Lotteries a threat to federal Web poker bill?

Oct 3, 2012, 10:16 am (182 comments)

Insider Buzz

In the battle for online gambling in cyberspace, Nevada casinos and multiple state lotteries could be close to a showdown — one that will shape the U.S. gaming industry forever.

The lottery, referred to as "the most popular form of gambling in the world" by Illinois Lottery Superintendent Michael Jones, just months ago broke ground on the Web. Jones, who was speaking on a panel at G2E held Monday in Las Vegas, has so far seen about 100,000 people in his state use the Internet to buy tickets.

Lotteries are powerful entities, gaining acceptance from the residents of a state because a large chunk of the money they lose goes to "good causes," as lottery directors say.

In order to generate even greater revenues, lotteries are also eying casino gambling. Some in Illinois want it under the control and supervision of the lotto. In Delaware, which has legalized web gambling, a synergy will be formed between the lotto and the three local casinos. The District of Columbia once had online poker approved under the control of its lotto, but the law was reversed under a cloud of controversy.

On the other side of the aisle are Nevada and California, who have strong casino interests vying for control of the U.S. web poker market. Despite legalizing it for intrastate business, gaming executives in the Silver State want a federal bill. Not surprisingly, Nevada Sen. Harry Reid is behind efforts on Capitol Hill, and he's trying to exclude the lotteries from the game.

In response, the lotteries have talked about lobbying together against a federal bill, according to Scarlet Robinson, an Internet gaming consultant and owner of Rungood Gaming LLC. The lotteries also don't want any legislation to limit games to only poker.

However, unlike the casino giants located in the U.S. pushing for such authorization, state lotteries don't have the lobbying money to oppose a Reid bill with equal force, according to Rick Weil, president of Scientific Games, a maker of lotto systems.

The lotteries' motivation stems from the fear of an aging customer base. The era of Facebook's "social" gaming, as well as a once healthy, but illegal, U.S. web poker industry, has created a fear that younger generations just don't have an interest the lotto.

In an effort to further protect its future, the Illinois lotto will soon launch on mobile devices. The goal is "seductive" front-ends that will one day help replace the baby boomers.

A Nevada casino and a state lotto are now on the cusp of offering similar products.

"The notion that lotteries and casinos are separate industries is outdated," Michael Pollock, managing director of Spectrum Gaming Group, said at the G2E conference.

Once separated by the types of brick-and-mortar joints where the gambling occurred, both will tap into the Internet to appeal to the same demographic.

While lotteries shun web poker run by the feds, some are busy with their own battles on a more local level. In Maryland, the convenient store chain 7-Eleven has "drawn a line in the sand" against Internet lottery tickets, said Stephen Martino, the leader of the state's gambling industry.

According to Martino, Maryland doesn't have a "firm stance" on current federal online gaming efforts, but it wants "states rights" to be preserved. The state recently flirted with the idea of legalizing web casino games for itself.

"States want max profit and more control," Robinson said. "They don't want the feds in gaming."

Nevada, which doesn't have a lottery, also wants power in how it regulates web gambling but only so that its casinos can leverage their exclusive right to intrastate Internet poker by making southern Nevada the hub of a nationwide network. Nevada-based companies also have longstanding relationships with gambling in California and New Jersey.

With widespread Internet lottery sales likely to help escalate jackpots to unprecedented heights, brands will only grow stronger with time. Jones said he envisions a purse reaching $1 billion in the future, which could even attract casino gamblers who wouldn't typically play the lotto.

Card Player

Comments

gocart1's avatargocart1

Wish i could hit the fast forward button to see how this will play out

Littleoldlady's avatarLittleoldlady

Quote: Originally posted by gocart1 on Oct 3, 2012

Wish i could hit the fast forward button to see how this will play out

It will wind up like everything else, the ones who have the most money to promote their side will win.

They need to talk about better games for the players.  Those online poker sites..are sucky at best.

mcginnin56

Quote: Originally posted by Littleoldlady on Oct 3, 2012

It will wind up like everything else, the ones who have the most money to promote their side will win.

They need to talk about better games for the players.  Those online poker sites..are sucky at best.

I Agree!

RedStang's avatarRedStang

This will probably never get solved. Uncle Sam is getting $ from both sides and it would make no sense to favor one side. Nevada should start their own pb/mm game if they lose.

JonnyBgood07's avatarJonnyBgood07

..and the more they dig and dig and root out any competition, you'd better believe the 5 D everyone loves here will be no more...or at least our access to it.

jamella724

Even though Online Gambling is making its way to the top, still a lot of lottery players are playing manually.  They are after the thrill and excitement seeing how their numbers are playing...

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by gocart1 on Oct 3, 2012

Wish i could hit the fast forward button to see how this will play out

The Republican Party platform calls for a ban on all Internet gambling including state lotteries so it depends on who wins the Presidential election next month.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 6, 2012

The Republican Party platform calls for a ban on all Internet gambling including state lotteries so it depends on who wins the Presidential election next month.

Thanks Stack, I guess I am now no longer undecided on who to vote for.

As for online poker, i think thats stupid.  How can you trust the computer programs?  Although the same can be said of RNG's i suppose, but i wouldn't trust it.  Good thing New York still has good ole fashioned balls.  But i would really prefer the option of buying tickets online.

If 7-11 is so intent on drawing a line in the sand then maybe they should have some sort of freebie offer for buying in store, such as a BOGO offer.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 6, 2012

The Republican Party platform calls for a ban on all Internet gambling including state lotteries so it depends on who wins the Presidential election next month.

The Justice Department, through its interpretation of the Wire Act, has already virtually opened the door to internet gambling and it's extremely doubtful with the mess we're in from the current administration that the new administration would waste any time acting on one obscure sentence added to the Platform to assuage a special interest group when Platforms are routinely ignored.

No one swears any oath to uphold or enforce any item in any Platform and very few even pay any attention to it. Dam* few read it or have any idea what's in it. It's largely ceremonial and soon forgotten. Most people know what each party's general principles and core values are and don't have to look up chapter and verse to find out.

And even if it were a looming threat (which it isn't), anybody who would cast their vote to ensure a convenience in lottery playing over the survival of the nation in one of the most dangerous times in world history would have to be a complete imbecile.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 6, 2012

The Republican Party platform calls for a ban on all Internet gambling including state lotteries so it depends on who wins the Presidential election next month.

If you are undecided and dont know who to vote for than just think who of the two candidates is the lesser of the two

 

Manchurians.

 

If you are a lottery player,

Vote Democrat

Not repugnikan.

 

Besides the only sane vote is for ron paul.

But the insane establishment would never let a sane man on the ballot.  Who would of thunk?

 

P.S.  With all the turmoil in the Middle East and world wide It seems that Democrats and Republicans cant stop their murderous ways and blood lustRed Devil, but please please, please

 

dont murder Big Bird.Turkey

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 8, 2012

The Justice Department, through its interpretation of the Wire Act, has already virtually opened the door to internet gambling and it's extremely doubtful with the mess we're in from the current administration that the new administration would waste any time acting on one obscure sentence added to the Platform to assuage a special interest group when Platforms are routinely ignored.

No one swears any oath to uphold or enforce any item in any Platform and very few even pay any attention to it. Dam* few read it or have any idea what's in it. It's largely ceremonial and soon forgotten. Most people know what each party's general principles and core values are and don't have to look up chapter and verse to find out.

And even if it were a looming threat (which it isn't), anybody who would cast their vote to ensure a convenience in lottery playing over the survival of the nation in one of the most dangerous times in world history would have to be a complete imbecile.

Sorry to break it to you Ridge, but there is a slight chance, maybe the odds of winning the PB chance, that you or anybody can do anything to save the nation. 

We dont have enough money.

We dont have enough guns.

We dont have enough love.

And we cant agree on what it takes to even win the lottery.

I know ridge, if you and your conservative cronies had their way they would ban chocolate milk in the cafeterias at school. 

Of course if you were in office they would replace it with Baileys.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 8, 2012

Sorry to break it to you Ridge, but there is a slight chance, maybe the odds of winning the PB chance, that you or anybody can do anything to save the nation. 

We dont have enough money.

We dont have enough guns.

We dont have enough love.

And we cant agree on what it takes to even win the lottery.

I know ridge, if you and your conservative cronies had their way they would ban chocolate milk in the cafeterias at school. 

Of course if you were in office they would replace it with Baileys.

"Sorry to break it to you... but there is a slight chance... that you or anybody can do anything to save the nation."

So said King George and all his yeomen.

 

"We dont have enough money. "

Oh, we have plenty of money.

 

"We dont have enough guns."

Oh, we have plenty of guns.

 

"We dont have enough love."

"What's Love Got To Do With It?"

-Tina Turner

 

"And we cant agree on what it takes to even win the lottery."

That don't matter a hill o' beans.

 

"I know ridge, if you and your conservative cronies had their way they would ban chocolate milk in the cafeterias at school."

I can see you don't follow politics after that remark.

Or current events.

The Democrats and Liberals (redundant, I know) have already banned chocolate milk in school cafeterias along with soda and candy.

They are forcing the kids to take vegetables they don't want now with the school lunch and the kids dump them in the garbage.

Now they are installing cameras by the garbage cans to see who is not eating the food that the government has ordered them to eat.

That is the kind of world the Democrats want us to live in.

That is the kind of world that "me and my Conservative Cronies" have always stood against.

 

"Of course if you were in office they would replace it with Baileys."

I'm glad to see that you're not totally without redeeming qualities.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 8, 2012

If you are undecided and dont know who to vote for than just think who of the two candidates is the lesser of the two

 

Manchurians.

 

If you are a lottery player,

Vote Democrat

Not repugnikan.

 

Besides the only sane vote is for ron paul.

But the insane establishment would never let a sane man on the ballot.  Who would of thunk?

 

P.S.  With all the turmoil in the Middle East and world wide It seems that Democrats and Republicans cant stop their murderous ways and blood lustRed Devil, but please please, please

 

dont murder Big Bird.Turkey

"...the only sane vote is for ron paul."

You said "sane" and "Ron Paul" in the same sentence, lol. That's rich. The guy who wants to dismantle our military in today's dangerous world.

Isn't Obama dismantling it fast enough? Hell, our navy is already down to the size it was in 1917 and he's going to cut another half trillion dollars out of the military across the board on January 1st when Sequestration starts. 

 

"If you are a lottery player,

Vote Democrat

Not repugnikan."

Yeah, base your vote on a rumor about the lottery, not the fate of the nation.

Makes perfect sense.

Maybe the lottery will survive after the economy collapses.  Crazy

 

"With all the turmoil in the Middle East and world wide It seems that Democrats and Republicans cant stop their murderous ways and blood lust..."

Yeah, we're the bad guys, us d*mn Americans.

We should stop hijacking their planes and flying them into their buildings and killing their innocent people with all our murderous ways and blood lust.

 

"...dont murder Big Bird.Turkey"

Nobody's out to murder Big Bird. But he's a big enough bird to support himself like all the other kiddie shows that don't get the luxury of confiscating money from people's paychecks every week to keep them on the air along with a bunch of liberal yappers who couldn't make it in the free market.

If there's a big enough audience for Big Bird and the lib yappers to attract advertisers they'll survive like every other show does. But to force taxpayers to donate money to keep them all on life-support is ridiculous. Especially when we have to borrow the money from China to do it.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 8, 2012

"...the only sane vote is for ron paul."

You said "sane" and "Ron Paul" in the same sentence, lol. That's rich. The guy who wants to dismantle our military in today's dangerous world.

Isn't Obama dismantling it fast enough? Hell, our navy is already down to the size it was in 1917 and he's going to cut another half trillion dollars out of the military across the board on January 1st when Sequestration starts. 

 

"If you are a lottery player,

Vote Democrat

Not repugnikan."

Yeah, base your vote on a rumor about the lottery, not the fate of the nation.

Makes perfect sense.

Maybe the lottery will survive after the economy collapses.  Crazy

 

"With all the turmoil in the Middle East and world wide It seems that Democrats and Republicans cant stop their murderous ways and blood lust..."

Yeah, we're the bad guys, us d*mn Americans.

We should stop hijacking their planes and flying them into their buildings and killing their innocent people with all our murderous ways and blood lust.

 

"...dont murder Big Bird.Turkey"

Nobody's out to murder Big Bird. But he's a big enough bird to support himself like all the other kiddie shows that don't get the luxury of confiscating money from people's paychecks every week to keep them on the air along with a bunch of liberal yappers who couldn't make it in the free market.

If there's a big enough audience for Big Bird and the lib yappers to attract advertisers they'll survive like every other show does. But to force taxpayers to donate money to keep them all on life-support is ridiculous. Especially when we have to borrow the money from China to do it.

Actually I do keep up with some current events.  I did see the 7 year olds having their hands scanned at the cafeteria line. ( NWO Indoctrination)

As far as the military goes.  It doesn't matter how big your military is if as on 9-11, the brass in charge yells "STAND DOWN!!"

You can have the most HUMONGOUS military in the world.  Its still not gonna protect you from false flag attacks.

Apparntly you dont remember your history.  The gulf of tonkin and the reichstag?

I thought you were a Republican?  Ron Paul is not a good enough patriot for you?  Go ahead vote for Obama again.

But I am totally for Carolans at lunch time.  It would give me something to look foward to after all those teachers put me to sleep.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 8, 2012

Actually I do keep up with some current events.  I did see the 7 year olds having their hands scanned at the cafeteria line. ( NWO Indoctrination)

As far as the military goes.  It doesn't matter how big your military is if as on 9-11, the brass in charge yells "STAND DOWN!!"

You can have the most HUMONGOUS military in the world.  Its still not gonna protect you from false flag attacks.

Apparntly you dont remember your history.  The gulf of tonkin and the reichstag?

I thought you were a Republican?  Ron Paul is not a good enough patriot for you?  Go ahead vote for Obama again.

But I am totally for Carolans at lunch time.  It would give me something to look foward to after all those teachers put me to sleep.

Keeping up with current events and keeping up with conspiracy theories are two different things. One's informative, one's loony.

I see you're committed to the Ron Paul strategy of dismantling the military, sticking our heads in the sand and hoping for the best. Yeah, that'll work. Maybe if we're nice to the religious fanatics who are committed to destroy us, they'll change their minds and be happy shiny people.

I know all about false flags and The Reichstag and the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. What's the point?

You think I'm a Republican and then you tell me to go ahead and vote for Obama again?  ??? ??? ???

Ron Paul is a patriot? Patriots don't disarm and hope for the best while leaving their families and nation unprotected against bloodthirsty madmen who have pledged to kill us all. Patriots defend their countries.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 8, 2012

Keeping up with current events and keeping up with conspiracy theories are two different things. One's informative, one's loony.

I see you're committed to the Ron Paul strategy of dismantling the military, sticking our heads in the sand and hoping for the best. Yeah, that'll work. Maybe if we're nice to the religious fanatics who are committed to destroy us, they'll change their minds and be happy shiny people.

I know all about false flags and The Reichstag and the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. What's the point?

You think I'm a Republican and then you tell me to go ahead and vote for Obama again?  ??? ??? ???

Ron Paul is a patriot? Patriots don't disarm and hope for the best while leaving their families and nation unprotected against bloodthirsty madmen who have pledged to kill us all. Patriots defend their countries.

The point is that all war is staged illusion.

Patriots dont start illigitimate wars looking for imaginary WMD.

Ron Paul is for defending the constitution.  Something that Bush and Obama are pretty good at trying to desecrate.

Dont forget those blood thirsty madmen, work for the C.I.A.  Maybe you didn't know we trained osama bin laden to be a great terrorist.  So we could defend ourselves from the Soviet Union.

Its not a conspiracy theory when its true.

Conspiracy theory is a term the establishment uses to slander people as loony instead of revealing the true facts.

Invading Iraq, Syria, Egypt, possibly Iran, doesn't make me feel any safer.  I bet you believe we need to invade IRAN so we can be safe.

Ron Paul doesn't believe we should be the policeman of the world.  Thats called facism.  Maybe you should read up on your history again.

Maybe you just like being groped by the TSA when you go on flights, and living in a total recall type of world.  No thank you.

People are just people wherever you go.  Maybe you would learn that if you get out of them darn hills.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

The point is that all war is staged illusion.

Patriots dont start illigitimate wars looking for imaginary WMD.

Ron Paul is for defending the constitution.  Something that Bush and Obama are pretty good at trying to desecrate.

Dont forget those blood thirsty madmen, work for the C.I.A.  Maybe you didn't know we trained osama bin laden to be a great terrorist.  So we could defend ourselves from the Soviet Union.

Its not a conspiracy theory when its true.

Conspiracy theory is a term the establishment uses to slander people as loony instead of revealing the true facts.

Invading Iraq, Syria, Egypt, possibly Iran, doesn't make me feel any safer.  I bet you believe we need to invade IRAN so we can be safe.

Ron Paul doesn't believe we should be the policeman of the world.  Thats called facism.  Maybe you should read up on your history again.

Maybe you just like being groped by the TSA when you go on flights, and living in a total recall type of world.  No thank you.

People are just people wherever you go.  Maybe you would learn that if you get out of them darn hills.

"...all war is staged illusion."

Like wow man, if I ever start dropping acid I'll come back and contemplate that one, dude. Far out. Gnarly. Rad. Groovy.

 

"Patriots dont start illigitimate wars looking for imaginary WMD."

Yeah, I know. They should throw down their weapons and hope for the best while hiding with the women and children. If worse comes to worse, they could just beg and plead for their lives, right? Cuz once they disarm themselves they pretty much have to do whatever the bad guys tell them to do. Sounds like fun.

 

"Ron Paul is for defending the constitution."

Ron Paul is fine with domestic policy and the Constitution as it pertains to it.

On foreign policy however - he's a nutjob.

A very dangerous nutjob with chronic tunnel vision.

 

"Invading Iraq, Syria, Egypt, possibly Iran, doesn't make me feel any safer."

I'm glad, cuz we never invaded Syria or Egypt or Iran.

 

"Ron Paul doesn't believe we should be the policeman of the world.  Thats called facism.  Maybe you should read up on your history again."

Unilaterally disarming and hoping for the best is not good foreign policy strategy - it's a death wish.

And if you think Ron Paul is some kind of saint you should check out his racist rants sometime - http://www.loop21.com/top-5-racist-ron-paul-quotes-newsletter . And when a racist gets in power his racism soon turns to fascism. 

 

"People are just people wherever you go."

No they're not. There are some very dangerous people in this world who are intent on killing us, who are kept at bay by people willing to do what you think we ought not to do. And those are the people who provide the secure bubble from whence you safely pontificate about the error of their ways.   

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

"...all war is staged illusion."

Like wow man, if I ever start dropping acid I'll come back and contemplate that one, dude. Far out. Gnarly. Rad. Groovy.

 

"Patriots dont start illigitimate wars looking for imaginary WMD."

Yeah, I know. They should throw down their weapons and hope for the best while hiding with the women and children. If worse comes to worse, they could just beg and plead for their lives, right? Cuz once they disarm themselves they pretty much have to do whatever the bad guys tell them to do. Sounds like fun.

 

"Ron Paul is for defending the constitution."

Ron Paul is fine with domestic policy and the Constitution as it pertains to it.

On foreign policy however - he's a nutjob.

A very dangerous nutjob with chronic tunnel vision.

 

"Invading Iraq, Syria, Egypt, possibly Iran, doesn't make me feel any safer."

I'm glad, cuz we never invaded Syria or Egypt or Iran.

 

"Ron Paul doesn't believe we should be the policeman of the world.  Thats called facism.  Maybe you should read up on your history again."

Unilaterally disarming and hoping for the best is not good foreign policy strategy - it's a death wish.

And if you think Ron Paul is some kind of saint you should check out his racist rants sometime - http://www.loop21.com/top-5-racist-ron-paul-quotes-newsletter . And when a racist gets in power his racism soon turns to fascism. 

 

"People are just people wherever you go."

No they're not. There are some very dangerous people in this world who are intent on killing us, who are kept at bay by people willing to do what you think we ought not to do. And those are the people who provide the secure bubble from whence you safely pontificate about the error of their ways.   

No we didn't invade Syria or Egypt, we only funded, provided weapons and assisted members of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al queda to rise up against their own governments.  The same madmen you are afraid of, we are still assisting.  How ironic.

Boy Ridge, stay away from the 151 proof moonshine, its gonna make your head cloudy, when you are walking up in those hills, after coming from your stills, you wont know if its a DEA terrorist or a sasquatch coming for you.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

No we didn't invade Syria or Egypt, we only funded, provided weapons and assisted members of the Muslim Brotherhood and Al queda to rise up against their own governments.  The same madmen you are afraid of, we are still assisting.  How ironic.

Boy Ridge, stay away from the 151 proof moonshine, its gonna make your head cloudy, when you are walking up in those hills, after coming from your stills, you wont know if its a DEA terrorist or a sasquatch coming for you.

No, actually we didn't fund, assist or provide weapons to the Muslim Brotherhood or Al Qaeda in Syria or Egypt. And I'm not afraid of any madmen. But I'll be d*mned if I'd disarm and surrender without a fight like your heroes Ron Paul and Obama want to do. You must be French.

And maybe a swaller o' hooch might keep you from thinkin' all them crazy thoughts like ya do.

JonnyBgood07's avatarJonnyBgood07

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

No, actually we didn't fund, assist or provide weapons to the Muslim Brotherhood or Al Qaeda in Syria or Egypt. And I'm not afraid of any madmen. But I'll be d*mned if I'd disarm and surrender without a fight like your heroes Ron Paul and Obama want to do. You must be French.

And maybe a swaller o' hooch might keep you from thinkin' all them crazy thoughts like ya do.

...But I'll be d*mned if I'd disarm and surrender without a fight like your heroes Ron Paul"..

 

how nutty of a notion is it.?..stop pissing countries off and getting involved in thier internal conflicts and they may have a tendency to leave us alone???....

You've got to admit rigde we ain't exactly making any friends just about anywhere anymore.

We can't just keep putting the world in a headlock to bend to our ways and expect that it's not going to backfire at some point.

mcginnin56

Quote: Originally posted by JonnyBgood07 on Oct 9, 2012

...But I'll be d*mned if I'd disarm and surrender without a fight like your heroes Ron Paul"..

 

how nutty of a notion is it.?..stop pissing countries off and getting involved in thier internal conflicts and they may have a tendency to leave us alone???....

You've got to admit rigde we ain't exactly making any friends just about anywhere anymore.

We can't just keep putting the world in a headlock to bend to our ways and expect that it's not going to backfire at some point.

Defending our borders and airspace is absolutely essential.

Forcing our philosophies and regimes down the throats of middle east countries, is utterly insane, and putting us in harms way.

As long as we maintain our military's strength, we have no business telling the rest of the world how to govern themselves.

With record deficits, our economy going down the toilet, and a moral crises to contend with, don't we have enough of our own problems?

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by JonnyBgood07 on Oct 9, 2012

...But I'll be d*mned if I'd disarm and surrender without a fight like your heroes Ron Paul"..

 

how nutty of a notion is it.?..stop pissing countries off and getting involved in thier internal conflicts and they may have a tendency to leave us alone???....

You've got to admit rigde we ain't exactly making any friends just about anywhere anymore.

We can't just keep putting the world in a headlock to bend to our ways and expect that it's not going to backfire at some point.

Stop pissing countries off? How? Like not hijacking their planes and flying them into their skyscrapers? Like that?

Is there a chance maybe you could tell them that?

Or should we apologize for polluting their lands with our Christian presence while we developed their oil industry and built all their oil wells for them so they could get rich and start exporting their hate?

We should hope that they may have a tendency to leave us alone?

No, we are Americans, we lead, we don't cower in the corner hoping the bad guys will leave us alone and pick on somebody else. Do you live your life like that? I don't.

Why do libs always think that we're the bad guys? 

Exactly how do we stop pissing them off? The Egyptians hate us and we give them billions in aid every year. Is that pissing them off? Or is it their nutty religion? You tell me. We give aid to the Palestinians and Hamas on a regular basis also and they danced in the streets when they saw the towers fall. They hate our guts. Osama Bin Laden is like a national hero there.

You can't hope for love from people like these.

You have to command respect.

And showing indecisiveness and vacillation and limp-wristed resolve with a military in decline and retreat to these people is like an old lion limping in front of a pack of hyenas - when they detect weakness they go in for the kill. They don't care what you used to be - if you show weakness - you're dead meat.

Some people in life just have to be kept in line or they'll do bad things; we all know people like that. You can't let them push you around or it will only get worse. That's just a fact of life. Some people just won't act right unless you keep your boot on their neck, and that will never change.

And one thing is for sure, if you don't keep your boot on their neck, they will sooner or later have their boot on yours.

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 8, 2012

The Justice Department, through its interpretation of the Wire Act, has already virtually opened the door to internet gambling and it's extremely doubtful with the mess we're in from the current administration that the new administration would waste any time acting on one obscure sentence added to the Platform to assuage a special interest group when Platforms are routinely ignored.

No one swears any oath to uphold or enforce any item in any Platform and very few even pay any attention to it. Dam* few read it or have any idea what's in it. It's largely ceremonial and soon forgotten. Most people know what each party's general principles and core values are and don't have to look up chapter and verse to find out.

And even if it were a looming threat (which it isn't), anybody who would cast their vote to ensure a convenience in lottery playing over the survival of the nation in one of the most dangerous times in world history would have to be a complete imbecile.

My source was the Poker Players Alliance that doesn't care which party is in control as long as they pass an Internet Poker Bill. They were equally disappointed when the Democrats failed to mention Internet gaming on their platform.

However there is a huge difference between being silent on a subject and being openly opposed. I'm pretty sure the American people in this election as well as in every other election will vote for the candidate who they believe will benefits them the most regardless what other voters think.

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 8, 2012

If you are undecided and dont know who to vote for than just think who of the two candidates is the lesser of the two

 

Manchurians.

 

If you are a lottery player,

Vote Democrat

Not repugnikan.

 

Besides the only sane vote is for ron paul.

But the insane establishment would never let a sane man on the ballot.  Who would of thunk?

 

P.S.  With all the turmoil in the Middle East and world wide It seems that Democrats and Republicans cant stop their murderous ways and blood lustRed Devil, but please please, please

 

dont murder Big Bird.Turkey

I mentioned the Republican Party platform because someone said they are interested in how it will play out. Speaker of the House John Boehner said he has never read a platform and as Rdgrnr said, platforms are not written in stone. If Internet gaming is your deciding factor, it depends if you think Romney would veto or sign an Internet Gaming Bill.

Personally I'd rather try to pick winning lottery numbers than to try to pick the winner in presidential elections.

mediabrat's avatarmediabrat

Quote: Originally posted by mcginnin56 on Oct 9, 2012

Defending our borders and airspace is absolutely essential.

Forcing our philosophies and regimes down the throats of middle east countries, is utterly insane, and putting us in harms way.

As long as we maintain our military's strength, we have no business telling the rest of the world how to govern themselves.

With record deficits, our economy going down the toilet, and a moral crises to contend with, don't we have enough of our own problems?

You make far too much sense... which means Ridge will likely accuse you of being a flaming liberal.

We do not need to rule the world with an iron fist.  Furthermore, given the nature of the threats today, a huge military may hinder us more than it would help.  For the most part, our enemies are not nations, they are individuals and small groups, and we need to be nimble so that we can target them while minimizing collateral damage.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 9, 2012

My source was the Poker Players Alliance that doesn't care which party is in control as long as they pass an Internet Poker Bill. They were equally disappointed when the Democrats failed to mention Internet gaming on their platform.

However there is a huge difference between being silent on a subject and being openly opposed. I'm pretty sure the American people in this election as well as in every other election will vote for the candidate who they believe will benefits them the most regardless what other voters think.

Well, I know the American people are smart enough to put the survival of the nation ahead of a false rumor about the lottery when they vote. Just because the Poker Players Alliance which is apparently composed of incredibly stupid people focused on a single dimensional issue is advocating for the Democrats, it doesn't foretell a sea change in voting preferences. Stupid people will always vote for stupid things.

And let's face it, the Democrats have had the "stupid vote" wrapped up for a long, long time now.

mcginnin56

Quote: Originally posted by mediabrat on Oct 9, 2012

You make far too much sense... which means Ridge will likely accuse you of being a flaming liberal.

We do not need to rule the world with an iron fist.  Furthermore, given the nature of the threats today, a huge military may hinder us more than it would help.  For the most part, our enemies are not nations, they are individuals and small groups, and we need to be nimble so that we can target them while minimizing collateral damage.

LOL

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by mediabrat on Oct 9, 2012

You make far too much sense... which means Ridge will likely accuse you of being a flaming liberal.

We do not need to rule the world with an iron fist.  Furthermore, given the nature of the threats today, a huge military may hinder us more than it would help.  For the most part, our enemies are not nations, they are individuals and small groups, and we need to be nimble so that we can target them while minimizing collateral damage.

F**K That mediabrat. I agree with ridge.  Our military is nearly not big enough.  I think we should raise taxes to ensure we finally have the biggest military in the world.   I think we should never settle for being number two.  I mean F**K what the rest of the world thinks.  When will we finally have the biggest goddarn military in the world? I dunno.

I mean when  9-11 happened we didn't have not one single plane to scramble! Ridge is right our military was too small to scramble.  BIGGER!!! BETTER!! BADDER!!

(Maybe Ridge doesn't realize but since an airplane once crashed into the EMPIRE STATE building, all large skyscrapers are engineered to withstand the impact of large airplanes) 

And WTC building 7 coveniently collapses in a controlled demolition after Larry Silverstein the lease holder orders the building to be pulled.  Explain that one ridge. And FEMA clean up crews were in N.Y. the Monday before 9-11 to prepare for cleanup.  Explain that one ridge.  Oh FOX news told you?  Wow thanks that cleared it up for me. Just do a search for TOM KENNEY one of the Fema clean up crew.

  As a matter of fact it already is the biggest!!  But it should be bigger!!  And we should put our boot on the neck of the world too!  And thrust it down with a vigourous crunch. Long live the New World Order.

But i digress.  I just want to play my lottery game online.  Is that too much to ask?

Can the U.S.  the greatest country in the world really be that f**king backwards?

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

Well, I know the American people are smart enough to put the survival of the nation ahead of a false rumor about the lottery when they vote. Just because the Poker Players Alliance which is apparently composed of incredibly stupid people focused on a single dimensional issue is advocating for the Democrats, it doesn't foretell a sea change in voting preferences. Stupid people will always vote for stupid things.

And let's face it, the Democrats have had the "stupid vote" wrapped up for a long, long time now.

Yeah they wrapped it up in a man named George W. Bush.Roll Eyes

The guy only got into harvard probably because he is a legacy.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by mediabrat on Oct 9, 2012

You make far too much sense... which means Ridge will likely accuse you of being a flaming liberal.

We do not need to rule the world with an iron fist.  Furthermore, given the nature of the threats today, a huge military may hinder us more than it would help.  For the most part, our enemies are not nations, they are individuals and small groups, and we need to be nimble so that we can target them while minimizing collateral damage.

Good Lord, save us from people like mediumbratwurst.

 

Get a load o' this:

"...given the nature of the threats today, a huge military may hinder us more than it would help."

Who gave ya that pearl of wisdom? Governor Moonbeam? Al(massage down there please)Gore? Michael Dukakis? John(Horseface)Kerry? Harry(GirlyVoice)Reid? Nancy(BotoxMonster)Pelosi? Bawney Fwank? Not exactly a West Pointer, are ya son? 

 

Here's another gem:

"...we need to be nimble so that we can target them while minimizing collateral damage."

Jiminy Christmas, I don't even know where to start on that one. That was Jimmy (the Peanut Picker) Carter's strategy. And it was a colossal failure. He cut our military to ribbons, just as you advocate, and the buzzards started to circle overhead immediately. The hyenas and jackals of the world saw that and followed suit. That was the last time before just recently that we had an American Ambassador killed. It was under Carter because he was weak and chicken-livered just like Obama. That's also when the hyenas in Iran overran our embassy and took our diplomats hostage for 444 days. They were released the day Ronald Reagan took office. Why? Because they knew Reagan wouldn't play games and beg and negotiate from a position of weakness like Carter did and like Obama does. 

 

Tell ya what, son, just play your video games and march in your marches and leave the masculine things to the men. You remind me of the King's son in the movie Braveheart. Or maybe his boyfriend who flew out the window.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

F**K That mediabrat. I agree with ridge.  Our military is nearly not big enough.  I think we should raise taxes to ensure we finally have the biggest military in the world.   I think we should never settle for being number two.  I mean F**K what the rest of the world thinks.  When will we finally have the biggest goddarn military in the world? I dunno.

I mean when  9-11 happened we didn't have not one single plane to scramble! Ridge is right our military was too small to scramble.  BIGGER!!! BETTER!! BADDER!!

(Maybe Ridge doesn't realize but since an airplane once crashed into the EMPIRE STATE building, all large skyscrapers are engineered to withstand the impact of large airplanes) 

And WTC building 7 coveniently collapses in a controlled demolition after Larry Silverstein the lease holder orders the building to be pulled.  Explain that one ridge. And FEMA clean up crews were in N.Y. the Monday before 9-11 to prepare for cleanup.  Explain that one ridge.  Oh FOX news told you?  Wow thanks that cleared it up for me. Just do a search for TOM KENNEY one of the Fema clean up crew.

  As a matter of fact it already is the biggest!!  But it should be bigger!!  And we should put our boot on the neck of the world too!  And thrust it down with a vigourous crunch. Long live the New World Order.

But i digress.  I just want to play my lottery game online.  Is that too much to ask?

Can the U.S.  the greatest country in the world really be that f**king backwards?

Believe all the conspiracy theories you want, it doesn't change anything in the real world, only yours. If there are monsters under your bed and in your closet and you're abducted by aliens on occasion who probe you into nirvana, it makes no difference to me.

You can believe King Kong really climbed the Empire State Bldg and swatted planes like flies, yeah, I really don't care.

Elvis is alive and working at Arby's in Ann Arbor Michigan? Fine with me.

Black Helicopters track your every move? Oh well.

I realize there's no talking sense to nutjob conspiracy theorists who think there's government agents following them everywhere and space aliens probing them while they sleep.

But just because you spend your life in fear, kowtowing to bullies and doing what you're told to do in fear of an ass-whooping doesn't mean the rest of us should adopt your way of life. There are cowards in every society and in every generation of every society. They just have to be told to shut up and stay out of the way while the men take care of business.

The world is going up in flames and Americans are being brutally murdered because of a weak President and we have a chance to rid ourselves of him next month.

And what is your main concern amidst all of this? -- "I just want to play my lottery game online.  Is that too much to ask?"

What a guy.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

Believe all the conspiracy theories you want, it doesn't change anything in the real world, only yours. If there are monsters under your bed and in your closet and you're abducted by aliens on occasion who probe you into nirvana, it makes no difference to me.

You can believe King Kong really climbed the Empire State Bldg and swatted planes like flies, yeah, I really don't care.

Elvis is alive and working at Arby's in Ann Arbor Michigan? Fine with me.

Black Helicopters track your every move? Oh well.

I realize there's no talking sense to nutjob conspiracy theorists who think there's government agents following them everywhere and space aliens probing them while they sleep.

But just because you spend your life in fear, kowtowing to bullies and doing what you're told to do in fear of an ass-whooping doesn't mean the rest of us should adopt your way of life. There are cowards in every society and in every generation of every society. They just have to be told to shut up and stay out of the way while the men take care of business.

The world is going up in flames and Americans are being brutally murdered because of a weak President and we have a chance to rid ourselves of him next month.

And what is your main concern amidst all of this? -- "I just want to play my lottery game online.  Is that too much to ask?"

What a guy.

Amen and hoping the great state of Virginia does the right thing here.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

Believe all the conspiracy theories you want, it doesn't change anything in the real world, only yours. If there are monsters under your bed and in your closet and you're abducted by aliens on occasion who probe you into nirvana, it makes no difference to me.

You can believe King Kong really climbed the Empire State Bldg and swatted planes like flies, yeah, I really don't care.

Elvis is alive and working at Arby's in Ann Arbor Michigan? Fine with me.

Black Helicopters track your every move? Oh well.

I realize there's no talking sense to nutjob conspiracy theorists who think there's government agents following them everywhere and space aliens probing them while they sleep.

But just because you spend your life in fear, kowtowing to bullies and doing what you're told to do in fear of an ass-whooping doesn't mean the rest of us should adopt your way of life. There are cowards in every society and in every generation of every society. They just have to be told to shut up and stay out of the way while the men take care of business.

The world is going up in flames and Americans are being brutally murdered because of a weak President and we have a chance to rid ourselves of him next month.

And what is your main concern amidst all of this? -- "I just want to play my lottery game online.  Is that too much to ask?"

What a guy.

The world is going up in flames and Americans are being brutally murdered because of a weak President and we have a chance to rid ourselves of him next month.

 

The Man did what a republican couldn't do.  He got Osama Bin Laden.

How is that weak?

Or Maybe you think thats also a conspiracy theory?

Maybe you are right ridge, maybe it was aliens who got him.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Artist77 on Oct 9, 2012

Amen and hoping the great state of Virginia does the right thing here.

Thanks Artist, and I think they will.

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

Well, I know the American people are smart enough to put the survival of the nation ahead of a false rumor about the lottery when they vote. Just because the Poker Players Alliance which is apparently composed of incredibly stupid people focused on a single dimensional issue is advocating for the Democrats, it doesn't foretell a sea change in voting preferences. Stupid people will always vote for stupid things.

And let's face it, the Democrats have had the "stupid vote" wrapped up for a long, long time now.

"Stupid people will always vote for stupid things."

And that should apply equally to the people voting to put the ban on any form of Internet gaming on the Republican Party's platform. You already said nobody cares what is written into the platforms and I agreed.

As for "a false rumor",

"Millions of Americans suffer from problem or pathological gambling that can destroy families. We support the prohibition of gambling over the Internet and call for reversal of the Justice Department's decision distorting the formerly accepted meaning of the Wire Act that could open the door to Internet betting."

It's on page 32 of the Republican Party Platform. http://www.gop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012GOPPlatform.pdf

Do you believe "millions of Americans" are pathological gamblers or that the 47% of voters paying zero in taxes will vote for Obama when nation wide 55% of voters 65 and older (the majority of them paying zero in Federal taxes) voted for McCain in 2008?

If the Republican Party is more intelligent, why is their math wrong?

The math in Kentucky is simple whether my reasons for voting one way or the other is based on one issue, several issues, or a coin flip; Romney will get all 8 KY electoral votes.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

The world is going up in flames and Americans are being brutally murdered because of a weak President and we have a chance to rid ourselves of him next month.

 

The Man did what a republican couldn't do.  He got Osama Bin Laden.

How is that weak?

Or Maybe you think thats also a conspiracy theory?

Maybe you are right ridge, maybe it was aliens who got him.

You think he got Bin Laden?

You need more help than I can give ya.

He put the kibosh on the operation 3 times previously on orders from Valerie Jarrett, his wife's girlfriend, you know, the one who really runs the country.

Do you honestly believe he had anything to do with that besides saying "ok" on the 4th occasion they had him located and then scurrying in front of the cameras to tell the world that he  got Bin Laden? Really?

I thought you were smarter than that.

Ya know, old dopey Joe Biden likes to chant a slogan:  "General Motors is alive - Bin Laden is dead!"

Maybe Romney ought to chant a slogan too:   "Al Qaeda is alive - Ambassador Stevens is dead!"

Because that's the dirty little secret that the Obama doesn't want us to know - that our enemies are alive and well and gaining strength to fill the vacuum when Obama decimates our military and ability to project power to vital areas of the world.

The hyenas are gathering and the buzzards are circling overhead.

But more importantly, I hope you don't have to go all the way to the store to buy your lottery tickets.

LottoBoner

But more importantly, I hope you don't have to go all the way to the store to buy your lottery tickets.

Thank you kindly sir.

It is better to play online.  Everytime I start up my car I contribute to global warming and the destroying of the polar ice caps.  Think of the thousands of cars that could stay off the road! (I wish Al Gore was running, he is our environmental saviour)

The less I drive, the less Carbon Tax i will have to pay.

As for who is gonna win the election it doesn't really matter, policy has already been decided by the CFR and the Bilderberg group.

As for me I am gonna do what Monty Brewster says to do,

VOTE NONE OF THE ABOVE!

I trust you Ridge to make the correct choice in November on behalf of the entire populace and myself. Return us to Paradise whereby all the problems of the world will be solved with one swift push of the lever.  And return the NeoCons unto the throne where they can rule with compassion and with love for all.

Because surely they wont lift the iron hand in the silk glove. Who needs a constitution anyway?  We will be happier and safer under a North American Union. <snip> terrorists, dont they ever sleep?

This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 9, 2012

"Stupid people will always vote for stupid things."

And that should apply equally to the people voting to put the ban on any form of Internet gaming on the Republican Party's platform. You already said nobody cares what is written into the platforms and I agreed.

As for "a false rumor",

"Millions of Americans suffer from problem or pathological gambling that can destroy families. We support the prohibition of gambling over the Internet and call for reversal of the Justice Department's decision distorting the formerly accepted meaning of the Wire Act that could open the door to Internet betting."

It's on page 32 of the Republican Party Platform. http://www.gop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012GOPPlatform.pdf

Do you believe "millions of Americans" are pathological gamblers or that the 47% of voters paying zero in taxes will vote for Obama when nation wide 55% of voters 65 and older (the majority of them paying zero in Federal taxes) voted for McCain in 2008?

If the Republican Party is more intelligent, why is their math wrong?

The math in Kentucky is simple whether my reasons for voting one way or the other is based on one issue, several issues, or a coin flip; Romney will get all 8 KY electoral votes.

I've read the Platform before, Stack, and it's clear which way you will vote regardless of which way your state goes.

So your lobbying for Obama here for my benefit wasn't necessary.

But you knew that.

And the "false rumor" didn't pertain to the plank being in the platform but rather if the plank in the Platform would carry any weight (which it won't).

But you knew that too.

But you got your "evidence" out there and that's what's important (to you).

To keep the false rumor going anyway.

Cuz you know there are always a few stupid people here, ripe for the taking.   

The hell with the country. Me, me, me.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

The world is going up in flames and Americans are being brutally murdered because of a weak President and we have a chance to rid ourselves of him next month.

 

The Man did what a republican couldn't do.  He got Osama Bin Laden.

How is that weak?

Or Maybe you think thats also a conspiracy theory?

Maybe you are right ridge, maybe it was aliens who got him.

LB, you'll do very well by just leaving it alone. Any reasonable, level-headed individual should be able to find some good in BOTH CANDIDATES no matter what the good may be. I was actually very pleased to see Gov. Romney step with such an extreme aggression as he did...he actually HAD to for the masses.

However, I'm sure you remember Mohammed Ali and his boxing strategy called the "Rope-A-Dope". Lure his opponent in, let him pound on him while he hugs the ropes. The masses get all happy and the opponent thinks he's doing very well...winning even.

Do you remember the outcomes? If you do, then you should have no problem with my very first sentence.

 

L.L.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

But more importantly, I hope you don't have to go all the way to the store to buy your lottery tickets.

Thank you kindly sir.

It is better to play online.  Everytime I start up my car I contribute to global warming and the destroying of the polar ice caps.  Think of the thousands of cars that could stay off the road! (I wish Al Gore was running, he is our environmental saviour)

The less I drive, the less Carbon Tax i will have to pay.

As for who is gonna win the election it doesn't really matter, policy has already been decided by the CFR and the Bilderberg group.

As for me I am gonna do what Monty Brewster says to do,

VOTE NONE OF THE ABOVE!

I trust you Ridge to make the correct choice in November on behalf of the entire populace and myself. Return us to Paradise whereby all the problems of the world will be solved with one swift push of the lever.  And return the NeoCons unto the throne where they can rule with compassion and with love for all.

Because surely they wont lift the iron hand in the silk glove. Who needs a constitution anyway?  We will be happier and safer under a North American Union. <snip> terrorists, dont they ever sleep?

This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.

"As for me I am gonna do what Monty Brewster says to do,

VOTE NONE OF THE ABOVE!"

 

Hope springs eternal. Thumbs Up

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 9, 2012

LB, you'll do very well by just leaving it alone. Any reasonable, level-headed individual should be able to find some good in BOTH CANDIDATES no matter what the good may be. I was actually very pleased to see Gov. Romney step with such an extreme aggression as he did...he actually HAD to for the masses.

However, I'm sure you remember Mohammed Ali and his boxing strategy called the "Rope-A-Dope". Lure his opponent in, let him pound on him while he hugs the ropes. The masses get all happy and the opponent thinks he's doing very well...winning even.

Do you remember the outcomes? If you do, then you should have no problem with my very first sentence.

 

L.L.

Maybe you have a point L.L.  After all it wasn't Obama that got Osama Bin Laden.  Thats is just a conspiracy theory.  It was his wife.  Now wait it was George W. Bush!  Oh wait, no that was Saddam Hussein.  My Bad.  No wait! Thats a conspiracy theory also. It was aliens from an interdimension. Or maybe it was Condeleeza Rice.  Or maybe it was Ridge!

  I see now why you cant debate with Ridge, he always takes the facts distorts them and then turns them into personal attacks.

My mother was right, never argue with a drunkard.  You cant win.  They get tunnel vision.

Just wait until they pass out, and then pee on them.

Mohammad Ali?  Was that one of those Al-Queda terrorists? No wait Al- queda is a conspiracy theory too!

So you are saying Obama was setting Romney up with a rope a dope?  More conspiracies!!!! ARRGHH!!!!

There is only one dope on this thread, let me tell you, and he has got a big beard.

mediabrat's avatarmediabrat

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

Good Lord, save us from people like mediumbratwurst.

 

Get a load o' this:

"...given the nature of the threats today, a huge military may hinder us more than it would help."

Who gave ya that pearl of wisdom? Governor Moonbeam? Al(massage down there please)Gore? Michael Dukakis? John(Horseface)Kerry? Harry(GirlyVoice)Reid? Nancy(BotoxMonster)Pelosi? Bawney Fwank? Not exactly a West Pointer, are ya son? 

 

Here's another gem:

"...we need to be nimble so that we can target them while minimizing collateral damage."

Jiminy Christmas, I don't even know where to start on that one. That was Jimmy (the Peanut Picker) Carter's strategy. And it was a colossal failure. He cut our military to ribbons, just as you advocate, and the buzzards started to circle overhead immediately. The hyenas and jackals of the world saw that and followed suit. That was the last time before just recently that we had an American Ambassador killed. It was under Carter because he was weak and chicken-livered just like Obama. That's also when the hyenas in Iran overran our embassy and took our diplomats hostage for 444 days. They were released the day Ronald Reagan took office. Why? Because they knew Reagan wouldn't play games and beg and negotiate from a position of weakness like Carter did and like Obama does. 

 

Tell ya what, son, just play your video games and march in your marches and leave the masculine things to the men. You remind me of the King's son in the movie Braveheart. Or maybe his boyfriend who flew out the window.

And immediately Ridge goes to the name calling.  What a surprise... not.

I'm not in favor of dismantling the military.  I just don't want to conquer the world, nor do I find it necessary to do so.  You, on the other hand, want to drop a bomb on the Middle East that would make the atomic bombs we dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like firecrackers.

The idea that Reagan secured the release of the Iranian hostages -- whether directly or because Iran was scared of him -- is yet another fiction perpetuated by the spin artists in the Republican party.  Iran gave in because they needed money for their war against Iraq and the US agreed to turn over several billion dollars in Iranian assets that had been frozen in American banks after the embassy was invaded.  The release of the hostages on Inauguration Day was merely a coincidence.

More importantly, the Algiers Accords -- the agreement that ended the hostage crisis -- included a provision that the US would stay out of Iran's internal affairs.  The US's insistence upon sticking its nose in everyone else's business is one of the chief reasons why we have so many enemies.  Did it ever occur to anyone that they'll be happy to leave us alone provided we leave them alone?  Nah, why do that when we can conquer the world and rule it with an iron fist?

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by mediabrat on Oct 9, 2012

And immediately Ridge goes to the name calling.  What a surprise... not.

I'm not in favor of dismantling the military.  I just don't want to conquer the world, nor do I find it necessary to do so.  You, on the other hand, want to drop a bomb on the Middle East that would make the atomic bombs we dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like firecrackers.

The idea that Reagan secured the release of the Iranian hostages -- whether directly or because Iran was scared of him -- is yet another fiction perpetuated by the spin artists in the Republican party.  Iran gave in because they needed money for their war against Iraq and the US agreed to turn over several billion dollars in Iranian assets that had been frozen in American banks after the embassy was invaded.  The release of the hostages on Inauguration Day was merely a coincidence.

More importantly, the Algiers Accords -- the agreement that ended the hostage crisis -- included a provision that the US would stay out of Iran's internal affairs.  The US's insistence upon sticking its nose in everyone else's business is one of the chief reasons why we have so many enemies.  Did it ever occur to anyone that they'll be happy to leave us alone provided we leave them alone?  Nah, why do that when we can conquer the world and rule it with an iron fist?

I don't recall calling you any names. I probably wanted to though and forgot.

But I just skimmed over your post again and it's all pretty much the same liberal talking points and loony conspiracy theories that you all recite, isn't it?

Basically that the Democrats are brave and dashing heroes and Reagan was dumb and all of that, right?

Yeah, that's what I thought so just do a search of my past posts if you'd like a response cuz I've probably addressed all of that wacky stuff a million times before and de-constructed all the drooling morons who posted it too while I was at it.

Have a nice day.

mcginnin56

And that about wraps up the threats to our federal Web poker bill.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 9, 2012

Maybe you have a point L.L.  After all it wasn't Obama that got Osama Bin Laden.  Thats is just a conspiracy theory.  It was his wife.  Now wait it was George W. Bush!  Oh wait, no that was Saddam Hussein.  My Bad.  No wait! Thats a conspiracy theory also. It was aliens from an interdimension. Or maybe it was Condeleeza Rice.  Or maybe it was Ridge!

  I see now why you cant debate with Ridge, he always takes the facts distorts them and then turns them into personal attacks.

My mother was right, never argue with a drunkard.  You cant win.  They get tunnel vision.

Just wait until they pass out, and then pee on them.

Mohammad Ali?  Was that one of those Al-Queda terrorists? No wait Al- queda is a conspiracy theory too!

So you are saying Obama was setting Romney up with a rope a dope?  More conspiracies!!!! ARRGHH!!!!

There is only one dope on this thread, let me tell you, and he has got a big beard.

Well, LB, you've learned a personal lesson pretty fast!! Just leave the debating to the candidates in question. Here's my personal view:

The world is the patient and was very, very sick WELL BEFORE the current doctor took the case. All sorts of "economic remedies and prescriptions" have been administered in their proper dosages. Now, we all know that medications cost money...and more money HAD to be FURTHER borrowed to implement the medicines and recovery therapies.

All sicknesses are recovery- dependent upon several things: the NATURE of the sickness, the EXTENT of the sickness, CONDITION of the body (immune system), strength of the medication, and the ATTENTIVENESS of the doctor towards a successful and full recovery. No sickness heals instantly I don't care how much the medicine costs, or, who the doctor may be. It takes time and the patient cannot be rushed to heal...won't happen. Healing is a slow process and the more damage there is, the longer it takes.

If there was absolutely NO HEALING, I'd say we have a serious problem. However, I can look at the patient's records (numbers) and factually see that healing is taking place everyday...just at a slow pace. Which is more acceptable? Slow healing or no healing? Some "vital organs" have already been saved within the patient's body, I might add. With healing currently taking place, the current doctor doesn't need to keep going over his remedies and prescriptions because they're working...just not as fast as some may like. Patience.

Now, if people want to debate the speediness of the recovery, that's beyond the doctor's control due to the factors already mentioned. Another doctor is claiming to magically be able to heal the same patient at a much faster rate without spending any more money on medication or therapy. Personally, I don't know if this doctor's method of healing will work because none of the medications, therapies, and treatments have been discussed in any detail. Furthermore, other doctors that have carefully examined what little information that was dissemminated have confirmed that it won't work, and, could quite possibly re-injure the patient.

Also, the doctor in question has a current history of just "giving up" on other "organs" and simply shipping them off to be healed elsewhere. A calm doctor is more attentive and efficient than an overly aggressive and uncaring one...although he may speak as though he's concerned about the patient. So, there you go. You have the doctors and the patient in question...and must decide if one get's the shot at either continued treatments, or, another one with a supposedly better and magically fast method of treating. It's on you.

L.L.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 10, 2012

Well, LB, you've learned a personal lesson pretty fast!! Just leave the debating to the candidates in question. Here's my personal view:

The world is the patient and was very, very sick WELL BEFORE the current doctor took the case. All sorts of "economic remedies and prescriptions" have been administered in their proper dosages. Now, we all know that medications cost money...and more money HAD to be FURTHER borrowed to implement the medicines and recovery therapies.

All sicknesses are recovery- dependent upon several things: the NATURE of the sickness, the EXTENT of the sickness, CONDITION of the body (immune system), strength of the medication, and the ATTENTIVENESS of the doctor towards a successful and full recovery. No sickness heals instantly I don't care how much the medicine costs, or, who the doctor may be. It takes time and the patient cannot be rushed to heal...won't happen. Healing is a slow process and the more damage there is, the longer it takes.

If there was absolutely NO HEALING, I'd say we have a serious problem. However, I can look at the patient's records (numbers) and factually see that healing is taking place everyday...just at a slow pace. Which is more acceptable? Slow healing or no healing? Some "vital organs" have already been saved within the patient's body, I might add. With healing currently taking place, the current doctor doesn't need to keep going over his remedies and prescriptions because they're working...just not as fast as some may like. Patience.

Now, if people want to debate the speediness of the recovery, that's beyond the doctor's control due to the factors already mentioned. Another doctor is claiming to magically be able to heal the same patient at a much faster rate without spending any more money on medication or therapy. Personally, I don't know if this doctor's method of healing will work because none of the medications, therapies, and treatments have been discussed in any detail. Furthermore, other doctors that have carefully examined what little information that was dissemminated have confirmed that it won't work, and, could quite possibly re-injure the patient.

Also, the doctor in question has a current history of just "giving up" on other "organs" and simply shipping them off to be healed elsewhere. A calm doctor is more attentive and efficient than an overly aggressive and uncaring one...although he may speak as though he's concerned about the patient. So, there you go. You have the doctors and the patient in question...and must decide if one get's the shot at either continued treatments, or, another one with a supposedly better and magically fast method of treating. It's on you.

L.L.

Good Lord, wouldn't it have been easier to just say you support Obama than to put us all through that? You could have helped them write a few thousand pages of Obamacare with a droning diatribe like that. I'm sure they're always looking for a few good windbags to produce further reams of mumbo-jumbo, so Nancy Pelosi can say we need to pass it now and read it later to see what's in it.

And your doctor analogy didn't include the modality Obama is using on the patient right now → → Euthanasia.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

Good Lord, wouldn't it have been easier to just say you support Obama than to put us all through that? You could have helped them write a few thousand pages of Obamacare with a droning diatribe like that. I'm sure they're always looking for a few good windbags to produce further reams of mumbo-jumbo, so Nancy Pelosi can say we need to pass it now and read it later to see what's in it.

And your doctor analogy didn't include the modality Obama is using on the patient right now → → Euthanasia.

Thanks, ridge. I appreciate your input and respect your views as well. A few posts back, no one said a word about how much detail you went into with discrediting the president on pretty much every issue. As such, you could've just said you support Gov. Romney and don't believe that Obama has accomplished nothing in your book. We both simply elaborated in our own ways.

 

Euthanasia...I like that one. Take it easy and have a shot of Jack for me!

 

L.L. 

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 9, 2012

I've read the Platform before, Stack, and it's clear which way you will vote regardless of which way your state goes.

So your lobbying for Obama here for my benefit wasn't necessary.

But you knew that.

And the "false rumor" didn't pertain to the plank being in the platform but rather if the plank in the Platform would carry any weight (which it won't).

But you knew that too.

But you got your "evidence" out there and that's what's important (to you).

To keep the false rumor going anyway.

Cuz you know there are always a few stupid people here, ripe for the taking.   

The hell with the country. Me, me, me.

"Lotteries a threat to federal Web poker bill?

Who I'll vote for 5 or 6 times on November 6 has no relevance to this topic. 

The Poker Players Alliance goal is to make it legal for U.S. poker players to deposit funds into an online account and play poker on the Internet in the privacy of their homes. If state lotteries offer online poker, the PPA has accomplished part of their goal, but Federal legislation is still the main goal because the lotteries will restrict their play to state residence.

Even if the anti-Internet gambling plank in the National Republican Party platform is a useless waste of space paragraph, it's still a slap in the face to the millions of U.S. Poker players.

"Cuz you know there are always a few stupid people here, ripe for the taking.

I have no clue how many LP members played online poker for real money, but the conservative estimate before the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was 10 million U.S. poker players. The last time I looked at the polls the race to 270 was close and it's possible the PPA in reporting the Republican Party plank in their August newsletter to their 3 million plus membership, swayed some undecided voters.

"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what." --- Mitt Romney

It's obvious Romney knew the undecided voters will determine this election yet he allowed members of his own party to add a plank that could possibly cause his defeat.

"The hell with the country. Me, me, me."

People said the same thing when both the 18th and 21st Amendments were ratified and someone will always say it when their vote is in the minority. After the Great Depression, 15,761,841 people voted for Herbert Hoover. It's all part of the "Great Experiment" started in the late 18th century.

Though it wasn't my intention by relaying factual information from the PPA to persuade someone's vote, it really doesn't matter because the First Amendment gives all of us that right.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 10, 2012

Thanks, ridge. I appreciate your input and respect your views as well. A few posts back, no one said a word about how much detail you went into with discrediting the president on pretty much every issue. As such, you could've just said you support Gov. Romney and don't believe that Obama has accomplished nothing in your book. We both simply elaborated in our own ways.

 

Euthanasia...I like that one. Take it easy and have a shot of Jack for me!

 

L.L. 

I've never hidden my political proclivities, everybody knows very well where I stand and I don't have to discredit the President because he does a great job of that all by himself. I can understand though, the embarrassment you must feel in supporting an abject failure like him. But if you really like those easy to get food stamps with no requirements, well, there's no getting around it, he's your man. And I hear those Hot Pockets are really good! None for me though, thanks, I'm watching my salt.

And I'm not saying Obama hasn't accomplished anything in my book, he's accomplished plenty. He just hasn't accomplished anything that's good for the country. Everything he's accomplished has been bad for the country. And that's exactly the way he wanted it to be.

Anybody who claims to love this country but votes for Obama is an insufferable moron because Obama is out to destroy this country.

And thank God there are people who will put their own selfish personal interests aside for the good of the country and vote him out.

Thank God for real American Patriots.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 10, 2012

"Lotteries a threat to federal Web poker bill?

Who I'll vote for 5 or 6 times on November 6 has no relevance to this topic. 

The Poker Players Alliance goal is to make it legal for U.S. poker players to deposit funds into an online account and play poker on the Internet in the privacy of their homes. If state lotteries offer online poker, the PPA has accomplished part of their goal, but Federal legislation is still the main goal because the lotteries will restrict their play to state residence.

Even if the anti-Internet gambling plank in the National Republican Party platform is a useless waste of space paragraph, it's still a slap in the face to the millions of U.S. Poker players.

"Cuz you know there are always a few stupid people here, ripe for the taking.

I have no clue how many LP members played online poker for real money, but the conservative estimate before the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was 10 million U.S. poker players. The last time I looked at the polls the race to 270 was close and it's possible the PPA in reporting the Republican Party plank in their August newsletter to their 3 million plus membership, swayed some undecided voters.

"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what." --- Mitt Romney

It's obvious Romney knew the undecided voters will determine this election yet he allowed members of his own party to add a plank that could possibly cause his defeat.

"The hell with the country. Me, me, me."

People said the same thing when both the 18th and 21st Amendments were ratified and someone will always say it when their vote is in the minority. After the Great Depression, 15,761,841 people voted for Herbert Hoover. It's all part of the "Great Experiment" started in the late 18th century.

Though it wasn't my intention by relaying factual information from the PPA to persuade someone's vote, it really doesn't matter because the First Amendment gives all of us that right.

Well Stack, you got your rhetoric and propaganda out there again. There's really no need to address it to me. Just give your speech.

I'm sure there could be a few old card players with gambling problems like you here that you might influence, who knows?

And maybe if your man Obama wins you'll get your wish of online poker, taxpayer funded abortions, Sodomite Marriage and a decimated military all in one bill. And a young liberal-activist Supreme Court to make sure nobody can ever change any of it.

Good work buddy, keep at it.

You're a great American.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

I've never hidden my political proclivities, everybody knows very well where I stand and I don't have to discredit the President because he does a great job of that all by himself. I can understand though, the embarrassment you must feel in supporting an abject failure like him. But if you really like those easy to get food stamps with no requirements, well, there's no getting around it, he's your man. And I hear those Hot Pockets are really good! None for me though, thanks, I'm watching my salt.

And I'm not saying Obama hasn't accomplished anything in my book, he's accomplished plenty. He just hasn't accomplished anything that's good for the country. Everything he's accomplished has been bad for the country. And that's exactly the way he wanted it to be.

Anybody who claims to love this country but votes for Obama is an insufferable moron because Obama is out to destroy this country.

And thank God there are people who will put their own selfish personal interests aside for the good of the country and vote him out.

Thank God for real American Patriots.

Okay, I'll bite. The perfect combination would be Romney and Bush...hands down. Do you support this idea? If not, then why? Didn't Bush leave us with a $surplus$ and record low unemployment rate? Who was on the watch when 9/11 took place...and had forewarning of an imminent threat but played it down? Did they ever find those weapons of mass destruction in Baghdad? Why isn't anyone praising Bush for all his accomplishments if he did such a good job? This man was in office for (8) years, and NO ONE EVEN CARED TO HAVE HIM SPEAK AT THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION. 

He wasn't even via satellite. He wasn't EVEN THERE. Rather, he had a smallish clip made. HIS DAD wasn't even there and they served as presidents back to back of each other. Help me to under all this because I know you have all the answers.

 

L.L.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 10, 2012

Okay, I'll bite. The perfect combination would be Romney and Bush...hands down. Do you support this idea? If not, then why? Didn't Bush leave us with a $surplus$ and record low unemployment rate? Who was on the watch when 9/11 took place...and had forewarning of an imminent threat but played it down? Did they ever find those weapons of mass destruction in Baghdad? Why isn't anyone praising Bush for all his accomplishments if he did such a good job? This man was in office for (8) years, and NO ONE EVEN CARED TO HAVE HIM SPEAK AT THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION. 

He wasn't even via satellite. He wasn't EVEN THERE. Rather, he had a smallish clip made. HIS DAD wasn't even there and they served as presidents back to back of each other. Help me to under all this because I know you have all the answers.

 

L.L.

"HIS DAD wasn't even there and they served as presidents back to back of each other. Help me to under all this because I know you have all the answers."

Here's an answer for ya just for starters, son.

You better do your homework if I have to school ya boy, cuz I'll take ya out to the woodshed, son. Copy?

Blee dat.

 

 

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) George Bush (1981-1989)
George Bush (1989-1993) Dan Quayle (1989-1993)
Bill Clinton (1993-2001) Al Gore (1993-2001)
George W. Bush (2001-2009) Dick Cheney (2001-2009)
Barack Obama (2009-present) Joe Biden (2009-present)
rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 10, 2012

Okay, I'll bite. The perfect combination would be Romney and Bush...hands down. Do you support this idea? If not, then why? Didn't Bush leave us with a $surplus$ and record low unemployment rate? Who was on the watch when 9/11 took place...and had forewarning of an imminent threat but played it down? Did they ever find those weapons of mass destruction in Baghdad? Why isn't anyone praising Bush for all his accomplishments if he did such a good job? This man was in office for (8) years, and NO ONE EVEN CARED TO HAVE HIM SPEAK AT THE REPUBLICAN CONVENTION. 

He wasn't even via satellite. He wasn't EVEN THERE. Rather, he had a smallish clip made. HIS DAD wasn't even there and they served as presidents back to back of each other. Help me to under all this because I know you have all the answers.

 

L.L.

OK, Mr. Loser, I see you're cut from the same cloth as your lying weasel hero. How do I know? Cuz you're a lying, sniveling, weasel-like loser just like him.

Which means all you ever talk about is how everything bad that ever happens is Bush's fault and everything good that ever happens is Obama's success.

You don't have the character or self-respect to tell the truth about the man cuz you're a sniveling little slimy puke just like him. A real Texas Dandy. Loser is a good name for ya, I see why you chose it, it fits.

I don't need to hear all your whining and sniveling about WMD's and "Bush lied, people died" for the 6 millionth friggin' time. Put a lid on that garbage, junior.

Listen real close now, numbnuts: BUSH AIN'T RUNNIN' FOR OFFICE, YOU INSUFFERABLE MORON PUKE!!! 

Wake the f*** up, stupid!

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

"HIS DAD wasn't even there and they served as presidents back to back of each other. Help me to under all this because I know you have all the answers."

Here's an answer for ya just for starters, son.

You better do your homework if I have to school ya boy, cuz I'll take ya out to the woodshed, son. Copy?

Blee dat.

 

 

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) George Bush (1981-1989)
George Bush (1989-1993) Dan Quayle (1989-1993)
Bill Clinton (1993-2001) Al Gore (1993-2001)
George W. Bush (2001-2009) Dick Cheney (2001-2009)
Barack Obama (2009-present) Joe Biden (2009-present)

hehehehe, yep, you had the answer, wonder if it will sink in though.,

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Oct 10, 2012

hehehehe, yep, you had the answer, wonder if it will sink in though.,

LOL, not a chance.

Mr. Loser is brainwashed to the bone.

If Saturday Night Live or Jon Stewart or Bill Maher tell him that the Bush's served back to back -- it's Gospel.

Loser was more entertaining when he used to talk about the hookers he got all the time and he even invited me to join him once or twice (I graciously declined).

Must be a real handsome guy.

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

LOL, not a chance.

Mr. Loser is brainwashed to the bone.

If Saturday Night Live or Jon Stewart or Bill Maher tell him that the Bush's served back to back -- it's Gospel.

Loser was more entertaining when he used to talk about the hookers he got all the time and he even invited me to join him once or twice (I graciously declined).

Must be a real handsome guy.

Got a girl at work, hates Romney cause he's so corporate, she wants all the tax loop holes closed, I asked her, so, no more deducting the interest on your mortgage? no more deducting your kids, no child care credit?, I asked her if she had a 401k, yep, her and hubby, my next question, do you know what a 401k is? answer..., yep, the company saves her money and gives her interest. she is clueless.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Oct 10, 2012

Got a girl at work, hates Romney cause he's so corporate, she wants all the tax loop holes closed, I asked her, so, no more deducting the interest on your mortgage? no more deducting your kids, no child care credit?, I asked her if she had a 401k, yep, her and hubby, my next question, do you know what a 401k is? answer..., yep, the company saves her money and gives her interest. she is clueless.

Hates him cuz he's so corporate, lol, good one.

Space -- The Final Frontier.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

I've never hidden my political proclivities, everybody knows very well where I stand and I don't have to discredit the President because he does a great job of that all by himself. I can understand though, the embarrassment you must feel in supporting an abject failure like him. But if you really like those easy to get food stamps with no requirements, well, there's no getting around it, he's your man. And I hear those Hot Pockets are really good! None for me though, thanks, I'm watching my salt.

And I'm not saying Obama hasn't accomplished anything in my book, he's accomplished plenty. He just hasn't accomplished anything that's good for the country. Everything he's accomplished has been bad for the country. And that's exactly the way he wanted it to be.

Anybody who claims to love this country but votes for Obama is an insufferable moron because Obama is out to destroy this country.

And thank God there are people who will put their own selfish personal interests aside for the good of the country and vote him out.

Thank God for real American Patriots.

 And that's exactly the way he wanted it to be.

You know ridge this is a very naive statement.  I thought you had more wisdom than that.

Do you think the President really has any power any more?  Do you really think Obama makes policy? The last president that actually was showing some power  and creating some of his own policies was JFK and look what happened to him.  All presidents since JFK, more or less kowtow to the military industrial complex.  The real power real lies with the lobbyists and the bankers and corporations they represent.  War is good money!  You can bomb in the name of democracy.  Take the money, gold, and resources, and create a whole lot of resentment and new terrorists at the same time to continue the war on terror.  A never ending cycle.

You think Romney is any different?   The first thing on Romneys agenda will be to have pre-emptive attack on Iran.  Not because Romney wants to, but because of those pulling the strings.  You think the same masterminds of the 9-11 attacks are not still plotting?  You think they still dont lurk within the government? (And ridge you still never explainted WTC number 7).  Romney is already bought.  He wont live up to his claims as no president ever does.  They all run on the model of bait and switch.

And let me tell you the Iranians will not be afraid of Romney like Reagan.( like your farfetched claims), because romney never played a cowboy in hollywood, and Reagan was a bad ass scary ass cowboy.  I mean if i had hostages i would give them up too.  One look from the gipper and I would be like "Allah save us!"

All I can say is that Obama is a wolf in sheeps clothing.  And Romney will simply be the wolf.

Anybody who claims to love this country but votes for Obama is an insufferable moron because Obama is out to destroy this country.

Again, naivety.  Romney will be an even bigger puppet then Obama. And more dangerous for the security of the world, less alone the U.S., because Romney has already sold out.  Just look at his major contributors.  But you already know all this oh wise oracle.

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

Hates him cuz he's so corporate, lol, good one.

Space -- The Final Frontier.

LOL, They'll screw that up so bad, the aliens will give us the boot and put a force field around the planet, so we can't escape.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 10, 2012

 And that's exactly the way he wanted it to be.

You know ridge this is a very naive statement.  I thought you had more wisdom than that.

Do you think the President really has any power any more?  Do you really think Obama makes policy? The last president that actually was showing some power  and creating some of his own policies was JFK and look what happened to him.  All presidents since JFK, more or less kowtow to the military industrial complex.  The real power real lies with the lobbyists and the bankers and corporations they represent.  War is good money!  You can bomb in the name of democracy.  Take the money, gold, and resources, and create a whole lot of resentment and new terrorists at the same time to continue the war on terror.  A never ending cycle.

You think Romney is any different?   The first thing on Romneys agenda will be to have pre-emptive attack on Iran.  Not because Romney wants to, but because of those pulling the strings.  You think the same masterminds of the 9-11 attacks are not still plotting?  You think they still dont lurk within the government? (And ridge you still never explainted WTC number 7).  Romney is already bought.  He wont live up to his claims as no president ever does.  They all run on the model of bait and switch.

And let me tell you the Iranians will not be afraid of Romney like Reagan.( like your farfetched claims), because romney never played a cowboy in hollywood, and Reagan was a bad ass scary ass cowboy.  I mean if i had hostages i would give them up too.  One look from the gipper and I would be like "Allah save us!"

All I can say is that Obama is a wolf in sheeps clothing.  And Romney will simply be the wolf.

Anybody who claims to love this country but votes for Obama is an insufferable moron because Obama is out to destroy this country.

Again, naivety.  Romney will be an even bigger puppet then Obama. And more dangerous for the security of the world, less alone the U.S., because Romney has already sold out.  Just look at his major contributors.  But you already know all this oh wise oracle.

I wish you considered common sense as much as all those fairy tales and conspiracy theories you get from moveon and all the other leftwing loony sites.

They're warpin' your mind, son.

But I'm not gonna waste any time trying to convince you of anything cuz you don't vote anyway and even if you did, you live in the land of the people who elect giants like Anthony (Hey! Look what I got!) Weiner and Chuck (The Schmuck) Schumer and Mikey (small soda) Bloomberg, so you probably voted the same way.

And even if you did vote intelligently, it would just be cancelled out by the hordes of stupid people who vote Democrat everytime like mind-numbed robots anyway.

A man's got to know his limitations.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

I wish you considered common sense as much as all those fairy tales and conspiracy theories you get from moveon and all the other leftwing loony sites.

They're warpin' your mind, son.

But I'm not gonna waste any time trying to convince you of anything cuz you don't vote anyway and even if you did, you live in the land of the people who elect giants like Anthony (Hey! Look what I got!) Weiner and Chuck (The Schmuck) Schumer and Mikey (small soda) Bloomberg, so you probably voted the same way.

And even if you did vote intelligently, it would just be cancelled out by the hordes of stupid people who vote Democrat everytime like mind-numbed robots anyway.

A man's got to know his limitations.

I dont need to vote Ridge.  I trust you to make the right decision upon my behalf and all the players on Lottery Post.

I trust you will make the correct decision come election day so i can play the lotto online.  And I think Poker Players should have the right to choose whether they want to play or not.  Big government doesn't have to babysit us all the time you know.

If government had the common sense to allow us the choice of gaming online, then they might also have the common sense to find some of those terrorists they are always blabbing about in a droning endless mantra.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 11, 2012

I dont need to vote Ridge.  I trust you to make the right decision upon my behalf and all the players on Lottery Post.

I trust you will make the correct decision come election day so i can play the lotto online.  And I think Poker Players should have the right to choose whether they want to play or not.  Big government doesn't have to babysit us all the time you know.

If government had the common sense to allow us the choice of gaming online, then they might also have the common sense to find some of those terrorists they are always blabbing about in a droning endless mantra.

"I trust you will make the correct decision come election day so i can play the lotto online."

Hey, I thought the puppetmasters controlled everything?

Shouldn't you be contacting them at the Skull&Bones Society or the Bilderberg Mansion to tell them to okay your online gambling?

That is, if they're not too busy filling up airplanes with cuckoo powder to spray on us with the vapor trails.

Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs! Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs! Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs!

I smell bacon.

Do you smell bacon?

I smell bacon!

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

"I trust you will make the correct decision come election day so i can play the lotto online."

Hey, I thought the puppetmasters controlled everything?

Shouldn't you be contacting them at the Skull&Bones Society or the Bilderberg Mansion to tell them to okay your online gambling?

That is, if they're not too busy filling up airplanes with cuckoo powder to spray on us with the vapor trails.

Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs! Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs! Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs!

I smell bacon.

Do you smell bacon?

I smell bacon!

I smell bacon.

Do you smell bacon?

I smell bacon.

CrazyCrazyCrazyPatriotDupe Alert?

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 11, 2012

I smell bacon.

Do you smell bacon?

I smell bacon.

CrazyCrazyCrazyPatriotDupe Alert?

Yeah! So do I!

mcginnin56

Is it soup yet?

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

"HIS DAD wasn't even there and they served as presidents back to back of each other. Help me to under all this because I know you have all the answers."

Here's an answer for ya just for starters, son.

You better do your homework if I have to school ya boy, cuz I'll take ya out to the woodshed, son. Copy?

Blee dat.

 

 

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) George Bush (1981-1989)
George Bush (1989-1993) Dan Quayle (1989-1993)
Bill Clinton (1993-2001) Al Gore (1993-2001)
George W. Bush (2001-2009) Dick Cheney (2001-2009)
Barack Obama (2009-present) Joe Biden (2009-present)

Good boy...you caught that!!! You do a pretty good job with "give me's"...just like Gov. Romney.

L.L.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

OK, Mr. Loser, I see you're cut from the same cloth as your lying weasel hero. How do I know? Cuz you're a lying, sniveling, weasel-like loser just like him.

Which means all you ever talk about is how everything bad that ever happens is Bush's fault and everything good that ever happens is Obama's success.

You don't have the character or self-respect to tell the truth about the man cuz you're a sniveling little slimy puke just like him. A real Texas Dandy. Loser is a good name for ya, I see why you chose it, it fits.

I don't need to hear all your whining and sniveling about WMD's and "Bush lied, people died" for the 6 millionth friggin' time. Put a lid on that garbage, junior.

Listen real close now, numbnuts: BUSH AIN'T RUNNIN' FOR OFFICE, YOU INSUFFERABLE MORON PUKE!!! 

Wake the f*** up, stupid!

Now, we're talkin'...and good job with the names. You're too easy...very easily wound up over politics which none of us have any control or reasonable influence over. The political process is nothing like it used to be...and should be.

"everything bad that happens is Bush's fault and everything good that ever happenes is Obama's success."

From what I've read in pretty much all your posts, regarding Obama, everything bad that has and is happening in this country is Obama's fault. He's "weak". Quote, "I didn't say he hasn't accomplished anything, he just hasn't done anything good for the country." End quote.

"BUSH AIN'T RUNNIN' FOR OFFICE". This has nothing to do with my question regarding his significance as president for (2) terms, not being at the convention, and what state he left the economy in, in relation to how it was when he inherited it. Talk to me about surplus, jobs, and unemployment...deficit after he left. Can you do this for us? It should really be a cake walk.

Even some reasonable generalization of what he accomplished for the country will work for me. I know you can do it, ridge.

 

L.L.

LottoBoner

Even some reasonable generalization of what he accomplished for the country will work for me. I know you can do it, ridge.

He will need to have his stomach pumped first to remove the poison moonshine.

Then he will need to be put on a diet of H20 and vitamins.

And the bacon grease will have to be removed from his ears. (we might as well remove the microchip at the same time).

Which of course is all obamas fault also.

And George W. Bush should run for a third term.  He was a perfect little messiah, with only moderate satanic tendencies.

And Nancy Pelosi should have a baby with Newt Gingrich, and it will be raised to be the savior of America.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 10, 2012

 And that's exactly the way he wanted it to be.

You know ridge this is a very naive statement.  I thought you had more wisdom than that.

Do you think the President really has any power any more?  Do you really think Obama makes policy? The last president that actually was showing some power  and creating some of his own policies was JFK and look what happened to him.  All presidents since JFK, more or less kowtow to the military industrial complex.  The real power real lies with the lobbyists and the bankers and corporations they represent.  War is good money!  You can bomb in the name of democracy.  Take the money, gold, and resources, and create a whole lot of resentment and new terrorists at the same time to continue the war on terror.  A never ending cycle.

You think Romney is any different?   The first thing on Romneys agenda will be to have pre-emptive attack on Iran.  Not because Romney wants to, but because of those pulling the strings.  You think the same masterminds of the 9-11 attacks are not still plotting?  You think they still dont lurk within the government? (And ridge you still never explainted WTC number 7).  Romney is already bought.  He wont live up to his claims as no president ever does.  They all run on the model of bait and switch.

And let me tell you the Iranians will not be afraid of Romney like Reagan.( like your farfetched claims), because romney never played a cowboy in hollywood, and Reagan was a bad ass scary ass cowboy.  I mean if i had hostages i would give them up too.  One look from the gipper and I would be like "Allah save us!"

All I can say is that Obama is a wolf in sheeps clothing.  And Romney will simply be the wolf.

Anybody who claims to love this country but votes for Obama is an insufferable moron because Obama is out to destroy this country.

Again, naivety.  Romney will be an even bigger puppet then Obama. And more dangerous for the security of the world, less alone the U.S., because Romney has already sold out.  Just look at his major contributors.  But you already know all this oh wise oracle.

Man, I'm so glad that someone here has sense enough to see what's really going on! You're POUNDING the nail on the head, LB. We're essentially talkin' about a lesser of two evils here...POINT BLANK. Romney is just itching to launch an attack on Iran and we haven't even come close to leaving Afghanistan yet...and are still borderline with Iraq issues which tie into everything happeneing  as we speak.

Neither one can do anymore than all the entities around them will allow...and Romney will be told what he can do as well. Difference is that he will have lots more leverage due to his "like party". Our next war is already planned regardless of who takes office, but if it were up to one person, we'd be in Iran right now. In fact, based on his remarks about the killed ambassador and Obama's "weakness", he would've jumped all over that opportunity for war.

It goes on to no avail. I'm not claiming that Obama is so very good, but he's a lot less dangerous economically- speaking. We did much better when we kept our noses "clean"....out of the far east's affairs.

I found it to be very "low" to utilize a SEAL'S death to fight and campaign against Obama. As with other issues that Romney flipped the script on, and changed, he did it with this one as well. He dropped the story. I have to wonder why since it was so legitimate for him to use in the first place. Better yet, his own advisers allowed it to be used as well. All this during his high level campaign and this lady had to jump into his chest with both hands and feet for him to realize that it was just wrong.

 

L.L.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 11, 2012

Good boy...you caught that!!! You do a pretty good job with "give me's"...just like Gov. Romney.

L.L.

Oh, I see, you were just testing me, right Loser?

To see if I caught that boneheaded statement you made, right?

Cuz we all know what an intellectual you are from your long-winded, gas-bag testimonials, right?

Cuz you never thought for a moment that the Bush's served their terms back to back when you said that, right?

Right, Loser? 

Yeah, right.

Heh,heh,heh,heh,heh...

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 11, 2012

Now, we're talkin'...and good job with the names. You're too easy...very easily wound up over politics which none of us have any control or reasonable influence over. The political process is nothing like it used to be...and should be.

"everything bad that happens is Bush's fault and everything good that ever happenes is Obama's success."

From what I've read in pretty much all your posts, regarding Obama, everything bad that has and is happening in this country is Obama's fault. He's "weak". Quote, "I didn't say he hasn't accomplished anything, he just hasn't done anything good for the country." End quote.

"BUSH AIN'T RUNNIN' FOR OFFICE". This has nothing to do with my question regarding his significance as president for (2) terms, not being at the convention, and what state he left the economy in, in relation to how it was when he inherited it. Talk to me about surplus, jobs, and unemployment...deficit after he left. Can you do this for us? It should really be a cake walk.

Even some reasonable generalization of what he accomplished for the country will work for me. I know you can do it, ridge.

 

L.L.

Go to your leftwing loon sites if you want to talk about Bush, you boring moron. There's plenty of a$$holes just like you there who thrive on it.

I'll continue to live in the present if it's all the same to you, Prickley.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 11, 2012

Even some reasonable generalization of what he accomplished for the country will work for me. I know you can do it, ridge.

He will need to have his stomach pumped first to remove the poison moonshine.

Then he will need to be put on a diet of H20 and vitamins.

And the bacon grease will have to be removed from his ears. (we might as well remove the microchip at the same time).

Which of course is all obamas fault also.

And George W. Bush should run for a third term.  He was a perfect little messiah, with only moderate satanic tendencies.

And Nancy Pelosi should have a baby with Newt Gingrich, and it will be raised to be the savior of America.

Ah, here I come in from toiling in the blogs all day to find you and Prickley Loser having a love fest. How apropos!

Next thing you know, you'll be painting each other's toenails and talking baby-talk to each other.

I know! You could be his snooky-wookums and he could be your widdo tickle-britches!

How about it?

 

PS. You better watch how you talk about Nancy Pelosi in front of Prickley.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 11, 2012

Man, I'm so glad that someone here has sense enough to see what's really going on! You're POUNDING the nail on the head, LB. We're essentially talkin' about a lesser of two evils here...POINT BLANK. Romney is just itching to launch an attack on Iran and we haven't even come close to leaving Afghanistan yet...and are still borderline with Iraq issues which tie into everything happeneing  as we speak.

Neither one can do anymore than all the entities around them will allow...and Romney will be told what he can do as well. Difference is that he will have lots more leverage due to his "like party". Our next war is already planned regardless of who takes office, but if it were up to one person, we'd be in Iran right now. In fact, based on his remarks about the killed ambassador and Obama's "weakness", he would've jumped all over that opportunity for war.

It goes on to no avail. I'm not claiming that Obama is so very good, but he's a lot less dangerous economically- speaking. We did much better when we kept our noses "clean"....out of the far east's affairs.

I found it to be very "low" to utilize a SEAL'S death to fight and campaign against Obama. As with other issues that Romney flipped the script on, and changed, he did it with this one as well. He dropped the story. I have to wonder why since it was so legitimate for him to use in the first place. Better yet, his own advisers allowed it to be used as well. All this during his high level campaign and this lady had to jump into his chest with both hands and feet for him to realize that it was just wrong.

 

L.L.

Listen up, numbnuts. Stop worrying and fretting and sniveling about your fear of war with Iran, my delicate little flower.

When the time comes, just go hide with the women and children the way gutless cowards like you have always done through the ages.

I'm sure it's been a tradition with the males in your family for generations.

So don't get your lace panties in a bunch,  the men will take care of business.

Maybe you could bake cookies or something.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

Listen up, numbnuts. Stop worrying and fretting and sniveling about your fear of war with Iran, my delicate little flower.

When the time comes, just go hide with the women and children the way gutless cowards like you have always done through the ages.

I'm sure it's been a tradition with the males in your family for generations.

So don't get your lace panties in a bunch,  the men will take care of business.

Maybe you could bake cookies or something.

When the time comes, just go hide with the women and children the way gutless cowards like you have always done through the ages.

Easy for you to say.  Being the wretched miser that you are, you certainly have NO WOMEN.  Which brings me to the logical reasonable conclusion that you also have no children.

I would assume that maybe you have some goats, and maybe a chicken. Considering your lonliness and general lack of human contact with real women, i would assume those goats and chickens come in mighty handy for you.

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 11, 2012

When the time comes, just go hide with the women and children the way gutless cowards like you have always done through the ages.

Easy for you to say.  Being the wretched miser that you are, you certainly have NO WOMEN.  Which brings me to the logical reasonable conclusion that you also have no children.

I would assume that maybe you have some goats, and maybe a chicken. Considering your lonliness and general lack of human contact with real women, i would assume those goats and chickens come in mighty handy for you.

My, aren't we the testy one today?

You're gonna hurt my feelin's if you keep that up!

Then how would you feel, Mr. Poopy-pants?

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

Oh, I see, you were just testing me, right Loser?

To see if I caught that boneheaded statement you made, right?

Cuz we all know what an intellectual you are from your long-winded, gas-bag testimonials, right?

Cuz you never thought for a moment that the Bush's served their terms back to back when you said that, right?

Right, Loser? 

Yeah, right.

Heh,heh,heh,heh,heh...

Evil LookingHeh,heh,heh,heh,heh...Evil Uhh

Red Devil

Please do me a favor ridge.  Stick with the goats and chickens, and stay away from Rosemarys baby.

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

My, aren't we the testy one today?

You're gonna hurt my feelin's if you keep that up!

Then how would you feel, Mr. Poopy-pants?

Then how would you feel, Mr. Poopy-pants?.

I imagine it might feel warm and moist.  The same way i imagine it feels for you, chickenlover.

Feelings?  Without a woman, and no children, its hard for me to believe you have any feelings.

Stack47

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 10, 2012

Well Stack, you got your rhetoric and propaganda out there again. There's really no need to address it to me. Just give your speech.

I'm sure there could be a few old card players with gambling problems like you here that you might influence, who knows?

And maybe if your man Obama wins you'll get your wish of online poker, taxpayer funded abortions, Sodomite Marriage and a decimated military all in one bill. And a young liberal-activist Supreme Court to make sure nobody can ever change any of it.

Good work buddy, keep at it.

You're a great American.

"Sodomite Marriage"

Marriage is a state's right issue and since I didn't live in Massachusetts while Romney was Governor and gay marriage became legal, it's none of my business. Even in very liberal California, the opponents put the "yes or no" issue on the state ballot, but Romney's answer was to resurrect a 90-year-old state law, aimed in part at preventing interracial marriage, to keep same-sex couples from flocking to Massachusetts for weddings. 

At least California tried, Romney tried to use a law that was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 in the Loving vs Virginia case by unanimous decision. Will gay marriage be abolished just because Romney says so?

"and a decimated military all in one bill."

Wasn't Romney a Mormon missionary when most young men his age were being drafted and sent to Viet Nam?

"You're a great American."

Nope, I'm just an average American that took the step forward when they called my name. The thing is, I never complained or whined because Bill Clinton didn't serve even though most conservatives labeled him a draft dodger. And I'm not complaining because Romney was handing out Books of Mormon in France either.

BTW, why aren't the same "great American" conservatives calling Romney a draft dodger too? 

It's hypocritical how your same arguments of decimating the military used against Clinton just don't apply to Romney; maybe because there is a "R" behind his name?

mcginnin56

Time for a break everyone, stretch those legs, grab some popcorn and onion rings.

All this debating over the federal Web poker bill, makes for a voracious appetite! Please get back to it in 15 minutes........Argue

 

LottoBoner

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Oct 11, 2012

"Sodomite Marriage"

Marriage is a state's right issue and since I didn't live in Massachusetts while Romney was Governor and gay marriage became legal, it's none of my business. Even in very liberal California, the opponents put the "yes or no" issue on the state ballot, but Romney's answer was to resurrect a 90-year-old state law, aimed in part at preventing interracial marriage, to keep same-sex couples from flocking to Massachusetts for weddings. 

At least California tried, Romney tried to use a law that was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 in the Loving vs Virginia case by unanimous decision. Will gay marriage be abolished just because Romney says so?

"and a decimated military all in one bill."

Wasn't Romney a Mormon missionary when most young men his age were being drafted and sent to Viet Nam?

"You're a great American."

Nope, I'm just an average American that took the step forward when they called my name. The thing is, I never complained or whined because Bill Clinton didn't serve even though most conservatives labeled him a draft dodger. And I'm not complaining because Romney was handing out Books of Mormon in France either.

BTW, why aren't the same "great American" conservatives calling Romney a draft dodger too? 

It's hypocritical how your same arguments of decimating the military used against Clinton just don't apply to Romney; maybe because there is a "R" behind his name?

It's hypocritical how your same arguments of decimating the military used against Clinton just don't apply to Romney; maybe because there is a "R" behind his name?

Does that R stand for retard, or reject? Maybe it because Romney is a homophobe, that would rather put gay patriots in jail instead of letting them fight the islamic bogeymen that ridge is also afraid of. 

I mean gayness is a disease, romney is the cure.  Unless your a pedophile, in which case, mormonism would like to recruit you.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

Oh, I see, you were just testing me, right Loser?

To see if I caught that boneheaded statement you made, right?

Cuz we all know what an intellectual you are from your long-winded, gas-bag testimonials, right?

Cuz you never thought for a moment that the Bush's served their terms back to back when you said that, right?

Right, Loser? 

Yeah, right.

Heh,heh,heh,heh,heh...

Hook, line, and sinker...AKA "Rope-A-Dope!!! In the famous words of Ronald Reagan, "Here we go again."

Just like Romney continues to do with seemingly no effort, you've put your foot not only in your mouth, but way down your throat. Boneheaded statements huh? Let's see, here. You said, and I quote, "anyone that votes for Obama is an insufferable moron." Wow! Are you assumming that all past and present service members are voting for Romney? What about those who have lost limbs and come back with mental issues needing psychological help? Are they all (R)? How about the retired Vets that voted for Obama in the last election?

How about Mrs. Gabrielle Gifford who was shot? Oh, yeah, she's (D), too, and her husband who's an astronaut. Morons, huh? What about the people at the convenience stores and grocery stores which bag your purchases...just every day average people trying to earn a living? Are they insufferable morons just because they may have, or, will will vote for Obama? So, it's okay for all those servicemembers to protect us...even giving their lives and limbs, but they have to be (R) or not vote at all in order to not be insufferable morons?

What about the elderly who are just trying to make it every month on what they get for years and years of service? If they vote for Obama, they are insufferable morons as well? All the teachers and college professors in this world that vote for Obama are insufferable morons? The meter readers for electricity and water...what about them?

Yep, you and Romney have everything in common. This is exactly the same reasoning regarding the 47% he mentioned in his private meeting...and he meant it just like you meant what you said. No regrets at all. "It's not my responsibility to care about those people" is what he said if my memory serves correctly. This is far from a true conservative. Extremist is more descriptive for both of you.

Yeah, I threw you a bone with the "back to back" deal. I'm a former serviceman and I know full well who was in office. You took an obvious "give me" just as Romney did. Now, go ahead and gnaw on this while you attempt to reverse this irreversible, and fatal damage you've inflicted yourself with.

By the way, BIG BIRD halloween costume sales are up by 500%. I suppose, now, Romney will buy out all the factories that make the costumes as well as the stores that are selling them.

 

L.L.

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 11, 2012

Hook, line, and sinker...AKA "Rope-A-Dope!!! In the famous words of Ronald Reagan, "Here we go again."

Just like Romney continues to do with seemingly no effort, you've put your foot not only in your mouth, but way down your throat. Boneheaded statements huh? Let's see, here. You said, and I quote, "anyone that votes for Obama is an insufferable moron." Wow! Are you assumming that all past and present service members are voting for Romney? What about those who have lost limbs and come back with mental issues needing psychological help? Are they all (R)? How about the retired Vets that voted for Obama in the last election?

How about Mrs. Gabrielle Gifford who was shot? Oh, yeah, she's (D), too, and her husband who's an astronaut. Morons, huh? What about the people at the convenience stores and grocery stores which bag your purchases...just every day average people trying to earn a living? Are they insufferable morons just because they may have, or, will will vote for Obama? So, it's okay for all those servicemembers to protect us...even giving their lives and limbs, but they have to be (R) or not vote at all in order to not be insufferable morons?

What about the elderly who are just trying to make it every month on what they get for years and years of service? If they vote for Obama, they are insufferable morons as well? All the teachers and college professors in this world that vote for Obama are insufferable morons? The meter readers for electricity and water...what about them?

Yep, you and Romney have everything in common. This is exactly the same reasoning regarding the 47% he mentioned in his private meeting...and he meant it just like you meant what you said. No regrets at all. "It's not my responsibility to care about those people" is what he said if my memory serves correctly. This is far from a true conservative. Extremist is more descriptive for both of you.

Yeah, I threw you a bone with the "back to back" deal. I'm a former serviceman and I know full well who was in office. You took an obvious "give me" just as Romney did. Now, go ahead and gnaw on this while you attempt to reverse this irreversible, and fatal damage you've inflicted yourself with.

By the way, BIG BIRD halloween costume sales are up by 500%. I suppose, now, Romney will buy out all the factories that make the costumes as well as the stores that are selling them.

 

L.L.

Your so full of it you stink  no, your memory does not serve you correctly, he did not say

" IT'S NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CARE ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE"

He said, the 47 percent would probably not vote for him, because obama supporters do not pay income taxes, consider themselves victims, fell entitled to government handouts, and will never be persuaded to take personal responsibilty for their lives.

AND GUESS WHAT NUMB #UTS...HE'S RIGHT!

sully16's avatarsully16

Oh yeah, almost forgot, anyone who votes for him is either a moron or parasite, take your your pick.

Lucky Loser

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Oct 11, 2012

Your so full of it you stink  no, your memory does not serve you correctly, he did not say

" IT'S NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CARE ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE"

He said, the 47 percent would probably not vote for him, because obama supporters do not pay income taxes, consider themselves victims, fell entitled to government handouts, and will never be persuaded to take personal responsibilty for their lives.

AND GUESS WHAT NUMB #UTS...HE'S RIGHT!

Sully, I understand your plight as well, okay. I really, really would prefer NOT to get into it with you over this...please. You've already started off all wrong. Just simply go to Google and type the words "Mitt Romney it's not my..." and it'll come up.

Oh, you're right. He didn't say "it's not my responsibilty". He said, "It's not my JOB to care about the poor."

I was under the impression that a job and responsibilities went hand in hand. Sorry I wasn't clear, and down to the "T" with the quote. I guess the name calling thing runs deep. Glad I know how to hold a decent and intelligent conversation without trying to verbally degrade the other person. Seems that's the trend, but I have really thick skin...and I'm proud of it.

 

L.L.

mediabrat's avatarmediabrat

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

Go to your leftwing loon sites if you want to talk about Bush, you boring moron. There's plenty of a$$holes just like you there who thrive on it.

I'll continue to live in the present if it's all the same to you, Prickley.

And you go to your wingnut sites if you want to talk about Obama.  Last I checked, this was Lottery Post, not Huffington Post.

Artist77's avatarArtist77

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Oct 11, 2012

My, aren't we the testy one today?

You're gonna hurt my feelin's if you keep that up!

Then how would you feel, Mr. Poopy-pants?

Ridge:  It is interesting how study after study shows that republicans give more money to charities and a higher percentage of their income as well.  It has been my life experience that the louder someone screams how liberal and pro women or pro minority they are because they are a democrat, the more bigoted they often are since they hide behind that label (Well I am a Dem!...I cannot be bigoted or unfair!  I am above being questioned!).  Let me work or deal with a conservative Republican any day who will judge me based on my skills in getting the job done.

I usually ask Dems when they scream about the poor, if they have ever done volunteer work in a homeless shelter (I have); donated their "free" time to charities (I have); or even made the time to take unwanted but usable items to shelters and to the Salvation Army vs selling them on Craigslist for a few dollars (I have).  Yet, these Dems always answer "no."

Lucky Loser

Hmmm, let's see. FOOD NOT BOMBS right here in Houston. Myself and (11) others, both (D) and (R) have taken food downtown and participated in such an effort. Strange thing is, we've been TICKETED for trying to help those less fortunate. Any old clothes to give to them directly rather than take them to the Salvation Army and get picked over. Decent clothing I might add...nothing all stained or ripped.

Any canned goods and non-perishable items...and lots of times, hot meals purchased locally. You see, reasonable people know how support either party, respect each other, and also get along while finding common grounds. It's really not hard to do at all.

 

L.L. 

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by Lucky Loser on Oct 11, 2012

Sully, I understand your plight as well, okay. I really, really would prefer NOT to get into it with you over this...please. You've already started off all wrong. Just simply go to Google and type the words "Mitt Romney it's not my..." and it'll come up.

Oh, you're right. He didn't say "it's not my responsibilty". He said, "It's not my JOB to care about the poor."

I was under the impression that a job and responsibilities went hand in hand. Sorry I wasn't clear, and down to the "T" with the quote. I guess the name calling thing runs deep. Glad I know how to hold a decent and intelligent conversation without trying to verbally degrade the other person. Seems that's the trend, but I have really thick skin...and I'm proud of it.

 

L.L.

He didn't say it wasn't his job either, nice twist, but no cigar, my plight...wth, we are bracing for the largest tax hike this country has ever seen, and you think it's plight, no sweet pea, it's anger. We won't have a plight, we're prepared, are you?

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Oct 11, 2012

Then how would you feel, Mr. Poopy-pants?.

I imagine it might feel warm and moist.  The same way i imagine it feels for you, chickenlover.

Feelings?  Without a woman, and no children, its hard for me to believe you have any feelings.

You're projecting again, numbnuts.

Work on a cogent thought and get back to me.

Do it now.

Subscribe to this news story