1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Success or Failure?

Marek3 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 12:43 PM
Why because obama promised to act, finally now that he has no other choice? I am thinking if anything that proves Dr. Sowell column THAT much more.
In response to:

Success or Failure?

Marek3 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 12:42 PM
Yeah , I do have to say that I am always surprised by giving obama any moniker of great intellect. He isn't retarded to be sure; but he most certainly isn't all that smart either. If I was placing his IQ, based on his knowledge and how he speaks without a prompter I would say he is maybe 110 tops. He most certainly is not overly smart.
Any man who strikes a Women is no longer a Man. I don't care if that sounds Chauvinistic or not; the PC crowd can stuff it. Women, for whatever reason, seem to forgive abusers too often. I don't understand why, but it happens far too often. Personally, I applaud Ravens (whom normally I seriously dislike) for this. Now if Government was to get involved in this, I would disapprove of that; unless (of course) she files abuse chargers in which case Government needs to forefill its duty as a judge.
Amen tinsldr2! BTW people get called RINO for different reasons. Some would call me a RINO because I am not a social conservative (I am a Classical Liberal), even though I am very strong fiscal conservative. And of course there is the reverse, someone who is very strong Fiscal Conservative but weak on economical issue may be called a RINO as well. Gardner is way above Udall in all issues, and I will vote for him in a heart beat. The only thing that scares me about CO is that Udall with everything he has done is even in the race! Republican must take over Senate.
In response to:

We Don’t Have to Have More Fergusons

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 25, 2014 2:14 PM
Some certainly do, people like Jackson, Sharpton, Clinton, Late Kennedy, LBJ, etc.. all those kinds of "people" are using the system to gain more power. They learned long time ago (as a matter of fact in America in the 1936 elections when FDR divided people into single issue voters) that by pushing Racism and throwing scraps they can get rich and powerful. HOWEVER I maintain that those are in the minority, vast majority of Liberals are well meaning. And that's where the real challenge begins. A person who is in it for power/money will only go as far as his personal benefit will last. When such ends, they will shift, since they have no personal stake in any of it. However a true believer will continue down the same road regardless of any path or obstacle or even proof to the contrary. That's because they are convinced of their righteous cause. Such people will never concede nor give up.
In response to:

We Don’t Have to Have More Fergusons

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 25, 2014 12:33 PM
"Gentle Giant" I suppose if one considers violent thug as a "gentle" :P
In response to:

We Don’t Have to Have More Fergusons

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 25, 2014 12:08 PM
Thank you :) and I didn't notice that I said "...nor common sense even.. should have been ever obviously. I wish I could edit :(
In response to:

We Don’t Have to Have More Fergusons

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 25, 2014 11:56 AM
I agree with most Ms. Parker says, with exception of the last bit. "It is insulting that liberals pretend to care about the poor yet fight any acknowledgment of what has failed and block efforts to move forward with what can succeed" The problem with most Liberals (there are exception such as Clinton or Jackson who do it purely for power/money) is that they don't pretend that they want to help the poor. They completely BELIEVE that they are doing what is best for the Poor. Therein lies the biggest danger of all, and of course the biggest failure of Liberal thought. For to see that they are doing bad, it is necessary to first look at their own ideology as a source of that failure. Since this ideology is also source of their well being, and self identification, that is impossible. Hence the ideology is right, only scope is wrong. Which is to say the ideology will be successful if just more money is spent, and the programs are bigger. The failure isn't with them, it is with everybody outside of that. This is what most people on the Right miss, they look at the obvious failure of the Liberal agenda, and draw a conclusions that Liberals follow this agenda cynically, for their own personal gain. The reality is far worse, for the following of the agenda is directly related to the core of the Liberal self identify, the honest believe. Which is why neither Logic nor evidence, nor common sense even will ever persuade Liberals that they are wrong. Never underestimate the damage that well meaning people can do, no evil has ever been done by evil people that can compare to the evil done by those with good intentions.
Just give them a week, and those same killed will showed in graphic pictures as a result of "Israeli" strike. Like in America where Dead vote Democrat in Palestine the Dead are all dead due to Israel. Same mentality.
In response to:

The Patriotism of Prosperity

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 13, 2014 11:44 AM
While I agree with almost everything that Dr. Carson said; I would amend one thing. Corporations shouldn't be directly or indirectly expected to provide any "Community Benefit". Why? Because the greatest community good that Corporation provides is when it makes the most amount of money possible. This brings Jobs, raises standard of living, and provides customer that which they want. Any money spent directly on Community is money NOT spend on business. This means less expansion and less jobs. Community is far better served by successful business doing what it is suppose to be doing, than by one who does things that it has neither expertise nor resources to do.
1 - 10 Next