RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election

RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Thadius -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 11:43:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail its a two thirds confirmation vote anyhow isn't it? I also see that the teabaggers have targeted Romney and Pawlenty and the guy from SD. Romney for expanding healthcare in Mass, and Pawlenty taking federal money for budget balancing. Purity and wholesomeness, and its going to be interesting who they say is big shit, Bachmann???? LOLOLOLOFUCKINGL Ron Yep, I saw on the news last night that Palin is stumping for Bachman. Anyone want to say Palin/Bachman - Bachman/Palin for 2012? I would like to know which one of them would be on top. Is it going to be on pay per view?[;)]

Musicmystery -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 11:50:40 AM)
quote: Pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. Much as I'd like to see financial restraint and discipline, this isn't the way. It would handcuff us. Would you want your household legally unable to borrow under any circumstances? Emergencies? Investment opportunities? It would force the necessary guns or butter conversation. But at high cost. For example, Bush's war wouldn't have been possible, because we couldn't pay for it. Emergency equipment for troops? Sorry, no money. Hurricane disaster? Can't afford it. Now I'd love to have skipped the Bush Wars---but I can see others one day that might be necessary. And you KNOW we aren't going to plan enough to prevent those occurrences--or we'd have fixed SS, Medicare, health care, infrastructure decay--along with a debt reduction plan.

brainiacsub -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 11:50:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail its a two thirds confirmation vote anyhow isn't it? I also see that the teabaggers have targeted Romney and Pawlenty and the guy from SD. Romney for expanding healthcare in Mass, and Pawlenty taking federal money for budget balancing. Purity and wholesomeness, and its going to be interesting who they say is big shit, Bachmann???? LOLOLOLOFUCKINGL Ron Yep, I saw on the news last night that Palin is stumping for Bachman. Anyone want to say Palin/Bachman - Bachman/Palin for 2012? I would like to know which one of them would be on top. Is it going to be on pay per view?[;)] No, but I bet it will be on Fox News...or So You Think You Are Smarter Than a Fifth Grader

rulemylife -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 12:06:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub Yep, I saw on the news last night that Palin is stumping for Bachman. Anyone want to say Palin/Bachman - Bachman/Palin for 2012? I would like to know which one of them would be on top. Why do I find that perversely exciting? Nevermind, I briefly forgot I was a pervert.

Lucylastic -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 12:15:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub <snip>I would like to know which one of them would be on top. <snip> I personally find that visual disgusting to the point of throwing up, thanks a LOT gag[:'(] altho I know many others will be getting some enjoyment out of it, the sick sick bastages snicker Edited to add, I knew it, lol winks to the chaps

rulemylife -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 12:24:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub <snip>I would like to know which one of them would be on top. <snip> I personally find that visual disgusting to the point of throwing up, thanks a LOT gag[:'(] altho I know many others will be getting some enjoyment out of it, the sick sick bastages snicker Edited to add, I knew it, lol winks to the chaps Oh yeah! [8D] I just pulled up some pictures of the two. I'll let you know how it works out in a few minutes. I have something to.......well........you know......to take care of.

brainiacsub -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 1:12:46 PM)
You are what's wrong with CM. You give perversion a bad name.

slutslave4u -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 8:33:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: slutslave4u Would there be any doubt that he would have lost re-election had he attempted so? I think he understood and knew after his last vote he was on his way out with no chance for re-election. Actually he claims that he would have won if he chose to run again. Yes I saw that, however claiming and actually doing are completely different things arent they now? I do think that due to his actions with the Health Care vote, there will be far too many out there that would not have voted for him at all. Perhaps it is he that saw the writing on the wall.....you do have to admit, his timing is suspect enough.

Arrogance -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 9:21:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xBullx I didn't have any trouble seeing what you meant Thadius, then again my view isn't clouded by a static left or right stance. Silly, Bully boy... If you want people to believe you when you're lying, you have to remember not to completely contradict what you said two posts down. It also helps not to use "lefties" as a derogatory statement when you're oh-so-moderate.

slvemike4u -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 9:45:47 PM)
In reality that is not so strange around these parts...we have a number of self proclaimed "independent" types who spend an inordinate amount of time alternately slamming "lefties" and espousing right wing talking points. It's a curious CollerMe quirk...but it is what it is [:D]

FirmhandKY -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:12:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy Didn't that bitch from Alaska step down from her gig to spend more time with her family? teabaggers are such a joke...it will be fun to pull these threads out in a short time to get some explanations from their supporters. No, she stepped down so she can make tons of money running around the country raking in big bucks for speaking engagements, her book, and her show on Fox. That nonsense about her devoting more time to her family was typical Palin, because she obviously is spending far less with them. Meanwhile, her devoted followers ignore that she played them, and continues to do so. Seems like a lot of people are rewriting history in this thread ... Palin offered few clues about her ambitions but said she arrived at her decision in part to protect her family, which has faced withering criticism and occasional mockery, and to escape ethics probes that have drained her family's finances and hampered her ability to govern. She said leaving office is in the best interest of the state and will allow her to more effectively advocate for issues of importance to her, including energy independence and national security. "I love my job and I love Alaska, and it hurts to make this choice, but I'm doing what's best for them," Palin said, the sun glinting off a seaplane on Lake Lucille behind her. Firm

brainiacsub -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:16:08 PM)
Firm, you take her word for it?

FirmhandKY -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:21:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub Firm, you take her word for it? She seems to have accomplished her stated goals in respect to reducing the turmoil in the State of Alaska. The bogus ethic charges have stopped. Her family isn't broke due to legal expenses anymore, and she's been working on supporting causes she believes in nationally. What's to "take her word" about? Her actions since she resigned have matched her stated goals. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:21:33 PM)
So we are to take her at her word,and buy what she is selling there hook line and sinker.Just swallow it whole. Firm that just doesn't sound right,I mean giving someone the benifit of the doubt is one thing but swallowing her self serving "reasons" for quitting is one hell of a leap.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:22:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u So we are to take her at her word,and buy what she is selling there hook line and sinker.Just swallow it whole. Firm that just doesn't sound right,I mean giving someone the benifit of the doubt is one thing but swallowing her self serving "reasons" for quitting is one hell of a leap. I suspect this post was written before you saw my just previous response. Firm

brainiacsub -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:25:19 PM)
Mike, you and I are beginning to think each others thoughts. Do you want to answer him or should I?

slvemike4u -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:26:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub Firm, you take her word for it? She seems to have accomplished her stated goals in respect to reducing the turmoil in the State of Alaska. The bogus ethic charges have stopped. Her family isn't broke due to legal expenses anymore, and she's been working on supporting causes she believes in nationally. What's to "take her word" about? Her actions since she resigned have matched her stated goals. Firm Have they also matched the actions of someone with another,perhaps undisclosed agenda ?.....Of course they have.Taking her at her word is an act of faith.....I certainly do not deny you any faith you choose to adopt,but to act as if there is no room for serious skepticism here is just unfucking beleivable!

slvemike4u -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:27:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u So we are to take her at her word,and buy what she is selling there hook line and sinker.Just swallow it whole. Firm that just doesn't sound right,I mean giving someone the benifit of the doubt is one thing but swallowing her self serving "reasons" for quitting is one hell of a leap. I suspect this post was written before you saw my just previous response. Firm Yeah it was...but thhe last one iis newer...so ,if you don't mind just jump to that one.[:D]

brainiacsub -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:30:58 PM)
I'd like to add that you can't possibly believe that the cheering crowds and tons of adoration she received as VP candidate and the ensuing opportunity to make millions didn't factor in to that decision. I agree that she was unfairly targeted with false ethics claims and was spending her own money to defend herself, but she is a classic opportunist and hardly what I'd call a dedicated public servant.

slvemike4u -> RE: Tea Party target Stupak won't seek re-election (4/9/2010 10:40:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brainiacsub I'd like to add that you can't possibly believe that the cheering crowds and tons of adoration she received as VP candidate and the ensuing opportunity to make millions didn't factor in to that decision. I agree that she was unfairly targeted with false ethics claims and was spending her own money to defend herself, but she is a classic opportunist and hardly what I'd call a dedicated public servant. Add to that she is a fucking politician and not for nothing but that is a breed of cat I have learned to be just a little skeptical of. Damm right before popping over here I had the pleasure of reading Sanity's scathing rip and listing of all the reasons he distrusted a Frontline piece...and than I popped over here and Firm seems to be saying "because she said so". Seems to me the deciding factor in both of these viewpoints is the desire to believe or disbelieve is driviing the bus.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0546875