Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
Mitt Romney

Wake Forest, NC

#29309 Nov 30, 2012
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Silver, we can call Mike's team the nana nana boo boo team or "honey boo boo" team. In the words of honey boo boo, they like to be "redneckanized" and that way Mike can get the recognition he so deserves!!!!
Wonderfully mature. No wonder I lost.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#29310 Nov 30, 2012
Mitt Romney wrote:
<quoted text>
Wonderfully mature. No wonder I lost.
I'll put you down for the "honey boo boo" team. Who's going to be "honey bear" you or Mike?!?!:) Prepare to be "redneckonized"!!!! I think that was wonderfully put, don't you???
police state

Kenly, NC

#29312 Nov 30, 2012
Because republikans have spent the last four years being purposefully obstructive and it pretty much cost them the election. Their oath of office to the USA takes a back seat to Grover Norquist and tax breaks to the rich. There is no reason to believe they will work for solutions now because they could give a hoot in hell about the USA and its working class citizens. The republikan house congressmen are simply money whores for the rich.
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Why?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#29313 Nov 30, 2012
police state wrote:
Because republikans have spent the last four years being purposefully obstructive and it pretty much cost them the election. Their oath of office to the USA takes a back seat to Grover Norquist and tax breaks to the rich. There is no reason to believe they will work for solutions now because they could give a hoot in hell about the USA and its working class citizens. The republikan house congressmen are simply money whores for the rich.
<quoted text>
TSF, I think I've asked you this before, would you be better satisfied with our government if only democrats were in charge? You've never had anything positive to say about the republican party and it seems if it were up to you we would just have a one party government. I believe your moniker is "police state", so wouldn't that be to your liking if we had only a one party government with democrats who aren't money whores because they're all penniless (wink wink) and know what it's like for people like you and me?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#29314 Nov 30, 2012
police state wrote:
Because republikans have spent the last four years being purposefully obstructive and it pretty much cost them the election. Their oath of office to the USA takes a back seat to Grover Norquist and tax breaks to the rich. There is no reason to believe they will work for solutions now because they could give a hoot in hell about the USA and its working class citizens. The republikan house congressmen are simply money whores for the rich.
<quoted text>
TSF, looks like you may get your "police state"

http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/11/30/democr...

Looks like your beloved dems want to start leading the way. Of course before you take Hank's statements too seriously, remember, he is the dem representative that stated the island of Guam could tip over!!!:)
TSF

Kenly, NC

#29316 Nov 30, 2012
Animosity toward the party of corruption and Norquist tax breaks for the rich is not an endorsement of individual democratic corruption. Hank is certainly far too stupid to have been sent to congress. He probably graduated from the same college as Murdock and Todd Aiken.
I believe that political parties have become more important to some people than the USA itself and therin lies most of our problem.
TSF

Kenly, NC

#29317 Nov 30, 2012
Positive statement about republicans:
The republican party was ONCE a great party that was lead by men of principle who protected the best interests of our nation in their own way.
The republikan party of today consist of money whores whose only interest is protecting the pampered rich from having to pay their fair share of taxes. I submit as evidence Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America , John Boehner handing out PAC checks on the house floor. That act alone speaks loudly and clearly.
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
TSF, I think I've asked you this before, would you be better satisfied with our government if only democrats were in charge? You've never had anything positive to say about the republican party and it seems if it were up to you we would just have a one party government. I believe your moniker is "police state", so wouldn't that be to your liking if we had only a one party government with democrats who aren't money whores because they're all penniless (wink wink) and know what it's like for people like you and me?
Taxpayer

Point Harbor, NC

#29318 Nov 30, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Brainwashing them with what specifically?
Deny self-independence and to warship the state.
Dick

Lenoir, NC

#29319 Nov 30, 2012
TSF wrote:
Positive statement about republicans:
The republican party was ONCE a great party that was lead by men of principle who protected the best interests of our nation in their own way.
The republikan party of today consist of money whores whose only interest is protecting the pampered rich from having to pay their fair share of taxes. I submit as evidence Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America , John Boehner handing out PAC checks on the house floor. That act alone speaks loudly and clearly.
<quoted text>
WTF do you know, Twinkie?
Taxpayer

Point Harbor, NC

#29320 Nov 30, 2012
police state wrote:
Because republikans have spent the last four years being purposefully obstructive and it pretty much cost them the election. Their oath of office to the USA takes a back seat to Grover Norquist and tax breaks to the rich. There is no reason to believe they will work for solutions now because they could give a hoot in hell about the USA and its working class citizens. The republikan house congressmen are simply money whores for the rich.
<quoted text>
When did anyone in the Federal government give a dam about anyone but themselves?
Taxpayer

Point Harbor, NC

#29321 Nov 30, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Bravo.
Yes Bravo, that is why the United Socialist Authority is so far down on the stupide list with other nations.
Taxpayer

Point Harbor, NC

#29322 Nov 30, 2012
I like these words.They fit.
America's social policy, with its unending bureaucratic programs to "help" the poor, the needy, the children, the disabled, the disenfranchised that benefits the authoritarian ruling class at the expense of productive citizens is the direct result of the Democrat Party adopting and implementing the old Socialist Party of America platform along with its class warfare under the now unpopular name "liberalism."
But anyone who calls socialism "socialism" will be called unhinged, deranged or simply stupid because we're all expected to use the euphemistic code word "progressivism" and pretend it isn't socialism.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29323 Nov 30, 2012
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike, if you don't like the content of this forum, don't post on it anymore. Move on to one that will better serve your intellectual debating skills. No one is making you stay on here. Maybe you can find one with "teams".
Mike, I've said in the past, I spent my days doing criminal background searches on people and to err is human. I don't know if your name is Thomas, if there was a photograph I still wouldn't know if it was you and quite frankly, I don't care if it was you. Let it go if it's not you. If it wasn't you good, and if it was you and you did your time, good too.
You are right, I need to find a new thread. This one is dead.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29324 Nov 30, 2012
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
TSF, I think I've asked you this before, would you be better satisfied with our government if only democrats were in charge? You've never had anything positive to say about the republican party and it seems if it were up to you we would just have a one party government. I believe your moniker is "police state", so wouldn't that be to your liking if we had only a one party government with democrats who aren't money whores because they're all penniless (wink wink) and know what it's like for people like you and me?
I only think we need two parties because history shows one ruling party leads to draconian rule.
Balance is always needed, but this does not mean the republicans should just be obstructionists. Compromise is needed.

There are many people who are far to the left of myself, so the republican party keeps them from taking America to far to the left.
And for the same reasons, having just republicans running the show would lead to the same problems of extremism.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29325 Nov 30, 2012
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
TSF, looks like you may get your "police state"
http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/11/30/democr...
Looks like your beloved dems want to start leading the way. Of course before you take Hank's statements too seriously, remember, he is the dem representative that stated the island of Guam could tip over!!!:)
Corporations are not people. This is all about campaign finance, not what people can or cannot say.
Seems republicans are for corporations ruling the country and democrats are for the citizens running the country.

Luckily, the corporate money was not enough to win the presidency, but it did help in smaller races from what I am hearing.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29326 Nov 30, 2012
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
TSF, looks like you may get your "police state"
http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/11/30/democr...
Looks like your beloved dems want to start leading the way. Of course before you take Hank's statements too seriously, remember, he is the dem representative that stated the island of Guam could tip over!!!:)
BTW, these corporations are not even exclusively owned by Americans. Why would you want foreign owners to be able to fund our political races?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29327 Nov 30, 2012
Taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text>
Deny self-independence and to warship the state.
I challenge you to show evidence of such. Produce a curriculum or a text book that has such and agenda.
Now as far as worshiping the state is concerned, lets get rid of that pledge for starters. Democrats are on that side, in case you were not aware. We are for science, not pledges.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29328 Nov 30, 2012
Taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text>
When did anyone in the Federal government give a dam about anyone but themselves?
Oh cynical. Not everyone is as selfish as yourself.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#29329 Nov 30, 2012
Taxpayer wrote:
I like these words.They fit.
America's social policy, with its unending bureaucratic programs to "help" the poor, the needy, the children, the disabled, the disenfranchised that benefits the authoritarian ruling class at the expense of productive citizens is the direct result of the Democrat Party adopting and implementing the old Socialist Party of America platform along with its class warfare under the now unpopular name "liberalism."
But anyone who calls socialism "socialism" will be called unhinged, deranged or simply stupid because we're all expected to use the euphemistic code word "progressivism" and pretend it isn't socialism.
I do not mind the word 'socialism' as long as it is used in proper context. When one claims America is a socialist society, it is to broad a claim, as we have some socialism and much capitalism.
I get really pissed when someone uses the word 'communism' incorrectly. America is not communist at all.

I have zero problem with being called a liberal. Only republicans think the word is negative. Funny thing though, republicans hate being called republicans. They all feel they are independent.
I guess 'republican' is a bad word, no matter what side the aisle one is on.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#29330 Dec 1, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>BTW, these corporations are not even exclusively owned by Americans. Why would you want foreign owners to be able to fund our political races?
Sounds like sour grapes to me. I don't believe ANY speech should be limited in the U.S. Mike, you better wake up and smell the roses, our political races are bought and paid for by people that have or want to have a vested interest in the running of our government.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charlotte Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Do you think women with hairy armpits are ok (Jan '09) 14 hr NemO 545
Help wanted. Sales in Charlotte Fri NemO 2
Location questions. Thu Abc 1
Is it reasonable for a trained officer ........ Wed Nemo 4
Why are Southerners rude in action, but pretend... (Jan '13) Wed Nemo 250
Buh Bye All You IBM Employees (Oct '10) Aug 23 Timmy_ 289
Rioting in Charlotte Aug 23 Bob Marloy 5
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Charlotte Mortgages