'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate

Oct 1, 2010 | Posted by: Top Mod2 | Full story: thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com

"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Comments (Page 1,932)

Showing posts 38,621 - 38,640 of138,850
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Darryl Washington

Cincinnati, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42497
Jun 21, 2012
 
WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
The Tea Party movement started gaining traction under Bush, plenty of people who protested and spoke up against the Patriot Act, funny how the ones on the Left aren't criticizing it, or Obama and his fellow Dems expanding it even farther-you sure it's the Right that's the one being hypocritical?
<quoted text>
So, two wrongs make a right? Besides, all things in context, still, it's been creeping towards big government a little at a time, Obama's mistake has been throwing the frog into the pot with the water boiling, instead of slowly turning up the temperature. The NDAA, the power grabs of the EPA, all the "quantitative easing", etc topped off with the latest being illegal amnesty with a stroke of the dictatorial pen all while refusing to turn over documents related to the Gun Walker program. The arrogance of Obama and the Dems in power make the expansion of government and the loss of our rights and freedoms to obvious for even the dense to ignore.
<quoted text>
lol, still harping that "bush stole the election"? On November 12, 2001, the Times reported: "Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic counties — Mr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations … The media consortium included The Times ... "
<quoted text>
I feel like I may see you one day walking around with a tin foil hat on your head.
<quoted text>
Valeria Plame? Cheney? lol, it was Richard Armitage at State, and it was known since the beginning. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/219836...
<quoted text>
Pretty sure Dan Rather lost his job running with that make believe story, perhaps you should read up on it, most of this link cites things from factcheck.org http://old.nationalreview.com/owens/owens2004...
<quoted text>
Osama escape? It was Bush's policies that led to Obama's ability to have him assassinated. There was no active WMD program, but a couple of tons of yellow cake uranium, 500+ chemical shells, weaponized strains of bacterial and virus samples and more. There were the multiple UN resolutions as well as Congressional authorization, that cited more than just the threat of WMD's, it also talked of states supporting terrorism, not that Iraq was behind 9/11
You confidently advance questionable assumptions as though they were fact and then build upon them to draw invalid conclusions. You then insult other people’s intelligence by sarcastically implying they are crazy because they don’t do the same thing. It would behove you to recognize this as a problem, and think before you spring into action.
And it’s “aluminum foil,” not “tin foil,” for the crazy stereotype.
American Lady

Danville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42498
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Death Panels After All?
Posted on June 21, 2012

There’s an explosive story out today in the Daily Mail over in the UK claiming that Britain’s National Health Service

>>>> euthanizes(KILLS) 130,000 elderly patients a year.<<<

This claim doesn’t issue from some loopy former governor of an arctic province;

it comes from professor Patrick Pullicino, a consultant neurologist for East Kent Hospitals and Professor of Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Kent.

He made this claim in a speech to the Royal Society of Medicine in London.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/06...
American Lady

Danville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42499
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

In housing bubble scandal......

Holder prosecutes mom and pop, fat cats walk
Yet another scandal for Obama's embattled attorney general

http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/holder-prosecutes-...

NoCrud

Much of this started with Bill Clintoon and CRA. However, keep in mind that while many financial institutions were reluctant to finance risky potential debtors, the ACORN outfit caused many to do it, anyway. And much of it was because of government intervention in the person of Congressman Fwank, and others like him, saying that everything was A-OK.

I also read that George Bush & Co.*complained as many as 17 times* that all was not rosy in the financial area, namely Fannie May and Freddie Mack,

but were told there was no problem. <<<<----<< <

Then the blame either goes to those who did not continue with the complaints regardless of the Media spotlight or that they did not prosecute Frank and his cohorts.(AMEN)

Looking back, there's plenty of blame to pass around. But, I suspect that Holder looks back at his earlier problems and sees them as much more agreeable compared with what is happening in his house now.

The more one digs with this Washington crowd, the deeper it gets.

----------

Holder needs hung by his "toenails?"
My version of justice....;-)
frank

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42500
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
It's just more smoke and mirrors.
Consider your use of the Chevy Volt as an example. You're absolutely right that there have been more Volts "delivered" to dealers. The dealers are ordering the Volts b/c they have been ordered to do so by GM. Not b/c anyone is actually buying the things. Chevy actually SUSPENDED Volt sales starting this past March b/c there was zero demand for the things.
I wouldn't be so keen at crowing car sales as good news. It seems to be another "bubble" similar to the housing market of '08. Ally Financial (formerly GM Financial) has been making loans along the same guidelines of the "no job, no income, but got a pulse? we can finance you!"
Ally Bank offers 72 month paper at 150% of invoice (to cover deficiencies in the trade) at 3% to credit scores as low as 520. Auto dealers reportedly think Ally is “insane” for underwriting such poor quality auto loans, but they are pleased that volume has increased by 20% as a result of the reformatted auto loan program.
Come on Frank, open your eyes man and take a look around every once in a while.
No wonder Ally Financial is preparing to file for bankruptcy. FYI: Ally Financial Inc. was founded in 1919 as GMAC, a provider of financing to automotive customers across the globe. Since then, the business has expanded to include insurance, direct banking, mortgage operations and commercial finance. At its peak it provided over $1 trillion of financing for 150 million cars and trucks around the world. Clearly that bubble is in your head and not in the real world!
Actually, I’m using the Chevy Volt because wingers, like you, have been falling all over each other to find fault as it receives awards and accolades for innovative engineering – your lame attempt at an argument is typical winger-whining!

“Hopping around Topix”

Since: Nov 08

On The Highway To Hell

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42501
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

wtf wrote:
<quoted text>Is Romney running in China?
NO but he`ll be running toward China when it`s all said and done! lol
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42502
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

frank wrote:
<quoted text>
No wonder Ally Financial is preparing to file for bankruptcy. FYI: Ally Financial Inc. was founded in 1919 as GMAC, a provider of financing to automotive customers across the globe. Since then, the business has expanded to include insurance, direct banking, mortgage operations and commercial finance. At its peak it provided over $1 trillion of financing for 150 million cars and trucks around the world. Clearly that bubble is in your head and not in the real world!
Actually, I’m using the Chevy Volt because wingers, like you, have been falling all over each other to find fault as it receives awards and accolades for innovative engineering – your lame attempt at an argument is typical winger-whining!
So, you advance the position that Chevy volts are ostensibly, out selling the corvette. I point out the fallacy of that, and you think that b/c you drive a volt, that the actual failed economic impact of the Volt and the policies that are subsidizing it to the tune of billions aren't even worth discussing any further b/c pointing out the numbers is just "typical winger-whining" and not worth acknowledgement.

Gotcha.

As for Ally Financial, funny how everyone was so gung-ho about housing values continuing to climb, and when a few analyst pointed out the worthlessness of the mortgages being made...it was poo-pooed as doom and gloom and fear mongering...how well has that worked out for everyone?
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42503
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

Darryl Washington wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again (and finally), saying we are spending money on programs that are unconstitutional does not make it true. I understand that’s the name of the tune playing continuously on your radio station, and that it’s not going to change, so I’ll not keep asking you to pause long enough to think or enter into a real discussion. Waking up, metaphorically speaking, is out of the question for you.
Nothing in the Constitution allows for the existence of the Departments of Education, Commerce and Energy (to name a few), government-sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae ( FNM - news - people ) and Freddie Mac ( FRE - news - people ), or ineffective bureaucracies such as the SEC and the FDA. Obamacare is just one of the more recent examples.

The Washington Times, documents federal spending that includes $2.6 million for the training of "Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job," $3.9 million for the SEC to rearrange "desks and offices at its Washington headquarters" and nearly $1 million for the shipping of "two 19-cent washers from South Carolina to Texas," along with the improper use of government credit cards for the purchase of goods including "lingerie, iPods, XBoxes, jewelry, Internet dating services and Hawaiian vacations."

So, for the sake of a real discussion that I am apparently not having...want to chime in on your thoughts about these things?
frank

Oakland, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42505
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you advance the position that Chevy volts are ostensibly, out selling the corvette. I point out the fallacy of that, and you think that b/c you drive a volt, that the actual failed economic impact of the Volt and the policies that are subsidizing it to the tune of billions aren't even worth discussing any further b/c pointing out the numbers is just "typical winger-whining" and not worth acknowledgement.
Gotcha.
As for Ally Financial, funny how everyone was so gung-ho about housing values continuing to climb, and when a few analyst pointed out the worthlessness of the mortgages being made...it was poo-pooed as doom and gloom and fear mongering...how well has that worked out for everyone?
The Chevy Volt was designed and built long before the current administration; the attempt by the wingers to connect Obama with the car is not only laughable, it’s ignorant.
The government does not subsidies the design and manufacture of green cars, it offers rebates on hybrid and alternative-fuel cars through the state or local government after the car is purchased. While rebates on hybrid and alternative fuel cars vary by state, the federal government offers tax credits on some hybrid and alternative fuel car purchases. For hybrid cars, you can currently get a tax credit of up to $3,400 (depending on the make and model hybrid you buy). Anyone buying a Chevrolet Volt, your eligible for the $7500 Federal rebate, as well as a potential $5000 California Rebate.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxcenter.shtm...
whitehair

Eminence, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42506
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

And with what you just said,you think the Gov`t does not subsidise the auto industry for the so called green cars?The chevy volt is expensive,no one wants to buy,and they then have to be re-batteried,which is very expensive.A really good conversation,not a good conservative purchase.And where in the Constitution does the gov`t get the right to take over any private(stock owned)company?Where in the constitution does it say the gov`t may rebate any companies product?Where does it say the gov`t may choose which company will be helped to succeed or fail?
Could the rebates be why Calif.and the Fed.gov `t are going broke?Just can not control themselves from wetting their own pants?Of course this is just my opinion,not worth a cup of coffee.
Darryl Washington

Cincinnati, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42507
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing in the Constitution allows for the existence of the Departments of Education, Commerce and Energy (to name a few), government-sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae ( FNM - news - people ) and Freddie Mac ( FRE - news - people ), or ineffective bureaucracies such as the SEC and the FDA. Obamacare is just one of the more recent examples.
The Washington Times, documents federal spending that includes $2.6 million for the training of "Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job," $3.9 million for the SEC to rearrange "desks and offices at its Washington headquarters" and nearly $1 million for the shipping of "two 19-cent washers from South Carolina to Texas," along with the improper use of government credit cards for the purchase of goods including "lingerie, iPods, XBoxes, jewelry, Internet dating services and Hawaiian vacations."
So, for the sake of a real discussion that I am apparently not having...want to chime in on your thoughts about these things?
The basic rules of logic can be tricky for the uninitiated and require some discipline and exercise to master. Let me explain as concretely as possible. Failure of the constitution to specify that something is legal does not make it illegal. The constitution does not say that it is legal for there to be Republican and Democratic political parties, that a woman, African American or Mormon may serve as president, that states may adopt official state flowers or slogans, etc.

I could do this until I’m orange in the face, but what would be the point? You’re stuck in the attack mode dedicated to espousing only one irrefutable idea ad infinitum in the form of regurgitating without formal analysis most anything and everything that you believe to demonstrate your belief system.

You might want to check out http://www.campbellsville.edu/ .
Darryls sister Darrylene

Glasgow, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42508
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Darryl Washington wrote:
<quoted text>
The basic rules of logic can be tricky for the uninitiated and require some discipline and exercise to master. Let me explain as concretely as possible. Failure of the constitution to specify that something is legal does not make it illegal. The constitution does not say that it is legal for there to be Republican and Democratic political parties, that a woman, African American or Mormon may serve as president, that states may adopt official state flowers or slogans, etc.
I could do this until I’m orange in the face, but what would be the point? You’re stuck in the attack mode dedicated to espousing only one irrefutable idea ad infinitum in the form of regurgitating without formal analysis most anything and everything that you believe to demonstrate your belief system.
You might want to check out http://www.campbellsville.edu/ .
Didn't I read those exact words in your post in a newspaper article somewhere? lol Your words? Come on Darryl, you're not fooling anyone. Well, maybe you are fooling your other brother Darryl but the rest of us...not so much boy! LMMFAO!
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42509
Jun 21, 2012
 
frank wrote:
<quoted text>
The Chevy Volt was designed and built long before the current administration; the attempt by the wingers to connect Obama with the car is not only laughable, it’s ignorant.
The government does not subsidies the design and manufacture of green cars, it offers rebates on hybrid and alternative-fuel cars through the state or local government after the car is purchased. While rebates on hybrid and alternative fuel cars vary by state, the federal government offers tax credits on some hybrid and alternative fuel car purchases. For hybrid cars, you can currently get a tax credit of up to $3,400 (depending on the make and model hybrid you buy). Anyone buying a Chevrolet Volt, your eligible for the $7500 Federal rebate, as well as a potential $5000 California Rebate.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxcenter.shtm...
The Volt only exists thanks to government subsidies. No one wants the thing, and taxpayer money is going much farther than a simple $7,500 a car.

James Hohman at Michigan’s Mackinac Center has added up the numbers at the supply end and found the public subsidy for the Volt amounts to a $3 billion, putting the public subsidy per car at a whopping $250,000 per car. http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16...

The figure looks at total state and federal assistance offered for the development and production of the Chevy Volt. His analysis included 18 government deals that included loans, rebates, grants and tax credits. For example, the Department of Energy awarded a $105.9 million grant to the GM Brownstown plant that assembles the batteries.
The amount of government assistance does not include the fact that General Motors is currently 26 percent owned by the federal government.
Depending on what state, and which other tax incentives, government "loans" that can be used, the Volt is subsidized at roughly $50,000 to $250,000 per car since they've only "sold" approximately 6,000 vehicles.
Darryl Washington

Cincinnati, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42510
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Darryls sister Darrylene wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't I read those exact words in your post in a newspaper article somewhere? lol Your words? Come on Darryl, you're not fooling anyone. Well, maybe you are fooling your other brother Darryl but the rest of us...not so much boy! LMMFAO!
Darrylene, my long-lost sister! I thought I’d never hear from you after Mama threw you out of the house for selling yourself for a few hits of crack. It’s such a coincidence that you ended up in the small town of Glasgow. There’s this person there that goes by “Lordy,” who keeps trying to engage me in a discussion but it’s like listening to a broken record.

Please try to be more selective in your choice of friends there. If you ever kick the pipe, you’d be welcome to join us at the compound.
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42511
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

3

1

1

Darryl Washington wrote:
<quoted text>
The basic rules of logic can be tricky for the uninitiated and require some discipline and exercise to master. Let me explain as concretely as possible. Failure of the constitution to specify that something is legal does not make it illegal. The constitution does not say that it is legal for there to be Republican and Democratic political parties, that a woman, African American or Mormon may serve as president, that states may adopt official state flowers or slogans, etc.
I could do this until I’m orange in the face, but what would be the point? You’re stuck in the attack mode dedicated to espousing only one irrefutable idea ad infinitum in the form of regurgitating without formal analysis most anything and everything that you believe to demonstrate your belief system.
You might want to check out http://www.campbellsville.edu/ .
Wow, that was a really long and drawn out way of saying "you're stupid". No matter how you have couched it, you're still letting your elitism and disdain slip through in overwhelming force.

The 10th Amendment states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

So actually, yes the Constitution DOES say that the Republican party and Democrat party are legal. The First Amendment includes the freedom of association. Americans are free to associate with and without whom we wish, for whatever reason we like.(Or at least we should be) Only the government must treat us with “equal justice under law". In Roberts (1984), the Court recognized that the power to determine its own membership is central to the free speech rights of expressive organizations, and what is more expressive of our values and beliefs than the political parties we choose to support financially and with our vote.

The point being, the Constitution sets limits to the powers available to the government, especially the Federal government. There should be SOMETHING that the Federal Government can point to for the laws and regulations it sets forth. Otherwise, there really is no law.
Feel free to make the Constitutional argument concerning the legality of Obamacare, or any of the other departments and spending that I previously mentioned. Unless your whole constitutional argument is that b/c the Constitution doesn't explicitly state we can't have "x", then we can.(of course, that means ignoring the 10th amendment...)

You appear to be what many refer to as "an over educated idiot".
Darryl Washington

Cincinnati, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42512
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

2

Don’t you mean “overly educated idiot?” Our words define us. Q.E.D.
WakeUp

Campbellsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42513
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Darryl Washington wrote:
Don’t you mean “overly educated idiot?” Our words define us. Q.E.D.
ah's so'ry ah did not use right grammar

ah hope yo' will on over look this hyar terrible transgresshun in an effo't t'unnerstan' th' larger points of mah postin'

Still waiting for your words to contain anything of substance (or anything at all at this point) in expanding upon your original Constitutional argument showing the apparent fallacy of statements most often associated with the Tea Party movement.
Darryl Washington

Cincinnati, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42514
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
ah's so'ry ah did not use right grammar
ah hope yo' will on over look this hyar terrible transgresshun in an effo't t'unnerstan' th' larger points of mah postin'
Still waiting for your words to contain anything of substance (or anything at all at this point) in expanding upon your original Constitutional argument showing the apparent fallacy of statements most often associated with the Tea Party movement.
That was an embarrassing presentation, certainly not the best way to define your demeanor. I’ve showered you with meaningful substance and you consistently failed to recognize it. Your agenda is to fail thusly and only react reflexively in direct opposition with an apparently endless stream of ridiculous challenges.

If you want meaningful content, you will need to open your mind to new ideas and think for yourself rather than just being oppositional to those who can and do. Seriously, seek a college education. It will make you more capable. formal education does not tend to people stupid, which is only a myth espoused by people who feel inferior to those who are better educated and equipped to solve problems.

It would be futile to expend further effort for you, WakeUp, but I do wish you well and hope you will choose to elevate yourself.
Gary Johnson 2012

Fontana, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42515
Jun 21, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Recall that sell out traitor right now!: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/recall-ran...
Hello

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42516
Jun 21, 2012
 
Darryl Washington wrote:
Don’t you mean “overly educated idiot?” Our words define us. Q.E.D.
Actually it's just (Educated Idiot)

And I think he hit the nail right on the head...
Justthefacts

Morgantown, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42517
Jun 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

WakeUp wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing in the Constitution allows for the existence of the Departments of Education, Commerce and Energy (to name a few), government-sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae ( FNM - news - people ) and Freddie Mac ( FRE - news - people ), or ineffective bureaucracies such as the SEC and the FDA. Obamacare is just one of the more recent examples.
The Washington Times, documents federal spending that includes $2.6 million for the training of "Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsibly on the job," $3.9 million for the SEC to rearrange "desks and offices at its Washington headquarters" and nearly $1 million for the shipping of "two 19-cent washers from South Carolina to Texas," along with the improper use of government credit cards for the purchase of goods including "lingerie, iPods, XBoxes, jewelry, Internet dating services and Hawaiian vacations."
So, for the sake of a real discussion that I am apparently not having...want to chime in on your thoughts about these things?
You left out there is nothing in the Constitution about having Medicare, Social Security, building interstate highways, dams to control flooding and provide power or laws to protect us from companies dumping waste into rivers. I'm glad you and Ron Paul aren't running the nation. People would be working for .30 cents an hour just like in China. Nothing in the Constitution against that either.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 38,621 - 38,640 of138,850
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••