the waker wrote:
:thumbup:
I thought the shutdown did a good job at showing those people who stayed home have unnecessary jobs that should be either discontinued or made private (ie. The selling of National Parks to non-profit organizations would give the government a some money to work on the National debt, but would also eliminate the cost of running them).
The extreme right and the extreme left are the two sides of the establishment. By having these "extremes", the establishment stays in control, keeps politics stagnated in the issues they want, and creates the delusion that there are choices within the establishment.
For example, the argument on what to do with the i*****l i*******ts would not be nearly as important, and meaningful if the Federal government was not involved in so many costly things that are handed to the immigrants. Schools, healthcare, and so on, and so on.
If we could shrink the Federal government down to the duties it was originally intended to carry, the i*****l i*******ts would not be as eager to get here and they would not be as costly to the government and people of this country.
But, this aspect of the issue is ignored by the establishment and is niether extreme of right or left.
cant beleve wrote:
He (Obama) is doing everything possible to shut us up. He does not want you to disagree! Just behave like good sheeple.
I don't think he really cares whether or not you, and even the majority of Ameicans disagree with him or his actions, as much as he just does not want to hear anything at all from the ciitizens.
If you object to King Obama and where this country is going, watch what you Say and Do, because Obama isn't just calling you a r****t now, he has made it so he can treat you as if you are a dangerous terrorist...
http://www.t***hdig.com/eartotheground/item/us_government_doesnt_need_evidence_to_call_you_a_terrorist_20140724
Habitually, this administration is doing more and more un-Constitutionally. In this case, Amendment VI of the Bill of Rights clearly states that we have the right to a fair trial---
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.
Liberty Tree wrote:
Here are the steps Obama has taken in reference to the current border crisis:
1. He creates the crisis by failure to enforce laws and not allowing others to do so.
2. He knows the crisis is coming for months and fails to prepare for it.
3. Now that the crisis is here he has time to drink beer, shoot pool, and fundraise for Democrats but no time to visit the border.
4. He makes every effort to shield the whole t***h from the American people including denying Congressmen and the media access to direct information.
5. He makes no effort to seal the border to stop the problem from getting worse.
6. He basically asks Congress for an open checkbook with no accountability.
7. As usual, as he has done with every other scandal, he accepts no responsibility and blames it all on someone else.
8. He counts on his blind, koolade drinking followers to try and cover for him and divert attention to someone or something else.
Here are the steps Obama has taken in reference to... (
show quote)
The word 'crisis' is a word the Democrats use, and no matter what the 'crisis' is, there is always only one solution, which is through more of the tax payer's money at it. Sure, the money can pay for lots of different things, such as a fence at the border, border patrol, hospital care for the aliens, an education for the young immigrants. No matter what form of action is taken to address a "crisis", the bottom line is the government spending money, and we all know how the Democrats love to spend our money.
V**E LIBERTARIAN and kick those members of the establishment out of Washington. Yes, Democrats and Republicans are the same. They are both k*****g the nation, the dollar and your freedom!
I am no tea party member, but I agree with them on most issues.
the waker wrote:
Yes that's all I'm saying, a 3rd party would be nice, I'm not a tea partier, but the 2 ruling parties are so damn corrupt its hard to tell them apart anymore. You get two solutions to pick from. 350 million people and we can only come up w/ 2 choices on everything, and usually I don't like either choice they come up with, considering its just the next page of agenda 21.
I could see calling it socialism more if the gas was rationed, paid for by everyone via taxes, whether they used it or not, and no money was exchanged at the pumps.
This just seems like a government trying to get involved in something they have no business. Why not have the local community get together and open up a gas station privately?
BoJester wrote:
In Kentucky, the hotbed of teabagconservatism and white trailerpark trash libertarianism, the good folks H**E Obamacare, but LOVE Kynect, which strangely enough is Obamacare.
Like so many of the mentally r****ded conservatives who love the benefits of "Big Government", the trailer parkers and bible thumpers and gun toters don't think that the benefits they are getting are just like the benefits that urban dwellers enjoy.
Proof that the republican war on education plus home schooling morons, will ensure the continued demise of this country.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/05/13/kentuckians-love-obamacare-if-you-dont-call-it-obamacare/
In Kentucky, the hotbed of teabagconservatism and ... (
show quote)
In your first sentence, you talked about "teabagconservatism and white trailerpark trash libertarianism".
In the second sentence, you talked about "so many of the mentally r****ded conservatives".
In the third sentence, you talked about the "republican war on education" and "home schooling morons".
I am going to assume these people do not share the same political view as you, because of the juvenile name calling you did here.
I never heard of the "republican war on education", but nothing about education is in the Constitution, so I hope you mean they want to get rid of the Federal governments involvement in education, because from my perspective, that would make education cost us less and be much better for the students.
From my perspective, 'home school morons', will have the ability to teach the students to use commas, and put together good sentences, unlike your second sentence that my home schooled fifth grade daughter laughed at for its poor English.
J Anthony wrote:
"Anti-Obama" is "fancy rhetoric?" Sounds like it's being called what it is. I'm no fan of B.O., but blaming him for everything is a major cop-out.
Yes, blaming everything on obama is wrong, but on the other hand he is currently on the top of the pyramid we call the Federal Government. So, he is an open target. Senators and House Reps have each other and obama to point their fingers at, when trying to get out of any responsibility for what the Feds are doing, and since he is doing a lot of crap without Congress's approval, he has to be seen as responsible for the direction of things.
ibKelly and Tasine-- Colombia is the correct way to spell the fine country my wife is from, which is different from the way universities and companies mispell the name in the United States.
And whoever used the term "half-rican American", that might be a humorous linguistically, but the politically correct and those who are running the show in Washington jump on stuff like that as an opportunity to dismiss valid complaints about obama's unconstitutional, criminal, and/or socialistic 'presidency'.
Keep in mind that my criticism is petty as can be when compared to the negativity I have to say about people like one of my siblings who actually v**ed for him not just once, but twice. People like him are really starting to make me question democracy and think it would be much better titled if it were called democrazy.
Terry Hamblin wrote:
Right on alex, the dwebs of Californica have affected me in Arizona, well, again, civic apathy helped. Many Californians have moved here since 2000, because they couldn't continue to pay the freight in "paradise", when gas is 3.40$ a gallon here, it is 4.40$ a gallon there, not to mention electric bills which are 400 - 500$ a month, because they decided that they didn't want to buy electricity produced by f****l f**ls and nuclear plants are therefore out of the question, and don't light a fire in your fireplace, ad nausea. Well, here in AZ they promptly started running for office and wrote and supported a bill to eliminate smoking in bars. The good old cowboys from here decided that such a bill would never pass in AZ and promptly forgot to go and v**e it down! So, no smoking in bars! Now it has reached to all public buildings, all businesses and maybe in your own home! My take is this: Irritates me no end to not be able to smoke in a bar, that is what they are for! Try smoking outside when it is 120 degrees! The way to curb smoking in bars would have been to require the bar owners to decide whether they wanted smoking to continue in their bar or not, but you know that no way would any bar owner opt for a no smoking bar. So the best way is to force us to not smoke in a bar. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness! You guys all thought that this was a foregone conclusion right?
Right on alex, the dwebs of Californica have affec... (
show quote)
I moved to Arizona in 1998, and having smoked good, non filtered 100% tobacco cigarettes for the 16 years before the move, had my last cigarette at the New Mexico and Arizona border. The elimination of cigarettes in my life was easy, because with my move came the elimination of all habitual times and places to have cigarettes from my day. Other than giving the reader the knowledge that i not only have enjoyed many cigarettes AND that I am not a 'smoker' that has no regard for a non-smokers desire not to have their air filled some one else's commercial cigarettes (interestingly enough, at least 95% of commercial cigarettes do not even have the word tobacco on their packs, so who knows what they are having you smoke).
If some one wants to have a cigarette with their alcohol, and the owner of the bar is ok with it, who is the government to call that illegal? Just like there is something for all non-smokers, who are bothered by some one else's cigarettes in bars. It is called the door, and they can take their money with them. Just like our ability to go into smoke filled bars for a drink, this ability to spend money where you want to spend it is one of the beauties of the FREE MARKET!
The greatest threat to America is ignorance.
The government owns 80% of the land in Arizona.
ibKelly wrote:
The greatest threat to this country are the people who v**ed for Obama.....
...and actually believe they made a good choice, and are also living in a delusion that what he is doing is not only Constitutionally legal but is also good for our republican democracy.