DescentBB

....the GOP rank and file moves on to Latinos:

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... &GT1=43001

I'm sure the 'wetback' vote is going to turn out for them in years to come......

callmeslick wrote:....the GOP rank and file moves on to Latinos:

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... &GT1=43001

I'm sure the 'wetback' vote is going to turn out for them in years to come......

ya and the VP never said anything Racially stupid either

Funny for a man that "claims" to be a moderate you never criticize the left EVER. why is that?

Biden is just a motormouth. I can excuse that. But the Republican Party enshrines putting down anyone who's not a white male of a certain income or ethic. The "other races" and "women" in the party are there because they kiss enough derriere to look and act white and give the party a little credence. They're tokens.

Define 'acting white.'

ThunderBunny wrote:Define 'acting white.'

Eddie Murphy





look, I'm just kidding........everyone have a fine Easter Weekend. Mrs. Slick and I plan to. Back next week.

tunnelcat wrote:Biden is just a motormouth. I can excuse that.

Of course you can, because he's a Dem. If he was a Repub you would abandon such rationalization and say something outrageous like he was representing the whole party or something like that.

tunnelcat wrote:But the Republican Party enshrines putting down anyone who's not a white male of a certain income or ethic.

And if you can't show us how every one in that Party has done what you just claimed they do then please refer to my response to the previous comment again...

tunnelcat wrote:The "other races" and "women" in the party are there because they kiss enough derriere to look and act white and give the party a little credence. They're tokens.

Right because you are the omnipotent God of human gender and race and all poseurs are immediately known to your all seeing eyes! All thoughts of all mankind are laid bare for your magnificent scrutiny so you and only you, the deserving one, can deliver unto us your virtuous judgement and then we will rejoice in witnessing your vengeance as you wrench their humanity from their very soul and discard it like a soiled tissue!

tunnelcat wrote:Biden is just a motormouth. I can excuse that.

no you CHOOSE to excuse that

But the Republican Party enshrines putting down anyone who's not a white male of a certain income or ethic. The "other races" and "women" in the party are there because they kiss enough derriere to look and act white and give the party a little credence. They're tokens.

are you REALLY going to down that path???? that comment in and of it self is racist

Yay, another anti-Republican propaganda post, just to prove how fair and balanced ole slick is.

if the Dems came out with stuff this stupendously ignorant, especially in the face of large-scale public rejection at the polls due to EXACTLY this sort of narrow minded stupidity, I would be all over it, Spidey.

I won't hold my breath.

ThunderBunny wrote:Define 'acting white.'

European descent, mostly male, straight and the women properly married. An 87% white registered base. Fairly white don't you think? So in order to "fit in" and yet be of another race or gender, people need to "act" conservative, their version of "normal". Married, 2 kids, steady upper income job, homeowner, no criminal record, gun owner, usually Christian, born in the U.S. That about sum it up?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... hite-party

CUDA wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Biden is just a motormouth. I can excuse that.

no you CHOOSE to excuse that

I choose to ignore him precisely BECAUSE he has a history opening his mouth BEFORE engaging his brain. Kind of like Dubya always did with his malaprops. Frankly, I wouldn't even want Biden as president either.

CUDA wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:But the Republican Party enshrines putting down anyone who's not a white male of a certain income or ethic. The "other races" and "women" in the party are there because they kiss enough derriere to look and act white and give the party a little credence. They're tokens.

are you REALLY going to down that path???? that comment in and of it self is racist

Read the link in my response to TB. If the shoe fits, you're wearin' it. Last election's vote should have told the Republicans volumes. Obama WON!!!!, despite his failures, but I don't think it has sunk in as to WHY.........STILL. CPAC showed that.

Will Robinson wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:Biden is just a motormouth. I can excuse that.

Of course you can, because he's a Dem. If he was a Repub you would abandon such rationalization and say something outrageous like he was representing the whole party or something like that.

Well, there's a Republican motormouth I excuse just the same. Sarah Palin. Her flapping mouth is her own downfall. I need not be concerned.

Will Robinson wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:The "other races" and "women" in the party are there because they kiss enough derriere to look and act white and give the party a little credence. They're tokens.

And if you can't show us how every one in that Party has done what you just claimed they do then please refer to my response to the previous comment again...

Against women, all those abortion, contraception and person-hood laws being passed in Republican controlled states. Against African Americans, all those Democracy subverting emergency manager laws in Republican controlled Michigan and all the draconian voter ID laws in Republican controlled states that hit immigrants, seniors and Blacks disproportionately.

Will Robinson wrote:Right because you are the omnipotent God of human gender and race and all poseurs are immediately known to your all seeing eyes! All thoughts of all mankind are laid bare for your magnificent scrutiny so you and only you, the deserving one, can deliver unto us your virtuous judgement and then we will rejoice in witnessing your vengeance as you wrench their humanity from their very soul and discard it like a soiled tissue!

More than you'll ever know, because being of the opposite gender, I have experienced quite a bit of Republican BS.

tunnelcat wrote:Frankly, I wouldn't even want Biden as president either.

I wouldn't vote for that moron either. I think the democrats also know he can't win so we'll likely never see him run, thank the gods. Everybody wins then.

tunnelcat wrote:

Against women, all those abortion, contraception and person-hood laws being passed in Republican controlled states. Against African Americans, all those Democracy subverting emergency manager laws in Republican controlled Michigan

Do you seriously have any idea of what you are talking about or just listening to the Jackson/Sharpton version? Detroit has ineptly handled it's affair for 40 years (all of which has been the Dems in power) to the point where now they are asking the State to give them even more money to spend ineptly. Case in point (which I'm sure the liberal blogs you read never brought up) was a offer from the state parks to lease Bell Isle in 10 year increment, refurbish it and in the process...save Detroit 6 million a year. Detroit city council decide not to accept the deal. Too bad because at the end of the first 10 year lease, they could of not renewed the lease and took back a park all nicely fixed up for free. This is typical.

Detroit is the only (I believe) major city that had more than a 60% drop in population from it's peak of 1.8 million to under 700,000 today. So tell me TC, just what is being subverted? Detroit has already been subverted by crooked politicians. Like the famous Rec. Wright said, "The chickens have come home to roost".



and all the draconian voter ID laws in Republican controlled states that hit immigrants, seniors and Blacks disproportionately.

Did you mean "illegal" immigrants? And just how were seniors and black hit disproportionately? Will those same blocs be equally affected when they want to purchase a firearm to protect themselves?

California isn't heading to certain doom? Who knew? An illustrative story of what might just happen when the GOP pisses enough people off to lose control of the power to block everything:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/01/opini ... html?_r=1&

From your link:

"A dozen years ago, the state was supposedly doomed by all its environmentalists. You see, the eco-freaks were blocking power plants, and the result was crippling blackouts and soaring power prices"

Immediately followed by:

"Undeterred, a few years later conservatives found another line of attack."

Last time I checked eco-freaks were not conservative. Maybe the author should learn to double check what he is writing.

...or just learn how to read for context....the contention was FROM the conservatives, that the left('eco-freaks') would doom the economy. That, at least was how I read the paragraph.

Woodchip wrote:Did you mean "illegal" immigrants? And just how were seniors and black hit disproportionately? Will those same blocs be equally affected when they want to purchase a firearm to protect themselves?

The very same "illegal immigrants" long hired by American business for their cheap labor? Yes, that sounds like a Republican idea to me. By the way,11 percent of Americans don't have a government issued photo ID. Most of them are minorities, those who are disabled and seniors.

NPR wrote:By all estimates, those least likely to have a government-issued photo ID fall into one of four categories: the elderly, minorities, the poor and young adults aged 18 to 24. The Brennan Center estimates that 18 percent of all seniors and 25 percent of African-Americans don't have picture IDs.

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/28/146006217 ... -wont-vote

http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/voter-id

http://www.thedp.com/article/2013/03/vo ... tudy-shows

And if you think the Republican idea of "emergency managers" is a good idea, you must like the idea of oligarchies, where people can't vote for their own elected officials to represent them, in good times or bad.

http://www.eclectablog.com/2013/02/a-co ... hoice.html

You can choose to watch Maddow's segment below or not, but she has a good take on how the Republican emergency manager law has only really worked in ONE Michigan city, Three Oaks, which happens to have a mostly white population base. Every other city it has been tried in, they're still in financial straits. And you have to remember that Michigan repealed the emergency manager law in the last election, but the Republicans flipped everyone the bird because they think they know best and put it right back in, against the will of the voters.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-rachel-m ... 2#51188382

tunnelcat wrote:...because xxxxxxxx flipped everyone the bird because they think they know best and put it right back in, against the will of the voters.

...

Although you only seem to notice when the guys on the right pull this kind of thing off the left is no stranger to the practice. You are a team player through and through which severely devalues your opinion outside of your team.

Will Robinson wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:...because xxxxxxxx flipped everyone the bird because they think they know best and put it right back in, against the will of the voters.

...

Although you only seem to notice when the guys on the right pull this kind of thing off the left is no stranger to the practice. You are a team player through and through which severely devalues your opinion outside of your team.

it shouldn't......for instance, feel free to cite a similar case of the Dems doing such a thing(ie:enacting a major program after the voters of the state completely rejected it, at the polls, a couple months before). Don't worry, I'll view your information on it's merit, not on the assumption you are partisan when you post the information.

Yea, I guess if you narrowed it down to having to be the “EXACT” same thing, you might find it hard to find an example…on the other hand it does sound a lot like health care reform, that was soundly rejected by the voters, then enacted at the first opportunity.

Health care reform was enacted under the false guise of some kind of “mandate” which was the farthest thing from the truth, any schumk could have beaten the Republican in that election.

Spidey wrote:Yea, I guess if you narrowed it down to having to be the “EXACT” same thing, you might find it hard to find an example…on the other hand it does sound a lot like health care reform, that was soundly rejected by the voters, then enacted at the first opportunity.

Health care reform was enacted under the false guise of some kind of “mandate” which was the farthest thing from the truth, any schumk could have beaten the Republican in that election.

Obama care was what I was thinking of but there are numerous times they lose at the poll and go to court to tie things up.... California does it often on heir proposition votes.

Obviously being the same kind of tactic doesn't mean the same kind of tactic to slick cause he will be moving the goalposts regardless.

still reaching, huh, boys? I figured you all would jump on Obama care, but the truth be told, it was NEVER voted out by anyone, and then passed despite it. Sure, it was always at best at around 50% support, but there are, as I said, NO comparisons with what Michigan's legislature just pulled. NONE.

callmeslick wrote:still reaching, huh, boys? I figured you all would jump on Obama care, but the truth be told, it was NEVER voted out by anyone, and then passed despite it. Sure, it was always at best at around 50% support, but there are, as I said, NO comparisons with what Michigan's legislature just pulled. NONE.

Come on slick, you're really upset at MI because they passed a right to work bill which in turn will impact how much money MI unions can use to buy...er contribute to the Democratic party. As to comparisons let me reiterate, Detroit was so piss poor run by Democrats for the last 40 year that they were now begging for money from the rest of the MI taxpayers so they could continue to run Detroit in the same piss poor manner. Comparing the emergency manager bill to somehow being worse than the Obamacare bill is another stretch even for you. Obamacare was passed without any one reading the bill and the royal Obama press corps not bothering to report on it in the most miniscule manner. If the bill were to have been fully explored you would of seen the 50% figure drop down to the 30% range. No comparison to the emergency manager bill in the least.

callmeslick wrote:still reaching, huh, boys? I figured you all would jump on Obama care, but the truth be told, it was NEVER voted out by anyone, and then passed despite it. Sure, it was always at best at around 50% support, but there are, as I said, NO comparisons with what Michigan's legislature just pulled. NONE.

Actually there is a comparison...we made it so I'm positive there Is one and in the context of the discussion it is quite valid. And as predicted you have come to the rescue of your party by trying to redefine the discussion.
Now go back to moving goalposts because you still have all those ballot propositions in California to hide...

the ballot props in California could be seen as the closest to the Michigan thing, but the major ones were tossed by the courts, not reversed by the legislature.

great news! The GOP in Virginia wishes to look more closely into the bedroom activities of the citizenry:
http://democraticgovernors.org/cuccinel ... odomy-law/

That is absolutely insane.

I'd be willing to bet money that the guy turns out to be a total closet case having an affair with some guy, though, like several other prominent examples in the past.

Will Robinson wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:...because xxxxxxxx flipped everyone the bird because they think they know best and put it right back in, against the will of the voters.

...

Although you only seem to notice when the guys on the right pull this kind of thing off the left is no stranger to the practice. You are a team player through and through which severely devalues your opinion outside of your team.

Heh! I'm not blind to the stupidity of liberals. We've got our very own liberal stupidity police in Corvallis. They, meaning the city council, has managed to piss off most of the town with 2 broad actions, banning plastic grocery bags and trying to force a tiny traffic circle down everyone's throats. I guess because they know best for the rest of us.

First, the bag ban. What these well meaning idiots came up with was a ban on plastic shopping bags, well intentioned by itself, BUT, they created a big stick approach to force everyone to obtain reusable bags. Now that it's law, everyone has to either get or purchase some type of reusable bags (most made in China by the way), OR pay 5 cents for grocer-supplied paper bags if they want to use them, paper bags that were formerly part of the service provided by the grocer and which used to be made by the local kraft paper mill (now closed). An idea that has gone over like a ton of bricks. I DON'T agree with the whole scheme either. The unintended consequence of this little action has changed my shopping habits. Not only did I buy some plastic baskets to shop with, I tend to limit the amount I shop for depending on what will fit in those baskets in one trip, meaning, I'm not buying as much as I used to.

The other moronic idea has been this very tiny traffic circle that replaced a 4-way stop in one neighborhood. It was too small to begin with to work right. Take a 20 foot circle concrete-rimmed planting area and plop it down into the middle of a normal neighborhood intersection without condemning big parts of the corner lots. It has been quite a fight at most council meeting ever since it went in years ago. Now that the city is removing it to repave the roads, they STILL want to put the thing back in, even though most people want it GONE! Sometimes liberals just don't get the message, no matter how much they're hit over the head. As of today, a panel has recommended that they scrap the circle altogether. Will the liberal council cave in or dig their feet in? We'll see.

callmeslick, that's the kind of conservative nonsense I'm talking about! I think most of these guys who propose these laws seem to be fixated on what goes on in everyone-else's-but-theirs bedrooms. Perverts perhaps? Hands off our guns, but let us police the privacy of the bedroom for everyone else. Just ignore all that adultery and philandering we politicians love to do so much!

Top Gun wrote:That is absolutely insane.

I'd be willing to bet money that the guy turns out to be a total closet case having an affair with some guy, though, like several other prominent examples in the past.

Duh, you can’t tell grandstanding when you see it, I do believe I accused you of that before.

Just how do you enforce such a law…huh?

Duh!

callmeslick wrote:great news! The GOP in Virginia wishes to look more closely into the bedroom activities of the citizenry:
http://democraticgovernors.org/cuccinel ... odomy-law/

No... great news site.
I followed a link to find out what was really going on. I have a challenge for anyone who's interested: explain why an anti-sodomy law is different from a law prohibiting sex with close relatives or minors.

Becauuuuuse...what two consenting adults do behind closed doors is nobody's goddamn business?

How about 2 consenting adults and a pony?

So long as the pony signs a consent form too.

Heh

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I have a challenge for anyone who's interested: explain why an anti-sodomy law is different from a law prohibiting sex with close relatives or minors.

It's not really a challenge. Inbreeding expresses harmful recessive genes in your progeny.

Why is it that people continue to bring up bestiality when we're talking about TWO consenting adults? We aren't talking about polygamy, it's still only two people that are making a commitment to each other. Woodchip, aren't you the one with a weird relationship with raccoons? Is there something you need to tell us?

Republicans are so idiotically brilliant--they bring in these ridiculously stupid comparisons and they're able to obscure the issue. I could care less who a church will marry, but the govt provides tangible benefits to married couples and not recognizing same sex marriage is clear-cut discrimination. I just don't get it, Republicans are supposed to be the party of personal freedom right? Govt out of our lives right? I would think that people like woodchip would be all for this kind of stuff.

There is a difference between control over people's lives which originates in a centralized government, and a social agreement to exclude certain behaviors from the group deemed destructive. "Individual liberty", so far as government is concerned, is a recognition of a right inherent to being an individual "created equal" to those around you, not a suicide compact designed to throw off all restraint.

Jeff got the closest, but his is not really an answer to the question (not really a challenge so I don't really get an answer? ).

Jeff wrote:Inbreeding expresses harmful recessive genes in your progeny.

This is absolutely correct, but it doesn't address what gives society the power/authority to restrict it.

As a side note, bestiality is no different. It just removes ONE of the TWO "consenting adults".

So the unanswered question, put more pointedly, is why does society have the right to impose restriction on certain behaviors, and the question that naturally follows in this case would be why does it not have the right to restrict sodomy if it may restrict other aberrant behavior. This is bearing in mind that the relatively recent campaign to characterize homosexuality as a natural and even perfectly healthy part of humanity or nature, present as such throughout history, is as contrived as it is subjective.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:This is bearing in mind that the relatively recent campaign to characterize homosexuality as a natural and even perfectly healthy part of humanity or nature, present as such throughout history, is as contrived as it is subjective.

Bigot. Learn your facts.

I am not a bigot, and I dare say none of the facts you could bring to the table would actually be found to dispute my statement. That will be my second challenge in this thread.

Or to put it another way, you'll conveniently ignore any and all evidence which contradicts your already-established worldview, so there's no real point in anyone trying to convince you otherwise.