Looks like the rightwingers finally accomplished their mission of "Second Ammendment Solutions" to get the congress they want by shooting Gabrielle Giffords in the head. Congratulations FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter. I would wish the same thing upon them but some of us Americans actually have to continue acting sane or this nation will fall apart.
@ETericET Yeah, stop distorting her comments, when we have audio and video of her saying it. We don't need Fox News to interpret and do our thinking for us.
@tishhead ah, yes, Tishhead. I'm wearing egg on my face today. Botched my local predictions, too. Seriously considering retirement from political prognostication.
If any of you are still in doubt about Reid winning, check this out. A June 9, 2010, Rasmussen Reports post-primary poll showed her leading incumbent Senator Reid by a margin of 50% to 39%. A July 2010 poll showed Senator Reid leading Angle by 7 points. The change of margin, 18% in less than a month, IS THE LARGEST IN SENATE ELECTIONS HISTORY. don't get me wrong, Reid isn't my first choice. he's too moderate for me, i want a true progressive. Democrats need to get as radical as the tea party :)
hahaha what the hell, do 90% of you exclusively watch fox news? why all the hatred toward these guys? angle is gonna lose, simple as that. people dont go from a sane-moderate politician (who happens to be the senate majority leader) to a crazy far-far-far-right-winger overnight. if she had one insane position she might still have a chance, but nearly everything she wants to do is crazy, look at HER OWN DAMN WEBSITE. she's as far right as you can get, on everything.
...these people, everyone, are absolutely " in the tank" for the Democrat Party. Are they genuinely psychophants? Are they getting paid to spout this crap? Yeah, I guess they are, huh?
I think Ill watch MSNBC on the evening of November 2. The thought of watching egg all over thier faces while swallowing the main dish of Crow along with the shocked "WTF just HAPPENED!?!? expressions will be just too tempting to resist.
This show and these people are disgusting. Combined IQ of about 60. Why not use your platform to educate and enlighten instead of twist and subvert? Oh, I know, it is part of your agenda. Glad I stopped watching all mainstream media shows.
Chris Matthews, enjoy your last year on MSNBC, you yap-trap. You belong in the vanguard of an 8 person gay NAMBA protest. What color are your wife's panties that you're wearing. What a freaking complaining machine. Chris you would do a bacteria count on the milk of human kindness!! Whining bitch!!
The embarassment will be on these pointy-hat wearing democrats on November 2nd, National Eviction Day. Instead of being embarassed to send Sharon Angle to Washington, you guys would rather be proud to send a senator whose responsible for record unemployment in your state. Talk about mental cases, look in the mirror MSNBC and pathetic Reid supporters. You and your Prince Harry are going the way of the Dinosaur. We'll get your unemployment back to single digits and you can thank us NOT Obama.
Yeah right you freakin retard (including DemRapidRespone) "I would rather have 100 percent unemployment with Harry Reid than have someone who "embarass me" as my Senator?!! WTF! All you ass-clowns should be embarrased by the pathetic spineless, idealistic-driven performance of "Barely Reid." To not be embarassed simply points to uninformed democratic-kool-aid drinking panty wearing sheep.
Oh, we can't disrupt the apple cart! These goons want us to keep business as usual? Please! Don't these communists know WHY our Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment?
@ohce Insane? Dangerous? I think people who arent outraged with both political parties & all the corruption r dangerous & insane. By naively going along for the ride to hell that our gov is taking us empowers he gov more. People have just been conditioned to not care about politics. Those that actually support the "Progressive" Imperialistic, War mongering, Crony Capitalist empire we have become r the scary ones. They cant seem to c thru the propaganda. & dont revere the wisdom of our founders.
Progressives demonizing Angle have helped conviced many to vote for her.
The more progressives demonize Sharron Angle, the more they confirm that Sharron Angle will be able to help us defend ourselves -- and our children and grandchildren -- from Obama, Reid and Pelosi and their job-killing, economy-killing, freedom-killing scams like Obamacare and cap and trade.
The more people learn about what Sharron REALLY stands for and why, the more votes she will eventually get.
@Antonio33s I'm sorry to dissapoint you but what Angle REALLY stands for is unconstitutional. She wants to give the federal government total control over individual's civil liberties while giving multinational corporations freedom to do whatever they want regardless of how harmful it may be for society as a whole. Her doctrine is purely religious in nature and she admits it. It's dangerous to have a person such as this in the government. Sorry but you are wrong.
@derekxnl What civil liberties is she planning on infringing upon? I am so sick of politicians & other people supporting laws to try to control the morals of others. If there is no victim then there is no crime right? I dont have a problem with a candidate declaring their beliefs & how that will affect their agenda though, the Founders were big on Christianity being essential to our success. What kind of freedoms r u worried she will let multinational corporations abuse?
I love when the media attacks non-politicians who say what many think and feel, but won't say in order to get "the vote". Lying is not a virtue. PC is not a virtue. It is a disease. It is a cancer. Andthat is what is wrong with Washington. Electing lying, deceitful politicians over honest American citizens with real values and real beliefs is FUCKED UP. How far we have moved from our founders. Our founders were the greatest collection of people on Earth EVER.
I am just wondering who is the "non-politician" you are referring to? If you are speaking of Sharon Angle, she has been a politician since 1998, albeit a small time politician: A member of Nevada State Assembly.
If you think she is of sound mind, google the word "Criminon". It is a church of scientology program for rehabilitating prisoners using L. Ron Hubbard's teachings. Sharon Angle sponsored legislation for placing this program in women's prisons in Nevada, in 2003.
Pick the exception and not the rule and generalize. Harry Reid said it was "his job" to create jobs. Since when did we become communist and since when did communism do a good job of creating jobs and wealth? Every sngle economic problem in the US was CAUSED by the Federal Government including Wall Street's gambling. We are stiffling small business in favor of Wall Street, the banks, the lawyers, the unions and government. No wonder we are fucked.
I heard her say it & I appreciate Joe Scarborough for his response. I fear my Tea Party friends, however, are perhaps just as crazy as Angle. The friends I have are successful people who have not been adversely affected by the economic downturn, but have grown extremely fearful of the future. They are ardent fans of Glenn Beck and FOX News.
MSNBC progressive opperatives professional?! This race is over?! Only the Orwellian world of progressives -- in which good is evil, sin is virtue, left is right, war is peace!
The fact that MSNBC progressive opperatives demonize Angle demonstrates that Angle is great for our country. Unlike Reid, she is right on most issues and she's a smart, courageous, honest and patriotic American. The more progressives demonize her, the more we love her.
Millions have been invested to demonize Angle? That's completely unnecessary. 2 bucks for a newspaper is all that's needed. Every bizarre "idea" that spills out of her head makes a mess of common sense. Disingenuous, evasive, loopy, inarticulate, perhaps Sharon should help America best by turning the Second Amendment solutions on herself.
Progressives like Reid use race to promote hate and manipulate uneducated blacks and Latins and other groups into believing that their socialist programs would help them.
The truth is just the opposite. Socialist programs create a plantation mentality that keeps blacks and others poor and enslaved.
INFORMED Americans, including blacks and Latins, are against Obamacare and the rest of the "help-the-poor" socialist/Marxist scams.
As we can see, the powerful progressive propaganda machine has invested millions to demonize Angle, and progressive operatives are lemmings, like packs of wild dogs, go in a feeding frenzy every time Angle opens her mouth!
The frenzy in demonizing Angle shows they fear Angle and, therefore, Angle can help us save Nevada and the U.S. from Obama, Reid, and the rest of the comrades bent on destroying our country through Marxist "help-the-poor" SCAMS like Obamacare.
o.k. if you want to play tit for tat. remember senator moynahan? he was on a ss commission in the early nineties and they came out as one of the plans as giving people the option to invest themselves. privatizing as you put it. his quote 'we should give people the opportunity to invest at least a portion of their ss tax. of course if we do this that will mean a republican majority forever'.
@jhamm999 so many problems with this. first, moynihan was not strictly a liberal -- her served in the nixon and ford admin. second, his plan called for a massive tax hike, a sharp cut in benefits and a payroll tax cut that would be temporary and then rise beyond the cut. still excited? third, he's dead. gingrich is alive and you say you support him. and yet he (dishonestly) used the idea of privatizing as a reason NOT to vote for mondale. explain.
@tishhead well nixon and ford weren't exactly conservatives either. and no,he came out in favor of the option to get out. btw i tried to fing newt's alleged remark concerning mondale i can't find it. clue me in.
@jhamm999 after paul wellstone died and was replaced by mondale in minn senate race, gingrich went on meet the press and accused mondale of favoring privatization and raising the retirement age. in fact, mondale chaired a commission that recommended those things but mondale wrote a very, very strongly worded dissent that specifically attacked the notion of privatization. this is typical of newt's character. check out the quotes from his 2nd wife the past few days.
@tishhead being that mondale is a liberal it would not surprise me that he wants to raise the retirement age. but it would surprise me if he wanted to privatise it. so if newt said that then he is wrong,unless he was trying to point out the double standard of the dems who wanted to do something to ss that they scolded the repubs for wanting to do.
@jhamm999 i'm not sure what being a liberal would have to do with raising the retirement age. but yes it would be very surprising to find out he favored privatizing, especially since the very report gingrich referred to clearly stated the opposite. but that's newt being newt. truly disgusting, even among repubs.
nice work by your girl sarah, btw. being a teacher apparently equals being a socialist or al qaeda or something. i'm sad to see her implode so early. i want her to run.
@tishhead because everytime you hear of reforming ss. the same ideas come from the left. raising the retirement age,raising taxes,cutting benefits. as far as sarah goes what i saw of the tape it looked like the little teacher was the protagonist there. sarah was simply trying to explain what she was doing. the snarky one was the 'teacher'.
@jhamm999 ss reform is actually simple. raise the cap so everyone is paying the same percentage into it. raising retirement age is worth looking at simply because life expectancy has changed greatly since SS began. as for sarah, she was the one who walked over and engaged, showing the mind-numbingly bad judgment that we've come to expect from her. and it is her obvious attitude toward teachers that will further damage her standing among independents.
@tishhead we have 65 trillion in unfunded liabilities from our entitlement programs. you can take all of the money from the rich and it still won't even come close. no,let the people under 45 opt out if they wish,the retirement age i'm not against raising,allow ss to grow at the rate of inflation,don't let the pols touch it.
@jhamm999 don't want to get started on this merry go round again. you want to kill SS without saying you're killing it. even crazy sharron knew enough to try to back away from her quote on that. SS has enough money on hand for 30 years and a raise in the cap would extend it through the baby-boom years. btw you with sharon on doing away with the EPA, forcing young rape victims to carry pregnancies to term? how about opposing psych testing of young gun criminals becuz it's a form of gun control?
@tishhead no,if ss dies it will be because of the gutless pols. agree on the epa. disagree on the rape provision. opposed to govt mandating psych exams. btw isn't it illegal to get a gun if you are a violent criminal anyway? kinda moot. how about reid's racist assertion that if your hispanic you shouldn't be a republican? i wonder if he told that to his sons hispanic opponent for the governors race.
@jhamm999 there shouldn't be an epa? i guess you think we don't have enough pollution? that might be the single most insane thing you have said yet. companies are going to police themselves, just like rand paul saying the mines should police themselves. wow. reid said he couldn't understand why a latino would be a republican. the only correction i would make to that is i could if the latino was a millionaire. otherwise, the repubs are a party that raises funds by demonizing latinos.
@tishhead what good has the epa done? boy they sure prevented that gulf oil spill by their hawkeye inspections huh? we didn't even have an epa till carter. also angle used to be a teacher,and she is for abolishing the dept of no education. good for her. that would save the taxpayers 70 billion a year. remember in 1995,the infamous govt shutdown? a news report from abc stated that only essential personnel of the dept of education and epa came to work. there were 98% and 95% layoffs.
@jhamm999 your logic, as usual, is stunning. first, it wasn't the EPA in charge of overseeing the wells, it was MMS. but like the EPA, the MMS was staffed under bush by nothing but people from the polluting industries. sort of like putting the mafia in charge of law enforcement. i imagine you think it would be better for polluting industries to police themsevles. brilliant!
@tishhead as usual libs go back to their default setting of blaming bush. oh yeah the epa doesn't have career people in the dept. it was completely unstaffed all these years until bush got in. what a moron!. the epa did not exist until carter in 1977as a sop to the enviro whack jobs like you who want to take us back where we live in huts and get our own food. gibbs was right about you guys.
@jhamm999 yes, when he puts polluters in charge of regulating pollution, we do blame him. just as the bush people were still blaming clinton after EIGHT YEARS in office. and oh yes, i believe the living in huts was part of the dem platform. also must have been the goal of those pinko socialists nixon and daddy bush when they signed the clean air acts.
you will literally do ANYTHING a huge corp tells you to, won't you? just use protection when they bend you over next time.
@tishhead like i said these were career people. but if you are right why didn;t obama get rid of them and put his own people in? hell he already has more czars the the russians did. blaming clinton? besides the disgrace he brought upon his presidency what did they talk about? face it big nanny govt is the problem not the answer.
@jhamm999 the "career people" aren't the ones making decisions. please be serious. obama has no more "czars" (a media made-up description) than bush did. as for blaming clinton, are you f-ing kidding me? they blamed him for 9-11, they talked about the "clinton recession" (not even technically true) for 8 years. the talking heads are still doing it. and he brought so much disgrace on the presidency that he left office with a 65 approval rate.
@tishhead he introduced them as this is my czar,dumbass!. he has 26 last i counted,bush had like 13. you do the math stephen hawking. one was a 9-11 truther to boot!. that gives you an insight to his soul right there. and yes in the campaign in 2000 they were talking then about we were slipping into a recession.
@jhamm999 the title czar is still a media creation. there is no one with that official title. the current count is 38 under obama, 31 under bush. but at the time your hero glenn beck started all this nonsense obama had fewer than bush. and the biggest jump in history was from clinton's 8 to bush's 31. i don't recall you righty nutjobs throwing a hissy fit then. we didn't actually make it into a recession in 2000 but that's not the pt. the pt. is bushies blaming clinton even at end of term.
@jhamm999 oh relax. was bill bennett, one of the big heroes on the right, circumventing the constitution when he was the "drug czar"? you guys talk about the constitution like it's sacred -- until you want to ignore it (as in bush's wiretapping and cybersnooping) or change it (as in the anti-brown 14th amendment nonsense).
@tishhead yes. as far as wiretapping it was set up to monitor incoming calls from another country,preferably one with ties to terrorism.anti- brown 14th amend.? it may surprise you to know that it,like all the rest of the amendments are not absolute. for instance we don't bestow citizenship rights to native americans. if a foreign diplomat's wife gives birth in the u.s. we don't make that child a citizen. so why should we make the child of a person who came across illegally a citizen?
@jhamm999 you know, of course, that people are being monitored within this country without probable cause. and most of the right is just fine with that. as for the 14th, there has never been a court that has ruled that babies born here aren't citizens. otherwise, why would your hysterical friends on the right be talking about amending it?
@jhamm999 those examples have not stopped millions upon millions of babies gaining instant citizenship by being born. there has never been a court decision that even called that right into question. the repubs are just using it to whip up their gullible base knowing full well they have NO chance of amending the constitution. what they do have a chance of is driving hispanics from the GOP in the same numbers that blacks have been driven away.
@tishhead speaking of being driven away,how about those independents that are leaving the dems in droves? also obama had a approval rating of 74% among hispanics now it is 54%. this may come as a surprise to you but there are a lot of hispanics that think illegal immigration is wrong and should be stopped.
@jhamm999 thanks again for reinforcing my pt. the hispanic vote was available to repubs. bush did decently with them. and many are for tightening the border. what they're not for is whipping up hysteria about fictional crime rates and the idiocy about the 14th amendment. that attitude is what turned calif into a solid blue state for a generation and the hispanic vote is growing every year. the indys will be back when they see whatever fundamentalist loon the repubs dredge up.
@tishhead bush got 44% in 2004,and he did what exactly to get them? how was i reinforcing your point? the narrative coming out of liberals today is if you get tough on the borders and crack down on the illegals today you lose hispanic support. that's baloney,unless you count la raza,which are a bunch of kooks anyway.
@jhamm999 he did so by proposing realistic immigration reform that understood you're not going to deport them all. and he never engaged in the kind of demonizing that's going on, trying to make it seem like they're all murderers and drug runners. he didn't talk about changing the constitution so they could throw babies out of the country. as i said, the obama admin is actually deporting more than bush was. but they're also advocating a rational approach. long term, this is suicide for the GOP.
@tishhead nobody is demonizing them like you stated. and as i said you don't have to change it to make it illegal. besides if you dep-ort the ones with the kids,don't you think,unless the kidfs are grown they will go with them?
@jhamm999 you got to be kidding. they talk about murder and kidnapping and leprosy and terror anchor babies. it's one of the great demonization campaigns in history. this may be news, but latinos are not idiots. they can distinguish between a legit policy debate and a campaign to portray illegals as disease-spreading madman killers. they know most illegals are just working their asses off to support families. and the GOP in the long run will pay a very, very high price for this.
@jhamm999 you yourself tried to defend both the leprosy and crime claims. lou dobbs was the big perpetrator of the leprosy claim, but others picked up on it. and the crime issue was used as the major selling point for 1070. the very idea that brown babies are such a threat that the repubs -- the party that created the 14th amendment -- would want to change it. like i said, latinos are not stupid. look what happened in calif after prop 187. there's the future of the GOP.
@tishhead no ,if you want to see the future talk to me after the elections. funny you still don't want to comment about reid. i'll say something,blacks and hispanics should all be republican or at least conservatives. most are pro-life,traditional marriage. they are being sold a bill of goods by the libs thet they need big govt to protect them from mean evil whitey.
@jhamm999 you guys have a chance to do well in this election, though you are letting some races slip away with nut cases like angle. but the gop and fox news, every day, are sending out the message non-whites do not belong. many in your own party are EXTREMELY alarmed by this. they see the writing on the wall. the 14th amendment idiocy, the mosque, it's all part of GOP's whites-only crusade. i am no fan of reid. part of me says i'd rather have schumer as the sen leader. but angle? insane.
@tishhead so i guess you won't be upset to learn that reid called for the mosque to not be built then? tere are 39 black candidates running for congress as repubs. how's that for a whites only party? 60-70% of americans think the mosque should be moved. and your man obama is a bit hypocritical also. wasn't he the one last year that said israel should not build more houses in jerusalem because it would offend the palestinians?
@jhamm999 reid being a spineless weasel is no surprise to me. i still prefer that to a stark, raving loon (check out her rant against black football uniforms being evil). i believe your total was the number running for nominations. most already have or will lose primaries and most of the rest will lose in nov. repubs have had zero blacks in either house for 2 congresses now. are you really comparing americans building a house of worship to an occupying force? sanity check.
@tishhead i have no idea what you are talking about with angle. one that already won is a guy that beat strom thurmond jr. in south carolina. contrast that with the dems keeping harold ford out of the primary against gillibrand in n.y. talk about needing a sanity check. in case you are a little weak in geography jerusalem is in israel.
@jhamm999 google angle and black uniforms. maybe even you can laugh at her like we have been for months. yes, the gop does have a chance to increase their black membership from 0 to 1. whoo-hoo! keep thinking the GOP is the rightful home for blacks and they don't have to change. and the 90 percent totals will keep rolling in year after year. matched soon by 70-80 percent latino votes. israeli rule over east jerusalem is not internationally recognized. there is no comparison to american citizens.
@tishhead yeah that is a little strange. but i've senn stranger things coming from the left. also how about reid in 1993 introducing a bill in the senate that would do away with the so called anchor babies provision?
@jhamm999 really? i'd be interested to learn about a senator or senate candidate from either party coming up with something stranger than satanic football jerseys. again, you don't have to convince me that reid is a weasel. but i don't think he ever suggested that a 15-year-old pregnant rape victim should "take lemons and make lemonade" or have the kid because the rape was part of god's plan. he also didn't say social security should be ended and then repeatedly claim that he never said it.
@tishhead ss. do you really run around that tree again? what you gave me was a news account. i would like to see it in full context. and she said black was regarded as bad luck as well. how about pelosi acting like joe mccarthy saying that the people funding the ads against the mosque should be investigated? i would rather have angle saying stuff about some jerseys that pelosi's crap. btw rasmussen has angle up by two. also howard dean has joined the chorus against building the mosque there.
@jhamm999 no i don't. it's not about SS. it's about her clearly making a statement on tape and then trying to claim she didn't. the woman is an idiot and a nut. and please show a little more honesty on pelosi. she merely said the funding for the anti-mosque mania should be transparent, just as the ADL is asking on funding for the mosque. the anti-mosque idiocy certainly fits the whites-only GOP. as someone once described the GOP, male, pale and stale.
@tishhead no she said quote ' i'm joining the others in calling for an investgation of the funding for the anti mosque forces'. quit making an excuse for her. your last part is laughably absurd. anti mosque idiocy? so you are calling howard dean an idiot now? or just a right wing extremist. no the dems are showing their true colors. they don't give a damn about the people who make this country work. they want to control the people. better red than dead i guess huh?
@jhamm999 you're going to pull a hamstring stretching that much. an investigation into where the funding is coming from. the issue is idiocy. i'll turn the tables. do bush's speechwriter and adman, who have ripped people for fighting the mosque, not give a damn about people who make the country work? and i love the repubs defending 9-11 families when they blocked the bill to aid first responders who were injured and sickened saving lives. there's your GOP true colors.
@tishhead who are you talking about? i do think it is rich that people like maureen dowd and libs who hated bush are now calling on him to come out and support the mosque. and yes the rhetoric coming from the leftie talking heads from msdnc is that people are doing this because of religious bigotry. really? o.k.; so i guess these same people won't bitch and moan if a school has a nativity scene in their christmas play. but they won't,they will get the aclu after them before you can blink.
@jhamm999 you don't see the difference between a church building a community center on their own land and a public endorsement of a specific religion in the public schools? really? and please educate yourself about what the repubs did to block aid to first responders from 9-11, those american heroes they love to associate themselves with. they blocked it to save tax loopholes for corporations. you must be so, so proud of them.
@tishhead you might want to read the 1st amendment before you talk like you know it. it says the congress shall make no law ESTABLISHING a religion. so showing a nativity scene in a school play is forcing people to believe in christianity how? as far as the bill you are referring to the dems set it up where it had to have a two thirds majority to pass because they would not allow a single repub amendment. hell even weiner says that.
@jhamm999 so, according to you, a public school teacher can tell her kids that jesus is the true savior and all other religions are false because he/she technically isn't establishing a religion. novel idea. on the bill, (a) why would anyone vote against it to begin with and (b) why would repubs want to stick poison pill amendments to try to kill it. if repubs can't agree to help first responders straight up, how can you defend that? and then they try to speak for 9/11 families?
@tishhead i didn't say that. although that would be correct. define the word establish for me as you see it. why did the dems make it where you had to get a two thirds majority? why didn't they say we'll vote on your amendments? they would vote them down anyway,so where is the problem?
@jhamm999 really, a teacher could talk about the superiority of christianity as long as they weren't actually forming a new church? so i assume a teacher of a different persuasion could talk about the superiority of islam or hinduism? why should religion be practiced anywhere but in the church? there is no defense for the repubs action. they played games with the health needs of the first responders and then they voted against them because corporate tax loopholes were more important.
@tishhead yes,just because someone is a teacher and if a student asks then sure. christianity,muslim,whatever. even atheism. the constitution is clear. the teacher cannot force someone to become a christian. however if the state decides to they can,as evidenced by the anglican church in england.
@jhamm999 that is one of the most bizarre things i have ever read in any of these rooms. if you think teachers can preach in the classroom, i don't where this discussion can go. it's like me saying the teachers can flunk their students if the parents are republicans. you are in angle-land on that one.
@jhamm999 that's because i never dreamed you would take the bait on the first scenario. curious to see how far you would go. apparently there is no limit. why do you people feel the need to spread your religion outside the church? is it a pathological condition? do you need therapy? everyone who wants (well except maybe muslims) can go to whatever church they want and pray their ass off. just leave the rest of us alone.
@tishhead where in the constitution does it say you have freedom of religion? if someone knocks on your door and asks you to go to their church say no. the difference between christianity and radical islam is we don't say convert or die.
@jhamm999 actually, the difference between christianity and islam in this country right now is that islam isn't trying to tell christians where they can build their churches.
@jhamm999 bigots in the union? no! shocking! if they force them to move, what a great victory for america that will be. a country founded by people trying to escape religious persecution engaging in religious persecution. wonderful. that ought to help when we try to convince the world's 1.5 billion muslims that we're not at war with their religion.
@tishhead there you go calling good hard working people names. just because they said if you move the mosque a few blocks down we will build. gov.patterson said he will donate govt land ten blocks down to build it,yet the imam says no. bridge building my ass. most muslims around the world know we are not at war with them just the extremists. and there is nothing we can do to change their minds. besides we were the ones attacked,why should we be the ones who need to compromise all the time?
@jhamm999 your entire mindset here is totally skewed. what is this, "we" and "they." this is a group of americans, just as american as the 9-11 widows, exercising their american rights. again, you people would have more credibility if you would speak just as loudly against those trying to block mosques elsewhere in the country or if you would call on repubs to pass the bill for aid to first responders. now, it seems a lot more like anti-muslim bias than concern for 9-11 families.
@tishhead uhhh 'we' being americans as you said trying to show the muslims around the world we are not at war with them. i would have a little more respect for the libs on this issue if they weren't so hostile to christians say about a manger scene at christmas at times square? but i bet you would be against that huh?
@jhamm999 it's not the biggest issue in the world, but, yes, the people who object are in the right. just as they would be in the right for protesting a muslim or hindu or jewish display in the public square. why do you people need to take your religion into the streets and schools? it's not like there's a shortage of churches in this country.
@jhamm999 it doesn't do me any harm. public nudity doesn't do me any harm either, but clearly it offends many people. it is, if in a small way, a public endorsement of religion and a specific religion. and again my question what is the need you people have for taking your religion out of your church. why is worshipping in your church somehow inadequate for you.
@tishhead not saying it is inadequate. just saying if you believe in freedom of speech as you do to defend the mosque then you should defend it for all faiths.
@jhamm999 actually, the mosque isn't a freedom of speech issue, it's a property issue (which you should be advocating). it's their property. all they want is to practice their religion and, in this case, extend an open hand to the community. it's not at all the same as creating a display in a public space. no one's telling the christians where they can or can't build a church.
@jhamm999 absolutely nowhere. you can talk about religion all you want til everybody moves away from you because you're annoying the hell out of them. but setting up a display on public lands is different. again, this is not something that matters that much to me, but when the ACLU fights it, they are unquestionably correct.
@tishhead ahh the anti christian liberties union. funny i don't hear them crying about our tax dollars going to this imam or the fact our tax dollars are helping rebuild mosques in the middle east. but let some high school valedictorian say how thankful they are for jesus for granting them the gift to get where they are today and they are there!!. it's to the point in school districts you can't even say christmas. it's happy holidays. or winter solstice. way to stand up for freedom.
@jhamm999 as soon as you point out any hypocrisy i'd be glad to discuss it. but if you are again going to compare a group building a church (or mosque) on land that they own with a display on public grounds, you are just wasting everyone's time. they are not the same thing. i think even you know that on some level.
@tishhead i already pointed out the hypocrisy of the aclu earlier. if by having a nativity scene in a school christmas play is violating the establishment clause,then why isn't giving tax dollars to rebuild mosques abroad a violation also? i gave you this earlier but i guess you forgot.
@jhamm999 it's a mildly interesting but irrelevant question. not being an expert, i would guess one big difference is that these mosques are being built in countries where islam is in fact the official state religion. we don't have one of those. again, i'm curious about this need you people have to take your worship out of your church. why isn't a church the proper place for religion?
@tishhead no there are some christians in the middle east. the ones that aren't dead. when it comes to using taxpayer money what difference does it make if islam is the state religion? why does our money have to go there to build mosques? if a dime went to build a church here you would be screaming. as i said b4 a church is and that is where people go to worship. why is it a crime if someone wants to express his faith in public?
@jhamm999 because there are "some" christians doesn't mean islam isn't the official state religion. you can argue about the wisdom of spending the money but it has nothing to do with establishing or endorsing a religion in this country. it is not a first amendment issue. an individual expressing faith is far different from a publicly-endorsed display. again, why isn't worshipping in church enough for you?
@tishhead asked and answered. so that would mean since you think it is okay to spend tax dollars to build mosques oversees it would be okay to spend tax dollars here to build a church or synagogue. after all you wouldn't want to be accused of having a double standard would you? btw i hear boxer and brown are in trouble in california.
@jhamm999 actually it has been asked 6 or 7 times and hasn't come close to being answered. why can't you just pray in church? what pathological need do you have to impose that on other people? building a mosque in another country that has an official state religion is so obviously different than endorsing religion in a secular state that it's ridiculous for you to even ask. calif election is close but been awhile since we elected an anti-choice candidate (fiorina).
@jhamm999 no, i don't because you haven't even taken the first step to explaining this phenomenon. no one is inhibiting your ability to worship in your church, to say you individual prayers or to discuss your beliefs. and yet you people have a pathological need to take it into the public square, to get some sort of public endorsement , to proclaim that the "US is a christian nation." it appears to be a sickness, like a child begging for approval. i find it more amusing than offensive.
@tishhead and i find that statement imbecilic. i already outed you as a hypocrite. you think it's okay for tax dollars to go abroad to build mosques but let them do the same thing here for christian churches and libs will yell separation of church and state all day long.
@jhamm999 and yet with 7 or 8 chances, you can't even formulate a sentence to explain why worshipping in your church isn't good enough for you. a time and a place, dude, a time and a place. as for the mosques, i'm baffled why you can't see the difference. almost all of these mosques were either destroyed by us or are historical buildings, some more than 1,000 years old. and no i would not object to public funds being used to restore the old north church or a historic cathedral.
@tishhead i can't believe you are this thick. worship in your church good. express your faith in public good. simple enough? 'a time and a place'. so in other words you feel the need to put us christians 'in our rightful place'. no thanks i prefer to ride in the front of the bus. we did not destroy any mosques in the war. those were your darling terrorists.
@jhamm999 so i suppose we should give equal space in every public setting to christians, jews, hindus, mormons, jeohovah's witnesses, scientologists, sikhs, muslims, the hundreds of native american religions, wiccans, atheists and all the other sects i've forgotten. each one should get their own display. we can close the parks and stop traffic, i guess. we destroyed no mosques? what? we dropped thousands of tons of bombs and managed to miss them? seriously, get a checkup, i'm worried about you.
@tishhead considering i was there in iraq i think i'll pass on the checkup.on holidays concerning those faiths i don't have a problem with them displayin a menorrah,a cross or anything else. i thought you libs preach tolerance to us? guess not. btw when are you going to 'pummel' me with your 'facts' about gore winning florida? i need a good laugh.
@jhamm999 if you served, thank you for your service. however, that doesn't excuse making one of the most blindingly idiotic statements ever recorded in the english language. we didn't destory any mosques with our "shock and awe" or the massive bombing in afghan. you can still pull that chess piece back if you want.
and i'm not talking a cross or a menorrah. i'm talking a display as big as your manger for every one of the 300 or 400 religions in this country. and the atheists.
@tishhead actually a manger scene is small. as i said i witnessed it first hand. at the first strike it was surgically done,we were specifically targeting where we thought saddam was.
@jhamm999 what a good little propaganda consumer you are. we rain down thousands of tons on a huge city, but we don't kill civilians, we don't wipe out hospitals and we don't level mosques. man, that's impressive! fictional, but impressive. i suppose you bought the jessica lynch story and the pat tillman story too?
so whatever the christians get, EVERY other religion and the atheists get too? do we put them all in the same park or all over the city?
@jhamm999 actually, even the GOP realizes the trouble they're in seen as a party of only white males. so they desperately try to come up with a different look and they produce national laughingstocks like sarah palin, michelle bachmann, sharron angle, michael steele and bobby jindal. keep thinking you don't have to change your message and policies. in this election, people are pissed so you may do ok, though not as well as you should. the future belongs to the dems, though.
@tishhead and what happened in 1994 when they took over and controlle dboth branches for 12 years?. you can try to console yourself all you want but the truth is the american people are not buying what the lefties are selling.
@jhamm999 and what happened 2 years after the great repub victory? clinton kicked your ass to hell and back. and what happened 4 years after that? gore beat bush by 500,000 votes and bush needed to be installed by a supreme court coup. at any rate, the demographics are way different now than in 94 and they'll be diff still in 2, 4 or 6 more years. keep telling yourself you don't need anything but old white votes. i love it.
@tishhead and how did clinton do that? what by signing the welfare reform bill? or the cap gains tax cut? no,no i know signing a balanced budget!. yeah that'll show those rascally republicans. heh,heh. in 2000 i see you still cling to that old myth. bush won florida,in every recount,gore never led. scotus said that fla. supremes went against the law and that the sec of state can go ahead and put the deadline in effect which she did. still with the racial politics huh?
@jhamm999 you are such a good hannity puppet. whatever good happened in the clinton admin was because of the repubs. absolute rot. clinton's economic package including tax hikes was already slashing the deficit. and clinton CAMPAIGNED on welfare reform. you will literally believe anything won't you? as for 2000, if you want to go there be prepared to be pummelled with facts. there is ZERO DOUBT that gore won fla and the SC staged a coup. if you actually read, it's not even debatable.
@tishhead no i give clinton credit for signing the bills. his first budget in 1993 when the dems were in control raised taxes a total of 17 billion. because the rich did not get rich by being stupid they sheltered more of their money. clinton did not campaign on welfare reform,get real. if he did he would never got the nomination. as for 2000. bring it on.
@jhamm999 you don't remember the phrase "ending welfare as we know it." that was from clinton long before slimeball newt ever entered the picture. clinton raised taxes on the rich and we produced 22 million new jobs and a surplus. bush lowered taxes on the rich and we produced 3 million new jobs (not even keeping up with population growth) and a massive deficit. for 2000, i will have to send you a message. i have WAY too much to post here. this will be easiest argument i have EVER had.
@tishhead so if there is a correlation on raising taxes and spurring the economy,tell me why when reagan lowered the top marginal rates from 70% to 28% he created 21 million jobs? same with jfk.
@jhamm999 actually i checked the labor bureaun numbers. not good for you: kennedy-johnson 8 years, plus 15.8 million, nixon-ford 8 years plus 11.3, carter 4 years plus 10.3, reagan-bush 12 years plus 18.7, clinton 8 years plus 22.7, bush 8 years plus 1 (pathetic), obama less than 2 years minus 3. totals repubs 28 years plus 31, dems 22 years plus 45.8. 14 million more jobs in 6 fewer years, even with the aftermath of the bush recession/depression.
@tishhead okay. if you remember the point i was making was jfk,reagan,even clinton cut taxes and created jobs. clinton signed a cap gains tax cut. bush had periods of good employment after his cuts. in august 2007,the unemployment rate was 4.5%. now obama and the looming tax raises next year the economy is tanking.
@jhamm999 check out the quotes from repubs when clinton passed the 93 package with zero repub votes. they were all predicting recession, depression, the end of jobs. now come and say it. they were wrong. they were wrong in a huge way. and of course to suggest the economy started tanking under obama is ridiculous. look at the last 8 months under bush. we have made progress in almost every area since obama came in. slow, but progress.
@tishhead obama came into office with an unemployment rate of 7.3%. it is now 9.5%. bush's last budget deficit was 261 billion. obama's deficit is 1.4 trillion this year. you call that progress? only if you want to progress to the status of greece.
@jhamm999 actually it was 7.7, by the time his stimulus was passed it was 8.2 and by the time it took full effect it was already about 9. guess what happens in a near depression? the deficit goes up. more spending is required automatically as people are laid off and fall into poverty and tax revenues go down. of course the repubs response is to cut taxes for the rich which would EXPLODE the deficit.
@tishhead that can't be true! why obama said himself that if the stimulus passed unemp. would not go above 8.%,and our dear leader would not mislead us would he? nice try though. looking forward to your pummeling of me as to how gore got more votes than bush in florida.lol.
@jhamm999 let's see he was wrong by a pt or 2. your side predicted a massive depression on clinton's tax hike and instead got the largest expansion in history. which one was closer? and your side is so concerned about deficits that they want to enact a policy that will lead to the single biggest expansion of the deficit in recorded history. btw if the tax cut expires, it will be a repub tax hike, not a dem one. it was the repubs who passed the bill that set the expiration date.
@tishhead obviously you have a masters in revisionist history. a point or two? lol. face it he knows nothing about the private sector and how the markets work. remember clinton only got 17 billion from his tax hike.before the repubs got into office they were predicting deficits of 200 billion as far as the eye can see. that was before the repubs got the purse strings. a cap gains cut and welfare reform later and bingo. surpluses.
@jhamm999 welfare reform had virtually no impact on the economy and, again, it was something clinton campaigned on. the cap gains cut didn't go into effect until 1998, by which time clinton had already whittled the reagan-bush deficit to nearly nothing. 92.5 percent of the deficit was gone by the time cap gains went into effect. i would say nice try but i would be lying.
@tishhead you forget as a provision in the welfare reform bill,it had a two year moratorium. you were cut off after 2 years if u did not have a job. as far as your claim about the cap gains cut let me show you why your teacher told you to do your homework. goes into effect in 1998,. fy 98-surplus 69.2. fy 99-surplus 122.7. fy200-230.0 billion. now what was that about tax cuts blowing a hole in the deficit?
@jhamm999 welfare had a microscopic, if any, effect on the deficit. you didn't address my main pt, that clinton essentially eliminated the huge deficit before cap gains even took effect. as for tax cuts blowing a hole in the deficit, see the bush administration. how to make a massive surplus disappear. and now they want to do it again. even conservatives like greenspan say it's insanity.
@tishhead no,greenspan says tax cuts should be offset by spending cuts,and i agree. the point is some tax cuts do not pay for themselves and some do. when cap gains are cut the revenue to the govt goes up. that is because you incentivize businesses to put their capital to work creating jobs. more tax payers more revenue to the govt. quite simple really. we were still running a deficit until the later years in the nineties. don't forget that the congress controls the purse strings.
@jhamm999 greenspan said "they should follow the law and let them expire." there's not much wiggle room there. the kind of cuts that would be needed to offset those cuts would contract the economy into a depression. the argument for tax cuts to the top is job creation. that clearly failed in the bush admin and failed in a big way. the key is to put money in middle class pockets and let them spend. you build from the ground up, not the top down.
@tishhead he said they should be paid for. you need to check the irs figures as to who pays the taxes in america. the top half pay 97% AND THE BOTTOM HALF PAY 3%. also how do you explain that in august in 2007 the unemployment rate was 4.55 down from 7% before the tax cuts? the problem as usual,is spending. if a country could spend it's way into prosperity greece would be #1.
@jhamm999 look at jobs created. we were sold the tax cuts on the idea that they would create jobs. they didn't. job creation during the bush years was pathetic. look at the percentage of income paid in taxes not overall taxes. as warren buffett said, i pay a lower rate than my secretary. when you are in recession and businesses aren't spending and consumers aren't spending, the govt HAS to spend. there is no choice.
Looks like the rightwingers finally accomplished their mission of "Second Ammendment Solutions" to get the congress they want by shooting Gabrielle Giffords in the head. Congratulations FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter. I would wish the same thing upon them but some of us Americans actually have to continue acting sane or this nation will fall apart.
oeyesea 1 year ago 6
@oeyesea well said
nagrimes 1 year ago
Everybody .. stop distorting her comments with what she really ment. Tune into to fox news and see what she was supose to mean first next time.
ETericET 1 year ago
@ETericET Yeah, stop distorting her comments, when we have audio and video of her saying it. We don't need Fox News to interpret and do our thinking for us.
rakrobn 1 year ago
Why watch a person who feels no pain?
benfmo 1 year ago
by God, Sharron Angle is going to win!
oddsox1919 1 year ago
@oddsox1919 by god, maybe. by the actual voters, not so much
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead ah, yes, Tishhead. I'm wearing egg on my face today. Botched my local predictions, too. Seriously considering retirement from political prognostication.
oddsox1919 1 year ago
Sharron Angle is mental. If she's elected people will get what they deserve.
zzzoe11 1 year ago
Put this video on failblog.org as "Life FAIL."
ArmageddonWillStrike 1 year ago
If any of you are still in doubt about Reid winning, check this out. A June 9, 2010, Rasmussen Reports post-primary poll showed her leading incumbent Senator Reid by a margin of 50% to 39%. A July 2010 poll showed Senator Reid leading Angle by 7 points. The change of margin, 18% in less than a month, IS THE LARGEST IN SENATE ELECTIONS HISTORY. don't get me wrong, Reid isn't my first choice. he's too moderate for me, i want a true progressive. Democrats need to get as radical as the tea party :)
skyhighkyguy 1 year ago
hahaha what the hell, do 90% of you exclusively watch fox news? why all the hatred toward these guys? angle is gonna lose, simple as that. people dont go from a sane-moderate politician (who happens to be the senate majority leader) to a crazy far-far-far-right-winger overnight. if she had one insane position she might still have a chance, but nearly everything she wants to do is crazy, look at HER OWN DAMN WEBSITE. she's as far right as you can get, on everything.
skyhighkyguy 1 year ago
...these people, everyone, are absolutely " in the tank" for the Democrat Party. Are they genuinely psychophants? Are they getting paid to spout this crap? Yeah, I guess they are, huh?
bry1399 1 year ago
I think Ill watch MSNBC on the evening of November 2. The thought of watching egg all over thier faces while swallowing the main dish of Crow along with the shocked "WTF just HAPPENED!?!? expressions will be just too tempting to resist.
jotm1 1 year ago
@jotm1 Must be a nice break after spending the last two years in the fetal position.
SmallpoxRot 1 year ago
This show and these people are disgusting. Combined IQ of about 60. Why not use your platform to educate and enlighten instead of twist and subvert? Oh, I know, it is part of your agenda. Glad I stopped watching all mainstream media shows.
mistyandscooby 1 year ago
Chris Matthews, enjoy your last year on MSNBC, you yap-trap. You belong in the vanguard of an 8 person gay NAMBA protest. What color are your wife's panties that you're wearing. What a freaking complaining machine. Chris you would do a bacteria count on the milk of human kindness!! Whining bitch!!
revealer007 1 year ago
@revealer007 I think you mean the conservative group NAMBLA. Try getting your insults right, dummy.
SmallpoxRot 1 year ago
The embarassment will be on these pointy-hat wearing democrats on November 2nd, National Eviction Day. Instead of being embarassed to send Sharon Angle to Washington, you guys would rather be proud to send a senator whose responsible for record unemployment in your state. Talk about mental cases, look in the mirror MSNBC and pathetic Reid supporters. You and your Prince Harry are going the way of the Dinosaur. We'll get your unemployment back to single digits and you can thank us NOT Obama.
revealer007 1 year ago
Yeah right you freakin retard (including DemRapidRespone) "I would rather have 100 percent unemployment with Harry Reid than have someone who "embarass me" as my Senator?!! WTF! All you ass-clowns should be embarrased by the pathetic spineless, idealistic-driven performance of "Barely Reid." To not be embarassed simply points to uninformed democratic-kool-aid drinking panty wearing sheep.
revealer007 1 year ago
"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure." Jefferson
savedslave 1 year ago
Oh, we can't disrupt the apple cart! These goons want us to keep business as usual? Please! Don't these communists know WHY our Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment?
joe80dman 1 year ago
Right-wing nuts: armed, dangerous and insane.
ohce 1 year ago
@ohce Insane? Dangerous? I think people who arent outraged with both political parties & all the corruption r dangerous & insane. By naively going along for the ride to hell that our gov is taking us empowers he gov more. People have just been conditioned to not care about politics. Those that actually support the "Progressive" Imperialistic, War mongering, Crony Capitalist empire we have become r the scary ones. They cant seem to c thru the propaganda. & dont revere the wisdom of our founders.
savedslave 1 year ago
Progressives demonizing Angle have helped conviced many to vote for her.
The more progressives demonize Sharron Angle, the more they confirm that Sharron Angle will be able to help us defend ourselves -- and our children and grandchildren -- from Obama, Reid and Pelosi and their job-killing, economy-killing, freedom-killing scams like Obamacare and cap and trade.
The more people learn about what Sharron REALLY stands for and why, the more votes she will eventually get.
We'll support Angle!
Antonio33s 1 year ago
@Antonio33s I'm sorry to dissapoint you but what Angle REALLY stands for is unconstitutional. She wants to give the federal government total control over individual's civil liberties while giving multinational corporations freedom to do whatever they want regardless of how harmful it may be for society as a whole. Her doctrine is purely religious in nature and she admits it. It's dangerous to have a person such as this in the government. Sorry but you are wrong.
derekxnl 1 year ago
@derekxnl What civil liberties is she planning on infringing upon? I am so sick of politicians & other people supporting laws to try to control the morals of others. If there is no victim then there is no crime right? I dont have a problem with a candidate declaring their beliefs & how that will affect their agenda though, the Founders were big on Christianity being essential to our success. What kind of freedoms r u worried she will let multinational corporations abuse?
savedslave 1 year ago
@Antonio33s P.S. When will Republicans stop demonizing Obama? Hypocrites.
derekxnl 1 year ago
I love when the media attacks non-politicians who say what many think and feel, but won't say in order to get "the vote". Lying is not a virtue. PC is not a virtue. It is a disease. It is a cancer. Andthat is what is wrong with Washington. Electing lying, deceitful politicians over honest American citizens with real values and real beliefs is FUCKED UP. How far we have moved from our founders. Our founders were the greatest collection of people on Earth EVER.
666sigma 1 year ago
@666sigma
I am just wondering who is the "non-politician" you are referring to? If you are speaking of Sharon Angle, she has been a politician since 1998, albeit a small time politician: A member of Nevada State Assembly.
If you think she is of sound mind, google the word "Criminon". It is a church of scientology program for rehabilitating prisoners using L. Ron Hubbard's teachings. Sharon Angle sponsored legislation for placing this program in women's prisons in Nevada, in 2003.
ShubieChris 1 year ago
@ShubieChris
Pick the exception and not the rule and generalize. Harry Reid said it was "his job" to create jobs. Since when did we become communist and since when did communism do a good job of creating jobs and wealth? Every sngle economic problem in the US was CAUSED by the Federal Government including Wall Street's gambling. We are stiffling small business in favor of Wall Street, the banks, the lawyers, the unions and government. No wonder we are fucked.
666sigma 1 year ago
Another traitor to the people.
fusermia327 1 year ago
I heard her say it & I appreciate Joe Scarborough for his response. I fear my Tea Party friends, however, are perhaps just as crazy as Angle. The friends I have are successful people who have not been adversely affected by the economic downturn, but have grown extremely fearful of the future. They are ardent fans of Glenn Beck and FOX News.
Stonesdoor 1 year ago
"Let's look at a race that's actually gonna be close."
Check the polls, LOL
NicPap12 1 year ago
CHRIS MATTHEWS IS A JOKE - A LIB HACK FROM WAAAAY BACK - I SUPPOSE HE HAS A THRILL RUNNING UP HIS ASS! HE OUGHT TO HAVE A SHOE SHOVED IN IT!
thevoiceisbydon 1 year ago
@thevoiceisbydon You are the idiot....seriously.
dakotajoman 1 year ago
@thevoiceisbydon Nothing says idiot like all caps!
ohce 1 year ago
Comment removed
thevoiceisbydon 1 year ago
MSNBC progressive opperatives professional?! This race is over?! Only the Orwellian world of progressives -- in which good is evil, sin is virtue, left is right, war is peace!
The fact that MSNBC progressive opperatives demonize Angle demonstrates that Angle is great for our country. Unlike Reid, she is right on most issues and she's a smart, courageous, honest and patriotic American. The more progressives demonize her, the more we love her.
We support Sharron Angle!
Antonio33s 1 year ago 5
@Antonio33s the guy who said it was over was joe scarborough. that's your idea of a progressive?
tishhead 1 year ago
@Antonio33s You do know Scarborough is a Republican right? He was part of the Republican Revolution in Congress in 1994.
AndyH3000 1 year ago
Millions have been invested to demonize Angle? That's completely unnecessary. 2 bucks for a newspaper is all that's needed. Every bizarre "idea" that spills out of her head makes a mess of common sense. Disingenuous, evasive, loopy, inarticulate, perhaps Sharon should help America best by turning the Second Amendment solutions on herself.
BluntRapture 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Reid is a RACIST.
Progressives like Reid use race to promote hate and manipulate uneducated blacks and Latins and other groups into believing that their socialist programs would help them.
The truth is just the opposite. Socialist programs create a plantation mentality that keeps blacks and others poor and enslaved.
INFORMED Americans, including blacks and Latins, are against Obamacare and the rest of the "help-the-poor" socialist/Marxist scams.
Another reason to vote for Angle!
Antonio33s 1 year ago
As we can see, the powerful progressive propaganda machine has invested millions to demonize Angle, and progressive operatives are lemmings, like packs of wild dogs, go in a feeding frenzy every time Angle opens her mouth!
The frenzy in demonizing Angle shows they fear Angle and, therefore, Angle can help us save Nevada and the U.S. from Obama, Reid, and the rest of the comrades bent on destroying our country through Marxist "help-the-poor" SCAMS like Obamacare.
We'll vote for Angle!
Antonio33s 1 year ago 6
@Antonio33s well said. liberals do attack what they fear. that;s why the sexism to pallin as well.
jhamm999 1 year ago
o.k. if you want to play tit for tat. remember senator moynahan? he was on a ss commission in the early nineties and they came out as one of the plans as giving people the option to invest themselves. privatizing as you put it. his quote 'we should give people the opportunity to invest at least a portion of their ss tax. of course if we do this that will mean a republican majority forever'.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 your point?
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead meaning that if even a liberal senator as moynihan can see the light why can't you?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 so many problems with this. first, moynihan was not strictly a liberal -- her served in the nixon and ford admin. second, his plan called for a massive tax hike, a sharp cut in benefits and a payroll tax cut that would be temporary and then rise beyond the cut. still excited? third, he's dead. gingrich is alive and you say you support him. and yet he (dishonestly) used the idea of privatizing as a reason NOT to vote for mondale. explain.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead well nixon and ford weren't exactly conservatives either. and no,he came out in favor of the option to get out. btw i tried to fing newt's alleged remark concerning mondale i can't find it. clue me in.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 after paul wellstone died and was replaced by mondale in minn senate race, gingrich went on meet the press and accused mondale of favoring privatization and raising the retirement age. in fact, mondale chaired a commission that recommended those things but mondale wrote a very, very strongly worded dissent that specifically attacked the notion of privatization. this is typical of newt's character. check out the quotes from his 2nd wife the past few days.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead being that mondale is a liberal it would not surprise me that he wants to raise the retirement age. but it would surprise me if he wanted to privatise it. so if newt said that then he is wrong,unless he was trying to point out the double standard of the dems who wanted to do something to ss that they scolded the repubs for wanting to do.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 i'm not sure what being a liberal would have to do with raising the retirement age. but yes it would be very surprising to find out he favored privatizing, especially since the very report gingrich referred to clearly stated the opposite. but that's newt being newt. truly disgusting, even among repubs.
nice work by your girl sarah, btw. being a teacher apparently equals being a socialist or al qaeda or something. i'm sad to see her implode so early. i want her to run.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead because everytime you hear of reforming ss. the same ideas come from the left. raising the retirement age,raising taxes,cutting benefits. as far as sarah goes what i saw of the tape it looked like the little teacher was the protagonist there. sarah was simply trying to explain what she was doing. the snarky one was the 'teacher'.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 ss reform is actually simple. raise the cap so everyone is paying the same percentage into it. raising retirement age is worth looking at simply because life expectancy has changed greatly since SS began. as for sarah, she was the one who walked over and engaged, showing the mind-numbingly bad judgment that we've come to expect from her. and it is her obvious attitude toward teachers that will further damage her standing among independents.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead we have 65 trillion in unfunded liabilities from our entitlement programs. you can take all of the money from the rich and it still won't even come close. no,let the people under 45 opt out if they wish,the retirement age i'm not against raising,allow ss to grow at the rate of inflation,don't let the pols touch it.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 don't want to get started on this merry go round again. you want to kill SS without saying you're killing it. even crazy sharron knew enough to try to back away from her quote on that. SS has enough money on hand for 30 years and a raise in the cap would extend it through the baby-boom years. btw you with sharon on doing away with the EPA, forcing young rape victims to carry pregnancies to term? how about opposing psych testing of young gun criminals becuz it's a form of gun control?
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead no,if ss dies it will be because of the gutless pols. agree on the epa. disagree on the rape provision. opposed to govt mandating psych exams. btw isn't it illegal to get a gun if you are a violent criminal anyway? kinda moot. how about reid's racist assertion that if your hispanic you shouldn't be a republican? i wonder if he told that to his sons hispanic opponent for the governors race.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 there shouldn't be an epa? i guess you think we don't have enough pollution? that might be the single most insane thing you have said yet. companies are going to police themselves, just like rand paul saying the mines should police themselves. wow. reid said he couldn't understand why a latino would be a republican. the only correction i would make to that is i could if the latino was a millionaire. otherwise, the repubs are a party that raises funds by demonizing latinos.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead what good has the epa done? boy they sure prevented that gulf oil spill by their hawkeye inspections huh? we didn't even have an epa till carter. also angle used to be a teacher,and she is for abolishing the dept of no education. good for her. that would save the taxpayers 70 billion a year. remember in 1995,the infamous govt shutdown? a news report from abc stated that only essential personnel of the dept of education and epa came to work. there were 98% and 95% layoffs.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 your logic, as usual, is stunning. first, it wasn't the EPA in charge of overseeing the wells, it was MMS. but like the EPA, the MMS was staffed under bush by nothing but people from the polluting industries. sort of like putting the mafia in charge of law enforcement. i imagine you think it would be better for polluting industries to police themsevles. brilliant!
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead as usual libs go back to their default setting of blaming bush. oh yeah the epa doesn't have career people in the dept. it was completely unstaffed all these years until bush got in. what a moron!. the epa did not exist until carter in 1977as a sop to the enviro whack jobs like you who want to take us back where we live in huts and get our own food. gibbs was right about you guys.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 yes, when he puts polluters in charge of regulating pollution, we do blame him. just as the bush people were still blaming clinton after EIGHT YEARS in office. and oh yes, i believe the living in huts was part of the dem platform. also must have been the goal of those pinko socialists nixon and daddy bush when they signed the clean air acts.
you will literally do ANYTHING a huge corp tells you to, won't you? just use protection when they bend you over next time.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead like i said these were career people. but if you are right why didn;t obama get rid of them and put his own people in? hell he already has more czars the the russians did. blaming clinton? besides the disgrace he brought upon his presidency what did they talk about? face it big nanny govt is the problem not the answer.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 the "career people" aren't the ones making decisions. please be serious. obama has no more "czars" (a media made-up description) than bush did. as for blaming clinton, are you f-ing kidding me? they blamed him for 9-11, they talked about the "clinton recession" (not even technically true) for 8 years. the talking heads are still doing it. and he brought so much disgrace on the presidency that he left office with a 65 approval rate.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead he introduced them as this is my czar,dumbass!. he has 26 last i counted,bush had like 13. you do the math stephen hawking. one was a 9-11 truther to boot!. that gives you an insight to his soul right there. and yes in the campaign in 2000 they were talking then about we were slipping into a recession.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 the title czar is still a media creation. there is no one with that official title. the current count is 38 under obama, 31 under bush. but at the time your hero glenn beck started all this nonsense obama had fewer than bush. and the biggest jump in history was from clinton's 8 to bush's 31. i don't recall you righty nutjobs throwing a hissy fit then. we didn't actually make it into a recession in 2000 but that's not the pt. the pt. is bushies blaming clinton even at end of term.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead actually as far as i was concerned i did. unaccountable people with that much power cicumvent the constitution as far as i'm concerned.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 oh relax. was bill bennett, one of the big heroes on the right, circumventing the constitution when he was the "drug czar"? you guys talk about the constitution like it's sacred -- until you want to ignore it (as in bush's wiretapping and cybersnooping) or change it (as in the anti-brown 14th amendment nonsense).
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead yes. as far as wiretapping it was set up to monitor incoming calls from another country,preferably one with ties to terrorism.anti- brown 14th amend.? it may surprise you to know that it,like all the rest of the amendments are not absolute. for instance we don't bestow citizenship rights to native americans. if a foreign diplomat's wife gives birth in the u.s. we don't make that child a citizen. so why should we make the child of a person who came across illegally a citizen?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you know, of course, that people are being monitored within this country without probable cause. and most of the right is just fine with that. as for the 14th, there has never been a court that has ruled that babies born here aren't citizens. otherwise, why would your hysterical friends on the right be talking about amending it?
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead because theu don't understand that you don't have to. otherwise the examples i gave to you before would not hold up.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 those examples have not stopped millions upon millions of babies gaining instant citizenship by being born. there has never been a court decision that even called that right into question. the repubs are just using it to whip up their gullible base knowing full well they have NO chance of amending the constitution. what they do have a chance of is driving hispanics from the GOP in the same numbers that blacks have been driven away.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead speaking of being driven away,how about those independents that are leaving the dems in droves? also obama had a approval rating of 74% among hispanics now it is 54%. this may come as a surprise to you but there are a lot of hispanics that think illegal immigration is wrong and should be stopped.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 thanks again for reinforcing my pt. the hispanic vote was available to repubs. bush did decently with them. and many are for tightening the border. what they're not for is whipping up hysteria about fictional crime rates and the idiocy about the 14th amendment. that attitude is what turned calif into a solid blue state for a generation and the hispanic vote is growing every year. the indys will be back when they see whatever fundamentalist loon the repubs dredge up.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead bush got 44% in 2004,and he did what exactly to get them? how was i reinforcing your point? the narrative coming out of liberals today is if you get tough on the borders and crack down on the illegals today you lose hispanic support. that's baloney,unless you count la raza,which are a bunch of kooks anyway.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 he did so by proposing realistic immigration reform that understood you're not going to deport them all. and he never engaged in the kind of demonizing that's going on, trying to make it seem like they're all murderers and drug runners. he didn't talk about changing the constitution so they could throw babies out of the country. as i said, the obama admin is actually deporting more than bush was. but they're also advocating a rational approach. long term, this is suicide for the GOP.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead nobody is demonizing them like you stated. and as i said you don't have to change it to make it illegal. besides if you dep-ort the ones with the kids,don't you think,unless the kidfs are grown they will go with them?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you got to be kidding. they talk about murder and kidnapping and leprosy and terror anchor babies. it's one of the great demonization campaigns in history. this may be news, but latinos are not idiots. they can distinguish between a legit policy debate and a campaign to portray illegals as disease-spreading madman killers. they know most illegals are just working their asses off to support families. and the GOP in the long run will pay a very, very high price for this.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead give me one conservative who said what you claim. as far as bigotry you might want to check reid's statements i gave you.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you yourself tried to defend both the leprosy and crime claims. lou dobbs was the big perpetrator of the leprosy claim, but others picked up on it. and the crime issue was used as the major selling point for 1070. the very idea that brown babies are such a threat that the repubs -- the party that created the 14th amendment -- would want to change it. like i said, latinos are not stupid. look what happened in calif after prop 187. there's the future of the GOP.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead no ,if you want to see the future talk to me after the elections. funny you still don't want to comment about reid. i'll say something,blacks and hispanics should all be republican or at least conservatives. most are pro-life,traditional marriage. they are being sold a bill of goods by the libs thet they need big govt to protect them from mean evil whitey.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you guys have a chance to do well in this election, though you are letting some races slip away with nut cases like angle. but the gop and fox news, every day, are sending out the message non-whites do not belong. many in your own party are EXTREMELY alarmed by this. they see the writing on the wall. the 14th amendment idiocy, the mosque, it's all part of GOP's whites-only crusade. i am no fan of reid. part of me says i'd rather have schumer as the sen leader. but angle? insane.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead so i guess you won't be upset to learn that reid called for the mosque to not be built then? tere are 39 black candidates running for congress as repubs. how's that for a whites only party? 60-70% of americans think the mosque should be moved. and your man obama is a bit hypocritical also. wasn't he the one last year that said israel should not build more houses in jerusalem because it would offend the palestinians?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 reid being a spineless weasel is no surprise to me. i still prefer that to a stark, raving loon (check out her rant against black football uniforms being evil). i believe your total was the number running for nominations. most already have or will lose primaries and most of the rest will lose in nov. repubs have had zero blacks in either house for 2 congresses now. are you really comparing americans building a house of worship to an occupying force? sanity check.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead i have no idea what you are talking about with angle. one that already won is a guy that beat strom thurmond jr. in south carolina. contrast that with the dems keeping harold ford out of the primary against gillibrand in n.y. talk about needing a sanity check. in case you are a little weak in geography jerusalem is in israel.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 google angle and black uniforms. maybe even you can laugh at her like we have been for months. yes, the gop does have a chance to increase their black membership from 0 to 1. whoo-hoo! keep thinking the GOP is the rightful home for blacks and they don't have to change. and the 90 percent totals will keep rolling in year after year. matched soon by 70-80 percent latino votes. israeli rule over east jerusalem is not internationally recognized. there is no comparison to american citizens.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead yeah that is a little strange. but i've senn stranger things coming from the left. also how about reid in 1993 introducing a bill in the senate that would do away with the so called anchor babies provision?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 really? i'd be interested to learn about a senator or senate candidate from either party coming up with something stranger than satanic football jerseys. again, you don't have to convince me that reid is a weasel. but i don't think he ever suggested that a 15-year-old pregnant rape victim should "take lemons and make lemonade" or have the kid because the rape was part of god's plan. he also didn't say social security should be ended and then repeatedly claim that he never said it.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead ss. do you really run around that tree again? what you gave me was a news account. i would like to see it in full context. and she said black was regarded as bad luck as well. how about pelosi acting like joe mccarthy saying that the people funding the ads against the mosque should be investigated? i would rather have angle saying stuff about some jerseys that pelosi's crap. btw rasmussen has angle up by two. also howard dean has joined the chorus against building the mosque there.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 no i don't. it's not about SS. it's about her clearly making a statement on tape and then trying to claim she didn't. the woman is an idiot and a nut. and please show a little more honesty on pelosi. she merely said the funding for the anti-mosque mania should be transparent, just as the ADL is asking on funding for the mosque. the anti-mosque idiocy certainly fits the whites-only GOP. as someone once described the GOP, male, pale and stale.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead no she said quote ' i'm joining the others in calling for an investgation of the funding for the anti mosque forces'. quit making an excuse for her. your last part is laughably absurd. anti mosque idiocy? so you are calling howard dean an idiot now? or just a right wing extremist. no the dems are showing their true colors. they don't give a damn about the people who make this country work. they want to control the people. better red than dead i guess huh?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you're going to pull a hamstring stretching that much. an investigation into where the funding is coming from. the issue is idiocy. i'll turn the tables. do bush's speechwriter and adman, who have ripped people for fighting the mosque, not give a damn about people who make the country work? and i love the repubs defending 9-11 families when they blocked the bill to aid first responders who were injured and sickened saving lives. there's your GOP true colors.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead who are you talking about? i do think it is rich that people like maureen dowd and libs who hated bush are now calling on him to come out and support the mosque. and yes the rhetoric coming from the leftie talking heads from msdnc is that people are doing this because of religious bigotry. really? o.k.; so i guess these same people won't bitch and moan if a school has a nativity scene in their christmas play. but they won't,they will get the aclu after them before you can blink.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you don't see the difference between a church building a community center on their own land and a public endorsement of a specific religion in the public schools? really? and please educate yourself about what the repubs did to block aid to first responders from 9-11, those american heroes they love to associate themselves with. they blocked it to save tax loopholes for corporations. you must be so, so proud of them.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead you might want to read the 1st amendment before you talk like you know it. it says the congress shall make no law ESTABLISHING a religion. so showing a nativity scene in a school play is forcing people to believe in christianity how? as far as the bill you are referring to the dems set it up where it had to have a two thirds majority to pass because they would not allow a single repub amendment. hell even weiner says that.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 so, according to you, a public school teacher can tell her kids that jesus is the true savior and all other religions are false because he/she technically isn't establishing a religion. novel idea. on the bill, (a) why would anyone vote against it to begin with and (b) why would repubs want to stick poison pill amendments to try to kill it. if repubs can't agree to help first responders straight up, how can you defend that? and then they try to speak for 9/11 families?
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead i didn't say that. although that would be correct. define the word establish for me as you see it. why did the dems make it where you had to get a two thirds majority? why didn't they say we'll vote on your amendments? they would vote them down anyway,so where is the problem?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 really, a teacher could talk about the superiority of christianity as long as they weren't actually forming a new church? so i assume a teacher of a different persuasion could talk about the superiority of islam or hinduism? why should religion be practiced anywhere but in the church? there is no defense for the repubs action. they played games with the health needs of the first responders and then they voted against them because corporate tax loopholes were more important.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead yes,just because someone is a teacher and if a student asks then sure. christianity,muslim,whatever. even atheism. the constitution is clear. the teacher cannot force someone to become a christian. however if the state decides to they can,as evidenced by the anglican church in england.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 that is one of the most bizarre things i have ever read in any of these rooms. if you think teachers can preach in the classroom, i don't where this discussion can go. it's like me saying the teachers can flunk their students if the parents are republicans. you are in angle-land on that one.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead i notice you keep upping the ante on this one. first it was expressing her faith,now you have her in the pulpit.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 that's because i never dreamed you would take the bait on the first scenario. curious to see how far you would go. apparently there is no limit. why do you people feel the need to spread your religion outside the church? is it a pathological condition? do you need therapy? everyone who wants (well except maybe muslims) can go to whatever church they want and pray their ass off. just leave the rest of us alone.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead where in the constitution does it say you have freedom of religion? if someone knocks on your door and asks you to go to their church say no. the difference between christianity and radical islam is we don't say convert or die.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 actually, the difference between christianity and islam in this country right now is that islam isn't trying to tell christians where they can build their churches.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead take it up with your good old union boys in new york that says they won't work on it unless they move.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 bigots in the union? no! shocking! if they force them to move, what a great victory for america that will be. a country founded by people trying to escape religious persecution engaging in religious persecution. wonderful. that ought to help when we try to convince the world's 1.5 billion muslims that we're not at war with their religion.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead there you go calling good hard working people names. just because they said if you move the mosque a few blocks down we will build. gov.patterson said he will donate govt land ten blocks down to build it,yet the imam says no. bridge building my ass. most muslims around the world know we are not at war with them just the extremists. and there is nothing we can do to change their minds. besides we were the ones attacked,why should we be the ones who need to compromise all the time?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 your entire mindset here is totally skewed. what is this, "we" and "they." this is a group of americans, just as american as the 9-11 widows, exercising their american rights. again, you people would have more credibility if you would speak just as loudly against those trying to block mosques elsewhere in the country or if you would call on repubs to pass the bill for aid to first responders. now, it seems a lot more like anti-muslim bias than concern for 9-11 families.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead uhhh 'we' being americans as you said trying to show the muslims around the world we are not at war with them. i would have a little more respect for the libs on this issue if they weren't so hostile to christians say about a manger scene at christmas at times square? but i bet you would be against that huh?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 it's not the biggest issue in the world, but, yes, the people who object are in the right. just as they would be in the right for protesting a muslim or hindu or jewish display in the public square. why do you people need to take your religion into the streets and schools? it's not like there's a shortage of churches in this country.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead and what harm does it do to see this?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 it doesn't do me any harm. public nudity doesn't do me any harm either, but clearly it offends many people. it is, if in a small way, a public endorsement of religion and a specific religion. and again my question what is the need you people have for taking your religion out of your church. why is worshipping in your church somehow inadequate for you.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead not saying it is inadequate. just saying if you believe in freedom of speech as you do to defend the mosque then you should defend it for all faiths.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 actually, the mosque isn't a freedom of speech issue, it's a property issue (which you should be advocating). it's their property. all they want is to practice their religion and, in this case, extend an open hand to the community. it's not at all the same as creating a display in a public space. no one's telling the christians where they can or can't build a church.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead where is it written that you can't express your religious beliefs in public only at your church?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 absolutely nowhere. you can talk about religion all you want til everybody moves away from you because you're annoying the hell out of them. but setting up a display on public lands is different. again, this is not something that matters that much to me, but when the ACLU fights it, they are unquestionably correct.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead ahh the anti christian liberties union. funny i don't hear them crying about our tax dollars going to this imam or the fact our tax dollars are helping rebuild mosques in the middle east. but let some high school valedictorian say how thankful they are for jesus for granting them the gift to get where they are today and they are there!!. it's to the point in school districts you can't even say christmas. it's happy holidays. or winter solstice. way to stand up for freedom.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 rightys stomping their feet about the ACLU. yawn.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead and lefties being hypocritical about religious freedom. YAWN.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 as soon as you point out any hypocrisy i'd be glad to discuss it. but if you are again going to compare a group building a church (or mosque) on land that they own with a display on public grounds, you are just wasting everyone's time. they are not the same thing. i think even you know that on some level.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead i already pointed out the hypocrisy of the aclu earlier. if by having a nativity scene in a school christmas play is violating the establishment clause,then why isn't giving tax dollars to rebuild mosques abroad a violation also? i gave you this earlier but i guess you forgot.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 it's a mildly interesting but irrelevant question. not being an expert, i would guess one big difference is that these mosques are being built in countries where islam is in fact the official state religion. we don't have one of those. again, i'm curious about this need you people have to take your worship out of your church. why isn't a church the proper place for religion?
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead no there are some christians in the middle east. the ones that aren't dead. when it comes to using taxpayer money what difference does it make if islam is the state religion? why does our money have to go there to build mosques? if a dime went to build a church here you would be screaming. as i said b4 a church is and that is where people go to worship. why is it a crime if someone wants to express his faith in public?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 because there are "some" christians doesn't mean islam isn't the official state religion. you can argue about the wisdom of spending the money but it has nothing to do with establishing or endorsing a religion in this country. it is not a first amendment issue. an individual expressing faith is far different from a publicly-endorsed display. again, why isn't worshipping in church enough for you?
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead asked and answered. so that would mean since you think it is okay to spend tax dollars to build mosques oversees it would be okay to spend tax dollars here to build a church or synagogue. after all you wouldn't want to be accused of having a double standard would you? btw i hear boxer and brown are in trouble in california.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 actually it has been asked 6 or 7 times and hasn't come close to being answered. why can't you just pray in church? what pathological need do you have to impose that on other people? building a mosque in another country that has an official state religion is so obviously different than endorsing religion in a secular state that it's ridiculous for you to even ask. calif election is close but been awhile since we elected an anti-choice candidate (fiorina).
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead one last time. yes attend church,but don't limit it to just that. understand now?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 no, i don't because you haven't even taken the first step to explaining this phenomenon. no one is inhibiting your ability to worship in your church, to say you individual prayers or to discuss your beliefs. and yet you people have a pathological need to take it into the public square, to get some sort of public endorsement , to proclaim that the "US is a christian nation." it appears to be a sickness, like a child begging for approval. i find it more amusing than offensive.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead and i find that statement imbecilic. i already outed you as a hypocrite. you think it's okay for tax dollars to go abroad to build mosques but let them do the same thing here for christian churches and libs will yell separation of church and state all day long.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 and yet with 7 or 8 chances, you can't even formulate a sentence to explain why worshipping in your church isn't good enough for you. a time and a place, dude, a time and a place. as for the mosques, i'm baffled why you can't see the difference. almost all of these mosques were either destroyed by us or are historical buildings, some more than 1,000 years old. and no i would not object to public funds being used to restore the old north church or a historic cathedral.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead i can't believe you are this thick. worship in your church good. express your faith in public good. simple enough? 'a time and a place'. so in other words you feel the need to put us christians 'in our rightful place'. no thanks i prefer to ride in the front of the bus. we did not destroy any mosques in the war. those were your darling terrorists.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 so i suppose we should give equal space in every public setting to christians, jews, hindus, mormons, jeohovah's witnesses, scientologists, sikhs, muslims, the hundreds of native american religions, wiccans, atheists and all the other sects i've forgotten. each one should get their own display. we can close the parks and stop traffic, i guess. we destroyed no mosques? what? we dropped thousands of tons of bombs and managed to miss them? seriously, get a checkup, i'm worried about you.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead considering i was there in iraq i think i'll pass on the checkup.on holidays concerning those faiths i don't have a problem with them displayin a menorrah,a cross or anything else. i thought you libs preach tolerance to us? guess not. btw when are you going to 'pummel' me with your 'facts' about gore winning florida? i need a good laugh.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 if you served, thank you for your service. however, that doesn't excuse making one of the most blindingly idiotic statements ever recorded in the english language. we didn't destory any mosques with our "shock and awe" or the massive bombing in afghan. you can still pull that chess piece back if you want.
and i'm not talking a cross or a menorrah. i'm talking a display as big as your manger for every one of the 300 or 400 religions in this country. and the atheists.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead actually a manger scene is small. as i said i witnessed it first hand. at the first strike it was surgically done,we were specifically targeting where we thought saddam was.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 what a good little propaganda consumer you are. we rain down thousands of tons on a huge city, but we don't kill civilians, we don't wipe out hospitals and we don't level mosques. man, that's impressive! fictional, but impressive. i suppose you bought the jessica lynch story and the pat tillman story too?
so whatever the christians get, EVERY other religion and the atheists get too? do we put them all in the same park or all over the city?
tishhead 1 year ago
@jhamm999 actually, even the GOP realizes the trouble they're in seen as a party of only white males. so they desperately try to come up with a different look and they produce national laughingstocks like sarah palin, michelle bachmann, sharron angle, michael steele and bobby jindal. keep thinking you don't have to change your message and policies. in this election, people are pissed so you may do ok, though not as well as you should. the future belongs to the dems, though.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead and what happened in 1994 when they took over and controlle dboth branches for 12 years?. you can try to console yourself all you want but the truth is the american people are not buying what the lefties are selling.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 and what happened 2 years after the great repub victory? clinton kicked your ass to hell and back. and what happened 4 years after that? gore beat bush by 500,000 votes and bush needed to be installed by a supreme court coup. at any rate, the demographics are way different now than in 94 and they'll be diff still in 2, 4 or 6 more years. keep telling yourself you don't need anything but old white votes. i love it.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead and how did clinton do that? what by signing the welfare reform bill? or the cap gains tax cut? no,no i know signing a balanced budget!. yeah that'll show those rascally republicans. heh,heh. in 2000 i see you still cling to that old myth. bush won florida,in every recount,gore never led. scotus said that fla. supremes went against the law and that the sec of state can go ahead and put the deadline in effect which she did. still with the racial politics huh?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you are such a good hannity puppet. whatever good happened in the clinton admin was because of the repubs. absolute rot. clinton's economic package including tax hikes was already slashing the deficit. and clinton CAMPAIGNED on welfare reform. you will literally believe anything won't you? as for 2000, if you want to go there be prepared to be pummelled with facts. there is ZERO DOUBT that gore won fla and the SC staged a coup. if you actually read, it's not even debatable.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead no i give clinton credit for signing the bills. his first budget in 1993 when the dems were in control raised taxes a total of 17 billion. because the rich did not get rich by being stupid they sheltered more of their money. clinton did not campaign on welfare reform,get real. if he did he would never got the nomination. as for 2000. bring it on.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 you don't remember the phrase "ending welfare as we know it." that was from clinton long before slimeball newt ever entered the picture. clinton raised taxes on the rich and we produced 22 million new jobs and a surplus. bush lowered taxes on the rich and we produced 3 million new jobs (not even keeping up with population growth) and a massive deficit. for 2000, i will have to send you a message. i have WAY too much to post here. this will be easiest argument i have EVER had.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead so if there is a correlation on raising taxes and spurring the economy,tell me why when reagan lowered the top marginal rates from 70% to 28% he created 21 million jobs? same with jfk.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 actually i checked the labor bureaun numbers. not good for you: kennedy-johnson 8 years, plus 15.8 million, nixon-ford 8 years plus 11.3, carter 4 years plus 10.3, reagan-bush 12 years plus 18.7, clinton 8 years plus 22.7, bush 8 years plus 1 (pathetic), obama less than 2 years minus 3. totals repubs 28 years plus 31, dems 22 years plus 45.8. 14 million more jobs in 6 fewer years, even with the aftermath of the bush recession/depression.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead okay. if you remember the point i was making was jfk,reagan,even clinton cut taxes and created jobs. clinton signed a cap gains tax cut. bush had periods of good employment after his cuts. in august 2007,the unemployment rate was 4.5%. now obama and the looming tax raises next year the economy is tanking.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 check out the quotes from repubs when clinton passed the 93 package with zero repub votes. they were all predicting recession, depression, the end of jobs. now come and say it. they were wrong. they were wrong in a huge way. and of course to suggest the economy started tanking under obama is ridiculous. look at the last 8 months under bush. we have made progress in almost every area since obama came in. slow, but progress.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead obama came into office with an unemployment rate of 7.3%. it is now 9.5%. bush's last budget deficit was 261 billion. obama's deficit is 1.4 trillion this year. you call that progress? only if you want to progress to the status of greece.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 actually it was 7.7, by the time his stimulus was passed it was 8.2 and by the time it took full effect it was already about 9. guess what happens in a near depression? the deficit goes up. more spending is required automatically as people are laid off and fall into poverty and tax revenues go down. of course the repubs response is to cut taxes for the rich which would EXPLODE the deficit.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead that can't be true! why obama said himself that if the stimulus passed unemp. would not go above 8.%,and our dear leader would not mislead us would he? nice try though. looking forward to your pummeling of me as to how gore got more votes than bush in florida.lol.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 let's see he was wrong by a pt or 2. your side predicted a massive depression on clinton's tax hike and instead got the largest expansion in history. which one was closer? and your side is so concerned about deficits that they want to enact a policy that will lead to the single biggest expansion of the deficit in recorded history. btw if the tax cut expires, it will be a repub tax hike, not a dem one. it was the repubs who passed the bill that set the expiration date.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead obviously you have a masters in revisionist history. a point or two? lol. face it he knows nothing about the private sector and how the markets work. remember clinton only got 17 billion from his tax hike.before the repubs got into office they were predicting deficits of 200 billion as far as the eye can see. that was before the repubs got the purse strings. a cap gains cut and welfare reform later and bingo. surpluses.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 welfare reform had virtually no impact on the economy and, again, it was something clinton campaigned on. the cap gains cut didn't go into effect until 1998, by which time clinton had already whittled the reagan-bush deficit to nearly nothing. 92.5 percent of the deficit was gone by the time cap gains went into effect. i would say nice try but i would be lying.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead you forget as a provision in the welfare reform bill,it had a two year moratorium. you were cut off after 2 years if u did not have a job. as far as your claim about the cap gains cut let me show you why your teacher told you to do your homework. goes into effect in 1998,. fy 98-surplus 69.2. fy 99-surplus 122.7. fy200-230.0 billion. now what was that about tax cuts blowing a hole in the deficit?
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 welfare had a microscopic, if any, effect on the deficit. you didn't address my main pt, that clinton essentially eliminated the huge deficit before cap gains even took effect. as for tax cuts blowing a hole in the deficit, see the bush administration. how to make a massive surplus disappear. and now they want to do it again. even conservatives like greenspan say it's insanity.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead no,greenspan says tax cuts should be offset by spending cuts,and i agree. the point is some tax cuts do not pay for themselves and some do. when cap gains are cut the revenue to the govt goes up. that is because you incentivize businesses to put their capital to work creating jobs. more tax payers more revenue to the govt. quite simple really. we were still running a deficit until the later years in the nineties. don't forget that the congress controls the purse strings.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 greenspan said "they should follow the law and let them expire." there's not much wiggle room there. the kind of cuts that would be needed to offset those cuts would contract the economy into a depression. the argument for tax cuts to the top is job creation. that clearly failed in the bush admin and failed in a big way. the key is to put money in middle class pockets and let them spend. you build from the ground up, not the top down.
tishhead 1 year ago
@tishhead he said they should be paid for. you need to check the irs figures as to who pays the taxes in america. the top half pay 97% AND THE BOTTOM HALF PAY 3%. also how do you explain that in august in 2007 the unemployment rate was 4.55 down from 7% before the tax cuts? the problem as usual,is spending. if a country could spend it's way into prosperity greece would be #1.
jhamm999 1 year ago
@jhamm999 look at jobs created. we were sold the tax cuts on the idea that they would create jobs. they didn't. job creation during the bush years was pathetic. look at the percentage of income paid in taxes not overall taxes. as warren buffett said, i pay a lower rate than my secretary. when you are in recession and businesses aren't spending and consumers aren't spending, the govt HAS to spend. there is no choice.
tishhead 1 year ago