First Official GOP President Announcement

ok... When you are talking about transparency, you mean that Obama has a good poker face, not the amount of official documentation that is available to the public... He's declassified more documents and granted more freedom of information act requests than any president in modern history.


If you want to play it that way, enjoy yourself, the Democrats aren't claiming to be conservative.

Hillary has never lied just ask her !

Obama truth seeker freedom fighter !

Before Obama I didn't believe in America. Now I are one !

That "article" isn't a scientific paper. If you weren't so blind, you would have seen how biased the reporting it was.

But I know you want to create an argument for argument's sake.

Naw, I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies in your stories.

First you were a manager at a manufacturing plant. Then you were a CEO of a corporation, and now you are an owner of "intellectual property" which you infer that you collect royalties from.

See, you cannot even get your stories straight, nor prove that any of what you are saying is true.

Now, I know you are going to accuse me of the same, but I believe I have more than enough proof in my profession and wealth on this forum, without getting into the details of my life. At least the very least my profession. How many people do you know who quotes IRC and law by the source?

Just like her email server was not deleted, it crashed and she lost all of her emails on it.

They're claiming to be the champions of the middle class, sooooo.....

Huh? lol
Of course it's biased. They obviously do not like Cruz, but I asked what was inaccurate and why it's so easy for you to dismiss information.

I'm still wondering why fiscal responsibility is a bad thing when it comes to the democrats' budget process.

I mean, all they do is increase the limits and pretend that more revenue will come from it.

It's inaccurate because their basis of reasoning behind their "findings" when it comes to what Politifact states is "true" or not.

Also, they stated that there aren't 110k IRS agents, which is true, but there are over 110k IRS employees and contractors which is what Cruz was referring to. He said the wrong word, and they are jumping on that.

Their biased reporting is clouding their judgement to the point that there is no point in bothering with their reasoning.

Give me a nonbiased source that states the same thing, and I'll listen. Use such a blatant, idiotic article, and I'm going to call you out on it.

I was the sole member of a small LLC that manufactured parts for specific types of autosports, when the economy tanked I took a job managing a department in manufacturing facility and have retained my intellectual property. I parted with the manufacturing company and have moved on to other things. I couldn't care less if you believe me, your expertise in most areas you claim credulity is beyond minuscule. Carry on.


Which still has nothing to do with Republicans falsely claiming to be conservative. The only thing they are conservative on are reproductive rights and the bible.

Does anyone else see irony in Jassik calling out people for falsely claiming to be conservative? Just a thought.

He said agents, did he not? (Nevermind that the context of that statement is pretty idiotic.)

Bias and factual inaccuracy aren't the same thing. If you're going to 'call people on it', then you actually need to back it up, no?

I'm thoroughly conservative on political issues, homie, it's all that personal liberty social oppression I don't fall in line on. I also rarely give my personal opinion on topics, I enjoy the discussion of ideas and solutions, so long as they're grounded in reality.


And, when he was made aware of the discrepancy, did he issue a correction? Did he even respond? He doesn't care about being factual, he cares about getting an emotional response.

So much of what you said is just biased 'wow'....

Especially the part about 'they want armed men at the border shooting brown people' because border control is such a bad thing...

If they actually wanted immigration reform, they could, you know, pass legislation for it? But it makes a such good fundraising platform for everyone afraid of the job-stealing, disease-carrying, brown people so that seems unlikely.

Biased toward facts. Border security is the only thing republicans seem to want in an immigration reform discussion, they don't have any plan to address the serious shortfalls of the immigration process, the fees and red tape that make legal immigration nearly impossible, how about the policies that have contributed to the violence and oppression a lot of potential immigrants are fleeing? What about the people who work for us in other countries that are almost universally denied amnesty after we leave their country a mess? Maybe we can address the policies that lead people to overstay visas knowing they will likely never have the opportunity to get another. Maybe we can address the nature of our student visa programs that let students come and study here then take those skills back to other countries while denying visas to skilled professionals who want to bring skills here?

Immigration reform is a really big header to throw on a bill that basically just doubles the budget for border guards and deportation proceedings.

What you say:

What you do:

Zing! If only it were true...

I got a great idea for border control. Start fining any company who employees illegal aliens $1 million per employee per day. The excuse is they come here to take jobs. So make it cost prohibitive for any companies to employee them. Or will they just ship more jobs overseas instead.

Now, let take a look at that "religious freedom" law.


Its that "substantially burden" part that is troubling.

The bible allows slavery.

The bible calls for the execution of witches. And adulteresses. (Not adulterers BTW.)

Laws existing in that state would "substantially burden" a fundamentalist who wished to bring an AK 47 to a pagan gathering.

Or a bigamist.

Or someone who wished to follow the example of Jesus and drive the moneychangers out of the temple.

Or someone who wished to stone his adulteress wife to death.

Do these politicians have even two functioning brain cells in their logic units?

There are laws against employing illegals oh... the "undocumented."

They are occasionally enforced. The largest kosher butchering operation in the country went down hard over that one a few years back.

lol.. of course lets assume the worst. The law was created because sadly it was needed. The purpose is to protect that baker who refused to service a gay couple(among other stories). But of course, we assume the worse from a law that shouldnt have needed to be created, but was unfortunately proven needed.

How was it needed? Businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone, the problem is they're too stupid to just say they're very busy, they publish ridiculous policies that discriminate against protected groups. They might as well make a law that says it's ok to discriminate against handicapped people if you find them really icky.

Yeah the law was not needed at all, its pathetic to say that it was. I've said this before, only the dumbest business owners tell money to walk out the door. I hope the Indiana GOP is happy that Nausi's flower shop can now refuse to sell a $20 dollar bouquet to a customer because they live their lives different.
Of course, when they see the NCAA come out and announce that there will be no more Final Fours played in their state, when the NFL announces no more Super Bowls in Indy, when the NBA says no more All Star weekends in Indy, when they see millions and millions of dollars leave their state without so much as a goodbye, all because Nausi's flower shop could be happy, I hope the Indiana GOP feels proud of themselves.

Because being restricted to a wheelchair or having prosthetic limbs is in anyway the same thing as 'i am a guy who likes guys' or 'I am a women trapped in a guys body'.... for heaven's sake...

Discrimination in and of itself is not a bad thing. I have a right to choose who I will service and you have a right to voice your opinion on that matter with your money.(if you don't like it, you disapprove by taking your business elsewhere)

Gay isn't something you do on a dare, and if you'd ever known a gay person, you wouldn't make that assumption.

You wish that stuff would happen. It will not. They are not discriminating based on a factual thing... Gay is not a solid characteristic(like the color of your skin would be, or the fact that you have to rely on a wheelchair to get around) Gay is a lifestyle choice.

The law is absolutely needed because 'nausi's flower shop' has every right to choose not to service them.

I know gay people, i know plenty, i have some within my own family.

Cool people.. but...

Maybe being gay may be hardwired.. maybe.. but it is entirely possible not to give into it.

'being gay' and choosing not to be... is NOWHERE near the same as say being black and bleaching your skin to be white.

Have you ever considered not giving in to being straight? That's probably one of the most common stupid fallbacks said about homosexuality. Yes, they should be unhappy, tormented, or a-sexual, and they should be legally discriminated against because? Just no, businesses can either take their money or not and they don't have to give them a reason. This law legalizes and sanctions bigotry against one group of people for something they cannot change.