Bush is a hero
UidiotRaceMAkeWO RLDPEACE

United States

#172369 Nov 19, 2013
Lost In Transition wrote:
<quoted text>
According to the little kid's round-table, bigger is always better.
And raisins turn into grapes.
lol! Seriously. really! BwhHAAAAA
aDD THE fRIUT LOOPS and nuts. bAHAHAHHhahaaaaaa

USA_1

“For F***'s Sake”

Since: Aug 13

Tanner Flats

#172370 Nov 19, 2013
UidiotSOMALIANbuttPirateRaceMA keWORLDPEACE wrote:
<quoted text> Save enough to retire around 50?? or you waiting to 66? Or even 100? You hate unions , then you are CONfederate! ABhahahahahahaaa
Hey CHOCOLATE FACE, what's the retirement age in Somalian pirate's union, khat chewing imbecile? <¦-o
HipGnozizzz

Dahinda, IL

#172371 Nov 19, 2013
Lost In Transition wrote:
<quoted text>
Man, I hate when they do that.
"OK, first we want you to turn the unit off using the front panel controls.
"I can't. When the lightning hit it shot the front panel through the living room wall and into the laundry room where the dog attacked it."
"OK, then let's unplug it for 10 seconds. And put the dog outside."
I lost the Direct in a hurricane, they told me it would take 6 weeks to get to me. Called Dish, they were here 2 days later. Have fried a couple receivers since, they always over-night me a new one. You should get a generator, they come in pretty handy. We've lost power a bunch of times, 17 days when Opal bonked us. We live in the sticks so we're always the caboose when it comes to getting power restored.
fried receivers: Those lightning arrestor power strips really do work. Case in point. I was working in the office when a storm rolled in. A bolt hit danger-close and immediately following I hear a pop below the desk and the computer went black. Pulled out the power strip and there was scorching on the underside - fried strip. Rats! Plugged the computer in direct and she booted right up. I'm sold.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#172372 Nov 19, 2013
Democrats undermine the representative government concept.

In state after state, through gerrymandering and voter suppression, Democrats have systematically undermined the idea that the popular political complexion shall be represented in the one place that the Founding Fathers envisioned the people to be directly represented - the House of Representatives.

====

As tasty as that may sound to some, the above is fiction. Replace "Democrat" with "Republican" however, and the fiction becomes demonstrable fact.

Demonstrate it then, you say? OK, how about this? Let's look at a few battleground states. In 2012, the popular vote in Michigan fell out 53% Democrat, 47% Republican. But, due to gerrymandered districts that look like Rorshach tests for the addled, Michigan sent 9 Republicans and 5 Democrats to Washington.

Isolated examples? Not so much. Let's look at, uh, North Carolina.
Popular Vote: 51% D, 49% R.
House reps: 4 D, 9 R.

Wisconsin:
Pop vote: 51% D, 49% R;
House reps: 3 D, 5 R.

Pennsylvania:
Pop vote: 51% D, 49% R;
House reps: 5 D, 13 R (thirteen!)

(please don't evade by asking for "source". These numbers are NOT opinion - they are publicly available to any "hi-info voter" with a keyboard and internet. If you're too lazy to look, common mythology says you're probably an Obama-worshipping commie entitlement-happy lo-info-voter.)

That's just four states. Run up a picture of any district in these states. I'll suggest the NC 4th House District. In 2010 it was pretty much a block in the north-central part of the state; in 2012 it looks like a long-tailed dragon splitting the state in two.

As has been said, a voter ID law probably won't swing a >national< election in itself. But these things all happen at the state and local level, where local boards and commissions have the power to make sweeping changes, esp. when done in concert across the nation. Add this rampant gerrymandering to the other voter suppression laws that have swept the nation at the grass-roots level - voter IDs, polling place restrictions, eligibility restrictions, etc, and you have the planned and systematic undermining of a representative democracy. Game Over.

The way the game is rigged, it's been estimated that Democrats would need to win the popular vote by 7 points to get the slimmest majority in the House.

This ain't about ideology. It ain't about liberal vs conservative. It's about the most fundamental electoral right guaranteed by the US Constitution. You want a concrete example of who's really "fundamentally changing" the ideals this nation was founded on? Look no further than the Republican National Committee. If you're content with the shape of things, well good for ya, but please don't be mewling about "returning to the principles of the Founding Fathers". YOU don't believe in their brand of democracy.
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172373 Nov 19, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
There was a series of events that led to Obama's coronation, and his return to the throne. Low-info voters was only 1 segment of that series.
<quoted text>
a "meaningful way" is subjective isn't it. Both ideologies ARE political, and as such COULD be part of "meaningful discussions" (IMO).
<quoted text>
Here I guess you're just throwing things at the wall to see what sticks.
But I've never claimed to be smart. I do however know the difference between SSR & SSD. Elementary, Mr Watson.
Oh Bob Mr high and Mighty was doing a (what he thinks) is a high class mudsling at me. He never got what I was saying, so he had to reduce it to that.
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172374 Nov 19, 2013
But i love that he thinks of me so often. (blush)

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#172375 Nov 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Oh Bob Mr high and Mighty was doing a (what he thinks) is a high class mudsling at me. He never got what I was saying, so he had to reduce it to that.
I suspect he "got" what you were saying ok, but wasn't buying your premise. As I recall, you seemed to find some insidious but indeterminate ACA connection between the decades-old practice of moving all SSDI recipients to standard Medicare at normal retirement age. You maintained that certain necessary but undefined services were now no longer available. It's obvious they're still available - they haven't ceased, they just may not be covered by basic Medicare. That's what the supplementals are for, which YOU maintain that people are perfectly capable of finding for themselves on the free market.
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172376 Nov 19, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>I suspect he "got" what you were saying ok, but wasn't buying your premise. As I recall, you seemed to find some insidious but indeterminate ACA connection between the decades-old practice of moving all SSDI recipients to standard Medicare at normal retirement age. You maintained that certain necessary but undefined services were now no longer available. It's obvious they're still available - they haven't ceased, they just may not be covered by basic Medicare. That's what the supplementals are for, which YOU maintain that people are perfectly capable of finding for themselves on the free market.
I will say this once more and never again. They refused to give him a disabled designation so that he could reap certain govt benefits.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#172377 Nov 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Oh Bob Mr high and Mighty was doing a (what he thinks) is a high class mudsling at me. He never got what I was saying, so he had to reduce it to that.
You have the courage to sample escargot. NOTHING can stand in your way.

We discussed this (not the snails) in email a couple years ago, you didn't save it??? Aaaauuughhgh!! And here I figured you "treasured" each & every one.
:-D
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#172378 Nov 19, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Low information voters turned out in equal numbers for both candidates, bob. It's convenient to think otherwise, but it's self delusion.
That's some mathamatical formula you've got going on there, Willie. 65 million people were wowed and fooled by this rookie and 60 million who absolutely were NOT and somehow you think that equals an even number of low information voters?- heh heh- My math results come out somewhat differently.

You just can't stand being in the hoodwinked section of the stadium. I don't know if you've ever bought a horse before but voting for president is pretty much the same thing.
You have to look at a whole lot more than a shiny coat, Willie.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#172379 Nov 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Did you know that when prohibition was repealed, organized crime moved on to unions to make their big money and establish their dynasty?
Its why I laugh when Hoffa is revered as a hero.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#172380 Nov 19, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did I say they didn't turn out equally (or similar)? I only said that low-info voters were 1 segment of the series of events needed to put Obama in the WH.
<quoted text>
The difference now is that liberalism is reportedly in serious
peril because of Obama and his ACA law. Just today some pundit said this ACA rollout and Barry's "misleading" of the US population with his numerous public statements regarding "keeping your insurance and your doctor", may set liberalism a generation back.
A few days earlier, Krauthammer went further and said this debacle may very well put an END to liberalism in the US. I hope it does end it, or at least cripple it. Because I agree with David Higgins when he said often, that liberalism (in the US) is a failure, liberal policies don't generally work, and are mostly harmful to the US (paraphrasing).
I never saw much of a difference between Higgins braying at the moon about the eeeeeeeeeeeevils of liberalism and the idiot's mumbling about global elites or bipartisan shop of horrors.

I told him so, in fact.

Nothing's changed, bob.

As far as Krauthammer ... thought he phoned that one in. It's not his best work. He was preaching to the choir.

Now ... the long term effects of the health care roll out will be interesting to see, but to predict the death of liberalism from it is just plain silly.

Besides ... the liberal's best friend right now is the 600 pound gorilla on the far, far, far right of the Republican party, the uncontrollable but wholly owned subsidiary known as the Tea Party.
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172381 Nov 19, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
That's some mathamatical formula you've got going on there, Willie. 65 million people were wowed and fooled by this rookie and 60 million who absolutely were NOT and somehow you think that equals an even number of low information voters?- heh heh- My math results come out somewhat differently.
You just can't stand being in the hoodwinked section of the stadium. I don't know if you've ever bought a horse before but voting for president is pretty much the same thing.
You have to look at a whole lot more than a shiny coat, Willie.
I was talking to the priest who officiated at the wedding I attended. Yes many many priests are big Obama fans. He said when he voted for him the first time he really thought he was like a messiah. The second time he wasn't so entranced but still thought he was okay. Now he's not so sure and would not vote for him again. I think that's pretty common.
sallygal

Donora, PA

#172382 Nov 19, 2013
youtube.com/watch... …… Im Earthly but Bush is a loser
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172383 Nov 19, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
You have the courage to sample escargot. NOTHING can stand in your way.
We discussed this (not the snails) in email a couple years ago, you didn't save it??? Aaaauuughhgh!! And here I figured you "treasured" each & every one.
:-D
I did. I printed them all out and wrapped them in tissue and pink ribbon and put them in a drawer. I didn't think to go look at them before I wrote that post, but I remember. XOXO

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#172384 Nov 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Oh Bob Mr high and Mighty was doing a (what he thinks) is a high class mudsling at me. He never got what I was saying, so he had to reduce it to that.
It was definitely a pot shot at you - there was no pretense otherwise.

I tried to get what you were saying. It didn't make sense, except in a muddle-headed 'I don't want the government taking over my Medicare' fashion. The problem you ran into - a real one, to be sure - has nothing to do with the health care debate, but you tried to boot strap it on there.

I mean, unless you were trying to give an example of disinformation that could persuade low information voters - you had no point.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#172385 Nov 19, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
That's some mathamatical formula you've got going on there, Willie. 65 million people were wowed and fooled by this rookie and 60 million who absolutely were NOT and somehow you think that equals an even number of low information voters?- heh heh- My math results come out somewhat differently.
You just can't stand being in the hoodwinked section of the stadium. I don't know if you've ever bought a horse before but voting for president is pretty much the same thing.
You have to look at a whole lot more than a shiny coat, Willie.
There's no mathematical formula necessary for something that's common sense.

You lost an election - twice. It happens.

It's comforting to attribute your defeat to low information voters, because then you don't have to look at WHY you lost.
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172386 Nov 19, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>It was definitely a pot shot at you - there was no pretense otherwise.
I tried to get what you were saying. It didn't make sense, except in a muddle-headed 'I don't want the government taking over my Medicare' fashion. The problem you ran into - a real one, to be sure - has nothing to do with the health care debate, but you tried to boot strap it on there.
I mean, unless you were trying to give an example of disinformation that could persuade low information voters - you had no point.
Whatever you want to think. The whole story is rather private meaning you don't need to know so I guess it was a nonstarter. As for Obamacare effecting Medicare? Oh yes it does.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#172387 Nov 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I will say this once more and never again. They refused to give him a disabled designation so that he could reap certain govt benefits.
I'm sorry, it's really none of my business. This is exactly why I chose not to involve myself the first time around, as it makes me uncomfortable to tread near personal matters in a topical discussion forum,

BUT at the same time you did freely choose to insert it as a "proof" in the larger discussion, so,

there are stringent defined guidelines "they" must follow. Disability is not an arbitrary designation. I'm not completely ignorant of the process, as a dear friend for the last 15 years was (passed away last spring) a para who was injured in the course of his duties as a volunteer firefighter in his 30's. As he had no family nearby, I was privileged to assist where possible in that time, which inc. his transition to SSI/Medicare. For informational purposes only - are you comfortable sharing what reason was given for the denial?
lisw

Delaware, OH

#172388 Nov 19, 2013
affecting

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) 7 min Gabriel 981,426
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 8 min Buck Crick 104,962
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 21 min Ex Lesbian River 673,543
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr onemale 286,297
Poll Bible - Written by Man - Edited by Man (Apr '09) 5 hr Jedi Master of All 1,933
Gay/bi Skype Sex ? (Mar '14) 6 hr Dom daddy for sub 21
Paul Ryan is a closet HOMOSEXUAL (Aug '12) 9 hr John 10
More from around the web