|
|
| Re: Liberalism is the Future (946154) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
|
| (946862) | |
Re: Liberalism is the Future |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jun 4 19:32:01 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism is the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 19:30:26 2012. False! |
|
|
| (946865) | |
Re: Liberalism is the Future |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Mon Jun 4 19:42:56 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism is the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 19:30:26 2012. I wish. |
|
|
| (946866) | |
Re: Liberalism is the Future |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 4 19:43:18 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism is the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 19:30:26 2012. You're misinformed. What kind of source id feeding this misinformation?During the G20, President Obama told the British and the EU's leaders to stop what they're doing. Repeatedly. |
|
|
| (946867) | |
Re: Liberalism is the Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 19:51:41 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism is the Future, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 4 19:43:18 2012. QED |
|
|
| (946896) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:16:40 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 17:27:25 2012. Illegal Mexicans can't run for president due to the obvious fact that they aren't natural born citizens. Religious leaders can be citizens. |
|
|
| (946898) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:19:41 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 18:40:09 2012. Except for a brief period, he did not have 60 votes in the Senate, and even when they did, it included "conservative" Democrats. If the filibuster were rightfully abolished, then you'd have a point. |
|
|
| (946899) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:19:49 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:16:40 2012. But by your logic you wouldn't have to worry because they have no chance of winning anyway. |
|
|
| (946900) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:21:47 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:19:41 2012. Every other president has had to deal with filibusters. The difference is that they were sufficiently versed in the inner workings of Washington that they learned how to build consensus and compromise. This president is an amateur. |
|
|
| (946902) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:22:35 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:19:49 2012. Well, yes. It wouldn't be a major problem if the requirements for president were abolished. |
|
|
| (946903) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:24:08 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:21:47 2012. No, because the filibuster was a procedure of last resort and not a routine parliamentary tool. |
|
|
| (946907) | |
Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:31:32 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:24:08 2012. The issue of filibusters against o'bummer is an extremist liberal myth. The last filibuster was by Harry Reid in 2003. He spoke for over 8 hours about Judicial Nominees.Now do you have any documentation that contradicts me? http://www.cbsnews.com/2316-100_162-696235-5.html |
|
|
| (946915) | |
Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:45:55 2012, in response to Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:31:32 2012. You know the kind of filibusters we're talking about, so don't obfuscate. |
|
|
| (946923) | |
Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jun 4 21:56:51 2012, in response to Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:45:55 2012. He only knows what Rove and Ailes tell him. |
|
|
| (946927) | |
Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 22:02:16 2012, in response to Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:45:55 2012. No - tell me what you are talking about. Where are all these filibusters? |
|
|
| (946972) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 4 23:18:05 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jun 4 21:19:41 2012. The filibuster should never be abolished. 51 percent of the Senate is not necessarily the majority of the population. |
|
|
| (946996) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jun 4 23:56:32 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 4 23:18:05 2012. But this is a REPUBLIC ... designed ever so carefully to protect against the "tyranny of the majority" ... I mean just LOOK at the mess we're in as a result of that majority now ... |
|
|
| (947050) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jun 5 02:39:07 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 4 23:18:05 2012. It's too bad then that the Senate is the only chamber of Congress. If only we could have some sort of House of Representatives that could represent the people roughly in proportion to their population. Oh well. |
|
|
| (947052) | |
Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jun 5 02:46:26 2012, in response to Re: Filibusters (was: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 22:02:16 2012. The ones where the bill fails because 3/5ths of Senators don't vote to cut off debate. |
|
|
| (947071) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Tue Jun 5 08:53:24 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 21:21:47 2012. The difference is that they were sufficiently versed in the inner workings of Washington that they learned how to build consensus and compromise.That is actually not true. The problem, as I stated before, is that the parties have become more ideologically separated. The Democrats as a party have moved further to the Left, while the Republicans have moved further to the Right:  It is this fact that is responsible for the failure to build consensus in Congress, not any fault of Obama's. That whole bit is a strawman, and Romney would have the same problems with the Democrats (of course, then you get to blame the Democrats for holding up "progress"; heads I win, tails you lose). |
|
|
| (947206) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jun 5 21:23:37 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Train Dude on Mon Jun 4 17:28:55 2012. Sorry but your Bullshit button isn't working any more. Please come up with a new way to tell bingbong she's wrong. |
|
|
| (947209) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Tue Jun 5 21:29:32 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jun 5 21:23:37 2012. lol |
|
|
| (947211) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by dand124 on Tue Jun 5 21:31:49 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jun 5 21:23:37 2012. Stop emulating the turtle |
|
|
| (947216) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 5 21:37:42 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by dand124 on Tue Jun 5 21:31:49 2012. How is he emulating the turtle? I don't see three links to some obscure posts from months ago. |
|
|
| (947221) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by dand124 on Tue Jun 5 21:48:00 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by LuchAAA on Tue Jun 5 21:37:42 2012. If some responded to him that way he’d say they were “emulating the turtle”. |
|
|
| (947224) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jun 5 21:52:10 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by JayMan on Sun Jun 3 10:42:13 2012. I heard this one after Reagan was first elected. politics runs in cycles! |
|
|
| (947227) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Tue Jun 5 21:56:35 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jun 5 21:23:37 2012. He can't, because I'm not. There's a link somewhere on this board that explains the whole thing. He doesn't think US News and World Report is a legitimate source. It's not "Reactionaryfoamblog.com" |
|
|
| (947235) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Tue Jun 5 22:29:54 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jun 5 21:23:37 2012. Hey Dan, if you are really in need of attention, send me a self addressed stamped envelope and I'll send you an autographed picture and a lock of hair from my neighbor's Pitt Bull. |
|
|
| (947276) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Wed Jun 6 02:39:20 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by dand124 on Tue Jun 5 21:48:00 2012. Yes. You're giving him the old switcheroo. |
|
|
| (947628) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Jun 6 22:03:37 2012, in response to Liberalism and the Future, posted by JayMan on Fri Jun 1 23:15:05 2012.  Why do people feel entitled to the services of others? I'm a cardiologist and my nephew was complaining about heart problems. He showed up to my clinic, wanting treatment, so I asked him for his insurance information. He said he didn't have it. So, I asked him for money to cover the costs of the treatment. He said he left his wallet at home. Then, he actually had the audacity to ask me to treat him for free so that he could pay me back later on. I actually kind of wanted to help him (he was my nephew after all), but I couldn't. He's an unreliable person - I don't think he would pay me back ever, let alone in a reasonable amount of time. He ended up dying in his home the next day. The moral of the story: Be a hard worker so you can be prepared for your problems in life. Had my nephew not been a lazy fuck, and had gotten a job so that he could afford insurance, he would still be alive today. |
|
|
| (947633) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by JayMan on Wed Jun 6 22:20:07 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Jun 6 22:03:37 2012. Heh. Where did you find this story? |
|
|
| (947636) | |
Re: Liberalism and the Future |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Jun 6 22:27:57 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism and the Future, posted by JayMan on Wed Jun 6 22:20:07 2012. Republican commentary on one of the forums I monitor ... |
|
|
| (947637) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed Jun 6 22:33:33 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Train Dude on Tue Jun 5 22:29:54 2012. Sorry, not interested. |
|
|
| (947643) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Train Dude on Thu Jun 7 00:00:55 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed Jun 6 22:33:33 2012. Yeah well that's how I feel about your imbecilic comments. Tell someone who actually cares what you think. |
|
|
| (949713) | |
Re: Liberalism has no Future |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Tue Jun 12 21:57:41 2012, in response to Re: Liberalism has no Future, posted by Train Dude on Thu Jun 7 00:00:55 2012. Go move in with the Turtle. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||