Not too weak, DTB, it just doesn't serve any positive purpose or further the discussion - it just sidetracks it.
Political Unrest
- Thread starter Mags
- Start date
Not too weak, DTB, it just doesn't serve any positive purpose or further the discussion - it just sidetracks it.
It is nice to see u clarify ur post the 2nd time around and ur idea with the people voting on things is as insane as u are. That is why u vote for the congress u clown. The way Fox News and nitwit neo-con radio brainwashes guys like you, we would go right to rich or poor and say good bye to the middle class. I could just see it now. Lets vote on welfare. 90 percent of the people will vote against welfare and now we can throw mentally challenge people right on the streets. Silly idea. Lets vote on defense cuts and then for a month watch Fox news scare every gullible nitwit into thinking the boogie man was coming. Kinda like the color charts u clowns fell for in 2004.
Last edited:
.
.
The conservative way is the only way to go :shrug: too much government is bad for the country, why can't we make our own decisions why does it take someone else decide what I do? Protect me, protect my food, and get out of my life
.
The conservative way is the only way to go :shrug: too much government is bad for the country, why can't we make our own decisions why does it take someone else decide what I do? Protect me, protect my food, and get out of my life
.............................................................
Sponge
I was listening to talk radio two week ago and they were detaiing the salarys of people that worked at Carnigie Hall. Granted its a pretty big venue and all that.
They got the information from a required report.
They had a guy that moved staging and chairs
and set ups. The guy made 377 K a year.
They had electricians that were making 288 K a year for electrical work
The director of the place pulled in 700 K
The reason the stage and elec people were making that money was they were in a union.
This is why people say that unions are taking down America. They could never receive that pay working as a stage hand in another large non union environment.
Granted if that was me I would be socking away that cash and thanking my lucky stars. But that dont make this right.
how do you explain this ?
.............................................................
Throwing in the race card is DTBlackgumbys standard operating procedure.
He cant see his nose to spite his face
he is eaten up with this sick way of thinking about everything and goverment tits will be the next subject he brings up.
.......................................................
Your just missing the complete understanding of what is going on in America when you say this.
Its just so not that simple and even if you get it
you will find it solves nothing.
Yes, Mags, I have been harping on it since it happened. I think it's exactly the wrong way to approach the issue and the logic behind a corporation being the same as an individual citizen is actually quite ludicrous. The only real logic FOR the ruling that I've seen, and seen from you, is that "hey, the unions get to do it, so all the corporations in the country should, too." To me, that makes no sense if you're being realistic or really care about the individual. Which, I maintain, many conservatives - ironically - don't.
I still do not see how a corporation is a better steward of the rights of an individual worker than a union is, which by definition is an organization for the sole purpose of making things better for the individual. While we all know that's not the case in many circumstances, we all know in many more that corporations are far less concerned with the benefit of their employees than they are their bottom line, management, board, and furthering their ability to grow their profits.
As I've said, I would rather see Unions not allowed to contribute to the process than remove all safeguards of corporations funding the political process. I think that makes a lot of sense. Sadly, in no way has it made our system BETTER by opening up the funding floodgates to EVERYONE. At least in my opinion. As individuals without a specific personal axe to grind for financial security and gain - such as a consultant or insurance salesman, I think we've all been done a great disservice. I say that admitting that hopefully I'll soon be a part of a very powerful union, being a teacher. Not for the union part of it, but for the schedule and job satisfaction angle. I would honestly agree that unions not contribute if corporations could not. And the logic behind the ruling (from my memory) did not deal with leveling the playing field for unions. It was comparing corporations to the individual. I could be wrong about that.
I still do not see how a corporation is a better steward of the rights of an individual worker than a union is, which by definition is an organization for the sole purpose of making things better for the individual. While we all know that's not the case in many circumstances, we all know in many more that corporations are far less concerned with the benefit of their employees than they are their bottom line, management, board, and furthering their ability to grow their profits.
As I've said, I would rather see Unions not allowed to contribute to the process than remove all safeguards of corporations funding the political process. I think that makes a lot of sense. Sadly, in no way has it made our system BETTER by opening up the funding floodgates to EVERYONE. At least in my opinion. As individuals without a specific personal axe to grind for financial security and gain - such as a consultant or insurance salesman, I think we've all been done a great disservice. I say that admitting that hopefully I'll soon be a part of a very powerful union, being a teacher. Not for the union part of it, but for the schedule and job satisfaction angle. I would honestly agree that unions not contribute if corporations could not. And the logic behind the ruling (from my memory) did not deal with leveling the playing field for unions. It was comparing corporations to the individual. I could be wrong about that.
Let me say this
Let me say this
Worked at the state hosp in Az doing forensic rehab for yrs n yrs...(in a hurry so will cut it short). He may have been a pot head and many articles reflect so but but he WILL NOT get sent to the AZ State Hospital due to....there is no longer a defense for substance induced psychosis (U go to prison). Gov Brewer knows how the state hosp is run....I have talked to her on several occasions. He will not get a GEI (Guilty except insane) and be in the hospital. IMO, he did know right from wrong at the time of the crime.
Let me say this
Worked at the state hosp in Az doing forensic rehab for yrs n yrs...(in a hurry so will cut it short). He may have been a pot head and many articles reflect so but but he WILL NOT get sent to the AZ State Hospital due to....there is no longer a defense for substance induced psychosis (U go to prison). Gov Brewer knows how the state hosp is run....I have talked to her on several occasions. He will not get a GEI (Guilty except insane) and be in the hospital. IMO, he did know right from wrong at the time of the crime.
Once again revealing that you're too simpleminded to realize that swing-voting moderates NEVER cared about race. Only imbeciles like you care about it.Fact #1
I just posted the #'s a week ago about 2008 having highest % of white people voting for O than any Dem since 1974.
Fact #2 We just had reversal of white vote in 2010 midterms--
These facts would dictate to a sane person--it was politics and not color of the great uniter being the culprit.
--or you can look at it from muffins view and figure it took everyone 2 years to find out he was black.
opcorn2
:0corn
Dogs... I'd like you to tell us what "you" think these numbers reveal.
I just KNOW this is gonna be good.
:0corn
With all due respect Mags--I think it did just the opposite--
the issue of race is no longer viable--now you can get to the real source your lookin for
If not -as we saw--you have the Tramps with their intellectual site photo's
http://www.the-peoples-forum.com/images/birther-country-back.jpg
--continue their intent--diversion from the facts.
If you expose their dillusional drivel enough--they'll go away--
You can't figure it out.? Sheez
Mags wanted to now why the social unrest.
Your race baiting duo tried to make it appear it was because of black president--exit poll of NYT plainly exposes that rant.
so imo the reason as I stated earlier is -pissed off people of a right center majority being force fed a left agenda by closed door one sided congress/pres.
2010 showed a huge swing from 2008 of the middle. Even Kennedy and O's old seats went the other side.
Lots of folks not real happy bout the last 2 years. Even your own
as they now know what all hat no cattle means--
Gitmo pledge--will never happen
Anti war group--saw more deaths in Afgan in either of last 2 years than all other previous years "combined"
Pledge to increase tax on wealthy--flip flop
The groveling/bowing world tour--and comes out yesterday with who else but- France is our greatest ally??
Jewish community can't like him taking sides with Palestine against Isreal.
Then the ole transparency-pay as you go-no washington as usual-no lobbyist-no earmarks etc standard grifts.
eg; lots of folks have lots of reasons to be pissed.
He did throw you a bone with 700 billion redistribution of wealth entitlements disquised as stimulus.
People are realizing printing and throwing money at every problem is not the solution.
Unemployment/economy probably biggest factor
in 2010.
Now you can try find solutions or you can try and buy the people off with 2 years unemployment.
Feed a man a fish and you fed him for a day--teach him to fish and you fed him for a lifetime.
You didn't answer my question, Dogs.
I understand why you believe the right-shift of the mid-term elections occurred, but you keep posting the Democrat "white" vote results of past elections. What point are trying to make by repeatedly posting those statistics?
Just answer that question. Are you capable of staying on topic and answering a direct question? I wonder... :shrug:
:0corn
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
...............................................................
I dont think he will answer but I think it has something to do with a goverment tit thingee.
...............................................................
I will just take this one thing and ask
Obama tried to keep the tax cuts for only the middle class but what happened ?
Repubs cried so long and threatened to fawk it up for the majority of us so the richy richy million ga billionaires could get their cut also.
you cant make his shit up
wtf how can you even say that
explain:facepalm:
PS you forgot to put your
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
...............................................................
I will just take this one thing and ask
Obama tried to keep the tax cuts for only the middle class but what happened ?
Repubs cried so long and threatened to fawk it up for the majority of us so the richy richy million ga billionaires could get their cut also.
you cant make his shit up
wtf how can you even say that
explain:facepalm:
PS you forgot to put your
I noticed that too but its useless debating his small brain. He wants the tax cuts for his masters and then blames Obama for giving him what he asked for. It just never ends with doggie dipshit.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
Hey doggie. I found the x-ray from the last time you saw your doctor. We had a good laugh about it. He was curious how you even found his office so points for you doggie dipshit.
It's NOT democratic white vote--It's total % of white vote for dem candidate. Jeeez Louise.:facepalm:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
link to poll "NYT"
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html
on left you'll see 2008 with slide bar for results back to 1980--if you have prob figuring it out--I'm here to help.
opcorn2
Last edited:
