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

Douglas, GA

#6707 Apr 10, 2013
It's sure isn't Isakson he has been castorated. By the Democraps he is supporting gun control ,can you be leave it a Ga. Senator voting to control guns the jerk.
Glorya

Norcross, GA

#6708 Apr 10, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Projecting again I see.
Dispelling the lies and myths Right Wingers spew forth from their frothy lips whenever they lift their faces from the government trough is hardly taxing.
In fact it's disappointingly easy.
Thanks to the Internet, all one has to do is insert a few words Ina search engine, and the truth emerges from primary sources without the need to break a sweat.
That's one reason it's so amusing to read Right Wing Wackos posts completely contrary to known, accepted, and undisputed facts.
I find you disappointingly boring and really don't care what your views are or your opinion of me. I've worked my ass off, without being a tax dodger, without loopholes. So NOTHING you say to me, bothers me, ABSOLUTELY nothing. I know ALL about work ethic, so don't preach to me. You've done enough of that ... about 3-4 days worth, just recently. Your "black labrador" needs a friend, I don't.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#6709 Apr 10, 2013
Glorya

Norcross, GA

#6710 Apr 10, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If they all went to Canada there would not be any tax revenues and all you liberal's would starve to death.
You go, Dave!
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6711 Apr 10, 2013
Bill in Dville wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. I believe that rule changed in the late 90s.
If memory serves correct, it (the capital gains exclusion) was available to those 55 and over and it was a lower amount. If you were under 55 and purchased a more expensive home, you could "delay" the capital gains impact.
The $250K/$500K exclusion applies to all, subject to certain rules.
I stand corrected. thanks.
This means IO raises his batting average to .002 and may get in a game before the all-star break.
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6712 Apr 10, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA201.h...
The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" (Barnhart 1948). In the case of the theory of evolution, the following are some of the phenomena involved.
All are facts:
Life appeared on earth more than two billion years ago;
Life forms have changed and diversified over life's history;
Species are related via common descent from one or a few common ancestors;
Natural selection is a significant factor affecting how species change.
Many other facts are explained by the theory of evolution as well.
The theory of evolution has proved itself in practice. It has useful applications in epidemiology, pest control, drug discovery, and other areas (Bull and Wichman 2001; Eisen and Wu 2002; Searls 2003).
Besides the theory, there is the fact of evolution, the observation that life has changed greatly over time. The fact of evolution was recognized even before Darwin's theory. The theory of evolution explains the fact.
If "only a theory" were a real objection, creationists would also be issuing disclaimers complaining about the theory of gravity, atomic theory, the germ theory of disease, and the theory of limits (on which calculus is based). The theory of evolution is no less valid than any of these. Even the theory of gravity still receives serious challenges (Milgrom 2002). Yet the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is still a fact.
see also...
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fac...
When non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several theories of the mechanism of evolution....
You are beginning to get Boring like IO.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#6713 Apr 10, 2013
This is a VERY interesting article(short) about the drop in union membership in Wisconsin. Seems those people are finally figuring it out!

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sean-higgins-wi...

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

#6714 Apr 10, 2013
Synergy wrote:
This is a VERY interesting article(short) about the drop in union membership in Wisconsin. Seems those people are finally figuring it out!
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sean-higgins-wi...
Interesting.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#6715 Apr 11, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
I wish that evolution did deal with only what could be observed in the real world - the whole theory would be in the junkpile because it cannot be observed.

"does not concern itself with the question of who" - no, but it most certainly does try and deal with the question of what - and it has no answers. The scientists who created simple amino acids in the lab in the 50's thought they had finally answered the question, but they were never able to get beyond those simple amino acids. When later research indicated their approximation of Earth's early atmosphere was wrong and they tried to replicate their results with the new information, they couldn't even get to simple amino acids. And even if they had, what would it really prove?- congratulations to the intelligent designers.

"This process can be very disconcerting for those who need the illusion of something concrete to support their beliefs." I couldn't agree with you more - and the best example is the stampede by atheists to embrace Darwin's theory.
Are you suggesting that direct observation of an event is required before conclusions can be drawn? I'm sure that criminal investigators would find this a flawed premise.

Failures in scientific experiments do not negate the scientific method, they simply show a path of reasoning that fails. As I mentioned previously, the very essence of Science is the testing of theory and refinement of theory from the results of testing. The example you have provided is an excellent example of this very process.

Do you feel that the Scientific Method is a valid method to draw conclusions about the real world?

If the identity of the Designer is not relevant, why do you feel it relevant that atheists accept Evolution.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#6716 Apr 11, 2013
Man in Plaid wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
I doubt that the GOP will chase its tail into oblivion just like I doubted my friends who after Bush's reelection bemoaned that the right had created such conditions that we wouldn't have a Democrat President for decades. Eventually, things shift.
Must be why I phrased it as a choice...

"At some point the GOP will need to decide whether it wants to be a viable political party or chase its conservative tail into oblivion."
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#6717 Apr 11, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
You are beginning to get Boring like IO.
I see you've removed enough egg to see the keyboard.
domino

Austell, GA

#6718 Apr 11, 2013
I guess we will all have to stand back and see what happens in Washington now. its on the wire; Obama has angered both political parties with his 2014 budget proposal. 3.77 trillion dollars. Proof positive he is attempting to destroy the United States. Both parties are saying no way.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#6719 Apr 11, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Must be why I phrased it as a choice...
"At some point the GOP will need to decide whether it wants to be a viable political party or chase its conservative tail into oblivion."
It just might be too late for them to make that choice. Obviously for a party to viable they need voter support. In order to get that the Republicans are going to have to convince Americans of the following:

1. They are for the middle-class.
2. They have different policies than the same ones they've touted since Reagan, which have proven not only ineffective, but disastrous.
3. They are inclusive and welcoming of African Americans and Latinos and Gays.
4. They actually believe in science.
5. They are not the paid puppets of the corporations.

At this point the Republicans say "We've changed! please believe us!". But really, who's stupid enough to actually believe them?

If somebody is that stupid they are probably ALREADY a Republican.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#6720 Apr 11, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
It just might be too late for them to make that choice. Obviously for a party to viable they need voter support. In order to get that the Republicans are going to have to convince Americans of the following:
1. They are for the middle-class.
2. They have different policies than the same ones they've touted since Reagan, which have proven not only ineffective, but disastrous.
3. They are inclusive and welcoming of African Americans and Latinos and Gays.
4. They actually believe in science.
5. They are not the paid puppets of the corporations.
At this point the Republicans say "We've changed! please believe us!". But really, who's stupid enough to actually believe them?
If somebody is that stupid they are probably ALREADY a Republican.
1. To be FOR the middle class takes more than lip service.(Which is what we have now. Some people will BELIEVE ANYTHING.)
2. How is Obama's policies(?) working? Which policies?
3. They've always welcomed those groups. Some of the people in those groups do vote Republican.
4. They DO believe in science. They may not support YOUR belief, but they do believe. So, you are just being left wing on that one. You just MIGHT be WRONG about some of your beliefs. What a concept!
5. Democrats fit that bill, too. Are you REALLY that naive? Seriously???? Come on!

At this point, Dems aren't doing well either. You seem to be numb to the point that dems are grumbling right along with the republicans. WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU"?
Democrats are going to have to stop lying. They are talking out both sides of their mouths. Those who don't already realize that, well, they are party loyalists and will never get it. They are just being STUPID DEMOCRATS.
columbus native

Edmond, OK

#6721 Apr 11, 2013
These republican politicians are sure sneaky. They are going to protect you but there is a super-high premium to pay. A big army and navy build-up to scare you while they and the defence companies rip us all a new azz with the tremendous over charges for these products. Talk to a mindless republican and they will tell you how important it is and don't worry about the cost these men go to church every sunday and believe in jesus. What a crock full of fools! romney still has a wet azz knowing he and a few will not make billions from a 2 trillion dollar navy. Once again Thank God this Count Dracula looking freak did'nt get to fullfil his evil attempt to steal from his fellowman. 4 more years republicans 4 more years kiss my azz!
columbus native

Edmond, OK

#6722 Apr 11, 2013
I'm sure not for gay marriages and gun control, but sure not going to jump on their disastrous republican bandwagon because I disagree a some areas of their policies. Tickles me to hear them sqeel like the pigs they are on this forum. Keep sqeeling for 4 more years there repup fools.
Glorya

Grayson, GA

#6723 Apr 11, 2013
Love thy party ... it makes no difference to me.
From this day forward, I'll be saying - Washington, District of Corruption.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#6724 Apr 11, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
1. To be FOR the middle class takes more than lip service.(Which is what we have now. Some people will BELIEVE ANYTHING.)
2. How is Obama's policies(?) working? Which policies?
3. They've always welcomed those groups. Some of the people in those groups do vote Republican.
4. They DO believe in science. They may not support YOUR belief, but they do believe. So, you are just being left wing on that one. You just MIGHT be WRONG about some of your beliefs. What a concept!
5. Democrats fit that bill, too. Are you REALLY that naive? Seriously???? Come on!
At this point, Dems aren't doing well either. You seem to be numb to the point that dems are grumbling right along with the republicans. WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU"?
Democrats are going to have to stop lying. They are talking out both sides of their mouths. Those who don't already realize that, well, they are party loyalists and will never get it. They are just being STUPID DEMOCRATS.
I know you gave it shot - but you haven't refuted a single thing or convinced anyone of anything with this post. Don't feel bad, nobody could have.

It's duly noted that you tried though.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#6725 Apr 11, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
I know you gave it shot - but you haven't refuted a single thing or convinced anyone of anything with this post. Don't feel bad, nobody could have.
It's duly noted that you tried though.
What has your hero DONE for the middle class? I've asked several times....nothing.
As far as the rest, I have disputed every single thing you erroneously stated. Just because you said it doesn't make it so. I know you THINK it does, but it doesn't.

Well documented? Where? Left wing sites? I can refute your erroneous statements by posting links from right wing sites. THAT doesn't take a rocket scientest to figure THAT out.

You SHOULD feel bad because you, along with the rest of the very impressionable libs, have been unceremoniously DUPED.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#6726 Apr 11, 2013
columbus native wrote:
romney still has a wet azz knowing he and a few will not make billions from a 2 trillion dollar navy. Once again Thank God this Count Dracula looking freak did'nt get to fullfil his evil attempt to steal from his fellowman.
I don't know if you're aware of this, but our navy is smaller than at any time since 1917. Of course we also have fewer horses and bayonets.

ROFLMA--- LOL - I miss the election. Never has so much money been spent to showcase just how idiotic a group of rich guys can be wehn trying to sell a load of crap to America and when they don't get their way. Oh well, I can always fondly reminisce a bout Rove having a complete breakdown until the next election.



Good times.

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.

Darien Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Chamber honors YALL graduates Jun 22 Anonymous 1
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Jun 21 Sweetums67 39
cornerstone christian correspondence school dip... (Apr '10) Jun 21 OrangeU 302
where can we catch shrimp in Darien with a thro... Jun 18 mac 8
Jeannie Stamey (Jul '15) Jun 16 Farrell Landon 4
News Former members allege church is a cult Jun 15 Beautiful 2
I'm Baaaaaack Jun 12 Cecil Nobles 1

Darien Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Darien Mortgages