The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 15 of 30 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 587
  1. #281
    Join Date
    Feb. 16, 2010
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie View Post
    One of the reasons is to redistribute the money into the areas of the economy you deem most deserving. Like green energy. Or electric cars.
    I know what the true reasoning is. I'm talking about what they claim will happen. They claim is redistributing the income will get the economy going. But that never works out because logically what was already there doesn't multiply when artificially manipulated. The Government has a horrible record of picking the winners and losers in the marketplace.

    A lot of people don't know the true definitions of Fascism and Socialism.

    Socialism is when the government controls both the means of production (businesses) and the distribution of goods.

    Fascism is when the means of production (businesses) are privately owned and the government controls the pricing, distribution and the state regulates almost all aspects of industry.

    They're not that different but honestly we're closer to Fascism then we are to Socialism as the businesses remain privately owned but are heavily influenced by the Government.

    A lot of those green businesses like Solyndra have gone bankrupt and cost the Taxpayers untold millions or billions.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  2. #282
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noms View Post
    You fail to see the obvious, Until 2008, there were NO candidates of color, not a single one. So your logic is totally without any merit.

    AND, that proves the almost undeniable fact that the black vote went to Obama, based on the color of his skin, rather than the content of his policies.
    LOL

    Logic is apparently not your strong point. The fact that the previous candidates were white is exactly the point!

    If 90% of the Black vote goes to a white democratic candidate and 90% of the Black vote goes to a Black democratic candidate how do you reach to conclusion that the votes in the latter were based on skin color?

    perhaps the common denominator is "democratic candidate"?


    11 members found this post helpful.

  3. #283
    Join Date
    Feb. 16, 2010
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunny59 View Post
    LOL

    Logic is apparently not your strong point. The fact that the previous candidates were white is exactly the point!

    If 90% of the Black vote goes to a white democratic candidate and 90% of the Black vote goes to a Black democratic candidate how do you reach to conclusion that the votes in the latter were based on skin color?

    perhaps the common denominator is "democratic candidate"?
    This is a great point and you're probably right. However we'll never know what would happened if Republicans had been the first party to nominate a black Presidential candidate. How many blacks would have crossed over just to vote to make history? I venture to guess a lot, but probably not anywhere near 90%.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #284
    Join Date
    Aug. 4, 2011
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunny59 View Post
    LOL

    Logic is apparently not your strong point. The fact that the previous candidates were white is exactly the point!

    If 90% of the Black vote goes to a white democratic candidate and 90% of the Black vote goes to a Black democratic candidate how do you reach to conclusion that the votes in the latter were based on skin color?

    perhaps the common denominator is "democratic candidate"?
    Here is what you posted earlier:

    "I addressed this on another thread, but the answer is clearly the latter. In all the other recent elections, the vote of minorities has been predominantly democrat. Often > 90%. The highest (94%) for Johnson. Obviously they were voting for policies, NOT color."

    Of course they were not voting for color. The candidates were all WHITE.

    Sunny59 FAIL.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #285
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leahandpie View Post
    Thank you.
    I wish I could believe in the idealism of the Obama platform, but after living in the south for over a year I just can't anymore. I lived in Seattle my entire life and was 100% democrat when I moved down here. The level of entitlement in this country is out of control. If you don't believe me, come shop at Walmart near my house. Watch people pay for their groceries with food stamps, and then buy cigarettes and beer with the cash in their pocket.

    Not all people will 'work harder' when you give them a little support. Most just take it, and expect more. It is human nature.

    I hate the social conservatism of the Republican party. It is polarizing to my generation of voters. (I'm 26) However, our country is in deep shit and progressing towards socialism is not the right direction.
    I am not sure the entitlement is a Democrat versus Republican issue. I think there are people who work very hard to make what little they have stretch. It is always disturbing to see people buy beer and cigarettes with cash while paying for food with food stamps (sorry I forget the new program name), but I don't think one can correlate that behavior to a political party.


    9 members found this post helpful.

  6. #286
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noms View Post
    This is what you posted which it totally FALSE. "as the Democrats firmly stood up for Civil Rights. "


    They in fact did not firmly stand up for civil rights. The KKK was made up of all democrats. All the of KKK was democratic. ALL.
    LOLOLOLOLOLOL

    You again are missing the point. It is becoming laughable. The old south was racist and Democrat. When the Democrats (primarily Northern) started pushing for civil rights, the Southern Ds left the party. The party is substantially different today. You can not compare the old southern Ds with the Ds of today.

    As far as the KKK, again, they were the Southern Ds who LEFT the party over differences in thoughts on civil rights....


    14 members found this post helpful.

  7. #287
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2010
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    They're not that different but honestly we're closer to Fascism then we are to Socialism as the businesses remain privately owned but are heavily influenced by the Government.
    I think it is more often the opposite...our government is unduly influenced by corporate interests.


    11 members found this post helpful.

  8. #288
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2001
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    2,079

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lesyl View Post
    I am not sure the entitlement is a Democrat versus Republican issue. I think there are people who work very hard to make what little they have stretch. It is always disturbing to see people buy beer and cigarettes with cash while paying for food with food stamps (sorry I forget the new program name), but I don't think one can correlate that behavior to a political party.
    Exactly. Just because the Democrats are the party that supports these programs doesn't mean that the people who benefit from them actually support Democrats. Remember the tea party "get the government out of my social security/medicare etc!" rants? Yeah...


    8 members found this post helpful.

  9. #289
    Join Date
    Aug. 4, 2011
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunny59 View Post
    LOLOLOLOLOLOL

    You again are missing the point. It is becoming laughable. The old south was racist and Democrat. When the Democrats (primarily Northern) started pushing for civil rights, the Southern Ds left the party. The party is substantially different today. You can not compare the old southern Ds with the Ds of today.

    As far as the KKK, again, they were the Southern Ds who LEFT the party over differences in thoughts on civil rights....
    Negative, again Sunny59 fails the history of the US .



  10. #290
    Join Date
    Feb. 16, 2010
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canaqua View Post
    I think it is more often the opposite...our government is unduly influenced by corporate interests.
    It's one and the same. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. The elite always come out on top either way and the majority of the population gets screwed. I'm just a suspicious of big business as I am of big government. The difference is big business can't lock me up, force me to give up my money, or force me to do business with them.

    I'm always shocked by those who are so suspicious of business never seem to reserve the same level of suspicion for the government as a whole when the government can do so much more damage.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  11. #291
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noms View Post
    Here is what you posted earlier:

    "I addressed this on another thread, but the answer is clearly the latter. In all the other recent elections, the vote of minorities has been predominantly democrat. Often > 90%. The highest (94%) for Johnson. Obviously they were voting for policies, NOT color."

    Of course they were not voting for color. The candidates were all WHITE.

    Sunny59 FAIL.
    LOL again. No FAIL here

    I will stop trying to explain logic to you as you are obviously impaired in that department.

    Oh and instead of responding to the other post, I'll jsut add here re your history post. You can say anything you want, I really don't care. but when you argument is only "Negative, again Sunny59 fails the history of the US", it's pretty clear who is failing...... You have not provided any evidence to contradict what I have said.

    you are however an expert at quoting wiki (without giving credit)
    and I did see your edited jab about wiki too....


    11 members found this post helpful.

  12. #292
    Join Date
    Feb. 16, 2010
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunny59 View Post
    LOLOLOLOLOLOL

    You again are missing the point. It is becoming laughable. The old south was racist and Democrat. When the Democrats (primarily Northern) started pushing for civil rights, the Southern Ds left the party. The party is substantially different today. You can not compare the old southern Ds with the Ds of today.

    As far as the KKK, again, they were the Southern Ds who LEFT the party over differences in thoughts on civil rights....
    Laughing and mocking people will never encourage them to see your argument. All they will see is the mocking and whatever valid point you may be making will be lost.

    EDITED TO ADD: Who are you people disliking this post? Do you truly believe mocking people facilitates a conversation?
    Last edited by showhorsegallery; Nov. 7, 2012 at 05:51 PM.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  13. #293
    Join Date
    Dec. 29, 1999
    Location
    Harrisburg, PA USA
    Posts
    5,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noms View Post
    This is what you posted which it totally FALSE. "as the Democrats firmly stood up for Civil Rights. "


    They in fact did not firmly stand up for civil rights. The KKK was made up of all democrats. All the of KKK was democratic. ALL.
    WAS made up of. WAS. When the Democratic Party changed its platform and came out wholeheartedly in support of civil rights, Democrats LEFT the party in droves.

    If you are old enough to remember that time, you know what I'm talking about. The Democratic Party did what was right for the country and the people, not what was right in order to win, and many many people left it.

    That's the point. The Democrats DID stand up for civil rights and stuck to it because it was the right thing to do. If the Republicans would now do the same, stand up for the rights of women, gay or straight, the far right wackadoos will freak out just the way the Democrat wackadoos did in the 1960s - Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, et al. The will freak and scream and flee the party.

    The point is that did not stop the Democrats in the 1960s. They did it anyway because it was right, and it became the champion of the those who needed a champion.

    It did stop the Republicans in 2012 ("I enthusiastically endorse Richard Mourdock for Senate!"). If the GOP learns from history and does the right thing for the right reason, the GOP will be tough to beat in 2016.

    When all those Democrats left the Democratic party when they failed to stop the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, what party did they end up in, hmmm? And think about that for a minute. They LEFT the Dems because the Dems wanted to stop segregation and discrimination. And it wasn't internet sniping back then. It was REAL sniping and REAL lynching if you dared to speak up. I'm Proud to be a Democrat.


    14 members found this post helpful.

  14. #294
    Join Date
    Oct. 21, 1999
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    12,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    Laughing and mocking people will never encourage them to see your argument. All they will see is the mocking and whatever valid point you may be making will be lost.
    You speak truth. However, and I'm not referring to your posts, anger and belligerence don't change minds either. If only we could look at what we are saying, and what we want, I think we'd probably be a lot closer together than we think we are.
    Originally Posted by Alagirl
    We just love to shame poor people...when in reality, we are all just peasants.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  15. #295
    Join Date
    Aug. 4, 2011
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anne FS View Post
    WAS made up of. WAS. When the Democratic Party changed its platform and came out wholeheartedly in support of civil rights, Democrats LEFT the party in droves.

    If you are old enough to remember that time, you know what I'm talking about. The Democratic Party did what was right for the country and the people, not what was right in order to win, and many many people left it.

    That's the point. The Democrats DID stand up for civil rights and stuck to it because it was the right thing to do. If the Republicans would now do the same, stand up for the rights of women, gay or straight, the far right wackadoos will freak out just the way the Democrat wackadoos did in the 1960s - Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, et al. The will freak and scream and flee the party.

    The point is that did not stop the Democrats in the 1960s. They did it anyway because it was right, and it became the champion of the those who needed a champion.

    It did stop the Republicans in 2012 ("I enthusiastically endorse Richard Mourdock for Senate!"). If the GOP learns from history and does the right thing for the right reason, the GOP will be tough to beat in 2016.

    When all those Democrats left the Democratic party when they failed to stop the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, what party did they end up in, hmmm? And think about that for a minute. They LEFT the Dems because the Dems wanted to stop segregation and discrimination. And it wasn't internet sniping back then. It was REAL sniping and REAL lynching if you dared to speak up. I'm Proud to be a Democrat.
    In the Civil Rights Era both the Rep and Dem parties were much different then thay are today. Both have morphed.

    I dont agree with you that Reps are against the rights of women, this was the unfortunate result of a biased media, trying desperately to distract from the larger issues.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  16. #296
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2006
    Posts
    2,528

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noms View Post
    You fail to see the obvious, Until 2008, there were NO candidates of color, not a single one. So your logic is totally without any merit.

    AND, that proves the almost undeniable fact that the black vote went to Obama, based on the color of his skin, rather than the content of his policies.
    Jesse Jackson ran at least once that I can personally remember. He never even got close to the nomination, so where was all that support from black voters for Jackson? He should have been hauling in the "race vote", based on the color of his skin. Right?
    Sheilah


    9 members found this post helpful.

  17. #297
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    285

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    Laughing and mocking people will never encourage them to see your argument. All they will see is the mocking and whatever valid point you may be making will be lost.
    I do agree and try to not go that route, but when someone keeps going on in the way that NOMS has, mocking me and completely failing to see any logic, then it does become laughable. I think the point was lost on that poster before I began.

    I am happy to discuss in a rational and intelligent manner at any time.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  18. #298
    Join Date
    Feb. 23, 2005
    Location
    Spotsylvania, VA
    Posts
    12,267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kate66 View Post
    I think you do white, educated polygamist women a disfavor there. I would agree that many Muslim women living in Islamic countries are not aware of other options, I would disagree that polygamist women living in the US are unaware of other options. However, have they been conditioned socially to accept that as the norm - absolutely. Therefore it is hard to judge whether they are actively making a choice or whether their norm is so pre-conditioned that that has become their choice.
    I would be interested to know how many white educated polygamist women there are. I don't watch the reality show (?)Big Love(?) I do know the story of the child brides of the FLDS is horrific.
    Smurf
    Penmerryl's Sophie RIDSH
    "I ain't as good as I once was but I'm as good once as I ever was"
    The ignore list is my friend. It takes 2 to argue.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  19. #299
    Join Date
    Feb. 23, 2005
    Location
    Spotsylvania, VA
    Posts
    12,267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    They are not minor issues at all. But faced with the looming fiscal issues we are facing they are minor in comparison.

    The Supreme Court has upheld Abortion. A President can't do anything about that. Gay Marriage will happen.

    What is an immediate problem is the HUGE deficits and high unemployment.
    The president will probably appoint 3 justices of the Supreme Court.
    Smurf
    Penmerryl's Sophie RIDSH
    "I ain't as good as I once was but I'm as good once as I ever was"
    The ignore list is my friend. It takes 2 to argue.


    10 members found this post helpful.

  20. #300
    Join Date
    Oct. 27, 2009
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    I know what the true reasoning is. I'm talking about what they claim will happen. They claim is redistributing the income will get the economy going. But that never works out because logically what was already there doesn't multiply when artificially manipulated. The Government has a horrible record of picking the winners and losers in the marketplace.

    A lot of people don't know the true definitions of Fascism and Socialism.

    Socialism is when the government controls both the means of production (businesses) and the distribution of goods.

    Fascism is when the means of production (businesses) are privately owned and the government controls the pricing, distribution and the state regulates almost all aspects of industry.

    They're not that different but honestly we're closer to Fascism then we are to Socialism as the businesses remain privately owned but are heavily influenced by the Government.

    A lot of those green businesses like Solyndra have gone bankrupt and cost the Taxpayers untold millions or billions.
    Do you honestly believe that this country resembles anything like a fascist state? If you believe that you are truly unhinged from reality. All I can do is shake my head.


    6 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 83
    Last Post: Nov. 7, 2012, 04:41 PM
  2. Poll; Does Obama deserve re-election?
    By riderboy in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 347
    Last Post: Nov. 27, 2011, 09:02 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sep. 23, 2011, 03:36 PM
  4. Yet another election, this time for FEI president.
    By His Greyness in forum Off Course
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Nov. 5, 2010, 12:07 PM
  5. Thank goodness, Election Day is near!
    By Alagirl in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Oct. 31, 2010, 05:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •