• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

FOX Keeps Fear Alive. Restore Sanity, Drop FOX.

DarkWizard12 said:
Imagine a threesome with Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham. YUUUUUUM
Click to expand...

As long as I don't have to hear any of them rant about anything and Laura Ingraham can't say anything at all. Between Coulter, Ingraham and Palin we have the three most annoying female voices on the face of the earth.
 
cpwill said:
you are aware that Glenn Beck was a pretty big critic of the Bush Administration?
Click to expand...

Yea, he became a pretty big critic of GW right after Obama was elected. before that he was like most conservatives, praising him almost every chance he got.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Yea, he became a pretty big critic of GW right after Obama was elected. before that he was like most conservatives, praising him almost every chance he got.
Click to expand...

Really? How about some quotes from Beck's CNN tv show proving what you claim.

Before Obama was elected, very few people had even heard of Beck. I know I hadn't.
 
Gill said:
Really? How about some quotes from Beck's CNN tv show proving what you claim.

Before Obama was elected, very few people had even heard of Beck. I know I hadn't.
Click to expand...
Cuz he was on CNN, and, you know, most liberals don't watch CNN becaue "the entire media are clowns".
 
roughdraft274 said:
As long as I don't have to hear any of them rant about anything and Laura Ingraham can't say anything at all. Between Coulter, Ingraham and Palin we have the three most annoying female voices on the face of the earth.
Click to expand...
Just think of the squeels though! hur hur hurr!
 
Well, like I thought Lieberman reminded me of Palpatine. Then I just came to the conclusion it was really badass, so then I supported him.
 
roughdraft274 said:
As long as I don't have to hear any of them rant about anything and Laura Ingraham can't say anything at all. Between Coulter, Ingraham and Palin we have the three most annoying female voices on the face of the earth.
Click to expand...

you're missing Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi

roughdraft274 said:
Yea, he became a pretty big critic of GW right after Obama was elected. before that he was like most conservatives, praising him almost every chance he got.
Click to expand...

:lamo he called for Bush to be impeached!


 

Wow, suppress free speech, ideology dead in the water, etc. GOP won this election, but in two to four years, it will be the reverse. Lib ideology is temporarily dead in the water, but Con ideology will be dead in the water in two to four. It is sad, but Americans have short memories and make the same mistake over and over and over, e.g. Vietnam - Iraq, Carter - Obama, 1994 - 2010, etc. Depression - Current recession. Cut gov't - too much gov't.

GOP cannot lead, they polarize. Dem cannot lead, they are too idealogical. With the Dem in POTUS and control of the Senate, and the GOP in control of the House, do you really think something good is going to happen in two years? Or, do you think all that will happen is more foder for the pundits on both sides to complain.

Sad day for the USA, we will have to put up with two more years of bickering and in action.
 

Giant Noodle, I am behind you on this one. WE NEED A THIRD PARTY to balance this "MORE OF THE SAME" bs.
 
WhyteRash said:
nah.. not Malkin.. she reminds me too much of the witch from Conan The Barbarian movie:




you know that cant be good..
Click to expand...

She what?



Don't look like no witch to me. :shrug:
 
Ockham said:
She what?



Don't look like no witch to me. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Liberals better get over their hatred and jealousy of Fox News as last night just showed. Fox News competed with the major networks for ratings and beat MSNBC and CNN combined. Over 7 million viewers watched Fox Election coverage and that is an amazing number since Fox News is a cable channel not in every home and yet they competed well against the networks. In addition News Corp the parent company of Fox just announced a 36% profit increase due in large part to profits from Fox News. Remember all those boycott attempts by the left?

Looks like more and more people see the left for who they really are, angry, jealous, vindictive people who really are out of touch with reality.

I watched Fox News last night and it was incredible. They were well represented with people from both sides and did an outstanding "fair and balanced" report on the election. I know those Democrats and Independents that watched Fox had to come away with the same feelings. It is time for the partisans here to come to the same conclusion and stop with the Fox bashing. Based upon results you look foolish.
 

I watch Fox News for the entertainment value.
 
winston53660 said:
I watch Fox News for the entertainment value.
Click to expand...

I know that Fox Appreciates the viewership that you provide, but I believe you are in a very small minority who watches Fox for purely entertainment value when most watch it because of a good fair and balanced exchange of ideas. Looks to me like you confuse Fox News with Fox entertainment. You seem to do that a lot as evidenced by the way you defend your position.

By the way went back and checked your claim that TX had a 25 billion deficit which is a downright lie. I suggest you stop watching entertainment programs and get actual facts.
 

Think what you want about Fox.

Texas budget gap:

this think tank pegs it at 16 billion for 2004 '05:

THE BOTTOM LINE: The General Revenue cost of
maintaining the current level of state services in 2004-2005 is
thus $69.7 billion—$15.6 billion more than the amount of
General Revenue estimated to be available.* This $15.6 billion
is the shortfall amount that more realistically measures the
challenge ahead and what it would cost merely to “tread water”
in state services. (And it is worth citing at least a few examples
of what “treading water” means: more than 60,000 Texans on
waiting lists for community care services; more than 52,000
children on waiting lists for low-income child care subsidies.) It
is impossible to eliminate a shortfall of this enormous
magnitude by reducing waste and increasing efficiency. It is
also impossible to close this gap through spending cuts alone,
without causing unacceptable pain for all Texans. Additional
state revenue is needed. For some potential sources, see the
Texas Revenue Primer at
http://www.cppp.org/products/reports/rev-primer.pdf

And it has only gotten bigger:

State Budget Outlook Getting Gloomier

AUSTIN - A top state lawmaker today predicted that the state's projected budget shortfall will likely be significantly higher than $21.5 billion and warned that the Legislature may be forced to take a "meat-cleaver" approach when it meets next year to write a new state spending blueprint for the next two years.

Rep. Rene Oliveira, D-Brownsville, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, issued the bleak assessment at a two-day meeting of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. Projections of the anticipated shortfall - the result of a steep decline in state sales tax revenue because of the national economic downturn - were originally pegged at around $10-$11 billion and have worsened over the past several months.


Read more: http://blogs.star-telegram.com/poli...t-outlook-getting-gloomier.html#ixzz14GRQcr6f
 
Last edited:

First of all the link is broken, second the article tals about 2004-2005, we are looking at the 2012-2013 budget that will be debated in January 2011. You really don't know how your state operates. the fiscal year 2010-2011 shows a rainy day fund in tact of 9 billion dollars and there may be a 3.5 billion shortfall that is being handled by budget cuts. TX has a balanced budget requirement so your claim is total bs.
 
TBone said:
Giant Noodle, I am behind you on this one. WE NEED A THIRD PARTY to balance this "MORE OF THE SAME" bs.
Click to expand...

Last night, a withdrawn third-party bid ended up costing Republicans at least one key victory. I’m starting to think the New York 23rd district is cursed. Doug Hoffman, Conservative-party candidate, inspiring figure of 2009′s special election, made a remarkably mature decision to drop his Conservative bid this year and back the Republican, Matt Doheny. Last night, 6 percent of the district voted for Hoffman, even though he had withdrawn. Democrat Bill Owens is ahead by 2.4 percent.

In Oregon, Republican Chris Dudley is hanging on in the governor’s race; his 1.1 percent lead is less than the share of the vote that went to the Constitution-party candidate (1.4 percent) and the Libertarian-party candidate (1.3 percent)...

Tim Cahill cost Charlie Baker his shot at the Massachusetts governorship.

In Indiana, one of the cycle’s promising Republicans, Jackie Walorski, has fallen short by 1.4 percent while the Libertarian candidate took 5 percent...

In Colorado’s governor’s race, we saw a strange reversal: the surprising 11 percent who backed Republican Dan Maes probably cost conservative independent Tom Tancredo a victory, or at least a chance to take Democrat John Hickenlooper down to the wire.

Late in this cycle, we saw desperate Democrats doing everything they could to promote little-known third-party options. Sometimes it didn’t work (Alan Grayson, Tom Perriello). But clearly the Democrats will go back to this option, time and again, until right-of-center voters realize that if you want to throw out an entrenched liberal Democrat incumbent, there is only one real option. Every vote has to be earned, but sometimes you have to be willing to take someone less than ideal if you want to throw a bum out.

UPDATE: Looks like two more near-misses for the GOP in Arizona, where the Democrat’s margin of victory will be smaller than the Libertarian Party candidate’s share of the vote.

Again, it’s a free country. But when you’re voting in a race that is neck-and-neck between Bad and Less Bad and your preferred candidate, Ideal, is in single digits, you’re not going to see Ideal suddenly leap ahead in a three-way race on the last day. If you want to beat Bad, you may have to hold your nose and vote for Less Bad.
 
among the points made:

1. plurality is the constitutional system. changing it would require an amendment, not "just a decision on the part of the Republican and Democrat Parties"
2. most libertarian votes would go Republican; especially the kinds of candidates that they have begun to recruit this year. that is why Democrats spent money and effort helping third parties like them out. you may want to take a look at who is helping you, and why.
3-4. absolutely agreed that Republicans shouldn't have forgotten who they were supposed to be while they were in power. but let's not pretend that voting third party in significant numbers doesn't put democrats in charge. you are responsible for the results of your own decisions, no whining that there should have been a happy magical world in which a candidate that would have made you happy also has a chance at winning, you live in reality.

to recite the hardly whiny article (though your response demonstrates a certain small-mindedness): Again, it’s a free country. But when you’re voting in a race that is neck-and-neck between Bad and Less Bad and your preferred candidate, Ideal, is in single digits, you’re not going to see Ideal suddenly leap ahead in a three-way race on the last day. If you want to beat Bad, you may have to hold your nose and vote for Less Bad.
 
Conservative said:
TX has a balanced budget requirement so your claim is total bs.
Click to expand...


So?

..........
 
winston53660 said:
So?

..........
Click to expand...

So you lied about the deficit, learn how to read a financial statement because nothing you posted shows a deficit as it is a violation of the TX Constitution to have a deficit. Where are the impeachment charges?

That so called 25 billion budget deficit is an actual 18 billion dollar PROJECTED shortfall in revenue for fiscal year 2012-2013. Like all predictions it is just that, certainly not fact especially since this is 2010 and no one really knows what is going to happen in 2012-2013
 


I said budget gap.
 
Conservative said:
So you lied about the deficit, learn how to read a financial statement because nothing you posted shows a deficit as it is a violation of the TX Constitution to have a deficit. Where are the impeachment charges?
Click to expand...


2006-2007 budgeted $138.2 billion[46] spent $145.1 billion[47][48]
Hello what semantical tricks do you want to use?
 
Conservative said:
A budget gap is not a deficit and just means that action needs to be taken and it was.
Click to expand...


At some point a 25 billion budget gap needs to be addressed lest we become a third world country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…