Island Dog Island Dog

What Has Happened to Our Great Country?

▼

What Has Happened to Our Great Country?

from JoeUser Forums

Isn’t it funny for 8 years we heard the left scream how Bush “shredded” the Constitution, and they acted like they really cared?  Yeah.

“A very dangerous act is being attempted by the Left to secure their rule over the American people and transform the legislative process from a Constitutional Republic to a government by fiat. Today on Fox News Sunday, Democratic leader Rep. Chris Van Hollen admitted Democratsintend to use the unconstitutional “Slaughter Rule” as a solution to ram nationalized health care through Congress without majority vote and in defiance to the will of the American people.

The Slaughter rule would declare that the House of Representatives “deems” the Senate health care bill “passed” by the House. House members would have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but would then be able to claim they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself. In other words, Democrats will avoid a direct vote on the health care bill while allowing it to become law! They will take over one-sixth of the US economy without voting on it in direct violation to the legislative process defined by the U.S Constitution. Article I, Section VII, Clause II specifically states,”

At last count I was reading this morning, democrats don’t have the votes they really need to pass this 2300+ page bill.  The White House and democrats have bribed as many people as they can, to the point of it possibly being illegal, so what’s the next step?  Simple, pass it regardless.

What has happened to our great country?

28,245 views 101 replies
Reply #76 from JoeUser Forums Top

Obama's gun is not loaded and he is unwilling to use it, and they know it.
End of quote

You analogy is quite weak. Obama doesn't need to react within seconds. He needs to react within 30m-1h of a crisis requiring military intervention, and that is probably the tightest margin required (ennemy military strike?). Usually, you have 12h to be able to properly react. His proverbial gun is as loaded as it was under Bush's year. A carrier fleet is still in the Gulf.

No. No one knows if he is willing to use it or not. You THINK he is unwilling, but then again, your jugement is clouded by partisanship. You do not know what is in Obama's head, nor what is in Khomeni's head. Or Kim-Jong Il's. They know the gun is there, and that's it. The rest is rethoric.

Reply #77 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 76
You analogy is quite weak. Obama doesn't need to react within seconds. He needs to react within 30m-1h of a crisis requiring military intervention, and that is probably the tightest margin required (ennemy military strike?). Usually, you have 12h to be able to properly react. His proverbial gun is as loaded as it was under Bush's year. A carrier fleet is still in the Gulf.
End of Cikomyr's quote

The analogy was of your instigation.  clearly we do not need a base in Afghanistan to bomb the hell of out Iran.  We proved that in Afghanistan.  But you said we had the troops there.  So that is why I used the analogy of the gun.  And the analogy - of using a weapon - is appropriate.  Obama will not.  We know and they know it.  It is not a secret and I do not think I will get arrested for divulging state secrets (although these days you can never tell).

Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion
Reply #78 from JoeUser Forums Top

The analogy was of your instigation. clearly we do not need a base in Afghanistan to bomb the hell of out Iran. We proved that in Afghanistan. But you said we had the troops there.
End of quote

Well, the troops in Afghanistan are not there to treathen Iran, but to pressure the Talibans..

Reply #79 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 78
Well, the troops in Afghanistan are not there to treathen Iran, but to pressure the Talibans..
End of Cikomyr's quote

And the troops in Iraq are there to control the terrorists (home grown or imported). not Iran either.  But yes, I do agree with you that iran can (and probably does) see both as a threat.  Which just goes back to my statement that the leaders are crazy.  They see threats everywhere.  And under Bush they sniped at the corners but kept the big dog chained.  They are now letting loose the dogs.

Reply #80 from JoeUser Forums Top

I do agree with you that iran can (and probably does) see both as a threat. Which just goes back to my statement that the leaders are crazy.
End of quote

I don't think they see the troops in Afghanistan or Iraq as direct treath, but as liabilities for the U.S.. They draw your ressources and are easy to attack.

What Iran see as a treath is your Carrier Fleet in the Gulf, and the other bomber bases that can reach them. They fear THAT, and these are no less present than they were were.

Reply #81 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 80
I don't think they see the troops in Afghanistan or Iraq as direct treath, but as liabilities for the U.S.. They draw your ressources and are easy to attack.

What Iran see as a treath is your Carrier Fleet in the Gulf, and the other bomber bases that can reach them. They fear THAT, and these are no less present than they were were.
End of Cikomyr's quote

You are projecting (which is normal).  As am I.  But I am not projecting a rational psyche, but a fervent hatrid backed up by a religious dogma.

Reply #82 from JoeUser Forums Top

But I am not projecting a rational psyche, but a fervent hatrid backed up by a religious dogma.
End of quote

I am projecting a rational psyche, using religious dogma to get its way. Like any other religious-driven political leaders.

Reply #83 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 82

But I am not projecting a rational psyche, but a fervent hatrid backed up by a religious dogma.
I am projecting a rational psyche, using religious dogma to get its way. Like any other religious-driven political leaders.
End of Cikomyr's quote

I know. Sometimes I think you are just too nice. ;)

Reply #84 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sometimes I think you are just too nice
End of quote

Or extremely insulting to all religious people, so daring to suggest that their leaders are not really taking their dogma to heart.

Reply #85 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 84
Or extremely insulting to all religious people, so daring to suggest that their leaders are not really taking their dogma to heart.
End of Cikomyr's quote

Better watch out for those fatwas!

Reply #86 from JoeUser Forums Top

Better watch out for those fatwas!
End of quote

You know what?

I really. Really. REALLY go insulted by Comedy Central about South Park's "Cartoon Wars".

I didn't got insulted that they censored Muhammed taking tea. (I'm not muslim, so I don't really care)

I didn't got insulted that they didn't censored Jesus & Bush shitting on the american flag (I'm not American, and I don't believe in Jesus, so I don't really care).

I got insulted that they had double standard, and that they decided to show one, and not the other.

Reply #87 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 86
I got insulted that they had double standard, and that they decided to show one, and not the other.
End of Cikomyr's quote

Too many institutions/nations/companies are just plain cowardly.  They will show a picture of Piss Christ (or Gay Jesus), but actually run and hide if the subject is about Islam.

It kind of matters to me, but not a lot since I do not respect them or patronize them for the most part.  I stopped not because of their cowardly practices, but for other reasons that just indicated they would react that way when faced with the dilemna.

Reply #88 from JoeUser Forums Top

I stopped not because of their cowardly practices, but for other reasons that just indicated they would react that way when faced with the dilemna.
End of quote

I wouldn't have minded if they hadn't shown Muhammed, but they would have ALSO censored the Jesus part. I mean, either you censor and don't offend ALL religions, or you don't interfere at all. You cannot refuse to offend ONE religion. South Park's writers are genius to make us realise the flaws of our own societies sometime.

Reply #89 from JoeUser Forums Top

You cannot refuse to offend ONE religion. South Park's writers are genius to make us realise the flaws of our own societies sometime.
End of quote

If you mean hypocrisy, I agree.  But I do not attribute that trait to the society as a whole, just the policial correctness movement.

Reply #90 from JoeUser Forums Top

If you mean hypocrisy, I agree. But I do not attribute that trait to the society as a whole, just the policial correctness movement.
End of quote

Nah. Political correctness is just the easier to spot. There is also a lot of it in many other areas.

Face it, Liberals make the US what they are, as much as the Conservatives. You both brough good and bad things to the US of A. You kinda need one another.

Again, this was a big point in 1 other episode.

another big point was that it didn't mattered if you had the choice between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich, voting is still important.

Reply #91 from JoeUser Forums Top

That's US and A, Ciko. ;)

Reply #92 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Cikomyr, reply 90
Political correctness is just the easier to spot. There is also a lot of it in many other areas.
End of Cikomyr's quote

Better said than I did.  I did not mean it was a monopoly by the movement, but yes, it sure is easier to spot.

Reply #93 from JoeUser Forums Top

That's US and A, Ciko
End of quote

Eh?

Reply #94 from JoeUser Forums Top

My inner Borat took over for a moment there.  Sorry. ;)

Reply #95 from JoeUser Forums Top

My inner Borat took over for a moment there. Sorry.
End of quote

Oh.. never watched it. Never saw the appeal of a movie that just bashes the U.S. senselessly

Reply #96 from JoeUser Forums Top

For folks sick as me, it was damn funny.  Not much I can't see humor in, though.

Reply #97 from JoeUser Forums Top

I did not know it bashed the USA.  I judt don't find him funny.

Reply #98 from JoeUser Forums Top

It didn't 'bash' in the Moore sense of bashing.  Even Moore's stuff & Maher's condescending s**t is funny, though.  Just not true. 

Reply #99 from JoeUser Forums Top

It didn't 'bash' in the Moore sense of bashing
End of quote

Most of the people's comments I got about this movie was that it depicted the really dummy parts of the USA. The funniest wasn't Borath himself, but the people he interacted with, as they were quite redneck.

Reply #100 from JoeUser Forums Top

This seems appropriate here.