Town halls gone wild

[Cold Fusion38]

I had some a$$hole acuse me of being a comunist the night Obama became our President. What a freaking moron.

 

[Vast LWC]

I had some a$$hole acuse me of being a comunist the night Obama became our President. What a freaking moron.

I usually just respond by telling the other person they're a "Corporate whore".

One good hyperbole deserves another.

 

[DiveCon]

Yes, I have. My point was not that the congressmen in question received money, but that they received substantially more than their counterparts from particular sources.

so, you bought influence? or did you donate because they already had expressed opinions you supported?

Frankly I donated because I was alarmed at the funding provided by Corporations and Special Interests, and felt that the only way to get any word in edgewise was to personally support a candidate of my choice financially.

If this were not a pre-existing necessity, I would not have donated at all.

But small donations from private citizens seem to be the only way to keep the tables balanced, and to keep DEMOCRACY in action.

When a Corporation donates millions, however, they are buying large chunks of a representatives attention, and representing a relatively small group of people. This is about as un-democratic as you can get.

Personally I'd rather see ALL donations done away with to campaigns.

uh, you messed up those quotes, YOU said whats in that top box

 

[Coyote]

Divecon, it will be a sunami in the 2010 elections. My two senators both democrats have not scheduled their town halls either, the chicken shits. I guess they all think they are the ruling class and don't have to answer to the people who sent them there in the first place.

Good news, Fox news is on this coverage like a wet blanket, their ratings have sky-rocketed, the news is getting out there and people are waking up to the Obama coma that they have been in. No one likes being called Un-american, carrying swasticas, Pelosi and her left wing nut cases are just digging a deeper and deeper hole. Hell, Obama is going to be lameducked by a bunch of scared democrats from his own party before we get the chance to vote them all out and kick them to the curb. There's will be a hard landing on their asses on the astroturf.

2010 elections eh? Good luck with that one Maple. I think you may be in for quite a surprise.

And I love how you're going on about FoxNews' "ratings".

There is a minority of Republicans in this country, but they still make up a very large number of people.

A great number of them will only watch FoxNews (because they refuse to listen to any viewpoiont but one they agree with), and everyone else splits their viewership between a variety of media sources. So FoxNews gets good ratings. Good for them.

Doesn't mean squat as far as national popular majorities go.

And as far as Pelosi and company talking about "Swastikas"?

Your nasty right-wing propaganda machine has been calling Democrats Nazis and Stalinists for some time now. Even calling the preseident of the United States a "racist", a "facist" and a "communist".

And now you're complaining about name-calling? LOL.

You have a lot more patience with hypocrisy than I do

 

[CrusaderFrank]

McCaskill just stated that she read the Senate bill then in the next sentence stated, there is no senate bill...WTF...we pay these stupid idiots?

Fool me once shame on you; fool me again and again, I must be a Democrat

 

[Vast LWC]

uh, you messed up those quotes, YOU said whats in that top box

Fixed. Any spelling errors or typos you noticed that need fixing?

 

[Terry]

McCaskill just stated that she read the Senate bill then in the next sentence stated, there is no senate bill...WTF...we pay these stupid idiots?

Fool me once shame on you; fool me again and again, I must be a Democrat

I rather die then belong to any party. I'm so screwed because there won't be anybody I see in the future who is worthy of my vote.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

McCaskill just stated that she read the Senate bill then in the next sentence stated, there is no senate bill...WTF...we pay these stupid idiots?

Fool me once shame on you; fool me again and again, I must be a Democrat

I rather die then belong to any party. I'm so screwed because there won't be anybody I see in the future who is worthy of my vote.

The system is rigged so that truly competent people would never even think of running!

 

[Terry]

isn't that the truth! I only know one way to change all that and it's not time.

 

[DiveCon]

uh, you messed up those quotes, YOU said whats in that top box

Fixed. Any spelling errors or typos you noticed that need fixing?

i never make comments about that since i make enough on my own
and the only time i ever point them out is when someone who has done it to me to deflect from the topic does it

cant stand arrogant pricks

 

[Vast LWC]

Fool me once shame on you; fool me again and again, I must be a Democrat

Yep, cause it was Democrats who were the big supporters of the war in Iraq, right?

WMD's, Al Qaeda training camps, being "welcomed with open arms", etc, etc.

 

[DiveCon]

Fool me once shame on you; fool me again and again, I must be a Democrat

Yep, cause it was Democrats who were the big supporters of the war in Iraq, right?

WMD's, Al Qaeda training camps, being "welcomed with open arms", etc, etc.

dems controled the Senate when the war was authorized

 

[Vast LWC]

Fool me once shame on you; fool me again and again, I must be a Democrat

Yep, cause it was Democrats who were the big supporters of the war in Iraq, right?

WMD's, Al Qaeda training camps, being "welcomed with open arms", etc, etc.

dems controled the Senate when the war was authorized

And Cons controlled the House. But it wasn't Dems who were the wars biggest supporters, now was it?

 

[DiveCon]

Yep, cause it was Democrats who were the big supporters of the war in Iraq, right?

WMD's, Al Qaeda training camps, being "welcomed with open arms", etc, etc.

dems controled the Senate when the war was authorized

And Cons controlled the House. But it wasn't Dems who were the wars biggest supporters, now was it?

and there you go, confusing conservative with republican

 

[Vast LWC]

dems controled the Senate when the war was authorized

And Cons controlled the House. But it wasn't Dems who were the wars biggest supporters, now was it?

and there you go, confusing conservative with republican

I'll give you one thing, there are a lot of Republicans out there that are not Conservative, at least when it comes to spending federal funds.

But as all the Republican members of congress, with very few exceptions, would label themselves "conservative", I'm not going to argue with them.

Especially since I feel the term "Cons" is a very good description in more ways than one.

 

[DiveCon]

And Cons controlled the House. But it wasn't Dems who were the wars biggest supporters, now was it?

and there you go, confusing conservative with republican

I'll give you one thing, there are a lot of Republicans out there that are not Conservative, at least when it comes to spending federal funds.

But as all the Republican members of congress, with very few exceptions, would label themselves "conservative", I'm not going to argue with them.

Especially since I feel the term "Cons" is a very good description in more ways than one.

that is something i can agree with
the GOP not being conservative is what got them where they are right now
and unless there are changes i wont be voting for any GOPers for a while

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Yep, cause it was Democrats who were the big supporters of the war in Iraq, right?

WMD's, Al Qaeda training camps, being "welcomed with open arms", etc, etc.

dems controled the Senate when the war was authorized

And Cons controlled the House. But it wasn't Dems who were the wars biggest supporters, now was it?

Now would this be the war which eliminated the most vociferous proponent if international Islamic Terrorism in the Middle east, until his timely demise at the hands of the Iraqi people? The war which successfully has removed a hostile, terrorist promoting Socialist regime with a democratically elected representative Republic and a US Ally in one of the most destablizing regions on earth?

And you were against that war? Is that what I'm reading here? You were in favor of leaving the most notorious, destabilizing terrorist in the Middle East to govern Iraq and to continue to foment Anti-American discontent; such as that which manifested itself on 9-11 through the brutal mass murder of 3000 innocent people?

So you actually ARE an audacious hoper of NO CHANGE then... Yet you worship at the trough of the BOY King, an advocate of CHANGE and the bower to Islamic Kings...

Fascinatin'...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I'll give you one thing, there are a lot of Republicans out there that are not Conservative, at least when it comes to spending federal funds.

But as all the Republican members of congress, with very few exceptions, would label themselves "conservative", I'm not going to argue with them. ...

ROFL... Most US Leftist lable themselves "Americans" and thats no more true than Republican Leftists labeling themselves as 'Americans'... OKA: Conservatives.

 

[Vast LWC]

dems controled the Senate when the war was authorized

And Cons controlled the House. But it wasn't Dems who were the wars biggest supporters, now was it?

Now would this be the war which eliminated the most vociferous proponent if international Islamic Terrorism in the Middle east, until his timely demise at the hands of the Iraqi people?

Oh my god, the Iraqis killed Osama Bin Laden??? Quick someone call the media!

The war which successfully has removed a hostile, terrorist promoting Socialist regime with a democratically elected representative Republic and a US Ally in one of the most destablizing regions on earth?

Which terrorists did Saddam Hussein promote that attacked the United States? Hmm?
And tell me this: Why would a "Socialist" promote the spread of radical Islam? I thought "socialists" were all a bunch of godless athiests?
Not to mention the fact that if one were to call Hussein "Terrorist Promoting" then:
1. The US, having backed the Hussein government for decades are equally culplable, and
2. Ronald Reagan can also be clearly defined as "Terrorist Promoting" for his support of the Contras, and the Mujahadeen.

And you were against that war? Is that what I'm reading here? You were in favor of leaving the most notorious, destabilizing terrorist in the Middle East to govern Iraq and to continue to foment Anti-American discontent; such as that which manifested itself on 9-11 through the brutal mass murder of 3000 innocent people?

Where do you even get this stuff?
"most notorious, destabilizing terrorist in the Middle East to govern Iraq"? What terrorist act did Hussein commit, ever?
The most "destabilizing" period of Hussein Government was when they went to war with Iran, an WE FUNDED THAT.
And, finally, once and for all IRAQ HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. No matter how many times you crazy right-wing fanatics tell yourselves that they did.
George Bush himself admitted that.

Now, don't get me wrong, Hussein was a tyrant, I agree, but he was toothless, and there were much greater threats that we needed to deal with at the time, that DIDN'T get dealt with.

WHERE'S OSAMA BIN LADEN??? Bush didn't catch him, did he?

Isn't Al Qaeda just as strong, if not stronger than they were before 9/11? Doesn't Al Qaeda still retain the ability to "Strike us at any time"? Just ask Dick Cheney, he'll tell you yes.

Which means that the Bush administration FAILED in their utmost mission in the War on Terror.

Why did they fail? Because of some moronic invasion of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

So you actually ARE an audacious hoper of NO CHANGE then... Yet you worship at the trough of the BOY King, an advocate of CHANGE and the bower to Islamic Kings...

Fascinatin'...

As opposed to your hero George Bush, who liked to hold hands and get intimate with the Saudi king, or your other hero, Reagan, who was a big fan of arming both Iran and Central American terrorists.

 

[Vast LWC]

I'll give you one thing, there are a lot of Republicans out there that are not Conservative, at least when it comes to spending federal funds.

But as all the Republican members of congress, with very few exceptions, would label themselves "conservative", I'm not going to argue with them. ...

ROFL... Most US Leftist lable themselves "Americans" and thats no more true than Republican Leftists labeling themselves as 'Americans'... OKA: Conservatives.

In the words of good ol' Ronnie: "There you go again."

Anyone who doesn't agree with your twisted view of the world is naturally "not an American", right?

Well, let me tell you bud, anyone who claims that Americans shouldn't be able to have different points of view is worse than un-American, they're traitors to everything America stands for.

Not that being traitorous is anything new to you, is it?