies. Education was non-existent or a joke.
Reservation. Ghetto. Tomaeto. Tomahto. Either way, you're an idiot.
Heh, Dufus! He ran as a third party candidate. He got absolutely NO leverage. At least running as a Republican has moved the Republican base to something a little more sane than "allow the Democrats to spend us bankrupt, while invading every other country in the world"
The people clearly stated they wanted Romeny as their candidate.
-Except where the party leaders postponed conventions in places where Paul support was strong, and then said votes from those conventions would not be accepted because they were late. -Except where the media would praise and flaunt the anti-Romney candidate of the day, even though Paul won more votes than they did ("Santorum! The guy who lost to the guy that lost so bad he dropped out of the race!!" -Jon Stewart) -Except in Georgia, where the people showed up to elect a delegate contingency, but the party old-guard had already chosen the slate of delegates, ignored the actual vote, and gave the positions to people who were not present, against the party's by-laws.
There has been quite a lot of cheating. Very little of it attributable to Paul.
He didn't in previous elections. The media completely shut him out at that point. The only way to affect the system is from within the system.
The Republicans debated questions that would never had been asked if they could have shut Paul out. Compare the "I'll start a new Federal Agency to fix problem X" from this primary vs the last. Would you have heard that there is an option to foreign policy other than invade countries and set up perpetually bases if not for Paul? Even if he isn't elected, the fact that different ideas saw the light of day is completely owed to Ron Paul.
Keynesian economic theory requires that the government reduce debt by raising taxes and/or cutting spending during times of economic expansion. Reagan ushered in an era of perpetual deficit spending
Isn't that the elephant that the Keynesian school refuses to recognize, though? Putting the purse strings in the hands of politicians, whose popularity rides on increasing benefits while lowering taxes, is a guaranteed fail. Adam Smith wrote a couple paragraphs on the actual value of coinage decreasing over time, as monarchs sought to increase the coinage in circulation without actually increasing the amount of gold and silver. If the politicians could actually act like statesmen during the good times, there would be the reserves to bring the economy up during the bad times. They can't, because they can't see past the cloud of good times never being good enough. Someone is always in "desperate" need, requiring them to spend the constituents money to ride in like a knight on the white horse to save the [children|elderly|working man|entrepreneur|economy|Somali|Bosnian|Afghan|Iraqi|black man|colored man|Mexican|.........
I hope you are not American. I could totally understand this statement coming from a foreign national. But an American believing that a President has sovereign powers makes me want to cry.
No, the Democrats are just as evil. Their use of divisive "group" politics where they attempt to split people and pit them against one another is proof enough. They do a better job of hiding it from the ill informed, but their sadistic tendencies are clear.
I was deeply impacted by the debates between Obama and McCain. It was two guys trying to one-up each other on what new government programs they would institute. No discussion about how all these new programs would be paid for, or how they fit within the overall framework of governance. Just, "I'm going to give you stuff if you vote for me." That's a sadistic lie.
The re-passage of things like the Patriot Act and the midnight signing of a law that eliminates habeas corpus from a bipartisan Congress only adds to the proof that both the major parties are evil.
Slashdot Mirror
But it's funny if you're locked in the room with someone you don't like, and annoyingly complains at the least of smells. Besides, my farts don't stink.
Good point. There is also a case to be made that the most dangerous jobs are almost exclusively filled by men. When are we going to hear of the women's rights activist screaming for more women to be represented among the ranks of unskilled construction labor, road construction (aka,asphalt pushers), deep sea fishermen (and it is almost exclusively men), or high-rise steel workers?
Someone who is working the grounds, skill or no, is much more likely to get hurt on the job than a kitchen worker or maid.
Is that the society we want to live in? One where you slip government officials a little something on the side with the understanding that you will be treated as a preferred citizen, and then the government welches on the deal?
Of course not, that is why the Obama administration re-negotiated the terms of the Solyndra loan so that the bribe collectors could get their investments returned first (before the taxpayers) in bankruptcy court. The fidelity of "campaign contributions" must be upheld before all else.
Kinda like that sig you're sporting.
-Libertarians think they're getting freedom by eliminating the government. They're just getting corporate slavery.
Since the government is OWNED by the corporations:
-Democrats think they're getting freedom by enhancing the power of government to redistribute wealth. They're just getting corporate slavery.
-Republicans think they're getting freedom by enhancing the police powers of government. They're just getting corporate slavery.
Well, Mr. Joe 170, you are mentally ill. You claim to have such a high IQ, but you've not figured out how to game the social system to get what you want. Instead, you've turned spiteful and bitter. At least, that is how you portray yourself in the above post. I would say that you are broken, aka mentally ill.
Because, we do not have a citizen legislature (if we ever did), and it would still be impossible to get everyone on the same page if we did.
1) When the Washington pols go off the deep end, they drag everybody down with them.
2) One size fits all rarely fits anyone.
3) Local schoolboards know better what is needed for their locality than a politician living in Washington.
The "but then something I dislike could happen in one place" is a vapid argument.
Which are the same idiots that elect your Congressmen/women.
The only difference is that the local school board members might actually visit the local school on something other than a photo-op mission one day, and might actually talk to local parents and educators about local concerns.
Maybe it was a time traveler that came back in time to save their great-grandfather from a massacre, that would have been caused by a geriatric Duke Ferdinand, which opened the door for Hitler. The time travelers caused the Holocaust!!
So, now you agree to pay $600 for that $100 smartphone.
You aren't paying a fee to terminate the contract. You're paying for the phone that they discounted as long as you paid for the service.
To add more weight to your argument:
-"Bush hates black people."
-Romney hates poor people.
-Ron Paul supports the rights of states; therefore, he is a racist that wants to re-institute Jim Crow laws.
The major reason conservatives believe Obama is a Muslim is that he does so much "outreaching" to Muslim communities at the same time he has attempting to downplay the importance of the majority conservative Protestant religions. This has as much to do with the Democrat's habit of partitioning people into minority groups so that they can claim victimization, as it does the current liberal fad of portraying conservative Christians as uneducated dolts.
It's has nothing to do with racism. That's just the brain-dead branch of the liberal's goto cop-out so that they don't have to come up with an intelligent argument.
And Romney won't either. He has already stated that he supports this travesty, so I see no reason why he wouldn't support the next one.
First: Veto it? He don't need no stinkin' veto. He could have asked Harry Reid not to even let it come up for a vote in the Senate, like they have done with budget proposals for the last 1134 days.
Second: Really? He had to sign it, 'cause he was scared of "right wing heads"? He is so ineffectual that he can't make a cogent argument that burying the 4th amendment and shredding habeas corpus is stupid? I knew he sucked as a President, but....that's just plain scary. Damn. Just....damn.
Your statement, combined with your sig, gave me a serious headache.
The Republicans are offering coporate slavery.
The Democrats are offering government bureaucrat slavery.
They both are willing to use the military, the "War on [Terror|Drugs|Poverty|Obesity|Bullying|CO2]" to get their way.
so they failed to do some research and took a bit too much risk
You mean they didn't do the research where the government employee said that the company was going to run out of money in September, so they renegotiated the loan so that Obama's campaign donor would get paid back in a bankruptcy before the taxpayer, even though it was against the law sort of research?
No one forgot Libya.
Posting AC so that everyone doesn't know what a dumbass you really are?
The NA's were consistently pushed off of good, arable lands to places that would barely support animal life above the size of insects. The were ripped from their cultural underpinnings which would allow them to fend for themselves, and shoved into a culture of government dependencies. Education was non-existent or a joke.
Reservation. Ghetto. Tomaeto. Tomahto. Either way, you're an idiot.
That's because Harry Reid has been blocking everything that Obama would veto...so they can keep trying to tag Republicans as obstructionist.
What did the Senate's budget look like again?
Heh, Dufus! He ran as a third party candidate. He got absolutely NO leverage. At least running as a Republican has moved the Republican base to something a little more sane than "allow the Democrats to spend us bankrupt, while invading every other country in the world"
The people clearly stated they wanted Romeny as their candidate.
-Except where the party leaders postponed conventions in places where Paul support was strong, and then said votes from those conventions would not be accepted because they were late.
-Except where the media would praise and flaunt the anti-Romney candidate of the day, even though Paul won more votes than they did ("Santorum! The guy who lost to the guy that lost so bad he dropped out of the race!!" -Jon Stewart)
-Except in Georgia, where the people showed up to elect a delegate contingency, but the party old-guard had already chosen the slate of delegates, ignored the actual vote, and gave the positions to people who were not present, against the party's by-laws.
There has been quite a lot of cheating. Very little of it attributable to Paul.
He didn't in previous elections. The media completely shut him out at that point. The only way to affect the system is from within the system.
The Republicans debated questions that would never had been asked if they could have shut Paul out. Compare the "I'll start a new Federal Agency to fix problem X" from this primary vs the last. Would you have heard that there is an option to foreign policy other than invade countries and set up perpetually bases if not for Paul? Even if he isn't elected, the fact that different ideas saw the light of day is completely owed to Ron Paul.
What would stop them this time?
Keynesian economic theory requires that the government reduce debt by raising taxes and/or cutting spending during times of economic expansion. Reagan ushered in an era of perpetual deficit spending
Isn't that the elephant that the Keynesian school refuses to recognize, though? Putting the purse strings in the hands of politicians, whose popularity rides on increasing benefits while lowering taxes, is a guaranteed fail. Adam Smith wrote a couple paragraphs on the actual value of coinage decreasing over time, as monarchs sought to increase the coinage in circulation without actually increasing the amount of gold and silver. If the politicians could actually act like statesmen during the good times, there would be the reserves to bring the economy up during the bad times. They can't, because they can't see past the cloud of good times never being good enough. Someone is always in "desperate" need, requiring them to spend the constituents money to ride in like a knight on the white horse to save the [children|elderly|working man|entrepreneur|economy|Somali|Bosnian|Afghan|Iraqi|black man|colored man|Mexican|.........
after all, you have sovereignty over them
I hope you are not American. I could totally understand this statement coming from a foreign national. But an American believing that a President has sovereign powers makes me want to cry.
Right, because Obama lied and invaded a country
Twice. Libya and Pakistan.
celebrated it with "Mission Accomplished"
He preferred "spiking the football" when he thought it would benefit his campaign.
endorsed the federal marriage amendment
Again, he only entered that social issue when his campaign thought he needed some extra support.
questioned the science on global warming, refused to sign the kyoto protocol
Worse, he didn't question it. Instead, choosing to push taxpayer money to questionable companies run by his campaign contributors.
If you can't see how the Dems and Repubs are as intertwined as a Picasso painting, then you're just choosing not to look.
No, the Democrats are just as evil. Their use of divisive "group" politics where they attempt to split people and pit them against one another is proof enough. They do a better job of hiding it from the ill informed, but their sadistic tendencies are clear.
I was deeply impacted by the debates between Obama and McCain. It was two guys trying to one-up each other on what new government programs they would institute. No discussion about how all these new programs would be paid for, or how they fit within the overall framework of governance. Just, "I'm going to give you stuff if you vote for me." That's a sadistic lie.
The re-passage of things like the Patriot Act and the midnight signing of a law that eliminates habeas corpus from a bipartisan Congress only adds to the proof that both the major parties are evil.