Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Holy cow, did she really say that?
Author Message
nomad2u2001 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,356
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 450
I Root For: ECU
Location: NC
Post: #21
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
That's been the case for every recent president.
01-22-2009 09:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #22
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 09:07 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  That's been the case for every recent president.

..and it's the reason we're ****** up.

In the past, presidents were "usually" vetted before they made it to the top of the party. Can you, an Obama supporter, honestly say he was vetted? If you say yes, you know you're lying.
01-22-2009 09:11 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Pragmatic Classical Liberal
*

Posts: 42,023
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 1206
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #23
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 08:48 PM)Rebel Wrote:  Wow. What we've learned from Democrats. He who is popular, wins.

No wonder we're ****** up.

And this election is different? All elections are popularity contests....Most people dont even know the issues...They just go to the polls and vote for some "Ideal"....not substance... If they actually took the time to start understanding this silly system and these violent politicians that they think are so wonderful.... we might actually have some competent people in charge that would really help achieve liberty in our lifetimes.

Unfortunately the system does nothing to lure principled and competent people to want to serve...and...If any of those people actually achieve positions in government...they are usually called kooks, nuts and radicals...ie..Ron Paul.
01-22-2009 09:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
firmbizzle Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,447
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 442
I Root For: UF, UCF
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 09:11 PM)Rebel Wrote:  
(01-22-2009 09:07 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  That's been the case for every recent president.

..and it's the reason we're ****** up.

In the past, presidents were "usually" vetted before they made it to the top of the party. Can you, an Obama supporter, honestly say he was vetted? If you say yes, you know you're lying.

Rebel, We are not F'd up. This a system that has been in place for 236 years. The longest of it's kind. It's not perfect but if it were, there would be nothing for us to do. I know you are not happy with the outcome of this election, as I wasn't with the last two (not because of idealogy, but because I felt GWB never strived to accomplish anything in his life, given his advantages). Those elections are in the past, and unless you can find a time travelling delorean we can't do anything about them. What we can do is focus on today. Obama doesn't seem like he is coming from a place of idealism, but pragmatism. Whatever works to make us better, then lets do it. If its your ideas fine,if it's my ideals fine. Let's just make this thing work. We need your help my friend.
01-22-2009 09:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #25
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
Our founders would be rolling over in their f'n graves, Firm. Don't tell me we're not ****** up. We're now at a state that we take from the earners and give to the leeches. The founders wanted that? My ass.

This country's days are numbered. ....and not in the 3 digits in terms of years.
01-22-2009 10:12 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Pragmatic Classical Liberal
*

Posts: 42,023
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 1206
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #26
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 09:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  
(01-22-2009 09:11 PM)Rebel Wrote:  
(01-22-2009 09:07 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  That's been the case for every recent president.

..and it's the reason we're ****** up.

In the past, presidents were "usually" vetted before they made it to the top of the party. Can you, an Obama supporter, honestly say he was vetted? If you say yes, you know you're lying.

Rebel, We are not F'd up. This a system that has been in place for 236 years. The longest of it's kind. It's not perfect but if it were, there would be nothing for us to do. I know you are not happy with the outcome of this election, as I wasn't with the last two (not because of idealogy, but because I felt GWB never strived to accomplish anything in his life, given his advantages). Those elections are in the past, and unless you can find a time travelling delorean we can't do anything about them. What we can do is focus on today. Obama doesn't seem like he is coming from a place of idealism, but pragmatism. Whatever works to make us better, then lets do it. If its your ideas fine,if it's my ideals fine. Let's just make this thing work. We need your help my friend.

I admire your optimism....I dont currently share it. As I have stated many times....history is not in our favor as far as the length of tenure of our governmental system....Most have met their demise within 200 years..with the exception of ancient Iceland(about 500yrs.) and it was a tribal society..not really a governmental system.

We have pushed the envelope as far as a governmental system has ever done. I give the credit to the founders for using the failures of past systems to design ours. Still...Our system is in the throes of the same thing the brought the others down....the failure to "restrain" centralized power. If we can not find a way to reduce the size,power and scope of the federal government...WE ARE DOOMED to the same fate as those that fell before us....I'm sorry...but..I see absolutely ZERO indication that any of these politicians are willing to address the DRASTIC downsizing of the government.

The only way I can see to STOP this bloodsucking federal government and give the liberty back to the citizenry...is through MASS civil disobedience and protest. STOP PAYING THE GANG!!!! Without your stolen wages...The government will have NO choice other than downsize to meet revenue. Just as a small percentage of citizens actually decide who becomes their masters during an election....A small percentage of citizens is all that is needed to revolt,resist and protest against this system to make it change. Every major change in our nation has ALWAYS occurred with mass protest and civil disobedience....Its becoming time to do it again...This time will be to SAVE the nation not change it.
01-23-2009 12:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
firmbizzle Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,447
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 442
I Root For: UF, UCF
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 10:12 PM)Rebel Wrote:  Our founders would be rolling over in their f'n graves, Firm. Don't tell me we're not ****** up. We're now at a state that we take from the earners and give to the leeches. The founders wanted that? My ass.

This country's days are numbered. ....and not in the 3 digits in terms of years.

The best thing about this country is that it is able to change. If we need to take from our earners to produce more wealth in the future, then so be it. The ultimate goal is to have a strong economy and a strong defense or offense. The country's days are not numbered. You can give up, but I will never give up!
01-23-2009 01:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul M Offline
American-American
*

Posts: 21,196
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 649
I Root For: OU
Location: Next to Boomer
Post: #28
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-23-2009 01:52 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  If we need to take from our earners to produce more wealth in the future, then so be it.

You are truely confused as to how to create wealth.
01-23-2009 08:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tripster Offline
Most Dangerous Man on a Keyboard
*

Posts: 3,140
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 16
I Root For: The Best Only
Location: Where the Action is
Post: #29
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 04:53 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  26 national debates. 20 month campaign. Running the most effective and efficient campaign in the modern era. At the base of an election is a popularity contest, at least in America it is. A black dude named Barack Hussein Obama won that contest 7 years after a guy with a similar name attacked this country. Whatever you think about his politics, you have to give him his due. What he did was nothing short of amazing, and I didn't even mention that he beat a Clinton.

You really really believe this don't you ?

Believe Bambi won on some Merits of Character ? This is an Honest Deep Down Feeling for you isn't it ?

I will do my best to locate the video, that shows how these Fine Debates you watched were Scammed Up - -

The MSM made sure the Best Runners got more air time and face time than all the other Candidates ..... they seated them in such a way as to ostracize the Marginal Candidates and placed Hilary and Bambi directly in the Center, so even when they weren't directly on camera, their Faces Could be Seen in the background.

The average time the "Other Candidates" got in the Debates hovered around 7 minutes or so .....

Hilary and Bambi ..... around 22 Minutes not counting their Background Face Time at Center Court.

You were Subliminally Scammed and you bought it.

It is what it is and their Guy Won ..... simple attrition by Camera.

.
01-23-2009 09:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
firmbizzle Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,447
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 442
I Root For: UF, UCF
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-23-2009 08:53 AM)Paul M Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 01:52 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  If we need to take from our earners to produce more wealth in the future, then so be it.

You are truely confused as to how to create wealth.


You are blinded by idealogy.
01-23-2009 10:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul M Offline
American-American
*

Posts: 21,196
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 649
I Root For: OU
Location: Next to Boomer
Post: #31
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
If you say so. Wasn't any idealogy in my statement at all. Just pointing out "creating" and "stealing" are two different things.
01-23-2009 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Artifice Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,063
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Beer
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-22-2009 12:39 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The same people that voted for Bush twice. You act like there were 20-40 new Americans that all of a sudden voted for Obama. Those people in your video voted for Kerry, Gore, and Clinton. The reason Obama won is because the people that voted for Bush in 2000, and 2004 voted for Obama this time. Get over it.

Didya see the Daily Show bit about this? It was superb.
01-23-2009 10:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #33
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-23-2009 10:02 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 08:53 AM)Paul M Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 01:52 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  If we need to take from our earners to produce more wealth in the future, then so be it.

You are truely confused as to how to create wealth.


You are blinded by idealogy.

As are you. Except you have no evidence to support your position. Wealth has always been created by collecting resources and having them work in cooperation. Whether done by force, or by the will of a charismatic leader, it's the way.

Now the scale of such an operation can vary. It may be the simple shoemaker's hut, where he gathers the material and operates the tools himself, and sells them from his dutch door...creating wealth in a slow fashion. Or it can be the Nike shoe company, operating several factories and distibution networks...creating wealth on a tremendous scale.

Sharing that wealth divides the tools for efficient production. The wealth will get smaller.

A free market, by definition, allows those with a mind to, to start putting those wealth creating pieces together, at the most efficient way possible. There is no guarantee that their endeavor will be successful, but they have the best chance at it.

A free market doesn't mean zero regulations, but rather it means only those that keep opportunity available. The real crime are oppressive regulations (and that includes a tax code) that prevent the utilization of resources except on a grand scale. This is what prevents the poor from getting rich, because the tools are then held in check by the "haves."

Many have abused this through the millennia...from land barons to robber barons...czars to CEOs...pharoahs to plantation owners. But the real travesty today are people like Ted Turner or Jerry Yang, folks who got theirs in a free market, then support the party that would prevent others from competing.
(This post was last modified: 01-23-2009 03:11 PM by DrTorch.)
01-23-2009 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
firmbizzle Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,447
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 442
I Root For: UF, UCF
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-23-2009 03:08 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 10:02 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 08:53 AM)Paul M Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 01:52 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  If we need to take from our earners to produce more wealth in the future, then so be it.

You are truely confused as to how to create wealth.


You are blinded by idealogy.

As are you. Except you have no evidence to support your position. Wealth has always been created by collecting resources and having them work in cooperation. Whether done by force, or by the will of a charismatic leader, it's the way.

Now the scale of such an operation can vary. It may be the simple shoemaker's hut, where he gathers the material and operates the tools himself, and sells them from his dutch door...creating wealth in a slow fashion. Or it can be the Nike shoe company, operating several factories and distibution networks...creating wealth on a tremendous scale.

Sharing that wealth divides the tools for efficient production. The wealth will get smaller.

A free market, by definition, allows those with a mind to, to start putting those wealth creating pieces together, at the most efficient way possible. There is no guarantee that their endeavor will be successful, but they have the best chance at it.

A free market doesn't mean zero regulations, but rather it means only those that keep opportunity available. The real crime are oppressive regulations (and that includes a tax code) that prevent the utilization of resources except on a grand scale. This is what prevents the poor from getting rich, because the tools are then held in check by the "haves."

Many have abused this through the millennia...from land barons to robber barons...czars to CEOs...pharoahs to plantation owners. But the real travesty today are people like Ted Turner or Jerry Yang, folks who got theirs in a free market, then support the party that would prevent others from competing.

I'm a pragmatist. I look at what works and what doesn't. I also don't complain and nitpick about every little thing that I see. 05-stirthepot
01-23-2009 03:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #35
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-23-2009 03:26 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  I'm a pragmatist. I look at what works and what doesn't.

It wouldn't seem that way.

Quote:I also don't complain and nitpick about every little thing that I see. 05-stirthepot

Maybe that's why you don't have wealth.
01-23-2009 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
firmbizzle Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,447
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 442
I Root For: UF, UCF
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
(01-23-2009 03:29 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  
(01-23-2009 03:26 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  I'm a pragmatist. I look at what works and what doesn't.

It wouldn't seem that way.

Quote:I also don't complain and nitpick about every little thing that I see. 05-stirthepot

Maybe that's why you don't have wealth.

Who said that?
01-23-2009 04:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
T-Monay820 Offline
Get Rotor-vated!
*

Posts: 5,397
Joined: Apr 2002
Reputation: 49
I Root For: Duke, VPI
Location: Norfolk, VA
Post: #37
RE: Holy cow, did she really say that?
1) Obama's election is in direct conflict with the Founder's intentions on electing a Chief Executive (can I do anything about it? No, thats how our system has evolved). The whole Electoral College was meant to ensure that the Chief Executive would be quailified to assume the duties that would be expected of him. It was also meant to stop the rise of factions and the emergence of populist leaders who appealed to these factions (in retrospect, it also would have detered the massive campaigns we have today, as all "campaigning" would have been attempts to court the Electors appointed by each state and which states would get to choose how to select these Electors). They believed that America should avoid people that "aspired" to assume the job (this would basically be all presidents and candidates since Eisenhower since many experts believed Eisenhower to care more about his short game than running the country). This is what made Washington such great candidate to the Founders in that he sought to serve as a statesman in the best interest of the nation rather than a politician and was actually quite reluctant to take the office, best seen by his desire to give up the office after 8 years, his initial declining of a salary, and the fact that he wished to be addressed simply as Mr. President rather than the longer, more royalistic titles. When states began to change how they select their members of the Electoral College, most states required that Electors vote in consensus with the popular vote from their state effectively defeating the whole point of the Electoral College. In short, the Founders did not believe the American people had the ability/intelligence to pick a leader that would ultimately serve the the best interests OF THE NATION. The more I learn about the intricacies of the system and the arguments of the Founders, and the more I see the type of leaders we elect, the dumber American's seem for essentially eliminating this safeguard. We were not intended to be a direct democracy on the Federal level.

2)
(01-22-2009 12:38 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  
(01-22-2009 12:36 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  
(01-22-2009 12:34 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  Wow, I can't wait until it's my turn to be a senator. I will instantly raise the IQ of our government a few points. 05-stirthepot

Why would you believe that?

Because, unlike you, I'm actually smarter than a fifth grader.

Rimshot

03-lmfao I love it!
01-23-2009 05:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.