HorrorMovieFans.com

So with all this rhetoric about divisiveness, and trying to point the finger at Trump, I started thinking more about the past and when this happened. Basically, in the last 20 years, liberals went bat shit crazy. Let's look at some examples where we had broad agreement among both Democrats and Republicans in the past, but where Democrats have shifted into insanity. Let's examine recent radical shifts on some issues.

Immigration - Border Wall - Birth right Citizenship
2006 - Obama, Hillary, Schumer all saw problems with border security and ALL voted for 700 miles of new fencing

1993 - Harry Reid, a democratic party leader authored a bill that stated a newborn would “not be a citizen of the United States or of any State solely by reason of physical presence within the United States at the moment of birth.”

2013 - President Obama - “Real reform means strong border security, and we can build on the progress my administration has already made -- putting more boots on the Southern border than at any time in our history

Today - Open borders and birthright citizenship





Gay Marriage - Gender Nonsense
1996 - 85 Senators voted that marriage should be defined as being between a man and a woman only, Bill Clinton signed it into law

2008 - Obama said, ""I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."





Welfare reform
1996 - 74 Senators from both parties passed a bill that Clinton signed into law. This greatly reduced welfare spending by introducing work requirements and limiting the time.

Today - Obama bloated and expanded welfare programs and Democrats want to expand them even more, while Republicans want work requirements and limits

there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

gay marriage should be separated from the multiple genders thing, i agree. i don't know why the tranny thing is so ridiculous. trying to justify bias by saying that they'll touch or rape your children and there is nothing you can do about it, is what's ridiculous.

For instance, what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to have someone sneak over our birder to have a baby, and then grant the baby all the rights and benefits a US citizen? Yet that is where Democrats are.

Foo wrote:For instance, what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to have someone sneak over our birder to have a baby, and then grant the baby all the rights and benefits a US citizen? Yet that is where Democrats are.

i think most people can agree that there are problems with the border. what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to undercut legal american workers by hiring illegal immigrants at a far lower wage? yet that is where employers are.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

gay marriage should be separated from the multiple genders thing, i agree. i don't know why the tranny thing is so ridiculous. trying to justify bias by saying that they'll touch or rape your children and there is nothing you can do about it, is what's ridiculous.

With the bathroom thing, it is not just about trannies. If is for everyone. Use the correct bathroom. If no one notices you, you are in the correct one. Sorry, a man pretending to be a woman has no place in a ladies bathroom or locker room. If he is passable and goes in and does his thing without making an ordeal, oh well. Where did this fly off the track so far that we think that is even a good argument?

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

gay marriage should be separated from the multiple genders thing, i agree. i don't know why the tranny thing is so ridiculous. trying to justify bias by saying that they'll touch or rape your children and there is nothing you can do about it, is what's ridiculous.

With the bathroom thing, it is not just about trannies. If is for everyone. Use the correct bathroom. If no one notices you, you are in the correct one. Sorry, a man pretending to be a woman has no place in a ladies bathroom or locker room. If he is passable and goes in and does his thing without making an ordeal, oh well. Where did this fly off the track so far that we think that is even a good argument?

that is the way that it used to be, before someone made it an actual law that they can't use the bathroom unless they were born as the gender that is supposed to be in that bathroom.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:For instance, what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to have someone sneak over our birder to have a baby, and then grant the baby all the rights and benefits a US citizen? Yet that is where Democrats are.

i think most people can agree that there are problems with the border. what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to undercut legal american workers by hiring illegal immigrants at a far lower wage? yet that is where employers are.

Employers are not responsible for border control. If you own a chicken farm in Oklahoma, you are not a deputized ICE agent.

Amazing how many questions you are not supposed to ask of a potential employee, but you are supposed to investigate their country of origin? If it was a cop asking, liberals would be whining and doing the "Papers, please" routine.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

gay marriage should be separated from the multiple genders thing, i agree. i don't know why the tranny thing is so ridiculous. trying to justify bias by saying that they'll touch or rape your children and there is nothing you can do about it, is what's ridiculous.

With the bathroom thing, it is not just about trannies. If is for everyone. Use the correct bathroom. If no one notices you, you are in the correct one. Sorry, a man pretending to be a woman has no place in a ladies bathroom or locker room. If he is passable and goes in and does his thing without making an ordeal, oh well. Where did this fly off the track so far that we think that is even a good argument?

that is the way that it used to be, before someone made it an actual law that they can't use the bathroom unless they were born as the gender that is supposed to be in that bathroom.

Why do you think after all these years, such a law suddenly became a priority? Could it be because of incidents and prevalence?

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:For instance, what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to have someone sneak over our birder to have a baby, and then grant the baby all the rights and benefits a US citizen? Yet that is where Democrats are.

i think most people can agree that there are problems with the border. what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to undercut legal american workers by hiring illegal immigrants at a far lower wage? yet that is where employers are.

Employers are not responsible for border control. If you own a chicken farm in Oklahoma, you are not a deputized ICE agent.

Amazing how many questions you are not supposed to ask of a potential employee, but you are supposed to investigate their country of origin? If it was a cop asking, liberals would be whining and doing the "Papers, please" routine.

fine. if that's what it takes, build a wall. we can't even maintain our streets and sidewalks. but we can build a wall across the border. a wall that will be worked around, if there is incentive to do so. *shrug*

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

gay marriage should be separated from the multiple genders thing, i agree. i don't know why the tranny thing is so ridiculous. trying to justify bias by saying that they'll touch or rape your children and there is nothing you can do about it, is what's ridiculous.

With the bathroom thing, it is not just about trannies. If is for everyone. Use the correct bathroom. If no one notices you, you are in the correct one. Sorry, a man pretending to be a woman has no place in a ladies bathroom or locker room. If he is passable and goes in and does his thing without making an ordeal, oh well. Where did this fly off the track so far that we think that is even a good argument?

that is the way that it used to be, before someone made it an actual law that they can't use the bathroom unless they were born as the gender that is supposed to be in that bathroom.

Why do you think after all these years, such a law suddenly became a priority? Could it be because of incidents and prevalence?

if you're causing an incident in the bathroom, you should be dealt with accordingly, just the same as if any man caused an incident in the men's room or any woman in the women's room. we already had ways to deal with that kind of thing.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:there is a definite case to be made that the first and third are harmful to the united states and to u.s. workers.

The bigger point is that we had a wide sharing of common values not that long ago. What made Democrats shift so wildly to where all common sense has been lost?

Compare platforms of both parties in most elections until the last decade. They are different, but not radical. The discussion would be surrounding a minimum wage hike of 5% not 100%. The debate would be civil unions or gay marriage, not 100 shades of gender queer in restrooms. We would talk how to secure the border, not whether we bother to stop a caravan of thousands from barging in.

All three of the issues I brought up had support from 74-85 Senators, because it was not crazy. They were commonly held beliefs. You and I can have a civil discussion about $100 vs $110 for something. If I say $100 and you say $10,000, that is where civility starts to die.

having some sort of system in place to regulate the border and encouraging employment and work, while minimizing handouts are both common sense and should be worked toward. those are both values that we can agree on. (even when we don't agree on how we should get there) i don't know where that change came from.

should we really be civil about giving freedoms to a majority and denying them to a minority, that are doing the same thing?

I think the response needs to be proportional. I thought the push for civil unions was reasonable. I thought the push for gay marriage was reasonable. 30 different gender types with special protections is dumb. The tranny bathroom thing is mind blowingly dumb.

gay marriage should be separated from the multiple genders thing, i agree. i don't know why the tranny thing is so ridiculous. trying to justify bias by saying that they'll touch or rape your children and there is nothing you can do about it, is what's ridiculous.

With the bathroom thing, it is not just about trannies. If is for everyone. Use the correct bathroom. If no one notices you, you are in the correct one. Sorry, a man pretending to be a woman has no place in a ladies bathroom or locker room. If he is passable and goes in and does his thing without making an ordeal, oh well. Where did this fly off the track so far that we think that is even a good argument?

that is the way that it used to be, before someone made it an actual law that they can't use the bathroom unless they were born as the gender that is supposed to be in that bathroom.

Why do you think after all these years, such a law suddenly became a priority? Could it be because of incidents and prevalence?

if you're causing an incident in the bathroom, you should be dealt with accordingly, just the same as if any man caused an incident in the men's room or any woman in the women's room. we already had ways to deal with that kind of thing.

Did we? The reason laws were passed was because we did not have them to deal with men lingering in ladies rooms. Without a law, how do you stop it?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:For instance, what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to have someone sneak over our birder to have a baby, and then grant the baby all the rights and benefits a US citizen? Yet that is where Democrats are.

i think most people can agree that there are problems with the border. what percent of americans would believe that it would be fine to undercut legal american workers by hiring illegal immigrants at a far lower wage? yet that is where employers are.

Employers are not responsible for border control. If you own a chicken farm in Oklahoma, you are not a deputized ICE agent.

Amazing how many questions you are not supposed to ask of a potential employee, but you are supposed to investigate their country of origin? If it was a cop asking, liberals would be whining and doing the "Papers, please" routine.

fine. if that's what it takes, build a wall. we can't even maintain our streets and sidewalks. but we can build a wall across the border. a wall that will be worked around, if there is incentive to do so. *shrug*

Nothing else stops them. As a small business owner, I don't think I should have to try to determine someone's citizenship status. "Hey, you look brown, price you are an American. I don't care about your drivers license, illegals can get those in some states. I need more!"

Foo wrote: Did we? The reason laws were passed was because we did not have them to deal with men lingering in ladies rooms. Without a law, how do you stop it?

what steps are they taking now to police bathrooms that they weren't taking before the law was enacted? wouldn't it be the same as if someone was causing a scene in the bathroom of the gender they were born as?

Foo wrote:
Nothing else stops them. As a small business owner, I don't think I should have to try to determine someone's citizenship status. "Hey, you look brown, price you are an American. I don't care about your drivers license, illegals can get those in some states. I need more!"

you could be right. let's see how well the wall works, while they're being paid, essentially, to remain illegal and take jobs.

It's no longer acceptable to have shared ideas if you do it on the right you are a RINO if you do it on the left you are a NAZI sympathizer.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: Did we? The reason laws were passed was because we did not have them to deal with men lingering in ladies rooms. Without a law, how do you stop it?

what steps are they taking now to police bathrooms that they weren't taking before the law was enacted? wouldn't it be the same as if someone was causing a scene in the bathroom of the gender they were born as?

It is not about policing, it is about having the law there to charge the crime.

Previously if a man was standing in a ladies room, what would police do? There was nothing to charge them with.