GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-12-2012, 18:59   #41
certifiedfunds
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 43,991


Quote:
Originally Posted by muscogee View Post
OK, borders and shores. Happy now? The point was that all of us depend on the government for something.
The difference is you people depend on it for everything
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 19:08   #42
evlbruce
Senior Member
 
evlbruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
The socialist whine for wealth redistribution but when their argument fails they resort to basic government functions. Typical.
More importantly they wave a fraction of total expenditure around and think it justifies the other 90% of FedGov spending.
__________________
Big Brother is Watching You.

"No matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Banzi
evlbruce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 19:26   #43
certifiedfunds
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 43,991


Quote:
Originally Posted by evlbruce View Post
More importantly they wave a fraction of total expenditure around and think it justifies the other 90% of FedGov spending.
Well put
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 19:36   #44
G29Reload
Tread Lightly
 
G29Reload's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
If conservatives are so sick and tired, why did they nominate Romney?
They didn't. Conservatives are on the short end of the stick in the RNC because its controlled by moderate semi-RINO's who seem to think that hard core conservatism is too tough for the masses and try to water it down to attract people who end up going with the leftists who play Santa Claus with the public dole. Except the Dems offer to give them the whole hog and not just a cut.

When you're a true american, a tough, business starting, go it alone, pioneering type willing to take risks and stand on your own two feet, thats how things get done. Businesses get built, progress is made that way. You don't want government doing anything that you can do for yourself.

Others, not so much. Lazy, demanding help, their votes go to the party that offers handouts and says we're here to help you. That's the American Left.

The Establishment REpublicans are trying to play both sides of the street and more often than not, they fail at it. The key turn was to leave behind Reagan's highly successful conservatism and that started with GHWBush's "kindler and gentler" nonsense. There was nothing unkind about all the millionaires created by RR's conservatism. GHWB started pushing the govt left, except he didn't need to do it at all, and he went too far instead of just a little.
__________________
Avenge me...AVENGE ME!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by G29Reload; 11-12-2012 at 19:40..
G29Reload is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 20:50   #45
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-421 View Post
Well, when the messages being portrayed are "We hate women." And "We want to make life as tough as possible for the illegals already in our country." And Republicans need the votes of women and minorities, when the minorities tend vote based on immigration policies a lot of the time, don't you think the messages need to be different?
Who is saying that and what is the basis for it?
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 20:59   #46
FLIPPER 348
Happy Member
 
FLIPPER 348's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Klamath Falls OR
Posts: 23,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by G17Jake View Post
Why should there be different messages based on race and gender?

Because you might want to actually win a Presidential election.
FLIPPER 348 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:05   #47
certifiedfunds
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 43,991


Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-421 View Post
Well, when the messages being portrayed are "We hate women."
Democrats hate unborn babies.

See how that works?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:06   #48
TK-421
Senior Member
 
TK-421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by G17Jake View Post
Who is saying that and what is the basis for it?
The fact that it's one of the republican/pro-life ideals? People have been saying forever that abortions are horrible things, they're murdering unborn children, and they want to outlaw abortions. They want to take the choice away from women, and they want the government to do it, even though they keep claiming they want small government and less government, because that's also a republican ideal.

Who hasn't been saying it?

Saying Romney wants to ban all abortions, except for cases of rape or incest. Which takes away the option for women to have abortions from unwanted pregnancy. Which pisses off women. It's their body, let them do with it as they will.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...b829_blog.html

This one says that Romney supports abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is in danger, but not in any other cases, and that Ryan doesn't support it. It also states that he claims he won't seek any legislation on abortion if he got elected.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-in-new-tv-ad/

But with Romney flip-flopping so much back and forth on so many different issues, depending on who his audience was, who can ever truly know what Romney might or might not have done if he had been elected?

This one talks about how he used to be pro-choice, and then switched to pro-life when he wanted seats of higher power.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-and-abortion/

And that moron Mourdock certainly didn't help the view women have on the republican party, and how the republican party doesn't view women as equals.

Basically, Republicans seem to want to control a woman's body, even though they have absolutely no right trying to do so, and it really pisses off women. So it's no surprise that women don't want to vote Republican when doing so means the Republicans will force their ideals about women and women's bodies onto women who want to be able to make their own decisions about what goes on with their body. It's just stupid. It's their body, let them do with it whatever the hell they want.

But the one fact that people keep skipping over, is the fact that most republicans seem to be against abortions, most democrats seem to be for abortions. So who do you think is getting the abortions? I bet it's the democrats. What does that mean? LESS DEMOCRATS. I'm honestly surprised the Republicans are so against abortions. I always figured they'd be for it even more so than the democrats, even if they never get abortions themselves, because it would mean less competition. And with as crappy as the republicans are running their party, they really need as much as help as they can get to get less votes for the democrats.

Last edited by TK-421; 11-12-2012 at 21:10..
TK-421 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:10   #49
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-421 View Post
The fact that it's one of the republican/pro-life ideals? People have been saying forever that abortions are horrible things, they're murdering unborn children, and they want to outlaw abortions. They want to take the choice away from women, and they want the government to do it, even though they keep claiming they want small government and less government, because that's also a republican ideal.

Who hasn't been saying it?

Saying Romney wants to ban all abortions, except for cases of rape or incest. Which takes away the option for women to have abortions from unwanted pregnancy. Which pisses off women. It's their body, let them do with it as they will.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...b829_blog.html

This one says that Romney supports abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is in danger, but not in any other cases, and that Ryan doesn't support it. It also states that he claims he won't seek any legislation on abortion if he got elected.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-in-new-tv-ad/

But with Romney flip-flopping so much back and forth on so many different issues, depending on who his audience was, who can ever truly know what Romney might or might not have done if he had been elected?

This one talks about how he used to be pro-choice, and then switched to pro-life when he wanted seats of higher power.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-and-abortion/

And that moron Mourdock certainly didn't help the view women have on the republican party, and how the republican party doesn't view women as equals.
Somewhere in there it says Republicans hate women?
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:12   #50
certifiedfunds
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 43,991


Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-421 View Post
The fact that it's one of the republican/pro-life ideals? People have been saying forever that abortions are horrible things, they're murdering unborn children, and they want to outlaw abortions. They want to take the choice away from women, and they want the government to do it, even though they keep claiming they want small government and less government, because that's also a republican ideal.

Who hasn't been saying it?

Saying Romney wants to ban all abortions, except for cases of rape or incest. Which takes away the option for women to have abortions from unwanted pregnancy. Which pisses off women. It's their body, let them do with it as they will.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...b829_blog.html

This one says that Romney supports abortion in the cases of rape, incest, or if the mother's life is in danger, but not in any other cases, and that Ryan doesn't support it. It also states that he claims he won't seek any legislation on abortion if he got elected.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...-in-new-tv-ad/

But with Romney flip-flopping so much back and forth on so many different issues, depending on who his audience was, who can ever truly know what Romney might or might not have done if he had been elected?

This one talks about how he used to be pro-choice, and then switched to pro-life when he wanted seats of higher power.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-and-abortion/

And that moron Mourdock certainly didn't help the view women have on the republican party, and how the republican party doesn't view women as equals.
The fact of the matter is that Planned Parenthood was founded to get rid of society's undesirables (read minorities) before they exited the womb. It was part of the whole racial purification movement of the early 20th century.

Why do democrats hate minorities so much that they'd prefer to kill their children and/or keep them enslaved to the state if they somehow manage to slip past the abortion safety net?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 11-12-2012 at 21:13..
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:14   #51
TK-421
Senior Member
 
TK-421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by G17Jake View Post
Somewhere in there it says Republicans hate women?
When you try to force your ideals upon women, and try to make their choices for them, it certainly sends a very strong message that you don't view women as equals, and don't think they're mentally capable to make important decisions for themselves. Which women tend to view as extremely negative. "Hate" might not be the exact word to use, but you can choose whatever word you like, republicans dislike women, republicans think women are inferior, or however you think it should be worded. But the impression I've been getting is that Republicans are all about men being superior, the bread winners, the political leaders, and women are there to tag along and look pretty.

It seems very 50's-esque to me, where the women are expected to sit there and smile, but not actually open their mouth, or even form an opinion.
TK-421 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:17   #52
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLIPPER 348 View Post
Because you might want to actually win a Presidential election.
So you think it would be better to pander to specific groups?

Obama offers phones, Repubs could counter with high speed internet.

Would a message of smaller government, lower taxes and personal responsibility go over well?.... not that that is what the Repubs are offering.
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:18   #53
TK-421
Senior Member
 
TK-421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
The fact of the matter is that Planned Parenthood was founded to get rid of society's undesirables (read minorities) before they exited the womb. It was part of the whole racial purification movement of the early 20th century.

Why do democrats hate minorities so much that they'd prefer to kill their children and/or keep them enslaved to the state if they somehow manage to slip past the abortion safety net?
Because those kinds of democrats have grown up believing that the government is there to support them, to give them free food and money, and that they don't have to do anything in return. And they're the kind of people who will stand in line for hours to get something for free, instead of walking down the block and standing in line for 2 minutes to buy the exact same thing for $5. It's the whole mentality they grow up with and live around. They think it's easier to sit back and let the government give it to them, rather than actually working for it.

Granted, that's not the way all democrats are, just enough of them that the system keeps giving them free stuff in return for their votes.
TK-421 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:21   #54
TK-421
Senior Member
 
TK-421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by G17Jake View Post
So you think it would be better to pander to specific groups?
I think it would be better to do what it takes to actually win, instead of sticking to outdated ideals that keep pissing off the voters and causing the republicans to lose. Romney would have had a fairly decent chance if Mourdock and that other moron, who's name escapes me, would have kept their traps shut. Republicans need to learn that if they want to win, they need to shut up about women and abortion, and take a stance that minorities will view as favorable. Otherwise, it will be loss after loss at the polls.
TK-421 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:27   #55
certifiedfunds
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 43,991


Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-421 View Post
Because those kinds of democrats have grown up believing that the government is there to support them, to give them free food and money, and that they don't have to do anything in return. And they're the kind of people who will stand in line for hours to get something for free, instead of walking down the block and standing in line for 2 minutes to buy the exact same thing for $5. It's the whole mentality they grow up with and live around. They think it's easier to sit back and let the government give it to them, rather than actually working for it.

Granted, that's not the way all democrats are, just enough of them that the system keeps giving them free stuff in return for their votes.
By "those kinds of democrats" you mean blacks and hispanics I take it.
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:30   #56
FLIPPER 348
Happy Member
 
FLIPPER 348's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Klamath Falls OR
Posts: 23,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by G17Jake View Post
So you think it would be better to pander to specific groups?

.


That's Politics. Do you want to win or lose (again)??
FLIPPER 348 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:30   #57
TK-421
Senior Member
 
TK-421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
By "those kinds of democrats" you mean blacks and hispanics I take it.
No, I don't specifically mean any particular race, I mean democrats in general who have grown up with that sort of mentality. Yes, it's generally found in urban areas where cheap housing is found, because that's where there seems to be a greater congestion of welfare people. But there are also white people on welfare, or people who need some extra money to help pay for groceries and the like. Blacks and mexicans aren't the only ones accepting money from the government, I'm pretty sure at least some people of all races are.
TK-421 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:38   #58
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLIPPER 348 View Post
That's Politics. Do you want to win or lose (again)??
I want a very limited federal government.
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:40   #59
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-421 View Post
I think it would be better to do what it takes to actually win, instead of sticking to outdated ideals that keep pissing off the voters and causing the republicans to lose.
Spoken like a true Democrat.
Quote:
Romney would have had a fairly decent chance if Mourdock and that other moron, who's name escapes me, would have kept their traps shut. Republicans need to learn that if they want to win, they need to shut up about women and abortion, and take a stance that minorities will view as favorable. Otherwise, it will be loss after loss at the polls.
Would you vote Republican if this was the case?... or would you find some other issue to dangle out there like a carrot on a stick.

Are you a woman?

Last edited by G17Jake; 11-12-2012 at 21:45..
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 21:44   #60
certifiedfunds
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 43,991


Who wants to win if you have to become what you despise in order to do it?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:23.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,034
293 Members
741 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31