RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Sinergy -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 12:15:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

I'm a realist.  A civil war would line the population up on one side or the other rather nicely.  Military matters are simplified when there's a clear deliniation between friend and foe.



This statement is a bit idiotic to me.

I am sorry that people no longer follow the tried and tested method, which you suggest they should, of dressing up in red uniforms with white cross belts, standing in a long line, and shooting at the other side until they ran away screaming.

The realistic aspect of warfare you speak of was proven unrealistic and obtuse during the American revolution, yet you still hang on to this 200 years later hoping that the enemy will stand in a nice line and get blown up with the machine guns that your side technologically developed to destroy men standing in lines.

The problem the US has is that their entire military is designed to fight a large scale tank war in Western Europe and Asia.  While it completely wiped out the Revolutionary Guard in Iraq (who also fought with that concept in mind) the insurgents never got the proper playbook, and are fighting a war of attrition based on tried and true principles tested and developed in hundreds of border wars the world over.

You can either learn from history, or continue to fight wars you cannot win until you crawl home with your tail between your legs.

I hope it works out for you.

Sinergy



Sinergy -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 12:16:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

The president is ELECTED through the electoral college. He is not appointed.

The reason why he is elected in this fashion is because the founding fathers believed that the average voter is an idiot. And they are right. Just look at the latest Obama-craze. You ask an Obama supporter why they like him and 9 out of 10 will say, "Uh....I like how he talks...."

It's not wonder how dictators like Hugo Chavez and Putin get elected...


I was saying the same thing when people were cheering for Flawed Intel.

Sinergy



celticlord2112 -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 1:26:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

I'm a realist. A civil war would line the population up on one side or the other rather nicely. Military matters are simplified when there's a clear deliniation between friend and foe.



This statement is a bit idiotic to me.

I am sorry that people no longer follow the tried and tested method, which you suggest they should, of dressing up in red uniforms with white cross belts, standing in a long line, and shooting at the other side until they ran away screaming.

The realistic aspect of warfare you speak of was proven unrealistic and obtuse during the American revolution, yet you still hang on to this 200 years later hoping that the enemy will stand in a nice line and get blown up with the machine guns that your side technologically developed to destroy men standing in lines.

The problem the US has is that their entire military is designed to fight a large scale tank war in Western Europe and Asia. While it completely wiped out the Revolutionary Guard in Iraq (who also fought with that concept in mind) the insurgents never got the proper playbook, and are fighting a war of attrition based on tried and true principles tested and developed in hundreds of border wars the world over.

You can either learn from history, or continue to fight wars you cannot win until you crawl home with your tail between your legs.

I hope it works out for you.

Sinergy



And your argument disproves my statement how?



caitlyn -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 5:54:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112
One has to make decisions today with information available today. Hand wringing over what ifs is how battles (and elections) are lost.


Couldn't help notice that in all the latest polls, the numbers have swung heavily in favor of the two Democratic candidates, vs. Senator McCain.
 
It's amazing how these well considered and accurate polls, can swing in the breeze like that.
 
It's a good thing our media doesn't use these things as a tool to keep rating high. That would be dreadful!!![;)]



farglebargle -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 7:01:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Farg seems to have missed the Sarcasm....


Yeah... Perhaps... But I do believe strongly that the "disconnect" in public/private life happened at the same time that the easy, ubiquitous transportation at the local level was dismantled. The shared resource provided a bonding opportunity.

Ah well... Look, those were the days when it was *work* to rig an election - and - at least on the local level, it actually meant something.

Now it's not only all *totally* fake, but "Society" has devolved to the point where people publicly advocate the commission of Felonies without fear of censure, and beyond that, seek to provide immunity for those crimes.

Torture
Spying
Treason

So many people stand up and support those values these days. I can't help thinking that if people rode together to go shopping the world would suck just a little less...




luckydog1 -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 9:57:09 AM)




ubiquitous



Main Entry:
ubiq·ui·tous [image]http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif[/image]
Pronunciation:
\yü-ˈbi-kwə-təs\
Function:
adjective
Date:
1830
: existing or being everywhere at the same time : constantly encountered : widespread <a ubiquitous fashion>   So you think trolleys were everywhere and constantly encountered at some point in the past?  Your view of history is often based on pure fantasy.  This is a perfect example.    We have never had more easy and ubiquitous travel for the little people in the USA than we do now.    



farglebargle -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 2:44:46 PM)

There is more to traveling than locking yourself in your own little box and getting from point a to point b.

My point is that there was a Pubic and Social component to it, which was essential for Healthy communities.



luckydog1 -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/8/2008 4:28:41 PM)

And my point that it was ubiquitous is nonsense.  Trolleys were not very common at all.  The vast majority of people never even saw one, except in pictures.  It's just fantasy.  And where they did exist they were racially segregated.  The vast majoprity of people got not social or community benefit from them.  When/ where exactly did these fantasy healthy communities with no fraud and ubiquitous trolleys exist?



thompsonx -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/10/2008 8:33:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

thompsonx, That's not the way it works in my state.  I doubt it does in any.

lucky:
As you have pointed out to us before you are "special" and you live in a "special" state....where you pay lower taxes than the rest of us and get welfare for just being a resident.
I am sure everyone wants to be as "special" as you.
thompson







thompsonx -> RE: Rush Limbaugh tells Texas Republicans to vote for Hillary (3/10/2008 9:01:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Is it true that the president is appointed by the electors? No he/she is elected by the elctors.
Is it  true that the electors are appointed by the legislature? No, each state gets to decide the method of allocating thier electors
Is it  true that there is no law that requires the electors to appoint the person who gets the most votes. Depends on the State
Is it true that the electors have appointed,on more than one occasion, someone to the presidency that did not receive the majority of the popular vote? Nope, they elected someone who did.  Bush in 2000, Clinton in 92 &96 (the Majority voted for someone other than Clinton, he won with 38% &46% of the vote), and a few other times going back in history
I would therefore submit that the president is appointed and not elected.    You can make up silly terminology all day if you like.  But if you want to change the Constitution, better get cracking on it.  The electoral colledge (and choosing of the President by weighted voting) is one of the bedrocks of our Federal Republic.  Otherwise you are just demanding to throw away the Constitution


 
I can only suggest that you are mistaken. 
The Supreme Court has ruled that the people have no right to vote for "electors".
I have not suggested we change the constitution nor throw it away. 
What I did say was that the president is appointed and not elected.
The electors appoint the president.
The legislature appoint the electors.
You may spin that anyway you want.
thompson








Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125