If republicans claim to be so opposed to socialism, why is it that they are so content with...

[rightwinger]

You idiot.

FY 2014 - $1.022 trillion
FY 2013 - $672 billion
FY 2012 - $1.276 trillion
FY 2011 - $1.229 trillion
FY 2010 - $1.652 trillion
FY 2009 - $253 billion

Democrats while holding majorities in both houses and having a president in the White House ran three straight trillion dollar plus deficits from 2010-12, then this year, picked up where they left off. They chose not to stop spending on defense until the sequester.

Oh and might I add, it is Obama who is recklessly killing innocent civilians with drones. Guess you're the hypocrite here buddy.

Um no you're the moron. Republicans are planning on reversing the defense cuts. That means MORE spending.

Oh and the drone program isn't what socialism is you dumbshit.

neither is defense.

Is defense capitalism?
Defense is socialized security.

 

[FA_Q2]

You idiot.

FY 2014 - $1.022 trillion
FY 2013 - $672 billion
FY 2012 - $1.276 trillion
FY 2011 - $1.229 trillion
FY 2010 - $1.652 trillion
FY 2009 - $253 billion

Democrats while holding majorities in both houses and having a president in the White House ran three straight trillion dollar plus deficits from 2010-12, then this year, picked up where they left off. They chose not to stop spending on defense until the sequester.

Oh and might I add, it is Obama who is recklessly killing innocent civilians with drones. Guess you're the hypocrite here buddy.

Um no you're the moron. Republicans are planning on reversing the defense cuts. That means MORE spending.

Oh and the drone program isn't what socialism is you dumbshit.

neither is defense.

Is defense capitalism?
Defense is socialized security.

Defense is not socialism. Look up the actual meaning of the term and then do some study on it and get back to us.

 

[rightwinger]

You idiot.

FY 2014 - $1.022 trillion
FY 2013 - $672 billion
FY 2012 - $1.276 trillion
FY 2011 - $1.229 trillion
FY 2010 - $1.652 trillion
FY 2009 - $253 billion

Democrats while holding majorities in both houses and having a president in the White House ran three straight trillion dollar plus deficits from 2010-12, then this year, picked up where they left off. They chose not to stop spending on defense until the sequester.

Oh and might I add, it is Obama who is recklessly killing innocent civilians with drones. Guess you're the hypocrite here buddy.

Um no you're the moron. Republicans are planning on reversing the defense cuts. That means MORE spending.

Oh and the drone program isn't what socialism is you dumbshit.

neither is defense.

Is defense capitalism?
Defense is socialized security.

Defense is not socialism. Look up the actual meaning of the term and then do some study on it and get back to us.

Good start

Now, why is a country pooling its resources to provide healthcare called socialism but pooling our resources for a common defense called patriotism?

 

[frigidweirdo]

No. He could have worked a deal out but he was not interested because he wanted to pull out.

Obama is more popular than Bush (both internationally and here at home) because a burning turd on your porch is more popular than bush. Many republicans outright disavowed the party because of him and most still refuse to say much about bush because they know how unpopular he is and was. Popularity, however, is utterly meaningless. I would bet that
Jennifer Lawrence is pretty popular right now all over the place. That doesn't really mean jack.

I am not going to evaluate the president, his actions or how I vote/support politicians based off how many idiots they can get to like them. Particularly those in other nations who are not concerned about the general welfare of America but more concerned with their own nations (as they should be).

And why would he? The US wanted out, the Iraqis wanted the US out. Why stay?

What you're saying just doesn't make much sense for the period of time we're dealing with.

Popularity in politics means a hell of a lot. Okay, Obama doesn't have any elections left to win, but still.

You might not evaluate a president by how much you like him, but most people do.

 

[Harry Dresden]

i asked you a legitimate question too Billy in your other thread.....look at the answer i got from you.....remember when you called Democrats "corrupt but hypercritical assholes"?......and all i did was ask how you could back people like that when you admit they are assholes just like the other guys....MOST people,except,the farther right and left.....would have a problem with backing someone like that.....you kinda got pissed at me billy....and ignored me the rest of the thread.......must have hit one of them "far" left nerves.....the audacity of me......

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

Billy if your Senator is a corrupt politician and you know this,but you vote for the guy anyway because you like some of his policies,are you not supporting the guy as well?........its the same way with the party.....if you say they are corrupt hypercritical basterds but like some of their policies do you not have to vote for them to get those policies? .....if yes you are supporting those same corrupt people.....to say their corruptness is irrelevant does not say much for you.....if you knew your Senator or Rep was a pedophile but you liked his policies, would you still vote for the guy?.....would him being a pedophile be irrelevant?......

See now you're making the false accusation that I vote for corrupt democrats.

Billy....if you support their policies....you have to vote for them to get them....right?...

 

[FA_Q2]

You idiot.

FY 2014 - $1.022 trillion
FY 2013 - $672 billion
FY 2012 - $1.276 trillion
FY 2011 - $1.229 trillion
FY 2010 - $1.652 trillion
FY 2009 - $253 billion

Democrats while holding majorities in both houses and having a president in the White House ran three straight trillion dollar plus deficits from 2010-12, then this year, picked up where they left off. They chose not to stop spending on defense until the sequester.

Oh and might I add, it is Obama who is recklessly killing innocent civilians with drones. Guess you're the hypocrite here buddy.

Um no you're the moron. Republicans are planning on reversing the defense cuts. That means MORE spending.

Oh and the drone program isn't what socialism is you dumbshit.

neither is defense.

Is defense capitalism?
Defense is socialized security.

Defense is not socialism. Look up the actual meaning of the term and then do some study on it and get back to us.

Good start

Now, why is a country pooling its resources to provide healthcare called socialism but pooling our resources for a common defense called patriotism?

Again, look up the definition of socialism and get back to me.

Explain, how either of those items are socialism or are not socialism and maybe we can start.

 

[rightwinger]

Um no you're the moron. Republicans are planning on reversing the defense cuts. That means MORE spending.

Oh and the drone program isn't what socialism is you dumbshit.

neither is defense.

Is defense capitalism?
Defense is socialized security.

Defense is not socialism. Look up the actual meaning of the term and then do some study on it and get back to us.

Good start

Now, why is a country pooling its resources to provide healthcare called socialism but pooling our resources for a common defense called patriotism?

Again, look up the definition of socialism and get back to me.

Explain, how either of those items are socialism or are not socialism and maybe we can start.

Stop the presses!

A conservative is claiming that Government involvement in healthcare is not SOCIALISM?

STRIKE ME BLIND!

 

[Billy000]

I back their policies. Not them. How hard is that to understand? I support raising the minimum wage, not cutting food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits. So what if they happen to be corrupt?

Don't you see how insane your reasoning on my politics are? In your perfect world one can only Either be a centrist or a radical. I am moderate liberal. Just because I lean left it doesn't mean I lean far left.

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

Billy if your Senator is a corrupt politician and you know this,but you vote for the guy anyway because you like some of his policies,are you not supporting the guy as well?........its the same way with the party.....if you say they are corrupt hypercritical basterds but like some of their policies do you not have to vote for them to get those policies? .....if yes you are supporting those same corrupt people.....to say their corruptness is irrelevant does not say much for you.....if you knew your Senator or Rep was a pedophile but you liked his policies, would you still vote for the guy?.....would him being a pedophile be irrelevant?......

See now you're making the false accusation that I vote for corrupt democrats.

Billy....if you support their policies....you have to vote for them to get them....right?...

Um yeah what's your point?

 

[FA_Q2]

neither is defense.

Is defense capitalism?
Defense is socialized security.

Defense is not socialism. Look up the actual meaning of the term and then do some study on it and get back to us.

Good start

Now, why is a country pooling its resources to provide healthcare called socialism but pooling our resources for a common defense called patriotism?

Again, look up the definition of socialism and get back to me.

Explain, how either of those items are socialism or are not socialism and maybe we can start.

Stop the presses!

A conservative is claiming that Government involvement in healthcare is not SOCIALISM?

STRIKE ME BLIND!

Interestingly, I didn't actually state that (though it is true for the time being) but then again, I am also not a conservative.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I back their policies. Not them
if you back their policies you back them billy....and your buddy dean will tell you that....he has said that to me about the other party more than once
So what if they happen to be corrupt?
so what?........you are empowering these corrupt guys by saying you agree with them....so you dont care about their character as long as they put forth a policy you like?.....thats also insane billy....." i wont say anything about their corruptness because i agree with a few of their policies".....what about those their corruptness affects?...do they matter?.....

You're missing the point. I am not defending them being corrupt when I say "so what". I am saying the fact that they are corrupt is irrelevant if all I support are some of their policies. Not all their policies. Some of them. The people themselves are douche bags but I like some of the stuff they put forth. That is what makes them the LESSER OF TWO EVILS.

Billy if your Senator is a corrupt politician and you know this,but you vote for the guy anyway because you like some of his policies,are you not supporting the guy as well?........its the same way with the party.....if you say they are corrupt hypercritical basterds but like some of their policies do you not have to vote for them to get those policies? .....if yes you are supporting those same corrupt people.....to say their corruptness is irrelevant does not say much for you.....if you knew your Senator or Rep was a pedophile but you liked his policies, would you still vote for the guy?.....would him being a pedophile be irrelevant?......

See now you're making the false accusation that I vote for corrupt democrats.

Billy....if you support their policies....you have to vote for them to get them....right?...

Um yeah what's your point?

then you are supporting them....you could not figure that out?....