OneVoteOneBrick

Jack, The Democratic Party lays claim to being the party of the oppressed, equal rights, and non-discrimination: they're for minorities, womens, and gay rights. Yet they have slurs for black Republicans, they have slurs for Republican women, and they have slurs for Republican gays. So much for the principles. In fact, the black community has so bought into the bias of the Democrats that for many they joke that the (R) after a Republican's name, stands for racist. It's not about the principles the Party espouses, it's about party first, power, and self-interests, and sure, they'll throw some bone to the oppressed and then crow about it like it was coming out of their pockets. The Republican Party does similar things. And that's why most people don't hold to being party affiliated. The best that can be done is to vote for the lesser of either evil. That is, who in one's own mind, not the party pimps rhetoric, will do the least harm. Stop believing what your professors tell you or what the books define the world as. Those are textbook fantasies. It's a dog eat dog world out there, and if you didn't agree more with the liberals here, than you disagree, they wouldn't be patting you on your head, they'd be calling you moron, idiot, or whatever word moved them at the moment.

Jack, The Democratic Party lays claim to being the party of the oppressed, equal rights, and non-discrimination: they're for minorities, womens, and gay rights. Yet they have slurs for black Republicans, they have slurs for Republican women, and they have slurs for Republican gays. So much for the principles. In fact, the black community has so bought into the bias of the Democrats that for many they joke that the (R) after a Republican's name, stands for racist.

It's not about the principles the Party espouses, it's about party first, power, and self-interests, and sure, they'll throw some bone to the oppressed and then crow about it like it was coming out of their pockets.

The Republican Party does similar things.

And that's why most people don't hold to being party affiliated. The best that can be done is to vote for the lesser of either evil. That is, who in one's own mind, not the party pimps rhetoric, will do the least harm.

Stop believing what your professors tell you or what the books define the world as. Those are textbook fantasies.

It's a dog eat dog world out there, and if you didn't agree more with the liberals here, than you disagree, they wouldn't be patting you on your head, they'd be calling you moron, idiot, or whatever word moved them at the moment.

Capitalist party? Now who is smokin' dope? It's sorta like Nancy Pelosi calling herself a Catholic. Anyone can call themselves what they choose, but it's really all about who is supporting the party or its leadership. Go back to sleep jack, the class isn't over yet!

Capitalist party? Now who is smokin' dope? It's sorta like Nancy Pelosi calling herself a Catholic. Anyone can call themselves what they choose, but it's really all about who is supporting the party or its leadership.

Go back to sleep jack, the class isn't over yet!

The SDS and the DSA and their founding fathers and mothers, are the antithesis to patriotic Americans. Rascism is their theme to divide the country. Only in America can people go from making and planting bombs in public places to affect socialism to writing socialist propaganda for the impressionable youth in its schools of higher learning, and then be hailed by the Mayor of Chicago and presidential hopeful, Obama, as respected citizens, while the liberal media applaudes. Most here, cling to the mantle of being the educated class. It's what separates them from the masses and what their professors tell them has empowered them. Like their leaders they now speak using the lanquage of Debs, Alinsky, Ayers, Dohrn, Sanders, Fox, and even the man whom Oprah has dubbed, the one. They dare not call themselves socialists, rather instead, like the white-hoods of the KKK they adopt different labels for themselves, but their actions belie their identity. Read and listen to the lanquage of the socialist revolutionaries the SDS patriarch and matriarch for yourselves. Compare how they've softened their rhetoric over 40 years, but it's the same devisive garbage and cites the same ills as if no change in America has occurred. Yes, read the "The Evolution of Cooperation" and "Let the Trumpet Sound" for a better understanding of racism. Then, for a better understanding of America, read the writings of Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Colin Powell, Juan Williams, Bill Cosby and others who see America for what it has become and what it has to offer, as opposed to the Obamas and the Democratic Party, who need to keep America divided to win razor thin majorities. Chicago's politicians and community leaders with their divisive politics mock the best efforts of MLK. Like Capone era mobsters they've divided the city amongst themselves and to hell with the people. Make no mistake about it, black people will play a significant role in any socialist revolution led by the leftist leaders of the Democratic Party, but they are merely the pawns as intimated by the cited African Americans.

The SDS and the DSA and their founding fathers and mothers, are the antithesis to patriotic Americans. Rascism is their theme to divide the country. Only in America can people go from making and planting bombs in public places to affect socialism to writing socialist propaganda for the impressionable youth in its schools of higher learning, and then be hailed by the Mayor of Chicago and presidential hopeful, Obama, as respected citizens, while the liberal media applaudes.

Most here, cling to the mantle of being the educated class. It's what separates them from the masses and what their professors tell them has empowered them. Like their leaders they now speak using the lanquage of Debs, Alinsky, Ayers, Dohrn, Sanders, Fox, and even the man whom Oprah has dubbed, the one. They dare not call themselves socialists, rather instead, like the white-hoods of the KKK they adopt different labels for themselves, but their actions belie their identity.

Read and listen to the lanquage of the socialist revolutionaries the SDS patriarch and matriarch for yourselves. Compare how they've softened their rhetoric over 40 years, but it's the same devisive garbage and cites the same ills as if no change in America has occurred.

Yes, read the "The Evolution of Cooperation" and "Let the Trumpet Sound" for a better understanding of racism. Then, for a better understanding of America, read the writings of Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Colin Powell, Juan Williams, Bill Cosby and others who see America for what it has become and what it has to offer, as opposed to the Obamas and the Democratic Party, who need to keep America divided to win razor thin majorities.

Chicago's politicians and community leaders with their divisive politics mock the best efforts of MLK. Like Capone era mobsters they've divided the city amongst themselves and to hell with the people.

Make no mistake about it, black people will play a significant role in any socialist revolution led by the leftist leaders of the Democratic Party, but they are merely the pawns as intimated by the cited African Americans.

hmmmmmmmmm, So okay, we can account for the black vote for Obama in the general because blacks generally vote Democratic. How do you account for 94% of the black vote for Obama in the Democratic Primary against Hillary? It's not like she's a racist or anything being married to the first black president and all. LOL To the OP's original point, to me it sorta looks like the campaign and its surrogates are looking to explain away Obama losing. I guess there's no way the Party wants to believe Obama could lose because of any other reason, e.g. like being a man that doesn't quite share the politics of the independents, isn't quite experienced, or lacks credibility? Nah, none of those reasons, must be racism.

hmmmmmmmmm,

So okay, we can account for the black vote for Obama in the general because blacks generally vote Democratic. How do you account for 94% of the black vote for Obama in the Democratic Primary against Hillary? It's not like she's a racist or anything being married to the first black president and all. LOL

To the OP's original point, to me it sorta looks like the campaign and its surrogates are looking to explain away Obama losing.

I guess there's no way the Party wants to believe Obama could lose because of any other reason, e.g. like being a man that doesn't quite share the politics of the independents, isn't quite experienced, or lacks credibility? Nah, none of those reasons, must be racism.

While Obama Democrats love to talk distain for law enforcement hacking into the personal lives of suspected criminals, terrorists, and hostile protesters, they do love to read and post the opposition's private mail. But hey, they wouldn't be Obama Democrats if they didn't hold to double standards. Here's the offspring of the TN Obama Democrat, state representative, the law is taking a closer look at: http://wjnoblog.com/2008/09/is-this-the-face-of-palins-hacker/ I say hacking's fine, if you're man enough to do the time.

While Obama Democrats love to talk distain for law enforcement hacking into the personal lives of suspected criminals, terrorists, and hostile protesters, they do love to read and post the opposition's private mail.

But hey, they wouldn't be Obama Democrats if they didn't hold to double standards.

Here's the offspring of the TN Obama Democrat, state representative, the law is taking a closer look at: http://wjnoblog.com/2008/09/is-this-the-face-of-palins-hacker/

I say hacking's fine, if you're man enough to do the time.

You know HN, it's that kind of audacity that loses elections. Nobody thought Juliani would get elected, so I guess stranger things have happened. Besides, it's been awhile since a Democrat was elected Mayor. And if you remember good ole Tim Russert gave Hillary a hard time about promises she made to the upstaters that she failed to keep, so she has some fences to mend too.

You know HN, it's that kind of audacity that loses elections. Nobody thought Juliani would get elected, so I guess stranger things have happened. Besides, it's been awhile since a Democrat was elected Mayor. And if you remember good ole Tim Russert gave Hillary a hard time about promises she made to the upstaters that she failed to keep, so she has some fences to mend too.

So Hillary cancels her appearance at a Jewish Rally in New York next week. With Congressman Wexel having his own problems with residency in FL, looks like Hillary, Bill and Barack will have to stump a little harder in Florida and New York to capture the Jewish vote in two states with significant Jewish populations. Not to worry Ben and Jerry still love Obama and he has their votes. Maybe Team Obama can have them represent the Democrats at the rally. Will this latest diss by Obama and his surrogates, lower the jewish vote count? Here's the story: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/16/clinton-blindsided-by-scheduled-event-with-pali-1/

So Hillary cancels her appearance at a Jewish Rally in New York next week. With Congressman Wexel having his own problems with residency in FL, looks like Hillary, Bill and Barack will have to stump a little harder in Florida and New York to capture the Jewish vote in two states with significant Jewish populations.

Not to worry Ben and Jerry still love Obama and he has their votes. Maybe Team Obama can have them represent the Democrats at the rally.

Will this latest diss by Obama and his surrogates, lower the jewish vote count?

Here's the story: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/16/clinton-blindsided-by-scheduled-event-with-pali-1/

Rumors abound among the Democrats who've disconnected themselves from the Party in outrage over the Primary debaucle. The NoBama Network groups report that consideration among Democratic Party leaders is being given to having Obama dump Biden after the VP debate and replace him with Hillary. They report that such a move would do little to woo back the discontented Democrats. For them, it was never about the VP choice so says the group, Just Say No Deal. Methinks that such a move would show just how desperate the Party has gotten in light of the Palin selection. Moreover, if true, it would illustrate just how little the Party leaders believes in the leadership of the leader they chose. And if Obama gives into such pressure, it's prima facie evidence that he is no less a party puppet than was GWB.

Rumors abound among the Democrats who've disconnected themselves from the Party in outrage over the Primary debaucle.

The NoBama Network groups report that consideration among Democratic Party leaders is being given to having Obama dump Biden after the VP debate and replace him with Hillary. They report that such a move would do little to woo back the discontented Democrats. For them, it was never about the VP choice so says the group, Just Say No Deal.

Methinks that such a move would show just how desperate the Party has gotten in light of the Palin selection.

Moreover, if true, it would illustrate just how little the Party leaders believes in the leadership of the leader they chose. And if Obama gives into such pressure, it's prima facie evidence that he is no less a party puppet than was GWB.

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN,

I need to begin here with your opening statement. Sorry, but your reply that you are referencing was to my 1ST POSTING. Correct? Nowhere in that post did I use the word "pretty".

That you didn't use the word pretty, you were right, and I was wrong. I mistakenly saw it in the OP's comment. That I baited you, is the truth, although the reasoning was based on that mistake. The liberal democrat question was sarcasm. It was based on my original opinion that your posts contained words or expressions that by some could be considered gender bias and reflective of the double standards that some liberals, democrats or otherwise, hold to when describing how offended they are by others who use such references, but then explain their use as unintended or out of context. I'm sure you've run into folks who do that. Thank you for clearing up my misunderstanding by clarifying your position. Perhaps I'm just overly sensitive based on similar references used by the media, Obama, and some critics of Hillary during the primaries. I too am not a "political party whore" and as open to pointing to hypocrisy on the right, but I'm not liberal in my thinking, except in what I consider my personal life and behavior. This election, however, I'm more engaged in defeating Obama, so I'm likely to focus more on the Dems and appear strictly conservative. Maybe next cycle I'll be focusing on the right wing. Salutations of peace to you too. KC

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN,

I need to begin here with your opening statement. Sorry, but your reply that you are referencing was to my 1ST POSTING. Correct? Nowhere in that post did I use the word "pretty".

That you didn't use the word pretty, you were right, and I was wrong. I mistakenly saw it in the OP's comment. That I baited you, is the truth, although the reasoning was based on that mistake.

The liberal democrat question was sarcasm. It was based on my original opinion that your posts contained words or expressions that by some could be considered gender bias and reflective of the double standards that some liberals, democrats or otherwise, hold to when describing how offended they are by others who use such references, but then explain their use as unintended or out of context.

I'm sure you've run into folks who do that. Thank you for clearing up my misunderstanding by clarifying your position. Perhaps I'm just overly sensitive based on similar references used by the media, Obama, and some critics of Hillary during the primaries.

I too am not a "political party whore" and as open to pointing to hypocrisy on the right, but I'm not liberal in my thinking, except in what I consider my personal life and behavior.

This election, however, I'm more engaged in defeating Obama, so I'm likely to focus more on the Dems and appear strictly conservative. Maybe next cycle I'll be focusing on the right wing.

Salutations of peace to you too.

KC

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN, Welcome to the debate. Admittedly, I did bait you with the DNA question. Since you used the word, "Pretty", a redflag went up for me and I primarily wanted to get a hint as to whether you were locked into gender issues. While your suggestion below says to me you don't, other gender reference were raised in your posts, so I'm not for sure where you stand. WHATEVER REPUBLICAN suggests:

Let's leave assuming comments out shall we. Gender has nothing to do with politics either.

Agree, and I will do my best to do that, except in those cases where I think that I see bias or double standards on either side. That said, here are some excerpts from your posts, that to me, drip with needless gender references or assumptions.

WHY IN GOD'S NAME would you still want to vote a man into office who lets this woman COMPLETELY push him around.

Just what point is being made here?

You're voting for Sarah Palin, honey...

Honey? Such references would never have been allowed on my job, based on EEO rules there. Are you sure you are a liberal Democrat?

THIS PALIN WOMAN IS FLYING...

Would you say, THIS OBAMA MAN IS FLYING..?

....she is a strong woman....

As opposed to weak women? In the future will I see you refer to weak men and strong men?

...Little Sarah Palin ISN'T going to be able to "drive herself to work"....

I think you get my point. Again welcome, and I look forward to the debate, just wanted to ensure the "rules of engagement" didn't involve the typical liberal double standards.

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN,

Welcome to the debate. Admittedly, I did bait you with the DNA question. Since you used the word, "Pretty", a redflag went up for me and I primarily wanted to get a hint as to whether you were locked into gender issues. While your suggestion below says to me you don't, other gender reference were raised in your posts, so I'm not for sure where you stand.

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN suggests:

Let's leave assuming comments out shall we. Gender has nothing to do with politics either.

Agree, and I will do my best to do that, except in those cases where I think that I see bias or double standards on either side. That said, here are some excerpts from your posts, that to me, drip with needless gender references or assumptions.

WHY IN GOD'S NAME would you still want to vote a man into office who lets this woman COMPLETELY push him around.

Just what point is being made here?

You're voting for Sarah Palin, honey...

Honey? Such references would never have been allowed on my job, based on EEO rules there. Are you sure you are a liberal Democrat?

THIS PALIN WOMAN IS FLYING...

Would you say, THIS OBAMA MAN IS FLYING..?

....she is a strong woman....

As opposed to weak women? In the future will I see you refer to weak men and strong men?

...Little Sarah Palin ISN'T going to be able to "drive herself to work"....

I think you get my point.

Again welcome, and I look forward to the debate, just wanted to ensure the "rules of engagement" didn't involve the typical liberal double standards.

In my opionion, there are no good reasons to believe in anything Obama tells the electorate. Hence it would be foolish to vote for someone you can't believe - no matter what he promises or whatever his fanatical following testifies as to what he will change. Obama has risen to the top of the Democratic ticket based his ability to work with the bosses of the most corrupt political system in this nation - Chicago politics. His record is so leftist, he aught to be wearing a DSA red shirt and carrying a sign promoting socialism. He has pleased the Democratic Party liberals leaders, Kennedy, Kerry, Rockefeller, Dean, etc. and so early on he was their champion. If you'd want facts on which you can decide whether or not he lacks veracity or character to be president, based on his Chicago career and shallow experience, read my blog posts beginning with the first one. For anyone who knows little about politics and is not interested in doing any research, the best reason to vote for McCain is that he has a record of being a maverick and taking on his own party and a demonstrated willingness to work with Democrats, but more importantly, he is not Obama. Frankly, as indicated in my profile, I don't advocate for the Republican Party, but rather have become disenchanted with the Democratic Party and its movement further to the left, and remain unaffiliated with either party. I follow the "Just Say No" philosophy, when it comes to this presidential election.

In my opionion, there are no good reasons to believe in anything Obama tells the electorate. Hence it would be foolish to vote for someone you can't believe - no matter what he promises or whatever his fanatical following testifies as to what he will change.

Obama has risen to the top of the Democratic ticket based his ability to work with the bosses of the most corrupt political system in this nation - Chicago politics. His record is so leftist, he aught to be wearing a DSA red shirt and carrying a sign promoting socialism. He has pleased the Democratic Party liberals leaders, Kennedy, Kerry, Rockefeller, Dean, etc. and so early on he was their champion.

If you'd want facts on which you can decide whether or not he lacks veracity or character to be president, based on his Chicago career and shallow experience, read my blog posts beginning with the first one. For anyone who knows little about politics and is not interested in doing any research, the best reason to vote for McCain is that he has a record of being a maverick and taking on his own party and a demonstrated willingness to work with Democrats, but more importantly, he is not Obama.

Frankly, as indicated in my profile, I don't advocate for the Republican Party, but rather have become disenchanted with the Democratic Party and its movement further to the left, and remain unaffiliated with either party. I follow the "Just Say No" philosophy, when it comes to this presidential election.

HN says,

I'm sooooo tired of Sarah Palin. She's the "karen the douchebag" of politics.

Among adults, I think one low blow deserves another, just to even the score: :) Barack Obama is the "Chicago Pimp of Pander"

HN says,

I'm sooooo tired of Sarah Palin. She's the "karen the douchebag" of politics.

Among adults, I think one low blow deserves another, just to even the score: :)

Barack Obama is the "Chicago Pimp of Pander"

Shadow says,

Are reparations even relevant in 2008? If you go back 50 or 100 years then yes, I could see it as relevant, but not now.

Reparations, set asides, and affirmative action are issues both candidates have somewhat counterveiling positions on each. That said, both men are smart enough not make them issues in campaign '08. Nonetheles, each is waiting for the other to pander his positon first. If neither does, we'll find out who believes in what after January 20. 2009.

Shadow says,

Are reparations even relevant in 2008? If you go back 50 or 100 years then yes, I could see it as relevant, but not now.

Reparations, set asides, and affirmative action are issues both candidates have somewhat counterveiling positions on each. That said, both men are smart enough not make them issues in campaign '08. Nonetheles, each is waiting for the other to pander his positon first. If neither does, we'll find out who believes in what after January 20. 2009.

HN, says

Whats the matter brick? Upset he took your ace out of the deck?

No HN, I actually think it shows that Obama is trainable! Who knows, with another four years in the Senate under the tutelage of Hillary, he may actually learn how to treat women with the same respect he holds for men? HDL says as he lectures others,

Time enough for stupid trivia after the election is over. Now is the time to focus. This is an important election.

Twenty-one hours later, HDL posts this gem, entitled?

Hooray, Shadow broke my record!.

That's why my replies to HDL take the form of HDL replying to HDL. Priceless!

HN, says

Whats the matter brick? Upset he took your ace out of the deck?

No HN, I actually think it shows that Obama is trainable! Who knows, with another four years in the Senate under the tutelage of Hillary, he may actually learn how to treat women with the same respect he holds for men?

HDL says as he lectures others,

Time enough for stupid trivia after the election is over. Now is the time to focus. This is an important election.

Twenty-one hours later, HDL posts this gem, entitled?

Hooray, Shadow broke my record!.

That's why my replies to HDL take the form of HDL replying to HDL. Priceless!

No jack, being or not being on SNL is not an issue. Why he chose not being on SNL compared to why he said he won't be on SNL - is an issue that goes to political strategy. Therefore, it's a political decision. This is political forum. Political decisions are issues in political campaigns. And I offered my opinion as to why. So again, Jackriter, doesn't get to decide what are or are not valid issues here, and then lecture OVOB what is or isn't an issue and imply that OVOB shouldn't offer up any comment that bugs the hell out of him. Make any sense at all now? If you can accept this as a valid point of view, then the rest may make some sense to you. If you can't, then you won't find anything I've written below to be useful, so don't waste your time. When people do not see things your way you have an opportunity to reconcile the difference. Now you can remain silent, agree, or disagree and make your point - but bringing in your emotions does nothing to move your point forward. In fact, it only brings out the emotions in others, and there ends civil discourse. That someone doesn't see things your way, and it bugs the hell out of you, is - quite frankly - your problem. And no one, but you, can do anything about how you feel. The world does not revolve around making Jackriter comfortable. And telling someone that what they do is bugging the hell out of you, when you've not even taken the time to understand or try to understand is foolish behavior. Now you can call the above comment being snide, but it's a fact. And you will live a terribly depressive existence trying to make people act only in a way that doesn't bug you. If we were at a bar and you made your above comment in the same fashion about the same comment I offered in beginning this thread, I might, according to how many drinks I had, say to you, too fucking bad that it bugs you - now do something about it instead of whining you little piece of shit. And then I would be acting foolish. Now maybe we can exchange ideas rather than foolish comments. Shadow, Yes, it will be Tina Fey, and I expect it will be a great spoof.

No jack,

being or not being on SNL is not an issue. Why he chose not being on SNL compared to why he said he won't be on SNL - is an issue that goes to political strategy. Therefore, it's a political decision. This is political forum.

Political decisions are issues in political campaigns. And I offered my opinion as to why.

So again, Jackriter, doesn't get to decide what are or are not valid issues here, and then lecture OVOB what is or isn't an issue and imply that OVOB shouldn't offer up any comment that bugs the hell out of him.

Make any sense at all now? If you can accept this as a valid point of view, then the rest may make some sense to you.

If you can't, then you won't find anything I've written below to be useful, so don't waste your time.

When people do not see things your way you have an opportunity to reconcile the difference. Now you can remain silent, agree, or disagree and make your point - but bringing in your emotions does nothing to move your point forward. In fact, it only brings out the emotions in others, and there ends civil discourse.

That someone doesn't see things your way, and it bugs the hell out of you, is - quite frankly - your problem. And no one, but you, can do anything about how you feel. The world does not revolve around making Jackriter comfortable. And telling someone that what they do is bugging the hell out of you, when you've not even taken the time to understand or try to understand is foolish behavior.

Now you can call the above comment being snide, but it's a fact. And you will live a terribly depressive existence trying to make people act only in a way that doesn't bug you.

If we were at a bar and you made your above comment in the same fashion about the same comment I offered in beginning this thread, I might, according to how many drinks I had, say to you, too fucking bad that it bugs you - now do something about it instead of whining you little piece of shit. And then I would be acting foolish.

Now maybe we can exchange ideas rather than foolish comments.

Shadow,

Yes, it will be Tina Fey, and I expect it will be a great spoof.

Says it's cause of the hurricane, I'm betting that SNL does a great job spoofing Palin. And somebody had the good sense to tell him, it won't help his reputation as chauvinist.

Says it's cause of the hurricane, I'm betting that SNL does a great job spoofing Palin. And somebody had the good sense to tell him, it won't help his reputation as chauvinist.

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN says:

This woman KEEPS GETTING BUSTED over and over making things up, candy coating, exagerating, twisting, fabricating, imbellishing, skirting, skirting, skirting...shall I go on? Do you know what these BIG words mean? Tee hee.

Do you think it's in the DNA, I still remember the sniper fire in Bosnia?

WHATEVER REPUBLICAN says:

This woman KEEPS GETTING BUSTED over and over making things up, candy coating, exagerating, twisting, fabricating, imbellishing, skirting, skirting, skirting...shall I go on? Do you know what these BIG words mean? Tee hee.

Do you think it's in the DNA, I still remember the sniper fire in Bosnia?

Yes HDL, the differences between the parties are as absolute as you describe them.

Yes HDL, the differences between the parties are as absolute as you describe them.

Shadow, It's too late here to take up that discussion in depth, but we did go to war with those who actually attacked us. Sadly, we let a man and his crew divert us from that war and go to Iraq. But we can discuss this another day. Good nite.

Shadow,

It's too late here to take up that discussion in depth, but we did go to war with those who actually attacked us. Sadly, we let a man and his crew divert us from that war and go to Iraq. But we can discuss this another day. Good nite.