vampire

Chambersburg, PA

#42746 Nov 17, 2012
Sir Spamalot wrote:
<quoted text>
Wag
Yeah, everbody knows Rush Limbaugh is a big fat ass.hole too.
Yeah, capitalism at work...what hourly rate do restauranteers actually have to pay their employees....
This is the only industry that doesn't have to pay its employee's a decent living wage...
So this forces us consumers to have to pay their salaries along with the price of the food itself...
I say make them pay their employees properly and we can still decide
Whether we want to tip...
You're nuts....too
Not conjecture either..you're certifiable and you know it.
Your party is finally starting to flush your kind down the toilet too.
Hahahhaha
Flush, Flush, Flush
Aahhhhh, what a relief it is....hahahahaha
you should try to become buddies with dan the man, and maybe, just maybe he'll let you eat for free in his restaurant. after all you seem to prefer handouts rather then paying your own way.
Dick C

West Mifflin, PA

#42747 Nov 17, 2012
rudy wrote:
Don't forget corbit is going to be next in line over sandusky ordeal.did you all forget what position he held during the cover up.do your research I would not vote for anyone involved in a cover up for a child molester unless the vote was to prosecute!
Corbett is toast next election,,,,another crooked Rep down the tubes.....
Dick C

West Mifflin, PA

#42748 Nov 17, 2012
So Romney says O won by offering "gifts" to blacks and Latinos. His gift was to offer Netanyahu a FREE war on Iran complete with unlimited US blood, and treasure. As a bonus he offered to pay US taxpayer money for the clean up. What a guy! He would have us carpet bombing Gaza and offering our dear ally more endless US money and weapons. Good grief, thank God he is off at one of his homes permanently.
bobby64

Charlotte, NC

#42749 Nov 17, 2012
Vampire, you sucking of other peoples blood. That's like the pot calling the kettle black, moron. Your ideas have been proven to fail all due to the ever lasting ignorance you have nourished your whole frigging life.
TaxNoMore

Los Angeles, CA

#42750 Nov 17, 2012
bobby64 wrote:
Your severe bad luck is america is not concerned about the opinions of the daily caller. If that floats your boat racist warrior tea bag keep spitting it out like you love it. We got Obama care which you hate and next we will get immigration reform which you will also hate, who cares? This great patriotic america will make racist tea bags three time presidential election losers soon enough. All you got to do is what you did, racial hating warrior T bag
//////////

Socialism will usher in a new era in this county.

The great wealth of the United States will for the first time be for the benefit of all the people.

Foreign policy will be based on mutual respect, peace, and solidarity.

The people’s democratic rights will be guaranteed and expanded.

Racial, gender, and social equality will be the basis of domestic policies and practices.

Socialism is not a dream, but a necessity to working peoples lives.

Only socialism has the solutions to the problems of capitalism in this country.
Dick C

West Mifflin, PA

#42751 Nov 17, 2012
Romney didn't appear to know who he was appealing to. Look at the majority of who voted for him: poor under-educated rural conservatives. Mitt and Paul couldn't even win their home states. And Romney lost in all three states where he has homes!!!!! He needs to move to Alabama. Maybe he can win sheriff in some rural county
vampire

Chambersburg, PA

#42752 Nov 17, 2012
hey clueless democrats, what's the obsession with romney. i thought obama won the election? don't you think it's time to move on and stop worrying about romney? or is it that you just like to whine all the time?
bobby64

Charlotte, NC

#42753 Nov 17, 2012
Your socialism claim is a pure false claim and every voting block knows this except yours( racial hating tea bags) president Obama went against his liberal base by not fully advocating for single payer health care which happens to be socialism. President Obama is not trying to please haters or dumb ass clowns which your ignorance will bend over backwards daily to represent. You did more to make Obama president then you realize
bobby64

Charlotte, NC

#42754 Nov 17, 2012
Vampire, if i was you i would desperately want to move past etch a sketch, but your playing the same cards right after mccain lost. All your doing is yapping complaints
TaxNoMore

Los Angeles, CA

#42755 Nov 17, 2012
vampire wrote:
hey clueless democrats, what's the obsession with romney. i thought obama won the election? don't you think it's time to move on and stop worrying about romney? or is it that you just like to whine all the time?
//////////

hey clueless democrats, what's the obsession with romney. i thought obama won the election? don't you think it's time to move on and stop worrying about romney? or is it that you just like to whine all the time?

//////////

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.
.
.

The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.
.
.

This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
.
.

Topic A is under discussion...

****..OBAMA..****

A DO NOTHING, LEAD FROM BEHIND, FOUR YEAR FAILURE.

.
.
.

Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A

(pick one)

1. Fluke…………..WAR ON WOMEN / CLASS WARFARE

2. Martin.………..WAR ON BLACKS / GUNS / CLASS WARFARE

3. Buffett Rule…. WAR ON MILLIONAIRES / CLASS WARFARE

4. Romney Dog..WAR ON PET OWNERS / INCITE PETA

5. Osama bin Laden..WAR HERO OBAMA / COURAGE ABOVE ANY MORTAL

6. GLBT…….SHAKE DOWN THE GAYS FOR CASH / DEFLECT CONVERSATION FROM ECONOMY

7. Romney Bain Capital….. WAR ON FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM /OBAMA BAILOUTS CREATE JOBS

8.Romney Taxes…. WAR ON MILLIONAIRES / CLASS WARFARE

(when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
.
.

Topic A is abandoned.
.
.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the

topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.

..........

Topic A

oBUMMER a four year failure
Carl R

West Mifflin, PA

#42756 Nov 17, 2012
Conservative groups and the hundreds of millions of dollars they wasted in their failure to influence this election:

Restore Our Future -$142,645,946
American Crossroads-$91,115,402
RNC -$40,166,559
Americans for Prosperity-$33,564,920
Crossroads GPS-$22,133,006
American Future Fund -$19,038,220
Winning Our Future-$17,008,038
Americans for Job Security-$15,223,067
Ending Spending Action Fund-$9,928,188
NRA-$9,334,379
Red White and Blue Fund-$7,529,620
Republican Jewish Coalition-$4,571,446
Make Us Great Again-$3,959,824
Endorse Liberty-$3,417,467
Our Destiny-$2,804,234
Conservative Majority Fund-$2,792,830
The Next Generation -$1,730,458
Susan B. Anthony List-$1,644,793
Citizens for a Working America PAC-$1,090,734

Why can't we raise taxes on the wealthy again?
vampire

Chambersburg, PA

#42757 Nov 17, 2012
bobby64 wrote:
Vampire, if i was you i would desperately want to move past etch a sketch, but your playing the same cards right after mccain lost. All your doing is yapping complaints
hey dingbat i'm not the one still worrying about romney, or whinning around that he lost. you democrats are acting ike he won and obama lost. good grief move on already you whinny little babies.
TaxNoMore

Los Angeles, CA

#42758 Nov 17, 2012
vampire wrote:
hey clueless democrats, what's the obsession with romney. i thought obama won the election? don't you think it's time to move on and stop worrying about romney? or is it that you just like to whine all the time?
**********

i thought obama won the election?

**********

Rules for Radicals

By Saul Alinsky - 1971

Alinsky's tactics were based, not on Stalin's revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist.

Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci's transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.

"'The organizer's first job is to create the issues or problems,'

and 'organizations must be based on many issues.'

The organizer 'must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community;

fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression.

He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act....

An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.'"

//////////

An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.'"
bobby64

Charlotte, NC

#42759 Nov 17, 2012
Marisa
not you

United States

#42760 Nov 17, 2012
not you
TaxNoMore

Los Angeles, CA

#42761 Nov 17, 2012
Carl R wrote:
Conservative groups and the hundreds of millions of dollars they wasted in their failure to influence this election:
Restore Our Future -$142,645,946
American Crossroads-$91,115,402
RNC -$40,166,559
Americans for Prosperity-$33,564,920
Crossroads GPS-$22,133,006
American Future Fund -$19,038,220
Winning Our Future-$17,008,038
Americans for Job Security-$15,223,067
Ending Spending Action Fund-$9,928,188
NRA-$9,334,379
Red White and Blue Fund-$7,529,620
Republican Jewish Coalition-$4,571,446
Make Us Great Again-$3,959,824
Endorse Liberty-$3,417,467
Our Destiny-$2,804,234
Conservative Majority Fund-$2,792,830
The Next Generation -$1,730,458
Susan B. Anthony List-$1,644,793
Citizens for a Working America PAC-$1,090,734
Why can't we raise taxes on the wealthy again?
//////////

We have all heard from President Barack Hussein "kill list" Obama that "the rich don't pay their fair share."

While polling data reaffirms that view with the U.S. population, there are polls,

and then there is reality.

A Pew Research Center poll said that 58 percent of the U.S. population say the rich don't pay enough in taxes.

Twenty-six percent believe that the rich pay their fair share of taxes, while 8 percent say they pay too much.

Further, "[t]he poll found that many Americans believe rich people to be

intelligent [43%]

and hardworking [42%]

but also greedy [55%]

and less honest [34%]

than the average American."

What follows shows that Obama is lying:

This 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) offers this view of reality.

And let's not forget that Obama was a senator in 2004 so that all this data was available to him.

Taxes paid by highest incomes

The top 1%[of income-earners] pay 22.7% of taxes.

The top 10% pay 50% of taxes.

The top 20% pay 65.3% of taxes

The top 40% pay 84.3% of taxes.
.
.

Taxes paid by lowest incomes

The bottom 20%[of income-earners] pay 1.1% of taxes.

The bottom 40% pay 6.1% of taxes.

The bottom 40% pay about 6% of taxes, while the top 40% pay about 85% of taxes -- or about 14 times more than their counterparts in the lower brackets.

But in light of the constant droning that "the rich don't pay their fair share," how many expected the distribution reported in the CBO paper?

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/the_ri...
Carl R

West Mifflin, PA

#42762 Nov 17, 2012
TaxNoMore wrote:
<quoted text>
.
.
.
“Benghazi-gate.”
.
.
luv the sound of that.........
by gawd, it's music to me ears
The hills are alive
With the sound of Benghazi
With impeachment songs they have sung
For a thousand years
The hills fill my heart
With the sound of Benghazi
My heart wants to sing ev'ry impeachment song it hears
“Benghazi-gate.”
//////////
"Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this Presidency"
-Berry Insane Obummer
The real question is: If you consider the attack on Benghazi as a security blunder on the part of Obama, does it rise to the level of 9/11, about which there were many tell-tale signs and forewarnings? And what about the attack in Beruit in 1983? The attack on the U.S. Cole? Pearl Harbor?

We live in a dangerous world and there are always going to be Americans at risk.

And what role did the funding cuts requested by he Republican leadership have on the administration's being able to provide more security in Benghazi without jeopardizing security elsewhere?

And what might enhanced security meant for the secrecy of the covert operations that were under way in Benghazi?

McCain wants to say that the difference between Condi Rice relying on intelligence information in the lead up to Iraq is that other intelligence agencies around he world also believed the nonsense the Bush administration was peddling about Saddam's non-existent WMD PROGRAM.

Does this mean that any statements on security issues heretofore must be based on a consensus of world intelligence agencies, which proved wrong on Iraq and resulted in NOT 4, but in excess of 4 THOUSAND American lives?

The reason McCain and Romney lost to Obama is because both were loose cannons who lose their cool..
TaxNoMore

Los Angeles, CA

#42763 Nov 17, 2012
Carl R wrote:
<quoted text>
The real question is: If you consider the attack on Benghazi as a security blunder on the part of Obama, does it rise to the level of 9/11, about which there were many tell-tale signs and forewarnings? And what about the attack in Beruit in 1983? The attack on the U.S. Cole? Pearl Harbor?
We live in a dangerous world and there are always going to be Americans at risk.
And what role did the funding cuts requested by he Republican leadership have on the administration's being able to provide more security in Benghazi without jeopardizing security elsewhere?
And what might enhanced security meant for the secrecy of the covert operations that were under way in Benghazi?
McCain wants to say that the difference between Condi Rice relying on intelligence information in the lead up to Iraq is that other intelligence agencies around he world also believed the nonsense the Bush administration was peddling about Saddam's non-existent WMD PROGRAM.
Does this mean that any statements on security issues heretofore must be based on a consensus of world intelligence agencies, which proved wrong on Iraq and resulted in NOT 4, but in excess of 4 THOUSAND American lives?
The reason McCain and Romney lost to Obama is because both were loose cannons who lose their cool..
//////////

//////////

The real question is:

Was Clinton impeached for a blow j*b or was he impeached for lying to congress?

.
.
.

Answer:

Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States, was impeached by the House of Representatives on two charges,

one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice,

on December 19, 1998.

Two other impeachment articles, a second perjury charge and a charge of abuse of power, failed in the House.

The charges arose from the Lewinsky scandal and the Paula Jones lawsuit.

//////////

We live in a dangerous world and there are always going to be Americans at risk.
Sir Spamalot

Paterson, NJ

#42764 Nov 17, 2012
Carl R wrote:
<quoted text>
The real question is: If you consider the attack on Benghazi as a security blunder on the part of Obama, does it rise to the level of 9/11, about which there were many tell-tale signs and forewarnings? And what about the attack in Beruit in 1983? The attack on the U.S. Cole? Pearl Harbor?
We live in a dangerous world and there are always going to be Americans at risk.
And what role did the funding cuts requested by he Republican leadership have on the administration's being able to provide more security in Benghazi without jeopardizing security elsewhere?
And what might enhanced security meant for the secrecy of the covert operations that were under way in Benghazi?
McCain wants to say that the difference between Condi Rice relying on intelligence information in the lead up to Iraq is that other intelligence agencies around he world also believed the nonsense the Bush administration was peddling about Saddam's non-existent WMD PROGRAM.
Does this mean that any statements on security issues heretofore must be based on a consensus of world intelligence agencies, which proved wrong on Iraq and resulted in NOT 4, but in excess of 4 THOUSAND American lives?
The reason McCain and Romney lost to Obama is because both were loose cannons who lose their cool..
Oh, by the way he's not able to use reason and logic..

His "debate" responce will carefully sidestep the valid point that you're making here...
But you knew that...hahahah

Bush war crimes

West Mifflin, PA

#42765 Nov 17, 2012
TaxNoMore wrote:
<quoted text>
//////////
//////////
The real question is:
Was Clinton impeached for a blow j*b or was he impeached for lying to congress?
.
.
.
Answer:
Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States, was impeached by the House of Representatives on two charges,
one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice,
on December 19, 1998.
Two other impeachment articles, a second perjury charge and a charge of abuse of power, failed in the House.
The charges arose from the Lewinsky scandal and the Paula Jones lawsuit.
//////////
We live in a dangerous world and there are always going to be Americans at risk.
I dont recall bloodshed on clintons blo job ( never heard about a blo job, maybe Fox told you that ) like Bush slaughtered thousands of lives on false information ( I mean made up ) information on WMD..send thousands to the butcher shop in Iraq...wonder how he sleeps at night.

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.

Hanover Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Snyder's of Hanover (Aug '09) 8 hr Wharfs for Cape Cod 5,454
PA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Pennsylva... (Oct '10) 18 hr Fast Eddie 3,992
PA Who do you support for Lieutenant Governor in P... (Oct '10) 20 hr Jeremy 183
Hanover Police Force 20 hr Jeremy 1
Review: Dean's Auto Plaza (Sep '13) Sep 4 lesson learned 8
Snyder's Lance Sep 3 Old School Lance Man 4
York City man charged with murdering baby Aug '14 Joe Biden 1
•••
•••
•••

Hanover Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••
•••

Hanover People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Hanover News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Hanover
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••