|
|
Post by Chuck Storm on Apr 12, 2008 22:10:49 GMT -6
I don't know where people come up with this stuff.  |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Apr 13, 2008 7:00:45 GMT -6
First, Harvard Law School is a festering toilet of liberal fascism and fascist thought. Second, Barry is a liberal elite snob. Do you recall looking at his tax returns. Dude saved essentially no money when he was making over $200k a year. Now, he wants to soak the "rich" to pay for his and millions of other mouthbreathing Americans' piss poor retirement "planning."
|
|
|
|
Post by ignatiusreilly on Apr 13, 2008 12:24:15 GMT -6
Last I checked most people like this guy. Even I like him and I hate snobs. His 'snobness' is conjured up by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Republicans who think any Democrat with a brain is a snob.
You guys calling people snobs is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. All I ever hear from you schmoes is how you are lawyers and you don't like 'poors' and all that other B.S. Whenever I read your posts I always conjure up Tracy Morgan as the black woman on the View from SNL. "I am a LAWYER" Anyone remember those skits? LOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattahawk on Apr 13, 2008 18:29:01 GMT -6
I actually don't think he sounds like to bad of a guy. Way better than billary. As far as what he said the majority of it sounded true to me. He still isn't going to get my vote though do to 3 or 4 big issues I have with the libs'.
1) they are about as weakkneed on Defense as a schoolgirl.
2) Abortion.
3) they are the lovers of illegals.
4) I think if they needed money for something they would invent a product, build it, market it, sell it just for the sole purpose of TAXING IT.
Other than that I think SOME democrats have good ideas. If I could find a Lib' that was flexible on some of these issues, I might actually be persuaded to vote for the Dem's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Storm on Apr 13, 2008 19:17:23 GMT -6
First, Harvard Law School is a festering toilet of liberal fascism and fascist thought. Second, Barry is a liberal elite snob. Do you recall looking at his tax returns. Dude saved essentially no money when he was making over $200k a year. Now, he wants to soak the "rich" to pay for his and millions of other mouthbreathing Americans' piss poor retirement "planning." Well now that the University of Iowa has the Apollo Project in place, I'm sure they'll be flying up the rankings any day now. |
|
|
|
Post by ignatiusreilly on Apr 13, 2008 20:23:05 GMT -6
1) they are about as weakkneed on Defense as a schoolgirl. Why is that? Because they propose to quit throwing money at a war we had no business starting in the first place? I guarantee if someone wanted to start a real war with us, America would respond with supreme force whether there's a simpleton daddy's boy in office or someone that can present himself as an intelligent leader. America's defense is perfectly sound I assure you. We're a little spread thin on troops right now, but of course that's in no way shape or form a fault of the 'weak-kneed' liberals (or many other Democrats). You know which side must take the blame for that stupidity. |
|
|
|
Post by GhostMod 5000 on Apr 13, 2008 20:34:16 GMT -6
Hmmm, Democrats are in favor of illegals?
Why the hell didn't Bush and the Republicans do something about it when they were in charge for 6 years? Oh yeah, because they don't really want to do anything about it either!
|
|
|
|
Post by ignatiusreilly on Apr 13, 2008 21:09:51 GMT -6
I love these 'issues' like abortion. They are completely irrelevant, but always get used as a reason to vote for a Republican. Nothing but a political issue that I personally couldn't give a sh*t about. Not because it's not an important topic but because it's meaningless. It's just a way to divide up the votes. I think anybody who uses that as a reason to vote a certain way is a sucker, no offense. You're just dividing yourself up exactly the way the party wants you to. Every president, senator, house rep, governor, mayor and city councilman claims to be one way or another on this to get these easy votes. But nothing ever changes and understandably so. Abortion was made legal by the supreme court and that isn't going to change. I'm no lawyer, but what is the term- 'stare decisis', basically Case Law - a US court has made a decision and that decision becomes law. George Bush doesn't even know what that means-- you think he's capable of changing the abortion laws? Republicans and people who use this anti-abortion 'issue' tactic are just securing the gullible vote. It's like 'family values'... got to be one of the stupidest political terms I've ever heard, but many people fall for it. They are likely the same ones that vote for candidates who are 'strong on abortion'. Maybe I should have posted this in the 'people who need to be thinned from the herd' thread. If I were running for President (God help us all), I would make clear my position on abortion. "I don't give a f*ck". I'm not going to do anything. I'm going to let the courts decide that one. The President has more important issues that need 4 years of attention. And I'd guarantee my opponents would do the same thing, no matter what they say. I'd challenge them.. someone like John McCain. If he wants to use abortion as an issue I'd want to know his specific plan to overturn the decision. And if he didn't have one I'd tell him to shut the hell up about it then so we could focus on a real issue. |
|
|
|
Post by detlef on Apr 14, 2008 7:09:17 GMT -6
Chicago-Kent is not elitist. Much like the Illinois men's basketball program under that dork mid-major coach Bruce Weber, it's not elite.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Storm on Apr 14, 2008 8:04:19 GMT -6
Last I checked most people like this guy. Even I like him and I hate snobs. His 'snobness' is conjured up by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Republicans who think any Democrat with a brain is a snob. Exactly. No person who spent 4 years at Harvard would say something as snobby and elitist to the people of small town and middle America as... You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. The quote must have been manufactured by the vast right wing conspiracy and the Clinton PR machine. I just can't believe that any Harvard Law grad would think/say that people only "cling" to their religion because of bitterness about jobs that left 25 years ago, especially at a fundraiser in San Francisco. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Apr 14, 2008 8:17:30 GMT -6
I love these 'issues' like abortion. They are completely irrelevant, but always get used as a reason to vote for a Republican. Nothing but a political issue that I personally couldn't give a sh*t about. Not because it's not an important topic but because it's meaningless. It's just a way to divide up the votes. I think anybody who uses that as a reason to vote a certain way is a sucker, no offense. You're just dividing yourself up exactly the way the party wants you to. Every president, senator, house rep, governor, mayor and city councilman claims to be one way or another on this to get these easy votes. But nothing ever changes and understandably so. Abortion was made legal by the supreme court and that isn't going to change. I'm no lawyer, but what is the term- 'stare decisis', basically Case Law - a US court has made a decision and that decision becomes law. George Bush doesn't even know what that means-- you think he's capable of changing the abortion laws? Republicans and people who use this anti-abortion 'issue' tactic are just securing the gullible vote. It's like 'family values'... got to be one of the stupidest political terms I've ever heard, but many people fall for it. They are likely the same ones that vote for candidates who are 'strong on abortion'. Maybe I should have posted this in the 'people who need to be thinned from the herd' thread. If I were running for President (God help us all), I would make clear my position on abortion. "I don't give a f*ck". I'm not going to do anything. I'm going to let the courts decide that one. The President has more important issues that need 4 years of attention. And I'd guarantee my opponents would do the same thing, no matter what they say. I'd challenge them.. someone like John McCain. If he wants to use abortion as an issue I'd want to know his specific plan to overturn the decision. And if he didn't have one I'd tell him to shut the hell up about it then so we could focus on a real issue. I really don't want to sound like a dick, but this is precisely why uneducated poors shouldn't be allowed to vote. Abortion is a prime issue in the country, and though the POTUS can't change it on his own, he can appoint a non-liberal non-judicial activist justices to do so. Stare decisis is code word for liberal judicial activists to "make" law by crafting crap out of thin air (i.e. right to privacy from Roe v. Wade or separate but equal doctrine) and then try to tie the hands of future generations to follow the activist approach. When a Republican presidential or congressional candidate says they are anti-abortion, you can take that to mean they will work to nominate and confirm anti-abortion judges who don't buy into the fictitious penumbral rights that a bunch of Yale and Harvard elitists crafted a few decades ago. Of course, my guess is that the GOP as a whole would rather keep abortion laws the way they are now so they have something to fight against. I mean hell, if we just get one more red blooded small government American on the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade is gone, but then I would worry that voter turnout would drop for the GOP and we'd have liberal elites winning elections based on who is more opposed to free trade and who wants to implement the bigger wealth transfer scheme. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Apr 14, 2008 9:24:12 GMT -6
Last I checked most people like this guy. Even I like him and I hate snobs. His 'snobness' is conjured up by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Republicans who think any Democrat with a brain is a snob. Exactly. No person who spent 4 years at Harvard would say something as snobby and elitist to the people of small town and middle America as... You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. The quote must have been manufactured by the vast right wing conspiracy and the Clinton PR machine. I just can't believe that any Harvard Law grad would think/say that people only "cling" to their religion because of bitterness about jobs that left 25 years ago, especially at a fundraiser in San Francisco. That quote is 100% true. He should not back down from that. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Apr 14, 2008 9:25:31 GMT -6
I love these 'issues' like abortion. They are completely irrelevant, but always get used as a reason to vote for a Republican. Nothing but a political issue that I personally couldn't give a sh*t about. Not because it's not an important topic but because it's meaningless. It's just a way to divide up the votes. I think anybody who uses that as a reason to vote a certain way is a sucker, no offense. You're just dividing yourself up exactly the way the party wants you to. Every president, senator, house rep, governor, mayor and city councilman claims to be one way or another on this to get these easy votes. But nothing ever changes and understandably so. Abortion was made legal by the supreme court and that isn't going to change. I'm no lawyer, but what is the term- 'stare decisis', basically Case Law - a US court has made a decision and that decision becomes law. George Bush doesn't even know what that means-- you think he's capable of changing the abortion laws? Republicans and people who use this anti-abortion 'issue' tactic are just securing the gullible vote. It's like 'family values'... got to be one of the stupidest political terms I've ever heard, but many people fall for it. They are likely the same ones that vote for candidates who are 'strong on abortion'. Maybe I should have posted this in the 'people who need to be thinned from the herd' thread. If I were running for President (God help us all), I would make clear my position on abortion. "I don't give a f*ck". I'm not going to do anything. I'm going to let the courts decide that one. The President has more important issues that need 4 years of attention. And I'd guarantee my opponents would do the same thing, no matter what they say. I'd challenge them.. someone like John McCain. If he wants to use abortion as an issue I'd want to know his specific plan to overturn the decision. And if he didn't have one I'd tell him to shut the hell up about it then so we could focus on a real issue. I really don't want to sound like a dick, but this is precisely why uneducated poors shouldn't be allowed to vote. Abortion is a prime issue in the country, and though the POTUS can't change it on his own, he can appoint a non-liberal non-judicial activist justices to do so. Stare decisis is code word for liberal judicial activists to "make" law by crafting crap out of thin air (i.e. right to privacy from Roe v. Wade or separate but equal doctrine) and then try to tie the hands of future generations to follow the activist approach. When a Republican presidential or congressional candidate says they are anti-abortion, you can take that to mean they will work to nominate and confirm anti-abortion judges who don't buy into the fictitious penumbral rights that a bunch of Yale and Harvard elitists crafted a few decades ago. Of course, my guess is that the GOP as a whole would rather keep abortion laws the way they are now so they have something to fight against. I mean hell, if we just get one more red blooded small government American on the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade is gone, but then I would worry that voter turnout would drop for the GOP and we'd have liberal elites winning elections based on who is more opposed to free trade and who wants to implement the bigger wealth transfer scheme. Don't worry about sounding like a dick.......you always sound like a snob just like you accuse Obama of. If he is such a snob, I'm surprised you are not supporting him......2 peas in a pod. |
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Storm on Apr 14, 2008 9:30:23 GMT -6
Exactly. No person who spent 4 years at Harvard would say something as snobby and elitist to the people of small town and middle America as... You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. The quote must have been manufactured by the vast right wing conspiracy and the Clinton PR machine. I just can't believe that any Harvard Law grad would think/say that people only "cling" to their religion because of bitterness about jobs that left 25 years ago, especially at a fundraiser in San Francisco. That quote is 100% true. He should not back down from that. Wait, you think it's true that people are religious (or more religious, as the case may be), because they're bitter because their lives suck so bad? And you think people only keep their guns because they're bitter because their lives suck so bad? Like I said, that's just such an elitist line of thought, it's impossible an HLS-educated politician could have said it. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Apr 14, 2008 9:47:21 GMT -6
That quote is 100% true. He should not back down from that. Wait, you think it's true that people are religious (or more religious, as the case may be), because they're bitter because their lives suck so bad? And you think people only keep their guns because they're bitter because their lives suck so bad? Like I said, that's just such an elitist line of thought, it's impossible an HLS-educated politician could have said it. Do you realize when you call others elitist how much of a hypocrite you are? Chicago lawyer who despises the working class and calls them "poors". I believe it is true that people cling to issues such as abortion, gay marriage, gun control because they feel they can affect some sort of change. They have given up on the "have" and "have not" effect of our economy. The people in West Branch, Iowa or Allentown, PA have been resigned to the fact that they will always be working class or working poor; thus, they focus on "don't take my guns away" or "don't kill babies". If the working poor organized and rose up on economic issues like they do some social issues, the distribution of wealth could be changed, much to your dislike. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Apr 14, 2008 10:11:29 GMT -6
If the working poor organized and rose up on economic issues like they do some social issues, the distribution of wealth could be changed, much to your dislike. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas. I know that you liberal fascists are of the opinion that communism is the way to go since it worked so well for the USSR, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodai, North Korea and is leading to a revolution in Venezuela. Maybe someday we can live in a country with a 100% tax on estates and a 99% tax on income above $50,000. Oh wait, we had that, it was called the Carter Administration. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Apr 14, 2008 10:16:15 GMT -6
Oh yeah, I can't be a snob. I can bowl over 200. I grew up in a trailer park. I couldn't afford to go to a big city liberal elite law school like Harvard, Stanford, Northwestern, or Yale. I guess that making chicken salad out of chicken shit and getting out of poverty and the white trash culture that pervades Iowa, makes some of you think I'm a snob.
I enjoy a mac and cheese supper and an ice cold can of Coors Light (it's non-union) as much as the next freaking guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Norm "racerhawk" Parker on Apr 14, 2008 10:23:10 GMT -6
First, Harvard Law School is a festering toilet of liberal fascism and fascist thought. Second, Barry is a liberal elite snob. Do you recall looking at his tax returns. Dude saved essentially no money when he was making over $200k a year. Now, he wants to soak the "rich" to pay for his and millions of other mouthbreathing Americans' piss poor retirement "planning." This is just so perfect. An elitist snob lawyer dissecting what it means to be an elitist snob. Anyone who uses the term "poors" is a de facto snob, are they not? What we really need is a bunch of lawyers gathering around, having a meaningless word parsing party. Oh, wait. We have that already. It's our government, which is represented quite nicely on this board. Both wings. I really get a chuckle when republicans call the left wing "elitist." What could possibly be more elitist than our current executive branch, which has, like you, great disdain for the "poors" as you like to call them? |
|
|
|
Post by ignatiusreilly on Apr 14, 2008 10:26:01 GMT -6
I think it's more your Star Jones attitude and the general douchebaggery that exists in your posts that would lead people to come to this conclusion.
It has nothing to do with bowling, tralier parks, and drinking sissy beer like Coors Light.
But to each his own. If you think that your liberal arts degree makes you better than the next guy, then by all means think that. You are not alone. I was watching an old episode of Hell's Kitchen and there was this customer who got irate and proclaimed, "I have a doctorate in Music" to the maitre'd as he poked his chest. I figured the guy to be about as tough as the paper his liberal arts degree is printed on... soaking wet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Norm "racerhawk" Parker on Apr 14, 2008 10:26:23 GMT -6
Oh yeah, I can't be a snob. I can bowl over 200. I grew up in a trailer park. I couldn't afford to go to a big city liberal elite law school like Harvard, Stanford, Northwestern, or Yale. I guess that making chicken salad out of chicken shit and getting out of poverty and the white trash culture that pervades Iowa, makes some of you think I'm a snob. I enjoy a mac and cheese supper and an ice cold can of Coors Light (it's non-union) as much as the next freaking guy. Your rise to success is admirable, to be sure. That doesn't preclude you from being a snob. Just because you like Coors and mac and cheese doesn't mean you're not a snob, either. It just means you like cheap beer and mac and cheese. That's just fine, and has nothing to do with your apparent disdain for people who aren't like you (an achiever who came from poverty). I don't know, you tell me. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Apr 14, 2008 10:33:57 GMT -6
Oh yeah, I can't be a snob. I can bowl over 200. I grew up in a trailer park. I couldn't afford to go to a big city liberal elite law school like Harvard, Stanford, Northwestern, or Yale. I guess that making chicken salad out of chicken shit and getting out of poverty and the white trash culture that pervades Iowa, makes some of you think I'm a snob. I enjoy a mac and cheese supper and an ice cold can of Coors Light (it's non-union) as much as the next freaking guy. You can be a snob and you are in your posts about those who don't have the same economic means as you do. I do not want to live in a Communist country and don't think it is the ideal system of government or economics. However, the other extreme (which you and auto jack off to) can be just as destructive. Your personal rags to riches story is admirable and should be congratulated. It is too bad that the you hate on those who didn't choose the same path as you and think that they are inferior people. That is where you need to mature. |
|
|
|
Post by ignatiusreilly on Apr 14, 2008 10:39:53 GMT -6
I have no admiration for arrogance.
I came from a poor family too. Going to college is easy. It's not the 1930s or China, where you have to go work in the fields when you reach a certain age. Pell Grants, Loans, Scholarships, etc. Some of the dumbest people I know graduated from college.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gumbyhawk on Apr 14, 2008 11:08:44 GMT -6
I actually don't think he sounds like to bad of a guy. Way better than billary. As far as what he said the majority of it sounded true to me. He still isn't going to get my vote though do to 3 or 4 big issues I have with the libs'. 3) they are the lovers of illegals. <cough!!> McCain!!!!! <cough!!> Remember his Amnesty Bill that got shot down? Yeah... me too. And I hope even MORE folks remember that come November! Dems soft on immigration... PLEASE. Pot, meet kettle. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Apr 14, 2008 11:14:08 GMT -6
First, Anyone who uses the term "poors" is a de facto snob, are they not? What we really need is a bunch of lawyers gathering around, having a meaningless word parsing party. Oh, wait. We have that already. It's our government, which is represented quite nicely on this board. Both wings. I really get a chuckle when republicans call the left wing "elitist." What could possibly be more elitist than our current executive branch, which has, like you, great disdain for the "poors" as you like to call them? Why does everyone get their panties up in a bunch over calling a group "poors?" My family and I were all poors when I was a kid. Through hard work, we made a better life for ourselves. There used to be a time when poors realized the path to not being poor anymore was through hard work and perseverance. Now, it's all about transfer payments and "tax rebates." The Dems failure to comprehend the tremendous negative impact on the poors by the continued implementation of the ethanol subsidy is categorically the greatest economic injustice our government has ever inflicted on the poor. Think about that the next time you libs fill up your car with your ethanol to help the environment. You guys who take actions that directly take food off the plates of the working class make me sick. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Apr 14, 2008 11:18:23 GMT -6
I think it's more your Star Jones attitude and the general douchebaggery that exists in your posts that would lead people to come to this conclusion. It has nothing to do with bowling, tralier parks, and drinking sissy beer like Coors Light. But to each his own. If you think that your liberal arts degree makes you better than the next guy, then by all means think that. You are not alone. I was watching an old episode of Hell's Kitchen and there was this customer who got irate and proclaimed, "I have a doctorate in Music" to the maitre'd as he poked his chest. I figured the guy to be about as tough as the paper his liberal arts degree is printed on... soaking wet. What the hell is a Star Jones? I don't think everyone should go to college because the world needs ditchdiggers, too. In fact your average dumbass with a doctorate in music (I'm not surprised you'd be watching a show about such a guy who got tough with what sounds like a Frenchman) is probably a helluva lot dumber than the guy who graduated last in his class at Lincoln Tech. |
|
