Bored

Berlin, MD

#2108 Jan 15, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
"My guy" didn't win. "My guy" would have been Robert Kennedy Jr., Russ Feingold, or Elizabeth Warren.
Thanks for the choice between a corporate shill and a corporate monster.
Boring as hell.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2109 Jan 15, 2013
Profnot wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you're so knowledgeable and objective (yeah, like hell) then give us your brilliant insight as to the outcome of the meeting the Republicans are currently having at a horse ranch in Virginia - will the leadership "win" and raise the national debt limit (as they want to) or will the "lessers" prevail and if they aren't given the pork they want, let the country default and/or the sequestered cuts go into effect?
Got another question for you - how are you able to blame the spending spree on Bush (partly) and Obama and not Congress? Has someone rewritten the Constitution and not told us?
Well, all I'm claiming is that I have an opinion, just as you do. You just don't like it because I'm not a dribbling idiot over Obama.
I am guessing(and that's all YOU can do is guess) that the debt ceiling will be raised. Is Obama still wanted the debt ceiling to be negated?(can't recall his exact words) I'm sure he would love THAT.
There was pork in the deal over the fiscal cliff, so that is nothing new.
All of this is for naught. Whatever is decided, that is what we'll get. We(the People) are powerless.

The president who is on "watch" gets the credit or the blame. Certainly, congress makes the decisions unless executive order is enacted. Bush had a democrat congress his last two years. Obama had a democrat congress his first two years. Nothing much was done during those four years. A democrat congress certainly wasn't going to HELP Bush. Just don't understand why a democrat congress didn't do more with Obama during his first two years. Obama could have been a kid in a candy store. Instead, he ends up with a republican House and now stomps his feet. He is a master manipulator and you libs are hanging at the end of his strings.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2110 Jan 15, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
"My guy" didn't win. "My guy" would have been Robert Kennedy Jr., Russ Feingold, or Elizabeth Warren.
The corporate powers gave us a choice between Tweedle Dee, "Obama", who would appoint Wall Street investment bankers to rule the world, or Mitt Romney, who would appoint Wall Street investment bankers to rule the world.
The only difference was Obama is at least smart enough not to destroy the middle class completely. He knows there has to be a reason for the serfs to serve; and
Romney, who like President Cheney, believes that you can totally crush the middle class serfs, because they are so stupid they will continue to worship the Lords and Gods of the 1%, even as the 1% destroys them. After all, the 99% aren't people, they are "FTEs" and "PTEs".
Thanks for the choice between a corporate shill and a corporate monster.
I can't disagree with you totally. I wouldn't have chosen the same people as you, but I get your point. Romney was not a good choice, however, you know exactly what he meant by his % statement. He was 100% correct. The liberal media took it, put their spin on it and you libs ran with it. If you aren't intelligent enough to know what he meant(and I believe you are), you need to grow a brain. At any rate, that's a moot point.
As far as destroying the middle class, that's just more liberal media bias. Take a look, the middle class is already seeing their taxes going up. By 2014, it seems they'll go up even more. Class warfare took off four years ago as a campaign platform and now we'll see how the middle class is going to be "saved".
It seems you voted "against" Romney just as I voted "against" Obama. I have no quarrel with your last sentence.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2111 Jan 15, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>excellent point!you know,the real debate is more about how we will finace our gov't.we will see.
We are pretty powerless at this point. Whatever happens, we'll just have to deal with it.(Same as usual.)

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2112 Jan 15, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Happy you're happy.
Maybe next time the Republicans will nominate anyone but a Right Wing loony and we won't have an imaginary choice between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb.
Okay. Now THAT'S pretty funny.:)
Profnot

Blairsville, GA

#2113 Jan 15, 2013
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#2114 Jan 15, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not an Obama worshipper, so you are pouting. Don't be sad. You are exactly Obama's kind of guy. Just turn that 'ole frown upside down and smile at the wonderment of the annointed one.
after reading your other posts,you really don't seem to be as radical as some in your party.in fact,i am not an obama worshipper,nor do i always vote democratic.my reasons for voting as i did for the executive,was more against one than for the other.chances are,that if mccain had ran again(minus the airhead,pallin)i would have given that serious consideration.i have a lot of contempt for politics in general:)feel better now?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#2115 Jan 15, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't disagree with you totally. I wouldn't have chosen the same people as you, but I get your point. Romney was not a good choice, however, you know exactly what he meant by his % statement. He was 100% correct. The liberal media took it, put their spin on it and you libs ran with it. If you aren't intelligent enough to know what he meant(and I believe you are), you need to grow a brain.
how smart can someone be when her user name is informed opinion?
Profnot

Blairsville, GA

#2116 Jan 15, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
We are pretty powerless at this point. Whatever happens, we'll just have to deal with it.(Same as usual.)
True, but since both parties are going to destroy the country, what's the point in picking "sides?" Why not "us," the people, vs "them," the Congress.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#2117 Jan 15, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>after reading your other posts,you really don't seem to be as radical as some in your party.in fact,i am not an obama worshipper,nor do i always vote democratic.my reasons for voting as i did for the executive,was more against one than for the other.chances are,that if mccain had ran again(minus the airhead,pallin)i would have given that serious consideration.i have a lot of contempt for politics in general:)feel better now?
sorry,palin-not pallin

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2118 Jan 15, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Happy you're happy.
Maybe next time the Republicans will nominate anyone but a Right Wing loony and we won't have an imaginary choice between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb.
Exactly... and it turns out those %43 Mitt Romney sneered about were registedred voters?

Who would ever have guessed?

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2119 Jan 15, 2013
Profnot wrote:
<quoted text>
True, but since both parties are going to destroy the country, what's the point in picking "sides?" Why not "us," the people, vs "them," the Congress.
Two words:

Third Party.

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2120 Jan 15, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>after reading your other posts,you really don't seem to be as radical as some in your party.in fact,i am not an obama worshipper,nor do i always vote democratic.my reasons for voting as i did for the executive,was more against one than for the other.chances are,that if mccain had ran again(minus the airhead,pallin)i would have given that serious consideration.i have a lot of contempt for politics in general:)feel better now?
McCain, unlike the sleazy Romney, was a likable guy.

The thing that 86ed him in 2008 was when he started saying things were "fine" with the Bush rule, and if elected he'd give us "more of the same".

This, and maybe Palin, rendered him unelectable.

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2121 Jan 15, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you even bothering to post such trash? YOUR guy won. If he's such a hero, he can do whatever he wants with executive order. He certainly hasn't been bashful about doing that before. Wonder why he won't do that now?
Well, as you know Synergy, that's why I couldn't support Obabam a second time.

In four years, and certainly the first two, I found that he did practically nothing.

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2122 Jan 15, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, anyone who voted for a failure AGAIN is pretty funny. Um...let's see....anyone complaining about the debt NOW and then voted for Obama AGAIN. Oh! Here's one......anyone who thinks our country can spend itself OUT of debt. Yeah, that's a good one. Ohhhhhh, those who still blame Bush. That's the BEST one. He certainly shares a portion of the blame, but not what the libs have been drinking from Obama's bottle. More?
All of this has been discussed ad nauseam. You just asked what is funny, so I told you. I'm not going to ask you what's funny because you have already tried to amuse me and it was an epic fail.:)
I know I sure couldn't vote for Obama a second time, even though Romney was also intolerable for me.

Then it turns out the best man for the job was in the Third Party, and seems to be ready to give it another shot in 2016:

Gary Johnson for President 2016!

http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/gary-johnso...

ALBUQUERQUE – A tired and defiant Gary Johnson delivered a concession speech to supporters shortly before 10 p.m. Tuesday night, whacking the major parties and hinting at a 2016 run in the process.

"A wasted vote is voting for somebody you don’t believe in and there were a lot of wasted votes tonight. There were more wasted votes tonight than I’ve ever seen,” said Johnson.

The Libertarian nominee took pot shots, again, at the idea that he played the role of spoiler in the 2012 election.

“We all should be proud of ourselves because over the next four years none of us are gonna have to say we are responsible for this. I didn’t vote for either one of ‘em, I voted for Gary Johnson,” he said.

Early on when Johnson was hovering around .4-.6 percent of the vote the Johnson campaign kept saying that their numbers would take off in the western portion of the country. They were right.

Johnson made Libertarian Party history last night. With 1,139,562 votes, he passed Ed Clark's 1980 record of 921,128 votes (as total percentage, he fell .06 percent short of Clark's record). But he wasn’t even around to celebrate the occasion. Shortly after speaking, an exhausted Johnson turned in for the night. Less than an hour later, he hit one percent.

As soon as results from the Mountain West started to trickle in Johnson’s percentage slowly crept up to the 1 percent mark.

Johnson staffers like Apollo Pazell, who appeared largely content with the trickle of votes, became increasingly antsy as Johnson closed in on single digits. Every fifteen minutes or so he came over to view the expanded national returns map I was viewing. After 10:35 p.m., Johnson topped the 1% mark for an extended period of time for the first time that night.

“Beating the record is a great success but you know we all expected to do better. I think Gary would be the first one to tell you that we expected to do better,” said Pazell, a veteran of the Newt Gingrich and Hillary Clinton campaigns.

Others, like Johnson's Ohio volunteer coodinator Debbie Dean, were more disapointed in the results "I felt that, for Ohio, at least we were going to be between three and five. It's a let down," she said.

Dean said the silver lining to Johnson getting one percent was that his campaign organized and networked Libertarians like neve before, plus the next generation of voters appears to be increasingly libertarian.

Near midnight, as the Johnson inner circle started to gather near the center of the empty hall that held Johnson’s party, Ron Nielson sounded optimistic going forward, noting that they’ve built a large nationwide organization that Johnson could tap into in 2016 if he were to run.

“It’s all about exceeding expectations and there’s an expectation there before of a watermark line, and we crossed that watermark line, well, we exceeded expectations,” said Nielson.

--
Music & poetry from Will Dockery & Friends:
http://www.reverbnation.com/willdockery

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2123 Jan 15, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Happy you're happy.
Maybe next time the Republicans will nominate anyone but a Right Wing loony and we won't have an imaginary choice between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb.
Nah... "Let 'em wander in the wilderness a while longer.", as one Gary Johnson blogger recently wrote.

The time has come to reject both Democrat and Republican, as both seem in cahoots and in a race to see which is the most lousy.

Gary Johnson for President 2016!

http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/07/gary-johnso...

ALBUQUERQUE – A tired and defiant Gary Johnson delivered a concession speech to supporters shortly before 10 p.m. Tuesday night, whacking the major parties and hinting at a 2016 run in the process.

"A wasted vote is voting for somebody you don’t believe in and there were a lot of wasted votes tonight. There were more wasted votes tonight than I’ve ever seen,” said Johnson.

The Libertarian nominee took pot shots, again, at the idea that he played the role of spoiler in the 2012 election.

“We all should be proud of ourselves because over the next four years none of us are gonna have to say we are responsible for this. I didn’t vote for either one of ‘em, I voted for Gary Johnson,” he said.

Early on when Johnson was hovering around .4-.6 percent of the vote the Johnson campaign kept saying that their numbers would take off in the western portion of the country. They were right.

Johnson made Libertarian Party history last night. With 1,139,562 votes, he passed Ed Clark's 1980 record of 921,128 votes (as total percentage, he fell .06 percent short of Clark's record). But he wasn’t even around to celebrate the occasion. Shortly after speaking, an exhausted Johnson turned in for the night. Less than an hour later, he hit one percent.

As soon as results from the Mountain West started to trickle in Johnson’s percentage slowly crept up to the 1 percent mark.

Johnson staffers like Apollo Pazell, who appeared largely content with the trickle of votes, became increasingly antsy as Johnson closed in on single digits. Every fifteen minutes or so he came over to view the expanded national returns map I was viewing. After 10:35 p.m., Johnson topped the 1% mark for an extended period of time for the first time that night.

“Beating the record is a great success but you know we all expected to do better. I think Gary would be the first one to tell you that we expected to do better,” said Pazell, a veteran of the Newt Gingrich and Hillary Clinton campaigns.

Others, like Johnson's Ohio volunteer coodinator Debbie Dean, were more disapointed in the results "I felt that, for Ohio, at least we were going to be between three and five. It's a let down," she said.

Dean said the silver lining to Johnson getting one percent was that his campaign organized and networked Libertarians like neve before, plus the next generation of voters appears to be increasingly libertarian.

Near midnight, as the Johnson inner circle started to gather near the center of the empty hall that held Johnson’s party, Ron Nielson sounded optimistic going forward, noting that they’ve built a large nationwide organization that Johnson could tap into in 2016 if he were to run.

“It’s all about exceeding expectations and there’s an expectation there before of a watermark line, and we crossed that watermark line, well, we exceeded expectations,” said Nielson.

--
Music & poetry from Will Dockery & Friends:
http://www.reverbnation.com/willdockery

“Shadowville All-Stars”

Since: Dec 08

Columbus, GA

#2124 Jan 15, 2013
Sorry for the double post... it looked like Topix.com had lost my first version.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2126 Jan 15, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>after reading your other posts,you really don't seem to be as radical as some in your party.in fact,i am not an obama worshipper,nor do i always vote democratic.my reasons for voting as i did for the executive,was more against one than for the other.chances are,that if mccain had ran again(minus the airhead,pallin)i would have given that serious consideration.i have a lot of contempt for politics in general:)feel better now?
lol I've pretty much given up at this point. I, too, have contempt for politics in general and politicians specifically.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#2127 Jan 15, 2013
Profnot wrote:
<quoted text>
True, but since both parties are going to destroy the country, what's the point in picking "sides?" Why not "us," the people, vs "them," the Congress.
It IS we, the people, but no one seems to care about we, the people. We have put our fate in their hands. Any suggestions?
Informed Opinion

Lehigh Acres, FL

#2128 Jan 15, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>Well, all I'm claiming is that I have an opinion, just as you do. You just don't like it because I'm not a dribbling idiot over Obama.
I am guessing(and that's all YOU can do is guess) that the debt ceiling will be raised. Is Obama still wanted the debt ceiling to be negated?(can't recall his exact words) I'm sure he would love THAT.
There was pork in the deal over the fiscal cliff, so that is nothing new.
All of this is for naught. Whatever is decided, that is what we'll get. We(the People) are powerless.

The president who is on "watch" gets the credit or the blame. Certainly, congress makes the decisions unless executive order is enacted. Bush had a democrat congress his last two years. Obama had a democrat congress his first two years. Nothing much was done during those four years. A democrat congress certainly wasn't going to HELP Bush. Just don't understand why a democrat congress didn't do more with Obama during his first two years. Obama could have been a kid in a candy store. Instead, he ends up with a republican House and now stomps his feet. He is a master manipulator and you libs are hanging at the end of his strings.
Why is it impossible for right wingers to understand that Bush was an incompetent buffoon who was led by the short hairs by President Cheney and the multinational corporations,
and that,
Obama is simply Bush with a brain.

Recognizing the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of Bush and his gang of criminals doesn't mean you love Obama,
only that you recognize he's not the draft dodging, war mongering, corporate tool Bush was.

Its possible to criticize Communist China and not compliment North Korea.

Maybe anything other than dogmatic simplistic right wing reactionary responses are just no longer possible.

Let's try this even more simply:

Bush/Romney = catastrophic disasters;
Obama = Slightly less so.

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
might be moving to Brunswick Tue sick of it all 3
Best Clubs in the Darien,Brunswick area (Jan '11) Oct 25 Danny Noonan 3
*Missing Person* Amber Whited (Jul '13) Oct 17 your wrong 8
Are you a Southern Democrat? Oct 16 voter 2
Did Morenos court order shut down Kingsland and... Oct 15 Cold War Warrior 5
The Red Carpet (Jul '13) Oct 15 HGN 3
Help in Woodbine!!!!!! Oct 15 Political Traveler 8
Brunswick Dating
Find my Match

Brunswick People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Brunswick News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Brunswick

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]