okalb

That is fine, then they should hold hearings and not confirm him. That is how it is supposed to work. The problem is that they are more interested in making a stupid anti Obama statement than they are in doing their job. I have not seen anyone state that they MUST confirm the nominee. People just want them to do their job and hold the hearings. If the hearings show that he is not a qualified candidate, then they should not confirm. If he is qualified then they should. All anyone is asking them to do is hold the hearings, which it is their job to do. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Of course - you claim to be conservative, but everything about you screams liberal. Seems like you have something in common with Trump. Or it could be that he is a true conservative and the right wing religious freak show has moved things so far right that you can't tell what an actual conservative looks like at this point. Probably so...same thing can be said for the dems. Who's fault is that? Granola crunching tree huggers :) Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Of course - you claim to be conservative, but everything about you screams liberal. Seems like you have something in common with Trump. Or it could be that he is a true conservative and the right wing religious freak show has moved things so far right that you can't tell what an actual conservative looks like at this point. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

I had a situation years ago. I was working for a wall street bank in IT. An email was sent to several people in my group containing what was considered by SOME people to be classified information. All of us that were copied on the email were called into offices to meet with corporate council and then were suspended pending an investigation. After a 2 day investigation it was determined that the "classified" password in the email was not supposed to be classified and they were wrong. We were all allowed to return to work except for 2 people. The person that sent the email was terminated for sending it to us. Even though it wasn't classified, he should not have been emailing a password around (against company policy). The second person that was terminated was one of the people copied on the email. The reason for her termination was because she worked for the IT security department and they felt that in that role it was her responsibility to report the breach. She did not report it because she knew it to be unclassified, but they still felt that she should have reported it. The other 10 or so people returned to work and it was never mentioned again. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

There you go again, injecting facts into a discussion again. When will you learn that facts mean nothing in Rush world? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

What, that wasn't enough for you Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

While I don't disagree, we have Christian "religious leaders" here in the US that claim 9/11 happened because of homosexuals. We have ones that claim Marijuana is the root of all evil. My point is that you consider the people that make those claims to be nut jobs that don't represent average Christians. These "religious leaders" that blame the victims are in the same category as far as I am concerned. Extremist nut jobs and nothing more. Why is it that people have no problem using their statements as proof rather than writing off what they say as the ramblings of a lunatic that is no different than Fred Phelps or Jerry Fallwell? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

That is an incredibly concise and reasonable question. What do you think the chances are that the response will be the same? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Willful ignorance is not a valid excuse, guilty! Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

I take a great deal of comfort in the fact that he is nothing like you. The more a president is like you, the less he would be inclined to make decisions based on the principles that this country was founded on. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

His question was: "What does that mean, in practical terms?" Your response was "Within the limits of the power given them by congress? Sure To ban lead bullets for political reasons? Not so much " Can you explain how your response addresses his question? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Within the limits of the power given them by congress? Sure To ban lead bullets for political reasons? Not so much This explains a lot about your posts. People regularly comment on your lack of reading comprehension skills and you berate them for it. Can you please point out exactly where in this post you answered his question. Now I don't really give a crap if you answer his question or not, but you seem to think that somehow in this post you answered his question and it is just him that didn't agree. I don't see anything that could even be an attempt to answer the question that he asked in your response. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

What insurance company is your policy through? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Meh, just seems like more passive aggressive non-sense. If you were being "honest...No games, no hidden agenda... genuinely curious" then why not just ask him straight-up about the american muslims without all the clueless detective pretense - trying to draw a parallel that isn't there? Nothing to do with any pretense other than my own personal litmus test. Anyone that in this day and age still believes that Japanese internment was a good idea is just not worth trying to have a discussion with about this particular topic. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Now nothing. I got an answer, there is nothing more to talk about. I said that I was not trying to set you up and I am sticking to that. It tells me what I wanted to know about you and I am leaving it there. So you're okay with potential terrorists sneaking into the US as a "Syrian refugee"? Thanks, that's all I need to know. First of all I was not referring to syrian refugees. I was asking about American citizens. It seems that some people would be ok with rounding up American muslims and treating them the way we did the Japanese during WWII. I am not ok with that. I wasn't talking about Muslims that are U.S. citizens. You interjected that qualifier. Therefore, you did have an agenda and was not truthful with me. OK, that's understandable. I am talking about Syrian refugees at the moment. Here is an idea, why not establish hold areas for the Syrian widows and orphans only? We should be able to process them quickly. And, it is Biblical. I was not trying to trap you. I specifically asked about the way we treated Japanese IN THIS COUNTRY. The majority of the people in the camps were Japanese Americans. You have made it very clear that you have a problem with ALL Muslims. I apologize if I mistakenly assumed that when you said you were ok with the Japanese camps you were aware that they were Americans that we were imprisoning. I took that to mean that you were also ok with putting American Muslims into similar camps. I was really not trying to get into a pissing match with you. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Now nothing. I got an answer, there is nothing more to talk about. I said that I was not trying to set you up and I am sticking to that. It tells me what I wanted to know about you and I am leaving it there. So you're okay with potential terrorists sneaking into the US as a "Syrian refugee"? Thanks, that's all I need to know. First of all I was not referring to syrian refugees. I was asking about American citizens. It seems that some people would be ok with rounding up American muslims and treating them the way we did the Japanese during WWII. I am not ok with that. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Now nothing. I got an answer, there is nothing more to talk about. I said that I was not trying to set you up and I am sticking to that. It tells me what I wanted to know about you and I am leaving it there. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Thanks for the answer. This is what I was really curious about. I was wondering if you are ok with the idea of rounding up and incarcerating American citizens without due process. It tells me all I need to know. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

How could you guarantee that none of the German Jews that were seeking asylum weren't actually Nazis just pretending to be refugees? I wasn't born until 1942. However, the Progressive Democrats of the time certainly welcomed a lot of Nazi's after the war. I have an honest question for you. No games, no hidden agenda, I am genuinely curious. I know that you were not old enough then, but looking at the history, do you support what the US did to the Japanese in this country during the war? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

How could you guarantee that none of the German Jews that were seeking asylum weren't actually Nazis just pretending to be refugees? Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Ummmm...miss, I speak Jive. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

You are by far my favorite poster on this site. You provide more entertainment than anything on TV. Watching people try to have a discussion with you is like watching Bud Abbott try to introduce the players on his baseball team. It makes no difference what the topic is, it always eventually degrades into something that I can only describe as a combination between a vaudeville routine and an "I know you are but what am I" argument between children on a playground. Thank you for doing what you do :) Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

I am not sure what you mean by that. If any rights/privileges/benefits are granted, they must be granted equally to all citizens. I don't see any ambiguity there. It is pretty straightforward. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

I agree that marriage itself is not defined in the constitution, but equal protection under the law is. As long as we afford certain rights/benefits/privileges to one group of people, we can't discriminate. It makes no difference if that is regarding a marriage, the ability to buy beer on Sunday, or any other law. It MUST be applied equally to all. You can't make a law that singles out a certain classification of people. As I said, I agree that the government shouldn't be in the marriage business, but the fact of the matter is that they are. As long as they are, then the laws must be applied equally to everyone regardless of race, creed, color or sexual preference. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

Actually, it wouldn't necessarily, but once again even if it did. Why should some couples have to be treated differently than others? Separate but equal was not constitutional last time it was tried, nor is it this time. Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana