Moderator: Community Team
Phatscotty wrote:She's the definition of a Rino.
There is no question about this.
Rinos are not conservative. If they were, they wouldnt be a rino.
spurgistan wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:spurgistan wrote:You're angry that Rachel Maddow invited Meghan McCain to talk about gun control on her show in March of 2009? If you have a problem with the talking heads format, that's great, because it is mostly stupid, but having conservative guests on shows is good for conservatives. Especially charismatic and likable ones, like Meghan McCain. Which is odd, given that the liberal media has a preponderance of conservative guests.
Biggest, Unsubstantiated Post of the Year 2011
Honestly, I would like to see if that's a fact.
And I wonder if the relevant data played loosely with the defintions of liberal and tightly with the definition of conservative, and vice-versa.
So, still a contender for BUPotY 2011?
Phatscotty wrote:Megan Mccain does not represent conservativism.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
spurgistan wrote:Phatscotty wrote:Megan Mccain does not represent conservativism.
OK. So, should every person who gets called in to be a talking head against gun control be the most far right conservative they can find? is it possible that many of them didn't want to go on Maddow? Also, what is conservatism? Obviously, it's what phatscotty thinks, but I think you might get a few answers if you asked more people than just yourself. Meghan Mccain is a conservative American. She is against gun control. Her being on television is not a bad thing for pro-gun conservatives. This thread is exceedingly silly.
BigBallinStalin wrote:For a lot of people in poor neighborhoods, a handgun is much more reliable than expecting the cops to help you or expecting them to be able to reduce crime. My problem are the Concealed Weapons Permits costing about $250 per year. Those, who needs a handgun the most, can not really afford $250 per year for a piece of paper, so many "illegally" carry a gun. This illegal action is then exploited by cops for whatever purposes--good or bad.
Baron Von PWN wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:For a lot of people in poor neighborhoods, a handgun is much more reliable than expecting the cops to help you or expecting them to be able to reduce crime. My problem are the Concealed Weapons Permits costing about $250 per year. Those, who needs a handgun the most, can not really afford $250 per year for a piece of paper, so many "illegally" carry a gun. This illegal action is then exploited by cops for whatever purposes--good or bad.
For someone who usually asks for substantiation of statements, I think you will be fine with me asking you substantiate that one. I'm fairly certain there is very little data to suggest that is the case.
Chariot of Fire wrote:As for GreecePwns.....yeah, what? A massive debt. Get a job you slacker.
Viceroy wrote:[The Biblical creation story] was written in a time when there was no way to confirm this fact and is in fact a statement of the facts.
Phatscotty wrote:maybe Megan Mccain is a Progressive Conservative?
Timminz wrote:Phatscotty wrote:maybe Megan Mccain is a Progressive Conservative?
That was the actual name of the right-wing party in Canada up until fairly recently.
Phatscotty wrote:Timminz wrote:Phatscotty wrote:maybe Megan Mccain is a Progressive Conservative?
That was the actual name of the right-wing party in Canada up until fairly recently.
We call them RINO's here
Republican In Name Only
Woodruff wrote:Because if a Republican has the audacity not to follow the party line right down the line, they must not be real Republicans!
Mr_Adams wrote:Woodruff wrote:Because if a Republican has the audacity not to follow the party line right down the line, they must not be real Republicans!
Actually, what scotty fails to see, is that the Rinos ARE following the party lines to the T. The party has become a social left, economic Kenseyn (sp?) system supporting establishment, which the constituency is sick of. that is why Ron Paul is such a moving force. he wants to go with the government where the people such as myself want the government to go. DOWN in size, and BACk in it's intrusion on privacy. (See liberty defined, chapter 6)
Mr_Adams wrote:Woodruff wrote:Because if a Republican has the audacity not to follow the party line right down the line, they must not be real Republicans!
Actually, what scotty fails to see, is that the Rinos ARE following the party lines to the T.
Mr_Adams wrote:The party has become a social left
Woodruff wrote:Mr_Adams wrote:Woodruff wrote:Because if a Republican has the audacity not to follow the party line right down the line, they must not be real Republicans!
Actually, what scotty fails to see, is that the Rinos ARE following the party lines to the T.
That doesn't make any sense at all. A Republican following the Republican Party line "to the T" is a "Republican In Name Only"? How can that possibly be true?Mr_Adams wrote:The party has become a social left
When the hell did that happen? I certainly haven't seen it.
Woodruff wrote:Mr_Adams wrote:The party has become a social left
When the hell did that happen? I certainly haven't seen it.
natty_dread wrote:Controlling guns is also important because without proper control they can shoot you in the face. That's way not cool because then you'll lose face.
Mr_Adams wrote:Woodruff wrote:Because if a Republican has the audacity not to follow the party line right down the line, they must not be real Republicans!
Actually, what scotty fails to see, is that the Rinos ARE following the party lines to the T. The party has become a social left, economic Kenseyn (sp?) system supporting establishment, which the constituency is sick of. that is why Ron Paul is such a moving force. he wants to go with the government where the people such as myself want the government to go. DOWN in size, and BACk in it's intrusion on privacy. (See liberty defined, chapter 6)
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
Phatscotty wrote:natty_dread wrote:Controlling guns is also important because without proper control they can shoot you in the face. That's way not cool because then you'll lose face.
same goes with a fork...
spurgistan wrote:Mr_Adams wrote:Woodruff wrote:Because if a Republican has the audacity not to follow the party line right down the line, they must not be real Republicans!
Actually, what scotty fails to see, is that the Rinos ARE following the party lines to the T. The party has become a social left, economic Kenseyn (sp?) system supporting establishment, which the constituency is sick of. that is why Ron Paul is such a moving force. he wants to go with the government where the people such as myself want the government to go. DOWN in size, and BACk in it's intrusion on privacy. (See liberty defined, chapter 6)
Umm, see, the thing is, the Republican Party is farther to the right then it's been in around 50 years, at least economically. Note how the health care reform package we passed less year was significantly less comprehensive than Nixon's. Our taxes-to-GDP ratio was higher under Reagan source for BBS. BUPotY your ass.
BigBallinStalin wrote:Baron Von PWN wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:For a lot of people in poor neighborhoods, a handgun is much more reliable than expecting the cops to help you or expecting them to be able to reduce crime. My problem are the Concealed Weapons Permits costing about $250 per year. Those, who needs a handgun the most, can not really afford $250 per year for a piece of paper, so many "illegally" carry a gun. This illegal action is then exploited by cops for whatever purposes--good or bad.
For someone who usually asks for substantiation of statements, I think you will be fine with me asking you substantiate that one. I'm fairly certain there is very little data to suggest that is the case.
Intuitively, it makes sense, and I base my observation on conversations with people. Sure, that may limit my obsevations to my immediate area; however, consider the following and maybe it's not so limited to my immediate area:
How many people in poor neighborhoods really appreciate cops? Judging from my conversations with 10 police officers, poor people tend to hate cops. Judging from my conversations with random people around my city, they tend to roll their eyes at me, thinking I'm an idiot (which they should because it's such an obvious answer). They usually don't want to cooperate with police because the police may be corrupt or untrustworthy, or those in power in the immediate neighborhood may punish others for cooperating with police. Therefore, relying on police becomes difficult, so a handgun for a lot of people in poorer neighborhoods is seen as more reliable.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users