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

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3892 Feb 24, 2013
@OMTE

If you are going to reference a website to support your positions you might want to look at it more closely. Most of those considered to be undernourished are in DEVELOPING countries, not "developed countries."

"if the rich are not willing to do what's right on their own. They should be made to. Plain and simple. Constitution or no Constitution."
And who is going to determine "what's right" - someone like you, Heaven help us all.

"Constitution or no Constitution" - and once you start dismantling the protections that have made this country free and great, where does it end? But that is one of the biggest problems with the Left anyway, somehow they feel qualified to tell everyone else how to live. They sit up in their ivory towers with no knowledge of the real world and what keeps the economy healthy for the benefit of all and think that they know best and so they attempt to regulate and micromanage things they know nothing about and in the process destroy the engine that can allow people to improve their lives through their own initiative and hard work.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3894 Feb 24, 2013
soros wrote:
<quoted text> Childhood obesity leads to diabetes, arthritis, etc, which leads to adult obesity which leads to more and more chronic health problems. It's about creating a lazy, dependent society who does nothing but walk to the mailbox for their government check. Then hit the boob tube or smartphone, or video games. The government prefers a weak, disabled society. Less chance of a successful rising against them.
see there now,we do agree on some things!
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3895 Feb 24, 2013
FYI,ka boom spelled backwards is "moob ak".dyslexia(and manic depression) have some benefits.
OMTE

Annandale, MN

#3897 Feb 24, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
@OMTE
If you are going to reference a website to support your positions you might want to look at it more closely. Most of those considered to be undernourished are in DEVELOPING countries, not "developed countries."
"if the rich are not willing to do what's right on their own. They should be made to. Plain and simple. Constitution or no Constitution."
And who is going to determine "what's right" - someone like you, Heaven help us all.
"Constitution or no Constitution" - and once you start dismantling the protections that have made this country free and great, where does it end? But that is one of the biggest problems with the Left anyway, somehow they feel qualified to tell everyone else how to live. They sit up in their ivory towers with no knowledge of the real world and what keeps the economy healthy for the benefit of all and think that they know best and so they attempt to regulate and micromanage things they know nothing about and in the process destroy the engine that can allow people to improve their lives through their own initiative and hard work.
You sit down here with your backwards knowledge that you know more than the people that's elected to lead us. I try to keep an Open Mind To Everything and only state my opinions. You talk about things like you know them to be fact. Sometimes I try and point out facts that is obvious for any open minded person to see, but most of you are to busy trying to protect your pot of gold with your head up your ass to see anything other than what you've been taught. The Constitution was written in time when there was enough opportunity for everyone with the idea that everyone would get a fair chance. Them days are over. There is not enough opportunities out there for everyone and everyone doesn't get a fair chance in life as some do. What does it say about our country if one person starves to death while there are a few with unlimited masses of wealth. I think our president should make these decisions to change or ammend this old a$$ document, but he probaly won't, because he's a pu$$ like most of you are.
OMTE

Annandale, MN

#3898 Feb 24, 2013
The White Raven wrote:
soros
Lithonia, GA
> You are very uniformed and uneducated.
> I post under Soros, I could care less how much time you have or don't have researching my name.
> I don't waste time wondering how many others there are out there. So why should you? But, whatever makes ya tractor crank...get my drift. I certainly hope so.
----------
> I'm glad that I DON'T need YOUR opinion to 'VALIDATE' me.
> I'm glad that you don't care. I don't care either. We do agree on something - after all.
> I'm sure we're all very interested and concerned about the activities that you don't do, so as to not waste your time.
_________
OMTE
Pasadena, CA
Lithonia, GA
Mableton, Ga
Fitzgerald, GA
Brunswick, GA
I don't have time to talk to you right now, but I'll be back BUDDY. Did you catch that undertone? If not, I'll explain to you; when I return. I don't think you know what party you belong to. You're probally Atheist as well. Oops. There I go again with my assuming. I forgot how dangerous that is. Please forgive my ignorance sir you know I's jus a po ol famhand.
__________
We know what you are or 'IT' is. You're not my 'BUDDY'- there buddy. Like I have pointed out before, I never a$$ume anybody is who they ~claim to be. You have no need to 'explain' anything to me, like you ever actually could. But yes, there you go again... However, most people assume, with you it's the case that you a$$-ume. Ignorance isn't such a problem and can often be corrected; stupidity, on the other hand, is quite different and there is no help for that condition. As time passes you're making it more and more clear to everyone what your problem really is.
I will look forward to your return, and at that time I will AGAIN re-post your TOPIX comments of 2-22-13. And if it is how you say, that we ain't seen nothing yet... Then we have a lot to look forward to - right?
Good that your commwents, apparently, are acceptable and are not a problem at TOPIX, so we can all speak freely, no doubt..., going forward.
Your absurd guesses, and a$$-umptions, about my religion and party affiliation are just you proving again how clueless you are.
You a f*ckin wack job. You're probally a mexican fa**ot. Add that to my list of topix crimes. Reject.
OMTE

Annandale, MN

#3899 Feb 24, 2013
The republican party should be renamed to the aristocrat party at least then they wouldn't be hypocrites.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3900 Feb 24, 2013
just a few general thoughts,questions and comments abouut some recent posts.first,how did silver/gold investment get to be a political issue,much less one that favors(or is favored by republicans).next,someone(i forget who)posted that if an economic collapse(like 1929)were to occur again,then the U.S.gov 't would just confiscate all the gold and silver again.this is so ridiculous that i hardly know how to try to explain just how difficult this would be.but first, back then gold and silver were both common currency.there were $20 double eagles,$10 eagles,silver dollars,etc.today things are very different.in 1986,the U.S. mint started producing gold & silver coinage again,but it is now called bullion.although it is legal tender(that is because of some gov't regulations about the U.S.mint).a couple of examples,a one ounce gold double eagle has a 'face value' of $50 (while the 'spot price' of gold is @1700/oz.)needless to say,it would take a complete fool to use todays' gold/silver bullion as currency.i guess my main point is this.it would be nearly impossibe for the gov't to 'collect or confiscate' the gold and silver owned by people today.i would summit that collecting all the guns would be 'childs play'-by comparison,since at least there is some registrations/licensing processes about that.sorry about the rant.
driving me nuts

United States

#3901 Feb 24, 2013
OMTE wrote:
The republican party should be renamed to the aristocrat party at least then they wouldn't be hypocrites.
I took time away from this to see if any comments would change as in rise to a higher plain. They haven't. I have decided you don't believe any or much of what you post and are posting crap just to upset the few people who are still on this thing. Having said that...
"Beam up Scottie, there's no signs of intellegent life.." or words to that effect!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3902 Feb 24, 2013
I was initially opposed to the sequestration simply because it was one more example of the Republican leadership caving when they actually had a position of strength. Having mandatory defense cuts looked like a win/win for the Democrats. However, after all the hysterics of the past week with Obama parading out his "usual suspects" in terms of who would be hurt and his ridiculous laundry list of programs and people facing dire circumstances if the sequestration went through, I decided to do a little research.(Should have done it in the first place.) What a joke! Once again, everyone is playing the Washington game of "if you don't increase spending as much as you said you would, it's a cut." Only in Washington could you say "we spent $100 billion last year, we were going to spend $110 billion this year, but now we are only going to spend $108 billion. Oh, woe is us, our budget has been cut by $2 billion." Excuse me, you are still spending $8 billion more than last year - nowhere in the land of logic is that a cut. Example, Leon Panetta claims that that DoD will face a 20% cut over ten years if sequestration goes through. LIE. With sequestration, defense increases 18% instead of 20% over those ten years- oh, the sky is falling. And the same is true of the all the other areas supposedly impacted by the sequestration. They are facing no cuts at all, only decreases in the rate of increase.

Our only hope:
1. Term limits.
2. End Baseline budgeting
3. Balanced budget amendment

Please can we get a little sanity in Washington.
good grief

United States

#3903 Feb 24, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
I was initially opposed to the sequestration simply because it was one more example of the Republican leadership caving when they actually had a position of strength. Having mandatory defense cuts looked like a win/win for the Democrats. However, after all the hysterics of the past week with Obama parading out his "usual suspects" in terms of who would be hurt and his ridiculous laundry list of programs and people facing dire circumstances if the sequestration went through, I decided to do a little research.(Should have done it in the first place.) What a joke! Once again, everyone is playing the Washington game of "if you don't increase spending as much as you said you would, it's a cut." Only in Washington could you say "we spent $100 billion last year, we were going to spend $110 billion this year, but now we are only going to spend $108 billion. Oh, woe is us, our budget has been cut by $2 billion." Excuse me, you are still spending $8 billion more than last year - nowhere in the land of logic is that a cut. Example, Leon Panetta claims that that DoD will face a 20% cut over ten years if sequestration goes through. LIE. With sequestration, defense increases 18% instead of 20% over those ten years- oh, the sky is falling. And the same is true of the all the other areas supposedly impacted by the sequestration. They are facing no cuts at all, only decreases in the rate of increase.
Our only hope:
1. Term limits.
2. End Baseline budgeting
3. Balanced budget amendment
Please can we get a little sanity in Washington.
Great post. Too bad those folks in DC could care less!
Ka Boom

Blairsville, GA

#3905 Feb 24, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
I was initially opposed to the sequestration simply because it was one more example of the Republican leadership caving when they actually had a position of strength. Having mandatory defense cuts looked like a win/win for the Democrats. However, after all the hysterics of the past week with Obama parading out his "usual suspects" in terms of who would be hurt and his ridiculous laundry list of programs and people facing dire circumstances if the sequestration went through, I decided to do a little research.(Should have done it in the first place.) What a joke! Once again, everyone is playing the Washington game of "if you don't increase spending as much as you said you would, it's a cut." Only in Washington could you say "we spent $100 billion last year, we were going to spend $110 billion this year, but now we are only going to spend $108 billion. Oh, woe is us, our budget has been cut by $2 billion." Excuse me, you are still spending $8 billion more than last year - nowhere in the land of logic is that a cut. Example, Leon Panetta claims that that DoD will face a 20% cut over ten years if sequestration goes through. LIE. With sequestration, defense increases 18% instead of 20% over those ten years- oh, the sky is falling. And the same is true of the all the other areas supposedly impacted by the sequestration. They are facing no cuts at all, only decreases in the rate of increase.
Our only hope:
1. Term limits.
2. End Baseline budgeting
3. Balanced budget amendment
Please can we get a little sanity in Washington.
Maybe the government will let me run my personal finances this way? Think they'll let us do that?
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3906 Feb 24, 2013
Ka Boom wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe the government will let me run my personal finances this way? Think they'll let us do that?
great point! and one that i have been trying to make(with mixed results)but we must remember to have "charity for all".
OMTE

Annandale, MN

#3907 Feb 24, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>...but after some further thought,it is hard for me to see how hunger can be linked to every worldwide problem.here in the U.S.,for example,i think a strong arguement could be made that the exact oppisite is true.obesity seems to be much more of a problem,especially among our younger folks.
Yeah and we're spitting these babies out faster than the old folks are dying. To parents that are babies themselves and have no business having one child and surely not four or five. I think people should have to be licensed to have a child. That they go through some kind of parenting class or something other than home ec. I think that if a young girl gets pregnant without a license. That the parent of the male should be held accountable. That would slow down all these punks from going around creating babies that they never plan on taking care of. These fat a$$ kids are going to eat us out of house and home. Why are these preppers prepping? I think it's they're scared of starving or being killed and eaten. Right?
Informed Opinion

Lehigh Acres, FL

#3908 Feb 24, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah and we're spitting these babies out faster than the old folks are dying. To parents that are babies themselves and have no business having one child and surely not four or five. I think people should have to be licensed to have a child. That they go through some kind of parenting class or something other than home ec. I think that if a young girl gets pregnant without a license. That the parent of the male should be held accountable. That would slow down all these punks from going around creating babies that they never plan on taking care of. These fat a$$ kids are going to eat us out of house and home. Why are these preppers prepping? I think it's they're scared of starving or being killed and eaten. Right?
Facts as to birth rates in the U.S.:

Pew Research Center: The US birth rate – the number of births per 1,000 women – fell last year to a record low, led by a significant decrease in the number of children born to immigrant women.

Quote.
Based on preliminary data, Pew says, the country’s birth rate in 2011 was 63.2 per 1,000 women – about half the rate of the Baby Boom years, when, in 1957, say, there were 122.7 babies per 1,000 women. That’s the lowest since at least 1920, when the government began keeping reliable birth rate statistics.
End of Quote.

Illegal aliens increase the labor pool of unskilled and semi-skilled workers, increasing profits for employers, by decreasing wages, and assisting in the destruction of the Middle Class;

meanwhile

illegal aliens pay Social Security taxes,(without any right to collect), subsidizing payments by the shrinking payor pool caused by the lower birth rates.

Life is complicated.

Oh wait ... I forgot... Those facts are "Cut and Pasted", which makes them "pretend".
Bored

Commerce, GA

#3909 Feb 24, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Facts as to birth rates in the U.S.:
Pew Research Center: The US birth rate – the number of births per 1,000 women – fell last year to a record low, led by a significant decrease in the number of children born to immigrant women.
Quote.
Based on preliminary data, Pew says, the country’s birth rate in 2011 was 63.2 per 1,000 women – about half the rate of the Baby Boom years, when, in 1957, say, there were 122.7 babies per 1,000 women. That’s the lowest since at least 1920, when the government began keeping reliable birth rate statistics.
End of Quote.
Illegal aliens increase the labor pool of unskilled and semi-skilled workers, increasing profits for employers, by decreasing wages, and assisting in the destruction of the Middle Class;
meanwhile
illegal aliens pay Social Security taxes,(without any right to collect), subsidizing payments by the shrinking payor pool caused by the lower birth rates.
Life is complicated.
Oh wait ... I forgot... Those facts are "Cut and Pasted", which makes them "pretend".
Boring
soros

Atlanta, GA

#3910 Feb 24, 2013
Have no worries, the DREAM ACT will push through, it's just a matter of time. Amnesty granted to appromiately 11 million illegals, up to the age of 35. Yeah, there are rules, stipulations and other requirements which must be met, but who's going to be tracking them? Nobody.

So it doesn't matter if US births rate are down. We're moving hispanics in and they'll be sure to birth some babies. US born = US citizens.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3911 Feb 24, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Boring
i am really kinda concerned about your emotional state.normally i don't like comments about someones' personal life, but i just can't help but wonder what it would take to get you excited- if you know what i mean.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3912 Feb 24, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah and we're spitting these babies out faster than the old folks are dying. To parents that are babies themselves and have no business having one child and surely not four or five. I think people should have to be licensed to have a child. That they go through some kind of parenting class or something other than home ec. I think that if a young girl gets pregnant without a license. That the parent of the male should be held accountable. That would slow down all these punks from going around creating babies that they never plan on taking care of. These fat a$$ kids are going to eat us out of house and home. Why are these preppers prepping? I think it's they're scared of starving or being killed and eaten. Right?
yep,i agree but i think that we would have to build quite a few more prisons.
jeb stuart

Savannah, GA

#3913 Feb 24, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah and we're spitting these babies out faster than the old folks are dying. To parents that are babies themselves and have no business having one child and surely not four or five. I think people should have to be licensed to have a child. That they go through some kind of parenting class or something other than home ec. I think that if a young girl gets pregnant without a license. That the parent of the male should be held accountable. That would slow down all these punks from going around creating babies that they never plan on taking care of. These fat a$$ kids are going to eat us out of house and home. Why are these preppers prepping? I think it's they're scared of starving or being killed and eaten. Right?
but,it should also be noted that the parents of the girl should be held respondsible,too.believe it or not,some of them actually encourage this behavior if they think it will improve there station in society or if they think it may be a financial benefit.
soros

Lithonia, GA

#3914 Feb 24, 2013
jeb stuart wrote:
<quoted text>i am really kinda concerned about your emotional state.normally i don't like comments about someones' personal life, but i just can't help but wonder what it would take to get you excited- if you know what i mean.
ur wife excites us.

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.

Tyrone Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Egg on Your Face: Responding to Former Whitewat... Sep 6 antifascist 1
Racism (Apr '10) Sep 6 Tomahawk 11
Co-op Aug '17 Mysteriouspiscesgal 1
looking for friend james alexander aka (Big Jim) Aug '17 fred 1
News Georgia - Inmates Complain of Treatment at Clay... (Nov '07) Jul '17 Smdh 54
David Bebout Supplying Phony Letters of Intent (Dec '10) Jul '17 ger 56
News Newnan man dead after Thursday shootout (Feb '07) Jul '17 SHAINA 6

Tyrone Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Tyrone Mortgages