I Hate Liberals and Democrat Voters

[Quick Karl]

So much for passing something to see what's in it.

I suspect that they all knew what was in in, but pretended they didn't know what was in it, so they could continue to pretend they didn't know what was in it when the shit hit the fan. Now they will blame the Insurance companies for it, because the Insurance Companies WROTE the Bill that they "didn't" read, but trusting the rich Insurance companies to write the bill, was actually a wise thing to do, at the time...

That almost sounds as convoluted as something that Nancy would actually say! If she gets on TV and actually says something like this, I am going to start charging for my predictions.

[ItsOver]

I suspect that they all knew what was in in, but pretended they didn't know what was in it, so they could continue to pretend they didn't know what was in it when the shit hit the fan. Now they will blame the Insurance companies for it, because the Insurance Companies WROTE the Bill that they "didn't" read, but trusting the rich Insurance companies to write the bill, was actually a wise thing to do, at the time...

That almost sounds as convoluted as something that Nancy would actually say!

Could be, since we seem to have Sgt. Schultz as the Prez.

[Quick Karl]

Could be, since we seem to have Sgt. Schultz as the Prez.

In the best organization I ever worked for, the owner never once used the word "I" or "my". Every single success we had he gave 110% credit to the team, and on the few occasions we had setbacks, he took 110% of the responsibility for them.

That's what leadership is really about, everything else is bullshit.

[ItsOver]

In the best organization I ever worked for, the owner never once used the word "I" or "my". Every single success we had he gave 110% credit to the team, and on the few occasions we had setbacks, he took 110% of the responsibility for them.

That's what leadership is really about, everything else is bullshit.

Agree.  Bystander Barry's theme song:

The Crystal Method "Busy Child"

[awake]

Our next President!

I think you may want to look at any poll run by Nate Silver rather than whatever source you currently employ.  Oh, and apropo of nothing; Rand plagiarized wikipedia yesterday while giving a speach at liberty university. 
Just in case anyone wishes to google it, here is a some help: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/rachel-maddow-rand-paul-wikipedia-99015.html and here http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2013/10/29/rand-paul-uses-wikipedia-for-eugenics-speech[size=78%]/[/size] . 
The speech itself was strange and the plagiarized portions really seemed out there in relation to the topic which was that Virginia should elect ken "the cooch" cuccinelli (I swear it is his given nickname). 
Here's a nice article on how that race is going : http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/29/ken-cuccinelli-making-bad-candidate-history-in-virginia.html.

I understand that you are unhappy with the way things are but your views are not those of the majority of the nation.  But here's something you may wish to consider:

The Republican Party gerrymandered districts which removed any Democratic challenge to the seats.  This was great except that the party lost control of the primary process.  Now the party is being challenged by big money PACS at every turn meanwhile the party is losing financial type donors over the shut down.  AND if the Supreme Court strikes down the law restricting the amount of money any one person can give to a candidate (It was a case heard by the court this month) things will get worse for the Republican Party.  Billionaires will simply buy a candidate.  If a candidate can avoid the time consuming fundraising process with ONE check from one of the Koch brothers it will happen.  If that occurs what leverage does the party have, how can the leaders of the party move forward with an agenda for the country if their members have an agenda of their own? 

[PB the Deplorable]

Poverty by state rankings
125% Poverty Level and Below - LowerHouse/UpperHouse/Pres/Gov
1. Mississippi 22.0%  Dem/Rep/Rep/Rep
2. Louisiana 21.1% Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
3. New Mexico 20.4% Dem/Dem/Dem/Rep
4. Arkansas 20.1%  Dem/Dem/Rep/Dem
5. Arizona 19.0% Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
6. Tennessee 18.6%  Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
7. District of Columbia 18.4%
8. Georgia 18.1% Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
9. Oklahoma 18.0%  Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
10. Kentucky 17.9% Dem/Rep/Rep/Dem
11. North Carolina 17.2% Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep

Rep = 32    Dem = 8

US News Ranks Poorest States  LowerHouse/UpperHouse/Pres/Gov
1. Mississippi US News rank 1  Dem/Rep/Rep/Rep
2. Arkansas US News rank 2  Dem/Dem/Rep/Dem
3. Tennessee US News rank 3  Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
4. West Virginia US News rank 4  Dem/Dem/Rep/Dem
5. Louisiana US News Rank 5  Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
6. Montana US News rank 6  Rep/Rep/Rep/Dem
7. South Carolina US News rank 7  Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
8. Kentucky US News Rank 8  Dem/Rep/Rep/Dem
9. Alabama US News rank 9  Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep
10. North Carolina US News rank 10 Rep/Rep/Rep/Rep

Rep = 30   Dem = 10

What this shows is that the bottom 20th percentile of states are southern and rural.  Historically they've tended to be poorer than the rest of the country.  I would guess the next lowest 20th percentile would be similar, along with a few border states and states whose factory jobs have been exported.

These states are not one-party fiefdoms held un-opposed by the R's for decades.  There isn't a list of specific Conservative policies one can point to to explain why these states rank lowest. 

The people in states like these have been voting R lately because they don't trust government, aren't looking for lifelong welfare handouts, and aren't the urban elite who want to run our lives.

[awake]

That's the part that isn't going to work - great for Iacocca and a TV commercial, but that isn't how he worked with leadership, management, and assembly line workers to revive the company - they ALL compromised. The part we are missing is the Leadership to bring the parties together, something people said Iacocca would NOT be able to do.

And if you don't think the ACA rollout was bungled, badly, I'm not sure we can have a productive conversation. Would you rather I have said it looks like a highly qualified professional was responsible for it?

Once again, the greater flaw with the ACA is that is was rammed down America's throat without even the appearance of trying to reach a compromise that even the most progressive of Republicans in the Congress or The Senate would have voted for - not one single Republican in either house voted for it - heck, not even the pretend Republicans McCain, Graham or Peter King voted for it!

That flaw will haunt the democrats and the ACA for a looooooong time. Every time something goes wrong with it, it will be on their shoulders. That is a political blunder.

I am not a fan of the "Straw-Man" Fallacy because the phrase is overused BUT....straw-man, straw-man, straw-man.  I thought you were responding to my post because you quoted it but your responses in no way relate to what I wrote.  If you wish refute something I said, please do but commenting on these made-up talking points is just a bit silly.  Having said that you did mention the "lead, follow or get out of the comment.  You selected the last, throw-away, line of my post and nothing else so I could suggest that your silence meant agreement, but that is also a fallacy. 


I think you know that I was speaking of the recalcitrance of the Republican party and leadership before, during and after the passage of the Affordable Care Act.  The comment that the law was rammed down anyone's throat is demonstrably untrue and if you are unaware of that, shame on you. 


I not only mentioned the origin of the Affordable Care Act, I provided a link to the article discussing that VERY topic.  You have chosen to ignore, that link and apparently all of the others.  I thought you might. 


I'm am happy to have the mantle/legacy of the Affordable Care Act, so thanks for being on the wrong side of this issue too.


I agree that we likely have nothing much else to say to each other, you will have better luck debating your own questions.  Best of luck with the hate.

[Quick Karl]

I think you may want to look at any poll run by Nate Silver rather than whatever source you currently employ.  Oh, and apropo of nothing; Rand plagiarized wikipedia yesterday while giving a speach at liberty university. 
Just in case anyone wishes to google it, here is a some help: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/rachel-maddow-rand-paul-wikipedia-99015.html and here http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2013/10/29/rand-paul-uses-wikipedia-for-eugenics-speech[size=78%]/[/size] . 
The speech itself was strange and the plagiarized portions really seemed out there in relation to the topic which was that Virginia should elect ken "the cooch" cuccinelli (I swear it is his given nickname). 
Here's a nice article on how that race is going : http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/29/ken-cuccinelli-making-bad-candidate-history-in-virginia.html.

I understand that you are unhappy with the way things are but your views are not those of the majority of the nation.  But here's something you may wish to consider:

The Republican Party gerrymandered districts which removed any Democratic challenge to the seats.  This was great except that the party lost control of the primary process.  Now the party is being challenged by big money PACS at every turn meanwhile the party is losing financial type donors over the shut down.  AND if the Supreme Court strikes down the law restricting the amount of money any one person can give to a candidate (It was a case heard by the court this month) things will get worse for the Republican Party.  Billionaires will simply buy a candidate.  If a candidate can avoid the time consuming fundraising process with ONE check from one of the Koch brothers it will happen.  If that occurs what leverage does the party have, how can the leaders of the party move forward with an agenda for the country if their members have an agenda of their own? 

All I know is that Ted Cruz scares the panties off the left, and I get such a kick out of that I can't even begin to describe - it's like a chill runs up and down my leg (I know, I'm plagiarizing a speech Chris Matthews gave)...

Let the Crusade to restore the Republic begin! I can't wait...

I get it, you don't like the political and social philosophies I like. Don't let it ruin your day!

[Yorkshire pud]

In the best organization I ever worked for, the owner never once used the word "I" or "my". Every single success we had he gave 110% credit to the team, and on the few occasions we had setbacks, he took 110% of the responsibility for them.

That's what leadership is really about, everything else is bullshit.

...and of course he was a politician? Naaa.. not really. Obama doesn't obfuscate any more or less than any other politician; with the notable exception of Aung San Suu Kyi; I don't expect you've heard of her, but she has more guts and sheer power of determination than anyone on this forum, especially those who yell from their ball less crotch 'I hate liberals, and think they have a mental disorder'... Liberal? Aung San Suu Kyi, could be well described as being so.. And if she's suffering from a mental disorder, the ones who rail against what she stands for need some very serious supervison, and not allowed near sharp objects or water.

[Quick Karl]

...and of course he was a politician? Naaa.. not really. Obama doesn't obfuscate any more or less than any other politician; with the notable exception of Aung San Suu Kyi; I don't expect you've heard of her, but she has more guts and sheer power of determination than anyone on this forum, especially those who yell from their ball less crotch 'I hate liberals, and think they have a mental disorder'... Liberal? Aung San Suu Kyi, could be well described as being so.. And if she's suffering from a mental disorder, the ones who rail against what she stands for need some very serious supervison, and not allowed near sharp objects or water.

ALL "leaders" are politicians - in government, in business, in schools, in sports, and in families.

There are good leaders, and there are bad leaders; party affiliation and/or philosophical bent has little to do with the difference.

I prefer Gandhi over any of them, but look what happened to him!

[Quick Karl]

I am not a fan of the "Straw-Man" Fallacy because the phrase is overused BUT....straw-man, straw-man, straw-man.  I thought you were responding to my post because you quoted it but your responses in no way relate to what I wrote.  If you wish refute something I said, please do but commenting on these made-up talking points is just a bit silly.  Having said that you did mention the "lead, follow or get out of the comment.  You selected the last, throw-away, line of my post and nothing else so I could suggest that your silence meant agreement, but that is also a fallacy. 

I think you know that I was speaking of the recalcitrance of the Republican party and leadership before, during and after the passage of the Affordable Care Act.  The comment that the law was rammed down anyone's throat is demonstrably untrue and if you are unaware of that, shame on you. 

I not only mentioned the origin of the Affordable Care Act, I provided a link to the article discussing that VERY topic.  You have chosen to ignore, that link and apparently all of the others.  I thought you might. 

I'm am happy to have the mantle/legacy of the Affordable Care Act, so thanks for being on the wrong side of this issue too.

I agree that we likely have nothing much else to say to each other, you will have better luck debating your own questions.  Best of luck with the hate.

I have a suggestion - get yourself a big mirror and situate it such that you can see yourself when you are typing these responses...

[NowhereInTime]

I have a suggestion - get yourself a big mirror and situate it such that you can see yourself when you are typing these responses...

This is what Quickie does to simulate another human being touching him.  As if.

[PB the Deplorable]

...and of course he was a politician? Naaa.. not really. Obama doesn't obfuscate any more or less than any other politician...

Obama has hidden all records of his life - or worse fabricated them, like his phony birth certificates - and if he can't blame his failures and scams on someone else, then he denies knowing a thing about any of it.

Just as Bill and Hillary Clinton took lying and scandal to a whole new level, Obama has taken stealth, secrecy, blame, and 'I-didn't-know' to a whole new level.


Gotta love these Libs.  When someone else is a shit politician, they're all over it - when it's their guy, it's 'well they're all the same'. 

[PB the Deplorable]

...  Aung San Suu Kyi; I don't expect you've heard of her, but she has more guts and sheer power of determination than anyone on this forum...

... Liberal? Aung San Suu Kyi, could be well described as being so...

There you go again.

You love to trot out your dictionary and say this or that respected leader is a Liberal, based on the definition. 

But calling people 'Liberals' now suggests they are tax & spenders that support failed social policies.  It's disingenuous to refer to someone like, say, Thomas Jefferson as a Liberal, and I doubt the modern political definition describes Aung San Suu Kyi either.

[NowhereInTime]

There you go again.

You love to trot out your dictionary and say this or that respected leader is a Liberal, based on the definition. 

But calling people 'Liberals' now suggests they are tax & spenders that support failed social policies.  It's disingenuous to refer to someone like, say, Thomas Jefferson as a Liberal, and I doubt the modern political definition describes Aung San Suu Kyi either.

The "modern definition" you, Lee Atwater, Don Regan, and Ronald Reagan managed to hang onto Liberals in the 80's to villify them.
Your "modern definition" is horseshit code for long haired, tree hugging, union supporting, tax and spending children.  And it was "Hannitized" in the last ten years to now mean "and Hates America." 
It is disingenuous code and it has lost most of its lustre as, with anything conservatives say and do, the light of truth erodes its dark, sickly prevarication.

[Yorkshire pud]

There you go again.

You love to trot out your dictionary and say this or that respected leader is a Liberal, based on the definition. 

But calling people 'Liberals' now.....

Now? Who says? You? Or all people who share your biased and unqualified political viewpoint? Presumably you'd see it as unfair and erroneous (as I do) to describe all Republicans as card carrying KKK members but some were ejected for being too extreme? But their bigoted and backward attitude is justified because they all loved their mum and knew the lords prayer word perfect and they're essentially great examples of humanity? See how arbitrary definitions (Republican) can get twisted and well away from their original (and correct) definitions. You seem to try and make mileage with your ludicrous mocking when I present true definitions; it could go a way to explaining why 45 million plus American young and older adults are effectively illiterate.

suggests they are tax & spenders that support failed social policies.  It's disingenuous to refer to someone like, say, Thomas Jefferson as a Liberal, and I doubt the modern political definition describes Aung San Suu Kyi either.

Your modern political definition. Or those who use it to try and effect an insult; the way some think telling a man he's a 'faggot'. The premise being I presume that homosexuality should be seen as an insult? Still I can't see any true Reps being so restricted that way. 

You want the supreme irony? Those in the UK who want a people (communist) led non government, accounting to no-one but themselves and crucially eliminate the Royal family and all it's apparatus (as well as parliament and all the palaces) are known as ......(Go on, guess?)

Yep, Republicans. As you say PB, modern definitions

This sums it up perfectly.
The Newsroom First Scene

[PB the Deplorable]

Now? Who says? You? Or all people who share your biased and unqualified political viewpoint? Presumably you'd see it as unfair and erroneous (as I do) to describe all Republicans as card carrying KKK members but some were ejected for being too extreme?...

You do know the KKK members were Democrats, and the KKK was set up specifically to harass blacks and Republicans?

... You want the supreme irony? Those in the UK who want a people (communist) led non government, accounting to no-one but themselves and crucially eliminate the Royal family and all it's apparatus (as well as parliament and all the palaces) are known as ......(Go on, guess?)...

Umm, the term for "a people led non-government accounting to no-one but themselves" is 'Anarchy'.  That should even be in your dictionary.  I think the Anarchists have been given a bad name by Hollywood and that they are actually on the right track - although I'd argue we need some small limited government.

The group wearing black that covers their faces and marches with Occupy also claim to be Anarchists.  They are not. 


Communism is on the far end of the spectrum, as far away from "a people led non-government accounting to no-one but themselves" as one can possibly get.  Or did you miss the major events of the 20th Century?

Communism must be forced on a nation at gunpoint.  Those still resisting will be shot.  There needs to be a massive cumbersome awful bureaucracy to determine what and how much each factory is to make, what and how much each farm is to grow, where every bit of raw material goes.  They determine what education and jobs everyone is going to have, where they are going to live, and who gets what.  This is all in addition to the normal government functions.   Anyone who might resist or be an enemy of the new order must be shot - professors, business owners, farm owners, clergy, community leaders, union leaders.  When things start to fail, scapegoats are found - gays, intellectuals, minorities.

What you are talking about is a collective or commune.  That can only work on a small farm or business somewhere when everyone volunteers to do so.  It can't possibly work on anything larger scale than that or when it's imposed on people.  Well over 100 million murdered for this 'cause' should have suggested that.

[PB the Deplorable]

Now? Who says? You? Or all people who share your biased and unqualified political viewpoint?...

If you think they are both just 'Liberals', could you post a list of what you think Thomas Jefferson and Barrack Obama have in common.  Please be specific.

[aldousburbank]

If you think they are both just 'Liberals', could you post a list of what you think Thomas Jefferson and Barrack Obama have in common.  Please be specific.

Both grew hemp?

[Yorkshire pud]

If you think they are both just 'Liberals', could you post a list of what you think Thomas Jefferson and Barrack Obama have in common.  Please be specific.

I don't think (in fact I'm certain) I said Obama was a liberal, you did.

Their commonality off the top of my head? They both have five vowels in their names? Do I get a pwize?

[ItsOver]

Both grew hemp?

Did they both inhale?

[aldousburbank]

A thing for sistas?

[PB the Deplorable]

I don't think (in fact I'm certain) I said Obama was a liberal, you did.

Their commonality off the top of my head? They both have five vowels in their names? Do I get a pwize?

My bad.  You absolutely did say Obama is a right-winger. 

[ItsOver]

A thing for sistas?

[Yorkshire pud]

My bad.  You absolutely did say Obama is a right-winger.

Indeed I did. Not say in comparison with Genghis Khan or Nero, or any number of despots. But he isn't liberal either; cos I think a certain German chancellor might take issue with that and give short shrift to that definition at this present time.

[Quick Karl]

I just can't wait for Ted Cruz to get elected so the Crusade can begin...

[Quick Karl]

CNN Falls To Lowest Primetime In Over A Year; Fox’s Megyn Kelly Returns To Cable News Ratings Top Spot

http://www.deadline.com/2013/10/cnn-falls-to-lowest-primetime-in-over-a-year-foxs-megyn-kelly-returns-to-cable-news-ratings-top-spot/

Right thinking women are just smarter and better looking -- it's in the genes and is a product of evolution so you can't argue against it.

[NowhereInTime]

CNN Falls To Lowest Primetime In Over A Year; Fox’s Megyn Kelly Returns To Cable News Ratings Top Spot

http://www.deadline.com/2013/10/cnn-falls-to-lowest-primetime-in-over-a-year-foxs-megyn-kelly-returns-to-cable-news-ratings-top-spot/

Right thinking women are just smarter and better looking -- it's in the genes and is a product of evolution so you can't argue against it.

Glad you approve, Rush-bo!  I'm sure she'd treasure the Quick Karl Lurid Leer of Approval! No, really, like all women, I'm sure she NEEDS you!
But, by God, you're not a misogynist!  Keep protesting!

[NowhereInTime]

I just can't wait for Ted Cruz to get elected so the Crusade can begin...

I just can't wait for Halloween to be over so people realize that's not just a horrifying costume and mask you have on...

[PB the Deplorable]

Indeed I did. Not say in comparison with Genghis Khan or Nero, or any number of despots. But he isn't liberal either; cos I think a certain German chancellor might take issue with that and give short shrift to that definition at this present time.

Try as he might, he just can't fool you, since  only right-wing regimes ever do any spying.   One more puzzle piece proving Obama' s right-wingness.  How did I miss that.