blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 (edited) Just to quibble, I said "elected officials". Valerie Jarret wasn't elected, she was appointed. Oh, ok. That makes me feel a lot better. She is considered to be "Obama's brain", yet because she was not an elected official I'm supposed to believe she and her boss, who is an elected official, have my best interest at heart. This is the very reason I said what I did at the beginning of our discussion, that any argument I have will fall on deaf ears as far as you are concerned. You reassured me, although in a condescending manner, that you would listen. In fact you made a big deal out of being a good listener, in your words "unlike many others here". Then you give a sarcastic answer by saying, "But I'm glad your determined to making sure everyone knows THE TRUTH(!) about everything that happens in the democratic party. Let me tell ya, you're doing us all a world of good. Then again, you're equally, if not a bigger part of the problem, right? You feel threatened, so you threaten, so who you threaten threatens back, etc. etc. etc. until we end up in the place we are today". What the hell is that all about? You say one thing, then do the exact opposite. That's hypocritical on your part. I never implied I know everything there is to know about the Democratic party, but I do know what I have lived through these past four years, and it hasn't been a pleasant experience by any stretch. I disagree that the Democratic party or their elected officials have my best interests at heart. Sorry if that offends you, but it's my life and my opinion. I stand by everything I have said, without being a hypocrite. Edited November 8, 2012 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
com74bsslc 10 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I used to work with a guy who thought someone was recording all of his conversations to bring him up on charges for going against the government. Blueinbama is your real name Ron if so you should go back on your meds we've talked about this before. If not I'm sorry, you know you can get help for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redtiger 1,740 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Here we go -full throttle Socialism . The American Sheeple made it possible by re-electing Obumble. Its statements like that that push people who lean left farther left and make people who lean right feel that they have to move farther right. It does nothing positive for this country. And I really hope youre not calling me a sheeple. Hell I voted for Romney. Im just willing to try to make the best of a situation that I feel isint the best for America. I would have made basically the same post if Romney would have won the election. We are all Americans and need to start acting as such. This partisan crap is ruining this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sup_rbeast 296 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Judging from all the crying on here, folks that have their money invested in gold might want to move it to Kleenex and towels....prolly a safer investment..lol As for Benghazi, it has come out that the consulate was basically a front for a CIA operation...and some things aren't meant to be public knowledge..especially if it could endanger the lives of other operatives in the field. There's a reason Romney and the GOP dropped Benghazi as an issue after the second debate..and there it is. The rapid hushed rhetoric from both parties should have sent up red flags for anyone following the issue that the CIA or other intelligence was involved...it sure did for me. Anyways, the article link below is prolly all we will ever know or need to know about the events that transpired in Benghazi...if you feel the need to know more, I suggest finding a job with a security clearance... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204712904578092853621061838.html (There's many more articles from the news source of your choosing...all ya gotta do is google "Benghazi CIA operation"..I really thought this was common knowledge by now but I don't watch FoxNews. And I realize now that if FoxNews doesn't report it, many folks in the area never hear it....and if FoxNews does say something is true, then it must be. Guess that's why so many locals were so surprised when the GOP got drubbed nationwide in last night's election...and why they woke up this morning scared that the apocalypse is upon us..."Cuz FoxNews said so". Cheer up guys...2 states legalized pot last night!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixcat 2,919 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I saw this earlier today. Unbelievable. It is unbelievable, because its not at all accurate. Just look at Virginia, Obama actually carried each and every county in NOVA and Tidewater. Another example would be Florida, this "article" was posted at 6:41am the morning following the election. Florida had not sorted out its ritualistic voting mess by that time. I am not an Obama supporter nor a Democrat. I just trust the "moral majority" or the "christian right" about as much as any other politician. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixcat 2,919 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I am admittedly not a very politically minded person. As I stated before on another thread, I have only began to pay attention to it over the past year or two. I tend to read a lot of commentary and books about various subjects pertaining to politics. I try to avoiding the biased television media, all of which is owned and controlled by the same organizations selling its propaganda to the masses. In my reading, I have came up with a question I have yet to get a satisfactory answer for. I will pose it on here just to further intelligent conversation. We are sold as fact that America is a democracy. Democracy is defined as government by the people, a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. Nowhere in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or Declaration of Independence or any other doctrine authored by our forefathers is the word "democracy" ever mentioned. It does however, mention repeatedly, the term "republic". The definition of republic is a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of it's citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them. To me, the term "republic" seems far better than "democracy". In the true definition of "democracy", wouldn't 51% of the people control the country? How would the remaining 49% be "free" from the majority? In a true "republic", 99% of the people can't take away any rights of any 1%, or any other percentage you want to throw out there. We would all have a voice, the way it was intended. My question is, when did we get so far off course that we began accepting ideals that are not based on what the authors of the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence intended? Or, am I just over analyzing the differences between two fairly similar words? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I used to work with a guy who thought someone was recording all of his conversations to bring him up on charges for going against the government. Blueinbama is your real name Ron if so you should go back on your meds we've talked about this before. If not I'm sorry, you know you can get help for this. Swiiiiinnnnngggg and a miss. Pretty lame, dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 (edited) Judging from all the crying on here, folks that have their money invested in gold might want to move it to Kleenex and towels....prolly a safer investment..lolAs for Benghazi, it has come out that the consulate was basically a front for a CIA operation...and some things aren't meant to be public knowledge..especially if it could endanger the lives of other operatives in the field. There's a reason Romney and the GOP dropped Benghazi as an issue after the second debate..and there it is. The rapid hushed rhetoric from both parties should have sent up red flags for anyone following the issue that the CIA or other intelligence was involved...it sure did for me. Anyways, the article link below is prolly all we will ever know or need to know about the events that transpired in Benghazi...if you feel the need to know more, I suggest finding a job with a security clearance... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204712904578092853621061838.html (There's many more articles from the news source of your choosing...all ya gotta do is google "Benghazi CIA operation"..I really thought this was common knowledge by now but I don't watch FoxNews. And I realize now that if FoxNews doesn't report it, many folks in the area never hear it....and if FoxNews does say something is true, then it must be. Guess that's why so many locals were so surprised when the GOP got drubbed nationwide in last night's election...and why they woke up this morning scared that the apocalypse is upon us..."Cuz FoxNews said so". Cheer up guys...2 states legalized pot last night!) Wait Libs...I thought Benghazi was Bush's fault. Isn't everything? Edited November 8, 2012 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuceswild 15 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Wait Libs...I thought Benghazi was Bush's fault. Isn't everything? BENGHAZI IS DEFINITELY ON OBAMA! He had them killed on purpose because he hates freedom. He's a muslim and a terrorist. We can all see it here why can't the rest of America??? Their blood is all over his hands.. disgraceful. GOD HELP THIS NATION. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I am admittedly not a very politically minded person. As I stated before on another thread, I have only began to pay attention to it over the past year or two. I tend to read a lot of commentary and books about various subjects pertaining to politics. I try to avoiding the biased television media, all of which is owned and controlled by the same organizations selling its propaganda to the masses. In my reading, I have came up with a question I have yet to get a satisfactory answer for. I will pose it on here just to further intelligent conversation. We are sold as fact that America is a democracy. Democracy is defined as government by the people, a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. Nowhere in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or Declaration of Independence or any other doctrine authored by our forefathers is the word "democracy" ever mentioned. It does however, mention repeatedly, the term "republic". The definition of republic is a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of it's citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them. To me, the term "republic" seems far better than "democracy". In the true definition of "democracy", wouldn't 51% of the people control the country? How would the remaining 49% be "free" from the majority? In a true "republic", 99% of the people can't take away any rights of any 1%, or any other percentage you want to throw out there. We would all have a voice, the way it was intended. My question is, when did we get so far off course that we began accepting ideals that are not based on what the authors of the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence intended? Or, am I just over analyzing the differences between two fairly similar words? This might help. "Democracy" and "republic" are not mutually exclusive, but not identical either. Democracy means "rule by the people" while republic means "rule by elected officials" (as opposed to hereditary rulers). A representative democracy is a type of republic. A direct democracy is not. In a "pure democracy" or "direct democracy", the people vote directly on every issue. In a "representative democracy", or "republic", they instead elect representatives to study and vote on the issues for them. Direct democracy is a bit unwieldy for anything much larger than, say, a small town, and so primarily exists only on the local level. Examples of direct democracy include New England town halls or the Athenian government in ancient Greece. Most national governments that are called "democracies" are representative democracies or republics, not direct democracies. Some people are confused by the names of the two major political parties in the US: the Democrats and the Republicans. In fact, the names of the parties are purely historical (formed from the split of the Democratic-Republican Party in the 1820s), and both parties support the current system of constitutional representative democracy. A constitution is what prevents tyrannical majorities from taking away the rights of minorities. This is unrelated to the distinction between "republic" and "democracy". The United States, for instance, is a "constitutional representative democracy", or a "constitutional republic". Both are equivalent. It's the word "constitution" that prevents abuse of individual rights, not the word "republic". To prevent tyranny of the majority, modern democracies use supermajority rules, constitutional limits, or a Bill of Rights to limit the power of the majority. Personal rights are respected and cannot be taken away. This helps to avoid tyranny and mobocracy (the majority makes laws and governs by passion, prejudice, or impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences). The Founders knew full well the differences between a Republic and a Democracy and they repeatedly and emphatically said that they had founded a republic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend11 32 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 What the hell is that all about? You say one thing, then do the exact opposite. That's hypocritical on your part. I never implied I know everything there is to know about the Democratic party, but I do know what I have lived through these past four years, and it hasn't been a pleasant experience by any stretch. I disagree that the Democratic party or their elected officials have my best interests at heart. Sorry if that offends you, but it's my life and my opinion. I stand by everything I have said, without being a hypocrite. Well, first of all, I wasn't hypocritical about anything. My statement was simply an attack against those of you who are so dug into your political stances that you can't see the merit of the actions of a differing opinion, or why those actions were taken. Take that statement as a personal attack, but don't call me hypocritical. It didn't even touch on my original point that our elected officials have their constituencies' needs in mind when they act. I should have also said earlier that it's the way we want our officials to act that is so debatable, to put it simply. I hope that our politicians can look past the demagoguery that the general American population likes to spew, and act in a way that is the most beneficial to everyone. And I really, truly think they do, despite a singular quote from an appointee. I'm sorry you have such a sorrowful and macabre outlook on government today, but my guess is that it's not going to be nearly as bad as you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 (edited) I'm sorry you have such a sorrowful and macabre outlook on government today, but my guess is that it's not going to be nearly as bad as you think. My outlook is based on four years of suffering. My outlook is shared by those of us who have made an effort to stop the madness. Our efforts failed. If Obama can now stop the lies and do what he has "promised", maybe that will change, but he owes us all, not just Republicans. His empty promises and reckless spending have put this nation behind the 8 ball. He needs to own it and stop blaming George Bush. He has inherited his own mess. He is now "promising" to work across the aisle to fix some of those issues, as he "promised" in his campaign before the 2008 election. We will now see whether or not his words are meaningful this time around, or as empty as they were for the past four years. And before someone says, "Tell me what lies you are talking about"?, they are too numerous to mention. So here's a link for your enlightenment in case you've had your head in the sand for four years. http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies Edited November 8, 2012 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixcat 2,919 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Thanks Blue, That raises another question though. How have we not drifted into a "direct democracy" mindset? You read and hear everywhere how "gay marriage" is going to "destroy traditional family values". Haven't we, as a society, done a good enough job of that ourselves with alcoholism, drug abuse, adultery, spousal abuse, child abuse, etc. I may not agree with homosexuality but in a "representative democracy", wouldn't they be the "protected minority"? To prevent tyranny of the majority, modern democracies use supermajority rules, constitutional limits, or a Bill of Rights to limit the power of the majority. Personal rights are respected and cannot be taken away. This helps to avoid tyranny and mobocracy (the majority makes laws and governs by passion, prejudice, or impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences). Or am I misunderstanding this all together? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I enjoy checking out maps and statistics and such. Thought you guys would like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend11 32 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 My outlook is based on four years of suffering. My outlook is shared by those of us who have made an effort to stop the madness. Our efforts failed. If Obama can now stop the lies and do what he has "promised", maybe that will change, but he owes us all, not just Republicans. His empty promises and reckless spending have put this nation behind the 8 ball. He needs to own it and stop blaming George Bush. He has inherited his own mess. He is now "promising" to work across the aisle to fix some of those issues, as he "promised" in his campaign before the 2008 election. We will now see whether or not his words are meaningful this time around, or as empty as they were for the past four years. And before someone says, "Tell me what lies you are talking about"?, they are too numerous to mention. So here's a link for your enlightenment in case you've had your head in the sand for four years. http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies Suffering?! Four years of suffering?!?! You really are a hopeless case. I can guarantee you that you weren't "suffering" for the past four years. It's all relative, I guess... But hey. Keep on with your negative outlook on government today. And when you're not dead or broke in four years, when you can still worship whatever god you worship, whenever you still own every gun you've ever bought, let's discuss your "suffering" again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhs7695 185 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 To say that some of our elected officials don't have the best interests of the country in mind is disappointing. I knew I would face opposition when I said that, and I hope you see soon that no one is out to get you. In fact, Obama and others in his party want the best for you, as much as they want the best for everyone else. If that's the case, then why would they not let the people that voted them into office in the first place have some input or at least conversation back and forth when it comes to bills that are negotiated behind closed doors and signed into law? (ie Obamacare) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frontierman95 10 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-arms-treaty-un-idUSBRE8A627J20121107 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 (edited) Suffering?! Four years of suffering?!?! You really are a hopeless case. I can guarantee you that you weren't "suffering" for the past four years. It's all relative, I guess... But hey. Keep on with your negative outlook on government today. And when you're not dead or broke in four years, when you can still worship whatever god you worship, whenever you still own every gun you've ever bought, let's discuss your "suffering" again. Funny you mention "suffering". "Suffering" is watching your employer of 18 years pack up and move away because one of the conditions of the GM Bailout was to sell the LEAR Corporation to BMW, who immediately relocated the plant out of the area. "Suffering" is being the 4th-most senior driver at a bottling plant and getting cut back from full-time to part-time because people can't afford to buy your product anymore. Nevermind that you have a wife who's been stricken with a disease that the doctors can't determine. "Suffering" is losing your husband of 50 years and worrying yourself sick that Obama's $781M cuts to Medicare are going to force you to pay for some of your $300+ medications out of your own pocket. "Suffering" is graduating from law school with $300K in debt and having to take temp jobs in a warehouse and an optical shop because no one will hire you. No one in your field is retiring, because they lost the millions in their 401Ks and IRAs in the 2008 collapse. 30+ applicants for every job. Even when you do get an interview, you get passed up because someone with 5+ years experience lost his job, too, and has you outflanked. All these have happened in my family under Barry Soetoro's watch. Your move. Edited November 8, 2012 by UVAObserver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Suffering?! Four years of suffering?!?! You really are a hopeless case. I can guarantee you that you weren't "suffering" for the past four years. It's all relative, I guess... But hey. Keep on with your negative outlook on government today. And when you're not dead or broke in four years, when you can still worship whatever god you worship, whenever you still own every gun you've ever bought, let's discuss your "suffering" again. You can't "guarantee" anything, because you have no idea what my family and I have had to endure. Suffering is appropriate. As far as being "dead or broke in four years", maybe I won't be dead, but you're too late on the "broke" part. I won't go into details, but you have no idea what you are talking about. And it is directly related to the Obama administration. So stop talking about something of which you know nothing. And I worship the one and only God, creator of the universe, who sent His Son Jesus to die on a cross for your sins and mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker 82 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 I enjoy checking out maps and statistics and such. Thought you guys would like this While you're at it, why don't you include the historic map showing the 1860 slave population from the same page. Hence the name "Black Belt." That pattern exists as a result of cotton plantations in the old south. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 While you're at it, why don't you include the historic map showing the 1860 slave population from the same page. Hence the name "Black Belt." That pattern exists as a result of cotton plantations in the old south. I'm aware. I just thought it was pretty cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adsi97 35 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 BENGHAZI IS DEFINITELY ON OBAMA! He had them killed on purpose because he hates freedom. He's a muslim and a terrorist. We can all see it here why can't the rest of America??? Their blood is all over his hands.. disgraceful. GOD HELP THIS NATION. It's about time you came around to our way of thinking!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuceswild 15 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 It's about time you came around to our way of thinking!!! I know! I FEEL SO STUPID! I should've went to Electoral College! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie07 11 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 The more things change, the more they stay the same? P.S. I'm not insinuating that all red states still equal slave states and are racist. Just a pretty neat graphic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker 82 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 The more things change, the more they stay the same? P.S. I'm not insinuating that all red states still equal slave states and are racist. Just a pretty neat graphic... Growing up, they always talked about the Solid South in Presidential Politics. In the 1950s and until 1968 it meant the region was reliably Democratic. It was the era of Jim Crow laws and voter suppression. Now the region is reliably Republican and has been with few exceptions (Carter in 1976 and Clinton) Listen to Bill O'Reilly's post election comments and draw the conclusion you choose. And people wonder why knowing history is important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
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.