Jump to content
Islamic Forum
SaracenSoldier

Us Elections 2012

Recommended Posts

Aligarr, where do you get the idea that Southrons are elitist? You know where you hear that term most often, especially these days? The rural areas of the south, which is about as un-elite as you can get. As for states' rights being the battle cry of the Confederacy, that is true. But you make the same dumb mistake as many people do when you talk about slavery being the cause of the war.

 

If slavery was the cause of the Civil War, why then was Lincoln prepared to keep it to a greater level than even Jefferson Davis wanted or expected? Lincoln had no intention of freeing slaves until it became necessary to prevent foreign governments from acknowledging and recognizing the sovereignty of the Confederacy. No, the war was about economics. Along with states' rights, something the Constitution upheld at the time, economics was the single biggest reason for the war. (As I said before, I would love to debate the Civil War since I did intense and in depth study of it.)

 

Now, that being said...I agree with Wanderer in that our government is today corporatist if you will. Corporations determine the position of the government almost as much as anything, and they care little for the regular person, so neither do the politicians on either side. All that matters is money. That being said, I also don't like socialism because it never has managed to really work yet, and we have a horrible track record as it is, so I don't want the US to try it. As for current system, the regulators pick and choose what they want to regulate and what they want to allow, which lets large companies get away with things smaller companies never would be able to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Aligarr, where do you get the idea that Southrons are elitist? You know where you hear that term most often, especially these days? The rural areas of the south, which is about as un-elite as you can get. As for states' rights being the battle cry of the Confederacy, that is true. But you make the same dumb mistake as many people do when you talk about slavery being the cause of the war.

 

If slavery was the cause of the Civil War, why then was Lincoln prepared to keep it to a greater level than even Jefferson Davis wanted or expected? Lincoln had no intention of freeing slaves until it became necessary to prevent foreign governments from acknowledging and recognizing the sovereignty of the Confederacy. No, the war was about economics. Along with states' rights, something the Constitution upheld at the time, economics was the single biggest reason for the war. (As I said before, I would love to debate the Civil War since I did intense and in depth study of it.)

 

Now, that being said...I agree with Wanderer in that our government is today corporatist if you will. Corporations determine the position of the government almost as much as anything, and they care little for the regular person, so neither do the politicians on either side. All that matters is money. That being said, I also don't like socialism because it never has managed to really work yet, and we have a horrible track record as it is, so I don't want the US to try it. As for current system, the regulators pick and choose what they want to regulate and what they want to allow, which lets large companies get away with things smaller companies never would be able to.

 

Socialism is built into the government as the Constitution states the role of government is to protect the welfare of the people. It allows taxation to help it seek the welfare within its open framework. However, as you know, socialism has many varying steps and degrees. We are not as socialistic as Scandinavia but we definitely do not have a perfect capitalism, either. Wage regulations, utility regulations, progressive taxation, social agenda taxation, and subsidies ensure the market is far from free. However imperfect Socialism is, it is really the only true combination of government and politics which has ensured a highly developed economy for the long term. The more free the market, the less confidence people have to spend. Perhaps the measure of economic success should change. Otherwise, socialism is the only solution for current economic success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you know Wanderer , I been through the South countless times from Brownsville Texas , New orleans , Lake Charles , Biloxi , Gulfport, Moblie ,Jacksonville ,Savannah and Charleston to Wilimington . Worked in those cities , spent time with freinds in some , and hotel brooms in others , and NEVER have I heard that term used . But that's beside the point , I did not attach any elitist connotation to that word of yours -"Southrons " . Perhaps a re-read of my post is in order ? Funny , but I find similar " miscomprehension " in replies by Nightingale as I do you . Curious .

Indeed there is a negative relation between government and large corporations ., groups like ALEC are proof that large corporations can consolidate into organizations like ALEC pool money together in super-funds ,ands actually buy legislation favorable to those corporations interests . And THAT has been going on well BEFORE the recent Supreme Court Ruling that " corporations are people too " when it comes to political donations .

Again , this is a capitalistic economy and nation , but with the ethical codes eroded or discarded alltogether . This is the fdault of corrupt politicians and people who re-elect these bums time and again , to ignorant to realize tat it is their well being is not even a remote consideration .The whole idea of any contribution to a sitting politician OR an aspiring one puts those politicians in a position to "OWE " their financial benefactors .

Now comes the ideology that I spoke of which you have missed . You have heard that roughly 90% of the wealth in this country is owned by about 1 % of the population , and that statistic is accurate . These are the elitists I spoke of , and there are two ideologies that dominate their thinking . It's got nothing to do with sociialism , facism ,communism , marxism or any of the other " invented descriptions" each side uses against the other , and has everything to do with the nature and intentions of greed and power , two human characteristics that have been around since man formed any type of society . The Northern or Yankee elitists operate under different ethics and agendas as do the Southern elitists . This has been evident , as I said since well before the civil war . The Southern mentality in this is based on the old colonialism that brought Europeans to foreign lands gave cause to the use of slaves to exploit those lands which took place in the plantations of the Carribean and the southern parts of what was not yet the United States .Whereeas in the NORTH where originally Europeans landed to escape the British Empire , and colonize those areas which are now Vermont ,Connecticut , New Hampshire ,New York etc . were more based in individuals exploiting resources and making a life independantly hence those in the north looked down upon slavery atleast to the degree that it was never prevelant in those regions . Yes that was still colonialism but of a different nature .As fortunes amassed as the northerners built the railroads and more or less the great ports which brought fortunes in trade , these are what are known as the Yankee or northern elitists .The tensions between the two which ultimately centered around slavery , led to the Civil War . Those same divisions and tensions continue today . Unions are an old /ancient idea , yet were popular only in the north , and the same Plantation mentality which persists among the Souhern Elitists kepty unions out of the southern states ....to this day .

having said all of that .....no one takes your land or goods for no apparent reason other than self enrichment of the government , that is political rhetoric .Everyone has to pay taxes , taxes pay for defense and a host of other things for the common good . In the case of the bailouts of 2006-2008 and into thwe Obama administration ....they were necessarry , although not perfectly executed neither by Bush jr.nor Obama's Administrations , but nonetheless absolutely necessarry to prevent further collapse of the economy and much greater loss of jobs .Both sides know this , but it is part ofg their political rhetoric and football these days .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nightingale , no disrespect intended , but I will not argue with anyone who repeats what they have heard , rather than having any knowledge from what they have LEARNED . I suggest if I may , that you exercise a greater diligence in studying American History .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nightingale , no disrespect intended , but I will not argue with anyone who repeats what they have heard , rather than having any knowledge from what they have LEARNED . I suggest if I may , that you exercise a greater diligence in studying American History .

 

I have to laugh at this. I do study American History, and I have taken part in roundtables and panels alongside History professors. Did you know for instance that the North had slaves too? In fact Massachusetts had slaves all the way up to the early 1800s, New York even longer, and so forth. So slavery was not so much as big of an issue as you place on it.

 

I just think you can't stand someone else actually being more knowledgeable on certain aspects than yourself. I've got news for you, get used to it. There is always someone who knows more than you. I don't repeat what I have heard, in fact I tend to thrash anyone who does in debates. What I say is what I have learned, so don't go trying to cast aspersions on me because you have no clue.

 

Do you also know that I used to work as a historical re-enactor at Colonial Williamsburg? If I did that, do you think I am really as stupid as you make me out to be? I've also worked at Pamplin Park Civil War Battleground (Petersburg). So again, I bring actual knowledge and not just empty words. My historical credentials are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you haven't absorbed very much have you ? That bit about Lincoln is as old as the hills and your conclusion is evident of parroted knowledge rather than learned . In fact it is a classic example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because I repeat the truth doesn't make it any less true. You do realize that don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and no one said you were stupid , just too opinionated to be objective . And perhaps a bit lazy in in your endeavors to learn beyond what is told you .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and again you fail to comprehend [purposely ? ] what I stated . re:slaves in the north , I said was never prevelant , and was looked down u[on in general .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF you knew me, you would never accuse me of being lazy and just believing what I was told. I left my church because I was told that I would have to just be a sheep and do what I was told, which goes against everything I believe in.

 

As far as opinionated, yes I have opinions. Anyone who doesn't is a liar or so obtuse as to be useless. Am I objective, no I really don't claim to be generally speaking. Now here's a question for you...can you name me any journalist currently in the United States that is objective? I'm sorry but the school of thought that gave us Edward R. Murrow is dead and gone now. That's just a fact of life.

 

I don't have a problem with people having opinions, in fact I welcome them. Why? Because it shows that they honestly do care enough to discuss. Whatever else we are going to disagree on, I won't disagree with your right to have an opinion and debate it. But don't you dare try to keep me from having mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyones entitled to their own opinion .......not their own facts . You can say anything you wish and no one is attempting to deprive you of having an opinion , or expressing it , but dont blame me if I call you out when you confuse or express opinion as fact ./

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as long as you don't think you're the sole arbiter of what is fact. Which is something you have tried to do in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is sole arbitor of FACT .Fact stands on it own merit .Fact resides in the realm of experience objectivity and most importantly REALITY . When a fact is established , it is only revisionism that is used to "re-establish " facts . If a fact is disputed , that is resolved by deeper investigation and a forming of a general consensus . No one can dispute a facvt based on opinion or projected possibility , theories on 9/11 are a great example of that . A theory is not accepted based merely on a possibility . There are other parts that must be established Ultimately facts trump any theory , and that through objective observation , historical record in the public domain , and reality . my conclusions are reached in that order and are not governed by my opinion . If I am expressing opinion , it will be preceeded by IMO .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you know Wanderer , I been through the South countless times from Brownsville Texas , New orleans , Lake Charles , Biloxi , Gulfport, Moblie ,Jacksonville ,Savannah and Charleston to Wilimington . Worked in those cities , spent time with freinds in some , and hotel brooms in others , and NEVER have I heard that term used . But that's beside the point , I did not attach any elitist connotation to that word of yours -"Southrons " . Perhaps a re-read of my post is in order ? Funny , but I find similar " miscomprehension " in replies by Nightingale as I do you . Curious .

Perhaps a reread of my post in order.

 

"Southron" is a generic term meaning "a person from the south." It's not used as commonly as it used to be, but it has been used to mean a person from the southern United States in general. There aren't any "elitist" connotations to the word that I'm aware of.

Perhaps the reason you haven't heard the term used is because it's not used as commonly as it used to be, which I stated in my post that you apparently "miscomprehended." I'd never even heard of the word until it popped up in this thread, and I initially thought that it was perhaps a misspelling of another word. So I "used my index fingers" and googled the word and came upon the definition that I wrote in my previous post. You've given as much advice to others on this forum; I'm not sure why you didn't bother following your own advice regarding googling things you don't know about.

 

In regard to the "elitist" portion of the comment, here's what you said:

Your fellow "southrons " are descendent from an ideology that goes back to plantation times .There ate two elitist groups in the US , Southern Elitists who think it their god given right to doi whatever is necessarry to improve their own condition at the expense of the lesser population , and there is the Yankee Elitists who by an original different type of christians ethics , felt that if one was rich and prosperous they bore a responsibility to to the less fortunate among them . Indeed this is at the heart of the present political debacle in the US . I am not impressed by your "book knowledge " as to your thoughts on the Patriot Act .....the gene pool has indeed been strained since the times of Franklin and the Founding Fathers , the situations today were not even dreamed of in those days let alone provisions to deal with them .

You said the southrons are "descendent [sic] from an ideology that goes back to plantation times." You then talked about the two types of elitism (ideologies) in the United States, starting with "Southern Elitism." Now if the "ideology" of which you spoke (from which the southrons descended from) isn't "southern elitism," then what is it? You made no references in your post to any other ideology besides "southern elitism," "Yankee elitism," communism, and capitalism. So what exactly were you referring to in that first sentence?

 

Is this perhaps the ideology you were referring to that I must have missed?

Now comes the ideology that I spoke of which you have missed . You have heard that roughly 90% of the wealth in this country is owned by about 1 % of the population , and that statistic is accurate . These are the elitists I spoke of , and there are two ideologies that dominate their thinking .

Now here you go again, speaking of the ideologies you've talked about at length in your posts. You stated that the "Southrons" descended from an ideology, yet unless you were referring to either of these elitist ideologies, you didn't elaborate. Now if you think that the "Southrons" descended from the "Southern elitism" that has existed for a few hundred years, and you give the appearance that you have a negative viewpoint of said elitism, then the term "Southron" connotes something negative due to its relationship as a descendant of "Southern elitism." If you do not think that "Southrons" descended from "Southern elitism," then what ideology did they descend from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off Wanderer I didn't say "southrons " were descended from anyone , I've never heard that term . I specifically stated that 90% of thewealth in this country is concentrated to about 1 percent of the population . They are the elitists ,And Among them , there are two divisions of thought or ideology . I was quite elaborate in explaining where the plantation mentality originated and why ....did you not read the post ?

I was being kind in that I said you may have missed it , but now it's simply a matter of your being argumentative . If you disagree just say so , I would then refer you to the history of Colonialism on the Part of the British , French , Spanish , Portuguese and Dutch .Their ventures to South America and the mostly unpopulated Islands of the Carribean where the need for slaves to work the plantations was the cause and effect of slavery in the Western Hemisphere and eventually the Southern part of the United States .

 

So apparently, you are practicing a cognizant dissonance here , and wasting my time .

 

As for the word , "southron " I said it had never been used or heard in my 40 years of travel throughout the south . What the reason for your use of it is, one can only guess , but it is irrelevant . And your use of it in this discussion is meaningless because you have misconstrued what I said to begin with . In additiion you are playing a game of semantics with issues that I have expressed quite clearly . If you are in doubt as to my meaning on any point or fact that I have already expressed ....a bit of advice ...take the words at face value .Your predisposed notions are getting in the way of your reading comprehension . You , like nightingale are making assumptions based in your own biases .

 

So run along wanderer and let's end this on a semi-freindly note . Game over .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off Wanderer I didn't say "southrons " were descended from anyone , I've never heard that term .

 

Then what exactly were you talking about when you stated in the very first sentence in post #197,

 

"Your fellow "southrons " are descendent from an ideology that goes back to plantation times ."

 

Go back a page and reread your own words. That's the question on which I needed some clarification. You said that you didn't claim that the term had elitist connotations, yet in a post devoted to talking about two elitist ideologies, you have this one sentence prefacing the descriptions. On face-value, it looks to me that you're attaching elitist connotations to the word because you placed it in a paragraph describing elitist ideologies, linking it to the word "ideology" you used in that sentence. You refuse to admit that that is what you did, and now you're claiming that you never said "southrons" were descended from anyone, yet there are your own words from yesterday. Sounds like you're the one who has a case of cognitive dissonance.

 

Since you claim that I have reading comprehension problems, tell me, oh wise one, what you meant by that first sentence in post #197?

 

I specifically stated that 90% of thewealth in this country is concentrated to about 1 percent of the population . They are the elitists ,And Among them , there are two divisions of thought or ideology . I was quite elaborate in explaining where the plantation mentality originated and why ....did you not read the post ?

 

I read the post, and I didn't find much to disagree with regarding the elites. My previous post was merely a call for clarification regarding what you meant in the very first sentence you wrote in post #197, which I quoted above. A little bit of clarification, and all will be well on this issue.

 

As for the word , "southron " I said it had never been used or heard in my 40 years of travel throughout the south . What the reason for your use of it is, one can only guess , but it is irrelevant . And your use of it in this discussion is meaningless because you have misconstrued what I said to begin with . In additiion you are playing a game of semantics with issues that I have expressed quite clearly . If you are in doubt as to my meaning on any point or fact that I have already expressed ....a bit of advice ...take the words at face value .Your predisposed notions are getting in the way of your reading comprehension . You , like nightingale are making assumptions based in your own biases .

 

If you had bothered to read my previous posts, then you would have known that I hadn't heard of the word "southron" either until abdullahfath used it in this thread. So I googled it (which is something you were too lazy to do, even though you've admonished others on this forum for not googling things they don't know about) to find out if it was an actual word, and it if was, what the meaning of that word was. I don't use it in everyday speech, but your preconceived notions seem to have gotten in the way of your own reading comprehension as you lumped me together with abdullahfath and others who use the word regularly. Go ahead and read through all my previous posts, and you won't find a single mention of the word "southron" outside of this thread.

 

Also, as far as I can tell, you've been nothing but argumentative in every single one of your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanderer , your every reply thusfar has contained repetition of my word usage .....do you have any original thoughts in your head ? And if so , do you remember them ? It was YOU who chose to use the term "southrons " rather than southerner AFTER I had stated the two ideologies which are the driving forces between the present political divide in politics today in the US . Which I specifically stated that those tw divisions were amongst the two ELITISTS groups in this country who control over 90% bof the wealth .

YOU chose to make an assumption there , by abandoning objectivity , by assuming a "negative connotation " in my description of the Southern elitists who YOU CHOSE to use the descriptor- "southrons " .The notions of Southern elitists just as those of what I described as those of Yankee elitists in the Northern States are descendant of those same notions pre-existing the American Civil War , indeed pre-existing the American Revolution , going back to the original colonialism and notions held by plantation owners in The Caribbean predating the formation of the United States which incorporated the necessity of slaves to work the hot climate plantations in order to exploit and become wealthy . on the crops grown there and eventually in the Southern States , such as cotton and tobacco .

Since any idea of unionism or any rights for that matter amongst laborers was anathema to this palntation mentality . indeed the same anti-unionism was built-in to that mentality , and persists to this day amongst Southern elitists .THAT ideology amongst the Southern Wealthy , or "elitists " ,descends from that of the early colonialists and continues to this day and is evident in the divide between the two parties as they exist today , whereas up to and including the eras well beyond the end of the Civil War , the distinction between Democrats and Republicans was not evident.

Only recently was this divide to be described as the ideologies opposing one another as Democrat vs. Republican ,with the republican ideology resembling more the plantation ideology .The aversion to unions , or any organized labor and the bitter hatred expressed against Obama ,a BLACK PRESIDENT is STILL obvious today and EVIDENT in the success of Right To Work legislation first among exclusively the Southern States and eventually some of the post civil war northern statesmore recently . And that is due to the Repuiblican Party co-opting the values and notions of those same original southern plantation owners .

 

YOU construed THAT as a negative connotation , whereas I described it as an historical reality describing the origins of that "ideology " , you CHOSE to view it as a negative connotation regarding "your southrons " , and after atleast three clear explanations , you continue purposely to misconstrue the words that you are reading in my posts . which obviously has nothing to do with any lack of clarity on my part . And you call me argumentative ? Why ? Because you reject history ? Surely at best , you are being facetious .

The Southern Elitists have also co-opted the "religious narrative " as just cause for their ideology and thus constantly refer to their Northern counterparts as "godless Liberals " communists or socialists and heap them into one rhetorical decription - Leftists .

Ergo , Democrats are Leftists , and because they are " godless" ,an evil connotation exists in their rhetoric and politics towards Democrats ....this is undeniable . Does this elude you so far ? This has polarized politics to such a degree , that the electorate ,both Democrat and Republican vote, based on emotional issues rather than the things that will affect the greater good of the country .

Capitalism with principles and ethics , originated in he Northern colonies later to becomes States is more of a reflection of the capitlists we claim to be . Again there was no real distinction between Democrat and Republican in that respect , in Pre Civil War and Post Civil War . Our revolution was not based in Dem .or Rep, ideologiy but in the rights of the common man . Indeed the original 13 colonies did not include the planatatios of the South which where in fact territories at the time .The Common Wealth of Virginia and the Carolinas did however have plantations and slaves .

 

-can't make it any clearer than that pal .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed the original 13 colonies did not include the planatatios of the South which where in fact territories at the time .The Common Wealth of Virginia and the Carolinas did however have plantations and slaves .

 

This part is confusing as you are basically saying they aren't and then they are part of the original 13 colonies. Would you clarify that? I mean, the fact is that in Virginia at that time, the landed gentry mostly had plantations and slaves yes. Including Washington, Jefferson, R.H. Lee, Wythe, Nelson and others. Many of them found slavery to be a despicable practice, as evidenced by Washington's own writings as well as Jefferson's attempts to make slavery illegal in the Declaration of Independence. (Which contrary to what is shown in the movie 1776...despite being a great movie/play...was not what caused the South to refuse to approve the Declaration...as Maryland, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Delaware and New York all were slaveholding states too at the time.)

 

In the Confederacy, Thomas J. Jackson aka Stonewall, was well-known as an anti-slavery zealot who nevertheless fought for the South because he felt that God called on him to. Robert E. Lee had slaves, though mostly due to his wife, since he had little to do with them throughout his military career. Also, after the Civil War ended, he was one of the first Southerners to accept black people into his church and kneel in prayer with them. That's a known fact. Jefferson Davis had plans for manumitting the slaves throughout the war, but needed a victory in the war to allow himself to be able to actually do it.

 

Yes, these were all elitists. Now, you also allude to Right-to-work being a bad thing. May I ask you how you came up with that? There are unions here in Virginia, however no one is forced to join them. If they choose to join them, that's their decision. But a lot of companies, large and small prefer to not have to deal with unions themselves. But this is evil because it is taking the rights of workers away? Also you mention that in the South, there is all this hatred for Obama because he is black. That is not fact but opinion. While it may be true in areas, there are areas that are dominated by blacks who hate him just as much. The difference is, many people here dislike the job he is doing, for someone who campaigned on hope and change, there's been precious little change if you ask me.

 

I'm sure that if McCain had won, I'd be saying the same exact thing. The real problem isn't that Obama is black or the Democrats are the "good guys" or anything like that. The problem is that both political parties are the same thing! We should have followed Washington's advice in his farewell speech, when he warned of the dangers of foreign entanglements as well as political parties ripping apart the country with their ideologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey.. how about that whole Romney versus Obama election. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really interested in the whole Romney vs. Obama election. They're essentially the same things, just different parties. Which is silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really interested in the whole Romney vs. Obama election. They're essentially the same things, just different parties. Which is silly.

 

Yeah.. all the rules Congress created to ensure a dominance of only two parties should be considered unconstitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL...no you're not interested Nightingale , but you are interested in splitting hairs , misreading or misunderstanding what I write . Here's an idea for you , since you are as thick as wanderer , continue this discourse amongst the two of you , since I have no more time to waste on either of you . Cognizant dissonance seems to be a tactic common to you both , and that commonality part of a greater one .

As for the election , you are only partially right and in a minimal sense .They are the same only in that they are both liars and both self-perpetuating politicians , as is Ron paul ,as is McCain as is with all of them [that's were the similarities end ]. You minimize the difference , and coming from you that is totally understandable and expected . LOL....and after you listing your "credentials " I can not feign surprise .Your book or "college knowledge " is not only encapsulated but it is higly compartmentalized , which becomes an impediment to understanding .

So have a good discussion with wanderer and dont forget to exercise your right as an American and vote " even if you think they are the same " after all technically Romney has not attained the Nomination until it is confirmed and approved at the NRP Convention . lol... you may find yourself having to choose between Obama and Sara Palin ...lol...it's possible .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you not read Aligarr??? I said I wasn't interested in Romney or Obama. I work for Ron Paul and you better believe we're going to at the least nominate him at the convention. You are just being too argumentative. You demean others but can't stand having people criticize you. Grow up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL...no you're not interested Nightingale , but you are interested in splitting hairs , misreading or misunderstanding what I write . Here's an idea for you , since you are as thick as wanderer , continue this discourse amongst the two of you , since I have no more time to waste on either of you . Cognizant dissonance seems to be a tactic common to you both , and that commonality part of a greater one .

As for the election , you are only partially right and in a minimal sense .They are the same only in that they are both liars and both self-perpetuating politicians , as is Ron paul ,as is McCain as is with all of them [that's were the similarities end ]. You minimize the difference , and coming from you that is totally understandable and expected . LOL....and after you listing your "credentials " I can not feign surprise .Your book or "college knowledge " is not only encapsulated but it is higly compartmentalized , which becomes an impediment to understanding .

So have a good discussion with wanderer and dont forget to exercise your right as an American and vote " even if you think they are the same " after all technically Romney has not attained the Nomination until it is confirmed and approved at the NRP Convention . lol... you may find yourself having to choose between Obama and Sara Palin ...lol...it's possible .

 

I am glad I don't know you personally. You took one simple sentence about Romney and Obama and just... went off. Really, if you have nothing constructive and sensible to post without attacking others, just don't write. Just because you are online does not mean you can automatically grow a "pair." There is no way you could do this in person with anyone and garner any respect or anyone who would care to listen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now we can get back to the topic at hand. The presidential election isn't the only one going on, as every House seat is up for reelection and about 1/3 of the Senate as well. In addition, there are local races. Anybody in the U.S. have any good words about congressional, senatorial, city council, mayoral, etc. candidates in their state?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×