This comment shows exactly why anything you say should not be taken seriously.
One party rule
- Thread starter HDRider
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Okay Stan.
Ky hills
Well-known member
@Lee VanRoss , think and say what you will, it is not my goal to stop you or anyone else from speaking their minds. I have nothing but respect for HD Rider and many others who share a different view. I welcome his. yours, or anyone else's posts. As I stated earlier, I have only been posting responses to show a different viewpoint. Perhaps I should keep quiet and let those more sophisticated than I have the floor at all times, but that doesn't seem very much like freedom to me.
From your statement of crows on my nose ( hey that's a nifty rhyme ) I take it that you are not so subtly implying that I am dishonest. Again you are free to think what you will, however that statement was made without knowing anything about me.
If you knew me, you would likely see that I appreciate the same freedoms and rights that you do, and likely hold several of the same positions on a number of issues.
As for using conversations of day to day farm and ranch life to lull others into a false sense of commradarie to influence their political outlook, that is you giving it way too much thought, and me too much credit. I am a full time farmer, have been all of my life. I can assure everyone that when I'm talking about cattle, or anything farm life related that is a subject that I am passionate about and am not using it for any nefarious means. Quite frankly I don't believe that others here are either.
In my posts I am not intending to be divisive. Sharing a differing view, or a different side of an issue does not mean that I don't respect the authors of the posts I respond to.
Romans 3:23
John 3:16-17
From your statement of crows on my nose ( hey that's a nifty rhyme ) I take it that you are not so subtly implying that I am dishonest. Again you are free to think what you will, however that statement was made without knowing anything about me.
If you knew me, you would likely see that I appreciate the same freedoms and rights that you do, and likely hold several of the same positions on a number of issues.
As for using conversations of day to day farm and ranch life to lull others into a false sense of commradarie to influence their political outlook, that is you giving it way too much thought, and me too much credit. I am a full time farmer, have been all of my life. I can assure everyone that when I'm talking about cattle, or anything farm life related that is a subject that I am passionate about and am not using it for any nefarious means. Quite frankly I don't believe that others here are either.
In my posts I am not intending to be divisive. Sharing a differing view, or a different side of an issue does not mean that I don't respect the authors of the posts I respond to.
Romans 3:23
John 3:16-17
D2Cat
Well-known member
So you you think she should serve longer, she was 87 and in very poor health? Explain how the statement by TT discredits his post.
Son of Butch
Well-known member
No, I don't think judges should serve past their deaths.
Justice system moves slow enough as it is, 75 should be mandatory retirement age for all federal judges.
I can't speak for sstterry, but I assume he was referring to name calling the dead (Ruth Buzzy) (RBG) let her rest in peace.
greybeard
Well-known member
OR, they have developed the ability (as most adults do) to discuss a specific issue without it affecting personal day to day relationships.
To my knowledge, Ruth Buzzy never served on the Court. Unless, of course, he was simply name-calling which is very common. No solutions, just rhetoric. It appears that is difficult for some on here to have an adult conversation and debate about real issues.
I have been on this Board long enough to know that no one here is going to change anyone else's mind on politics.
Last edited:
Again, who is Stan?
Did you or did you not ask a Moderator to instruct me to stop calling you by your name?
Yes, Ruth "Buzzy" Ginsburg is the affectionate nickname we assigned the old fossil of the court. I apologize for omitting her last name. You knew who I meant and even your cohorts on the left begged her to step aside during Barry's term.
Barry is what Obama went by as a youth by the way. just another guy who liked nicknames.
I'm not her to change your mind, but a liberal sometimes does see the light.
Here* not her.
I did and in the old days you would have been banned for that.
OP
OP
HDRider
Well-known member
Do you support Democrats' efforts to add 4 seats to the Supreme Court?
OP
OP
HDRider
Well-known member
If you do not understand what is going on then nothing anyone can say can help you. You simply do not want to understand.
OP
OP
HDRider
Well-known member
Who ended the filibuster on naming judges? Who is trying to end the filibuster on passing legislation?
Name one thing Republicans have done to negate two party rule.
I named many that Democrats are working on to become the single party system.
OP
OP
HDRider
Well-known member
Who told you that, Don Lemon?
Ky hills
Well-known member
No I do not. The view that hive on that is that if they were successful in doing so which I don't think it will be, that it would set a precedent to do more changes each election cycle. That is something that no one should want.
OP
OP
HDRider
Well-known member
I can only take them at their word.
Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) took to Twitter to addressed the death of 20-year old Daune Wright Tuesday calling for an 'end of policing, incarceration and militarization."
The Congresswoman wrote that policing in the U.S. is "inherently and intentionally racist" and that it "cannot be reformed.
"It wasn't an accident," tweeted Tlaib. "Policing in our country is inherently and intentionally racist. Daunte Wright was met with aggression and violence."
OP
OP
HDRider
Well-known member
Do you support the uncontrolled influx of illegal immigrants?
Ky hills
Well-known member
It's not as simple as wanting or not wanting to understand another's conclusion. It's more of a desire to take a broader view of the issues and try to get more of an understanding of the surrounding circumstances that have direct and indirect effect on what ever topic is being discussed so that the best conclusion can be reached. Nowhere have I said or intended to say that my views were the only way, or that yours were wrong. It would be much easier for me to just say yes you are correct on all points as usual. There would however be something missing without a broader discussion. I have said many times on this forum that I support the concept of two party system and that those parties holding power in various branches of government are the best scenario.
