What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Rover

Re your 4. Disagree. A vocal minority and sympathetic judges got homosexual marriage implemented. Legislative change, though slower, reflects the will of the people and has the benefit of acceptance then implementation. SSM, for the most part, was implementation, and you'd better like it you rascist bahstahd!
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Rover

Re your 4. Disagree. A vocal minority and sympathetic judges got homosexual marriage implemented. Legislative change, though slower, reflects the will of the people and has the benefit of acceptance then implementation. SSM, for the most part, was implementation, and you'd better like it you rascist bahstahd!

In Minnesota we rejected the GOP State Senate and the GOP State House when they tried to put through an amendment banning gay marriage.

Once a few states did that the Supreme Court had no choice. Marriage is a legal contract. All states have to recognize marriages from other states or there would be discrimination and chaos.

But, you and Rubio get down with your bad selves and try to turn back the clock.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Rover

Re your 4. Disagree. A vocal minority and sympathetic judges got homosexual marriage implemented. Legislative change, though slower, reflects the will of the people and has the benefit of acceptance then implementation. SSM, for the most part, was implementation, and you'd better like it you rascist bahstahd!

Too bad Obamacare doesn't cover a brain transplant.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Rover

Re your 4. Disagree. A vocal minority and sympathetic judges got homosexual marriage implemented. Legislative change, though slower, reflects the will of the people and has the benefit of acceptance then implementation. SSM, for the most part, was implementation, and you'd better like it you rascist bahstahd!

In 1850, there was slavery and then there wasn't. In 1900, women couldn't vote and then they could. In 1950, blacks had no rights and then they did. Gay marriage is not the Dem party moving left. Its progress and it was popular with the people at the same time it was with the party.

The Dems positions on government, taxation, welfare, business, personal rights, etc. haven't changed...and have probably become more mainstream. The party is fairly centrist compared to today's society.
 
Rover

Re your 4. Disagree. A vocal minority and sympathetic judges got homosexual marriage implemented. Legislative change, though slower, reflects the will of the people and has the benefit of acceptance then implementation. SSM, for the most part, was implementation, and you'd better like it you rascist bahstahd!

Believe it or not, gays probably don't see it as much of a benefit to have to wait for people like you to accept that they deserve equal rights.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Rover

Re your 4. Disagree. A vocal minority and sympathetic judges got homosexual marriage implemented. Legislative change, though slower, reflects the will of the people and has the benefit of acceptance then implementation. SSM, for the most part, was implementation, and you'd better like it you rascist bahstahd!

To some extent but I'm more talking about SSM and the Dems themselves. Lets say for a moment it did come about via court rulings. That's not my point. My point is the Dem party didn't move to the left and lead on this issue. It basically watched (nervously) as court after court ruled it legal, then by the time the SCOTUS got around to it they read the polls the rest of us did and decided to jump on board the bandwagon.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Oh give it a rest already. You sound like a lunatic. Gee whiz, the most popular living ex-President since Teddy Roosevelt is in high demand for speaking fees. Who woudda thunk it? :rolleyes: Do us a favor and post some Drudge Report links to back this up...

Do you really not remember any of that? The Clintons were on the news saying that they had to spend all of their savings and income of defense lawyers during the Kent Starr investigations and subsequent impeachment. They were asking for donations to cover those costs back in 2000, the famous Clinton Defense Fund.

Yes, Pres. Clinton made a lot of money on the speech circuit after leaving office, but he and Shrillary were claiming indigence upon the actual moment of leaving office.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Oh give it a rest already. You sound like a lunatic. Gee whiz, the most popular living ex-President since Teddy Roosevelt is in high demand for speaking fees. Who woudda thunk it? :rolleyes: Do us a favor and post some Drudge Report links to back this up...
It's not Drudge, but...

1992

1999

2012
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

The Clintons' coin isn't money, it's power. They like being globe-trotting power figures and they like having the ability to effect changes that this gives them. They believe in themselves and their friends.

There are two types of oligarchy in this country.

Type I: There is a meritocratic oligarchy that gets its way through academic prestige and brutal ambition. Their apotheosis is Obama: even a half-African with a terrorist name can earn his way into Yale and go on to be president.

Type II: There is an old money oligarchy that gets its way through traditional privilege and class (both types) ties. Their apotheosis is Dubya: even a nitwit with the correct family name can buy his way into Yale and go on to be president.

Type IIs all start out as Type I and then as the kinetic/potential energy ratio drops they move to Type II. The Clintons look like they are just starting the transition now, but they're still Type I. Chelsea's husband is some needle-dicked hedge fund manager who bundles cash and the o' "White House dog" is bound to push out a string of meticulously-prepped activists and candidates, assuming she isn't one herself.

The thing about these oligarchs and oligarchs-to-be is that money and fame are just side effects. They want power. There have always been people like this. They can be useful in their Type I phase, but it's important to cut them down before they ossify into Type II.

I suppose there's a Type III as well, the burned out husk of a dead power family. I suppose the Adams and Lees and Harrisons and Roosevelts are all on that pile. The Kennedys are moving from II to III. May the Bushes follow post haste.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

In 1850, there was slavery and then there wasn't. In 1900, women couldn't vote and then they could. In 1950, blacks had no rights and then they did. Gay marriage is not the Dem party moving left. Its progress and it was popular with the people at the same time it was with the party.

The Dems positions on government, taxation, welfare, business, personal rights, etc. haven't changed...and have probably become more mainstream. The party is fairly centrist compared to today's society.
and which of those were changed by the supreme court? Oh, the rest changed by amending the constitution? What a novel idea!
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

and which of those were changed by the supreme court? Oh, the rest changed by amending the constitution? What a novel idea!

I was listening to the Log Cabin Republican spokesman at CPAC yesterday and he mentioned that there's a Gender ERA out there which formally extends all the 14th Amendment protections to women and LGBT. That's the end game, though I assume it will take 50 years or more.

Pretty sad that every time we all agree "OK, we're not going to be dicks to x any more," the people who just need to be dicks to somebody immediately find a y.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

The always good Josh Marshall sums up the last debate with some piquant imagery.

Right now it's Trump vs the stakeholders of the institutional GOP, represented by Rubio, Cruz and Romney in the wings, like two vast armies wheeling around for a decisive combat over a small town or village. Trump's army is clearly stronger, but not unbeatable. Whatever happens, there's no way the village doesn't get brutalized and probably destroyed in the process.

He also makes the following point: with the frothy mix of the right wing base now barking obscenities and threats at everything "Establishment," including the RNC, can these guys be far from the auto de fe?
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Do you really not remember any of that? The Clintons were on the news saying that they had to spend all of their savings and income of defense lawyers during the Kent Starr investigations and subsequent impeachment. They were asking for donations to cover those costs back in 2000, the famous Clinton Defense Fund.

Yes, Pres. Clinton made a lot of money on the speech circuit after leaving office, but he and Shrillary were claiming indigence upon the actual moment of leaving office.

I remember it but its not the point. Hovey after presumably consuming mind altering narcotics believes Hillary Clinton is running for President to further the family income. This is stupid on multiple levels. Its possible the Clintons were in fact net negative in assets vs liabilities (legal bills) immediately after he left office since he wasn't that wealthy upon assuming office. However, a couple of hundred million bucks later I have to assume they have all the $$$ they need now, especially since I doubt they have many expenses. I have no idea who Hovey's supporting for President but he sounds like one of those bitter Sanders loons on daily kos.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

I remember it but its not the point. Hovey after presumably consuming mind altering narcotics believes Hillary Clinton is running for President to further the family income. This is stupid on multiple levels. Its possible the Clintons were in fact net negative in assets vs liabilities (legal bills) immediately after he left office since he wasn't that wealthy upon assuming office. However, a couple of hundred million bucks later I have to assume they have all the $$$ they need now, especially since I doubt they have many expenses. I have no idea who Hovey's supporting for President but he sounds like one of those bitter Sanders loons on daily kos.

Have you noticed that you're now bleating at everybody on this site with the same tired, juvenile attacks?

Cuz everybody else has.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Have you noticed that you're now bleating at everybody on this site with the same tired, juvenile attacks?

Cuz everybody else has.

Have you noticed the world can kiss my @ ss!


IF the concept of "Sanders loons" doesn't exist (and that doesn't mean all Sanders supporters), explain THIS!

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...XacdVBxEsvdJ/story.html?p1=feature_stack_4_hp

Hovey posted something dumb, so he needs to own up to it. If you post something dumb, you get the same treatment. If I ever post something dumb, you can do the same. Grow up Kep - its a message board not a church service.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

and which of those were changed by the supreme court? Oh, the rest changed by amending the constitution? What a novel idea!

Not accusing you, but some people both love the constitution and love to change the constitution. Those two really don't jive.

But in this case, we don't need to change the constitution every time there is progress. I'd say changing the Constitution to end slavery in a nation totally divided on the issue and with countless structures in place supporting its continuation...merits constitutional change. Gay marriage...not so much. Most of society is aligned on this.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Have you noticed the world can kiss my @ ss!


IF the concept of "Sanders loons" doesn't exist (and that doesn't mean all Sanders supporters), explain THIS!

http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...XacdVBxEsvdJ/story.html?p1=feature_stack_4_hp

Hovey posted something dumb, so he needs to own up to it. If you post something dumb, you get the same treatment. If I ever post something dumb, you can do the same. Grow up Kep - its a message board not a church service.

You've been posting nothing but idiocy since about January 15, so unless your adolescent child has stolen your keyboard or you're off your meds, that is not the path you want to go down.

I haven't seen anything stupid or crazy in the remarks you've chosen to bring your, um, unique brand of "analysis" to. On the other hand, your responses have grown increasingly shrill and deranged.

You're picking fights with EVERYBODY.

You know the saying. If you meet one jerk on the way to work, you've met a jerk. If you meet jerks everywhere you go, ...
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

Do you really not remember any of that? The Clintons were on the news saying that they had to spend all of their savings and income of defense lawyers during the Kent Starr investigations and subsequent impeachment. They were asking for donations to cover those costs back in 2000, the famous Clinton Defense Fund.

Yes, Pres. Clinton made a lot of money on the speech circuit after leaving office, but he and Shrillary were claiming indigence upon the actual moment of leaving office.

They probably were poor and probably were bankrupt. But, given who they are they were not going to be poor and bankrupt for very long. As soon as Bill got out of office the money was going to start pouring in regardless. While he was in office they were probably hamstrung on what they could do financially.

It's really not that difficult to grasp or understand.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - in bridge, the trump cards are really wild.

I remember it but its not the point. Hovey after presumably consuming mind altering narcotics believes Hillary Clinton is running for President to further the family income. This is stupid on multiple levels. Its possible the Clintons were in fact net negative in assets vs liabilities (legal bills) immediately after he left office since he wasn't that wealthy upon assuming office. However, a couple of hundred million bucks later I have to assume they have all the $$$ they need now, especially since I doubt they have many expenses. I have no idea who Hovey's supporting for President but he sounds like one of those bitter Sanders loons on daily kos.
Why is it stupid to think that people want even more income and wealth than they already have? Some want it out of pure avarice, while others may want it for the power than such riches yield them. Others accumulate vast amounts of wealth just because they enjoy pursuing the challenge of gaining said wealth, while other pursue it in order to attempt more personal good in the world. Do you really think that the Clintons aren't interested in the power that comes with more wealth? If they've proven anything, and especially through Hillary's contempt of those questioning her both while she's performing her duties in office as Sec. of State, and on the campaign trail ("Why don't you run for office, then?"), it's that she wants power. She craves it the way a termite craves wood.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top