Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

So, not being an American I am puzzled as to why everyone has to sing the National Anthem like they were at a baseball game before things get underway?

 

Glad to see Wayne Newton was there with his newest face.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, not being an American I am puzzled as to why everyone has to sing the National Anthem like they were at a baseball game before things get underway?

 

They have to prove who is most American. Notice most usually have those pointless flag pins on their lapel as well, as if we'll think they're on team Malaysia or Uruguay unless we see the pin. And they feel the singing of the anthem somehow imbues the following farce with a sense of unearned importance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, not being an American I am puzzled as to why everyone has to sing the National Anthem like they were at a baseball game before things get underway?

 

Glad to see Wayne Newton was there with his newest face.

 

To remind us that they actually have allegiance to America ... Repubs tend to hold party over country in our current era.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, not being an American I am puzzled as to why everyone has to sing the National Anthem like they were at a baseball game before things get underway?

 

Glad to see Wayne Newton was there with his newest face.

 

LOL. ANOTHER facelift?????????? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

but the democrats don't? :huh:

 

No, I think not. The Dems are ideologically diverse, it's difficult to get to off the track with Party and Country because another faction of the Dems will shoot it down.

 

The Repubs are more single minded, they have dogmas that surround closely with money and power (to a greater degree than Dems IMO) that gets easily in trouble with respect with where the ultimate allegiance is. They don't want their followers to be circumspect about anything (regarding their stances on social issues, for instance) and encouraged to fall into step (lock-step) like "good" Republicans (or Conservatives, take your pick).

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's depressing that these are the best the GOP can up with for President

 

..to their peril. They will not be able to control Trump (for instance) if he should actually be elected president (compare how easily W was controlled). Trump profiles more like a 3rd Party candidate. The Repubs are no doubt glad that he isn't but not being able to get their yes man in the WH is a problem as well. For them, anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you expect to read from a far-left leaning opinion-based organization?

Regardless of the publication, the current Republicans ARE very pro-war.  With the exception of Rand Paul.  Unfortunately, none of them has a clue as to how to actually engage in a war, who the enemy should be, how many troops to send and more importantly how to end it (or them).  They do know how to finance it though.  Provide huge contracts to denfense contractors and borrow the money from China.  Then ignore the disabled vets when they come home except for a few photo ops.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of the publication, the current Republicans ARE very pro-war.  With the exception of Rand Paul.  Unfortunately, none of them has a clue as to how to actually engage in a war, who the enemy should be, how many troops to send and more importantly how to end it (or them).  They do know how to finance it though.  Provide huge contracts to denfense contractors and borrow the money from China.  Then ignore the disabled vets when they come home except for a few photo ops.

One thing I appreciate about President Obama's time in office is that he campaigned about ending U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for the most part, he delivered on that.  True, the U.S. still has a presence in both countries, but it's nothing like it was when he was first inaugurated.  After a while, I got tired, angry, and depressed about seeing a steady stream of flag-draped coffins arriving at Dover AFB.  Fortunately, that has pretty much stopped.  While President Bush's foray into Iraq was not justified in my book, I thought our invasion of Afghanistan was the right call, but I also thought that our time there had to be limited to 7 or 8 years.  If the Soviets couldn't impose its will on the Afghan people after 15 years of occupation, why on earth would an American government think it could do better?  To be fair, Donald Trump stated in the Las Vegas debate that the U.S. should not engage in a large-scale military presence in the Middle East, since the 4 trillion dollars spent by us since 2001 could have been better used for things here like hospitals, education, roads and bridges, and other social services.  Of course, the world has changed quite a bit in the last 15 years; not just technologically, but in people's attitudes about the issues of the day--are we becoming a more negative and hateful nation?  I hope not, but some days, I wonder.  For now though, I agree with others here that if a Republican is elected President next fall, we will be engaged in some military conflict somewhere during that person's first term.  Hope I'm wrong, but the past track record for GOP Presidents doesn't look very promising.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I appreciate about President Obama's time in office is that he campaigned about ending U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for the most part, he delivered on that.  True, the U.S. still has a presence in both countries, but it's nothing like it was when he was first inaugurated.  After a while, I got tired, angry, and depressed about seeing a steady stream of flag-draped coffins arriving at Dover AFB.  Fortunately, that has pretty much stopped.  While President Bush's foray into Iraq was not justified in my book, I thought our invasion of Afghanistan was the right call, but I also thought that our time there had to be limited to 7 or 8 years.  If the Soviets couldn't impose its will on the Afghan people after 15 years of occupation, why on earth would an American government think it could do better?  To be fair, Donald Trump stated in the Las Vegas debate that the U.S. should not engage in a large-scale military presence in the Middle East, since the 4 trillion dollars spent by us since 2001 could have been better used for things here like hospitals, education, roads and bridges, and other social services.  Of course, the world has changed quite a bit in the last 15 years; not just technologically, but in people's attitudes about the issues of the day--are we becoming a more negative and hateful nation?  I hope not, but some days, I wonder.  For now though, I agree with others here that if a Republican is elected President next fall, we will be engaged in some military conflict somewhere during that person's first term.  Hope I'm wrong, but the past track record for GOP Presidents doesn't look very promising.

If I am correct, the British also tried to impose their will on Afghanistan without any success.

As for Trump, he wants to bomb and engage in other war activities in the Middle East.  As is typical of what he says, he contradicts himself and makes no sense.  Not to mention, his "military plans" are totally impossible to realize.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am correct, the British also tried to impose their will on Afghanistan without any success.

As for Trump, he wants to bomb and engage in other war activities in the Middle East.  As is typical of what he says, he contradicts himself and makes no sense.  Not to mention, his "military plans" are totally impossible to realize.

But most people watching the debates don't realize that he makes no sense. Image is everything to them, and his bombast obscures what he is saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But most people watching the debates don't realize that he makes no sense. Image is everything to them, and his bombast obscures what he is saying.

Just like a couple of guys in Italy and Germany about 70 years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

"Those CNBC moderators in last October’s Republican debate were just way too mean, wanting Republican presidential candidates to answer questions about stuff like policy, and to explain some of the things they said about stuff like policy, and about each other. The Republican National Committee can't have any of that, so they've decided they just won't play with NBC anymore."

 

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/1/19/1471835/-RNC-is-taking-its-ball-and-going-home-No-more-NBC-debates?detail=facebook

 

:rolleyes:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

"Marcobot" strikes again....

"You can watch the clip

. He begins by complaining about the difficulties of raising children “in the 21st century” in light of “the values they try to ram down our throats.” And then, moments later, the rattled senator said nearly the same thing, complaining once more about how hard it’s become to raise children “in the 21st century” because of “the values they try to ram down our throats.”
 
If you watch the clip, pay particular attention to the 0:26 mark, when Rubio actually pauses. He seems to realize that he’s stuck, once again repeating the exact same talking point, but he was unable to break free of the script."
 
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what's with Ben Carson?

He wants a single tax rate for everyone.  Even the poor should pay that rate.  Ben thinks it will make them feel better to contribute.  Shades of King John and Sir Guy stringing people up?

Refugees in Syria don't really want to leave.  He's been there for five minutes so he knows.  They're happy where they are.

Asked if bankers found guilty of fraud in 2008 should not only pay fines but face criminal charges Carson says we need to do away with banking regulations altogether.

And that was just one of the candidates!

 

Even Kasich the other day boasted how he did away with 'regulations' when he was Governor.  But aren't 'regulations' to protect joe citizen from things like Flint, Michigan or banks hosing the little guy?  Am I missing something here?  Are the great unwashed in America that dumb that they think the GOP is fighting for them?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Way more than you will ever know, an encyclopedia wouldn't cover everything.

 

Enlighten me.  Even a sentence or two from your encyclopedia will do.

I'm anxious to hear how ridiculous you will sound.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...