Finally Mark Levin!

[tinydancer]

If I could promote Mark for just one moment in time it would be....Mark any new body tuning in would tune you out when you are full blast screaming is going to tune you out.

Levin I consider you brilliant and I have tuned you in all these years because of your intellect. But you are drowning me with your noise. I'm not even 30 minutes of your program and me of all people in the middle of freaking no where radio land I'm switching to CBC.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

There is no room for rigid dogmatic absolutism in a supposedly free society, history shows that it always leads to tyranny no matter what high ideals the fanatics who advocate it start out with. Trying to make a society of chaotic humans adhere to some social theory always requires coercion and brute force.

Yeah ... Sure.... Such arguments from liberals are muted when society is forced to live under the heel of socialism. Then somehow we are supposed to conform to their rules.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Wow, what a giant load of horse shit. You people call European social democracies leftists and also Muslims even though they seem to be a great odds these days. Orthodox/militant Muslims are so conservative they make you silly rightists look liberal by comparison while European counties without a lot of civilian guns are so stable and orderly they make the US look like the wild west.

There is nothing conservative about Islam and its control of our lives. That ideology has nothing to do with individual freedom. It's more aligned with liberalism and its control of every facet of our lives. It's no mystery why Obama won't fight Islamic terrorism. And it's no mystery why liberals support Palenstine terrorists over our Israeli friends.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I see Hoss hit you between the eyes with you liberals with the BS "Why do I hate the country" We only HATE you scum, that have taken the once greatest country into a country laughed at by most 2nd world countries now. When we have to look at Egypt, and Jordan's heads of state to see how a leader should act, it makes many of us cringe, especially after most of us have been in the military, seen combat, and respect men of courage, and dignity..... this idiot does NOT represent what I would expect from a leader.....

Right, I get it. You hate or country because it isn't racist enough for you any more. Big deal. Leave if you don't like it traitor. We don't want or need your sorry ass here.

Why would the states using a method of amendment clearly spelled out in the Constitution, be "hating the country".

I was talking about his desire for a armed uprising. I'm not aware of any states advocating that. Just a few crazies in a few of the states.

Logically, it has to happen, it's been 150 years since the tree had been refreshed. You want to argue with this Founding Fathers philosophy? You Jakeass!

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

I don't think they WANTED a war (and it doesn't have to be civil). I think they recognized that serious threats to liberty would arise periodically and have to be beaten back, whether people WANTED to do so or not.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We wrote it....You libs love your imperial president, Hussein Obama

We? Liberals wrote the Constitution. Conservatives were fighting for King George.

Nonsense. Liberals want big government and a dictator (king) to rule over them. Conservative want small government and no king.

I've seen no evidence whatsoever that conservatives want small government. You guys sure talk a good game, but you're as quick as the left to put your boot on people's throats the minute they want to do something you don't agree with.

Then you aren't looking very hard.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Logically, it has to happen, it's been 150 years since the tree had been refreshed. You want to argue with this Founding Fathers philosophy? You Jakeass!

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

It says from time to time, you fucking illiterate asshole, you're so stupid, you make it up as you go along! I like this one.... perfect for TODAY!

Just shut up. Your type of stupidity is a big part of why teabaggers are generally considered to be crazy.

Oh, you want to swap shit, until you are put down like the shit you are.... Yes, the tea Party is crazy... you fucking Commie/socialist shithead!

Nice picture. It would be better if teabaggers actually believed in all those things.

And now you're going to prove that Tea Partiers adhere to your puerile view of who they are and what they believe, rather than their own platform. Right? I'm waiting, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[BULLDOG]

Right, I get it. You hate or country because it isn't racist enough for you any more. Big deal. Leave if you don't like it traitor. We don't want or need your sorry ass here.

Why would the states using a method of amendment clearly spelled out in the Constitution, be "hating the country".

I was talking about his desire for a armed uprising. I'm not aware of any states advocating that. Just a few crazies in a few of the states.

Logically, it has to happen, it's been 150 years since the tree had been refreshed. You want to argue with this Founding Fathers philosophy? You Jakeass!

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

I don't think they WANTED a war (and it doesn't have to be civil). I think they recognized that serious threats to liberty would arise periodically and have to be beaten back, whether people WANTED to do so or not.

A war against the government would be a civil war, and many right wingers are hoping for it every day. Of course, there will always be threats of one type or another. Destroying the voting rights act is one of them. That's why our government is set up the way it is, to deal with those threats without armed conflict.

 

[BULLDOG]

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

It says from time to time, you fucking illiterate asshole, you're so stupid, you make it up as you go along! I like this one.... perfect for TODAY!

Just shut up. Your type of stupidity is a big part of why teabaggers are generally considered to be crazy.

Oh, you want to swap shit, until you are put down like the shit you are.... Yes, the tea Party is crazy... you fucking Commie/socialist shithead!

Nice picture. It would be better if teabaggers actually believed in all those things.

And now you're going to prove that Tea Partiers adhere to your puerile view of who they are and what they believe, rather than their own platform. Right? I'm waiting, but I'm not holding my breath.

No need for me to prove it. There are plenty of examples for anyone to make that decision.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Nice picture. It would be better if teabaggers actually believed in all those things.

Judging by their less guarded comments all they really want is to be in control and to make it permanent regardless of the constitution.

Who has the pen and phone to do away with Constitutional protections and laws?

Nobody idiot.

He's done nothing his office doesn't allow him to do.

If you define "his office" as "whatever he wants to do and can get away with", then you're right. If you define it by that pesky Constitution and separation of powers stuff, not so much.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why would the states using a method of amendment clearly spelled out in the Constitution, be "hating the country".

I was talking about his desire for a armed uprising. I'm not aware of any states advocating that. Just a few crazies in a few of the states.

Logically, it has to happen, it's been 150 years since the tree had been refreshed. You want to argue with this Founding Fathers philosophy? You Jakeass!

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

I don't think they WANTED a war (and it doesn't have to be civil). I think they recognized that serious threats to liberty would arise periodically and have to be beaten back, whether people WANTED to do so or not.

A war against the government would be a civil war, and many right wingers are hoping for it every day. Of course, there will always be threats of one type or another. Destroying the voting rights act is one of them. That's why our government is set up the way it is, to deal with those threats without armed conflict.

Thank you, I don't require a definition of "civil war", particularly not from the likes of you, and it's irrelevant to what I was saying, anyway. My point, which clearly flew right over your pointy head, is that Jefferson's "refreshing" didn't have to come from a civil war; it could also come from an external one.

And I'm well aware of the reason our government has the structure it does. However, anyone but a naive dimwit (take a bow) understands that the structure of our government is only as good and effective as the adherence paid to it by the people and their representatives in government.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It says from time to time, you fucking illiterate asshole, you're so stupid, you make it up as you go along! I like this one.... perfect for TODAY!

Just shut up. Your type of stupidity is a big part of why teabaggers are generally considered to be crazy.

Oh, you want to swap shit, until you are put down like the shit you are.... Yes, the tea Party is crazy... you fucking Commie/socialist shithead!

Nice picture. It would be better if teabaggers actually believed in all those things.

And now you're going to prove that Tea Partiers adhere to your puerile view of who they are and what they believe, rather than their own platform. Right? I'm waiting, but I'm not holding my breath.

No need for me to prove it. There are plenty of examples for anyone to make that decision.

In other words, you have nothing but bullshit, trash talk, and blind hatred. Thank you for clarifying.

And now, piss off.

 

[BULLDOG]

Judging by their less guarded comments all they really want is to be in control and to make it permanent regardless of the constitution.

Who has the pen and phone to do away with Constitutional protections and laws?

Nobody idiot.

He's done nothing his office doesn't allow him to do.

If you define "his office" as "whatever he wants to do and can get away with", then you're right. If you define it by that pesky Constitution and separation of powers stuff, not so much.

That pesky constitution is what gives him the authority to do what he has done. If the crazy right wing House would do their jobs, he wouldn't have to.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not from what I've seen so far, conservatives talk about hating crony capitalism but demand their politicians be "business friendly" to the point that they are lapdogs of big business.

This is a political board people, have their own opinion here. Crony capitalism will be address by true conservatives. it's a cancer on our system

Got any specific ideas? I would really like to hear them.

Term limits would certainly help, baring former memembers of congress from becoming lobbyist after leaving office would also help, more transparency with political contributions would help as well

I am with you on the first and third, but how do you justify the second in a free country? Rules like that just inevitably end up being a game to get around and they are never consistently implemented. With the first the second would be less of an issue anyway

Becoming lobbyist right out of office is unseemly there should at least be a waiting period of a few years

I think lobbyists would become much less of an issue if politicians were much less valuable commodities to be purchased.

 

[BULLDOG]

I was talking about his desire for a armed uprising. I'm not aware of any states advocating that. Just a few crazies in a few of the states.

Logically, it has to happen, it's been 150 years since the tree had been refreshed. You want to argue with this Founding Fathers philosophy? You Jakeass!

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

I don't think they WANTED a war (and it doesn't have to be civil). I think they recognized that serious threats to liberty would arise periodically and have to be beaten back, whether people WANTED to do so or not.

A war against the government would be a civil war, and many right wingers are hoping for it every day. Of course, there will always be threats of one type or another. Destroying the voting rights act is one of them. That's why our government is set up the way it is, to deal with those threats without armed conflict.

Thank you, I don't require a definition of "civil war", particularly not from the likes of you, and it's irrelevant to what I was saying, anyway. My point, which clearly flew right over your pointy head, is that Jefferson's "refreshing" didn't have to come from a civil war; it could also come from an external one.

And I'm well aware of the reason our government has the structure it does. However, anyone but a naive dimwit (take a bow) understands that the structure of our government is only as good and effective as the adherence paid to it by the people and their representatives in government.

Obviously you do require a definition because that is exactly what many in the right wing are hoping, and evidently preparing for. Your whining about any supposed non adherence to the constitution is nothing more than the crazy birther claims. Constant false outrage is what the right has degenerated to.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Do you dummies actually think you could hold such a convention and leave the liberals outside and deny them a say in the matter? Not on your fucking lives you fucking fascists.

What are you going to go to the floor demanding?

Free shit... it's what they do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Who has the pen and phone to do away with Constitutional protections and laws?

Nobody idiot.

He's done nothing his office doesn't allow him to do.

If you define "his office" as "whatever he wants to do and can get away with", then you're right. If you define it by that pesky Constitution and separation of powers stuff, not so much.

That pesky constitution is what gives him the authority to do what he has done. If the crazy right wing House would do their jobs, he wouldn't have to.

Yeah, and I'm sure you're just as capable of supporting that argument with evidence as you were before when you airily declared that no proof was needed.

See above re: piss off. No one here is interested in taking your word for anything, lightweight.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Logically, it has to happen, it's been 150 years since the tree had been refreshed. You want to argue with this Founding Fathers philosophy? You Jakeass!

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

I don't think they WANTED a war (and it doesn't have to be civil). I think they recognized that serious threats to liberty would arise periodically and have to be beaten back, whether people WANTED to do so or not.

A war against the government would be a civil war, and many right wingers are hoping for it every day. Of course, there will always be threats of one type or another. Destroying the voting rights act is one of them. That's why our government is set up the way it is, to deal with those threats without armed conflict.

Thank you, I don't require a definition of "civil war", particularly not from the likes of you, and it's irrelevant to what I was saying, anyway. My point, which clearly flew right over your pointy head, is that Jefferson's "refreshing" didn't have to come from a civil war; it could also come from an external one.

And I'm well aware of the reason our government has the structure it does. However, anyone but a naive dimwit (take a bow) understands that the structure of our government is only as good and effective as the adherence paid to it by the people and their representatives in government.

Obviously you do require a definition because that is exactly what many in the right wing are hoping, and evidently preparing for. Your whining about any supposed non adherence to the constitution is nothing more than the crazy birther claims. Constant false outrage is what the right has degenerated to.

Obviously, you have a vested interest in not understanding what people are saying, rather than just an innate stupidity and illiteracy that makes you incapable.

Strike Three! Yer outta there! Next batter!

 

[BULLDOG]

So now you think the founding fathers wanted a civil war every couple of hundred years. You are too stupid to live.

I don't think they WANTED a war (and it doesn't have to be civil). I think they recognized that serious threats to liberty would arise periodically and have to be beaten back, whether people WANTED to do so or not.

A war against the government would be a civil war, and many right wingers are hoping for it every day. Of course, there will always be threats of one type or another. Destroying the voting rights act is one of them. That's why our government is set up the way it is, to deal with those threats without armed conflict.

Thank you, I don't require a definition of "civil war", particularly not from the likes of you, and it's irrelevant to what I was saying, anyway. My point, which clearly flew right over your pointy head, is that Jefferson's "refreshing" didn't have to come from a civil war; it could also come from an external one.

And I'm well aware of the reason our government has the structure it does. However, anyone but a naive dimwit (take a bow) understands that the structure of our government is only as good and effective as the adherence paid to it by the people and their representatives in government.

Obviously you do require a definition because that is exactly what many in the right wing are hoping, and evidently preparing for. Your whining about any supposed non adherence to the constitution is nothing more than the crazy birther claims. Constant false outrage is what the right has degenerated to.

Obviously, you have a vested interest in not understanding what people are saying, rather than just an innate stupidity and illiteracy that makes you incapable.

Strike Three! Yer outta there! Next batter!

Isn't that cute. You think you won something.

 

[Jroc]

This is a political board people, have their own opinion here. Crony capitalism will be address by true conservatives. it's a cancer on our system

Got any specific ideas? I would really like to hear them.

Term limits would certainly help, baring former memembers of congress from becoming lobbyist after leaving office would also help, more transparency with political contributions would help as well

I am with you on the first and third, but how do you justify the second in a free country? Rules like that just inevitably end up being a game to get around and they are never consistently implemented. With the first the second would be less of an issue anyway

Becoming lobbyist right out of office is unseemly there should at least be a waiting period of a few years

I think lobbyists would become much less of an issue if politicians were much less valuable commodities to be purchased.

Yeah that would mean smaller less powerful federal govenrment