a6mzero wrote:The last 4 democratic presidents have been driven center right by the republicans accept on social issues.
So what you're saying is that Democrats are actually controlled by the Republicans?
I don't think that's what you meant to say. Is that what you meant to say?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
Night Strike wrote: Our Constitution undermines democracy on a daily basis as well. Good thing we instead have a republic that is supposed to be run under the Rule of Law (although the current president eagerly ignores it).
It's sad that most people don't know this....
My first response was to set you straight but i re read it , yes , the word democracy as it applies to the countries that "practice" it has different meanings , no two democracies are the same. We live in a republic and this president undermines it daily as well as reed , pelosi and hilary ,just to name a few. Put all the propaganda aside and that alone should make us nervous .
Of course! It's all the Democrats! Those Republicans would NEVER undermine it. And you have the gall to talk about putting the propoganda aside?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
a6mzero wrote: the scope of family leave laws. This assault on women should come as no surprise,.
Wow, you finally said something i may agree with, women should be paid for a said period of time to nurture a newborn child. Yet again an outline needs to be established so that career babymakers cannot exploit.
Career babymakers? Where do you people get these stupid ideas?
Is this sarcastic ? Or are you just naive to how the system is gamed ?
It absolutely isn't sarcastic, but I'm going to go ahead and say that YOU don't understand how the system is "gamed" by these massive numbers of "career babymakers".
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
a6mzero wrote:Was counting Carter,Clinton twice and Obama.LBJ was the last president who ever did anything significant for the average American.We need to FDR to rise out of the ashes like a phoenix and give the bulk of this nation something to hope for not just the freaking 1%.
So now it's the government's job to do things for people? What ever happened to people being responsible for taking care of themselves?
And yeah, LBJ did significant things.....that have had absolutely no positive effects. He gave us a Medicare system that is going bankrupt and a War on Poverty that has spent trillions of dollars without a decrease in poverty. If you want the country to hope for something positive, drastically cut the federal government. We don't need $4 trillion of federal spending annually to run this country as it was Constitutionally designed to be run.
War on Poverty. War on Drugs. War on Terrorism. Clearly, based on prior results, what we desperately need in this country is a War on Prosperity.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
a6mzero wrote:Quit putting damn words in my mouth Scotty. I didn't say if u had health insurance and got cancer u would always live. But if u don't have health insurance and u get cancer u will always die. And u Patrick can refer to my earlier quote regarding FDR. The greatest American president hands down but the little republican rats in their holes still like to bare their fangs.Republicans will not be satisfied until they return this country to the gilded age.
Can you imagine Bush or Obama putting Middle Eastern people in internment camps?
I certainly can. In fact, they exist.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
patrickaa317 wrote:Can you imagine Bush or Obama putting Middle Eastern people in internment camps?
No, that would be inconceivable.
Nice.
Unfortunately either you don't realize or didn't know that the imprisonments under FDR were all Japanese Americans (regardless of any actions). While GITMO was enemy combatants.
So trials have been held for all GITMO detainees and they were all found guilty? Because I'm pretty sure it's been shown that there were some detaineers who very much were NOT enemy combatants.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
Phatscotty wrote:patricka, those guys don't play fair. no matter what, you are always wrong, no matter what. They aren't here for conversation, they are here posting to irritate you.
Says the most dishonest poster I've ever seen in these fora.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
a6mzero wrote:At least I ain't drinking the koolaid Patrick.
You're definitely seem to be drinking the kool-aid, but you somehow believe it's a different flavor of it.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
It used to be a different flavor.It still could be a different flavor.The occupy protests gave me a brief glimmer of hope until they were beaten,pepper sprayed, and jailed out of existence. The war on unions seems to be going well as it should be with assaults ranging from the supreme court all the way down to state and local levels. Why do u think so many plants have moved to the south , the mexico of the US.Even with shit wages and poor benefits the Textile magnates convinced their employees (indentured servants) how much better off they were without unions. Without an organized voice the American worker will never be able enjoy the standard of living enjoyed from 1950 to 1970 when labor was strong and not every bit of the top profit went to the top.
My father raised 4 kids.We had a stay at home mom. Lived in nice houses. He retired with a generous pension and health benefits. Guess what he worked for Southern Bell. Union.
patrickaa317 wrote:Can you imagine Bush or Obama putting Middle Eastern people in internment camps?
No, that would be inconceivable.
Nice.
Unfortunately either you don't realize or didn't know that the imprisonments under FDR were all Japanese Americans (regardless of any actions). While GITMO was enemy combatants.
So trials have been held for all GITMO detainees and they were all found guilty? Because I'm pretty sure it's been shown that there were some detaineers who very much were NOT enemy combatants.
And that is a shame if that is truly the case but often times it is in the definition of enemy combatant. In the book American Sniper, Chris Kyle talks about how he could see the same guy over and over who was definitely an enemy combatant give orders/carry a weapon but was not able to take a shot. Then the same guy would come out in the middle of the street for whatever reason and expose himself but since he was not armed, Chris could not take him out because he was not an enemy combatant since he did not possess a weapon at that point in time (though minutes/hours prior he would have killed any American he saw).
Either way, this still does not give any validity to the racism that the Japanese Americans suffered under FDR.
taking a break from cc, will be back sometime in the future.
a6mzero wrote:The last 4 democratic presidents have been driven center right by the republicans accept on social issues.
I agree, except for the cause. I say the last 4 Democrat president have been driven center right by the American people and their wills reflected through Congress and the previous presidents respect for Congress where the Constitution is concerned as many presidents over our history have found a way to work with the other side of the aisle through Congress. Bill Clinton is honored most of all for this, though the most partisan will give Clinton all the credit for the balanced budget, many forget Clinton would not play ball for a long time and had to be dragged to the balanced budget by Republicans, kicking and screaming the whole way.
a6mzero wrote:It used to be a different flavor.It still could be a different flavor.The occupy protests gave me a brief glimmer of hope until they were beaten,pepper sprayed, and jailed out of existence. The war on unions seems to be going well as it should be with assaults ranging from the supreme court all the way down to state and local levels. Why do u think so many plants have moved to the south , the mexico of the US.Even with shit wages and poor benefits the Textile magnates convinced their employees (indentured servants) how much better off they were without unions. Without an organized voice the American worker will never be able enjoy the standard of living enjoyed from 1950 to 1970 when labor was strong and not every bit of the top profit went to the top.
you left out sky-high corporate tax rates, NAFTA/globalism, eroding currency, and an American government who won't do the right thing unless you hand over some control of the company to them.
a6mzero wrote: the scope of family leave laws. This assault on women should come as no surprise,.
Wow, you finally said something i may agree with, women should be paid for a said period of time to nurture a newborn child. Yet again an outline needs to be established so that career babymakers cannot exploit.
Career babymakers? Where do you people get these stupid ideas?
Is this sarcastic ? Or are you just naive to how the system is gamed ?
It absolutely isn't sarcastic, but I'm going to go ahead and say that YOU don't understand how the system is "gamed" by these massive numbers of "career babymakers".
Did i coin the term career babymaker? Children are multipliers. If you are not in fear of being called a racist , we can certainly discuss how each demographic games the system.
a6mzero wrote: the scope of family leave laws. This assault on women should come as no surprise,.
Wow, you finally said something i may agree with, women should be paid for a said period of time to nurture a newborn child. Yet again an outline needs to be established so that career babymakers cannot exploit.
Career babymakers? Where do you people get these stupid ideas?
Is this sarcastic ? Or are you just naive to how the system is gamed ?
It absolutely isn't sarcastic, but I'm going to go ahead and say that YOU don't understand how the system is "gamed" by these massive numbers of "career babymakers".
Did i coin the term career babymaker? Children are multipliers. If you are not in fear of being called a racist , we can certainly discuss how each demographic games the system.
refugee: (noun) a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster. "tens of thousands of refugees fled their homes" synonyms: émigré, fugitive, exile, displaced person, asylum seeker
a6mzero wrote:The US invasion of Iraq has created approx. 2 million refugees , just for karma's sake alone we should take care of the refugee kids at the border.
You can always invite a couple of them live with you.
taking a break from cc, will be back sometime in the future.
a6mzero wrote:The US invasion of Iraq has created approx. 2 million refugees , just for karma's sake alone we should take care of the refugee kids at the border.
You can always invite a couple of them live with you.
I'm already taking care of a totally handicapped child so at this point in time that's not an option.
a6mzero wrote:The US invasion of Iraq has created approx. 2 million refugees , just for karma's sake alone we should take care of the refugee kids at the border.
You can always invite a couple of them live with you.
I'm already taking care of a totally handicapped child so at this point in time that's not an option.
They could always help you out.
taking a break from cc, will be back sometime in the future.
a6mzero wrote: the scope of family leave laws. This assault on women should come as no surprise,.
Wow, you finally said something i may agree with, women should be paid for a said period of time to nurture a newborn child. Yet again an outline needs to be established so that career babymakers cannot exploit.
Career babymakers? Where do you people get these stupid ideas?
Is this sarcastic ? Or are you just naive to how the system is gamed ?
It absolutely isn't sarcastic, but I'm going to go ahead and say that YOU don't understand how the system is "gamed" by these massive numbers of "career babymakers".
Seriously Woody, I once pursued a career as a career baby maker but it cost way too much for the condoms and they weren't tax deductible, so I pursued a career as a jailer. I have almost caught the career, the pursuit is nearing it's inevitable conclusion, then I will have POWER over others!!!!!
