Since: Sep 08

Anderson, IN

#82 Feb 6, 2013
Christian wrote:
<quoted text>
They don't understand common sense, Frank.
Laci. Sorry, hon, but even hiding behind a gray box won't help you sound as though you have a lick of common sense.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#83 Feb 6, 2013
Christian wrote:
<quoted text>
OH, are you one of those global warming earth worshippers?
Well, I do live on the Earth. I also note that the "hottest year on record" has been broken time and time again within the last 20 years.

But my question is this:

Is it "common sense" to name a law which allowed coal plants to release more mercury into the air thus harming Americans and poisoning our food supply the "Clean Air Act"?

It's a pretty simple straight forward question. I understand it's damning to your position, but that's because your position is not supportable.

So, I'll ask again:

Is it common sense to call increasing pollution "clean air"?
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#84 Feb 6, 2013
For me, the bottom line is this: Both parties are flawed and neither fully represent my views but the gop is the lesser evil until something better comes along.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#85 Feb 6, 2013
Frank wrote:
For me, the bottom line is this: Both parties are flawed and neither fully represent my views but the gop is the lesser evil until something better comes along.
I agree that both are flawed, but here's what I see as the difference.

The Dems are honestly believe what they say.

I just don't see that from Republicans.

Look at immigration. Three days before the election, the Republicans were EXTREMELY anti-immigration. Immediately following the election, they suddenly have a change of heart?

If Obama had lost the election, the Dems would not suddenly be pushing an anti-immigration agenda. They wouldn't be pushing to lower taxes on the rich. They wouldn't be anti-equal rights for gays. They wouldn't be trying to curtail women's rights.

The Dems have positions and they stand by them.

How many anti-gay Republicans have been shown to be secretly gay? Dozens, if not more than a hundred.

How many pro-gay Democrats have been shown to be secretly anti-gay? None.

How many anti-abortion Republicans have been shown to have gotten or insisted on abortions? Dozens, if not more than a hundred.

How many pro-choice Democrats have been shown to have denied someone an abortion? None.

How many anti-immigrant Republicans have been caught hiring illegal workers?

How many pro-immigration Democrats have been shown to refuse to hire anyone who is an immigrant?

The examples are endless.

It's not that they have positions with which I disagree. It's that they only want those rules to apply to _other people_ and not to them.

THAT is the problem.
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#86 Feb 6, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that both are flawed, but here's what I see as the difference.
The Dems are honestly believe what they say.
I just don't see that from Republicans.
Look at immigration. Three days before the election, the Republicans were EXTREMELY anti-immigration. Immediately following the election, they suddenly have a change of heart?
If Obama had lost the election, the Dems would not suddenly be pushing an anti-immigration agenda. They wouldn't be pushing to lower taxes on the rich. They wouldn't be anti-equal rights for gays. They wouldn't be trying to curtail women's rights.
The Dems have positions and they stand by them.
How many anti-gay Republicans have been shown to be secretly gay? Dozens, if not more than a hundred.
How many pro-gay Democrats have been shown to be secretly anti-gay? None.
How many anti-abortion Republicans have been shown to have gotten or insisted on abortions? Dozens, if not more than a hundred.
How many pro-choice Democrats have been shown to have denied someone an abortion? None.
How many anti-immigrant Republicans have been caught hiring illegal workers?
How many pro-immigration Democrats have been shown to refuse to hire anyone who is an immigrant?
The examples are endless.
It's not that they have positions with which I disagree. It's that they only want those rules to apply to _other people_ and not to them.
THAT is the problem.
You've got a point, but politicians flip-flopping isn't anything new. Repubs aren't retarded, they know that the mexicans and certain others are going to vote for whomever's passing out the candy...hence we have no choice but to appease those people if the gop is ever to win another election.

And posting examples of right-wing hypocrisy doesn't really make any difference to me. Conservatism can't be defined by the worst of what some of it's adherents have done.

Who cares?

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#87 Feb 6, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>
You've got a point, but politicians flip-flopping isn't anything new. Repubs aren't retarded, they know that the mexicans and certain others are going to vote for whomever's passing out the candy...hence we have no choice but to appease those people if the gop is ever to win another election.
And posting examples of right-wing hypocrisy doesn't really make any difference to me. Conservatism can't be defined by the worst of what some of it's adherents have done.
Who cares?
I'm not talking about the "worst". I'm talking about _all_ Conservatives.

On every issue, the Conservative position is "they shouldn't, but in my case it's different".

Look at Paul Ryan. He wants to prevent people from getting welfare and social security. But, as a kid HE got social security when his family faced a hardship.

That was the _candidate_!

It's a pervasive attitude through out the entire Conservative movement. You guys call Obama a communist for wanting to raise taxes to less than they were under Reagan, yet you call Reagan the a great capitalist.

You guys call ObamaCare liberal handouts, yet it's based on Romney's plan which in turn came from a Conservative thinktank and, at it's core, it's basically requiring people to take _personal responsibility_ and get health care.

The Religious faction of the Conservatives complains that they are being discriminated against because they aren't allowed to put their religion in schools thus discriminating against other religions which would be harmed by this action.

I honestly don't know if hypocrisy is the most important force in Conservatism or if its ignorance, but I do know this, neither reality nor sincerely held beliefs plays any role in their thinking.

Look, I know you probably don't watch the Daily Show. However, they just did a segment about the GOP's language guy who keeps appearing on FoxNews and telling them what phrases to use.

"Instead of 'small government' say 'more efficient government'" etc.

The point of the piece was that he is shaping the Conservative vocabulary, NOT their thinking. He wants them to change the labels on the things but to keep things the same.

This s the guy that named the removal of pollution controls on coal burning power plants "The Clean Air Act". And named the law which allows logger to cut any tree they want without restriction the "Healthy Forests Act".

So, either the base knows what the leadership is doing and approves of it (Hypocrisy!) or they have no idea and they are supporting things which they themselves disapprove of (Ignorance!).

I remember when Obama's tax plan came out early on, there was a tea party rally where the people were all bitching about their taxes going up.

A guy got up on the platform and asked if there was anyone in the audience who made more than $250,000 a year. Everyone shouted "No!". He then explained that none of them had their taxes go up, that in fact their taxes have all gone down.

So, everyone cheered and went home because there was nothing to protest... No, wait. That's not what happened. They boo'd him off the stage and continued to call for impeachment saying things like "keep your government hands off my medicare".

SEriously. I don't understand you guys at all.
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#88 Feb 6, 2013
I don't understand the point of this conversation.

I've thouorghly explained my situation.

You seem unable to seperate conservatism from the deeds of certain conservatives.

You do nothing but hit me with stuff straight out of liberal talking points.

Why not start a thread titled "What I hate about republicans"?

“ ILKS r kewl ”

Since: Apr 09

Conch republic

#89 Feb 6, 2013
Frank wrote:
I don't understand the point of this conversation.
You dont understand much..considering of course.....your pea sized brain.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#90 Feb 6, 2013
Frank wrote:
I don't understand the point of this conversation.
I've thouorghly explained my situation.
You seem unable to seperate conservatism from the deeds of certain conservatives.
You actually didn't.

What you've said is that you believe in certain things: "values", etc.

Yet, the "values" you hold don't line up with the Conservative positions on anything.

So, yeah. I'm confused.

I don't mean to insult you, but it's either got to be hypocrisy or ignorance. There really isn't a third option.
OKAY

United States

#91 Feb 7, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I do live on the Earth. I also note that the "hottest year on record" has been broken time and time again within the last 20 years.
But my question is this:
Is it "common sense" to name a law which allowed coal plants to release more mercury into the air thus harming Americans and poisoning our food supply the "Clean Air Act"?
It's a pretty simple straight forward question. I understand it's damning to your position, but that's because your position is not supportable.
So, I'll ask again:
Is it common sense to call increasing pollution "clean air"?
The "Clean Air Act" was created in 1963. Anything remotely connected falls under this guise. Whether improving on improved regulations or regressing from the most stringent, it still falls under The "Clean Air Act".
OKAY

United States

#93 Feb 7, 2013
Frank wrote:
I don't understand the point of this conversation.
I've thouorghly explained my situation.
You seem unable to seperate conservatism from the deeds of certain conservatives.
You do nothing but hit me with stuff straight out of liberal talking points.
Why not start a thread titled "What I hate about republicans"?
That's how they roll..."all conservatives this, all Christians that".

Talk about blanket statements.
OKAY

United States

#94 Feb 7, 2013
Troth for Leogere wrote:
<quoted text>You dont understand much..considering of course.....your pea sized brain.
Still better than the gnat's ass-sized one you got!

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#95 Feb 7, 2013
OKAY wrote:
<quoted text>
The "Clean Air Act" was created in 1963. Anything remotely connected falls under this guise. Whether improving on improved regulations or regressing from the most stringent, it still falls under The "Clean Air Act".
Sorry, it was late and I was posting fast.

Yes, the clean air act is from 1963, what I'm talking about is the Clear Skies Act of 2003 which substantially increased the allowable amounts of air pollution industry could release.

Or, basically the OPPOSITE of its title.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#96 Feb 7, 2013
OKAY wrote:
<quoted text>
That's how they roll..."all conservatives this, all Christians that".
Talk about blanket statements.
Yes, because Conservatives like your CANDIDATE didn't make blanket statements about people who support Obama all being on welfare, etc.

Oh, right. I forget, it's okay when you guys do it, but if someone opposed to you does the same thing it's suddenly some sort of crime.

What's that called again? Oh, yeah HYPOCRISY which is my point entirely.

The Conservative platform is supported by three pillars: Hypocrisy, Hate and Ignorance.

Can you cite a single Conservative position which doesn't highlight two if not all three of these positions?

Try. I dare you.
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#97 Feb 7, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
You actually didn't.
What you've said is that you believe in certain things: "values", etc.
Yet, the "values" you hold don't line up with the Conservative positions on anything.
So, yeah. I'm confused.
I don't mean to insult you, but it's either got to be hypocrisy or ignorance. There really isn't a third option.
I's sorry massah, I forgots that whites liberals knows everything!

No need to come and here and have lengthy chats---simply post the links to the liberal websites that your parroting.

" O G-d, please curse this devil, please Lord cause him to get run over and killed by one of the floats in the next gay parade that he/she attends"

amen
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#98 Feb 7, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, because Conservatives like your CANDIDATE didn't make blanket statements about people who support Obama all being on welfare, etc.
Oh, right. I forget, it's okay when you guys do it, but if someone opposed to you does the same thing it's suddenly some sort of crime.
What's that called again? Oh, yeah HYPOCRISY which is my point entirely.
The Conservative platform is supported by three pillars: Hypocrisy, Hate and Ignorance.
Can you cite a single Conservative position which doesn't highlight two if not all three of these positions?
Try. I dare you.
Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find a welfare recipient whom didn't vote for Obama, white ones too (except for the racist ones, of course). Personally, I don't believe that long-term welfare recipients should be allowed to vote, period.

How you gonna vote for a candidate in charge of our tax dollars when you don't contribute anything?


"Hypocrisy, hate, ignorance", more liberal buzz-words, lol.

"hateful", "intolerant", "offensive" blah blah blah.

Anytime

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#99 Feb 7, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>
I's sorry massah, I forgots that whites liberals knows everything!
No need to come and here and have lengthy chats---simply post the links to the liberal websites that your parroting.
" O G-d, please curse this devil, please Lord cause him to get run over and killed by one of the floats in the next gay parade that he/she attends"
amen
I love the fact that when I point out stuff that is actually happening, you claim I'm "parroting liberal websites", however when you post empty rhetoric taken straight off FoxNews, I'm supposed to mistake it for you opinion.

So far, the only opinions you've given me are that you hate gay people, you hate feminists and you think that half the country is on welfare.

Oh, and that black people shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Gotta love that one.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#100 Feb 7, 2013
Frank wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find a welfare recipient whom didn't vote for Obama, white ones too (except for the racist ones, of course). Personally, I don't believe that long-term welfare recipients should be allowed to vote, period.
This is exactly what I was talking about.

There are just as many Conservatives on welfare. The difference is that the Southern/midwest Conservative welfare base doesn't consider themselves to be on welfare. Or, at the very least, they see it as something they are owed or earned.

It's the hypocrisy that is at the heart of Conservativism.

They say, "I hate those people on welfare. In my case, it's different because the factor shut down and I can't find a job. But those people in that other state? They're lazy bums."

It's the same with abortion and equal rights and taxes and laws and freedom and religion and friggin EVERYTHING.
How you gonna vote for a candidate in charge of our tax dollars when you don't contribute anything?
Romney didn't contribute anything and he was the CANDIDATE.

A big chunk of the Republican base is elderly and on social security - contributing nothing.

Another big influence is religion which ALSO contributes nothing.

This is my other point. Ignorance. You claim that the 2% of the population which is actually on Welfare (which INCLUDES people who are working multiple jobs) is responsible for 55% of the vote that Obama got. Meanwhile, you ignore the fact that you criticism applies even more firmly to the base of your own party.
"Hypocrisy, hate, ignorance", more liberal buzz-words, lol.
This is like saying that "lynching" is a black buzz-word and therefore the Klan never did it.

Guess what, these are "buzzwords" because they ACCURATELY describe what is going on.

Seriously, I asked you for a single example of a Conservative position which is not based on at least two of those three things.

Can you think of one?

No. Of course you can't. Being able to present the Conservative positions would require that you weren't suffering from ignorance which is at the core the this problem to begin with.
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#101 Feb 7, 2013
Okay, clearly you're not reading my posts.

Lets try this again:

YOU CAN'T DEFINE CONSERVATISM BY THE WORST DEEDS COMMITED BY CONSERVATIVES.

Pointing out the foolishness or hypocrisy of some republicans and saying "that's conservatism" would be similiar to me saying "suicide bombers are islam" or "the kkk is what white people are".

And I don't watch fox news--in fact, I don't trust the media much at all as most of it is controlled by the same group of people.
Frank

Fayetteville, NC

#102 Feb 7, 2013
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
This is exactly what I was talking about.
There are just as many Conservatives on welfare. The difference is that the Southern/midwest Conservative welfare base doesn't consider themselves to be on welfare. Or, at the very least, they see it as something they are owed or earned.
It's the hypocrisy that is at the heart of Conservativism.
They say, "I hate those people on welfare. In my case, it's different because the factor shut down and I can't find a job. But those people in that other state? They're lazy bums."
It's the same with abortion and equal rights and taxes and laws and freedom and religion and friggin EVERYTHING.
<quoted text>
Romney didn't contribute anything and he was the CANDIDATE.
A big chunk of the Republican base is elderly and on social security - contributing nothing.
Another big influence is religion which ALSO contributes nothing.
This is my other point. Ignorance. You claim that the 2% of the population which is actually on Welfare (which INCLUDES people who are working multiple jobs) is responsible for 55% of the vote that Obama got. Meanwhile, you ignore the fact that you criticism applies even more firmly to the base of your own party.
<quoted text>
This is like saying that "lynching" is a black buzz-word and therefore the Klan never did it.
Guess what, these are "buzzwords" because they ACCURATELY describe what is going on.
Seriously, I asked you for a single example of a Conservative position which is not based on at least two of those three things.
Can you think of one?
No. Of course you can't. Being able to present the Conservative positions would require that you weren't suffering from ignorance which is at the core the this problem to begin with.
Listen, trying to have a serious conversation about conservatism (or just about anything else) with a liberal is pointless--you're attached to your views and will do nothing but continue to parrot garbage from liberal websites..what purpose would it serve?

And any issue discussed will inevitably end in the liberal falling back on his buzz words "hate", "racist", "igorant". "offensive", etc., etc.

Pointless.

"O G-d, please cause the roof to cave in on this devil the next time that he/she visits a "cultural diversity" museum"

Amen

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.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why doesn't God let its believers know who has ... 51 min par five 166
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 1 hr Nc resident 16,534
Why doesent God cure cancer? 1 hr dollarsbillisadum... 407
Heavenly Tours 2 hr Faith-Healer 3
Bible says Satan will be Destroyed, Not Live Fo... (Apr '10) 3 hr Jake999 565
Imagine that you had to tell an alien about God... 3 hr Skeptic 46
Why doesent God help? 3 hr witchie poo 286
Is the Bible always literally true or correct? 4 hr messianic114 4,107
HERE is WHAT DEMON POSSESSION LOOKS LIKE 6 hr hmmmmm 71

Christian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE