Keystone Pipeline

[carlfense]

So you're conjecturing that the kid actually made the sign? Looks like grown-up workmanship to me.

 

 

No obviously it was made by an adult I am saying he has no clue what it means. Who knows who gave it to him to hold but they shouldn't have given it to him. He shouldn't even be there. I think children shoudl be children and not indocturinated inot any movement until much older!!

Ah. You support indoctrination . . . but only if we let the children grow up first.

 

I see things differently.

[knapplc]

So you're conjecturing that the kid actually made the sign? Looks like grown-up workmanship to me.

 

 

No obviously it was made by an adult, I am saying he has no clue what it means. Who knows who gave it to him to hold but they shouldn't have given it to him. He shouldn't even be there. I think children should be children and not indocturinated into any movement until much older!!

Then the kid is extraneous to the discussion, because the term was put on the sign by an adult, as we all agree. So an adult, who knows the term "tea bagger," wrote the sign. Thus matthew's argument remains valid.

 

I'm glad we got that cleared up.

[johnnyrodgers20]

So you're conjecturing that the kid actually made the sign? Looks like grown-up workmanship to me.

 

 

No obviously it was made by an adult I am saying he has no clue what it means. Who knows who gave it to him to hold but they shouldn't have given it to him. He shouldn't even be there. I think children shoudl be children and not indocturinated inot any movement until much older!!

Ah. You support indoctrination . . . but only if we let the children grow up first.

 

I see things differently.

 

 

You know what I meant. You can play with semantics and be funny!!

[johnnyrodgers20]

So you're conjecturing that the kid actually made the sign? Looks like grown-up workmanship to me.

 

 

No obviously it was made by an adult, I am saying he has no clue what it means. Who knows who gave it to him to hold but they shouldn't have given it to him. He shouldn't even be there. I think children should be children and not indocturinated into any movement until much older!!

Then the kid is extraneous to the discussion, because the term was put on the sign by an adult, as we all agree. So an adult, who knows the term "tea bagger," wrote the sign. Thus matthew's argument remains valid.

 

I'm glad we got that cleared up.

 

 

Maybe, I am not sure all adults know what the term means. Can you say with certainty every adult knows what that means? Thus Matthew's argument may not be valid!!

[knapplc]

I can say that any adult writing that sign should know what it means, and if they don't they're not smart enough to be a relevant voice in the public discourse.

[johnnyrodgers20]

I can say that any adult writing that sign should know what it means, and if they don't they're not smart enough to be a relevant voice in the public discourse.

 

 

So you are saying every adult should know every sexual slang or not be allowed to be in the public discourse? Would you like to try that theory out on yourself? If you miss one you are not allowed to be in the public doscourse ever?

[carlfense]

So you're conjecturing that the kid actually made the sign? Looks like grown-up workmanship to me.

 

 

No obviously it was made by an adult I am saying he has no clue what it means. Who knows who gave it to him to hold but they shouldn't have given it to him. He shouldn't even be there. I think children shoudl be children and not indocturinated inot any movement until much older!!

Ah. You support indoctrination . . . but only if we let the children grow up first.

 

I see things differently.

 

 

You know what I meant. You can play with semantics and be funny!!

That wasn't semantics. That was a direct quote of you saying that children should not be indoctrinated until they are older.

[johnnyrodgers20]

So you're conjecturing that the kid actually made the sign? Looks like grown-up workmanship to me.

 

 

No obviously it was made by an adult I am saying he has no clue what it means. Who knows who gave it to him to hold but they shouldn't have given it to him. He shouldn't even be there. I think children shoudl be children and not indocturinated inot any movement until much older!!

Ah. You support indoctrination . . . but only if we let the children grow up first.

 

I see things differently.

 

 

You know what I meant. You can play with semantics and be funny!!

That wasn't semantics. That was a direct quote of you saying that children should not be indoctrinated until they are older.

 

 

OK you know what I meant and if you don't then I am sorry for giving you more credit than you deserve, my Bad!!

[knapplc]

I can say that any adult writing that sign should know what it means, and if they don't they're not smart enough to be a relevant voice in the public discourse.

 

 

So you are saying every adult should know every sexual slang or not be allowed to be in the public discourse? Would you like to try that theory out on yourself? If you miss one you are not allowed to be in the public doscourse ever?

 

 

You know what I meant. You can play with semantics and be funny!!

 

And if you don't then I am sorry for giving you more credit than you deserve, my Bad!!

[formercactusboy]

I can say that any adult writing that sign should know what it means, and if they don't they're not smart enough to be a relevant voice in the public discourse.

 

 

So you are saying every adult should know every sexual slang or not be allowed to be in the public discourse? Would you like to try that theory out on yourself? If you miss one you are not allowed to be in the public doscourse ever?

 

 

You know what I meant. You can play with semantics and be funny!!

 

And if you don't then I am sorry for giving you more credit than you deserve, my Bad!!

 

now that is more like it! a little back and forth banter. it's typically difficult to refrain from joining in the fun. gotta love smiley faces!

[johnnyrodgers20]

I can say that any adult writing that sign should know what it means, and if they don't they're not smart enough to be a relevant voice in the public discourse.

 

 

So you are saying every adult should know every sexual slang or not be allowed to be in the public discourse? Would you like to try that theory out on yourself? If you miss one you are not allowed to be in the public doscourse ever?

 

 

You know what I meant. You can play with semantics and be funny!!

 

And if you don't then I am sorry for giving you more credit than you deserve, my Bad!!

 

Do you always copy other peoples' posts? So then you admit that some people may not know what tea bagging is, even adults?

[knapplc]

I thought it would be interesting to see how you responded to the same nonsense you post.

 

To answer your earlier question, I did not say they should not be allowed in the public discourse. I said they would not be relevant. Huge difference there.

 

Everyone has a voice. It's just that some voices aren't worth listening to, and others are.

[johnnyrodgers20]

I thought it would be interesting to see how you responded to the same nonsense you post.

 

To answer your earlier question, I did not say they should not be allowed in the public discourse. I said they would not be relevant. Huge difference there.

 

Everyone has a voice. It's just that some voices aren't worth listening to, and others are.

 

 

That I will agree with, there are some who are not worth listening to about anything!!

 

By the way I thought your last post was your best one!!

[krill]

If nothing else he got some people talking about a budget. Is it correct that the senate has not passed a budget since '08?

 

The reason we haven't had a budget in almost three years is directly tied to use of the filibuster by the senate minority (Republicans). Publicly they say it's a travesty that congress cannot even pass a budget, but privately they don't want to pass a budget. Why? Because in lieu of a budget the basic functions of government are funded with individual continuing resolutions, which essentially continue funding at the previous fiscal year's level. This makes it much easier to cut spending without an actual vote to cut (usually unpopular), and it allows specific funding, like public broadcasting and planned parenthood to be targeted when it's politically convenient. It's turned the entire budgetary process into a circus that is good politics in the short term.

[Comish]

If nothing else he got some people talking about a budget. Is it correct that the senate has not passed a budget since '08?

 

The reason we haven't had a budget in almost three years is directly tied to use of the filibuster by the senate minority (Republicans). Publicly they say it's a travesty that congress cannot even pass a budget, but privately they don't want to pass a budget. Why? Because in lieu of a budget the basic functions of government are funded with individual continuing resolutions, which essentially continue funding at the previous fiscal year's level. This makes it much easier to cut spending without an actual vote to cut (usually unpopular), and it allows specific funding, like public broadcasting and planned parenthood to be targeted when it's politically convenient. It's turned the entire budgetary process into a circus that is good politics in the short term.

 

Do you have any supporting facts dealing with how often a budget was even presented (let alone voted upon).........??