“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater and Honolulu

#168964 Sep 24, 2013

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168965 Sep 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>
The takeaway here, of course, is that you don't consider Democrats to be American voters....
????

Of course Democrats are in the definition of 'American voters'. You couldn't have over 60% of the voters being opposed to obamacare without having a sizeable number of Democrats in that mix.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#168966 Sep 24, 2013
UidiotRACEMAKEWORLDPEACE wrote:
A Foul Tragedy
Garrison Keillor
In These Times magazine, November 2005
There are more folks in prison for marijuana than for violent crimes.
There are numerous reasons for this:

1) Marijuana is a branch of the hemp family, and Big Oil doesn't want to be hemp farmers. As long as marijuana is considered a scheduled drug, industrial hemp will also remain illegal.

2) Marijuana is easy to grow, and Big Pharma wants to remain one of the only two industries legally allowed to profit from it. As long as its possession by the unlicensed is criminally prosecuted, they will.(Of course the drug cartels, and the black market, are an acceptable part of this business model.)

3) Big Prison is the only OTHER industry allowed to profit from marijuana, although these profits are incidental to its legality, or the lack thereof.(Of course the drug cartels, and the black market, are an acceptable part of this business model, as well.)

4) Big Fed, otherwise known as the DEA, has far too much pride invested in the "War on Drugs." to go back now. Should marijuana suddenly become de-criminalized -or made entirely legal- Big Fed suddenly looks like a stone fool. They can't be having that, even though we've already repealed prohibition once, because it didn't work.

It still hasn't worked - for the American People. Working just fine for the above folks though. Don't see it happening anytime soon, but willing to work to make it happen eventually.


Legalize it.
JMO

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168969 Sep 24, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
If I can interrupt your confetti throwing for a minute...
John McCain's position and the position of multiple republican senators on the defunding issue hasn't been properly explained in here. But putting that aside, his record has been exemplary as both a senator and a soldier. The man was a POW longer than Obama was a senator and he was the extraordinary leader who refused to leave his men behind so he could come home due to Washington connections. We shouldn't ever forget that.
I have absolutely no problem with John McCain's military service. He acted heroically, and deserves respect for that service.

What I have a problem with is John McLame as a Senator. He is probably second only to obama on how many of his core values he has surrendered... Kerry, bailouts, immigration, obamacare... where does it stop.
Lyndi wrote:
Maybe you're caught up in your enthusiasm over Ted Cruz but I'm a taken aback of how incredibly disrespectful you're being to an American who has put his country ahead of himself again and again. "McLame" and such isn't okay. He doesn't deserve that.
Not as a Senator, he hasn't.
Lyndi wrote:
Again, I appreciate your enthusiasm about the new kid on the block but maybe you could leave out kicking the old workhorse McCain as part of your party games.
If the Democrats had chosen Hillary as their candidate instead of obama, I would have voted for her over McLame.
Lyndi wrote:
Two things to note about Cruz. One he's doing this in great part to position himself as presidential candidate in 2016 so his motives aren't as entirely selfless and pure as you're making them out to be
Canadian born U.S. citizens are ineligible to become President of the USA. Unless I'm mistaken, Ted Cruz was born in Canada.
Lyndi wrote:
and two, if this strategy of his isn't the correct one, he's running full throttle into a standing bayonet and his 15 minutes will be up.
That's what they said in the House, just before they passed funding the entire U.S. budget, except for obamacare. Why surrender the battle without a fight... that sounds like something Senator McLame would do.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#168970 Sep 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you can't counter assertions with something at least funnier, if not more accurate, it says more about you than it does anyone.
This was really lame.
(Thanks, Sister Kathryn)
Too stupid to think up yer own d@mn msgs.

Worthless freakin' troll.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168971 Sep 24, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>That's very well done, Lyndi - probably the best artificial argument I've seen posted in this thread by anyone for as long as it's been going on.
You may not believe it, but that's sincere.
I've already told you why I think it's an artificial argument, and you've done nothing to address that. You keep plugging away, banging on your drum, trying to force me to accept or overlook the flawed premise.
In the end you're still trying to make political points off of something that isn't political. No matter how creative you get, no matter how hard you work, no matter how much you ratchet up the invective, it's still not going to work.
You don't believe in Santabama?

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168972 Sep 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
The bill currently active in Congress, which was introduced on February 5 of this year by Rep. Jared Polis (D-Col.), would:
remove marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act;
revise the definition of “felony drug offense” to exclude conduct relating to marijuana;
prohibit the transporting of marijuana into any place where its possession, use, or sale is prohibited;
require marijuana producers to purchase a permit like commercial alcohol producers do;
subject marijuana to the federal provisions that apply to intoxicating liquors and distilled spirits;
and reassign jurisdiction of marijuana regulation from the Drug Enforcement Administration to the renamed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana, Firearms and Explosives.
Said Representative Polis,
This legislation doesn’t force any state to legalize marijuana, but Colorado and the 18 other jurisdictions that have chosen to allow marijuana for medical or recreational use deserve the certainty of knowing that federal agents won’t raid state-legal businesses. Congress should simply allow states to regulate marijuana as they see fit and stop wasting federal tax dollars on the failed drug war.
Now that doesn’t mean that Representative Polis is a Democratic version of former Congressman Ron Paul. It doesn’t mean that he is a libertarian. It doesn’t mean that he opposes the wasting of federal tax dollars on anything else. It doesn’t mean that he wants all the states to legalize marijuana, for medical use or otherwise. It doesn’t mean that he favors the legalization of drugs besides marijuana. All it means is that, at least on this issue, Representative Polis wants to transfer the oversight of something from the federal government to the states; that is, at least on this issue, he wants the federal government to follow the Constitution.
The Constitution nowhere grants to the federal government the authority to have anything to do with marijuana or any other drug. No regulations, no restrictions, no drug schedules, no controlled substances, and certainly no prohibition.
Maybe Congress should read it sometime.
Maybe you should look at 'real' facts...

:)

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168973 Sep 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Much as it would otherwise pain me to say such a thing, I have respect for any Tea Party Republicans, it would be the 'politically insane' ones. Unfortunately, the majority of Tea-party Republicans, don't fit this description, and are far more 'ideologically insane' than politically so...in that most of them have been just as busy stumping for re-election as any Democrat, since they took office.
Talk about 'all hat and no cattle'....
You used a Texas phrase, I hope you didn't have Ted Cruz in mind. He's doing what he thinks is right, knowing that so doing will probably cost him any party support when it comes to his re-election.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168974 Sep 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
The bill currently active in Congress, which was introduced on February 5 of this year by Rep. Jared Polis (D-Col.), would:
remove marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act;
revise the definition of “felony drug offense” to exclude conduct relating to marijuana;
prohibit the transporting of marijuana into any place where its possession, use, or sale is prohibited;
require marijuana producers to purchase a permit like commercial alcohol producers do;
subject marijuana to the federal provisions that apply to intoxicating liquors and distilled spirits;
and reassign jurisdiction of marijuana regulation from the Drug Enforcement Administration to the renamed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana, Firearms and Explosives.
Said Representative Polis,
This legislation doesn’t force any state to legalize marijuana, but Colorado and the 18 other jurisdictions that have chosen to allow marijuana for medical or recreational use deserve the certainty of knowing that federal agents won’t raid state-legal businesses. Congress should simply allow states to regulate marijuana as they see fit and stop wasting federal tax dollars on the failed drug war.
Now that doesn’t mean that Representative Polis is a Democratic version of former Congressman Ron Paul. It doesn’t mean that he is a libertarian. It doesn’t mean that he opposes the wasting of federal tax dollars on anything else. It doesn’t mean that he wants all the states to legalize marijuana, for medical use or otherwise. It doesn’t mean that he favors the legalization of drugs besides marijuana. All it means is that, at least on this issue, Representative Polis wants to transfer the oversight of something from the federal government to the states; that is, at least on this issue, he wants the federal government to follow the Constitution.
The Constitution nowhere grants to the federal government the authority to have anything to do with marijuana or any other drug. No regulations, no restrictions, no drug schedules, no controlled substances, and certainly no prohibition.
Maybe Congress should read it sometime.
Screw the trailer, have the whole 'fact based' movie...

:)

If ever there was a reason to be suspicious of 'government facts', watch it.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater and Honolulu

#168976 Sep 24, 2013
BobinX wrote:
<quoted text>
You used a Texas phrase, I hope you didn't have Ted Cruz in mind. He's doing what he thinks is right, knowing that so doing will probably cost him any party support when it comes to his re-election.
Just watched a clip where Rove was pissed off because Cruz didn't consult him and other so called leaders. Love him or hate him Cruz is a man whose word is worth something. That alone hacks off most in Washington circles.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#168979 Sep 24, 2013
"I think that history will judge Bush by what he's done:
Used his family's money to avoid prosecution for DUI.
Used his family's influence to avoid military service.
Used his family's money to buy a barely-passing college degree."

This is a nice chunk of truth.

But hes done worse. Lied to the world about Iraq is the big one that jumps out at me.
Roberta G

United States

#168980 Sep 24, 2013
Compu Craft wrote:
"I think that history will judge Bush by what he's done:
Used his family's money to avoid prosecution for DUI.
Used his family's influence to avoid military service.
Used his family's money to buy a barely-passing college degree."
This is a nice chunk of truth.
But hes done worse. Lied to the world about Iraq is the big one that jumps out at me.
Not another one :p
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168983 Sep 24, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
????
Of course Democrats are in the definition of 'American voters'. You couldn't have over 60% of the voters being opposed to obamacare without having a sizeable number of Democrats in that mix.
Over 60%, is it now?

“If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.” &#8213; Mark Twain

It's a good bet you gotta keep a journal to remember all yours.

Sample polling 9/4-9/15
Rasmussen - 53% opposed
ABC/Wash Post - 52%
CNN - 57%
Fox News - 54%
NBC/WSJ - 44%
USA Today/Pew - 53%

Looks like your "over 60%" comes from the same "think-tank" that produced Rove's election predictions.

Of course the "hi-info voter" would know just how that avg. 52% opposed breaks down into subsets. Right? You know, because you're one of those lofty ones always sniffin' you have such superior command of all pertinent "information" and all.

So, out of that 52% opposed, what percent feel it was too watered down and doesn't go far enough to reform a bloated, inefficient, and diabolically expensive health-care system? Of course I know, but it's your story, so I'll let you share with the class. You know,'cos it'd make the statement more "fair and balanced", right?

You'd rather not? Ah well. You can lead an ideologue to facts, but you can't make him think.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#168985 Sep 24, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>
Just watched a clip where Rove was pissed off because Cruz didn't consult him and other so called leaders. Love him or hate him Cruz is a man whose word is worth something. That alone hacks off most in Washington circles.
If you're talking about what Rove said on O’Reilly, it wasn't about him and it wasn't about the leadership. It was about not consulting and coordinating his strategy with his Senate colleagues.
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168986 Sep 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>There are numerous reasons for this:
1) Marijuana is a branch of the hemp family, and Big Oil doesn't want to be hemp farmers. As long as marijuana is considered a scheduled drug, industrial hemp will also remain illegal.
2) Marijuana is easy to grow, and Big Pharma wants to remain one of the only two industries legally allowed to profit from it. As long as its possession by the unlicensed is criminally prosecuted, they will.(Of course the drug cartels, and the black market, are an acceptable part of this business model.)
3) Big Prison is the only OTHER industry allowed to profit from marijuana, although these profits are incidental to its legality, or the lack thereof.(Of course the drug cartels, and the black market, are an acceptable part of this business model, as well.)
4) Big Fed, otherwise known as the DEA, has far too much pride invested in the "War on Drugs." to go back now. Should marijuana suddenly become de-criminalized -or made entirely legal- Big Fed suddenly looks like a stone fool. They can't be having that, even though we've already repealed prohibition once, because it didn't work.
It still hasn't worked - for the American People. Working just fine for the above folks though. Don't see it happening anytime soon, but willing to work to make it happen eventually.
Legalize it.
JMO
There it is. But I think we're moving along. There really isn't that much political opposition any longer, except knowing the weeping and ganshing of teeth of the Puritans will have a field day. I won't be surprised they'll be celebrating 4/20 in the open air before I pass. I'll bring the Doritos if you'll get the donuts...;)

HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168987 Sep 24, 2013
Can't decide which was more impressive about Cruz's faux-filibuster - his moving rendition of Green Eggs and Ham, or the way he managed to shoe-horn a Nazi reference in.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#168988 Sep 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
From the WGY home page:
An open letter to parents in Rensselaer County
What planet do you live on?
Last week, word got out that your children had broken into a home in Stephentown and threw a party. More than 300 of them partied and drunkenly smashed windows, urinated on the floors, stood on tables, punched holes in the ceiling and stole a statue that was part of a memorial for the owner’s stillborn grandson. Oh, it gets better. Before, during and after the party, they tweeted about it and posted pictures of themselves engaged in this behavior.
Way to go.

The house is owned by former NFL player Brian Holloway. It is his second residence, paid for in part by his Super Bowl bonus. He lives in Florida and the Stephentown house is on the market. He watched this unfold online while at his home in Florida. Instead of demanding the arrest of your kids, he instead created a website, www.helpmesave300.com where he reposted their photos, identified the people involved, and called for ways to reach out to young people and show them that there are better ways to spend their time than drinking, drugs and vandalism.

He is a better person than I would have been in that position. It takes class and compassion to see beyond the urine stained carpets, broken windows, damaged walls and blatant disrespect to reach out to your kids. He even offered to welcome these derelicts back to his house for a picnic, where they would work together to make repairs and clean up the mess they left behind. I don’t know that the rest of us would have been able to react the same way.
And one kid showed up. One, out of the 300 teens who were there.
Instead of dragging your kids back to apologize and clean up the mess, you lashed out at Brian Holloway, threatened to firebomb his house, and are now planning to sue him. For what? For identifying your kids online. Well guess what? Your little Johnny did that himself the minute he tweeted that iPhone photo standing on the dining room table, holding a red solo cup filled with beer.

Look, I don’t blame you for what your kids did. Heck, I don’t even really blame them. Teens will be teens, and they do stupid things sometimes. We’ve all been there. It’s not fair to judge parents on the mistakes their kids make. It is how you handle that behavior afterwards that reflects on you as a parent.

Instead of sitting little Johnny down and reminding him that what he did is not acceptable and then dragging him by the collar to apologize to Mr. Holloway, you chose instead to harass and threaten the victim. Let’s not forget here, your child victimized this man by destroying his home. How dare you respond with anything other than regret, embarrassment, and a sincere apology instead of righteous indignation, threats of violence and lawsuits.

Parents like you are responsible for an entire generation that expects the world handed to them, because you have given it to them all along. Instead of teaching your kids to work hard and earn things, you give a trophy to every kid in youth sports and then hand them an iPhone in middle school. You are the parents screaming through the fence at the Little League umpire instead of teaching good sportsmanship. You are the ones criticizing the teacher instead of realizing they just want to help your child learn.

Can you please just step back and look at what you are doing to your kids? This is the generation that will grow up to lead our country and make decisions regarding our lives. I hope none of them are YOUR children.
-Kelly
Wow. I hadn't heard this before, maybe because I don't keep up with football or football players. I don't know how Mr. Holloway could have been so gracious to these young vandals, how all but one showed not the slightest sense of shame, and most of all I cannot comprehend the parents that would make excuses for kids who did this kind of thing.

Thanks for posting it, Kat.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#168989 Sep 24, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>It's not republican or democrat. I have a theory about what's happened to our kids. The greatest generation wanted their kids to have more than they did so they raised them in the strictest sense with almost a demand to make it. Result was the yuppie generation who thought their parents were too tough on them and vowed to make things easier going on their kids.
Result was a dependent generation that needed their parents to get the things they were used to without having to work for it. Now these teens are the kids of those dependent adults and have no boundaries or accountability at all. I'm not saying this is true of all families but it sure seems to be a trend.

Now I have to add that these are the youth that Obama appeals to. It is a parenting style they're used to, being taken care of without having to work.
You know, that's roughly what I think myself, Lis. My dad, on the other hand, blames it all on Dr. Spock :)
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168990 Sep 25, 2013
No Brief Encounter
By: MAUREEN DOWD
Published: September 24, 2013

The man formerly hailed as a messiah was having a bad day.


The Iranians snubbed him. The Brazilians upbraided him. Ted Cruz faux-filibustered him. And you just know that, behind the scenes, the Russians were messing with him.

At the end of a long, hard day at the United Nations, he escaped into the sweaty and freighted embrace of the Clintons, who had to explain and defend the president’s own health care plan for him at their global initiative conference/Hillary 2016 pep rally. The choreography of diplomacy danced around the tantalizing possibility of a historic handshake that could end three decades of poison.(Even though the last climactic clasp, between Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat, disappointingly proved that sometimes a handshake is just a handshake.)

With the welcome exit of the provincial Iranian fruitbat, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, could the country W. declared part of the “axis of evil” reach out to the country smeared as the “Great Satan” by Ayatollah Khomeini? Obama administration officials at the U.N. on Tuesday explained to reporters that there would not be a bilateral between President Obama and President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, or any sort of “formal meeting.”

“We’re not prepared for heads of state to negotiate or presidents to negotiate on the nuclear issue,” an official said, speaking on background. An “encounter” would be permissible. Not a long one, but an “informal, brief encounter.”

“So,” a reporter asked,“like a handshake?”

“Yes, that type of thing,” the official replied.“Exactly. On the margins here.”

Except that, after the White House spent a week suggesting that there could be a press-the-flesh moment, Rouhani snubbed Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/opinion/dow...

Pitiful.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168991 Sep 25, 2013
Lost In Transition wrote:
<quoted text>
I like waffles. And asses. Sounds like a winning combo.
I can overlook the tattoo.
No tattoo.
http://www.interestment.co.uk/wp-content/uplo...

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Tide with Beach 775,688
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 26 min andet1987 5,115
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 33 min UnderstandPeople 4,780
Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says (Jun '07) 44 min RiccardoFire 37,820
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 45 min karl44 605,053
ChristmasProfits.co Review - Information About ... 1 hr theepicbonus 1
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Protester 265,194
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr June VanDerMark 559,649
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 5 hr duststorm 441,786
More from around the web