Political Crossfire Forums

[JLB]

Dookiestix wrote:
JLB also predicted a GOP win as well with some of his copy and paste screeds. I'd be careful about those kinds of sources in the future.


You just recently predicted Murtha a shoe in. :lol:

I'm allowed to be wrong once or twice a year. 8:)

[JLB]

Alizard wrote: Ozzone wrote: So now that the Democrats are going to be in power in Congress, Republicans are supposed to just accept preposterous ideas like "cut and run" and raising the minimum wage?

The funny thing is: the repubs all now realize that "cut and run" lying soundbyte won't fly.... as they used it in their campaigns and it backfired on them big time.

The real question is: why haven't you caught on that nobody is buying that lie anymore?

Is that why Murtha just got trounced?

How did "cut and run" work out for him? :lol:

[_Kev_]

America didn't buy the "cut and run" rhetoric. At least if polls are to be trusted:

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

"Cut and run" Dems scored better on almost every question in almost every poll listed. And ~50%-40% FOR a timetable. You can question the accuracy of statistical polls but they're certainly better than op-ed pieces.

Oh, and Americans overwhelmingly want a higher minimum wage too:

http://pewresearch.org/obdeck/?ObDeckID=18

Maybe this was a win for the Democratic platform after all. :wink:

[Swampfox.f]

JLB wrote:

Wrong.

You can be correct and still be partisan.

It's a shame you combine blind partisanship with the inability to use logic. 8:)


Look, your clearly an egotist with an authority problem. Keep on telling yourself how great you are. :lol:

I am glad the country wasn't as naive or as partisan as you.


Quote:

Again you are wrong.

Conservatives=good and Liberals=bad.

The fact that you can't tell the difference is what is destroying our country. 8:)

I agree

You really don't consider yourself, a Bush worshiper, a conservative now do you? :!oops:

[Quell]

Ozzone wrote: So now that the Democrats are going to be in power in Congress, Republicans are supposed to just accept preposterous ideas like "cut and run" and raising the minimum wage?

The rest of the country had to swallow the s**t that came out of the Republican party for several year...else be called Anti-American, Pro-terrorist, Anti-Troop..ect..ect.

Quote: Democrats did not win control because Americans wanted us to abandon Iraq in 4-6 months without consequence nor did they want small businesses to suffer or fail.

They won, because they saw your party as a dismal failure, and in fact a large part of that message was that we needed to get the f**k out of Iraq. I'll conceed that your prolly right about, not wanting an immediat withdrawl, but its pretty clear that the American people want a timeline to get the hell out...Something your party is incapable and unwilling to give for fear of political ramification that they built THEMSELVES over the last 3 years in attempt to discredit anyone who disagreed with the crap policies set forth.

Also the majority of Americans are for an increase in minimum wage. Lets try to remove your little strawmen out of an argument...for once it would be nice, if Republicans could make 1 argument without having to use that old stand by.

Quote: What will Americans think if we do "cut and run" and Iraq falls completely apart? Will the Democrats just say "oops"?

It would be better than the, clinical level of denial, your party seem to have. I would much rather hear "oops" than "everything is going swimmingly" as people are dieing left and right, and EVERYONE can clearly see the situation is getting worse. One is at least a partial admission of failure, and indicates that the damage will be stopped. The other is phycosis, at the expensive of American, and Iraqi lives, at the expense of our coffers, and at the expense of any "good will" we have accumulated over the course of ~225 years.

Quote: What will Americans think if small businesses fail or massive job cuts ensue? Will the Democrats just say "oops" again?

See above for pretty much the same answer.

Quote: No, the Democrats will find a way to blame the Republicans. That's what they always do.

Before calling the kettle black, you may want to check the color of your own party..Your party has somehow managed to blame everyone but yourselves depsite having the most control a president has had in the country since possibly Lincoln, you have controled congress, and seeded the SC with your own cheerleaders. Your party has been acting like a bunch of out of control 9 year olds for years now, and instead of trying to control yourselves you project onto the Democrats. The Democrats have very good reason to blame the Republicans for nearly everything that had gone wrong over the last 6 years. The Republicans...Sorry, there is very little you can pin on the Democrats, as they havent had any real power to get anything done...Thats not to say they are blameless, but when placed on the scales the Republicans put a crater in the ground.

Clinical...Level....Of...Denial and this is why the Neo-con, and Christian fundy branch of your party will be stomped (Hopefully) into a sad footnote in American history.

Democrats are bad..Neo-cons are phsycotic loyalist completely out of touch with any sort of reality, and do so at the expense of not only the American people, and our soldiers, but the world as a whole.

Thanks a lot for turning what many people consider the abosulte peak of American history (or at the very least a very high up tick) into some of its darkest days in a matter of 1/2 a decade. THAT is why Republicans lost, and until you people move from step 1 of the 12 steps you will never understand that...which Ironically is better for the rest of sane America.

[Sands]

JLB wrote: Sands wrote: Now Swampfox.f...

You see, what you do is...

Post a copy and paste of a columnist's blog from a rightwing Opinion site, with HUGE TEXT and obnoxious colors...add no original opinion of your own, no debate questions, then follow it up with a hundred back to back troll comments until someone with some intelligence shuts your case down.

That's how you get a 20,000+ post count.


Your troll post is certainly an example of how you plan to get there.

I did it the hard way. 8:)
This post was addressed to another poster, not you.

I was explaining to him how certain other posters operate. Let's look in more detail shall we?

#1. Scour the conservative blogs and rightwing websites looking for any and all inflammatory tidbits about Democrats.
#2. Copy and Paste verbatim, embellish with lots of large text and color to emphasize all the inflammatory information.
#3. Add a few trollish comments, forget to add even the slightest valid opinion or ask a debatable question (all violations of forum rules by the way).
#4. Then proceed to rack up the post count by responding with trollish and somewhat puerile comments to any reasonable responses by other posters.

These tactics are not exclusive to you JLB, sorry.

The only thing you've done the hard way is destroy your credibility, what little you have left.

[JLB]

[quote="Swampfox.f"] JLB wrote:

Wrong.

You can be correct and still be partisan.

It's a shame you combine blind partisanship with the inability to use logic. 8:)


Quote: Look, you clearly an egotist with an authority problem.

I have no problem, as I am the authority. 8:)

Quote: Keep on telling yourself how great you are. :lol:

It's obvious. 8:)

Quote: I am glad the country wasn't as naive or as partisan as you.

I'm waiting for you to say something intelligent.....


Quote:

Again you are wrong.

Conservatives=good and Liberals=bad.

The fact that you can't tell the difference is what is destroying our country. 8:)

I agree

Quote: You really don't consider yourself, a Bush worshiper, a conservative now do you? :!oops:

I'm to the right of Reagan, and I don't worship Bush anymore than you worship Stalin. 8:)

[JLB]

Sands wrote: JLB wrote: Sands wrote: Now Swampfox.f...

You see, what you do is...

Post a copy and paste of a columnist's blog from a rightwing Opinion site, with HUGE TEXT and obnoxious colors...add no original opinion of your own, no debate questions, then follow it up with a hundred back to back troll comments until someone with some intelligence shuts your case down.

That's how you get a 20,000+ post count.


Your troll post is certainly an example of how you plan to get there.

I did it the hard way. 8:)
This post was addressed to another poster, not you.

I was explaining to him how certain other posters operate. Let's look in more detail shall we?

#1. Scour the conservative blogs and rightwing websites looking for any and all inflammatory tidbits about Democrats.
#2. Copy and Paste verbatim, embellish with lots of large text and color to emphasize all the inflammatory information.
#3. Add a few trollish comments, forget to add even the slightest valid opinion or ask a debatable question (all violations of forum rules by the way).
#4. Then proceed to rack up the post count by responding with trollish and somewhat puerile comments to any reasonable responses by other posters.

These tactics are not exclusive to you JLB, sorry.

The only thing you've done the hard way is destroy your credibility, what little you have left.

Son, let me show you just what you are dealing with, because I hate being a black belt and beating up on a 98 pounder. 8:)

I have over a thousand links to factual data, in nearly every topic imaginable.

I know more about what goes on than you'll ever learn in a lifetime.

Here's a screen shot of a partial list of fact sources.

This is an old list, and from one of my three computers.



Here's a screen shot of just one of those folders, and this isn't even everything that's in it.




Now let's see your list.................

Don't have one, do you? :lol:


You have no chance stepping up to me.....none. 8:)

[Eternal]

You've perked my interest. What exactly is under the names you've covered up?


Cheers, Eternal

[sLiPpY]

JLB wrote: Democratic agenda already under fire
By Donald Lambro
Friday, November 17, 2006



WASHINGTON -- When the Democrats were campaigning to take over Congress, they benefited from a tidal wave of political anger aimed at the Republicans who had been in charge for the past 12 years.

But as the Democrats prepare to take control of the House and Senate, it is their legislative proposals that are in the spotlight, drawing much closer critical scrutiny than they received in this year's election. As one top GOP political strategist told me, "They are the ones who are in trouble now." The Democrats won't assume power until January, but their proposals to pull out of Iraq, slap a higher minimum wage on small businesses and raise taxes, including the tax on dividends and capital gains, are already taking hits.

In some cases, the criticism is coming from people who were among the Republicans' severest critics. People like retired Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, the former head of the U.S. Central Command, who called for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's resignation and has been a critic of the conduct of the war. Zinni thinks the Democrats' proposal to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within four to six months would be a disaster.

The Democrats' reasoning behind their plan, if you can call it a plan, is that the prospect of troop withdrawal would put pressure on Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki to take more aggressive steps to combat the terrorists and end the sectarian violence there.

"Well, you can't put pressure on a wounded guy," Zinni told The New York Times last week. "There is a premise that the Iraqis are not doing enough now, that there is a capability that they have not employed or used. I am not so sure they are capable of stopping sectarian violence."

Indeed, he thinks it makes more sense to increase U.S. troop strength, as Republican Sen. John McCain has proposed, to "regain momentum" as part of a comprehensive effort to stabilize Iraq, build its economy and its security forces.

Zinni is not the only one criticizing the troop-withdrawal plan devised by Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which would send the proposal to the Senate floor early next year. Retired two-star Maj. Gen. John Batiste, who commanded a division in Iraq and who had also called for Rumsfeld's resignation, said the idea was "terribly naive."

"There are lots of things that have to happen to set them up for success," Batiste said. "Until they happen, it does not matter what we tell Maliki." Kenneth Pollack, a defense analyst at the Brookings Institution and a former national-security adviser in the Clinton administration, told the Times that if Levin's plan were put into effect, it would result in "the eventuality of civil war tomorrow."

That view was further underscored in Senate testimony last week by Gen. John P. Abizaid, the American military commander for the Middle East, who said withdrawal would result in an increase in sectarian killings and undermine Iraq's ability to provide for its own security.

One of the Democrats' major campaign promises is to raise the federal minimum wage to more than $7 an hour, but small-business lobbies are already gearing up to battle the proposal they say would hurt smaller enterprises that have been the engine of job growth in the United States.

This would be a job killer, plain and simple. If it became law, millions of small businesses would find ways to trim their employment force, reducing the number of entry-level jobs that are critical to helping people get on the first rung of the economic ladder.

The businesses most severely hurt would be the younger start-ups that are still struggling to get established and that have not built up their payroll capacity to the much higher levels the Democrats would mandate by legislative fiat. Economist John Cogan at the Hoover Institution said, "This would hurt small businesses, especially in the South" where wages tend to be lower than in other regions of the country. But Cogan thinks the Democrats' plan would face numerous hurdles in Congress and very possibly from Democrats themselves, particularly in the Senate.

"There will be Democrats who don't want to stick it to small business," Cogan told me.


Democrats also hope to repeal the capital-gains and stock-dividend tax cuts that Republicans passed and President Bush signed into law, reforms that unlocked needed venture-capital investment that created jobs, lifted the stock market to record levels and boosted worker pension wealth.

Hundreds of companies have begun offering dividends as a result of the GOP's pro-growth initiative, and the lower tax rate on capital gains has made it more profitable to sell stock, spawning increased tax revenue that has helped to shrink federal- and state-budget deficits.

If Democrats vote to raise taxes on capital gains and dividends, they are going to encounter fierce opposition from two powerful constituencies, many of whom voted for them on Nov. 7: Millions of retirees and those soon to retire who depend on a lifetime of stock investments for their income; and the financial industry and investors who have plowed larger capital gains into new investment opportunities, boosting the nation's economy in the process.

The Democrats' campaign mantra that it's time for a change apparently appealed to a lot of dissatisfied Americans. But once these voters learn the fine print in the Democrats' plans, many may begin to think this wasn't the change they had in mind.


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DonaldLambro/2006/11/17/democratic_agenda_already_under_fire



They are started off with a whimper, aren't they? :lol:

Murtha down, Pelosi with the rug yanked out from under her, and nothing but unpopular ideas that they mislead the American people about.

2008 is going to be the end of the Democrat Party. 8:)

Relax JLB, the adults are now in charge. 8:)

[Sands]

Wow...all that crap and you're still out classed by 98% of the Liberal posters here, JLB.

You're all fluff...no substance.

[JLB]

Sands wrote: Wow...all that crap and you're still out classed by 98% of the Liberal posters here, JLB.

You're all fluff...no substance.


What color is the sky in your world? :lol:

Even the liberals know you are lying when you say that. 8:)

[JLB]

Eternal wrote: You've perked my interest. What exactly is under the names you've covered up?


Cheers, Eternal

Links to NASA and space related files that my wife works on. She's a rocket scientist, and no, I'm not kidding when I say that. She's currently working on the replacement for the shuttle.

[Sands]

JLB wrote: Sands wrote: Wow...all that crap and you're still out classed by 98% of the Liberal posters here, JLB.

You're all fluff...no substance.


What color is the sky in your world? :lol:

Even the liberals know you are lying when you say that. 8:)

:lol:

[JLB]

sLiPpY wrote:

Relax JLB, the adults are now in charge. 8:)

This one?









Why the long face, John? :lol:

[sLiPpY]

JLB wrote: Sands wrote: Now Swampfox.f...

You see, what you do is...

Post a copy and paste of a columnist's blog from a rightwing Opinion site, with HUGE TEXT and obnoxious colors...add no original opinion of your own, no debate questions, then follow it up with a hundred back to back troll comments until someone with some intelligence shuts your case down.

That's how you get a 20,000+ post count.


Your troll post is certainly an example of how you plan to get there.

I did it the hard way. 8:)

I like the new "diggs" err...avatar/sig.

They're "classic" JLB...but I just lament that if refer to the urple "wind bag."

None of the new folks will know exactly what I'm talking about.

But then again it's "classic JLB" maybe just like inaliable rights it's self-evident? :lol:

Long wrive teh' "purple wind-bag" :flwr:

[JLB]

[quote="sLiPpY"] JLB wrote: Sands wrote: Now Swampfox.f...

You see, what you do is...

Post a copy and paste of a columnist's blog from a rightwing Opinion site, with HUGE TEXT and obnoxious colors...add no original opinion of your own, no debate questions, then follow it up with a hundred back to back troll comments until someone with some intelligence shuts your case down.

That's how you get a 20,000+ post count.


Your troll post is certainly an example of how you plan to get there.

I did it the hard way. 8:)

Quote: I like the new "diggs" err...avatar/sig.

It's from around 1999.


Quote:
They're "classic" JLB...but I just lament that if refer to the urple "wind bag."

None of the new folks will know exactly what I'm talking about.

But then again it's "classic JLB" maybe just like inaliable rights it's self-evident? :lol:

Long wrive teh' "purple wind-bag" :flwr:

Just for you.

[JLB]

[sLiPpY]

JLB wrote:

[Mr. Sunshine]

The numbers of the votes for Hoyer indicate more trouble for the Democratic agenda. He beat Murtha AND Pelosi by more than a 2:1 margin. As elected Majority leader, I can only wonder who is more powerful now; Pelosi or Hoyer. They had quite a falling out awhile before this. The cracks in the solidarity party of ethics have gotten big enough to drive a train through in just one week. :rofl: