DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
has anybody been to democratic underground ? what a bunch of quacks. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twak.gif
has anybody been to democratic underground ? what a bunch of quacks. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twak.gif
DEMOCRAT's at their zenith
- Thread starter tkl
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Floating Spots
Enlightened
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
I have been now.
I didn't make it through the first two sentences.
Even that was way too much!
I have been now.
I didn't make it through the first two sentences.
Even that was way too much!
Rothrandir
Flashaholic
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
too bad you have to register...i would love to make a couple post /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif
what weak minded imbeciles !!!
too bad you have to register...i would love to make a couple post /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif
what weak minded imbeciles !!!
Rothrandir
Flashaholic
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
i can't find the top 100 idiots list /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
i can't find the top 100 idiots list /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
Scroll to the bottom of the first page, then go to the top ten conservative idiots page, at the bottom is a link to idiot archive, top one in that list.
Or just click this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/03/100.html
Scroll to the bottom of the first page, then go to the top ten conservative idiots page, at the bottom is a link to idiot archive, top one in that list.
Or just click this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/03/100.html
Rothrandir
Flashaholic
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
thanks!
thanks!
DieselDave
Super Moderator,
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
I love the website, it's a graphic display of their feelings and intellect. I think it should be required viewing by all undecided voters in 2004. It has the potential to get the Republicans more votes than a Democrats memorial service turned into a pep-rally. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
I love the website, it's a graphic display of their feelings and intellect. I think it should be required viewing by all undecided voters in 2004. It has the potential to get the Republicans more votes than a Democrats memorial service turned into a pep-rally. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
Rothrandir
Flashaholic
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yellowlaugh.gif
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yellowlaugh.gif
Sigman
* The Arctic Moderator *
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
First and last time I need to go there! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
First and last time I need to go there! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Silviron
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
I went there a few times before you had to be a member to post. I did manage to make a few succinct comments, but they changed to membership only posts only two or three days later. (Wonder if I had anything to do with that??? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )
It literally made me sick to my stomach to go there and see the depths of ignorance and pure hate that is the primary product of DU. Even the stuff coming from Al Queda or france isn't as disgusting.
I went there a few times before you had to be a member to post. I did manage to make a few succinct comments, but they changed to membership only posts only two or three days later. (Wonder if I had anything to do with that??? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )
It literally made me sick to my stomach to go there and see the depths of ignorance and pure hate that is the primary product of DU. Even the stuff coming from Al Queda or france isn't as disgusting.
beemerphile
Newly Enlightened
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
They have the gall to call Cheney a "humorless fool". I havn't met to many Democrats that WERE NOT humorless. That's why they can't come up with a television personality (a la O-Reilly or Rush) that anyone would voluntarily sit down and listen to more than once. They never get the jokes. Heck, they never get the fact that THEY ARE the jokes. Oppose the war to strengthen our enemies, then complete the total gun control agenda to remove our ability to defend ourselves. I wonder what that agenda is? - Lee
They have the gall to call Cheney a "humorless fool". I havn't met to many Democrats that WERE NOT humorless. That's why they can't come up with a television personality (a la O-Reilly or Rush) that anyone would voluntarily sit down and listen to more than once. They never get the jokes. Heck, they never get the fact that THEY ARE the jokes. Oppose the war to strengthen our enemies, then complete the total gun control agenda to remove our ability to defend ourselves. I wonder what that agenda is? - Lee
pedalinbob
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
i have read many of their posts...and i am still stunned at how violent some of them are. they dont express general dislike for Bush, they HATE him!
i cant quote, but paraphrasing is something like this: "i would just punch the *******. those conservatives really pi$$ me off..."
jees. even though i wasnt fond of Clinton, i never hated the guy. arent libs supposed to be the "nice" party?
insted of sticking to the issues, they seem to only be able to redicule the opposition. there are so few facts, and huge stretches of conjecture: a+b=Z!
when someone with a logical opposing view posts on their forum, they are censored.
buncha whiney-babies! cant handle a good debate.
Bob
i have read many of their posts...and i am still stunned at how violent some of them are. they dont express general dislike for Bush, they HATE him!
i cant quote, but paraphrasing is something like this: "i would just punch the *******. those conservatives really pi$$ me off..."
jees. even though i wasnt fond of Clinton, i never hated the guy. arent libs supposed to be the "nice" party?
insted of sticking to the issues, they seem to only be able to redicule the opposition. there are so few facts, and huge stretches of conjecture: a+b=Z!
when someone with a logical opposing view posts on their forum, they are censored.
buncha whiney-babies! cant handle a good debate.
Bob
Jonathan
Enlightened
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
Alas for democracy.
Used to be the Republicans were against the Democrats, but they would grudgingly respect each other. But the Republican party and pro Republican press did their best to sow _hatred_ against Clintion, and the Democrats and the pro Democrat press are doing the same with Bush (not that this was the beginning; there ave always been groups who were opposed to the administration then in power to the point of hatred, but now it seems to be _everywhere_ all the time).
I would have rather Gore been elected than Bush. I believe that he would have been a better president. (No, I'm not going to spend time debating the topic, that isn't the point that I'm trying to make.) But Bush is good enough that he got the support of about half of the country, and I am certain that on some points he is doing a better job (by the measure of things that I care about) than Gore would have done.
Discourse and disagreement are an essential part of democracy. If we all agreed on everything, then we wouldn't need a democracy; we'd simply have a lottery and the loser would be supreme dictator for that week. Hating the 'other side' is a useless waste of time and emotion and lives. I do not agree with the 'Democratic Agenda', I agree even less with the 'Republican Agenda', and it is my job as a member of a democratic society to think about these issues and debate these issues, and to explicitly reject the dogma being spouted by both sides.
-Jon
Alas for democracy.
Used to be the Republicans were against the Democrats, but they would grudgingly respect each other. But the Republican party and pro Republican press did their best to sow _hatred_ against Clintion, and the Democrats and the pro Democrat press are doing the same with Bush (not that this was the beginning; there ave always been groups who were opposed to the administration then in power to the point of hatred, but now it seems to be _everywhere_ all the time).
I would have rather Gore been elected than Bush. I believe that he would have been a better president. (No, I'm not going to spend time debating the topic, that isn't the point that I'm trying to make.) But Bush is good enough that he got the support of about half of the country, and I am certain that on some points he is doing a better job (by the measure of things that I care about) than Gore would have done.
Discourse and disagreement are an essential part of democracy. If we all agreed on everything, then we wouldn't need a democracy; we'd simply have a lottery and the loser would be supreme dictator for that week. Hating the 'other side' is a useless waste of time and emotion and lives. I do not agree with the 'Democratic Agenda', I agree even less with the 'Republican Agenda', and it is my job as a member of a democratic society to think about these issues and debate these issues, and to explicitly reject the dogma being spouted by both sides.
-Jon
Siriuslite
Newly Enlightened
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
[ QUOTE ]
Jonathan said:
I would have rather Gore been elected than Bush.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now we can start debating the usefulness of the Electoral college in todays modern world. According to the official government website, Gore did win the 2000 election. I used to think that democracy meant the person with the most votes wins, guess I'm wrong.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
[ QUOTE ]
Jonathan said:
I would have rather Gore been elected than Bush.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now we can start debating the usefulness of the Electoral college in todays modern world. According to the official government website, Gore did win the 2000 election. I used to think that democracy meant the person with the most votes wins, guess I'm wrong.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
pedalinbob
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
well stated, Johnathan.
i guess what surprised me, again, was the outright hatred of the president, and republicans.
the prez isnt perfect, but hate him? hate is a pretty powerful term. im sure there were conservatives that hated Clinton, but i havent seen much (any) of those statements. what i have seen are people refuting Clinton's policy, not him in general (go to americanconservatives.net--it is surprisingly without hate).
however, people were upset over the Lewinsky fiasco, which was a personal part of Clinton's life...until he blatantly lied to us. then it became a public issue. i didnt care if he doinked Lewinsky--none of my business, as long as he ran the country well.
im not slamming Clinton, or propping up Bush. i do believe that Bush has conducted himself in a more honorable manner than Clinton did.
truly, im not really conservative or liberal. but the conservative side tends to reflect my own beliefs.
i will support a liberal idea if it makes sense, and i will slam a conservative one if it doesnt make sense. if Bush goofs up, i will call him on it.
a agree whole-heartedly that hating the other side is non-productive. we should simply scrutinize ALL sides with an open mind...easier said than done!
take care,
Bob
well stated, Johnathan.
i guess what surprised me, again, was the outright hatred of the president, and republicans.
the prez isnt perfect, but hate him? hate is a pretty powerful term. im sure there were conservatives that hated Clinton, but i havent seen much (any) of those statements. what i have seen are people refuting Clinton's policy, not him in general (go to americanconservatives.net--it is surprisingly without hate).
however, people were upset over the Lewinsky fiasco, which was a personal part of Clinton's life...until he blatantly lied to us. then it became a public issue. i didnt care if he doinked Lewinsky--none of my business, as long as he ran the country well.
im not slamming Clinton, or propping up Bush. i do believe that Bush has conducted himself in a more honorable manner than Clinton did.
truly, im not really conservative or liberal. but the conservative side tends to reflect my own beliefs.
i will support a liberal idea if it makes sense, and i will slam a conservative one if it doesnt make sense. if Bush goofs up, i will call him on it.
a agree whole-heartedly that hating the other side is non-productive. we should simply scrutinize ALL sides with an open mind...easier said than done!
take care,
Bob
KC2IXE
Flashaholic*
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
[ QUOTE ]
siriuslite said:
...snip... I used to think that democracy meant the person with the most votes wins, guess I'm wrong.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep - Your wrong. The person who gets the most electoral votes wins. This was intentional on the part of the founding fathers
You see, they realized there was a MAJOR problem with a pure "democratic" vote (and still is BTW)
In a pure democratic vote, you can play one geographic section of the country off against all the rest. For instance, today, you would pretty much be able to win a "pure democratic" vote by promising everything to the cities, and saying "@#*^ the rural areas" You get all the votes in the cities, and you win. It allows you to play off a majority, and the folks in the minority have NO rights - the old problem of "In a democracy, 51% of the people can vote to kill the other 49%"
The electoral congress was created to make sure that people in the smaller states would have at least SOME say in the government
Thank God we live in a Republic, NOT a Democracy
"(@#*^ the rural areas" edited by DieselDave. That was one of only about three words I view as inappropriate in an open forum /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif )
[ QUOTE ]
siriuslite said:
...snip... I used to think that democracy meant the person with the most votes wins, guess I'm wrong.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep - Your wrong. The person who gets the most electoral votes wins. This was intentional on the part of the founding fathers
You see, they realized there was a MAJOR problem with a pure "democratic" vote (and still is BTW)
In a pure democratic vote, you can play one geographic section of the country off against all the rest. For instance, today, you would pretty much be able to win a "pure democratic" vote by promising everything to the cities, and saying "@#*^ the rural areas" You get all the votes in the cities, and you win. It allows you to play off a majority, and the folks in the minority have NO rights - the old problem of "In a democracy, 51% of the people can vote to kill the other 49%"
The electoral congress was created to make sure that people in the smaller states would have at least SOME say in the government
Thank God we live in a Republic, NOT a Democracy
"(@#*^ the rural areas" edited by DieselDave. That was one of only about three words I view as inappropriate in an open forum /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif )
treek13
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
[ QUOTE ]
KC2IXE said:
[ QUOTE ]
siriuslite said:
...snip... I used to think that democracy meant the person with the most votes wins, guess I'm wrong.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep - Your wrong. The person who gets the most electoral votes wins. This was intentional on the part of the founding fathers...
[/ QUOTE ]
If I may add, both Gore and Bush should have known how the system works here in the US before the election. I was not a Bush supporter but I must say I get sick of Gore supporters mentioning the whole popular vote vs. electoral college thing. It wasn't some big secret or conspiracy; it was simply the way the election laws work here. No offense meant to anyone but people even trying to make the electoral college into a controversy almost makes me think voters should be required to pass a civics exam before being allowed to vote.
Pat
[ QUOTE ]
KC2IXE said:
[ QUOTE ]
siriuslite said:
...snip... I used to think that democracy meant the person with the most votes wins, guess I'm wrong.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep - Your wrong. The person who gets the most electoral votes wins. This was intentional on the part of the founding fathers...
[/ QUOTE ]
If I may add, both Gore and Bush should have known how the system works here in the US before the election. I was not a Bush supporter but I must say I get sick of Gore supporters mentioning the whole popular vote vs. electoral college thing. It wasn't some big secret or conspiracy; it was simply the way the election laws work here. No offense meant to anyone but people even trying to make the electoral college into a controversy almost makes me think voters should be required to pass a civics exam before being allowed to vote.
Pat
pedalinbob
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
another thoughtful post!
what burns me is when people state that Bush did not win the election--that he was "appointed" by the supreme court.
hmmm. if my feeble memory serves, Bush won once. recount. Bush won again. Recount. Bush won again. (i cannot remember how many recounts there were--there were several, right?)
the incident is put before the supreme court (who initiated this step?), who UPHOLDS the election results.
so, let me get this straight: Bush wins three times, and is backed by the supreme court...but he was not elected?
i just dont get the logic...
Bob
another thoughtful post!
what burns me is when people state that Bush did not win the election--that he was "appointed" by the supreme court.
hmmm. if my feeble memory serves, Bush won once. recount. Bush won again. Recount. Bush won again. (i cannot remember how many recounts there were--there were several, right?)
the incident is put before the supreme court (who initiated this step?), who UPHOLDS the election results.
so, let me get this straight: Bush wins three times, and is backed by the supreme court...but he was not elected?
i just dont get the logic...
Bob
Brotherscrim
Enlightened
Re: DEMOCRAT\'s at their zenith
[ QUOTE ]
beemerphile said:Heck, they never get the fact that THEY ARE the jokes. Oppose the war to strengthen our enemies,
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't you think it's possible that they oppose war for reasons other than strengthening our enemies? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
Honestly, this whole "dissent is unpatriotic" stuff I've been hearing lately is distasteful. I'm sorry, but if somebody believes that this - or any other - war is stupid, they have my full support to say something about it.
This by the way, is a good way to tell whether you are in a free country or not. If you can freely criticize and argue the choices your government makes: Free country. If you can't: Not a Free country.
I submit to you that people who suggest it's wrong to oppose this opinion or that are either unfamiliar with what a free country is, or would do best not living in one.
[ QUOTE ]
beemerphile said:Heck, they never get the fact that THEY ARE the jokes. Oppose the war to strengthen our enemies,
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't you think it's possible that they oppose war for reasons other than strengthening our enemies? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
Honestly, this whole "dissent is unpatriotic" stuff I've been hearing lately is distasteful. I'm sorry, but if somebody believes that this - or any other - war is stupid, they have my full support to say something about it.
This by the way, is a good way to tell whether you are in a free country or not. If you can freely criticize and argue the choices your government makes: Free country. If you can't: Not a Free country.
I submit to you that people who suggest it's wrong to oppose this opinion or that are either unfamiliar with what a free country is, or would do best not living in one.
