Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

It Takes Two to End a War

Vincent107 Wrote: May 29, 2013 9:13 AM
I'm glad to see there are others who think the "war on terrorism" is akin to "war on ICBMs". If a person describes a problem so poorly, how can a solution be reached? It's not a war on terror, but a war on those who would use terror as a tactic. Our enemies easily make themselves known as they call for our destruction, rejoice at the fall of the World Trade Centers, and celebrate with the atrocities committed at the Boston Marathon.
In response to:

Why I’m Not a Conservative

Vincent107 Wrote: Mar 19, 2013 6:56 PM
"True Liberal"s, also sometimes called "old school" liberals are current day libertarians. The contention is that the "big government" globalist Prog (or "Statist") has hijacked the classical definition of a liberal and applied it to themselves.
In response to:

GOP Must Launch Reality Offensive

Vincent107 Wrote: Mar 15, 2013 10:40 AM
He's just trolling. He gets his kicks making inflammatory statements or asking open ended questions and seeing who responds.
In response to:

If We've Lost Walter ...

Vincent107 Wrote: Mar 08, 2013 5:20 PM
If a person is being killed by a weaponized drone, aren't they by definition engaged in combat? (Just sayin')
Such a great example of a false dichotomy argument AND an ad hominem attack! The reduction of a dissenting viewpoint to being held by 1) a moron or 2) an overtly religious person who, by extension, is unintelligent. (I bet it would pain you to learn that most historical scientific milestones were found by overtly religious people seeking to "discover the mind of God.") Blind assertions whose fallacies are obvious with a mere cursory consideration not only highlight a lack of intellectual depth, they give insight to a very close-minded style of derision reserved by intelligentsia who never migrated past the walls of academia to the real world beyond.
People forget that the KKK originally was formed out of the Democratic party to counter the Republicans' push for equal rights for blacks. The Democrats vociferously fought for Jim Crow laws and against segregation. The only thing Democrats did was manage to get enough votes to say they backed the Civil Rights Act after the Republican party laid all the groundwork and guaranteed its passage. The Democrat party LOVED Grand Cyclops Robert Byrd until he passed away. (But the Republican Party is racist for believing all races can pursue and achieve the American Dream without government handouts)
In response to:

Rove Vs. the Tea Party

Vincent107 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 11:38 AM
"The Architect's" (of GOP demise) and the establishment's solution is to become more like Democrats. It never occurs to them that if someone is going to vote Democrat-lite, they'll more readily vote for a Democrat. Americans need a viable alternative to statists.
In response to:

Rove Vs. the Tea Party

Vincent107 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 11:35 AM
Of course the establishment Republicans look at some of the candidates the Tea Party put forward who didn't get elected, and say this is indicative that the Tea Party can have no political traction. However, we never hear the establishment Republicans use the same logic against their own candidates. John McCain was such a lackluster moderate Republican that his campaign was barely on life support until he picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. He still lost. Mittens the Wonderhair was touted as the only candidate who could beat Obama, but he couldn't energize the base. Still, Obama won by only by a slim margin. Obama may have even lost if allowing for the rampant voter fraud in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania.
"[DeGeneres] told Parade that it took a great deal of hard work to convince producers she was “a funny woman who happens to be gay." I remember when she first "came out of the closet". I knew she was gay, but up until that point I had no idea she was a comedian.
In response to:

The Democrats Want You to Die

Vincent107 Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:15 PM
And the best part? After you die you still get to vote Democrat.
So the first amendment that states "congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]" only applies to churches and faith based organizations? Congress can make a law prohibiting the free exercise of religion when businesses are involved? A business cannot force an individual to do things that go against a persons religious beliefs. The owners who run Hobby Lobby believe that abortion kills an unborn albeit living child, yet you are fine with them being forced to violate their religious beliefs because they make up a business? If any component of the Bill or Rights is up for grabs, then all of it is up for grabs.
Previous 11 - 20 Next