quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
Yes "we" B33. I was very much a supporter of Romney and was disappointed he did not become the nominee. While not supporting each and every position he took, he seemed to have the required experience, success in politics and business, and intellect to lead the country.

His downfall, in my opinion, was that he was Mormon and the religious right would not bend to support him. That pissed me off and is still somewhat an issue with me.

That's what I don't get. Who cares if he's a Mormon? Harry Reid (Senate Dem leader) is!

At any rate, I'm hoping Romney or the other's I mention get the nomination. Huckabee reminds me of a greasy car salesman and I think he raised taxes in Arkansas when he was governor, and definitely supports illegals being in this country. I don't like him.

BB33 - Whitman scares me right now. Still too early for me to make a choice. Others may still jump in.

B33 Kind of like Kennedy - he was Catholic and almost lost it because of that. Only Nixon's poor showing turned the election for him.

Well, on the other hand, my thought then and now is, where are the Relig. Right going to go? To Obama/Pelosi/Reid? They'll go into the voting booths and vote for the Repubs. I'm pretty sure. Romney / Pawlenty / Giuliani etc - ANY of them will be my choice in 2012. I hope it's not Huck/Palin.

I understand what you mean about Meg but either her or Poizner will be my choice. I actually googled something about both of them recently. Remember the "you're a Dem, your wife gave money to Dems" kerfluffle only to have Steve counter "no YOU'RE the Dem, you gave money in 2005!!!". LOL. Politics is sooo fun. Honestly, it is.

Anyways, SFGate.com had a good article on the kerfluffle and also said that Poizner's "Dem" wife gave to Repubs as recent as 2008. So she's not so "Dem" now.

Link

According the SFGate, Carol Poizner has donated
"a luxury car's worth of money on Repubs". Heh.

Fun article.

Kenk, remember, don't violate Reagan's 11th commandment!!!!!! I didn't like Reagan but he was RIGHT about that.

So that was why I was questioning your "ahem" loyalty.

Link

Good article and why our side, esp. now needs to abide by the 11th commandment.

I guess the kerfluffle makes good gossip/news. Arnie's wife is a dem and no one seems to mind.

Re: Reagan's 11th commandment I'm not sure I agree as you have seen by my previous posts. I think he meant it to apply to candidates not necessarily voters. I'm kind of independent when it comes to political loyalty, especially during primary time. I try my best to be pragmatic and somewhat centrist when it comes to voting for a candidate. I just want the best person that is running to get the job. Sometimes, that ends up being a Democrat. If a candidate is too far off in left field or right field I more than likely will vote against them.

I can certainly understand candidates holding to Reagan's llth commandment but not for voters. Neither party should dictate who the voters can vote for or campaign for. If that kind of loyalty held true Republicans could never be elected to the Presidency as Democrats outnumber them.

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
I guess the kerfluffle makes good gossip/news. Arnie's wife is a dem and no one seems to mind.

Re: Reagan's 11th commandment I'm not sure I agree as you have seen by my previous posts. I think he meant it to apply to candidates not necessarily voters. I'm kind of independent when it comes to political loyalty, especially during primary time. I try my best to be pragmatic and somewhat centrist when it comes to voting for a candidate. I just want the best person that is running to get the job. Sometimes, that ends up being a Democrat. If a candidate is too far off in left field or right field I more than likely will vote against them.

I can certainly understand candidates holding to Reagan's llth commandment but not for voters. Neither party should dictate who the voters can vote for or campaign for. If that kind of loyalty held true Republicans could never be elected to the Presidency as Democrats outnumber them.

Who did you cast for in 2008?

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
Wow Kona! Where to start? Let's see now, you can't recognize satire or humor over a response to b33's foot-stomping demand. You do seem to meet the criteria in #9 on the 2nd post.

Oh, I am supposed to recognize your satire. Hm, I thought satire was supposed to be recognizable. You failed.

Time to change the tampon. Yer gettin' cranky. It was so obviously satire that you come across as amateurishly disingenous and obvious in your false denial. You're just trying to save face from your little tantrum.

I did not throw a tantrum and he was not funny. Satire is supposed to be funny. Which explains why he is posting here, because he is not funny. I know his lists were supposed to be funny, and they were a wee bit humorus, if you looked real hard. But the rest of his posts fell flat.

So, if his intention was to advance humor, he failed. He failed because he was genuine in his attacks on Palin and attempted to mix in satire to make his points more palatable, but it was not working for him.

Besides, he is a lousy comedian.

So now you're a comedy critic?

I think your ranting and raving proves one of his jokes: you have no sense of humor.

B33 and Kenk, have you looked into Tom Campbell's record? He is a long shot, but may be the best person for the job. Meg is a loose cannon and Poizner also comes acrtoss as a slimy car salesman in my eyes.

I know this may freak some out, but I'm looking at both Campbell and Brown. I think he's moved to the center a lot since he was first governor. Age does that to you.

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
Wow Kona! Where to start? Let's see now, you can't recognize satire or humor over a response to b33's foot-stomping demand. You do seem to meet the criteria in #9 on the 2nd post.

Oh, I am supposed to recognize your satire. Hm, I thought satire was supposed to be recognizable. You failed.

Time to change the tampon. Yer gettin' cranky. It was so obviously satire that you come across as amateurishly disingenous and obvious in your false denial. You're just trying to save face from your little tantrum.

I did not throw a tantrum and he was not funny. Satire is supposed to be funny. Which explains why he is posting here, because he is not funny. I know his lists were supposed to be funny, and they were a wee bit humorus, if you looked real hard. But the rest of his posts fell flat.

So, if his intention was to advance humor, he failed. He failed because he was genuine in his attacks on Palin and attempted to mix in satire to make his points more palatable, but it was not working for him.

Besides, he is a lousy comedian.

So now you're a comedy critic?

I think your ranting and raving proves one of his jokes: you have no sense of humor.

Humor is subjective, not objective. Just because you may find something funny does not make it so. Any fool knows that.

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
BB33 - I think you may have hit on a resonating chord with me. Too bad others don't recognize that. It's ultimately the center that leads the country. Kinda boring though. Both the far left and far right right are carried forward but screaming and ranting all the way. If conservatives keep playing to the base as Palin continues to do we will always be a minority party.

I disagree, I think fear leads this country more often then anything else.

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
Kona - This country is always changing - It was certainly not the same as when it was founded nor was it after Lincoln, after Teddy R, or after FDR. I wouldn't slam FDR too much though, as he brought us Social Security that many people rely on - even some of the ranting posters. Sure it has problems but it is primarily due to demographic changes that are occurring.

FDR also resisted a very strong isolationist position at the time. Had he not, we would likely be speaking German or Russian now. His work supporting the British and Russians before our involvement in WWII went totally against majority thinking in this country. Nor should his leadership during the war be forgotten. That being said, your comments referring to the New Deal was very controversial at the time and remains so to this day as you correctly state.

Social Security is an abject failure, regardless of the number of people who rely on it. Would you like to see the numbers that prove my point?

In 1960, the people who retired received or exceeded the amount of their payments in 1.1 years.

In 1980, the people who retired received or exceeded the amount of their payments in 2.8 years.

As of 2003, the people who retired received or exceeded the amount of their payments in 12.9 years.

By 2030, the people who retire will receive or exceed the amount of their payments in 18 years.

By contrast, the first person to ever receive Social Security, Ida Fuller of Ludlow, Vermont, invested $22 in payments and received more then $20,000 in benefits.

Socail Security was nothing more then a way to win votes, by the time people figured out it was a scam, FDR had been dead for decades. Virtually every retirement package that existed at the time out performed Socail Security, even with the Great Depression and all the Recessions in between.

World War II was the only thing he excelled at. As far as our economy was concerned, FDR was a complete and total imbecile. Virtually every program he created, including Social Security and the Minimum Wage damaged this nation and prolonged the Great Depression. The War saved his ass. He could no longer stand in the way of the very business community that he needed to win.

In fact, to this very day we still suffer under his programs, like the Tennesse Valley Water Authority. A dictitorial entity created by none other then FDR and his administration. It is a complete and total monopoly that we both subsidize and receive zero benefits from.

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
Wow Kona! Where to start? Let's see now, you can't recognize satire or humor over a response to b33's foot-stomping demand. You do seem to meet the criteria in #9 on the 2nd post.

Oh, I am supposed to recognize your satire. Hm, I thought satire was supposed to be recognizable. You failed.

Time to change the tampon. Yer gettin' cranky. It was so obviously satire that you come across as amateurishly disingenous and obvious in your false denial. You're just trying to save face from your little tantrum.

I did not throw a tantrum and he was not funny. Satire is supposed to be funny. Which explains why he is posting here, because he is not funny. I know his lists were supposed to be funny, and they were a wee bit humorus, if you looked real hard. But the rest of his posts fell flat.

So, if his intention was to advance humor, he failed. He failed because he was genuine in his attacks on Palin and attempted to mix in satire to make his points more palatable, but it was not working for him.

Besides, he is a lousy comedian.

So now you're a comedy critic?

I think your ranting and raving proves one of his jokes: you have no sense of humor.

Humor is subjective, not objective. Just because you may find something funny does not make it so. Any fool knows that.

And just because you do not see humor in something does not make it unfunny.

Your opinion doesn't trump anybody else's although I know you think it does.

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:
Your opinion doesn't trump anybody else's

You did fine recognizing my man, Campbell.


But, this is where you go wrong, buddy. You're talking about Kona here.

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:

quote:

Originally posted by CapttanKona:

quote:

Originally posted by kenk91645:
Wow Kona! Where to start? Let's see now, you can't recognize satire or humor over a response to b33's foot-stomping demand. You do seem to meet the criteria in #9 on the 2nd post.

Oh, I am supposed to recognize your satire. Hm, I thought satire was supposed to be recognizable. You failed.

Time to change the tampon. Yer gettin' cranky. It was so obviously satire that you come across as amateurishly disingenous and obvious in your false denial. You're just trying to save face from your little tantrum.

I did not throw a tantrum and he was not funny. Satire is supposed to be funny. Which explains why he is posting here, because he is not funny. I know his lists were supposed to be funny, and they were a wee bit humorus, if you looked real hard. But the rest of his posts fell flat.

So, if his intention was to advance humor, he failed. He failed because he was genuine in his attacks on Palin and attempted to mix in satire to make his points more palatable, but it was not working for him.

Besides, he is a lousy comedian.

So now you're a comedy critic?

I think your ranting and raving proves one of his jokes: you have no sense of humor.

Humor is subjective, not objective. Just because you may find something funny does not make it so. Any fool knows that.

And just because you do not see humor in something does not make it unfunny.

Your opinion doesn't trump anybody else's although I know you think it does.

It also does not mean that I do not have a sense of humor. It just means my tastes are different then yours and Kenks.

And, as you stated, your opinion does not trump mine, or anybody else's. Keep that in mind the next time you choose to insult my humor and intelligence. I pride myself on not being cut from the same mold as others, it is called individuality. Try it sometime instead of following the cookie cutter crap you are so used to.