Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble

Trouble-Free Transmission

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Trouble-Free Transmission

  1. Yeah,.. that's become apparent. It didn't seem so at first, but now I see that srplane is 1. not a bitterly bitter pro-Hillary anti-Obama nutjob, he's a bona-fide republican anti-Obama nutjob; and.. 2. he is capable of engaging in a semblance of thoughtful debate at times. That's proof positive x2 that he's not you, Rick-Icantquityoubabe-Overthehillsandfaraway-Absolutentonic-"Hillary still has a mathematical good chance of winning the primary"-Wand Boy. abracadabra!.. dammit!
  2. Fwiw,.. my achilles heel is math. D'oh! cheers, bud.
  3. First of all, Barack Obama has never been a Muslim. The fact that the public school that he briefly attended as a child taught a class on the Koran does not mean he was a Muslim. Secondly, Barack Obama has been a Christian for well over 20 years during which time he has regularly attended church, has had his children baptized, and was married in a Christian church. What basis do you have for doubting his claim that he's a practicing, devout Christian? It's fine that you disagree with Obama's policy positions; its fine that you prefer McCain over Obama; and it's fine that you're concerned about the direction you think Obama would take our military. That's your prerogative as a voter. I have many concerns about McCain, and that's my prerogative as a voter. I'm glad to see you say do NOT think Obama is anti-America. I take that to mean that you recognize that he has America's best interest at heart, even though you might personally disagree with his policy proposals. Are you big enough to go so far as to impugn the McCain campaign for questioning/denigrating Obama's patriotism? You wanna play guilty by association, do ya? Ok then,.. do your research on McCain's friends: George W Bush Dick Cheney Keating Five Jack Abramoff Phil Gramm Helen Gramm (Enron) Faisal Abdullah Harry Sargeant III Randy Scheunemann Charlie Black Rick Davis Jerry Falwell Ralph Reed Ok, so you think he votes the liberal party line; which means he SUPPORTS a liberal agenda; which means he stands for progressive policies; which means his principles and values are those that he shares with other democrats. Fair enough. But then how can you logically claim, at the very same time (as you've been doing), that he "stands for nothing"? Good. I'm glad we cleared that up. You recognize that Obama DOES stand for something. We won't be seeing you claiming he doesn't stand for anything anymore, right? Oh, the irony! Your take on reality is rather twisted, bud. Have you not noticed that John McCain is the one "trying to act like a conservative"? You know, to win over the majority of conservatives who think he's not conservative enough? You do recognize that he's gone from opposing Bush tax cuts to supporting the Bush tax cuts; he's gone from supporting Roe v Wade to opposing Roe v Wade; he's gone from opposing the Confederate flag to supporting the Confederate flag; he went from opposing torture to supporting torture; he went from calling Falwell and Robertson "agents of intolerance" to denying they are "agents of intolerance"; and he went from sponsoring campaign finance reform legislation to abandoning campaign finance reform,.. don't you? Those policy position changes do not constitute a mere "shift" to the right for McCain; they are indicative of a total abandonment of his moderate principles for the sake of appealing to conservatives. Either McCain is simply "pretending to be a conservative" or he has entirely abandoned the principles that earned him his "maverick" reputation. Which is it? You choose, friend. On the other hand,.. how is Obama trying to "act conservative"? Really. How? By saying while he still doesn't think offshore drilling is the best course to take but he's willing to support it as a part of a much broader energy policy if that's what oit takes to get policy-makers moving forward? Puh-lease. His energy policy has always been broad-based and progressive. Compromising with conservatives over limited expanded offshore drilling is not "pretending to be conservative". And it's not abandoning his principles either. Similarly Obama chose to support a "compromise" FISA bill, a bill that to the dismay of many democrats included immunity for telecom companies. Obama was a "maverick". he was willing to reach across the aisle; he was willing to go against the grain of his party in order to get the bill passed (Obama is well aware, btw, that the bill only grants civil immunity to telecoms; it does not grant them immunity from criminal prosecution. *wink*). Here again, Obama did not abandon his principles; he merely found a way to compromise while still ensuring that telecoms can be held criminally liable. Brilliant! Is Obama "moving to the middle" in his general election rhetoric? Sure. It's what most presidential candidates have to do to win over centrist voters. Usually people do not have an issue with a candidate moving toward the middle; it's certainly less "radical" than moving to further left or further right. Ironically, in this election, to win over conservatives John McCain has been forced to move far to the right from his usual positions. he's moved so far right of his usual position that his movement is indicative of his either "pretending" to be conservative or his outright abandoning many of his previously held principles. He's either a fake or a panderer. Which is it, my friend? You choose. I will give McCain this much credit though: through and through he is, and always has been, pro-war. That is one core "principle" of his that he has not sold out on, and that's the one policy position on which his candidacy authentically resonates with most republicans. The rest of his candidacy (tax cuts, pro-life, torture, "maverick") is a sham. McCain is no maverick, my friends. Don't take my word for it; take it from one of your fellow conservatives: Surely you don't disagree with Rabid Ann Coulter, do you "srplane"? [You can agree with Ann,.. or you can totally discredit her. Which is it, my friend? You choose.] ROFL!! His "non-answer" reflects the uncertainty many people are willing to acknowledge with regard to the "when life begins" question. The fact of the matter is that while people do have strong opinions and feelings on the issue, no one knows for sure when life truly begins. If life begins at conception, do you think that mean the destruction of an undifferentiated single cell in a woman's womb.. or in a petri dish in a fertilization clinic.. amounts to murder? Do you think everyone should be required to consider such a belief to be the one definitive answer to that question? Or is there room for uncertainty? Apparently Obama recognizes that there's room for uncertainty. As much as you righties like your sound-bite version of reality, the world is quite often not reducible to sound-bites, my friend. Obama gave thoughtful answers in that forum, whereas McCain resorted to over-simplified, silly sound-bite responses. For example, without any hesitation whatsoever and without any qualifications whatsoever (ie, without any thoughtfulness whatsoever) McCain said "[evil should be] destroyed". Great sound-bite. Republicans loved it. But uhh.. McCain's been in the US Senate for some 30 years. Shall we compile a list of all the evils that have transpired in the world during that time that he couldn't have cared less about? But the absurdity of his reply doesn't stop you righties from gobbling up with great enthusiasm his made-to-order super-simplified righty-rallying sound-bites, does it? "I'm gonna follow bin Laden to the gates of hell if that's what it takes!" Yyyyeah,.. ok, Mac. Send us a postcard, will ya? ROFL!! Come on, "srplane",.. wake up and smell the coffee, my friend. I don't know how many copies of Corsi's abomination of a book are still left. And I don't care. Afaic, how ever many are left,.. you can have em all, bud. Fwiw though,.. I suggest you spend your money on a dictionary instead. NY Times Best Seller list: August 24, 2008 1. THE OBAMA NATION, by Jerome R. Corsi. (Threshold, $28.) The Democratic candidate as an extreme leftist, from a co-author of “Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry.” (†) A dagger (†) indicates that some bookstores report receiving bulk orders. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/books/be...amp;oref=slogin
  4. "srplane",.. are you unable to answer the questions I asked of you --> ..or are you simply avoiding them? You've read Corsi's "scholarly" book, right? (well, you've looked at the pictures anyway, I figure). You oughta be able to answer these few simple questions. Is Obama a Muslim or a Christian? ..is he anti-America" or a patriotic American? ..are he and Michelle racists? ..is he a party-line liberal or does he not stand for anything at all? C'mon man, what say you?!
  5. Hiya dude! Welcome back. How was your fishing trip? How many trout did you catch.. and release? Yes Del, we know you righties favor "simple, decisive and unrealistic" over "complex, thoughtful and realistic". I bet you got erect (you know, stood up) and cheered when John "Can I tell you a POW story" McCain promised to "chase Osama to the gates of hell!", huh? And I bet John "I've got 10-homes and I'm worth $100 million" McCain even managed to convince you that you're "rich", huh? You know, cuz you have "a home, a good job and an education". Haha! You righties are so gullible. Obama went into the viper's den on Saturday and he did pretty well I thought. He stayed true to his beliefs, and he gave thoughtful replies to difficult questions regarding complex issues. I was impressed with how Pastor Rick conducted the forum. Kudos to them both. And yes, McCain did seem to have a more black-and-white view of things (what you call "decisive").. and he seemed more simplistic.. and unrealistic. So far in this campaign John McCain has made "jokes" about bombing Iran, about domestic violence, and about bestiality (the latter during a forum in a church amongst evangelicals). In the past he's made jokes about rape. And about Corsi's smear book, McCain says "you gotta keep your sense of humor". Apparently a vote for McCain is not just a vote for four more years of failed Bush foreign and domestic policies, it's also a vote for four more years of inappropriate jokes and a president with a sub-sophomoric sense of humor.
  6. So that wasn't you rooting for Hillary throughout the primaries, eh "srplane"? Ok dude, if you say so. [i'll play along. *wink, wink*]. My mistake, I guess. If you will though,.. please clarify for me: Do you think Barack Obama is a Muslim.. or a Christian? Do you think he's "anti-America".. or a patriotic American? Do you think he and Michelle Obama are racists? And while you're at it, perhaps you might clarify for me your seemingly contradictory beliefs about Barack Obama. You rail against him as being a "party-line liberal" (or some version thereof), and yet at the very same time you rail against him for "not standing for anything at all". Which is it? Does he stand for the left wing agenda, or for nothing at all? And if you think Obama being a "party-line liberal" is a shortcoming of his, why is it that you don't see it as a good thing when he shows a willingness to "move toward the middle" (ie, compromise; ie, reach across the aisle) on some issues? It seems to me that no matter Obama does,.. and no matter what position he takes on any issue.. you're always gonna find fault with him. And not based any rational, logical argument, but merely because you hate don't like him very much.. at all. And btw,.. if you think McCain's age is his only shortcoming that's been pointed out about him, then you obviously haven't been paying very close attention. Fwiw, I don't begrudge anyone their preference for John McCain. People who approve of the job George Bush has done, who like the direction he has taken our country, and who want four more years of the same.. those people should vote for McCain because that's exactly what he'll bring, and Barack Obama will not. If you disagree with this assertion,.. if you think John McCain will not represent a continuation of Bush policies, then please do point out how it is that you think McCain will differ from Bush with regard to domestic (economic and social) and foreign policy. Anyway,.. I don't expect that you're gonna respond to the specific questions I've asked of you, "srplane",.. that hasn't really ever been your style, has it?
  7. Anyone who gives Corsi's book any credibility is a fool. Anyone who gives the book's "#1 Best Seller" rating any credibility is doubly a fool. The New York Times has this book at #1 on its best seller list .. with a dagger against it. From the best seller list legend: "Rankings reflect sales, for the week ended [--], at many thousands of venues where a wide range of general interest books are sold nationwide. These include hundreds of independent book retailers (statistically weighted to represent all such outlets); national, regional and local chains; online and multimedia entertainment retailers; university, gift, supermarket, discount, department stores and newsstands. An asterisk (*) indicates that a book’s sales are barely distinguishable from those of the book above. A dagger (†) indicates that some bookstores report receiving bulk orders." What does that mean? In this case it means that right wing fringe groups are buying the book in bulk simply to get the #1 rating, and the NY Times is bringing it to peoples' attention that the #1 rating is NOT an accurate reflection of how many individuals have bought the book. In other words, it's a right wing #1 Best Seller sham. But hey,.. I doubt anyone is surprised.. or fooled.. by this. We all know that lies and deceit is how the right wing operates. Spot on observation, Eric. "McCain the Maverick" is ghost of the past; he's a figment of right wing imaginations. Nowadays John McCain is nothing but a forgetful, right wing pandering sell-out. Make no mistake about it, a vote for McCain is a vote to continue the failed domestic (economic and social) and foreign polices of GWB; it's a vote to continue the erosion of civil liberties, of the US Constitution, and of US relations with rest of the civilized world; it's a vote for more saber rattling instead of diplomacy; and it's a vote for more unnecessary wars. A vote for Barack Obama is a vote to change the disastrous course charted by neocon marionette GWB. Btw, Eric,.. I should let you know that regardless of the merits of your arguments, there is no reasoning with "srplane". His mind is so consumed with anti-Obama hatred that he's simply not capable of rational political discussion at this point. You see, "srplane" isn't really pro-McCain; he's anti-Obama. He absolutely hates Barack Obama. He's one of those people who thinks Obama is both anti-American and Muslim. If that doesnt tell you all you need to know, get this: "srplane" *ahem* supported Hillary Clinton in the democratic primaries, and he maintained to the very end that Hillary had "a good mathematical chance of winning" the nomination. He swore that if Hillary lost to Obama he was then going to vote for McCain. That's how politically confused in the head he is. He's so confused that even though he very enthusiastically agrees with Hillary Clinton's policy positions, he's now going to vote for John McBush, a politician whose policy positions are polar opposite from Clinton's on almost every issue, rather than voting for Barack Obama whose policy positions are very much in line with Clinton's on most issues. Go figure.
  8. McCain: Verging On Senility? ..or just Grumpy Old Man? * Hey you kids,.. get back to work, darnit!! * Seriously though..
  9. Yeah, Paris Hilton,.. an intellectually vapid self-centered celebrity who has inherited her wealth, being compared to Barack Obama,.. an intelligent, thoughtful, charismatic, self-made man, Harvard Law School magnum cum laude graduate, Harvard Law Review president, Illinois state senator, US senator, and US Presidential candidate. How could anyone not get McCain's ever-so-poignant point,.. right? We all know that Obama never suggested that properly inflating tires was the entiretly of his energy plan; we all know that he has put forth a comprehensive energy proposal of which "properly inflating tires" is merely one very small aspect of the plan. And it just happens to be an aspect that is WIDELY acknowledged as being a legitimate, effective gas saving step.. a step that every American can implement on their own and realize immediate savings as a result. As Obama pointed out, the fact that John McCain mocks that simple step seems to suggest that John McCain.. and his supporters.. take pride in being ignorant. Speaking of being ignorant.. anyone who says that they agree that properly inflating tires increases a car's gas mileage and thus saves gas and yet they "don't agree with it".. are fools. If it saves gas.. which it absolutely does.. why would anyone then "not agree with it"? "Dee Dee Deeee!"
  10. Throughout this campaign, repubs have tried to paint Obama as an.. elitist. Meet the real elitist candidate: Phil "Americans are a bunch of whiners" Gramm, campaign adviser to John "As far as I can tell, the economy is doing just fine" McCain.
  11. fwiw.. the math behind my hunch: * By and large, Republicans support offshore drilling. * Republicans make up roughly half the electorate (approx 48%). [since not "all" repubs support offshore drilling, I'll say only 40% of repubs support offshore drilling]. * It was claimed that 2/3 of the Americans support offshore drilling. * 2/3 = 66% * 66% (total support) - 40% (repub support) = 26% remaining (non-repub) support. * 40% vs 26% = "most of that 2/3 are republicans". btw.. It is a fact that "energy exploration" does NOT equate with "oil exploration". the questions in the poll you cited make that apparent to an objective observer. ..are you able to be an objective observer of that poll, Bill? I'm heading out on a road trip. ..catch ya in a couple days, friend.
  12. Granted, I have no data source to back up my claim, Bill; I was merely expressing an educated hunch. My point remains though: expanded offshore drilling and a gas tax holiday are "feel good/accomplish nothing" policy proposals. And my question remains: when did republicans become supporters of bogus "feel good/accomplish nothing" policy proposals? Having said that, your source reports on a poll regarding "ENERGY exploration" not "OIL exploration". In that context, "expand exploration" does not necessarily refer exclusively to "expand exploration for oil", it can just as well mean "expand exploration for alternate energy sources". My point is supported by the fact that the poll shows a 6% increase (from 54% to 60%) among all poll participants who identify "developing new energy sources" as a priority. --> As you can see, in one poll question people were asked to identify what they consider a "More important priority for energy policy"; they had the option of choosing between "expand exploration, mining/drilling, construction of new power plants" vs "more energy conservation/regulation" vs "I don't know". Given those choices, someone who thinks our priority should be expand exploration of alternate energy resources moreso than than our priority being "more energy conservation/regulation" would have to vote for the "expand exploration, mining/drilling, construction of new power plants" option. Furthermore, I can't help but notice that the poll shows a 6% DROP between Feb 2008 (49%) and June 2008 (43%) among REPUBLICANS who consider "Expand exploration, mining/drilling, build power plants" to be "More important" than "More energy conservation/regulation". --> It seems to me that any poll that shows a decrease in republican support for expanded exploration is clearly not a poll measuring republicans' support for "expanded offshore drilling". And if support for expanded offshore drilling it is what it was measuring, then it's clearly a flawed poll. And finally,.. the poll shows that 50% support for drilling in ANWR, and 43% opposition to drilling in ANWR. Nowhere in the poll are people asked specifically about expanded offshore drilling for oil.. the specific issue that I had commented on when I surmised "most of those 2/3 are republicans". I maintain my hunch that most of the 2/3 of the American population who support expanded offshore drilling and a gas tax holiday are republicans who are supporting "feel good/accomplish nothing" policy proposals. Your Pew poll has done nothing to sway my opinion on that.
  13. It is true, TypeO, that Barack Obama has.. since well before he'd announced his candidacy.. been advocating wind power as an alternate energy source. "While I take very seriously any concerns that these structures could interfere with military readiness, I also believe that with mounting instability in the Middle East and energy prices at record levels, we must begin investing in alternative energy sources today. Wind farms are an important part of our ongoing efforts to make the United States more energy independent, which is why the FAA needs to immediately clarify its position so that investors feel comfortable putting their money into these projects and construction crews can get to work." [barack Obama, July 26 2006] One of the stalled projects is located in Bloomington, Illinois. If completed, the wind farm would be the largest source of wind energy in the nation, generating enough power to serve an estimated 120,000 Chicago-area homes. On June 2, 2006, Senators Durbin, Obama, Russ Feingold (D-WI), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Kent Conrad (D-ND) and Byron Dorgan (D-ND) wrote letters to officials at DOD and FAA voicing their support for the responsible development of wind power. http://windenergynews.blogspot.com/2006/08...wind-power.html
  14. Obama has never said he "wants" more drilling (in fact he's been clear that he doesn't think offshore drilling is a worthwhile proposal). What he HAS said is that even though he personally doesn't support the idea, he's willing to consider it as an option IF that's what it takes to get a compromise deal done. He's being pragmatic; he's reaching across the aisle; he's being open-minded and flexible. Pragmatic, open-minded, flexible, and bi-partisan; qualities that will serve him well as the next president of the US, don't you think? Furthermore, the fact that the American people "want" more drilling by a 2:1 margin is not an indication that expanded offhsore drilling is sound economic or energy policy; it's merely an indication that there are twice as many short-sighted, gullible (dare i say ignorant?) Americans as there are wise, intelligent, practical Americans. ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION Official Energy Statistics from the US Government Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf "For the lower 48 OCS [Outer Continental Shelf], annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher-2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case. Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant." http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html [wellhead price: the price less transportation costs charged by the producer for petroleum or natural gas. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wellhead+price ] Bottom line: 2/3 of the American people may misguidedly want more drilling, but the US Government's own report predicts that expanded offshore drilling will not have a significant impact on gas prices. Other than for the big oil companies who will reap even more profits from expanded offshore drilling, increased offshore drilling and a "gas tax holiday" are nothing but "feel good" propositions for those 2/3 of the American population who now support them. Most of those 2/3 are republicans,.. which makes me wonder: when did you republicans become such avid proponents of meaningless "feel good" policy ideas? Expanded Offshore Drilling: Gas Tax Holiday: link: Barack Obama's Ten Point Page Energy Plan
  15. Is that George "Keep Drilling" Bush.. or John "Keep Drilling" McCain? "..the fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I've been totally in agreement and support of President Bush. ..I strongly disagree with any assertion that I've been more at odds with the president of the United States than I have been in agreement with him." -John McCain, Meet The Press, June 2005 It could be changed to..... "Oil Now $116 a Barrel (so why am I still paying $4.39/gallon at the pump?)"
  16. Thank you, Medhb. As was pointed out to Joe Republican, that breath of fresh air you're enjoying is thanks to some environmentalist wacko liberals who fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.
  17. As long as I'm jumping into the thick of it here, I guess I might as well jump in with both feet. "As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality." - George Washington, President Of The United States, 1789-1797 I see the vote in this poll is squarely in favor of Barack Obama becoming the next president of the United States. That's great news! I guess there's hope for positive change in America after all.
  18. A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE REPUBLICAN Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised. All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor. Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune. It is noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university. Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to. Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have." http://www.hellblazer.com/archives/2004/12...republican.html damn liberals.
  • Create New...