Lash
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 07:05 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Yeah, baby!
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 07:06 pm
@roger,
Hey man, people are pining for you over on facebook. What must we do to get you hither?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 07:26 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

Hey man, people are pining for you over on facebook. What must we do to get you hither?


What is the deal here, are you just using us cause you have something controversial that you want to talk about, then you will desert us for facebook again?
roger
 
  4  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 08:34 pm
@Lash,
I don't care if they are teaking for me, which I kind of doubt.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 09:34 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Frank, What you are saying is basically "nominate Hillary Clinton or the country gets destroyed."
This isn't politics, it's extortion.

I believe you misunderstand his intent.

Instead of extortion, think of him as saying something like: "Don't jump off that cliff or you'll be splattered all over the concrete at the bottom!"

If someone jumps off the cliff, he is not the cause of them being splattered all over the concrete at the bottom. He was just warning them of what he believes to be the inevitable result of jumping off the cliff.

That said, I don't think it matters. The Democrats are doomed. The 2013 gun control debacle sealed their fate. The Republicans are going to win in 2016 no matter what.


maxdancona wrote:
Anyway, the Supreme Court isn't going anywhere. There will be a Supreme Court in Washington no matter who takes the White House next year. Kennedy and Roberts were nominated by Republicans.

The Supreme Court is going WAY to the right.

Note the ages of the following left-wing justices:
Anthony Kennedy: 79
Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 82
Stephen Breyer: 77

Come 2016 none of them will be any younger. Eight more years of Republican appointees is going to have everyone referring to Antonin Scalia as "one of the old moderates".

Probably the first thing to go will be Roe vs Wade, since the pro-lifers have devoted so much to the Conservative cause. However, it won't be too long after that that we'll see the courts striking down all those outrageous gun laws.

Our freedom is just over the horizon.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 09:36 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Just for the record, Obama was perceived as a socialist (and a Muslim and a Kenyan).

And he had a plausible case to make that the accusations were untrue.

Sanders is provably a Socialist. He openly supports policies that would allow our foreign enemies to destroy us.

Note: I'm not saying that he wants our destruction to occur -- just that the policies that he advocates would cause it.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  3  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 09:48 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
That said, I don't think it matters. The Democrats are doomed. The 2013 gun control debacle sealed their fate. The Republicans are going to win in 2016 no matter what.


I hate to break it too you... most Americans don't give a crap about the 2013 gun control debacle (and all of the people who do give a crap were Romney voters anyway). This will have zero impact on the 2013 election.

I also hate to break it too you, but unless Sanders wins the primary, Hillary Clinton will be our next president.

Believe me, I am not much happier about this than you are.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 20 Aug, 2015 11:09 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
I hate to break it too you... most Americans don't give a crap about the 2013 gun control debacle (and all of the people who do give a crap were Romney voters anyway).

Doesn't matter. It's still going to sink the Democrats in 2016.


maxdancona wrote:
This will have zero impact on the 2013 election.

The 2013 gun control debacle resulted in Mr. Obama not achieving any legislative victories in his second term (unless we count things that the Republicans wanted even more than he did).

Come election day 2016, it will have been a long six years since he's had a legislative victory. That's going to lead to the voters swapping which party controls the White House.


maxdancona wrote:
I also hate to break it too you, but unless Sanders wins the primary, Hillary Clinton will be our next president.

Not possible. There is no way that any Democratic candidate can win the White House in 2016. No matter who they are or what they do or say, they will just fail to get traction.

It won't be their fault. It will be the result of Mr. Obama not having achieved anything in six years.


maxdancona wrote:
Believe me, I am not much happier about this than you are.

I have mixed feelings about Hillary.

I can't abide Clinton corruption. But aside from gun control issues (which admittedly are pretty important to me), Clinton/Obama policy closely mirrors my own viewpoint.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 06:41 am
@RABEL222,
Dang it, Rabel, Baldimo, oralboy, Hawkeye will start on the voter fraud cannard all over again!!!!

My advice is to vote the Chicago way: 'Vote early and vote often."
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 06:43 am
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM1PyqpUEAAZSxm.jpg
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 03:31 pm
@hawkeye10,
Haha. Nah. I just want Rog over there, and blamed other people.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 03:38 pm
@Lash,
Well, I am impressed with your willingness to buck A2K groupthink. I dont think I have seen this from you before though it might have happened.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 05:04 pm
@hawkeye10,
I'm actually not avoiding A2K.

My friends and I can still talk here, but there will relieve us from a few persistent trolls.



0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 05:05 pm
@roger,
I am oaking for you. And that's heavy stuff. Smile
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 05:52 pm
For Lash...

..."troll" means...

...someone who disagrees with her.
snood
 
  5  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 06:54 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Not the Webster's, that's for sure.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 07:17 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

Not the Webster's, that's for sure.


If Frank is right then Lash has adopted the standard A2K definition. I dont know that he is right, before now she has not tended to run in the same threads as me usually, and she has been gone a lot. I do like here threads on teaching and education, and I was impressed that she was willing to cash in her life for a man apparently. She certainly has some gumption.
snood
 
  4  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2015 07:56 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

snood wrote:

Not the Webster's, that's for sure.


If Frank is right then Lash has adopted the standard A2K definition. I dont know that he is right, before now she has not tended to run in the same threads as me usually, and she has been gone a lot. I do like here threads on teaching and education, and I was impressed that she was willing to cash in her life for a man apparently. She certainly has some gumption.


It's nice seeing people make new friends.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  3  
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2015 08:29 am
@hawkeye10,
Hawk,

I have to ask: when you're in a relationship, do you refer to that as cashing in your life for a chick? I can't imagine how you make that jump.

Here is why people prefer not to see Frank on most of the progressive threads:

concern troll
A person who posts on a blog thread, in the guise of "concern," to disrupt dialogue or undermine morale by pointing out that posters and/or the site may be getting themselves in trouble, usually with an authority or power. They point out problems that don't really exist. The intent is to derail, stifle, control, the dialogue. It is viewed as insincere and condescending.
A concern troll on a progressive blog might write, "I don't think it's wise to say things like that because you might get in trouble with the government." Or, "This controversy is making your side look disorganized."

It looks like he "shares his concern" after each and every post that calls his preferred candidate out for her corruption. A paid shill wouldn't post as much and say the same thing ad nauseum. He is a troll.

And I do much prefer your ideas to his. Smile At least they vary occasionally.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2015 08:34 am
@Lash,
http://fordntractor.com/products/photos/ABC050.jpg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bernie's In
  3. » Page 46
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/09/2022 at 08:08:00