OT, What Did You Expect When A Commiecrat Is In The White House?

Page 5 of 6  


Bad analogy. From what I've seen so far, the correct analogy is calling up for a dinner reservation for 4 at 8PM, the person clearly explaining that, even putting two others on the phone trying to get the reservation made and the maitre'd saying over and over again, "OK, you want 3 cheese pizzas to go"
The issue was clear from the start. Any govt agency enforcement of laws and rules is always somewhat subjective. The more you leave the making of the actual rules to agencies instead of making it clear in law, the more they can be made up on the fly. Those rule makers almost always are within the executive branch, as they are in this case of changing the rules for unlocking cell phones. Obama, is the head of the executive branch. If he did not agree with it, he could pick up the phone, call the regulators and get it reversed. Really quite simple.
And there are other prime examples of other similar Commiecrat action by Obama. Take the NLRB blocking Boeing from opening a new factory in SC. The union tried to link that to a strike years ago in state of Washington, despite the fact that since then, union employment by Boeing has grown. Now with 9% unemployment, who else but a Commiecrat would allow that to happen? Not only was the union and the nutty NLRB screwing with 3,000 new jobs in SC, they were screwing with the entire 787 program that involves hundreds of thousands of jobs. We were in a serious national economic crisis yet to Obama appeasing a union was more important than jobs and the economic security of the USA. One call from Reagan or Bush and probably Clinton too and that would have ended in a day.
Another example. Last spring, in an election year, Obama issued a decree to stop enforcing part of immigration law whereby some illegal aliens are deported. That isn't interpreting a rule. It's disregarding the law, which is unconstitutional. A case has now been filed by a group of ICE employees saying essentially that they have taken an oath to uphold the law and Obama can't tell the not to. Looks like at least someone understood the oath they took. The case is starting it's way through the courts. Ain't no way in hell it's going to be upheld, but it will probably have to go to the SC and waste their time to tell Obama it's an unconstitutional abuse of power. And he was a consitutional lawyer? It also demonstrates that a president does have power, as I have cited. It's just a question of how a president chooses to use them. In this case, however it's clearly an abuse of powers that he does not have.
Those are examples of a Commiecrat in action. Please, now, may I have that reservation for 4 at 8pm?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/31/2013 7:08 AM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

He has been leaving that up to the Attorney General who ignored criminal activity by Black Panther members interfering with voters. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/31/2013 4:19 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

You really need to back away from giving three hours/day to have Limbagh tell you what to think.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You really need to back away from giving all your day to have the LSM tell you what to think and project nonsense about Limbaugh on others.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/31/2013 8:54 AM, Attila Iskander wrote:

LSM? So you are saying it is a good idea that people should never weigh things and look at all of the angles on their own but instead simply tune in for three hours and be told what to think?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're the one making the claim that they are fed stuff for 3 hours and told what to think Since you seem to like operating off stupid and bigoted, not to mention ignorant presumptions and propaganda, you are in no position to talk about where and how other people get their information.
Come back when you actually have something other than bigoted ignorance. Then you will have a chance of being taken seriously.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/31/2013 10:32 AM, Attila Iskander wrote:

If only I could be enlightened like a true dittohead or whatever name is used for a true believer. Sorry about that. I am a believer in looking at all available sources and coming to my own conclusion and not mindlessly going with what anyone says for three hours per day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I find that blind belief happens more on the left, with the LSM. Most of the Rush Limbaugh listener I meet, are informed on both sides of issues.
The dittohead thing is more a parody of the left, than actual happening.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
If only I could be enlightened like a true dittohead or whatever name is used for a true believer. Sorry about that. I am a believer in looking at all available sources and coming to my own conclusion and not mindlessly going with what anyone says for three hours per day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Funny thing. Almost all those that know what Limbaugh says don't even listen to him. There was a superb example of this lib trait recently on Bill O'Reilly's show. He had run a segment with Jesse Watters interviewing people in Hawaii. The essence of the piece was how liberal HI is. In that segment O'Reilly said that it's hard to understand, because Asian-Americans are hard working, industrious people. Well Whoah! Stop everything. That was highly offensive to a lib congresswoman from HI. She contacted Fox and objected to it. So, O'Reilly has her on the show the next night. And what a show it was.
Somehow the first thing out of her mouth was going back to the Japanese internment camps of WWII. I mean, WTF? But the best part was when O'Reilly started questioning her on the specifics of what she saw on the show. Finally, the truth came out. She had not seen the show. She saw PART of the show on Media Matters. Now, there you have it folks. A Congresswoman who is so stupid that she goes on national TV before tens of millions of people, to argue against something and she didn't even bother to view the actual 5 mins of show that she was bitching about. If she needed the piece, she could have easily gotten it from either Media Matters or Fox. So, she instead wound up looking like a true lib ass in front of millions, giving further proof of why Congress has a 15% approval rating.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How would you know considering that you are spouting the ignorant cant of a true believer from the left with the "Rush Limbaugh" nonsense ??

ANd yet that is EXACTLY what you are doing while making your stupid projection Talk about stupid AND delusional.

Clearly your claim is a delusional lie Were you IN ACTUAL fact
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

doesn't understand.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/31/2013 7:32 AM, George wrote:

Sorry George, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh even though I find him entertaining whenever I do hear his rants. Unlike you, an obvious drooling P.L.L.C.F., I don't take my marching orders and instruction on what to believe from the Commiecrat loving mainstream press. I do the logical and intelligent thing and listen to and read the news from all sources from both Liberal and Conservative organizations then filter out the obvious bias and male bovine droppings from both sides to get to the truth which sticks out like a sore thumb. It funny how you can always notice a slant when you keep a level head.
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jan 30, 4:33pm, The Daring Dufas <the-daring-du...@stinky- finger.net> wrote:

Definitely Fascist.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/30/2013 11:33 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

And you were probably blabbering about "commicrats" 15 years ago. The politicians have achieved what they want. Get people who won't do anything expect roll in the dirt arguing all cranked up and they do what their owners want.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/30/2013 3:19 PM, George wrote:

You obviously didn't grok my post you poor thing. O_o
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/30/2013 5:24 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

Words mean something. You can't expect people to spend hours trying to discern what you really meant. Thats why we have lots of words and concise ways to assemble them to convey an idea.
Someone writes "commicrat" and it is totally reasonable to take it at face vale that the writer only spent enough effort to pass on what Limbagh or someone else told them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes they do Even more so with people who are not constantly trying to manipulate the meaning of words for their agenda.

Maybe you should work to the KISS rule. And go with the simplest explanation, instead of working off the premise that it's all a big onion you need to unwrap

That's in part due to "progressive", who are constantly working to re-define the meaning of words to suit their agenda. That does lead to the confusion and distrust of meanings that you exhibit.

Actually it is ONLY IF, YOU are working on the premise that Limbaugh is the ONLY source available Commicrat has been around long enough and used by enough people that ANY (possible) association to Limbaugh (if such ever existed) has been lost. Only those (like you) who NEED to suppose that people who disagree with you are AUTOMATICALLY ALL Limbaugh audience, are the ones who are stuck in a groove of presumption and projection.
I, for example, have NEVER listened to Limbaugh. I may have heard outtakes here and there, but that's about it. And frankly WHO THE FUCK CARES, if someone uses a term also used by Limbaugh, except for bigots who have a need to put people into categories. But categorization is once again a favorite pastime of the left After all, that is the base of their strategy to create an "us and them" mindset such as you exhibit..
Maybe you should spend more time actually thinking about issues instead of trying to package people, and then trying to understand their meaning according to how you "packaged " them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/31/2013 8:43 AM, George wrote:

Accusing someone of being a Rush Limbaugh listener must be a new swear word used like "racist" by the P.L.L.C.F. to condemn someone they disagree with. You freaks never fail to entertain. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sorta reminds me of the guy a couple years ago who kept suggesting that I was a zombie follower of Ayn Rand pretty much any time I disagreed with him. Of course, I had never gotten around to reading Ayn and now I don't dare to so I can remain clean (grin).
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.