Get out of my country!

1. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 11 years ago

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … 7fTsF5BiSM
   
   Argh I hate stupid.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Credence2posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well, Jaxson, nice plug, but you must be getting nervous because the Convention is resonating among so many and the message that Obama has been trying to get through rightwing static is coming thru all the same.. We have our stars such as Liz Warren and Bill Clinton, putting the issues and choices before the American people in plain english. The right wing is terrofied and all that you can offer is a buffoon video?

      replyreport
      1. 61

         American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         CRED
         
         Hi buddy how have you been? I haven't seen you in a while I hope all is well.
         
         While I agree with you that was a buffoon video, did you take a close look at it? Three of the people who answered questions were Democrats who are currently serving in the house of representatives.
         
         I particularly like the one made the comment that it's too late you can't change the platform, and yet today the Democrats changed platform.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Credence2posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Hi, AV, missed you, I have had to draw back a bit over the last few weeks and glad you are going strong, and regardless of the outcome of this contest, may the best man win!
            
            I missed the particular point you speak of, but I did hear the question about corporate profits. Of course we all have a right to profit as long as it is honest and not unfairly acquired at anyones expense.  I have spent more time on these forums and will keep my eye out for you when you start one.  Even as I may be adversarial relative to your or your audience, it is all good, believe me....

            replyreport
      2. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not all that worried, I still have faith in America.
         
         I saw the video, so I posted it. You make too much out of it.
         
         I am worried about Obama being re-elected... he doesn't know how to fix our economy... hasn't the slightest idea really. He's hypocritical at best, naive at worst.

         replyreport
      3. 50

         Doodleheadposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         The international banking cartel, controls THE FED.  The Fed is not part of the government.   The Fed is not a United States Agency.  The Fed is a private internatonal corporation whose shares are owned by ten internatonal banks including Bank of America, JP Morgan, and others.
         
         These banks control our congressmen and women with "favors". 
         
         Without going into detail about The Fed, let's just say the banking cartel cares not whether you vote for Obama or Romney.  They are both funded and controlled by the banks who want to bankdrupt this country and get it into the new world order.
         
         There is one candidate you ddn't hear a lot of as the banks own stock in the media and prevented you knowing about his agenda.
         
         it is not important you understand who the candidate was;  what is important that you understand the public is being "duped" into thinking we hae a choice.
         
         The banks have the votiing machines rigged.  All the banks want to make sure is you  don't vote for a third party who is not "owned" by the banks.
         
         Take that one to the bank.  Sad, but true.

         replyreport
   2. 68

      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Peter Schiff is an idiot. And his father is a "nutberger" in jail because he refused to pay income tax.
      
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S98_eMax9xo

      replyreport
   3. 93

      habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Oh, please tell me that's not real footage.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I sincerely hope it isn't...
         
         Either way, it's good for outrage, faux-outrage, or lolz... depending on your mood.

         replyreport
   4. 0

      Onusonusposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Ah greedy people.
      

      replyreport
      1. 80

         psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         But then they want the government to make abortion illegal, which is about as invasive as a government can get--regulating what happens inside a citizen's body.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Onusonusposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            And yet on the other side of the coin people want the government to fund abortions (An invasive destroyer of the human spirit) which would be government regulating what occurs inside a citizens body.

            replyreport
   5. 61

      Niteriterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You've disappointed me with this one, Jaxson. This is really beneath your abilities and otherwise good judgement.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Niteriter,
         
         There is no real, honest discussion to be had on these forums.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Niteriterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I hear ya, brother. But I do believe you have a gift you can use to help raise the standards. Chin up, chip up!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Lol... I just need a sign that says
               
               "If you are interested in serious discussion about real issues, rather than partisan fan-boy-isms, I'll be happy to oblige."

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  You'd have to start a whole new website!!

                  replyreport
   6. 72

      rhamsonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Wow! Everybody attending the DNC Convention was in favor of limiting corporate profits?
      
      Arggh! I hate propoganda.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Niteriterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I think the people being interviewed were just being polite. I don't think they were of the same mindset as the conniver with the microphone.
         
         I don't like it when smarmy professionals take advantage of good, everyday people.

         replyreport
         1. 72

            rhamsonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Methinks a little editing towards the right was afoot as they say.
            
            No one can limit the profits of these multi national corporations, It just is not in the constitution. We can however limit their access to political influence by taking the money out of the campaigns and votes on the floor.
            
            Term limits, publicly financed campaigns and lobby reform is the only hope we have. The only problem with acheiving this is that the people that represent us and in charge of making it happen are hard set against it.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Speaking of things that aren't in the Constitution, term limits.... Can't do it!

               replyreport
   7. 84

      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Jaxson, I saw the asininity of these people.    Anyone who studied economics or have the least amount of business sense, knows that businesses must make a profit in order for them to stay in business, jeez.    These people are totally -------------------(you put the appropriate word in).     Socialism and communism at its finest here, folks.   Why the stupid prejudice against the wealthy.  It is the wealthy people who have  businesses thus creating jobs for peple thus stimulating the economy.  K.I.S.S.  Well, I guess that these people want a socialistic and communistic "utopia".    Hmmmmmmmm, inverse logic at its very, very, very best!

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Niteriterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Aw, gm, why are you getting all paranoid on us? Socialism?
         
         Could we not give these folks (all except the very rabid!) a little slack and assume that "profit" to them is net profit... after expenses? And could we further assume that they are thinking of profits of the kind that characterized corporations like Enron? Just for the fun of it, give it a try.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            sen.sush23posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Niteriter, I agree. But when a forum thread begins with a declared intolerance for others' opinions ('Get out of my country') there is hardly much scope for a hypothetical discussion.
            
            Economic systems gradually evolve- as do societies. A society where business need not be conducted for excessive profits may soon become the mode of commerce, across the globe. It may be sci-fi at present, but sci-fi have turned true many times.
            
            Those meager and man-made concepts, which are actually perceptions, of any form of 'nationalism' (as been said in this forum, 'Get out of 'America') also may soon become quite redundant- it is actually becoming so - if you are careful enough to notice, though racism is raging in the news!
            
            However, I guess some people are really not ready and will feel threatened. Unfortunately, they feel threatened by a better form of society, but not really by things like Global Warming or Nuclear War-heads etc. etc.
            
            Did I go rambling away from the discussion? I hope the forum members will forgive me- anyway, I probably don't qualify to speak. I am not an American.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Niteriterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I just replied to you but it disappeared somehow. Essentially what I said was, Jaxson is really good at presenting an argument and I almost always find his arguments to be reasonable. I think he just got a little carried away with his heading this time.
               
               I believe free enterprise is good but that it needs to be regulated for the benefit of the societal whole. Business people can act like big boys on a playground if left unsupervised!

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  sen.sush23posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  ...liked the part about 'big boys on a playground.. left unsupervised'..so aptly stated..

                  replyreport
               2. 0

                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Nah, not carried away.
                  
                  I just gave up on real discussion here a while ago(ask MM, she was there when I broke, lol).
                  
                  Just trying to establish balance, when someone posts about something stupid Akin says, the force becomes unbalanced

                  replyreport
                  1. 80

                     Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     I am a witness, yes.
                     Not the cause of the break, I hope!
                     
                     
                     Probably not the best example, Jaxson.
                     When someone posts about something stupid Akin says, of COURSE the force becomes unbalanced!! How can even the most resolute maintain any semblance of balance in the face of such unbalancedness?
                     
                     
                     Maybe we can shoot for balance at the Veep level and above and their policy pros and cons.*
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     
                     *Oops. I think that was a monkey that just escaped from my derriere!
                     

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Lol, no, not the cause MM
                        
                        I have full confidence that, in reality, the balance exists... there is plenty of stupid on all sides to go around!

                        replyreport
      2. 80

         Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         That is not true. Not all businesses have to make a profit to stay in business.
         There are many -- and many types of -- thriving, lonstanding nonprofit businesses out there.
         Now granted, if you are not intentionally established as a nonprofit, your goal IS to have money left over after paying your expenses.

         replyreport
2. 80

   psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago

   Whose country?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      America... land of the free. Not land of the 'we will say what you can do'

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         As in, we will decide whether you were raped or not, and whether you will give birth to that child.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah, who wants to stand up for the child...
            
            Not the same thing.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               It wouldn't be would it. Who wants to stand up for the woman that is raped? In fact, who wants to stand up for the child of rape that is born to a woman that cannot bear to even look at him? Will you stand up for him when he's so messed up that he engages in drink and drugs, ends up in prison, on welfare? Or will he become just another welfare parasite that your tax dollars support?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  It's not a dichotomy though.
                  
                  You can stand up for the woman, and the child. Life is too sacred to allow for as many abortions as we do.
                  
                  How about, if anyone wants to support abortion, they show their support for volunteering to be belated-aborted? I mean, if it's not that big of a deal...

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Having an abortion is a massive deal, and so is having a child. I honestly do not believe that abortion should be in any way an easy option. I have two kids of my own. My daughter is fifteen, doing really well at school (brags) three Grade A Gcses all ready, one year before she's due, and will take  the other 12 next year. Her friend, on the other hand, is four months pregnant. HER mother thinks that it will all be OK, after all, she was only fifteen when she gave birth to Ciara. What is she thinking, why has she not tried to educate her daughter?
                     
                     But she is pregnant and it's a life. That's completely different from her being raped, though. Surely you see the difference here?

                     replyreport
            2. 68

               Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Not a child.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Your opinion.
                  
                  Let's play the line game Ralph.
                  
                  Is a 1-minute old baby a human?
                  What about 1 minute before birth?

                  replyreport
                  1. 68

                     Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Not my opinion. Standard, correct usage of the English language. A fetus is not a child. You should try to be more careful expressing yourself. Calling a zygote or a fetus a "child" is inflammatory, and it incites psycho murderers like Scott Roeder.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        So is it a child when it is born alive during a late term abortion and must be murdered so that its mother doesn't have to deal with it? Or is that living thing still a fetus? Just curious.

                        replyreport
                        1. 68

                           Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           St. Thomas Aquinas defined the beginning of a human life (a baby, not a child) as when it is sufficiently mature to survive outside the womb. That works for me.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              So, whether or not a baby is human or not depends on technology. Great.

                              replyreport
                              1. 68

                                 Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Are you a Scott Roeder fan? If not, why not use standard English terminology.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    How about, instead of nit-picking terminology, you discuss the issue?
                                    
                                    I'll say baby, or child, or human, because I consider it life. Get over it.
                                    
                                    So, if a newborn that couldn't survive 20 years ago could survive today, then it is more of a human being today?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 68

                                       Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                       "discuss the issue?"
                                       
                                       I support Roe v. Wade and court interpretations of it.

                                       report
                                       1. 0

                                          JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                          See, that's a way of dodging the issue.
                                          
                                          You said you think human life starts when it is viable outside the womb.
                                          
                                          'viable' depends on technology. A newborn that wouldn't survive 20 years ago could survive today.
                                          
                                          So, do you agree with allowing our current level of technology to decide who is human and who isn't?

                                          report
                                          1. 68

                                             Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                             Yes. I agree with St. Thomas.

                                             report
                                             1. 0

                                                JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                How do you justify saying that being human isn't an inherent trait?

                                                report
                                                1. 68

                                                   Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                   A zygote or an unviable fetus is not a person or a human being or a child or a baby in accordance with English or medical or legal usage.

                                                   report
                                                   1. 0

                                                      JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                      That's not what I asked.
                                                      
                                                      How do you justify being human as not being an inherent trait.
                                                      
                                                      If you were to say that at 20 weeks a fetus becomes a human being, no matter what, then that would be considered an inherent trait... all 20 week-olds are humans.
                                                      
                                                      But, to have a shifting measure means that it's not US that defines us as human, it is something else. How do you justify that?

                                                      report
                                                      1. 60

                                                         KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                         It can't be scientifically proven, so they use the opinion of scientists. How can we prove when a child's first thought is formed? We can't, so the liberals just decide to use the opinion of someone who backs up their position. It makes it easier for them to exterminate (I didn't say mu---er!!) those unwanted children.

                                                         report
                                                         1. 80

                                                            Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                            I think the real question here is at what point do they become "unwanted"?
                                                            For conservatives, they are sacrosanct while inside the mother.
                                                            Once she gives birth and can't care for the kid, it becomes society's unwanted.

                                                            report
                                                            1. 60

                                                               KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                               Except there are huge waiting lists in this country for adoption; it's almost impossible for many decent couples to even find a child available to adopt, no matter what the race of the child. Many minority families refuse to allow their children to be adopted, so they live in poverty instead. Maybe instead of promoting abortion the liberals could get out there in the ghettos and promote adoption. It's what's best for lots of children but it's not even a consideration for many young pregnant girls.

                                                               report
                                                               1. 0

                                                                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                                  A - Inconvenience = Life
                                                                  B - Inconvenience > Life
                                                                  C - Inconvenience < Life

                                                                  report
                                                               2. 80

                                                                  Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                                  "decent couples"
                                                                  I assume by that you mean non-gay, right?

                                                                  report
                                                                  1. 60

                                                                     KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                                     No, what I meant was couples that qualify, since the process is very intrusive and many couples won't even be considered, such as myself and my husband because we were over 35 when we began the incredible and disappointing journey.

                                                                     report
                                                      2. 68

                                                         Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                         Actually, becoming a human is a gradual, lifelong process. Some never quite make it. Others become Abraham Lincolns, FDR, Nelson Mandelas and Barack Obamas.

                                                         report
                                 2. 60

                                    KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    I will agree that it would have been better for the good doctor to have dropped dead of a heart attack, but why keep asking about his killer? Is anyone who wants innocent children (fetuses is your mind) protected from murdering, money-grubbing doctors a radical who is destined to commit a heinous crime? I didn't think so.

                                    replyreport
                        2. 68

                           Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Scott Roeder was a murderer or assassin if you prefer, under the law. The man he murdered was acting in accordance with the law, and not committing murder. You are entitled to your beliefs. However, you should be more careful about how you express yourself.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              KK Trainorposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              I don't have to be careful because I asked a simple question. Are you threatening me or something? I don't get it.

                              replyreport
                              1. 68

                                 Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Your innacurate terminology is inflammatory. Get it? Probably not.

                                 replyreport
      2. 80

         psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         It also a land where every citizen has the right to be there and have their own opinion. Where every person counts as one person, not more and not less.

         replyreport
      3. 60

         sen.sush23posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         You are contradicting yourself, my friend!

         replyreport
3. 89

   GA Andersonposted 11 years ago

   *sigh* I tried not to respond. I even turned over the keyboard.... but.... that's scary stuff.
   
   It would be bad enough it it were just "man in the street" blurbs, (the old "surrounded by idiots" phrase comes to mind), but these are people that are obviously heavily into politics. After all they are at the convention. And as such they probably wield a little more voter influence than Joe Coach Potato, even if it is only one or two friends they are able to manipulate. Or legislature they affect (if they are Reps.)
   
   It shows a very dangerous mentality.
   
   But, what's even scarier is that the same video could probably had been done at the RNC using Repub talking points as bait. The Dems got nabbed this time - but I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a Repub counterpart out there somewhere.
   
   All in favor of a voter intelligence test say aye. Wait, let's get a recount. Alright then, one more time, this time raise your right hand if you agree. No, your other right hand.
   
   ps. to Cred.
   I thought E. Warren was a little loose with some of her points - but Bill Clinton was damn impressive. He almost had me saying amen brother. It's a crying shame he couldn't keep it in his pants. I think I could even vote for him if that weren't an issue.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 0

      JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Honestly, I think I watched 30 seconds of it... I really have no idea how it ends

      replyreport
   2. 79

      Credence2posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well, GA, you have to admit, that Clinton was in great form, as the President's secret weapon he was quite effective. As for keeping it in his pants, much of his libido may explain why his tenure as president was so successful. I wish that I could transfer that libido to everyman seeking higher office, you know much like Mary Lincoln's assessment of US Grant as a drunkard and butcher, what was it that Abe said.....
      
      As for Liz, I think that she assessed the current situation with more points toward accuracy rather than less.

      replyreport
4. 80

   Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

   When I saw this thread come through in my inbox, I wondered if it had something to do with First Americans (aka Native Americans).
   
   
   This could have been funny in the hands of Letterman, Leno, Colbert, Fallon or Stewart.
   More of a "meh."
   
   Waiting for the rebuttal from the corporations who are people.
   

   replyreport
5. 80

   psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago

   A child is generally a person between birth and reaching their majority,  It's arbitrary because legal life stages are arbitrary.
   
   Unless you think Aquinas was a radical pro-choicer with a (very well) hidden agenda, that is.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If he was, someone better tell Paul Ryan to find (yet) another hero to worship.

      replyreport
6. 80

   Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

   Liberals promote responsible sex through widespread access to birth control.
   
   Not for anything, but how many nuns spoke at the RNC again?
   #arithmetic.
   = 0
   
   http://crevecoeur.patch.com/articles/nu … udget-plan

   replyreport
7. 80

   Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

   Jaxson,
   This fun's for you!
   http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-s … -inclusion

   replyreport
8. 80

   psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago

   If you mean by human: one who has human rights--those rights attach only to those in a class of beings able to fulfill the associated duties.  Because lets face it, this is not about a word.  It's about which classes we feel have which rights and why.  Semantics is just a distraction.

   replyreport
9. 28

   allnewscirlceposted 11 years ago

   http://www.allnewscircle.com/2012/09/pa … ainst.html

   replyreport
10. 80

    psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago

    As a person going through the green car system right now, 'get out of my country' is a phrase that really slaps me in the face.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I didn't say it toward you. But if anybody thinks that government should ban profits, I have no problem saying it to them. If they don't like freedom, there are places in the world they can go to get away from it.

       replyreport