Analysis of my Weekend with The Pinheads

We spend less per capita than almost any state in the union.

Its not that we got gyped. Its that the state has never seen education as a priority.

Well, that and that some of the idiots have repeatedly decided to press their personal views onto the state education system.

But thats an entirely different topic.
 
Grind said:
Trying to immobilize government and being obstructionist is the fun stuff. You democrats should try it sometime instead of putting your tails between your legs and doing whatever the republicans tell you :)
Click to expand...

Dear Grind,

If I were speaker or president of the senate, I would throw the Republicans off of every committee, revoke their speaking privileges, and use the nuclear option every single time they tried to filibuster, no matter the bill.
 
Solitary said:
We spend less per capita than almost any state in the union.

Its not that we got gyped. Its that the state has never seen education as a priority.

Well, that and that some of the idiots have repeatedly decided to press their personal views onto the state education system.

But thats an entirely different topic.
Click to expand...

Governors in my state have actually been defeated because the public thought they were too obsessed with education.
 
Watermark said:
Dear Grind,

If I were speaker or president of the senate, I would throw the Republicans off of every committee, revoke their speaking privileges, and use the nuclear option every single time they tried to filibuster, no matter the bill.
Click to expand...

Dear Waterhead,

You are promoting a Fascist Regime style of Government. We live in a Representative Republic Democracy. In order to implement such a government, you would first need to orchestrate a coup, and overthrow our current government, then you would need to revoke the Constitution. Since Liberals are notoriously 'anti-gun' this might pose a bit of a problem, because I don't think Republicans are going to volunteer to be overthrown. The up-side is, you wouldn't really need to have "bills" any more, as Liberals could do whatever they wanted to do, and the people would just be forced to accept it under your authoritarian regime. The down-side is, you would have to spend a bunch more on the military, in order to prevent a counter-insurgency and an overthrow by 'rebel' forces. I don't really think you want to go down this road, you just think it sounds cool at this time. If it ever came to fruition, you would be unhappy, because you wouldn't likely be among the 'ruling class' and you would essentially be a peasant. A peasant is not a bird, Waterhead... that is a pheasant. You would be a "slave" ....put it like that. Do you really want to be enslaved?
 
Dixie said:
Dear Waterhead,

You are promoting a Fascist Regime style of Government. We live in a Representative Republic Democracy. In order to implement such a government, you would first need to orchestrate a coup, and overthrow our current government, then you would need to revoke the Constitution. Since Liberals are notoriously 'anti-gun' this might pose a bit of a problem, because I don't think Republicans are going to volunteer to be overthrown. The up-side is, you wouldn't really need to have "bills" any more, as Liberals could do whatever they wanted to do, and the people would just be forced to accept it under your authoritarian regime. The down-side is, you would have to spend a bunch more on the military, in order to prevent a counter-insurgency and an overthrow by 'rebel' forces. I don't really think you want to go down this road, you just think it sounds cool at this time. If it ever came to fruition, you would be unhappy, because you wouldn't likely be among the 'ruling class' and you would essentially be a peasant. A peasant is not a bird, Waterhead... that is a pheasant. You would be a "slave" ....put it like that. Do you really want to be enslaved?
Click to expand...

Dixie, there is nothing in the constitution that even mentions committees, speaking privileges, or the filibuster. The majority of the house can vote to remove these privileges at any time. It is not fascist to do this. It is democratic to remove their obstructionism and for once in America's nationhood have government that works unfettered by Republicans.
 
Watermark said:
Dixie, there is nothing in the constitution that even mentions committees, speaking privileges, or the filibuster. The majority of the house can vote to remove these privileges at any time. It is not fascist to do this. It is democratic to remove their obstructionism and for once in America's nationhood have government that works unfettered by Republicans.
Click to expand...
LOL There were no Republicans prior to 1854, and no one can say that they would have voted Democrat prior to 1932 in today's world... It would indicate really shitty character. Its nice that your trolling got Di X iE really freaked out, though... :)
 
Watermark said:
Dixie, there is nothing in the constitution that even mentions committees, speaking privileges, or the filibuster. The majority of the house can vote to remove these privileges at any time. It is not fascist to do this. It is democratic to remove their obstructionism and for once in America's nationhood have government that works unfettered by Republicans.
Click to expand...

Waterhead, there are reasons those rules have existed for many years, and will continue to exist. It is not "obstructionist" to allow "the people" a voice in the form of their elected representation. I know you like to think the whole country thinks and feels like you, and we "republicONS" just represent a small minority of radicals you'd rather not have to listen to, but that simply isn't the case. In fact, the Pugh Research Center recently did a survey, where they found that 61% of the country identifies with either center-right to right political ideology. This is why you always see Liberals "run to the middle" in the general election. This is why Obama is fighting the liberal image so fiercely, it's almost impossible for your particular ideology to win an election on a national level. But it's nice to know some Liberals actually favor eliminating Democracy and going with Fascism. It's something I have thought for a long time, and it's good to see my suspicions confirmed.
 
Dixie said:
Waterhead, there are reasons those rules have existed for many years, and will continue to exist. It is not "obstructionist" to allow "the people" a voice in the form of their elected representation. I know you like to think the whole country thinks and feels like you, and we "republicONS" just represent a small minority of radicals you'd rather not have to listen to, but that simply isn't the case. In fact, the Pugh Research Center recently did a survey, where they found that 61% of the country identifies with either center-right to right political ideology. This is why you always see Liberals "run to the middle" in the general election. This is why Obama is fighting the liberal image so fiercely, it's almost impossible for your particular ideology to win an election on a national level. But it's nice to know some Liberals actually favor eliminating Democracy and going with Fascism. It's something I have thought for a long time, and it's good to see my suspicions confirmed.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is perfectly Democratic. The Republicans got 45% of the vote, and should get 45% of the power in the house. Which unfortunately for them means nothing.
 
Watermark said:
What I'm saying is perfectly Democratic. The Republicans got 45% of the vote, and should get 45% of the power in the house. Which unfortunately for them means nothing.
Click to expand...

It's perfectly "Democratic" but we are not a pure Democracy. We are a "REPRESENTATIVE Republic" ....Do you comprehend what that means, or should I design a coloring book for you? The minority ALWAYS has a voice in our particular political process, that is what makes it so beautiful and perfect. Every man has representation, and it means something. Take that away, and you have "Mob Rule!" That may sound fine to you, as long as YOUR mob is ruling, but what about when you are on the short end of the stick? You gonna be okay with it then? I doubt it. What you would like is, "mob rule" while your "mob" is in the majority, and "representative republic" when they aren't. That is not going to happen in this universe. Sorry!
 
I agree, people are too stupid for a pure democracy to work. We're bad enough with the democratic growths that have occurred thoughout our history.
 
Blackflag said:
Wow so your racist liberal fag friends are having second thoughts about voting for Obama. Surprise!
Click to expand...

Nope... they are all planning to vote for Obama, they are just resigned to "hard times" ahead. They seem to know and understand, Obama isn't going to solve the problems, or fix a damn thing. Things are about to get really bad, and they can see it coming... but at least we'll have a Liberal in charge!

From my perspective, I am fine with that... Let Democrats control every single facet of government, when it all goes to hell in a hand basket! We'll see who ultimately gets elected to "bring change" in the end. It's happened before, you know?
 
Dixie said:
Nope... they are all planning to vote for Obama, they are just resigned to "hard times" ahead. They seem to know and understand, Obama isn't going to solve the problems, or fix a damn thing. Things are about to get really bad, and they can see it coming... but at least we'll have a Liberal in charge!

From my perspective, I am fine with that... Let Democrats control every single facet of government, when it all goes to hell in a hand basket! We'll see who ultimately gets elected to "bring change" in the end. It's happened before, you know?
Click to expand...

It is funny to me that you idiots think McCain will be better than Obama. They have both proposed a shit load of socialist ideas with McCain even topping Obama last week.

The conservative support of McCain shows me how you idiots are really just regular party republicans like the rest. Calling Obama a socialist while ignoring Mccain's pledge to make me bail out you poor people with your shit credit adjustable rate mortgages shows your hypocrisy.

America is getting a shit sandwich this election.
 
My vote for McCain is based more on his ability to handle foreign affairs and the war against radical extremists... I think Obama is practically one of them!

Also, between the two, I think McCain has a better ability to 'reach across the aisle' and work with the other side to get things done and be effective in governing. I think Obama will bring the same partisan polarization we've seen the past 8 years, just from the other side.

I also think Palin brings a new perspective to the table. McCain, Obama, and Biden, are all political insiders, Senators... part of the freaking problem! Palin represents a break from status quot politics in Washington, and could effect meaningful change and represent the 'voice of the people' again.... A Mr. Smith Goes to Washington thing.

I'm not crazy about McCain, he tends to fold like a cheap walmart tent. I do think he has better leadership qualities to be president than Obama.
 
Dixie said:
My vote for McCain is based more on his ability to handle foreign affairs and the war against radical extremists... I think Obama is practically one of them!

Also, between the two, I think McCain has a better ability to 'reach across the aisle' and work with the other side to get things done and be effective in governing. I think Obama will bring the same partisan polarization we've seen the past 8 years, just from the other side.

I also think Palin brings a new perspective to the table. McCain, Obama, and Biden, are all political insiders, Senators... part of the freaking problem! Palin represents a break from status quot politics in Washington, and could effect meaningful change and represent the 'voice of the people' again.... A Mr. Smith Goes to Washington thing.

I'm not crazy about McCain, he tends to fold like a cheap walmart tent. I do think he has better leadership qualities to be president than Obama.
Click to expand...


You are such a hypocrite prick. Just a couple years ago you were CRYING because McCain was reaching across the aisle.

None of this is surprising at this point though.

Also, Palin is a bonafide retard. Everyone knows it, even you. Most of you will go ahead and admit it if McCain loses but surely not until then. Only the honest conservatives have admitted what everyone knows about Palin.
 
Blackflag said:
You are such a hypocrite prick. Just a couple years ago you were CRYING because McCain was reaching across the aisle.

None of this is surprising at this point though.

Also, Palin is a bonafide retard. Everyone knows it, even you. Most of you will go ahead and admit it if McCain loses but surely not until then. Only the honest conservatives have admitted what everyone knows about Palin.
Click to expand...

Hey, if I had my choice, we would be electing Mike Huckabee right now. I want a died-in-the-wool conservative who will stand on conservative principles and not bend. Unfortunately, that candidate is not one of my choices in this election. I have my pick... McCain or Obama. Given that choice, I have to go with McCain. Given the choice of polarization or the possibility of bipartisanship, I will take my chances with bipartisanship... maybe I will regret that, maybe not.... I think it's better to not have complete gridlock in government. Obama isn't going to "unite" a damn thing, mark my words. 4 years of partisan rhetoric and republican obstructionism is what you will have, and nothing will change that with Obama. McCain at least has a chance of being able to compromise and get along enough to get something done.

Palin is not a "retard" ...far from it. She is a bright articulate conservative who is pro-life and she has appeal to a wide section of the base. The sad thing is, she has not been able to speak for herself during this election, the McCain people have kept her silenced, and it was a huge mistake, in my opinion. She had the chance to really change the dynamic for McCain, and he blew it. It's also sad, the way politics go, she will be on the losing ticket this election, and we'll probably never hear from her again. I do think she is the kind of person the Republican party has yearned for since Ronald Reagan, my opinion hasn't changed one bit on that.

Republicans who have criticized Palin, are beltway insiders, who naturally don't like ANYONE from the outside. They did the same thing with Reagan when he first gained national prominence.
 
Dixie said:
It's perfectly "Democratic" but we are not a pure Democracy. We are a "REPRESENTATIVE Republic" ....Do you comprehend what that means, or should I design a coloring book for you? The minority ALWAYS has a voice in our particular political process, that is what makes it so beautiful and perfect. Every man has representation, and it means something. Take that away, and you have "Mob Rule!" That may sound fine to you, as long as YOUR mob is ruling, but what about when you are on the short end of the stick? You gonna be okay with it then? I doubt it. What you would like is, "mob rule" while your "mob" is in the majority, and "representative republic" when they aren't. That is not going to happen in this universe. Sorry!
Click to expand...

Every man has representation, and if you happen to be part of the minority, you are overridden. SORRY! Perfectly democratic. Perfectly Republican. The Republicans do not deserve to be heard. They are scum.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top