so you want to vote for this witch?....great for you...

[Soonerjeepman]

Corporations and businesses don't create jobs...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nbFYP3xB6k


if you like your plan you can keep it...THIS IS NOT GOV RUN HEALTH care...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D74ZO082G8Q

[dwarthog]

She's a peach isn't she?

The lemmings are lined up, practically salivating to be her fools.

[olevetonahill]

Sure Ima vote for her, we need another Failed ****ing social experiment!

[FaninAma]

Words are cheap. She and her husband are both bought and paid for by big banks and corporations. Go back and review under which administration the big banks were really unleashed to reap windfall profits.

[badger]

so you want to vote for this witch?
I just assume you're referring to our current state superintendent. No worries, we already ousted her in the primary. Alas, she gets to stick around till the next one's elected in. I know it can be confusing, but her time's nearly up. Stop trying to dump water on her; Wizard of Oz is a fairy tale :P

[TAFBSooner]

Words are cheap. She and her husband are both bought and paid for by big banks and corporations. Go back and review under which administration the big banks were really unleashed to reap windfall profits.

You'd be mad if I called you a liberal for this post. So I will stick with "astute observer."

[TAFBSooner]

Corporations and businesses don't create jobs...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nbFYP3xB6k


if you like your plan you can keep it...THIS IS NOT GOV RUN HEALTH care...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D74ZO082G8Q

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

[okie52]

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

Paul, Sanders and Warren...are they in the same universe?

[TAFBSooner]

Paul, Sanders and Warren...are they in the same universe?

Not only the same universe, they are in the same dirty line of work.

Rand has at least some of the time claimed to be against our foreign adventurism. That is all. I'd really like not to have to choose between Hillary and Rand Paul.

So with my luck that will be the 2016 race.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

She's a peach isn't she?

The lemmings are lined up, practically salivating to be her fools.they want der schlickmeister back onto the throne. simple as that.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Paul, Sanders and Warren...are they in the same universe?Sanders and Warren are.

[okie52]

Not only the same universe, they are in the same dirty line of work.

Rand has at least some of the time claimed to be against our foreign adventurism. That is all. I'd really like not to have to choose between Hillary and Rand Paul.

So with my luck that will be the 2016 race.

So your primary focus is foreign policy? Because beyond "interventionism" I can't put Sanders and Warren in the same universe with Paul.

[TAFBSooner]

they want der schlickmeister back onto the throne. simple as that.

It's not who is on the throne that matters, but who's on the Small Council (Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz; or Samantha Power and Susan Rice). So you would be right to believe that BillC will be back in the thick of things again.

[TAFBSooner]

So your primary focus is foreign policy? Because beyond "interventionism" I can't put Sanders and Warren in the same universe with Paul.

I think foreign policy is pretty d@#m important, though certainly not the only thing. Our founding fathers were wise beyond our pale ken in warning us against foreign intervention. Foreign wars and standing armies had always led and would always lead to tyranny, they warned us.

And so they have.

[okie52]

I think foreign policy is pretty d@#m important, though certainly not the only thing. Our founding fathers were wise beyond our pale ken in warning us against foreign intervention. Foreign wars and standing armies had always led and would always lead to tyranny, they warned us.

And so they have.

I couldn't say I was absolutely non interventionist but I would like it greatly reduced and for us to be a whole lot smarter about those rare occasions where intervention might be necessary.

Beyond that issue you have a self declared socialist, a far lefty and a libertarian (mostly)...

[TAFBSooner]

I couldn't say I was absolutely non interventionist but I would like it greatly reduced and for us to be a whole lot smarter about those rare occasions where intervention might be necessary.

Beyond that issue you have a self declared socialist, a far lefty and a libertarian (mostly)...

Sander's "socialist" self-label doesn't scare me. If I thought he had any inkling of nationalizing the means of production I would change my mind, but I don't think he really intenda anything like that. I will cop to not researching him a lot on that.

I am (mostly) a "lefty."

I agree with libertarians on issues of personal freedom.

I disagree when they scale that concept up to giving corporations free reign over the rest of us. They use phrases like "by force of arms" when talking about government coercion of behavior. The fault in their logic is that mass economic power also enables coercion, in this case by the monopoly or oligopoly.

So, a libertarian (mostly) is worth considering if the other choice was Hillary, who voted for Iraq 2.0, AND who, as astute observer Fan pointed out, is in bed with the Wall Street giant banks and investment companies.

PS - I am not absolutely non-interventionist either. I can justify three of our wars: the Revolution, the Civil War, and WWII (although it wouldn't have been a thing without WWI which was NOT justified). BTW, "my side" won all three of those without the need for large standing armies.

[okie52]

Sander's "socialist" self-label doesn't scare me. If I thought he had any inkling of nationalizing the means of production I would change my mind, but I don't think he really intenda anything like that. I will cop to not researching him a lot on that.

I am (mostly) a "lefty."

I agree with libertarians on issues of personal freedom.

I disagree when they scale that concept up to giving corporations free reign over the rest of us. They use phrases like "by force of arms" when talking about government coercion of behavior. The fault in their logic is that mass economic power also enables coercion, in this case by the monopoly or oligopoly.

So, a libertarian (mostly) is worth considering if the other choice was Hillary, who voted for Iraq 2.0, AND who, as astute observer Fan pointed out, is in bed with the Wall Street giant banks and investment companies.

PS - I am not absolutely non-interventionist either. I can justify three of our wars: the Revolution, the Civil War, and WWII (although it wouldn't have been a thing without WWI which was NOT justified). BTW, "my side" won all three of those without the need for large standing armies.

I don't want to have to vote for someone in the hopes that he/she will be "shackled" by a more conservative congress (even if that means lefty congressmen that are to the right of sanders or even warren) to keep him/her from pursuing socialist economic policies. It may be the reality but certainly not a choice I would want to have to make.

I hate to label myself as a fiscal conservative, social liberal because that just depends on whose political spectrum you use. But I'm probably closer to that description than other generalizations.

I don't think corps should have free reign but I generally favor pro business positions. However, I don't think Wall Street should get a pass on fiscal improprieties nor do I think that corporations/businesses should dictate our border security or citizenry...particularly at tax payer expense. I am not a fan of the US Chamber of Commerce.

I can agree with 2 of your wars but strongly disagree about WWI as to our intervention...but maybe we have already had that discussion. Nonetheless, there is truth that the heavy handed armistice agreement was a partial cause to WWII. The Civil War? The "War of Northern Aggression"...heh heh...I just had to throw that in there. From a preservation of the Union perspective that war would be justified.

We've had other "interventions" that were correct...like Tripoli and the Barbary Wars for one. But, like many Americans, I feel the title and unwanted responsibility of being the world's police force illustrates a dated and costly foreign policy.

[TAFBSooner]

I don't want to have to vote for someone in the hopes that he/she will be "shackled" by a more conservative congress (even if that means lefty congressmen that are to the right of sanders or even warren) to keep him/her from pursuing socialist economic policies. It may be the reality but certainly not a choice I would want to have to make.

That's funny, because if I were to vote for Rand Paul, I would have to use similar logic: he can't change the whole economic system by himself, but as president he would be in the most powerful position to keep us out of war.

That is, if any president really has freedom of action if the powers that be want a war.

[Soonerjeepman]

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

nope...she said her hubby bill raised minimum wages and so did she...so it didn't kill jobs like everyone said it would....I will say it cut off after she said that corporations and business don't create jobs...she was blasting "trickle down economics"...

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.


nope. she never mentioned Customers. she mentioned how govt raising minimum wage would create jobs/ govt creates jobs.

[TAFBSooner]

nope. she never mentioned Customers. she mentioned how govt raising minimum wage would create jobs/ govt creates jobs.

Customers create jobs. Businesses/corporations and government can channel and organize supply, demand, creativity, and other economic factors, but if there is no demand out there, there will be no jobs (MOL).

[Sooner8th]

Customers create jobs. Businesses/corporations and government can channel and organize supply, demand, creativity, and other economic factors, but if there is no demand out there, there will be no jobs (MOL).

So you do get it, why do you keep voting republican then?

[olevetonahill]

Hey KC hes One of YOU LOL Ya Dumas!:highly_amused:

[Sooner8th]

Hey KC hes One of YOU LOL Ya Dumas!:highly_amused:

My bad.

TAFBSooner my deepest and most sincere apologies, calling someone a republican is the most horrific, appalling, disgusting, revolting and repulsive or insults and I truly apologize.

[okie52]

Customers create jobs. Businesses/corporations and government can channel and organize supply, demand, creativity, and other economic factors, but if there is no demand out there, there will be no jobs (MOL).

Is this the Obama "you didn't build that" speech with a Hillary twist? Maybe she's still having flashbacks to her war days in Bosnia.

[TAFBSooner]

My bad.

TAFBSooner my deepest and most sincere apologies, calling someone a republican is the most horrific, appalling, disgusting, revolting and repulsive or insults and I truly apologize.

I have to disagree. "Republican" is not even in the bottom ten. After all, Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were Republicans. And there have been decent Republicans in living memory.

Just don't call me Les Miles, or there will be blood.:highly_amused:

[olevetonahill]

I have to disagree. "Republican" is not even in the bottom ten. After all, Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were Republicans. And there have been decent Republicans in living memory.

Just don't call me Les Miles, or there will be blood.:highly_amused:

Aint it against the law to smack Little retards around?

[TAFBSooner]

Is this the Obama "you didn't build that" speech with a Hillary twist? Maybe she's still having flashbacks to her war days in Bosnia.

The "you didn't build that" meme doesn't capture the concept. It's more like "you didn't build that by yourself." People that build successful, useful companies depend on a whole network of other people, including employees, customers, suppliers, and yes, some that work in government. Those who are skilled in orchestrating that network to buld a useful business deserve our admiration, and they deserve to be well-paid for what they do. They DON'T deserve to have more political power than the rest of us.

[Sooner8th]

The "you didn't build that" meme doesn't capture the concept. It's more like "you didn't build that by yourself." People that build successful, useful companies depend on a whole network of other people, including employees, customers, suppliers, and yes, some that work in government. Those who are skilled in orchestrating that network to buld a useful business deserve our admiration, and they deserve to be well-paid for what they do. They DON'T deserve to have more political power than the rest of us.

Obama was talking about they didn't build that roads that their goods were delivered on. Warren in a different speech added you didn't educate the people who are working for you, making you rich.

This was really f'ing stupid thing for Hillary say, I understand where she was going, but she didn't tie it together. If she hired a speech writer for that, fire them, if she didn't, hire one. The real problem is instead of debating why businesses and corporations create jobs - tax, regulations cuts and more tax cuts for the wealthy or raising the minimum wage, having more unions and eliminating outsourcing being subsidized through the tax code, we are now going to argue about who creates jobs.

[Sooner8th]

I have to disagree. "Republican" is not even in the bottom ten. After all, Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt were Republicans. And there have been decent Republicans in living memory.

Just don't call me Les Miles, or there will be blood.:highly_amused:

It was sarcasm........ If I can ask, who are the "decent Republicans in living memory"?

[dwarthog]

The "you didn't build that" meme doesn't capture the concept. It's more like "you didn't build that by yourself." People that build successful, useful companies depend on a whole network of other people, including employees, customers, suppliers, and yes, some that work in government. Those who are skilled in orchestrating that network to buld a useful business deserve our admiration, and they deserve to be well-paid for what they do. They DON'T deserve to have more political power than the rest of us.

It's interesting to see all of the people "who helped" come forward where there is success and proclaim how they were key and are nowhere to be found when something doesn't work or fails.

Politicians create the power of the few when they go sticking their hands out for "donations" from the few with the deep pockets.

[TAFBSooner]

It was sarcasm........ If I can ask, who are the "decent Republicans in living memory"?

Jim Jeffords. Dwight Eisenhower. Including Ike is stretching the point. I remember seeing his picture in the newspaper.

My parents. Hell, me (by voting pattern anyway) before 1989. A lot of good people I work with.

. . .

[TAFBSooner]

It's interesting to see all of the people "who helped" come forward where there is success and proclaim how they were key and are nowhere to be found when something doesn't work or fails.

Maybe because they were already laid off? Unfortunately, that's been turned on its head. Now the 1% have "success" in the stock market when they lay people off.


Politicians create the power of the few when they go sticking their hands out for "donations" from the few with the deep pockets.

So I suppose you also blame hookers and let the johns off scot-free? 'Cause the political donation process is about the same thing, only scaled way up in the $$$ involved and the number of people hurt.

[dwarthog]

Maybe because they were already laid off? Unfortunately, that's been turned on its head. Now the 1% have "success" in the stock market when they lay people off.



So I suppose you also blame hookers and let the johns off scot-free? 'Cause the political donation process is about the same thing, only scaled way up in the $$$ involved and the number of people hurt.

The point was who claims to be part of or key to business successes. You mentioned the infrastructure required for a venture to be successful on some scale. That's different than an investor reaping rewards on some investment in an artificially inflated market and somewhat of a tangent to the point you were making initially.

The hooker analogy is interesting, not sure how it's an apples to apples comparison to a politician grubbing for cash out of a rich person pocket.

Arguably, hookers provide a real service on a transactional basis where both parties are satisfied at the conclusion of the transaction. I'll let you worry about the chicken and egg discussion on this one. It's of no concern to me.

Lamenting that a "few rich people" have more power than others is fairly easy to resolve, politicians shouldn't be begging money from people/orgs/places which ultimately requires them to "see that donors" point of view when running government.

[Sooner8th]

Jim Jeffords. Dwight Eisenhower. Including Ike is stretching the point. I remember seeing his picture in the newspaper.

My parents. Hell, me (by voting pattern anyway) before 1989. A lot of good people I work with.

. . .

You are stretching it, jeffords dropped out of rebpub and became an I caucusing with dems, Ike and his do nothing run by big business 2.5% gdp term. You haven't been in 25 yrs. Good people don't vote republican.

[TAFBSooner]

The hooker analogy is interesting, not sure how it's an apples to apples comparison to a politician grubbing for cash out of a rich person pocket.

Arguably, hookers provide a real service on a transactional basis where both parties are satisfied at the conclusion of the transaction. I'll let you worry about the chicken and egg discussion on this one. It's of no concern to me.

Lamenting that a "few rich people" have more power than others is fairly easy to resolve, politicians shouldn't be begging money from people/orgs/places which ultimately requires them to "see that donors" point of view when running government.

You see the hooker/john transaction as at least in the ballpark of being mutually beneficial, yet you seem to think of the politician/donor situation as being one-sided, or even somehow involuntary. Explain.

[TAFBSooner]

You are stretching it, jeffords dropped out of rebpub and became an I caucusing with dems,

OK, I will take your comments to refer to "Republians since 2001."


Ike and his do nothing run by big business 2.5% gdp term.

Interstate Highway system (and I know all the problems that's caused IN HINDSIGHT. At the time it was a major, high-payoff investment in infrastructure, something that government did well.). NASA. Didn't start any major wars. Yah, Vietnam. Hindsight again. And I said decent, not great.


You haven't been in 25 yrs. Good people don't vote republican.

I strongly disagree with you there.

1 - There is more to life than politics.
2 - People have different reasons that lead to their political choices. They may be wrong, but that doesn't make them not good people.
3 - Very little is THAT black and white. Politics is not even close to being that black and white.

4 - Most important, I personally know good people who vote Republican.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

dang this thread really brings out the iggies.

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

OK, I will take your comments to refer to "Republians since 2001."



Interstate Highway system (and I know all the problems that's caused IN HINDSIGHT. At the time it was a major, high-payoff investment in infrastructure, something that government did well.). NASA. Didn't start any major wars. Yah, Vietnam. Hindsight again. And I said decent, not great.



I strongly disagree with you there.

1 - There is more to life than politics.
2 - People have different reasons that lead to their political choices. They may be wrong, but that doesn't make them not good people.
3 - Very little is THAT black and white. Politics is not even close to being that black and white.

4 - Most important, I personally know good people who vote Republican.



TAFB, this may be the best post i've seen in a very long time. Although you and i may disagree on politics, I respect what you say. What you have stated here is something that 8th refuses to or will ever grasp. I have many many friends that do not share the same political beliefs as I, but we treat one another with respect--because we are decent people. Thank you for this post. 8th could learn a lesson from you.

[dwarthog]

You see the hooker/john transaction as at least in the ballpark of being mutually beneficial, yet you seem to think of the politician/donor situation as being one-sided, or even somehow involuntary. Explain.

I don't see the politician/donor relationship as involuntary.

I do see as an artifact of the relationship between a politician and deep pocketed individual/group/org an expectation they'll be getting some return on their investment, either short term or long. Maybe even both.

[okie52]

You are stretching it, jeffords dropped out of rebpub and became an I caucusing with dems, Ike and his do nothing run by big business 2.5% gdp term. You haven't been in 25 yrs. Good people don't vote republican.

Governor Cuomo...is that you?

[TAFBSooner]

I don't see the politician/donor relationship as involuntary.

I do see as an artifact of the relationship between a politician and deep pocketed individual/group/org an expectation they'll be getting some return on their investment, either short term or long. Maybe even both.

The donor gets influence, which you and I are unable to access. The pols get the money they need to run their continual campaigns, minus a percentage for personal slush.

I take from that fact that we ought to be about reducing the influence of money in politics. What do you think should be done about it? Since both the pols and the donors benefit from the current system, it will be danged hard to change anything.

[Sooner8th]

OK, I will take your comments to refer to "Republians since 2001."



Interstate Highway system (and I know all the problems that's caused IN HINDSIGHT. At the time it was a major, high-payoff investment in infrastructure, something that government did well.). NASA. Didn't start any major wars. Yah, Vietnam. Hindsight again. And I said decent, not great.



I strongly disagree with you there.

1 - There is more to life than politics.
2 - People have different reasons that lead to their political choices. They may be wrong, but that doesn't make them not good people.
3 - Very little is THAT black and white. Politics is not even close to being that black and white.

4 - Most important, I personally know good people who vote Republican.

Ike did do some good things as you listed above. The problem I have with him is he was way to influenced by his group of golfing buddies. His 2.5% gdp average yearly growth is pretty weak given the circumstances we were in. Got us out of korea, but left us with two korea's.

As for good people don't vote republican, that is mostly tongue in cheek. Most of my friends are conservatives who vote Republican. We don't talk politics much.

[Sooner8th]

TAFB, this may be the best post i've seen in a very long time. Although you and i may disagree on politics, I respect what you say. What you have stated here is something that 8th refuses to or will ever grasp. I have many many friends that do not share the same political beliefs as I, but we treat one another with respect--because we are decent people. Thank you for this post. 8th could learn a lesson from you.

Remember the truce I tried? It was not me who broke it..........

[SoonerorLater]

Remember the truce I tried? It was not me who broke it..........

Your strident manner makes almost any discourse with you painful.

[ouwasp]

The discouraging thing is this: HRC already has the Left Coast and the People's Republic of New England in the bag. Plus most any minority voter and all the females enamored with having the first woman president will march in lockstep to the polls, all the while only having the faintest idea about the structure and function of our federal government. But they'll get their girl elected.

Then the title of the book Barbara Olson wrote about HRC all those years ago will really become ominous: Hell To Pay.

Wonder who's gonna pay that bill?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The discouraging thing is this: The Democrat Party already has the Left Coast and the People's Republic of New England in the bag. Plus most any minority voter and all the females enamored with having the first woman president will march in lockstep to the polls, all the while only having the faintest idea about the structure and function of our federal government. But they'll get their girl elected.

Then the title of the book Barbara Olson wrote about HRC all those years ago will really become ominous: Hell To Pay.

Wonder who's gonna pay that bill?FIFY

[Sooner8th]

Your strident manner makes almost any discourse with you painful.

So, it's my fault you people are a bunch of dumbass hillbillies.

I get it.

[olevetonahill]

Remember the truce I tried? It was not me who broke it..........


So, it's my fault you people are a bunch of dumbass hillbillies.

I get it.
Nope Ya Moran ! Its your fault for coming out the gate after 2 years of Hiding and being a Dick head!

[Sooner8th]

Nope Ya Moran ! Its your fault for coming out the gate after 2 years of Hiding and being a Dick head!

Oh...olvet keep telling yourself that.

[olevetonahill]

Oh...olvet keep telling yourself that.

really? You joined this Board well over 2 years ago!
Then just a few months ago you Came out swinging!
Tell me where Im wrong slick dude?

[SoonerorLater]

So, it's my fault you people are a bunch of dumbass hillbillies.

I get it.

No it's your fault you're a dyspeptic troll.

[REDREX]

really? You joined this Board well over 2 years ago!
Then just a few months ago you Came out swinging!
Tell me where Im wrong slick dude?---I still think he is that old fool Gaffer that used to post here

[okie52]

---I still think he is that old fool Gaffer that used to post here

Heh heh...Gaffer, Syberite, Nomad....

[Soonerjeepman]

The discouraging thing is this: HRC already has the Left Coast and the People's Republic of New England in the bag. Plus most any minority voter and all the females enamored with having the first woman president will march in lockstep to the polls, all the while only having the faintest idea about the structure and function of our federal government. But they'll get their girl elected.

Then the title of the book Barbara Olson wrote about HRC all those years ago will really become ominous: Hell To Pay.

Wonder who's gonna pay that bill?

BINGO...

[REDREX]

Heh heh...Gaffer, Syberite, Nomad....---ETC---- All Liberal- gov't loving- atheists----Nice group

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

OK, I will take your comments to refer to "Republians since 2001."



Interstate Highway system (and I know all the problems that's caused IN HINDSIGHT. At the time it was a major, high-payoff investment in infrastructure, something that government did well.). NASA. Didn't start any major wars. Yah, Vietnam. Hindsight again. And I said decent, not great.



I strongly disagree with you there.

1 - There is more to life than politics.
2 - People have different reasons that lead to their political choices. They may be wrong, but that doesn't make them not good people.
3 - Very little is THAT black and white. Politics is not even close to being that black and white.

4 - Most important, I personally know good people who vote Republican.

Ike did do some good things as you listed above. The problem I have with him is he was way to influenced by his group of golfing buddies. His 2.5% gdp average yearly growth is pretty weak given the circumstances we were in. Got us out of korea, but left us with two korea's.

As for good people don't vote republican, that is mostly tongue in cheek. Most of my friends are conservatives who vote Republican. We don't talk politics much.

So that's why you come on here and be the dick that you are, because your "friends" would probably kick your *** if you talk to them the way you talk to people on this board. I'm sure if you called them ****ing hillbillies, they wouldn't be your friends anymore.

[olevetonahill]

So that's why you come on here and be the dick that you are, because your "friends" would probably kick your *** if you talk to them the way you talk to people on this board. I'm sure if you called them ****ing hillbillies, they wouldn't be your friends anymore.

I want him to come to the Ho-down next month. :highly_amused:

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

Com won Vet, you know as well as I do, he'd never show up. He would be revealing himself as the little bitch he really is, and then he wouldn't have a leg to stand on on this board.

I still don't understand why he wastes his time here. If he was genuinely civil, it would be one thing, but he isn't. He must love getting his hearty rate up. He'll maybe that's the only way he can!!:cool:

[olevetonahill]

Com won Vet, you know as well as I do, he'd never show up. He would be revealing himself as the little bitch he really is, and then he wouldn't have a leg to stand on on this board.

I still don't understand why he wastes his time here. If he was genuinely civil, it would be one thing, but he isn't. He must love getting his hearty rate up. He'll maybe that's the only way he can!!:cool:

But he would have so much fun.

[Sooner8th]

So that's why you come on here and be the dick that you are, because your "friends" would probably kick your *** if you talk to them the way you talk to people on this board. I'm sure if you called them ****ing hillbillies, they wouldn't be your friends anymore.

Shows just how ****ing stupid you are. We talked about politics last night and to a person, every last conservative is voting against brownback and roberts. That is why I don't calling them ****ing hillbillies, because they are not. Unlike you.

Tell me, hillbilly, what facts did I make up. You see a hillbilly makes a claim then refuses to back it up.

****ING HILLBILLY

[Sooner8th]

Com won Vet, you know as well as I do, he'd never show up. He would be revealing himself as the little bitch he really is, and then he wouldn't have a leg to stand on on this board.

I still don't understand why he wastes his time here. If he was genuinely civil, it would be one thing, but he isn't. He must love getting his hearty rate up. He'll maybe that's the only way he can!!:cool:

I WAS civil and you dumbasses couldn't help yourselves. You all had to start back in on me and I am not some limp-wristed, ***** *** liberal who thinks oh no I don't want to be like them. What I say is **** YOU and the horse you rode in on when you start to call me names.

Look through the threads and see insults directed at liberals and democrats. You are a typical thin skinned conservative republican. You can dish it, but you can't take it.

Tell me what facts I made up!

[Soonerjeepman]

voting against brownback and roberts.

lol and you didn't tell them to %uck off? you've said on here that pubs just vote against obama at every chance and that shows how stupid they are....good one.

[Sooner8th]

lol and you didn't tell them to %uck off? you've said on here that pubs just vote against obama at every chance and that shows how stupid they are....good one.

Why would I? We are voting the same way. You see, when a vast majority of pubs are told they are voting again obama, they grab their pitchforks and run to the polls, these guys aren't buying it this time. Not a one of them mentioned reid or obama, just talked about how worthless roberts and brownback are.

[Soonerjeepman]

Why would I? We are voting the same way. You see, when a vast majority of pubs are told they are voting again obama, they grab their pitchforks and run to the polls, these guys aren't buying it this time. Not a one of them mentioned reid or obama, just talked about how worthless roberts and brownback are.

disagree...I didn't vote for obama because of many of his positions on things I believe are important are not what I want. Isn't that what voting is all about? Good for your buddies that they want to vote against Roberts and Brownback...I know a few folks as well that voted for obama and now regret it. Guess we'll see.

[Sooner8th]

disagree...I didn't vote for obama because of many of his positions on things I believe are important are not what I want. Isn't that what voting is all about? Good for your buddies that they want to vote against Roberts and Brownback...I know a few folks as well that voted for obama and now regret it. Guess we'll see.

Well, vast majority of them might be overstating it on my part. The bottom line is that is all roberts is running on, nothing else. In a normal state, roberts would be 15-20 points down, but kansas is deep blood red and there is a very large chunk of republicans who just won't vote for anyone without a R behind their name.