Stonehenge said:

Speaking of delusional

>When you can prove it you can prosecute it.

We all know that but they have it down to a science. They hold a fund raiser, people pay to attend and for their donation get to speak to the candidate. That gets them access. Next, they talk in private to the politician and explain what it is they want; a yes vote on bill xyz, for example. The pol gives them a standard evasive answer and gives him the name of his favorite lobbyist who will serve as bag man. Donor gives money to lobbyist who has ways of getting it to politician. Bill xyz gets a yes vote from politician. Can we prosecute? No, thats the way the system works. There are variations of course but unless they can get them to say they will sell their vote for x amount of money, its all legal.

---

Quote:

You know all that and are just acting dumb.

---

Quote:

>The media attacks Republicans.  It ignores the other parties because they are not viable and there is no use in attacking them.  Your perception of the media landscape is beyond inaccurate.  It is more appropriately described as delusional.

Thats basically what i said so you are admitting you are delusional?

---

Quote:

> If elected I will not serve

I don't think you have to worry about that.

---

Stonehenge said:

>So?  Is it wrong for a citizen to speak to a politician or support politicians who will pursue policies they favor?

Its a slippery slope. By allowing large contributions via lobbyists, in kind donations like attack ads, and various ways of getting big money into the picture, it becomes more and more like bribery. The pol is in no doubt that the funds will dry up or even go to his opponent if he doesn't play ball.

---

Quote:

>to argue that people should not have access to politicians or be allowed to assist ones they deem in their interest is absurd.  And fascistic.

I don't think people should get any favors from pols in return for donations. That isn't fascism, that is an attempt to clean up the present system which is a sewer.

---

Quote:

>No, you said the media supports Republicans and Democrats and attacks the others.  That is absurd and utterly afactual.  Ignoring is not attacking.

I don't believe i said that at all. Can you give us a quote that supports your ridiculous contention? I have said several times they give slanted reporting to favor dems over gop. I said they attack anyone who threatens to overturn the duopoly. I know you are wedded to the duopoly but not everyone is.

---

Quote:

Mostly because the media attacks any candidate that might be a threat to the duopoly

---

Quote:

Bribery means the average person's interests, the interests of the public that is, are last in line for politicians attention. That means rich assholes control the country and i mean super rich assholes both on the right and left. The result is a disfunctional govt policy that looks from the outside to be insane but is intended to extract the most payola from donors.

---

Quote:

Did enlil take the day off? I guess the govt isn't paying any overtime this week.

---

Stonehenge said:

>It is 100% legitimate to support candidates who you think will help you.  What do you think all the welfare cases do by voting for Democrats?  In the end that is all the power anybody has.  To vote.  Spending money to convince people to vote for you or your candidate is 100% legit.

Up to a point, yes. However, when the monetary support becomes a lot from one source and that one source wields undue influence, it becomes wrong. Voting is something else, we each have only one vote but may choose to give many dollars.

---

Quote:

>I don't think anybody should get any favors.  That includes welfare bums

---

Quote:

Welfare need to be reformed, thats for sure. Some assistance is fine but not making a career out of living on the dole

---

Quote:

>http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/19935822#19935822

Sorry, that does not support your statement below

---

Quote:

>No, you said the media supports Republicans and Democrats and attacks the others.  That is absurd and utterly afactual.  Ignoring is not attacking.

I never said that and your link, not quote, does not say it either. Time to admit you were wrong, or delusional.

---

Quote:

>>Quote:
Mostly because the media attacks any candidate that might be a threat to the duopoly

>How do they attack them?

You know how, by hatchet jobs, set ups blowing up nothing to make it look to fools like wrong doing.

---

Quote:

>Are unions rich assholes who you would disenfranchise?  Sorry, your hat doesn't fly

I would not let them have any extra say in things. What do you mean or is the ripple talking now? Hat? Its a shame to see a once lucid person go downhill like that.

---

Stonehenge said:

>Well then we are entirely in agreement.  We are not, however, in agreement with any Democrat and many Republicans.

We won't be in agreement for long.

>I quoted you.  You said the media supports the duopoly and attacks everybody else.

You are still wrong and the link, not quote, you provided does not support your statement. I've said many times the media supports dems, goes against gop and attacks anyone who threatens the duopoly. Your mischaracterisations of my statements are basically lies.

---

Quote:

>>>How do they attack them?

>>You know how, by hatchet jobs, set ups blowing up nothing to make it look to fools like wrong doing.

>Example?

I guess you've never seen the media attacking anyone. You yourself rant against the media but when i point out wrong things they do, you act ignorant.

---

Quote:

>Linkee no workee.

Its your link, the > was too close to the link so its not clickable, but its your link and it does not show what you claim.

---

Quote:

>I don't think anybody should get any favors.  That includes welfare bums

You want to get your handouts, but not the other bums?

---

Stonehenge said:

I said many times that the media attacks gop, you of course ignore facts so you can rant your ignorant opinions.

---

Quote:

 

>What handouts do I get.  Please, enlighten me

You apparently were a carpenter for some time. You were unable to get far because of competition from illegals, hence your hatred of them. You probably got hurt on the job by coming in drunk or hung over. You now get a disability check plus your welfare so you can rant on the internet all day. You rail against "moochers" to hide the fact you are among them.

---

Stonehenge said:

The media does support the duopoly but it supports the dem half more than the other.

You definitely seem to support big govt and never seem to have a problem with them controlling all parts of people's lives. The only part you seem to be against is welfare and you probably are getting your share of that.

---

You are a walking talking

Will you please provide an example of the media unfairly going after any other party.  Thanks in advance.

zappaisgod said:

The media ignores other parties.  They clobber Republicans.  They support one party, not two.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

zappaisgod said:

The media ignores other parties.  They clobber Republicans.  They support one party, not two.

---

The problem with the 'mainstream' media is that they avoid conspiracy theory.  Hence, you don't see them report on Benghazi, Obama's Kenyan birth, the climate change 'hoax', etc., which makes conservatives believe mainstream media has a liberal bias.

---