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.
Now again, the irony of conservatives is that they are all for cigarettes and alcohol, which kill far more people but are against pot smoking which statistically kill far less. You see where are going here. Who is more schizo?
Hmm---last time I checked, you dont get the munchies from smoking cigarettes...
Hmm---last time I checked, you dont get the munchies from smoking cigarettes...
LOL. Is this all you could come up with on my list of hypocritical examples? I can't even understand what you're trying to say unless you're saying all pot smokers get the munchies so they make up the fat population. This post is asinine. It's obvious that smoking and drinking have led to far more deaths and we have yet to understand all the consequences of second hand smoke. I dare you to show me any studies that people are dying more due to pot smoking than cigarettes/alcohol which are just legalized drugs IMO.
Give and example, please. What Constitutional rights have they violated?
Habeas Corpus, speedy trial, right to confront accuser
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
What "imperialistic" wars?
Iraq
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Huh??? Ahhhhh Most of our legal system, indeed our very government, is based on principles that come from the Bible, and Christian values. Are you telling me you didn't know that? Ever heard of John Locke? Puritans? These are people who's Christian world view helped shape America, our judicial system, and our government.
You should read the writings of Jefferson and Madison They both disagree with you. But then, I'm sure you know better than they.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Now that is utterly ridiculous! Such nonsense! Upon what do you base such and outlandish statement? That is hardly even worthy of a response it is so nonsensical.
Fundamentalists are flip sides of the same coin. Muslim fundamentalist = Christian fundamentalist
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Ronald Reagan was the only conservative president that we have had that I can remember. Has there been someone else?
Reagan ran huge budget deficits. Spending increased by 70%, Debt more than doubled. That's what you call "conservative." He was almost as bad as the current Bush.
Reagan ran huge budget deficits. Spending increased by 70%, Debt more than doubled. That's what you call "conservative."
WOW...another person who doesn't understand and hasn't read our Constitution. Let's just call BS on your comment.
Reagan didn't run any deficts....the Congress did. Granted, Reagan didn't veto their appropriations, nor were his sample budgets submitted as balanced, but the Democrat Congress didn't pass their own balanced budget either. They could have passed a balanced budget at any time.
If you read the Constitution, you will see that all appropriations originate in the House of Representatives and must be passed by Congress before going to the President for signature.
Fundamentalists are flip sides of the same coin. Muslim fundamentalist = Christian fundamentalist
Let's call BS on this one too. I'm an atheist, so I have no horse in the race, but come on.
When is the last time a "Christian Fundamentalist" blew up a bus load of people in Jerusalem? When did a Christian terrorist put on a bomb belt and walk into a crowded market in Baghdad and explode it? Name all the Christian fundamentalists who flew planes into buildings. Name all the Christian fundamentalist governments around the world, and especially the ones who have sworn to destroy the west and the US. I could go on and on.
Sure, there have been some individual wackos taking shots at abortion doctors, but you cannot compare that with the massive record of terrorism perpetuated on the US, Israel, and the west since the 1960's by Arab and Muslim terrorist.
WOW...another person who doesn't understand and hasn't read our Constitution. Let's just call BS on your comment.
Reagan didn't run any deficts....the Congress did. Granted, Reagan didn't veto their appropriations, nor were his sample budgets submitted as balanced,
This is all you needed to say. Reagan was no fiscal conservative. He was the original "borrow and spend" republican.
Let's call BS on this one too. I'm an atheist, so I have no horse in the race, but come on.
When is the last time a "Christian Fundamentalist" blew up a bus load of people in Jerusalem? When did a Christian terrorist put on a bomb belt and walk into a crowded market in Baghdad and explode it? Name all the Christian fundamentalists who flew planes into buildings. Name all the Christian fundamentalist governments around the world, and especially the ones who have sworn to destroy the west and the US. I could go on and on.
Sure, there have been some individual wackos taking shots at abortion doctors, but you cannot compare that with the massive record of terrorism perpetuated on the US, Israel, and the west since the 1960's by Arab and Muslim terrorist.
You mean other than blowing up medical clincs and federal buildings in Oklahoma?
William A. Niskanen is chairman of the Cato Institute and was a member of President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers from 1981 to 1985. Washington Post columnist Lou Cannon, in his book, President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime, called Niskanen's book, Reaganomics, "a definitive and notably objective account of administration economic policies."
William A. Niskanen is chairman of the Cato Institute and was a member of President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers from 1981 to 1985. Washington Post columnist Lou Cannon, in his book, President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime, called Niskanen's book, Reaganomics, "a definitive and notably objective account of administration economic policies."
Ohh if the real world were as easy as yours.
Nowhere does it assert Reagan was a fiscal conservative. It describes "Reaganomics", a less clear description than "borrow and spend" which the author acknowledges is Reagan's legacy. Two other aspects of "Reaganomics" -- inflation fighting and unwinding of price controls -- the author acknowledges were just continuations of programs begun by Carter.
The economy was in a downward spiral during carter.....Reaganomics turned it around into a growing economy.
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.
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.
Do you read what you type?
