Why do you think republicans are flat-out bad?
Bachmann is just another Sarah Palin, IMOO.
As for the GOP in general, they are for the party
for rich people who...
-Don't care about the good of society
-Cheat on or don't do their taxes
-Speak only for those who like giving the poor a hard time, ETC.
LOL, this is too funny. Everything you listed applies to democrats, not Republicans.
Republicans are the ones who want to help people get rich, not be dependant on the government
Do you remember when Obama was putting his cabinet together? How many people had to be turned away due to tax problems?
The Republicans are the ones who want to help the poor help themselves, not be tied to a government check with no hope to move beyond that.
Bachmann is just another Sarah Palin, IMOO.
As for the GOP in general, they are for the party
for rich people who...
-Don't care about the good of society
-Cheat on or don't do their taxes
-Speak only for those who like giving the poor a hard time, ETC.
LOL, this is too funny. Everything you listed applies to democrats, not Republicans.
Republicans are the ones who want to help people get rich, not be dependant on the government
Do you remember when Obama was putting his cabinet together? How many people had to be turned away due to tax problems?
The Republicans are the ones who want to help the poor help themselves, not be tied to a government check with no hope to move beyond that.
LOL you think the republicans are good.
LOL you think there is a difference.
hahaha this is so funny
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
Found this article comparing the Republican party to a cult. I certainly agree with the author. We established a representative democracy for the specific purpose of not having to fear any tyranny from the majority, yet that is exactly what the GOP has become. They're so large, so organized, and so homogenous in their ideals that they think they no longer need to compromise with their opposition.
As controversial as it may sound, I think that we should have a psychiatric litmus test for our elected officials. If a politician shows that they are incapable of critical thinking, have no common sense, or exhibit thought disorders such as megalomania, paranoia, psychopathy, malignant narcissism or magical thinking, they should be ineligible to hold office. This proposition should be given more consideration, when you consider that now just two people alone (the President and the Secretary of Defense) possess the authority to start a nuclear war. We don't allow psychotic people to own firearms, so why would we ever let one have control over our nuclear arsenal?
remember Quis custodiet and nolo episcopari.
From what I hear - Herself takes an interest and reads among other things a lot of RepublicAn stuff - the Republicans are not all that uniform.
But say they were.
Much as I would LOVE to see elected officials capable of critical thinking - who are you going to trust to administer the test?
And most voters would rather have a pretty face than a sharp mind.
AND - how many peiople capable of critical thought really want to do politics?
As controversial as it may sound, I think that we should have a psychiatric litmus test for our elected officials. If a politician shows that they are incapable of critical thinking, have no common sense, or exhibit thought disorders such as megalomania, paranoia, psychopathy, malignant narcissism or magical thinking, they should be ineligible to hold office. This proposition should be given more consideration, when you consider that now just two people alone (the President and the Secretary of Defense) possess the authority to start a nuclear war. We don't allow psychotic people to own firearms, so why would we ever let one have control over our nuclear arsenal?
Again, every example you use here can be applied to the democrats. Forcing people to have to buy health insurance is a bigger loss of freedom by far than anything Bush did to/for us. You want to talk abou megalomania, Obama's war on Libiya is much more so than either Afghanistan or Iraq.
As controversial as it may sound, I think that we should have a psychiatric litmus test for our elected officials. If a politician shows that they are incapable of critical thinking, have no common sense, or exhibit thought disorders such as megalomania, paranoia, psychopathy, malignant narcissism or magical thinking, they should be ineligible to hold office. This proposition should be given more consideration, when you consider that now just two people alone (the President and the Secretary of Defense) possess the authority to start a nuclear war. We don't allow psychotic people to own firearms, so why would we ever let one have control over our nuclear arsenal?
Again, every example you use here can be applied to the democrats. Forcing people to have to buy health insurance is a bigger loss of freedom by far than anything Bush did to/for us. You want to talk abou megalomania, Obama's war on Libiya is much more so than either Afghanistan or Iraq.
buy a mirror. What was Iraq about again?
please attack Barry all you want ( I will agree with most of it)
but don't think the republicans are not the filthiest whore ever to walk the face of this Globe.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
As controversial as it may sound, I think that we should have a psychiatric litmus test for our elected officials. If a politician shows that they are incapable of critical thinking, have no common sense, or exhibit thought disorders such as megalomania, paranoia, psychopathy, malignant narcissism or magical thinking, they should be ineligible to hold office. This proposition should be given more consideration, when you consider that now just two people alone (the President and the Secretary of Defense) possess the authority to start a nuclear war. We don't allow psychotic people to own firearms, so why would we ever let one have control over our nuclear arsenal?
Again, every example you use here can be applied to the democrats. Forcing people to have to buy health insurance is a bigger loss of freedom by far than anything Bush did to/for us. You want to talk abou megalomania, Obama's war on Libiya is much more so than either Afghanistan or Iraq.
buy a mirror. What was Iraq about again?
please attack Barry all you want ( I will agree with most of it)
but don't think the republicans are not the filthiest whore ever to walk the face of this Globe.
Well, at least the second filthiest after the democrats.
Iraq was about a couple of things.
1. WMDs. The entire world believed Sadam had them. The "Bush lied" argument holds no water.
2. Violation of cease fire. By shooting at our planes, the cease fire that was signed after the first Gulf War was broken and technically, the original war was still ongoing.
3. Supporting terrorists. While Sadam was not involved with 9/11, he was still supporting terrorism by paying the families of suicide bombers $15,000 (I believe that is the correct amount). That made him a legitimate target of the war on terror.
What's Libiya about? Not even the president knows.
As controversial as it may sound, I think that we should have a psychiatric litmus test for our elected officials. If a politician shows that they are incapable of critical thinking, have no common sense, or exhibit thought disorders such as megalomania, paranoia, psychopathy, malignant narcissism or magical thinking, they should be ineligible to hold office. This proposition should be given more consideration, when you consider that now just two people alone (the President and the Secretary of Defense) possess the authority to start a nuclear war. We don't allow psychotic people to own firearms, so why would we ever let one have control over our nuclear arsenal?
Again, every example you use here can be applied to the democrats. Forcing people to have to buy health insurance is a bigger loss of freedom by far than anything Bush did to/for us. You want to talk abou megalomania, Obama's war on Libiya is much more so than either Afghanistan or Iraq.
buy a mirror. What was Iraq about again?
please attack Barry all you want ( I will agree with most of it)
but don't think the republicans are not the filthiest whore ever to walk the face of this Globe.
Well, at least the second filthiest after the democrats.
Iraq was about a couple of things.
1. WMDs. The entire world believed Sadam had them. The "Bush lied" argument holds no water.
2. Violation of cease fire. By shooting at our planes, the cease fire that was signed after the first Gulf War was broken and technically, the original war was still ongoing.
3. Supporting terrorists. While Sadam was not involved with 9/11, he was still supporting terrorism by paying the families of suicide bombers $15,000 (I believe that is the correct amount). That made him a legitimate target of the war on terror.
What's Libiya about? Not even the president knows.
1. only morons thought Sadam had them.
I know I lived threw it I held a god damn sign before the illegal invasion
that read there are no WMD's. (Repeating lies does not make them true.)
2.closer to a reason but still BS. there was no reason for us to increase hostilities at that time
he had been firing on our planes for 11 years.
3. so it was about 15 grand !?! !? really!? well it that case.
but the biggest and most important critique of the Iraq war is.
.
.
.
It hurt our national interest. So Bush will have to go down as a ret*d.
the reason we went is because the Bush white house was incompetent period.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
The Arab League did not demand a thing, Saudi Arabia and Qatar did. Most AL countries didn't even show up at the meeting in question. The rebels in Libya are working for them. The ICC has no credibility. Its chief prosecutor blamed the Hutus for Paul Kagame's Congo atrocities that killed millions. He also repeated this lie about Viagra rape squads in Libya.
The Arab League voted to support a no-fly zone and asked the UN to implement the details of one. The UNSC voted for a more muscular no fly zone with ground aggression prevention included.
And now that Gaddafi's old buddies in Turkey are extending recognition and money to the opposition as well, Gaddafi is toast. Cry all you like about it.
Does anyone here (besides myself) think that by now MAYBE the US is heterogeneous enough that we can have a direct democracy? I think it's pretty clear that our lawmakers no longer represent the public's interest. They're perfectly fine letting their prejudices and religious beliefs dictate their decisions, along with the interests of their campaign financiers. The GOP has been taken over by Right-wing fanatics who deny evolution and global warming, want to overturn abortion laws, keep fighting our futile war on drugs, let big business dictate their policies, create new laws that ensure that none of them can be held accountable for any injustices they may have committed, and pander to any extreme prejudices their constituents may have just to get elected. Any moderate, clear-thinking lawmakers do not stand a chance against them. Do you think we would have anymore oil wars if there weren't any legislators that could be bribed, or that the middle and lower class portions of the country would get stuck with the majority of the tax burden?
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
well its quite old - the left thinks the right is evil and the right thinks the left is wrong
the why doesn't need to be re-explained(just ask yourself whatever side you are on if you think it is true of the opposition) but the what needs reminding from time to time
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
I don't consider Republicans to be "flat-out bad", as Democrats officially hold that achievement, unless they have convinced themselves that Wal-Mart is good economically because it provides cheap crap from China and jobs to unemployed people who otherwise might have found a job that wont drive them insane and treat them like mere robots.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Jupiter May Have Been Flat At One Point, Not Spherical |
20 Feb 2024, 3:37 am |
Duck Hunt for NES and modern flat screen TVs. |
22 Apr 2024, 2:19 pm |
Republicans Lash Out At Marjorie Taylor-Greene Over Threat |
22 Mar 2024, 3:21 pm |
Republicans Aim to Stop Noncitizen Voting in Federal Electio |
14 Apr 2024, 8:35 pm |