Poll: Do You Think America Should Dissolve

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by bestmapman, Nov 12, 2012.


Do you think the US should split up.

Poll closed Dec 12, 2012.
  1. Yes, I think the US should split up

    4 vote(s)
  2. No, the US should not split up

    25 vote(s)
  1. xcel

    xcel PZEV, there's nothing like it :) Staff Member

    Hi Indigo:

    You realize the US has not had "legal" slavery in over 146 years?

  2. ALS

    ALS Super Moderator Staff Member

    Who says, the race batting poverty pimps like Al Sharpton and Jessie I cheat on my wife with white chicks Jackson. Funny your side is the only one that is constantly on the race bait band wagon. My white conservative friends don't have much to say about it but you should hear the democrats around me rip on black people.

    You do know the most dangerous place to be for an American black child is Indigo?

    Their mothers womb. You see 50% of all black children are aborted. Add on top of that why don't you open up the phone book and check out where most of the Planned Parenthood clinics are located in Baltimore. You'll find out quickly that most are located in minority neighborhoods.

    The KKK couldn't have dreamed that a political party could easily convince a woman of color that aborting her child was a right of passage in her community. :(

    BTW 1,200 black children are aborted each day with over 15 million since 1973.

    And Indigo it seems your political party is the one that wants these clinics to stay open and mine wants to see them closed.

    Which political party is really the one that is practicing racism or genocide on the black community.

    It seems the Republican party cares a whole lot more about the civil rights of those unborn children of color.
  3. diamondlarry

    diamondlarry Super MPG Man/god :D

    Now hold on just a minute! That is NOT what he said! What the man said was, “I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God, and I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen.”
    Now I wasn't all that good at English in school but even I know that the subject of this sentence is "life" NOT rape. So what he said was that even when a "life" is created, despite the fact that it resulted from the horrible circumstance of rape, that life is still precious in God's eyes. Only a liberal could twist it into something it was never intended to mean. But I suppose that a party that booed the inclusion of God in the party platform probably wouldn't get that.:rolleyes: I wasn't going to get into this discussion again but when a smear as blatant as this is made, I will stand up for the truth.
  4. xcel

    xcel PZEV, there's nothing like it :) Staff Member

    Hi Larry:

    This is exactly what Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said:
    As a Christian, did you not find his comment distasteful? Apparently Indiana voters did and I suspect it was more the woman vote that showed him the door? If you have any stats on that, I would be interested in seeing them.

    Last edited: Nov 14, 2012
  5. booferama

    booferama He who posts articles

    I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my car forum free of arguments about abortion.
  6. xcel

    xcel PZEV, there's nothing like it :) Staff Member

    Hi Booferama:

    Have you seen the home page and any other forum but the Off Topic one? Even within the Off topic one. There are thousands of threads to read and reply too :)

  7. diamondlarry

    diamondlarry Super MPG Man/god :D

    Funny you should mention my being a Christian. Because of that, I have the Holy Spirit guiding me so I pretty much knew what he intended by his comment so no, I didn't find it distasteful. Personally though, I would have worded it differently because that small voice in me lets know if the words I'm planning to use are going to be intentionally twisted. Any Christian can hear the truth of someones words unless of course their conscience has been seared to the point that they can't hear that voice anymore.
  8. xcel

    xcel PZEV, there's nothing like it :) Staff Member

    Hi Larry:

    As a fellow Christian, I try to understand both intentions and deeds. He said exactly what he believes and by that measure, he stands above the fallout.

    He will be employed elsewhere because of it but he stood by his beliefs and I do not fault him for it. I do however see fault in him because of the same.

    Does that make sense?

  9. 2RR2NV

    2RR2NV Ultimate Newbie

    well, it's about time. it'll definitely ensure 100% employment
  10. booferama

    booferama He who posts articles

    I know, I know, but I think I have the most to add to OT, Anything Goes, and AGW threads. I only drive a couple times a week, and I live in an impossibly hilly town.

    Plus, dancing banana. :Banane06:
  11. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    The comment that the REP made
    that implied a woman was less likely to get pregnant when raped
    Has a tiny bit of truth in it.
    There aren't any good studies on rape and pregnancy
    but there are studies on stress
    and woman are less likely-slightly less likely-to get pregnant when stressed
    Of course it is a small difference-small precentage
    so he put his foot in it implying it was much much less likely for a woman to get pregnant-which isn't true-tiny bit less likely-entirely plausible-rape=stress
    Now what he was getting at with legit rape comment- it was his clumsy way of saying "women will lie about getting raped just so they can have an AB" if regulations make ABs illegal except in cases of rape.
    And of course-THAT IS TRUE- of course they will lie if that is the only way to get an AB.
    But you can't accuse a woman of lying about rape-not PC-

    So those that concern themselves with ABs-know they are being or will be "tricked" by woman claiming they were raped-and it pisses them off that they are being snookered-and there isn't much they can do about it-hence why some use the legit rape or forceable rape terms-figuring forcible rape means "she called the cops rape"

    I let other folks worry about ABs-friend of mine is involved in them-she says she sees that same morons OVER AND OVER- not a sympathetic bunch
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
  12. ALS

    ALS Super Moderator Staff Member

    First a little history lesson to bring you up to speed. Most of you have been flat out lied to by the media on this whole mess. It wasn't George W Bush's fault he just got caught in office when the whole ponzi scheme blew up.

    It all started back in Jimmy Carters administration
    when they propose a program to end Red Lining of minority neighborhoods by the financial institutions.

    Many people who had good credit and decent jobs that could afford a home were being discriminated against when it came time for them to acquire a mortgage. This was happening just because they lived in one of these Red Lined neighborhoods

    The program was called the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

    They put in enough safe guards to prevent fraud and keeping people from buying too much house and getting over their heads in debt. The CRA continued on very successfully with a few tweaks through 1996. A whole lot of lower income Americans living in poorer neighbors benefited greatly under this government program becoming home owners

    Then came the Welfare Act of 1996 under President Clinton is when things started to get out of hand after the financial safe guards were pretty much eliminated as a payoff to the poor communities across the country for taking away their easy access to Welfare.

    Under George W. Bush they tried 17 times to rein in the craziness that was going on in the program. Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and Maxine Waters who were on the Banking Committee refuse to let anyone fix the mess by threatening a filibuster on any bill that came up for a vote.

    When the banks balked in the late nineties and said there is no way they were taking on all this bad paper. At the time they threatened to stop making any residential mortgages if they were going to be forced to give loans out to people who would never be able to pay them back.

    Here comes the Government Bureaucrats who said ok we’ll guarantee them through Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. To get most of these people qualified many were set up with Adjustable Rate Mortgages or ARM’s. Here you have someone making $25K being given a $100K mortgage and can pay it because it only has a 3%, 2% and even 0% interest rate over the next five years.

    We all saw and heard the stories of zero down, interest only mortgages even like one of my employees who got a 4% down deal then that 4% was rolled into her mortgage so people could buy a home with no money down. With of all this easy money, home prices exploded across the country. The problem soon became evident when all those ARM’s that were put into place reset. These homeowners were now being put behind the Eight Ball. That is because these peoples $500 mortgage payment blew up to a $1200 payment over night when their ARM reset.

    The banks realized early on that this Ponzi scheme on all this bad paper was going to blow up probably sooner than later. No one want to be the one holding the bag so they package them up and sold them off as AAA rated securities. European Banks bought up a whole lot of these junk paper mortgage packages and most of the financial mess we are seeing in the E.U. was brought on by this bad paper. You have no idea how much money the U.S. Government had to pay to the European Central Bank over this FUBAR. Makes the bail out of the Wall Street banks look small.

    This banking and housing mess was caused by a bunch of bureaucrats who felt that everyone should be able to buy a house whether they can afford it or not. The banks since they are under strict federal regulations were between a rock and a hard place as they say. Either make the loans or we here at Government house are going to put a gun to your head make your life miserable.

    Well we all saw what happened when the ARM’s on these unqualified home owners started to reset in 2006.

    Well here comes the nightmare a second time on steroids. The same game that ran between 1996 and the 2007-2008 housing crash is now being played again and this time it is going to be far worse. It is being repackaged as an Affirmative Action Program for minorities.

    Equal Outcomes Act
  13. southerncannuck

    southerncannuck Well-Known Member

    I'm a naturalized American. Native born citizens at times thump their chests about the seeming superiority of the circumstances of their birthplace, but I made a conscious decision to become an American. I chose to do it because it’s the most incredible, vibrant, free country on earth. I can’t believe the reaction some have had due to the recent election. The most extreme ones have been signing petitions calling for the breakup of the country. It seems to me that this might be an appropriate response. What do you guys think?

  14. southerncannuck

    southerncannuck Well-Known Member

    noun \ˈtrē-zən\
    Definition of TREASON

    1: the betrayal of a trust : treachery

    2: the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family
  15. worthywads

    worthywads Don't Feel Like Satan, I am to AAA

    I agree, most of the federal government has betrayed my trust, therefore are treasonous.

    Every founding father committed treason, but the didn't only attempt, they succeeded.
  16. Indigo

    Indigo Witch with wry sense of humor

    Gotta ask: How many black babies born to unwed teenage mothers have YOU adopted? See, it's really easy for conservatives to preach and judge. However, they never want to back up their tough talk with actions.
  17. ALS

    ALS Super Moderator Staff Member

    Indigo, lets see I'm single and work upwards of 65 hours a week running my business. When would I have time to take care of a child. I feel bad enough now that I can't spend more time at home with the feral cat I took in this summer.

    So tell about all the kids have you adopted into your home, since you care so much.

    Your argument is an empty one to say the least.
  18. xcel

    xcel PZEV, there's nothing like it :) Staff Member

    Hi Al:

    Similarly, it was Clinton who signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall that eliminated much of the oversight on Wall Street. Freed from onerous regulation, the banks could supposedly “innovate” and grow. They sure did…

    With Wall Street guy Rubin and Republican Gramm onboard that crazy train…

    Repeal of Glass-Steagall: Not a cause, but a multiplier

    … the role the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act played in the financial crisis. The Depression-era regulation that separated Main Street banks from Wall Street investment firms had a huge impact on the finance sector.

    The repeal of Glass-Steagall may not have caused the crisis — but its repeal was a factor that made it much worse. And it was a continuum of the radical deregulation movement. This philosophy incorrectly held that banks could regulate themselves, that government had no place in overseeing finance and that the free market works best when left alone. This belief system manifested itself in damaging ways, including eliminating regulation and oversight on derivatives, allowing exemptions for excess leverage rules for a handful of players and creating dangerous legislation...

    The Fed still would have taken rates down to unprecedented low levels. This would have led to a global spiral in asset prices. The nonbank, lend-to-sell-to-securitizer mortgage originators were still going to make subprime-mortgage loans to unqualified borrowers. Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers would still have overwhelmingly increased exposure to subprime mortgages. AIG would still have written trillions of dollars in credit-default swaps and other derivatives with zero reserves set against them. The largest security firms and deposit banks would still have charged headlong into the subprime securitization business. And Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would still have belatedly chased these banks into the same subprime market, just at the peak of the housing boom.

    So no, the repeal of Glass-Steagall was not a proximate cause of the crisis. But its impact was both nuanced and complex…

    Glass-Steagall’s repeal allowed the credit bubble to inflate much larger. It allowed banks to be more complex and difficult to manage. When it all came down, the crisis was broader, deeper and more dangerous than it would have been otherwise…

    Newfangled derivatives? No oversight, reporting or reserves necessary, courtesy of the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000. Subprime-lend-to-sell-to-securitizers business model? Those are the financial innovators! At least, that is what Greenspan called them, and why he refused to oversee them as Fed chairman. Rules on SEC leverage? Let’s create a special exemption from the law for just five investment banks.

    Of course “reputational risk” would serve as a deterrent to poor decision making! No bank would ever behave so recklessly as to put their own hard-won status on the line — or its very existence.

  19. Indigo

    Indigo Witch with wry sense of humor

    That arguement doesn't apply to me. I don't claim a "moral high ground" like conservatives. I claim that a woman has the right to manage her reproductive processes as she sees fit.

    However, as a probation agent, I often work 50-60 hours per week, have had no raise in five years, and am also a Wiccan priest in a part-time capacity.
  20. booferama

    booferama He who posts articles

    This isn't even remotely true: the CRA had nothing to do with the financial crisis (scroll down for explanation; see also here). There's also the Fed's report.

Share This Page