The "Stay Classy, Republicans" Super Nintendo Chalmers Thread

The problem is worse on the right for sure as there's more anti-intellectualism over there than on the left. And there's more religiosity and supporting things based on their religious beliefs than on science/good of society.

But there are plenty on the left who are entrenched in inflexible ideological views as well.

To stay on the current topic, I'm sure their are many on the left who'd remain opposed to drug testing welfare recipients even if studies where done and showed it saved tax payer money and didn't have major negative side effects for society. i.e. they're just ideologically opposed to drug testing recipients, just like a lot of cons are just ideologically opposed to not having it and having recipients using drugs and would rather test them even if it costs more money.

Again, the right is worse, but people stuck in rigid ideologies is a problem on both sides of the aisle.
 
I will gladly accept anyone's proof that not a single individual opted out of getting tested/applying for benefits due to the new testing requirements.

Someone's going to say something like "it's so easy to cheat!" - ignoring the fact that it apparently wasn't easy for two of the 40 who did go through with it...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mykevermin']Rock Scott, yes, dohdough? There's collusion and corruption, but Rick Scott is the FL governor.[/QUOTE]
Lolz...drunk posting...heh.
 
[quote name='camoor']I'd feedback alot more on your posts but saying "Right on" and "I agree" all the time doesn't add much. CAG needs a like button.[/QUOTE]

I keep at this for my fans.
 
[quote name='dohdough']So far they tested about 1500 people in the last month. It turns out that there was only a 2% positive rate.

http://www2.tbo.com/news/politics/2...ting-yields-2-percent-positive-res-ar-252458/

And here's a quick article about Scott's estimated $62,000,000 interest in the clinics conducting this farce of a program.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/busine...ell-his-holdings-in-urgent-care-chain/1163630

edit: whoops, forgot the link

edit 2: whoops, put Perry instead of Scott[/QUOTE]

P.S. The consequences for NOT taking the test were the same as failing (akin to DWI tests) approx. 2% failed and 2% declined to take it (not all those who declined are necessarily drug users).
 
Granted the level of stupidity in this country seems to be on the rise, I still don't think she'd get elected.
 
[quote name='nasum']Thank god for dual citizenship is all I can say. Not that things are great right now, but if she actually gets elected I am so out of here.[/QUOTE]

Where are you going to?
 
Rep. Webster’s Winter Garden, Florida district office gave out a “Watch List” of six Floridians who had asked questions at Webster’s previous town halls. The list, with the header “For the Media,” included names, photographs, and questions that members of the media should ask them.
...
With black and white photos that resemble police surveillance, some of them pulled from the individuals’ Facebook profiles, the memo is clearly meant to intimidate these six people and anyone else who might stand up and ask a question of their elected representative.
Click to expand...

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/26/305501/webster-town-hall-watchlist/

Classy
 
[quote name='camoor']Where are you going to?[/QUOTE]

hang out with The Green Bastard in Parts Unknown...

O'Reilly might just be the 2nd coming of Andy Kaufman. I still think some of these people are just acting because there's no way anyone can be that obtuse.
 
Cheney had been busted in Rock Springs for drunk driving, his second such collar in less than a year. In November 1962 he was arrested in Cheyenne for “operating motor vehicle while intoxicated and drunkenness.”
...
At the time of his arrests, Cheney worked on a crew building electrical transmission lines in Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado. The future politician was a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Click to expand...
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/dick-cheney-drunk-driving-arrests-102938

I knew the guy was a scumbag drunk driver, but I had no idea that Cheney used to be in a union. What a dick.
 
*pins on flag lapel*

HEY YOU COMMIE LIBRULS. Ya' hear ta'bout how HP is werkin wid Obama to stimulate ther 'CONomy with them thrrr Pedopads? Yeah you hrrd me, touchin' is what dem pedos do. Aint right, people gonna be all getting tetchy with them pads. 'Course nunna u guys would kno 'bout this kernspiracy, wouldja? Naw I din thunk so.

Jus think 'bout it. TOUCHPAD. OBAMA. Same nummer of sybalulls. I aint fallin' fer it, nope.
 
[quote name='Msut77']http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779

tl:dr Republicans are a psychopathic death cult, but you don't have to take my word for it.[/QUOTE]

If Republicans have perfected a new form of politics that is successful electorally at the same time that it unleashes major policy disasters, it means twilight both for the democratic process and America's status as the world's leading power.
Click to expand...

This is a great closing paragraph. Although I think the latter is a foregone conclusion, it would be a shame if the Democratic process was shut down.

Personally I think the founding fathers were brilliant. I hope the people are always in charge of the government.
 
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...how-the-gop-s-one-sided-war-on-democrats.html

Average Democratic Senate support for Bush: 45.5 percent.
Average Democratic House support for Bush: 36.8 percent.


Average combined Democratic support for Bush: 41.1 percent.


Average Republican Senate support for Obama: 8.8 percent.


Average Republican House support for Obama: 2.7 percent.


Average combined Republican support for Obama: 5.75 percent.
Click to expand...

Take it with a grain of salt, it's not scientific. But can you come to any conclusion after seeing numbers like this?

I suppose some dishonest hack could make the argument that Obama's policies are so far out of the mainstream that there's no way Republicans could support them.
 
Holy Shit! Blitzer just asked soem question about health care to Ron paul and asked, "Well, should we just let people die in the street?" And while Ron paul fumbled for an answer, a couple people started yelling "Yeah!" in the audience. That's sick!
 
[quote name='Admiral Ackbar']Holy Shit! Blitzer just asked soem question about health care to Ron paul and asked, "Well, should we just let people die in the street?" And while Ron paul fumbled for an answer, a couple people started yelling "Yeah!" in the audience. That's sick![/QUOTE]
There's a debate tonight? fuck! I can't believe I missed most of it!

edit: Wow...5 minutes in and the craziness ensues...LOLZ
 
Final question: How do you plan to reach the Muslim GOP base with your current campaign approach which marginalizes their entire community?

LOLOLOLOLZ

edit: huh? WTF happened to the questions!
 
No Child Left Behind (NCLB): Democrats rallied to Bush here, supporting him, interestingly, by larger margins than even the Republicans did. Forty-seven of 50 Senate Democrats and 197 of 210 House Democrats backed NCLB; 94 percent in both cases.
Click to expand...

This can't be right...

Republicans always vote in lock-step with their Republican leaders. They always tow the line with the talking points and never dissent...
 
[quote name='Clak']Does anyone actually believe that?[/QUOTE]

Catholics have a split personality. Some of them (especially the nuns) are die-hard liberals who advocate ceaslessly for the poor and needy (you know - the stuff Jesus actually said). Others are more hard-line conservatives.

So without researching further, I could believe it. But one good church hospital a health plan does not make.
 
[quote name='camoor']Catholics have a split personality. Some of them (especially the nuns) are die-hard liberals who advocate ceaslessly for the poor and needy (you know - the stuff Jesus actually said).
[/QUOTE]

There could not possibly be a bigger difference between promoting helping the poor and making it the law (read: illegal not to).

Here is a hint: Jesus did tons of one and none of the other.

The primary difference between teaching people the importance of helping those in need and making legal consequences if they don't, is that liberals tend to not see a difference.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']There could not possibly be a bigger difference between promoting helping the poor and making it the law (read: illegal not to).

Here is a hint: Jesus did tons of one and none of the other.

The primary difference between teaching people the importance of helping those in need and making legal consequences if they don't, is that liberals tend to not see a difference.[/QUOTE]
LOLZ

Preventing harm is more important AND efficient than helping those that are already harmed.
 
[quote name='dohdough']LOLZ

Preventing harm is more important AND efficient than helping those that are already harmed.[/QUOTE]

So you're way into gun rights then?

If that's what you believe, then go ahead and choose to to practice such. Donate your $ to whatever bureaucracies and organizations that cares for people as you think they should be taken care of. Do you like the cost effectiveness of government feeding and clothing "the poor" - complete with it's eternally widening definitions? Then donate.

Just don't push your wide definitions of "preventing harm" on others that disagree, and don't try to pretend Jesus advocated the same.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']So you're way into gun rights then?[/QUOTE]
I actually do support gun ownership rights and think that you should be able to buy whatever you want and when you want after training, but I'm also for much more enforcement and regulation of straw purchases, gunshow purchases, etc as all those guns on the street were bought by someone. I'm also not supportive of CCW or open carry.

If that's what you believe, then go ahead and choose to to practice such. Donate your $ to whatever bureaucracies and organizations that cares for people as you think they should be taken care of. Do you like the cost effectiveness of government feeding and clothing "the poor" - complete with it's eternally widening definitions? Then donate.

Just don't push your wide definitions of "preventing harm" on others that disagree, and don't try to pretend Jesus advocated the same.
Click to expand...
By the way, charities are ineffective because most organizations don't have the resources to help anyone on a broad scale. A church might be able to help 1 person pay for chemo, but it can't help 1 person on chemo AND another person that needs heart surgery. Donating to charities is a nice idea, but an ideal society would make it so charity isn't necessary.

But like you said, it's better to treat someone in the later stages of a deadly medical condition than in the beginning.:roll:

With the level of cognitive dissonance you have, I'm surprised you're able function at all.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']There could not possibly be a bigger difference between promoting helping the poor and making it the law (read: illegal not to).

Here is a hint: Jesus did tons of one and none of the other.

The primary difference between teaching people the importance of helping those in need and making legal consequences if they don't, is that liberals tend to not see a difference.[/QUOTE]

This is about the 70th reiteration of this theme and I do not expect thrust to make an actual answer.

If you thrust were able to hold your breath and magically make things the way you want but you then get some horrible disease which you cannot afford treatment for (the magic ran out).

Would you be perfectly alright with dying? Would your last thoughts be all happy and content?
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']There could not possibly be a bigger difference between promoting helping the poor and making it the law (read: illegal not to).

Here is a hint: Jesus did tons of one and none of the other.

The primary difference between teaching people the importance of helping those in need and making legal consequences if they don't, is that liberals tend to not see a difference.[/QUOTE]

The government provides mandatory aid for those they consider poor. It is the law, per your metric.

The government supports, but does not mandate, healthy eating and exercise as a path to fitness and all its benefits. It is a promotion, by your metric.

So, with that in mind, do you still stick to your guns regarding mandating and suggesting something? The sleight of hand implied by Paul and people like you who think these matters should be handled by charities is that you presume, with zero evidence in support and ample in contrast, that positive outcomes (i.e., not dying as a measure of health) will remain the same or improve. Which is preposterous to suggest.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']This would've been a really good time to ask him about his old campaign manager, who died of pnumonia at 49, uninsured and leaving his family in debt.[/QUOTE]
Welp, the only answer to that is that the widow should've divorced him for someone with more money and the kids should've tried to emancipate themselves. Since they didn't, they should get fucked. Personal responsibility right?:booty:
 
[quote name='62t']Tea partiers cheer to let uninsured die, Ron Paul says let churches help
http://blog.chron.com/rickperry/201...ed-die-ron-paul-says-let-churches-help/?tsp=1[/QUOTE]

I find this unbelievable disgusting. Not even in the funny way....I dont have thewords to even comment on this.

I thought this is what separate Americans from places like Somalia. The notion of letting an American die solely based on the wanting/ability of paying insurance is mind boggling. And to justify it by saying, "Thats freedom," is....is....I dont even know. Its beyond my ability to process it.

Then to say that churches should take care of them? I am not against churches but the notion of letting them choose who lives or dies is fucking ludicrous.

I love the fact that everyone will put on their Never Forget Pins and cry and god bless America for 9/11 on the one hand and the other be perfectly alright with letting someone die if they think it cost them too much.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We are an image-based society that prefers quips, put-downs, and slams instead of substance.

We are a society that lets people start a debate with the Star-Spangled Banner, wear flag pins, and then attempt to make a genuine issue of the patriotism of others because they don't participate in such solely symbolic acts (and have the main stream media these same people abuse like a dog tow the line for them without question or critique).

This is why John Huntsman is polling so low, and someone who is all charisma and no intellect polling so high.

Think of it this way - if Rick Perry called Romney a "motherfucker" and then tackled him, Jerry Springer style, what do you think would happen to his poll numbers among "base" Republicans (i.e., those likely to vote in primaries)?

If Rick Perry, instead, said that he was tired of the unwillingness of parties to work together and instead thinks that bipartisan committees will help bring about the most agreed upon solutions, and he called for an end to modern, unpleasant politics, what would happen to his poll numbers then?

I think that about says it all. Reasonable people and intellectual people don't get elected. We hate intellectual people (why else do you think the GOP has the talking point referring to Obama as "lecturing us like a professor"?)
 
Can someone explain to me how this:
And Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, looking to siphon support from Perry's base of evangelical and tea party supporters, said: "To have innocent little 12-year-old girls be forced to have a government injection through an executive order is just flat out wrong." She also noted that that the company that makes the vaccine, Merck & Co., employed Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff, as a lobbyist in Texas, and that the drug company had donated to Perry's campaigns.
Click to expand...
is any different than requiring kids have certain vaccines before entering school? Not that it would make any difference to morons like her, but still.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top