PDA

View Full Version : The rise of thugocracy ...



LWW
01-06-2012, 03:47 AM
PART ONE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGZFgMNM-UU)

LWW
01-06-2012, 03:48 AM
PART TWO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXNqFQmGxDU&feature=related)

LWW
01-06-2012, 03:53 AM
PART THREE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4XFvq5XMk8&feature=related)

LWW
01-06-2012, 03:54 AM
PART FOUR (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnclKiHwatw&feature=related)

Qtec
01-06-2012, 04:59 AM
LMAO.

Not going to listen to all that crap.

There was an election. They had their chance to vote for who they wanted.

Obama won. Live with it. Stop whining.

Q

LWW
01-06-2012, 05:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO.

Not going to listen to all that crap.

Q </div></div>

It's cool ... I had no higher aspirations for you.

eg8r
01-06-2012, 09:17 AM
Why don't you follow your own advice with respect to our most recent election when all the dems got the boot?

eg8r

Soflasnapper
01-06-2012, 02:43 PM
"...all the dems got the boot?"

????

Your statement is very exaggerated, or what appears to be your claim that all persons in the Congress and heading up the executive branch are not Democrats, false.

As you know, the presidency (1/3rd of the federal government), and the Senate (1/2 of 1/3rd of the government) are still in Democratic control.

So I'm sure you'll excuse Democrats from sitting down and shutting up and saluting the GOP agenda until they, you know, win the presidency and the Senate?

Oddly, Republicans and their enablers celebrate the American peoples' decision for a divided government (in Congress), and then act as if that means they should get their way and control all the proceedings, even in the case of admitted divided government? Strange. When they win everything and have the two elected branches under their control, they demand complete authority. Then, when they lose the two elected branches, they demand their policies rule the day. Then, when the people do not return full control of the Congress, they also demand they should always get their way, including denying the president his lawful duty to appoint officials, and now denying him his COTUS power for a recess appointment, when necessary government officials' are being blocked by parliamentary trick maneuvers?

eg8r
01-06-2012, 03:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your statement is very exaggerated,</div></div>Sure it is but what do you expect when all we heard were "gasps" and "sucking of air" by dems across the country as they saw the TPers moving in.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So I'm sure you'll excuse Democrats from sitting down and shutting up and saluting the GOP agenda until they, you know, win the presidency and the Senate?
</div></div>So those are the only requirements? Maybe you and qtip should get together and hash that out before claims like qtips are made. Frankly it is hypocritical in the least for him to make such a suggestion when he couldn't shut up the entire time Bush was winning left and right. Why would you suggest the rules be changed now that Dems have the WH when you did not practice what you preach during the Rep control?

eg8r

LWW
01-06-2012, 04:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So those are the only requirements? Maybe you and qtip should get together and hash that out before claims like qtips are made. Frankly it is hypocritical in the least for him to make such a suggestion when he couldn't shut up the entire time Bush was winning left and right. Why would you suggest the rules be changed now that Dems have the WH when you did not practice what you preach during the Rep control?

eg8r </div></div>

Because as leftists they believe stealing elections to advance an agenda is a necessary evil ... while losing an election requires protests, slurs and lies of being robbed.

It's basic Alinskyism ... when you don't have the upper hand you cry foul and make your opponent defend positions they never took. OTOH, when you have the upper hand you crush all opposition.

Obama is black and the Chicago machine knew that he was the lone candidate who could use the Chicago thugocratic way on a nationwide basis.

Soflasnapper
01-06-2012, 09:09 PM
So now you claim that 'the regime' (tm) is only a front for the Chicago Machine (tm)?

We've had a coup from whoever is in charge of Chicago? (The Daley family? Blago? Rezko (now serving his jail sentence, iirc)?)

I will say I agree that the caucuses were subject to gaming, and perhaps, outright fraud. I will also agree that I do not think such gaming came out of Obama's own head, but was strategizing from elsewhere. But that doesn't mean it was the Democratic Machine (tm), which if anything, meant 'the Clintons.'

So someone ran a coup on the Democratic Machine? And they let it happen?

Gayle in MD
01-07-2012, 07:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Your statement is very exaggerated,</div></div>Sure it is but what do you expect when all we heard were "gasps" and "sucking of air" by dems across the country as they saw the TPers moving in.

<span style="color: #990000"> What does Liberal repulsion over the ugly, racist, ignorant display by Tea Partiers, have to do with you making gross misstatements about the balance of Congress? </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So I'm sure you'll excuse Democrats from sitting down and shutting up and saluting the GOP agenda until they, you know, win the presidency and the Senate?
</div></div>So those are the only requirements? Maybe you and qtip should get together and hash that out before claims like qtips are made. Frankly it is hypocritical in the least for him to make such a suggestion when he couldn't shut up the entire time Bush was winning left and right.


<span style="color: #990000"> It's revealing how you love to accuse people of hypocrisy.

So, would you tell the doctor to let your wife, the mother of your existing children, just die, rather than save her life if delivering a fetus put her life at risk?

We'd all like to know the answer? Maybe it would be a good thing to discover for yourself, before you go on and on accusing everyone you disagree with, of hypocrisy. Calling women who support a woman's right to choose, or have chosen to abort, murderers, while your own birth control methods, abort fertilized fetuses. </span>
Why would you suggest the rules be changed now that Dems have the WH when you did not practice what you preach during the Rep control?

eg8r </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Why would you suggest the rules be changed now that Dems have the WH when you did not practice what you preach during the Rep control?

</div></div>


<span style="color: #990000"> More tiwsting of what is written. No where in his post does Sofla suggest changing any rules. He is simply noticing the gross obstructionism of Republicans, when they "ACT" like they are the overarching elected authority, act like chosen dictators and obstruct eveything, although they do not have the majority of the countries mandate, as far as the number of elected Representative seats, nor the mandate of the office of the presidency.

During Bush, OTOH, statesmen and women, from the right and the left, were outraged over his overreaching abuse of presidential power, his many impeachable offenses, and hence, he left office with some of the lowest approval ratings in history, and the country in the worst shape since The Great Depression.

Try to keep up with what is being written, instead of twisting the words of others, into your fantasy version, can you?

The definition of Republican Policies: fascism n. a merging of the interests of big corporations and government, adjoined with a systematic curtailment of civil liberties

Gayle in Md </span>

eg8r
01-07-2012, 11:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More tiwsting of what is written. No where in his post does Sofla suggest changing any rules.</div></div>Basically we have another example of you running your mouth before comprehending what is being discussed. If you are not going to take the time to actually read and follow along then please be quiet and allow the adults to talk.

eg8r

LWW
01-08-2012, 05:20 AM
I remember a member who chastised others for posting in their threads unless they were will to display total fealty to the ideological points presented ... I'm assuming that rule doesn't apply to the left, in their opinion?

hondo
01-09-2012, 06:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I remember a member who chastised others for posting in their threads unless they were will to display total fealty to the ideological points presented ... I'm assuming that rule doesn't apply to the left, in their opinion? </div></div>

Is this what got LWW banned?

LWW
01-10-2012, 04:05 AM
What are you trying to cover up my friend?

You come across as a man bearing some heavy guilt.

hondo
01-10-2012, 08:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are you trying to cover up my friend?

You come across as a man bearing some heavy guilt. </div></div>

Nope. Sorry.
I'm sure you'll keep digging.

LWW
01-10-2012, 11:05 AM
Why don't you take the advice of your brother Q?