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.
That ass-clown has been the subject of many arguments in my family for decades.Thats good news, Stop the tyrants!! Here is one of them,Yeah lets let guys like this (the elites) decide what news and info we get...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffhQ5z5CWTM
The American Republican stance pretty much says the same thing. Republicans seem to want to be in control of everything that goes on in this country, and that free will be destroyed. If a Republican thinks anything I do to be "immoral" or any other thing they dont agree with, they want to make a law against it.Conservatives want maximum individual freedom and minimal government interference.
Not really. The American Democratic stance is that no one is capable of making their own decisions, and must have Big Government looking out for them from cradle to grave. For instance, the government decided that YOU have to buy insurance, regardless of your health or economic circumstances.The American Democratic stance basically states that every individual is protected against discrimination and is able to live their lives in relative peace and harmony, without fear that someone else be able to take away their right to independence of thought and action, under reasonable circumstances.
Your submission is rejected. China is a Communist nation. Therefore, it is leftist. This is inarguable.I submit to you, that if either of the "leftist" or "rightwing" theories in this country are to lead us to be closer to China, it would be the Republicans.
Thanks for playing
Not really. The American Democratic stance is that no one is capable of making their own decisions, and must have Big Government looking out for them from cradle to grave
That ass-clown has been the subject of many arguments in my family for decades.Thats good news, Stop the tyrants!! Here is one of them,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffhQ5z5CWTM
My step-dad is from WV and has an unhealthy admiration for that goon
[1) so that would be why most republicans in this country has decided to get the government to make a law against homosexuals getting married right?
AND the fact that they want all elected officials to believe in the God of their perceptions, right?
That is your own misinformed perception of the democratic agenda.
2) The MANDATE that everyone should have to have insurance in order for the healthcare bill to be passed was a REPUBLICAN addition to the healthcare bill.
You are either a total idiot or woefully misinformed. For the time being, giving you the benefit of the doubt, Im going to go for the latter2) The MANDATE that everyone should have to have insurance in order for the healthcare bill to be passed was a REPUBLICAN addition to the healthcare bill.
It's good for politicians to put riders into unrelated bills to avoid an honest vote on something?Good.
We'll remember that the next time the Dems do it and you bitch about it.
Why would that be wrong? Unless both the Senate and the House rewrite their rules to make every single bill that gets passed standalone, prohibiting any amendment that does not directly bear on the original bill, that is the way things will always get done. Can you imagine the gridlock if Congress had to debate every issue separately, and deliver an up or down vote based solely on the merits of that issue? The government would grind to a halt, and the only things that would get done each year would be the things that are impossible to ignore. While I, and others like me, would view that as an improvement, I suspect you would soon be clamoring for a return to the status quo.
[1) so that would be why most republicans in this country has decided to get the government to make a law against homosexuals getting married right?
AND the fact that they want all elected officials to believe in the God of their perceptions, right?
That is your own misinformed perception of the democratic agenda.
Wrong... Conservatives want the states to be able to make thier own laws ,based on what thier citizens want. Not have the big bad federal government come in with some unelected Judge's opinion telling them what they have to do based on thier scewed view of the Constitution get it?
2) The MANDATE that everyone should have to have insurance in order for the healthcare bill to be passed was a REPUBLICAN addition to the healthcare bill.
You are either a total idiot or woefully misinformed. For the time being, giving you the benefit of the doubt, Im going to go for the latter2) The MANDATE that everyone should have to have insurance in order for the healthcare bill to be passed was a REPUBLICAN addition to the healthcare bill.
Wrong again, the Republicans were totally shut out of the process, they had no amendments, those that were there, were put there to satisfy the so called blue dogs
You just proved my statement for me. Millions of gay Americans want to get married nationwide. It is something that you nor anyone else has a right to decide for someone else. IE, freedom to have independence of thought or action...Wrong... Conservatives want the states to be able to make thier own laws ,based on what thier citizens want. Not have the big bad federal government come in with some unelected Judge's opinion telling them what they have to do based on thier scewed view of the Constitution get it?
Republicans Create Rider To Stop Net Neutrality - SlashdotSen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) submitted a rider yesterday to a bill on military and veterans' construction projects. The rider would, 'prohibit the FCC from using any appropriated funds to adopt, implement or otherwise litigate any network neutrality based rules, protocols or standards.' It is co-signed by six other Republican senators
It's good for politicians to put riders into unrelated bills to avoid an honest vote on something?Good.
We'll remember that the next time the Dems do it and you bitch about it.
Republicans Create Rider To Stop Net Neutrality - SlashdotSen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) submitted a rider yesterday to a bill on military and veterans' construction projects. The rider would, 'prohibit the FCC from using any appropriated funds to adopt, implement or otherwise litigate any network neutrality based rules, protocols or standards.' It is co-signed by six other Republican senators
Liberalism...ideas so good, they have to be mandated by law!
like all those ideas that had to be put in the constitution?
But nevermind that by consensus they made it LAW of the land...for folks like YOU to dismiss as old and moldy.
Right?
Let's just make law for the fuck sake of it because we have a minroity of fucking whiners...forget the Constitution. Outcomes HAVE TO be equal
Liberalism...ideas so good, they have to be mandated by law!
like all those ideas that had to be put in the constitution?
There's a major difference:
The ideas in the Constitution limit the powers of government to maximize individual freedom.
The left's ideas seek to limit individual freedoms to maximize the power of government.
like all those ideas that had to be put in the constitution?
There's a major difference:
The ideas in the Constitution limit the powers of government to maximize individual freedom.
The left's ideas seek to limit individual freedoms to maximize the power of government.
These idiots know this. They post shit like this because they'd rather have Big Government cover their asses for thier own individual failings and portend to call everyone else crazy.
And they will NEVER admit their own failings in life to boot.
The American Republican stance pretty much says the same thing. Republicans seem to want to be in control of everything that goes on in this country, and that free will be destroyed. If a Republican thinks anything I do to be "immoral" or any other thing they dont agree with, they want to make a law against it.
China is a Communist nation.
Clearly, you're retarded.It's good for politicians to put riders into unrelated bills to avoid an honest vote on something?Good.
We'll remember that the next time the Dems do it and you bitch about it.
so you are against Freedom of Speech
Nice to now comrade
Thats good news, Stop the tyrants!! Here is one of them,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffhQ5z5CWTM
I gotta agree with you here. It's not up to the government to decide who, what, we see and hear. Otherwise is an affront to the First Amendment...period.
Now as to the Status of this 'RIDER'...Bad form. The rider as any of them should be fronted to survive in it's own right.
Albiet I agree with the premise of the rider? It's presentation should be done separately.
Actually net neutrality means that providers can't decide what you get to see and hear o_0
It's good for politicians to put riders into unrelated bills to avoid an honest vote on something?Good.
We'll remember that the next time the Dems do it and you bitch about it.
Why would that be wrong? Unless both the Senate and the House rewrite their rules to make every single bill that gets passed standalone, prohibiting any amendment that does not directly bear on the original bill, that is the way things will always get done. Can you imagine the gridlock if Congress had to debate every issue separately, and deliver an up or down vote based solely on the merits of that issue? The government would grind to a halt, and the only things that would get done each year would be the things that are impossible to ignore. While I, and others like me, would view that as an improvement, I suspect you would soon be clamoring for a return to the status quo.
and another misinformed jackass pours out of the works to defend a misinformed perception that the original guy couldnt get himself out of. Kk, Ill bite, I will take you on too.
WASHINGTON Republicans were for President Barack Obama's requirement that Americans get health insurance before they were against it.
The obligation in the new health care law is a Republican idea that's been around at least two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to Bill and Hillary Clinton's failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These days, Republicans call it government overreach.
Mitt Romney, weighing another run for the GOP presidential nomination, signed such a requirement into law at the state level as Massachusetts governor in 2006. At the time, Romney defended it as "a personal responsibility principle" and Massachusetts' newest GOP senator, Scott Brown, backed it. Romney now says Obama's plan is a federal takeover that bears little resemblance to what he did as governor and should be repealed
Mitt Romney? In Massachusetts? thats it? Sorry but thats weak. No Republican supported THIS health care law and the mandate is going to be ruled unconstituitonal. also notice I said CONSERVATIVE and why would anyone want to impose a FAILED Massachusetts health law on the whole country genuusas for your other statement:
Wrong... Conservatives want the states to be able to make thier own laws ,based on what thier citizens want. Not have the big bad federal government come in with some unelected Judge's opinion telling them what they have to do based on thier scewed view of the Constitution get it?
You just proved my statement for me. Millions of gay Americans want to get married nationwide. It is something that you nor anyone else has a right to decide for someone else. IE, freedom to have independence of thought or action...
conservatives then go to the government, be it state, fed, whoever, to try to legislate AGAINST independence of thought or action. GET IT?
Plenty of Polygamists want to have more then one spouse So?... Even in California they passed a law against same sex marriage. They can have civil unions IF IT IS APPROVED IN THIER STATES. These things cannot be imposed on the whole country by federal judges get it?
Obama opposes gay marriage, too. You don't seem to be able to criticize him for it, though. And given the failure of so many gay marriage initiatives to pass, lots of Democrats oppose it as well.1) so that would be why most republicans in this country has decided to get the government to make a law against homosexuals getting married right?
AND the fact that they want all elected officials to believe in the God of their perceptions, right?
I'm going to need to see a credible link for that claim.That is your own misinformed perception of the democratic agenda.
2) The MANDATE that everyone should have to have insurance in order for the healthcare bill to be passed was a REPUBLICAN addition to the healthcare bill.
You are either a total idiot or woefully misinformed. For the time being, giving you the benefit of the doubt, Im going to go for the latter.
That doesn't say what you say it says. Oh, and it's a good idea to put in a link...unless you don't want people to find out that your article doesn't say what you say it says.[1) so that would be why most republicans in this country has decided to get the government to make a law against homosexuals getting married right?
AND the fact that they want all elected officials to believe in the God of their perceptions, right?
That is your own misinformed perception of the democratic agenda.
Wrong... Conservatives want the states to be able to make thier own laws ,based on what thier citizens want. Not have the big bad federal government come in with some unelected Judge's opinion telling them what they have to do based on thier scewed view of the Constitution get it?
Wrong again, the Republicans were totally shut out of the process, they had no amendments, those that were there, were put there to satisfy the so called blue dogs
and another misinformed jackass pours out of the works to defend a misinformed perception that the original guy couldnt get himself out of. Kk, Ill bite, I will take you on too.
WASHINGTON Republicans were for President Barack Obama's requirement that Americans get health insurance before they were against it.
The obligation in the new health care law is a Republican idea that's been around at least two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to Bill and Hillary Clinton's failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These days, Republicans call it government overreach.
Mitt Romney, weighing another run for the GOP presidential nomination, signed such a requirement into law at the state level as Massachusetts governor in 2006. At the time, Romney defended it as "a personal responsibility principle" and Massachusetts' newest GOP senator, Scott Brown, backed it. Romney now says Obama's plan is a federal takeover that bears little resemblance to what he did as governor and should be repealed.
