Your church people stayed home because they didn't like Romney's religion. You elected Obama.<quoted text>
You have a nasty habit of oversimplifying things to the point of absurdity. If you don't mind my saying so.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Hampton Roads Daily Press.
#878671 Mar 23, 2013
#878673 Mar 23, 2013
Democrat Senate passes measure increasing taxes a
T - R - I - L - L - I - O - N
dollars - vote 50-49
First budget by the loser Democrats and Senate Majority leader Hairball Weed
All Democrats except for 4 in moderate district up for reelection voted yes.
Democrats suck and need to be fired.
Since: Sep 10
#878674 Mar 23, 2013
The number of murders isn't a disgrace??
The number of poor with no healthcare is a national disgrace.
The way we treat Americans is a national disgrace.
We have more people in prison, per capita, than any other major nation, including communist China and Russia. That's a national disgrace.
You stupidly want to force women to have babies they don't want and can't afford.
Then you offer nothing to help them, allowing these infants to grow up in poverty and end up committing crimes because they have nothing.
Your entire policy is a sham, designed to punish women, not help them.
The Supreme Court declared Abortion to be legal almost 40 years ago.
Yet you wingnuts have done your level best to make the law of the land impotent. Everyone sees it, old white men making laws for women.
And stupid old harpies like you imposing your moral values on others.
While you smoke, eat junk and expect the rest of us to pay for your medical expenses, all self destructive.
But have another piece of pie and a cigarette, you hypocrite!!
Jesus Christ hates people like you, who pervert his beliefs.
#878675 Mar 23, 2013
Nuculur correct me if I’m Wrong!! But didn’t Liberals and the Media write Off the Republican Party in 2010?
#878676 Mar 23, 2013
It took Hairball Weed four years to come up with this? No budget in four years?
And this is what the Democrats come up with?
Democrats are a joke!!!!
#878677 Mar 23, 2013
But there is no political mileage in the truth.
#878678 Mar 23, 2013
Who was the politician that said Obama was a "light skinned N - E - G - R - O" ?
Since: Sep 10
#878679 Mar 23, 2013
It proves nothing.
FL and TX used Federal Stimulus money to balance their budgets, while complaining about the stimulus at the same time. I'm sure the rest did the same, but won't bother to look.
""NEW YORK (CNNMoney)-- Texas Gov. Rick Perry likes to tell Washington to stop meddling in state affairs. He vocally opposed the Obama administration's 2009 stimulus program to spur the economy and assist cash-strapped states.
Perry also likes to trumpet that his state balanced its budget in 2009, while keeping billions in its rainy day fund.
But he couldn't have done that without a lot of help from ... guess where? Washington.
Turns out Texas was the state that depended the most on those very stimulus funds to plug nearly 97% of its shortfall for fiscal 2010, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Even budget deficits are bigger in Texas
Texas, which crafts a budget every two years, was facing a $6.6 billion shortfall for its 2010-2011 fiscal years. It plugged nearly all of that deficit with $6.4 billion in Recovery Act money, allowing it to leave its $9.1 billion rainy day fund untouched.
"Stimulus was very helpful in getting them through the last few years," said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies for the National Association of State Budget Officers, said of Texas.
Even as Perry requested the Recovery Act money, he railed against it. On the very same day he asked for the funds, he set up a petition titled "No Government Bailouts."
"Join our fight and add your voice to a growing list of several thousand Americans who are fed up with this irresponsible spending that threatens our future," Perry wrote on his blog on Feb. 18, 2009.""
As usual, you're full of shit, Waxturd.
#878680 Mar 23, 2013
Peggy Noonan:“War Almost Killed the GOP”
The quote in my title is actually from the deck of her article, so she probably didn’t write those words. But they capture the gist of her column on the Iraq War:
It muddied up the meaning of conservatism and bloodied up its reputation. No Burkean prudence or respect for reality was evident. Ronald Reagan hated the Soviet occupation of the Warsaw Pact countries—really, hated the oppression and violence. He said it, named it, and forced the Soviets to defend it. He did not, however, invade Eastern Europe to liberate it. He used military power sparingly. He didn’t think the right or lucky thing would necessarily happen. His big dream was a nuclear-free world, which he pursued daringly but peacefully.
Noonan notes, in parallel with TAC‘s cover story, that the war blew the GOP’s reputation as the party of sober foreign policy and economic stewardship. It also “stoked an atmosphere in which doubters and critics were dismissed as weak, unpatriotic, disloyal.… A conservative movement that had prided itself, in the 1970s and 1980s, on its intellectualism … seemed no longer capable of an honest argument.”
Since: Aug 11
#878681 Mar 23, 2013
FOX is Controlled by the Modern Liberals Which Rupert Murdoch is one.
Rupert Murdoch Political activities in Australia
Murdoch found a political ally in John McEwen, leader of the Australian Country Party (now known as the National Party of Australia), who was governing in coalition with the larger Menzies-Holt Liberal Party. From the very first issue of The Australian Murdoch began taking McEwen's side in every issue that divided the long-serving coalition partners.(The Australian, 15 July 1964, first edition, front page: "Strain in Cabinet, Liberal-CP row flares.") It was an issue that threatened to split the coalition government and open the way for the stronger Australian Labor Party to dominate Australian politics. It was the beginning of a long campaign that served McEwen well.
#878682 Mar 23, 2013
Beware the National Fertilizer Association
Let's check in for a moment with the far-left fringes of the gun debate, the kind of people who apparently can't read or don't understand the meaning of words like "shall not be infringed."
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." These are words of an extremist.
Only some liberal could come up with this argument, which continues by claiming that any number of prohibitions and restrictions on guns passed by various legislatures, state and federal, are well within the rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
Who could have such obvious disrespect toward the clear meaning of the Founding Fathers?
Unfortunately for the gun lobby, this was the argument put forth by none other than Antonin Scalia, associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, considered by many people to be the foremost conservative legal mind in America today. His position on almost everything (except when he finds it inconvenient) boils down to taking the words of the Constitution literally. There is no interpretation needed, really -- the words mean what they mean and that's that, regardless of changing times.
His argument in this case comes from a decision in 2008 that overturned a local ban against owning firearms for personal use in Washington, D.C. The 5-4 decision codified the notion that the Second Amendment refers to a person's individual right to bear arms, not just in the context of a militia.
Of course, not everyone agrees with the court on this, but it is, until further notice, the law of the land. That's how it works with the Supreme Court. There's no further appeal, and its decision stands unless a future Supreme Court wants to disagree or the Constitution is amended.
But it does put the lie to what many gun-rights supporters consider their trump card. It's a widespread belief that because gun rights are in the Constitution, that's the end of the story.
You can argue whether the various proposals currently on the table are a good idea. That's what's going on, supposedly, in the state Assembly and in Congress. But the argument that these discussions are illegitimate is a losing one.
Read more: http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Hugh-Baile...
#878683 Mar 23, 2013
The focus for conservatives at the present time should only be on the survival of the economy and the nation. Things will fall into
place in due time once sanity and common sense is restored.
However, as long as we condone the killing of the most vulnerable among us simply because of irresponsible behavior in too many instances, we can never expect anything good to come out of it.
Complacency and self-absorption has been the undoing of many societies in the past and empires have fallen for the same reasons.
Since: Sep 10
#878685 Mar 23, 2013
Yet another issue Repugnants will lose future elections over.
You've lost elections over your stupid policies towards immigrants.
You've lost elections over your stupid policies towards women.
You've lost elections over your stupid policies towards gays.
Soon you will lose elections over Climate Change.
Nitwits like you and Carol appear to enjoy losing elections.
It gives you something to bitch and whine about.
""Is there a scientific consensus on climate change?
The major scientific agencies of the United States — including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)— agree that climate change is occurring and that humans are contributing to it. In 2010, the National Research Council concluded that "Climate change is occurring, is very likely caused by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems". Many independent scientific organizations have released similar statements, both in the United States and abroad. This doesn't necessarily mean that every scientist sees eye to eye on each component of the climate change problem, but broad agreement exists that climate change is happening and is primarily caused by excess greenhouse gases from human activities.
Scientists are still researching a number of important questions, including exactly how much Earth will warm, how quickly it will warm, and what the consequences of the warming will be in specific regions of the world. Scientists continue to research these questions so society can be better informed about how to plan for a changing climate. However, enough certainty exists about basic causes and effects of climate change to justify taking actions that reduce future risks.""
Want proof how bad your beliefs will be for your party??
""For the first time since the United States entered a deep recession five years ago, 70% of Americans now say they believe global warming is a reality, according to researchers.
In a report released Thursday by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, authors wrote that America’s concern about global warming is now at its highest level since 2008, and that 58% of Americans expressed worries about it""
You lost the debate, now it will cost you deniers plenty.
#878686 Mar 23, 2013
there's always the Daily Caller or Breitbart.
but if you're into bikini pics, the Caller is the way to go.
but if you're into Alex Jones type conspiracy theories, Breitbart would be the choice.
but if you're Galt, WND is the only way to go.
#878688 Mar 23, 2013
#878689 Mar 23, 2013
And you can prove that how?
Blacks and Hispanics make up a significant number of "church people". Who do you suppose most of them voted for?
Conservative Christians would have voted for anyone besides Obama and I can pretty much guarantee most did.
Since: Dec 08
gauley bridge wv
#878690 Mar 23, 2013
I know I go grocery shopping every day. The prices go up or the product gets smaller or both.
#878691 Mar 23, 2013
The numbers prove it: The GOP is estranged from America
there's what your version of sanity and common sense will get ya.
#878692 Mar 23, 2013
No, they didn't.
We were quite aware of the short-term drawbacks of healthcare reform in 2010,
But as you can see, the tide has begun to turn.
#878694 Mar 23, 2013
This is directed at Lily too who posted something about this earlier.
$9 trillion has been spent on the War on Poverty since the Johnson era.
Statistics show there are only three ways to avoid poverty:
1. Finishing school.
2. Delaying parenthood.
3. Getting a job (any job).
High school dropouts are three times more likely to end up in poverty. One of the most common reasons teens drop out of high school is out-of-wedlock births. Single mothers are the most dependent on welfare with over half of all welfare money spent on families that began with a teen birth.
So tell me how do you suppose we end poverty with these statistics if $9 trillion over the past four decades hasn't even made a dent?
Add your comments below
|Tom Brady suspended four games, Patriots lose d...||38 min||tom wingo||53|
|Thousands storm Baltimore streets in protest ca...||1 hr||White Bytch||600|
|Police changing strategies after spate of shoot...||2 hr||reality is a crutch||1|
|Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08)||3 hr||Phil Donahue||309,893|
|5 dead in 24 hrs in Baltimore.||4 hr||Susan||3|
|Why is racism getting worse in Baltimore?????||6 hr||perple nerple||3|
|Baltimore Bloodshed Continues; 28 Shot, 9 Dead ...||6 hr||Mike||4|
Find what you want!
Search Baltimore Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC