Tenn. Democratic Party disavows its n...

Tenn. Democratic Party disavows its nominee for Senate as member of anti-gay hate group

There are 35 comments on the The Washington Post story from Aug 3, 2012, titled Tenn. Democratic Party disavows its nominee for Senate as member of anti-gay hate group. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

The Tennessee Democratic Party is disavowing the man who won the party's nomination to challenge Republican Sen.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#22 Aug 4, 2012
Ron431 wrote:
It is the version of the Dream Act that the President signed by executive order. This is similar to what Governor Perry endorsed in Texas. It allows young people who were brought to the states when they were young to stay and work legally. They were not "criminals" they were victims of circumstance. The money is collected to offset the cost of processing the executive order.
Like reasoned thought is going to work. You're talking to a sufferer of ODS. That ferry left the dock years ago and with all the fun they are having being absolutely outraged at that man all day every day, they really don't care if it ever comes back for them. They're not the least bit concerned that the DREAM Act is the most reasoned approach to the problem of millions of young people in this country who were brought here illegally by one or both of their parents. If they grow up behaving themselves, why shouldn't this country overlook that they never should have been brought here in the first place? They were probably too young to understand it themselves. But they got the message to work hard, stay in school and stay out of trouble. I wonder how many of our local ODS sufferers support group's little miracles of conception would even qualify under it and aren't just damn lucky to have been born here legally, or we'd be dumping their butts back "home". When you get off on going through life, really, really pissed all the time, reality tends to get lost along the way quickly and they aren't about anything like fact, logic and reason interrupt their party.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#23 Aug 4, 2012
Pattysboi wrote:
fr old coastie:
>...After all, it's the union way....<
UNIONS got you the following: the 8 hour workday, paid sick and vacation leave, a clean and safe work environment, paid breaks, and abolished child labor in mines and factories.
The next time you get a paycheck, thank a UNION member.
You do realize, don't you, that Americans are woefully ignorant as to the roots of the union struggles, and the benefits thereof? They will learn in the near future, by personal experience, if the keep scape-goating the unions.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#24 Aug 4, 2012
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Like reasoned thought is going to work. You're talking to a sufferer of ODS. That ferry left the dock years ago and with all the fun they are having being absolutely outraged at that man all day every day, they really don't care if it ever comes back for them. They're not the least bit concerned that the DREAM Act is the most reasoned approach to the problem of millions of young people in this country who were brought here illegally by one or both of their parents. If they grow up behaving themselves, why shouldn't this country overlook that they never should have been brought here in the first place? They were probably too young to understand it themselves. But they got the message to work hard, stay in school and stay out of trouble. I wonder how many of our local ODS sufferers support group's little miracles of conception would even qualify under it and aren't just damn lucky to have been born here legally, or we'd be dumping their butts back "home". When you get off on going through life, really, really pissed all the time, reality tends to get lost along the way quickly and they aren't about anything like fact, logic and reason interrupt their party.
I always have hope that some spark of truth can still exist. I know from my own experience that one sided exposure causes brain cells to die. After seeking news from multiple sources and a little research, I was able to begin thinking for myself. I am still working on my family, but I have seen some signs of logic on occasion.

Don't give up on anyone.:)
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#27 Aug 4, 2012
pedro wrote:
<quoted text>
unions might have been needed at one time,but not anymore,as they turned into greedy bastards,and the #1 reason companies move out of the USA.
Not true. The #1 reason is environmental regulations.
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#28 Aug 4, 2012
luv Sarah Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Pattysboi is ready if God forbid Obama has a second term to assist in reporting any Christian patriot so the leftist pro-gay agenda can begin the way she wants it to.
"U.S. Homeland Security to use U.S. Military to hunt down Christians to put in F.E.M.A.Camps for not taking the mark of the Beast from Antichrist Obama!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Mn8i55NvCZgXX
I do not believe the Kenyan is the beast but I do know we Christians are facing FEMA camps.
See what happens when you go off your meds?

You are a lunatic.
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#29 Aug 4, 2012
luv Sarah Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama was to turn this country into a Mexican illegal plantation and than BOOM, give them citizenship to make sure that only Dems get elected as president from now on.
If you dare call ICE on suspected illegals, they ignore you because that is what Obama and Pelosi want.
Gee... I wasn't aware of the Presidents "BOOM" power to grant citizenship. Your delusions sure are interesting.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#30 Aug 4, 2012
Gay And Proud wrote:
<quoted text>
And from what I read in the CNN link provided, it only means they can stay for 2 years before being deported.
Except you know they never will be, because The Obamaniac will "dream" up another excuse to not comply with federal immigration law. Why have congress write immigration laws at all if The Obamaniac is just going to ignore them, evade them, circumvent them, and defy teh will of the Congress.

And let me go on record here and now as stating:

I am in favor of preventing ANY PERSON FROM ENTERING THE U.S. AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON. THERE IS NO "RIGHT" to EMIGRATE TO TEH U.S.!

We have a limited amount of land, water, trash dumps, and other resources, that will be used up faster by allowing immigrants into the U.S., than if we prohibit immigratio altogether. The land can only support SO MUCH ! I'm approaching this from purely an environmental view.

NO MORE IMMIGRATION TO THE U.S.!
Doug

Pekin, IL

#32 Aug 4, 2012
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the version of the Dream Act that the President signed by executive order. This is similar to what Governor Perry endorsed in Texas. It allows young people who were brought to the states when they were young to stay and work legally. They were not "criminals" they were victims of circumstance. The money is collected to offset the cost of processing the executive order.
Obummer is discounting the value of American labor and making it harder for legitimate citizens to go to school with his racist policies favoring illegals.

Obummer has go G@!

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#33 Aug 4, 2012
Doug wrote:
<quoted text>Obummer is discounting the value of American labor and making it harder for legitimate citizens to go to school with his racist policies favoring illegals.
Obummer has go G@!
On the contrary, it means that these people will be working legally. Their employers will need to abide by minimum wage rules and deduct appropriate taxes. Now those citizen workers are no longer disadvantaged by these people working for less than the minimum wage.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#34 Aug 4, 2012
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the version of the Dream Act that the President signed by executive order. This is similar to what Governor Perry endorsed in Texas. It allows young people who were brought to the states when they were young to stay and work legally. They were not "criminals" they were victims of circumstance. The money is collected to offset the cost of processing the executive order.
So what you're saying is that Congress did NOT pass the Dream Act, so The Obamaniac just instituted it by executive fiat. That's being a dictator. What's the purpose of Congress if the POTUS is simply going to ignore it ? How is that "Democratic" ???

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#35 Aug 5, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you're saying is that Congress did NOT pass the Dream Act, so The Obamaniac just instituted it by executive fiat. That's being a dictator. What's the purpose of Congress if the POTUS is simply going to ignore it ? How is that "Democratic" ???
Actually, when you look at the number of executive orders per year, Obama is in the lower use category compared to most other recent Presidents. Reagan and HW Bush were much higher, Clinton and GW Bush slightly higher. That is surprising to me since the Republicans in the Senate have used the filibuster to stop votes more than it has ever been used before. Now that doesn't sound very democratic does it?

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#36 Aug 5, 2012
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, when you look at the number of executive orders per year, Obama is in the lower use category compared to most other recent Presidents. Reagan and HW Bush were much higher, Clinton and GW Bush slightly higher. That is surprising to me since the Republicans in the Senate have used the filibuster to stop votes more than it has ever been used before. Now that doesn't sound very democratic does it?
First of all, I'd like a source from you on which POTUSes issued the most executive orders.

Secondly, just because Congress doesn't pass a bill, doesn't mean the POTUS, can say, "Oh well, I'll just bypass congress and issue an order myself." That's one-man rule and is called dictatorship.

Thirdly, since the Democrats are the majority party in the Senate, and are constantly blaming the Republicans for filibustering their bills, then why don't the Democrats simply chnage, or do away with, the filibuster ? They can do that by a simple majority vote according to Senate rules. And DEMOCRATS in the Senate, have changed the filibuster rules, BY SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE, on AT LEAST TWO OCASSIONS, BOTH TIMES LOWERING THE THRESHOLDS.

So why don't they chnage those rules again or do away with the filibuster ?

(Some of you may be unaware of it, but the House Of Representatives USED TO HAVE filibusters also, but they changed the House rules, and filibusters have not been allowed in the House for a long time).

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#37 Aug 5, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all, I'd like a source from you on which POTUSes issued the most executive orders.
Secondly, just because Congress doesn't pass a bill, doesn't mean the POTUS, can say, "Oh well, I'll just bypass congress and issue an order myself." That's one-man rule and is called dictatorship.
Thirdly, since the Democrats are the majority party in the Senate, and are constantly blaming the Republicans for filibustering their bills, then why don't the Democrats simply chnage, or do away with, the filibuster ? They can do that by a simple majority vote according to Senate rules. And DEMOCRATS in the Senate, have changed the filibuster rules, BY SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE, on AT LEAST TWO OCASSIONS, BOTH TIMES LOWERING THE THRESHOLDS.
So why don't they chnage those rules again or do away with the filibuster ?
(Some of you may be unaware of it, but the House Of Representatives USED TO HAVE filibusters also, but they changed the House rules, and filibusters have not been allowed in the House for a long time).
If you want a source, Google executive orders by president, there are several available with factual numbers.

Your second concern, executive orders are temporary and changeable. They have been a power of the President, and they have been documented since Lincoln.

On your third point, I agree. I would love to see the filibuster be more than a simple cloture vote. Make them stand up for their positions with a real filibuster. Both parties are guilty. We need to go back to the "Mr Smith Goes To Washington" type. BTW, I loved Jimmy Stewart in that one.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#38 Aug 5, 2012
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want a source, Google executive orders by president, there are several available with factual numbers.
Your second concern, executive orders are temporary and changeable. They have been a power of the President, and they have been documented since Lincoln.
On your third point, I agree. I would love to see the filibuster be more than a simple cloture vote. Make them stand up for their positions with a real filibuster. Both parties are guilty. We need to go back to the "Mr Smith Goes To Washington" type. BTW, I loved Jimmy Stewart in that one.
Jimmy Stewart was an avowed racist. Did you know that ? I read that when he was on a movie set, he forbade ANYONE except white people to be on the set. That included anybody employed in any capacity on the set.

I have seen him in some good movies.

He was also a commercial aircraft pilot and a noted WWII B-24 Liberator pilot, and flew over 30 bombing missions over Europe.

The highest military rank he achieved was Brigidier General in the U.S. Air Force.(I don't know of any actor, or anyone else with a career other than a military career, to be promoted to such a high rank).

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#39 Aug 8, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Jimmy Stewart was an avowed racist. Did you know that ? I read that when he was on a movie set, he forbade ANYONE except white people to be on the set. That included anybody employed in any capacity on the set.
I have seen him in some good movies.
He was also a commercial aircraft pilot and a noted WWII B-24 Liberator pilot, and flew over 30 bombing missions over Europe.
The highest military rank he achieved was Brigidier General in the U.S. Air Force.(I don't know of any actor, or anyone else with a career other than a military career, to be promoted to such a high rank).
An avowed racist? I do see some rumblings about his discomfort with black people, but and avowed racist, no I think that is off. Like many people of his time, he clearly had some issues, but I would look at how one accepts change and he did not seem to have a problem as he aged.

There are people today who once worked against gay rights, but are now supporters. Do we not allow people to grow in their thinking?

I was once a staunch conservative, but now I have learned to think for myself. I am sure you would not hold my ill informed past against now, would you?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Bob Corker Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Iran deal faces fight in U.S. Congress, but wil... Jul 31 private guy 265
News Biden promotes Iran nuclear deal in Senate Jul 16 SirPrize 2
News Netanyahu again warns of 'bad deal' with Iran Jul 8 goonsquad 32
News U.S. lawmakers step up warnings against 'weak' ... Jun '15 Abrahammock Relig... 4
News Russia providing arms to Ukrainian separatists:... Jun '15 -TheExam- 1,371
News Corker warns of 'breathtaking' concessions on I... Jun '15 Christsharia Law 3
News Congressional vote on war against ISIS might no... Jun '15 barefoot2626 17
More from around the web