Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:06 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
You might as well add Republicans to that list because they too love the big government, don't believe me, just as the Cons on here how much we should cut the military budget by.
Wow, so Republicans like a strong military so I guess that equates to a loss of freedoms..

Yeah, I guess if you're dumb..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,899,643 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
that would be 1789 to 1951
Times are a lot different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,187,290 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Wow, so Republicans like a strong military so I guess that equates to a loss of freedoms..

Yeah, I guess if you're dumb..
No, Republicans like a strong military, a big military is run by the government, to have a big military means more government spending, therefore Republicans like big government, but just want to see that money spent on a big military that is still apart of the government.

Our military isn't some independent entity in this country, it is still apart of the government in case you have forgotten.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:12 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
No, Republicans like a strong military, a big military is run by the government, to have a big military means more government spending, therefore Republicans like big government, but just want to see that money spent on a big military that is still apart of the government.

Our military isn't some independent entity in this country, it is still apart of the government in case you have forgotten.
um, wrong.. One can very well have a large military and small legislation for the citizens it governs.

How the hell do you think we won numerous wars before we even had an income tax in this nation? Thats right, you think that we must inprison the citizens in order to defend them..

Like I said.. dumb
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:17 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73 View Post
Nuh uh...communism and fascism are complete opposites. A neo-proggie twitted it.
not really


"In order to bring about a North American Union (NAU), the public first has to be conditioned to think of themselves as North Americans. ... "Zbigniew Brzezinski has been a CSIS counselor, and at Mikhail Gorbachev's first State of the World Forum in 1995, Brzezinski revealed:


"We cannot leap into world government through one quick step.... The precondition for eventual and genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units."

"At this point, it is worth remembering that in Stalin's January 1913 address in Vienna, he advocated national loyalties becoming subservient to regions. And 3 years later, Lenin in 1916 proclaimed:

"The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into smaller states and all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge them."

"...in Brzezinski's BETWEEN TWO AGES (1970), he praised Marxism, and he claimed that "the nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty." One aspect of American sovereignty that is being yielded is ownership of American companies by Americans. In the first 9 months of 2007, 69 companies in New England alone have been sold to foreign buyers. Nationally, the French company Alcatel bought Lucent Technologies in the U.S. last year, and in September 2007 announced it will be cutting thousands of jobs. ...

"This is a form of Socialism known as fascism, and it will be the type of world government the power elite plans ultimately to bring about and control. In this government, the power elite will control politicians who will become government leaders who will promulgate laws, rules and regulations favorable to certain transnational corporations....

"Modern day globalization was launched with the creation of the Trilateral Commission in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Its membership consisted of just over 300 powerful elitists from north America, Europe and Japan. The clearly stated goal of the Trilateral Commission was to foster a 'New International Economic Order' that would supplant the historical economic order.



"...The Trilateral Commission nonetheless established a headlock on the Executive Branch of the U.S. government with the election of James Earl Carter in 1976. Hand-picked as a presidential candidate by Brzezinski, Carter was personally tutored in globalist philosophy and foreign policy by Brzezinski himself. Subsequently, when Carter was sworn in as President, he appointed no less than one-third of the U.S. members of the Commission to his Cabinet and other high-level posts in his Administration. Such was the genesis of the Trilateral Commission's domination of the Executive Branch that continues to the present day.

"With the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Trilateral Commission member George H.W. Bush was introduced to the White House as vice-president. Through Bush's influence, Reagan continued to select key appointments from the ranks of the Trilateral Commission. In 1988, George H.W. Bush... was followed by fellow Trilateral Commission member William Jefferson Clinton, who... appointed fourteen fellow Trilateral members to his Administration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:22 AM
 
Location: North Texas
24,561 posts, read 40,291,156 times
Reputation: 28564
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
We should note that this wasn't a fascist country before passing term limits for a president. We should also note that it has no chance of passing.
This.

I'm a liberal and I'm all for term limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:22 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
8,982 posts, read 10,463,986 times
Reputation: 5752
Duplicate thread

//www.city-data.com/forum/polit...-serranos.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:28 AM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,858,535 times
Reputation: 9283
Zero cosponsors... means only IDIOTS actually believe in it...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,187,290 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
um, wrong.. One can very well have a large military and small legislation for the citizens it governs.

How the hell do you think we won numerous wars before we even had an income tax in this nation? Thats right, you think that we must inprison the citizens in order to defend them..

Like I said.. dumb
Yeah you keep pretending small government includes a large military. Who pays for that large military? Large military= large government, like I said, anyone who doesn't include the military in with government size is dumb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2013, 11:37 AM
 
Location: One of the 13 original colonies.
10,190 posts, read 7,955,882 times
Reputation: 8114
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkGuy View Post
President Obama has already proven to be one of the greatest Presidents in US History. Given where America was when Bush left office and the great strides we've made since then, most Americans would agree that President Obama should be allowed the opportunity to seek 4 more years in office if he so desires. Why do we have this arbitrary 2 term limit anyways? If Obama remains popular with the majority of Americans and they desire for him to remain their leader, why should he be prevented from seeking a 3rd term? Isn't democracy supposed to be about the will of the people?




I want some of what this guy ^^^^^^^^^^^^^is smoking. Obama one of the greatest Presidents. That is a side splitting joke. Leave it up to the Dimwitties to want to have a Dictator running the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:32 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top