Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » The 800 teapartys today
| Re: The 800 teapartys today [message #381824 is a reply to message #381808] |
Tue, 21 April 2009 20:19   |
 |
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Muad Dib15 wrote on Tue, 21 April 2009 18:27 |
Yeah we may be paying for the Bush spending, but Obama's is going to be paid for over a loooooooooooooooooooooonnnng period of time. Heck, even my citizenship teacher, liberal, agrees that 12% of the budget just to pay for INTEREST in the loans we've been getting from China is pretty dumb. I don't want to have 25+ percent of the budget 10 years from now paying for interest for what we own China. That is precisely why I supported Paul Ryan's budget proposal. It would still have been a lot of spending, but GOSH IT WAS SHOT DOWN BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE IT WOULD RAISE THE NATIONAL DEBT!!! FANCY THAT!!! Yet they supported Obama's budget even though it was projected to raise the debt 1 trillion more in the long run.
CHECKOUT THE HYPOCRISY!!!!! 
|
Yeah! Let's admit my mistakes while glossing them over and BITCH ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HASN'T HAPPENED YET!!!1!!one1!1
I hate to break it to you, Maud, but "Paul Ryan's" proposal (That WAS the budget proposal that didn't include any real numbers, right?) is kind of a joke. The Unfunny kind. Here's one of his graphs:
2080? Really? Republicans couldn't predict a budget accurately for the first half of Bush's first term. You're really taking their numbers seriously for the next 65+ years? GG to you for taking this bullshit seriously.
And of course, none of that changes any of this:
| Dover wrote on Mon, 20 April 2009 20:34 |
The US has the lowest tax rates of the developed world, most protesters are getting lower taxes, and it's retarded to pin any of this on Obama since he hasn't actually raised anyone's taxes. People are quick to point out the "massive" government spending that our children will pay for, but for some reason don't like talking about Bush's massive government spending that's being paid for right now (Except cheesesoda, who as a non-hypocrite is more than happy to talk about it).
|
Your party lost. Accept it and get to work on a real way to fix your internal issues, instead of slinging shit haphazardly like monkeys on muscle relaxants. McCain lost his election bid partly because he focused on his opponent instead of fixing the gaping holes in his proposals. Have you learned nothing?
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
[Updated on: Tue, 21 April 2009 20:20] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: The 500 teapartys today [message #383082 is a reply to message #380519] |
Mon, 27 April 2009 19:29 |
 |
slosha
Messages: 1540
Registered: September 2008
Location: North Dakota FTW
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| so say we all. wrote on Wed, 15 April 2009 17:51 |
teabagging *cough*
|
oh i wish, heh jk
The road I cruise is a bitch now, baby.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The 800 teapartys today [message #383279 is a reply to message #381574] |
Tue, 28 April 2009 17:00 |
Muad Dib15
Messages: 839
Registered: July 2007
Location: behind a computer screen,...
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| cheesesoda wrote on Mon, 20 April 2009 20:00 |
I'm pro gay-marriage, so I'm thrown in with the liberals.
I'm pro-separation of church and state. Oops, liberal again.
I'm pro-responsible government spending. I'm a conservative, apparently (even though conservatives like to waste money, too).
|
First yes, last yes, middle, not really. See separation of Church and State is basically not letting any church set rules that govern the state. Separation From church and state would be liberal. Because, then you are taking any christian, judio, hindu, bhuddist, whatever influence out of the picture all together. Then, what morals would we base our country on. You can't base them on anything because every religion teaches morals. Separation of Church and State is as I said before, not allowing any religion to make any rules but still have some influence in the morality of the rules. Separation from Church and State takes all religious influnce, good or bad out all together. I agree that having a church run state is bad for this country because of the way we are, but we shouldn't cut it out all together because some liberal atheists are butthurt about it. It is necessary for the moral fiber of America.
The manliest post on the internet
|
|
|
|
| Re: The 800 teapartys today [message #383282 is a reply to message #383279] |
Tue, 28 April 2009 17:09 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Muad Dib15 wrote on Tue, 28 April 2009 17:00 |
| cheesesoda wrote on Mon, 20 April 2009 20:00 |
I'm pro gay-marriage, so I'm thrown in with the liberals.
I'm pro-separation of church and state. Oops, liberal again.
I'm pro-responsible government spending. I'm a conservative, apparently (even though conservatives like to waste money, too).
|
First yes, last yes, middle, not really. See separation of Church and State is basically not letting any church set rules that govern the state. Separation From church and state would be liberal. Because, then you are taking any christian, judio, hindu, bhuddist, whatever influence out of the picture all together. Then, what morals would we base our country on. You can't base them on anything because every religion teaches morals. Separation of Church and State is as I said before, not allowing any religion to make any rules but still have some influence in the morality of the rules. Separation from Church and State takes all religious influnce, good or bad out all together. I agree that having a church run state is bad for this country because of the way we are, but we shouldn't cut it out all together because some liberal atheists are butthurt about it. It is necessary for the moral fiber of America.
|
Because religions hold a monopoly on morals and values, right? Fuck you.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The 800 teapartys today [message #383283 is a reply to message #383279] |
Tue, 28 April 2009 17:10 |
 |
nikki6ixx
Messages: 2545
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Muad Dib15 wrote on Tue, 28 April 2009 19:00 |
Then, what morals would we base our country on. You can't base them on anything because every religion teaches morals. Separation of Church and State is as I said before, not allowing any religion to make any rules but still have some influence in the morality of the rules. Separation from Church and State takes all religious influnce, good or bad out all together. I agree that having a church run state is bad for this country because of the way we are, but we shouldn't cut it out all together because some liberal atheists are butthurt about it. It is necessary for the moral fiber of America.
|
Allow me to refer you to the second panel of this comic.
My morals are founded on 'conscience' ... aka, whether or not something is a dick thing to do. I don't need a religion to tell me what is right, or wrong. Humans are generally programmed to know what makes a person an asshole.
Renegade:
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 10 January 2014 16:56 |
The only game where everyone competes to be an e-janitor.
|
[Updated on: Tue, 28 April 2009 17:12] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: The 800 teapartys today [message #383298 is a reply to message #380512] |
Tue, 28 April 2009 18:57 |
 |
u6795
Messages: 1261
Registered: March 2006
Location: Maryland
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Ugh, exactly. I don't need a book to tell me that murder and stealing are wrong, and implying that we would be nowhere without said book is like saying you can't have drink water unless you piss in your dead great grandfathers eye cavity. Fucking stupid.
yeah
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Apr 29 01:10:23 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01243 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
