• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rasmussen: Rick Perry now up 11 points on GOP field

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Quiz time, Con ...

Would that be "non partisan" or would that be "bipartisan?"

:lamo :lamo :lamo
Click to expand...

Is that what you got out of the video? nice diversion, bi partisan, non partisan is something you don't seem to understand. Think it is non partisan to take the Ryan Budget or the House's Cut,Cap,and Trade and not even debate it? Or to table Cut,Cap, and Trade? Think it is bi partisan or non partisan to continue to demonize Bush 2 1/2 years after Obama took office? Think it is bi partisan or non partisan to attack and try to destroy anyone with a different plan than the liberal plan. I can see there is nothing bi partisan or non partisan from you and others like you.
 
Conservative said:
Is that what you got out of the video? nice diversion, bi partisan, non partisan is something you don't seem to understand. Think it is non partisan to take the Ryan Budget or the House's Cut,Cap,and Trade and not even debate it? Or to table Cut,Cap, and Trade? Think it is bi partisan or non partisan to continue to demonize Bush 2 1/2 years after Obama took office? Think it is bi partisan or non partisan to attack and try to destroy anyone with a different plan than the liberal plan. I can see there is nothing bi partisan or non partisan from you and others like you.
Click to expand...

Maybe you missed it, but Republicans now control the House.
 
AdamT said:
Maybe you missed it, but Republicans now control the House.
Click to expand...

One of the things you are going to learn in civics is that the House is 1/2 the Congress and 1/3 of control of the legislative process. Thank goodness that they control the House and have put a stop to the massive creation of a nanny state in this country. God bless them, free will and personal responsibility, not forced govt. involvement in personal responsibility issues.

Still waiting for an answer to the questions I posed to you over the weekend. Would you prefer living in a state where people have the freedom to choose what is best for them or one where you are forced to participate in what the govt. wants for you?
 
Conservative said:
Is that what you got out of the video? nice diversion, bi partisan, non partisan is something you don't seem to understand.
Click to expand...
Can't you see the wisdom in you learning the definition of "non partisan" before you accuse others of not understanding it?

Just sayin'.

Conservative said:
Think it is bi partisan or non partisan to continue to demonize Bush 2 1/2 years after Obama took office? Think it is bi partisan or non partisan to attack and try to destroy anyone with a different plan than the liberal plan.
Click to expand...
Perhaps this presents an opportunity for you to pause for a moment to reflect on this thought of yours and consider how it sounds to others to hear you bitch and moan about those of us who blame Bush 2 1/2 years after he left office for the mess he left at Obama's feet -- after you just got through blaming the real-estate crash in 2008 on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley bill Clinton signed 9 years earlier.

Conservative said:
I can see there is nothing bi partisan or non partisan from you and others like you.
Click to expand...
Spits the Conservative who has spent a lifetime of voting along party lines. :roll: I guess irony means absolutely nothing to you, huh, Con?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Can't you see the wisdom in you learning the definition of "non partisan" before you accuse others of not understanding it?

Just sayin'.


Perhaps this presents an opportunity for you to pause for a moment to reflect on this thought of yours and consider how it sounds to others to hear you bitch and moan about those of us who blame Bush 2 1/2 years after he left office for the mess he left at Obama's feet -- after you just got through blaming the real-estate crash in 2008 on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley bill Clinton signed 9 years earlier.


Spits the Conservative who has spent a lifetime of voting along party lines. :roll: I guess irony means absolutely nothing to you, huh, Con?
Click to expand...

LOL, are you ever going to stop lying. You seem to believe if you say something often enough it becomes the truth. As has been pointed out I have voted for more Democrats than you have Republicans but you still think posting that bs over and over again it becomes true. Do you even remember what you posted in the past regarding my voting record?

Keep diverting from the thread topic and showing how truly non partisan you are. Is there anything that Bush did that you supported making it bi partisan in your world? Whether it be non partisan or bi partisan, neither seem to be part of your vocabulary as all I see from you is rhetoric, diversion, and distortions. Keep it up
 
Conservative said:
LOL, are you ever going to stop lying. You seem to believe if you say something often enough it becomes the truth. As has been pointed out I have voted for more Democrats than you have Republicans but you still think posting that bs over and over again it becomes true.
Click to expand...
You're the liar, Con, not me. Didn't you even notice I said, "along party lines?" I didn't say you spent a lifetime voting for Republicans. You're a political party's dream voter -- a non-thinking elector. BR (Before Reagan) you voted for whoever put a "D" after their name. SR (Since Reagan), you vote for whoever puts an "R" after their name. Results don't matter one iota to you. All that matters to you is that the candidate put an "R" after their name.

Conservative said:
Keep diverting from the thread topic and showing how truly non partisan you are. Is there anything that Bush did that you supported making it bi partisan in your world?
Click to expand...
Sure, I supported him invading Afghanistan following 9.11. I supported him establishing an alliance with Pakistan in rooting out Al-Qaeda. And I supported his humanitarian aid for Africa.

Conservative said:
Whether it be non partisan or bi partisan, neither seem to be part of your vocabulary as all I see from you is rhetoric, diversion, and distortions. Keep it up
Click to expand...
And exactly how can it be part of your vocabulary when you don't even know what the words "non partisan" mean? :roll:

And what am I diverting from? I challenged you to cite the bill(s) Perry signed into law which led to the current economy in Texas and you could name one.
 
Last edited:
Sheik Yerbuti said:
You're the liar, Con, not me. Didn't you even notice I said, "along party lines?" I didn't say you spent a lifetime voting for Republicans. You're a political party's dream voter -- a non-thinking elector. BR (Before Reagan) you voted for whoever put a "D" after their name. SR (Since Reagan), you vote for whoever puts an "R" after their name. Results don't matter one iota to you. All that matters to you is that the candidate put an "R" after their name.


Sure, I supported him invading Afghanistan following 9.11. I supported him establishing an alliance with Pakistan in rooting out Al-Qaeda. And I supported his humanitarian aid for Africa.


And exactly how can it be part of your vocabulary when you don't even know what the words "non partisan" mean? :roll:

And what am I diverting from? I challenged you to cite the bill(s) Perry signed into law which led to the current economy in Texas and you could name one.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Sheik, but more diversion. Perry has been Governor of TX for 10 years and during that period of time TX has grown its labor force, population, employment, and economy. What legislation did Perry sign? Look it up, it is public record. I assure you that Perry signed more legislation, had more personnel management experience, budget experience, and leadership experience than the guy you voted for in 2008. The question is why did you vote for Obama? What was it in his resume that caused you to vote for him.

Perry has drawn a lot of business to TX by making trips, making phone calls, promoting TX all over the nation. The TX results have led to businesses moving to this state, employment growing in this state leading to a NET JOBS GAIN during the recession. It would serve no purpose to post the legislation that Perry signed because you wouldn't buy it or believe it yet you believe the Obama rhetoric and ignore that he signed no legislation or even authored any legislation that has warranted your vote for him.

The Obama record speaks for itself thus the choice between Perry and Obama if that happens is quite clear, Perry! Just like with Bush vs. Gore, Bush vs. Kerry, McCain vs. Obama, the choice was clear to thinking individuals, thinking with the brain something liberals never seem to do. Continue to buy the Obama rhetoric and ignore the Obama results for that is what liberals always do. Just a reminder

News Headlines
 
Conservative said:
Sorry, Sheik, but more diversion. Perry has been Governor of TX for 10 years and during that period of time TX has grown its labor force, population, employment, and economy. What legislation did Perry sign? Look it up, it is public record. I assure you that Perry signed more legislation, had more personnel management experience, budget experience, and leadership experience than the guy you voted for in 2008. The question is why did you vote for Obama? What was it in his resume that caused you to vote for him.

Perry has drawn a lot of business to TX by making trips, making phone calls, promoting TX all over the nation. The TX results have led to businesses moving to this state, employment growing in this state leading to a NET JOBS GAIN during the recession. It would serve no purpose to post the legislation that Perry signed because you wouldn't buy it or believe it yet you believe the Obama rhetoric and ignore that he signed no legislation or even authored any legislation that has warranted your vote for him.

The Obama record speaks for itself thus the choice between Perry and Obama if that happens is quite clear, Perry! Just like with Bush vs. Gore, Bush vs. Kerry, McCain vs. Obama, the choice was clear to thinking individuals, thinking with the brain something liberals never seem to do. Continue to buy the Obama rhetoric and ignore the Obama results for that is what liberals always do. Just a reminder

News Headlines
Click to expand...

Hmmm, yes it is the reason Perry FAILS.

The PRIMER if you look up the Perry Record.

Public pri*vate part*ner*ships (or P3s) are part and parcel of the United Nations’ Agenda 21. Two of the pur*poses of Agenda 21 are to abolish pri*vate prop*erty and restrict mobility and P3s act as the vehicle to do it. Perry made P3s a cen*ter*piece of his trans*porta*tion policy since he stepped in as governor.

It started with the Trans Texas Cor*ridor, known at the fed*eral level as high pri*ority cor*ri*dors, cor*ri*dors of the future, or the NAFTA super*high*ways. Just in Texas, it was to be a 4,000 mile multi-modal net*work of toll roads, rail lines, power trans*mis*sion lines, pipelines, telecom*mu*ni*ca*tions lines and more. It was going to be financed, oper*ated, and con*trolled by a for*eign com*pany granted mas*sive swaths of land 1,200 feet (4 foot*ball fields) wide taken forcibly through emi*nent domain.

Called the biggest land grab in Texas his*tory, it was going to gobble up 580,000 acres of pri*vate Texas land (the first cor*ridor alone was to dis*place 1 mil*lion Texans) and hand it over to well-connected global players using P3s, who would gain exclu*sive rights to deter*mine the route and what hotels, restau*rants, and gas sta*tions were along the cor*ridor in a government-sanctioned monopoly for a half cen*tury. It was the worst case of emi*nent domain for pri*vate gain ever conceived.

I can go on with pages of dirty deals and good ol boy give aways from the People of Texas to the Elite All Hat no Cattle crowd that buzz around Perry. I am saving it for it's own thread, closer to the election.
 
Since Perry has been office, the price of oil skyrocketted from under $25/barrel to a high of around $140/barrel. That is the No. 1 reason that Texas has performed better than some other states.
 
shintao said:
Hmmm, yes it is the reason Perry FAILS.

The PRIMER if you look up the Perry Record.

Public pri*vate part*ner*ships (or P3s) are part and parcel of the United Nations’ Agenda 21. Two of the pur*poses of Agenda 21 are to abolish pri*vate prop*erty and restrict mobility and P3s act as the vehicle to do it. Perry made P3s a cen*ter*piece of his trans*porta*tion policy since he stepped in as governor.

It started with the Trans Texas Cor*ridor, known at the fed*eral level as high pri*ority cor*ri*dors, cor*ri*dors of the future, or the NAFTA super*high*ways. Just in Texas, it was to be a 4,000 mile multi-modal net*work of toll roads, rail lines, power trans*mis*sion lines, pipelines, telecom*mu*ni*ca*tions lines and more. It was going to be financed, oper*ated, and con*trolled by a for*eign com*pany granted mas*sive swaths of land 1,200 feet (4 foot*ball fields) wide taken forcibly through emi*nent domain.

Called the biggest land grab in Texas his*tory, it was going to gobble up 580,000 acres of pri*vate Texas land (the first cor*ridor alone was to dis*place 1 mil*lion Texans) and hand it over to well-connected global players using P3s, who would gain exclu*sive rights to deter*mine the route and what hotels, restau*rants, and gas sta*tions were along the cor*ridor in a government-sanctioned monopoly for a half cen*tury. It was the worst case of emi*nent domain for pri*vate gain ever conceived.

I can go on with pages of dirty deals and good ol boy give aways from the People of Texas to the Elite All Hat no Cattle crowd that buzz around Perry. I am saving it for it's own thread, closer to the election.
Click to expand...

Perry has real life experience and executive management experience, you voted for an empty suit incompetent and the results show it. Perry vs. Obama, judge for yourself the Obama results

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 24+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 40% JAR and well over 50% disapproval ratings.
 
AdamT said:
Since Perry has been office, the price of oil skyrocketted from under $25/barrel to a high of around $140/barrel. That is the No. 1 reason that Texas has performed better than some other states.
Click to expand...

Liberalism has prevented other states from capitalizing on their natural resources as well. Any idea how much oil is off the coast of California and how much the state could get in royalties? How about the East coast? Keep demonizing Perry while ignoring the mess Obama has created. I suggest you pay close attention to the Fortune 500 companies in TX because although Oil is important there are many others not related to the oil business that contributes significantly to the labor force growth and economic growth of the state. I am still waiting for any Obama supporter to really explain why they voted for Obama in 2008 and how they can justify the results TODAY
 
Conservative said:
One of the things you are going to learn in civics is that the House is 1/2 the Congress and 1/3 of control of the legislative process. Thank goodness that they control the House and have put a stop to the massive creation of a nanny state in this country. God bless them, free will and personal responsibility, not forced govt. involvement in personal responsibility issues.

Still waiting for an answer to the questions I posed to you over the weekend. Would you prefer living in a state where people have the freedom to choose what is best for them or one where you are forced to participate in what the govt. wants for you?
Click to expand...
I suppose in your world because the Republicans passed the Medicare Part D, it wasn't "nanny state." :lamo
 
Conservative said:
Sorry, Sheik, but more diversion. Perry has been Governor of TX for 10 years and during that period of time TX has grown its labor force, population, employment, and economy. What legislation did Perry sign? Look it up, it is public record.
Click to expand...
Translation: you have no f'n clue what bills Perry signed that helped the Texas economy. You don't even know if he did. He's your governor and you don't even know what he's done to help Texas.

What a ringing endorsement to not vote for Perry -- his own constituents can't say what he's done!

:lamo

Conservative said:
I assure you that Perry signed more legislation
Click to expand...
No, you cannot assure me of that. You can't even cite one single piece of legislation he signed which helped boost the economy of Texas.

Conservative said:
It would serve no purpose to post the legislation that Perry signed because you wouldn't buy it or believe it
Click to expand...
Can you scream, "I have no f'n clue what bills Perry signed that helped boost our economy," any louder? :lol:

Conservative said:
The Obama record speaks for itself thus the choice between Perry and Obama if that happens is quite clear, Perry!
Click to expand...
Unless you can show what Perry did to help the economy there, you have nothing to praise. I saw another poster say what Perry did was to do nothing. You seem to be in agreement with that other poster.

Conservative said:
Just like with Bush vs. Gore, Bush vs. Kerry, McCain vs. Obama, the choice was clear to thinking individuals, thinking with the brain something liberals never seem to do. Continue to buy the Obama rhetoric and ignore the Obama results for that is what liberals always do. Just a reminder
Click to expand...
Voting for Bush 4 times only serves to reveal you are in no position to judge what qualifies as a "wise choice" when it comes to casting a vote.

Conservative said:

News Headlines
Click to expand...
The forum has already seen that Texas ranked second in business -- unfortunately for you, you have failed to show any legislation Perry passed which made that possible. Seems to me it happened in spite of him, not because of him.

Still waiting for proof to the contrary. <tap, tap, tap>
 
Conservative said:
Perry has real life experience and executive management experience, you voted for an empty suit incompetent and the results show it. Perry vs. Obama, judge for yourself the Obama results

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 24+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 40% JAR and well over 50% disapproval ratings.
Click to expand...

..................
 

Attachments

  • con1.gif
    con1.gif
    14 KB · Views: 16
pbrauer said:
I suppose in your world because the Republicans passed the Medicare Part D, it wasn't "nanny state." :lamo
Click to expand...

So the nanny state to you means putting the consumer in charge of their healthcare and prescription drug program? Now that is a new one.
 
Conservative said:
Perry has real life experience and executive management experience
Click to expand...
So does Obama.

Still waiting ... what bills did Perry sign that helped boost the economy of Texas?
 
Conservative said:
Liberalism has prevented other states from capitalizing on their natural resources as well. Any idea how much oil is off the coast of California and how much the state could get in royalties? How about the East coast? Keep demonizing Perry while ignoring the mess Obama has created. I suggest you pay close attention to the Fortune 500 companies in TX because although Oil is important there are many others not related to the oil business that contributes significantly to the labor force growth and economic growth of the state. I am still waiting for any Obama supporter to really explain why they voted for Obama in 2008 and how they can justify the results TODAY
Click to expand...

Nothing you said changes the fact that Perry was the beneficiary of skyrocketting oil prices, which account for most of Texas' gains. I guess you could give Republicans credit for that, since their failure to address energy speculation and their Iraq war contributed to the massive run up in oil prices. Kudos.
 
AdamT said:
Nothing you said changes the fact that Perry was the beneficiary of skyrocketting oil prices, which account for most of Texas' gains. I guess you could give Republicans credit for that, since their failure to address energy speculation and their Iraq war contributed to the massive run up in oil prices. Kudos.
Click to expand...

Uh, no it doesn't, any idea how many employees the oil industry employ in the state of TX? What exactly is in that Kool-aid you continue to drink? High dollar volume low employment numbers vs. the rest of the labor force
 
Conservative said:
Fact, the labor force in TX is growing, Fact, the population of TX is growing, Fact, businesses are moving to TX many of them Fortune 500 Companies. Fact, liberals don't like facts so rather than accept the facts, try to duplicate what is working, liberals demonize. What do you think is going to happen to high tax states around the country if liberals get their way and raise corporate taxes and personal income taxes on the rich? Think the state tax revenue is going to be the same? Do you ever think beyond the moment?
Click to expand...

You make the same mistakes as you don't seem to know why or how. Much what has happened there as noted can't be copied elsewhere, it involves many low wage jobs for immigrants, and took federal dollars and corporate welfare. This is not something to be too excited about or praise overly.
 
Boo Radley said:
You make the same mistakes as you don't seem to know why or how. Much what has happened there as noted can't be copied elsewhere, it involves many low wage jobs for immigrants, and took federal dollars and corporate welfare. This is not something to be too excited about or praise overly.
Click to expand...

You seem to be an expert on TX whereas I live here and obviously am not. What you fail to recognize is that BLS shows 550,000 minimum wage and sub minimum wage jobs in TX out of a total labor force of over 12 million. In case you cannot do the numbers that is less than 5% so hardly significant but keep spreading the misinformation
 
Rick Perry does an excellent impersonation of Josh Brolin impersonating George Bush.
 
Conservative said:
You seem to be an expert on TX whereas I live here and obviously am not. What you fail to recognize is that BLS shows 550,000 minimum wage and sub minimum wage jobs in TX out of a total labor force of over 12 million. In case you cannot do the numbers that is less than 5% so hardly significant but keep spreading the misinformation
Click to expand...

It's true that your not an expert, yes. Living somewhere actually doesn't by itself make you an expert. It is possible to be blinded by ideaology.
 
Boo Radley said:
It's true that your not an expert, yes. Living somewhere actually doesn't by itself make you an expert. It is possible to be blinded by ideaology.
Click to expand...

Why did you totally ignore this part of the post?

What you fail to recognize is that BLS shows 550,000 minimum wage and sub minimum wage jobs in TX out of a total labor force of over 12 million. In case you cannot do the numbers that is less than 5% so hardly significant
Click to expand...

Instead of answering this part you chose to insert a snarky little, small minded jab....Why should anyone take you seriously?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Why did you totally ignore this part of the post?



Instead of answering this part you chose to insert a snarky little, small minded jab....Why should anyone take you seriously?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Because it has been addressed earlier and repeatedly. Like many who don't understand, he repeats numbers but never addresses the rebuttal points. Until he does, his repeation is nothing more than . . . Squirrel!!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom