Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
rename

Carnesville, GA

#50827 Jul 19, 2014
silverfox wrote:
<quoted text>I'm too smart to be played, even by you. Are you really as dumb as you prove yourself to be in every post? You make me PROUD to be a Republican.... You have a wonderful life, but, you be sure to tack that sign on your back that reads, HELP me - LEAD me - GUIDE me. Or in your case, tattoo it on your forehead. LOL

That dummy having a nose ring has led him into the pits of self affliction of viewing Fox News ...,. No one else on topix views as he does, he knows so much about them....



silverfox

Abbeville, GA

#50828 Jul 19, 2014
silverfox wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm thankful you have friends on this forum. Personally, I think you are in NO way, shape or form, any better than any other L wing poster. With that being said, you & others were all about Hillary, Hillary this - Hillary that, Hillary can't lose, what happened? Now YOU like Elizabeth Warren, think she's cool, liberals are so predictable. You should know, republicans saw Warren coming way, way before many Hillary supporters even knew her name, trust me.... Now, take a look at what you just said, republicans should focus on 2016 & stop fixating on Obama. What did Dick Cheney say? He said, beginning an impeachment process at this point would be a "distraction." Basically, he meant, "Why begin now?" Why spend so much time and energy on an impeachment process of a President who will leave NO legacy as it is? That's what I think Cheney meant? There's nothing more Republicans can do to prove or show to the world that Obama is any worse than he already is.... Don't count Republicans down & out just yet. Before candidates are announced? Before campaigns? Before debates? If I were a liberal, I would be nervous. This 2016 Presidential campaign is the most important EVER. t's going to be tight, it's going to be exciting. Remember, no matter who republicans run, candidates will be running after the WORST president in HISTORY, a democrat. How can that possibly hurt us?... IF Republicans can't secure a victory after Obama, in 2016, America loses. It's over.
I should have placed Jeb's word, "cool" in quotation marks. Jeb thinks Warren is "cool", I DO NOT.... thought it necessary to clarify.
Sick Man Freud

Blairsville, GA

#50829 Jul 19, 2014
rename wrote:
<quoted text>
The dummy is getting to be like the dummy Oh my..... Confirming your position...
Libroids = "give'em a rope and they'll hang themself."......"giv e'em a life preserver and they'll drown."..,...,
Right Wing Wackos = "give rename a public internet board and he'll make a fool of himself every time."...
rename

Carnesville, GA

#50831 Jul 19, 2014
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>

Since you did not bother to post a reference to the quoted material from Paul Davies I really don't know what he was responding to, perhaps this post from 2007 is relevant.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/11/25...
...Alas, Davies also brings up the anthropic principle, that tiresome exercise in metaphysical masturbation that always flounders somewhere in the repellent ditch between narcissism and solipsism. When someone says that life would not exist if the laws of physics were just a little bit different, I have to wonder…how do they know? Just as there are many different combinations of amino acids that can make any particular enzyme, why can’t there be many different combinations of physical laws that can yield life? Do the experiment of testing different universes, then come talk to me. Until then, claiming that the anthropic principle, an undefined mish-mash of untested assumptions, supports your personal interpretation of how the universe exists and came to be is a self-delusional error.

I’m also always a bit disappointed with the statements of anthropic principle proponents for another reason. If these are the best and only laws that can give rise to intelligent life in the universe, why do they do such a lousy job of it? Life is found in one thin and delicate film on one planet in this mostly empty region of space, and even if there are other fertile planets out there, they will be nearly impossibly distant, and life will be just as fragile and prone to extinction there as here. Even on this world, all of the available environments favor bacteria over scientists or theologians, and said scientists and theologians have existed for only about 0.00001% of the lifetime of this universe, and are prone to wink out of existence long before we can get rid of one of the zeroes in that number. If I wanted to argue for a position on the basis of the anthropic principle, rather than trying to pretend that we live in a Goldilocks universe, we should be wondering how we ended up in such a hostile dump of a universe, one that favors endless expanses of frigid nothingness with scattered hydrogen molecules over one that has trillions of square light years of temperate lakefront property with good fishing, soft breezes, and free wireless networking.

Maybe Davies has faith in science, but I don’t. I take it as it comes. I have expectations and hypotheses, but these are lesser presuppositions than what is implied by faith—and I’m also open to the possibility that any predictions I might make will fail. Perhaps if Davies weren’t so obsessed with equating his religion with his science, he wouldn’t be blind to the fact that most scientists don’t see his god in the operation of the universe.


And perhaps if man wasn't so obsessed with equating himself with the Creator, he wouldn't be so blind to see that Christian faith is not built upon science nor assumptions.....nor even conjectures....

Perhaps science can answer the question of why only Earth possesses life as we know it....but science cannot ...., as science is only an attempt to give answers to the physical world ....

And so far, has only given answer to only a small portion of the physical worlds we know ....,


Science can't even give us total accurate weather as of yet,,, nor every earthly event that affects the weather ...,,,

Man knows less than man brags about.... One thing is known for sure, modern man considers himself god and master of this world.....while forgetting we are one catastrophe away from extinction.....and cannot even provide data on that catastrophe ...,






Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#50832 Jul 19, 2014
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
Did Obama NOT say on National TV that he would go AROUND Congress by using his phone and his pen?
So what...

Presidential Signing Statements tell Congress how the President is going to interpret the law he is signing.

If the House don't like what Obama is doing they can always sue him, and when that fails they can impeach him, heck they ain't doing nothing else.

Besides it's all just thrown bones for you folks anyway.
rename

Carnesville, GA

#50833 Jul 19, 2014
Sick Man Freud wrote:
<quoted text>Right Wing Wackos = "give rename a public internet board and he'll make a fool of himself every time."...

If knowing the truth makes you unhappy, would your moral purpose be served with a lie?

In your case , the answer is yes...



rename

Carnesville, GA

#50834 Jul 19, 2014

And I see dummy one and dummy two are once again holding hands again in grumpyville, n.c..........moralizing on how to tell lies without getting caught in a net of deceit..........


The two dummies trip all over themselves to be the first in the net......


rofllllllllllllllllll.......




“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#50835 Jul 19, 2014
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
So what...
Presidential Signing Statements tell Congress how the President is going to interpret the law he is signing.
If the House don't like what Obama is doing they can always sue him, and when that fails they can impeach him, heck they ain't doing nothing else.
Besides it's all just thrown bones for you folks anyway.
The president may issue a signing statement at the time he signs a bill. The presidential signing statement may simply explain the purpose of the bill, instruct the responsible executive branch agencies on how the law should be administered or express the president's opinion of the law's constitutionality.

A president may also issue an executive order, which has the full effect of law and is directed to federal agencies that are charged with carrying out the order.

Congress can pass a bill canceling or changing the executive order in a manner they see fit. The president will typically veto that bill, and then Congress can try to override the veto of that second bill. The Supreme Court can also declare an executive order to be unconstitutional.

:us.gov
rename

Carnesville, GA

#50836 Jul 19, 2014
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
So what...
Presidential Signing Statements tell Congress how the President is going to interpret the law he is signing.
If the House don't like what Obama is doing they can always sue him, and when that fails they can impeach him, heck they ain't doing nothing else.
Besides it's all just thrown bones for you folks anyway.

What a dufus..........obama is being sued as we post..........

"there is also no part of the Constitution which grants any legal value to signing statements. Article I, Section 7 (in the Presentment Clause) empowers the president to veto a law in its entirety, to sign it, or to do nothing. Article II, Section 3 requires that the executive "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". The Constitution does not authorize the President to cherry-pick which parts of validly enacted Congressional Laws he is going to obey and execute, and which he is not."


hence, if Obama has broken the law, impeachment most likely will occur next year after repubs take both house of congress..........

another dummy who has fallen into the net..........


rename

Carnesville, GA

#50837 Jul 19, 2014
rename wrote:
<quoted text>
What a dufus..........obama is being sued as we post..........
"there is also no part of the Constitution which grants any legal value to signing statements. Article I, Section 7 (in the Presentment Clause) empowers the president to veto a law in its entirety, to sign it, or to do nothing. Article II, Section 3 requires that the executive "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". The Constitution does not authorize the President to cherry-pick which parts of validly enacted Congressional Laws he is going to obey and execute, and which he is not."
hence, if Obama has broken the law, impeachment most likely will occur next year after repubs take both house of congress..........
another dummy who has fallen into the net..........


and add this to the quoted post..........


"I never would have thought, 10 years ago or even five years ago, that recess appointments would ever get litigated at the Supreme Court, Rotunda said.If there is a theme here, its when it gets to the Supreme Court, the president loses, the professor said, pointing to a string of defeats at the court for presidents from Richard Nixon to Bill Clinton to Obama on executive power issues."


rename

Carnesville, GA

#50838 Jul 19, 2014
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
The president may issue a signing statement at the time he signs a bill. The presidential signing statement may simply explain the purpose of the bill, instruct the responsible executive branch agencies on how the law should be administered or express the president's opinion of the law's constitutionality.
A president may also issue an executive order, which has the full effect of law and is directed to federal agencies that are charged with carrying out the order.
Congress can pass a bill canceling or changing the executive order in a manner they see fit. The president will typically veto that bill, and then Congress can try to override the veto of that second bill. The Supreme Court can also declare an executive order to be unconstitutional.
:us.gov

and the sorry "presidential signing statement" has no standing on law..........

just a wind bag instrument to puff up the President and make him look like a blowfish.......


Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#50839 Jul 19, 2014
rename wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
Perhaps science can answer the question of why only Earth possesses life as we know it....but science cannot ...., as science is only an attempt to give answers to the physical world ....
Perhaps life as we know it is the only type of life that is known because we're currently stuck in this locale.

Yep, science answers questions about the physical world, a very astute observation.

There have always been people who thought themselves gods, so what. Oh wait, I know, it gives you a hammer to beat on things you don't understand.

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#50840 Jul 19, 2014
New data shows the White House has painted a false picture of the Central American migration by hiding a huge spike in family units who are illegally crossing the Texas border.

In the Rio Grande area where most of the migrants are crossing the border, the number of so-called unaccompanied children was actually outnumbered by the inflow by adults, parents and children in family units, according to the data.

The much-faster growth in family units has been hidden by White House and agency officials, who have tried to portray the influx as a wave of children fleeing abuse and violence.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/18/white-house...
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#50841 Jul 19, 2014
The House isn't doing anything else, so they might as well sue...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law[1] when they take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress that explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation). Like statutes or regulations promulgated by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review, and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution. Major policy initiatives usually require approval by the legislative branch, but executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of government, deciding how and to what degree laws will be enforced, dealing with emergencies, waging war, and in general fine policy choices in the implementation of broad statutes.

...Critics have accused presidents of abusing executive orders, of using them to make laws without Congressional approval, and of moving existing laws away from their original mandates.[13] Large policy changes with wide-ranging effects have been effected through executive order, including the integration of the armed forces under Harry Truman and the desegregation of public schools under Dwight D. Eisenhower.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/us/politics...
...Mr. Obama has issued signing statements claiming a right to bypass a handful of constraints rejecting as unconstitutional Congresss attempt to prevent him from having White House czars on certain issues, for example. But for the most part, Mr. Obamas increased unilateralism in domestic policy has relied on a different form of executive power than the sort that had led to heated debates during his predecessors administration: Mr. Bushs frequent assertion of a right to override statutes on matters like surveillance and torture.

Obamas not saying he has the right to defy a Congressional statute, said Richard H. Pildes, a New York University law professor.But if the legislative path is blocked and he otherwise has the legal authority to issue an executive order on an issue, they are clearly much more willing to do that now than two years ago.

The Obama administration started down this path soon after Republicans took over the House of Representatives last year. In February 2011, Mr. Obama directed the Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages, against constitutional challenges. Previously, the administration had urged lawmakers to repeal it, but had defended their right to enact it.

In the following months, the administration increased efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions through environmental regulations, gave states waivers from federal mandates if they agreed to education overhauls, and refocused deportation policy in a way that in effect granted relief to some illegal immigrants brought to the country as children. Each step substituted for a faltered legislative proposal.

But those moves were isolated and cut against the administrations broader political messaging strategy at the time: that Mr. Obama was trying to reach across the aisle to get things done. It was only after the summer, when negotiations over a deficit reduction deal broke down and House Republicans nearly failed to raise the nations borrowing limit, that Mr. Obama fully shifted course.
rename

Carnesville, GA

#50842 Jul 19, 2014
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>Perhaps life as we know it is the only type of life that is known because we're currently stuck in this locale.

Yep, science answers questions about the physical world, a very astute observation.

There have always been people who thought themselves gods, so what. Oh wait, I know, it gives you a hammer to beat on things you don't understand.

Then perhaps you should get out of your tiny world of Murphy , as it seems to have atrophied your ability to avoid nets dummy .... And get hammered again and again ....


I would advise some science experiments with explosives.....but being a dummy, you would only blow up yerself and the dullard .,, and you two give us conservatives so much pleasure, so we would be disappointed in our nets rotting ....






rename

Carnesville, GA

#50843 Jul 19, 2014
General Robert E Lee wrote:
New data shows the White House has painted a false picture of the Central American migration by hiding a huge spike in “family units” who are illegally crossing the Texas border.

In the Rio Grande area where most of the migrants are crossing the border, the number of so-called “unaccompanied children” was actually outnumbered by the inflow by adults, parents and children in “family units,” according to the data.

The much-faster growth in “family units” has been hidden by White House and agency officials, who have tried to portray the influx as a wave of children fleeing abuse and violence.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/18/white-house...

Obama's whole purpose is to tag it a humanitarian issue to allow U N involvement to take the heat off the Libroids ....



Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#50844 Jul 19, 2014
http://videos.komando.com/watch/6017/viral-vi...

Perhaps this video will provide some education for the clueless and uneducated about the size of our $17 trillion (that's $17 TRILLION) "documented" debt. When you add in items that are owed in the future, the number is estimated to be around $70 TRILLION.

The top 185 wealthiest families are worth approximately $1.2 trillion, the top 10 (including Skippy's buds at #2) are worth around 44% of the $1.2 trillion. You can do the math (perhaps not Doo-do)...

In other words (as has been previously posted), if you"take" all of the wealth of the "rich" people for federal government purposes, it would operate this country for only a fairly short period of time.

Think about it.
rename

Carnesville, GA

#50845 Jul 19, 2014

Awwww. the ole NY times..........turned into mush, now spittles out libroid leanings......



"New York Times a sinking ship that can no longer aid Obama"

"There are several data points, but lets start with one that is especially gratifying one that shows that the country no longer believes in the New York Times.

In a recent Pew poll, the legendary paper of record was voted less believable than ABC News, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, NBC news, and CBS News. What a comedown for the Grey Lady.

Not only is the paper considered less trustworthy than most others news organizations, the decline has been sharp. The average believability of the 13 news organizations reviewed was 56%; the Times came in at 49%.(The Wall Street Journal comes in at 58%, by comparison.) Whereas trust in all those outfits has dropped in recent years, the Times has fared worse than most. Since 2010, their rating has sunk from 58 to 49.

For a paper that boasts a proud heritage and certainly a devoted following among liberals, this should be worrisome. Indeed, in his farewell column published this past weekend, Public Editor Arthur Brisbane, essentially the paper's ombudsman, took the Times to task, saying that its political and cultural progressivismvirtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times. He describes the paper as a hive on Eighth Avenueshaped by a culture of like minds a uni-view that he suggests is more visible from the outside than the inside. That may or may not be correct, but for sure, Americans have taken note.

For the Obama White House, this disaffection with our leading newspaper should be something of a heads-up. If the Times acts as a virtual mouthpiece for the administration, and people do not find it credible, what does that say about the president?

It is not only 63% of Republicans that judge the Times lacking in credibility, it is also 56% of independents. Among those same independents, only 45% consider the Wall Street Journal unreliable.

The Times performance is nearly identical to that of Fox News, which is widely considered right-leaning. While neither organization is likely to welcome such pigeon-holing, branding the Times a partisan mouthpiece would surely have been more controversial in the past.

For someone who grew up in a Republican household that nonetheless considered the Times an essential part of our intellectual diet, the papers increasing bias over the past decade has been breathtaking.

The carefully placed articles that laud the presidents security chops (pieces that have now landed the White House in hot water for information leaks) and those that incessantly remind Americans that Mitt Romney is a MORMON and a wealthy one to boot the reporting has become as one-sided as the sledge-hammer editorials and over-the-top op-eds.(Does anyone really consider one-note Paul Krugman, who never met a government spending hike he didnt like, a deep thinker?)"


Note the term sledge hammer.......I use the same weapon on Oh my's sorry posts........




rename

Carnesville, GA

#50846 Jul 19, 2014
Bill in Dville wrote:
http://videos.komando.com/watc h/6017/viral-videos-you-wont-b elieve-how-much-americas-riche st-families-are-worth
Perhaps this video will provide some education for the clueless and uneducated about the size of our $17 trillion (that's $17 TRILLION) "documented" debt. When you add in items that are owed in the future, the number is estimated to be around $70 TRILLION.
The top 185 wealthiest families are worth approximately $1.2 trillion, the top 10 (including Skippy's buds at #2) are worth around 44% of the $1.2 trillion. You can do the math (perhaps not Doo-do)...
In other words (as has been previously posted), if you"take" all of the wealth of the "rich" people for federal government purposes, it would operate this country for only a fairly short period of time.
Think about it.


"In other words (as has been previously posted), if you"take" all of the wealth of the "rich" people for federal government purposes, it would operate this country for only a fairly short period of time."

I think the number of days was like maybe 15.........against federal spending of 3.5 trillion a year......

and the debt would not even be touched......



rename

Carnesville, GA

#50847 Jul 19, 2014
and those 15 days would not even pay the interest on the debt.......

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.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Thu Sherlock 55
where in Darien can i use draw net to catch shr... Sep 2 Dvht 3
Jekyll Public Oyster Beds Aug 28 Brief 1
Jennifer aka Snow (Jun '14) Aug '17 Ja nuttz 4
Job Corps info. (Aug '11) Aug '17 Jenforbus 6
Looking Aug '17 Truth 10
are great white sharks in altamahal river ? Aug '17 FLNDN 6

Brunswick Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brunswick Mortgages