• 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!

DNC Chair: GOP wants to "Drag Us Back To Jim Crow Laws"

apdst said:
Democracy is a bunch of welfare chumps voting for the person that will keep the checks coming to the mailbox and take money from the working folks to pay for it?

That's democracy?
Click to expand...

Disenfranchising someone because they don't make enough money is democracy?
 
toddwv said:
Well, we've went from losing 750,000 jobs a month to bitching about how last month there were only 38,000 new jobs created so I'm going to say pretty well.

Of course, now we have the Republican House already in full campaign mode and their election theme seems to be "Destroy America So That The Libruls Can't Have It" so the next few months are a crap shoot.



Didn't take as long as you apparently think.
Click to expand...

You do realize that we started losing those jobs after the Democrats took over Congress. Right?
 
FilmFestGuy said:
You are anti-democracy and pro-aristocracy.

And again, you prove her point.

And of course, in Indiana if you become the FIRST PERSON indicted on voter fraud charges, you become the Republican over-seer of elections and win the support of the governor (who decided not to run for president).
Ind. Supreme Court permits challenge of Charlie White's election to proceed
Click to expand...

Right! I want to keep more of my hard earned money in my pocket. You're right; I'm just evil for that. Oh and a racist, too.
 
Deuce said:
Disenfranchising someone because they don't make enough money is democracy?
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about disenfranchising someone because they don't make enough money. I'm talking about disenfranchising someone because they don't make any money and live off the government tit. Don't like it? Get a ****ing job.
 
Deuce said:
You've just changed your argument from "X people don't pay taxes" to "Well ok everyone pays taxes but certain types of taxes don't count because____"
Click to expand...

No. You are apparenlty having an attack of liberal "I didn't really read your posts. I am just pretending." My position with regard to taxes has been consistent in all of my post here. It is you that are having a comprehension problem .... otherwise known as liberal hypocrisy.
 
apdst said:
I'm not talking about disenfranchising someone because they don't make enough money. I'm talking about disenfranchising someone because they don't make any money and live off the government tit. Don't like it? Get a ****ing job.
Click to expand...

That's all I needed to know, thanks.

You're anti-democracy which is anti-American. Don't like it? Move to ****ing North Korea.
 
apdst said:
Right! I want to keep more of my hard earned money in my pocket. You're right; I'm just evil for that. Oh and a racist, too.
Click to expand...

I never said racist. You are the one who replied to my post about making it more difficult for poor people and students to vote by saying they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Unless you're going to play the Sarah Palin victim card and blame others for taking your own words seriously, you wrote what you wrote.

My post: An overstatement, perhaps...but it's essentially true that Republicans want to make it harder for poor people and students to vote - ESPECIALLY in Florida.

Your response: People who don't have skin in the game shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Should I apologize to you for taking your words seriously? And please point to one mention of race on my part.
 
megaprogman said:
More like, how very roman of him :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

more like how very Founding Father of him. ;)



as a general matter, however, I think he is correct. a better filter than simply "age" is needed for the franchise, I think. but that is properly a state decision. Myself, I would support voters having to pass a test similar to the citizenship one (even just something basic; stuff like "name the three branches of government" and "who are you voting for").

if that is "anti-democratic", then I'm fine with that. because we aren't a democracy. :)
 
Last edited:
justabubba said:
please tell us exactly what she said which was in error
Click to expand...

Again I shall request from you as I already did one earlier.

Please tell us exactly how her statement that Republicans "literally" want to drag us back to Jim Crow Laws.

You must show this in two parts.
1. That Republicans have "literally" attempted to enact legislation to segregate us and remove the right to vote from blacks.
2. Republicans "literally" are attempting to drag people.
 
Caine said:
Again I shall request from you as I already did one earlier.

Please tell us exactly how her statement that Republicans "literally" want to drag us back to Jim Crow Laws.

You must show this in two parts.
1. That Republicans have "literally" attempted to enact legislation to segregate us and remove the right to vote from blacks.
2. Republicans "literally" are attempting to drag people.
Click to expand...

you inability to post what about her statements was in error shows us that your criticism of her comments is baseless. you only oppose that she dares utter the truth
 
justabubba said:
you inability to post what about her statements was in error shows us that your criticism of her comments is baseless. you only oppose that she dares utter the truth
Click to expand...

So you can't support her ridiculous comments ... just repeat them. Got it. ;)
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Wasserman-Schultz is the epitome of all that is wrong with American politics, and especially the cancer that is American liberalism, which has devolved to nothing more than suckling the government teat. And in another stroke of head-up-their-asses brilliance, Dems made here the Chair.

She's a friggin joke. Just as Liberalism in the US has become a joke. A really bad joke. An incredibly costly joke.
Click to expand...

Very incorrect - it's no joke. Schultz like Dean before her, as the head of the DNC is to make outlandish, unsubstantiated propoganda claims. Next, she'll come out and say all Republicans want women and small children to get cancer or aids or better yet, will say Tea Party members are canibalistic nosferatu who torture puppies with hot pokers. Her job is to do that. Once you realize that she as the DNC head is nothing short of a whip, that froths up the far left progressive mouth-frothers, the easier she becomes to take. The ONLY reason she is heard in the media is because of the outlandish things she says - and that's a tactical move. Say something so over the top, it'll get coverage, e.g., Charlie Sheen.

Other than the mouth-frothers, no one --- no one is taking Shultz (Ed or Debbie) seriously and in actuality, it's comedy gold.
 
ludahai said:
And who doesn't pay taxes?
Click to expand...

About half of the population, doesn't pay income tax. GE didn't pay taxes. Tons of organizations, business, individuals -- are tax exempt.
 
apdst said:
If you don't pay taxes, you don't. If you don;t have anything to lose, other than your welfare, then you don't have skin in the game.
Click to expand...

You do know the voting age is 18 don't you?? Just wondering..
 
Caine said:
Again I shall request from you as I already did one earlier.

Please tell us exactly how her statement that Republicans "literally" want to drag us back to Jim Crow Laws.

You must show this in two parts.
1. That Republicans have "literally" attempted to enact legislation to segregate us and remove the right to vote from blacks.
2. Republicans "literally" are attempting to drag people.
Click to expand...

I asked him taht two pages ago...

All I got was this...
cricket_1.jpg
 
apdst said:
You do realize that we started losing those jobs after the Democrats took over Congress. Right?
Click to expand...

So?? Your claim is that Bush just blindly signed countless bills to make it the fault of democrats that the economy crashed?? Is that your claim?? The dems taking over congress is irrelevent.. But it is all you can say from accepting blame yourself.. Which is typical of conservatives.. Nothing is ever your fault.. It is always the fault of the dems..

If your party has to desinfranchise thousands, if not millions of people in order to win elections.. Then there is a serious problem there.. You have no business running if you have to cheat to win.. But I suppose it is the dems fault that you all have issues winning elections without running ads on television telling people either not to vote or the wrong time to vote..

Newsvine - GOP Front Group Runs Ad in Nevada Telling Latinos Not to Vote

Pretty sad if you ask me.. Sorry.. That isn't democrats fault..
 
justabubba said:
you inability to post what about her statements was in error shows us that your criticism of her comments is baseless. you only oppose that she dares utter the truth
Click to expand...

So you're claiming she speaks the truth, yet claim your an indepenent on your profile. There's no other way to address such dishonesty on so many levels other than to just ignore you as irrelevant. Is that what you want?
 
justabubba said:
you inability to post what about her statements was in error shows us that your criticism of her comments is baseless. you only oppose that she dares utter the truth
Click to expand...

You're not very good at this, you know that?
The error in what she said was that the GOP literally wants to return to Jim Crow.

In order for that to literally be true, you have to prove a single solitary GOP senator or congressman has supported legislation that would re-establish Jim Crow.

If you cannot do that... there in lies her factual error.

I don't expect to you agree... or even comprehend. Just pointing out the stupidity in your statement.
 
apdst said:
I'm not talking about disenfranchising someone because they don't make enough money. I'm talking about disenfranchising someone because they don't make any money and live off the government tit. Don't like it? Get a ****ing job.
Click to expand...

Says the man who also costs the taxpayer more than he contributes in taxes... That star under our names should tell everyone we cost people money in taxes, far more than we produce and pay in taxes. Think not only about our military salaries, but retirement benefits, the cost of training us, healthcare, equipment, support channels, etc, etc, etc.

Yes we provide a service but there's no denying we are a drain on gov't resources, not only that but all military spending is fundamentally a bad investment. Building a tank for example doesn't provide the same economic benefit as building a road, or a school. Maintaining thousands of nuclear weapons in our military produces no economic gain but costs us millions if not billions.

Get off your ivory tower and realize we've cost the government more money than any welfare recipient, are you worth that investment? Am I?
 
Wiseone said:
Says the man who also costs the taxpayer more than he contributes in taxes... That star under our names should tell everyone we cost people money in taxes, far more than we produce and pay in taxes. Think not only about our military salaries, but retirement benefits, the cost of training us, healthcare, equipment, support channels, etc, etc, etc.

Yes we provide a service but there's no denying we are a drain on gov't resources, not only that but all military spending is fundamentally a bad investment. Building a tank for example doesn't provide the same economic benefit as building a road, or a school. Maintaining thousands of nuclear weapons in our military produces no economic gain but costs us millions if not billions.

Get off your ivory tower and realize we've cost the government more money than any welfare recipient, are you worth that investment? Am I?
Click to expand...

That is one hugely God-awful mis-statement of what a national defense is. Without a doubt the dumbest thing I have read here in a week or more.

If you want to elect politicians so as to create a larger or smaller defense, then go for it. If you want to plead to our enemies to be not so bad, so that we can hopefully have less of a need for defense, then go for it. Otherwise, its in our Constitution to provide for the National Defense. Benevolence is not.

When you join the military, you are hired to do a job. To be trained. To risk your well-being in the performance of that job. To earn all that you are paid, and to be taxed for sure.

You not only have "skin" in the game. You got your flesh and blood in the game.

I served plenty myself, so if you can't see the accuracy of my words as they apply to you, then worry not as I am speaking for myself, and for other members of our armed forces who have a better understanding of how it works than do you.
 
Perhaps her office could put out a statement similar to this...

'her remark was not intended to be a factual statement, but rather to illustrate the unnecessary Republican legislative hurdles designed to disenfranchise some segments of the voting populace reminds one of the Jim Crow days'

After all it worked for Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). I didn't hear many, if any, complaints from the right on that.
 
Wow, she makes Howard Dean appear sane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom