What the f is wrong with the President?

James wrote:
If the Democratic Party were as pro-life and the Republican Party, they'd never lose an election.

Discuss.


That's why they have to bring out the dead out on election day.

Don't know about other areas but its been proven and documented over and over again that Baltimore City always has a crap load of dead voters, especially from Greenmount Cemetery, voting Democratic on election days. Don't know how they keep getting away with it!

* Btw, before you gangsters continue to attack with made up shit attacks against the wall, though I'm not a Democrat (NOR a Republican), I am definitely pro-choice. I just can't stand voter fraud from any angle!
sweetcell wrote:
http://www.galacticempiretimes.com/2011/05/09/galaxy/outer-rim/obi-wan-kenobi-is-killed.html


Wrong thread, Kool-Aid zombie.
James wrote:
If the Democratic Party were as pro-life and the Republican Party, they'd never lose an election.

i don't think so.  a small portion of the republican base is single-issue voters on abortion, but i just don't think there enough people who think "if they just went pro-life, i'd switch".  being pro-life, IMO, is part of a wider right-of-center worldview (includes being pro-religion, pro-military, anti-big-gov't, etc).  as such, you can't cherry-pick one issue and ignore the wider context it's part of.  my experience is that most anti-abortion types are opposed to the basic tenets of the Democrats.  but i don't claim to have spent a lot of time with a lot of pro-lifers.
Jaguar wrote:
sweetcell wrote:
http://www.galacticempiretimes.com/2011/05/09/galaxy/outer-rim/obi-wan-kenobi-is-killed.html


Wrong thread, Kool-Aid zombie.

actually it's not.  the most discussion we've had of bin laden has been in this thread.  your lack of sense of humor might not have allowed you to appreciate this, but this article was a parody of obama's press conference announcing bin laden's death.  t'was a bit of levity.

open you mind, jag!
^ Missed the Bin Ladin reference. The article just didn't interest me enough to read that far. (Not a Star Wars fan.) Sorry about that.

In a bad mood from all the shit flinging and those choosing to ignore what I'm actually saying rather than checking out facts and documents for themselves. Especially the constant accusations of things that I clearly stated that I did not believe in. Only proves the accusers prefer to believe what they want to believe rather than what's been documented. You know that I have a great sense of humor but even that erodes after too much bullying.
how are we supposed to get people to our side if you attack articles without reading them :(

youre letting the them win
sweetcell wrote:
James wrote:
If the Democratic Party were as pro-life and the Republican Party, they'd never lose an election.

i don't think so.  a small portion of the republican base is single-issue voters on abortion, but i just don't think there enough people who think "if they just went pro-life, i'd switch".  being pro-life, IMO, is part of a wider right-of-center worldview (includes being pro-religion, pro-military, anti-big-gov't, etc).  as such, you can't cherry-pick one issue and ignore the wider context it's part of.  my experience is that most anti-abortion types are opposed to the basic tenets of the Democrats.  but i don't claim to have spent a lot of time with a lot of pro-lifers.


That's a whole can of worms spread all over the place and I too don't know how they all wiggle their way around. What irks me is when people get so hung up on one issue that they quickly assume that one party has their vote for that one issue alone. That and that the issue obsessed tend to ignore all other issues from any given party or candidate (or even a specific bill, etc.) to the point of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

One example that also points out some major hypocrisy are those who solely vote for pro-life candidates on that issue and that issue alone without regard for them holistically. Sometimes, if that candidate is a Republican, that same pro-lifer is also big on war and the death penalty. On one hand they claim it's sinful to take a life but on the other are chomping at the bit to do just that.

But there are more issues than abortion. Maybe it's because I'm a very right brained person that I often tend to look at the big picture. You have to do so with politicians because none of them will ever truly represent all of your preferences regardless of how decent they may turn out to be. You really need to study the whole package or you end up with getting your way in one good issue but lose with a multitude of others.
godsshoeshine wrote:
how are we supposed to get people to our side if you attack articles without reading them :(

youre letting the them win


Very true. But, at least I admitted so.  ;)
Liberals - kill babies because we don't like killing adults regardless of their crimes

Conservatives - don't kill babies so we can fry em when they grow up.


It's a funny old country eh???

:D
Jaguar wrote:
In a bad mood from all the shit flinging and those choosing to ignore what I'm actually saying rather than checking out facts and documents for themselves. Especially the constant accusations of things that I clearly stated that I did not believe in. Only proves the accusers prefer to believe what they want to believe rather than what's been documented.

you see, i feel exactly the same way about everything you've posted: it's opinion and conjecture.  you consider your sources solid and the "proofs" defensible - but every single one that i've google'd along with the words "argument against" resulted in more convincing information than your original argument/position/"proof".  if i cared enough, i'd reply to every link you posted with five that debunk it… but i don't care enough because i know i won't convince you (any more than your information is going to convince me).  and as your last post proved, it's not like you're reading what i post anyways ;D

if i "bully" you, it's in response to the (IMO baseless) high-and-mighty attitude you display at times.  feel free to believe whatever you want, and share your beliefs, but don't insult me because i don't believe in highly debatable (if not flat-out disproven) fringe theories. 
And this is why I'll never believe anything you say about anything ever.

Jaguar wrote:
^ Not a Star Wars fan.
What are the basic tenets of the Democrats?

Aren't they (supposed to be) the party of the common working man? If the two parties had no difference on abortion, you're telling me that most middle/lower class people wouldn't side with the Democrats (if they were truly adhering to Democrat tenets)? Read Thomas Frank's What's the Matter With Kansas for an interesting take on this.


Granted, this is an old news story, but do you think things have really changed that much?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/13786/abortion-issue-guides-one-five-voters.aspx

October 26, 2004
Abortion Issue Guides One in Five Votersby Lydia Saad, Senior Gallup Poll EditorAbortion, though not the most talked-about subject this presidential election, may be an important stealth issue that could impact the outcome in key states, or even nationally. Most Americans have moderate views on abortion and are focused on other concerns. But there is a segment of voters on either side of the abortion debate – representing 19% of likely voters – who claim that the issue completely directs which candidates they are willing to support. Maximizing turnout among these voters is certain to be an important part of both candidates' Election Day strategies.

"Pro-Life" Voters Have Electoral Edge

By a 52% to 41% margin, Americans are more likely to identify as "pro-choice" than as "pro-life," which would seem to bode well for Democratic candidate John Kerry's chances of capitalizing on the issue. However, pro-life voters may have the greater impact at the polls. The reason lies in their level of intensity.

A recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll* shows that self-identified pro-life Americans are nearly three times as likely as pro-choice Americans to describe themselves as single-issue voters on abortion. Thirty percent of pro-lifers say they will only vote for a candidate who shares their views on abortion. This contrasts with only 11% of pro-choicers who say they will only back candidates of a similar mind on abortion.



The net result is that 13% of all likely voters say they are pro-life and will only vote for a candidate who shares their views on abortion. Naturally, most of these (90%) are voting for George Bush. By contrast, only 6% of the electorate will vote strictly pro-choice, and virtually all of these people are voting for Kerry. The remaining voters are divided between those who say abortion will be one of many important issues they consider (48% of the voting public), and those who say abortion is not a major factor for them (32%).

These results are not unique to this election. Gallup found a similar pattern in 2000, and the national exit polling in every presidential election since 1984 has shown a net advantage to the pro-life side over the pro-choice side, based on the percentage of single-issue abortion voters in the electorate.

Bush Depends More on the Issue

The importance of the pro-life position to Bush's base of support this year is clear. Nearly a quarter of his voters (23%) are single-issue pro-life voters. Take them away and Bush's lead in the national horse race would disappear. Only 13% of Kerry's supporters are single-issue pro-choice voters. But in a close election, activating these votes could be important to his candidacy also.






sweetcell wrote:
James wrote:
If the Democratic Party were as pro-life and the Republican Party, they'd never lose an election.

i don't think so.  a small portion of the republican base is single-issue voters on abortion, but i just don't think there enough people who think "if they just went pro-life, i'd switch".  being pro-life, IMO, is part of a wider right-of-center worldview (includes being pro-religion, pro-military, anti-big-gov't, etc).  as such, you can't cherry-pick one issue and ignore the wider context it's part of.  my experience is that most anti-abortion types are opposed to the basic tenets of the Democrats.  but i don't claim to have spent a lot of time with a lot of pro-lifers.
I know the Kool-Aid Zombies won't bother to touch this (besides, NKOTB, it's NOT science-FICTION), but this guy has a nice list of factual documents and other sorts of archives supporting a lot of the stuff you guys are in total denial about. Much of it is in the government's own words! You can deny all you want but history, documents and the future outcomes will prove otherwise.

Enlighten your mind.

More of their dirt
The movie version - which is even better.
Just a thought: You're not going to get much of a (positive) receptive reaction by referring to you audience as "Kool Aid Zombies" and the "Ziplock (sic) Gang".
James wrote:
Just a thought: You're not going to get much of a (positive) receptive reaction by referring to you audience as "Kool Aid Zombies" and the "Ziplock (sic) Gang".


They're already a lost cause and some have even already, more of less, admitted so. It's more for others who may be interested. Besides, they have no problems insulting me so I'm just throwing a little bit of the shit back they are flinging my way.

How's the lawn? Maybe you'll want to try out a few other backyards. You know, just for varieties sake. Kind of like trying out a new beer. ;)
Mark Dice is a media analyst, social critic, political activist, and author who, in an entertaining and educational way, gets people to question our celebrity obsessed culture, and the role the mainstream media plays in shaping our lives. 


I like how this appeared on a page with 16 pictures of himself. And the page with vanity pics of him with such talents as Danny Bonaduce and Neil Strauss was a winner too.
Relaxer wrote:
Mark Dice is a media analyst, social critic, political activist, and author who, in an entertaining and educational way, gets people to question our celebrity obsessed culture, and the role the mainstream media plays in shaping our lives. 


I like how this appeared on a page with 16 pictures of himself. And the page with vanity pics of him with such talents as Danny Bonaduce and Neil Strauss was a winner too.


Score one for Relaxer! BUT…. stop trying to kill the messenger. The truth is in the documents.
sweetcell wrote:
Jaguar wrote:
In a bad mood from all the shit flinging and those choosing to ignore what I'm actually saying rather than checking out facts and documents for themselves. Especially the constant accusations of things that I clearly stated that I did not believe in. Only proves the accusers prefer to believe what they want to believe rather than what's been documented.

you see, i feel exactly the same way about everything you've posted: it's opinion and conjecture.  you consider your sources solid and the "proofs" defensible - but every single one that i've google'd along with the words "argument against" resulted in more convincing information than your original argument/position/"proof".  if i cared enough, i'd reply to every link you posted with five that debunk it… but i don't care enough because i know i won't convince you (any more than your information is going to convince me).  and as your last post proved, it's not like you're reading what i post anyways ;D

if i "bully" you, it's in response to the (IMO baseless) high-and-mighty attitude you display at times.  feel free to believe whatever you want, and share your beliefs, but don't insult me because i don't believe in highly debatable (if not flat-out disproven) fringe theories. 


Say what you want about Jags opinions and postings but she is most certainly not 'high and mighty' or insulting. She's educated with strong opinions and has no problems posting her opinions for all to see. I just with politicians could be as honest.

I've never met you personally Sweetcell, and it's probably just your writing style, but your comments almost always come over as insulting and 'high and mighty'.
Frank wrote:
sweetcell wrote:
Jaguar wrote:
In a bad mood from all the shit flinging and those choosing to ignore what I'm actually saying rather than checking out facts and documents for themselves. Especially the constant accusations of things that I clearly stated that I did not believe in. Only proves the accusers prefer to believe what they want to believe rather than what's been documented.

you see, i feel exactly the same way about everything you've posted: it's opinion and conjecture.  you consider your sources solid and the "proofs" defensible - but every single one that i've google'd along with the words "argument against" resulted in more convincing information than your original argument/position/"proof".  if i cared enough, i'd reply to every link you posted with five that debunk it… but i don't care enough because i know i won't convince you (any more than your information is going to convince me).  and as your last post proved, it's not like you're reading what i post anyways ;D

if i "bully" you, it's in response to the (IMO baseless) high-and-mighty attitude you display at times.  feel free to believe whatever you want, and share your beliefs, but don't insult me because i don't believe in highly debatable (if not flat-out disproven) fringe theories. 


Say what you want about Jags opinions and postings but she is most certainly not 'high and mighty' or insulting. She's educated with strong opinions and has no problems posting her opinions for all to see. I just with politicians could be as honest.

I've never met you personally Sweetcell, and it's probably just your writing style, but your comments almost always come over as insulting and 'high and mighty'.


i.e. "I agree with her"
Frank wrote:
sweetcell wrote:
Jaguar wrote:
In a bad mood from all the shit flinging and those choosing to ignore what I'm actually saying rather than checking out facts and documents for themselves. Especially the constant accusations of things that I clearly stated that I did not believe in. Only proves the accusers prefer to believe what they want to believe rather than what's been documented.

you see, i feel exactly the same way about everything you've posted: it's opinion and conjecture.  you consider your sources solid and the "proofs" defensible - but every single one that i've google'd along with the words "argument against" resulted in more convincing information than your original argument/position/"proof".  if i cared enough, i'd reply to every link you posted with five that debunk it… but i don't care enough because i know i won't convince you (any more than your information is going to convince me).  and as your last post proved, it's not like you're reading what i post anyways ;D

if i "bully" you, it's in response to the (IMO baseless) high-and-mighty attitude you display at times.  feel free to believe whatever you want, and share your beliefs, but don't insult me because i don't believe in highly debatable (if not flat-out disproven) fringe theories. 


Say what you want about Jags opinions and postings but she is most certainly not 'high and mighty' or insulting. She's educated with strong opinions and has no problems posting her opinions for all to see. I just with politicians could be as honest.

I've never met you personally Sweetcell, and it's probably just your writing style, but your comments almost always come over as insulting and 'high and mighty'.