Stand by for political rant that no one else really cares about.
3DS friend code: 1650 1976 9524
My FS type is Steel with Magneton, Forretress and Bronzong.
Last edited by BigLutz; 15th June 2013 at 3:44 AM.
If anything, partisan politics should NEVER be a reason for impeachment.
There's also Chris Matthews accusing Romney of using racist "code words" when he criticized Obama's handling of welfare reform, alongside Salon.com's Alex Sietz-Wald claiming that the welfare argument is all about race. Even during the 1996 election, the Washinton Post's Sig Gassler accused Republicans of using phrases like "violent crime," "welfare reform," and "illegal immigration" as racist code words.
Then we have James Clyburn portraying criticism of Susan Rice after the Benghazi-video debacle as racist. Why? Because they used the word "incompetent."
There's also Richard Wolffe appearing on MSNBC, claiming that Republican criticism of Obama stems from racism.
And to top it all off, there's former President Jimmy Carter claiming that the majority of Obama critics are racists.
Like Rush or hate him, but you can't deny that he's probably right. If people are going to accuse Republicans of being racists just for attacking Obama's policies such as ObamaCare, you can surely bet that they'll throw even stronger allegations at them if they try to impeach him.
Well it doesn't help that certain Republicans have shown extra hostility by calling Obama lazy, accuse him of palling around with terrorists, and the whole freaking Birther movement. But then again since day one, the GOP has been extra hard on the President and that is no secret. Remember what Colin Powell said about there is a dark vein of intolerance within the GOP?
He actually did "pal" around with terrorists, especially now that it is confirmed that he had deep friendships with Bill Ayres
And as for the lazy part, all those days of golf do add up. Not to mention how many times did Dems attack Bush for his time at his ranch?
First off, you do realize that you do show hostility toward Powell when he voted for Obama twice and there might have been reasons that 93 percent of African Americans also did the same? And besides, what part of SOUTHERN STRATEGY do you not understand?That is kind of ironic considering how the left hurled many horrible racist slurs at him including calling him a "House N****" in the lead up to the Iraq war. Seems he has a short memory of how ugly the left can get when there is a Black Republican in a position of power.
I would say McCain did
He did, and Democrats decried that, so why shouldn't Republicans get to decry Obama's constant golf outtings with out being labeled racists?
The left shows all their "tolerance" for her race basically any time she speaks.
Last edited by BigLutz; 15th June 2013 at 6:01 AM.
After what Trent Franks caused an uproar (like most things Republicans say about rape and pregnancy) House Republicans caved and quietly added provisions for rape and incest to his controversial bill in hopes of gaining Democrat support.
I still doubt the Senate will even consider voting on it, if it even passes the House right now.
Anyway, on another topic, I had an interesting conversation with another Republican supporter, who, like others, was accusing Holder of standing behind an "unconstitutional crime" by promising to arrest and punish Mr. Snowder, the "unconstitutional crime" being the whole NSA thing he leaked, which people claim violates the Fourth Amendment.
I pointed out to him that the Fourth Amendment does not apply to telephone metadata, something which was decided as far back as the 70's by the Supreme Court in three cases, including Smith v. Maryland.
While he did not deny it, this is what he said:
My response?"That was decided" by a majority, not a consensus.
I stand with the dissenters, who like me, hold the Fourth Amendment in higher esteem.
He never replied.For someone who seems to "respect" the Constitution so much, you seem to have NO respect at all for Article III. That's the part where it explains the Supreme Court's authority to decide what is constitutional and what is not. Like always, you're trying to have your cake and eat it too.
Just like the guy I spoke to a few days a go, who in several posts argued that gun rights must be maintained, but in many others, called Casey Anthony a murder who deserved to be locked up for the rest of her life. In other words, he supported the Second Amendment but thought that the Sixth should be burned.
Edit: And by the way, JesusFreak, you left out the part about how Rush uses Godwin's Law (something that a certain someone here accused me of doing once, not naming names) and is proud of it. I mean, who coined the term "feminazis"?
Last edited by Maedar; 15th June 2013 at 2:22 PM.
Besides, if you want to go down the "Republicans are a bunch of dirty sexists" road, I can easily point you to Sarah Palin's treatment during the 2008 campaign, which even Hillary Clinton aides stated was downright sexist.
Last edited by jesusfreak94; 15th June 2013 at 3:21 PM.
Also, how could we forget about Red State's Erick Erickson's comments about female breadwinners being antithetical to nature?
Even Fox News' Megyn Kelly didn't take that well.“I’m so used to liberals telling conservatives that they’re anti-science. But liberals who defend this and say it is not a bad thing are very anti-science. When you look at biology — when you look at the natural world — the roles of a male and a female in society and in other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, it’s not antithesis, or it’s not competing, it’s a complementary role.”
Last edited by BigLutz; 15th June 2013 at 4:13 PM.
Let's remind you that Rick Perry vetoed the Equal Pay Bill recently. It goes to show how are they appealing to the women.
Maybe the left should come into the 21st century and accept that the wage gap is driven by personal decision, not evil old men.
Perry also does not even know what the Constitution says, despite how he is so determined to defend it (as I've previously said of Republicans in general):
“Religious freedom does not mean freedom from religion”? Right, Rick. Sure. Maybe you need reading glasses.
Edit: By the way, get a load of this. You'll flip. http://www.upworthy.com/watch-a-poli...-math-lesson-2
Last edited by Maedar; 15th June 2013 at 9:47 PM.
Which is: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
There you go, first ten words.
Then for uses that are not online, it's not Godwin's Law, but something called The Association Fallacy, which is just as bad. (Also called "Hitler ate sugar" by some critics, especially when used in fiction.) Here, this will explain it:Which is: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"
This does not establish a religion as it uses two or more religious symbols and a secular one.
Last edited by BigLutz; 15th June 2013 at 10:33 PM.
Yeah, the "Straw Feminist", as in the feminist whose "feminism" is drawn only for the purposes of either proving them wrong or ridiculing them.
More likely to fight an imaginary male conspiracy rather than actually helping disadvantaged women, often being an out-and-out man hater with exaggerated beliefs.
This is FAR more a product of fiction than it is reality, created by chauvinistic authors. Trust me, I've seen it LOTS of times. Here's a whole list of them: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph.../StrawFeminist
I would dare say that fits such a extreme feminist.
By the way I noticed you did not respond to the Rick Perry thing, so I guess he can read the constitution!