The coming liberal thugocracy - Page 15

classicman · 01-05-2009, 03:03 PM

Good point Blue - who needs democracy anyway.

bluecuracao · 01-05-2009, 04:04 PM

You mean a republic, right?

TheMercenary · 01-05-2009, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluecuracao

You mean a republic, right?

Stop clouding the facts.

bluecuracao · 01-05-2009, 04:45 PM

Oh please, classic's the one being all vague. I'm just trying to help him clarify his...whatever he's doing.

TheMercenary · 01-05-2009, 04:50 PM

I understand him. I see no vagueness.

classicman · 01-05-2009, 07:33 PM

Pelosi's plan eliminates debate on an issue - that isn't a democracy thats a virtual dictatorship.

DanaC · 01-05-2009, 07:42 PM

I know it's wrong of me, but I read the last part of that sentence to the tune of Virtual Insanity (Jamiriquoi -sp?)

morethanpretty · 01-05-2009, 07:45 PM

Here's a fact ya'll need to get straight. We are democratic republic. Meaning we vote in people who are supposed to represent US. We are NOT directly democratic. Pelosi is meant to represent those who voted her in. The majority of voters want changes to go through, they want a the Democratic agenda to succeed. If that means repressing the Republican agenda, than thats what is needed. I don't think its right that the party that is clearly not the favored of this country can keep the party that has been chosen by a popular vote from fulfilling the wishes of the majority, of the people. I think all parties need to work harder to represent the people, not just their own party agendas, not just those who voted for them. We are not a bi-partisan country, only our government is. That is not representative and the democractic process is severly hindered by big bucks and big business.

jinx · 01-05-2009, 07:51 PM

Quote:

I don't think its right that the party that is clearly not the favored of this country can keep the party that has been chosen by a popular vote from fulfilling the wishes of the majority, of the people.

So, you think it's right that homosexuals are banned from marriage in CA, since that is clearly what the majority in that state wish?

TheMercenary · 01-05-2009, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morethanpretty

Here's a fact ya'll need to get straight. We are democratic republic. Meaning we vote in people who are supposed to represent US. We are NOT directly democratic. Pelosi is meant to represent those who voted her in. The majority of voters want changes to go through, they want a the Democratic agenda to succeed. If that means repressing the Republican agenda, than thats what is needed. I don't think its right that the party that is clearly not the favored of this country can keep the party that has been chosen by a popular vote from fulfilling the wishes of the majority, of the people. I think all parties need to work harder to represent the people, not just their own party agendas, not just those who voted for them. We are not a bi-partisan country, only our government is. That is not representative and the democractic process is severly hindered by big bucks and big business.

Fail.

classicman · 01-05-2009, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx

So, you think it's right that homosexuals are banned from marriage in CA, since that is clearly what the majority in that state wish?

At what point did I say ANYTHING about that?

morethanpretty · 01-05-2009, 08:18 PM

No because the ban is a violation of the constitution. All citizens' right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It violates seperation of church and state. It also violates right to privacy. The ban should be thrown out for its violation of the constitution, unless they can amend the constitution to get rid of all that. One reason why we have a representative government rather than a directly democratic government is because the majority will completely bully the minorities otherwise.
Thats why I stated our government needs to do a better job of representing ALL of us. Also why are gov is set up with a Supreme Court, if a law made by congress is unconstitutional, it can be fought by the people. Of course everyone's opinion of unconstitutional and freedom differ, their will always be hairs to split. Not every one is gonna be happy.

morethanpretty · 01-05-2009, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Fail.

Oh yeah a one word post that is not in anyway backed up by truth, or even your opinion. You are obviously right. [/sarcasm]

jinx · 01-05-2009, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman

At what point did I say ANYTHING about that?

Are you high?

classicman · 01-05-2009, 08:29 PM

What thread are you in?

01-05-2009, 03:03 PM	#211
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Good point Blue - who needs democracy anyway. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

01-05-2009, 04:50 PM	#215
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	I understand him. I see no vagueness. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

01-05-2009, 07:33 PM	#216
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Pelosi's plan eliminates debate on an issue - that isn't a democracy thats a virtual dictatorship. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

01-05-2009, 07:45 PM	#218
morethanpretty Thats "Miss Zipper Neck" to you. Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: little town (but not the littlest) in texas Posts: 2,957	Here's a fact ya'll need to get straight. We are democratic republic. Meaning we vote in people who are supposed to represent US. We are NOT directly democratic. Pelosi is meant to represent those who voted her in. The majority of voters want changes to go through, they want a the Democratic agenda to succeed. If that means repressing the Republican agenda, than thats what is needed. I don't think its right that the party that is clearly not the favored of this country can keep the party that has been chosen by a popular vote from fulfilling the wishes of the majority, of the people. I think all parties need to work harder to represent the people, not just their own party agendas, not just those who voted for them. We are not a bi-partisan country, only our government is. That is not representative and the democractic process is severly hindered by big bucks and big business. __________________ Addicts may suck dick for coke, but love came up with the idea to put a dick in there to begin with. -Jack O'Brien

01-05-2009, 08:18 PM	#222
morethanpretty Thats "Miss Zipper Neck" to you. Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: little town (but not the littlest) in texas Posts: 2,957	No because the ban is a violation of the constitution. All citizens' right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It violates seperation of church and state. It also violates right to privacy. The ban should be thrown out for its violation of the constitution, unless they can amend the constitution to get rid of all that. One reason why we have a representative government rather than a directly democratic government is because the majority will completely bully the minorities otherwise. Thats why I stated our government needs to do a better job of representing ALL of us. Also why are gov is set up with a Supreme Court, if a law made by congress is unconstitutional, it can be fought by the people. Of course everyone's opinion of unconstitutional and freedom differ, their will always be hairs to split. Not every one is gonna be happy. __________________ Addicts may suck dick for coke, but love came up with the idea to put a dick in there to begin with. -Jack O'Brien

01-05-2009, 04:04 PM	#212
bluecuracao in a mood, not cupcake Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 3,034	You mean a republic, right?

01-05-2009, 04:45 PM	#214
bluecuracao in a mood, not cupcake Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 3,034	Oh please, classic's the one being all vague. I'm just trying to help him clarify his...whatever he's doing.

01-05-2009, 07:42 PM	#217
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	I know it's wrong of me, but I read the last part of that sentence to the tune of Virtual Insanity (Jamiriquoi -sp?)

01-05-2009, 08:29 PM	#225
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	What thread are you in? __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)