What about Christie?

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:29 am

dudejcb wrote:Spinner, this thread is about what's going on in New Jersey with Christie and his cohorts. Start a new thread about those lying liberals if you want to tell us what we're like. Try to stay on task.

Why do we care so much about the governor of New Jersey? Are you from Jersey? Neither am I.

However, there is a reason we care. He may some day be President. I hope that does not happen for a variety of reasons, one being that this type of institutional corruption and the culture that enables it are a danger to our nation AND IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT PARTY LABEL OR POLICIES THEY ADVOCATE!

However, it is clear that the current interest, watch Matthews on MSNBC or others, it is not because they reject this type of behavior and corruption as a threat to society, but only as a means to the end they seek which is more centralized control in the hands of the people like them.

Read my lips, if Christie was The Torch (Robert Torricelli, D-NJ), the Dems would be defending him as long as they could and if they could not hold the line, then under the bus he goes.

None of this surprises me about Christie, which is one of the reasons since he became nationally known I have warned people on the right from thinking he was anything but what he appears to be now.

I'm simply tired of people on the left defending corruption among their own and then their faux-outrage when it is someone on the right. I think Christie is below the bar of acceptability, but so is Obama and a huge number of Republicans and Democrats. The bar is not a function of the party label or policies they advocate. The bar should be set very high, not at sainthood, but forgiving of large personal failing decades earlier, and harshly unforgiving for corruption and the appearance of corruption, criminal activity, abuse of power, manipulative lies for personal benefit as well as large personal failings in the present (sorry, go get your life in order before we trust you with political power). If in doubt, throw them out. That should be the bar we apply. A political office is at its core a position of trust and not a job any individual is entitled to. These are positions held temporarily by a tiny fraction of the population, and we should demand nothing but exceptionalism across the board. Of course, the left seems solely focused on winning which is why they will do the right thing with condemning Christie and do the wrong thing if he were Democrat like they will ignore all the ethical, corruption, and incompetency issues with Hillary and simply argue "what difference does it make at this point?"
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16043
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL


Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:17 am

Why do we care so much about New Jersey? Well gee ... becasue it's a current event. When it was your state's governor, you were okay with it. Why the change of heart?

And please Spinner: no one is going to slog through a 1500 word rant full of tangential diversions and rabbit holes. Try to keep it short, to the point, adn about New Jersey corruption. That's what this thread is about.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5249
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby High Sierras » Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:14 pm

Why do we care about Christie and New Jersey and corruption? Because he makes obama and his shenanigans look less suckey. Duh. Pretty much ever since the Clintons were in the white house, anytime a lib tries to make the case about how evil and corrupt a conservative politician is it's to try and soften the edge of whatever crappy dem is in office at the time. Want proof? Hey, Dude, give me three reasons to support obama and his policies that don't involve "well, gee, at least he's less suckey than old conservative so-an-so.




























Couldn't do it. Told you so.
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Sun Feb 09, 2014 1:23 pm

dudejcb wrote:Why do we care so much about New Jersey? Well gee ... becasue it's a current event. When it was your state's governor, you were okay with it. Why the change of heart?

And please Spinner: no one is going to slog through a 1500 word rant full of tangential diversions and rabbit holes. Try to keep it short, to the point, adn about New Jersey corruption. That's what this thread is about.

How have I had a change of heart? :huh:

I'll keep it simple since like most liberals, you have strong opinions, and little desire to give think deeply about complex issues.

Whatever you apply to Christie, should apply at least as much to the President. Same with the Governor of Illinois, whether we are talking about the current Democrat in jail or the Republican before him that got out of jail fairly recently.

Obama lying to cover up Benghazi is a current event, unless maybe you are 12. The IRS abuse is a current event, again, unless you have an extremely short attention span. Hillary will likely run for President, but I guess everything bad she did in the past is not current, but any perceived good, well that is relevant :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: I guess what you are really saying is that what Christie may or may not have done is irrelevant for the 2016 election because by then it will no longer be a current event, so why do you care about what will be old news from Jersey?
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16043
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Sun Feb 09, 2014 1:59 pm

High Sierras wrote:Why do we care about Christie and New Jersey and corruption? Because he makes obama and his shenanigans look less suckey. Duh. Pretty much ever since the Clintons were in the white house, anytime a lib tries to make the case about how evil and corrupt a conservative politician is it's to try and soften the edge of whatever crappy dem is in office at the time. Want proof? Hey, Dude, give me three reasons to support obama and his policies that don't involve "well, gee, at least he's less suckey than old conservative so-an-so.


Because that is a credible argument, HS. The POTUS is obviously in probably the most high profile, most scutinized, most subject to criticism position of any person in the world. Regardless of actions taken, or not taken, there will always be detractors. Every move is given the utmost in negatie spin by these detractors, and this partisanship is growing exponentially. In fact, it is growing within parties, as exemplified by the current division within the Republican Party.
However, what is the obvious and inevitable reaction expected to be by a supporter, or even one less committed to a party when criticism is heaped upon the POTUS currently in charge?
It's going to be "Well, look what you brought to the table. Let me list his failings for you."
So, "well, gee, at least he's less suckey than old conservative so-an-so" is a legitimate argument. If you replace a hitter with a 160 avg with a player hitting 200, you can always say "This guy is a bum. Jeez, he only hits 200." Well that may be true, but he's "less sucky" than the guy that was hitting 160. While it is a tired cliche, it may very well be true in its application.
And I am not saying this in respect to Obama vs Bush. I think that it is quite simply the trend de rigueur of American politics. and will become worse before it gets better.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:57 pm

dudejcb wrote:Spinner, this thread is about what's going on in New Jersey with Christie and his cohorts. Start a new thread about those lying liberals if you want to tell us what we're like. Try to stay on task.



Have you not learned that you might start a thread but someone else is gonna finish it. :lol3: :lol3: :lol3:
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7297
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:28 pm

what about Christie anyway? Sure he's not the president, so whatever he does isn't that big a deal. right? Imean we gotta focus 24/7 on Obama cuz that's all there is in this world.

Then there's this $6 Million disaster relief misdirection...quid pro quo
''http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/01/questions_raised_about_christies_use_of_sandy_funds_to_build_complex_in_town_where_mayor_endorsed_hi.html
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5249
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Indaswamp » Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:34 pm

dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
cartervj wrote:It appears to me it's time to downsize, they have become a big ole mess of corruption.

:thumbsup:

dudejcb wrote:Whether I like big government or not is irrelevant. We have a big government.
And you will never fight to reduce the size and scope of big government, why?
who said I wouldn't? What parts do you think should go?

SpinnerMan wrote:... those such as yourself are not open minded enough to contemplate how an alternative solution would work. Your way is the only way that you consider and not the alternatives proposed which are given no serious consideration. All liberal thinking must be in the rigid box just like any other religious zealot. So you will never decide that while we have big government it is too big and it is time to downsize. It's just not a possibility that you are open to.
You don't really know me, or liberals, do you? IN contrast to your notion of liberalism, liberalism is actually defined as being open to, and tolerant of, other's views and practices, within a staunch belief in freedom and equality. here's a refresher...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

But you do have your very well defined stereotype of "liberal" think. So ya got that going for you ... generally, in the wrong direction.

could have fooled me....
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56772
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:45 pm

Indaswamp wrote:
cartervj wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.



If you cry fowl and conspiracy then make excuses for those you like when they have done the same thing you are a complete ass hat with a douche bag cherry on top! Trying to play it both ways to your benefit makes it so your being a decent guy is completely canceled by your lack of integrity.

First: don't care if Scaup takes me seriously. It's mutual.

Second: When you look at the gaggle of ex Justice Department cronies Christie has in his New Jersey machine, and then see the various things they've done, it appears there is an eerily similar, if not organized, effort to expand power on several fronts, not just the lane closures. The use of hurricane Sandy relief funds is especially interesting/concerning and deserves more sunshine and scrutiny. SERIOUS stuff.



What about entire Obama Administration filled with Chicago acolytes and liberal cronies? What about the IRS? What about the stimulus? What about the ACA? Anything Christie is ALLEGED (so far only accusations in four years yet to be produce a shred, a shred of evidence) to have done pales in comparison to what Barry and his minions has done you myopic hypocritical fool.



:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

X2! :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
And I don't like Christie either, but Obama is far worse!

So what you are practicing, Inda, is the exact same behavior that gets every liberal castigated for even the barest mention of a conservative's failings. "Well, he may not be the best, but he is not as bad as....." Go back and review every political minded thread on this forum. This comes up from the conservatives 10x as often as from liberals, but the conservatives want to label this as "Bush Bashing" or "distraction from real problems". A little consistency would be welcome.
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Indaswamp » Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:50 pm

Glimmerjim wrote:
Indaswamp wrote:
cartervj wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:
Glimmerjim wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:No one here takes him seriously for a lot of reasons.

Aw c'mon, Scaup. Lay off a bit. dude is a decent guy whether you agree with him or not. And I've never heard him get personal about anyone.



If you cry fowl and conspiracy then make excuses for those you like when they have done the same thing you are a complete ass hat with a douche bag cherry on top! Trying to play it both ways to your benefit makes it so your being a decent guy is completely canceled by your lack of integrity.

First: don't care if Scaup takes me seriously. It's mutual.

Second: When you look at the gaggle of ex Justice Department cronies Christie has in his New Jersey machine, and then see the various things they've done, it appears there is an eerily similar, if not organized, effort to expand power on several fronts, not just the lane closures. The use of hurricane Sandy relief funds is especially interesting/concerning and deserves more sunshine and scrutiny. SERIOUS stuff.



What about entire Obama Administration filled with Chicago acolytes and liberal cronies? What about the IRS? What about the stimulus? What about the ACA? Anything Christie is ALLEGED (so far only accusations in four years yet to be produce a shred, a shred of evidence) to have done pales in comparison to what Barry and his minions has done you myopic hypocritical fool.



:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

X2! :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
And I don't like Christie either, but Obama is far worse!

So what you are practicing, Inda, is the exact same behavior that gets every liberal castigated for even the barest mention of a conservative's failings. "Well, he may not be the best, but he is not as bad as....." Go back and review every political minded thread on this forum. This comes up from the conservatives 10x as often as from liberals, but the conservatives want to label this as "Bush Bashing" or "distraction from real problems". A little consistency would be welcome.

sigh...
Obama is the President.
Christie is a state governor.
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56772
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:48 pm

Indaswamp wrote: sigh...
Obama is the President.
Christie is a state governor.

Oh thanks! I always get them mixed up! :thumbsup: I think it's because they have NO letters in common in their names. That's just weird! I mean, even president and governor have "E" and "R" and "N". But Obama and Christie, not a single one. :huh:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby High Sierras » Mon Feb 10, 2014 12:34 am

Glimmerjim wrote:
High Sierras wrote:Why do we care about Christie and New Jersey and corruption? Because he makes obama and his shenanigans look less suckey. Duh. Pretty much ever since the Clintons were in the white house, anytime a lib tries to make the case about how evil and corrupt a conservative politician is it's to try and soften the edge of whatever crappy dem is in office at the time. Want proof? Hey, Dude, give me three reasons to support obama and his policies that don't involve "well, gee, at least he's less suckey than old conservative so-an-so.

Because that is a credible argument, HS. The POTUS is obviously in probably the most high profile, most scutinized, most subject to criticism position of any person in the world. Regardless of actions taken, or not taken, there will always be detractors. Every move is given the utmost in negatie spin by these detractors, and this partisanship is growing exponentially. In fact, it is growing within parties, as exemplified by the current division within the Republican Party.
However, what is the obvious and inevitable reaction expected to be by a supporter, or even one less committed to a party when criticism is heaped upon the POTUS currently in charge?
It's going to be "Well, look what you brought to the table. Let me list his failings for you."
So, "well, gee, at least he's less suckey than old conservative so-an-so" is a legitimate argument. If you replace a hitter with a 160 avg with a player hitting 200, you can always say "This guy is a bum. Jeez, he only hits 200." Well that may be true, but he's "less sucky" than the guy that was hitting 160. While it is a tired cliche, it may very well be true in its application.
And I am not saying this in respect to Obama vs Bush. I think that it is quite simply the trend de rigueur of American politics. and will become worse before it gets better.

That was the go-to campaign for old Slick Willies supporters... He's no worse than John Kennedy with Marilyn... He's no worse than Thomas Jefferson with his black slave girl... and besides, those women ( Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Juanita Broderick...) were just trailer trash anyway. Our man Bill is at least as respectable as the worst trash to ever sit in the White House, so he doesn't deserve to be impeached over a little lie he told during a civil lawsuit about sexual harrassment. Heck, thats what spawned the whole 'move_on.org' website... liberal appologists trying to define how un-suckey their guy was by comparing him to some real trash throughout history, and can we please now move on and get the spotlight off the philanderer-in-chief...

But I don't recall anyone on the conservative side employing that tactic on a regular basis.

When Reagan, G H Bush or more recently G W Bush were in office, I don't recall any mainstream conservatives saying "well, at least he's no worse than..." and use the tactic of lowering the expected level of intelligence / behavior as a means to prop up their guy. The closest I can recall was back when Dan Quayle & the whole 'potatos' v. 'potatoes' debackle the dems tried to slime Dan with as some sort of hayseed illiterate politician.

Now, with obama, the mantra is he's no worse than Richard Nixon was. He's no worse than "insert the name of your crooked politician here", all the while they insist ol' obama is the most erudite man in the room. If that is indeed the 'trend de rigueur' as you put it, can you help me out and show me a few cases where the conservative side uses it as their go-to arguement to prop up their guy in the last few decades?

It seems when one of the guys on the right gets caught doing something egregious, their fellow conservatives will push them off the cliff post haste, or just let them burn out and go away on their own. But very seldom do they rally around and try to make the claim Hey.. at least he's not as bad as...".

And using that "Hey, my guy is at most just as sucky as, or less sucky than, these other deadbeats throughout history" arguement may be credible, but it's kinda like trying to justify why it was ok that you slept with that stinky, skanky, one eyed 'girl' thing last weekend... Hey, at least I wasn't yanking it all by myself. Hey, at least MY girl had some teeth left. Hey, at least...she wasn't something you could blow up and use in case your boat capsized :eek: :eek: :eek:

Either way, whether we're talking about appologizing for obamas failures or nailing the stinky skanky girl-thing last weekend... if the only arguement you've got is "Hey, at least..." you might want to consider keeping that fact (and whats left of your dignity) to yourself. :beer:
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Feb 10, 2014 6:34 am

dudejcb wrote:what about Christie anyway? Sure he's not the president, so whatever he does isn't that big a deal. right? Imean we gotta focus 24/7 on Obama cuz that's all there is in this world.

Then there's this $6 Million disaster relief misdirection...quid pro quo
''http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/01/questions_raised_about_christies_use_of_sandy_funds_to_build_complex_in_town_where_mayor_endorsed_hi.html

It is a big deal and he should never be President. Should he run out of Governor? Don't know. They need to keep investigating like they are because for all we know, at this point it could just be an incompetent mistake at trusting underlings that were corrupt and/or incompetent.

We knew this same thing about Obama before hand. While I cared just as much about him as Christie, the Dems did not care. Now they are up on their moral high horse as if they have never seen a public official in this situation before. It's largely because they have a complete blind eye to their own politicians. Maybe it's the same syndrome where mother's of the most evil children cannot see it.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16043
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Gunnysway » Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:10 am

I think it's more the " Don't look behind the curtain, there's nothing to see here" tactic that pisses off the middle of the road voters.

Excuse me Mr. Oz... Your no God... Your just some slimey, lying politician with a big, fake green head, that's proped up by a bunch of sissy lemmings, as that's their guy...

Why pull the curtain to expose the truth...?

It's too painful to realize YOU are the lemming in question. They are far to along into their loyalty-to-party, to actually think for themselves.

Here's what I know. In the real world, there are consequences for lying and misleading others. Our parents punished us for these inappropriate behaviors. But that all changes when we invest ourselves into politicians. Case in point. The President. Gov. Christie. ( place the name of your over paid, corrupt politician here.) if you can only argue that "yeah, but he is not as bad as..."

You ARE the problem. You just admitted he/she sucks donkey d!(k, but you have no spine, and since there is a D/R next to their name, its ok.

Bull spit.

Lemmings...
Setting up meetings between geese and God since 1992...

Gud till ära, oss till gagn...
User avatar
Gunnysway
hunter
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 11:46 am
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: What about Christie?

Postby assateague » Mon Feb 10, 2014 8:42 am

I'm amused by the constant liberal focus on things which really don't have anything to do with anything. Spewing about Christie is about as relevant as spewing about Palin. But yet they seem to engage in both. I'm convinced that it's fear, more than anything.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: What about Christie?

Postby beretta24 » Mon Feb 10, 2014 12:13 pm

Indaswamp wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
cartervj wrote:It appears to me it's time to downsize, they have become a big ole mess of corruption.

:thumbsup:

dudejcb wrote:Whether I like big government or not is irrelevant. We have a big government.
And you will never fight to reduce the size and scope of big government, why?
who said I wouldn't? What parts do you think should go?

SpinnerMan wrote:... those such as yourself are not open minded enough to contemplate how an alternative solution would work. Your way is the only way that you consider and not the alternatives proposed which are given no serious consideration. All liberal thinking must be in the rigid box just like any other religious zealot. So you will never decide that while we have big government it is too big and it is time to downsize. It's just not a possibility that you are open to.
You don't really know me, or liberals, do you? IN contrast to your notion of liberalism, liberalism is actually defined as being open to, and tolerant of, other's views and practices, within a staunch belief in freedom and equality. here's a refresher...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

But you do have your very well defined stereotype of "liberal" think. So ya got that going for you ... generally, in the wrong direction.

could have fooled me....

:lol3:
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5695
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Mon Feb 10, 2014 12:22 pm

dudejcb wrote:Why do we care so much about New Jersey? Well gee ... becasue it's a current event. When it was your state's governor, you were okay with it. Why the change of heart?

And please Spinner: no one is going to slog through a 1500 word rant full of tangential diversions and rabbit holes. Try to keep it short, to the point, adn about New Jersey corruption. That's what this thread is about.



You care about Christie because you are acting like a three year old child when it comes to politics. You desperately want to find another guy on the other side to point a finger at. This will hopefully distract folks from how horrible your beloved leader is at his job. My children learned to not try this kind of diversion before they were four.

Christie is a corrupt douche. We all know it. The real issue is that the people looking into things need to prove it or find it untrue. That of course does not include the media in any manner or form. When you sell flash and splash and hold a severe bias, you are no longer worthy of trust or attention. The media is most definitely not trustworthy.

As for focusing on Obama and his failings many of which have been listed in this thread. He is the President. He is supposed to represent and defend all of us. He is desperately failing at everything he does. He can no longer blame Bush or anyone else. He has had the time he needed to fix things and is making them worse. He is and will be the focuse of attention for everyone with any intelligence of any kind.. Anyone who thinks he, his policies, and their implimentation shouldn't be the center of attention is acting the fool.
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Mon Feb 10, 2014 6:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6535
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Feb 10, 2014 12:48 pm

ScaupHunter wrote:You care about Christie because you are acting like a three year old child when it comes to politics. You desperately want to find another guy on the other side to point a finger at. This will hopefully distract folks from how horrible your beloved leader is at his job.
I wonder if it is more to distract from how big of a sucker they were. They all voted for this guy with no experience, no track record of accomplishment beyond getting a law degree and some lecturing at college (big frigging deal), ties to whackjob preachers, unrepentant terrorists, wrote a book about his fathers dreams (the one that abandon him and was a terrible human being), etc. They just don't want to admit to themselves how badly they got conned, particularly with the entire Obamacare thing being proven to be an entire debacle and that one can't be blamed on anyone but Obama and the Democrats no matter how hard they try. Although, the people spinning lower employment as a positive attribute may still think it is Bush's fault somehow. Or my favorite that the old outlawed policies were not worth the paper they were written on.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/18/opinion/begala-obama-problems-to-fix/index.html
Yes, it is frightening to receive a letter canceling your insurance. But a lot of those policies weren't worth the paper they were written on.

And that was Paul Begala, the Clinton crony/adviser.

He probably thinks the doctors people cannot keep were just quacks anyways.

We should have some compassion. They drunk the figurative (literal if you are an idiot like Biden) Kool Aid and unlike the leftist hippies of the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project at Jonestown that drank the poisoned Flavor Aid, they have to live with how big of a sucker they were. Obamacare was the
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16043
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:06 pm

Dumb is the lack of ability to process and use knowledge. Ignorance is that actual lack of knowledge. I have sympathy for the dumb since they simply cannot help it. I have no sympathy for the ignorant. The answers are out there.

I also have no sympathy for the educated and intelligent who should and do know better and delude themselves. Lying to yourself to justify your actions is the singularly worst behavior we as humans can practice. Why is it worse than mass murder? Rape? Because when practiced by enough people it leads the the knowing and willful murder of hundreds of millions of innocent people.

Idiots like Dhunt think they can just believe hard enough and it will be true. They know the facts, they know the truth, and refuse to see them for what they are. People like him willfully chose to be dumb, they knowingly choose to ignore what does not fit their view. That kind of behavior when deeply entrenched and encouraged by a society guarantees that societies end. It is just a matter of time once the foot hold is gained. Why? because honest and intelligent people play by the rules and obey the law. Idealists with no grasp on reality lie, cheat, break rules, and do anything in their power to force their way on others. All while telling them how it is for their own good.
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6535
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Indaswamp » Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:20 pm

beretta24 wrote:
Indaswamp wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
cartervj wrote:It appears to me it's time to downsize, they have become a big ole mess of corruption.

:thumbsup:

dudejcb wrote:Whether I like big government or not is irrelevant. We have a big government.
And you will never fight to reduce the size and scope of big government, why?
who said I wouldn't? What parts do you think should go?

SpinnerMan wrote:... those such as yourself are not open minded enough to contemplate how an alternative solution would work. Your way is the only way that you consider and not the alternatives proposed which are given no serious consideration. All liberal thinking must be in the rigid box just like any other religious zealot. So you will never decide that while we have big government it is too big and it is time to downsize. It's just not a possibility that you are open to.
You don't really know me, or liberals, do you? IN contrast to your notion of liberalism, liberalism is actually defined as being open to, and tolerant of, other's views and practices, within a staunch belief in freedom and equality. here's a refresher...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

But you do have your very well defined stereotype of "liberal" think. So ya got that going for you ... generally, in the wrong direction.

could have fooled me....

:lol3:

I'm certainly glad that did not go over everyone's head. At least you caught it.
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Image
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 56772
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:57 pm

dudejcb wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
cartervj wrote:It appears to me it's time to downsize, they have become a big ole mess of corruption.

:thumbsup:

dudejcb wrote:Whether I like big government or not is irrelevant. We have a big government.
And you will never fight to reduce the size and scope of big government, why?
who said I wouldn't? What parts do you think should go?

SpinnerMan wrote:... those such as yourself are not open minded enough to contemplate how an alternative solution would work. Your way is the only way that you consider and not the alternatives proposed which are given no serious consideration. All liberal thinking must be in the rigid box just like any other religious zealot. So you will never decide that while we have big government it is too big and it is time to downsize. It's just not a possibility that you are open to.
You don't really know me, or liberals, do you? IN contrast to your notion of liberalism, liberalism is actually defined as being open to, and tolerant of, other's views and practices, within a staunch belief in freedom and equality. here's a refresher...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

But you do have your very well defined stereotype of "liberal" think. So ya got that going for you ... generally, in the wrong direction.


2 questions,

Liberals believe in FREEDOM, ok, why pass so many damn laws pertaining Political Correctness then? Soda laws etc....

Tolerant, :lol3: hell all these liberal sites I visit OPENLY HATE conservatives and or Christians. Mockery runs amuck on those sites and has crossed over into the MSM so much that MSNBC has a once a day apology hour these days. :lol3:

so what is a liberals definition of tolerant?
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7297
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby ScaupHunter » Mon Feb 10, 2014 6:01 pm

That is simple Carter. It is killing everyone they don't agree with or at best sujugating and putting them in the Gulag. We have seen all the examples we need of their behavior to know they are not safely allowed any form of control.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6535
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: What about Christie?

Postby dudejcb » Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:18 pm

cartervj wrote:2 questions,
Liberals believe in FREEDOM, ok, why pass so many damn laws pertaining Political Correctness then? Soda laws etc....

Did I claim to be Mayor Bloomberg? Did I hold him up as an example? Did anyone? It's early for cherry picking, but you're having fun so go on ahead.
cartervj wrote: hell all these liberal sites I visit OPENLY HATE conservatives and or Christians.
It's just you.
cartervj wrote:Mockery runs amuck on those sites and has crossed over into the MSM so much that MSNBC has a once a day apology hour these days.
when is that time slot? I'll DVR it.
cartervj wrote:so what is a liberals definition of tolerant?
Letting you rant incoherently till you get it all out. Feel better?
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5249
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: What about Christie?

Postby cartervj » Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:30 pm

dudejcb wrote:
cartervj wrote:2 questions,
Liberals believe in FREEDOM, ok, why pass so many damn laws pertaining Political Correctness then? Soda laws etc....

Did I claim to be Mayor Bloomberg? Did I hold him up as an example? Did anyone? It's early for cherry picking, but you're having fun so go on ahead.
cartervj wrote: hell all these liberal sites I visit OPENLY HATE conservatives and or Christians.
It's just you.
cartervj wrote:Mockery runs amuck on those sites and has crossed over into the MSM so much that MSNBC has a once a day apology hour these days.
when is that time slot? I'll DVR it.
cartervj wrote:so what is a liberals definition of tolerant?
Letting you rant incoherently till you get it all out. Feel better?



:zzz:
“Nothing makes me more certain of the victory of our ideas than our success in the universities” – Adolf H, 1930
User avatar
cartervj
hunter
 
Posts: 7297
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: NW AL

Re: What about Christie?

Postby Glimmerjim » Mon Feb 10, 2014 10:48 pm

cartervj wrote:
dudejcb wrote:
cartervj wrote:2 questions,
Liberals believe in FREEDOM, ok, why pass so many damn laws pertaining Political Correctness then? Soda laws etc....

Did I claim to be Mayor Bloomberg? Did I hold him up as an example? Did anyone? It's early for cherry picking, but you're having fun so go on ahead.
cartervj wrote: hell all these liberal sites I visit OPENLY HATE conservatives and or Christians.
It's just you.
cartervj wrote:Mockery runs amuck on those sites and has crossed over into the MSM so much that MSNBC has a once a day apology hour these days.
when is that time slot? I'll DVR it.
cartervj wrote:so what is a liberals definition of tolerant?
Letting you rant incoherently till you get it all out. Feel better?



:zzz:

C'mon carter. Dude had some pretty funny responses in there! :thumbsup:
Glimmerjim
hunter
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

PreviousNext

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Slack Tide, SpinnerMan and 3 guests