(NSR) Republican Humor

[Richard Simmons]

Originally posted by Viva
Probably a rerun:

Curriculum Vitae

George W. Bush

The White House, USA

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:



COLLEGE:

I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. I was a cheerleader.

OOOOOHHHHH, he was a cheerleader....I looooove cheerleaders!

http://www.shmater.com/richardsimmonsinegypt.jpg

[half-fast]

what's a conservative?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
a liberal with a teenage daughter

[1080Rider]

Originally posted by Samwich

I am neither democrat nor republican (i'm undecided, and only 17) so i'd like you to attempt to persuade me that the republican viewpoint makes sense. As of right now, for all of the democrats' failings, their side looks more reasonable.

Samwich, I really don't think there are anymore republicans. Here's my idea of a conservative. They want: 1. small goverment. Government is there to provide you w/ the means to make a living. Roads, courts, legislature who represents you etc. What we don't need are useless offices/divisions that don't add anything constructive to your daily life. This doesn't mean too little gov't, just effective gov't. 2. Low taxes- this goes w/ #1, if you have effective gov't you don't need a ton of taxes. 3. Gov't to stay out of your shit. You should be able to do what you want when you want as long as you don't infringe on other people's rights or laws. This goes for your business as well. You should be able to conduct your business free from gov't regulation (again, as long as you don't infringe on other rights- this is where environmentalists take issue. No one is advocating for the forrest, we may well infringe on the rights of the forrest but no one is there to call us on it.) These are all generalities and it goes much deeper than these. However, like I said, there are no conservative representatives that adhere to these ideals anymore.

Liberals generally: 1. Want to help out the less fortunate and beleive that the gov't is an effective (or appropriate tool) for this. They beleive that by helping the less fortunate that they'll eventually be able to help themselves and no longer need gov't help. They're willing to have a bigger gov't to effectuate this process. 2. They're okay w/ a little higher taxes in order to fund these programs. 3. The beleive in a little more business regulation to ensure that there's a fair playing field and that the environment isn't being hurt. Again, these are all GENERALITIES and is not exactly how it is today.

I don't think anyone here will try to sway you one way or the other. The other thing you need to realize is that this is politics. I had a professor one time who told us a little story. It's quite a proveocative look into politics and I thought did a good job of getting the point across.

He was running for a city council position in a reasonably sized city. There was a tract of land in his district that was on a corner. It had always been zoned for residential. The locals did not want a gas station there. He stood behind them and stated he would fight to keep it from being rezoned. He was falling behind in the polls and needed $ for his campaign. The owner of the business who wanted to put the gas station in approached him and offered $100,000 for his campaign. He had a moral dilema here. He could take the $$$ and maybe win the election but then he'd have to break his word and allow the gas station to go in. Or, he could refuse the $$$ and lose the election. Pretty difficult decision. He really wanted the position, even if he had to break his word, he could have done a lot of good while in office. I think he chose not to take the $$$, that's not the point. The point is that every politician is pulled in a number of different ways. They owe people for getting elected. Its not good to turn your back on the people who got you there otherwise you won't win the next time around. Politics are pretty shitty all in all.

And remember, if you're 19 and not a liberal you don't have a heart, if you're 39 and not a conservative you don't have a brain.

[Honc]

This seems fair, the last line in particular.

[DaveTV]

So then when you're 29, what are you/should be ?

[Honc]

Originally posted by DaveTV
So then when you're 29, what are you/should be ?

Depends on how much responsibility (primarily financial) you've taken on.

Slowly losing the twinkle in your eye sounds about right.

[1080Rider]

Originally posted by DaveTV
So then when you're 29, what are you/should be ?

Heartless and brainless???

[Viva]

Originally posted by DaveTV
So then when you're 29, what are you/should be ?

Bi

[365wp]

Originally posted by 1080Rider
Samwich, I really don't think there are anymore republicans. Here's my idea of a conservative. They want... 3. Gov't to stay out of your shit. You should be able to do what you want when you want as long as you don't infringe on other people's rights or laws.

I think you're dead on with this one..."conservatives" are shooting themselves in the foot with the whole marriage amendment. "Give more power to the states" doesn't really align with constitutional amendments.

[KevinDineen]

You can add this to Bush's resume:

"While every other plane in the U.S. was grounded following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, I arranged a private plane to pick up 25 members of Osama Bin Laden's immediate and extended family living in the United States so that they could be granted safe passage to Saudi Arabia without facing questioning from the FBI, CIA, NSA, or any other U.S. law enforcement or security organization."

[KevinDineen]

Originally posted by 365wp
I think you're dead on with this one..."conservatives" are shooting themselves in the foot with the whole marriage amendment. "Give more power to the states" doesn't really align with constitutional amendments.

Either does stepping in when states vote to legalize things like medical weed.

[Tippster]

Originally posted by 1080Rider
Here's my idea of a conservative. They want: 1. small goverment....

Liberals generally...they're willing to have a bigger gov't to effectuate this process

Just to set the record straight:

The ONLY president in the last 50 years to reduce the federal workforce was William Jefferson Clinton.

1080: I really liked the tone of your post, and apologise if I've been prickly in the past. Let's all try to keep it at this level from now on!

[dipstik]

Originally posted by iceman
Illiterate prep school boy speaks.

trolling: saying something with the intention of creating a negative response/ creating negative vibes. Thats what I was taught anyway.


Look guy, if you have a bone to pick with me, then facking pick it already. I know you have some little personal vendetta against me because your caught up in these narrow minded views based on where I go to school. Fine, I go to a prep school, big fucking deal. Your the only one here who has a problem with that, no one else has ever bothered to question me about it. Does it make me a bad person? Do you generalize everyone? Do you think that all irish guys are drunks, all polish people are stupid, all puerto ricans are thiefs, and all prep school kids are snobs? What are you, a fucking bigot? Get that shit out of here. There is no place for that. So get the stick out of your ass, quit making judgments about me, and stick to talking about skiing. If you want to have a little argument or something, I'd be glad to have one in a PM, because nobody wants to read my shit or your shit.
I've stayed out of the political flame wars so I don't get shit on, but I sure as hell am not going to take crap from you.

Oh, and as for being illiterate, its "moderator" not "moderater"

[Samwich]

Originally posted by Dr. Gaper
Do your own dirty work.

Good argument. I'm sold.

I've never met a republican who was actually able to defend their beliefs. They usually talk about one point, and one point only (i.e. abortion is an abomination under god so democrats are heathens) and the evils of the republican party seem to go completely unnoticed. The only valid arguments I have heard a republican make is that democrats do bad things as well.

Sure, I've met reasonable, intelligent people who also happen to be staunch republicans, but they were few and far between (and really really rich). Most of the republicans I have had the distinct pleasure () of talking politics with have been bumbling morons.

Yeah, both sides are bad, but it seems to me that nothing the republicans do makes any sense. I haven't seen one policy come out of Bush's office thus far that I agree with. Maybe the democrats don't have the solutions, but at least they don't create nearly as many new problems.

[KQ]

Originally posted by EPSkis
Just out of curiosity:

Ummm - if we're stealing Iraq's oil for America's consumption, why am I paying $1.79 for regular?

Because the "we" that are "stealing" is not you and me. You are but a blip on the radar of the conglomerate. You are solyent green.

[1080Rider]

Originally posted by Tippster

1080: I really liked the tone of your post, and apologise if I've been prickly in the past. Let's all try to keep it at this level from now on!

No problemo, I don't have a problem debating issues w/out callin' people names. I get a little pissed when some facker calls me names for my opinions/beliefs. That's all. I haven't taken offense to anything you've directed at me or anyone else.

[road trip]

Originally posted by Samwich
I've never met a republican who was actually able to defend their beliefs.

IMHO it is because the philosophy of the republican party is way different than the practice. While you can defend the philosophy itself, you sure as hell can't defend those that are in office.

[KevinDineen]

Originally posted by KQ
You are solyent green.

I'm made out of people? Well, yeah, i guess so.

[Cornholio]

Originally posted by KQ
Because the "we" that are "stealing" is not you and me. You are but a blip on the radar of the conglomerate. You are solyent green.

And, 5 extra points if you have a clue what she's talking about.

[KQ]

Originally posted by KevinDineen
I'm made out of people? Well, yeah, i guess so.

Okay - how 'bout "you will be soylent green?"

Edit: Actually I think my original statement works - meaning you are nothing but a means to an end for the government.

http://datacore.sciflicks.com/soylen...n_large_01.jpg

http://www.soylent-green.com/sglogo.gif

[Mcwop]

I love when people rag on Republicans and act as if their party is so great. Want to see the Democratic Party handiwork? Come visit a little cesspool called Baltimore. Dems are doing a bangup job here.

Baltimore, Maryland Top 10 List (year ending 2002)

1) Baltimore is the Most Crime Violent of the 25 largest US cities (www.FBI.gov 12/2002)

1) Mayor O'Malley proclaimed Baltimore the Juvenile Murder Capital of America (WBAL, 9/2002)

1) Baltimore ranked #1 in Out-of Wedlock Teen births nationwide (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2/2002)

1) Baltimore rated DEAD LAST in Money Magazine's Popularity Contest (12/2002)

1) Baltimore is the Heroin Capital of the country (Baltimore SUN, 2002)

2) Baltimore is the Second-Most Deadly Per Capita of the 25 largest US cities ( Uniform Crime Reports, 12/2002)

2) Baltimore is the 2nd Most Dangerous City (out of 342) in the US ( 11/2002)

2) Baltimore City is the 4th Most Violent Crime City in the US ( 11/2002)

2) Baltimore City ranks #2 in the nation for reported cases of AIDS (CDC 2001 HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 10/2002)

2) Baltimore is the Second WORST City in America for Black Families (BET.com, 10/2002)

3) Baltimore is the 3rd Most Kid Unfriendly City in the country ()

3) Baltimore ranked #3 in the US for reported cases of Gonorrhea (CDC 2001 STD Surveillance Report, 12/2002)

3) Baltimore City is rated #3 in the US for reported cases of Primary and secondary Syphilis (CDC 2001 STD Surveillance Report, 12/2002)

4) The Baltimore Metro Area has the 4th Most Violent Crime rate in the US ( 11/2002)

4) Maryland is the 4th Most Dangerous State in the country ( 5/2002)

4) Four human corpses were found floating dead in Baltimore's Inner Harbor (Baltimore SUN, 2002)

5) Baltimore is the 5th Most Dangerous Metro Area in the US (11/2002)

5) Baltimore ranked #5 in Personal Crime Risk (CNN's Money magazine, 11/2002)

5) Maryland is rated #5 in the US for reported cases of Primary and secondary Syphilis (CDC 2001 STD Surveillance Report, 12/2002)

5) Baltimore was rated 5th in Drug-tied ER visits nationwide (Drug Abuse Warning Network, 8/2002)

5) Baltimore ranked in the Top 5% with toxic air pollution levels (6/2002)

6) Baltimore City is rated #6 in the country for reported cases of Chlamydia (CDC 2001 STD Surveillance Report, 12/2002)

6) Baltimore was rated 6th WORST nationwide in % of kids in single-parent households (BET.com, 10/2002)

6) Baltimore was rated #6 in the US for reported cases of Early Latent Syphilis (CDC 2001 STD Surveillance Report, 12/2002)

7) Baltimore City was rated #7 in the US for reported cases of Primary and secondary Syphilis (CDC 2001 STD Surveillance Report, 12/2002)

7) Maryland is the 7th WORST State in % of households headed by married couples ( 11/2002)

8) Baltimore is the 8th Most Murderous City in the US (11/2002)

8) Baltimore was rated 8th WORST in the death of black infants nationwide (BET.com, 10/2002)

8) One of every eight Baltimore residents is a drug addict (Baltimore SUN, 2002)

9) Baltimore is the 9th Most Dangerous Metropolitan Area (out of 271) in the US ( 11/2002)

9) Nine of every ten drug addicts in Baltimore is infected with Hepatitis C (Baltimore SUN, 2002)

10) Baltimore is the 10th Most Murderous Metro Area in the US (11/2002)

10) The Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area ranked #10 in Most Ozone Air Polluted Cities in the US ( 2002)

10) Baltimore recorded 10 consecutive years of 300+ murders (thru the 1990s)

[CaddyDaddy77]

Originally posted by 365wp
I think you're dead on with this one..."conservatives" are shooting themselves in the foot with the whole marriage amendment. "Give more power to the states" doesn't really align with constitutional amendments.

Now they are trying to shot off the "foot" with a bazooka.
The level of ignorance and belief that we should "constitutionally" discrimnate is sickening.

Bush for Constitutional Ban on Gay Marriage-Source
Thu February 19, 2004 02:30 PM ET

(Page 1 of 2)



By Alan Elsner
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush's political director has told a group of prominent conservatives that the president would soon publicly endorse a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Bay Buchanan, sister of former Republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan, told Reuters she was one of several conservatives who heard the message from political director Karl Rove two weeks ago.

"We were told by Karl Rove that the president would support the constitutional amendment -- not just that he would endorse it but also that he would fight for it," Buchanan said.

Specifically, Rove told an alliance of conservatives known as the Arlington Group in a telephone conversation that Bush would back the amendment being put forward by Colorado Republican Rep. Marilyn Musgrave and that his statement would come "sooner rather than later."

The debate over gay marriage has heated up recently with a decision by San Francisco's mayor last week to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and a decision by the highest court in Massachusetts to strike down a ban on gay marriage.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush had not yet decided whether to support a constitutional amendment.

"It's something he continues to look at very closely. He has indicated that, if necessary, he would be prepared to support a constitutional amendment if activist judges continue to seek to redefine marriage," McClelland said.

"The only alternative would be the constitutional process, and the president has specifically said the legislation introduced by Congresswoman Musgrave reflects the principles which he has talked about."

The proposed amendment would reserve marriages solely for "unions between a man and a woman." It would allow state voters and legislatures to determine if they want to legalize civil unions between same-sex couples but would state that no court can require states to accept such civil unions.

Buchanan said she and colleagues were a little concerned that Bush had not yet spoken out in favor of the amendment.

"We had expected it by now. There have been several opportunities for the president to speak out since that time. We're not sure what he's waiting for," she said.

[1080Rider]

I guess my biggest question is what the hell the Rev is doing posting this stuff. Living in Idaho you could end up missing for this type of literature. Better watch yourself.

[Mcwop]

Originally posted by Samwich
Good argument. I'm sold.

I've never met a republican who was actually able to defend their beliefs. They usually talk about one point, and one point only (i.e. abortion is an abomination under god so democrats are heathens) and the evils of the republican party seem to go completely unnoticed. The only valid arguments I have heard a republican make is that democrats do bad things as well.

Sure, I've met reasonable, intelligent people who also happen to be staunch republicans, but they were few and far between (and really really rich). Most of the republicans I have had the distinct pleasure () of talking politics with have been bumbling morons.

Yeah, both sides are bad, but it seems to me that nothing the republicans do makes any sense. I haven't seen one policy come out of Bush's office thus far that I agree with. Maybe the democrats don't have the solutions, but at least they don't create nearly as many new problems.

Do my own dirty work? You're a fuckwit.

Wait until you earn more money. Then you may appreciate tax cuts to an extent, especially if you are a sole proprietor. Maybe Bush should not have gone so high up the income scale, but many people did get some needed relief. At least Kerry has promised to only repeal tax cuts for the rich - whatever the Democrat definition for that is.

[Samwich]

Originally posted by 1080Rider
No problemo, I don't have a problem debating issues w/out callin' people names. I get a little pissed when some facker calls me names for my opinions/beliefs. That's all. I haven't taken offense to anything you've directed at me or anyone else.

with this in mind, I think I'll do a little editing. (Sorry about the fuckwit comment Dr Gaper, I just get angry when people are such staunch advocates of something that they appear to be entirely unable to defend.)