GOOGLE
The best place to find a running mate
(John McCain)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous This is why… | Hey! Next »
» 153 comments
-
Recent Comments
Justacarolinian on Giggity Giggity funkers on Giggity Giggity Kai on Always keep Sayvara on Mrph furmer miff Justacarolinian on Giggity Giggity Jordan on ABSTINENCE Ovaltine Jenkins on ABSTINENCE ElbieSee on Giggity Giggity viking gal, original… on And then the nasty ol… froofrou on Giggity Giggity 
Cheezburger Network Blog
First!
anon <3
Ha! This one actually made me laugh…. out loud…..
Then again, I’ve been laughing a lot today. I think it’s from eating paint.
I think I need some of that paint…
I think it was poster paint. Or maybe acrylic. hmmm. Certainly didn’t taste like oil paint or watercolour……
I used to paint, but I never actually ate any of it… although oils do get messy.
Yeah, and you have to clean up with turps. Turps fumes are a bit odd too..
Hey ema, I feel like you’ve been a real underdog lately, a lone conservative facing off against a sea of liberals. So I’m going to say some things I like about Republican ideas, and things I don’t like about the Democrats, so maybe you don’t feel like everyone is attacking you all the time.
–
I like fiscal responsibility, state’s rights, and the Constitution. In many ways, the idea of a smaller Federal government makes sense. Let the states decide how to do things, let them tax and allocate the money. Don’t make the rich states like California and New York pay for the poor states. If a state wants to repeal all safety nets and handouts and enact pure, dog-eat-dog capitalism, let them. May the best system win.
–
I don’t like Nancy Pelosi any more. I’ve met her, and I liked her, but after seeing how she’s handled her role as Speaker, I’m unimpressed. Obama is merely okay in my book, he’s certainly no leftist. I don’t like how the Democrats have been sucking up to big business, but everyone is doing that these days I suppose.
–
I don’t see what the big deal is about guns. As Michael Moore showed in Bowling for Columbine, guns aren’t the problem. Fear and a culture of violence are the problem.
–
Ummm, okay, that’s all I’ve got, sorry. But at least it’s something, eh? It is possible to find common ground. In fact, I think most of us regulars here share some fundamental common ground that we should all try to keep in mind. We are all patriots. We all love our country, and want what’s best for America. Sometimes we just disagree about what’s best.
–
Anyway, don’t eat paint. We like the smart, funny ema, and we already have more than enough retards here.
Wow. You’re nice. I like you.
BTW – I have had much cognitive dissonance this past year. I have an Ex-Cop Dad and a Fed-Agent Brother who carry guns and vote GOP… While I’m an white accountant who lives in a black neighborhood who really REALLY appreciates Obama-Policy… So I’m going to vote Dem even though I love my GOP family.
What can we say? Your vote is yours. My vote is mine. The world is a funny place. Why can’t we all just get along?
Actually, I’m kind of an opinionated, loudmouthed, know it all dick, mostly, but I’m trying really hard to be a nice guy.
Drop the last one and you have described yourself to a ‘T’. While I disagree with most of what you say, I will give you kudos for having the balls to state your position and stick to it. And every now and then you come up with something that I just have to agree with. Otherwise, I think your a nice guy with a differing opinion from mine.
I say I’m a dick because my first instinct in an argument is to go for the jugular and discredit not only the argument, but the person making it. That’s what I’m trying not to do anymore.
Oh, well at least you clarified! I know I’ve felt kneecapped by you on a more then one occasion, but the stumps grew back.
Seth and I have had our run-ins in the past but I’ve always liked him, I think I always knew he was a real sweetheart underneath it all!
I don’t recall ever getting into that big of a deal with Seth but that might be perspective or lack of recollection.
He’s mellowed somewhat. I’ve always liked Seth, even when I was telling him to stop being such an ass.
He made it into my fail list as a stipulation… but now Im thinking
of taking it out and adding another shot at EP…..
I never liked Speark Pelosi, how is Obama not left enough for you when he voted 94 times all for liberal party ideals?
WAIT… There’s a liberal party now? Oh, I see, everything that is not YOU is to the left, isn’t it?
Technically, if someone is of the right, everything not them would *have* to be left. Even the center. Same goes for folks of the left and everything not them being right.
Liberal Party? We have one of those? Where? What’s it look like? You mean the Green Party? Obama is voting the Green Party platform?
I think TC means the Democrat party, that has become very liberal. I am actually a registered Democrat and used to vote Dem but have not liked the more liberal trend they have taken lately… Maybe we do need more than 2 parties these days?
More liberal? Isn’t it funny what a difference our perspective makes, because I like the unabashedly socialist Democratic Party of the 30s, or the civil rights Democrats of the 60s. I think the Democrats have moved towards the right recently.
Do you have 2 major parties? Or actually just 2 parties?
jings…
Two major parties with some minor one’s like the Greens, Libertarians, and I think a couple of others. They generally don’t carry much weight though.
Yeah, everywhere seems to have a green party.
So you basically choose right wing or left?
In England there’s 1 major party for left, 1 for right, 1 for centre.
Here in Scotland there are 3 major parties: left, left, and centre-left.
I don’t think the single axis, left-right style political graph covers all the nuances. I like the two axis graph, where one axis charts the tradition/innovation split, and the other charts the freedom/security split.
–
I don’t like Nolan’s two axis graph, because that one just covers freedom/security while breaking it down into personal and economic areas, and besides, its really just a propaganda tool to get people to ‘admit’ they are really libertarians.
Wow….Jargon.
)
(I’m afraid that I’m not as informed as you
Jargon, where? I am pretty sure all those words are straightforward.
Yeah, but I don’t know who “Nolan” is, so the reference is wasted on me.
2 parties with a handful of others, but you rarely to never see said others on TV or at the debates. Hence, most Americans don’t know about the other parties, they don’t get enough funding/votes to attend the debates, and the circle continues.
The last time you saw a third person in a debate was Ross Perot wasn’t it?
Yes. The Repbulicrats made up this magical 15% number that will allow you to get into the debate. Perot achieved it in some places. But the other parties didn’t and don’t have the financial backing that he did. But how can they get it if they don’t get face time? It’s a big circle and then people vote for the “lesser of two evils” because they don’t really know anything about anyone else and they feel like they are going to screwed and …
I’m going to stop.
If I don’t, I will start sounding like the people who were going around for Nader this year trying to get the debates opened, which clearly worked wonders.
Christine, you alluded to the elephant in the room – financial backing.
You can’t win an election without money these days.
Guess so. Wasn’t sure if Nader ever got in or not.
…and why are they ‘parties’ anyway. The whole thing ends up as a whole cluster f*#k come election day. ugh.
Use GOP/Democratic pandemic?
ema, I completely agree with you. I consider myself a Moderate Republican (or a RINO as some would call me) and tend to like some of the policies on both sides, but having disdain for the more radical thoughts. If you want a discription of a Moderate Republican, click on my name.
Eddie, I just read that page, and I can’t honestly disagree with a single principle of moderate republicans listed there. I’d vote for a RINO candidate.
Now if we could only find one that would stick to the principles. *sigh*
Thanks for that link eddie! I fall into that category myself!
I would guess froofrou would as well.
How about EP?
Sorry, but it had to be said.
:ninja: Come to think of it, I haven’t seen much of EP since I last argued with him. I’ve only seen him post once or twice, taking hit-and-runs at people. No disrespect or anything, but still.
froofrou hasn’t read it yet since she’s making a quick trip online and then back to the daily grind
Can’t get caught surfing and all, hehe.
-
Without reading it though, I have a feeling that I fall squarly in the moderate zone, and it kind of pisses me off. I thought I was more of a right wing nut than that!
Oh Lord no.. not in a thousand years, even if you tried hard at it!
I think I’m going to pout now. I wanted to be a nut…….*pout*
-
Oh, wait, that was to HAVE some nuts. Dammit, now I have to call my husband.
-
Crap
You could always hope for reincarnation..
I might come back as EP, and then I’d have to kill myself. And be reincarnated again. It gets really tiring.
Isnt it possible to be a moderate nut?
And eddie, I finally read that article. There are two things I moderately disagree with, but those fall under my right wing nut tendancies. The rest of it pretty much describes me to a T
Ok, point made..
-
Logic Woman strikes again
Well I am pretty sure you are just a nut. Froofrou flavored, not party flavored.
I can deal with that!
Now if I had said under my name instead of Lynn’s name because of stupid autofill at home, I would be Set!!!
I feel bad for the moderate Republicans. “RINO” indeed! It must be incredibly frustrating the see your party get hijacked by fundie nutjobs who want the US government to be based on the Bible instead of the Constitution. Those folks should call themselves “Biblicans” and stop pretending to be Republicans already.
Biblicans, lol, I like!
LOL! Biblicans.. damn that was perceptive!
They really should.
Wouldn’t that also pretty much describe a Moderate Democrat as well?
Man, I wish they were liberal. They get my vote lately because the neocons out there have been scaring me since 2000. As soon as they get control, I’m going to go back to bitching that they’re no different than the republican party!
Right? Seriously, lets kick the neo-cons and the christian fundamentalists out of the Republican party. I’m tired of feeling like I have to defend the indefensible in my own party just because the alternatives are so scary. I want to feel free to bitch about Democrats again, without feeling like I’m delivering my country into the hands of Dr. Evil.
Ain’t gonna happenm, they took it, it’s there’s, come with me to the New Federalist Party…we have cookies
I consider myself a Jeffersonian these days- we want to elect George and Weezy !
Weezy ok, but George is a bit to nutty for my liking.
Libertarians like to bitch about both, so you’d fit in well here. ;D
The one area where I am a hardcore leftist is property rights. I believe in collective, democratic control of the means of production, and use-stewardship. Basically, I don’t think anyone should be allowed to own more than they can use. When you own something just so you can profit off of other people using it, that’s not right or fair. The people who use it should have control of it.
–
Now, I’m not a communist because I do believe in personal property. My problems with ownership stem from people using ownership of natural resources and factories to economically oppress other non-owning people. When your choices are to do what the boss says or starve, you don’t have a choice. Now I know that supposedly in America, anyone can do anything, but the fact is that the poor can’t get ahead. Working three jobs, barely making ends meet, and not being able to get a loan to start a business means they simply can’t pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
–
But my stance on property and collective control pretty much guarantees I can’t be a libertarian. I’m an Anarcho-Syndicalist. We’re one of the leftist , socialist branches of anarchism, Libertarianism (using the term in the US political sense, not the world wide sense where it is merely a synonym for anarchism in general) is in the individualist branch of anarchism.
“Basically, I don’t think anyone should be allowed to own more than they can use. When you own something just so you can profit off of other people using it, that’s not right or fair.”
-
but.. but.. what if I own a U-Haul place?
“I believe in collective, democratic control of the means of production, and use-stewardship.”
I have to disagree with, perhaps, the tone of this statement. I think we can achieve this, to some degree, inside our capitalist system. We just need to make purchasing shares of companies something that anyone can do. I want to be able to cash my check, then go across the street to the “means of production” store and buy, say, one share of Microsoft and two of Sony/BMG. Or whatever. I don’t think it would be productive to take wealth away from those who already have it; I just want to impose huge taxes on anyone making, say more than 25 times the amount made by the lowest paid employee in any given company.
Yeah, I would REALLY like to see the Libertarian party rise up and make itself the third of the big-wigs. They are directly in the middle of both extremes, making themselves a reasonable choice. For fun, I’ve been asking a lot of GOP and Dem family and friends where they stand on a lot of stuff. The ones that aren’t die-hard fans of one party or the other tend to actually fall somewhere in the middle of the political graph, much like I do. Pointing out that they should vote Libertarian does no good, though. ;D
—–
On an even more personal note, I’ve done a lot of research on my own the past couple of weeks. (Yes, I’m sure you all missed me.) As a result, I realize now that there’s no reason for me to vote for someone I don’t agree with just because I don’t want the alternative. I found someone I fully agree with in Bob Barr, and for that reason, I am proud to say the Libertarian candidate from Georgia (home state has nothing to do with it, of course) has my vote.
—–
I think I’d like to make that a note to everyone. Vote with your own mind and conscience. Do NOT let family, friends, community, race, gender, etc. decide who you are going to vote for. That is the one and true way to “waste your vote”, not voting for the guy that won’t even win. Because, in all seriousness, that is far from the point of voting anyway. I think anyone could agree with me on that point – especially on a mostly sane-minded site such as this.
I voted third party in 2004 and had some friend of the family say to my face that I was stupid and throwing my vote away. She’s a nutter though, so meh.
I love how Thom Hartmann describes Libertarians: Republicans who like to smoke dope and sleep with hookers.
Meh, the Libertarian party has been going downhill for years…
Awww!! *hugs*
Thanks hun! *puts paint down…*
“I like fiscal responsibility, state’s rights, and the Constitution. In many ways, the idea of a smaller Federal government makes sense. Let the states decide how to do things, let them tax and allocate the money. Don’t make the rich states like California and New York pay for the poor states. If a state wants to repeal all safety nets and handouts and enact pure, dog-eat-dog capitalism, let them. May the best system win.”
I’d e-hug you if I wasn’t such an e-homophobe
“Anyway, don’t eat paint. We like the smart, funny ema, and we already have more than enough retards here. ”
Hey, I’m wearing my helmet.
Tell ya what Seth, you turned a corner for me…a couple of days ago I came to the conclusion that my stubborn anti socialist streak shouldn’t apply to cities. In a small rural community people help each other out…it’s socialism but it isn’t done as an ideal, it’s done because it makes sense. Over the past couple of years I’ve been in a mode of epiphany, and it’s tough to do considering all of the Neo-Con training I’ve received.
And While I was thinking about that, I realized that if a few States, say New York, CA, NJ, MA…want to be socialist….let em…but don’t let it affect the Federal system, because we’ve seen over and over that large governments can’t support it. Locally though, it can be effective.
I’m starting the Federalist Party, wanna come along (it will not be anything like the old one)?
I think most decent people want some form of socialism, they just don’t want to be forced into it. What decent person doesn’t want to help their neighbors? It’s like when I was a kid, and I’d start cleaning my room, and my parents would yell at me ‘clean your room!’ and all of a sudden, I don’t want to clean my room just out of spite.
–
Taking care of each other simply does make sense, because people don’t just give up and die when times get desperate. They get desperate and do desperate things that hurt society. What’s cheaper, feeding and clothing a person, or putting that person in jail over and over for stealing? The middle class tend not to be muggers. The fact that we are helping the less fortunate is really secondary, we are helping ourselves first, by not letting them become desperate animals. I don’t know about you, but desperate animals with human intelligence scare me.
” I don’t know about you, but desperate animals with human intelligence scare me.”
Nah, I own guns
You can’t stay awake forever. You can’t follow your kids everywhere to p[rotect them. Does your grandmother own a gun and know how to use it against an attacker?
You can’t stay awake forever
Correct, but busting down my door might just wake me
You can’t follow your kids everywhere to p[rotect them.
Correct again. I don’t have them. And if I did, I sure as hell wouldn’t live where I live.
Does your grandmother own a gun and know how to use it against an attacker?
They both did.
I’ve taken it upon myself to make sure that I’m as protected as is humanly possible. However, there is still the possibility that my brakes could go out, or the same could happen to that semi trying to come to a stop behind me.
If you want to be 100% safe from everything, end your life, it’s the only way. If you want to live in fear, you go right ahead. I did that for years listening to Bush. No more.
In every great society, from the Romans to today, there have been parts of the citizenry that will resort to crime, that, by mental or moral default, will not play well with others. That’s why we have always had police as you have so previously stated.
To try to eliminate them by giving them money doesn’t solve the problem, because the money is not the issue. It’s something else. That love of being an outlaw, a predisposition for violence. You name it, it’s out there.
I’d love to give you the crime rates for Russia in the 80’s, but the Soviets never kept them…wonder why?
It’s okay, so do they. Now it’s a duel. Have fun.
Oh and they outnumber you.
A triel (triuel)? Or a quadruel?
More like an action film. But I doubt he is Chuck Norris.
Guns carry Chuck Norris for Protection
If only we all could…
Excellent tie-in! I can, and so should you! Well, except when I’m on campus… It’s kind of against policy…
Y’know, Seth, I may come across as a right-wing nutjob, but I actually agree with every single thing you’ve said in this post.
/That said, it’s amazing how ignorant these liberal LOLmakers continually show themselves to be…
In bed… With bad lolz.
I agree! Socialism isn’t a bad thing, but I think it should be applied locally. Keep that kind of power out of the hands of a big government that could conceivable turn it against you at any time…
Okay, I am with fiscal responsibility, guns, etc. However, I have always had issue with the idea of state’s rights. I understand the need for a governor and state legislature to handle issues that occur within that state. However, I don’t understand the need for protection for various laws as if they were different countries. Taxes, fine as they have different needs but basic rights?
Perhaps I am just simplifying things but marriage laws, gun rights, things like shouldn’t be varied from state to state. If we are going to allow people to marry who they want, it should be for the country. If we are going to allow guns, then by God or whomever, allow guns. Some things just don’t make sense to vary from region to region.
I was told this was the land of the free but apparently some of my freedoms exist only in certain regions…
Yes, basic human rights should be a given country wide. Also, I kind of like having infrastructure that is country wide like our highways.
Ya, while we are wishing, we should wish for proper funding for schools and highways that are to meet standards for the countries. But that would require scary government control………..
*country
School funding from the Fed is bad. Always has been. American Schools where much stronger before they all started doing whatever it was California does this week.
Think about it. We’re taxed by the fed, then they dole the money back to us for education. Call me crazy, but I think that all that money we pay in is NOT coming back. In fact it can’t…we have to pay all those federal employees that keep track of the money, dole it out and decide what should be done with it.
I think it is in the best interest of education abroad to keep that money locally, so that way it can be used effectively, and not as an earmark up on the Hill.
The Federal Government was never supposed to be doing this.
However, they ARE supposed to maintain the National Highways. Instead, they sub it out to the State, and use Federal Highway Money as a carrot stick to the state politicans. Look into how the last remaining states in America that had the age of 18 as their legal drinking age finally gave in and raised it to 21.
As a former member of the US Military, I can tell you, being able to die, but not to drink, sucked.
I agree with this it would be much more efficient. Plus local communities would have more control and oversight on how local money was used in schools and what their kids where being taught. There may be inequalities between rich states and poor states but that could be addressed by feds if need be. I think teachers are NOT being paid enough now because the money we do spend on schools is being used inefficiently.
Ahem… We already have state supervision and community supervision of schools. It isn’t that great as standards aren’t being met.
Yea, what a mess schools are… There has to be a better solution though than having a big bloated beaurocracy take over the education of the future of the country… That’s one thing that should be in the hands of the individual familes, although I know that families are extra busy these days and it’s hard to be involved, etc.
Correct, but those standards are directed by the Dept of Education and also funded from the same.
The problem with No Child Left behind was that it had all these requirements and no money to back it up. What works in Des Moines doesn’t work for SAn Diego.
Let the schools be locally run
Good arguement
For my money, the things that really needed to be regulated by the states are issues of morality that get tied up in money (and education-but that’s for a different post). A lot of ardent Christians I talk to (I’m agnostic, but given my conservative status they talk to me like I’m a Christian….it’s kind of like the SNL Skit where Eddie Murphy goes out into NY City as a white guy) have no issues with abortion in those gray moral areas of mother’s life, incest, rape etc. But they always bring up that they don’t want to pay for abortions through their tax dollars.
In an America where there was a small federal government and States could make their own decisions, the state of Utah would most likely not be an abortion friendly state. NY would.
Personally, I like the idea of diverse states. If you aren’t in love with the way things are around where you live….you can move to a state that’s more suitable. If all the states were uniform in all respects, then you’d be…well, where we are today…stuck at the whims of the lesser of two evils every national election and a non caring public in non-national election cycles.
A Nation of apathetic people that feel no matter what they do they can’t really change things.
If they had the option to move to a place where the core values of being American were alive and well and those issues of morality were more in line with how they feel than current surroundings….well call me a liberal I like that idea of diversity.
Of course, the freedom of choice act will kill any possibility of that happening.
As for guns, every state should have good solid gun laws. Remember, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with crime or hunting, nor is it a moral issue. Uniformity there is a good thing.
Here is where we agree. Certain things should be uniform for the whole country. As for diversity, I am pretty sure nobody is paying for somebody else’s abortion just as I am not paying for your medical bills. If I had universal healthcare, sure, I would be happy to pay my part and not give a flying damn about your medical bills because mine would be covered too.
I finds guns just as necessary or unnecessary as I find Woman’s Choice. Think about that. She doesn’t need an abortion and you don’t need a gun. Period. However, if you want one, you should have that right.
Let’s not get petty with what we will allow somebody to buy and others not to do with their bodies. You stay out of a woman’s bodily choice and She will stay out of your gun rack.
Deal?
Addendum: Diversity is great which is why I prefer uniform laws to allow choices. Without choice, there is no diversity.
If continue to be this civil I may tear up and cry
If you live in certain states, you are paying for abortions. There are sections of the pro choice movement that believe that all abortions should be paid for by the state or fed…and all abortions….partial birth too. I find them to be just as screwed up as those that don’t believe in abortions in the 1st trimester where the mothers life is in danger.
The 2nd Amendment exists for one reason and one reason only. To protect the citizens against the government. If you look in modern history, the Nazis and Stalin made getting rid of the guns a top priority.
An armed and aware society is the bane of tyranny.
If you do not wish to partake in that right, then by all means it’s your choice not to. However, if it ever hits the fan, don’t ask to borrow one of mine.
We live in a nation with a Department called “Homeland Security”. Owning a gun doesn’t seem like such a bad idea.
Guns aren’t a bad idea, however, I have yet to see anybody get charged for an abortion somebody else has. If you talk about taxes then I have to bring to light tons of other things I would rather not pay for but have to anyway. Besides, are your taxes going to go down if they stop? Do you HONESTLY think they will lower taxes over that?
Also, I am for billing those who have abortions. I never said anything about it staying a tax paid endeavor. I just said it should be legal. Big difference. I think we are wandering away from the point.
Finally, a side note. If you have insurance, other people are paying for your medicine. Yes, you are making payments but the HUGE bulk of that expense is on somebody else. Not unlike taxes or anything that is shared expense. Just a bit of perspective. If you have insurance, you are paying for a lot of things you don’t like.
Also, Godwin’s law is in effect which means now we talk about my wang. It died for your sins and was resurrErected by your mom’s younger and hotter friend. Rejoice in the ecstacy that is my wang. Bow before my wang!!!
“To protect citizens against the government”
Do you honestly think that carrying a gun would save you if you went against a totalitarian government? Or that it would make a blind bit of difference?
Britain has a department called “Homeland Security.” (i.e.M15)
They are the people who stopped the transatlantic bomb plot that “would have eclipsed 9/11.”
Personally, I’m glad we have them. And no, M15 existing doesn’t seem a valid reason to carry a gun.
I tend to agree, the only way Americans could defeat a tyrannical government would be if they had military-level weapons. As it stands, they would be severely outclassed by the military, and totally pwnd if the government decided to use nukes…
Which would give the government a win that would be a loss. Using Nukes would destroy the homes of their army and income. We don’t want to nuke ourselves. So don’t be stupid and bring up the nuke argument. That is basically saying God will smite you so give up. Any government idiot stupid enough to drop a nuke on our own country is too stupid to be reasoned with and deserves to be shot anyway. Or maybe clubbed depending if it is silly hat Tuesday.
As for needing military grade weaponry, eh why give up before it happens? Saying it is hopeless is basically what any tyrannical government wants you to think. I shouldn’t fear my government, nobody should. They are there because we put them there, right? If I have to fear that or just give up, then we definitely are not free.
The nuke argument was an extreme example for a govt. that has gone batshlt insane. Is it likely? No. Is it possible? Sure. Plenty of nutters have ruled countries and killed their own citizens, and those nutters didn’t have nukes.
You obviously have a more optimistic view on average Americans with leetle guns taking on a corrupt military with big honking guns. And missiles. And bombs. And tanks. And fighter planes. Etc. Etc.
I’d get the hell out of a country long before I had to buy a gun to protect myself from its govt.
Well I hate to point out history of our country out but some gun toting citizens back a couple hundred years ago did get rid of a totalitarian government at the inception of our country…
But I would hate to bother you with details like history. See also other examples in history. To control a people, you must first disarm them. Even Gandhi acknowledged that fact.
They were an actual movement for goodness’ sake.
To quote Scotland’s (unofficial) anthem:
“those days are past now/ and in the past they must remain.”
Scotland has had its fair share of freedom fighters and I admire them but, frankly, it would be stupid for western citizens to try to change their modern government through arms. As ck said: they’d be “pwnd.”
Since you mention Gandhi, let’s think about how he overthrew an evil, totalitarian empire. Certainly not through arms and violence. In America itself, Martin Luther King jnr changed things through civil disobedience. And I don’t think that it was mere “gun toting” that made your nation what it is. The Declaration of Independence seems fairly important.
I can agree with that version of “love it or leave it.”
“If you aren’t in love with the way things are around where you live….you can move to a state that’s more suitable”
Except this only works if you have enough money to pick up and move.
Hey, that would be a great item for my platform! Moving assistance for the fist 1,000 miles, paid at going government per diem rates.
*first
That could be an acceptable solution.
Good point.
However, if you really really really want to do something in America, you can do it.
If you work a crap job and want to leave the state, you sell your crap possesions for whatever you can, quit smoking/drinking, live at the Y, and save up your money.
I know that as Americans we can’t walk the hard line anymore but come on.
When it happens, you first.
No prob, but just FYI, I’m moving in next to you and I’m bringing my Milli Vanilli collection with me
It’s multiple factors, now that I think about it. Having enough money to move, being able to find a reasonable job in the new state, and being able to afford living in the new state. Say I hated how North Dakota ran things but I couldn’t afford the housing/living expenses in other states because they were more expensive. It would be much more difficult for me to leave.
You could also work to elect officials that would change your state. If enough people felt that the way things were run were unbearable but couldn’t afford or didn’t want to move to a state were things were better, then things would eventually change to the way the majority wanted, just like the country does now…
Ya, that has totally worked for Gay marriage………….
In three states it has
HUG FEST.
WTF happened to PK???
Actually, this has been a very informative thread and I plan to bookmark it.
Too bad EP isn’t around to see everyone being human(e) to one another; he might learn something, poor kid.
No doubt. This is what political debate should be: people respectfully presenting their theories and ideas, and other people respectfully expressing their issues with said ideas. In the end, everyone walks away with better ideas.
–
In this thread, instead of partisan ranting, we have people thinking for themselves and discussing the fundamental differences between political philosophies. Why IS a smaller Federal government a good idea? What would be the drawbacks? Why should we have a social safety net? What are the consequences for having one versus the consequences for not having one?
–
Good for us. This is what freedom is all about. These types of discussions are never a waste of time, they are fundamental to maintaining a free democracy. This is what our founding fathers, and all our veterans, fought and died to give us. Maybe I’m being a little silly, forgive me, I’m all choked up with happy patriotism and optimism for America right now. I love you guys!
You know, I used to be afraid that America would become the next British Empire, betraying the constitution that gave it birth. Having just read Seth’s latest post, I don’t think I need to worry.
Oh you need to worry, we are a minority. People had a fit when they thought Michelle Obama wasn’t bursting at the seams proud of America. Blind patriotism has always spooked me. So keep worrying, just a little bit. We haven’t executed all the idiots left cuz I am still here.
Ok. *keeps worrying, shivers, has visions of “imperial America”*
I’m worried again…
This is the best thread evah!!! And I totally missed all the fun because my computer was infected with a boatload of viruses and my cousin had custody of it while he was fixing it. Now it’s too late to comment, everything good has already been said.
You know it’s nevah too late to join in the fun and frivolity! Just jump in your way-back machine and go for it.
Holy crap, Seth, I didn’t know you had it in you! Kidding, of course. It’s good to see the stubborn showing a little 3-Dness to their ideals. I knew you weren’t radical deep down, hahah.
—–
I’ve got to say, I agree with every single thing you just said, so I’d like to prove to some people myself that I really am moderate, not a crazy fundy or something like that. I just find it easier to argue with liberals – either that or I feel like conservatives are defenseless lambs in the back of my mind – especially when it comes to PK, heh.
—–
For starters, I like the liberal views on abortion. I feel like it’s an issue the Bible Belt has ruined for conservatives all around. Misinterpretations of the Bible, among a sh*t-load of other factless points is all that is being argued, and it’s pretty sad.
—–
Democrats and the economy have a nice history together. Could be coincidence, but it’s hard to tell. Currently, they don’t seem to know what to do, but who does? (I’ll tell you – the people no one is listening to.)
—–
I support the liberal (and even moreso Obama’s) stance on LGBTQ rights. I won’t go into it much since it’s such a hot topic and my post is dragging already, but that’s my viewpoint.
—–
Not many, I know, but it’s enough for me to call myself a moderate kind of guy, I think. Just thought I’d share since we’re all opening up. (Or coming out of the closet, one could say, hah!)
I laughed out loud as well, but I’ve been inhaling dry erase marker scent for the last few hours…
Me too. YAY Google.
XD Shouldn’t that be facebook?
You know, I’ve often wondered who he came up with Palin…
I figured he liked her picture on the CNN GOP Candidates write-up.
Wasn’t it just to pander to female and feminist voters?
Ah yes… that sure worked, didn’t it?
*yawn*
It’s the inspirational border, isn’t it?
Yeah, I have a coworker with lots of those around her office… and while she’s a ver’nice person, I keep thinking of Despair, Inc. ’s French Fries.
I’ll give who ever did this one credit for at least using the format correctly. But the caption was just plain weak.
Yea, it doesn’t match the photo, if he was sitting at a computer it might have worked… but I guess he doesn’t do that much!
Or if she was in the picture with him.
Considering he doesn’t even use e-mail, i doubt he “googles” anything.
The sad part is there’s definitely a measure of truth in this statement.
Think about it. Where do you find the voting records of your candidates? All of the shocking news stories and mass opinions? How else do you start trollzing the blagosphere?
Google makes us all ridiculously interconnected. 21st century is scary.
Plus it gives people the chance to find something that will support their position, regardless of how idiotic it may seem. I use Google a lot, but I tend to be a bit wary of alot of the information it comes up with.
What using something reliable?…….Like Wikipedia.
LOL! What I meant was, I use Google, but I don’t stop at the first hit that comes up. Whereas a lot of people do, and then point to it as fact.
Oops: “What ABOUT using…”
That’s actually what they did use to find Palin [citation needed]. Funny thing about that…
It always bothers me that his teeth look extra yellow next to his white hair. He grins like Skeletor.
The purple furry speedo would be pretty scary though.
i prefer craigs list
i imagine that this is exactly how he found his pretty little Eskimo.
BUT ON A SCARY NOTE… i just played this political game/quiz thingy and somehow came out aligned with McSame on one issue. how does that happen? i’m an Obamama
http://mypakragames.com/games/we-the-decided
I got mostly Obama except on one issue. My guess, everyone tends to unexpectedly shift positions when very especific details are put in or some other crap…
I quite liked John McCain when he was the anti-Bush, anti-torture Republican. Sadly, he sold out to get the nomination. Sad.