Palin Resigns [Archive] - DFWstangs Forums

Vertnut

07-03-2009, 10:34 PM

That was a dumbass move.

She can't even claim to be a one term governor now.

At this time, I have no plans to vote for her in the primaries. Frankly I think she just shot herself in the foot.

Which means she still has more experience than the current dickhead running the country...

She will go on a speech tour, and make $15-$20 million. She owes about $500k in legal fees due to false/bogus charges that she was forced to fight. After touring the country (and living on the FOX network), she will pursue some type of political office. Remember...once out of office, she's a regular citizen, and can say/do anything she likes without legal ramifications.

Sgt Beavis

07-03-2009, 10:50 PM

Which means she still has more experience than the current dickhead running the country...

She will go on a speech tour, and make $15-$20 million. She owes about $500k in legal fees due to false/bogus charges that she was forced to fight. After touring the country (and living on the FOX network), she will pursue some type of political office. Remember...once out of office, she's a regular citizen, and can say/do anything she likes without legal ramifications.

I didn't vote for that dickhead either. His lack of experience was one of the motivating factors. Now I have just one more reason to not vote for her in the primaries.

Frankly, I think she just helped Newt and the rest of the future Republican field quite a bit.

Denny

07-03-2009, 10:53 PM

Giuliani 2012!

No

Vertnut

07-03-2009, 10:59 PM

I didn't vote for that dickhead either. His lack of experience was one of the motivating factors. Now I have just one more reason to not vote for her in the primaries.

Frankly, I think she just helped Newt and the rest of the future Republican field quite a bit.

I see her more of a senator than a prez/VP, but really, after this joker we have now, anyone can run successfully without knowledge, experience, or a birth certificate.

Paladin

07-03-2009, 11:28 PM

Giuliani 2012!

I hope your joking and know he is just another mixed bag Republican and not a true conservative.

From the list of people who were running in the last Republican as a Presidential or VP candidate, I would rate them as follows:

Thompson, Palin, Romney, Huckabee. I either think all of the others were poor choices for various and sundry reasons.

I really think my current dream ticket would be Palin/Thompson.

Disclaimer: I do not know who might run in 2012, so I reserve the right to add people as they announce their candidacy in the next few years.

ceyko

07-04-2009, 07:30 AM

No

What am I missing and what happened to him that has everyone pissed at him? Last I heard he did a great job with NY/NYC. Did he succumb to all the political bullshit and is just another puppet now or what?

Sgt Beavis

07-04-2009, 08:14 AM

I see her more of a senator than a prez/VP, but really, after this joker we have now, anyone can run successfully without knowledge, experience, or a birth certificate.

Do you think her own state would voter her into the Senate when she won't even finish a single term as governor? At best she could find herself in the House.

Paladin

07-04-2009, 09:03 AM

What am I missing and what happened to him that has everyone pissed at him? Last I heard he did a great job with NY/NYC. Did he succumb to all the political bullshit and is just another puppet now or what?

For me he is way to socially liberal.

cannonball996

07-04-2009, 09:19 AM

Paladin

07-04-2009, 01:04 PM

I just never saw her as being a strong leader, and that her joining the ticket in 2008 was nothing more then a gimmick. as far as 2012 goes I just dont see a strong candidate for the republican party at this time. but I really hope that we can come up with a fresh crop of candidates instead of going with the same guys from last time.

I am puzzled by those who think she wouldn't be a strong leader and also want a non-traditional politicain to lead. How do we get both? If the person has a proven record of leadership they are just a typical veteran politician.

I think she was a breath of fresh air and even if she doesn't run or get the nomination, I hope her influence helps get someone like her in office.

Vertnut

07-04-2009, 01:06 PM

Do you think her own state would voter her into the Senate when she won't even finish a single term as governor? At best she could find herself in the House.

I think she would win anything she ran for, representing Alaska. No doubt...

Paladin

07-04-2009, 03:08 PM

I think she would win anything she ran for, representing Alaska. No doubt...

I agree and I think she would carry as high of a percentage of conservative voters at a national level as the Messiah got with black voters.

poopnut2

07-04-2009, 11:54 PM

I agree and I think she would carry as high of a percentage of conservative voters at a national level as the Messiah got with black voters.

Wasn't the increase in black voters from 2004 to 2008 pretty insignificant? I found 13.4 million voted in 2004, but can't find the numbers from 2008. I think I remember seeing the news though, and they said that the increase was next to nothing, especially considering how badly Obama beat McCain.

Vertnut

07-05-2009, 07:00 AM

Wasn't the increase in black voters from 2004 to 2008 pretty insignificant? I found 13.4 million voted in 2004, but can't find the numbers from 2008. I think I remember seeing the news though, and they said that the increase was next to nothing, especially considering how badly Obama beat McCain.

White people put the "Messiah" into office. There aren't enough black voters to sway an election, because 95% vote democratic anyway. Paladin said "percentage of black voters", which is a significant number when refering to white voters.

cannonball996

07-05-2009, 09:32 AM

I just didnt see anything that was appealing about her from a conservative perspective, her state ranks first in pork spending.

Sean88gt

07-05-2009, 11:39 AM

After Obama's rape of America, her conservative views will align with a lot of people's frustrations.

Not sure of this move, but we'll see..

Paladin

07-05-2009, 11:55 AM

Wasn't the increase in black voters from 2004 to 2008 pretty insignificant? I found 13.4 million voted in 2004, but can't find the numbers from 2008. I think I remember seeing the news though, and they said that the increase was next to nothing, especially considering how badly Obama beat McCain.

I am not sure about numbers of black voters, but as Vertnut pointed out, I was speaking of percentages of voters. I doubt there has ever been a huge increase in any voter group from voting cycle to voting cycle. I hope that changes due to the Messiah though.

I agree with Vertnut about white voters electing the Messiah.

cannonball996

07-05-2009, 11:57 AM

After Obama's rape of America, her conservative views will align with a lot of people's frustrations.

Not sure of this move, but we'll see..

what conservative views would those be? leading the nation in pork? not to mention all the controversy surrounding her.

Paladin

07-05-2009, 11:57 AM

I just didnt see anything that was appealing about her from a conservative perspective, her state ranks first in pork spending.

LOL, I think the one thing most agree on is her conservative views. If you can't see them you must not be looking or you aren't conservative yourself.

VETTKLR

07-05-2009, 12:03 PM

what conservative views would those be? leading the nation in pork? not to mention all the controversy surrounding her.

LOL, I think the one thing most agree on is her conservative views. If you can't see them you must not be looking or you aren't conservative yourself.

Obviously he's just spinning up some shit talk.

All the controversy????? Seriously???

And where's the information backing the statement about all the "pork"

Paladin

07-05-2009, 12:14 PM

what conservative views would those be? leading the nation in pork? not to mention all the controversy surrounding her.

Did you see how the liberals attacked her and her family? How vicious they were? You call a bunch of trumped up and false allegations from hate filled liberals controversy?

I guess if I made up a bunch of stuff about you that was unture or unfair there would be controversy surrounding you? :confused2:

Vertnut

07-05-2009, 12:52 PM

what conservative views would those be? leading the nation in pork? not to mention all the controversy surrounding her.

As the Gov, she has little to do with that, though I doubt you would ever acknowedge that fact. Sen. Ted Stevens DOES, however, bear the brunt of the pork. Let's not bring up the billions spent on "John Murtha Airport", or the billions spent on Sen Byrd's "road to nowhere" in West Virginia. They are both actually real "senators" who control spending in congress, unlike a state governor. Your reaching. Please try again...

Vertnut

07-05-2009, 12:58 PM

Obviously he's just spinning up some shit talk.

All the controversy????? Seriously???

And where's the information backing the statement about all the "pork"

He doesn't know what he's talking about.

Geor!

07-05-2009, 01:21 PM

poopnut2

07-05-2009, 01:28 PM

Maybe the percentage that voted Democrat stayed the same, but there's no way in hell that the number of black voters stayed the same.

I really don't believe it increased very much. The media just focused more on black voters because somebody, somewhere decided that Obama is black.

Geor!

07-05-2009, 01:29 PM

what conservative views would those be? leading the nation in pork? not to mention all the controversy surrounding her.

Do you even know what conservative values/viewpoints are?

cannonball996

07-05-2009, 05:13 PM

Do you even know what conservative values/viewpoints are?

of course I do, as a delegate I helped to write the texas republican platform. smaller government/less spending, thats the root of the party platform. so far I have not witnessed anything from Pallin that would make her stand out as a leader of our platform.

we need a leader with a plan, the next republican leader/nominee needs to step up with a real and viable plan to counter the democrats ideals in congress. why has a republican leader not emerged with a plan to solve the healthcare crisis in America. So far all we have seen is republicans opposing the democrats plan. well just opposing the democrats is not enough to solve the problem, we need a plan of our own. same goes on a lot of other issues.

Geor!

07-05-2009, 05:36 PM

of course I do, as a delegate I helped to write the texas republican platform. smaller government/less spending, thats the root of the party platform. so far I have not witnessed anything from Pallin that would make her stand out as a leader of our platform.

we need a leader with a plan, the next republican leader/nominee needs to step up with a real and viable plan to counter the democrats ideals in congress. why has a republican leader not emerged with a plan to solve the healthcare crisis in America. So far all we have seen is republicans opposing the democrats plan. well just opposing the democrats is not enough to solve the problem, we need a plan of our own. same goes on a lot of other issues.

So, then, the counterpoint would be to leave healthcare and insurance in the private sector, no? This is the land of opportunity, not the land of welfare. Because of the progressive agenda, this isn't enough anymore (or so we have been told).

Fox466

07-05-2009, 10:27 PM

I didn't vote for that dickhead either. His lack of experience was one of the motivating factors. Now I have just one more reason to not vote for her in the primaries.

Frankly, I think she just helped Newt and the rest of the future Republican field quite a bit.

Way to keep those blinders off. You vow to not vote for her when you have no clue whatsoever she would be running against.

Go anybody except Palin!

Fox466

07-05-2009, 10:30 PM

I really don't believe it increased very much. The media just focused more on black voters because somebody, somewhere decided that Obama is black.

It's really too bad we can't get our hands on the actual numbers on this stat. Cause it's my bet that were we able to you would be surprised at how high that number was.

Geor!

07-05-2009, 11:33 PM

Way to keep those blinders off. You vow to not vote for her when you have no clue whatsoever she would be running against.

Go anybody except Palin!

In a world of politics, you would have done the same thing!

McCain tried to salvage his run and Palin went along for the ride.

Just because Palin would have been a VP to a RINO doesn't mean she's one too.

Fox466

07-05-2009, 11:43 PM

In a world of politics, you would have done the same thing!

You're probably right bro. No way in hell I would vote for obsama, just as Beavis wouldn't vote for a conservative...

Yale

07-06-2009, 12:09 AM

Bobby Jindal is still my favorite Republican Governor.

VETTKLR

07-06-2009, 12:30 AM

of course I do, as a delegate I helped to write the texas republican platform. smaller government/less spending, thats the root of the party platform. so far I have not witnessed anything from Pallin that would make her stand out as a leader of our platform.

we need a leader with a plan, the next republican leader/nominee needs to step up with a real and viable plan to counter the democrats ideals in congress. why has a republican leader not emerged with a plan to solve the healthcare crisis in America. So far all we have seen is republicans opposing the democrats plan. well just opposing the democrats is not enough to solve the problem, we need a plan of our own. same goes on a lot of other issues.

Don't leave us hanging, almighty delegate!!! Obviously, you aren't rooting for some hot chick from Alaska, because MSNBC tells you not to. So PLEASE enlighten us all on who is the shining light for the republican party????

Of course that was rhetorical. Nobody gives a fuck what you say, because you don't back up anything with factual evidence. Go see what keith olberman tells you to say next, because you ain't got a leg to stand on with the shit you've argued so far.

5point0pony

07-06-2009, 12:45 AM

It's really too bad we can't get our hands on the actual numbers on this stat. Cause it's my bet that were we able to you would be surprised at how high that number was.

Without question, blacks are going to vote for Obama in overwhelming numbers; the latest Gallup tracking shows that Obama gets 93% of the black vote when pitted against Republican John McCain in a hypothetical trial heat.

So on the one hand, black voters say Obama's race makes no difference to them, and on the other hand, about 9 out of 10 blacks say they will vote for Obama. But the high percentage of the black vote going to Obama is not unusual. Gallup polling estimated that John Kerry received 93% of the black vote in 2004, and Al Gore received 95% in 2000. So it may be that black voters are making the (correct) self-observation that they would be voting for the Democratic candidate regardless of his or her race, meaning that Obama's particular race is not a deciding factor for them.
About the same percentage-wise, there was an increase in overall black votes, but there was an increase in overall votes as well. This is the only thing I could find with actual numbers so take it for what it's worth.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107770/Most-Say-Race-Will-Factor-Their-Presidential-Vote.aspx

Fox466

07-06-2009, 09:20 AM

Had they interviewed an equal number of each race those numbers would have been vastly different. How accurate is 250 vs 780 I wonder? I see that they tried to weight it according to makeup of the population but wonder how they can establish that as a control when there is no clear percentage of voting vs non voting.

Interesting how 70% of blacks vs 48% of whites said race would be exploited, even with the skewed percentages...

Who Needs 8

07-06-2009, 09:58 AM

This seems really strange. If she's going to shoot for 2012, she should really check out recent history of people who are the "front runner" two years or longer before the election. They don't last long.

I suspect she's going to get a show on Fox news or some such.

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 11:55 AM

She could be doing what Obama did. Start running years before the election

46Tbird

07-06-2009, 12:26 PM

She did what the Democrats wanted her to do. Crumble. She won't have a successful run for a seat in Congress, much less the actual presidency.

Vertnut

07-06-2009, 12:36 PM

She did what the Democrats wanted her to do. Crumble. She won't have a successful run for a seat in Congress, much less the actual presidency.

She could win any election she wants too in Alaska, but that's not what she wants. She'll take a break, make a $15 million on the speech/talk show circuit, and resurface in a couple of years. With the $500k in legal fee's she owes (due to bogus lawsuits), she needs to make a little coin first. I heard this morning that her attorney is already gearing up for several lible, defamation, and slanderous lawsuits that might be filed against several different publications and news organizations on her behalf...

Paladin

07-06-2009, 02:02 PM

She could win any election she wants too in Alaska, but that's not what she wants. She'll take a break, make a $15 million on the speech/talk show circuit, and resurface in a couple of years. With the $500k in legal fee's she owes (due to bogus lawsuits), she needs to make a little coin first. I heard this morning that her attorney is already gearing up for several lible, defamation, and slanderous lawsuits that might be filed against several different publications and news organizations on her behalf...

I heard someone on MSNBC point out that several politicians have bowed out from politics a few years before resurfacing and winning big elections. Nixon was one who did it and won the Presidency.

I am not sure what she is doing, but I bet you are pretty close to what she is doing.

5point0pony

07-06-2009, 02:15 PM

Bobba Fett

07-06-2009, 02:54 PM

Quick question for the Palin supporters. I get that you agree with her conservative views, but do you think she will be able to do what it takes to win? This years problem wasn't necessarily that the candidate wasn't conservative enough. The problem was being unable to grow the base. Do you think Palin will be able to grow the base enough to have a chance at winning?

The problem here wasn't "growing" the base. Do you really think that was the problem, or are you repeating what you hear on the news outlets? Obama didn't have a landslide victory, he only had a 53% victory. I DO think the problem was we didn't have a conservative canidate to vote for.

I think she has what it takes to win. She is one smart lady, and I think there is alot of behind the scene decisions being made that are not known right now. Time will tell.

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 03:00 PM

5point0pony

07-06-2009, 03:03 PM

The problem here wasn't "growing" the base. Do you really think that was the problem, or are you repeating what you hear on the news outlets? Obama didn't have a landslide victory, he only had a 53% victory. I DO think the problem was we didn't have a conservative canidate to vote for.

I think she has what it takes to win. She is one smart lady, and I think there is alot of behind the scene decisions being made that are not known right now. Time will tell.

By growing the base I meant attracting the independents and swing voters. Didn't most end up going towards the left? I could be wrong on that. I realize that 53% doesn't sound like a big win but that's not the whole story. He took the electoral votes 365-173

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 03:12 PM

That's because the majority of the states don't split their electorial votes AND electorial votes do not have to be used to vote for the same person the people wanted. In reality, the citizenship have zero say in who is president

Vertnut

07-06-2009, 03:45 PM

I heard someone on MSNBC point out that several politicians have bowed out from politics a few years before resurfacing and winning big elections. Nixon was one who did it and won the Presidency.

I am not sure what she is doing, but I bet you are pretty close to what she is doing.

I find it interesting that no one questioned Barry about breaking his promise to Illinois that he would serve out his term, or Janet Napolitano for doing the same to her constituents. Funny how the press overlooks video (shot by her "friend") of Biden;s daughter doing cocaine, but they will crucify the Palin's new-born son, because he's a "special needs" child. It makes me nauseous to think how the liberal's treated her and her family. They attacked every one of them, with the exception of her son who is serving in Iraq.

Paladin

07-06-2009, 04:11 PM

Way to keep those blinders off. You vow to not vote for her when you have no clue whatsoever she would be running against.

Go anybody except Palin!

LMAO at the "Anyone but Palin" line. I remember a group having a similar slogan, something like "Anyone but Bush" I think.

Paladin

07-06-2009, 04:17 PM

Quick question for the Palin supporters. I get that you agree with her conservative views, but do you think she will be able to do what it takes to win? This years problem wasn't necessarily that the candidate wasn't conservative enough. The problem was being unable to grow the base. Do you think Palin will be able to grow the base enough to have a chance at winning?

I think the media won the election for Obama. They convinced the sheeple that he would effect change that would help the country. I think the sheeple now realize they have been had and there will be repercussions in '10 and '12. I hope truly conservative people voice their displeasure by voting in conservative candidates into office at every level.

These freaking polls showing that some Obama supporters are surprised at his level of liberalism always make me laugh. I saw it coming a mile away so it shouldn't have been that hard for them to see if they had just paid attention.

Paladin

07-06-2009, 04:19 PM

I find it interesting that no one questioned Barry about breaking his promise to Illinois that he would serve out his term, or Janet Napolitano for doing the same to her constituents. Funny how the press overlooks video (shot by her "friend") of Biden;s daughter doing cocaine, but they will crucify the Palin's new-born son, because he's a "special needs" child. It makes me nauseous to think how the liberal's treated her and her family. They attacked every one of them, with the exception of her son who is serving in Iraq.

The Dems/liberals have somehow come to a place where they can do anything wrong or immoral they want to and support it like it was no big deal and then when a Republican does something similar they are allowed to call them wrong, immoral, and call for their resignation. Our country is so screwed up right now.

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 04:25 PM

She's smart and people identify with her. She loves her firearms, hunting, running around in a 4x4 and is a straight talker and I LOVE her voice.

If Barry keeps fucking up the economy, she should have it hands down

If you're not a girl, you're a faggot. Plus..."smart?" Did you watch any of the debates? Did she even answer a question throughout her entire campaign? The problem with trying to appeal with "Joe Six-Pack" is that Joe can't read. If Joe can't read, how the hell is he going to fill out a ballot?

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 04:28 PM

The Dems/liberals have somehow come to a place where they can do anything wrong or immoral they want to and support it like it was no big deal and then when a Republican does something similar they are allowed to call them wrong, immoral, and call for their resignation. Our country is so screwed up right now.

Morals are relative. Plenty of people think abortion is immoral. Plenty of people don't. Same with gay and pre-marital sex. I personally don't care if people get abortions, I don't care if people are gay, and I condone torturing assholes who fuck with this country and the rest of the sane people in the world.

Vertnut

07-06-2009, 04:34 PM

Morals are relative. Plenty of people think abortion is immoral. Plenty of people don't. Same with gay and pre-marital sex. I personally don't care if people get abortions, I don't care if people are gay, and I condone torturing assholes who fuck with this country and the rest of the sane people in the world.

I think we're questioning the hypocracy of the press, not so much the morality of folks. People from both sides screw up, but the coverage and opinions are what varies.

Zfan

07-06-2009, 04:56 PM

She's going into porn.

Works for me!!!

I seriously think she is sick of the bullshit and deep down probably knows after this admin is done in 3 yrs there will be nothing left to salvage from this once great Country. Hope I am wrong.

46Tbird

07-06-2009, 04:58 PM

If you're not a girl, you're a faggot. Plus..."smart?" Did you watch any of the debates? Did she even answer a question throughout her entire campaign? The problem with trying to appeal with "Joe Six-Pack" is that Joe can't read. If Joe can't read, how the hell is he going to fill out a ballot?
So you apparently missed out on the fact that "Joe Six-Pack" represents YOU, a middle class person that works and pays bills. Your hypothesis is that people that work for a living are illiterate? :confused:

Exactly WHO did you think Joe Six-Pack was supposed to represent?

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 05:57 PM

Hmm last I checked, I wasn't a faggot, but thanks. I've very literate and to me, she came off as much more qualified than Obama will ever be. She actually has executive power experience, unlike the messiah who just walked across water and turned water into MD 4040

cannonball996

07-06-2009, 06:48 PM

She's smart and people identify with her. She loves her firearms, hunting, running around in a 4x4 and is a straight talker and I LOVE her voice.

how does all that stuff qualify her to be president? if that were the case everyone on this forum would be qualified to run for office. where is her plan to save the economy, where is her plan to fix healthcare?

VETTKLR

07-06-2009, 07:07 PM

how does all that stuff qualify her to be president? if that were the case everyone on this forum would be qualified to run for office. where is her plan to save the economy, where is her plan to fix healthcare?

Where is this current cocksucker's plan to save the economy or fix health care?

:confused2::confused2::confused2::confused2::confu sed2:

Vertnut

07-06-2009, 07:16 PM

how does all that stuff qualify her to be president? if that were the case everyone on this forum would be qualified to run for office. where is her plan to save the economy, where is her plan to fix healthcare?

At least she was a governor of a state, and knows how to deal with a budget...that's more than Barry knows, obviously.

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 07:36 PM

Not only run a budget, but didn't she do away with taxes in Alaska?

VETTKLR

07-06-2009, 08:01 PM

Not only run a budget, but didn't she do away with taxes in Alaska?

I dunno...I've got a buddy up there, working at a goldmine and he says cigarettes are ridiculously expensive. I don't know if that's got to do with some sin tax or what. I can find out. :cool:

VETTKLR

07-06-2009, 08:07 PM

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/edit/state/profiles/state_tax_Aka.asp

Alaska is the only state that does not collect state sales tax or levy an individual income tax. To finance state operations, Alaska depends primarily on petroleum revenues. Some of its cities and other local jurisdictions, however, do collect sales tax revenue. More on Alaska taxes can be found in the tabbed pages below.

I guess it's just the store owners gouging the shit outta smokers Capitalism FTW :biglaugh:

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 08:15 PM

So you apparently missed out on the fact that "Joe Six-Pack" represents YOU, a middle class person that works and pays bills. Your hypothesis is that people that work for a living are illiterate? :confused:

Exactly WHO did you think Joe Six-Pack was supposed to represent?

I was more stating the fact that me, and I'm sure that I'm not the only one, doesn't really care to be viewed as "Joe Six-Pack." I knew that she was talking about middle class citizens. I don't want somebody who gives out retarded little nicknames like that anywhere near Washington. I don't know if it was supposed to be cute or what?

Vertnut

07-06-2009, 08:28 PM

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/edit/state/profiles/state_tax_Aka.asp

I guess it's just the store owners gouging the shit outta smokers Capitalism FTW :biglaugh:

Residents of Alaska get "royalty" checks of some kind, don't they?

Paladin

07-06-2009, 08:45 PM

Morals are relative. Plenty of people think abortion is immoral. Plenty of people don't. Same with gay and pre-marital sex. I personally don't care if people get abortions, I don't care if people are gay, and I condone torturing assholes who fuck with this country and the rest of the sane people in the world.

Your "morals are relative" is the fringe of left wing lunacy, and you guys claim to be center. The polls don't support it though.

VETTKLR

07-06-2009, 08:46 PM

Yes they do....

And I was incorrect about them not taxing smokes....

I just clicked the Sales Tax link on that page and found this...

Sales tax

While Alaska does not charge a state sales tax, it does impose a vehicle rental tax text (10 percent on passenger vehicles; 3 percent on RVs), as well as an excise tax of $46 per voyage on passengers traveling on commercial vessels that provide overnight accommodations while in Alaska waters.

On the local level, 89 municipalities collect a general sales tax, with a range of between 1 percent and 7 percent. Typical sales tax rates are 2 percent to 5 percent. Details on local sales taxes can be found in Alaska Taxable, the Commerce Department's official annual report to the Alaska State Legislature on local sales and property taxes. Contact information for Alaska's municipal taxing jurisdictions can be found in the state's directory.

Other types of local taxes levied include raw fish taxes, hotel and motel "bed" taxes, severance taxes, liquor and tobacco taxes, gaming (pull tabs) taxes, tire taxes and fuel transfer taxes.

A percentage of revenue collected from certain state taxes and license fees (e.g., petroleum, aviation motor fuel, telephone cooperative) is shared with municipalities in Alaska. For a look at the distribution of these funds, select a shared tax year report at the Tax Division's search page.

VETTKLR

07-06-2009, 08:48 PM

I'm not the only one, doesn't really care to be viewed as "Joe Six-Pack."

You mad because she profiled your ass, huh, cracker?!? :lmao:

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 08:55 PM

Being called "Joe six pack" is better than being called "a typical white person"

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 09:23 PM

Being called "Joe six pack" is better than being called "a typical white person"

Or you could just say middle class citizen. She was in support of "Joe Six Pack" which you refer to as a "typical white person." So...what about the other ethnicities she should probably be appealing to?

Paladin...morals are relative. Not everybody is taught the same morals growing up. Haha at left wing lunacy btw. What do you call it being too conservative? Right Wing Righteousness? I would say that I am VERY much in the middle. I personally don't give a shit what other people do with their lives. It's not my problem. Conservatives want the government to stay out of their business...except when it comes to abortion, gay marriage, and other things you deem "immoral."

I guess conservatives political beliefs are circumstantial.

forever_frost

07-06-2009, 09:27 PM

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 09:29 PM

Actually, Conservatives want government to stay out period. The fact that lefties petition government to grow bigger to govern these things means that conservatives have to fight back. And when lefties fail at new legislation, they go to the courts and get it changed

That's exactly why back in was it 2006, the conservative legislature of TX deemed it necessary to change the legal definition of marriage to "man and woman?" Because they want the government to stay out of people's lives?

Paladin

07-06-2009, 09:43 PM

Or you could just say middle class citizen. She was in support of "Joe Six Pack" which you refer to as a "typical white person." So...what about the other ethnicities she should probably be appealing to?

Paladin...morals are relative. Not everybody is taught the same morals growing up. Haha at left wing lunacy btw. What do you call it being too conservative? Right Wing Righteousness? I would say that I am VERY much in the middle. I personally don't give a shit what other people do with their lives. It's not my problem. Conservatives want the government to stay out of their business...except when it comes to abortion, gay marriage, and other things you deem "immoral."

I guess conservatives political beliefs are circumstantial.

To make my point I would have to make a very long post. I will just make a short one on abortion to maybe help you undertand why I think you are wrong or where you miss the point. BTW, this is just my little ol' opinion.

Conservatives, especially traditional conservatives like me, believe life begins at conception, so therefore the mother killing the child during pregnancy is murder. No one would say that murder is not something we should not care about, right? So it boils down to your opinion about when life begins and you don't seem to care, so why do you worry about this? It appears you have an opinion about abortion (if you want it to continue) or you don't care about murder (insert a little sarcasm).

Gay marriage is not a right, neither is murder, neither is getting a DL, or many other things people who have loose or nonexistent morals think are rights. That is why I have an opinion about them. I think gay people should have all human rights and anything that is in fact a RIGHT. I also think an unborn child should be given those same rights. How is that for consistent?

BTW, I think conservative values are consistent and use common sense. I think the death penalty, for example, is acceptable because it is a guilty life being extinguished for the common good of innocent people, and abortion is the killing of innocent life. It sure seems to me to be consistent and moral to think that way. I would think the immoral person thinks the death penalty is bad and abortion okay (almost all liberals think this twisted way) or those who think protecting guilty life is the same as innocent life, although that is not a terrible belief.

BTW, I was taught very liberal values as far as social issues go and came out the way I am because I lived my own life and made up my mind myself. I think your moral upbringing should be the foundation you build upon to come to your own conclusions, not just mimmick your parents values.

Paladin

07-06-2009, 09:51 PM

That's exactly why back in was it 2006, the conservative legislature of TX deemed it necessary to change the legal definition of marriage to "man and woman?" Because they want the government to stay out of people's lives?

Do you think marriage is a right?

Why do you say you don't care about what people do unless they do something you disagree with? Kind of funny how the far left and the "I don't care what people do" crowd only care when they think it affects them and can't see issues as a bigger part of society and how it affects others. I care about issues that affect me, my wife, my daughter, my family, my city, my state, my country, and my planet. There are things that affect one without affecting the other, but by your standards I should care about anything until it affects me only. Kind of silly, don't you think?

There is a saying that goes something like this (yeah I am going to butcher it, but you should get the point):

I didn't say anything when they came for my enemies. I didn't say anything when they came for my neighbors. I didn't say anything when they came for my friends. I didn't say anything when they came for my family. I had no one to help me when they came for me.

You should care when it affects others.

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 09:51 PM

To make my point I would have to make a very long post. I will just make a short one on abortion to maybe help you undertand why I think you are wrong or where you miss the point. BTW, this is just my little ol' opinion.

Conservatives, especially traditional conservatives like me, believe life begins at conception, so therefore the mother killing the child during pregnancy is murder. No one would say that murder is not something we should not care about, right? So it boils down to your opinion about when life begins and you don't seem to care, so why do you worry about this? It appears you have an opinion about abortion (if you want it to continue) or you don't care about murder (insert a little sarcasm).

Gay marriage is not a right, neither is murder, neither is getting a DL, or many other things people who have loose or nonexistent morals think are rights. That is why I have an opinion about them. I think gay people should have all human rights and anything that is in fact a RIGHT. I also think an unborn child should be given those same rights. How is that for consistent?

BTW, I think conservative values are consistent and use common sense. I think the death penalty, for example, is acceptable because it is a guilty life being extinguished for the common good of innocent people, and abortion is the killing of innocent life. It sure seems to me to be consistent and moral to think that way. I would think the immoral person thinks the death penalty is bad and abortion okay (almost all liberals think this twisted way) or those who think protecting guilty life is the same as innocent life, although that is not a terrible belief.

I have no problem with the death penalty. I do have a problem with the crazy amount of appeals there are and how much it costs the taxpayers.

I do NOT believe that life begins at conception. Given, the formula FOR life is there, it takes a little while to come together and "cook" to be logically considered "life." Is there a heartbeat? Is there conscious thought? Is there self-awareness? Now, abortions committed well into the pregnancy might be considered murder and they could be tried in that manner. Personally, if somebody I don't know aborts a fetus, it's not my place to push my beliefs on them.

Gay marriage is not a right........is straight marriage? If so, how?

Paladin

07-06-2009, 09:59 PM

I have no problem with the death penalty. I do have a problem with the crazy amount of appeals there are and how much it costs the taxpayers.

I do NOT believe that life begins at conception. Given, the formula FOR life is there, it takes a little while to come together and "cook" to be logically considered "life." Is there a heartbeat? Is there conscious thought? Is there self-awareness? Now, abortions committed well into the pregnancy might be considered murder and they could be tried in that manner. Personally, if somebody I don't know aborts a fetus, it's not my place to push my beliefs on them.

Gay marriage is not a right........is straight marriage? If so, how?

I guess it is not life but there has to be outside intervention for it to die, right? Like I said, I figured you thought it was not life until some point way into the pregnancy, and you are entitlted to that opinion.

Would you care if a woman carrying your child aborts the fetus without your consent? Who will stand up for the life that cannot defend itself?

Marriage is not a right, therefore it can be controlled by government, just like anything else that requires a license. You can live together, get civil unions, and do anything else you want in your life, just don't ask government to condone behavior society thinks is immoral. I think states should decide on abortion and gay marriage. The feds should bow out, it isn't in their job description to tell me those things. Hows that?

I can just see the gay rights and extreme left once gay marriage gets sanctioned. My children will then have to listen to how gay marraige and sex is "normal" and acceptable. You just watch, that is what they want ultimately. Do you really think they care about only marriage? Nope, and many gay rights activists have admitted as much.

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 10:06 PM

Do you think marriage is a right?

Why do you say you don't care about what people do unless they do something you disagree with? Kind of funny how the far left and the "I don't care what people do" crowd only care when they think it affects them and can't see issues as a bigger part of society and how it affects others. I care about issues that affect me, my wife, my daughter, my family, my city, my state, my country, and my planet. There are things that affect one without affecting the other, but by your standards I should care about anything until it affects me only. Kind of silly, don't you think?

There is a saying that goes something like this (yeah I am going to butcher it, but you should get the point):

I didn't say anything when they came for my enemies. I didn't say anything when they came for my neighbors. I didn't say anything when they came for my friends. I didn't say anything when they came for my family. I had no one to help me when they came for me.

You should care when it affects others.

I get the saying, but I'm more so talking about the hypocrisy of conservative politics. To say that I literally don't care is a bit of a stretch. Let's stay on the same subjects, considering they seem to be all the rage come election time.

My thoughts on abortion:I probably wouldn't have my unborn aborted. But that's me. I think that people should have the ability to choose. If there weren't abortion clinics, it's not going to stop abortions. At least women aren't gonna be sticking wire hangers up their snatches.

Gay marriage: If two people love eachother, let them get married if that's what they want. Saying that it stains the sanctity and pureness of marriage is horseshit. Straight people have been getting divorced for centuries.

The death penalty: I'm for the death penalty, but with all the appeals available to the convicted, it's just too damn costly. That's about as far as I can go with that. I couldn't even begin to think of a solution to that clusterfuck of appeals.

We can even talk about health care. Health care is expensive. Whether we get universal health care and are taxed like crazy, we pay for health insurance, or get stuck with a bill after a visit to the hospital, the fact is that health care is expensive. The conservative viewpoint is that they don't want to be paying for other people's health care, but if somebody that isn't insured should find themselves in the hospital, the taxpayers are going to be paying for it anyways. So with universal health care, you're being taxed more, but you're not paying for health insurance, and the person who wasn't paying for health care is now being taxed more. Does it balance out perfectly? I don't know. Just a thought.

I'm pretty in the middle.

poopnut2

07-06-2009, 10:12 PM

I guess it is not life but there has to be outside intervention for it to die, right? Like I said, I figured you thought it was not life until some point way into the pregnancy, and you are entitlted to that opinion.

Would you care if a woman carrying your child aborts the fetus without your consent? Who will stand up for the life that cannot defend itself?

Marriage is not a right, therefore it can be controlled by government, just like anything else that requires a license. You can live together, get civil unions, and do anything else you want in your life, just don't ask government to condone behavior society thinks is immoral. I think states should decide on abortion and gay marriage. The feds should bow out, it isn't in their job description to tell me those things. Hows that?

I can just see the gay rights and extreme left once gay marriage gets sanctioned. My children will then have to listen to how gay marraige and sex is "normal" and acceptable. You just watch, that is what they want ultimately. Do you really think they care about only marriage? Nope, and many gay rights activists have admitted as much.

Maybe it should be left to the states. I'm not going to say that gay sex is normal. In a sexual species, homosexuality is useless. Do I think that people that are gay are born that way? Yeah. I however believe that it's some type of defect in the body whether it be mental or chemical. I don't know. However, it exists and we DO have to deal with it. Just because your kid sees two gay guys holding hands or whatever, it's not gonna make him gay. It's just another way for people to point the finger at somebody else. If your kid grows up gay, it's probably because your kid is gay, not because he saw some gay people.

Vertnut

07-06-2009, 10:46 PM

cannonball996

07-07-2009, 10:00 AM

Where is this current cocksucker's plan to save the economy or fix health care?

his plans has been all over the new for the past several months (not that I agree with them) but he has put forth a stimulus plan and healthcare plan. but these plans were no surprise, they were repeatedly mentioned through out the campaign.

a winning candidate has to have plans, Bush had plans, clinton had plans, though they have not always been the best plans, you cant win with out one. I am hoping a republican will emerge with some good ideas, and a plan to get this country back on track.

46Tbird

07-07-2009, 10:17 AM

I was more stating the fact that me, and I'm sure that I'm not the only one, doesn't really care to be viewed as "Joe Six-Pack." I knew that she was talking about middle class citizens. I don't want somebody who gives out retarded little nicknames like that anywhere near Washington. I don't know if it was supposed to be cute or what?
I dunno. Were you trying to be cute when you said average people can't read well enough to punch a ballot?

I think it's funny that "conservatives" are labeled hate-mongers for having an opinion on all the hot buttons that liberals are constantly pushing. People that have a functional moral compass realize that murdering an unborn baby is a crime, and they realize that our government should not be in the business of promoting perverse behavior. Are there any other degenerate causes you want to get behind?

At this point, the Obama administration is tearing down rights, raising taxes, and crushing capitalism at a frantic pace so these are not the most important agenda items for me. The only people that want to spin their tires in the abortion and gay marriage debates are the ones that are too stupid to realize that our federal government is on a self-destructive power trip.

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 12:47 PM

What if the child lives with two gays (or a gay couple)? You don't think environment has anything to do with how a child turns out? They've already proven that if a child is around violence, they have a higher incidence of being violent. If they're from a broken home, they have a higher incidence of divorce when they marry, etc. Gay couples with kids, have not been around long enough to really "study", but I'm betting you'll see the same result...kids raised by openly gay couples will have a greater incidence of being gay.

Considering straight couple have been around quite a while, yet gay people still pop up, I don't think our social environment plays a critical role in our sexual preference.

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 12:52 PM

I dunno. Were you trying to be cute when you said average people can't read well enough to punch a ballot?

I'm not trying to be cute. Society is getting dumber. Which is ironic, considering how much more accessible information is. The fact that we have a politicians running for federal office positions giving nicknames like Joe Six-Pack should prove that.

Bobba Fett

07-07-2009, 01:39 PM

Considering straight couple have been around quite a while, yet gay people still pop up, I don't think our social environment plays a critical role in our sexual preference.

I think most here understand what you are trying to say but here's my qustion:

Why should we change our laws or make legal gay marriage when the percent of the population in this country who identify as gay is very small? In other words, why should 90% of Americans change to accommodate for the other 10% of Americans? It seems to me the real unjustice here is not that gay's can't marry, but that the rest of us have to change our values and beliefs on marriage because some small part of our population's voice is getting heard over ours.

mikeb

07-07-2009, 02:18 PM

What if the child lives with two gays (or a gay couple)? You don't think environment has anything to do with how a child turns out? They've already proven that if a child is around violence, they have a higher incidence of being violent. If they're from a broken home, they have a higher incidence of divorce when they marry, etc. Gay couples with kids, have not been around long enough to really "study", but I'm betting you'll see the same result...kids raised by openly gay couples will have a greater incidence of being gay.

Children of gay couples have a similar distribution of gay/straight as do children of heterosexual couples.

According to the American Psychological Association, numerous research shows that most kids of same-sex households describe themselves as heterosexual in roughly the same proportion as conventional families.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/wayoflife/06/28/gayby/index.html

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 02:43 PM

I think most here understand what you are trying to say but here's my qustion:

Why should we change our laws or make legal gay marriage when the percent of the population in this country who identify as gay is very small? In other words, why should 90% of Americans change to accommodate for the other 10% of Americans? It seems to me the real unjustice here is not that gay's can't marry, but that the rest of us have to change our values and beliefs on marriage because some small part of our population's voice is getting heard over ours.

You didn't put a lot of thought into your post before you made it did you?

Just how would you have to change if gay people could get married? Nobody is asking you to change your values or beliefs. Think about how interracial marriages were illegal in some states in the past. Did anybody have to change their moral values when "Loving VS. Virginia" did away with that? No. Now, two people from different races can get married and people can have their own opinions on the matter. Many people STILL disapprove of interracial relationships and marriages.

If gay marriage is legalized, it would be no different. You'd still have people that disapprove and don't have to change their "values and beliefs."

Bobba Fett

07-07-2009, 03:06 PM

You didn't put a lot of thought into your post before you made it did you?

Just how would you have to change if gay people could get married? Nobody is asking you to change your values or beliefs. Think about how interracial marriages were illegal in some states in the past. Did anybody have to change their moral values when "Loving VS. Virginia" did away with that? No. Now, two people from different races can get married and people can have their own opinions on the matter. Many people STILL disapprove of interracial relationships and marriages.

If gay marriage is legalized, it would be no different. You'd still have people that disapprove and don't have to change their "values and beliefs."

You dodged my only question, but thanks for trying.

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 03:21 PM

You dodged my only question, but thanks for trying.

Why should you change your laws for the minority? Because the minority still exists and the bigotry and "tradition" of others is robbing them of the same privileges that the majority enjoys. It's not like the majority has earned those privileges.

Why not let ugly people get married? Why not let redheads get married?

I didn't dodge your question. Your question shouldn't even exist. How about since Democrats rule the house and the senate, Republican votes don't count? They're the minority.

Bobba Fett

07-07-2009, 03:59 PM

Why should you change your laws for the minority? Because the minority still exists and the bigotry and "tradition" of others is robbing them of the same privileges that the majority enjoys. It's not like the majority has earned those privileges.

Why not let ugly people get married? Why not let redheads get married?

I didn't dodge your question. Your question shouldn't even exist. How about since Democrats rule the house and the senate, Republican votes don't count? They're the minority.

Slow down bud'dy, it was just a question! Don't get your pannies in wad!

What privileges are we robbing from the gay community? Are they being hunt down and gathered up like the Jews in Nazi Germany? Or turned into the slaves like the blacks in the pre-civil war era? What rights are they being denied? As far as I can see, the only rights they are being denied is the one where they can infrige on my belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Why exactly are you standing up for gay marriage? You stand up for abortion, yet you can't have an abortion. Isn't it strange how the loudest voices for gay rights are not even from the ones who need the rights in the first place?

Paladin

07-07-2009, 04:16 PM

I get the saying, but I'm more so talking about the hypocrisy of conservative politics. To say that I literally don't care is a bit of a stretch. Let's stay on the same subjects, considering they seem to be all the rage come election time.

My thoughts on abortion:I probably wouldn't have my unborn aborted. But that's me. I think that people should have the ability to choose. If there weren't abortion clinics, it's not going to stop abortions. At least women aren't gonna be sticking wire hangers up their snatches.

Gay marriage: If two people love eachother, let them get married if that's what they want. Saying that it stains the sanctity and pureness of marriage is horseshit. Straight people have been getting divorced for centuries.

The death penalty: I'm for the death penalty, but with all the appeals available to the convicted, it's just too damn costly. That's about as far as I can go with that. I couldn't even begin to think of a solution to that clusterfuck of appeals.

We can even talk about health care. Health care is expensive. Whether we get universal health care and are taxed like crazy, we pay for health insurance, or get stuck with a bill after a visit to the hospital, the fact is that health care is expensive. The conservative viewpoint is that they don't want to be paying for other people's health care, but if somebody that isn't insured should find themselves in the hospital, the taxpayers are going to be paying for it anyways. So with universal health care, you're being taxed more, but you're not paying for health insurance, and the person who wasn't paying for health care is now being taxed more. Does it balance out perfectly? I don't know. Just a thought.

I'm pretty in the middle.

We will just have to disagree about abortion and gay marriage. I will say again, if you think life begins at conception, then you think it is murder to kill a life that otherwise would continue. The gay marriage issue is just personal opinion, nothing more. I am just opposed to extending rights to people when there is no need. I feel the same way about illegal immigrants, they have no right to be in this country, therefore they don;t get them. No one has a rright to marriage, so there is no need to extend them to gays.

You claim to be center but are pro-abortion (I hate pro-choice because it waters down what actually your position is), for gay marriage, and for universal health care and you claim to be center? That is why I say the liberals claim the center is a far left position, nowhere near what I call center. You appear to me to be a typical liberal when it comes to major positions, but since when would someone who is liberal claim it? Hell gpamp is a hard core liberal and he denies it, so why would a regualr liberal claim it?

Paladin

07-07-2009, 04:59 PM

Maybe it should be left to the states. I'm not going to say that gay sex is normal. In a sexual species, homosexuality is useless. Do I think that people that are gay are born that way? Yeah. I however believe that it's some type of defect in the body whether it be mental or chemical. I don't know. However, it exists and we DO have to deal with it. Just because your kid sees two gay guys holding hands or whatever, it's not gonna make him gay. It's just another way for people to point the finger at somebody else. If your kid grows up gay, it's probably because your kid is gay, not because he saw some gay people.

Man, you keep taking liberal stances and positions but claim center. You have that right, but don't expect me to buy it.

How can you claim a gay person is born that way, but it's due to a defect? If I claimed that, I would be called a homophobe. How about it being mental, chemical, or environmental, maybe even a combination? I say way too many gay people claim severe abuse, especially from fathers, for it to not also possibly be a factor. I also would argue that way too many gays go back and forth between homo and hetero pARTNERS for it to not be just that they want to have sex with anyone. That is just my little old opinion though and part of how I come to my conclusion that gays should not be given a "right" to marry. Where do we stop, hell there are those who want to have sex with animals and small children, so should we allow them rights based off of the fact that they say they were born that way and it is normal to them? The gays can get all the rights to visit loved ones in the hospital, live together, own property together, adopt children, make wills giviung property to each other, and everything else tjhey choose. They have all this and yet they want to get married when those who support it claim the heteros are divorcing like crazy? How stupid is that argument, we should give something to gays the gays claim is not anything special. HUH? Guess waht, they have an agenda that is way beyond the marriage license, that is what. Why should we give marriage to people based solely off of who they have sex with?

cannonball996

07-07-2009, 05:19 PM

"there is no such thing as a homosexual, only homosexual acts." Gore Vidal

its a choice, I use to pay girls to make out with each other for my amusement, they chose to go gay for pay. but if it is a choice, then it could very well be a right, and if it is a right would it be wrong to create bigger government to restrict that right?

Paladin

07-07-2009, 05:42 PM

"there is no such thing as a homosexual, only homosexual acts." gore vidal

its a choice, i use to pay girls to make out with each other for my amusement, they chose to go gay for pay. But if it is a choice, then it could very well be a right, and if it is a right would it be wrong to create bigger government to restrict that right?

wtf?

mikeb

07-07-2009, 06:16 PM

its a choice

I disagree.

Think about it - why would anyone voluntarily CHOOSE a lifestyle that involves disease, death, getting thrown out of social circles, discrimination, getting beat up, hard to find a job, limited partnership benefits, and so on? For the "fun" of it? To be cool? :34: It just doesn't make sense now, does it? Would YOU choose such a lifestyle?

We all know and accept that birth defects happen - there are all kinds of horrible things like autism that happen in the womb. Surely someone's sexual basis is created in the womb, along with the rest of the person. And surely things can go wrong, given the complexity of making a baby. For example, we all started out female, and a hormone flood in our mothers changed some of us into boys. What happens when the hormone flood occurs at the wrong time, or with the wrong intensity? What about environmental factors that the mother encountered?

You can believe what you will, but I believe that there is a biological basis here.

Paladin

07-07-2009, 09:58 PM

I disagree.

Think about it - why would anyone voluntarily CHOOSE a lifestyle that involves disease, death, getting thrown out of social circles, discrimination, getting beat up, hard to find a job, limited partnership benefits, and so on? For the "fun" of it? To be cool? :34: It just doesn't make sense now, does it? Would YOU choose such a lifestyle?

We all know and accept that birth defects happen - there are all kinds of horrible things like autism that happen in the womb. Surely someone's sexual basis is created in the womb, along with the rest of the person. And surely things can go wrong, given the complexity of making a baby. For example, we all started out female, and a hormone flood in our mothers changed some of us into boys. What happens when the hormone flood occurs at the wrong time, or with the wrong intensity? What about environmental factors that the mother encountered?

You can believe what you will, but I believe that there is a biological basis here.

Why do people mutilate themselves, commit suicide, abuse their children, abuse drugs, and do any myriad of other things that can cause them hurt, pain, ridicule, or even death? The human brian is very complex and we are one of the few, if not the only, being on this planet that will purposely do things that are not in our best interest. I get so tired of hearing this lame argument.

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 10:49 PM

Man, you keep taking liberal stances and positions but claim center. You have that right, but don't expect me to buy it.

How can you claim a gay person is born that way, but it's due to a defect? If I claimed that, I would be called a homophobe. How about it being mental, chemical, or environmental, maybe even a combination? I say way too many gay people claim severe abuse, especially from fathers, for it to not also possibly be a factor. I also would argue that way too many gays go back and forth between homo and hetero pARTNERS for it to not be just that they want to have sex with anyone. That is just my little old opinion though and part of how I come to my conclusion that gays should not be given a "right" to marry. Where do we stop, hell there are those who want to have sex with animals and small children, so should we allow them rights based off of the fact that they say they were born that way and it is normal to them? The gays can get all the rights to visit loved ones in the hospital, live together, own property together, adopt children, make wills giviung property to each other, and everything else tjhey choose. They have all this and yet they want to get married when those who support it claim the heteros are divorcing like crazy? How stupid is that argument, we should give something to gays the gays claim is not anything special. HUH? Guess waht, they have an agenda that is way beyond the marriage license, that is what. Why should we give marriage to people based solely off of who they have sex with?

I've never heard a gay person say that they were gay because they were sexually abused as a child. There are probably plenty of gay people out there that feel ashamed of being so. That's probably why they try and go with a partner of the opposite sex. Maybe they don't want family or friends to think differently of them. We all do things we'd rather not out of fear of ridicule.

Really, marriage is a pretty small thing...so why not let them get married? If it's not that big of a deal, give it to them. It's more being denied marriage. It would be like a group of kids being handed ice cream, and then one kid doesn't get any because the adult giving it out doesn't like something about the kid. It's really not that big of a deal, but it doesn't make it right.

Just because one of my opinions (gays being born that way) is left sided, it doesn't mean I'm a liberal hippie. Me saying it's a defect wouldn't make me a homophobe. That would be like calling somebody who calls somebody mentally retarded, arandaphobic (not sure if that's the technical term, that's just what popped up on google.) Somebody who's a homophobe are the people that think they can make a gay person straight and can't learn to accept the fact that somebody else is different from them.

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 10:52 PM

Slow down bud'dy, it was just a question! Don't get your pannies in wad!

What privileges are we robbing from the gay community? Are they being hunt down and gathered up like the Jews in Nazi Germany? Or turned into the slaves like the blacks in the pre-civil war era? What rights are they being denied? As far as I can see, the only rights they are being denied is the one where they can infrige on my belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Why exactly are you standing up for gay marriage? You stand up for abortion, yet you can't have an abortion. Isn't it strange how the loudest voices for gay rights are not even from the ones who need the rights in the first place?

How am I a loud voice? I'm posting my opinion on an LS1 website. :D

Peoples beliefs are "infringed" upon every day. I believe that fatasses should not be considered handicapped. Once again, gay people getting married will not hurt you in any way.

poopnut2

07-07-2009, 11:00 PM

Why do people mutilate themselves, commit suicide, abuse their children, abuse drugs, and do any myriad of other things that can cause them hurt, pain, ridicule, or even death? The human brian is very complex and we are one of the few, if not the only, being on this planet that will purposely do things that are not in our best interest. I get so tired of hearing this lame argument.

Dolphins fight and fuck for pleasure and pain. Just thought I'd put that in there.

It seems the more complex the brain gets, the more things there are that could go wrong. Like modern cars. More shit can go wrong with modern cars than older cars, because there is more to break.

ceyko

07-07-2009, 11:20 PM

Just seems to me it is pretty straight forward.

Cocks were not made to go up dude's assholes.

Giners, although it (girl on girl) can be sexy can not inherently penetrate another giner.

Neither, for the purpose of reproduction (natural) can reproduce with the same sex...

Sex is love and love is sex and if you were not made to fuck the same sex - you should not be married. This is common sense, not religion or anything else.

black01gt

07-07-2009, 11:24 PM

Sex is love and love is sex

:laughing:

Paladin

07-07-2009, 11:29 PM

I've never heard a gay person say that they were gay because they were sexually abused as a child. There are probably plenty of gay people out there that feel ashamed of being so. That's probably why they try and go with a partner of the opposite sex. Maybe they don't want family or friends to think differently of them. We all do things we'd rather not out of fear of ridicule.

I don't think I said gay people claim they are gay becuase they were abused, I said it is kind of weird how many high profile gay people (like Rosie O'Donnell) claim severe abuse at the hands of a male. I know why people go back and forth between same and opposite sex, becuaser it gives them then possibility to have sex with anyone they meet! This is about sex, nothing more really.

Really, marriage is a pretty small thing...so why not let them get married? If it's not that big of a deal, give it to them. It's more being denied marriage. It would be like a group of kids being handed ice cream, and then one kid doesn't get any because the adult giving it out doesn't like something about the kid. It's really not that big of a deal, but it doesn't make it right..

I never said marriage was a small thing, you did when you claimed heteros get divorced so why is marriage a big deal. I think marriage is sacred and that is why I think it should be between a man and a woman. The "hetero's have a high divorce rate" is the far left argument. I just added, if it is something the far left claims is no big deal, why do they want it? I then answered, because then they can go into schools and other places and claim that it is accepted by the government and therefore must be taught as equal to heterosexuality. The gay agenda is verys trong and they don't care about marriage, they care about legitimizing behavior that an overwhelming majority of Americans and the world thinks is abnormal.

Why else would gays want marriage if the other issues they brought up at first, like no visitation for their loved one when they are in the hospital and no right to have civil unions and the legality problems they faced because of it were all addressed? They want legitimacy through getting marriage privileges!

Just because one of my opinions (gays being born that way) is left sided, it doesn't mean I'm a liberal hippie. Me saying it's a defect wouldn't make me a homophobe. That would be like calling somebody who calls somebody mentally retarded, arandaphobic (not sure if that's the technical term, that's just what popped up on google.) Somebody who's a homophobe are the people that think they can make a gay person straight and can't learn to accept the fact that somebody else is different from them.

If I said gays had a defect I would be called a homophobe, but becuase you are seemingly very left leaning you would not be called a homophobe. The far left and the very well funded gay agenda people would brand a conservative like me a homophobe for trying to argue they were born with a defect.

I think homosexuality is a choice a person makes, just like other odd or poor choices some people make. No one should be given special privileges because they CHOOSE to have sex with a person of the same gender, which is all that gay marriage really boils down to.

I have beaten this horse enough already. You can have the last word about it in this thread.

Paladin

07-07-2009, 11:32 PM

Dolphins fight and fuck for pleasure and pain. Just thought I'd put that in there.

It seems the more complex the brain gets, the more things there are that could go wrong. Like modern cars. More shit can go wrong with modern cars than older cars, because there is more to break.

So a gay brain is a wrong brain? :wiggle:

Did you miss the part where I said the humand brain was one of only a few animals that does that kind of stuff? Hell, male lions will kill the young of the male they just defeated for the females. The females will then immediately go into heat and mate with the victor who just killed their young.

ceyko

07-07-2009, 11:35 PM

:laughing:

Yeah, fair enough. I dunno where the fuck that came from. Sounding all fag hippy.

Paladin

07-07-2009, 11:35 PM

How am I a loud voice? I'm posting my opinion on an LS1 website. :D

Peoples beliefs are "infringed" upon every day. I believe that fatasses should not be considered handicapped. Once again, gay people getting married will not hurt you in any way.

Do you acknowledge that the gay agenda is to legitimize their lifestyle choice by getting official recognition of their lifestyle through the marriage license, which is a recognized government authorized document? I mean then they can demand schools teach gay lifestyle as just as normal as hetero lifestyle, since the governemtn cknowledges them by giving them a license to marry.

Can't you see that is what they are after, not the marriage license only? It does affect others.

poopnut2

07-08-2009, 04:18 PM

So a gay brain is a wrong brain? :wiggle:

Did you miss the part where I said the humand brain was one of only a few animals that does that kind of stuff? Hell, male lions will kill the young of the male they just defeated for the females. The females will then immediately go into heat and mate with the victor who just killed their young.

Haven't I said that multiple times before that I believe that a chemical or mental defect is PROBABLY what leads to making a person gay?

poopnut2

07-08-2009, 04:19 PM

Do you acknowledge that the gay agenda is to legitimize their lifestyle choice by getting official recognition of their lifestyle through the marriage license, which is a recognized government authorized document? I mean then they can demand schools teach gay lifestyle as just as normal as hetero lifestyle, since the governemtn cknowledges them by giving them a license to marry.

Can't you see that is what they are after, not the marriage license only? It does affect others.

And every muslim is a terrorist. Jesus Christ you people are turning this into the Rainbow Scare.

poopnut2

07-08-2009, 04:33 PM

I don't think I said gay people claim they are gay becuase they were abused, I said it is kind of weird how many high profile gay people (like Rosie O'Donnell) claim severe abuse at the hands of a male.

I say way too many gay people claim severe abuse, especially from fathers, for it to not also possibly be a factor.

...I'm sorry if you typed it in white or grey and I passed over it.

Paladin

07-08-2009, 05:59 PM

...I'm sorry if you typed it in white or grey and I passed over it.

Are you serious? I will try and clarify. It seems alot of gay people claim they were abused. I never meant to indicate they said they were gay because they were abused, just that alot of gay people claim to have been abused.

I doubt any gay person would actually claim they were gay because they were abused.

Paladin

07-08-2009, 06:00 PM

And every muslim is a terrorist. Jesus Christ you people are turning this into the Rainbow Scare.

You sure dodged giving an uncomfortable (for you) answer, huh?

What is Rainbow Scare, the new catch phrase for the far left when you are uncomfortable calling someone a homophobe?

Paladin

07-08-2009, 06:37 PM

How about we get back to the topic of the thread? While I am no big fan of polls, this seemed interesting to me. I found this on Yahoo!

Sarah Palin: Out, but not down

You betcha Sarah Palin is still a viable presidential candidate! Even though the governor of Alaska dropped the bombshell last week that she was leaving her post, a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds that her support among Republicans is still strong. In fact, her resignation seems to have even slightly boosted her among GOP constituents.

According to the nationwide poll, close to 67% of Republicans want Palin to be "a major national political figure" in the future. And 71% of them say they would likely vote for her if she ran for president in 2012.

Top Republican consultant Mary Matalin called Palin's move "brilliant," and conservative talk-show host Bill Bennett went on CNN to discuss the surprisingly high number of viewers who called into his show in support of Palin's decision.

"To political pros [Palin's resignation] may be a problem. To the base, I'm not sure it's a problem at all," Bennett told CNN.

And Bennett may be exactly right. Just as Republicans as a whole are unfazed by Palin's move, the poll shows Democrats and Independents are as unhappy with her as they were before, with 75% of Democrats and 55% of independents preferring she leave the national stage altogether.

According to USA TODAY, public opinion of Palin has become so polarized that her surprise announcement did little to change anyone's feelings: Seven out of 10 people say their views weren’t affected at all.

GOP consultant Alex Castellanos seconded Bennett's sentiment. He told USA TODAY:

"For Independents and Democrats, she's already not their candidate, and with Republicans her support is not based on her record as governor of Alaska."

But what would bring about such stark polarization between the parties?

Some would argue that it was Palin's in-your-face attitude and all-too publicized blunders that ultimately posited her as an inexperienced and unviable candidate. But Palin, in her resignation speech, blamed the media, calling its coverage of her a "superficial, wasteful, political bloodsport."

And Republicans echo Palin's complaints of media mistreatment. According to the poll, 75% of the GOP believes coverage of Palin has been unfairly negative.

Dana Oshiro of ReadWriteWeb.com opines that the Web is also to blame. "It’s the Internet that ignited the tournament of torment," she writes. From viral videos of "Palin drag shows" to ubiquitous photos of Palin Halloween costumes, the ex-governor became the "Internet's comic relief in an environment that might have otherwise been staunch."

Whether Palin has been unfairly portrayed in the media continues to be a hotly debated issue. But one thing seems to be certain: She has established herself as an American media fixture, loved and loathed by either side of the aisle.

poopnut2

07-08-2009, 11:51 PM

You sure dodged giving an uncomfortable (for you) answer, huh?

What is Rainbow Scare, the new catch phrase for the far left when you are uncomfortable calling someone a homophobe?

No. I'm comparing it to the red scare. You think that just because gays can marry, that all of a sudden America's youth will all be gay and that schools will teach a gay lifestyle, etc...

Basically blowing it out of proportion.

forever_frost

07-09-2009, 12:05 AM

Actually, I see allowing gays marriage as the government expanding yet again and getting into something they have no business in. No one should have to apply for a marriage liscense. If hertero whites went and started protesting demanding slurs against them dropped and government step in, they'd be called racists and bigots. When anyone else does it, it's a movement.

Government needs to be shrunk. Not expanded.

Paladin

07-09-2009, 04:54 PM

No. I'm comparing it to the red scare. You think that just because gays can marry, that all of a sudden America's youth will all be gay and that schools will teach a gay lifestyle, etc...

Basically blowing it out of proportion.

So do you believe my assertion that the gays just want marriage so that they can claim legitimacy and use the marriage license as proof from the government? It's a simple yes or no question actually.

poopnut2

07-09-2009, 08:42 PM

So do you believe my assertion that the gays just want marriage so that they can claim legitimacy and use the marriage license as proof from the government? It's a simple yes or no question actually.

Nope. First of all, I'm trying to remember when I was taught what a "hetero lifestyle" was in school. Not once was I taught how to live my life in school. In health, you're provided nutritional facts, but how you use those facts is up to you. In biology, you learn anatomy.

The closest thing that I can come to is in 5th grade, we were taught the process of reproduction. In gay sex, there is no reproduction.

Never once in school were we sat down and told "This is how you live and this is how you fuck." So I doubt anybody now is going to say "Or you could live this way and fuck this way."

Paladin

07-09-2009, 09:31 PM

Nope. First of all, I'm trying to remember when I was taught what a "hetero lifestyle" was in school. Not once was I taught how to live my life in school. In health, you're provided nutritional facts, but how you use those facts is up to you. In biology, you learn anatomy.

The closest thing that I can come to is in 5th grade, we were taught the process of reproduction. In gay sex, there is no reproduction.

Never once in school were we sat down and told "This is how you live and this is how you fuck." So I doubt anybody now is going to say "Or you could live this way and fuck this way."

Well you haven't been in PS recently then. There are teachers and administrators pushing sex education that involved much more then reproduction to elementary students. If the gays get recognized they will immediately push for equal time in school during sex ed. Like I said, half of my objection to marriage for gays is the slippery slope of their agenda pushing for more and more legitimacy for that which the majority thinks is not legitimate, and that is people of the same gender having sex. It is much differnet to not criminalize that which happens in private than it is to openly advocate it in a public way through a government issues license. If they would promise to let it go at marriage I might rethink my opinion, but I doubt they would do that.

poopnut2

07-10-2009, 12:07 PM

Well you haven't been in PS recently then. There are teachers and administrators pushing sex education that involved much more then reproduction to elementary students. If the gays get recognized they will immediately push for equal time in school during sex ed. Like I said, half of my objection to marriage for gays is the slippery slope of their agenda pushing for more and more legitimacy for that which the majority thinks is not legitimate, and that is people of the same gender having sex. It is much differnet to not criminalize that which happens in private than it is to openly advocate it in a public way through a government issues license. If they would promise to let it go at marriage I might rethink my opinion, but I doubt they would do that.

I graduated 6 years ago. I have a little sister in 4th grade and a little bro that's a junior in HS. Both in public school. Neither of them, nor my parents have mentioned lifestyle suggestions being mentioned in school, and trust me, my stepmom would've raised HELL if there had been. Yeah, there probably are a few gay people out there that want more than just a license. There are extremists in every group of people. You mentioned Rosie O' Donnell. That bitch is dumb. She uses her "celebrity" status to spit stupid shit through the television. I'm sure there are plenty of gays who wishes that she would shut up because she's making them all look bad. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that most extremist want attention more than anything else.

Paladin

07-10-2009, 12:36 PM

I graduated 6 years ago. I have a little sister in 4th grade and a little bro that's a junior in HS. Both in public school. Neither of them, nor my parents have mentioned lifestyle suggestions being mentioned in school, and trust me, my stepmom would've raised HELL if there had been. Yeah, there probably are a few gay people out there that want more than just a license. There are extremists in every group of people. You mentioned Rosie O' Donnell. That bitch is dumb. She uses her "celebrity" status to spit stupid shit through the television. I'm sure there are plenty of gays who wishes that she would shut up because she's making them all look bad. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that most extremist want attention more than anything else.

Please feel free to google "public school sex education" and read the first article that comes up from a teacher with 30 years of experience. There is a paragraph that talks specifically about homosexuality and it being taught in PS, mostly at the HS level. It is being taught right now without legitimacy and acceptance as normal. Imagine if it gets legitimized how early the very secular progressive administrators and teachers in PS will start teaching it.

Anyway, I am tiring of this discussion. If you want you can reply but if nothing new gets brought up, I will let you have the last word.

poopnut2

07-10-2009, 12:43 PM

Please feel free to google "public school sex education" and read the first article that comes up from a teacher with 30 years of experience. There is a paragraph that talks specifically about homosexuality and it being taught in PS, mostly at the HS level. It is being taught right now without legitimacy and acceptance as normal. Imagine if it gets legitimized how early the very secular progressive administrators and teachers in PS will start teaching it.

Anyway, I am tiring of this discussion. If you want you can reply but if nothing new gets brought up, I will let you have the last word.

This is the first link that came up: http://www.psparents.net/sex_education.htm

Maybe I missed it?

Paladin

07-10-2009, 12:59 PM

Doh! I actually searched it on Yahoo. Here it is http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=public+school+sex+education&fr=yfp-t-118&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8

poopnut2

07-10-2009, 02:58 PM

Doh! I actually searched it on Yahoo. Here it is http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=public+school+sex+education&fr=yfp-t-118&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8

Thanks for the link...I think.

How come there is no author or location of said school that actually has a class that's called "Moral and Religious Education?" That alone is fucked up enough to be concerned about public school.

Also, I've never heard of a "Family Life Education" class, which according to the article, exists in Fairfax country Virginia. For the most part, curriculum is left up to the states...so maybe the problem is just that. Some of the stupid shit states are requiring for schools. You shouldn't learn about family life in school, because there is no exact science to a what a family should be. That's fucked up to hear.

I can understand what you're saying now. If gays push for a similar class it's stupid, but the fact that a hetero version of that class is just as bad. Do you really want somebody you know very little about telling your children what his/her family SHOULD be like?

Paladin

07-10-2009, 03:11 PM

Thanks for the link...I think.

How come there is no author or location of said school that actually has a class that's called "Moral and Religious Education?" That alone is fucked up enough to be concerned about public school.

Also, I've never heard of a "Family Life Education" class, which according to the article, exists in Fairfax country Virginia. For the most part, curriculum is left up to the states...so maybe the problem is just that. Some of the stupid shit states are requiring for schools. You shouldn't learn about family life in school, because there is no exact science to a what a family should be. That's fucked up to hear.

I can understand what you're saying now. If gays push for a similar class it's stupid, but the fact that a hetero version of that class is just as bad. Do you really want somebody you know very little about telling your children what his/her family SHOULD be like?

I never meant to say EVERY PS has gay sex as part of their curriculum, but once marriage rights are given, that state's PS's will be inundated with requests/lawsuits for it to be included. I have no faith in PS's and have many family members, friends and people I care about in them. I am also paying PS taxes while sending my daughter to private school. I have an interest in what they do and how they do it. I have been in the hallways of PS's and have seen the out of control kids, the flagrant sexuality on display, and read the stories on what the administrators and teachers have done with the zero tolerance policies for weapons, etc.

Anyway, I made my point, I will now bow out and let you have the last word if you desire.