If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gothamist)   Jon Stewart reaches into the Obama 2012 gift bag   (gothamist.com) divider line 117
    More: Amusing, obama, Lena Dunham, heavy bag, concession speech  
•       •       •

7468 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Nov 2012 at 1:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



117 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-16 02:40:02 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: I'm a lifelong unaffiliated voter. You don't have to register for either party.


Depending on your State, you may not be able to vote in primaries if you do. Here in NC, it's up to each party whether they want to let unaffiliateds vote in their primaries, and currently all three recognized ones (D, R, L) do. When such a voter comes in on primary elections we offer them a choice of one of the party ballots, or a nonpartisan ballot that just lists the judicial primaries (which are also on all the party ballots).

BarrRepublican: I'm also a registered republican who voted democrat, but that was more of an anti-suppression measure due to recent laws put into place in this area.


Don't know if that would help. Even if nobody ever registered a party affiliation, gerrymandering, suppression, etc. can still proceed using demographic variables (like blackitude). In fact urbanity is probably enough to go on.
 
2012-11-16 02:40:18 PM
So where do I donate to the 60 Ft Tall Pink Dildo fund? Because that would be worth a road trip just to have an awesome story for the great grandkids one day.
 
2012-11-16 02:44:09 PM

Endive Wombat: As a conservative, It is astounding to me how I am becoming more and more alienated by the Republican Party, especially during this past election cycle. Yeah, I am a registered Republican who voted for the Democrats this time around.


Good for you, I'm the same, only two elections back. That means you don't belong to the hive mind that both sides of the aisle just assumes of you.
 
2012-11-16 02:48:13 PM

Endive Wombat: Drugs, legalize, regulate and tax. "But lots of junkines will start filling up the workforce" Simple - give tax cuts to employers that drug test. Incentiveize the job makers.


The only issue here is that drug tests would show that you had the drugs, which would be legal, at some point in the past. I think what you mean is drug testing to make sure they aren't on the drugs while working...which would work about as well as ensuring people aren't drunk while working. Very difficult to enforce unless you want to breathalize your employees on a daily basis, or in this case, have mandatory pee testing constantly.

Unless you're saying someone who does something totally legal on their own time shouldn't be allowed to work?
 
2012-11-16 02:48:41 PM

Endive Wombat:
Maybe it is because I am almost 30 and now with a little bit of life behind me


I just now realized I've been voting about as long as Endive has been on this earth.



*picks up cane, hobbles away to get drunk*
 
2012-11-16 02:53:51 PM

Dr. Whoof: Endive Wombat: Drugs, legalize, regulate and tax. "But lots of junkines will start filling up the workforce" Simple - give tax cuts to employers that drug test. Incentiveize the job makers.

The only issue here is that drug tests would show that you had the drugs, which would be legal, at some point in the past. I think what you mean is drug testing to make sure they aren't on the drugs while working...which would work about as well as ensuring people aren't drunk while working. Very difficult to enforce unless you want to breathalize your employees on a daily basis, or in this case, have mandatory pee testing constantly.

Unless you're saying someone who does something totally legal on their own time shouldn't be allowed to work?



I think he was talking about not being on drugs while working.

which would work about as well as ensuring people aren't drunk while working

You could have just posted you are not familiar with how companies already do this. No need for constant pee testing. Random pee testing works well enough.
 
2012-11-16 02:58:32 PM

Gaseous Anomaly: HellRaisingHoosier: I'm a lifelong unaffiliated voter. You don't have to register for either party.

Depending on your State, you may not be able to vote in primaries if you do. Here in NC, it's up to each party whether they want to let unaffiliateds vote in their primaries, and currently all three recognized ones (D, R, L) do. When such a voter comes in on primary elections we offer them a choice of one of the party ballots, or a nonpartisan ballot that just lists the judicial primaries (which are also on all the party ballots).


I think that's the case in every state, and it's up to the state branch of each party to decide if they want an open primary (anyone can vote regardless of affiliation), a closed primary (only registered party members can vote), or a semi-open primary (only registered party members and unaffiliated voters can vote; not sure if anyone actually uses this method). In California, if I remember correctly, the Democratic and Green parties have open primaries, while the Republican and Libertarian parties have closed primaries, so if you're a "decline to state" voter like me, you can vote in either the Democratic primary or the Green primary, but not in any other primary.
 
2012-11-16 02:58:45 PM

bulldg4life: Bleyo: We just haven't updated what we label ourselves.

People always fight to label themselves conservative. Part of it is making themselves seem sensible and part of it is the dirty connotation that liberal or progressive has become within american society.


I'm a liberal.

I'm taking it back!
 
2012-11-16 03:00:22 PM

FunkyBlue: spcMike: Endive Wombat: As a conservative

A real conservative would've bought an American car.

I've bought American cars. So far, I'm now driving a 20 year-old Accord with 260,000 miles and it runs better than most of the American cars I've bought when they were only 6 years old. And the Honda still gets 27MPG highway.

I can safely say I'm buying used Honda's from now on.


A lot of the people in my state work for Honda.
 
2012-11-16 03:00:29 PM

StopLurkListen: FunkyBlue: spcMike: Endive Wombat: As a conservative

A real conservative would've bought an American car.

I've bought American cars. So far, I'm now driving a 20 year-old Accord with 260,000 miles and it runs better than most of the American cars I've bought when they were only 6 years old. And the Honda still gets 27MPG highway.

I can safely say I'm buying used Honda's from now on.

Honda Accords are built in Marysville, Ohio. Check the VIN (if the first digit "1" = USA, "J" = Japan)


I know where they're built, but when you say Honda, it's a Japanese vehicle regardless of where it's made. I live about 2 hours from Marysville. You ask your crazy uncle with his 1952 Ford pickup truck about buying a Honda and he'll spout about not buying some Japanese trash and why didn't you buy an American car. Even over here, the Japanese attention to detail and the quality put in the manufacturing process just costs more but it's a better quality product.

GM, especially Pontiac, used as much cheap bodywork (plastic panels, plastic interiors, cheap engine parts) to bring the price on vehicles down to compete, but that lacking in component quality means they break down three times faster and have more mechanical problems. After owning two Pontiacs and a Chevy SUV, my little Honda go-cart is still my favorite to drive and has the least mechanical issues of all three despite being 12 years older then the oldest GM I had.
 
2012-11-16 03:02:11 PM

FunkyBlue: spcMike: Endive Wombat: As a conservative

A real conservative would've bought an American car.

I've bought American cars. So far, I'm now driving a 20 year-old Accord with 260,000 miles and it runs better than most of the American cars I've bought when they were only 6 years old. And the Honda still gets 27MPG highway.

I can safely say I'm buying used Honda's from now on.


I got a Ford Explorer with the same on it, runs fine. You can buy American, really.
 
2012-11-16 03:04:07 PM
I got a 70 Pontiac GTO... runs great.
 
2012-11-16 03:06:54 PM
LOL, 70's era cars were made the old fashioned way. Why a lot of them are still running.

I've heard Ford's have been made decently, but I really can't afford to buy new, if you know what I mean.
 
2012-11-16 03:08:04 PM
I have a 66 Ford Mustang for sale!!! :)
 
2012-11-16 03:11:09 PM

lennavan: You could have just posted you are not familiar with how companies already do this. No need for constant pee testing. Random pee testing works well enough.


I'm very familiar with it. In fact, it's often hair sample testing these days instead of random pee tests.

However, my point is, you don't see companies firing people for being alcoholics. In fact, alcoholism is covered under the ADA. Testing for drugs and incentivising companies for not keeping "junkies" on staff would be the same as encouraging companies to fire alcoholics. Unless they are literally high at work, and this would be reflected in their performance just the same as someone who is drunk, it really isn't the company's business what they do with their free time if, in this scenario, the drug use is legal.

Or, as I said, do you know of a (non-transportation based) company that routinely breathalizes its employees?
 
2012-11-16 03:12:48 PM

QueenMamaBee: I have a 66 Ford Mustang for sale!!! :)


$20. Cash money right now.
 
2012-11-16 03:16:23 PM

FunkyBlue: QueenMamaBee: I have a 66 Ford Mustang for sale!!! :)

$20. Cash money right now.


Sorry, should have done a Pawn Stars meme.

"No one really looks for a 1966 car anymore.

Give you $20 for it"
 
2012-11-16 03:16:26 PM

FunkyBlue: QueenMamaBee: I have a 66 Ford Mustang for sale!!! :)

$20. Cash money right now.


You drive a hard bargain sir. $40 and a roast beef sammich.
 
2012-11-16 03:16:44 PM

Endive Wombat: I see limited sized government more in a what I can and cannot do aspect rather than a monetary aspect. If I want to build a 60ft tall pink dildo on my property, I should be allowed.

You pickin' up what I'm throwin' down?


You had me up to the "dildo" part. I shouldn't have to see that thing on my commute every day no matter how much you dig it.

Not to mention the traffic! I mean, look at how the neighborhoods with the flashy Christmas lights get overrun during the weeks leading up to Christmas! You think a towering pink dildo wouldn't bring out the Lookie-Lous?

Recommend that you read up on the Common Law concepts of "Nuisance" and "Trespass", for further edification.
 
2012-11-16 03:17:06 PM

Dr. Whoof: Testing for drugs and incentivising companies for not keeping "junkies" on staff would be the same as encouraging companies to fire alcoholics.


You missed this part of my post:

lennavan: I think he was talking about not being on drugs while working.


It's okay to fire someone for being drunk on the job. It would therefore also be okay to fire someone for being high on crack while on the job.

Dr. Whoof: Or, as I said, do you know of a (non-transportation based) company that routinely breathalizes its employees?


Plenty of employers already routinely do drug/alcohol tests. For instance hospitals. Aren't you glad your doctor is (probably) not high on crack while operating on you?
 
2012-11-16 03:18:25 PM
I was told I would get a pony.


Still waiting.
 
2012-11-16 03:18:36 PM

Deucednuisance: Endive Wombat: I see limited sized government more in a what I can and cannot do aspect rather than a monetary aspect. If I want to build a 60ft tall pink dildo on my property, I should be allowed.

You pickin' up what I'm throwin' down?

You had me up to the "dildo" part. I shouldn't have to see that thing on my commute every day no matter how much you dig it.

Not to mention the traffic! I mean, look at how the neighborhoods with the flashy Christmas lights get overrun during the weeks leading up to Christmas! You think a towering pink dildo wouldn't bring out the Lookie-Lous?

Recommend that you read up on the Common Law concepts of "Nuisance" and "Trespass", for further edification.



It appears he disagrees with the nuisance laws. I do as well. If you don't like seeing the big pink dildo, you can take another way to work. That big pink dildo is not hurting you in any way.
 
2012-11-16 03:18:59 PM
Deucednuisance:Recommend that you read up on the Common Law concepts of "Nuisance" and "Trespass", for further edification.

Common Laws are just regulations for people lives, man. Like, we need to stop oppressing the giant pink dildos and embrace smaller government. RAND PAUL and giant pink dildos 2016!
 
2012-11-16 03:19:34 PM
Wow, I fail at HTML today, too...
 
2012-11-16 03:20:57 PM

QueenMamaBee: FunkyBlue: QueenMamaBee: I have a 66 Ford Mustang for sale!!! :)

$20. Cash money right now.

You drive a hard bargain sir. $40 and a roast beef sammich.


Are we talking Katz's or Arby's. I'm on a budget here.
 
2012-11-16 03:21:38 PM

FunkyBlue: I know where they're built, but when you say Honda, it's a Japanese vehicle regardless of where it's made.


If you want to get specific about it, there are very few "American" cars, regardless of the final assembly. The supply chain is international and suppliers often serve many car companies, car companies are multi-national, and many car companies own pieces of each other. If your goal is to buy cars that maximize American jobs, fine. If your goal is to "keep profits in this country", that's quaint, God bless ya, but I'd rather have the jobs.

The all-American muscle car Dodge Challenger: Final assembly in Ontario, Canada.
Ford Fusion? Mexico.

Anyway ... back to Politics. DARN YOU OBAMA for some reason.
 
2012-11-16 03:21:51 PM
Actually just about the only non-transportation based alcohol randoms we do in my office are refinery workers. Most hospitals don't alcohol test unless it's reasonable suspicion.
 
2012-11-16 03:22:49 PM

Needlessly Complicated: I was told I would get a pony.


Still waiting.


Well, it all depends on how "minority" you look. You know, sorta like those signs at the amusement park, but like "You must be this dark to collect welfare" instead.
 
2012-11-16 03:23:14 PM

FunkyBlue: QueenMamaBee: FunkyBlue: QueenMamaBee: I have a 66 Ford Mustang for sale!!! :)

$20. Cash money right now.

You drive a hard bargain sir. $40 and a roast beef sammich.

Are we talking Katz's or Arby's. I'm on a budget here.


Arby's.... step it up or I'm upping it to a beef and cheddar.
 
2012-11-16 03:24:23 PM

FunkyBlue: I know where they're built, but when you say Honda, it's a Japanese vehicle regardless of where it's made. I live about 2 hours from Marysville. You ask your crazy uncle with his 1952 Ford pickup truck about buying a Honda and he'll spout about not buying some Japanese trash and why didn't you buy an American car. Even over here, the Japanese attention to detail and the quality put in the manufacturing process just costs more but it's a better quality product.


When I mentioned that I'd bought a new Hyundai to replace my Neon, my normally quite sane mother in law snapped "Jap crap!" at me. My husband pointed out that it was Korean, and I tried to point out the 10 year warranty. I'm not sure she was listening, but since she's usually pretty easy-going I'm going to assume there was a knee-jerk reaction involved.
 
2012-11-16 03:25:02 PM

YoungSwedishBlonde: Well, it all depends on how "minority" you look. You know, sorta like those signs at the amusement park, but like "You must be this dark to collect welfare" instead.


I have Indian (casino, not mini-mart) ancestry, but at this time of year I'm just slightly darker than khaki. Do I have to wait til summer til I get my free stuff?
 
2012-11-16 03:27:17 PM

TheOther: What about power consumption? Is it Green? Does it run on Ancient Alien D-cells or is it hooked up to the grid? When you turn it on, will the vibrations cause nearby buildings to collapse? earthquakes? Whale beachings?


Point of order: "Dildos" are not necessarily "Vibrators", and likewise, not all "Vibrators" are "Dildos".

QueenMamaBee: So where do I donate to the 60 Ft Tall Pink Dildo fund? Because that would be worth a road trip just to have an awesome story for the great grandkids one day.


See? What did I just tell you? Freaking Tourists...
 
2012-11-16 03:28:14 PM

Bleyo: lennavan: Yeah but it still didn't answer my question. I don't understand how you can read this list of your positions and identify yourself as conservative. I get why you don't vote (R). I don't get why you consider yourself conservative. I really don't think you are. Not that the label really matters, I'm just genuinely interested why you and I hold similar beliefs and yet identify with very different ends of the political spectrum.

Speaking for myself here, but I hold a lot of his views and consider myself conservative. My family thinks I'm a bleeding heart liberal because I don't want to outlaw food stamps or start a nuclear war with China.

I think the definition of "conservative" has changed as both parties moved right. We just haven't updated what we label ourselves.


I think this post at Stonekettle is extremely relevant to this thread:

Everybody's So Different, I Haven't Changed.
 
2012-11-16 03:28:33 PM

lennavan: So you think there will be an enormous number of people wanting big pink dildos in their yard if we were to allow it?

That's interesting.



What!? That wasn't over the top whackadoodle enough for you? You really thought I was advocating an entire new regulatory agency charged with dildo construction safety?

QueenMamaBee: So where do I donate to the 60 Ft Tall Pink Dildo fund? Because that would be worth a road trip just to have an awesome story for the great grandkids one day.


Size queen.
 
2012-11-16 03:31:47 PM

lennavan: Dr. Whoof: Testing for drugs and incentivising companies for not keeping "junkies" on staff would be the same as encouraging companies to fire alcoholics.

You missed this part of my post:

lennavan: I think he was talking about not being on drugs while working.

It's okay to fire someone for being drunk on the job. It would therefore also be okay to fire someone for being high on crack while on the job.

No, didn't miss it, just pointing out that most drug tests are not used for the purpose you're claiming they are used for.

Dr. Whoof: Or, as I said, do you know of a (non-transportation based) company that routinely breathalizes its employees?

Plenty of employers already routinely do drug/alcohol tests. For instance hospitals. Aren't you glad your doctor is (probably) not high on crack while operating on you?/i>

They're looking for patterns of abusing legal and illegal substances (and in fact cannot fire someone for being an alcoholic, as I mentioned above). They generally are not looking to see if the person is high/drunk at that exact moment. That should be apparent from their actions.

My issue isn't with a company firing someone who is drunk or high at work - that should go without saying. However, the original point was to give tax breaks to companies who rigorously test individuals. If what the employee is doing on their own time is completely legal, and they are not using while on the job, what precisely would you want them to do from the results of these tests? Fire them? For doing something legal on their own time?

In your example, if my doctor was completely baked last night, but is no longer under the influence and completely sober, why should I or the hospital that employs them, or better yet, the IRS, care? Do you ask your doctor if he was pounding shots of tequila the night before if he appears to be sober?
 
2012-11-16 03:31:50 PM
Rebates, blunts, whores and dope
Chronic love of da fuggin Change and Hope.

Stamps fo' food is stamps for Gin
F*ck that honkey, Santa 'G did Win.

Bentleys, Dom, and the corpse of Biggie
Tank you, Brosef, for getting so jiggy

Now smoke this herb and high 5 Obummer
He gonna send out the Laker Girls to give me a hummer!

www.nndb.com
 
2012-11-16 03:35:45 PM

lennavan: It appears he disagrees with the nuisance laws. I do as well. If you don't like seeing the big pink dildo, you can take another way to work. That big pink dildo is not hurting you in any way.


If it's pink, it assaults the soul of any Right Thinking American. It's mere existence in that shade is enough to prompt a hue and cry!

Besides, if it's that big, I think we all know what color it should be, knowwhatI'msayin'?

And, to be more argumentative, if you have a problem with Nuisance laws, you have a problem with the entirety of American jurisprudence, it being based on the English Common Law* and all.

* Not applicable in Louisiana!
 
2012-11-16 03:36:17 PM

spcMike: Endive Wombat: As a conservative

A real conservative would've bought an American car.


A real conservative would've bought a 60 foot pink dildo.

/ interesting that spellcheck recognizes the word "dildo"
// but not the word "spellcheck"
 
2012-11-16 03:37:38 PM

LazarusLong42:
I think the definition of "conservative" has changed as both parties moved right. We just haven't updated what we label ourselves.

I think this post at Stonekettle is extremely relevant to this thread:

Everybody's So Different, I Haven't Changed.


That is a damn fine post.
 
2012-11-16 03:39:44 PM

lennavan: Yeah but it still didn't answer my question. I don't understand how you can read this list of your positions and identify yourself as conservative. I get why you don't vote (R). I don't get why you consider yourself conservative. I really don't think you are. Not that the label really matters, I'm just genuinely interested why you and I hold similar beliefs and yet identify with very different ends of the political spectrum.


You are right, a label really does not matter. Fine, I will take another wedge issue: Guns

Guns do not kill people. People use an object called a gun to kill people. I believe I should be allowed to own as many badass guns as I want. Full auto, tracer rounds, RPGs, etc. Only fine, arrest, prosecute if I use them illegally. Some guns are just toys to shoot shiat with because "fark you, that's why." The Dems want to restrict legal gun owners rights quite severely and that is not ok with me. Obama has been practially silent on the matter of gun restrictions and that sits just fine with me. Mittens helped pass the assault weapons ban in MA.

Let's talk about welfare: Dems think that you should be able to go on welfare no matter your circumstance. I agree to a certain degree. I think that there should be mandatory drug testing to receive welfare, food stamps, etc. Look, I had to piss in a cup to earn my money, you Mr. Welfare collector should be required to do so as well, especially since you are taking my money. Dems call that racist as a sizable portion of minorities on welfare statistically are drug users as well. I call bullshiat! Just because you are black, does not mean you have a proclivity to crack. This brings up and goes back to addressing why someone is using, not just that they are...

I also think that there should be limited use of welfare. If you are able bodied, and mentally sound, other than being lazy, I do not see the need for you to be on welfare. Quite frankly, welfare should be used in more dire circumstances. We need to stop rewarding those on welfare with more money the more kids they have. A current flaw in the system boots welfare income the more kids you've got. I am not sure of an answer to this problem, but it needs to be discussed.

I would argue that there are many aspects of my beliefs that are a pretty equal blending of liberal and conservative ideals, but for the aspects of my beliefs that I am unwilling to compromise on, I would say that more lean towards the right than left.

More_Like_A_Stain: Big government again. Without out government intrusion, how will we know if your 60ft tall pink dildo is structurally sound? Are the materials used certified as safe for such an application? Were worker safety standards followed during construction? An entire new bureaucracy will have to be formed, as surely you can't be saying that the local county building department is prepared to take on such a burden.


Assuming it is not open to the public and is on my property, not infringing on any other property, I do not see any need for government regulation. If this is open for public enjoyment, then proper building codes must be adhered to.
 
2012-11-16 03:42:19 PM

FunkyBlue: LOL, 70's era cars were made the old fashioned way. Why a lot of them are still running.

I've heard Ford's have been made decently, but I really can't afford to buy new, if you know what I mean.


70's cars are dangerous pieces of crap that handle like bricks, pollute like hell, and guzzle gas. You have NO idea what you are talking about. The 70's were THE worst for American cars, which is why Japanese cars became so [popular..
 
2012-11-16 03:48:46 PM

rtaylor92: So I've heard this a few times now and my question is

HOW DO I GET MY STUDENT LOANS FORGIVEN!

Seriously, when was this magical plan to release people from their student loan debt passed? I want to get in on some of that sweet sweet loan forgiveness as my wife and I (now in our mid 30's) will most likely be just finishing paying off our grad school loans when my daughter is ready to go to college.


I'm guessing they're referring to the income-based repayment plans and the debt forgiveness that comes at the end of that repayment plan. Under the strict IBR plan, your payment amounts are determined by your income and the outstanding loan balance. The catch comes at the end of the 25-year (typically) plan. Whatever balance remaining outstanding is forgiven but it is NOT A TAX-FREE discharge of indebtedness. So if you have $100,000 left on your balance at the end of the term that gets forgiven, you can add $100,000 to your income for that year's tax filing.

There is a second type of student loan forgiveness that comes after 10 years (i.e., 120 months) of employment in the public sector (military, state/federal government, and maybe 501(c)). After making those 120 monthly loan payments, the government *should* forgive your outstanding balance TAX-FREE.
 
2012-11-16 03:49:25 PM

Dr. Whoof: No, didn't miss it, just pointing out that most drug tests are not used for the purpose you're claiming they are used for.


You clearly missed it. There was no way you would possibly write:

Dr. Whoof: Testing for drugs and incentivising companies for not keeping "junkies" on staff would be the same as encouraging companies to fire alcoholics.


If you had read:

Dr. Whoof: lennavan: I think he was talking about not being on drugs while working.


It's okay, no big deal. No worries.

Dr. Whoof: They're looking for patterns of abusing legal and illegal substances (and in fact cannot fire someone for being an alcoholic, as I mentioned above). They generally are not looking to see if the person is high/drunk at that exact moment. That should be apparent from their actions.


How far up your own ass did you have to reach to pull that one?

Dr. Whoof: If what the employee is doing on their own time is completely legal, and they are not using while on the job


Again, it seems you missed it. There is absolutely no way you could possibly ask me this question had you read:

Dr. Whoof: lennavan: I think he was talking about not being on drugs while working.


You missed it twice now. Please, do read. Thanks.
 
2012-11-16 03:50:49 PM

Endive Wombat: Assuming it is not open to the public and is on my property, not infringing on any other property, I do not see any need for government regulation. If this is open for public enjoyment, then proper building codes must be adhered to.


It does not have to be open or accessible to the public to present a hazard. For example, if it incorporated a fountain, as the liquid spilled down the shaft and pooled at the base it could allow certain types of contaminants to leech into the groundwater table. Or if the spray were to be of sufficient velocity to atomize, it could drift onto adjacent properties. These things have to be accounted for. It's simply not good enough to leave these matters to the "Invisible Hand".
 
2012-11-16 03:55:41 PM

lennavan: Khanmots: Issues like marriage are obvious ones where government does not belong but take for instance Obamacare.


If you mean marriage from a religious viewpoint, sure. From a legal/civil rights viewpoint, the Federal government should be involved. Married in RI should still count as married in GA, and going all state's rights will muck that up a bit.
 
2012-11-16 03:57:42 PM

Headso: Endive Wombat: Yeah, I am a registered Republican who voted for the Democrats this time around.

there's a handful of republican farkers who are saying the same, I am curious if that was a "thing" bigger than just the few people I see on here.


I've personally met many. Blah blah work for non profit we poll to see demographics of our supporters blah blah.

Less new Rep now Dem voter converts than Palin election though.

/anecdotal experience
 
2012-11-16 04:09:22 PM

Endive Wombat: I believe I should be allowed to own as many badass guns as I want. Full auto, tracer rounds, RPGs, etc. Only fine, arrest, prosecute if I use them illegally. Some guns are just toys to shoot shiat with because "fark you, that's why."


I actually differ quite a bit with the Dems/liberals on guns and align more closely with you. Though if we were to (hopefully) start in a place of agreement - I'm against letting someone have a nuclear weapon. If we agree on that, then we at least agree some regulation is reasonable, it's just a question of where we draw the line.

Endive Wombat: I also think that there should be limited use of welfare. If you are able bodied


I think we agree on the goals, we just disagree on the solution. I'll admit, the liberal solution is going to send money to people who will trade in their food stamps for drugs. I absolutely agree there are people who will abuse the system. But that solution at least helps everyone who is deserving. Any alternative I think will not catch everyone who deserves help. Yes people who have multiple kids are going to get more welfare money and some will abuse it. But that's not the fault of the kids. And there actually are able bodied people trying their very best to find work who cannot find it.

Endive Wombat: I am not sure of an answer to this problem, but it needs to be discussed.


For sure. But I'm coming at it from an angle - I would rather err on the side of helping undeserving people, to make sure everyone who deserves it gets help. I also have no idea what the solution is.

Part of why I was interested in your posts was because there are times when I wonder if I myself would better align as conservative. The guns thing specifically is a big one. Or at least what conservatives theoretically stand for, smaller government and whatnot. I'm not pro-gay marriage because I love gay people. I'm against any government regulation of marriage because it's none of their damn business.
 
2012-11-16 04:15:21 PM

Endive Wombat: You pickin' up what I'm throwin' down?


You do realize that those very logical arguments make you, by todays standards, a rainbow flag waving godless communist liberal.

I know, I don't think the standards make any sense either.
 
2012-11-16 04:16:14 PM

Endive Wombat: As a conservative, It is astounding to me how I am becoming more and more alienated by the Republican Party, especially during this past election cycle. Yeah, I am a registered Republican who voted for the Democrats this time around.


I am a conservative registered Republican (for the moment, more down-comment). I voted for Obama and did not vote for a single Republican. Where I could, I voted for Libertarians. I found Romney morally repugnant in ways I didn't think possible, since I don't hold politicians in high regard to start with. Obama, in spite of being called a Marxist-Communist-Socialist, seemed to be a moderate choice, so I went with him as a compromise. When the only other choice is the not-crazy half-way decent guy standing over there without a spittle covered face, you make the only choice you can make.

The 47% comment offended me in so many ways. To get to 47%, Romney has to include soldiers who are in war zones (combat pay is tax exempt); people who have literally worked for half a century who are now on Social Security; and the working poor. The GOP had worked to expand the EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit) many times. The EITC is why many poor people don't pay federal taxes, and has always been treated as a giant step up from welfare. We'd rather people work than be on welfare, and if they make very little, we won't tax them to below welfare levels.

One of the largest expansions of the EITC was under Reagan. The GOP has traditionally been for the poor working as a way to help themselves, rather than getting welfare. Now, with the 47% comment and the "Gifts" comment, Romney has thrown decades of GOP policy down to toilet. He's now saying, "No welfare, no EITC, screw you, poor people. Go starve in the streets. You're not getting a step up, you're not getting shiat.

For a bunch of God fearing, church going folk, they sure do not care much about social welfare, the poor, and the disenfranchised. I am starting to get sick of them focusing on shiat like women's access to abortion when they should be focusing on why she is needing one in the first place and fixing that - poor, young, uneducated, forced into prostitution, whatever...

When Romney was caught back in June talking to the business owners, telling them that it was legal to tell their employees who to vote for, I got a whiff of "Eu de Robber Barron", which I found most distasteful. Romney is not my better. Romney isn't worthy to spit shine my shoes or the shoes of any American who goes to work every day. It was at that point that I decided that the GOP n' me were no longer a good fit.

Maybe it is because I am almost 30 and now with a little bit of life behind me, and have escaped my hometown - Orange County, SoCal...I am starting to see things a little differently...but the amount of crazy in the Republican Party is horrifying. While it is my own anecdotal observation...and don't get me wrong, the Dems have their mixed bag of far left cray cray too, I see the Dems as a lot more mainstream than anything else...it appears to me that they have done a pretty good job distancing themselves from the mega crazy and the Republicans need to do the same with the extreme religious right.

For me, it's the fact that the GOP was 100% confident that they had this election sewn up, and it finally didn't matter what they said or who they said it to. It didn't matter if they made enemies. What were our alternatives? Were we really gonna vote for the blah guy over Romney? Of course not. Now do what you're told and vote for Mitt.

One of my proudest moments as a conservative was watching the election results. Knowing that a lot of other conservatives did what I did, and voted for Obama. Or they did nothing and stayed home, knowing that Obama would get in by default. I don't think that anyone in the Republican Party has any idea yet what they wrought with this election. I don't think they know or could even guess how many conservatives they've turned away, many for good.

I have the paperwork here to re-register with another party. I wanted to wait until after the election so that there would be no confusion and my vote against Romney would count. It'll either be independent or Libertarian. Not sure, but I am no longer a Republican. They left me. I didn't leave them. Sounds like they've left you, too.
 
2012-11-16 04:28:31 PM

lennavan: I'm against any government regulation of marriage because it's none of their damn business.


The determination of property rights and the transfer of property is not a matter for the State?

Who knew?
 
Displayed 50 of 117 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report