1. Welcome To LPSG
    Welcome to LPSG.com. If you are here because you are looking for the most amazing open-minded fun-spirited sexy adult community then you have found the right place. We also happen to have some of the sexiest members you'll ever meet. Signup below and come join us.


Clear things up...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by conntom, Apr 16, 2010.

  1. conntom

    conntom Expert Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Posts:
    2,171
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston (MA, US)
    I detest big gov't.

    I don;t have a link. I don't have a news article. It is my own personal feelings.

    The way I see it - having gov't serve the people too much makes people lazy.

    It's like the parents that spoil a child. The kid never learns to take care of themselves.

    The old phrase about teaching people to fish and giving them a fish applies too.

    Someone once said - a gov't big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.

    A wise chinesse man once said something about the gov't being more dangerous than the tiger.

    Based on the history of gov'ts(all of them for recorded history) well, I would have to agree with the above two ideas and I'd rather not repeat history here in America.

    While I'm socially more liberal, fiscally I'm very conservative. This seems to be a problem for some and I get frustrated that I get pinned with labels I know do not fit me.

    I like talking politics but I'll probably be a little less vocal here because there isn;t much debate or learning going on here. Just rants and name calling and quotes out of context that just serves to stoke the fires of hate.

    Either way I'll be voting out Obama and at this point I have yet to find a candidate I really like.

    Best of luck to you all.
     
  2. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Posts:
    22,157
    Likes Received:
    31,085
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    Total RNC talking points. In other words......

    :bsflag:

    If you detest big government you must have had a very troubling 8 years under Bush. I've got a place for you Government Free Vacation.
     
    #2 sargon20, Apr 16, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2010
  3. justasimpleguy

    justasimpleguy Admired Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Posts:
    441
    Albums:
    7
    Likes Received:
    959
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alabama (US)
    Ideology isn't good enough to wipe your ass with. We need facts, statistics, science and hard study to better our society, not some bullshit about big government making people lazy.
     
  4. Levi

    Levi 1st Like

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Posts:
    41
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    England
    I am afraid your fantasys about living in some tax free, gun totting, nigger hanging right wing utopia are never going to happen, you can shout, you can start civil wars it really isnt going to work. You can try to 'educate' people as much as you like but sadly for you, most people on here are a bit brighter than you are.
     
  5. conntom

    conntom Expert Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Posts:
    2,171
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston (MA, US)
    Sargon...why do you assume I was happy with Bush?

    Levi - take that shit somewhere else.

    The responses here just prove my point. There is no discussion to be had here.
     
  6. maxcok

    maxcok Sexy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Posts:
    7,160
    Likes Received:
    92
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    Alrighty then. Ready, set, discuss:

    Cliche platitude and empty talking point. Does that also mean you detest big military, JAG?

    I don;t have a link. I don't have a news article. It is my own personal feelings.
    Shallow as they are, you pronounce them with great assurance. Yet they aren't your original thoughts at all, rather what you've been spoonfed from right-wing blogs and Faux News.

    The way I see it - having gov't serve the people too much makes people lazy.
    Platitude #2. So, what is "too much" in your opinion? Should we all build our own roads, haul our own water, provide our own police and fire protection, inspect our own meat and toys from China? Nevermind, clearly you only want government to provide what you personally benefit from, Right?

    It's like the parents that spoil a child. The kid never learns to take care of themselves.
    Platitude #3. See comments above.

    The old phrase about teaching people to fish and giving them a fish applies too.
    Platitude #4. Some people aren't capable of fishing. Should we let them starve?

    Someone once said - a gov't big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.
    How many damn platitudes are you going to post?

    A wise chinesse man once said something about the gov't being more dangerous than the tiger.
    Jeezhus. Platitude #6. How vague. See above. and above, and above, and above . . . .

    Based on the history of gov'ts(all of them for recorded history) well, I would have to agree with the above two ideas and I'd rather not repeat history here in America.
    Huh? Have no idea where you're going with that. Please enlighten us with your historical insights.

    While I'm socially more liberal, fiscally I'm very conservative. This seems to be a problem for some and I get frustrated that I get pinned with labels I know do not fit me.
    We hear this alot. You're not unique. The problem, and the irony is that like so many 'socially progressive' NeoCons, you believe the myth of Republicans being the party of fiscal responsibility. Historical evidence to the contrary is strikingly clear if you care to do a little research. If not, recent history should be evidence enough.

    You, like so many others, align with a party you profess to disagree with on virtually every other issue - except the promise they won't overtax those higher income brackets. It's personal greed, pure and simple. You just don't want anybody else to benefit from your good fortune.

    The irony is that you would do so much better under Democratic policies, and again, history proves it. Rather than 'trickle down' economics, think of a rising tide lifting all ships. We dodged a bullet with this financial crisis, but we're far from out of the woods. If Republicans have their way, we'll go right back in the ditch, and your investments won't be worth shit. Think about it.
    (I hope those simple figures of speech will help you comprehend.)

    I like talking politics but I'll probably be a little less vocal here because there isn;t much debate or learning going on here. Just rants and name calling and quotes out of context that just serves to stoke the fires of hate.
    No, what you like is 'enlightening' us all with your vapid pronouncements. While you're busy spitting out empty talking points you complain about the lack of learning?? Could not be more ironic.
    Anyway, if you can't play with the big boys . . .

    Either way I'll be voting out Obama and at this point I have yet to find a candidate I really like.
    Well, good luck with that. I'm sure somebody will tell you who to vote for, maybe Faux News?

    Best of luck to you all.
    Does this mean farewell??? :smile:

    You really don't give us much to 'discuss', but I did my best. What is absolutely clear about you and others of your mindset is you think that you and you alone are responsible for your financial success and the less fortunate are just lazy leeches. All your talk of personal responsibility means you just don't want to share the pie. 'I detest big gov't' is code for 'I'm a stingy bastard' and 'fuck everybody else'. It really is that simple. And transparent.
     
    #6 maxcok, Apr 17, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2010
  7. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Posts:
    22,157
    Likes Received:
    31,085
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis

    Yep...isn't that the most bullshit answer? The modern day Republican Party has NEVER been fiscally conservative. Bush I was the only one who tried and he was given his hat for doing it. It's all flat out lies and marketing fluff. They have no 'ideas' on how to balance the budget. If you are 100% against tax increases that only leaves spending cuts. This isn't nuclear physics. However they know the kind of spending cuts needed means they won't get elected again if they do it. So all they do is pay lip service.



    ALL the noise about the deficit and fiscal responsibility was non-existent during the Bush years and even the Reagan years. If you made noise about it then kudos for you. I was wrong. However that has not been the case in say 95.6429% of the time.
     
    #7 sargon20, Apr 17, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2010
  8. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Then move to a smaller, much less populated country and leave the rest of us out of your personal problems.

    You give no indication of wanting to actually discuss or learn anything, you just want to tell everyone what you think, and have them all nod in agreement... Sorry, but if you want to be widely respected, then you need to adhere to an ideology that is widely respected.
     
    #8 B_talltpaguy, Apr 17, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2010
  9. vince

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Posts:
    8,275
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,604
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    This thread is an example of the reason that myself and others barely take part in this forum.

    The poster did nothing in his OP and has done very little in his brief time here to deserve the abuse thrown his way. I don't agree with much of what he says either, but jeez guys... It another thread I read a poster say the teabaggers and the Republicians do nothing but "shout down the opposition". And yet.... here we are. And please... don't come back to me with the juvenile argument that "they did a first" lol.

    He's not in favor of big government and he doesn't agree with Obama. Big fucking deal. It doesn't mean his ideology isn't worthy to wipe his ass with. It doesn't make him a "nigger hanger" either.

    This method of "debate" is annoying and embarrassing and became tedious months ago. It is also indicative of public discourse in the US these days. Does everyone have to behave like a talking head on Fox News?

    Or it is just this medium that gives us big balls? If your neighbor said that he does like health insurance reform and he would be working to vote out Obama. would call him a nigger hanger? To his face?

    Ideology has completely replaced common sense.
     
  10. HazelGod

    HazelGod Sexy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Posts:
    7,158
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    26
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    +1
     
  11. dandelion

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Posts:
    13,297
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,693
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
     
  12. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    edited: misunderstood someone else's typo.
     
    #12 B_talltpaguy, Apr 17, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2010
  13. conntom

    conntom Expert Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Posts:
    2,171
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston (MA, US)

    I think health care reform was absolutely needed. I happen to think that without democrats it would never have gotten started. The republicans are on the issue out of need - not because they truely believe in it. BUt the form of HCR we are getting is not in the best interest of people or the country - yes...my opinion due to the way I see the world.

    His ties to racists is disturbing. I would not have voted for a white guy with a similar background.

    He makes fun of people like me for my beliefs. He says how I amuse him. He pokes at people who drive trucks, have guns and cling to a religion. I'm insulted by him.

    He apologizes for the US being a superpower.

    He calls the US public - basically decent people as a back handed compliment.

    He takes over GM. He continues what was started under Bush with the saving of banks that should be out of business.

    I believe that he and the people surrounding him in his administration are people that will, if allowed, change this country from what it is into something that I feel will be weaker and less successful of a nation.

    I watched him take sides without information during the Cambridge Police incident with his friend. His friend was the only racist in that situation.

    Has he done a few things I liked. Yes. But the bad outweighs the good for me.
     
  14. conntom

    conntom Expert Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Posts:
    2,171
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston (MA, US)

    Thank you.
     
  15. conntom

    conntom Expert Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Posts:
    2,171
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    243
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston (MA, US)


    W. Bush's first term gave me no real issues - he was handling 9/11 as well as I thought possible at that time.

    His second term went awfully wrong.

    The Repubs spent crazy like the Democrats we always complained of.

    The wars really got me though.

    Two things....

    1) I think we strayed from the Powell Doctrine. As an American, I think it is our duty to never send anyone into combat unless they are sent in to win and win with every tool and method available to us so that as many as possible return safely and that said conflict be one directly related to our national defense.

    2) How did Reagan bankrupt the USSR? He had them so scared we were everywhere - on the ground, in the sea and in SPACE. They spent themselves out of existence trying to fight off threats - including one that was made up !! Now, think about the fear we live with related to terrorism...we have to invade here and there, we have to spend spend spend in order to protect ourselves. We're allowing the terrorist to do to us what we did to the USSR.

    I hate debt and particularly debt I can not control and the national debt falls into that category!

    I credit Clinton for balancing the budget. But note....after two years in office he lost those midterm elections and it made him a much more centrist and better President. I wonder if the same will be said for Obama.
     
  16. LittleButt

    LittleButt Lurker

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Posts:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    Conntom: Just to answer a couple of your concerns here:

    1. Let's be honest: everyone knows racist people. At least Obama didn't attempt to send every white person back to Europe (Lincoln considered this you know). Judge a man by what he does, not who he knows.

    2. Obama poked fun at people who are frightened of change, not people who believe in God, guns and pickups. If you read the latest psychological literature you will understand that most of the FOX viewers and Teabaggers are terrified of change, the change that we see around us in this fast moving technological culture.

    3. Obama apologized for the US having a history of invading weaker cultures that did not go the way we wanted them to. IE: 78 times in Latin America alone between 1899 and 1981.

    4. I don't understand what you are saying here so...

    5. The US Government bailed out MANY companies. When they were stable we are currently selling back the stock WITH A HUGE PROFIT. The Government has already said they want out of GM the minute it can stand on on it's own two feet.

    6. Change of any sort is scary. Remember how frightened people were during Reconstruction, The Civil Rights Movement, etc? Give it time. He is trying to do what everyone knows needs to be done but cannot/will not do.

    7. Cambridge? Really? A man is confronted for breaking into his own house, shows the cop ID, was identified by neighbors and is arrested anyway? If that had happened in my home state the cop would have been shot at. Obama made a conservative comment. I personally was angered and outraged.

    8. I have never heard of the Powell Doctrine before. Usually it's called Foreign Relations: Fight a war to win it. (Here's a joke for you: FOX is discussing the new "Cheney Doctrine": breath air with the intention of living.

    9. Reagon increased the deficeit by 300% during his eight years. His smaller government idea increased the size of the Federal Government to it's largest post-war size in American History.

    10. A Centrist Democrat (n): A Democrat who votes Republican.

    Obama is not the evil out of control Jesus-hating, Black Panther-loving destroy America Muslim elitist that the Yellow Press FOX News calls him. Seriously, the only reason FOX has not been shut down years ago is because a.) Murdoch is the richest foreigner in the US, and b.) The Treason and Sedition Act was ruled unconstitutional.
     
  17. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    You think Obama is alone in thinking people with such an ideology are pathetic Americans? Check out the polls, the only people who like rednecks are other rednecks. Everyone else wishes you people would either grow up or shut up.
     
  18. Bbucko

    Bbucko Expert Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Posts:
    7,241
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    240
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    GWB's first term was when the Department of Homeland Security was established, creating yet another enormous governmental bureaucracy: just the type of "big gov't" approach you profess to "detest" and the single greatest expansion of entitlement since the 1960s in the form of Medicare Part D, which was passed without specific funding.

    Have you forgotten these minor details or are you just being disingenuous?
     
  19. TurkeyWithaSunburn

    TurkeyWithaSunburn Legendary Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Posts:
    3,562
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    1,099
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Denver (CO, US)
    Murdoch IS an American. He changed his citizenship so he could own, buy, control tv stations in the USA. He's an utter slimeball for money.
    Rupert Murdoch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  20. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    10,365
    Likes Received:
    34
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    And considering the negative stance several Fox viewers have on any form of immigration, the fact that the man that owns the station is a naturalized citizen makes the irony that much juicier.
     
  21. vince

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Posts:
    8,275
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,604
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah, but he's the "right kind" of immigrant. Know what I mean??
     
  22. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    ^Indeed, English speaking white people with money = come on in!

    Dark skinned people looking for an opportunity for themselves and their family = deadbeats who should go away and die.

    :rolleyes:
     
  23. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Posts:
    22,157
    Likes Received:
    31,085
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    Well we can agree on that point. Wars are expensive affairs and can be fiscally ruinous. Combining two expensive wars and a tax cut certainly went a long way to get us where we are.

    The democrats were always called ‘tax and spend’


    Yes Clinton did and I’ll never forget the Wall Street Journal running an editorial titled ‘Give It Back’. You see the government was running a surplus and it is in their view robbery. Never mind the surplus was going to pay down the debt and never mind it’s a good idea to run a surplus in good years so you don’t go into the hole too during the inevitable bad years. And never mind everyone knew the money should have been used to shore up government finances. Give it back they screamed. And Bush did.
     
  24. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    You forgot his ~$700 billion giveaway to big pharma (Medicare Part D)... I've yet to figure out why no one was criminally charged, or at least forced to resign over that one... The White House blatantly lied to Congress about the cost, and it was well known to Congress that they had been lied to.
     
  25. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    10,365
    Likes Received:
    34
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    vince: Yeah, but he's the "right kind" of immigrant. Know what I mean??
    talltpaguy: Indeed, English speaking white people with money = come on in!

    It's so good to know that among the rabid echoes of blinding ideology, some people really do get it.
     
  26. maxcok

    maxcok Sexy Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Posts:
    7,160
    Likes Received:
    92
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    With all due respect to you both, and I mean that sincerely, I disagree, at least in large measure. Levi's "nigger hanging" comment was uncalled for and beyond the pale. Other than that, I fail to see where any of the responses to the OP here were out of line. And yes, HazelGod, I imported your quote from another thread. It seemed more appropriate and efficient to make one response here, rather than repeating myself in that other thread. Speaking for myself, and I suspect it goes for many of the "regulars" here, I make every effort to gauge my comments relative to the poster I am responding too. For example, my responses to curiousme, a new poster in the thread where HG made his comment, well illustrate that. My responses to others are often influenced by that poster's previous history, as is the case with conntom.

    These are not matters of simple disagreement. There are posters here such as conntom, stratedude, KTF40, Trinity and others who habitually and repeatedly post the same uninformed, frequently absurd statements, empty platitudes and mindless talking points - spoonfed propaganda from right-wing media - over and over in thread after thread regardless of the topic. Talking points that at their source are factually incorrect and devoid of any basis in reality. As they refuse to link anything to back up their assertions (with the exception of Trinity, for whatever those sources are worth) it becomes incumbent on us to post links to independent sources disproving their statements. Even when we do, they refuse to accept or even acknowledge it. Instead, they reject clear evidence to the contrary and continue in the same line. It becomes very annoying and tiresome after awhile, and it is as disruptive to serious discussion as any other bad behavior. Left to their own devices they will completely dominate the 'discussion' with this repetitive drivel. Even if I try to ignore them, which I do more often than not, someone else is bound to engage them and the whole thread goes to shit.

    But aren't all opinions equally valid? I would say no. Not when they are devoid of original thought, rooted in unexamined ideology and flagrantly flawed reasoning - and especially when they are blanket statements presented as fact. They become even less valid through mindless repetition - after they have been disproven again and again. Typically when challenged, these posters will ignore the challenge to their position, deflect, distract, dissemble and continue to spout more inane pronouncements. Their position is "it's true because I think it (because [Hannity, Beck etc.] told me so)". When the challenges become too overwhelming and obvious to ignore, they typically abandon that thread and pop up in another to start the whole process over again from scratch They don't respond to reason, they are incapable of engaging in honest debate, so I ask you, what's a frustrated political junkie to do?

    Speaking for myself, I have no interest in wasting my time and mental energy going back to political kindergarten again and again, digging up links, trying to argue against such inane pointless premises over and over, when there are educated and enlightened adults with whom I could be having a meaningful exchange of ideas or even learn something from - adults like you, HazelGod and Vince, among others. It is for this reason more than the rancor that I avoid participating in many threads. Often I just read to educate myself and broaden my point of view, and I have no particular intention of posting. Inevitably though, one of these mindless neocons starts spouting off and throws the whole thing off track. I sometimes find myself jumping in at that point to try to move the discussion back to something relevant, with admittedly mixed success.

    A few, notably conntom, are very good at appearing good natured and reasonable in the face of opposition, because they've figured out this shields them from being shot down so quickly or so thoroughly. They are good at appearing like innocent victims, as CT does here, and making their challengers look like jerks. It's a lawyerly (JAG) technique, it's passive/aggressive, and it may be the thing he does best. I'll bet he uses it to great advantage in the courtroom. This thread is nothing more than him saying, "I really am a nice guy, and if you aren't nice to me I'm going to take my marbles and go home". Forgive me if I don't fall for it. Just because he puts a 'who, me?' smiley face of innocence on his statements does not make them any more palatable, nor does it make him any less disingenuous. It may make him more insidious. The fact that he started two new upbeat threads to distract and deflect from unanswered challenges to his very provocative statements in another thread, at the same time sending me a PM to protest his innocence and attempt to mollify me - rather than being a man and reponding in the thread - should not be overlooked either.

    It will probably come as a surprise to many that I am by nature a very laid-back congenial guy. However, I have a low tolerance for bullies and blowhards, in whatever guise they appear. Incidentally, I did not shy away from taking one of the most visible libs here to task for an over-the-line attack on one of the most visible neocons either. If my responses or those of others seem a bit heavy handed at times, I think it's helpful to understand the history. It's also helpful to understand that there are certain posters, beyond those mentioned here, who don't seem to respond to anything else but a good hard knock. I haven't been here that long, three or four months in the political forum, but it seems to me that rather than going downhill, the tenor and tone has actually improved in that time. There are a number of notorious right-wing trolls who used to show up in every thread but now rarely make an appearance. If they do, their comments seem better tempered. I think that is directly attributable to the actions of posters who will not hesitate to shoot them down in no uncertain terms. Should it be this way? I would prefer not, but that's they way it is.

    It's natural that this forum would be a reflection of the national political discourse, both in style and substance. Politics has always been a blood sport, and that was never truer than it is today. I think most Americans find the rancor and vitriol apalling, as do I, as I have said here on many occasions. I have also seen what happens when reasonable people try to maintan a reasonable 'debate' with an opposition that doesn't play by the same rules - an opposition that will use any trick in the book to dominate the discussion, gain political advantage and move the subject off track. It is these tactics I fault right-wing media and politicians for most. Playing too soft while the opposition spins the debate out of control is the thing I fault the Democrats and other progressives for most - and the president in particular during his first year in office. Finally standing up strongly to the opposition and moving the discussion back on track is the thing I credit the president with most.

    Should everyone be a policeman? Of course not, certainly not if they're not comfortable in that role. However, at the end of the day we all benefit from those willing to do the dirty work and take a strong stand against any kind of dishonesty, abuse or tyranny, whether it is here or in the wider world. You both have much of value to contribute here, and speaking for myself at least, your presence is always appreciated. Standing on the sidelines and criticizing the tenor of the debate strikes me as a little, oh I don't know, judgemental? superior? condescending?? If you don't like the direction the forum has taken, then I would encourage you and other disgruntled posters to be engaged and help move it in another direction.
     
    #26 maxcok, Apr 18, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2010
  27. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Posts:
    22,157
    Likes Received:
    31,085
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    There are so many crimes from the Bush years that apperently will go unpunished it's just breathtaking. Every time I see Karl Rove on FoxFauxFixed news I wonder why this man isn't in jail? How can this be America when you can apparently get away with firing US attorney's for political advantage. Why isn't Alberto Gonzales in jail too?
    +10
     
    #27 sargon20, Apr 18, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2010
  28. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    wtf? No idea how I posted into this thread... lol... ignore
     
  29. Smooth88

    Smooth88 Sexy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Posts:
    1,688
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Essex County, New Jersey
    Politics as the years go by, especially with the creation of the 24 hours news cycle, the "news" channels, and the blogosphere where everyone can say anything and anything you do or say is put under a microscope, dissected, and in many cases misconstrued has become more and more divisive.

    Any incompetent moron with a keyboard can say shoot off at the mouth and some peope will run with it. That's the nature of politics today. A blood sport and a war of (in this case human) attrition.
     
  30. 1kmb1

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Posts:
    770
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    169
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Tucson (AZ, US)
    Verified:
    Photo
    can you provide an example?
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice