Previous 31 - 40 Next
In response to:

Obama "Circling the Wagons"!?

Anonymous3224 Wrote: Oct 18, 2012 12:48 AM
Forget about Pennsylvania. The GOP hasn't won that state since 1988. They've come tantalizingly close a time or two, but this won't be the year. It's kind of remarkable that the Keystone State is in play when the GOP has essentially been conceding it the whole time, but suddenly dashing in with less than three weeks to go will not do the trick. I would love to be wrong here--a Romney win in Pennsylvania would make for a long night of weeping and gnashing of teeth over on MSPCP--but I just do not see it happening. Romney would need to clean up in the rural counties and beat the shenanigans you KNOW the Democrats will try to pull in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.
He's NOT a "wanna be" dictator. He already IS one.
So let me get this straight. They're using taxpayer money to bribe private companies to break the law in order to help them win the election. Just when you thought they couldn't get any more corrupt...
The polls are over-sampling Democrats. That is a fact. And if you seriously believe your boy is going to win in November, then hey, don't vote. It's not like he needs one vote from you, if he's going to win a landslide...right?
So an act of war, with dead Americans, only pushes back a campaign event 45 minutes. What would it take to cancel one of those things--a mushroom cloud over Los Angeles?!
The Weather Channel has BEEN tilting left. They used to be weather news and information, straight no chaser. Now they're practically The Climate Change Channel, and they only do forecasts on the side. Lost cause, alas--I get my forecasts from AccuWeather, and even THEY tend to editorialize too much.
Yeah, yeah, we know...the dog ate your homework. Tell us another one. Oh...and what happened to the dog, anyway?
In response to:

Obama's Most Dangerous Promise

Anonymous3224 Wrote: Sep 04, 2012 9:35 PM
So if he's not going to work with the GOP, but he's conceding that Congress will be in GOP hands, what's he going to do? He's too full of himself to sit back and cast blame: he doesn't have to get re-elected, so he doesn't need such subterfuge. The only possibility left is that he's going to rule by executive decree and dare Congress to stop him. In other words, Obama has just admitted that he's going to go for full-on autocracy if he wins.
In response to:

“Con Con” Carries Pros and Cons

Anonymous3224 Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 10:33 AM
Except that at a convention, 2/3 of the states have to propose each amendment, and 3/4 of the states have to approve each one. So an amendment wouldn't even make it to the floor if it didn't enjoy very broad support, and wouldn't be approved unless all but the most recalcitrant states signed on. It would only take 13 states to vote an amendment down, so there would be no room for mischief. Slow and steady may be an argument in the House, but it takes six years to turn over the Senate. We don't have 18 years, or 12, if the incumbents keep getting re-elected in the upper chamber. We'll have been Greeced long since. If the spendaholics on the Hill won't vote fiscal discipline upon themselves, We The People MUST impose it.
In response to:

WaPo: Man, This Economy Stinks

Anonymous3224 Wrote: Aug 25, 2012 11:55 PM
Marxism is all theory, but it has been tried. (Soviet Union, Cuba, China, North Korea) It never works; it can't. It sounds nice in theory, but it always ends up with a wealthy few and a destitute many. The Communist Manifesto is the most evil book ever written. I'd put it ahead of the satanic bible in that regard, if for no other reason than the nine-digit body count.
Previous 31 - 40 Next