What the 2012 election taught us

Nov 6, 2012 Full story: The Washington Post 10,324

We've been scouring the data for clues as to what we should learn from what happened tonight as President Obama relatively easily claimed a second term.

Full Story

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7813 Feb 5, 2013
Major Republic-an wrote:
<quoted text>
Spitting at you screen while screaming insults will render the same results to you inane questioning.
Dufus, you still haven't answered the question. All it takes is to name a source of money.

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

All it takes is a simple source of money to answer the question.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7814 Feb 5, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Where will the money come from to pay for anyone's gov't?
which recent president hasn't spent more than they took in?
If we don't answer this question, the government collapses. I'm hoping you aren't one of the Democrats that is working toward collapsing our government.

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7815 Feb 5, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Same place Bush got it. Take a civics class.
You have to identify a source of money to answer the question.
The cebt is nearing a level where it will be impossible to pay. So, the question is critical.

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

You Democrats do have a plan, don't you?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7816 Feb 5, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope.
But you are already pretty far behind on proving your statements.
Do you want to work your way forward or backward?
You are pretty far behind on answering some questions.

Where was Obama during the 7-hour battle between Al Qaeda and the stripped-down American embassy security detatchment when orders came from the White House to stand down AC-130 and Force Recon Marine units prepositioned specifically to respond to an attack on our embassy in Libya while the White House watched Al Qaeda kill them on the real-time video?

And;

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#7817 Feb 5, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Where will the money come from to pay for anyone's gov't?
which recent president hasn't spent more than they took in?
A trillion a year..........all of them before Obama.

“or Fox News”

Since: Jan 08

Vicksburg, MI

#7818 Feb 5, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Just look at you and see what the New Left rhetoric has created which abandoned the Old Left(FDR) in favor of this New Left rhetoric.
New Left
The New Left was a range of activists, educators, agitators and others in the 1960s and 1970s who focused their attention on marginal identities and, eventually, identity politics. They rejected involvement with the labor movement and Marxism's historical theory of class struggle. Abandoning the Marxist goals of educating the proletariat, the New Left turned to student activism as its reservoir of power.
In both the U.S. and Japan, the "New Left" was associated with the Hippie movement and college campus protest movements. The American New Left in particular opposed what it saw as the prevailing authority structures in society, which it termed "The Establishment", and those who rejected this authority became known as "anti-Establishment" .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left
Left-wing politics
In politics, left-wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social equality, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality. It usually involves a concern for those in society who are disadvantaged relative to others and an assumption that there are unjustified inequalities (which right-wing politics views as natural or traditional) that need to be reduced or abolished.
The political terms Left and Right were coined during the French Revolution (17891799), referring to the seating arrangement in the Estates General: those who sat on the left generally opposed the monarchy and supported the revolution, including the creation of a republic and secularization, while those on the right were supportive of the traditional institutions of the Old Regime. Use of the term "Left" became more prominent after the restoration of the French monarchy in 1815 when it was applied to the "Independents".
The term was later applied to a number of movements, especially republicanism during the French Revolution, socialism, communism, and anarchism. Beginning in the last half of the Twentieth Century, the phrase left-wing has been used to describe an ever widening family of movements, including the civil rights movement, anti-war movements, and environmental movements,[dubious discuss], and finally being extended to entire parties, including the Democratic Party in the United States and the Labour Party in the United Kingdom. In two party systems, the terms "left" and "right" are now sometimes used as labels for the two parties, with one party designated as the "left" and the other "right", even when neither party is "left-wing" in the original sense of being opposed to the ruling class.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politi...
Wikipedia? Really? THAT'S your source....lol....Wikipedia.... oh man...LOL

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7819 Feb 5, 2013
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia? Really? THAT'S your source....lol....Wikipedia.... oh man...LOL
Perhaps it was an oversight by you, but you didn't put any content into your post. I'll help you rectify your mistake. Here's the post you didn't answer again:

The New Left was a range of activists, educators, agitators and others in the 1960s and 1970s who focused their attention on marginal identities and, eventually, identity politics. They rejected involvement with the labor movement and Marxism's historical theory of class struggle. Abandoning the Marxist goals of educating the proletariat, the New Left turned to student activism as its reservoir of power.
In both the U.S. and Japan, the "New Left" was associated with the Hippie movement and college campus protest movements. The American New Left in particular opposed what it saw as the prevailing authority structures in society, which it termed "The Establishment", and those who rejected this authority became known as "anti-Establishment" .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left
Left-wing politics
In politics, left-wing describes an outlook or specific position that accepts or supports social equality, often in opposition to social hierarchy and social inequality. It usually involves a concern for those in society who are disadvantaged relative to others and an assumption that there are unjustified inequalities (which right-wing politics views as natural or traditional) that need to be reduced or abolished.
The political terms Left and Right were coined during the French Revolution (17891799), referring to the seating arrangement in the Estates General: those who sat on the left generally opposed the monarchy and supported the revolution, including the creation of a republic and secularization, while those on the right were supportive of the traditional institutions of the Old Regime. Use of the term "Left" became more prominent after the restoration of the French monarchy in 1815 when it was applied to the "Independents".
The term was later applied to a number of movements, especially republicanism during the French Revolution, socialism, communism, and anarchism. Beginning in the last half of the Twentieth Century, the phrase left-wing has been used to describe an ever widening family of movements, including the civil rights movement, anti-war movements, and environmental movements,[dubious discuss], and finally being extended to entire parties, including the Democratic Party in the United States and the Labour Party in the United Kingdom. In two party systems, the terms "left" and "right" are now sometimes used as labels for the two parties, with one party designated as the "left" and the other "right", even when neither party is "left-wing" in the original sense of being opposed to the ruling class.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politi ...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#7820 Feb 5, 2013
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia? Really? THAT'S your source....lol....Wikipedia.... oh man...LOL
truth hurts and that is all you can post with nothing to back up your rebuttal, again the truth hurts.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#7821 Feb 5, 2013
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
Wikipedia? Really? THAT'S your source....lol....Wikipedia.... oh man...LOL
Shoot the messanger, since you can't refute the message. Where have I seen that before.........oh yes Obama's speeches.
Major Republic-an

United States

#7822 Feb 5, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>Dufus, you still haven't answered the question. All it takes is to name a source of money.

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

All it takes is a simple source of money to answer the question.
You're an annoying azzhole.

“or Fox News”

Since: Jan 08

Vicksburg, MI

#7823 Feb 5, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps it was an oversight by you, but you didn't put any content into your post. I'll help you rectify your mistake. Here's the post you didn't answer again:
And allow me to rectify yours.

It was no oversight on my part at all.

Everybody with an above average intelligence(which apparently eliminates you) knows that Wikipedia can be edited to say anything by anybody. Therefore it is NOT a credible source for an argument, hence why I laughed at the use of it to prove anything.

In academia, if you were to use that as a source for your argument, the instructor would fail the paper and ask you to resubmit it using a CREDIBLE source.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7824 Feb 5, 2013
Major Republic-an wrote:
<quoted text>
You're an annoying azzhole.
Turn you rcomputer off, dufus.

And, dufus, you still haven't answered the question. All it takes is to name a source of money.

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

All it takes is a simple source of money to answer the question.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#7825 Feb 5, 2013
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
And allow me to rectify yours.
It was no oversight on my part at all.
Everybody with an above average intelligence(which apparently eliminates you) knows that Wikipedia can be edited to say anything by anybody. Therefore it is NOT a credible source for an argument, hence why I laughed at the use of it to prove anything.
In academia, if you were to use that as a source for your argument, the instructor would fail the paper and ask you to resubmit it using a CREDIBLE source.
That can be said about most of the sources you loons use to try and prove garbage. Many things about Obama's histry have been removed, edited or outright changed.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7826 Feb 5, 2013
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
And allow me to rectify yours.
It was no oversight on my part at all.
Everybody with an above average intelligence(which apparently eliminates you) knows that Wikipedia can be edited to say anything by anybody. Therefore it is NOT a credible source for an argument, hence why I laughed at the use of it to prove anything.
In academia, if you were to use that as a source for your argument, the instructor would fail the paper and ask you to resubmit it using a CREDIBLE source.
I consider Wikipedia to be infinitely more credible than George Soros' Snopes so-called "truth" site that is notorious for "proving" points with "high level sources" and "administration officials" and never names them.

But, we digress. You make some statement about the source, yet you never answer the content of the post, which is typical for you Democrats when the thruth gets shoved up your ass.
how abotu you go back and actually address the content of the post....

Since: Mar 11

Minnesota's North Coast

#7827 Feb 5, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Turn you rcomputer off, dufus.
And, dufus, you still haven't answered the question. All it takes is to name a source of money.
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?
All it takes is a simple source of money to answer the question.
From US treasuries and tax revenue, as it has for all the previous administrations.

“or Fox News”

Since: Jan 08

Vicksburg, MI

#7828 Feb 5, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
I consider Wikipedia to be infinitely more credible than George Soros' Snopes so-called "truth" site that is notorious for "proving" points with "high level sources" and "administration officials" and never names them.
But, we digress. You make some statement about the source, yet you never answer the content of the post, which is typical for you Democrats when the thruth gets shoved up your ass.
how abotu you go back and actually address the content of the post....
Well at least I don't ask the same stupid questions over and over again.

Anything from Wikipedia is to be suspect information and hardly the truth. I could post that Ronald Reagan was the bastard son of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster on that site if I so chose, doesn't make it so. But some lunkhead who believes that Wikipedia is like the Encyclopedia Britannica would probably use it as a source of information in a report about Ronald Reagan.

So I won't respond to any drivel that comes from a website that can be edited via the mass internet public and it hardly constitutes "having the truth [sic] shoved up your ass" Wikipedia is the internet equivalent of the check out line tabloids that you and your right wing conspiracy loons look to for information.

Answer me this:

Do you watch the Flintstones as a documentary?

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7829 Feb 5, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>From US treasuries and tax revenue, as it has for all the previous administrations.
US Treasury notes have to be purchased with money from a source of money. And, only Congress can authorize such.
But, your answer is half-way correct. You can say increasing the debt as a general answer, and be specific if you actually name the countries or entities that will porcure these Treasury notes Congress authorizes to be sold.
However, to increase the already obscene debt, your answer is the children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren that will have to pay for the government's insane spending today... which means they won't have any money to spend for their own benefit when they expect the same benefits from the government that can't even pay for it today.
What you're really saying when you say increase the already insane debt is, take it from people not born yet and leave them with nothing.... like taking candy from a baby, isn't it?

The other half of your answer was still not an answer to the question. "Taxes" is not a source of money. It is only a method of collecting money from a source of money. You have to identify the source of money the taxes will be levied against.
To identify a source of money that taxation will pay for the government, you actually have to identify a source of money where there is actually enough money there to pay for Obama's government.

So, where is all that money you are going to tax?
Shakalaka

Morrow, GA

#7830 Feb 5, 2013
inbred Genius wrote:
I think Shakalaka must have gone to Clayton County schools. Or perhaps she is a teacher there?
What you "think" nobody gives a dam. What you Know doesn't amount to much either.

“Forever Is Promised To No One”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#7831 Feb 5, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>From US treasuries and tax revenue, as it has for all the previous administrations.
Ah, you mean the people. Now since Obama's tax increase on the rich has already been eaten up with the money for Sandy victims, who's he going to come to next. Right, the middle class, which has been his intention from the beginning.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#7832 Feb 5, 2013
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
Well at least I don't ask the same stupid questions over and over again.
Anything from Wikipedia is to be suspect information and hardly the truth. I could post that Ronald Reagan was the bastard son of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster on that site if I so chose, doesn't make it so. But some lunkhead who believes that Wikipedia is like the Encyclopedia Britannica would probably use it as a source of information in a report about Ronald Reagan.
So I won't respond to any drivel that comes from a website that can be edited via the mass internet public and it hardly constitutes "having the truth [sic] shoved up your ass" Wikipedia is the internet equivalent of the check out line tabloids that you and your right wing conspiracy loons look to for information.
Answer me this:
Do you watch the Flintstones as a documentary?
Please provide an example of your contention.
What has Wikipedia published that is not true?

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min Learn to Read 184,262
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 10 min republiCONS 167,830
GOP presses state bills limiting gay rights bef... 12 min Wondering 26
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 18 min Brian_G 307,719
Analysis: Equal rights or statesa rights on gay... 18 min Wondering 163
Next gay marriage fight: religious exemptions 20 min Wondering 6,217
Judge: Michigan must recognize 300-plus gay mar... 35 min Belle Sexton 265
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 2 hr Chimney1 141,620
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 5 hr shinningelectr0n 1,171,847
The President has failed us (Jun '12) 5 hr Cheech the Conser... 303,932
Who do you side with in Ferguson? 5 hr Mss Mitchell 11,104
Team Rubio message: Ready to run 7 hr radiofreeamerica 3
More from around the web