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

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12116 May 18, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>

I think the Republcans will take the Senate in 2014. Even if they don't, I'm not worried about another Democrat winning in 2016. Well, barring a miracle, I'm not worried.
LOL! Just wait. You're going to see one serious Democratic campaign, and the Republicans are going to look pretty silly when it's all through. It's going to be the end of that party when most of America decides it's suffered enough by voting Tea Party clowns into office.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#12117 May 18, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it's a good think that we have a Republican Congress then. What have they been doing for us Americans lately? Oh. Nothing. That might explain why Boehners Original Gansta Thugs have a 15% approval rating.
lol Good try. Obama ticked them all off with his obvious arrogance. He thought he could run roughshod over everyone. He needed to be humbled and he has been. He was so used to being worshipped for DOING NOTHING BUT SHOWING UP and when he started hearing, "NOPE", he showed his tail. If nothing else, that renegade is learning some humilty. He won't admit it(it's a liberal thing), but he is. He should be thanking Congress.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12118 May 18, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
The article states that most of the suicides are over 50 years of age. I believe I read that correctly. If that's the case, wouldn't most of those be Vietnam soldiers? Desert Storm?
I had no idea about this. PTSD, I'm sure.
Yeah, I got bammed on this one.
A lot of it comes from financial problems and VA runaround.

It's too bad Congress voted down the Veterans Jobs Bill on the same day last September when they approved the Stop the War on Coal Act which benefited some of the richest men in the nation. We see where the Republican Congress' priorities lie.

It's pathetic. There's real consequences that come from voting Republican.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#12119 May 18, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! Just wait. You're going to see one serious Democratic campaign, and the Republicans are going to look pretty silly when it's all through. It's going to be the end of that party when most of America decides it's suffered enough by voting Tea Party clowns into office.
No. Obama has the meanest and most long reaching machine, but he is not doing very well. I don't think Hillary will run now. The democrats will be demoralized. This country has had enough of Obama with what is going on right now. He may not be to blame, but it's on his watch. Seriously, this isn't good. You now it, Chicken. If Obama were a conservative, you would be claiming impeachment in the works. That's why I don't take any of you seriously. You are "right fighters". You don't care what the cost.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12120 May 18, 2013
It's also worth pointing out this little tidbit about the "Stop the War on Coal" bill:

New fuel economy standards that cut tailpipe emissions -- set for model years 2017-2025 -- would be gutted by the act. So would the EPA's ability to regulate gases blamed for global warming. A 2007 Supreme Court ruling cleared the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under its authority to control air pollutants, but the legislation amends the Clean Air Act to preclude ANY taxes or REGULATIONS on greenhouse gases.

AMENDS THE CLEAN ARE ACT TO PRECLUDE ANY REGULATIONS ON GREENHOUSE GASSES - Republicans voted unanimously for that bill.

My child asked me "Daddy, how come Speaker Boehner doesn't want me to breath clean air when I grow up?". How do you answer a question like that?

There's real consequences that come from voting Republican.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12121 May 18, 2013
^^^^ CLEAN AIR ACT - I type too fast for my own good sometimes.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#12122 May 18, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
A lot of it comes from financial problems and VA runaround.
It's too bad Congress voted down the Veterans Jobs Bill on the same day last September when they approved the Stop the War on Coal Act which benefited some of the richest men in the nation. We see where the Republican Congress' priorities lie.
It's pathetic. There's real consequences that come from voting Republican.
Remember when Obama wanted them to pay for their healthcare? I don't remember that going over very well. Yeah, there are real consequences that come from voting Democrat,too.
BTW, that jobs bill was covered in several other bills that had already been passed. That latest bill was redundant. You didn't think I knew that, huh?

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12123 May 18, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think Hillary will run now.
Hillary, Biden - whoever. They've got it covered. Hell, we might just make an amendment that lets Bill run. You'd see 90% of the popular vote go his way.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12124 May 18, 2013
Heck, we'll flip Christie and run him as as a lean, mean example of how healthy Democratic policies are.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#12125 May 18, 2013
I'm outta here. Night.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#12126 May 18, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
It's also worth pointing out this little tidbit about the "Stop the War on Coal" bill:
New fuel economy standards that cut tailpipe emissions -- set for model years 2017-2025 -- would be gutted by the act. So would the EPA's ability to regulate gases blamed for global warming. A 2007 Supreme Court ruling cleared the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under its authority to control air pollutants, but the legislation amends the Clean Air Act to preclude ANY taxes or REGULATIONS on greenhouse gases.
AMENDS THE CLEAN ARE ACT TO PRECLUDE ANY REGULATIONS ON GREENHOUSE GASSES - Republicans voted unanimously for that bill.
My child asked me "Daddy, how come Speaker Boehner doesn't want me to breath clean air when I grow up?". How do you answer a question like that?
There's real consequences that come from voting Republican.
lol More liberal gobblygook.
Tell you son that he shouldn't believe all the propaganda his daddy tells him.
I wonder why Obama didn't use HIS POWER to VETO that bill???? Guess he doesn't care.
Farrell Landon

Bluffton, SC

#12127 May 18, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
It's good with Chili. You need to stay away from the Chili though. Seriously.
You gotta embrace it. Eat chili, blow a** as hard as humanly possible
jeb stuart

Cordele, GA

#12128 May 18, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
The article states that most of the suicides are over 50 years of age. I believe I read that correctly. If that's the case, wouldn't most of those be Vietnam soldiers? Desert Storm?
I had no idea about this. PTSD, I'm sure.
Yeah, I got bammed on this one.
no syn, I will try to answer better tomorrow but many were nat. guard types,pressed into duty by the Iraq war.but I will get back to you about this.
Oh my

Young Harris, GA

#12129 May 19, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
...All Christians that I know simply want the hostility to end towards any public displays. No one is claiming you have to be a Christian, but this is still a 73-78% Christian nation based on three polls and the US Census. How about a little tolerance for those who think children should still be able to sing Christmas songs in school and have Christmas programs - especially if they are limited to purely secular ones about Santa Claus. And how does it hurt anyone if the local fire station wants to put up a Nativity scene and a Menorah on their property?
The horrors, Christians are so victimized, the open hostility is everywhere you turn, private property and church property aren't enough to display our religious celebrations, why heck, we'll even leave some space for the Jews.

I. May schools display religious symbols during Christmas?

YES. Several federal district courts have ruled that under certain circumstances, it is permissible for a public school to display religious holiday symbols in school calendars and in holiday displays. For example, a district court in New Jersey directly addressed this issue in Clever v. Cherry Hill Twp., 838 F. Supp. 929 (D.N.J. 1993). In Clever, the plaintiffs challenged a school policy that provided for religious symbols to be used in school calendars and in a Christmas display. After noting the importance of context and the absence of denominational preference, the court upheld the policy:

Christmas and Chanukah are celebrated as cultural and national holidays as well as religious ones, and there is simply no constitutional doctrine which would forbid school children from sharing in that celebration, provided that these celebrations do not constitute an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and are consistent with a school’s secular educational mission.

II. Are students allowed to sing Christmas carols with religious themes at school events or in holiday programs?

YES. The Establishment Clause does not prevent the singing of Christmas carols with religious origins by public school choirs. A case that addressed this specific issue upheld the singing of religious Christmas carols in public schools. In Florey v. Sioux Falls School District, 619 F.2d 1311 (8th Cir. 1980), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that the study and performance of religious songs, including Christmas carols, are constitutional if their purpose is the “advancement of the students’ knowledge of society’s cultural and religious heritage, as well as the provision of an opportunity for students to perform a full range of music, poetry and drama that is likely to be of interest to the students and their audience.”

III. Can schools teach about the biblical origins of Christmas and Easter?

YES. In Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 42 (1980), the Supreme Court stated that “the Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, or the like.” Therefore, it would be constitutional for a public school teacher to have students study Biblical passages that relate to Christmas (e.g., Matthew 1:18-2:22, Luke 2:1-20) if the purpose was to study the historical or literary significance of the passages. In considering the type of activities that are appropriate in public schools, the federal appeals court in Florey stated,“[w]e view the term ‘study’ to include more than mere classroom instruction; public performance may be a legitimate part of secular study.”

IV. Are students permitted to write about the origin of Christmas and the birth of Jesus or other religious sentiments in school assignments?

YES. A student’s private religious speech is protected by the First Amendment, so long as that speech does not “‘materially or substantially interfere with school discipline.’”
Oh my

Young Harris, GA

#12130 May 19, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
I think it pretty obvious they were not looking at it as a "religion" option, they were just asked if "creationism" should be taught -do not try to infer more than is there to make you feel better about the result. And the decision of one judge is hardly the standard to which the validity of Intelligent Design should or shall be determined.
Yes, please teach us all about the dangers of inferring more than is really there, you have such a history of caution and restraint when jumping to a conclusion.

It's only the decision of one judge, too bad it was a public trial and the testimony is available to any and all, and any schoold district foolish enough to take that path again will need to clear the hurdles set by that trial. Oh wait, what was it that was shown in that trial, nothing more than the fact that ID is simply rebranded Creationism.
Danger Zone

Oxford, GA

#12131 May 19, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Classy. Real classy.
I'm not a name caller, but, to be attacked, I refuse to sit idylly by & take it. I'll take the high road next time. He can vomit or call me names, I refuse to stoop as low as him. Today is a new day.
Danger Zone

Fayetteville, GA

#12132 May 19, 2013
Obama isn't so tolerant of religious rights & freedom.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/16/oba...
Danger Zone

Fayetteville, GA

#12133 May 19, 2013
This columnist tells it as it really is...
Rather than standing before the United Nations praising Islam, Obama should exalt religious freedom.
Everyone already knows you love Islam, Mr. Obama, in case you haven't noticed, that IS the problem.

Well, ALMOST everyone, there are SOME who absolutely refuse to believe it.... I rest my case.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/24...
Oh my

Young Harris, GA

#12134 May 19, 2013
Recycled fears, recycled lies, right wing nuts in the crazy bin in Section-8.

Obama’s ‘National Security Force?’
Posted on November 11, 2008
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/11/obamas-natio...

This question stems from an interview that Republican Rep. Broun of Georgia gave to The Associated Press Nov. 10. The story carried a headline,“Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship.” It said that Broun “fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.” And it quoted him this way:

Rep. Paul Broun, Nov. 10:
It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s [Obama's] the one who proposed this national security force.… That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did.

Similar claims have been circulating in right-leaning blogs and conservative Web sites ever since July, when Obama made a single reference to a “civilian national security force” in a campaign speech in Colorado. Obama’s detractors make much of his expansive (and exaggerated) description of such a force as being “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the U.S. military. They also ignore the context....
==========
FEDS BUYING 100 YEARS WORTH OF AMMO
Government's argument 'could only fool a career civil servant'
Published: 03/11/2013

...Weeks before Palin’s warning, WND CEO Joseph Farah paired the ammo buildup with a statement made by then-candidate Barack Obama in 2008 calling for a “civilian national security force” as big, as strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department.
==========
Why is the Department of Homeland Security buying so many bullets?
Published February 14, 2013
Associated Press
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/14/wh...

...Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga . The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.

Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities. The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella. The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year.

The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency.

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Draketown, GA

#12135 May 19, 2013
anyway wrote:
<quoted text>
You are crazy, we have only been feared in some feeble minds that need to feel superior to others. Fact is even spending more money on our military than the next 10 developed nations we still haven't won a war, conflict or a police action since WW2. You should be able to relate to that, your namesake never won a war, just got a whole lot of good southern men killed, reminds me of Bush.
You say we govern ourselves but you do nothing but bitch about the results. The results are bought and paid for by the filthy rich and corporations to further their agenda of wealth. Most peoples minds are so malleable a good smear ad whether true on not will elect their people, happens ALL the time.
Discrimination, we have laws against discrimination, and speeding and murder. It all happens all the time anyway, now what?
Wrong on all counts. I am glad to see that you agree it was the filthy rich that "elected" this President.

Try again, with facts, not BS talking points.

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.

Savannah Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What percent of white women are with black men ... (Apr '13) 37 min tom jameson jonassin 51
Looking for an old friend Fri Kathy 1
News Attorney Lynsay Simons joins Judge John Morse a... Nov 29 OPERATION GREYLORD 2
Do anyone know of any spiritual healers or root... Nov 25 Beth Cox 5
Where can I get layed Nov 23 Brother Larry 1
Hillary will destroy White America Nov 12 Nathanael Greene 3
News Five stars for the new VA Nov 9 HumanSpirit 1

Savannah Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Savannah Mortgages