Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Georgia in 2010?

Posted in the Richmond Hill Forum

Comments (Page 795)

Showing posts 15,881 - 15,900 of39,489
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
one thing

Dahlonega, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16737
Jun 28, 2013
 
On thing this post is proving is that most people in these parts are sane. All the insane ramblings are coming from just a few. People who have nothing better to do than to search the internet all day and night for things that back up their clueless hate filled beliefs. This is the obvious reason for the decline of the Republican Party. These people here are crazy as hell.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16738
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Just MORE(if one even needs more) proof how out of touch our so called president is. The dictator, Obama, is making quite the name for himself.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/europe-exits-cl...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16739
Jun 28, 2013
 
Billy wrote:
<quoted text>
Among the long list of points you are missing, is the gay marriage issue. NOBODY is telling you what you can believe or can't believe when it comes to marriage. What they are doing is simply acknowledging the legal side of marriage, giving them the rights guaranteed to all by the Constitution. Not the religious side and their is a difference. Agnostics get married all the time and its a legal union, not a religious one. So go beat some other dead horse for the rest of the week.
No, what they are attempting to do is redefine the word "marriage" - that has enormous repercussions. Had the argument been made to grant civil unions between homosexuals the same rights and obligations as marriage, that would have been a reasonable debate and one that I suspect many who oppose the idea of so called gay marriage would not have had a problem with. But marriage is an institution that is very important to a stable society and to arbitrarily decide it can be fundamentally redefined is something that should not be done hastily - especially when other alternatives were available that would have accomplished the same end. Once it is established that the concept of marriage is fluid, it opens the door for many other relationships to stand up and say "now it's our turn".

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16740
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Billy wrote:
<quoted text>
Among the long list of points you are missing, is the gay marriage issue. NOBODY is telling you what you can believe or can't believe when it comes to marriage. What they are doing is simply acknowledging the legal side of marriage, giving them the rights guaranteed to all by the Constitution. Not the religious side and their is a difference. Agnostics get married all the time and its a legal union, not a religious one. So go beat some other dead horse for the rest of the week.
BTW, YOU missed the point of that post. Of course, add that to the Looooooog list of points you seem to miss rather regularly. My point was that Obama stated that he wasn't going to MAKE churches(or something to that effect) marry gay couples(AS IF). Well, thank you very much, Mr. Narcissistic Egomaniac.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16741
Jun 28, 2013
 
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Agree. He specializes in left wing rhetoric as long as it's on a teleprompter. He is an horrendous speaker without that help.
The left wing media is losing any cred it might have had by its constant defense of Obama. Actually, I don't hear nearly as much media Obama-loving as I did during his first term.
As I have said before. He is a good at reading speeches.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16742
Jun 28, 2013
 
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
My goodness, you are getting desperate. Spin and selective quotation editing to try and create a false impression.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/docume...
Uhmmm, "selective quotation editing", how is that possible when the original source is referenced with a link.

From J Russell George's response (from the referenced link), looks like they went back and did some additional research, and what did they find, they found that it wasn't just conevative groups that "were processed as potential political cases".

"Based on the information you flagged regarding the existence of a "Progressives" entry on BOLO lists, TIGTA performed additional research which determined that six tax-exempt applications filed between May 2010 and May 2012 having the words "progress" or "progressive" in their names were included in the 298 cases the IRS identified as potential political cases. We also determined that 14 tax-exempt applications filed between May 2010 and May 2012 using the words "progress" or "progressive" in their names were not referred for added scrutiny as potential political cases. In total, 30 percent of the organizations we identified with the words "progress" or "progressive" in their names were processed as potential political cases. In comparison, our audit found that 100 percent of the tax-exempt applications with Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12 in their names were processed as potential political cases during the timeframe of our audit."

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16743
Jun 28, 2013
 
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, what they are attempting to do is redefine the word "marriage" - that has enormous repercussions. Had the argument been made to grant civil unions between homosexuals the same rights and obligations as marriage, that would have been a reasonable debate and one that I suspect many who oppose the idea of so called gay marriage would not have had a problem with. But marriage is an institution that is very important to a stable society and to arbitrarily decide it can be fundamentally redefined is something that should not be done hastily - especially when other alternatives were available that would have accomplished the same end. Once it is established that the concept of marriage is fluid, it opens the door for many other relationships to stand up and say "now it's our turn".
You have again hit the nail on the head.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16744
Jun 28, 2013
 
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW, YOU missed the point of that post. Of course, add that to the Looooooog list of points you seem to miss rather regularly. My point was that Obama stated that he wasn't going to MAKE churches(or something to that effect) marry gay couples(AS IF). Well, thank you very much, Mr. Narcissistic Egomaniac.
Maybe he is leaving that task to Mayor Bloomberg. Another want to be emperor.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16745
Jun 28, 2013
 
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
No, what they are attempting to do is redefine the word "marriage" - that has enormous repercussions. Had the argument been made to grant civil unions between homosexuals the same rights and obligations as marriage, that would have been a reasonable debate and one that I suspect many who oppose the idea of so called gay marriage would not have had a problem with. But marriage is an institution that is very important to a stable society and to arbitrarily decide it can be fundamentally redefined is something that should not be done hastily - especially when other alternatives were available that would have accomplished the same end. Once it is established that the concept of marriage is fluid, it opens the door for many other relationships to stand up and say "now it's our turn".
Except that civil unions, like marriage, is defined by each state, and while marriages are recognized across state lines civil unions are not. What it comes down to is that while your religion can define what a religious marriage is for the followers of your religion, it cannot dictate the meaning of what a civil marriage is for everyone else. Something we've already seen in those states that have sanctioned civil same-sex marriage.

I suspect that even states that do not sanction civil same-sex marriage will be forced to recognize these out of state marriages under equal protection. Besides, it looks more and more that homosexuality falls under a condition of Nature.
Informed Opinion

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16746
Jun 28, 2013
 
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>lol Says the Obamabot from the Planet Libroid.
Amazing - a post that is completely wrong factually, but additionally plagiarizes the insults used in the factually inaccurate post.

Now that's entertaining and informative - but not in the manner intended by the author.

Since: Jul 12

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16747
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

If Zimmerman is acquitted will there be race riots? Sounds pretty stupid to me. If there are riots then the Black community is saying that protection given to citizens by the law only pertains to them.
I would also like to know why Blacks will blame the courts, Hispanics, and Whites if Zimmerman is acquitted. Also why do Black people somehow think hurting white people has something to do with Zimmerman? They are innocent and had absolutely nothing to do with the Zimmerman case. Zimmerman is a Hispanic and is not white. They shouldn't blame Hispanics either as they had nothing to do with the Zimmerman case either.
If Black people riot in the streets over this, they are setting themselves up for ridicule, hate, and non-acceptance from the rest of America. They will find themselves more isolated then before. If they riot they will not be helping to give themselves the respect and dignity that they want from the rest of America and the world.

http://www.infowars.com/ex-chicago-cop-zimmer...
When

Toccoa, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16748
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Couldn't agree with you more. So how about going to the source of the information rather than searching for those authors who slant the facts to give you the perception you prefer. To help you with that I will again include the link to the IRS IG's letter.
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/docume...

you're dealing with Obstinate and uninformed Lockstep. I've told you this before. Good luck and happy wasted posts.
They never post a link with clarity, only the ones that obfuscate.


When

Toccoa, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16749
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Except that civil unions, like marriage, is defined by each state, and while marriages are recognized across state lines civil unions are not. What it comes down to is that while your religion can define what a religious marriage is for the followers of your religion, it cannot dictate the meaning of what a civil marriage is for everyone else. Something we've already seen in those states that have sanctioned civil same-sex marriage.
I suspect that even states that do not sanction civil same-sex marriage will be forced to recognize these out of state marriages under equal protection. Besides, it looks more and more that homosexuality falls under a condition of Nature.

Nature my azz.

The Polygamists probably are more excited than the gays.

They say it's now their turn to become legal. They see the court ruling as opening the door for them.

"The nuclear family, with a dad and a mom and two or three kids, is not the majority anymore, one polygamist cheers."

That polygamist may be talking about poor unmarried women living off welfare who have between 6-12 kids by different race fathers.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/polygami...




Next will be adult + child. The cards predict it.
OMTE

Norman Park, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16750
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

When wrote:
<quoted text>
Nature my azz.
The Polygamists probably are more excited than the gays.
They say it's now their turn to become legal. They see the court ruling as opening the door for them.
"The nuclear family, with a dad and a mom and two or three kids, is not the majority anymore, one polygamist cheers."
That polygamist may be talking about poor unmarried women living off welfare who have between 6-12 kids by different race fathers.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/polygami...
Next will be adult + child. The cards predict it.
Dang. You're smarter than what I initially gave you credit for. I'm sorry I called you a d*ckhead. You were just pickin on my little budy Jeb.
enough said

Dahlonega, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16751
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Synergy wrote:
Just MORE(if one even needs more) proof how out of touch our so called president is. The dictator, Obama, is making quite the name for himself.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/europe-exits-cl...
You are one ignorant nut, who needs to get a real life, enough said.
Informed Opinion

Cape Coral, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16752
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

When wrote:
<quoted text>Nature my azz.

The Polygamists probably are more excited than the gays.

They say it's now their turn to become legal. They see the court ruling as opening the door for them.

"The nuclear family, with a dad and a mom and two or three kids, is not the majority anymore,” one polygamist cheers."

That polygamist may be talking about poor unmarried women living off welfare who have between 6-12 kids by different race fathers.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/polygami...




Next will be adult + child. The cards predict it.
Now, now, settle down.

Right Wing Wackos can still cheat on their wives, engage in wife-swapping, service strangers in public bathrooms, and then lecture the rest of us on the "sanctity" of marriage.

Gay marriage doesn't prevent RWWs from pretending they are morally superior to the rest of us.

It ought to be even more fun.

Right Wing Wacko Larry Craig can make an "honest man" out of of of his bathroom lovers by marrying him - and then as a typical RWW - lecture us all about the sanctity of marriage, while cheating on his spouse by servicing men in bathroom stalls.

Wait ... sorry ... I guess he already does that.

Right Wing Wackos can still look to Gingrich,(unless his current wife gets cancer); Sanford (unless he discovers another Latin temptress); Schwarzenegger,(unless his new housekeeper is hot); Reagan,( he's too dead to cheat on his wife again); Limbaugh,( he's just too tired to keep cheating, even with Viagra and Oxycotin); Giuliani,( he's not important enough anymore to get laid); McCartney,( that "Promise Keepers thing kinda blew-up); to help us mere mortals understand how seriously RWWs take the "Sanctity of Marriage".
OMTE

Norman Park, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16753
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Now, now, settle down.
Right Wing Wackos can still cheat on their wives, engage in wife-swapping, service strangers in public bathrooms, and then lecture the rest of us on the "sanctity" of marriage.
Gay marriage doesn't prevent RWWs from pretending they are morally superior to the rest of us.
It ought to be even more fun.
Right Wing Wacko Larry Craig can make an "honest man" out of of of his bathroom lovers by marrying him - and then as a typical RWW - lecture us all about the sanctity of marriage, while cheating on his spouse by servicing men in bathroom stalls.
Wait ... sorry ... I guess he already does that.
Right Wing Wackos can still look to Gingrich,(unless his current wife gets cancer); Sanford (unless he discovers another Latin temptress); Schwarzenegger,(unless his new housekeeper is hot); Reagan,( he's too dead to cheat on his wife again); Limbaugh,( he's just too tired to keep cheating, even with Viagra and Oxycotin); Giuliani,( he's not important enough anymore to get laid); McCartney,( that "Promise Keepers thing kinda blew-up); to help us mere mortals understand how seriously RWWs take the "Sanctity of Marriage".
You're a fa$$ot. Ain't ya?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16754
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
....
From J Russell George's response (from the referenced link), looks like they went back and did some additional research, and what did they find, they found that it wasn't just conevative groups that "were processed as potential political cases".
"Based on the information you flagged regarding the existence of a "Progressives" entry on BOLO lists, TIGTA performed additional research which determined that six tax-exempt applications filed between May 2010 and May 2012 having the words "progress" or "progressive" in their names were included in the 298 cases the IRS identified as potential political cases. We also determined that 14 tax-exempt applications filed between May 2010 and May 2012 using the words "progress" or "progressive" in their names were not referred for added scrutiny as potential political cases. In total, 30 percent of the organizations we identified with the words "progress" or "progressive" in their names were processed as potential political cases. In comparison, our audit found that 100 percent of the tax-exempt applications with Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12 in their names were processed as potential political cases during the timeframe of our audit."
And to put your quoted section in proper context, here is the preceding paragraph followed by the paragraph after your quoted section.

"The "Progressives" criteria appeared on a section of the "Be On the Look Out" (BOLO) spreadsheet labeled "Historical," and, unlike other BOLO entries, did not include instructions on how to refer cases that met the criteria. While we have multiple sources of information corroborating the use of Tea Party and other related criteria we described in our report, including employee interviews, e-mails, and other documents, WE FOUND NO INDICATION IN ANY OF THESE OTHER MATERIALS THAT "PROGRESSIVES" WAS A TERM USED TO REFER CASES FOR SCRUTINY FOR POLITIICAL CAMPAIGN INTERVENTION."

"Our audit did not find evidence that the IRS used the "Progressives" identifier as selection criteria for potential political cases between May 2010 and May 2012. The focus of our audit was on whether the IRS: 1) targeted specific groups applying for tax-exempt status, 2) delayed processing of targeted groups' applications, and 3) requested unnecessary information from targeted groups. WE DETERMINED THE IRS DEVELOPED AND USED INAPPROPRIATE CRITERIA TO IDENTIFY APPLICATIONS FROM ORGANIZATIONS WITH THE WORDS TEA PARTY in their names.
In addition, we found other inappropriate criteria that were used (e.g., 9/12, Patriots) to select potential political cases that were not included in any BOLO listings. THE INAPPROPRIATE CRITERIA USED TO SELECT POTENTIAL POLITICAL CASES FOR REVIEW DID NOT INCLUDE THE TERM "PROGRESSIVES."
The term "Progressives" appears, beginning in August 2010, in a separate section of the BOLO listings that was labeled "TAG [Touch and Go] Historical" or "Potential Abusive Historical." The Touch and Go group within the Exempt Organizations function Determinations Unit is a different group of specialists than the team of specialists that was processing potential political cases related to the allegations we audited."
"TIGTA did not audit how the criteria for the "Progressives" identifier were developed in the BOLO listings. We did not audit these criteria because it appeared in a separate section of the BOLO listings labeled as "Historical" (as described above) and WE DID NOT HAVE INDICATIONS OR OTHER EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS IN USE FOR SELECTING POTENTIAL POLITICAL CASES from May 2010 to May 2012."

=======
You are making yourself look exceedingly foolish by continuing to argue a case for which there is no evidence in order to continually deny that conservative groups were intentionally targeted and harassed by the IRS. IRS officials THEMSELVES have both admitted and apologized for this same targeting - you do yourself no favors by ignoring the facts.
When

Toccoa, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16755
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>You're a fa$$ot. Ain't ya?

He admits in with this sentence in his post:::

"Gay marriage doesn't prevent RWWs from pretending they are morally superior to the rest of us."
When

Toccoa, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16756
Jun 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

He's out of the closet, boom! bam! bang!

Wonder if he and Oh my will get married.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 15,881 - 15,900 of39,489
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

Other Recent Richmond Hill Discussions

Search the Richmond Hill Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
savannah 11 hr hey 1
NO MORE MONEY TO Ranell Williams Family Apr 17 Sheila Bryant 1
Hobart closing Richmond Hill plant Apr 15 CURRENT EMPLOYEE 3
Sex Offender works for Culligan...in and out of... Apr 15 Anonymous 1
Belize's prime minister to wed in Savannah (Feb '09) Apr 14 Nats 2
Locals voice opinions on low speed vehicles on ... Apr 14 DixieDarlin 2
Anglican priest ordained to Catholic priesthood... Apr 14 Highchurchman 5
•••

Flood Warning for Bryan County was issued at April 20 at 9:27PM EDT

•••
•••
•••
Richmond Hill Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Richmond Hill Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Richmond Hill People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••