Chris Clearwater

Largo, FL

#154418 Nov 13, 2012
Ds Higgins1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's always funny when liberals spend so much time telling us how much what we say is hurting our cause, when in fact, it's their feelings that's being hurt by the truth!:)
Hey DS. Good to see you again. Man Tampa is front and center on Petraeus. This is as old as King David and Bathsheba. Praying for his wife. Praying for our nation.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#154419 Nov 13, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe one of the following two scenarios will play out.
1. The Republicans come to their senses and work with the President to solve our problems and good things and great accomplishments are made. The economy moves forward faster than most thought possible. As a reward the American people keep things largely the same in 2014 with a split Congress and America wins.
2. The Republicans remain obstructionist and America suffers. In 2014 the American people continue trying to vote commonsense into the Republican Party and they lose the House and more Senate seats. Ideally, the Republicans retain 40 seats in the Senate to keep the Dems from getting too stupid. After this election, the Republicans decide the American people want progress instead of obstructionism.
Do you think Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats have enough people to submit a budget this year? As everyone knows, creating and maintaining a budget is always the first step when you're trying to get your finances in order.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#154420 Nov 13, 2012
DSHiggins1 wrote:
<quoted text>
What precisely is it about liberalism that makes you proud to be one?
I won't even try to explain it to you, because you wouldn't understand.

Fortunately, you're just one more in the out-of-touch right-wing minority in our country.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#154421 Nov 13, 2012
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks, Shemp. Hey, you know what's really cute? People all upset at us because they couldn't come up with one viable candidate to beat a President with allegedly the all-time worst records in the history of the United States. Ain't dat da shitz?
Again NO![We]'re upset with the Republican Party that they didn't front a viable candidate.

[We]'re upset with YOU because YOU chose Obama AGAIN, instead of a monkey, and knowing Obama's 4 year track record.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#154422 Nov 13, 2012
Ds Higgins1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's always funny when liberals spend so much time telling us how much what we say is hurting our cause, when in fact, it's their feelings that's being hurt by the truth!:)
Did you miss the election?

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#154423 Nov 13, 2012
DSHiggins1 wrote:
<quoted text>
What precisely is it about liberalism that makes you proud to be one?
" “If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.”-John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

Obama is no Kennedy, who would have viewed both the Patriot Act and the NDAA as anathema and abhorrent. JMO

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#154424 Nov 13, 2012
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I don't need comfort Hip, nothing will change much for me and i still bask in the glory of what has been accomplished in America. And in 4 years well we'll see. But let's be frank. You aren't exactly a big city guy though you like to portray yourself as worldly, I just don't see you that way. It's not a slam just a comment.
Boy, which way to go first?

Worldly? I sure don't recall "portray"ing myself as worldly. If I've "portray"ed myself in any way it's been as a working class family man from a long line of working-class families. But worldly? Now that's fun-ny.

As for the "big city" - first, I have no idea what's supposed to be gleaned about some difference whether one lives in a city in America or in the country, in America. But apparently you "city folk" see something superior about living in a city. >shrug<

But what's funny is your broad assumptions about people based in your own self-penned script after "meeting" people in an anonymous social forum. I think this has very often lead you to misconceptions. Then when somebody doesn't adhere to your script, you get confused and huffy. Not a slam just a comment.

Case in point - I was born and raised in what was then the 2nd-largest city in IL. Ours was a working-class neighborhood. We played, fought, and went to school with diverse people. We even reached out to a few white folks, just to show how progressive we were. I've lived from the projects to the suburbs. For some in here, minorities are some monolithic group referred to as "the ones I know". For others of us, minorities are among our family, friends, and neighbors. Even after moving out of town, we've never been more than an hour away. We still have our family and friends there, and a good portion of our business. We go to Chicago as often as we can too, to see old friends, like Bill Ayers and such.

So, yeah, I've lived in the city, the burbs, and now my address happens to be rural. See what I mean about assumptions?
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I know you like to picture us wringing our hands and dabbing our eyes but it ain't happening. I am looking forward to another president already and I just hope that some things will have changed.
Let me ask you something. I know you feel proud that we have a black president. So am I.
Well, here again, I think you're misapprehending my thoughts. Yes, you recall me being proud of the fact that this nation jumped that hurdle. That was election night '08. Many agreed, from both sides of the aisle. Beyond that night, you won't find a post of mine that references his heritage for it's own sake. The election of a black president was an historical milestone, while the President is just a man, who happens to be black. As a friend says, "It ain't no thang."
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>But are you proud that minority candidates and others who are of a conservative bent and don't please the Mas... scuse me the leadership, are metaphorically strung up on a regular basis? think of it.
This might be valid if it weren't for the many minority elected officials of conservative bent. Kinda blows the air right outta the tires.
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>There is something really wrong here, that Biden's and Reid's racist comments are abided but everyone who doesn't like Obama is a racist. Isn't there something wrong with the idea that the democratic party is supposedly for women, but not all women, women of the conservative bent are called the C word. C'mon, say what you like but at least be honest.
I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm sure you've found something. I believe you seine the ether for the most negative isolated instances you can find, then stand in front of your window shaking your fist and quailing, "See? What did I tell ya? They're all just like that!"

If we set out to confirm a pre-conception, we're sure to find it, by hook or by crook.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#154425 Nov 13, 2012
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Again NO![We]'re upset with the Republican Party that they didn't front a viable candidate.
[We]'re upset with YOU because YOU chose Obama AGAIN, instead of a monkey, and knowing Obama's 4 year track record.
Now I'm really confused. So, you're saying Romney's a monkey, and you're upset with us for not voting for the monkey?!?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#154426 Nov 13, 2012
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I won't even try to explain it to you, because you wouldn't understand.
Fortunately, you're just one more in the out-of-touch right-wing minority in our country.
That's just pathetic. You really have some superiority complex don't you? It's why you are a liberal. You're convinced you are a do-gooder. Well you're not, you are a man with a guilty conscience.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#154427 Nov 13, 2012
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy, which way to go first?
Worldly? I sure don't recall "portray"ing myself as worldly. If I've "portray"ed myself in any way it's been as a working class family man from a long line of working-class families. But worldly? Now that's fun-ny.
As for the "big city" - first, I have no idea what's supposed to be gleaned about some difference whether one lives in a city in America or in the country, in America. But apparently you "city folk" see something superior about living in a city. >shrug<
But what's funny is your broad assumptions about people based in your own self-penned script after "meeting" people in an anonymous social forum. I think this has very often lead you to misconceptions. Then when somebody doesn't adhere to your script, you get confused and huffy. Not a slam just a comment.
Case in point - I was born and raised in what was then the 2nd-largest city in IL. Ours was a working-class neighborhood. We played, fought, and went to school with diverse people. We even reached out to a few white folks, just to show how progressive we were. I've lived from the projects to the suburbs. For some in here, minorities are some monolithic group referred to as "the ones I know". For others of us, minorities are among our family, friends, and neighbors. Even after moving out of town, we've never been more than an hour away. We still have our family and friends there, and a good portion of our business. We go to Chicago as often as we can too, to see old friends, like Bill Ayers and such.
So, yeah, I've lived in the city, the burbs, and now my address happens to be rural. See what I mean about assumptions?
<quoted text>
Well, here again, I think you're misapprehending my thoughts. Yes, you recall me being proud of the fact that this nation jumped that hurdle. That was election night '08. Many agreed, from both sides of the aisle. Beyond that night, you won't find a post of mine that references his heritage for it's own sake. The election of a black president was an historical milestone, while the President is just a man, who happens to be black. As a friend says, "It ain't no thang."
<quoted text>
This might be valid if it weren't for the many minority elected officials of conservative bent. Kinda blows the air right outta the tires.
<quoted text>I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm sure you've found something. I believe you seine the ether for the most negative isolated instances you can find, then stand in front of your window shaking your fist and quailing, "See? What did I tell ya? They're all just like that!"
If we set out to confirm a pre-conception, we're sure to find it, by hook or by crook.
You're overly long response convinces me I'm right. You really have to talk yourself into it don't you, that somehow you and your liberal colleagues take the high road. If it werent so pitiful it'd be funny. I asked you to be honest. Why do you tolerate for instance Biden. he was on that ticket and you are obviously okay with all the racist things he's said.
I don't quail and I sure don't shake my fists. I'm just amazed at your hypocricy.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#154428 Nov 13, 2012
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, your pre-election predictions didn't lose me any money, but that might be more about how I arranged my wagers. But I was thinking. It'd sure be nice to hear people talking about working within our tried and true system to move the nation forward rather than m-o-o-ore hyper-ventilating focus on naming the President's moles. I got a strong impression that that was big part of last Tuesday's Memo from the Nation (ka "Da Boss"), saying, "There, now, we fired the rabble-rousers. Now quit the sh*t and git to work."

You guys need to decide if you want the party just to make your faction feel good, or if you want back in the game. I'm telling ya, people are sick of the dirt. Do a quick study on how backlashes work. You're due...
<2nd attempt>
"Pre-election predictions"...whoooee yessir ya got me there! Good one.

But regarding the rest of your msg, I was never much to conform to SOP. Didn't drink alcohol when it was the cool thing to do. Started smokin' pot 5 years after everyone else. Skated thru HS instead of getting an education. You know some of my HS pals had jobs after school, and some were eventually able to buy their own homes?

My strongest ambition back then was figuring out some way to get a gal's pants off, without the police being involved. But I joined a top-40 band a few years later and it all worked out.

So you can see that I really don't care if the Obama voters are sick of the "dirt", sick of hearing about the "moles", sick of hearing about how badly Obama is ruining our country.

Not that it has much bearing, but I was sick of the nearly EIGHT YEARS of Bush-bashing in here and across the globe, and some of it even continues to this day.

So I'll GLADLY be highlighting each & every blunder that Obama trips over, as long as I'm not in a coma and still able to work this here dadblasted desktop contraption.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#154429 Nov 13, 2012
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Now I'm really confused. So, you're saying Romney's a monkey, and you're upset with us for not voting for the monkey?!?
In a typical roundabout fashion, yes. You know I've been saying ever since last tuesday, a monkey should have easily defeated Obama.

Even if you scroll past most of my msgs, you were bound to spot
one such occasion.

Confusion? Naaaah, I don't think so.
BlackHeart

Redding, CA

#154430 Nov 13, 2012
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Such as those "millionaires" making $200,000/year in San Francisco.
200K a year in San Francisco? Hell, that's almost enough to pay rent on a two bedroom apartment there. You'd have to get another job, if you want to eat, that is.
BlackHeart

Redding, CA

#154431 Nov 13, 2012
What I thought was funny? In the run-up to the election, obama was talking about his PLAN to get america back on its feet.
What plan? And when did he come up with it? More, Why didn't he tell us about it? He kept Saying he had a plan, but never gave any details of it.
Well, could be he was using the french prison term for 'plan'. A 'plan' there is a small metalic vial that screws together, with a hollow center. It's used to smuggle cash, and other small valuables into or out of prison. How? Well, you stuff your valuables into the 'plan' screw it together, and shove it up beside bush's or in this case, obama's head.
Don't get it? BB will explain it to you.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#154432 Nov 14, 2012
BlackHeart wrote:
What I thought was funny? In the run-up to the election, obama was talking about his PLAN to get america back on its feet.
What plan? And when did he come up with it? More, Why didn't he tell us about it? He kept Saying he had a plan, but never gave any details of it.
Well, could be he was using the french prison term for 'plan'. A 'plan' there is a small metalic vial that screws together, with a hollow center. It's used to smuggle cash, and other small valuables into or out of prison. How? Well, you stuff your valuables into the 'plan' screw it together, and shove it up beside bush's or in this case, obama's head.
Don't get it? BB will explain it to you.
Sounds painful!

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#154435 Nov 14, 2012
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
OR Obama's incompetent, the MSM buried the stories until AFTER the election, and Romney ran a conservative campaign after winning the the 1st debate. The MSM admitted after Romney failed to challenge
Obama on Benghazi in the 3rd debate, "if Romney's not gonna bring it up, why should we"?
As for the congressional seats, pay attention. I'm not a political junkie, only a street urchin. I'll leave the ins and outs of CSpan I and II to those who're more interested.
Benghazi was doing Romney more harm among independents than he was gaining off of has adoring base by discussing it. For the most part, his adoring base stayed in a bubble unable to see things objectively which led to their shock and dismay the morning after.

They did Romney a favor not talking about the drone being shot at. All that would have done is remind independents and the military already weary from war how anxious Romney was to go after Iran.

The bubble is kind of like you just ignoring the fact that the Republicans lost seats in the Senate and the House. It allows you to just focus on one Presidential election where you can't see what it is really about.

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#154436 Nov 14, 2012
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to burst your mediamatter's fantasy, but Bush 43 received a greater percentage of the popular vote when he ran for his second term than obama did. "W" only received about 200 thousand less votes than barry... even though the U.S. population had increased by about 25 million since 2004. And... both of them did far better than our sexual predator president, Bill Clinton.
If anyone is lowering the presidential bar, it's Democrats like Clinton and obama. Don't let the facts confuse you, just keep spewing your usual tripe.
You are absolutely correct about bush and Clinton concerning their 2nd term election. Perhaps you have an explanation of why even though Bill was impeached, he was then and remains miles ahead of bush on a "mission accomplished" basis in the minds of Americans.

You could also explain why even though bush was one of the most popular Presidents of all time during his second election by the end of his second term he was one of the most unpopular Presidents of all time.

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#154437 Nov 14, 2012
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think Roberta meant that obama qualified as a pRsident, as barry has shown most of us that he doesn't... but he might qualify as a snake, if snakes don't have standards.
I assume that when you say "most of us" you are referring to those on this thread. The election showed that "most of them" thought Obama suitably qualified, particularly in light of the choices.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#154438 Nov 14, 2012
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>You're overly long response convinces me I'm right. You really have to talk yourself into it don't you, that somehow you and your liberal colleagues take the high road. If it werent so pitiful it'd be funny. I asked you to be honest. Why do you tolerate for instance Biden. he was on that ticket and you are obviously okay with all the racist things he's said.
I don't quail and I sure don't shake my fists. I'm just amazed at your hypocricy.
Heheheh......hey do you have to grease up before a performance, or are you just naturally oily?

lisw, every time we have an exchange - every time - it always end with you doing some shuck & jive, and feigning being "Shocked! Shocked, I tell you!" at some outrage of your own construct.

You offered your typically broad and erroneous personal assumptions, you were shown to be wrong yet again, and you respond by tossing even more crap. Transparent and pitiful.

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#154439 Nov 14, 2012
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what I sent my Senator and Congressman to do... hold the line on taxes, and cut spending instead. If they vote to raise taxes on the "makers", I'd consider that screwing us, and the USA.
obama has absolutely no clue as to what it takes to create jobs, as his past four years has shown... and it's for sure that penalizing those that are creating jobs won't do it.
Meeting with the big union's leaders won't do it, nor will meeting with big business... if many of them need to create new jobs, they do it overseas.
obama needs to meet with SMALL business owners, not unions and big businesses, they're the ones that create most of the jobs IN THE USA... but that group isn't getting a meeting with barry.
It's going to be a long four years for America.
Small business leaders also know more about laying off workers and failing. Do you have a point? No, of course not.

Obama probably knows more, or is at least interested more, in creating jobs than most of the Republican leadership in Congress.

In 1938 the top tax rate was increased significantly to a really punishing amount and it stayed in that area until about 1961 When President Kennedy reduced it to 70%. How much did the US economy grow between 1939 and 1962?

Reagan cut taxes, Clinton increased taxes, bush the son cut taxes.

Of the three, which had the largest job growth?

I was not quite honest on Reagan, he also had the largest tax increase in history. Practically doubled the SS and Medicare taxes on the self-employed SMALL BUSINESS OWNER. He also increased Capital Gains to 28%, almost double what it is today.

Of the two that were left above, which one had the second most jobs created?

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 3 min Rick in Kansas 267,241
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min Tide with Beach 793,017
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min RoSesz 567,227
Extra income... 7 min cowboy 5
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 10 min Student 39,638
Gingrich: Elite In Both Parties 'Unwilling to T... 13 min Truth 6
Does science disprove biblical teachings??? 16 min Doctor REALITY 4
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 42 min bacon hater 97,402
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr truth 607,021
More from around the web