With the way Republicans have gerrymandered so many districts, they should be able to keep whoever they want in many offices indefinitely. They are obviously smarter than Democrats to pull that off on such a scale. I'm sure the Democrats wish they would have.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 

Gerrymandering is nothing new, Democrats do and have done the same thing when and where they are the party in power.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

Who the hell cares if it's nothing new and if Democrats do it, too? That's always the stupidiest argument I hear in politics, like it justifies things or something. That's completely irrelevant for me, but I'm not a partisan. Stupid stuff is stupid, and wrong is wrong, regardless if a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, Green Party, or any other entity did it. Call a spade a spade. But the current gerrymandering by the Republicans is bad, and nothing more than a conniving political maneuver that is bad for Democracy.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 

Apparently you care since you went out of your way to say how Republicans have gerrymandered and also how you bet democrats wish they had. When the fact is Democrats do and have done the same thing, so all I did was point out that fact. It is always done by the party in power at the time boundaries get redrawn.

The "gerrymandering" that is being debated now, is pretty much a matter of race. Democrats want minority voters split into as many districts as they can because they know minorities historically vote for them. Republicans want minorities into as few districts as they can for the same reason. Which is a more accurate representation though?

You say it is bad for Democracy, I'm not sure. How did republicans get into the position where they can do this? They had to win in districts that were previously drawn to benefit democrats. That means either democrats got lazy and didn't turn out or republicans did the work and increased their voter turnout enough to win. Pretty much the same reason Trump won WI. He came and did some work, while Hillary pretty much ignored the state. Republicans did the work to win, now if Democrats want to get the power back, they need to do the same thing. I think that is something that is good for democracy.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

And Kevin, you talk about how horrible it is to label, yet you do it yourself. Like saying how religious people condemn gays. That is NOT true. We "label" sin as sin. God says homosexuality is sin. How does that make me evil for agreeing with what my (and your) creator says?.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 

You delusions are scary. but you like a typical democrat are masters of the scare tactics. We say we want to crack down on ILLEGAL immigration, your party translates that to racism as if Illegal is a race. We say we want to eliminate waste and abuse in welfare, your party translates that to Hate Poor people. We say we want to change Social Security to make it solvent, your party translates that to Hate Old People.

All your party does is preach hate and scare tactics. While making the poor and minorities more dependent on government rather then dependent on themselves.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

You don't want immigration because they will not vote Republican and that would make your gerrymandering more difficult.

If you wanted to eliminate waste, you wouldn't allow tax welfare to the wealthy and you would scale back the War Machine. Reform in welfare is necessary, but we need to give more help to the poor.

Your party wants to end Social Security and renege on the government's commitment to the people it has been stealing from since SS's inception.

The Republicans are the party of scare tactics, own your racism, and start treating ALL people with respect. That's all we ask for. And it is you and Cheesey that are the delusionoids in this forum.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

I'm just calling it what it is in its current form. If it was the Democrats that manufactured this gerrymander I'd attribute it to them. But it's not. That's just a matter of a fact statement, but that doesn't make the action right or justifiable in any way no matter who did it, which was the point.

I think the whole district drawing process is stupid. It should be more objective and follow other established boundaries like counties, township and ranges, or something. That would eliminate this issue, but partisans don't want that.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 

As usual with you, your posting is completely false.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

What news do you watch? This country is an oligarchy now, because people like you made that happen by voting for these horrible people. But they've cut into social programs that help the poor, that makes Christians like you real happy right?

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

What news do you watch? This country is an oligarchy now, because people like you made that happen by voting for these horrible people. But they've cut into social programs that help the poor, that makes Christians like you real happy right?

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

The original topic on Missile strikes in Shayrat is a perfect example.
Schumer, Clinton, Graham all support this stupidity. It is because, it is not about right or wrong, it about who gets them the MONEY! War means profit for the corporations the "democrats" serve!

And it is stupid; only after a gas attack killed a hundred or two, we announce we want Assad out. Prior to this, Assad conventionally exterminated hundreds of thousands, which was okay I guess. Fine! but now tell me who fights ISIS on the ground?

Assad was in the middle of a 3-way civil war, which is what gave ISIS its foothold. Today, Turkey is supporting a small population of Shia rebels fighting ISIS. The US is supporting the fiight against ISIS with a small population of Kurds, who Turkey is fighting and calls them a terrorist group. Assad w/ support of Russia and Iran and his Sunni majority Army are the main fighters on the ground against ISIS.

The Syrian army swears allegiance to Assad. If we take out Assad, many troops will leave. If the "paychecks" are disrupted at all most of the army will leave to feed themselves and families. They cant start a business or go to work at McDonalds or Walmart, they wont apply their mercenary capability for the Shia or Kurds. A whole bunch, maybe a majority of the Syrian Army will go to fight for ISIS. With the Syrian army no longer fighting ISIS on ground and ISIS's ranks swelling. who will fight them on the ground?

This is why the past administration didn't take out Assad; because it was stupid. But now it is more important for Trump and his corporate sociopath elites to get paid by going to war. And who cares if some Arabs or Asian types get killed so long as the industrial military complex and media make money making war.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

A bunch of things being said that are not even remotely true and yet spoken as facts. Why do you people do this? How does this amuse/entertain you to spread such foolishness and blatant lies predicated on your own political insecurities and bias? You embarrass Americans. Grow up.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Wow, we actually have Yoda with all the answers; now teach us oh great one.

What a disrespectful, rude and exceedingly arrogant way to argue: "Use guys be all wrong; but Eyes donts needs ta tell ya how; cuz all I does say is substantiated by my own opinion."

This nasty degrading type of argument is a propaganda technique used to inhibit the robust debate, something that is essential to any democracy.

Please learn to identify fact from opinion [PS a fact is something that can be proven wrong or right]; list the facts you have a problem with by anyone here and I'll guide you to a place to sort out its truth.

Oh and stop listening to Fox "news"...or CNN or MSNBC, this is NOT NEWS!

Remember WMD? Made you decide that we should invade Iraq when you didn't thinks so before; learn form your mistakes!

Now we have drums of war beating for N.Korea...ya gonna fall for it again?

This LINK: Where's the Navy?  will answer all your questions on Korea.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

The big problem I see with how we have handled all these evil dictators is how we remove them. We end up having to destroy their military and police, before getting the leaders so there is nobody left to defend the people when a new regime takes over. Which is what happened in both Iraq and Libya. And is a primary reason ISIS has gotten the power they have. If we would go and strategically and surgically take out just the dictators and their senior leadership leaving them with a functioning military and police force once new leadership was elected they would have the ability to defend their own borders.

Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad they were or are pretty much evil men. But they definitely were stabilizing forces. This is part of the reason why I believe the Tomahawk bombing in Syria didn't do the damage that so many people, yourself included think it should have done. I don't believe the intention was to destroy the air field or Syrian Air capability. It was more symbolic really.

Perhaps we should drop our policy on not using our military in assassinating political leaders in foreign countries and start making their heads explode from a mile out.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 

What is your plan for dealing with North Korea? Do we just let them keep going as they are and have been? Just wipe our hands and let them do as they please?

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins