Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 147

Thread: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

  1. #51
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,438

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    As incompetent as the Dems continually prove to be, it seems that the Reps are intent on giving seminars on how to alienate people and lose elections. Ms Ginsberg may be correct, but not for the reasons she thinks/hopes.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  2. #52
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Central Jersey
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 03:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    256

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    All of what I said is true.

    It is not "despicable" to refer to the disaffected coalition pandering candidates typically fielded by the liberal Dems as "socialists". They, by nature, present many rescue planks in their platform to appeal to the many "disaffected" groups, rescue planks that are intrinsically socialist.

    I presented the kind of President the people need to elect, that, rather, the GOP needs to field, a candidate that is, obiously, not a disaffected coalition rescue candidate.

    Your possible projection or transference that I'm an Obama-hater is false.

    The rescue candidate socialist aspects of both Kerry and Gore were also quite obvious, and, thus obviously, they would not have been able to prevent The Great Recesssion, and would merely have hastened in all likelihood.

    Obama won handly in 2008 because he was clearly a socialistic rescue candidate (Obamacare and ludicrous amnesty for 20 million illegals obvious indications) and because his skin was black, making him a hugely idealistically appealing candidate to the disaffected masses. Clearly, all such candidates do is make matters far worse.

    The desired candidate I described in my previous post is far different from Obama, Kerry, and Gore and he is far different from Bush, McCain and Romney, and all six of these people I just listed could not have helped but bring America down.

    We can do better.
    You don't know what the hell "socialism" is. These people do, and they know Obama is no socialist: What Do Socialists Think of Obamacare? | Michael Smerconish

  3. #53
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    In presenting an accurate comparison, the vast majority of disaffected and impoverished people do vote "bread and circuses" and will thus vote for the socialistic rescue candidate.

    This is understandable, as they experience themselves in bottom-tier dire straits, and do not have the luxury of higher level academic analytical pursuits in Maslow's Hierarchy of Need.

    These people are clamoring for the security previous policy did not provide, they are clamoring for the justice in "liberty and justice for all" because too many small special interests (such as the sub-prime security speculators who knew exactly what the great recession result of their get-rich scheme would be) took liberty that did not rightly belong to them, thereby perpetrating a huge injustice on so many people.

    Thus, with respect to accurate presentation, comparatively very few disaffected and impoverished people vote the economic "freedom" (economic/fiscal conservative candidate) line. They are greatly execeptions to the rule.

    They vote the economic security line, and for the liberal Dem candidate that stumps that line.
    The falsehood is in presenting a static class system. There is no such thing where economic freedom abounds. Those in a low SES, can and do move up and sometimes the rich fall. Gird your loins and run the race! Don't slow down for the handout is my advice.

  4. #54
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Comunitee View Post
    In her case, trying to keep up with Antonin Scalia.

    I have a problem with Supreme Court Justices ruling on cases on which they have a vested interest. I also have a problem with Supreme Court Justices lying: Corporations are NOT people, and money is NOT speech, and there was NO legal or moral reason to stop the Florida recount.

    Scalia should have been impeached 3 times over by now.
    1. Yes. Corporations are people, just like any church, club political party or other amalgamation of human beings.

    2. Money is private property. Speech, especially political speech is to be unencumbered. Thus the {People should be free to use their money in the exercise of the free speech as thy see fit with little or no government interference and with virtually no liitis.

    One should loot to how one shepherds one's own funds, not how one's neighbor manages his. In any event, the proper way to guarantee that one's speech has the widest audience available, is to create a compelling message.

    3. There were every legal and moral to stop repeated "Florida Recounts." The Florida vote was conducted under the auspices of the Florida Constitution, not the dreams of the Political Left. That document de manded that the nonsense cease by a given date. The Federal Courts had no right to intervene. People who assert otherwise have rejected the rule of law.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  5. #55
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-17 @ 06:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    15,248

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Oftencold View Post
    There is almost no such thing ans a significant "extreme right" in the country. Merely a moderate right (or rational) position that confuses the fantasists and low information serf of the Left. A few minutes of clear thinking supported by a casual perusal of facts will make this abundantly clear.
    Every time I think I've read the funniest post ever on this forum, a new one shows up to prove me wrong. Thanks, man! This one will take some beating.
    "Groups with guitars are on the way out, Mr. Epstein"

    Dick Rowe, A & R man
    Decca Records
    London, 1962

  6. #56
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Comunitee View Post
    You don't know what the hell "socialism" is. These people do, and they know Obama is no socialist: What Do Socialists Think of Obamacare? | Michael Smerconish
    Your linked author's opinion is merely that, employing hyperbole and metaphor to make his point.

    The socialist aspect of Obamacare is obvious.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  7. #57
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Oftencold View Post
    1. Yes. Corporations are people, just like any church, club political party or other amalgamation of human beings.

    2. Money is private property. Speech, especially political speech is to be unencumbered. Thus the {People should be free to use their money in the exercise of the free speech as thy see fit with little or no government interference and with virtually no liitis.

    One should loot to how one shepherds one's own funds, not how one's neighbor manages his. In any event, the proper way to guarantee that one's speech has the widest audience available, is to create a compelling message.

    3. There were every legal and moral to stop repeated "Florida Recounts." The Florida vote was conducted under the auspices of the Florida Constitution, not the dreams of the Political Left. That document de manded that the nonsense cease by a given date. The Federal Courts had no right to intervene. People who assert otherwise have rejected the rule of law.
    Corporations are not people. Corporations are state defined entities created to limit liability. There is zero constitutional basis for considering corporations to have the same constitutional rights as people.

    Citizen's United did NOT permit corporations to engage in electioneering. The same restrictions on electioneering that existed before Citizens United still exist. What Citizen's United did was to allow companies to use general treasury funds in electioneering rather than separate accounts.

    Before Citizens United, I could own a share of Walmart, and know that my money was being used only as an investment. If Walmart wanted to run an add in support of Obama, I'd know that it was raised separately from day to day operations. Citizens United means that a company can spend investors money without the concent of the investors.

    That's free speech for you.

  8. #58
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Corporations are not people. Corporations are state defined entities created to limit liability. There is zero constitutional basis for considering corporations to have the same constitutional rights as people.

    Citizen's United did NOT permit corporations to engage in electioneering. The same restrictions on electioneering that existed before Citizens United still exist. What Citizen's United did was to allow companies to use general treasury funds in electioneering rather than separate accounts.

    Before Citizens United, I could own a share of Walmart, and know that my money was being used only as an investment. If Walmart wanted to run an add in support of Obama, I'd know that it was raised separately from day to day operations. Citizens United means that a company can spend investors money without the concent of the investors.

    That's free speech for you.
    I do not accept, and can find no justification in the Constitution for limiting and collection of people, organization, corporation or company from freely spending virtually any amount of their own money they please with no outside interference in the exercise of free political speech. Despotics, self-condemned slaves, serfs, and people terrified of ideas which they are incompetent to refute will of course think otherwise. See to your own, and leave others be. You wish to restrict the speech of others because you have nothing convincing to say. The sooner you recognize that, they sooner you can address the shortcomings of your message.
    Last edited by Oftencold; 10-08-13 at 03:07 PM.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  9. #59
    Sage
    Oftencold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A small village in Alaska
    Last Seen
    05-09-14 @ 12:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    5,044

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    Every time I think I've read the funniest post ever on this forum, a new one shows up to prove me wrong. Thanks, man! This one will take some beating.
    I'd imagine that you send a lot of time beating whilst others think and engage in adult political discourse.

    Carry on, but please, close the drapes first.
    Quod scripsi, scripsi

  10. #60
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: Ruth Bader Ginsberg predicts another Dem in the White House. Do you Agree?

    Quote Originally Posted by Oftencold View Post
    I accept, and can find no justification in the Constitution for limiting and collection of people, organization, corporation or company from freely spending virtually any amount of their own money they please with no outside interference in the exercise of free political speech. Despotics, self-condemned slaves, serfs, and people terrified of ideas which they are incompetent to refute will of course think otherwise. See to your own, and leave others be. You wish to restrict the speech of others because you have nothing convincing to say. The sooner you recognize that, they sooner you can address the shortcomings of your message.
    I'm glad we at least agree on the first part.

    The only people who concentrate on the message are the people who are trying to sell a lousy product. Good ideas sell themselves.

Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •