I would rather have a bully as a president than a spineless weasel that tries to

[The T]

Appease everyone at the expense of the American people.

That's your lame OP? OK, I'll play. How is standing up for equal protection something that should be sacrificed?

I'd rather have a leader who lead for equal protection, even if they bullied a bit, over a spineless candidate who changes their beliefs on an hourly basis, who wants to support discrimination back into our constitution.

Lead by saying its the states decision, pretty much a wimpy thing to do.

In other words? Obama codified by his pronouncement that the Ninth and Tenth means something?

I'm sure the Statists will make him pay for that pronouncement, eh? (But STILL vote for him)?

 

[drsmith1072]

Appease everyone at the expense of the American people.

Well then, you must love the teabagger who was just elected. He said his version of bipartisanship means the Dems should agree with him. The Republicans have been doing everything they can to drive the US into bankruptcy and your bully candidate has promised to continue that effort.
.

The best the left has to offer is accusing the right of being exactly like them.

You see GOP voters don't care for Democrats because they do what you're accusing us of doing. Compromise to a Democrat means giving in to their demands. The Dems have been trying to screw everything up for a decade and they have the nerve to accuse us of it.

It would be funny if it wasn't so serious.

And yet republicans are the ones arguing that they hate big government even as they use it to try and force therie moral and religious beliefs onto others. They spend a lifetime trying to become part of the system they say is ineffective and inefficient but then when they get there they spend their time proving it ineffective and inefficient based on how they choose to run it.

the fact that your core arguemnt is the "Compromise to a Democrat means giving in to their demands" bs argument shows that you are nothing but a dishonest partisan hack.

Obama and the dems moved to right one the healthcare bill starting with the republican idea of an individual mandate and republicans who used to be for it are now against it merely because obama wants it.

The right railed against raising the debt ceiling refusing to compromise with obama and the dems which causes this country to lose our AAA rating. However, even if passed the ryan budget plan won't balance the budget until around 2040 and will increase the debt and require several increases to the debt ceiling before then.

Everytime the left moves legislation to the right the right wants more and more and refuses to compromise. See the agreement boehner made and ahd to renegg on ebcuase the teaparty refused to compromise. Although i find it funny how your compromise argument is pretty much what the republican who ousted lugar had to say about compromise and how it means that the democrats have to agree with the right.

Your perception of reality is clearly warped but the nthat is no surprise.

 

[drsmith1072]

If you insist

"Superpacs are a threat to our democracy"

Yep, 180 degrees

They are. That doesn't mean unilateral disarmament. Only a complete hack would expect their opponent to not fight for the power to make things better.

Your rebuttal is a joke. Superpacs are a threat to our democracy. I'm voting for Obama because he won't appoint hacks that will uphold Robert's idiotic decision regarding Citizens United.

Perhaps then we can level the playing field to keep secret money influencing choice and stop pretending that corporations are citizens.

Who do you think Romney might appoint?

Can you participate in a thread without acting like a 7th grade punk? Seriously


With regard to what you said I'll start of by saying that i do believe there is real danger with all this money in the campaigns. It diminishes the voices of everyday Americans.

Now that we got that out of the way let's look at your comments, the adult parts that is.

Essentially you're saying two things.

1. Obama can't beat Romney without large infusions of cash to add to his already huge warchest. Essentially he needs to buy the election.

2. It's ok to flip flop if it benefits you financially

essentially or otherwise, that is not what they said.

However, you do realize that romney and his pacs outspent all of his opponents to this point in order to win the nomination don't you?

You do realize that romney has moved from being to left of kennedy to extrememly conservative which has benefitted him financially?

It seems to me that you are suffering from a severe case of transference.

 

[Papageorgio]

I get the feeling that even if it were proven that Bush lied us into Iraq, because it pretty much has been proven, but if it were proven without a shadow of a doubt, I believe Republicans on USMB would defend the GOP for whatever they said their real motives were. Regime Change (Saddam was a bad man) We wanted the oil? Republicans would say fuck the Iraqi's, we need oil.

I guarantee righties on USMB would defend anything the GOP did. Even holding a gay boy down and cutting his hair.

To believe that silly theory you'd have to go beyond Bush just knowing, you'd have to believe senators from both parties, The Clinton's would've been in on it and Kerry, which I seriously doubt.

 

[Papageorgio]

They are. That doesn't mean unilateral disarmament. Only a complete hack would expect their opponent to not fight for the power to make things better.

Your rebuttal is a joke. Superpacs are a threat to our democracy. I'm voting for Obama because he won't appoint hacks that will uphold Robert's idiotic decision regarding Citizens United.

Perhaps then we can level the playing field to keep secret money influencing choice and stop pretending that corporations are citizens.

Who do you think Romney might appoint?

Can you participate in a thread without acting like a 7th grade punk? Seriously


With regard to what you said I'll start of by saying that i do believe there is real danger with all this money in the campaigns. It diminishes the voices of everyday Americans.

Now that we got that out of the way let's look at your comments, the adult parts that is.

Essentially you're saying two things.

1. Obama can't beat Romney without large infusions of cash to add to his already huge warchest. Essentially he needs to buy the election.

2. It's ok to flip flop if it benefits you financially

essentially or otherwoise that is not what they said.

However, you do realize that romney and his pacs outspent all of his opponents to this point in order to win the nomination don't you?

You do realize that romney has moved from being to left of kennedy to extrememly conservative which has benefitted him financially?

It seems to me that you are suffering from a severe case of transference.

So he changed from a liberal bully to a conservative?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I’ve never seen Obama as a ‘bully,’ but I agree that a spineless weasel such as Romney, who attempts to appease everyone at the expense of the American people, is unfit to be president.

 

[drsmith1072]

Fwank needs to move on. He's done his part.

He's done about as much damage as he could do.

Try and keep up. Frank is retiring.

Thank God for little miracles.

The Freddie's Fannie screw up finally got to him. I mean Freddie... ah hell, y'all know what I mean.

Immie

and based on how the republicans were on control of congress way back when the legislation, which would have made freddie and fannie directly under the supervision and control of a new WH postion that would have reported to W, made it out of committee but never went to the floor for a vote how is it that you can hold frank accountable for the inaction of the republicans?

 

[Papageorgio]

That's your lame OP? OK, I'll play. How is standing up for equal protection something that should be sacrificed?

I'd rather have a leader who lead for equal protection, even if they bullied a bit, over a spineless candidate who changes their beliefs on an hourly basis, who wants to support discrimination back into our constitution.

Lead by saying its the states decision, pretty much a wimpy thing to do.

In other words? Obama codified by his pronouncement that the Ninth and Tenth means something?

I'm sure the Statists will make him pay for that pronouncement, eh? (But STILL vote for him)?

That's how you know he means none of what he says and made a political move, imagine Obama believing in states rights? That would be really way out there.

 

[drsmith1072]

Appease everyone at the expense of the American people.

Name the expense.

Gridlock
Hate
Division
Debt
Distrust
Racial wounds

All the things he promised to change

Yeah now if he could only control republicans who contrinuted to all of the above as they stated that one of their primary goals was making obama a one term president as they stood in the way and riled up their base with an accusation that obama was a socialist out to destroy America and how he isn't a real American. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Name the expense.

Gridlock
Hate
Division
Debt
Distrust
Racial wounds

All the things he promised to change

And has bolstered ALL of them.

In other words? he lied.

and here I thought personal responsibility was important to republcians? I guess not seeing as to how their divisiveness and hatred are all someone elses fault. LOL

 

[The T]

Lead by saying its the states decision, pretty much a wimpy thing to do.

In other words? Obama codified by his pronouncement that the Ninth and Tenth means something?

I'm sure the Statists will make him pay for that pronouncement, eh? (But STILL vote for him)?

That's how you know he means none of what he says and made a political move, imagine Obama believing in states rights? That would be really way out there.

Precisely. His Objective...Number one goal is to get EVEN with the Republic.

The voting populace needs to remember this fact. The man has an axe to grind. NONE of those he claims to care about are in his plans to bring us down.

The man is a LIAR. All there is to it.

 

[drsmith1072]

Appease everyone at the expense of the American people.

Then why is romney, the human flip flop for appeasement, the republican candidate for president? LOL

ASK The Media...ASK The Blue-Blood elitists...

so the media chose romney as the republcian candidate despite his flip flopping appeasement?

But the why did all of those republcians waste their time voting for him? Again you rightwingers run away from personal responsbility as you try to blame others for your decisions.

 

[drsmith1072]

Obama changed his mind no less than 3 times on gay marriage. In the end the money convinced him of what his moral stand was.

The difference being is that obama was on the same side of the issue at all times even though his degree of support did change. However, he did not switch from for gay rights being further left than kennedy to completely against them as romney has done. Now what was his reasoning for flip flopping?

Neged for intentionally misrepresenting the facts.

Really?? What did i misrepresent? Please explain in detail if you can.

 

[The T]

Then why is romney, the human flip flop for appeasement, the republican candidate for president? LOL

ASK The Media...ASK The Blue-Blood elitists...

so the media chose romney as the republcian candidate despite his flip flopping appeasement?

But the why did all of those republcians waste their time voting for him? Again you rightwingers run away from personal responsbility as you try to blame others for your decisions.

You haven't been paying attention...

 

[Immanuel]

Try and keep up. Frank is retiring.

Thank God for little miracles.

The Freddie's Fannie screw up finally got to him. I mean Freddie... ah hell, y'all know what I mean.

Immie

and based on how the republicans were on ctroll of congress way back when the legislation, which would have made freddie and fannie directly under the supervision and control of a new WH postion that would have reported to W, made it out of committee but never went to the floor for a vote how is it that you can hold frank accountable for the inaction of the republicans?

How about holding both parties accountable?

I understand that is a foreign concept to you, but you might give it a try.

By the way, it was Barney Frank that tried to tell us everything was hunky-dorey with Freddie and Fannie not to long before the collapse. That was the insinuation of my joke.

Immie

 

[drsmith1072]

Dodd bailed...and Fwank IS bailing after the mess they made.

if this is an attempted refernce to the freddy fannie issue based on that BS video posted over and over again by the right you know that the republicans were in charge of congress at the time and they chose to do NOTHING. frank was a minority leader on the committee and the bill made it out of committee so frank did not stop it there. However, it never went to the floor for a vote because the republcians in charge never sent it to the floor.

So why are you trying to blame democrats for the repuiblcians failure to act?

They TRIED to act...the Democrats Balked...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM]Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube[/ame]

Again, the republicans were in charge and frank was MINORITY member of that committee. The bill made it out of committee but then was shelved by republicans who NEVER took the bill to the floor for a vote. How did the minority democrats stop this bill, which would have created a big government cabinet position that reported directly to W, when it made it out of committee? So how is the failure to act on the part of the MAJORITY republicans the fault of the MINORITY democrats? Republcians controlled the agenda so how did the dems stop the republicans from bringing the issue to a vote?

Your spin has been countered AGAIN but I am certain that you will bring this up again next time and pretend that you weren't shown to be a complete hack the next time this happens. You have shown a trend of willful ignorance where this issue is concerned in the past so I sincerely doubt it will end anytime soon.

 

[The Infidel]

Those who kept saying "Anyone but Obama" are getting their wish.

 

[The T]

if this is an attempted refernce to the freddy fannie issue based on that BS video posted over and over again by the right you know that the republicans were in charge of congress at the time and they chose to do NOTHING. frank was a minority leader on the committee and the bill made it out of committee so frank did not stop it there. However, it never went to the floor for a vote because the republcians in charge never sent it to the floor.

So why are you trying to blame democrats for the repuiblcians failure to act?

They TRIED to act...the Democrats Balked...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM"]Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube[/ame]

Again, the republicans were in charge and frank was MINORITY member of that committee. The bill made it out of committee but then was shelved by republicans who NEVER took the bill to the floor for a vote. How did the minority democrats stop this bill, which would have created a big government cabinet position that reported directly to W, when it made it out of committee?

Your spin has been countered AGAIN but I am certain that you will bring this up again next time and pretend that you weren't shown to be a complete hack the next time this happens. You have shown a trend of willful ignorance where this issue is concerned in the past so I sincerely doubt it will end anytime soon.

Doesn't matter it was BLOCKED by procedure...Democrats leading the way.

Sorry.

 

[beagle9]

Yes it is clear that the right thinks being an asshole bully is good but being intellgent is bad

Is apeasement being inteligent or showing the lack there of in character and/or in smarts ?

 

[Dot Com]

This thread gets the rationalization of the month award!

In other words I am gonna vote for Romney now i have to justify why.
Just admit you are partisan and go on.

Bullies are frequently popular with authoritarian types, it's why these old school stories will endear Romney to certain people who feel the weak exist for the amusement of the strong.

agree w/. both.