Who do you support for Governor in Oh...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25986 Feb 23, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>Be prepared to eat those words in December, basketcase...
Liberal Democrats in California have made it very clear have no use for Obama's version of Liberalism and his Obamacare he pushed hard for and there is going to be alot of basketcases leaving Washington DC and heading back to where they came from come this November.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25987 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
My point of taxpayers being the only Americans allowed to vote is that it's their money they are voting on--not somebody else's. With our current system, politicians promise lowlifes all kinds of goodies, and they vote for that candidate because they are getting something for nothing. They are voting money out of my pocket into theirs.
This is what shocked Americans with Commie Care. They thought it was the standard taking from the wealthy and working and giving it to the non-working or low income people. Now they find out that they are paying for this insanity either directly or indirectly, and the polls are showing their dissatisfaction.
So True.

Since: Aug 12

Union City, GA

#25989 Feb 23, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
The only difference between my scenario and yours (other than my restrictions make more sense than yours) is that mine excludes you and yours doesn't. That is the only reason you object to mine.
The lesson to you should be that there exists in this country a great deal of people smarter and more qualified than you when it comes to making decisions of government so you should be very careful before you start deciding to disenfranchise people.
The current regime clearly has no business experience and its showing very well. Got it runnin like a well oiled piece of junk. ROFLMAO

Since: Aug 12

Union City, GA

#25990 Feb 23, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
Your money is meaningless in the scope of the federal budget. Only people who pay $50,000.00 a year in tax should get to vote. How's that?
A person paying more taxes should have more say in how their money is spent.
Old Guy

Mason, OH

#25991 Feb 23, 2014
It's pretty easy to lose the thread of the conversation here on Topix, especially when conversations sometimes span several days. Here's a brief summary of a recent exchange:
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
there is no way Southern Democrats changed their affiliation to Republican.
Old Guy wrote:
Wrong.
"James Strom Thurmond ... represented South Carolina in the United States Senate from 1954 until 2003, at first as a Democrat and, after 1964, as a Republican. He switched because of his opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
Not wrong at all the Links provided tell the truth about the Democrats and their postion when it came to Civil Rights like LBJ said & Confirmed where him and the Liberals Democrats stood about Black America.
I was responding to your assertion "there is no way Southern Democrats changed their affiliation to Republican", with a concrete example (Strom Thurmond changing from Democrat to Republican) and another link that discussed the transformation of the South in general from Democrat to Republican. Your one sentence reply leads me to believe that you did not read the articles at all, and still don't understand this basic bit of our recent history.

"Though the "Solid South" had been a longtime Democratic Party stronghold due to the Democratic Party's defense of slavery before the American Civil War and segregation for a century thereafter, many white Southern Democrats stopped supporting the party following the civil rights plank of the Democratic campaign in 1948 (triggering the Dixiecrats), the African-American Civil Rights Movement, the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, and desegregation.

The strategy was first adopted under future Republican President Richard Nixon and Republican Senator Barry Goldwater in the late 1960s. The strategy was successful in winning 5 formerly Confederate states in both the 1964 and 1968 presidential elections. It contributed to the electoral realignment of some Southern states to the Republican Party, but at the expense of losing more than 90 percent of black voters to the Democratic Party. As the twentieth century came to a close, the Republican Party began attempting to appeal to black voters again, though with little success."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strateg...
Helen Roper

Dublin, OH

#25992 Feb 24, 2014
I wonder how long it will take for Pelosi's husband to divorce her once he realizes that she'll be home all the time.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#25993 Feb 24, 2014
Helen Roper wrote:
I wonder how long it will take for Pelosi's husband to divorce her once he realizes that she'll be home all the time.
Helen Roper.....great character in 3's company.

PS: if Pelosi visited Ohio in the winter her plastic surgery would get hard, and someone may mistake her for a shovel.
woo-boy

Van Wert, OH

#25994 Feb 24, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you too stupid to detect a dog and pony show when you see one?
http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/14845/...
Kind of funny of you showing a link from burnt orange. That sounds just like what the Chinese call their highest level warning they have for smog and pollution alerts.
woo-boy

Van Wert, OH

#25995 Feb 24, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
Helen Roper.....great character in 3's company.
PS: if Pelosi visited Ohio in the winter her plastic surgery would get hard, and someone may mistake her for a shovel.
You and Helen need to take another oxy and go back to sleep. It's nice when the intelligence level of posts are not lower than the last basement step. Or you two could hook up, you seem meant for each other.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#25996 Feb 24, 2014
woo-boy wrote:
<quoted text> You and Helen need to take another oxy and go back to sleep. It's nice when the intelligence level of posts are not lower than the last basement step. Or you two could hook up, you seem meant for each other.
intelligence level of posts?

see above.......written by someone with ZERO substantive thought to answer a post without making an abject fool of themselves, by proving they only spin and distort to make themselves feel accomplishment the only time in their pathetic life.
woo-boy

Van Wert, OH

#25997 Feb 24, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
intelligence level of posts?
see above.......written by someone with ZERO substantive thought to answer a post without making an abject fool of themselves, by proving they only spin and distort to make themselves feel accomplishment the only time in their pathetic life.
Good going, you just described yourself to a tee. Got to give you credit though, you typed more than one line at a time. Wait a minute, that was granny describing you and she doesn't know how to use the reply. That was way to smart to come from you. It's above the third grade level.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25998 Feb 24, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
Helen Roper.....great character in 3's company.
PS: if Pelosi visited Ohio in the winter her plastic surgery would get hard, and someone may mistake her for a shovel.
Dude, that shovel comment is the first funny thing I have heard you say on here. Freaking funny.

And they say there's no bipartisanship.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25999 Feb 24, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's try this from the top so even people like you can understand.
The Republicans had no desire for amnesty. They realize that they are lagging votes in the Hispanic community. So they put on this stunt to make it look like they really want amnesty. Then they throw in a last minute politician to stop the process.
Even though the Republicans could gain great favor among their business contributors with amnesty, they also know that by actually doing so, it would be the end of Republican leadership in national elections forever. This is because statistically, Mexican immigrants tend to vote strongly Democrat.
So one has to ask themselves: why would Republicans push for more Mexican citizenship if it would likely mean their demise? It just doesn't make sense. But if you put on this production as if you really want to see all these Mexican illegals gain citizenship, it's the only possible way to syphon some of these votes from Democrats. It also panders to their business supporters.
Let me give you another example: Republicans have a strong objection to abortion. Yet, when Republicans had leadership of Congress and Senate under President Bush, they didn't do very much to outlaw abortion. In fact, it was barely an issue.
Dog and Pony show. Getting the votes of the religious right by protesting abortion, they are able to capitalize on that issue. When the time comes to actually do something about abortion, nothing! Why is that?
The reason is they want to look good to their support base, but also know that it's mostly Democrat voters that exercise their right to have an abortion. So again, why would Republicans actually want a law that would create more likely Democrat voters in the future and put them out of business?
Yes, yes. We all know that the GOP are a conniving lot. Willing to say or do anything to get elected. Now if only you guys could understand that most of us don't look at Obama as the second coming. He's a mediocre president. It's the same conniving that you describe with the GOP that made us willing to vote for anyone over anything the same people who inflicted us with GW Bush had to offer. Obama is ten times better than Bush. The fact is, I would have voted for a rock that kinda looks like it had a face, over Mitt Romney. It's that same catering to the religious right that ruined the GOP, and it's those same religious fascist Tea Baggers that the GOP is trying to flick off themselves like a booger on their finger. The bottom line is you follow much of the religious right's views on abortion and gays that has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. You wonder why people think of you and yours as being racist, when it is due to the numerous, propaganda based "scandals" that you are so willing to believe, even after they have been proven to be lies. Did you know that there were 18 Benghazi like attacks on Bush's watch? Not a peep about those. Do you realize that Bush's needless war cost us around 800 billion dollars? Not a peep about that. Some how, you guys have been convinced that a purely corporate agenda, which is why you have your views on the climate, and on labor in this country, is somehow better than the people we elect to run this country. It's isn't.
Canton

Canton, OH

#26000 Feb 24, 2014
The only people I have ever known to get an abortion were wealthy, young Christian Republicans that didn't want their entire education and their careers shut down by an unwanted child. This I know first hand, because one of them was my cousin. How many abortions were due to small town church communities, and the absolute shun they would place on the upstanding, Christian families who had a young, pregnant unmarried daughter? If it's the Democrats that are so willing to get an abortion, then why has the abortion rate dropped 13% under Obama?
Canton

Canton, OH

#26001 Feb 24, 2014
Exxon Mobile CEO Sues To Stop Fracking Near His Texas Ranch

http://beta.slashdot.org/story/198575
Canton

Canton, OH

#26002 Feb 24, 2014
That Exxon Mobile CEO sounds a lot like the people in Texas who paid the bills of illegal aliens for decades, and now cry because nobody speaks English in their town anymore.
woo-boy

Van Wert, OH

#26003 Feb 24, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, yes. We all know that the GOP are a conniving lot. Willing to say or do anything to get elected. Now if only you guys could understand that most of us don't look at Obama as the second coming. He's a mediocre president. It's the same conniving that you describe with the GOP that made us willing to vote for anyone over anything the same people who inflicted us with GW Bush had to offer. Obama is ten times better than Bush. The fact is, I would have voted for a rock that kinda looks like it had a face, over Mitt Romney. It's that same catering to the religious right that ruined the GOP, and it's those same religious fascist Tea Baggers that the GOP is trying to flick off themselves like a booger on their finger. The bottom line is you follow much of the religious right's views on abortion and gays that has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. You wonder why people think of you and yours as being racist, when it is due to the numerous, propaganda based "scandals" that you are so willing to believe, even after they have been proven to be lies. Did you know that there were 18 Benghazi like attacks on Bush's watch? Not a peep about those. Do you realize that Bush's needless war cost us around 800 billion dollars? Not a peep about that. Some how, you guys have been convinced that a purely corporate agenda, which is why you have your views on the climate, and on labor in this country, is somehow better than the people we elect to run this country. It's isn't.
Oh, it's a lot more than 800 billion:
U.S. Costs of Iraq War through FY2013

DOD War Appropriations----769.9billion
State/USAID----52.38billion
Increase in DOD Base Spending----401.27billion
VA Medical(attributing 65% of total costs to Iraq War)----15.31billion
VA Disability( " " " " " " " " " )----21.84billion
SS Disability( " " " " " " " )----2.91billion
Growth in other VA Spending( " " " " " )----46.48billion
Homeland Security( " " 54% of increase to Iraq)----245.81billion
Interest Cost(54% of cumulative costs, not counting interest cost in 2002 and 2003)----138.8billion
SUBTOTAL COST OF IRAQ WAR and WAR-RELATED EXPENSES through 2013----1,694.70billion

FUTURE IRAQ RELATED COSTS FY2014-2053
Future Obligated Spending for Veterans Care and Disability, Net Present Value
(attributing 65% of total costs to Iraq War----490.59billion
TOTAL,not including interest on borrowing--------2,186billion

Because the Iraq War appropriations for FY2003-FY2013 were not funded with new taxes, but by borrowing, it is important to keep in mind the interest costs already paid, and future interest costs. Iraq War appropriations for DOD and State were 54% of the interest costs. If one were to include Iraq's share of cumulative interest through 2053, those costs could be more than $3.9trillion.

That pesky Budget Office.
Canton

Canton, OH

#26004 Feb 24, 2014
woo-boy wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, it's a lot more than 800 billion:
U.S. Costs of Iraq War through FY2013
DOD War Appropriations----769.9billion
State/USAID----52.38billion
Increase in DOD Base Spending----401.27billion
VA Medical(attributing 65% of total costs to Iraq War)----15.31billion
VA Disability( " " " " " " " " " )----21.84billion
SS Disability( " " " " " " " )----2.91billion
Growth in other VA Spending( " " " " " )----46.48billion
Homeland Security( " " 54% of increase to Iraq)----245.81billion
Interest Cost(54% of cumulative costs, not counting interest cost in 2002 and 2003)----138.8billion
SUBTOTAL COST OF IRAQ WAR and WAR-RELATED EXPENSES through 2013----1,694.70billion
FUTURE IRAQ RELATED COSTS FY2014-2053
Future Obligated Spending for Veterans Care and Disability, Net Present Value
(attributing 65% of total costs to Iraq War----490.59billion
TOTAL,not including interest on borrowing--------2,186billion
Because the Iraq War appropriations for FY2003-FY2013 were not funded with new taxes, but by borrowing, it is important to keep in mind the interest costs already paid, and future interest costs. Iraq War appropriations for DOD and State were 54% of the interest costs. If one were to include Iraq's share of cumulative interest through 2053, those costs could be more than $3.9trillion.
That pesky Budget Office.
Thanks, my friend. One has to wonder why none of that bothers the right wingers, yet they are soooo concerned about our nation's debt. We all know that war was pointless.
Republican 101

Lima, OH

#26005 Feb 24, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
One has to wonder why none of that bothers the right wingers, yet they are soooo concerned about our nation's debt. We all know that war was pointless.
It was different then because old, wealthy, white men were in power. Good conservatives NEVER hold themselves to the same standards as the "others".
Kinda like how they CLAIM to be so disgusted with the "moocher class", but let their parents pay their bills well into adulthood...
mutt

Chillicothe, OH

#26006 Feb 24, 2014
Canton wrote:
Thanks, my friend. One has to wonder why none of that bothers the right wingers, yet they are soooo concerned about our nation's debt. We all know that war was pointless.
It wasn't pointless until Obama took over. He's given Iraq to his pals, al-qaeda. And he's in the process of giving Afghanistan back to the Taliban.

One has to wonder why Obama's $7 T debt increase, over the span of 5 short years, doesn't bother left-wingers, but Bush's $5 T increase in 8 years made them set their hair on fire daily .. and they're still bitching about it. I guess if you didn't keep trying to put the focus back on Bush, you'd have to take a good, hard look at what you elected. Obama isn't a mediocre president, he's a national disaster.

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.

Xenia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Anyone know Matt Morrow? (Oct '15) 15 hr yourmom 165
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Aug 14 America 21,045
News Judo Instructor Surrenders, Accused Of Sex With... (May '07) Aug 11 03killer 16
News Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) Aug 9 EdWadeisathief 32,008
Not for the faint of heart. Aug 8 Heretoplay 1
whos dealin drugs Aug 8 Neighbor 6
News 2 men accused of raping woman in Dayton (Aug '12) Aug 5 UseHer 7

Xenia Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Xenia Mortgages