RNC: Make America Dumber
Example Kim K has not one talent, yet America has made her very wealthy
Quote: LoneStarHorse
Example Kim K has not one talent, yet America has made her very wealthy
This could be argued, though to what extent I'm not sure. Kim Kardashian has parlayed her family name and fortune into some very successful business ventures. Lots of people are raised with a silver spoon in their mouth and either throw it away or make nothing of themselves; she's done pretty well for herself so far.
Besides, people like her are nothing new. Look at Marilyn Monroe; one of the most famous pop culture icons of the 20th century, and for what? Because she was reasonably attractive and took her clothes off for money. She was a mediocre actress at best, mentally unstable, and a PITA to work with, from what I hear.
Quote: LoneStarHorseExample Kim K has not one talent, yet America has made her very wealthy
She's making like $2mil a month on her mobile app. You can't attach anyone's name to a dumbass mobile game and have it make that kind of cash.
Quote: gamerfreakBut LMAO at Ben Carson LITERALLY saying that Hillary Clinton worships Lucifer.
Dude also looks like he is constantly on the edge of a nap. I can't believe he was every allowed to mess around with kid brains.
If the horns fit....Quote: gamerfreakBut LMAO at Ben Carson LITERALLY saying that Hillary Clinton worships Lucifer.
Quote: gamerfreakBut LMAO at Ben Carson LITERALLY saying that Hillary Clinton worships Lucifer.
I just read some portions of his speech. I don't think Ben Carson is mentally all there. It's kind of frightening that someone like that was a neurosurgeon at one point.
Quote: gamerfreakBut LMAO at Ben Carson LITERALLY saying that Hillary Clinton worships Lucifer.
I was shocked that Carson would insult Lucifer like that.
So far this has got to be the lamest criticism of Hillary yet. Not surprised it came from Carson, though. The guy seems like he barely knows what month it is.
Quote: TigerWuSo far this has got to be the lamest criticism of Hillary yet.
lol, especially when there is so much good substantiated material to use against her
Quote: TigerWu
So far this has got to be the lamest criticism of Hillary yet.
I agree, leave Lucifer out of it. Why not just say that her senior thesis was about her hero and mentor, Saul Alinsky? Not many people have read his Rules for Radicals so they wouldn't know that he acknowledged Lucifer as the original radical on the dedication page. Why risk confusing people?
Quote: bobbartopWhy risk confusing people?
Because that's how politicians get votes. Confuse people by combining a few inflammatory buzzwords, then hope they won't do any research and just take your word for it.
Quote: TigerWuBecause that's how politicians get votes. Confuse people by combining a few inflammatory buzzwords, then hope they won't do any research and just take your word for it.
And here I thought they just straight out lie to voters.
Seriously this. Have you ever heard Trump actually talk about any topics or anything? He NEVER goes in to ANY level of detail about ANYTHING. He's literally running on air and words, and people are buying it because they have no common sense and don't do any research.Quote: TigerWuBecause that's how politicians get votes. Confuse people by combining a few inflammatory buzzwords, then hope they won't do any research and just take your word for it.
Quote: LoneStarHorseI regrettably watched the RNC last night, my feelings after watching it are. We are making America Dumber than we already are.
Example Kim K has not one talent, yet America has made her very wealthy
The rise in Trump's popularity, and the unnecessary GOP/RoNC's obstructionism & hostility can be attributed to the Tea Party (thanks to gerrymandering).
Witnessing the success of Trump, my fear is the GOP/RNC will adopt Trump's playbook and it will only make America worse and meaner. We must reform our gerrymandering process in order to unify America.
Quote: gamerfreakBut LMAO at Ben Carson LITERALLY saying that Hillary Clinton worships Lucifer.
No no, the Devil is terrified of Hill, she
makes his ears bleed.
Quote: EvenBobNo no, the Devil is terrified of Hill, she
makes his ears bleed.
That made me LOL.
Quote: 777The rise in Trump's popularity, and the unnecessary GOP/RoNC's obstructionism & hostility can be attributed to the Tea Party (thanks to gerrymandering).
Witnessing the success of Trump, my fear is the GOP/RNC will adopt Trump's playbook and it will only make America worse and meaner. We must reform our gerrymandering process in order to unify America.
777,
In my opinion, you're starting to cross the line into trolling RonC with this and several recent comments like it. If it's your spellchecker making a repeated typo for RNC, please edit your spellchecker. If it's your joke, you've made your point, and when the two of you discuss your differences here, it might be appropriate, but dragging him into every general comment on the GOP is not. Please stop doing that.
Quote: 777
Witnessing the success of Trump, my fear is the GOP/RNC will adopt Trump's playbook and it will only make America worse and meaner. We must reform our gerrymandering process in order to unify America.
Not going to happen. Courts have protected minority districts over, over, and over. As to unification, you have to want to be unified. Obama and Hillary share none of my personal values. Some of which include hard work, personal responsibility, right to bear arms to protect yourself, freedom to choose who you associate with, and personal morals. I do not want to "unify" with them, I want them defeated so they cannot do yet more damage to the country.
Obama has been the most divisive POTUS of our time, and the most political, The result is half the nation hates him but he has a rabid base that will never give up on him. Bush43 was rarely political, almost never fought back on attacks. He left office with record low approval ratings. Think anyone will try his way again?
Quote: AZDuffmanObama and Hillary share none of my personal values. Some of which include hard work, personal responsibility, right to bear arms to protect yourself, freedom to choose who you associate with, and personal morals.
Are you claiming that Obama and Hillary don't believe in any of that stuff? Or you just disagree with their interpretations of it?
Quote:I do not want to "unify" with them, I want them defeated so they cannot do yet more damage to the country.
What damage are you referring to?
Quote: TigerWuAre you claiming that Obama and Hillary don't believe in any of that stuff? Or you just disagree with their interpretations of it?
Yes, I am claiming that. From their gun grabbing plans to the "you didn't build that" line. I firmly believe they believe everything you get comes from government and nothing else matters.
Quote:What damage are you referring to?
Look around. It's everywhere.
Quote: AZDuffmanYes, I am claiming that. From their gun grabbing plans to the "you didn't build that" line. I firmly believe they believe everything you get comes from government and nothing else matters.
What "gun grabbing" plans? Obama has repeatedly said he is pro-2nd amendment and he doesn't want to ban all guns.
Quote:
Look around. It's everywhere.
Like what, specifically? I'm asking your opinion....
Here is the "you didn't build that" speech:
"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires."
What is it about that quote you disagree with?
Quote: beachbumbabs777,
In my opinion, you're starting to cross the line into trolling RonC with this and several recent comments like it. If it's your spellchecker making a repeated typo for RNC, please edit your spellchecker. If it's your joke, you've made your point, and when the two of you discuss your differences here, it might be appropriate, but dragging him into every general comment on the GOP is not. Please stop doing that.
RNC = Republican National Committee
Quote: TigerWuWhat "gun grabbing" plans? Obama has repeatedly said he is pro-2nd amendment and he doesn't want to ban all guns.
Nonsense. His history shows otherwise. Don't get between him and the mic after a shooting. He has never seen a gun ban he did not like.
Quote:Like what, specifically? I'm asking your opinion....
Record low labor force participation, record low job growth, plan to let refugees from a societies that despise the USA just to name a few.
Quote:Here is the "you didn't build that" speech:
"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business – you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires."
What is it about that quote you disagree with?
The whole idea of "If you've got a business – you didn't build that" By his logic it is all luck and not about a good idea or hard work. Of course he never had the stones to work in the real world. He said in his very brief time in a private business he "felt like he was behind enemy lines." I truly believe he has no idea how a job is created or how to meet a payroll.
I have known people who built successful businesses. And they had the same roads, bridges, internet, and teachers as the lumps who never make anything of themselves. So how did they "not build that?"
Quote: AZDuffmanYes, I am claiming that. From their gun grabbing plans to the "you didn't build that" line.
Look around. It's everywhere.
How many fewer guns do you own today than you did eight years ago?
Look around, it's nowhere
Quote: AZDuffmanNot going to happen. Courts have protected minority districts over, over, and over. As to unification, you have to want to be unified. Obama and Hillary share none of my personal values. Some of which include hard work, personal responsibility, right to bear arms to protect yourself, freedom to choose who you associate with, and personal morals. I do not want to "unify" with them, I want them defeated so they cannot do yet more damage to the country.
Obama has been the most divisive POTUS of our time, and the most political, The result is half the nation hates him but he has a rabid base that will never give up on him. Bush43 was rarely political, almost never fought back on attacks. He left office with record low approval ratings. Think anyone will try his way again?
It is IMPOSSIBLE for everyone to be on the same page 100% of the time. Therefore, only a DICTATORIAL form of government would satisfy for stated goals.
The beauty of democracy is the freedom of choice and the expression idea. You don’t have to agree with your friends, neighbors, fellow citizens and politicians on all or many issues, but the disagreements must not prevent the citizens and their political representatives from working together, from collaborating, and/or from compromising in order to come up with consensus solutions.
Duh, Obama is political because he is a politician, but he is not the most political or as political as other politicians. Obama is NOT divisive. He is a victim of continuous UNNECESSARY obstructions and hostilities by the republicans, which make it very difficult for him to unify the country, and for the legislative branch and the executive branch to work together.
Your displeasure with Obama and Clinton is understandable, but your displeasure must not cause unnecessary obstructions to the political process, and your statement further reinforces the need to reform gerrymandering.
Quote: rsactuaryRNC = Republican National Committee
I though it stands for "Republican of National Committee." Now I know there is no "of" in the RNC. Many thanks for your clarification.
Quote: 777I
Duh, Obama is political because he is a politician, but he is not the most political or as political as other politicians. Obama is NOT divisive. He is a victim of continuous UNNECESSARY obstructions and hostilities by the republicans, which make it very difficult for him to unify the country, and for the legislative branch and the executive branch to work together.
Oh, nonsense. Obama voted to filibuster a SCOTUS nominee, which he then cries when his own will not be voted on. He voted against raising the debt ceiling, then cried when he had a hard time getting the same vote. Right after elected he told the GOP to sit down, shut up, and let him drive. He never stopped. He never learned to be careful if you piss in the well as you need to drink out of it later.
He did not try to unify. Not for one minute.
Quote: TomGHow many fewer guns do you own today than you did eight years ago?
Look around, it's nowhere
Really? I suggest you check how many gun restrictions have been placed in places like NY and CA.
As to Obama, remember he once proposed that no gun store be allowed within 5 miles of a school or park. Yeah, he supports gun rights---not!
Quote: AZDuffmanOh, nonsense. Obama voted to filibuster a SCOTUS nominee, which he then cries when his own will not be voted on. He voted against raising the debt ceiling, then cried when he had a hard time getting the same vote. Right after elected he told the GOP to sit down, shut up, and let him drive. He never stopped. He never learned to be careful if you piss in the well as you need to drink out of it later.
He did not try to unify. Not for one minute.
Except the GOP are going against the constitution by refusing to even vote on a nominee.
That same constitution they say they hold so near and dear when it fits their political agenda.
I don't know anything about the Californis laws but NYs new laws didn't take a single legal gun away from anyone. It restricts future sales and imposes limits on ammo clips but it didn't take away a single gun .
Quote: rsactuaryRNC = Republican National Committee
Yes, I know.
RoNC is not RNC.
777 has repeatedly challenged (to put a best label on it; "badgered" or "mocked" might also be appropriate depending on how you read various posts) RonC about his political positions. Perhaps you haven't read all of those.
So I have some doubt, when reading 777's more general criticisms of the GOP, whether he's not taking advantage of their conflict to take digs at RonC thru the confluence of the acronym and his name. I believe it's deliberate. But also think 777 is likely wise enough to grin, say "aw shucks " and move on now that I've called him on it. We'll see.
Quote: 777I though it stands for "Republican of National Committee." Now I know there is no "of" in the RNC. Many thanks for your clarification.
And that's why you spelled it once each way in the post I quoted, when asking you to stop the baiting. Riiiiiiight.
If that's your "aw shucks", fine, we'll move on. If not...we won't.
Quote: billryanSo you are for States Rights except for when those States use them for something you disagree with? What did the Federal government have to do with the elected legislators of two states voting in laws ?
I don't know anything about the Californis laws but NYs new laws didn't take a single legal gun away from anyone. It restricts future sales and imposes limits on ammo clips but it didn't take away a single gun .
It is the Constitution it disagrees with, not just me. Why do you think the danger is just with the feds?
Restricting ammo clips = restricting guns = gun grabbing. No reason to make felons of law abiding citizens.
Quote: AZDuffmanOh, nonsense. Obama voted to filibuster a SCOTUS nominee, which he then cries when his own will not be voted on. He voted against raising the debt ceiling, then cried when he had a hard time getting the same vote. Right after elected he told the GOP to sit down, shut up, and let him drive. He never stopped. He never learned to be careful if you piss in the well as you need to drink out of it later.
He did not try to unify. Not for one minute.
There is a difference obstruction to get necessary concession or to stand up in one’s principle, and UNNECESSARY obstruction in an effort to obstruct the political process. Filibuster is a form of obstruction for the intent of protecting the MINORITY right and should be welcomed (there are many examples of filibusters; and one example on top of my head is the heroic filibuster by Wendy Davis, a Texas State Senator). However, if filibuster is used TOO often and is abused, then it will create havoc to the political process.
Obama and all other politicians' voting for or against certain issues or bills is normal and it is part of the democracy and it does NOT cause hravoc to the political process.
Duh, Obama’s "cry" is a normal behavior for any politician due to the built-in of our "check and balance" in the political process. The legislative branch and the executive branch are supposed to engage in the "check and balance" providing that the motive is not to destroy the political process, or to make anyone a one-term politician. Our nation can't be unified if the republicans stated goal is to make Obama a one-term president.
(One "cry" example is a controversial dispute about the War Power Act, and there is a strong dispute about what war powers does the President have? A once Congresswoman turned President would "cry" about the War Power Act, and this "cry" behavior may be hypocritical, but is a completely normal political behavior).
I don't believe that Obama told the GOP "to sit down, shut up, and let him drive." I think his statement was made along the line that the election is over and he won, and it was made in an attempt to ask the republicans please stop the unnecessary obstructions so that he can carry out his duties.
Quote: AZDuffman
Look around. It's everywhere.
How about the enormous debt they've saddled us with? Yes, republicans have done it too, but now the debt is approaching 20 trillion. How is anyone going to be an Advantage Player when our fiat currency is worth zero? You'll need a wheelbarrow full of money to play quarter video poker. It's happened before. You don't have to go all the way back to pre-war Germany, just google "Zimbabwe gold youtube".
I get the feeling there are a lot of young people on this forum.
Quote: 777There is a difference obstruction to get necessary concession or to stand up in one’s principle, and UNNECESSARY obstruction in an effort to obstruct the political process. p
Let me guess. When Obama obstructed it was for principle. When the GOP did it was unnecessary?
Quote:Duh, Obama’s "cry" is a normal behavior for any politician due to the built-in of our "check and balance" in the political process. The legislative branch and the executive branch are supposed to engage in the "check and balance" providing that the motive is not to destroy the political process, or to make anyone a one-term politician. Our nation can't be unified if the republicans stated goal is to make Obama a one-term president.
GASP! A party wanted the other party's POTUS to be a one-term POTUS only? You should call the news and get them to cover that because it clearly never happened before!
Quote:I don't believe that Obama told the GOP "to sit down, shut up, and let him drive." I think his statement was made along the line that the election is over and he won, and it was made in an attempt to ask the republicans please stop the unnecessary obstructions so that he can carry out his duties.
Not really. The GOP was shut out of any decisions at all. An adept leader would have called the losing side in and asked if there was something they could work together on. He would at the least do this with the weakest members of the losing side. Obama just blamed the GOP for "driving the country into the ditch" forgetting that the Democrats had Congress since 2006. He acted like an arrogant SOB. Well, maybe he was not acting? Well, when you behave like that you force the other side to be against you.
See, Obama was always with the party in power. Nowhere did he ever have to make a deal with the other side. He is still completely incapable of understanding how that works.
Quote: bobbartopHow about the enormous debt they've saddled us with? Yes, republicans have done it too, but now the debt is approaching 20 trillion. How is anyone going to be an Advantage Player when our fiat currency is worth zero? You'll need a wheelbarrow full of money to play quarter video poker. It's happened before. You don't have to go all the way back to pre-war Germany, just google "Zimbabwe gold youtube".
I get the feeling there are a lot of young people on this forum.
It is not just the debt, it is the money-printing. Loan to the banks at 0.5% at the Fed, let them loan to the Treasury at 1.5%. No risk to them! Eventually all that cash will chase assets and Mr and Mrs America see their buying power collapse.
Quote: bobbartopHow about the enormous debt they've saddled us with? Yes, republicans have done it too, but now the debt is approaching 20 trillion.
What I hate about both parties is their ability to get sidetracked. Yes, things happen like terrorist attacks, or whatever. Something will always happen though.
Whether anyone likes it or not, Obama was able to stick with the push for the ACA for (I think) 2 years.
Seems we rarely get politicians who can stay focused on a few things for the long term.
Quote: rxwineWhat I hate about both parties is their ability to get sidetracked. Yes, things happen like terrorist attacks, or whatever. Something will always happen though.
Whether anyone likes it or not, Obama was able to stick with the push for the ACA for (I think) 2 years.
Seems we rarely get politicians who can stay focused on a few things for the long term.
Seems they've all stayed focused on growing the size of the federal government.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt is not just the debt, it is the money-printing. Loan to the banks at 0.5% at the Fed, let them loan to the Treasury at 1.5%. No risk to them! Eventually all that cash will chase assets and Mr and Mrs America see their buying power collapse.
If I print it, I go to jail for counterfeiting. If the government prints it, they call it "monetizing". But it's the same thing.
Quote: AZDuffmanLet me guess. When Obama obstructed it was for principle. When the GOP did it was unnecessary?
Quote:Duh, Obama’s "cry" is a normal behavior for any politician due to the built-in of our "check and balance" in the political process. The legislative branch and the executive branch are supposed to engage in the "check and balance" providing that the motive is not to destroy the political process, or to make anyone a one-term politician. Our nation can't be unified if the republicans stated goal is to make Obama a one-term president.
GASP! A party wanted the other party's POTUS to be a one-term POTUS only? You should call the news and get them to cover that because it clearly never happened before!
Not really. The GOP was shut out of any decisions at all. An adept leader would have called the losing side in and asked if there was something they could work together on. He would at the least do this with the weakest members of the losing side. Obama just blamed the GOP for "driving the country into the ditch" forgetting that the Democrats had Congress since 2006. He acted like an arrogant SOB. Well, maybe he was not acting? Well, when you behave like that you force the other side to be against you.
See, Obama was always with the party in power. Nowhere did he ever have to make a deal with the other side. He is still completely incapable of understanding how that works.
My post stands by itself, and you can twist or interpret it to fit your thought process and I’m powerless to convince you otherwise or to interpret it correctly.
See, the beauty of the democracy is we can disagree with each other. And I’m not at all concern about the disagreement among citizens, but I’m very concern about the dysfunction in government caused by the unnecessary obstructions among politicians. And IMO, the unnecessary obstructions of the past 8 years were largely carried out by the by GOP politicians. Regardless of which party is at fault in the unnecessary obstructions, I believe one way to cure the current dysfunction in government is by reforming the gerrymandering process.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt is not just the debt, it is the money-printing. Loan to the banks at 0.5% at the Fed, let them loan to the Treasury at 1.5%. No risk to them! Eventually all that cash will chase assets and Mr and Mrs America see their buying power collapse.
Yes, but by printing the money, the Treasury eventually get the money for free????
Solving the debt problem requires HUGE SACRIFICE from ALL rich and poor citizens. Since no one is willing to make huge sacrifice, the easiest solution is printing money.
We've been cutting public education budgets for at least 40 years. We're reaping the benefits. Why do you think Trump thanked the poorly-educated after winning Nevada? If everyone in this country were well-informed, we wouldn't have a shyster for a presidential candidate.Quote: RomesSeriously this. Have you ever heard Trump actually talk about any topics or anything? He NEVER goes in to ANY level of detail about ANYTHING. He's literally running on air and words, and people are buying it because they have no common sense and don't do any research.
Quote: 777Solving the debt problem requires HUGE SACRIFICE from ALL rich and poor citizens.
I didn't write the budget. No appropriations bills originated with me. Only the House of Representatives can do that.
The current administration almost DOUBLED the entire national debt, in eight years.
Quote: MathExtremistWe've been cutting public education budgets for at least 40 years.
I call total BS. Show your work. Where did you learn how to count?
And are you saying that before the government got into the business of education, people were stupid?
No they didn't. In baseball, a relief pitcher entering the bottom of the 8th with no outs and the bases full doesn't get charged with the run if he induces a double play but the runner at 3rd scores. Obama inherited a skyrocketing debt from Bush and the Great Recession. If you think any new administration can simply turn that around in a month or a quarter, you're woefully ignorant of the velocity of our national economy.Quote: bobbartopI didn't write the budget. No appropriations bills originated with me. Only the House of Representatives can do that.
The current administration almost DOUBLED the entire national debt, in eight years.
The end of Bush's presidency and the beginning of Obama's was a really bad recession both domestically and globally, and the right solution was to use QE to spend our way out of that rather than impose European-style austerity, because we've just seen how well that worked out.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-qe-rescued-america-from-the-great-recession-charts-2014-10
But if you skip past the recession and its lagging effects, debt under Obama has leveled out over the past 4 years. That's because, absent a financial meltdown, democratic financial policies have tended to be better for the debt ratio than republican ones. Why? Politicians are going to spend money no matter what they promise you, but the democrats are the only ones honest about needing to pay for it through taxation, while republicans have tended to cut taxes despite the trickle-down theory being debunked in practice. According to the following chart, over the past half-century, every GOP president has left office with the debt on the rise (as a percentage of GDP), while every democratic president has left office with the debt either stable or on the decline.
Trump's plan is to cut taxes across the board, especially for rich people, and not do a damn thing about spending. According to conservative economists, that will add almost $10T to the debt over the next decade. There's no recession to excuse that debt increase this time, so what's the justification for such an unbalanced economic proposal?
