biggunsbob said:

I guess when you have money You can get away with anything.. Both sides do it and its sad. Get big time money donations out of freaking politics. I am sure in the end it will not matter and the the termination of the employee will stand.

Judge Gives GOP Mega-Donor Sheldon Adelson Epic ?Judge Judy? Treatment.

http://reverbpress.com/justice/sheldon-adelson-judge-in-court/

Click to expand...

it helps to have powerful friends like this guy...



http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/harry-reid-koch-brothers-sheldon-adelson-106484.html

Spartanmack said:

it helps to have powerful friends like this guy...

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/harry-reid-koch-brothers-sheldon-adelson-106484.html

Click to expand...

LOL
I knew you would post first... I guess you cant read. It's all bad on all sides which is pretty much what I said.. Good to know that your hero's the Koch Brothers are # 1 though. Least Reid is right there.. Probably because both live in Nevada you think Poor Harry has to play both sides off one and other in that Casino run state.. It probably wont matter anyway for that employee who tried to do the right thing.

biggunsbob said:

LOL
I knew you would post first... I guess you cant read. It's all bad on all sides which is pretty much what I said.. Good to know that your hero's the Koch Brothers are # 1 though. Least Reid is right there.. Probably because both live in Nevada you think Poor Harry has to play both sides off one and other in that Casino run state.. It probably wont matter anyway for that employee who tried to do the right thing.

Click to expand...

you did say "both sides do it" in your post, but some people can't get the partisan thinking out of their heads.

biggunsbob said:

LOL
I knew you would post first... I guess you cant read. It's all bad on all sides which is pretty much what I said.. Good to know that your hero's the Koch Brothers are # 1 though. Least Reid is right there.. Probably because both live in Nevada you think Poor Harry has to play both sides off one and other in that Casino run state.. It probably wont matter anyway for that employee who tried to do the right thing.

Click to expand...

This is AWESOME! What exactly about my post refutes anything you said? How could you possibly interpret that as a defense of Sheldon Adelson, or the Koch Brothers, or big $ in politics? I was agreeing with you but apparently you're too stupid and too much of a biased partisan hack to realize that.

I'm not at all surprised that this idiot didn't get it either...

michchamp said:

you did say "both sides do it" in your post, but some people can't get the partisan thinking out of their heads.

Click to expand...

It's hilarious that you two try so hard to disagree with everything I say that you can't even tell when I'm agreeing with you...morons.

But the funniest part, easily is in Bob's criticism of my post he actually tries to justify Harry Reid defending Sheldon Adelson pouring 10s of millions of dollars into elections and Michturd says I'm the one who can't get passed partisan bias. I literally laughed out loud when I read that.

michchamp said:

you did say "both sides do it" in your post, but some people can't get the partisan thinking out of their heads.

Click to expand...

Sorry, are you attempting to inform us that you are now a moderate who sees the good and bad of both sides of the political spectrum? Who are the Republicans or Independents you are supporting in the upcoming elections? Just curious, as I always pictured you voting straight D regardless of their qualities compared to an R or I that is running against them.

If I was wrong about that perception, I apologize and I'm looking forward to better understanding your bi-partisan mindset.

zyxt9 said:

Sorry, are you attempting to inform us that you are now a moderate who sees the good and bad of both sides of the political spectrum? Who are the Republicans or Independents you are supporting in the upcoming elections? Just curious, as I always pictured you voting straight D regardless of their qualities compared to an R or I that is running against them.

If I was wrong about that perception, I apologize and I'm looking forward to better understanding your bi-partisan mindset.

Click to expand...

I'm not a moderate; my views are probably pretty extreme, though I think they are rational (unreasonable people may disagree...), but I'm hardly a political partisan... I've posted two threads attacking the Clintons in the last month.

My views stay the same no matter what political party may or may not agree with them.

zyxt9 said:

Sorry, are you attempting to inform us that you are now a moderate who sees the good and bad of both sides of the political spectrum? Who are the Republicans or Independents you are supporting in the upcoming elections? Just curious, as I always pictured you voting straight D regardless of their qualities compared to an R or I that is running against them.

If I was wrong about that perception, I apologize and I'm looking forward to better understanding your bi-partisan mindset.

Click to expand...

I don't think I've ever voted straight D, and that's saying something since in Chicago being that a lot of offices don't even have a Republican candidate on the ballot. Instead, I've voted for a lot of Green Party candidates in the last couple elections, sometimes having to look them up and write them in (they are often not on the ballots either).

I actually once voted for GWB. I consider my vote in 2000 the most embarassing thing I've ever done. But I was young. And dumb. And I listened to the old people in my family, who are old. and dumb.

My new alderman (I voted for him) is the only Republican on the city council; oddly enough, given the twisted politics of this city, he (not his Democratic opponent) had union support, and he has pledged to caucus with the Progressive opposition on the city council.

so...

you can go to hell.

Spartanmack said:

This is AWESOME! What exactly about my post refutes anything you said? How could you possibly interpret that as a defense of Sheldon Adelson, or the Koch Brothers, or big $ in politics? I was agreeing with you but apparently you're too stupid and too much of a biased partisan hack to realize that.

I'm not at all surprised that this idiot didn't get it either...



It's hilarious that you two try so hard to disagree with everything I say that you can't even tell when I'm agreeing with you...morons.

But the funniest part, easily is in Bob's criticism of my post he actually tries to justify Harry Reid defending Sheldon Adelson pouring 10s of millions of dollars into elections and Michturd says I'm the one who can't get passed partisan bias. I literally laughed out loud when I read that.

Click to expand...

Wow your something. What didn't I get ?
I clicked your link and read Harry thought the Koch brothers were public enemy number or something like that and posted it and you got all spastic on me. LOL I didn't need to read any further as I know how Harry feels and I know both sides take the cash when possible.
I am pretty sure I said both parties are taking big money but I guess you didn't see it and like normal went off on a triad like normal .. Whatever.. Lets not forget it is really about the poor Guy he fired because he is testify against him but lets just let that slip and let all billionaires get a pass like your hero's the Koch brothers.. Shame the poor guy didn't have a good Union to protect him but alas Billionaires think they can buy everyone and they are probably right. Fact reminds I knew you would post first.. Get over yourself for a change.

biggunsbob said:

Wow your something. What didn't I get ?
I clicked your link and read Harry thought the Koch brothers were public enemy number or something like that and posted it and you got all spastic on me. LOL I didn't need to read any further as I know how Harry feels and I know both sides take the cash when possible.
I am pretty sure I said both parties are taking big money but I guess you didn't see it and like normal went off on a triad like normal .. Whatever.. Lets not forget it is really about the poor Guy he fired because he is testify against him but lets just let that slip and let all billionaires get a pass like your hero's the Koch brothers.. Shame the poor guy didn't have a good Union to protect him but alas Billionaires think they can buy everyone and they are probably right. Fact reminds I knew you would post first.. Get over yourself for a change.

Click to expand...

All of it, Bob. You didn't get all of it. You stink at this. I didn't go off on a triad, or even a tirade - I was laughing at you because your bias runs so deep, you can't even see when I'm agreeing with you. You still won't admit that - at least you stick to your guns and I guess that's good sometimes.

You also clearly don't get my position on the Koch Brothers. They are not my heros. The only point I've made about them is if you want to get rid of special interests, you have to get rid of them all - you can't pick and choose which groups get to have undue or disproportionate influence. If saying that makes you think I love the Koch bros, then there's not much I can do about it and I won't spend any more time arguing with you about this subject. I'll just conclude by explaining this in really simple terms - my position is "no special interests in politics", you and turd have the position "no conservative special interests in politics, but unions, climate alarmist, etc are ok." I want a level playing field and you two want to tilt it to your advantage and then you accuse me of being an extreme partisan - that's hilarious. Think about that before you embarrass yourself with another incoherent post that makes you look like a senile old man.

And let's not pretend that this is all about the poor guy he fired. In your OP you start the thread complaining about big $ in politics, remember?

biggunsbob said:

I guess when you have money You can get away with anything.. Both sides do it and its sad. Get big time money donations out of freaking politics...

Click to expand...

Spartanmack said:

All of it, Bob. You didn't get all of it. You stink at this. I didn't got off on a triad, or even a tirade - I was laughing at you because your bias runs so deep, you can't even see when I'm agreeing with you. You also clearly don't get my position on the Koch Brothers. They are not my heros. The only point I've made about them is if you want to get rid of special interests, you have to get rid of them all - you can't pick and choose which groups get to have undue or disproportionate influence. If saying that makes you think I love the Koch bros, then there's not much I can do about it and I won't spend any more time arguing with you about this subject. I'll just conclude by explaining this in really simple terms - my position is "no special interests in politics", you and turd have the position "no conservative special interests in politics, but unions, climate alarmist, etc are ok" and you two accuse me of being an extreme partisan. Think about that before you embarrass yourself with another foolish and incoherent post.

Click to expand...

The original post was not foolish for the poor guy that was fired. BTW I have never once voted straight party lines. I even foolishly voted for Reagan once. But anyway you win. Go ahead call you local city board and get the parade route set up.

speaking of judge judy:

I don't foresee another justice leaving the court before the next presidential election.

Would Judge Judy more likely be appointed by a Republican or a Democrat?

EDIT: I guess technically I should say "the next presidential inauguration."

zyxt9 said:

Sorry, are you attempting to inform us that you are now a moderate who sees the good and bad of both sides of the political spectrum? Who are the Republicans or Independents you are supporting in the upcoming elections? Just curious, as I always pictured you voting straight D regardless of their qualities compared to an R or I that is running against them.

If I was wrong about that perception, I apologize and I'm looking forward to better understanding your bi-partisan mindset.

Click to expand...

What does being objective have to do with being politically 'moderate?'

tinselwolverine said:

I don't foresee another justice leaving the court before the next presidential election.

Would Judge Judy more likely be appointed by a Republican or a Democrat?

EDIT: I guess technically I should say "the next presidential inauguration."

Click to expand...

I don't either. Ginsburg is the oldest, at 82, and if she was going to resign probably would've done so already. I suspect she's holding on as long as possible out of a sense of duty.

Scalia & Kennedy are ~ 79, and Breyer is 77.

Then you have a gap until you get to Thomas who is 66.

michchamp said:

I don't either. Ginsburg is the oldest, at 82, and if she was going to resign probably would've done so already. I suspect she's holding on as long as possible out of a sense of duty.

Scalia & Kennedy are ~ 79, and Breyer is 77.

Then you have a gap until you get to Thomas who is 66.

Click to expand...

I guess Ginsberg and Breyer, we were both appointed by a Democratic president (I think Clinton in both cases), aren't overly concerned about the party of the president who appoints their successors, otherwise I would suppose both would have a motivation to retire while the president is still a Democrat.

Obviously the next president could also be a Democrat, but that is uncertain.

tinselwolverine said:

I guess Ginsberg and Breyer, we were both appointed by a Democratic president (I think Clinton in both cases), aren't overly concerned about the party of the president who appoints their successors, otherwise I would suppose both would have a motivation to retire while the president is still a Democrat.

Obviously the next president could also be a Democrat, but that is uncertain.

Click to expand...

looking at the current field of bumbling morons the GOP is running, I think they feel confident about sticking it out.

Ginsburg in particular seems concerned enough about the poor reasoning of some justices to stick it out as a matter of conscience.

TheVictors said:

What does being objective have to do with being politically 'moderate?'

Click to expand...

he's employing the middle ground logical fallacy (I dug that up from an old thread).

I suggested we sticky that list to the politics board. I think Red_and_something suggested someone write some code that replaces a logical fallacy with the icon, whenever someone uses one.

michchamp said:

he's employing the middle ground logical fallacy (I dug that up from an old thread).

I suggested we sticky that list to the politics board. I think Red_and_something suggested someone write some code that replaces a logical fallacy with the icon, whenever someone uses one.

Click to expand...

Why would a person want to do that? Why would a person simply not book market for themselves, so any when they were having arguments on the internets with would not have access to the same rebuttal material?

I like this one, but maybe it's because I have that middle ground logical fallacy.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

michchamp said:

he's employing the middle ground logical fallacy (I dug that up from an old thread).

I suggested we sticky that list to the politics board. I think Red_and_something suggested someone write some code that replaces a logical fallacy with the icon, whenever someone uses one.

Click to expand...

Ginsburg is probably just waiting for Judge Judy's current contact to run out and those icons should appear under people's avatars for a week or so after they commit the fallacy. The method for figuring out who has committed what fallacy would be difficult though.