"After the elections"

"After the elections" (Full Version)

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

Message

Sanity -> "After the elections" (10/3/2014 5:51:03 AM)
"Really really this time" "I am with the illegals, the lawbreakers" "Rode over here with illegals" http://fusion.net/story/19540/obama-tells-frustrated-latinos-im-going-to-need-you-to-have-my-back/ Grow some balls, little man If its the right thing to do in your book, then do it now

mnottertail -> RE: "After the elections" (10/3/2014 7:12:45 AM)
His balls sit atop your head, sonny. He is doing it even as we speak, your caterwauling having no effect.

Zonie63 -> RE: "After the elections" (10/3/2014 7:37:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity "Really really this time" "I am with the illegals, the lawbreakers" "Rode over here with illegals" http://fusion.net/story/19540/obama-tells-frustrated-latinos-im-going-to-need-you-to-have-my-back/ Grow some balls, little man If its the right thing to do in your book, then do it now The immigration issue is tricky for both parties, trying to balance out various factions who have different reasons for either supporting immigration reform or just continuing with the status quo. It's also tied in with other issues related to economic policy, foreign policy, and border security. So, it's a very complicated enchilada on the President's plate, trying to placate different factions. None of his predecessors seemed to be able to figure out what to do either. For a while, it seemed the Administration was concentrating more on those who employ illegal immigrants, not so much on the immigrants themselves. That might be the better approach. But there need to be laws with some real teeth in them that will provide for stiff fines and long jail terms for those who employ illegal immigrants. But neither party has the balls to do anything like that.

cloudboy -> RE: "After the elections" (10/3/2014 11:37:14 AM)
CONGRESS CONTROLS IMMIGRATION The Tea Party has stonewalled every attempt at reform.

DesideriScuri -> RE: "After the elections" (10/6/2014 3:33:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy CONGRESS CONTROLS IMMIGRATION The Tea Party has stonewalled every attempt at reform. But, the President is going to do whatever he can within his power to write EO's to get the stuff done; after the election. Is he too busy stumping for Democrats to do what he says he's going to do? Does he think the elections are going to get him more Democrats to work with in Congress? These elections, under the most likely circumstances won't gain him Democrat majorities in both chambers, so the "Tea Party" will still be around to stonewall every attempt at reform. What you're supporting is the President (who broke his promise because of opposing Congressional members) promising action when it's quite likely there will be even more opposing Congressional members. He's trying to get Democrats elected. That's all he's doing. He's saying what he thinks they want to hear (and I think he's correct in what he thinks they want to hear) so they'll vote Democrat.

joether -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 2:01:35 AM)
The President's Approval Rating: 44% SOURCE Congress's Approval Rating: 13% SOURCE Congress's Rate of Turning Bills into Laws SOURCE Whether one loves the President or not. He is not running for office. Members of Congress ARE running for office. Their inability to get shit done is costing this nation in many ways. That Republicans decide to take half a year off from their day job to pursue campaign funding should really piss most Americans off. While Republicans say they have sent numerous bills to the Senate and are doing 'their job', reality is a different thing. No one cares how many bills have been sent. If they are not turned into laws, who cares? For the folks that don't understand this, consider the following: Democrats own the House and Republicans the Senate. The Democrats send 14,000+ bills that basically eliminate the 2nd amendment in every possible way. How many Republicans sign off on even one of those bills? None. Why? Because those bills are not the stuff Republicans would agree upon. Back to reality the Republican/Tea Party have sent hundreds of bills they know before hand, that Democrats would never sign off on. That Democrats have stated they'll come half way on bills, but expect the Republican/Tea Party to do the same. Unfortunately, the Republicans (and more so the Tea Party) have taken the stance of 'my way or go to hell!'. And that is not conductive to performance in Congress. The Republican/Tea Party have heavily contributed that low approval rating that exists in Congress. You want a better Congress? Vote Democrat. Republicans and especially the Tea Party, crave power and money above all else. With less power and say, they'll stop going down the 'damnation route of conservatism' and walk back their crap to a more moderate level. In the meantime this nation would see many projects that have been stonewalled finally get finished. A better border security, immigration, campaign reform, infrastructure improvements, education, foreign policy improvements, and several other areas.

DesideriScuri -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 3:43:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether The President's Approval Rating: 44% SOURCE Congress's Approval Rating: 13% SOURCE Congress's Rate of Turning Bills into Laws SOURCE Whether one loves the President or not. He is not running for office. Members of Congress ARE running for office. Their inability to get shit done is costing this nation in many ways. That Republicans decide to take half a year off from their day job to pursue campaign funding should really piss most Americans off. While Republicans say they have sent numerous bills to the Senate and are doing 'their job', reality is a different thing. No one cares how many bills have been sent. If they are not turned into laws, who cares? For the folks that don't understand this, consider the following: Democrats own the House and Republicans the Senate. The Democrats send 14,000+ bills that basically eliminate the 2nd amendment in every possible way. How many Republicans sign off on even one of those bills? None. Why? Because those bills are not the stuff Republicans would agree upon. Back to reality the Republican/Tea Party have sent hundreds of bills they know before hand, that Democrats would never sign off on. That Democrats have stated they'll come half way on bills, but expect the Republican/Tea Party to do the same. Unfortunately, the Republicans (and more so the Tea Party) have taken the stance of 'my way or go to hell!'. And that is not conductive to performance in Congress. The Republican/Tea Party have heavily contributed that low approval rating that exists in Congress. You want a better Congress? Vote Democrat. Republicans and especially the Tea Party, crave power and money above all else. With less power and say, they'll stop going down the 'damnation route of conservatism' and walk back their crap to a more moderate level. In the meantime this nation would see many projects that have been stonewalled finally get finished. A better border security, immigration, campaign reform, infrastructure improvements, education, foreign policy improvements, and several other areas. Congress's "job" isn't to pass laws. You don't judge a Congress according to the number of laws passed, but in the number of laws passed compared to the number of laws needed. That the voters in America disagree on how many laws need passed is clearly evident.

thishereboi -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 4:57:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri He's trying to get Democrats elected. That's all he's doing. He's saying what he thinks they want to hear (and I think he's correct in what he thinks they want to hear) so they'll vote Democrat. I think that pretty much sums up most of his term. and before anyone jumps on this, yes the other side does it too.

hot4bondage -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 7:06:10 AM)
Yes indeed. The agency tasked with keeping track of our laws says they can't do it anymore. We literally have more laws, codes, and regulations than we can count. There's a case before the Supremes right now because a patrol officer didn't know the brake light law for his state.

joether -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 7:25:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: joether The President's Approval Rating: 44% SOURCE Congress's Approval Rating: 13% SOURCE Congress's Rate of Turning Bills into Laws SOURCE Whether one loves the President or not. He is not running for office. Members of Congress ARE running for office. Their inability to get shit done is costing this nation in many ways. That Republicans decide to take half a year off from their day job to pursue campaign funding should really piss most Americans off. While Republicans say they have sent numerous bills to the Senate and are doing 'their job', reality is a different thing. No one cares how many bills have been sent. If they are not turned into laws, who cares? For the folks that don't understand this, consider the following: Democrats own the House and Republicans the Senate. The Democrats send 14,000+ bills that basically eliminate the 2nd amendment in every possible way. How many Republicans sign off on even one of those bills? None. Why? Because those bills are not the stuff Republicans would agree upon. Back to reality the Republican/Tea Party have sent hundreds of bills they know before hand, that Democrats would never sign off on. That Democrats have stated they'll come half way on bills, but expect the Republican/Tea Party to do the same. Unfortunately, the Republicans (and more so the Tea Party) have taken the stance of 'my way or go to hell!'. And that is not conductive to performance in Congress. The Republican/Tea Party have heavily contributed that low approval rating that exists in Congress. You want a better Congress? Vote Democrat. Republicans and especially the Tea Party, crave power and money above all else. With less power and say, they'll stop going down the 'damnation route of conservatism' and walk back their crap to a more moderate level. In the meantime this nation would see many projects that have been stonewalled finally get finished. A better border security, immigration, campaign reform, infrastructure improvements, education, foreign policy improvements, and several other areas. Congress's "job" isn't to pass laws. You don't judge a Congress according to the number of laws passed, but in the number of laws passed compared to the number of laws needed. That the voters in America disagree on how many laws need passed is clearly evident. Actually, according to a small document called 'The US Constitution', it IS Congress's job to pass laws. Because if they didn't past laws, how does anything get done? To hire interns for Senator 'So and So' requires a bill to become law. To pass a budget for the next year, requires a bill to be pass into law. To allow funds to be diverted from one area to support an emergency fund on a disaster, requires a bill to be pass. How did the Affordable Care Act come into law, if not pass by Congress? You were alive and on planet Earth in 2009-2010, right? I judge Congress on what they get done. What issues have come up in the last year's time? Immigration? Border Security? The Federal Budget? The US Debt? Infrastructure? Education? Student Loans? Health Care Issues? An what has Congress done to address these problems? There is a reason why they have a 13% approval rating. And that its dropped mainly due to the Republican/Tea Party. Or have you forgotten which political party wanted to shut down the whole country? And WHY? Because they wanted a law removed because they couldn't do it any of the other hundreds of thousands of failed attempts. Imagine if things were reversed. That Democrats demanded the 2nd amendment be revoked as 'payment' to pass the budget bill; would conservative be pissed? Oh hell yeah! Just try to bullshit that they wouldn't. And that's what happen with the Partial Shutdown. The Tea Party wanted the ACA removed before Americans started enjoying some new found freedoms....

joether -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 7:34:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hot4bondage Yes indeed. The agency tasked with keeping track of our laws says they can't do it anymore. We literally have more laws, codes, and regulations than we can count. There's a case before the Supremes right now because a patrol officer didn't know the brake light law for his state. For the simple minded, yes, there are to many laws. For those that can actually access libraries, smartphones, and computers; the information is pretty easy to come about. Gallup a few months ago asked a question of those that they surveyed. "Can you name the five parts of the 1st amendment"? 90% of those polled couldn't answer one item. 8% got one answer while 1% got two to three correct answers. The last two parts of the 1st amendment were only known to less than 0.001% of those polled. The percentages have just stuck in my mind for somereason.... And I've been looking around for that poll for days now, since it would be an interesting topic to discuss. Trying to Google '1st amendment, survey, Gallup' and variations of it, have proved to be useless. The point here, is that most Americans can rattle off the 1st amendment, WITHOUT, looking it up. Just the same as they cant rattle off how to set the DVR without looking it up. There is a reason why things are written down. So the officer couldn't remember the exact law; could the person rattle off the 4th amendment perfectly?

Aylee -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 1:13:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: hot4bondage Yes indeed. The agency tasked with keeping track of our laws says they can't do it anymore. We literally have more laws, codes, and regulations than we can count. There's a case before the Supremes right now because a patrol officer didn't know the brake light law for his state. For the simple minded, yes, there are to many laws. For those that can actually access libraries, smartphones, and computers; the information is pretty easy to come about. Gallup a few months ago asked a question of those that they surveyed. "Can you name the five parts of the 1st amendment"? 90% of those polled couldn't answer one item. 8% got one answer while 1% got two to three correct answers. The last two parts of the 1st amendment were only known to less than 0.001% of those polled. The percentages have just stuck in my mind for somereason.... And I've been looking around for that poll for days now, since it would be an interesting topic to discuss. Trying to Google '1st amendment, survey, Gallup' and variations of it, have proved to be useless. The point here, is that most Americans can rattle off the 1st amendment, WITHOUT, looking it up. Just the same as they cant rattle off how to set the DVR without looking it up. There is a reason why things are written down. So the officer couldn't remember the exact law; could the person rattle off the 4th amendment perfectly? I thought that there were six parts. 1. Establishment of religion 2. Free exercise of religion 3. Freedom of speech 4. Freedom of press 5. Freedom to assemble 6. Petition for redress of grievance.

DaddySatyr -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 1:30:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee I thought that there were six parts. 1. Establishment of religion 2. Free exercise of religion 3. Freedom of speech 4. Freedom of press 5. Freedom to assemble 6. Petition for redress of grievance. I'm pretty sure that the parts you have listed as 1 & 2 are, actually one part. I think the issue is that while the God-haters amongst us *love* to moan and wail about non-establishment, they *hate* to have to admit that we have a right to practice religion as we may seem fit. People that get bothered by my belief aren't atheists; they're God-hating control freaks that want to wipe out any belief in any higher power (except, as evidenced here, lately, if we're speaking of "Allah"). Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

mnottertail -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 2:05:28 PM)
And while the nutsuckers piss and moan paranoiacally about how their magical skywizard is 'hated', the religion of no-religion is also a religion. so, freedom to practice that religion is also a free speech. Suck a wad of cowpiss, Godfreaks.

stef -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 2:31:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail And while the nutsuckers piss and moan paranoiacally about how their magical skywizard is 'hated', the religion of no-religion is also a religion. so, freedom to practice that religion is also a free speech. Suck a wad of cowpiss, Godfreaks. It's also amusing how those who claim to be followers of the invisible sky wizard so seldom live their lives according to his teachings and are so often morally reprehensible buckets of pus.

DesideriScuri -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 3:01:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: joether The President's Approval Rating: 44% SOURCE Congress's Approval Rating: 13% SOURCE Congress's Rate of Turning Bills into Laws SOURCE Whether one loves the President or not. He is not running for office. Members of Congress ARE running for office. Their inability to get shit done is costing this nation in many ways. That Republicans decide to take half a year off from their day job to pursue campaign funding should really piss most Americans off. While Republicans say they have sent numerous bills to the Senate and are doing 'their job', reality is a different thing. No one cares how many bills have been sent. If they are not turned into laws, who cares? For the folks that don't understand this, consider the following: Democrats own the House and Republicans the Senate. The Democrats send 14,000+ bills that basically eliminate the 2nd amendment in every possible way. How many Republicans sign off on even one of those bills? None. Why? Because those bills are not the stuff Republicans would agree upon. Back to reality the Republican/Tea Party have sent hundreds of bills they know before hand, that Democrats would never sign off on. That Democrats have stated they'll come half way on bills, but expect the Republican/Tea Party to do the same. Unfortunately, the Republicans (and more so the Tea Party) have taken the stance of 'my way or go to hell!'. And that is not conductive to performance in Congress. The Republican/Tea Party have heavily contributed that low approval rating that exists in Congress. You want a better Congress? Vote Democrat. Republicans and especially the Tea Party, crave power and money above all else. With less power and say, they'll stop going down the 'damnation route of conservatism' and walk back their crap to a more moderate level. In the meantime this nation would see many projects that have been stonewalled finally get finished. A better border security, immigration, campaign reform, infrastructure improvements, education, foreign policy improvements, and several other areas. Congress's "job" isn't to pass laws. You don't judge a Congress according to the number of laws passed, but in the number of laws passed compared to the number of laws needed. That the voters in America disagree on how many laws need passed is clearly evident. Actually, according to a small document called 'The US Constitution', it IS Congress's job to pass laws. Because if they didn't past laws, how does anything get done? To hire interns for Senator 'So and So' requires a bill to become law. To pass a budget for the next year, requires a bill to be pass into law. To allow funds to be diverted from one area to support an emergency fund on a disaster, requires a bill to be pass. How did the Affordable Care Act come into law, if not pass by Congress? You were alive and on planet Earth in 2009-2010, right? I judge Congress on what they get done. What issues have come up in the last year's time? Immigration? Border Security? The Federal Budget? The US Debt? Infrastructure? Education? Student Loans? Health Care Issues? An what has Congress done to address these problems? There is a reason why they have a 13% approval rating. And that its dropped mainly due to the Republican/Tea Party. Or have you forgotten which political party wanted to shut down the whole country? And WHY? Because they wanted a law removed because they couldn't do it any of the other hundreds of thousands of failed attempts. Imagine if things were reversed. That Democrats demanded the 2nd amendment be revoked as 'payment' to pass the budget bill; would conservative be pissed? Oh hell yeah! Just try to bullshit that they wouldn't. And that's what happen with the Partial Shutdown. The Tea Party wanted the ACA removed before Americans started enjoying some new found freedoms.... The Constitution vests the authority to make laws in Congress. But, that doesn't mean they have to write laws. If the majority in Congress doesn't feel a new law has to be written, why should it write a law? If the majority in Congress feel legislation presented isn't good law, why should it be passed? The GOP and the Democrats don't agree on how to address any of the issues you listed. What law should have been written, in that case?

Aylee -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 3:18:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee I thought that there were six parts. 1. Establishment of religion 2. Free exercise of religion 3. Freedom of speech 4. Freedom of press 5. Freedom to assemble 6. Petition for redress of grievance. I'm pretty sure that the parts you have listed as 1 & 2 are, actually one part. I think the issue is that while the God-haters amongst us *love* to moan and wail about non-establishment, they *hate* to have to admit that we have a right to practice religion as we may seem fit. People that get bothered by my belief aren't atheists; they're God-hating control freaks that want to wipe out any belief in any higher power (except, as evidenced here, lately, if we're speaking of "Allah"). Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me? No, I am pretty sure that they are not. The Church of England is an establishment of religion. The religion is supported by the state. You are not allowed to do that in the US. Both countries have freedom of religion which means you can worship or not as your conscious dictates. KSA has an established religion and no freedom of religion. (They arrest Christians for participating in private services.)

deathtothepixies -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 3:41:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr People that get bothered by my belief aren't atheists; they're God-hating control freaks [/color] Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me? your personal beliefs are irrelevant, you are one idiot on a message board, get over it. last time I checked atheists don't believe in god, so it would be tricky for them to hate god. What atheists "hate" is the way god believers stop the world from moving forward. The hate is always from the believers, not the other way round. Stop being so frightened

crazyml -> RE: "After the elections" (10/7/2014 3:50:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I'm pretty sure that the parts you have listed as 1 & 2 are, actually one part. I think the issue is that while the God-haters amongst us *love* to moan and wail about non-establishment, they *hate* to have to admit that we have a right to practice religion as we may seem fit. Can you point to any posts by atheists that seek to deny your right to practice religion as you see fit. It seems like somewhat of a generalisation to me. quote: People that get bothered by my belief aren't atheists; they're God-hating control freaks that want to wipe out any belief in any higher power (except, as evidenced here, lately, if we're speaking of "Allah"). Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me? So, you do distinguish between "Atheists" and "God Haters"?

DaddySatyr -> RE: "After the elections" (10/8/2014 4:29:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee No, I am pretty sure that they are not. I must be doing something wrong because I'm being misunderstood a lot more than usual, lately. Here's the detailed version. I'm almost positive that *most* people view your Nos. 1 & 2 as one part (of what someone else proposed of the five) and here's why: There's a bunch of people that will refer to: quote: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ... as "freedom of religion". Then, there's a certain segment that will refer to that same passage as "Non-establishment" or (more incorrectly) "separation of church and state". I think both of these types of people will identify the entire clause as either one or the other. As a result, non-establishment and free exercise generally meld into one "part". There's no need to argue this, really. I'll bet if you found people that could recite the first amendment and asked them to break it down, you'd find that most agree with "five parts". Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625