Thats what I'm getting at. Of course when 'they' do it its wrong, when 'we' do it, its right.....
A logical Republican
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
Where on earth did you get this idea?
superstring01
Moderator
I make stuff up.
No really. It seems to me (from reading up on european political trends) that there is a desire to replace all common sense with legislation. It's a sad trend that seems to be catching on here in the USA.
~String
No really. It seems to me (from reading up on european political trends) that there is a desire to replace all common sense with legislation. It's a sad trend that seems to be catching on here in the USA.
~String
catching on? we invented that shit!
Where is the logic in that?
I am going to challenge MYSELF that I can keep answering the upcoming question on torture with my QUOTES...
I already said that:
I already said that:
Dr. Spock still sees no logic. 'The might is just' as a rule of life isn't a logical position.
I haven't seen a logical argument supporting that 'The might is just' is a rule of life. I have seen no logical support that says there are rules of life.
I haven't seen a logical argument supporting that 'The might is just' is a rule of life. I have seen no logical support that says there are rules of life.
Common sense is really reliable. That's why we dispensed of it in science. :itold:
I will explain gun control in view of the VT shootings:
First the data:
"The National Rifle Association last year spent $US5.1 million ($6 million) supporting some political candidates and attacking others. The independent Political Moneyline website reported that 85 per cent of that expenditure went to Republican Party candidates.
“The gun lobby in this country is very aggressive,” said Tom Mauser, whose son Daniel died in the Columbine massacre. “They really punish people who don’t vote their way.”"
So on one side we have a very powerful lobby and pro-gun people who actually vote, and on the other side the people who would be for gun control, but they don't tend to vote.
Thus for ANY politican it is a high risk and very low reward to take on the NRA and to advocate gun control, even if the majority of the people were for it...
Thus nothing ever changes. Congress let the ban on assault rifles expire back in 2004...
First the data:
"The National Rifle Association last year spent $US5.1 million ($6 million) supporting some political candidates and attacking others. The independent Political Moneyline website reported that 85 per cent of that expenditure went to Republican Party candidates.
“The gun lobby in this country is very aggressive,” said Tom Mauser, whose son Daniel died in the Columbine massacre. “They really punish people who don’t vote their way.”"
So on one side we have a very powerful lobby and pro-gun people who actually vote, and on the other side the people who would be for gun control, but they don't tend to vote.
Thus for ANY politican it is a high risk and very low reward to take on the NRA and to advocate gun control, even if the majority of the people were for it...
Thus nothing ever changes. Congress let the ban on assault rifles expire back in 2004...
Raping the Dead.
Hey, I thought I would explain the "liberal" media. Of course there is no such a thing, I invented it for boogie man purposes.
In both war and sport, you should always PRIZE your enemy/opponent. Why? To play it safe: if you win, you won against a strong opponent, if you lose, you lost to a stronger and worthy enemy. Who wants to lose to a weak adversary???
Also, just like there was NEVER a missile- or a submarine gap (I invented those too) in history, it was good to bitch about it and build up an even BIGGER arsenal of those weapon systems. History later showed the truth, but who cared for it by then??? I LOVED when the Russians actually managed to put up the first Sputnik! They had an advantage!! (perfect boogie man). I never got such a big government orders than back then...
So what is the deal with the media? Of course ALL major media outlets are in my hands, which is major corporations. We are NEVER liberal. But crying wolf helps us in 2 ways:
1. People actually believe that there is democracy and freedom of expression.
2. We can bitch about it continuously and build an even bigger and more conservative network...
There is such a thing as a beautiful world. Oh yes, and stupid, easily misled people too...
In both war and sport, you should always PRIZE your enemy/opponent. Why? To play it safe: if you win, you won against a strong opponent, if you lose, you lost to a stronger and worthy enemy. Who wants to lose to a weak adversary???
Also, just like there was NEVER a missile- or a submarine gap (I invented those too) in history, it was good to bitch about it and build up an even BIGGER arsenal of those weapon systems. History later showed the truth, but who cared for it by then??? I LOVED when the Russians actually managed to put up the first Sputnik! They had an advantage!! (perfect boogie man). I never got such a big government orders than back then...
So what is the deal with the media? Of course ALL major media outlets are in my hands, which is major corporations. We are NEVER liberal. But crying wolf helps us in 2 ways:
1. People actually believe that there is democracy and freedom of expression.
2. We can bitch about it continuously and build an even bigger and more conservative network...
There is such a thing as a beautiful world. Oh yes, and stupid, easily misled people too...
Last edited:
Just thought you would like to know, this post qualifies for posting in my thread "How DUMB can US Voters Be?"Hey, I thought I would explain the "liberal" media. Of course there is no such a thing, I invented it for boogie man purposes.
In both war and sport, you should always PRIZE your enemy/opponent. Why? To play it safe: if you win, you won against a strong opponent, if you lose, you lost to a stronger and worthy enemy. Who wants to lose to a weak adversary???
Also, just like there was NEVER a missile- or a submarine gap (I invented those too) in history, it was good to bitch about it and build up an even BIGGER arsenal of those weapon systems. History later showed the truth, but who cared for it by then??? I LOVED when the Russian actually managed to put up the first Sputnik! They had an advantage!! (perfect boogie man). I never got such a big government orders than back then...
So what is the deal with the media? Of course ALL major media outlets are in my hands, which is major corporations. We are NEVER liberal. But crying wolf helps us in 2 ways:
1. People actually believe that there is democracy and freedom of expression.
2. We can bitch about it continiously and build an even bigger and more conservative network...
There is such a thing as a beautiful world. Oh yes, and stupid, easily misslead people too...
Well, as dumb as they are, they are actually not responsible for electing Bush, let's give them credit.
OK, I will explain the last 2 elections:
1. The majority of people actually voted for Gore, but I had the Supreme court in my pocket and we just wanted it more badly than the Dems, also we have better lawyers so we won. The Florida trick wasn't well managed. Damn....
2. This time we played it safe with the Diebold machines. Thus the majority of people actually voted for Kerry, but we made the voting machines and the rest is history...Memo for the future: only close elections can be stolen, because of the slight discrepancy. Otherwise it would be too obvious, although I tend to think that it doesn't matter anyway...(exit polls are actually ACCURATE, but in America nobody understands basic math)
OK, I will explain the last 2 elections:
1. The majority of people actually voted for Gore, but I had the Supreme court in my pocket and we just wanted it more badly than the Dems, also we have better lawyers so we won. The Florida trick wasn't well managed. Damn....
2. This time we played it safe with the Diebold machines. Thus the majority of people actually voted for Kerry, but we made the voting machines and the rest is history...Memo for the future: only close elections can be stolen, because of the slight discrepancy. Otherwise it would be too obvious, although I tend to think that it doesn't matter anyway...(exit polls are actually ACCURATE, but in America nobody understands basic math)
Would you ever support a Democrat?
Sure. There is NO difference. Haven't I already explained the one party system? Check how many Dem candidates are actually against the war. (Hint: Kucinich)
Nobody is saying: I am going to withdraw the troops no matter what. They always say: I am going to withdraw them as soon as X...
Where X is an unrealistic goal, or when oil runs out in Iraq.
P.S.: I wouldn't just support a Democrat, but we always do. Most corporations fund BOTH parties. Just to play it safe. We call it insurance money, not that we don't get a good return on that investment...
Nobody is saying: I am going to withdraw the troops no matter what. They always say: I am going to withdraw them as soon as X...
Where X is an unrealistic goal, or when oil runs out in Iraq.
P.S.: I wouldn't just support a Democrat, but we always do. Most corporations fund BOTH parties. Just to play it safe. We call it insurance money, not that we don't get a good return on that investment...
Last edited:
Nice try, but I do not allow consective posts by same person in my thread.
Hey, if we are at it, I will explain the NEXT election:
As candidates go, we are rather screwed, let's face it. This is the first election for decades when there is no shoe-in candidate as a VIP or reelection. Thus it is a free for all and anybody can run.
Well, we are not happy with the choices we have. McCain is just too uncontrolable and not very electable due to his sticking to W. Rudy is too far on the left to our base. Romney would be good, but why he has to believe in false gods??? So there is not a good, god-fearing Christian fellow...
We would like to run Florida Bush, but his name is tainted and poisonous, so he might get to be the VIP. The rest of the candidates are fillers.
On the other hand, it wouldn't be such a bad idea actually losing the election. The shit is going to hit the fan soon, and why not let to have the blame for it? The main goals behind electing Bush (taxcuts and Iraq invasion) are already achieved, so this is a win-win situation really. We either got our guy (most likely Romney) elected or the "other side" of us wins, gets blamed for even longer staying in Iraq, inflation and the rest, and in 4 years Florida Bush will be ready to take over...
As candidates go, we are rather screwed, let's face it. This is the first election for decades when there is no shoe-in candidate as a VIP or reelection. Thus it is a free for all and anybody can run.
Well, we are not happy with the choices we have. McCain is just too uncontrolable and not very electable due to his sticking to W. Rudy is too far on the left to our base. Romney would be good, but why he has to believe in false gods??? So there is not a good, god-fearing Christian fellow...
We would like to run Florida Bush, but his name is tainted and poisonous, so he might get to be the VIP. The rest of the candidates are fillers.
On the other hand, it wouldn't be such a bad idea actually losing the election. The shit is going to hit the fan soon, and why not let to have the blame for it? The main goals behind electing Bush (taxcuts and Iraq invasion) are already achieved, so this is a win-win situation really. We either got our guy (most likely Romney) elected or the "other side" of us wins, gets blamed for even longer staying in Iraq, inflation and the rest, and in 4 years Florida Bush will be ready to take over...
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
How come Republicans don't reach out to Black Voters?
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member