General Discussion

Pab Sungenis

(9,612 posts)

75. "It's so because I say it's so."

Reply to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #74)

Wed Jun 26, 2013, 03:31 PM

Jun 2013

Sigh.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

117 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

To Ralph Nader who said their was no difference between the Democrats and repugs. Citizens United, [View all] still_one Jun 2013 OP

Beat me to it. nt onehandle Jun 2013 #1

2000 changed everything still_one Jun 2013 #2

To the Third Way Democrats who thought we had no place to go Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #3

Yes, and voting for 3rd party candidates helped cause this. riqster Jun 2013 #6

It only accelerated it. Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #9

"more right than nixon, and economically more right than reagan" BULLSHIT still_one Jun 2013 #13

More hyperbolic bullshit leftynyc Jun 2013 #26

that's patently false. cali Jun 2013 #31

what bullshit. Whisp Jun 2013 #32

How telling. Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #51

True dat. n/t 99Forever Jun 2013 #52

FIVE people call you on your bullshit because that's what it is: BULLSHIT!!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #59

With nothing to back up your claims. Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #61

BULLSHIT requires no evidence. That's why it's BULLSHIT!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #63

You're the one calling Bullshit. Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #65

BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT!!!! BULLSHIT! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #74

"It's so because I say it's so." Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #75

+1 DCBob Jun 2013 #98

Interesting that you want them to to substantiate THEIR posts, yet you didn't do that yourself. October Jun 2013 #101

That is totally and completely false Progressive dog Jun 2013 #80

Are you going to back up your claim? Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #81

Bullshit, see you make a claim you prove it Progressive dog Jun 2013 #83

Under Nixon Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #91

Let's play the reality game Progressive dog Jun 2013 #95

"So now we move from accomplishments to proposals." Pab Sungenis Jun 2013 #100

The price of gasoline has nothing to do with Presidents Progressive dog Jun 2013 #109

Ralph Nader- THIS is YOUR LEGACY. I have two choice words for you .... ... graham4anything Jun 2013 #4

Agreed Gothmog Jun 2013 #77

The Justices that Obama appointed dissented. n/t ProSense Jun 2013 #5

Nonono, that makes no difference to the "Weft, Twooo Weft". riqster Jun 2013 #8

There is a difference ... Scuba Jun 2013 #7

Today's decision, and the Citizens United decision, more than demonstrate the difference still_one Jun 2013 #20

A twice-elected Democratic President endorsed cutting Social Security .... Scuba Jun 2013 #43

Fuck Nadar, we can do it Jun 2013 #10

I will add the libertarians to my list also. One of the most selfish, self-centered ideologies still_one Jun 2013 #14

Yup self centered little bastards, just like the naderfucktards we can do it Jun 2013 #50

Al Gore ran an abysmal campaign beerandjesus Jun 2013 #11

Yep. He did. But even with that, the math confirms that Nader won Florida for Bush. onehandle Jun 2013 #12

Shrub did not win Floriduh. The SCOTUS selected/appointed him. Read the facts, Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #21

That happened After the Ralph Nader effect. onehandle Jun 2013 #30

Doesn't matter. You're trying to argue that Nader exercising his right to run was wrong, and Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #38

I thought you said SCOTUS selected him. onehandle Jun 2013 #40

They did. Certification was still required and several House members stood up to object. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #41

Keep believing that if doing so floats your boat. Independent vote counting showed that bluestate10 Jun 2013 #55

Gore would have won with over-votes Gothmog Jun 2013 #79

Nader enabled the SCOTUS to steal the election Gothmog Jun 2013 #78

This is what happens when those charged with doing the nation's business place their Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #84

Nader won Florida? That's news to me burnodo Jun 2013 #87

He did just enough in Florida, but his view that their was no difference, history has shown that still_one Jun 2013 #17

There is a difference. Bonobo Jun 2013 #15

So how do you make the difference larger? Skidmore Jun 2013 #16

You fight and work for candidates, or run yourself. You are correct, there is too much bitching still_one Jun 2013 #18

I try to get my viewpoint out and maintain the sense of what is right, Bonobo Jun 2013 #22

You get more progressive candidates by engaging early on Skidmore Jun 2013 #23

We agree on that. nt Bonobo Jun 2013 #24

And in the wrong places. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #39

You must have and still have blinders on. The difference is fucking enormous. nt bluestate10 Jun 2013 #56

So you say. Bonobo Jun 2013 #69

Every time the crypt keeper crawls out of his tomb and goes on tv, I change channels. Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #19

The difference between R and Blue Dog is one of degree, not substance. hobbit709 Jun 2013 #25

Actually that is wrong on many issues. Food stamps is just one of them, but more than that, because still_one Jun 2013 #27

Show me the recorded votes on all major issues. hobbit709 Jun 2013 #28

Point taken. However, the party that controls the houses determine the agenda still_one Jun 2013 #33

And when it comes up for a vote? hobbit709 Jun 2013 #35

I said point taken. I also said you need to have the control to have the agenda, and if there are still_one Jun 2013 #42

Bluedogs helped approve Obamacare, helped stop the gross House Farm Bill, with it's bluestate10 Jun 2013 #57

we cant afford dissent in this party markiv Jun 2013 #29

Oh really? BS hobbit709 Jun 2013 #36

We can afford dissent. Good arguments enlighten. But we can't be blind. bluestate10 Jun 2013 #60

R#10 & K nt UTUSN Jun 2013 #34

But when Gore chose Lieberman as his VP, I was sick. mountain grammy Jun 2013 #37

Gawd how I despise Lieberman. Arugula Latte Jun 2013 #66

democratic politicians love Citizens United. It means they get lobby money too. liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #44

Without Ralph, Al Gore wins Florida. Arkana Jun 2013 #45

+ infinity stevenleser Jun 2013 #49

The blindness of so called progressives stuns me at times. bluestate10 Jun 2013 #62

Context. Before there was Citizens United, there was Gramm-Leach-Bliley. beerandjesus Jun 2013 #46

you need to blame the culprits, namely SCOTUS noiretextatique Jun 2013 #47

Wrong. The SCOTUS didn't elect Bush. Bush won Florida by 1,000 votes. bluestate10 Jun 2013 #64

absolutely ridiculous noiretextatique Jun 2013 #71

Wendy Davis. Jodie Laubenberg NoPasaran Jun 2013 #48

k/r Dawson Leery Jun 2013 #53

Anyone who still believes Nader is fucking hopeless. nt bluestate10 Jun 2013 #54

The "tea party" is the Koch brothers' branch of government through the republicans Fire Walk With Me Jun 2013 #58

Definitely, fuck off, nader. Not to mention Cha Jun 2013 #67

If you lose an election, then you have-- by definition-- employed a losing strategy. Marr Jun 2013 #68

Yep. Fuck Ralph Nader. nt DevonRex Jun 2013 #70

Yep - zealots are typically unable to view the bigger picture BuddhaGirl Jun 2013 #72

What you call "zealots" actually have a more accurate grasp of the "bigger picture" Armstead Jun 2013 #97

LOL BuddhaGirl Jun 2013 #113

Typical false comparison. Armstead Jun 2013 #114

Nader Derangement Syndrome continues RandiFan1290 Jun 2013 #73

I've been waiting to see if anyone would actually explain the current lovefest with Nader. Rex Jun 2013 #76

Argh. Ralphie, go home. nt Hekate Jun 2013 #82

and where is "Ralphie"? burnodo Jun 2013 #88

Dunno, but there has been a spate of Nader postings lately, with lots of responses... Hekate Jun 2013 #89

Nader came close to making this latest SCOTUS ruling impossible. We won by one vote... stevenleser Jun 2013 #85

WTF does anything have to do with Nader? Apophis Jun 2013 #86

Thanks to the lifetime tenure of SCOTUS justices, screwing with one POTUS election can be a big deal stevenleser Jun 2013 #90

And saying that both parties are the same simply isn't so. For better or worse the Democratic Party still_one Jun 2013 #92

This has nothing to do with Nader Maximumnegro Jun 2013 #93

I realize you don't want to accept the truth, but it is the truth. stevenleser Jun 2013 #94

Strange, you seem to be saying Al Gore lost the election. Rex Jun 2013 #102

Nope, those are not mutually exclusive concepts. Gore won, Nader made it possible to steal. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #103

Nader had nothing to do with it being stolen. Rex Jun 2013 #104

Sure he did. The tactics by Republicans made them x closer to Gore, Nader's siphoned votes got them stevenleser Jun 2013 #105

Okay, I see democracy is only good when it is convenient for some here. Rex Jun 2013 #107

Our electoral vote system only supports two viable candidates at a time. Them's the facts. You need stevenleser Jun 2013 #108

You hit the nail on the head Armstead Jun 2013 #99

Yes let's shoot the messenger Armstead Jun 2013 #96

I disagree with your position Gothmog Jun 2013 #110

Yes there are differences -- Just not enough Armstead Jun 2013 #111

The fact remains that these differences are important Gothmog Jun 2013 #112

I agree they matter Armstead Jun 2013 #115

Nader's run was a vanity exercise based on a flawed premise Gothmog Jun 2013 #116

Hpowe about the better as an improvement over the "not quite as bad" Armstead Jun 2013 #117

Citizens United benefits unions also proud2BlibKansan Jun 2013 #106