Can we assume it was wrongly transcribed and was actually "Two buy partisan".
Then we can have a 3rd half-cocked interpretation of a non-story
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Bayh bayh
Bayh bayhFollow
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
No, I think it was "Dubai artisan" and he was referring to slave labour in Dubai and stuff.
Heres two partisans...
Dont know if they are 'Bi' or not but judging by the jaunty angle of their hats, who knows?
Dont know if they are 'Bi' or not but judging by the jaunty angle of their hats, who knows?
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
paulsol wrote:
Heres two partisans...
Pfftt... those are just your typical Irish potato hunters.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Crimy,
Who are you? What do you do?
So we can agree that there should be some type of test that qualifies whether a person should be allowed to vote, that's a start.
Do you think someone who's receiving govn welfare should be allowed to vote?
Who are you? What do you do?
Quote:
In fact your constant misinterpretation and constant 'yellow journalism' enforces my opinion that people like you Varus should not be allowed to vote
So we can agree that there should be some type of test that qualifies whether a person should be allowed to vote, that's a start.
Do you think someone who's receiving govn welfare should be allowed to vote?
Jophiel wrote:
Pfftt... those are just your typical Irish potato hunters.
These are Irish spud farmers...
Its mostly the rudimentary digging implements that sets them apart from the swarthy french partisans who tended to carry machine guns and stale bread/hunks of cheese in their pockets, rather than wrinkled potatoes and bottles of Guinness.
Of course the wooden spades (and skirts) may just be a cunning ploy to distract ze germans from noticing their nefarious anti-Reich activities.....
What was this thread about again?
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
paulsol wrote:
These are Irish spud onion farmers...
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
publiusvarus wrote:
Bayh didn't give a sh*t about bipartisanship until this year.
I'd be willing to bet that you had never even heard of Evan Bayh until a day or two ago.
Anyway, you're wrong.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Lord Nobby wrote:
paulsol wrote:
These are Irish spud onion farmers...
The lengths (Bi) partisans will go to deceive their oppressors knows no bounds!
Or perhaps those idjit Irish afrmers are tring to plant spuds in an onion set? No wonder they had a bloody famine!
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
paulsol wrote:
Or perhaps those idjit Irish afrmers are tring to plant spuds in an onion set? No wonder they had a bloody famine!
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
LockeColeMA wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I do find it interesting how the spin on his statements about too little cooperation between the Parties is almost universally assumed to be a condemnation of Republican Obstructionism, when he's almost certainly just as annoyed with his own Party's antics.
LockeColeMA wrote:
Bayh is saying that the lack of bipartisanship sapped his desire to stay in Congress. Republicans wouldn't budge; Democrats didn't need them to. It was both sides, and he was sick of it.
Yeah... ok champ. We're totally only spinning it to Republican obstructionism...
Sorry. I'm dead tired today, so I didn't complete the thought. I'm not talking about comments on this board. Joph had already mentioned something about Bayh being ticked at Dems. I was talking about how it's being presented in most of the media. Almost every story I've read so far carefully positions mention of the GOP right around the mention of Bayh's irritation with a lack of bi-partisanship, and primarily mentions the Dems and/or Obama in the context of their agenda failing because of it.
It's kinda hard to miss the spin...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
OMG that was sooooooooo hard! It was.... like.... the first hit!
Again, you had never even heard of Bayh until a day or two ago. Which is fine, I doubt many non-wonkish (or non-Hoosiers) would have but you should stop acting as though you know anything about politics.
Again, you had never even heard of Bayh until a day or two ago. Which is fine, I doubt many non-wonkish (or non-Hoosiers) would have but you should stop acting as though you know anything about politics.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
but you should stop acting as though you know anything about anything.
FTFY.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Quote:
So we can agree that there should be some type of test that qualifies whether a person should be allowed to vote, that's a start.
Yes I believe there should be some standards on who can and cannot vote. But there are those pesky lines I would draw that you would disagree with. For starters, only people that can rationally look at both sides and make a decision based on how it would better society as a whole, while at the same time keeping the independence each person has at choosing the life they want.
Quote:
Do you think someone who's receiving govn welfare should be allowed to vote?
I don't care if Bob is making $10 million a year and Joe is making $10,000, as long as both of them follow what I stated above, they are equals in my eyes.
If you must know Varus on who I am I suppose I will tell you. I am just another person on this planet, trying to make my way through life the best I can with the cards I was dealt. I do not judge based on religious, political, financial, or ancestral background. I do judge though on how people treat each other and the respect they show. With all due respect Varus, the way you present yourself on this forum, you remind me of Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson. Since I have trouble expressing such emotions in words I will let this link explain my feelings. I have a feeling this was linked in a different thread so please excuse me if it was.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPoWOw8Jm5w&feature=player_embedded
Criminy wrote:
you remind me of Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson.
Quote:
Yes I believe there should be some standards on who can and cannot vote. But there are those pesky lines I would draw that you would disagree with. For starters, only people that can rationally look at both sides and make a decision based on how it would better society as a whole, while at the same time keeping the independence each person has at choosing the life they want.
You can't create arbitrary metrics of IQ or non-partisanship and expect any sort of universal suffrage or ideas of equality. Otherwise it becomes incredibly justifiable to only allow give those whom you like the 'privilege' of voting. And I think that road is pretty well paved.
Just as Planned.
gbaji wrote:
Sorry. I'm dead tired today, so I didn't complete the thought. I'm not talking about comments on this board. Joph had already mentioned something about Bayh being ticked at Dems. I was talking about how it's being presented in most of the media. Almost every story I've read so far carefully positions mention of the GOP right around the mention of Bayh's irritation with a lack of bi-partisanship, and primarily mentions the Dems and/or Obama in the context of their agenda failing because of it.
It's kinda hard to miss the spin...
It's kinda hard to miss the spin...
It's also kinda hard to miss the 200+ Republican filibusters that have brought the Congress to a near standstill.
Love,
PunkFloyd
PunkFloyd
Quote:
You can't create arbitrary metrics of IQ or non-partisanship and expect any sort of universal suffrage or ideas of equality. Otherwise it becomes incredibly justifiable to only allow give those whom you like the 'privilege' of voting. And I think that road is pretty well paved.
I concur completely, the way I mentioned would only work in a society that is free from corruption and is just. Sadly people in reality are not like that (as a whole).
Quote:
And of course you would appoint people to determine who is rational and who isn't.
I would not appoint people, nor would anyone else. It would require everyone in society to determine. Of course it presents its own problems in reality, but I can always dream. :S
Quote:
I tend to think the voting public should be limited to people who don't receive welfare/food stamps, can name the current president and vp, and know how many branches there are in the govn. That's pretty much it.
What about those people in our society that commented crimes against society or humanity? What would happen if you are in a horrific accident where the only way you could survive is to be on food stamps? I understand that there are people who abuse welfare/ food stamps and I hope that is where your dislike for people is coming from. My question is what about those that are on it that rather not be on it, but it is their only means to survival at that time?
I really value the idea of universal suffrage and would hate to see people deprived of it for such ridiculous reasons.
My older brother gets food stamps. He has schizophrenia and can't really work enough to support himself. His symptoms are not managed well so right now, I don't see him going back to the working world anytime soon. However, he's understands the political landscape and shouldn't be deprived of the right to vote. I don't know why having schizophrenia makes him unworthy of his rights as a citizen.
Edited, Feb 16th 2010 5:58pm by Annabella
My older brother gets food stamps. He has schizophrenia and can't really work enough to support himself. His symptoms are not managed well so right now, I don't see him going back to the working world anytime soon. However, he's understands the political landscape and shouldn't be deprived of the right to vote. I don't know why having schizophrenia makes him unworthy of his rights as a citizen.
Edited, Feb 16th 2010 5:58pm by Annabella
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Recent Visitors: 441
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (441)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Bayh bayh
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC