Walker Has No College Degree...

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

He's the face of tyranny, the face of freedom lost, the face that dares to pull the robes from Lady Liberty, and the blindfold from Themis his hand on her scale.

And that's the face of America for he next two years. Badmouthing is really only slightly different than badmouthing the country as a whole, especially if we're using that idea that Jeremiah Wright hates the country because he has no fear of pointing out hundreds of years of injustice in our country that have only now began to be made right.

 

[unregistered]

 

[BotanyBoy]

He's the face of tyranny, the face of freedom lost, the face that dares to pull the robes from Lady Liberty, and the blindfold from Themis his hand on her scale.

Yet for years you fail to point out exactly what freedoms we have lost under O......

 

[BotanyBoy]

Bad mouthing Obama is a national pastime of a majority of Americans, you need to get out more. His is the face of the leftist minority in America.

Yet somehow he won the presidential election not once, but TWICE! Without resorting to overt/blatant cheating like Bush had to.

How do you reconcile these facts vette?

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Adre]

You're right! But that was then, this is now. He couldn't repeat that feat today and any honest person would say so.

Any honest person would recognize that he cannot run so your irrelevant point is moot.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

Bad mouthing Obama is a national pastime of a majority of Americans, you need to get out more. His is the face of the leftist minority in America. Reverend Wright is a black liberation theologian, a friend of Louie Farrakhan, a racist, a leftist who uses the evils of the past to whip op racial strife in order to divide the races of today.

I don't believe it is, but if it is they need to stop and start being patriots. Those are all fairly good and noble things you list. And racial strife is already there, minorities just have a bad habit of taking it.

Your freedom of choice. Wait until the FCC releases the new Internet regs after the vote tomorrow. Obama and his minions are planning a full fledged takeover of the net.

Hopefully they hurry up before the ISPs finish consolidating their power. Are you seriously not in favor of Net Neutrality?

You're right! But that was then, this is now. He couldn't repeat that feat today and any honest person would say so.

You mean he can't because of legal restrictions, remove them and yes he could do it a third time with ease.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Your freedom of choice.

There has been a list of choices you can't make without consequences for since 1789. Stop with that lamest of cop out bullshit excuses and name what freedom EXACTLY has been lost under O?

What EXACTLY are you prohibited from doing today that you could freely do 19JAN2009......??

Wait until the FCC releases the new Internet regs after the vote tomorrow. Obama and his minions are planning a full fledged takeover of the net.

Maybe so.....but given the GOP's history of internet ultra crony internet law you have ZERO...ZERO....ZERO high ground on the right and I GLADLY welcome what (D) is offering over the (R)'s concept of regulating the internet.

I think you're just mad people are considering (D) plan after slamming the fuckin' door shut, locking, re-locking then welding a steel cage over (R)'s idea of regulating the internet so hard your lot will have to wait until all the folks involved are dead before the GOP can think about coming up with some "How we gonna squeeze the web?" legislation to propose.

You're right! But that was then, this is now. He couldn't repeat that feat today and any honest person would say so.

Tough shit...we voted for it and unless he screws up big enough we have to eat that cake till the next election. Deal with it....if you're right? (R) will slaughter in the next presidential election. Better have a pocket ace though, walker won't make it.

 

[Adre]

Quit being dishonest. I was making a rhetorical point. Obama could not win an election today, now that he's exposed his true intentions for America. If he had exposed these beliefs in the first place he wouldn't have been elected. Americans armed with the knowledge they have of Obama today, would not have elected him then.

Not that you ever let facts get in the way of your view of the world, but in fact he pretty much told us what he was going to do and we elected him. Your hatred for him does not change that. So your rhetorical point is bullshit as well.

 

[cjh]

"The poll released Friday shows that just 34% of Americans can identify Obama as a Christian or, more specifically, as a Protestant. Eleven percent remain convinced that he is Muslim, and 44% say they don't know."

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/ju...s-do-not-identify-obama-as-christian-20120622

Are you a Christian?

Not were you raised a Christian, but do you believe today in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost?

Do we know yet whether Vette currently believes in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost?

Well, Vette, do you?

 

[Busybody]

Well, Vette, do you?

what difference does it make....NIGGER?

 

[cjh]

what difference does it make....NIGGER?

Seems to to him.

 

[Busybody]

Seems to to him.

see?

why I call you NIGGER?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

You lie. He did not run on redistributing the nation's wealth. He did not run on nationalizing the nation's healthcare system. He did not run on negotiating with Iran. He did not run on a negative relationship with Israel. He did not run on using the IRS to undermine the First Amendment rights of his political opponents. He did not run on gun control. He did not run on opening the borders, and legalizing 5 million illegal aliens. He did not run on purging the military high command in order to put women in foxholes and gays in the ranks. He did not run on taking an apology tour of the world. He did not run on bugging out of Iraq and Afghanistan willy nilly ala Vietnam, He did not run on dismantling NASA and re-directing them to help Islamic nations improve their technology. He did not run on gay marriage. He did not run on promoting the interests of Islam.

Joe The P was 100% right

 

[Adre]

You lie. He did not run on redistributing the nation's wealth. He did not run on nationalizing the nation's healthcare system. He did not run on negotiating with Iran. He did not run on a negative relationship with Israel. He did not run on using the IRS to undermine the First Amendment rights of his political opponents. He did not run on gun control. He did not run on opening the borders, and legalizing 5 million illegal aliens. He did not run on purging the military high command in order to put women in foxholes and gays in the ranks. He did not run on taking an apology tour of the world. He did not run on bugging out of Iraq and Afghanistan willy nilly ala Vietnam, He did not run on dismantling NASA and re-directing them to help Islamic nations improve their technology. He did not run on gay marriage. He did not run on promoting the interests of Islam.

You're free to make shit up all day long. Go for it. And while you're at it, explain to the class why Canadian oil needs to be in Houston.

 

[KingOrfeo]

He's the face of tyranny, the face of freedom lost, the face that dares to pull the robes from Lady Liberty, and the blindfold from Themis his hand on her scale.

How are you now less free than you were in 2007?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Your freedom of choice.

What EXACTLY are you prohibited from doing today that you could freely do 19JAN2009......??

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfgsj5EkvA1qgxm4ao1_500.gif

How are you now less free than you were in 2007?

He refuses to give anything other than typical cop out bullshit..."Freedom of choice" lol like we have ever had absolute freedom in the US. Not even he supports such an absurd fucking idea...unless hate mongering on Obama. Then "zomg absolute freedom or evil nazi commie...not sure which but both are bad so cover bases. " vetteman mode.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Your freedom of choice. Wait until the FCC releases the new Internet regs after the vote tomorrow. Obama and his minions are planning a full fledged takeover of the net.

Net neutrality is rather the opposite of what you think it is.

Net neutrality is the concept that Internet users should be the ones who control what they see on the net, not internet service providers (ISPs) or the government. Among the specific rights lobbied for under net neutrality are:

* The deregulation of content (other than that which is criminal, such as child pornography);

* Open access to all sites and platforms;

* The prevention of ISPs from charging extra for access to "premium" sites.

Naturally, corporatists don't like the idea of net neutrality. For instance, Glenn Beck has compared net neutrality proponents to Marxists,[1] which is hilarious because by that "logic" the entirety of Silicon Valley would be Marxists.[2] This may be because opponents and paid shills have likened it to the Fairness Doctrine as applied to the Internet, even though it has nothing to do with political speech.

<snip>

All packets are created equal

What net neutrality dictates is that all Internet traffic, regardless of source or destination, is to be treated equally. This means that Internet service providers cannot discriminate between packets sent from a competing ISP, or charge more for traffic to or from a specific source or destination, or block sites based on their content (an exception exists for illegal content). They can, of course, charge their customers for a bigger "pipe" (Google, for instance, has a massive link to a Tier 1 ISP) which equates to a better incoming/outgoing traffic capacity, but they cannot charge Google merely for connecting to a certain number of customers per day or for sending a certain volume of traffic through that pipe per month.

In relation to the Fairness Doctrine, net neutrality has no similarities. The Fairness Doctrine was a purely political framework dictating that a radio or television station promoting one viewpoint had to give equal time to the opposite viewpoint. So, if you were to host El Rushbo on your radio station for an hour, the next hour would have to feature a guaranteed timeslot for a liberal speaker. This was why pundits like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly were almost unheard of before the 1990s, when the Fairness Doctrine was lifted – every hour hosting one political commentator required an extra hour hosting a second political commentator.

However, net neutrality opponents (ironically a lot of libertarians) argue that both net neutrality and the Fairness Doctrine are examples of the government's overreach into the free market, and the fact that the Fairness Doctrine failed should be seen as a reason to burn net neutrality. In reality, net neutrality isn't as simple as regulation versus deregulation; net neutrality ensures that Internet service providers cannot act as regulators themselves, in effect decentralizing the Internet by buffering their power against consumers and Internet companies. With or without net neutrality, the Internet will be regulated, but net neutrality ensures that the power to regulate is itself heavily regulated (to the point that it is de facto deregulation).

Why libertarians don't get this is beyond the scope of our imagination.

Who supports net neutrality?

Anybody who owns/rents a web server or pays for broadband Internet service, so about 99% of Internet users. And apparently the Chairman of the FCC and former cable company lobbyist, Tom Wheeler himself.[3]

Who opposes net neutrality?

Self-contradicting libertarians and ISPs. Oh, and Ted Cruz and Alex Jones.[4][5]

 

[KingOrfeo]

You're right! But that was then, this is now. He couldn't repeat that feat today and any honest person would say so.

He could, easily, if he had to go up against Romney/Ryan again.

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

I will say, no church that I have ever been in had a minister yelling "God Damn America!"

Maybe that's your problem.