AngryOldGuy
double secret probation
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2013
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 658
- Location
- Phx,Az
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
No you dont! and you havent in this thread when someone else called you out.
Heck, there are people who wait hours in line just to VOTE.Except that Cruz' filibuster, which technically was not a filibuster (confused yet? - LOL), lasted a little over an hour. What the hell was that? Was THAT the amount of time he was able to stand on his feet? Jesus!! I know people who stood in line for hours just to get an iPhone. Cruz - You are a *****. LOL.
Article is here.
You tell us. Conservatism has failed every time it's been tried.You seem to only demand proof from conservatives and even when provided the proof you still want to believe the leftwing rhetoric. Why is that? Why such loyalty to a failed ideology
Number one, I never said all the Tea Party candidates elected were "big mouths" or problems. In fact, I admire many if not pretty much all of them because they have stuck to the principles by which they were elected and stuck to the wishes of the constituents in their districts who sent them to Washington. Not all of them by any stretch are big mouth fools and it's foolish of you to take my comments about one Senator and extrapolate that over the entire Tea Party contingent in congress.
Number two, Republicans lost seats in the last election both in the House and in the Senate. Particularly, in the Senate, they lost multiple seats they should have won had they not primaried out viable candidates that had been proven winners and not primaried in unelectible buffoons in races where the Democrat candidate was easily defeatable. Missouri and the "preventable rape" ignoramous quickly comes to mind as an example.
Finally, if you don't realize that since 1994 the Republicans actually gained and then lost control of the Senate you've got no business telling me I don't know what I'm talking about. But you continue to find pride in "losing by less" in the past election. You're probably one of those great Republican minds who talks glowingly about Obama winning less of the vote in 2012 than he did in 2008 as if that's somehow a great accomplishment.
As much as disagreeing with Obama does.
Liberal illogic says so.
You tell us. Conservatism has failed every time it's been tried.
As much as disagreeing with Obama does.
Here? Yep. The notion that having been slapped for no good reason repeatedly should prompt turning the other cheek in political venues is for ******s. Or are you saying that the political left can dish it out, but shouldn't have to take it?So doing the same thing makes it OK?
The compassion of the left is so touching. ****. Harvard isn't Harvard anymore. Hasn't been for a long, long time. Moveon.org is just a waste of good air.Yes, here is what happens when you go against Obama and liberalism, how compassionate and caring these people really are. Obamabots have no conscience.
MoveOn Petitions - RESCIND TED CRUZ'S HARVARD DEGREE
Reagan brought unemployment to 11 percent in 1982. Knowing that he'd failed, he did what George W. refused to do 20 years later: He compromised with the Democratic leaders of Congress, and raised taxes. THAT is why the economy got better between 1983 and 1989. Reagan was frequently oblivious, but he wasn't stupid. He figured out when the things he did weren't working -- at home (taxes) and abroad (Beirut, his ramping-up of Cold War rhetoric).Guess it is your definition of failure that is the problem because not many would consider the Obama results a success but then Obama could never be confused with a conservative. Reagan doubled GDP, grew tax revenue 60%, and created 17 million jobs. Liberals call that a failure
Conservatives talking about conscience is like priests talking about birth control.Yes, here is what happens when you go against Obama and liberalism, how compassionate and caring these people really are. Obamabots have no conscience.
MoveOn Petitions - RESCIND TED CRUZ'S HARVARD DEGREE
Reagan brought unemployment to 11 percent in 1982. Knowing that he'd failed, he did what George W. refused to do 20 years later: He compromised with the Democratic leaders of Congress, and raised taxes. THAT is why the economy got better between 1983 and 1989. Reagan was frequently oblivious, but he wasn't stupid. He figured out when the things he did weren't working -- at home (taxes) and abroad (Beirut, his ramping-up of Cold War rhetoric).
Conservatives talking about conscience is like priests talking about birth control.
I think a little arrogance is required in this situation, especially since he is getting plenty of it right back at him from both sides. I watched a little of it last night, he was answering questions. He is so well spoken, articulate, and extremely knowledgeable. It was so refreshing to see someone that could back up his position with a rock solid foundation of facts based in the Constitution. He is the real minority leader in the senate.And, God willing, he will be the leader one day, if not President.
Reid could just follow the rules of the Senate.
The loser getting less votes was not all that uncommon. Especially considering the "conservative" party didn't run a conservative again.
But Obama pulled a first. Millions caught on to his incompetence and ignorance. Maybe many of those that didn't vote for him the second time will tell others why it was dumb to vote for him the second time and the education will continue.
IF you dont want to purchase insurance or go through the exchange you pay a fine. Your not forced to you have to pay a one time fine.
Yes. If we wanna go by the ol "free market" line the more people buy something and go into a competive market insurance companies will offer better coverage and compete for that better coverage.
Ideological backgrounds.
Please don't go there as you aren't smart enough nor probably old enough to debate what Reagan did in the 80's. I could beat you up all day with actual data and facts but somehow doubt that you would even realize how foolish you are. Interesting how people like you always want to divert from the Obama performance and record to try and discuss something you don't understand and were probably too young to experience.
Here? Yep. The notion that having been slapped for no good reason repeatedly should prompt turning the other cheek in political venues is for ******s. Or are you saying that the political left can dish it out, but shouldn't have to take it?
These same Tea Party candidates that you claim to admire are the same ones that support the "big mouth Cruz" as you refer to him, in his efforts in the Senate.
Second, I was giving data from the 2010 midterm election, since you included the last two elections, and the data for that election proved your comments to be in error.
Third, the Republicans did not lose multiple seats as you exaggerate, they lost two. The data is in and says the base of the Republican party did not show up to vote in the last election because they are tired of the "elites" getting behind a candidate there is little difference between them and the Democrat. Romney and Romneycare? Seriously? What were they thinking? These yahoos went after Gingrich and Santorum with viciousness I have never seen before. Gingrich was actually ahead in the polls early on but because of folks like the great Karl Rove and Romney's elite support, the poison penned op ed pieces from Krauthammer to NRO hit the presses against Romney's opponents. Then to make sure their guy looked like he won the primary in Iowa, they hid the fact that Santorum won until AFTER the New Hampshire primary to give their guy Romney momentum. It all stunk to high heaven. And maybe if the Republican party allowed a stronger candidate that one could actually tell the difference between a Democrat and the Republican, most likely a lot more races especially in the Senate would have created a change in majority because a lot more of the base would have showed up to vote.