Ruling motivates Romney supporters

If conservatives needed any more motivation to unseat President Obama, they got it Thursday from the Supreme Court, which provided fresh political opportunities for Mitt Romney even as it handed the president a legal victory. Full Story

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

#526 Jul 22, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>I don't understand why you feel the need to lie in order to cover your lie, but Feinstein said no such thing on ANY TV NETWORK. IN FACT SHE SAID THE OPPOSITE YOU PATHETIC LIAR
http://abcnews.go.com/politics/t/blogEntry...
Conservatives will simply lie about anything
Senator Feinstein Says Concealed & Carry Would Have Meant a "Firefight in Theater" With Many
YOU TUBE hasnt got this entire clip, But before she talked about banning 134 different rifles

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

#527 Jul 22, 2012
Feinstein - Why are these weapons available


60 Minutes : Feinstein Not Coming For Guns YET
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
d-pants

Ostrander, OH

#528 Jul 22, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>I don't understand why you feel the need to lie in order to cover your lie, but Feinstein said no such thing on ANY TV NETWORK. IN FACT SHE SAID THE OPPOSITE YOU PATHETIC LIAR
http://abcnews.go.com/politics/t/blogEntry...
Conservatives will simply lie about anything
. Dianne Feinstein, one of more outspoken gun-control advocates in Congress, said today that both Mitt Romney and President Obama should give the gun control issue a lot of "consideration," but said now is a "bad time" to press the issue politically."
Direct quote from your link. Did you even read the article. It's hardly the opposite. You're a tool.

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

#529 Jul 22, 2012
d-pants wrote:
<quoted text>
. Dianne Feinstein, one of more outspoken gun-control advocates in Congress, said today that both Mitt Romney and President Obama should give the gun control issue a lot of "consideration," but said now is a "bad time" to press the issue politically."
Direct quote from your link. Did you even read the article. It's hardly the opposite. You're a tool.
just await his answer, He will lie until he is blue for another liberal

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#530 Jul 22, 2012
d-pants wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think most people don't know what a civil libritarian is?? They are better than the tea party.
A big part of the tea party are libertarians.

Since: Jun 09

Twentynine Palms, CA

#531 Jul 22, 2012
Prep-for-Dep wrote:
The key is to get third party candidates into ground level government positions first. Then work up through the ranks. Be patient rather than run third party candidates for president right away when there's no chance for victory. If we get third party candidates into local and state government, get third party electors appointed, and revamp presidential debates to allow third party participation, then we can get away from the "lesser of two evils" choice.
Be patient with whom? The machinery of the GOP has no motivation to change -- or even be significantly more accommodating -- as long as they can slate big government nominees and the masses of the right consistetly bend over for them (I don't mean to be overly offensive with this imagery, but I can't presently think of a better way to make my point) on the not-as-bad-as-a-liberal line of reasoning. The Democratic Party strayed far to the Left with McGovern & Co., but when a signifcant portion of the Democratic masses (Reagan Democrats, Boll Weevils, etc.), made it clear that they would not put up with just any feces that the establishment shoveled in their direction, the party had to make some serious moves to moderate. I'm not saying that the DLC, and Bill Clinton were ideal -- not by any means -- but they did represent a significant moderating shift in the party. Unfortunately, the DEMS fell in love with Barack Obama and now conservatives (by Democratic standards, at least) bend over backwards chanting "OBAMA, OBAMA" no matter how distateful they find his policies (e.g. Harry Reid)-- either that, or they step down (e.g. Evan Bayh). If conservative (again, by Democratic standards) Democrats had all said "well, we just have no choice but to vote for McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, etc.) then the party machinery would have no motivation to change. Afterall, why buy the cow when you're getting the milk for free?
A simliar situation existed in the British Labour Party, but Tony Blair significantly moderated that group -- although Gordon Brown may have ruined what Blair accomplished. I am, of course, no expert on UK politics.
While the GOP situation is by no means identical, I think that it is similar enough for liberty consevatives to at least play hard to get.

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Lake Charles, LA

#532 Jul 22, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>Although I agree with you completely, it is easier said than done. Libertarians have been on the ballot here for years. Most people don't know what a Libertarian is. The problem is money. Anyone who goes off of the GOP or Dem. platform doesn't get backed with party funds. The people are too ingrained with the two party system and don't go for something unfamiliar.
I totally understand. Believe me.
That's why it's important to start at the lower levels and work up. Lead by example, and win people's trust.
Hopefully, a few third party candidates can eventually end up in a position to effect change that will benefit this country. One change that would help tremendously is placing a cap on campaign funds. As you stated, the two dominant parties make the rules and fund their own. In the beginning of this country there was no radio, tv, or Internet. People rarely knew what a candidate even looked like. They voted on platform and record. If a candidate didn't do what he said he would do, he got fired the next election. I think a cap on campaign funding would get us back closer to the purity of those times.

It's an up hill battle. It won't happen over night. But I have to believe it will happen.

Since: Jun 09

Twentynine Palms, CA

#533 Jul 22, 2012
Teaman wrote:
Although I agree with you completely, it is easier said than done. Libertarians have been on the ballot here for years. Most people don't know what a Libertarian is. The problem is money. Anyone who goes off of the GOP or Dem. platform doesn't get backed with party funds. The people are too ingrained with the two party system and don't go for something unfamiliar.
There's more likely to be success when one takes a diversified approach. E.g., in New York state, the Conservative Party often endorses GOP nominees when they are faithful to a conservative vision. But they slate their own candidate when the GOP nominates a "RINO." 1965, they could have just said, "John Lindsay is not as bad as Abraham Beame" (William F. Buckley, Jr.'s "The Unmaking of a Mayor" is an excellent account of this mayoral race) or in 1970 "Senator Charles Goodel is better than Richard Ottinger", but they ran their own candidate instead. In instance it "worked" and another it did not, but in both cases they held to their convictions.

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#534 Jul 22, 2012
Card Carrying Zionist wrote:
<quoted text>
There's more likely to be success when one takes a diversified approach. E.g., in New York state, the Conservative Party often endorses GOP nominees when they are faithful to a conservative vision. But they slate their own candidate when the GOP nominates a "RINO." 1965, they could have just said, "John Lindsay is not as bad as Abraham Beame" (William F. Buckley, Jr.'s "The Unmaking of a Mayor" is an excellent account of this mayoral race) or in 1970 "Senator Charles Goodel is better than Richard Ottinger", but they ran their own candidate instead. In instance it "worked" and another it did not, but in both cases they held to their convictions.
I understand what you're saying. We ran our candidate here for the senate, stuck to our convictions, but that big GOP machine with all of it's money just ran right over him. Now we're stuck with an establishment republican RINO candidate for the senate. He'll never take the seat from Menendez in this very blue, entitlement ridden state. It's very difficult these days to become known to the public without big financial backing. A left leaning press doesn't help either.
d-pants

Ostrander, OH

#535 Jul 22, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
A big part of the tea party are libertarians.
What the hell is the tea party? Nobody I know knows what that is.
d-pants

Ostrander, OH

#536 Jul 22, 2012
Card Carrying Zionist wrote:
<quoted text>
Be patient with whom? The machinery of the GOP has no motivation to change -- or even be significantly more accommodating -- as long as they can slate big government nominees and the masses of the right consistetly bend over for them (I don't mean to be overly offensive with this imagery, but I can't presently think of a better way to make my point) on the not-as-bad-as-a-liberal line of reasoning. The Democratic Party strayed far to the Left with McGovern & Co., but when a signifcant portion of the Democratic masses (Reagan Democrats, Boll Weevils, etc.), made it clear that they would not put up with just any feces that the establishment shoveled in their direction, the party had to make some serious moves to moderate. I'm not saying that the DLC, and Bill Clinton were ideal -- not by any means -- but they did represent a significant moderating shift in the party. Unfortunately, the DEMS fell in love with Barack Obama and now conservatives (by Democratic standards, at least) bend over backwards chanting "OBAMA, OBAMA" no matter how distateful they find his policies (e.g. Harry Reid)-- either that, or they step down (e.g. Evan Bayh). If conservative (again, by Democratic standards) Democrats had all said "well, we just have no choice but to vote for McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, etc.) then the party machinery would have no motivation to change. Afterall, why buy the cow when you're getting the milk for free?
A simliar situation existed in the British Labour Party, but Tony Blair significantly moderated that group -- although Gordon Brown may have ruined what Blair accomplished. I am, of course, no expert on UK politics.
While the GOP situation is by no means identical, I think that it is similar enough for liberty consevatives to at least play hard to get.
Amen.

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#537 Jul 22, 2012
d-pants wrote:
<quoted text>
What the hell is the tea party? Nobody I know knows what that is.
A movement made up of hundreds of loosely connected groups that are for the original principle of the constitution, less federal government, fiscally responsible government, free market.

There is no overall leader. I'm beginning to feel there should be one. The Palins, Bachmanns, et al, have gone off message with social issues which were non issues in the beginning.

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Lake Charles, LA

#538 Jul 22, 2012
Card Carrying Zionist wrote:
<quoted text>Be patient with whom? The machinery of the GOP has no motivation to change -- or even be significantly more accommodating -- as long as they can slate big government nominees and the masses of the right consistetly bend over for them (I don't mean to be overly offensive with this imagery, but I can't presently think of a better way to make my point) on the not-as-bad-as-a-liberal line of reasoning. The Democratic Party strayed far to the Left with McGovern & Co., but when a signifcant portion of the Democratic masses (Reagan Democrats, Boll Weevils, etc.), made it clear that they would not put up with just any feces that the establishment shoveled in their direction, the party had to make some serious moves to moderate. I'm not saying that the DLC, and Bill Clinton were ideal -- not by any means -- but they did represent a significant moderating shift in the party. Unfortunately, the DEMS fell in love with Barack Obama and now conservatives (by Democratic standards, at least) bend over backwards chanting "OBAMA, OBAMA" no matter how distateful they find his policies (e.g. Harry Reid)-- either that, or they step down (e.g. Evan Bayh). If conservative (again, by Democratic standards) Democrats had all said "well, we just have no choice but to vote for McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, etc.) then the party machinery would have no motivation to change. Afterall, why buy the cow when you're getting the milk for free?
A simliar situation existed in the British Labour Party, but Tony Blair significantly moderated that group -- although Gordon Brown may have ruined what Blair accomplished. I am, of course, no expert on UK politics.
While the GOP situation is by no means identical, I think that it is similar enough for liberty consevatives to at least play hard to get.
I'm sorry you had to type all that.
I was talking about being patient with the voters.
My point is to get viable third party candidates in at the ground level and lead by example. Win the voters over by running average everyday people to represent average everyday people.
Eventually, a viable third party will have a chance at the presidency. It's not now, and it's not soon. But, it eventually has to happen.
d-pants

Delaware, OH

#539 Jul 23, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
A movement made up of hundreds of loosely connected groups that are for the original principle of the constitution, less federal government, fiscally responsible government, free market.
There is no overall leader. I'm beginning to feel there should be one. The Palins, Bachmanns, et al, have gone off message with social issues which were non issues in the beginning.
Yes when they get a leader who fits what you have described let us know.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#542 Jul 23, 2012
Vance1 wrote:
Feinstein - Why are these weapons available
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =pvQiKdSG5r4XX
60 Minutes : Feinstein Not Coming For Guns YET
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Youre patheticically covering your weak lie. ust admit your stupidity and move on. she clearly says that now is nopt the time in the clip you provided

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#543 Jul 23, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
A movement made up of hundreds of loosely connected groups that are for the original principle of the constitution, less federal government, fiscally responsible government, free market.
There is no overall leader. I'm beginning to feel there should be one. The Palins, Bachmanns, et al, have gone off message with social issues which were non issues in the beginning.
THe tea party were always backers of palin ad bachman. quite honestly i will never understand the conservative love for idiots.
Wake Up

Bourbonnais, IL

#544 Jul 23, 2012
Devotion to idiots would that include Obama and Pelosi LOL, yep the deep conservative thinker here LOL LOL saw this one a mile away!
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>THe tea party were always backers of palin ad bachman. quite honestly i will never understand the conservative love for idiots.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#545 Jul 23, 2012
Wake Up wrote:
Devotion to idiots would that include Obama and Pelosi LOL, yep the deep conservative thinker here LOL LOL saw this one a mile away! <quoted text>
Wow...see what you did ther? You took what I said and changed the names....you truly are a conservative genius
Wake Up

Bourbonnais, IL

#546 Jul 23, 2012
Really you don't think we call them idiots everyday in our homes out here in the cities and towns of America. We have as much respect for them, as they do us, calling us they and the enemy, etc.. It doesn't take a genius to see the last four years have been the worst economy of our lifetime.. Who elected this piece of shitt, thanks Nugent for expressing what millions now think. Btw Obama is not getting independents voters, no matter what he says about Romney, sounds good, what is the next plan for Obama LOL!!
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>Wow...see what you did ther? You took what I said and changed the names....you truly are a conservative genius

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

#547 Jul 23, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>Youre patheticically covering your weak lie. ust admit your stupidity and move on. she clearly says that now is nopt the time in the clip you provided
Thanks for proving that you are merely just a tool for Obama aka A Useful Idiot!
You are just another indoctrinated fool.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Retreat is 14th largest mental health provider ... 33 min Community Disorga... 10
Fannin Co. disputes bill for expert witness in ... 45 min One upon a time 4
Elk River pastor charged (Jan '11) 1 hr rebeccacanfield 1,586
Man Charged in Bushwick Anti-Gay Shooting Left ... 2 hr Beauty QUEEN 13
What's next for Shane Lamb after he admits lyin... 7 hr freedom 1
Eden reacts to new Boyd shooting recordings 8 hr merle 3
Money talks: Obamacare initiative makes headway... 11 hr barefoot2626 62

Law People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE