Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It's wonderful to see the respect for Secretary Clinton! You must think the world of her to arm yourself with her sentiments.It took a mere 5 posts for this thread to go ape-shit political! I was going to comment on the fine qualities of the video. But suddenly and rabidly, this thread became the USMB equivalent to a Sarah Palin thread!
"Since when has it been part of American patriotism to keep our mouths shut?" - Hillary Clinton 2006
"Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism" - Hillary Clinton 2006
"Blind faith in bad leadership is not patriotism" - Hillary Clinton 2006
happy 4th
Who said I don't like it? Seems you're trying to pick a fight.
a word of advice. always punch down, not up.
If I punched up I would only hit air. Always aim for the intended target, when it hits you hit it twice as hard.
OH and hell yell I go after any liberal I can. I hate all liberals they are the arm pit and asshole of America.
Well ...oh hell! Aren't you something special.So you hate the majority of Americans that voted for Obama. And..they did so because the Republicans fucked everything up they could. I guess that just makes you one of those ignorant tea baggers that doesn't really have a clue who to be mad at but you are damn sure mad at "liberals".
So what's your point sparky? That you are armed and everyone is supposed to be shaking in their boots?
Three words ..Go Fuck Yourself.
With astute political insight like this, I'm not at all surprised you're a Teabagger! Run Sarah run!Who said I don't like it? Seems you're trying to pick a fight.
a word of advice. always punch down, not up.
If I punched up I would only hit air. Always aim for the intended target, when it hits you hit it twice as hard.
OH and hell yell I go after any liberal I can. I hate all liberals they are the arm pit and asshole of America.
Who said I don't like it? Seems you're trying to pick a fight.
a word of advice. always punch down, not up.
If I punched up I would only hit air. Always aim for the intended target, when it hits you hit it twice as hard.
OH and hell yell I go after any liberal I can. I hate all liberals they are the arm pit and asshole of America.
I always thought that was Alabama and Mississippi.
If you mean the Political Class Elitists of today? You'd be correct.
Until you've read the fine print
If you mean the Political Class Elitists of today? You'd be correct.
And the political class elitests you call the Founding Fathers, too.
And yes, I am correct.
Asute observation.
If you mean the Political Class Elitists of today? You'd be correct.
And the political class elitests you call the Founding Fathers, too.
And yes, I am correct.
Asute observation.
Are you calling the founding fathers elitist?
If you mean the Political Class Elitists of today? You'd be correct.
And the political class elitests you call the Founding Fathers, too.
And yes, I am correct.
Asute observation.
Are you calling the founding fathers elitist?
And the political class elitests you call the Founding Fathers, too.
And yes, I am correct.
Asute observation.
Are you calling the founding fathers elitist?
how would you define people who thought only landed white men should vote?
Are you calling the founding fathers elitist?
how would you define people who thought only landed white men should vote?
Before I answer could you clearify what you mean by landed white men?
Are you calling the founding fathers elitist?
how would you define people who thought only landed white men should vote?
Before I answer could you clearify what you mean by landed white men?
how would you define people who thought only landed white men should vote?
Before I answer could you clearify what you mean by landed white men?
its not a trick question... white men who own land.
arm pits ans assholes? That's twice as hard? My god! You truly are one of two distinct things: a puppet sheep who 'never had much book learnin' but that fella Glenn Beck sure makes sense' or a twelve year old posing on a political discussion board and too quickly found himself way over his head. Take your pick.With astute political insight like this, I'm not at all surprised you're a Teabagger! Run Sarah run!If I punched up I would only hit air. Always aim for the intended target, when it hits you hit it twice as hard.
OH and hell yell I go after any liberal I can. I hate all liberals they are the arm pit and asshole of America.
I'm just following your lead When you hit I hit back twice as hard.
Who said I don't like it? Seems you're trying to pick a fight.playing by lib rules you don't like the rules when it's used against you.
a word of advice. always punch down, not up.
If I punched up I would only hit air. Always aim for the intended target, when it hits you hit it twice as hard.
OH and hell yell I go after any liberal I can. I hate all liberals they are the arm pit and asshole of America.
Before I answer could you clearify what you mean by landed white men?
its not a trick question... white men who own land.
There are two requirements to voting that I think should be made rule.
A person who pay's taxes and who has taken a U.S. Constitutional test should be the only people allowed to vote.
As for the white part the founders were men of their time.
its not a trick question... white men who own land.
There are two requirements to voting that I think should be made rule.
A person who pay's taxes and who has taken a U.S. Constitutional test should be the only people allowed to vote.
As for the white part the founders were men of their time.
Then the Republican Party, and the Conservatives would never have any winning candidates.
The Red states are the ones that are recieving welfare from the blue states because of the non-productive Conservatives in those states.
Red States, Blue States and the Distribution of Federal Spending | Jeff Frankels Weblog | Views on the Economy and the World
A virtue of the Tea Party movement is that many of its members are engaging in national politics for the first time. It occurred to me that they might be able to use some help figuring out the lay of the land, and so I thought I would pursue a little research on their behalf. The question is geographical redistribution: which states receive subsidies from the federal government, and which other states are taxed to provide those subsidies. One might be able to sympathize with the feeling of those living in the heartland of the country that they should not have to subsidize the northeastern states through, for example, federal housing programs. True, the cost of housing, food, and other living expenses is much higher in the coastal cities, compared to the South or Midwest; but it isnt the job of the federal government to smooth out geographical variation in real income. Furthermore the coastal residents could always move if they dont like their high cost of living. Given the big budget deficit problem that we will have to solve in the near future, knowing which states are receiving more than their fair share of handouts should help us know where to cut spending.
So, by your (let's call it "logic") it should be a constitutional requirement to oppress the voters by means testing and some half-assed 'literacy' test based on one's political conclusions about the constitution.There are two requirements to voting that I think should be made rule.
A person who pay's taxes and who has taken a U.S. Constitutional test should be the only people allowed to vote.
As for the white part the founders were men of their time.
Then the Republican Party, and the Conservatives would never have any winning candidates.
The Red states are the ones that are recieving welfare from the blue states because of the non-productive Conservatives in those states.
Red States, Blue States and the Distribution of Federal Spending | Jeff Frankels Weblog | Views on the Economy and the World
A virtue of the Tea Party movement is that many of its members are engaging in national politics for the first time. It occurred to me that they might be able to use some help figuring out the lay of the land, and so I thought I would pursue a little research on their behalf. The question is geographical redistribution: which states receive subsidies from the federal government, and which other states are taxed to provide those subsidies. One might be able to sympathize with the feeling of those living in the heartland of the country that they should not have to subsidize the northeastern states through, for example, federal housing programs. True, the cost of housing, food, and other living expenses is much higher in the coastal cities, compared to the South or Midwest; but it isnt the job of the federal government to smooth out geographical variation in real income. Furthermore the coastal residents could always move if they dont like their high cost of living. Given the big budget deficit problem that we will have to solve in the near future, knowing which states are receiving more than their fair share of handouts should help us know where to cut spending.
I understand my reply was outside of your comprehension level. But let me explain so you might understand.
Close to 50% of Americans do not pay taxes or under pays so let's say 40% of those people do not pay taxes at all. Those people are the ones that vote democratic without those people democrats would not have a chance in hell of ever winning an election for dog catcher.
Next if people had to study the Constitution and take a test the democrats would not be in power right now.
So that would knock a lot more votes out of the democrats side.
So, by your (let's call it "logic") it should be a constitutional requirement to oppress the voters by means testing and some half-assed 'literacy' test based on one's political conclusions about the constitution.Then the Republican Party, and the Conservatives would never have any winning candidates.
The Red states are the ones that are recieving welfare from the blue states because of the non-productive Conservatives in those states.
Red States, Blue States and the Distribution of Federal Spending | Jeff Frankels Weblog | Views on the Economy and the World
A virtue of the Tea Party movement is that many of its members are engaging in national politics for the first time. It occurred to me that they might be able to use some help figuring out the lay of the land, and so I thought I would pursue a little research on their behalf. The question is geographical redistribution: which states receive subsidies from the federal government, and which other states are taxed to provide those subsidies. One might be able to sympathize with the feeling of those living in the heartland of the country that they should not have to subsidize the northeastern states through, for example, federal housing programs. True, the cost of housing, food, and other living expenses is much higher in the coastal cities, compared to the South or Midwest; but it isn’t the job of the federal government to smooth out geographical variation in real income. Furthermore the coastal residents could always move if they don’t like their high cost of living. Given the big budget deficit problem that we will have to solve in the near future, knowing which states are receiving more than their fair share of handouts should help us know where to cut spending.
I understand my reply was outside of your comprehension level. But let me explain so you might understand.
Close to 50% of Americans do not pay taxes or under pays so let's say 40% of those people do not pay taxes at all. Those people are the ones that vote democratic without those people democrats would not have a chance in hell of ever winning an election for dog catcher.
Next if people had to study the Constitution and take a test the democrats would not be in power right now.
So that would knock a lot more votes out of the democrats side.
What is it exactly you love about America?
And although I make less than the mean income, I pay taxes (in spite of what those pillars of knowledge on talk radio have inculcated into that vacuum of an intellect you have been sporting on this thread).
Voter repression and literacy tests! George Wallace is proud of you today![/QUOT]
That's how you play it, taking a test is a way of oppression. I didn't say "'literacy' test" I said a Constitutional test. It would not be a pass fail test dumbass. It’s a sickening thought when a recent poll was conducted, 26 % of those polled did not know who America declared freedom from in 1776. Those people should never be allowed to vote.
As for taxes you pay them so why do you worry about that part?
Who wants to read something ironic? This sandbag wants to test voter's knowledge of American history and call it a "Constitutional Test"!So, by your (let's call it "logic") it should be a constitutional requirement to oppress the voters by means testing and some half-assed 'literacy' test based on one's political conclusions about the constitution.I understand my reply was outside of your comprehension level. But let me explain so you might understand.
Close to 50% of Americans do not pay taxes or under pays so let's say 40% of those people do not pay taxes at all. Those people are the ones that vote democratic without those people democrats would not have a chance in hell of ever winning an election for dog catcher.
Next if people had to study the Constitution and take a test the democrats would not be in power right now.
So that would knock a lot more votes out of the democrats side.
What is it exactly you love about America?
And although I make less than the mean income, I pay taxes (in spite of what those pillars of knowledge on talk radio have inculcated into that vacuum of an intellect you have been sporting on this thread).
Voter repression and literacy tests! George Wallace is proud of you today![/QUOT]
That's how you play it, taking a test is a way of oppression. I didn't say "'literacy' test" I said a Constitutional test. It would not be a pass fail test dumbass. Its a sickening thought when a recent poll was conducted, 26 % of those polled did not know who America declared freedom from in 1776. Those people should never be allowed to vote.
As for taxes you pay them so why do you worry about that part?
All American citizens have the right to vote and that's how it must be. Voter repression resulting in the ideological culling of what you perceive as ineligible voters is anti-American.
So, again I ask: what is it exactly you love about America?
