|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
Whatever happened to the Obama we saw in 2008? The one that touted bipartisanship and a new different kind of politics?
The Republicans happened.
The Republicans continually vote "No", "No", "No" on everything that comes before Congress. The only thing they are willing to say "Yes" to is their pay raises.
Obama has reached across the isle and many of the bills he has proposed have been changed after making concessions to the Republicans to get the bills passed. After the bills have had concessions made for the Republicans, the Republicans (sorry, I should say the Party of No) votes - you guessed it - "No".
Obama is trying to be bipartisan. The fact is though, that Republicans don't want anything. They are nihilists. Even after getting provisions they want into bills, they continue to vote "No".
So, if you want something to remember.
Teabaggers & Republicans = Nihilists
So where's the list of bills that he reached across the aisle for? And was this before or after the Democrats had full control of Congress?
And you shouldn't be calling out the Republicans for doing this because the Democrats did the exact same thing to Bush when he was in office and Republicans had a smaller control of Congress. The game of saying NO NO No swings both ways just as well as it does with the President reaching across the aisle for which Bush is guilty of as well.. But then again Bush never ran on a strong platform of Bi-Partisanship and clamored on about it in speeches..
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png) "Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Would anyone outside of media agitators have the nerve to declare that either party has any real integrity?
And despite this knowledge ... we take sides and vote for one of them.
You and I may fundamentally disagree on a lot of things, but I couldn't agree with you more on your post.
Not only do we take sides, we do it so blindly, argue vehemently against the other side, and refuse to see our own side has failed as well.
Furthermore, while we are busy ripping each other apart, the SOB's are robbing us blind..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147 |
CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented
January 11, 2010
In his first year in office, President Obama did better even than legendary arm-twister Lyndon Johnson in winning congressional votes on issues where he took a position, a Congressional Quarterly study finds.
The new CQ study gives Obama a higher mark than any other president since it began scoring presidential success rates in Congress more than five decades ago. And that was in a year where Obama tackled how to deal with Afghanistan, Iraq, an expanding terrorist threat, the economic crisis and battles over health care.
Unprecedented Success Rate
Obama has been no different from his predecessors in that he's always ready to send a firm message to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue as he "urges members of Congress" to come together and act. All presidents demand specific action by Congress — or at least they ask for it. But when you look at the votes of 2009 in which Obama made his preference clear, his success rate was unprecedented, according to John Cranford of Congressional Quarterly.
"His success was 96.7 percent on all the votes where we said he had a clear position in both the House and the Senate. That's an extraordinary number," Cranford says.
The previous high scores were held by Lyndon Johnson in 1965, with 93 percent, and Dwight Eisenhower, who scored 89 percent in 1953. Cranford notes that George W. Bush's score hit the high 80s in 2001, the year of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. But Obama surpassed them all, Cranford says.
Presidential Success
On roll-call votes where the president had a clear position, what percentage of the time did Congress support the president's position?
Source: Congressional Quarterly
Credit: Nelson Hsu/NPR
He Picked His Battles
A major reason for Obama's record high score this year: Democrats took away a significant number of seats from Republicans in the 2006 and 2008 elections, resulting in big majorities in the House and Senate for the president's party.
Part Two: Party Unity
CQ: 2009 Was The Most Partisan Year Ever
Jan. 11, 2010
But Sarah Binder, a congressional analyst at the Brookings Institution, says there's another key reason he scored so well. She says he only took an official position on issues that were really important to him — those that he knew he had a very good chance of winning. He picked his battles carefully.
"He can do that because he's been in the Senate, his staff has been in the House and he understands the process here. They are consummate congressional insiders in understanding how this works," Binder says.
Binder says the intense partisanship in Congress these days, a condition underlined in a separate CQ vote study, meant that Democrats were more likely to rally around the president each and every time he asked them to — if only to deny the Republicans a victory.
The Downside Of Compromise
But another contributing factor here may prove more controversial for the president and his party. That's his willingness to negotiate and to compromise. For example, as much as the president said he wanted a public option as part of a health care bill, the final legislation won't have one. But that's not counted as a loss for the president under the scoring of this survey.
Such compromises have brought strong criticism from the liberal wing of the president's own party. But White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a veteran of Congress, says compromise has a long, long history — one that makes it a great part of the democratic process.
"The question is: Are you compromising a set of principles, or are you making adjustment in strategies, roads, that can still achieve the same objectives? And not every compromise is the same in weight," Emanuel says.
On health care, for example, the White House insists that compromise was the only way to get the necessary 60 votes in the U.S. Senate.
Emanuel also cautions that having the president score so high on votes where he took a stand is not at all the same thing as having the White House get everything it wanted.
It will get tougher for the president in Congress this year, as more and more members of Congress look to their own re-election. Many are running in districts that voted for Republican John McCain in the 2008 presidential election. And even other districts are far from safe for the Democratic Party.
web page
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,104
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,104 |
Gee, his success in passing his own legislation wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the Democrats are a super-majority and control both the House and the Senate would it?
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Not sure of the point of his success rate.. he has had a super majority for much of his term so far.... NPR has already established that the dems in congress vote as a unit more than any partisan group in history so they aren't standing up to him.... nobody can stop the democrats if they want to enact something.. it's not like he's building a coaliltion of support.. hell a lot of what he's passed he hasn't even had a majority of public opinion in his favor... but he passed it anyway.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
So where's the list of bills that he reached across the aisle for? And was this before or after the Democrats had full control of Congress?
And you shouldn't be calling out the Republicans for doing this because the Democrats did the exact same thing to Bush when he was in office and Republicans had a smaller control of Congress. The game of saying NO NO No swings both ways just as well as it does with the President reaching across the aisle for which Bush is guilty of as well.. But then again Bush never ran on a strong platform of Bi-Partisanship and clamored on about it in speeches..
Really? They did this to Bush? When he wanted war in Iraq. Few spoke out. When he wanted War in Afghanistan few, if any spoke out. Bush wanted the Patriot Act. It was passed with few speaking out against it. Bush wanted something, he got it. Especially early on in his Presidency.
The Republicans? They have been against EVERYTHING Obama has put before Congress. So, for you to sit here and say that the Democrats did it first. I suggest you actually READ something before you claim it.
Examples of things changed for Republicans? The so called "Obamacare". It had the public option. Republicans didn't want it. So, guess what was dropped? Hmmm ... I wonder. Dropped to get Republican votes. But, once again, what Republican voted for it? NOT A ONE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048 |
And I suspect that many in Congress will pay for their sins this November.
Further, I suspect that this is the way Obama wants it. Things are so screwed up now that he can run either as the guy who fixed it if things turn around ....... or as an opposition to the Republicans if they don't.
Nothing like throwing your Party to the wolves to manage your own long term prospects.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
When he wanted war in Iraq. Few spoke out. When he wanted War in Afghanistan few, if any spoke out. Bush wanted the Patriot Act. It was passed with few speaking out against it. Bush wanted something, he got it. Especially early on in his Presidency.
You are right Charlie, a lot of dems did vote for those things.. then they whined and cried about them later like they were held hostage and forced to vote for them..
At least the republicans have the decency to fight THEM before they get passed.. the spineless dems would vote for stuff and then complain about how bad it was later... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
You are right Charlie, a lot of dems did vote for those things.. then they whined and cried about them later like they were held hostage and forced to vote for them..
At least the republicans have the decency to fight THEM before they get passed.. the spineless dems would vote for stuff and then complain about how bad it was later...
No, that's not then having a spine. That is Republicans refusing to accept the fact that the majority of Americans chose the person that wasn't their guy. Republicans can't fathom that a majority of Americans wanted the other guy and not their guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
No, that's not then having a spine. That is Republicans refusing to accept the fact that the majority of Americans chose the person that wasn't their guy. Republicans can't fathom that a majority of Americans wanted the other guy and not their guy.
Where does America stand on a lot of these issues Obama has passed or wants passed?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
And when the Republicans wanted to slow down and pull back on the Fannie Mae's and the out of control Home Lending. They predicted the downfall of the Housing Market and the subsequent Crash. Where were the Democrats???? Solidly lined up saying No...No...No..No..No..No....Things are fine...they are going great... The next thing we know we are bailing out Banks and Auto companies and passing stimulus packages and spending more money that we don't have than we the money we spent (that we didn't have) in 8 years.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
Where does America stand on a lot of these issues Obama has passed or wants passed?
They are for it.
If they were against what Obama wanted to do. They would have voted against him.
Last I checked the poll was:
69,456,897 for Obama
59,934,814 against Obama
52.9% For
45.7% Against
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Where does America stand on a lot of these issues Obama has passed or wants passed?
They are for it.
If they were against what Obama wanted to do. They would have voted against him.
Last I checked the poll was:
69,456,897 for Obama
59,934,814 against Obama
52.9% For
45.7% Against
That is ridiculously backward thinking.
For all I know those numbers may even be close ... but that logic is illogical.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
That is ridiculously backward thinking.
For all I know those numbers may even be close ... but that logic is illogical.
No, it is very logical.
You knew what Obama's platform was.
Everyone knew what Obama's platform was.
If people were so against Obama reforming Healthcare they would have voted against him en masse. They did not. In fact, they voted FOR Obama en masse.
So, if "America" is so against what Obama was planning why did nearly 70 million American vote for him?
The majority of Americans wanted Obama to reform Healthcare. You are all right though, come November there will be a wake up call. Teabaggers and Republicans as well as all the other proto-fascists will realise that they are on the wrong side of history.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
That's absolutely ludicrous.
What's gotten into you lately? ... you're a bright guy.
Just because someone is elected to do something doesn't mean whatever they do is wanted by the majority.
If I promised people cake, and I pooped in a bag instead, does that mean that those people want that crap bag?
A lot of people that voted for him were into his message that he was going to give them single-payer. He didn't. Hence, many of those folks are now against this bill. Subtract them from your percentages. And on, and on, and on...
That thinking is beyond obtuse.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048 |
Charlie ..... so what you're saying is that the next time we elect a Republican President, the Congress should get in lock step with whatever he wants .....?
I'm just asking for later .... like 2 years from now ......
I vote for a Congressman or Senator expecting that he will represent ME and MY interests ..... not his Party's interests ...... or the opposition's interests for that matter.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
A lot of people that voted for him were into his message that he was going to give them single-payer. He didn't. Hence, many of those folks are now against this bill. Subtract them from your percentages. And on, and on, and on...
That thinking is beyond obtuse.
.
You want to talk about obtuse thinking.
Who are the people responsible for getting rid of the single payer bill? What made the "public option" get dropped.
It went to committee ... then it was dropped. Why did it go to that committee? Oh yea, it went there to compromise with the Republicans. To get Republican votes. It was dropped, like the Republicans wanted. Republicans still voted against it.
So, you are saying that people are angry at Obama for compromising with the Republicans and taking out the "Public Option" and will vote for the people that voted to "take it out"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
Charlie ..... so what you're saying is that the next time we elect a Republican President, the Congress should get in lock step with whatever he wants .....?
I'm just asking for later .... like 2 years from now ......
Not going to happen. The Republican party is moving more to the extreme as a result of the extreme-right wing Teabaggers. Nobody is going to vote for those proto-fascists.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048 |
That wasn't the question.
The question was .... if we elect a Republican President in 2 years will you be on these boards banging your fist on the table, proclaiming that the congress should just do whatever he wants them to do?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Charlie ..... so what you're saying is that the next time we elect a Republican President, the Congress should get in lock step with whatever he wants .....?
I'm just asking for later .... like 2 years from now ......
Not going to happen. The Republican party is moving more to the extreme as a result of the extreme-right wing Teabaggers. Nobody is going to vote for those proto-fascists.
You heard it here first folks, we will NEVER have another Republican president. now if we can get the people to see the Dems are no better then amybe we can start to correct this mess with a third party president.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
So, you are saying that people are angry at Obama for compromising with the Republicans and taking out the "Public Option" and will vote for the people that voted to "take it out"?
Voting no in this bill does not equate with voting 'yes' for the GOP.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
I say we vote on sending Charlie to a Chinese labor camp, if we can get at least 51% of America to agree that it's a good idea, he will go willingly right?
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,230 |
Quote:
Voting no in this bill does not equate with voting 'yes' for the GOP.
Really? That's not what I'm seeing here.
Everyone on this board is proclaiming that Obama is not going to be President in two years because of "Obamacare" as they call it.
What is the Republican's (or should I say Teabaggers) plan?
Well, looking at their speaches.
1. Get rid of everything Obama signed into law
2. Get rid of all taxes
3. Impose a 31% sales tax Just ask Rick Barber
4. Go to war with Iran McCain and Palin: Iran is the enemy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
Really? That's not what I'm seeing here.
Yes we can see you don't have the capacity to understand that....
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
That is ridiculously backward thinking.
For all I know those numbers may even be close ... but that logic is illogical.
No, it is very logical.
You knew what Obama's platform was.
Everyone knew what Obama's platform was.
If people were so against Obama reforming Healthcare they would have voted against him en masse. They did not. In fact, they voted FOR Obama en masse.
So, if "America" is so against what Obama was planning why did nearly 70 million American vote for him?
The majority of Americans wanted Obama to reform Healthcare. You are all right though, come November there will be a wake up call. Teabaggers and Republicans as well as all the other proto-fascists will realise that they are on the wrong side of history.
Not everyone voted for Obama just for the healthcare... Heck a lot of them may have disliked his healthcare plan but just thought Obama was better than McCain.. People normally do not get elected or not elected based on only one platform issue but as a whole of all their platform issues...
And as far as Obama as Obama dropping the public option to gain Republican support.. he did not do that to be bi-partisan, he did that because he NEEDED to to ram his healthcare plan through..
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048 |
Most of the people I know who voted for Obama wanted a change from what we had. Fair or unfair, McCain was seen as a continuation of what we had. I was out the other night and spoke with a friend of mine who was a vehement Obama supporter .... and a tremendous Bush basher. I asked her how that change thing was working out and she gave me this dirty look and said ...... and I quote . ....... "I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I wish we had Bush back. At least we knew what he was going to screw up." lol She went on about how Obama seemed intent on screwing up everything. I wanted to say "I told you so" ..... but it just didn't seem a very nice thing to do ...... plus, with my back, I can't run that fast. 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I watched the first 2 minutes of the McCain bashing video.. and it's hard to believe that somebody who so adamently defends Sherrod like you do will post a video with that many things flagrantly misused and taken out of context.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Most of the people I know who voted for Obama wanted a change from what we had.
Fair or unfair, McCain was seen as a continuation of what we had.
I was out the other night and spoke with a friend of mine who was a vehement Obama supporter .... and a tremendous Bush basher.
I asked her how that change thing was working out and she gave me this dirty look and said ...... and I quote . ....... "I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I wish we had Bush back. At least we knew what he was going to screw up." lol She went on about how Obama seemed intent on screwing up everything.
I wanted to say "I told you so" ..... but it just didn't seem a very nice thing to do ...... plus, with my back, I can't run that fast.
McCain wasn't a good option either in 2008.. He's a shell of his former self and talks out of both sides of his mouth.. In 2007, he was all for granting illegal aliens amnesty and now in 2010 he's trying to act tough on illegal aliens and sadly the AZ voters are falling for it... He's just been flip-flopping away...
Hopefully, there is a better candidate in 2012 against Obama.. within any party out there..
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,956
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,956 |
Quote:
Not going to happen. The Republican party is moving more to the extreme as a result of the extreme-right wing Teabaggers. Nobody is going to vote for those proto-fascists.
What's hilarious is the, as you call them "tea baggers" - which is offensive when you get down to it, but you know that anyway which is why you use that term - what's hilarious is how scared you and the O admin. are of the TEA party. (see - common decency would dictate that you use the proper term - but I guess you're juvenile enough to try to denounce, or ATTEMPT to denounce the TEA party by using a slang sexual term - way to show yourself as being mature)
Why are you so scared of the TEA Party? Hell, it's loosely coordinated at best. But what it IS is people that have had enough.
You guys love to berate FOX news. The TEA Party..........what you don't realize is how much of America supports them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,445
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,445 |
Quote:
The TEA Party..........what you don't realize is how much of America supports them.
Not what I had in mind when I was thinking about how badly we needed a third party to emerge.
I'll definitely be hanging my hat with the Libertarian crowd, most likely.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
I'm not saying the tea party is going to turn into a viable third party but long ago when everybody was begging for a third party I kept asking people why they were so sure that a third party was going to come from the center.. it makes more sense for a third party to come from the far left or far right... just saying.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
Quote:
What's hilarious is the, as you call them "tea baggers" - which is offensive when you get down to it, but you know that anyway which is why you use that term
Maybe we should refer to them as "salad tossers", .I mean there nose is already between Obamas cheeks.....that's not offensive is it? But it doesn't surprise me, the left always turns to namecalling when they can't win the arguement.
Last edited by eryze19akaBT58; 07/23/10 06:51 PM.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
What's hilarious is the, as you call them "tea baggers" - which is offensive when you get down to it, but you know that anyway which is why you use that term
Maybe we should refer to them as "salad tossers", .I mean there nose is already between Obamas cheeks.....that's not offensive is it? But it doesn't surprise me, the left always turns to namecalling when they can't win the arguement.
Obviously, namecalling is restricted to one side.
I really wish folks would wake up and realize their willingness to serve as pawns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,048 |
Both phrases have sexual connotations, and ... to me ... neither is appropriate.
I don't make those rules though.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Quote:
Furthermore, while we are busy ripping each other apart, the SOB's are robbing us blind..
Exactamundo, and the people who are constantly pointing fingers are too stupid to see it for what it is.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Quote:
I really wish folks would wake up and realize their willingness to serve as pawns.
Its a little like rooting for the Browns the last 10 years. Yeah they suck but they're my team and things will be better. 
BTW I completely agree with you but realistically I see it it as the only game in town and we're stuck with it. Whats going to happen when folks wake up? 
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum The Tale of Two Obamas...
|
|
