Members Roman Posted June 13, 2012 Members Share Posted June 13, 2012 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/ed-schultz-rush-limbaugh-media-matters_n_1589488.htmlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/ed-schultz-rush-limbaugh-media-matters_n_1589488.html Interesting, and he has a point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GoldenDogs Posted June 13, 2012 Members Share Posted June 13, 2012 Hey guys... what have I missed? <<he innocently asked, eyes grower wider while glancing wildly about the uncomfortably quiet room>> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 13, 2012 Members Share Posted June 13, 2012 This is one of the most disgusting things I've heard of in politics. A state senator in Colorado, whose campaign is desperate to show just how anti-gay she is, outed her gay son, to brag about how she is so against civil unions that her son is irrelevant. She claims she had no knowledge of this, but her refusal to say anything negative about - much less fire - the woman responsible speaks volumes. This is where we are now, apparently (as she isn't the only one in CO's legislature who is praised for voting against their gay children). Having a gay child you discriminate against is a badge of honor, and your party will happily present these children as huge burdens that you just somehow manage to deal with. http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20827947/state-lawmaker-unhappy-campaign-e-mail-outed-her 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 13, 2012 Members Share Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) A new, well-funded study (funded by anti-gay groups) by a vocal opponent of gay marriage claims that children of gay parents suffer negative consequences in life. Of course, this study claims that anyone who ever had a homosexual experience is gay, and did not include a lot of same-sex couples (they claim that they just couldn't find enough), but that won't matter to our liberal media friends, like ABC. ABC initially had a very slanted headline until they were questioned about it. ABC proved their hostility towards gays with that disgusting hit piece on Matthew Shepherd that Elizabeth Vargas championed. North Carolina's GOP added bans on gay adoption to their platform, and Mitt Romney ran from gay adoption as fast as he could. His allies in the Senate, like Kelly Ayotte, are also against gay adoption. Expect them to hide behind this "science" to push more bigotry. The man who did the study wrote an article on it, barely managing to hide his attempts to use this against gay marriage. Remember his open bias when you hear about this "science." http://www.slate.com...different_.html http://thenewcivilri...012/06/10/41097 Edited June 13, 2012 by CarlD2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted June 16, 2012 Members Share Posted June 16, 2012 (edited) I don't think it's stupidity, I think it's voting for who you can identify with. I think every person in the country does that, unless the candidate is blatantly against your best interest. That's why all the rich waspy snobs will vote for Romney, why all the Bubbas voted for Bill Clinton, why all the military brats and "glory of war" war freaks voted for Mccain. It's just birds of a feather flocking together. Edited June 16, 2012 by alphanguy74 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 Oh the hilarity. These are the people Romney spends all his time catering to. http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/06/conservative-leader-jokes-president-obama-steals-silverware.php?ref=fpnewsfeed 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Max Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) It's the two-year anniversary of the "Recovery Summer": http://news.investor...mulus-claim.htm More broken promises and failed policies from Barry: Edited June 17, 2012 by Max 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 The stimulus wasn't big enough. If cutting and cutting and cutting was enough to get the economy going, Europe would be a paradise, instead of on fire. And now thanks to the endless frenzy for austerity, defense contractors are going to be laying off a million people 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 Plus none of the Forth Estate have bothered to report that Republican governors refused to spend any stimulus money in their states jjst to make the President look bad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wales2004 Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 I don't know why I feel like diving it today (maybe it's because I've got iPod blues), but I won't categorize it as racist. Where I disagree with the OP (and I'm not limiting myself to this one topic), is that skin color is the only qualification Barack Obama has/had. Obviously, Bobby Jindahl is a lot darker than Barack Obama and he's not President. It's flat out stupid to suggest that every person who voted for Barack Obama had his father in mind (since that is the person that makes him black yes? In the land of the free, a biracial person with a black parent has to be black unless that person's skin tone makes him/her ambiguous enough to be mistaken for white and then the person does not have to be black unless he/she wants to be because that's how idiotic race in America happens to be) Racism and racialism in America constantly shackles the minds of the people who buy into it so that they are emotional, reactionary, and speculate at a high rate about the results of given situations f the party had been black or white. Thus, we have the speculation that a white man with as limited a D.C. politcal background as Barack Obama would not have been considered to run for President. Just because the Republicans are prone to running a bunch of old geezers for President does not mean they might not go for an otherwise inexperienced fresh face. Ricky Rubio isn't exactly rolling in experience but he's being touted for VP and I know that it's not the same thing as running for President but it's a heart beat away from that office. Unfortunately black people in America (whether American or not) tend to be trapped by the small minded people's belief that black people are monolithic and constantly basking in racial solidarity. The media does a good job of painting that picture and finding the type of people like Al Sharpton, etc who gladly perpetuate it because it's to their benefit to pretend that the millions of black people in America share the same brain. It also goes a long way to making black people appear to be stupid. Racialists tend to bypass the fact that black American voters tend to vote Democrat so that they can make it seem like some racial thing that those same black voters who voted for all the white Democrats for President chose to vote for Barack Obama. Anyway, so what if there are people who voted for Barack Obama because of race? Is anyone equally concerned that others voted against him because of race meaning they voted for McCain because of his race? I am certain that there are going to be people who essentially sell their souls to vote for Mitt Romney when they don't believe in his integrity, simply because he's white and that does not seem to be a problem either. Barack Obama is no more contemptible than some of those other politicians so the level of animosity directed towards him is disturbing as well as the level of disrespect towards his office. Bill Clinton may have created a problem for Hilary Clinton in her 2008 bid but she didn't do herself any favors when she made that hardworking Americans comment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Max Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) Alphanguy, thanks for pointing this out. Though what you said is an obvious truth, few are willing to repeat such sentiments because doing so is very politically incorrect. Though I am in the vast minority on this matter, I personally believe that it is just as wrong to vote for somebody because of membership in some group/minority (e.g., voting for Romney because he is a Mormon, voting for Obama because he is black) than it is to vote against somebody because he is part of some group/minority. I seem to recall a lot of disrespect shown towards Bush when he was president. Certainly, his critics didn't let respect for the office of the presidency get in the way of trashing him personally. While I feel that Obama is horrendously incompetent, I don't believe that he's any sleazier/contemptible than most other opportunistic politicans out there. I think the reason why a lot of people dislike him is because he was hyped up as somebody who would be completely different, when--in reality--he represents politics as usual. His presidency would be in a lot better shape if these absurdly high expectations never existed in the first place. Edited June 17, 2012 by Max 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 I wonder how many times was Bush called a monkey, gorilla, him swinging on vines, AND his family, hung in effergy since day 1, and had sitting Republican politicians threatening his life? What he's went through any other POTUS can compare to. But many don't see that. They demand that everyone else be fair, while they themselves are truly close minded and won't open their ears to anything they don't agree with. Also, if someone who has differing political views actually says they agree with them for once, they will STILL try and get their shots in. Sometimes and makes on say "Oh to hell with it." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 Just sick. Really just sick. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 I don't believe it's down to voting to someone similar to you. Many "bubbas" hated and feared Bill Clinton. Many Wall Street types adored Bill Clinton. They still do. Clinton did as much to undo financial regulations - if not more - than any Republican President. I don't believe that all black people automatically see themselves in Obama. I do think that the racial attacks played a part, but I think many just saw him as the better candidate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted June 17, 2012 Members Share Posted June 17, 2012 Although I preferred Hilary over Obama because of her experience, I ended up voting for Obama because I DID like many of the things he said, and of course, the health care issue, and I knew that McCain's mind is on war and the military 24/7, so I knew he'd spend every dime of taxpayer dollars on military bullsh!t and let the roads and bridges fall down, and let people die for lack of treatment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.