Members bandbfan Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Bahaha that "jacket" that Suze Orman was wearing tonight needs to be spoofed on SNL when they do her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jess Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Democrats don't take the black vote for granted. If I'm not mistaken their nominee is black No one ever said that someone must be a racist if he votes against Obama. No one at all. Republicans are held to a higher standard on gay marriage because they put it on the ballot, they openly support constitutional amendments forbidding gay marriage and they shamelessly placed on the ballot in 2004 to bring out their block vote -- Christian Conservatives (aka The God Squad). Democrats are not out promoting a constitutional amendment and they do not pound their chests, as Karl Rove did in 2004, saying how their strategy of putting the gay amendment on state ballots throughout the country ensured Bush's re-election. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...ews/slater.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tishy Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Why would a black person be a racist if they voted against Obama? I can see why people would vote against Obama and for McCain and quite frankly I can't come up with a valid reason that has anything to do with skin color. Since I will be voting against McCain and Sarah Palin, does that make me an ageist and a woman hater? I really enjoy this thread and much of the sparring here but I find that I am very disheartened. Its proven to me yet again how very naive I am. And a little ignorant. It's making me afraid of what I can say in this thread for fear that I would be ridiculed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GoldenDogs Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Yeah, you and me both. Which is why I have given up on it. Intolerance for varying opinions rules the day here... Those who preach it don't practice it. It is extremely hypocritical and I have little respect for those who are so very unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Palin represents ‘fatal cancer’ to GOP, conservative says Posted: 04:19 PM ET From CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand (CNN) – Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks, who has expressed doubts about Sarah Palin’s readiness to serve as vice president, said this week the Alaska governor “represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party.” Brooks praised Palin’s debate performance and called her a natural political talent, but told a New York audience Monday that “experience matters”: “Do I think she’s ready to be president or vice president? No, she’s not even close to that,” he said. “…Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas,” he also said, in remarks first reported by the Huffington Post. “But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas, but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices. I think President Bush has those prejudices." Other prominent conservatives, including George Will and David Frum, have publicly questioned Palin's readiness to be vice president. Prominent conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early supporter, said late last month that recent interviews have shown the Alaska governor is "out of her league" and should leave the GOP presidential ticket for the good of the party. Brooks himself has also written skeptically about Palin. "Sarah Palin has many virtues," he wrote in a recent column. "If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness." http://www.crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy...day-open-thread Look at the button on their Open Thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 http://www.crooksandliars.com/silentpatrio...in-sank-republi Nina Easton: John McCain Sank the Free Market Republican Ship Last Night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 http://www.crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/mcc...-bailout-homeow McCain Flip-Flops on Mortgage Bailout for Homeowners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Toups Posted October 9, 2008 Administrator Share Posted October 9, 2008 You know...."violence" leads to more "violence". If you retaliate, you're just as responsbile as the person who "starated it" which eventually nobody will remember who "started it".......the "violence" will just continue. There's no need to attack each other. To quote Robert from Brothers & Sisters: "You're all grown ups. Get a filter!" And to show that I'm serious about this thread and that I've had enough If there is ANY negative talk towards a member in this thread, they will be suspended. If you don't like it. Fine. I'm ready to pull the trigger. So my advice, just talk about the issues and don't diss anyone. To use the Homeland Security Advisory System - this thread is now RED for SEVERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 What's up Max. I was going respond to your entire post, but this particular paragraph is near and dear to me. What Jess said above is a lot of the reason why I am more likely to dislike a Republican opposed to gay marriage than a Democrat. The Republican party has been using gay marriage as a wedge issue for the past 8 years under the leadership of GWB and his right-hand man, Karl Rove. Jess is right - the Republican party put this issue in the spotlight, encouraged ballot issues in every state and were proud of it. Not to mention that GWB is the first president in history that attempted to write discrimination into the US Constitution by way of his gay marriage ban. Casting anyone (including straight couples that don't believe in "traditional" marriage) as second class citizens because they can not get married. I will add that the only political figures that have supported "conversion" programs (like Palin) belong to the Republican party. Mind you, I didn't say all Republicans. But the ones that have come out in support of such nonsense are of the right wing persuasion. They're wrong. These programs do not work. How would you feel if a politician told you that not only you're not allowed to marry the person you love, but that your entire life is wrong and they want to change it? Being gay is not something someone chooses. That's a fact. You can't "choose" to be gay anymore than you can "choose" to be straight. And to have a politician, one that is supposed to represent you in Congress, announce it's wrong and you must change...well, believe me. It's not a good feeling. Concerning Democrats. IMHO, they are more accepting of the GLBT community than Republicans are. Other than gay marriage, Bill Clinton wanted to end the ban on gays in the military when he was elected. And who lead the opposition? Republicans. IA that Dems are given a pass a lot of the time on the gay marriage issue for the reason you said "to get elected". But they have traditionally done more for GLBT than Republicans. Ronald Reagan didn't even say the word "AIDS" until his second term because up until that time, he thought it was a "gay disease". And did you know that there is a gay Republican group - the Log Cabin Republicans - that the Republican party has barred from attending the convention every year since GWB was campaigning? You see the history there? I think the extra scrutiny of Republicans IRT gay issues is warranted because of it. I hope that everyone feels welcome to express how they feel in this thread. That's what makes it so much fun. At first, it can be quite intimidating because you never know how your posts will come across to others, regardless of how innocuous you feel they are when you're posting them. But most of us here are, I think, fairly objective and open-minded. Heck, I'm a liberal through and through but even I find myself nodding (at times) to posts by Brian or Casey. On the hopes that you will check back into the thread, Brian. I sincerely hope that you reconsider and continue posting here with us. I enjoy your posts, whether we agree ideologically or not, I think we have a lot of fun debating the issues. Come back, buddy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Toups Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Greg's GL Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 Is the Obama campaign making a mountain out of a mole hill? I'm not sure. But IA that McCain's use of "That One" in the debates came across as very disrepectful. From "The One" to "That One": McCain remark irks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 This merits a "yes" and "no" response for me. In the grand scheme of things "yes" because McCain probably just meant "that one" as in that one senator. From a political strategic standpoint "no" and I think it's really the surrogates and other "offended" peope that are running with that. I read an excerpt from Michelle Obama's Larry King transcript and she didn't make anything of it. I think some people just want to use it to their advantage because McCain and now Palin are trying to imply that Barack Obama is unAmerican and make people fear him. No one is going to make the distinction between fearing him as a candidate and fearing him as a black man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jess Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 I thought his remark "that one" was a a misspeak until I read that story. I thought McCain had meant to say, "which senator vote for it, that one" When I read that article, it appears that it was intentional and intended to be belittling. McCain has an awful temper, and appears not to be a very good loser. It behaved badly when he was against Bush in the 2000 primaries. I now think the comment was both disrespectful, intentional and petty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 I still think he meant that one senator but because he's such an angry man full of contempt for Obama, he could not control his tone. The message of his campaign lends itself to his not getting the benefit of the doubt and the fact that his campaign issued "The One" Obama cufflinks doesn't help his cause. He needs to drop the obsession but that's probably hard since certain people in his party seem to have it just as bad like Elizabeth Hasselback. Since you and GGL articulated the Republicans and the gay marriage issue so well, I just want to reiterate that I see nothing wrong with bloc voting and I don't see a reason to be bothered by anyone who implies that it's done because people don't think for themselves. Even if that is the reason then so what. There were two groups of people denied the right to vote and it was gender and race related. Women happen to come in all races and black people happen to come in both genders (I know duh). Since we're not that far removed from the Civil Rights movement and the Republican party doesn't seem to be all encompassing then it's not surprising, shocking or strange that most black voters are Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted October 9, 2008 Members Share Posted October 9, 2008 I'm posting this mainly because I like the last paragraph: Sarah Palin unappealin' to Jon Stewart Thursday, October 9th 2008, 9:51 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.