Should the Democrats do more to reach...

Level 9

Since: Nov 10

Powellton WV

#328 Jun 27, 2013
Limey, you are never going to convince
me that it's the right thing to do to
allow someone to die b/c they are poor.

It's monstrous that anyone even suggests it.

Level 9

Since: Nov 10

Powellton WV

#329 Jun 27, 2013
Let someone else die so that YOU don't
have to wait to see the dr.

It Is Monstrous.

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#330 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
<quoted text>
There are 100,000s cities in this land.
And each and every one of them have it's
poor, basically "black" section.
Even the local college town has an area
called "D-Block."
It covers the projects. Funnily enough
there are a lot of ppl from Detroit living
there.
It's all relative. Yes every city has it's poor side, but the poor side of town of most cities pales in comparison to Detroit.

And really do you suppose we should do with these people? What's the solution? Should we just pay for them to exist? Should we not expect any thing from them? Just maintain the status quo? We can spend all the money in the world trying to help them, but unless they try and change their value system, nothing will change the situation. In contrast with effort and a changed value system, even the ghetto is not insurmountable. Given this, it seems to me that's where we need to focus on.

Again, it's the difference between focusing on shipping food to feed starving Africans verses focusing on addressing the ecological, family planning, and sustainable farming deficiencies that cause famine. And if you really want to solve that problem, it takes effort on both sides. Your solutions are one sided and while they allow folks to exist, in miserable conditions, albeit, they also lead to perpetuation of the cycle of poverty and simply cause more misery in the long run and condemn folks to repeat the cycle far more often than not.

“Hello Trump”

Level 7

Since: Jan 07

Goodby Hillary

#331 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
<quoted text>
Those ppl that were victimized 50 yrs ago are still
alive. And they have kids and grandkids. No doubt
their kids were raised w/these stories. Also w/warnings
to keep their kids out of the same situations.
Racism is ugly and evil and it is dying a long, slow,
hard death in this country.
Racism here as an institution is past. Decent society will not allow it. You WILL find however individually based racism or small pockets of the country where certain people are "discouraged" to visit,live or work. Black AND White.

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#332 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
<quoted text>
Those ppl that were victimized 50 yrs ago are still
alive. And they have kids and grandkids. No doubt
their kids were raised w/these stories. Also w/warnings
to keep their kids out of the same situations.
Racism is ugly and evil and it is dying a long, slow,
hard death in this country.
So, why aren't the kids and grand kids of jews who survived the holocaust subject to this rule of yours? Why don't only 50% of them graduate from highschool? Why aren't they nearly 5 times more likely than white folks to be on welfare? Why aren't 70% of the children born to descendants of holocaust survivors born out of wedlock?

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#333 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
Limey, you are never going to convince
me that it's the right thing to do to
allow someone to die b/c they are poor.
It's monstrous that anyone even suggests it.
You are being overly dramatic.

If you don't have health insurance, you can go to a hospital funded by the state and many private hospitals treat the uninsured. Bottom line is, you CAN get health care in the USA anytime anywhere. The care is acute which means your problem will be taken care of right then and there and you'll be sent home or admitted to the hospital. If your condition is chronic and keeps reoccurring, you just keep coming back to the ER when you're sick. It's not the same level of care that you'd have if you had insurance where you could see a specialist, but don't look a gift horse in the mouth as they say.

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#334 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
Let someone else die so that YOU don't
have to wait to see the dr.
It Is Monstrous.
Again, you're being overly dramatic. See my post above. No one has to die. They just get a lower standard of care, which is exactly what I would get if we had universal healthcare. According to you, it's okay for me to have a lower standard of care, but if folks who can't afford insurance have one, to quote you it's monstrous!!!

Also, what if have cancer, it spreads because I had to wait twice as long to see a specialist, and I die? You think I'm going to take solace in the fact that I died so that someone can get free healthcare. F' that. When it's my life and I die so someone can get free healthcare ... that seems rather inequitable and we "aren't in this together."

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#335 Jun 27, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
In fact I think you couldn't be more wrong when it comes to republicans refusing to work with him because he's black.
You can bet your bottom dollar the republicans would love to work with this black man if he were president:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/0...
You're entitled to your own opinions as much as the next guy. You are not entitled to ignore and/or revise history, See partial quote below and attached full article. Whew! How dayum embarassed should you be? Now wipe that egg off of your face, Mr. Orwell! LOL

"As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.

The event -- which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured -- serves as the prologue of Robert Draper's much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives."

According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)-- who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.

For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's legislative platform.

"If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. "We've gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robe...

Level 7

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#336 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
<quoted text>
Those ppl that were victimized 50 yrs ago are still
alive. And they have kids and grandkids. No doubt
their kids were raised w/these stories. Also w/warnings
to keep their kids out of the same situations.
Racism is ugly and evil and it is dying a long, slow,
hard death in this country.
The black's own racism, does'nt seem to be dying off too soon....? Time's running out for many of them to sink or swim....handout's are gonna dry up soon......

Level 9

Since: Nov 10

Powellton WV

#338 Jun 27, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are being overly dramatic.
If you don't have health insurance, you can go to a hospital funded by the state and many private hospitals treat the uninsured. Bottom line is, you CAN get health care in the USA anytime anywhere. The care is acute which means your problem will be taken care of right then and there and you'll be sent home or admitted to the hospital. If your condition is chronic and keeps reoccurring, you just keep coming back to the ER when you're sick. It's not the same level of care that you'd have if you had insurance where you could see a specialist, but don't look a gift horse in the mouth as they say.
Wish that I was the type of person that was melodramatic.

Ppl in the U.S. have the notion that the hospitals
HAVE to care for the ill and injured. I've worked there.

They are stabilized in the E.R. and discharged.
Nothing more.

Finally when you are too ill to stabilize they will admit.
Too late to do any real good. And Allow them the privilege
to die there.....well..sometimes....I 've sent many a patient
home unable to [email protected] breathe b/c of "lack of funds" and
was instructed to tell them to "call an ambulance" a day or
so after they get home and be readmitted.

One guy didn't make it back.
They found him dead days later (he lived alone and had
no family). How's that for melodramatic?
I helped the system wipe that poor man out. I live w/that.
I wish that were the only one but......not..

Level 9

Since: Nov 10

Powellton WV

#339 Jun 27, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
Regardless of our differences, love ya, Arctic. It's been fun and you are civil to debate with, unlike that b1tch OC.(I know I shouldn't have, but I had to OC ... I'm totally totally kidding OC, I really, really am ... don't be mad, lmao)
:D
LOL

Never mad at you.
You're too damn civil to dislike:)

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#340 Jun 27, 2013
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>
You're entitled to your own opinions as much as the next guy. You are not entitled to ignore and/or revise history, See partial quote below and attached full article. Whew! How dayum embarassed should you be? Now wipe that egg off of your face, Mr. Orwell! LOL
"As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.
The event -- which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured -- serves as the prologue of Robert Draper's much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives."
According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)-- who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.
For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's legislative platform.
"If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. "We've gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robe...
It’s pretty hard for me to have egg on my face when you respond to a post of mine that suggests his skin color has nothing to do with why the republicans won’t work with him and cite an article that doesn’t even say his skin color is why they won’t work with him!!!! LMAO

These “top” republican lawmakers”, noticeably exclude the “top” republican lawmakers, I point out too ... that would be Senate Minority leader, Mitch McConnell, and House Minority Leader at the time, Boehner.

Not only that, the only one cited as advocating an obstructionist policy is one member of the house of representatives, Kevin McCarthy. I’ve never once said the Republican Party is completely lacking when it comes to folks who advocate unsound policies. I certainly don’t think they have a monopoly on it, however. I’m an independent, not a hack, like some…

Gee imagine a group getting together to discuss how they might win elections. How diabolical and evil.

FAIL

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#341 Jun 27, 2013
arctic wrote:
<quoted text>
Wish that I was the type of person that was melodramatic.
Ppl in the U.S. have the notion that the hospitals
HAVE to care for the ill and injured. I've worked there.
They are stabilized in the E.R. and discharged.
Nothing more.
Finally when you are too ill to stabilize they will admit.
Too late to do any real good. And Allow them the privilege
to die there.....well..sometimes....I 've sent many a patient
home unable to [email protected] breathe b/c of "lack of funds" and
was instructed to tell them to "call an ambulance" a day or
so after they get home and be readmitted.
One guy didn't make it back.
They found him dead days later (he lived alone and had
no family). How's that for melodramatic?
I helped the system wipe that poor man out. I live w/that.
I wish that were the only one but......not..
That sounds like a clear violation of the law:

"The federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) requires any hospital that participates in Medicare and maintains a dedicated emergency department to (1) conduct an “appropriate screening exam” on anyone who comes to the hospital and asks to be treated and (2) stabilize any emergency condition it detects."

"If the screening finds an emergency medical condition exists, the hospital must either provide treatment to stabilize the patient or transfer the patient to another facility. But a hospital does not necessarily violate EMTALA if a screening fails to accurately detect an emergency condition and the person is discharged (although it might be open to a malpractice claim)."

"Stabilizing treatment can be limited by the capabilities of a hospital's facility (e.g., its physical space, equipment, and specialized services such as surgery, pediatrics, trauma care) and staff (i.e., the level of care the staff, including those on-call, can provide within the scope of their licensure)."

"Federal regulations define “stabilized” to mean that there is a reasonable medical probability that discharging or transferring the person would not result in his or her condition materially deteriorating. In the case of a woman in labor, stabilizing means delivering the child and placenta (42 CFR 489.24(b))."

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#342 Jun 27, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think it has anything to do with racism.

I think they don't like his policies. I think he also set the tone with how he handled Obamacare and said it's their turn to ride in the back [of the bus]. You can't kick sand in someone's face and then claim they don't like you cause they are racist.

Bush was in their party. Bush didn't kick sand in the face of democrats either. He wasn't responsible for a massive piece of legislation, like the ACA, that was rammed through Congress and had zero bi-partisan support.
Obama played his cards so wrong if he wanted bi-partisanship. He did so at the outset, too.
I personally don't think Obama is as bad as a President as Bush, but he's not much better, either. I also find him to be a more charismatic and likeable guy, but he should have thought more about outreach, when he first game into office, instead of gloating and kicking sand into the republicans face.
Emanuel was caught saying f' em we don't need them or something to that effect, regarding the republicans, when the Obamacare vote took place. That type of attitude is not very helpful when it comes to working together.
My recent prior below was best a reply to your CON-bot "make-believe happy land" priors above, where those mean DEMs "kicked sand" in the poor innocent CON's faces, which then turned them against anything and everything your POTUS was for. You actually believe that? The CON meeting referred to above happened on Innaguration night! I could have done a better job of choosing your most appropriate prior to reply to. Thanks for the feedback. LOL

My prior:

You're entitled to your own opinions as much as the next guy. You are not entitled to ignore and/or revise history, See partial quote below and attached full article. Whew! How dayum embarassed should you be? Now wipe that egg off of your face, Mr. Orwell! LOL

"As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.

The event -- which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured -- serves as the prologue of Robert Draper's much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives."

According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)-- who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.

For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's legislative platform.

"If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. "We've gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robe ...

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#343 Jun 27, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think it has anything to do with racism.

I think they don't like his policies. I think he also set the tone with how he handled Obamacare and said it's their turn to ride in the back [of the bus]. You can't kick sand in someone's face and then claim they don't like you cause they are racist.

Bush was in their party. Bush didn't kick sand in the face of democrats either. He wasn't responsible for a massive piece of legislation, like the ACA, that was rammed through Congress and had zero bi-partisan support.
Obama played his cards so wrong if he wanted bi-partisanship. He did so at the outset, too.
I personally don't think Obama is as bad as a President as Bush, but he's not much better, either. I also find him to be a more charismatic and likeable guy, but he should have thought more about outreach, when he first game into office, instead of gloating and kicking sand into the republicans face.
Emanuel was caught saying f' em we don't need them or something to that effect, regarding the republicans, when the Obamacare vote took place. That type of attitude is not very helpful when it comes to working together.
Let's try this again, shall we? Your priors above would spin a tale of a make-believe happy place, where innocent CONs had "sand kicked in their face" by your mean POTUS, naturally causing them to obstruct anything and everything that he chose to do, instead of their jobs to govern and represent their voters. Revisionary history is an ungly thing, whether it's from DEM-bots or CON-bots. Nice try, no cookie!

My recent prior:

You're entitled to your own opinions as much as the next guy. You are not entitled to ignore and/or revise history, See partial quote below and attached full article. Whew! How dayum embarassed should you be? Now wipe that egg off of your face, Mr. Orwell! LOL

"As President Barack Obama was celebrating his inauguration at various balls, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to submarine his presidency at a private dinner in Washington.

The event -- which provides a telling revelation for how quickly the post-election climate soured -- serves as the prologue of Robert Draper's much-discussed and heavily-reported new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives."

According to Draper, the guest list that night (which was just over 15 people in total) included Republican Reps. Eric Cantor (Va.), Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Pete Sessions (Texas), Jeb Hensarling (Texas), Pete Hoekstra (Mich.) and Dan Lungren (Calif.), along with Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Ensign (Nev.) and Bob Corker (Tenn.). The non-lawmakers present included Newt Gingrich, several years removed from his presidential campaign, and Frank Luntz, the long-time Republican wordsmith. Notably absent were Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio)-- who, Draper writes, had an acrimonious relationship with Luntz.

For several hours in the Caucus Room (a high-end D.C. establishment), the book says they plotted out ways to not just win back political power, but to also put the brakes on Obama's legislative platform.

"If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the minority," Draper quotes McCarthy as saying. "We've gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robe ...

“Got'em figured out?”

Since: Nov 09

Think again

#344 Jun 27, 2013
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Why does it matter whether it happened here or not? Millions of Jews were gassed in WWII and many of those who survived came here and did quite well. My friend in college is parents went through “the killing fields” of Cambodia. They started a successful business. You keep saying that far less things that happened here 60 + years ago, mean so much more, but haven’t explained why. I’d much rather not be able to vote and not be able to go white schools, than live through the killing fields.
<quoted text>
MOVE. My ancestors got on a f’ing boat across the ocean, left everything they ever knew, everyone they ever knew, risked death, traveled to a foreign land, where folks spoke a different langague, in search of a better life.
If you wanna get out of the ghetto, don’t want to raise your kids in that environment, go move to f’ing Kansas. That’s what I would do. It’s really stupid personal decisions that perpetuates this cycle. You can live on welfare just as well in Kansas as you can in the inner city … probably better, in fact.
Problem is, folks are unwilling to do things to give their children a brighter future. They'd rather live in a rat infested, crime ridden, ghetto.
I've read all your posts all down the way. It's been a long day and I just don't have the time and mental energy to address all YOUR dogma, and so very much of it is. I just can't compete with such a productive Conservative.

But it's more than that. Both you and Arctic have generalized Jews in American life (I mean since the French and Brits fought over this land), but you particularly. Plus,'coloreds' since the French and British fought here. And your tunnel vision omits Jews in Europe and elsewhere in the world prior to WW2 ... WAY prior. Yeah, 70+ years. Way plus.

And finally, you're focusing on the 'moochers'[as in the 47%?| as being black-ish. Are you NOT aware that a whole lot of white folk are moochers too?

“Got'em figured out?”

Since: Nov 09

Think again

#345 Jun 27, 2013
So anyway, here's what Democrats WOULD NOT do regarding a black woman politician:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42163...

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/story/22638402/il...

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/06/21/Rep...

As has been discussed about Republican Conservatives wooing the women and minority voters. Ain't that special?!

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#346 Jun 27, 2013
Chilli J wrote:
<quoted text>My recent prior below was best a reply to your CON-bot "make-believe happy land" priors above, where those mean DEMs "kicked sand" in the poor innocent CON's faces, which then turned them against anything and everything your POTUS was for. You actually believe that? The CON meeting referred to above happened on Innaguration night! I could have done a better job of choosing your most appropriate prior to reply to. Thanks for the feedback. LOL
At best you have an article that says 12 republican legislators had a meeting on how to win elections and to counter Obama's legislative platform.

A few things to consider ...

First, the 12 republican legislators at this meeting are hardly representative of ALL the republican legislative members in Congress, of which their are close to 300 members. What is that 5%. Using your logic, if 5% of folks are gay, it necessarily follows that everyone is gay.

It is disingenuous of you to impute what was discussed between 12 members of the party to the 275 ... or however many their were at that time... other republican legislators who were not EVEN at this meeting, including the house and senate minority leaders, at the time. Its actually about as intelligent as suggesting that since Marion Barry smoked crack and is a democrat, it necessarily follows that all democrats agree with smoking crack.

I'm sure Rachel Maddow and the Obama phone lady would be impressed by that powerful logic of yours, but I'm not.

***

Second, you act like it is some profound smoking gun that republicans would disagree with many aspects of a democratic President's legislative platform and brainstorm on ways to block it in a situation where they had control of neither the house nor the senate. Do you live under a rock?

He's not a dictator and its not republican legislators job to roll over, do as he wishes, and subjugate their platform to his, and do all they can to promote his legislative agenda.

In other SHOCKING NEWS democrats disagree with the republican platform as it relates to entitlements, abortion, immigration, taxes, environment, gay marriage, etc, etc and seek to block the republicans legislative platform when it come to these and most every other issue.

******

Arctic and I were actually speaking about compromise, working together, and finding common ground. The President's legislative platform mentioned in your article is purely the democrats view point, which is not compromise or common ground. It should come as no surprise that republicans would object to a purely democrat view point regardless of the issue. That's why they are republicans, not democrats.

In connection with the ability for bipartisan compromise, yes Obama did poison the well. That 5% of the republican legislators had a meeting doesn't change the fact that Obsma did not come into office with the spirit of compromise ... He didn't feel the need to ... He controlled both houses of congress ... However since he lost control of the house of reps that attitude of his came back to bite him in the a$s.

There's a long history in politics if generating IOUs. Obama shoulda used the first half of his first term generating them instead of giving the republicans the finger and ramming Obamacare through, amongst other things. A more astute politician would have. He was naive and inexperienced. His legacy will suffer accordingly...

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#347 Jun 27, 2013
Deer Whisperer wrote:
So anyway, here's what Democrats WOULD NOT do regarding a black woman politician:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42163...

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/story/22638402/il...

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/06/21/Rep...

As has been discussed about Republican Conservatives wooing the women and minority voters. Ain't that special?!
Yes, of course republicans have a monopoly on as$holes and there is no such thing as a bad democrat.

I happen to think she's exactly the type of person republicans need more of in their party, and republicans in IL agree.

GOP activist Doug Ibendahl wrote that she'd be good for the party:

"Just be a great face for the Republican party," Ibendahl wrote. "We could actually do, in Illinois, we could do more than talk about diversity. We could actually promote it."

Congressman Davis' office put out a statement saying:

"Mr. Allen's comments are misguided and wrong and certainly do not reflect the views of Congressman Davis or his campaign."

“I looked, and behold,”

Level 8

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#348 Jun 27, 2013
Deer Whisperer wrote:
<quoted text>I've read all your posts all down the way. It's been a long day and I just don't have the time and mental energy to address all YOUR dogma, and so very much of it is. I just can't compete with such a productive Conservative.
You can't address anything I said because you can't defend your positions and can only make conclusory statements. That's why you like to jump in the threads, take pot shots, then run or only discuss folks who agree with you.
Deer Whisperer wrote:
<quoted text>But it's more than that. Both you and Arctic have generalized Jews in American life (I mean since the French and Brits fought over this land), but you particularly. Plus,'coloreds' since the French and British fought here. And your tunnel vision omits Jews in Europe and elsewhere in the world prior to WW2 ... WAY prior. Yeah, 70+ years. Way plus.
We also failed to discuss Jews in Roman times, when they were captives in Egypt, and the Exodus in Babylonia. What's your point?

For what it's worth we didn't run down the full gamut of Jewish history because we were discussing the role of racism and adversity and why most every group has encountered it to varying degrees, overcome it, and thrived in America.
Deer Whisperer wrote:
<quoted text>And finally, you're focusing on the 'moochers'[as in the 47%?| as being black-ish. Are you NOT aware that a whole lot of white folk are moochers too?
Again we've been discussing racism and the idea that racism is what holds black people back.

Yes, there are a lot of white moochers, but no one says they are moochers cause of racism. That's why we are not talking about white moochers in this conversation.

BTW, I prefer it if you call them European Americans.:p

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 3 min Faith 32,428
2words into 2new words (May '12) 2 hr Faerydust 8,916
Start a sentence in alphabetical order.. (Oct '16) 2 hr Faerydust 4,143
True False Game (Jun '11) 2 hr Faerydust 16,009
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 3 hr quilterqueen 13,880
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 4 hr quilterqueen 150,859
The Song Title Game (Jul '10) 4 hr quilterqueen 16,087
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 5 hr wichita-rick 226,075
JUST SAY SOMETHING. Whatever comes to mind!! (Aug '09) 7 hr Rosa 34,395
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 7 hr Rosa 6,732
More from around the web