Why bother
- Thread starter chuckster
- Start date
J
justhangn
Guest
Don't blame the country because of the democraps, blame the people that put them in office.
Frank
Chairman of the Board
I'm kind of disgusted - but I can see their point. We're not talking about flouting criminal behavior, we're talking about missing a deadline, and everyone has experienced being granted latitude for missing those. The only thing I find funny is the expression that the voters are entitled to a 'competitive' election. That's hysterical. In many parts of this country, a significant number of Congressman get elected unopposed.
I don't blame the country, just some of these 'democraps" that seem to want it both ways. They want Torricelli off in NJ because he fell behind in the polls BUT they want to keep a dead person on! What is happening to this country? I thought, or should I say hoped that the mess in Florida would have brought an end to all of this.
I hope that during the next election, or even this one, the republicans pull the same stunt. Would love to see the reaction from the Dems.
You have no idea how happy I am that I am an Independent and don't have to follow the "Party Lines"
I hope that during the next election, or even this one, the republicans pull the same stunt. Would love to see the reaction from the Dems.
You have no idea how happy I am that I am an Independent and don't have to follow the "Party Lines"
No we are talking about a LAW. 51 days is the cut-off time. I guess that it would be ok to miss the April15th deadline for our taxes. He missed the deadline because the poll results were not out showing that he was falling and falling fast.
We also do not know all the details of why he pulled out. I am sure that there is more to this story
B
Bruzilla
Guest
I think that Republicans should cease and desist with fighting this. It's far better to let the Dems get this fossil on the ballot and then continue to make honesty, integrity, and respect for the law the issue than to let the Dems take the initiative and cry voters rights, which the media will take off with in a heartbeat. The Republicans could easily win the battle and lose the war on this one.
The point is that you can't just look at the polls and say, "Oops, our guy is losing" then put someone else in his place whenever you want. If that were the case, our whole election process would become this huge quagmire, with constant ballot changes.
Judges toss out our Constitution all the time - this judge who decreed that the Dems could replace Torricelli on the ballot said something like "the general intent of the election laws is to preserve the two-party system." How much more un-Constitutional can you be?
Judges toss out our Constitution all the time - this judge who decreed that the Dems could replace Torricelli on the ballot said something like "the general intent of the election laws is to preserve the two-party system." How much more un-Constitutional can you be?
Christy
b*tch rocket
Bru, I have to disagree. If you look at the big picture, it's not a matter of politics (to me, not the politicians). It's a matter of LAW, as well as retaining the separation of the Legislative branch of Government and the Judicial branch of Government. They have their roles for a purpose. The Judicial Branch is responsible for applying the law, not creating it. This is to create checks and balances within our government.
The law is clear and doesn't take a rocket scientist to interpret it. The proper approach to the problem would be for the legislative branch to change or modify the law to address these types of situations.
Democraps....ah, jeez....I think I saw this dumb phrase used maybe 4-5 times in this thread? And it's not the first place it's come up.
Ok. So here's your challenge for today, folks: Be more clever.
Come up with a new way to refer to the democrats that undermines their position by making a clever play on their party title.
Oh and you can't use democRATS, cause apparently that's already been taken...good luck.
Ok. So here's your challenge for today, folks: Be more clever.
Come up with a new way to refer to the democrats that undermines their position by making a clever play on their party title.
Oh and you can't use democRATS, cause apparently that's already been taken...good luck.
Demon-crats - how's that?
Vrai,
That's actually one of the ones I was thinking of. Here's a few others:
Dumb-o-crats: seemed obvious but I haven't seen it used. You see, it implies that they are dumb.
Dump-o-crats: A clever variation on the Democraps theme. Still implies, however, that they are somehow akin to feces.
Dump-o-craps: This would be the true clincher. It has the DOUBLE feces reference so it cannot be infered on EITHER end of the phrase that the democrats are NOT poop-related.
That's actually one of the ones I was thinking of. Here's a few others:
Dumb-o-crats: seemed obvious but I haven't seen it used. You see, it implies that they are dumb.
Dump-o-crats: A clever variation on the Democraps theme. Still implies, however, that they are somehow akin to feces.
Dump-o-craps: This would be the true clincher. It has the DOUBLE feces reference so it cannot be infered on EITHER end of the phrase that the democrats are NOT poop-related.
How about "Depo-crats", insinuating that their mothers should have used better birth control?
