GOP Debate Threads

[Nate505]

First, do you agree with every single stance that happens to be labeled liberal?

Second, has your life been effected by any blue laws? Mine sure hasn't (at least as far as I know).

Every single one? No. However, I would not make a blanket claim about them when there are some serious holes in the claim.

As for blue laws, I wanted to buy a car last Sunday. No dice in this state. Why can't I, a responsible tax paying adult, buy a car on any day of the week I please?

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

So, you have stepped back from a claim that she said something was the result of a spontaneous attack, to merely saying she gave "deceptively worded denials". I'm fine with that characterization.

I don't particulary like the idea that there are such secrets in govenment, but I do accept that such denials are part and parcel of how governments operate, sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad. I'm a little surprised that you would be so naive as to think there has ever been an American Presidency that operated otherwise.

I'm a little surprised that you're so jaded that you are willing to accept deception of this kind from your leaders. Take a look at what she said at the Sept. 14 transfer of remains ceremony:

“This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”

While, on close examination, you may be correct that she never actually said that the raid was the result of a protest related to the video, it is clear from private messages that she and her staff had determined unequivocally that the video and the raid were unrelated, yet she continued to juxtapose the two in her comments so that any reasonable person would assume that these topics were intimately related. And since other government officials were simultaneously putting out the word that they were definitely connected the result of her words was exactly what I claimed. Go ahead and let her off on what you see as a technicality. I won't. Electing this woman as president would be a disaster.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Every single one? No. However, I would not make a blanket claim about them when there are some serious holes in the claim.

As for blue laws, I wanted to buy a car last Sunday. No dice in this state. Why can't I, a responsible tax paying adult, buy a car on any day of the week I please?

I don't understand the bolded sentence.

As for the blue laws, I didn't even realize that car dealerships were required to close on Sundays, but who cares? If it is so urgent to buy a car on that day just go to KSL.com. My guess is that the dealerships are the ones who are actually behind this law anyway. If they wanted it reversed it would be.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Oh and tell your cousins to move to the States if they like it there so much. Many refugees would die to take his spot.

He owns a business in Canada. Should I tell him to give it to you?

 

[Stoked]

I don't understand the bolded sentence.

As for the blue laws, I didn't even realize that car dealerships were required to close on Sundays, but who cares? If it is so urgent to buy a car on that day just go to KSL.com. My guess is that the dealerships are the ones who are actually behind this law anyway. If they wanted it reversed it would be.

If that individual dealership chose to close on Sunday than whatever. If they were forced or coerced into closing...why? Why do we need to gov. to tell us when we can or cannot buy a car? legislating for the sake of legislating.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

If that individual dealership chose to close on Sunday than whatever. If they were forced or coerced into closing...why? Why do we need to gov. to tell us when we can or cannot buy a car? legislating for the sake of legislating.

Like I said, I didn't even know such a law existed until Nate brought it up. I agree with both of you that it shouldn't. Seems like a pretty minor issue compared to the rest of our discussion, though.

 

[magic]

I have a question: Why do you guys argue about politics? Nobody is going to change their mind, so seems like a pointless exercise.

 

[b_line]

I don't understand the bolded sentence.

As for the blue laws, I didn't even realize that car dealerships were required to close on Sundays, but who cares? If it is so urgent to buy a car on that day just go to KSL.com. My guess is that the dealerships are the ones who are actually behind this law anyway. If they wanted it reversed it would be.

In Utah, LHM was behind the sunday closure thing. The law is actually that they can only be open one of the weekend days, and they wisely chose saturday.

 

[b_line]

He owns a business in Canada. Should I tell him to give it to you?

No, tell him to give it to me. Now I know you are lying. Everyone knows individuals can't own business in Canda, it's socialist. The govment owns that ****.

 

[sirkickyass]

I have a question: Why do you guys argue about politics? Nobody is going to change their mind, so seems like a pointless exercise.

You know, I wonder sometimes.

I gave a very very detailed post earlier in this thread about how Sanders budget proposals work. It was some of my most intricate work on the board.

No responses. It might have been a TL;DR.

That said, I made and like this thread because we're in the midst of a clown-car primary. And those are always good for a laugh.

RIP Jindal!

 

[b_line]

You know, I wonder sometimes.

I gave a very very detailed post earlier in this thread about how Sanders budget proposals work. It was some of my most intricate work on the board.

No responses. It might have been a TL;DR.

That said, I made and like this thread because we're in the midst of a clown-car primary. And those are always good for a laugh.

RIP Jindal!

I thought it was a great post. But then again, I agree with you on a lot of things politically.

The thing I liked about that post is that Bernie at least acknowledges where the money that is going to be spent will come from. In relation to some of the other guys budgets (Trump, Carson) Bernie looked like a genius.

 

[One Brow]

I'm a little surprised that you're so jaded that you are willing to accept deception of this kind from your leaders.

Secrecy and deceit is essential in government. If we have intelligence of a plot, you don't expect anyone to release the name of the source, do you? I would be surprised if you genuinely thought there should be no secrets nor deceit from any government official, but I actually believe this is a standard you apply to Clinton more than others, which is unsurprising.

Take a look at what she said at the Sept. 14 transfer of remains ceremony:

“This has been a difficult week for the State Department and for our country. We’ve seen the heavy assault on our post in Benghazi that took the lives of those brave men. We’ve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with. It is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable.”

While, on close examination, you may be correct that she never actually said that the raid was the result of a protest related to the video, it is clear from private messages that she and her staff had determined unequivocally that the video and the raid were unrelated, yet she continued to juxtapose the two in her comments so that any reasonable person would assume that these topics were intimately related. And since other government officials were simultaneously putting out the word that they were definitely connected the result of her words was exactly what I claimed. Go ahead and let her off on what you see as a technicality. I won't. Electing this woman as president would be a disaster.

So, she made two completely true statements, and you have a problem with their being next to each other, because a lower-level (than Clinton) in State used the talking points of the CIA. That's all fine, but don't expect me to believe that you hold all politicians to this standard. You are not a fool.