RE: GOP to the rescue.

RE: GOP to the rescue. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

cuckyman -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 9:54:35 AM)
I am out...things to do....AMF...

mnottertail -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 10:04:47 AM)
Well, I am looking at the fiasco in Nevada, and the conservatives have about fucked that up as perfectly as they could fuck it up, and I see no end in sight, nor do I see them as popular as individuals here think they are, they are gonna miss some boats. I think they are shooting themselves in the foot here, teabaggers are not mainstream, and they are going to suffer at the voting booth because of it, nowhere near what they could have picked up if they were slight of right.

MrRodgers -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 10:10:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cuckyman spend a lot of time READING.... but do stay informend on who is dishing out the propaganda.....and NBC is first on the list....along with the New York Times.... both are about broke, and MediaCom will change NBC, and maybe get rid of the propaganda machine that it has become.... Man...do you know anything at all not colored by your ignorant partisan bullshit ? Obviously there is a whole lotta reading you don't do...like this: July 16, 2010 \| 10:54 am Comcast Corp.'s timing on its multibillion deal to acquire controlling interest of NBC Universal is looking pretty good right now. General Electric Co. decided to unwind its interest in NBC Universal early last year when the media business seemed to be on the ropes. Comcast and GE finalized the deal in December and are waiting for regulators to approve the $30-billion transaction. The government's blessing is expected by the end of the year. On Friday morning, GE released its second quarter-earnings, and operating profit at its media unit was up 13% to $607 million compared with the period a year ago. Revenue at NBC Universal was up 5% to $3.75 billion, *which marked the biggest increase of any GE unit.* ___________________________________ After significantly scaling down costs, the NY times reported this morning upbeat Q1 2010 results, reporting a profit and growing digital advertising sales. NYT’s operating *profit grew more than fivefold* in the first quarter of 2010, to $83.3 million compared with $16.4 million in the first quarter of 2009. Total revenues were down 3.2% in Q1, to $587.9 million from $607.1 million in the same period last year. Most of the propaganda one reads in this forum...is from you. Just what do you know besides your ridiculous partisan swill ?

MrRodgers -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 10:20:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cuckyman I think you and those like you are about to get a big ole dose of reality come November.... and we will do what is necessary to throw Marxist out of this nation....you can bet the farm on that fact..... It is time for a rebirth of freedom, and Jefferson had it right a long time ago.... I simply say to the dems...bring it on....but be careful what you ask for, cause you just might get it..... Marxists in the US ? I am sure you are talking about the capitalist fascists on the right in this country. Point out those Marxists if you even know what they'd look and sound like...will you ? Midterms...repubs should not hold their breath...they might pass out. It is they who could be in for a rude awakening.

DomYngBlk -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 10:41:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cuckyman Bud I can hold my head up because I was a part of an effort to keep a country free.... and NO I did not, nor would fight for you..... obviiously you despise the military, could it be because you just don't measure up to being a soldier? Most democrats would not make a good pimple on a real soldier's ass.... My family has had veterans fight in WW!, WW2, and Viet Nam.... we don't owe anything to anybody.... when the nation called, we showed up..... that sir is called HONOR.... a term unfamiliar to most 'progressives'.... Yeah, like burning down villages and killing old men/woman, children....Napalm all over the jungles. Agent Orange dumped on the heads of people there. Fucking vietmanese women and giving them kids and then not recognizing the children as American? Yeah, something to hold your head up for.

pogo4pres -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 10:56:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: cuckyman The military was saddled with rusting ships.... no parts for aircraft...worn out everything when Carter was there..... Regan's military spending was NECESSARY to insure our very survival in the debacle of defeat in Viet Nam..... and the Star War threat was instrumental in th fall of the Soviet Union's collapse.... Odd how 'progressives' look at something real, and spin it into a fabrication.... MSNBC comes to mind in the present day.... maybe that is why no one is watching...and Obama's poll numbers are crashing....lies just don't sell anymore..... Bold statement cuck. Do you have any evidence to back it up? The only thing Reagan ever did with the military was win the battle of grenada after he got 300 marines slaughtered in Lebanon.......If you have something else then please shed some light 341 (or 343 depending on source) Marines, DomYng, I remember because in April 83 I separated and a few months later "KABOOM". And Cucky the USAF was not suffering for spare fucking parts I know because I was there. The USAF was wasting money hand over fist by buying a 600 dollar hammers, and 1500 dollar "high altitude" coffee makers. You tell me cucky if almost every aircraft mechanic on base had braided tubing, castellated grade 8 nuts, and wire holed grade 8 bolts, and two spools or more of safety wire and at least 1 pair of safety wire pliers, if that was not "waste". We spend roughly 1 trillion a year on defense (this includes all the hidden shit, like the cost of new nuclear tinker toys being charged off to the dept of energy) that figure is as much as the next FIFTEEN nations on the defense spending list, think we'd be in such a state if maybe we cut that to as much as say the next seven?? Your boy Ronnie while in charge when the Soviet Union collapsed was, to use a football analogy, the full back punching the ball into the end zone after 10 play 78 yard drive, yeah the fullback gets the score, but EVERY FUCKING OTHER MEMBER OF THE OFFENSE CONTRIBUTED. Just as every president before him contributed to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet empire. Politically, Some Knucklehead in NJ

MrRodgers -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 11:28:29 AM)
+ quote: ORIGINAL: pogo4pres quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: cuckyman The military was saddled with rusting ships.... no parts for aircraft...worn out everything when Carter was there..... Regan's military spending was NECESSARY to insure our very survival in the debacle of defeat in Viet Nam..... and the Star War threat was instrumental in th fall of the Soviet Union's collapse.... Odd how 'progressives' look at something real, and spin it into a fabrication.... MSNBC comes to mind in the present day.... maybe that is why no one is watching...and Obama's poll numbers are crashing....lies just don't sell anymore..... Bold statement cuck. Do you have any evidence to back it up? The only thing Reagan ever did with the military was win the battle of grenada after he got 300 marines slaughtered in Lebanon.......If you have something else then please shed some light 341 (or 343 depending on source) Marines, DomYng, I remember because in April 83 I separated and a few months later "KABOOM". And Cucky the USAF was not suffering for spare fucking parts I know because I was there. The USAF was wasting money hand over fist by buying a 600 dollar hammers, and 1500 dollar "high altitude" coffee makers. You tell me cucky if almost every aircraft mechanic on base had braided tubing, castellated grade 8 nuts, and wire holed grade 8 bolts, and two spools or more of safety wire and at least 1 pair of safety wire pliers, if that was not "waste". We spend roughly 1 trillion a year on defense (this includes all the hidden shit, like the cost of new nuclear tinker toys being charged off to the dept of energy) that figure is as much as the next FIFTEEN nations on the defense spending list, think we'd be in such a state if maybe we cut that to as much as say the next seven?? Your boy Ronnie while in charge when the Soviet Union collapsed was, to use a football analogy, the full back punching the ball into the end zone after 10 play 78 yard drive, yeah the fullback gets the score, but EVERY FUCKING OTHER MEMBER OF THE OFFENSE CONTRIBUTED. Just as every president before him contributed to the ultimate collapse of the Soviet empire. Politically, Some Knucklehead in NJ You are responding to a poster who has nothing, knows nothing but his attempts at partisan bullshit. Evaluating what effect presidents had in winning the cold war, (another war for profit) Carter will go down in history as having much more influenced the outcome...than Reagan. Gorbechev had as much or more influence in the end as Reagan. Reagan did nothing but give speeches. If one thinks that just building some ships, rebuilding a couple of useless battleships in our Navy had anything to do with it, clearly knows nothing of the that effect or the Navy's role on the cold war.

joether -> RE: GOP to the rescue. (8/17/2010 12:12:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So, what is the Grand Old Parties plans to get us out of our current difficulties? How will they create jobs? How will they balance payments, and pay down our debt? How will they fix our infrastructure? How will they deal with the global community to keep us safe and competitive? I'm listening. So, getting back to the original discussion. I've noticed the conservatives on here, have not answered any of the questions presented, but rather side-step or outright dodge each question. I have yet to hear one Republican in office, or running for office, give a clear, direct answer to any of the above for questions. Oh yes, they all blame the Democrats for failing at those things, and then give a very general, open, and 'typical politicatian's answer' to every question: They dont know, nor care; but do vote for them, so they can 'represent' you. So, conservatives, how about, instead of ducking responsibility (like Republicans did for 2000-2008) and answer the questions, indepth? I would just add one more question: What is considered 'Short Term', and 'Long Term', to Republicans? For Democrats, 'short term' seems to be about 2-4 years, while long term is 20-50 years.

Page: << < prev 6 7 8 9 [10]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125