Ted Cruz for President

[mykcob4]

So it is a lack of self-awareness.  I understand why you don't see your tantrum as a tantrum and your rant as a rant.

It's a lack of self-awareness alright by you. Look in the mirror pal.

[mykcob4]

So you think it is merited every time you receive anything less than absolute unquestioning agreement.

Apparently you do.

[mykcob4]

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/tag/bikini-graph/
Now back to the real issue. Above is a link to the now famous "Bikini Graph" which clearly illustrates the differences in the two parties.

[josephpalazzo]

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/tag/bikini-graph/
Now back to the real issue. Above is a link to the now famous "Bikini Graph" which clearly illustrates the differences in the two parties.

Thx for the link, but sadly enough, facts are not part of the GOP's reality bubble.

[Thumpalumpacus]

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/tag/bikini-graph/
Now back to the real issue. Above is a link to the now famous "Bikini Graph" which clearly illustrates the differences in the two parties.

No, that doesn't address partisanship at all.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy.

Remember, Glass-Steagal was repealed back in the 90s, and it is that which led to the housing bubble.

[mykcob4]

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/tag/bikini-graph/
Now back to the real issue. Above is a link to the now famous "Bikini Graph" which clearly illustrates the differences in the two parties.

No, that doesn't address partisanship at all.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy.

Remember, Glass-Steagal was repealed back in the 90s, and it is that which led to the housing bubble.

And who appealed it? Rhetorical, I know who repealed it.

[josephpalazzo]

http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/tag/bikini-graph/
Now back to the real issue. Above is a link to the now famous "Bikini Graph" which clearly illustrates the differences in the two parties.

No, that doesn't address partisanship at all.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy.

Remember, Glass-Steagal was repealed back in the 90s, and it is that which led to the housing bubble.

And who appealed it? Rhetorical, I know who repealed it.

The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, all republicans. Notice that Rep. John Dingell, a Democrat from Michigan, had argued that the bill would result in banks becoming "too big to fail."  That was 1999, prophetic in its times.

[frosty]

I don't think that I called anyone names on this thread. Although I may have called Sab a name in a heated response. I certainly didn't call you any names nor have I been rude to you. You seemed to have chimed in with a haphazard attempt at semi-attacking Joseph an I. That is unfortunate.
I don't think that you are really trying to relax anyone. From what I see you have sided and expressing unflattering comments at what may be the other side. That also is unfortunate.

If that's what you think that is also unfortunate, but in the end I don't care. I know what my intentions are, and like I said, I'm betting that you, joseph and a bunch of other people are simply going to continue how you are behaving because you all think you are proving some type of point. I truly meant well. Best regards mykcob4.

As if you have the authority to "judge" behavior. Try again frosty.

To be honest josephpalazzo is fun to play along with, but as for you, I don't know why you think I judged. Maybe I came off as judgmental in the other posts but I cannot, I repeat cannot control how you choose to perceive my words. And for the sake of consistency, I hereby apologize to everyone I've ever judged, or been rude to, on this forum since I joined. There.

[josephpalazzo]

To be honest josephpalazzo is fun to play along with, <snip>

Duh, be careful with your words. My wife is Italian and has a hot temper. You don't want to be around if she finds you out.

And for the sake of consistency, I hereby apologize to everyone I've ever judged, or been rude to, on this forum since I joined. There.

 =D>

[mykcob4]

To be honest josephpalazzo is fun to play along with, but as for you, I don't know why you think I judged. Maybe I came off as judgmental in the other posts but I cannot, I repeat cannot control how you choose to perceive my words. And for the sake of consistency, I hereby apologize to everyone I've ever judged, or been rude to, on this forum since I joined. There.

Then in good brinkmanship I not only fully accept your apology but offer my sincere apology as well. If in any way I have offended you, if I discounted your remarks on issue, if I made any comment about you personnally that you found offensive, or if I made a general statement that you found insulting I truly and most humbly am sorry.
Myke

[Thumpalumpacus]

What a sorry bunch!

[mykcob4]

What a sorry bunch!

And you're mad about what, at whom, and for what?
For someone that denigrated people for thowing around insults your post here doesn't make sense. I think that you need a boogie man to inspire you to post so that you can lord over them with condescending comments.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

What a sorry bunch!

And you're mad about what, at whom, and for what?
For someone that denigrated people for thowing around insults your post here doesn't make sense. I think that you need a boogie man to inspire you to post so that you can lord over them with condescending comments.

[Thumpalumpacus]

What a sorry bunch!

And you're mad about what, at whom, and for what?
For someone that denigrated people for thowing around insults your post here doesn't make sense. I think that you need a boogie man to inspire you to post so that you can lord over them with condescending comments.

It's called "humor", which in this case is denoted by my use of the exclamation point -- something I never do outside of humor or sarcasm.

Of course you didn't know that.  No harm, no foul.

[Special B]

The reason why the two parties are essentially the same is that they are both corporatist lobbyists who don't give two shits rubbed together about our rights, jobs, or economic prospects so long as the big companies are making money hand over fist.

The democratic party actually gets most of its contributions from unions (I'm talking country-wide, not just the presidential campaign), which have very different goals than corporations. Look up "Citizen's United" and read about its purpose (hint: the GOP pushed CU to crush the democratic campaign machine).

Look how Obama sandbagged gays on marriage rights for years; look at how he has continued Bush's policies on Gitmo, NSA, Patriot Act, and other rights-related issues; look at how both parties do nothing at all to keep middle-class jobs in this country, when by working tax laws they could ensure that companies doing business here be required to employ here.

You are talking about Obama. Hint: He is not the same as all other democrats. He is a blue dog democrat, which is true of very few elected state democrats at the moment. Alan Grayson? Bernie Sanders? Wendy Davis? Cory Booker? Al Franken? Elizabeth Warren? De Blasio? You can't tell the difference between them and people like Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham etc...? Or even between them and Obama or Baucus? Then you need to start paying attention. Even the left wing crazies like Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein have completely different stupid ideas than the crazies on the right (Feinstein wants to ban guns, which you won't hear from the GOP, while GOP crazies like Jan Brewer want to spread guns and get them into the hands of all white people). Do you think both parties are the same on abortion rights? Gun control? Affirmative Action? The ACA? Gay marriage? Religion mixed with state? Teaching Creationism? Unemployment benefits? SNAP/food stamps? Welfare? Tax code? Voter ID and early voter laws? Immigration?

Guess what: they are not.

Yeah, there are issues in which they are the same , and some democrats (like Obama and Baucus) are toward the center, but the two parties are very different and have demonstrably different masters and policies.

If pointing out those facts makes me an uninformed person in the eyes of some guy online, hey, I've heard worse, from better folk.

The difference between them boils down to window dressing.  They agree to argue about abortion rights after the matter has already been settled by SCOTUS ... i.e. dog-and-pony show.

You are not pointing out any facts about the democratic party, just one blue dog democrat, who is very atypical. You display your ignorance. The difference between the parties is vast on many issues. They get their money from VERY different places, and their money masters have VERY different goals. Corporations and unions are essentially after opposing goals. It shows in the differences between how the two parties vote in both houses of the congress. I listed several important issues above in which the parties differ greatly. Pay attention.