exfuckingactly. This country, this world, would be doing so much better if John McCain had been elected, died, and Ms. Palin was our President.eleven bravo wrote:
One Big Ass Mistake, America
Fiscal conservatism is one of those things that people rally behind but then completely discard once they enter power. Only a rare few candidates actually embrace it, because nearly every politician has to pay back favors for the funding they receive from special interests.Harmor wrote:
Yep, but the ratio is much worst (like 10 or 15:1). I'm not trying to be an apologist just making that point. Th 2006 and 2008 elections should had gotten enough of the spenders kicked out so hopefully this new batch are more fiscally Conservative.Turquoise wrote:
Did you happen to notice how much pork the Republicans pushed back when they ran things?lopermento wrote:
I'm new to the forums and am unfamiliar with you fellas so bear with me if we aren't on the same page.
Obama, and the democraps have no chance in the 2010/2012 elections. Its a sad fate that faces most presidents and parties in troubling times, but they deserve the boot out of office. I can hardly look at the news to see what else this lame duck of an administration is throwing down the Americans throats. First a 1.2Trillion bailout, then "health-care reform", another bailout, firing of McCrystal, VERY slow reaction to the oil spill, now a bank bill that favors the corrupt unions and radical activists and doesn't even address the financial situation. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 … activists/ It ticks me off to read that article... The Democraps are now official known as pigs in my book for all the pork they throw into bills for their constituents. One of the past war-funding bills had funds for TEACHERS union thrown in there. I mean seriously, what the FUCK!? They are unstoppable. Seems their idea of "change" is to fuck America up.
Judging by earlier post, my rant wasn't needed but I just had to throw in my 2 cents.
In short, our debts aren't going away anytime soon -- regardless of who enters power.
Agreed. Our taste with socialism has put a sour taste in our mouths. All the things lopermento mentioned, hopefully, will be a wakeup call to the electorate that the Obama experiment was indeed a mistake and is costing us dearly.eleven bravo wrote:
One Big Ass Mistake, America
The City of L.A. are issue tax mandates to people who file 1099s as if they were making $275,000/year. Repeat, the City assumes you make $275,000/year and are sending out tax bills for thousands of dollars as a "business tax". And the Justice Department filing suit against Arizona - not doing their job enforcing the border.
This is just an example of the hubris that our Government has against us. They are not helping...they are like protagonists in film called America. Its sad what our Government has become...hopefully we can turn this around in November.
Newt is definitely a fiscal Conservative and has a record for it in the 90s under then President Bill Clinton. It would be interesting through if they attack Newt's record they are actually attacking Bill Clinton's at the same time.
they are like protagonists in film called America
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I love the way harmor is speaking for everyone, he's like a little parroting politician.
Last edited by Reciprocity (2010-07-15 21:57:49)
Further proves my point, huh?Reciprocity wrote:
I love the way harmor speaking for everyone, he's like a little parroting politician.
not really
Tu Stultus Es
what point would that be, huh?Harmor wrote:
Further proves my point, huh?Reciprocity wrote:
I love the way harmor speaking for everyone, he's like a little parroting politician.
don't think harmor is very well versed in irony tbh...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
John McCain died?Reciprocity wrote:
exfuckingactly. This country, this world, would be doing so much better if John McCain had been elected, died, and Ms. Palin was our President.eleven bravo wrote:
One Big Ass Mistake, America
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
It's an affectation of Republicans. "We" "Us" "Solidarity" more nationalistic bullshit to unite the peopleReciprocity wrote:
I love the way harmor is speaking for everyone, he's like a little parroting politician.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Yes i did. The only reason why it wasn't such a big deal back in 2000-2008 was that the Repub's threw it in over an eight year span, giving the economy time to adjust to the expenditures. However, the numb-nuts in office are spending at the rate of almost three times the amount the Bush Administration spent, in one and a half years. And yes I do believe the Bush bailout was the beginning of the now debt crisis, but if it was the one bailout, things wouldn't be so bad, but N0bama did it several MORE times. Which IMO was stupid. You may say I am defending Bush, all I can say to that is I now miss those productive years under his administration. Clinton was almost before my time, I'm 19, and from what I researched on, he did a pretty good job in keeping the American economy in balance. Better than both Bush administrations.Turquoise wrote:
Did you happen to notice how much pork the Republicans pushed back when they ran things?
Below is the Bush deficit (left) vs. the Obama projected deficit:
If you need clarification about the graph, read the article here: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bus … -pictures/
They don't count because that was good pork. It was bacon instead of lard.Reciprocity wrote:
This country was doing so great until fucking obama showed up. Everything's gone to hell on his watch. everything.Those republicans don't count.Turquoise wrote:
Did you happen to notice how much pork the Republicans pushed back when they ran things?
Good pork is when it's used to destroy other countries. Bad pork is when it is to rebuild our own.
I would argue that the problems started when we deregulated much of the financial sector while revising the CRA to encourage lending to people that really shouldn't have been getting loans.lopermento wrote:
Yes i did. The only reason why it wasn't such a big deal back in 2000-2008 was that the Repub's threw it in over an eight year span, giving the economy time to adjust to the expenditures. However, the numb-nuts in office are spending at the rate of almost three times the amount the Bush Administration spent, in one and a half years. And yes I do believe the Bush bailout was the beginning of the now debt crisis, but if it was the one bailout, things wouldn't be so bad, but N0bama did it several MORE times. Which IMO was stupid. You may say I am defending Bush, all I can say to that is I now miss those productive years under his administration. Clinton was almost before my time, I'm 19, and from what I researched on, he did a pretty good job in keeping the American economy in balance. Better than both Bush administrations.Turquoise wrote:
Did you happen to notice how much pork the Republicans pushed back when they ran things?
Below is the Bush deficit (left) vs. the Obama projected deficit:
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/upl … udget1.jpg
If you need clarification about the graph, read the article here: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bus … -pictures/
A lot of this started with Reagan, but so far, no president has bothered to fix these problems. The recent finance bill was pretty crappy as well.
So while Clinton did handle debt well, he (like his predecessors and successors) didn't make any moves to stabilize the financial sector -- nor did Congress.
Debts created by government spending are bad past a certain point (like the bailouts), but the same logic can be applied when the financial sector racks up their own debts through taking ridiculous amounts of risks (which led to the bailouts in the first place).
In other words, it's not as simple as blaming it on Obama. He's an easy target because he's having to clean up the messes created by his predecessors.
Granted, I was against the bailouts as well. I would've preferred that we let things collapse, because if we had, the people would be so pissed off by now that we'd be entering a new age of sound financial regulation. All this talk of deregulation would be nonexistent under those conditions.
youre assuming he would die. not coolReciprocity wrote:
exfuckingactly. This country, this world, would be doing so much better if John McCain had been elected, died, and Ms. Palin was our President.eleven bravo wrote:
One Big Ass Mistake, America
Fixed.Turquoise wrote:
So while the combination of the Clinton Administration and the Republican-controlled Legislative branch did handle debt well, he (like his predecessors and successors) didn't make any moves to stabilize the financial sector -- nor did Congress.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
No argument there. If we get lucky, then 2010 will result in similar compromises being made between Obama and a Republican Congress.FEOS wrote:
Fixed.Turquoise wrote:
So while the combination of the Clinton Administration and the Republican-controlled Legislative branch did handle debt well, he (like his predecessors and successors) didn't make any moves to stabilize the financial sector -- nor did Congress.
Granted, if we're not so lucky, we'll just be laying the groundwork for another massive financial crash by about 2025.
What-if's and what-could've-beens don't really do a shit worth of good.
What needs to be done, is to wake the voters up and get one key point into their heads;
Do not elect another underexperienced, inept, hamfisted jackass as President again.
We did it with Bush Jr and Barry-O. We really can't afford a third round of 'amateur hour at the White House'.
"but.. but.. change and hope.. but.. campaign promises!.. but.. but.. fresh blood.. but.. but.. washington outsider!"
BULLSHIT.
Now, is there anyone in Washington D.C. that has the relevant experience, ethical perspective, leadership, intelligence, speaking ability, and integrity to actually make a decent President in 2012?
What needs to be done, is to wake the voters up and get one key point into their heads;
Do not elect another underexperienced, inept, hamfisted jackass as President again.
We did it with Bush Jr and Barry-O. We really can't afford a third round of 'amateur hour at the White House'.
"but.. but.. change and hope.. but.. campaign promises!.. but.. but.. fresh blood.. but.. but.. washington outsider!"
BULLSHIT.
- If you believe campaign propaganda from either side, you're obviously new around here.
- They get to Washington, they become part of the machine - or they get eaten alive by their inexperience and naivety.
- I'll take the 'old salt' that's been around the D.C. system a while, and is promising a little common-sense hard-choice change, not the Washington outsider promising grand visions of utopia and manna that he's got fuckall's chance of implementing due to his lack of experience, perspective, or contacts.
- Hiring people to cabinet or czar positions for party loyalty, rather than experience and ability is a sure-fire way to royally screw things up. Look at Dubya's advisors in Iraq and D.C. - Look at Barry-O's advisors everywhere (former terrorists and radicals and academics and corrupt Chicago politicos, oh my!)
Now, is there anyone in Washington D.C. that has the relevant experience, ethical perspective, leadership, intelligence, speaking ability, and integrity to actually make a decent President in 2012?
Actually, Bush had a lot of experience as Governor.
If anything, Bush proved that experience can be just as inept as inexperience. The problem is that the kind of people who appeal to the masses are rarely the same people who can be depended upon to run things effectively.
The people don't typically make educated votes. They vote on emotions and propaganda. The average person isn't too bright or perceptive, and the candidates who actually raise enough funds to run for a high office usually have so many favors to pay back that ethical policy is a pipe dream.
The problem in my mind concerning the presidency is that the U.S. is just too big. We have too much power and wealth consolidated under one government. I think we'd be better off if we split into about 6 pieces or so.
Granted, that's not going to happen.
If anything, Bush proved that experience can be just as inept as inexperience. The problem is that the kind of people who appeal to the masses are rarely the same people who can be depended upon to run things effectively.
The people don't typically make educated votes. They vote on emotions and propaganda. The average person isn't too bright or perceptive, and the candidates who actually raise enough funds to run for a high office usually have so many favors to pay back that ethical policy is a pipe dream.
The problem in my mind concerning the presidency is that the U.S. is just too big. We have too much power and wealth consolidated under one government. I think we'd be better off if we split into about 6 pieces or so.
Granted, that's not going to happen.
Did you just make an argument for someone like Donald Trump to be president?
Me or rdx?Harmor wrote:
Did you just make an argument for someone like Donald Trump to be president?
You.Turquoise wrote:
Me or rdx?Harmor wrote:
Did you just make an argument for someone like Donald Trump to be president?
I see everyone's frustration with politicians that run one way and vote another. Probably the best example in recent history was when George H. Bush promised "Read my lips. No new taxes." And then he voted with the majority Democrats at the time to raise taxes...and lost in his reelection bid.
I wonder if the solution to this is to have 'anonymous' campaign contributions? (Not sure about this btw, just thinking out loud). As long as the federal election commission checks for fraud and abuses after the fact (i.e. kickbacks), then the politicianswouldn't need to do 'favors'????
So someone like a Ross Perot then (who I voted for btw in 1992), would be someone that the country needs?
Well, I would've voted for Perot back in 92 had I been old enough to vote then, but I see what you mean.Harmor wrote:
You.Turquoise wrote:
Me or rdx?Harmor wrote:
Did you just make an argument for someone like Donald Trump to be president?
I see everyone's frustration with politicians that run one way and vote another. Probably the best example in recent history was when George H. Bush promised "Read my lips. No new taxes." And then he voted with the majority Democrats at the time to raise taxes...and lost in his reelection bid.
I wonder if the solution to this is to have 'anonymous' campaign contributions? (Not sure about this btw, just thinking out loud). As long as the federal election commission checks for fraud and abuses after the fact (i.e. kickbacks), then the politicianswouldn't need to do 'favors'????
So someone like a Ross Perot then (who I voted for btw in 1992), would be someone that the country needs?
I don't think anonymity would improve the system though. You know that wealthy interests wouldn't just send money to a candidate without strings attached, and finding out the source of funds would be rather easy.
Donald Trump's appeal is that he's independently wealthy, which can be a plus in terms of vested interests. In that respect, I can relate to your supposition.
I'm honestly not sure what would really improve the system other than to have preference voting (also known as Instant Runoff Voting). Another advantage would involve splitting up the U.S., but again, I know that isn't going to happen.
Isn't it already split up into 50 parts. Just sayin.Turquoise wrote:
Another advantage would involve splitting up the U.S., but again, I know that isn't going to happen.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
More parts than that if you take into account city and county disputes with each other and the state governments.LividBovine wrote:
Isn't it already split up into 50 parts. Just sayin.Turquoise wrote:
Another advantage would involve splitting up the U.S., but again, I know that isn't going to happen.