• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
Fiddytree
Reaction score
16,958

Profile posts Latest activity Postings Awards About

  • I got it! It took me forever, but I refuse to use google! Sen Daniel Moynihan moderate liberal from New York! He was a bit of an expert in the Johnson poverty programs and social security. Spoke with a lisp, penchant for wit and dry humor who spent many a Sunday on Meet the Press. Very clever Harvard graduate who was a speechwriter for Kennedy, and definitely the sort of fellow who would use the word 'fellow' to describe a man. I liked the character, the politics, the bow tie.
    Only am posting this here because I have a decent respect for you as a poster and it's mildly annoying to see a normally thoughtful and intelligent individual, even if I disagree with you a fair bit, up on the list of likes for something so dishonestly present.

    https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/322681-remembering-baker-turned-away-joe-biden-and-received-praise-conservatives.html

    I'd definitely urge you to relook at this thread, relook at some of the posts (specifically the link to snopes), and take a second gander of it all. The presentation on the matter, that what was done in Radford (near and dear to me as I grew up just up the road) was a denial of service as opposed to turning down the chance to host a political campaign event, is not worthy of a thumbs up.

    Just my two cents.
    "You know, repeating the words "fact" and "factually" more often doesn't make your presupposition any more true."

    ^---- literally busted out laughing reading that
    Absolutely agree on Russo, but the only reason that worked out is because they gave him kids.

    After all, the British version was a whacked out junkie who prostituted out his own girlfriend for political favours.

    I think you're spot on about the charm, there were times British Francis had me laughing my ass off at something that most people wouldn't find funny. In the last season when his own party member leaves and uses his own phrase against him "I couldn't possibly comment" and he's watching on Telly and says "You Bastard" I must have re-watched that 10, 000 times.

    They definitely did adapt the extreme difference in politics well to match the very different way the respective governments operate.

    Anyway I wait with baited breath for what comes next, I think it's going to be ****ing spectacular.
    So what do you think buddy, do you think the British house of cards is better than the American one?

    I suppose as Season 2 comes a few days from now we'll see how it goes, but I liked how the British one kept things succinct and free of fluff.

    That whole episode in the American one with the university library was utterly pointless filler to have an excuse for a thirteen episode season.
    I agree with you in that thread about the Fordham College/Ann Coulter incident. It's bogus how you-know-who is baiting you.
    Fiddy. I appreciate your appeals to objectivity when it comes to topics of history. I also appreciate your analyses of historical events in their correct context. You are one of the few here who "get it." Post on my man! :)
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Top Bottom