TomServo92 Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 I felt the need to correct it because it was biased and only mentioned the democrat, while not mentioning the two Republicans. Reid might well be guilty of what he's being accused but so might the two named conservatives including Sen Mike Lee (R-UT). I'm fine with that except for the obnoxious way you did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 22, 2014 Author Share Posted March 22, 2014 Well, I'm sorry if it came off obnoxious. It wasn't mean spirited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Well, I'm sorry if it came off obnoxious. It wasn't mean spirited. I'm sorry I asked you a question up there also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 23, 2014 Author Share Posted March 23, 2014 I'm sorry I asked you a question up there also. Yeah, but you're just being a dick so it's not important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Your not answering a question from something you started so it's just normal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 23, 2014 Author Share Posted March 23, 2014 Your not answering a question from something you started so it's just normal. I said my piece about Rand. He's not half the man his father is. I may not agree with Ron but I can respect him. I can do neither with Rand.n Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xr7g428 Posted March 23, 2014 Share Posted March 23, 2014 Langston, what are you for? You do a pretty good job of finding hit pieces but that is about it. What is your rallying call, seems like the Enlightened Leader got reved up about income inequality but lost the music... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 23, 2014 Author Share Posted March 23, 2014 Langston, what are you for? You do a pretty good job of finding hit pieces but that is about it. What is your rallying call, seems like the Enlightened Leader got reved up about income inequality but lost the music... What am I for? I'm pro-union, pro-gay marriage, pro-choice to name a few. I believe in tightening gun restrictions and less restrictions on pot. I'm for keeping religion out of our civic government and all other forms to. I believe in a progressive taxation policy, state and federal safety nets, limiting corporate influence on our environmental policy, and human forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 What am I for? I'm pro-union, pro-gay marriage, pro-choice to name a few. I believe in tightening gun restrictions and less restrictions on pot. I'm for keeping religion out of our civic government and all other forms to. I believe in a progressive taxation policy, state and federal safety nets, limiting corporate influence on our environmental policy, and human forcing. I feel all warm and comfy now. The Federal Breast will keep us warm, feed us and comfort us when we have a bad day. Why should we try to be independent. If we succeed, we are taxed more heavily as we earn more. Just give up. Let Obama take care of you and pat you on the back as you snuggle in his arms to the soft whispers of "There, there now. It'll be ok. We'll take care of you and rescue you from your own failures and irresponsible actions. Come to me, you who ran across the desert to sneak into this country in the dark of night or in concealed cargo. Huddled by the hundreds in hideout houses, waiting for a signal that you can slip out and assume a new life in this country.....because I'll welcome you, especially since you are cutting in line by looking for absolution instead of waiting for the slow gears of bureaucracy to process the legal entry papers you refused to submit. And as the government assumes greater powers over the people, the people are persuaded to surrender more and more of their "inalienable rights", and constitutionally noted rights to keep and bear arms. The people are conditioned to accept these in the name of security. Because, we can trust the government to take care of us. And if you need an example, ask the Japanese-Americans how well they were treated during WWII. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 Well, that warm and fuzzy feeling won't last long for you. Soon you'll be back to your paraniod self. At least you could thank me for the respite from your constant fears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 (edited) Well, I'm sorry if it came off obnoxious. It wasn't mean spirited.Apology accepted. I would like to point out that while I mentioned Reid specifically, I also mentioned Congress as whole (Democrats and Republicans) as being corrupt. I've lost confidence in our political parties. Edited March 24, 2014 by TomServo92 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 24, 2014 Share Posted March 24, 2014 What am I for? I'm pro-union, pro-gay marriage, pro-choice to name a few. I believe in tightening gun restrictions and less restrictions on pot. I'm for keeping religion out of our civic government and all other forms to. I believe in a progressive taxation policy, state and federal safety nets, limiting corporate influence on our environmental policy, and human forcing. As far as I'm concerned, half of those positions are actually conservative. Conservatives shouldn't in the least care about gay marriage, abortion, or marijuana legalization. They are all related to individual freedoms where the government should not be interfering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share Posted March 24, 2014 The thought of smaller government as only a rightwing philosophy is wrong. Leftwing anarcho-philosophy is guided by pursuing left wing policies at the local level instead of the federal. People like Bookchin wanted to see those politics fostered at civic government but understood that somethings like the civil rights movement requires a strong federal government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Conservatives shouldn't in the least care about gay marriage, abortion, or marijuana legalization. Many don't, until they have children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 25, 2014 Author Share Posted March 25, 2014 Many don't, until they have children. What changes about basic human rights once they have children? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 Peoples' attitudes change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted March 25, 2014 Share Posted March 25, 2014 What changes about basic human rights once they have children? Not much. But even less when aborted and incinerated as heating fuel for "Green" hospitals in the U.K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 25, 2014 Author Share Posted March 25, 2014 Not much. But even less when aborted and incinerated as heating fuel for "Green" hospitals in the U.K. That changes the attitudes towards gay marriage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.