god must bless america

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

so do you think Bush should have spent more or Obama less?

Neither, really. They're both probably too much, and once the floodgates are open, let's just do it the American way and go as big as we can.

That's the thing, is that I'm not the one complaining about Obama's spending, so I don't need to be accountable for not complaining about Bush's spending...why would I have done that? Obviously, like Bob says, I disagree with what he was spending it on, but I certainly wasn't complaining about the amount. That was supposed to be your job based on how we now know you feel about spending as of three months ago...

[SOREHOOF]

I thought the left would come around once they realized this guy was doing the same thing as the last guy was but I guess I was wrong. Wake up America.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Insightful, strange you capitilized God and not America?

i would have done it the other way around. i know america exists.

and if you take the emotion out, and of course the ' party in charge can't do a goddam thing right' as well....

you might just remember a guy named timothy mcveigh. he was a war vet.

now, does that mean all vets are to be suspected? obviously not. is the military a microcosm of our society? absolutely, emphatically, yes. now, the ordinary citizen doesn't get trained to kill, kill, kill. but our soldiers do. it's not blasphemous to suggest some might go down the wrong path upon discharge, it's reality.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Not in this case, because YOU weren't bitching about uncontrollable spending for 8 years...unless of course I missed that consistent POV coming from you around here.

I frankly don't care a whole lot...and wasn't bitching about Bush's spending when it was happening the same way I'm not bitching about Obama's.

I only do it now when you guys want to all of the sudden start holding people to a standard you just seem to have found three months ago. Your hypocrisy and transparency isn't all that much my personal problem to fix. I'm at least consistent.

no, he wasn't. dell didn't start with political posts til the dems started their electioneering.

[GBBob]

[quote=Danzig]no, he wasn't. dell didn't start with political posts til the dems started their electioneering.[/QUOTE]

Can you define that and what about it is relevant to Dell's paranoia?

[Danzig]

[quote=GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

no, he wasn't. dell didn't start with political posts til the dems started their electioneering.[/QUOTE]

Can you define that and what about it is relevant to Dell's paranoia?

oh, he's paranoid? i thought he was republican...

maybe i used the wrong word. i think i should have said campaigning.

[GBBob]

[quote=Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

oh, he's paranoid? i thought he was republican...

maybe i used the wrong word. i think i should have said campaigning.

John McCain is a Republican...Ronald Reagan was a Republican..Steve..well Steve is giving Ann Coulter a run for her money and making Joe McArthey proud

[Danzig]

[quote=GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

John McCain is a Republican...Ronald Reagan was a Republican..Steve..well Steve is giving Ann Coulter a run for her money and making Joe McArthey proud

argh, i can't stand her. she's a looney.

and reagan...he was our commander in chief when tony and i were in the service. i know some didn't care for him, but i liked the guy.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Not in this case, because YOU weren't bitching about uncontrollable spending for 8 years...unless of course I missed that consistent POV coming from you around here.

I frankly don't care a whole lot...and wasn't bitching about Bush's spending when it was happening the same way I'm not bitching about Obama's.

I only do it now when you guys want to all of the sudden start holding people to a standard you just seem to have found three months ago. Your hypocrisy and transparency isn't all that much my personal problem to fix. I'm at least consistent.

Being consistently wrong is nothing to brag about. Let me ask you and the other lefties that unilaterally defend Obama's spending, a question? Where are your posts on Bush's spending? Had you raised the issue perhaps the people on the right may have been willing to debate you. Of course none of you are complaining about the spending except in rebuttal to our complaints which are just as or in some cases more valid because of the enormity of the money being bandied about. My biggest question concerning the entire thread is that if this guys rights were violated why do some feel he should get "millions"? I mean does that supposed violation, not letting a guy pee during a song, really be the cause of such sustained agony that he should be rewarded by hitting the lottery? Pay his lawyers fees, give him a couple grand for his trouble and ask him not to come back seems like a fair penalty to me.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Being consistently wrong is nothing to brag about. Let me ask you and the other lefties that unilaterally defend Obama's spending, a question? Where are your posts on Bush's spending? Had you raised the issue perhaps the people on the right may have been willing to debate you. Of course none of you are complaining about the spending except in rebuttal to our complaints which are just as or in some cases more valid because of the enormity of the money being bandied about. My biggest question concerning the entire thread is that if this guys rights were violated why do some feel he should get "millions"? I mean does that supposed violation, not letting a guy pee during a song, really be the cause of such sustained agony that he should be rewarded by hitting the lottery? Pay his lawyers fees, give him a couple grand for his trouble and ask him not to come back seems like a fair penalty to me.

seems to be the reaction far too often. explains why car insurance is so high...millions don't grow on trees.
they ought to refund his ticket and be done with it.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Being consistently wrong is nothing to brag about. Let me ask you and the other lefties that unilaterally defend Obama's spending, a question? Where are your posts on Bush's spending? Had you raised the issue perhaps the people on the right may have been willing to debate you. Of course none of you are complaining about the spending except in rebuttal to our complaints which are just as or in some cases more valid because of the enormity of the money being bandied about. My biggest question concerning the entire thread is that if this guys rights were violated why do some feel he should get "millions"? I mean does that supposed violation, not letting a guy pee during a song, really be the cause of such sustained agony that he should be rewarded by hitting the lottery? Pay his lawyers fees, give him a couple grand for his trouble and ask him not to come back seems like a fair penalty to me.

My "millions" comment was a sarcastic response to the anger at him...to the "Frenchy" comments and to all the BS he probably faced from the Yankee's crackerjack security squad. Of course I don't think he should get Millions, but anything less is really slap in the face to an organization with a payroll like that

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

My "millions" comment was a sarcastic response to the anger at him...to the "Frenchy" comments and to all the BS he probably faced from the Yankee's crackerjack security squad. Of course I don't think he should get Millions, but anything less is really slap in the face to an organization with a payroll like that

it would do the organization as much good to give millions to him as to some of those players, eh?? lol

seriously tho...he doesn't deserve to hit the lottery-but he didn't deserve to get thrown out of the game either. too often things are either one extreme or the other.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

My "millions" comment was a sarcastic response to the anger at him...to the "Frenchy" comments and to all the BS he probably faced from the Yankee's crackerjack security squad. Of course I don't think he should get Millions, but anything less is really slap in the face to an organization with a payroll like that

Maybe they should just sign the guy to pitch out of the bullpen? Of course BWS would probably consider that torture.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Being consistently wrong is nothing to brag about. Let me ask you and the other lefties that unilaterally defend Obama's spending, a question? Where are your posts on Bush's spending? Had you raised the issue perhaps the people on the right may have been willing to debate you. Of course none of you are complaining about the spending except in rebuttal to our complaints which are just as or in some cases more valid because of the enormity of the money being bandied about. My biggest question concerning the entire thread is that if this guys rights were violated why do some feel he should get "millions"? I mean does that supposed violation, not letting a guy pee during a song, really be the cause of such sustained agony that he should be rewarded by hitting the lottery? Pay his lawyers fees, give him a couple grand for his trouble and ask him not to come back seems like a fair penalty to me.

I'll quote myself earlier today:

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Neither, really. They're both probably too much, and once the floodgates are open, let's just do it the American way and go as big as we can.

That's the thing, is that I'm not the one complaining about Obama's spending, so I don't need to be accountable for not complaining about Bush's spending...why would I have done that? Obviously, like Bob says, I disagree with what he was spending it on, but I certainly wasn't complaining about the amount. That was supposed to be your job based on how we now know you feel about spending as of three months ago...

I didn't complain about Bush's spending because it doesn't frankly bother me that much, inasmuch as we're talking about raw dollar amounts, even though it was clearly "too much" by your guys' standards. I'm a liberal, I'm pretty behind a great deal of government spending, so like I said, there would have been no reason for me to go out of my way to criticize the spending.

That's exactly why I never talked about it, because I didn't care that much...and guess what? I still don't care that much. It's ONLY relevant whether you guys that are complaining NOW were complaining back then when his spending was out of control...and you weren't.

I shouldn't be expected to complain about something that doesn't bother me, right? But you should be expected to complain when YOUR guy does the same thing you're mad about when OUR guy does, even if it's on a smaller scale. That's why it only comes up in response to your current complaints, because pointing out transparent hypocrisy is usually a pretty easy thing to show that people aren't being intellectually honest in a discussion.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'll quote myself earlier today:



I didn't complain about Bush's spending because it doesn't frankly bother me that much, inasmuch as we're talking about raw dollar amounts, even though it was clearly "too much" by your guys' standards. I'm a liberal, I'm pretty behind a great deal of government spending, so like I said, there would have been no reason for me to go out of my way to criticize the spending.

That's exactly why I never talked about it, because I didn't care that much...and guess what? I still don't care that much. It's ONLY relevant whether you guys that are complaining NOW were complaining back then when his spending was out of control...and you weren't.

I shouldn't be expected to complain about something that doesn't bother me, right? But you should be expected to complain when YOUR guy does the same thing you're mad about when OUR guy does, even if it's on a smaller scale. That's why it only comes up in response to your current complaints, because pointing out transparent hypocrisy is usually a pretty easy thing to show that people aren't being intellectually honest in a discussion.

Transparent hypocrisy? Because we didnt start threads about it we are hypocrites? That is rich. Let me ask you a question and to avoid being called a hypocrite answer honestly, would you have defended Bush's spending had we started a bunch of threads about it? You want to label those that disagree with your side as hypocrites when your labeling is as hypocritical as anything. Because fiscal conservatives like myself disagree with the spending habits of America's most liberal president ever we are hypocrites because we didn't bash Bush as loudly? Or IN YOUR OPINION do you think we are simply bashing him because he is a liberal? Why does everything that Obama or Congress does have to be attached to prior arguments about Bush?

Despite being labeled by Joey and you I am much more centrist than either of you ever dreamed about. As far as social issues there are a lot of conservative views that I disagree with. I am for stricter gun control. I am neither pro or anti abortion. I dont like the intrusion of religion in politics though I think altering of historical buildings with religious sayings is a bit over the top. I have no problem with gay marriage. But on economic issues I am very much conservative as is a great deal of America. Maybe not your version of America but the rest of the country outside of big cities. And that will ultimately be the downfall of your party, again.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Transparent hypocrisy? Because we didnt start threads about it we are hypocrites? That is rich. Let me ask you a question and to avoid being called a hypocrite answer honestly, would you have defended Bush's spending had we started a bunch of threads about it? You want to label those that disagree with your side as hypocrites when your labeling is as hypocritical as anything. Because fiscal conservatives like myself disagree with the spending habits of America's most liberal president ever we are hypocrites because we didn't bash Bush as loudly? Or IN YOUR OPINION do you think we are simply bashing him because he is a liberal? Why does everything that Obama or Congress does have to be attached to prior arguments about Bush?

Despite being labeled by Joey and you I am much more centrist than either of you ever dreamed about. As far as social issues there are a lot of conservative views that I disagree with. I am for stricter gun control. I am neither pro or anti abortion. I dont like the intrusion of religion in politics though I think altering of historical buildings with religious sayings is a bit over the top. I have no problem with gay marriage. But on economic issues I am very much conservative as is a great deal of America. Maybe not your version of America but the rest of the country outside of big cities. And that will ultimately be the downfall of your party, again.

I'll answer honestly.

I would have had nothing to say, with the exception of maybe a snarky comment about how I wish he'd spend less on killing foreigners in wars or something like that which would have been expected.

About the actual spending itself? I didn't have much of a problem with it...I may not have had much "defending" to do, mostly because I was indifferent and I generally wouldn't put those two together, defending things I don't care about very much.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'll answer honestly.

I would have had nothing to say, with the exception of maybe a snarky comment about how I wish he'd spend less on killing foreigners in wars or something like that which would have been expected.

About the actual spending itself? I didn't have much of a problem with it...I may not have had much "defending" to do, mostly because I was indifferent and I generally wouldn't put those two together, defending things I don't care about very much.

So your "indifference " to Obamas spending is why you defend him and attack us? To maintain some kind of political thread status quo?

Come on, you would have been all over him for spending so much on the war. For us the social agenda put forth in the current administration spending spree is as big a issue as the war is to you. Perhaps you disagree with our take but the reasoning is the same. I guess the thing that is most bothersome is that you guys consistently call conservatives or Reps names or make generalizations about us which are really not true as they are generally opinions of yours while at least I only resort to calling you typical liberals which, well, is true.

[dalakhani]

I consider myself liberal but i dont think anyone that actually looked at that stimulus could come away without questioning some of the pork. I have said time and again the biggest roadblocks to Obama's success would come from within his own party.

I applaud the president's iniatives. Might they fail? Sure. Do I agree with the lack of fiscal responsibility? Sure. But is the overall vision a step toward a better future?

Regardless of who was to blame, and I have no interest in debating that for the 1,000,000th time, there is no question that Obama walked into a heaping pile of smoldering crap on multiple fronts. Whether his plans work or not remains to be seen.

We are in a crisis situation. The markets are/were teetering on the precipice. Now is not the time to let markets take care of themselves.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I consider myself liberal but i dont think anyone that actually looked at that stimulus could come away without questioning some of the pork. I have said time and again the biggest roadblocks to Obama's success would come from within his own party.

I applaud the president's iniatives. Might they fail? Sure. Do I agree with the lack of fiscal responsibility? Sure. But is the overall vision a step toward a better future?

Regardless of who was to blame, and I have no interest in debating that for the 1,000,000th time, there is no question that Obama walked into a heaping pile of smoldering crap on multiple fronts. Whether his plans work or not remains to be seen.

We are in a crisis situation. The markets are/were teetering on the precipice. Now is not the time to let markets take care of themselves.

Communist

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

they should give btw a raise..