American Politics during the Obama Presidency

While some posters have from time to time used put-downs in their posts, Walleye has demonstrated he is the indisputable king of insults and put-downs. He uses them frequently in his responses, probably to compensate for the weak impact of his arguments.

Some recent gems:

[QUOTE]F-ing brilliant and poignant
One of the most Moreonic posts
Hopelessness and cluelessness
Mr. I don't know how to do a quote
Sorry, I meant utterly clueless
Still clueless
Clueless
There is the basis for your lie
Don't let ignorance keep you from posting
You are deluded
Basing emotional issues on lies
Hey dimwit
[/QUOTE]
It just goes to show you, all the money in the world can't buy class.

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye; 415782]I have proven myself to be a pretty decent barometer on certain subjects. I admit that I was off on the Republicans gaining control of the senate, that one was pretty close. I will tell you without a doubt, there are no polls that are currently, accurately tracking Obama's negatives amongst likely 2012 voters. If there were, they would be predicting something that would make Jimmy Carter blush. Despite the fact that in political terms there is still an eternity until November 2012, America hates this piker and it has nothing to do with his race.

America rejects liberalism, socialism and Obamaism. The election results of 2010 were a mere prelude. Thank God (I have one, thank you) they overstepped on healthcare (feel free to review WW's take on Obama overreaching circa summer 2009) and woke up the American public.

The political.slapping of 2010-2012 and beyond is like the culmination of 86 years or want by Bosox fans. The Yankees series is analogous to 2010 and hopefully 2012's electoral outcome will reflect the series win trouncing of St Louis. [/QUOTE]So are you giving 10-1 on Obama NOT winning 2012? Since my savings deposit's interest rate is so low, I don't mind taking the underdog.

[QUOTE=Black Shirt;415784]So are you giving 10-1 on Obama NOT winning 2012? Since my savings deposit's interest rate is so low, I don't mind taking the underdog.[/QUOTE]An actual national election, without suspending the Constitution and / or declaring Marshall Law, I'll treat you to a night out on the town

[QUOTE=Esten;415783]While some posters have from time to time used put-downs in their posts, Walleye has demonstrated he is the indisputable king of insults and put-downs. He uses them frequently in his responses, probably to compensate for the weak impact of his arguments.[/quote]If my posts are so weak, why can't you even respond on topic?

[quote=]It just goes to show you, all the money in the world can't buy class.[/QUOTE]Ouch, you hurt my feelings.

[QUOTE=Esten;415783]While some posters have from time to time used put-downs in their posts, Walleye has demonstrated he is the indisputable king of insults and put-downs. He uses them frequently in his responses, probably to compensate for the weak impact of his arguments.[/QUOTE]That's a bunch of nonsense and you know it. He's quite civil until attacked. Once someone else crosses the line, the gloves come off.

Once again, you distort things. I've come to expect nothing less, though, so that's par for the course.

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye;415785]An actual national election, without suspending the Constitution and / or declaring Marshall Law, I'll treat you to a night out on the town[/QUOTE]That's nice, and my chances are quite high. Obama will go all out to present a centrist policy with unemployment and economy being the key issues. Any liberal policies will be put on hold until 2nd term. The crisis in the Middle East and high oil prices will be roadblocks in his strategy.

In case I lose, is 2 girls in a soapie a deal?

We knew that Governor Sanford read this board, but it's good to see that Scott Walker is following along as well.

I threw this out there nearly a year ago and several times since then: Why do we need public unions? No one, not even Esten or Moreon, tried to answer it. The closest we got was someone who claimed that [i]private[/i] Sector unions had done some good long ago in San Francisco. That point is debatable, especially given San Francisco's dire financial condition, but it also was non-responsive.

Even now, with all the union furor in Wisconsin, none of the union bosses or lackeys, and no one in the media, has ever bothered to try to articulate why public unions are necessary or beneficial. I'm pretty sure I know why.

But, one last time: Why do we need public unions?

[QUOTE=Stan the Man; 409286]Here's another one I'll throw out to the masses:

Why do we have unionized government workers?

I understand the historical reasons for the rise of unions. Unions allowed workers, collectively, to negotiate with powerful capitalists and companies over things like wages, work safety and work conditions. There was a time when the country needed that.

Frankly, I think unions have served their purpose and do far more harm than good now.

But why do we have unionized government workers? So that they can collectively negotiate over safety, wages and work rules with who? The government? In other words, us.

This issue is the largest problem USA States need to grapple with. For the past 40-50 years, unions such as CALPERS, the teachers' unions, police and fire unions, have collectively negotiated with who? Other government workers, who frequently are unionized themselves, over pay and benefits packages that are now simply obscene. It is the equivalent of the wolf and fox negotiating with each other over who gets rights to the sheep and the hen house. We're the sheep and hen house. The result is defined benefit pension plans, fully funded early retirement plans that pay 20-year employees six figure salaries for life, massively underfunded retirement plans, work rules that can easily be exploited by the workers to significant financial advantage (ask any cop) and a system that will collapse under its own weight.

I'd say that the solution is easy: Some of these states should declare bankruptcy and just negotiate new contracts, like GM and Chrysler. The only problem is, states are constitutionally forbidden from filing for bankruptcy. As a consequence, these issues are the elephant in the room that no one talks about. This is because the public employee unions are so powerful that any dissent from politicians is immediately met with a huge union war chest allocated to unseating anyone with the temerity to address this obvious issue.

In the end, we're the folks footing the tab. But sooner or later. Likely sooner. Something has to give. It won't happen under the current administration, but a starting place would be to simply ban unions from representing public employees. Union necessity can be debated where the private sector is concerned, but why are they the least bit necessary for government workers? [/QUOTE]

It is hard enough to get laid in the USA, now he wants to closed Nevada's brothels.

[url]http://www.elynews.com/articles/2011/02/25/news/news12.txt[/url]

Stan, Take a look at this, if you haven't already, about public sector unions,

[url]http://www.economist.com/node/17849199[/url]

[QUOTE=Black Shirt; 415791]That's nice, and my chances are quite high. Obama will go all out to present a centrist policy with unemployment and economy being the key issues. Any liberal policies will be put on hold until 2nd term. The crisis in the Middle East and high oil prices will be roadblocks in his strategy.

In case I lose, is 2 girls in a soapie a deal? [/QUOTE]It'll take a really, really soapie deal (or a coup) to get our supreme ruler another term.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69; 415805]It is hard enough to get laid in the USA, now he wants to closed Nevada's brothels.

[url]http://www.elynews.com/articles/2011/02/25/news/news12.txt[/url]

[/QUOTE]When that fat bald dude with the hen house in NV jumps in front of the camera to stand up for the rights of the working girls. I have seen that show on HBO once or twice (literally only once or twice). While I enjoy titillating entertainment as much as the next monger, that show is a waste of time, unless you are a non-monger and the thought of dipping one's wick in some strange (any strange) gets the juices flowing. I think I recall some guy dropping 2Gs to play out some fantasy with one of the pigs on the farm (ranch or whatever) for an hour or two. Are you kidding me? That is round trip air fare to any number of mongering spots and would likely cover hotel or apt rental. Shit, in NV, if you go to a brothel, you're over paying (and getting a sow) anyhow.

I agree with Stan, there should be no public sector unions, period. There is no 'Man' against whom they are railing, no evil corporation with whom they are facing off. The evil on the other side of the negotiation is. The tax payer. Give them standard benefits package (a la private sector jobs) and place a 'suggestions box' where they can find it. If they don't like it, provide them with an informative slip of pink paper, upon which the realities of the private sector a written.

It used to be great.

Of course that was years ago.

When it was, it was, what we are paying in Argentina now.

I showed the owner of that brothel, you are talking about; Kit Cat ranch, a photo of Dennise (from the Mansion) that I paid 150p for, he invited me to visit his ranch. If I was younger I might have gone, just to tell him what he is missing in Argentina.

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye;415811]When that fat bald dude with the hen house in NV jumps in front of the camera to stand up for the rights of the working girls. I have seen that show on HBO once or twice (literally only once or twice). While I enjoy titillating entertainment as much as the next monger, that show is a waste of time, unless you are a non-monger and the thought of dipping one's wick in some strange (any strange) gets the juices flowing. I think I recall some guy dropping 2Gs to play out some fantasy with one of the pigs on the farm (ranch or whatever) for an hour or two. Are you kidding me? That is round trip air fare to any number of mongering spots and would likely cover hotel or apt rental. Shit, in NV, if you go to a brothel, you're over paying (and getting a sow) anyhow.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Stan the Man; 415787]That's a bunch of nonsense and you know it. He's quite civil until attacked. Once someone else crosses the line, the gloves come off.

Once again, you distort things. I've come to expect nothing less, though, so that's par for the course. [/QUOTE]Very laughable Stan. Quite civil until attacked? How many seconds do you think it would take me to locate a post where he insulted someone who was simply stating a point of view without attacking anyone?

Every reader here has seen enough of that from Walleye to know that what you wrote is a complete lie.

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye;415812]I agree with Stan, there should be no public sector unions, period. There is no 'Man' against whom they are railing, no evil corporation with whom they are facing off. The evil on the other side of the negotiation is. The tax payer. Give them standard benefits package (a la private sector jobs) and place a 'suggestions box' where they can find it. If they don't like it, provide them with an informative slip of pink paper, upon which the realities of the private sector a written.[/QUOTE]"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for officials to bind the employer. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives.

"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people. This obligation is paramount. A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent to prevent or obstruct government. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government, is unthinkable and intolerable."

Was it?

A. Ronald Reagan.

B. Ron Paul.

C. Rush Limbaugh.

Nope. FDR!

Here's the link:

[url]http://www.huberheightslibertygroup.com/node/259[/url]

I have noticed out fearless leader has taken some bold steps of late, deciding unilaterally the federal law regarding gay marriage is now unconstitutional.

We no longer need the Supreme Court, His Highness can decide what is 'Constitutional' or 'Unconstitutional' and direct the Justice Department to act accordingly regarding laws passed by Congress and signed by past presidents.

Just think, after getting rid of that pesky Supreme Court why not get rid of Congress as well and end all the bickering, rule by decree just like his buddy Chavez!

Obama has also taken bold steps to contain the crisis in Libya, he closed our embassy there. Wow I bet that has them quaking in their boots!

[QUOTE=Esten;415814]Very laughable Stan. Quite civil until attacked? How many seconds do you think it would take me to locate a post where he insulted someone who was simply stating a point of view without attacking anyone?[/quote]You? Forever! Given that you're a mental midget.

[quote=]Every reader here has seen enough of that from Walleye to know that what you wrote is a complete lie.[/QUOTE]Everyone also knows that you are a humorless, left-wing drone incapable of gathering facts and forming cogent thoughts or ideas of your own. Other than that, I am certain that you are lovely company.

I told you all up front that I am an asshole. Why don't you be honest and tell us what you are?

[QUOTE=Doppelganger; 415825]I have noticed out fearless leader has taken some bold steps of late, deciding unilaterally the federal law regarding gay marriage is now unconstitutional.

We no longer need the Supreme Court, His Highness can decide what is 'Constitutional' or 'Unconstitutional' and direct the Justice Department to act accordingly regarding laws passed by Congress and signed by past presidents.

Just think, after getting rid of that pesky Supreme Court why not get rid of Congress as well and end all the bickering, rule by decree just like his buddy Chavez!

Obama has also taken bold steps to contain the crisis in Libya, he closed our embassy there. Wow I bet that has them quaking in their boots! [/QUOTE]If he keeps going at the same pace, by election time they will be polling about the same regarding popularity at home.

I believe it was our esteemed, humorless colleague Esten who jumped all over me at the very beginning of our Supreme Ruler's term for pointing out that he is a Marxist with a very clear disdain for the Constitution and the American people. What do I know? (other than how to sling an insult or two)

Let's bomb them gal dang Libyans! Who's with me?! From the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli!

I was reading an article about Raghuram Rajan, a famous economist, recently. He's concerned about inequality in the USA. His solution is education. If every American were provided with a first class education, the gap between the rich and poor would decrease. In a global economy this is essential. We need to educate the scientists, engineers, machinists, technicians, etc. to compete with China et al in the 21st century.

Rajan promotes ideas like paying teachers more for outstanding performance and promoting charter schools and vouchers. But this is never going to happen. Why? Because along the with trial lawyers, the teachers' unions control local, state and national Democrat parties. They have the same effect on schools that the UAW has on GM.

Adjusted for purchasing power, the USA already spends more per capita on education than any country in the world except possibly Luxembourg. But our system produces results far inferior to countries that spend much less. The Democrats are never going to let this money be spent efficiently. The primary reason is the teachers' unions. Some speculate that another reason is that a poorly educated, poorly-compensated underclass is helpful in electing Democrats. I'm not sure whether or not that's true.

[QUOTE=Doggboy;415861]Let's bomb them gal dang Libyans! Who's with me?! From the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli![/QUOTE]If we could just colonize the oil fields. Maybe we could use that border fence they never built on the Mexican border.

It probably isn't worth pointing out how week and feckless the USA appears to the world (10 days to comment on Libya, no cogent position on Egypt, etc) and in particular to the Muslim World (who only understand strength).

[QUOTE=Wild Walleye;415832]I told you all up front that I am an asshole. Why don't you be honest and tell us what you are?[/QUOTE]IALOTFLMAO! I thought I was the biggest asshole on the board. Just ask the silly putas and the wild-ass liberals. Hope that my elite status isn't being infringed upon by you WW. I might get offended like all the humorless left wing retards that show up from time to time on this board. Better back down or no fishing trip for you. LOL. Happy Mongering All. Offended Toymann

[QUOTE=Toymann;415869]IALOTFLMAO! I thought I was the biggest asshole on the board. Just ask the silly putas and the wild-ass liberals. Hope that my elite status isn't being infringed upon by you WW. I might get offended like all the humorless left wing retards that show up from time to time on this board. Better back down or no fishing trip for you. LOL. Happy Mongering All. Offended Toymann[/QUOTE]As asshole second class

[QUOTE=Tiny12; 415863]I was reading an article about Raghuram Rajan, a famous economist, recently. He's concerned about inequality in the USA. His solution is education. If every American were provided with a first class education, the gap between the rich and poor would decrease. In a global economy this is essential. We need to educate the scientists, engineers, machinists, technicians, etc. To compete with China et al in the 21st century.

Rajan promotes ideas like paying teachers more for outstanding performance and promoting charter schools and vouchers. But this is never going to happen. Why? Because along the with trial lawyers, the teachers' unions control local, state and national Democrat parties. They have the same effect on schools that the UAW has on GM.

Adjusted for purchasing power, the USA already spends more per capita on education than any country in the world except possibly Luxembourg. But our system produces results far inferior to countries that spend much less. The Democrats are never going to let this money be spent efficiently. The primary reason is the teachers' unions. Some speculate that another reason is that a poorly educated, poorly-compensated underclass is helpful in electing Democrats. I'm not sure whether or not that's true. [/QUOTE]Hi Tiny. Thanks for posting that Economist article a while back. It was a good, in-depth discussion of the problems presented by unions. From the deafening silence emanating from our resident left-wingers, I suspect that even they cannot mount any cogent defense for public unions. But, they are much better at obfuscation than cogency when attempting to defend a point.

I read two additional pieces recently from unlikely sources, both pointing out how Democrats are now the party that desperately is trying to [i]undermine[/i] Democracy as best they can. I generally don't like Joe Klein or Time Magazine, but this is a decent piece.

[url]http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/02/18/wisconsin-the-hemlock-revolution/[/url]

And, Nolan Finley does a pretty good job of getting right to the point:

[url]http://www.detnews.com/article/20110227/OPINION03/102270310/1008/AWOL-Dems-defy-ballot-box[/url]

In essence, Democrats were "shellacked" this past election, to use their leader's words. They spent the better part of the run up to the election berating Republicans as the party of "no" for using the Filibuster. But, they still had their head handed to them by the electorate. So, what do Democrats do? They filibustered for a while in Wisconsin. But, when it appeared that this wouldn't succeed, they turned tail and ran. Essentially, despite a free and fair election, they refuse to participate in the democratic process unless they get their way.

They did the same thing in Indiana: Citizens be damned; we're not coming back unless we get our way.

So, now the Emperor has no clothes. Several things are abundantly apparent at this point.

First, the liberal message cannot succeed without a rigged game. That game is as follows. Force public workers to join unions in the majority of states. Automatically deduct union dues from public worker pensions. Spend the forcibly extracted union dues to re-elect Democrats, who then perpetuate this money-laundering scheme.

Liberals can cry all they want, but that [b]is[/b] What has been going on here. The population is generally pretty evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, with slight variations each election. But. 98. 7% of AFSCME contributions go to Democrats, with like percentages from other unions. It's no accident. A large proportion of their membership votes for the other team, but they need to continue this fraudulent scheme to have any chance. Unions are by far and away the biggest political contributors in this country, both at the national and especially the local levels. Starve them, and you starve the left.

So, now that someone has had the spine to challenge this corrupt enterprise, the Democrats refuse to play. The reason is as plain as day. They can't win without cheating, and they know it.

So, rounding back to the question you pose at the end of your post. Do the Democrats need a poorly paid and poorly educated demographic to succeed? You better believe it. That's their dirty little secret. Without that voting demographic and union money, they can't succeed.

If you look at American society as a whole, you have to say that the citizenry has "no clothes". Every president in their inaugural speech has made note of education but yet we have seen a steady decline in scores over the last 50 years. If not for the children of some minority immigrant groups, the decline in science and mathematics in the school systems would have been even more drastic. American buisness leaders have been beating their knuckles over this issue forever, yet Congress have not responded. And on the home front, the emphasis of dance and cheerleading teams clearly show where the Great American Society is, caught between 3rd base and home plate. Well, maybe, it is what it is, it's harder to stay at the top than to get to the top.

A public union employee, a tea party activist, and a CEO are sitting at a table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it.

The CEO takes 11 cookies, turns to the tea partier and says, 'Watch out for that union guy. He wants a piece of your cookie.'

A public union employee, a politician and a taxpayer are sitting at a table.

The taxpayer opens his lunchbag and pulls out a dozen cookies he baked for himself earlier that day.

The public union employee leans over to the politician and says [i]"The more of those cookies you take from the taxpayer and give to me, the harder I'll work to get you relected."[/i]

[QUOTE=Esten; 415892]A public union employee, a tea party activist, and a CEO are sitting at a table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it.

The CEO takes 11 cookies, turns to the tea partier and says, 'Watch out for that union guy. He wants a piece of your cookie. '[/QUOTE]I think you've got a point. Both the CEO and the public union employees play way too big a part in choosing the people who will decide their pay, being directors and politicians respectively. Shareholders and voters / taxpayers must take control, or suffer the consequences. In your imaginary group, it's the tea party activist who's the hero.

Or any intelligible inference that one may draw from your fictitious and fatuous farce?

[QUOTE=Esten; 415892]A public union employee, a tea party activist, and a CEO are sitting at a table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it.

The CEO takes 11 cookies, turns to the tea partier and says, 'Watch out for that union guy. He wants a piece of your cookie. '[/QUOTE]One question, where the fuck did the cookies come from? Did they just magically appear on the table? Guess they must metaphorically represent entitlements in that they appear out of nowhere and don't cost anyone anything.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;415895]I think you've got a point. Both the CEO and the public union employees play way too big a part in choosing the people who will decide their pay, being directors and politicians respectively. Shareholders and voters / taxpayers must take control, or suffer the consequences. In your imaginary group, it's the tea party activist who's the hero.[/QUOTE]I don't disagree with this. There is an inherent problem when CEOs are bargaining with a board they control.

But, the joke posited by Esten misses the point. While I'm no fan of [i]private sector[/i] Unions, they are at least subject to the laws of supply and demand, profit and loss, and an economic model that forces them to come to grip with reality or face the death (read, bankruptcy) of the host on which they are a parasite. That is, unless the government steps in for a bailout. The same reality does not exist for public sector unions.

In the public sector model, there is no CEO. The fat union guy stole all 12 cookies, passed 5 of them under the table to the Democrat politician, and the union guy still looks hungry. Meanwhile, the Democrat is rifling through the pockets of the tea party guy. The fat union guy's got to eat, and the politician sure as h*ll isn't going to give up any of his 5.

A public union employee, a politician, and a CEO are sitting at a table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it.

The politician pushes the plate over to the employee and thanks him for his public service.

The CEO leans over to the politician and says [i]"That union guy is getting too many cookies. Give him fewer cookies and I'll pay to get you re-elected."[/i]

[QUOTE=Esten; 415914]A public union employee, a politician, and a CEO are sitting at a table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it.

The politician pushes the plate over to the employee and thanks him for his public service.

The CEO leans over to the politician and says [i]"That union guy is getting too many cookies. Give him fewer cookies and I'll pay to get you re-elected."[/i][/QUOTE]Esten,

In order to understand your scenario, please tell me...

- Who made the cookies on the table?

- Shouldn't the owner of the cookies get to decide what happens to their cookies.

Thanks,

Jackson

I'll surely have fashioned a 'poking stick' (shiv) out of one of the wooden spoons laying around the kitchen. If the table is on my property, the first one to make a move on my cookies is going to catch the poking stick in the carotid, the rest will be catching some 45ACP. Add a $14 spade from Home Depot, a bag of lime and no one is going to miss any of the thieving scum.

Where can we get Sex in the USA?

That is all we want to Know.

We do not give a shit about what you think about who is in charge in our country and the workingman.

Maybe you should join Qaddafi your brother businessman?

Check Minnesota

I have been going to to Buenos Aires to get Laid FOR 10 YEARS.

The Price is right, why do you have to add all this other political bull Shit?

Who Cares, Are You Knot getting enough?

All Us mongers want to know IS WHAT IS THE PRICE AND THE ADDRESSES OF WHERE THEY CAN GET LAID?

How come you are NOT voting at home?

Or Did You Vote Wrong. THINK OR Can You?

Wake Up and see "Inside Job" The Academy award Winner.

How You and I Got FUCKED?

It Is Not About The Party You Voted For! THEY DO NOT CARE FOR US LITTLE MEN!, They Fucked You and ME!

SEE This!

" InSide JOB". The Movie.

You can a get a Pirate copy on any Street corner.

Screw the workers rights in around the the world, especially in China!

No Unions in China.

I know some some you "Can Not See the Trees from the Forest."

Stan, I never gave much thought to public employee unions until you brought it up and the recent news came out of Wisconsin. It's a real problem.

WT69, using your words, you've contributed your share of political bull shit to this thread, so I don't understand what you're complaining about. Especially since you could just disregard the thread. By the way, honestly, thanks for your diligent work compiling lists. I've never used the one in Buenos Aires, but have in a couple of other places.

I can't thank you enough for all the work you do on the privado list. Please don't take this the wrong way, as often times the typed response does not do justice to the intended message.

[quote=]I know some some you "Can Not See the Trees from the Forest."[/QUOTE][quote=]It Is Not About The Party You Voted For! THEY DO NOT CARE FOR US LITTLE MEN!, They Fucked You and ME![/quote]Look out, trees!

[quote=]Who Cares, Are You Knot getting enough?[/quote]Sounds like you care. So do I.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69; 415924]I have been going to to Buenos Aires to get Laid FOR 10 YEARS.

The Price is right, why do you have to add all this other political bull Shit? [/quote]There is no one happier about your freedom to do so than me. Let's hope we can all contribute to keeping it that way.

I don't view it as bullshit.

Everything that I enjoy, have ever enjoyed or will ever enjoy in life is derivative of my freedom to do it. It is not possible, nor desirable for me to separate enjoying and exploiting freedom from respecting it, for neither can exist without the other. Therefore, I enjoy with deference to the forces that made it possible. So far, only God and American patriots (their allies and righteous practitioners of freedom) have contributed to that freedom. It is incumbent upon me to do what I can to make sure that others can avail themselves of those same freedoms. It is a moral imperative of all Americans not only to preserve those freedoms but to avoid infringing upon them, intentionally or otherwise. That last part is what trips up most.

Our freedom didn't come easy or cheap nor is it a maintenance-free appliance. While our creator has imbued certain inalienable rights upon us, He didn't guarantee that we would be free to enjoy them, He left that part up to us.

If my posts bother you, please feel free to ignore me.

He just can't help himself WW. Good guy who is politically "way out there" and certainly not in touch with america these days. Hmmm. Just like the democratic party in general. If he doesn't like the thread then he doesn't have to read it. Makes sense to me! Happy Mongering WT69. Toymann

When I get bored from not getting Laid, etc..

I'm not saying that what this thread has to say is turning me on.
Like some of You.

I check in too see what Middle America is thinking about. Must be tough, with no clear calming Waters to See (Sea) (Ocean) and Feel.

I heard / read that the one of the reasons our founding fathers left England was to get away from the Anti-religion rulers.

I guess the old beliefs followed a little bit of our Middle America thinking.

Like the protesting at a Funeral.

What the election showed in 2008 was:

Bushes religious Right is here.

Personally, I respect all religions.

Even the belief "Each man is his own God".

"But do Not Take one."

"I don't care where anyone is from, Country, State or City."

"I know we all want to get Laid."

My brother gets home and turns on the TV.

FoxNews. I heard on the radio that the viewers are in the age group 65+.

And that the younger age groups do not want to listen or see that B. S.

I watch it with my bro and we both get pissed off. My Bro starts screaming, agreeing or not agreeing at the TV. I get pissed about how they are not impartial about what they are saying. Why would anyone want to Lie or Twist the Truth and Facts?

Must be Big Bucks. How low can you go?

What we believe in, in politics makes no difference to us, the graft and greed will prevail.

" I'd rather be drunk, watching something happy, than depressing". Like the bad guy getting is ass kicked, not ours."
Or getting Laid or helping others to do that, with Lists, not BULL SHIT.

It was said a long time ago."No News Is Good News." Yes, no news, is calming, but does get boring, but FOXNEWS,
Stop the Slanted Opinions. Please!

Gas is going up? Why. 2% is from Libya.?
?

"Greed is Good". What movie was that From?

[QUOTE=Toymann;415938]He just can't help himself WW. Good guy who is politically "way out there" and certainly not in touch with america these days. Hmmm. Just like the democratic party in general. If he doesn't like the thread then he doesn't have to read it. Makes sense to me! Happy Mongering WT69. Toymann[/QUOTE]